Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address to the Indian Science Congress at Mysuru on Sunday comes in the context of various controversies over knowledge drawn from classical texts, including his own reference in the past to plastic surgery in ancient India. But, there can be no quarrel with the PM’s assertion that the country must “bridge the distance between traditional knowledge and modern science” and must also “use scientific techniques and methods to delve deeper into traditional medicines and practices like Yoga.” The discipline of scientific enquiry will remain central, and traditional knowledge must be subject to the scientific method. In fact, since the prime minister has also mentioned issues like treatment and wellness, it will be a great gain if large clinical trials are run to validate traditional remedies. Some of what traditional medicine has to offer is so obviously useful that its efficacy is simply waiting to be recorded and documented in a manner acceptable to modern science.
Mr Modi has also underlined the commitment of his government to the revival of rivers and securing their future. Signalling a shift in paradigm, he has said that they are the soul of nature which has to be sustained, and man is part of nature, not superior to it. The implication is that the role of the civil engineer changing geography belongs to the last century. If this is indeed a paradigm shift, then it must be considered necessary also to discard at the highest level the ill-conceived idea of his ministerial colleague, of building several barrages across the Ganga. Such action, if undertaken, will take away whatever little life is still left in the river. In fact, the highest priority should be given to the idea of ensuring an abiral nirmal dhara which also includes the resolve not to dump waste in the river.
What the prime minister did not touch upon is the fact that the Indian scientific effort has a long way to go. How far the distance is can be gauged from the wide difference between India and China on several parameters like spending on research and development (R&D), research papers published and patent applications filed. China is now among the global leaders in the design and manufacture of smart phones, solar panels and high-speed trains. India has a lot of catching up to do — and both the government and the private sector have a role to play. Both must spend more on R&D, and the latter must tie it up with innovative efforts to gain global competitiveness. Making such efforts in generic pharmaceuticals and information technology solutions is not good enough. As for the productivity of government scientific establishments, which leaves a lot to be desired, the promise of a scientific audit should be followed through rigorously. The hierarchical culture in many government laboratories needs to be addressed. Innovative methods must be found to stimulate R&D. Providing tax incentives that are easily misused is not a sustainable solution; R&D superpowers like Germany have practically no such incentives. There are few alternatives to strengthening government-funded basic science and creating an ecosystem around that, which privileges intellectual property rights and innovation.
