Minister, where is science going?

Recently, the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) has issued a number of policies to renovate science and technology management, especially the project ' policy of using and utilizing scientific and technological officials, phase 2006-2010 period '.

Prof. Hoang Tuy.( Photo: Nguyen Vu )

As with all new undertakings in this transition period, there are also some ideas that are still confused. It is normal and healthy. However, recently on the forum www.most.gov.vn/fa_news , the leader of the Ministry of Science and Technology had an unusual reaction to comments that did not agree with their intentions.

Expressing annoyance, Prof. Hoang Tuy sent to VietNamNet thoughts about current scientific policies. Here is the article content.

Developing science and technology together with education has been solemnly mentioned as the top national policy, but so far science and technology have not really prospered. Is it because the investment is not enough, because our scientific and technological teams are too weak, or for other reasons? This question has been asked many times. And many times the management agencies have correctly judged that the most important reason, if not primarily, is the lack of appropriate policies to encourage and promote the potential of the scientific team. Unfortunately, we usually only finish it and leave it there, a few years later repeat as before, losing the trust of those who are passionate about their careers. The last time, in 2001, responding to the Prime Minister's call, many people contributed very sincere and earnest ideas, and then, like other times, all opinions continued to be silent, except for the State, it costs a few hundred million more for agencies to 'research policy mechanisms' to produce some more proposals to be put into drawers which are already filled with similar documents. Hopefully this time, with the integration pressure, we will work more seriously, honestly, more frankly and thoroughly, to have practical actions, to make real changes, to be credible. waiting for too long .

"New real is the religion"

In education, there was an idea of ​​blaming stagnation and scandals for the weakness of teachers. In science, we often hear opinions that criticize the scientific team. Of guilt, ill-fated disease, opportunities, chasing the status of title, envy, poor sense of co-operation, etc., are quite common in the scientific world. But according to me, it is necessary to reverse the way of thinking to see that a large part of such weaknesses is just an inevitable consequence of the inadequacies and failures, which lasted for tens of years of the management apparatus. , not only lack of scope, but lack of mind, and not only from executive level but from high level.

What to say, the development of scientific policies must aim at maximizing the scientific capacity of the country, making the productivity of scientific labor reach the highest possible level. In order to do this, it is necessary to correctly understand some of the characteristics of this type of labor, the physical and spiritual needs, and needs to be met so that the scientists can do their best and contribute.

First of all, salary and real income , because it is really new to be led, as we often say.

Not long ago, explaining the serious negativity in the registry industry had been uncovered by the press, an official complained that the average salary of a registry employee was only about 3 million / month was too low. Strangely, at that time, the salary of a good university professor was only two million / month, but very rarely saw the leader in distress, despite many times discussing measures and scientific development strategies and education.

Scientists have long been told: The State only has enough money to pay it, so please manage it yourself! And in fact, after a few years, they also managed all themselves, until now most of them have not such a living standard, some are richer, monthly income is up to tens of millions, nothing less than the ceiling level. US $ 1000-2000 proposed by the Ministry of Science and Technology for 'excellent' scientists to assume national duties!

Where only that extra income level comes from, what prices to pay for science, education and economics , should the Ministry of Finance, Interior, Education, and Science think more responsible .

With this odd payment method, the scientist can only use a small part of the time and mind to do science according to the responsibility, the rest must do other things, though not with the capacity, forte and responsibility, but bring most of their income.

After all, the total amount of society invested in science is still small but not small for us (including public funds and all other sources), but after decades, science remains stunted, many branches keep slowing down, wait for the day to be wiped out if not recovered promptly . Please mention only a few basic sciences: not counting a few highly qualified professors, but still older, and a few talented young people still working in the country, what about? In the next few years, the silver heads rest, or lie down or exhausted, and the good ones continue to find their way, while, with this management mechanism, very few young people are successful in foreign countries. return to work country. Until then, what would the average age of scientists actually work in these industries? 65? 70? Is it dying slowly?

But the damage of wrong pay policy is not just that. If in the entire state management system it is the basic cause of producing and nurturing rampant corruption, then in science it has a heavy impact on honesty, causing fraud and reporting. Or, like Lao Dong newspaper once wrote, "hanging the goat's head selling dog meat", not a rare thing in the scientific village.

On such a moral academic basis, the number of Ph.Ds, 'academicians' is increasing every year with no level of water in any area in the immediate future, asking how dangerous the pollution of the scientific environment is. . When deceit has entered into all scientific and educational activities, it is at risk of turning into an extremely ugly lifestyle and culture of society.

So in order to have a real transformation not only in science and technology but also in many other important industries, the urgent problem, the problem of all problems , is the need to adequately address the salary regime for scientists. , so that they do not have to earn a living by other jobs, but can devote their minds to science. Many officials say that this is not feasible because only a few million dong a month's salary increase for each scientist is beyond the budget's capacity. But not so. A study by Dr. Vu Quang Viet published in VietNamnet not too long ago about startling numbers in education spending, proved the opposite.

Conditions and working environments: Launchers for scientists

However, the salary, however urgent, is not all that matters. Experience has shown that Kuwait, Brunei, or some other wealthy country, pays very well what their science does. Even in our country, the policy of 'sergeants' of some localities has been made for more propaganda over the past few years but there have been some practical results.

Everyone who engages in science understands that this is not a job to get rich. A scientific invention often takes time to fully realize its benefits, moreover due to the interdisciplinary interrelationships in science and technology today, it is not always easy to assess the benefits. direct of a single science or a single scientific discovery of production and life. In contrast, a wise decision by a good manager can bring in billions of dollars in profits for the company in a short time, or a technical initiative can benefit millions of dollars right away. Therefore, it is understandable that in the advanced countries the salary of the chief executive or the chairman of the board of large companies is often much higher than the salary of the great scientists. But that does not mean that society underestimates the contribution of scientists, but only reflects a specificity of scientific activity.

Scientists need a decent wage, to ensure a relative standard of living, but no one thinks of tens of millions or hundreds of millions as directors of many state-owned businesses, but the huge debt may still be over heavy on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren for generations. So the salary issue for scientists is not too difficult, if the management agency really cares. What is harder but less noticeable is that on the basis of adequate wages it is necessary to ensure appropriate working conditions and environments to really encourage scientific labor.

The passion of scientists, their joy, is creativity, to maximize that creative capacity, they need enough salaries to spend all their working hours. But at the same time to work effectively, they also need a workplace with minimal facilities, convenient facilities (laboratories, libraries, internet, information, communication), scientific logistics. good (supporting office work), etc., needing sympathy, support and respect from society and regulatory agencies, needing friends, colleagues, students, and learning atmosphere democratic, liberal, healthy arts that encourage equal communication between different ideas, etc. Only with such conditions and an environment would many scientists hope to work day and night, rolling discharge into the most difficult tasks, as is often seen in major science centers around the world.

A scientific policy that does not fully pay attention to the above characteristics is easy to make childish and inadequate mistakes. For example, because of not understanding the complex interaction mechanism between science and practice, when it requires machines, all scientific works must be applied right into life and production, while others will honor those scientific values ​​aimlessly, encouraging psychology to run in a very heavy way (and quite expensive, because those titles are bought in foreign currency). Because of not paying attention to the characteristics of science, one side despises the salary, on the other hand allows the use of the majority of funding for scientific subjects to supplement the income, but the approval and acceptance of the topic it is very arbitrary, formal, does not encourage talent but only stimulates negative activities. Salary has been, and the workplace, according to the regulations of the Ministry of Finance professor does not have a separate working room, at least for years to be able to work 6m2 / person, not equal to the space for a deputy director the current low level; One hour of lectures of teachers is paid 12,000 VND, while one hour of teaching of the Minister, at any level, is also paid 15,000 VND. Although these are just silly formal rules, it is enough to reflect quite clearly how respectable state agencies are to science.

With such conditions and environment, how high it is is difficult to attract good scientists. So, in the September meeting with the Prime Minister, I said: scientists need salaries, but the more necessary is the conditions and the working environment.

Dear Minister of Science and Technology!

It was amazing, such a simple thing that the Minister of Science and the Ministry did not understand, when he said: Do not believe scientists say they do not need money, they say it is unreal (false!). , not really marketing; why 'despise' money, people's money, people do 'sweaty tears' ! Oh, this is the mindset of officials like the Minister, so the salary of a professor is only a few million / month, and today we don't have to remind each other of the people's money to discuss. the project of bidding scientific topics that anyone who 'criticized' must be an old-fashioned person!

Mr. Minister, in economic management, we have been (and are) paying a heavy price for hundreds of state-owned enterprises that have lost money and still have a high salary, causing great damage to the commune. Assembly These businesses are all set up by the State and 'select gold senders' to hand over the package management to the directors. They were also told: what needs to be spent on comfort, the State only cares about the results; and projects must be strictly bid. But what happened in the oil company, PMU 18, etc. did you know? Do you guarantee that the scientific institutions that did not lack this language in the past will be completely clean when you are in charge?

With goodwill I can trust the good promise, but the experience of civilized societies shows that avoiding temptation is safer than confronting it . So should we manage the bureaucratic centralized management of science?

Ironically, while we need to get out of the bureaucratic centralized yoke, does the science management sector 'innovate' by turning back that damn dead end?

I had the opportunity to do scientific research and to appraise scientific topics in many countries, not seeing where the scientific management is like us. The Ministry of Science and Technology said that they are learning how to manage the US and Japan, but I can affirm that our way of doing is completely different, but that others are not due to our own characteristics.

Making a road, building a factory, are complicated jobs but already have the process in place, and the anticipated results are sure, so you can bid to choose the cheapest, best, and most profitable option. But scientific research is to find new, fumbling, sometimes not finding the intention to find but finding out what is not expected, the creative process cannot be 100% sure but often has many unexpected factors. So there is nowhere to bid to implement a predetermined scientific topic, but nowhere does the State set up hundreds of specific scientific topics and then bid in the scientific world.

Scientists who want to create need to have academic freedom in a certain area, and usually only have field experts, knowledgeable and experienced researchers in that field. know what research topics should be studied and what facilities are needed.

And only the peer expert can evaluate and assess whether a topic is worth studying. But how can a group of people, though all masters, be able to discern 95 specific scientific topics for Vietnamese scientists to bid for research funding?

Doing so is different to developing literature, the State selects 95 novels and then calls for writers to bid to be given the cost of writing novels according to each topic? So is it called to apply the market mechanism to scientific management?

In other countries people do not do such machines. The State only identifies some priorities (often not so much) to focus investment in research on those directions, through institutes or universities (public or private) created by the State (such as the Institute). KIST in Korea) or established private organizations.

However, in each priority direction, it is necessary to study what topics should be discussed and decided by the experts. The State conducts inspections through products made, expressed in practical applications or works published in international journals.

For studies that belong to priority directions, like that, there are topics to solve the specific problems of each enterprise, the enterprises themselves do, with the cooperation and help of universities and institutes. research. Subjects with unknown specific application or long-term nature of basic science, which require high-risk investments, are selected by experts at universities and research institutes. funding from the State (or private organizations) through funds for scientific research support.

The topic that wants to be funded is to submit a proposal to the fund management agency, where they organize the appraisal of peer experts (peer review) and based on that, sponsor decision for which topics.

The rules of financial management of the topics are very clear: only research topics ordered by enterprises according to their needs can have remuneration or reward for researchers, and topics otherwise, the funding is usually only used to cover the needs of research facilities (procurement of equipment, materials, software, participation in academic conferences, inviting scientists from other places to come together). research work, etc.), not part of 'pay' to increase personal income for the researcher.

Thus, the actual benefit that scientists enjoy is not the research paid (because the study is considered to be a case, has been taken into account in the salary), but there is a condition to study the my problem is satisfactory; Each funded project along with the research results are evidence of scientific performance, recorded in the personal profile that is conducive to the advancement of the scientist's career.

Thus, the motivation to study is not direct income through the topic but is the long-term and basic benefit of research. When the project is done, it is not necessary to organize acceptance as we do in a formal and non-objective manner, but simply report the results to the funding agency. The appraisal of topics for funding is based not only on the content of the topic, its meaning and feasibility, but also on the most recent research achievements of the scientist, in which part is concerned. It is important that the results of previous projects have been funded. If a topic is funded with little results, there is no hope that the following topic will continue to receive funding. So, although not accepted, but still forced the researcher to take seriously.

Please don't 'condone'

That is how to manage civilization, take initiative, take the maximum initiative for scientists, respect the scientists at the maximum, and ensure effective investment. It may not be possible to apply all of these experiences to us, but its basic thinking is worth learning, and that's what we mean when speaking to the Prime Minister. Whether you agree or not, the Ministry of Science and Technology should show a serious attitude to listen to ideas against you. Should not respond to sincere comments in the words of lack of courtesy, that kind of behavior is not appropriate for the democratic and civilized social spirit. And please do not call young scientists (under 45, according to the content of the speech) with 'you', which is the way to call 'pat on the head' condescending, showing the lack of necessary respect.

Prof. Hoang Tuy