Friday, 23 April 2010
Holiness, Dear Participants,
Many queries have been voiced that I will try to answer on behalf of the Government of the Republic of Armenia. Though first of all, I would like to thank the President of the National Academy of Sciences for his thoughtfulness of Government’s scientific development principles and priorities which are at the heart of the social-economic development program.
Any government has a primary goal of modeling a highly competitive economy.
Competitive economy means knowledge-based economy speaking in contemporary terms. Knowledge-based economy is impossible to form without a knowledge based society.
This is our vision of Armenia’s prospective development strategy. Moreover, there is no alternative to developing fundamental research in the country, and we only have to define the ways leading to that objective.
Here, I wish to state the first thesis of my speech. The time has passed when the National Academy of Sciences used to raise questions. The time has come for the NAS to answer questions for it is the entity supposed to mobilize our intellectual potential. Moreover, you should reach them out to the government which in turn must be guided by them. You will have to answer the following queries: What are the challenges facing Armenia? What is our primary agenda and the list of priority action? It is up to you and not the government to formulate the tasks: you should be brave enough to define the tasks and introduce them to the society. Thereby you will tackle the moral issue, and scholars will be assessed at their true value by society. We are facing a moral and psychological crisis at this point of time. We must raise the reputation of our scientists. Here as well, there is a deep crisis as the scientist is not the hero in Armenia, on the contrary, they are often subjected to irony. Scientific activity is no longer profitable, and this is a serious problem.
The answer is very simple. If you want people to do research you must raise wages and the level of financing. But there is a counter-question: if you wish to have pay and money, you will have to provide output so that we can sell it and raise your remuneration.
Science is a tool for translating money into research in modern world, with innovation being the key to turning newborn knowledge into cash money. There is a serious problem in the Republic of Armenia in this respect as the foregoing two ingredients are not tied up in our country.
The second thesis of my speech concerns the ways of filling up this gap. Based on modern methodologies, together we must assess the result yielded by our scientific potential. But fail to do so. We cannot limit ourselves to mere publications and statements. Let us see how scientific outcome is assessed in the developed countries. We have already carried out a study to that effect.
While publications in authoritative reviews seem to be important, specific environment should be created liaising research and industry. We have not yet generated such an environment. It is very important for economic entities to be able to make earnings through applied innovations. Therefore, our scientists are supposed to provide them with such an opportunity.
An extremely important thesis was formulated: we should not rely on budget financing. And the second important thesis was that investment should be attracted from outside. Here, the question may arise as to why such amounts cannot be generated in Armenia.
The necessary amounts in foreign countries are generated in the economy as the latter is the one to give orders to scientists. If you are familiar with the organization of modern research centers you may see that venture capitalists, entrepreneurs and economic managers are in constant search of new knowledge and have a keen tendency to apply to science. We must create an environment like this in the Republic of Armenia as well. Here, too, we have such resources as may boost scientific development.
The third thesis is that we have a bad legacy from the soviet era, namely we fail to wrap up the outcome of scientific activity by giving it a market look.
Together, we discussed 28 projects, of which 20 were considered to be unfit for application. 4 of the remaining 8 projects were thought fit for business approval and the last 4 projects were deemed as risky. Dear colleagues, we are facing a serious problem in this field to tackle through joint efforts.
Both the National Academy of Sciences and the Government cannot address it on their own: collaboration and modern methodologies are needed to this end. Latest worldwide experience suggests us that domestic research can be developed on the basis of synergy and feedback.
The fourth thesis regards the design of such priorities in the field of science as may bring about outcome of global importance. I must assure you that this was a very useful exercise as we need successful projects and success stories in order to improve the moral and psychological atmosphere and push ahead with research in Armenia. The government has endorsed a number of initiatives, and we are now trying to give effect to them. But note that the National Academy of Sciences is the one to take the lead in this area.
Dear colleagues, I wish to assure you that those scientific development-related principles proclaimed at the latest annual meeting are still standing. There is no alternative to the strengthening of our intellectual potential, and I would be glad if the National Academy of Sciences could mobilize the needed potential by setting forth ambitious objectives and finding solutions.
The National Assembly is going to engage quite an exciting debate over this bill. The debate can be said already started as we proposed to complement it with the needed mechanisms. We are open to your suggestions. Financing mechanisms were said to be of top importance. The question is how we can encourage people, especially the youth, to embark on science.
You are expected to come up with proposals and recommendations which the government will keep in focus of attention. No efforts will be spared to find mutually acceptable solutions.
In conclusion, I wish to note that only through close collaboration we will be able to change the public standing of scientists and scientific activities in the Republic of Armenia. For a week already a discussion is underway on my personal blog concerning the prospects and priorities of scientific development in Armenia. The opinions voiced are sometimes controversial and contradicting each other and I can feel that there is no social consensus on the matter. I think the National Academy of Sciences has the mission of ensuring the following consensus: science itself is a priority. The Republic of Armenia has no alternative to ensuring that scientific research becomes the most worthwhile activity in the country. This is our objective.
Thank you.
