|
Page Updated:
25-Sep-2006
SPS Homepage > News 2002 > Article
Summary of points made at the Round Table Discussions
Below may be found a compilation of PowerPoint slides which bring out the salient points from the Working Session of the Grand Gathering. At this session the relevance and future of the Science Programme was examined in the context of a changing and expanding Alliance. These slides illustrate the main views expressed, including those at the Round Tables, and aim also to give the flavour of the proceedings.
| Science at NATO, Challenges and Opportunities |
|
|
Science at NATO, Challenges and Opportunities - Presentation by Mr Jean Fournet |
Round table 1: Basis of the future Science Programme
 top
Round table 2: Novel actions and priorities for cooperation
|
Round-table panelists were Dr. András Siegler (Hungary) - Prof. Sir Brian Heap (United Kingdom) - Prof. Alkiviades Payatakes (Greece) - Dr. Fausto Pedrazzini (Scientific Affairs Division) |
In tackling this topic the round-table panelists looked at
- trends in basic science which noted the rise of life sciences, showing that the life sciences are ideally suited to play an increasing and major part to address NATO objectives.
- topics with relevance to NATO's new challenges, from the point of view of NATO's new member countries, taking as example the situation in Hungary, which became a NATO member country in March 1999.
Among points made were:
- Many economists regard technological progress as the most important source of economic growth and the remarkable range of modern biotechnology was briefly reviewed, involving new or improved ways of accomplishing tasks such as better health care, growing crops or building houses
- the current risks posed by bioterrorism have given a new incentive to discover how to identify infectious agents; rapid diagnosis is essential.
- In respect of societal implications, the invention of DNA fingerprinting has become of outstanding importance in forensic science
- Hundreds of biopesticides will soon start to reduce our dependence on conventional chemicals, and nutriceuticals will provide new sources of health-promoting products for the human food chain.
- Cleaner processes that produce less waste, use less energy and water have been developed in industrial sectors; for example, many detergents now contain biotechnology-based enzymes rather than conventional chemicals.
- environmental monitoring systems using 'green chemistry' have been developed to detect harmful organic pollutants in soil or explosives in old munition sites.
- Today's estimate is that 130 biotechnology medicines and vaccines have helped more than 325 million people worldwide, 70 per cent of which have been approved in the past six years.
- NATO should not be ashamed, or afraid, when publicising the excellent scientific work it supports under the Science Programme, the quality of which should be safeguarded to maintain the programme.
- Scientists are the best diplomats and promoters for NATO. Stable long term scientific and professional links are the best means to deliver stability and innovative development in a society in transition.
- The longer view of fundamental scientific activity is by no means in contradiction with the requirement of increasing the relevance of the Science Programme to NATO priorities. For example, the new scientific challenges related to the fight against terrorism raise research problems of a fundamental nature and justify doing that research work in collaboration with Partner countries;
- Joining NATO is a political act of highest significance, which nevertheless has little direct impact either on the economic level of the new countries or on the conditions and capacities of their national science and innovation systems. Intra-alliance solidarity is therefore not merely an extension of the benefits of Partner Countries status for the first years of NATO membership, it is rather a vehicle to gradually introduce new member states into the common NATO science activities and make them assume the common responsibility towards the rest of the world that each and every member country is expected to exercise.
top Round Table 3: The Science Programme and "Leaders of Tomorrow"
Round-table panelists were Dr. Howard Alper (Canada) - Prof. Thordur Jonsson (Iceland) - Prof. Lajos Nyiri (Hungary) - Dr. Alain Jubier and Dr. Chris De Wispelaere (Scientific Affairs Division)
This round-table discussion dealt with some aspects of possible support for young scientists and associated problems. Many young men and women now involved in scientific research will become well known for their scientific achievements, others will hold important positions in political and economic arenas. Young scientists can therefore be considered as "Leaders of Tomorrow", and deserve our particular attention. The problems were analysed from three perspectives - the "brain drain"; fellowships opportunities; and possibilities for commercialisation. Some of the points raised were:
- Brain Drain of young scientists is a particular problem for Partner countries in transition, although some emigration is inevitable;
- Current fellowships programmes offered by Western countries often lead to a loss of talented people for the countries in transition.
- Brain circulation, however, is a positive phenomenon, which involves international scientific cooperation and exchanges on a short-term basis.
- Fellowships have been a traditional and important tool for educating young scientists and creating lasting relationships in an international context. This is particularly true for fellowships between countries of similar economic level or with established structures; between countries which have large structural and economic inequalities, however, they are of less obvious benefit.
- A different solution might be required for partner country scientists at present, such as "return fellowships", giving an incentive for young scientists to return to their countries to participate in building the future of the country.
- he strengths and weaknesses of the alternative possibilities should be examined to determine the right strategy, and other actions also considered.
- Commercialisation and NATO Science could be most profitably looked at in the context of the Science for Peace programme, where a growing number of projects offer commercialisation potential.
- There is a great demand for knowledge about the methods and application of commercialisation in Partner countries. Some of the problems in these countries are:- fragmented and under-developed NIS; poor academic-industry links; weak industrial base with poor market pull; financial markets under major transition; little internationalisation of S&T activities.
- NATO's own lack of resources and experience in this area faced with the complexity of the problem must be taken into consideration in efforts to be of assistance. One solution might be to cooperate with other international organizations and schemes- EU, EUREKA, IMF, etc.
- New mechanisms and actions for NATO should be considered in moving forward, e.g. special awards for projects with commercialisation potential; or participate in creation of a new international Fund
- Existing actions could be re-oriented, such as restructuring the evaluation criteria and changing the aims of Science for Peace; or strengthening an all-NATO approach, such as joint actions between Science for Peace and Science and Technology Policy and Organization.
top Round Table 4: Visibility and Communication
Round-table panelists were Prof. Dinçer Ülkü (Turkey) - Prof. Charles Buys (Netherlands) - Dr. Robert Moor (United Kingdom) - Dr. Walter Kaffenberger (Scientific Affairs Division) - Mr. Yves Brodeur (Office of Information and Press)
This round-table addressed two particular aspects of disseminating information on the Science Programme -
- The visibility of the Programme for the scientists in all eligible countries, for the governments in the NATO countries who must provide the funding, and for the general public.
- The problems faced in communicating the value of the Programme to both the funders and the general public.
Some of the ideas put forward were:
- For visibility as well as communication national contact authorities of NATO and Partner Countries might take the initiative in promoting the Science Programme in their countries with announcements, encouragement, information distribution etc. in local languages. The two critical issues to address for this to work are, the readiness of local authorities to assume such responsibilities, and the attractiveness of activities offered.
- There is neither a single target audience nor a single means of raising visibility. Instead four parallel methods are advocated.
- Government must be provided annually with a quantitative report of the Science Programme achievements measured against agreed NATO objectives.
- The informed public should be provided through the media with well crafted NATO success stories. To achieve this an improved final reporting system for NATO projects should be introduced and the Press office strengthened by dedicating two fellowships to the training of journalists or scientists wishing to train in science communication.
- Visibility within the scientific community should be raised by disseminating as widely as possible using Web teaching courses funded by NATO.
A structured symposium series on Stability and Security should be instituted to provide a unique, relevant and focused series of ARWs aimed at informing NATO, government and academics on topics associated with the underlying issues associated with security and stability in the 21st century.
- Annual analyses of the grants should be undertaken to identify the 'success stories', such as the activities around the Aral Sea, currently being supported by different panels.
- a new 'NATO Symposia Series on Stability and Security' should be organized, based on specific calls launched by the Science Committee. The Panels would identify high-quality applications for symposia to be held in new NATO, Partner and Mediterranean Dialogue countries. It would then be NATO's task to disseminate the information, and 'sell' the events properly.
- The general difficulty to reach governmental decision-makers and the public with scientific topics was pointed out. The difficulty lies in the necessity to be relevant to the targeted audiences and to serve specific information needs, tasks which are very complicated to fulfil.
- The need to find the right vocabulary when talking to government agents was highlighted in this context, as well as the ability to pick up and present the decision-makers' ideas back to them.
- Should dare to launch more projects which address the real needs and are big enough to make an impact in themselves
top
|
