AIPSN brief to the political parties for consideration in their election manifesto

AIPSN brief to the political parties for consideration in their election manifesto

Read the manifesto from JVV Andhra Pradesh in Telugu

 

 

Click here to read the pdf of the AIPSN brief for Political Parties 

28 Mar 2024

AIPSN brief to the political parties for consideration in their election manifesto

The All India People’s Science Network (AIPSN) – a platform of people’s science movements across the country has the following positions on various critical issues e.g., propagation of scientific temper, S&T policy and process, Environment and Water resources, Health and Agriculture. As the country gears up for the 18th General Election, we would like to present these positions to be considered for inclusion in the electoral manifesto of the secular, democratic political parties of the country.

  1. On Scientific Temper

Article 51A (h) of the Constitution of India speaks of the duty of citizens to promote scientific temper. Recently, new challenges have emerged in the country in the form of strong socio-political narratives, backed by the State power, that seek to oppose any scientific approach, evidence-based reasoning or, indeed, any perspective that acknowledges universal scientific knowledge. We demand:

  • Promote the separation of State apparatus from religion.
  • Promotion and support of campaigns for popularization of science and its methods, and for promotion of scientific temper, evidence-based reasoning and critical thinking.
  • Reversal of the present government’s various methods and measures to undermine scientific temper, critical thinking and evidence-based reasoning in governance, education and among the wider public
  • Reconstitution of text-book committees to reverse the present. government’s anti-science revision of NCERT textbooks so as to promote critical thinking among students; re-write these textbooks to address deletion of Darwin’s theory of evolution and various chapters/ sections on India’s natural resources, forests, environment, mineral resources etc, and rectify the distorted picture of ancient Indian civilization projected in these texts.
  • A thorough revision of the now compulsory UG/PG Courses and reading material on so-called “traditional Indian knowledge systems;” revise teaching material for new optional Courses on Science, Technology and other Knowledge Systems in Ancient and Medieval India based on the vast body of historical evidence-based material already available on the subject.
  • Correction of the unscientific view being projected in educational institutions and among the wider public of imaginary achievements in S&T in ancient India, and the primacy and superiority of only one stream of cultural-religious-linguistic knowledge, as against the diverse sources and streams of knowledge in the Indian civilization including bi-directional exchanges with other civilizations for a true picture of the growth of science.
  • Restoration of autonomy of academic and research Institutions in both natural and social sciences; pay due regard to research/survey-based data as basis for evidence-based policy-making; correct retrospective manipulation of data to suit ideological narratives; defend and restore academic freedom and pluralism of opinion in universities and research institutes; restore the confidence of the people in scientific institutions
  • Strict monitoring and regulation of the dissemination of “magical remedies,” pseudo-science and superstitious beliefs through commercial activities and in the media, including through Anti-Superstition legislation in the Centre and States.
  • Resumption of population census driven public policy framing.
  1. On Science and Technology (S&T)
  • Enhancement of public funding of indigenous research in S&T to at least 2 per cent of GDP, with due importance to basic research.
  • Strengthening of the university system in research and development (R&D).
  • Decentralization of systems and processes for research funding; scrap the highly centralized National Research Foundation (NRF) set up under the NEP, which also burdens State governments without according to them equitable participation in decision-making; enhance research in state-level universities and collaborations with Central universities and national S&T institutions.
  • Allocation of funds for state-level initiatives for S&T interventions to tackle people’s problems e.g. drought, water resource management, rural livelihoods, issues faced by marginalized communities.
  • Provision of requisite mission-mode R&D funding for identified sectors of the “4th Industrial Revolution” such as Artificial Intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), bio- and nano-technology etc towards self-reliance in advanced technologies expected to dominate the “knowledge era,” but in which India is in danger of being left behind in pursuit of externally-dependent and false “atma-nirbharta”; also focus on agricultural research to break monopolies of MNCs and enable climate-resilient agriculture/horticulture.
  • Increase in number of research fellowships especially for first generation students; increase number of faculty research positions in institutes; increase quality and quantity of PhDs in which India lags behind.
  • Systematic measures to increase participation of women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) research and jobs
  • Initiation of measures to reduce bureaucratism in S&T Institutions, and encourage academic freedom and culture of research towards reversing brain drain; reverse current trend of sycophancy, fear and discouragement of pluralism in universities and research institutes.
  • Regulation of AI, genetic engineering, data-mining and IT-based surveillance so as to ensure the public good.
  • Review of decision to close down many government-funded S&T Institutions; resuming government support for a restructured Indian Science Congress.
  • Promote free and open source software (FOSS) and other new technologies, free from monopoly ownership through copyrights or patents; “knowledge commons” to be promoted across disciplines e.g. like biotechnology, AI and drug discovery.
  • Recognition of digital infrastructure as public infrastructure to be used for public good.
  • Investment in public communication networks and free knowledge access to scientific and other academic publications without copyright barriers.
  • Ensuring all public funded research is made accessible to all.
  • Rigorous double-blind clinical trials with publication of data for open review for approval of new medicines, vaccines etc.

 

  1. Environment

Various dilutions of regulatory provisions for environmental protection have taken place in the recent past that would have serious impact on our natural resources and climate and will affect people’s livelihoods and wellbeing. There will have to be reversals of these changes. The specific demands are the following:

 

  • The system and processes of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Clearances at State and Central level be made effective, time-bound, transparent, accountable, and free of conflict of interests. EIA is to be conducted preferably through an independent Environmental Protection Agency; repeal EIA Notification 2020 and issue revised guidelines.
  • Economy-wide measures be planned and initiated to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the UNFCCC framework as applicable to developing countries, through effective policies, regulation, de-carbonization, energy efficiency in all sectors of production and consumption, while providing for a just transition from fossil fuels; promotion of renewable energy such as solar and wind; reducing energy inequality and promoting energy access for economically weaker sections such as in public transport; India’s updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) required to be submitted to UNFCCC in 2025 to be re-cast through a participatory process involving all stakeholders.
  • A National Adaptation Plan (NAP) should be evolved through a participatory process involving all stakeholders especially States to tackle climate impacts such as on agriculture, extreme rainfall and related landslides and urban flooding, heat waves and urban heat islands, coastal erosion and sea-level rise; streamline systems to tackle natural and climate-related disasters; evolve and implement climate resilient development strategies especially addressing the needs of vulnerable populations; provide adequate funds from the Centre and build capabilities of States and local governance structures for the above.
  • Sustainable and environment/climate-friendly development strategies should be evolved for the fragile Himalayan region and eco-sensitive regions of Western Ghats and the North-East; undertake comprehensive review of infrastructure development and urbanization in hill areas, especially in the Western Himalayan region.
  • Thoroughly revise National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) towards rapid and goal-oriented reduction of air pollution in urban areas especially through promotion of public mass transportation in preference to personal vehicle use, and effective regulation of polluting industries and construction activities; strengthen Central and State regulatory authorities.
  • Urgently initiate measures to prevent degradation and destructive development of riverbeds and flood plains, including in urban areas.
  • Undo different provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, apart from the modified definition of Forests struck down by the SC, especially 100 km from international boarder and LAC/LOC being exempt from any regulatory measure; ensure protection of rights of tribals and other forest dwellers under Forest Rights Act, 2006.
  • Repeal provisions of biodiversity Amendment Act 2023 which permits transfer of knowledge regarding bio-diversity resources to corporate without permission of National biodiversity Authority, and also denies local communities of due compensation or share of these benefits.
  • Scrap the environmentally disastrous and pro-corporate islands Development Plan for Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep Island chains, without due consultation with local population in Lakshadweep, and endangering the tiny remaining populations of mostly isolated tribes in the Andamans; re-examine feasibility and location of proposed naval base in A&N.
  • Scrap environmentally dangerous National Oil Palm Mission with highly inflated claims of yields and focusing on eco-sensitive North-East and Andaman Islands.
  1. Water Resources
  • Re-formulate National Water Policy treating water as a scarce public good; tackle the growing water crisis; enhance equitable water availability for optimized domestic use, irrigation and industry through effective protection of rivers, expansion of water bodies and increased groundwater recharge; appropriate legislation, effective regulation and demand management of water; water audits and measures to conserve, treat and recycle water especially in urban areas.
  • Ensure equitable provision of WHO-standard piped potable drinking water to all households
  • Halt privatization of water resources and water distribution utilities in urban areas and recognise the right to water as part of the right to life.
  • Check pollution of rivers and other water bodies through effective legislation, regulation and enforcement of sewage and other waste-water treatment and recycling policies; withdraw provisions of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment, 2024 allowing Centre to override State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs).
  • Undertake comprehensive review of the programme and projects for inter-linking of rivers.
  • Plan and urgently implement measures to protect and improve catchment areas of major rivers especially in the Himalayan region; also take all steps possible to check glacier melting rates such as through regulation of fossil-fuel powered vehicular movement and air pollution in mountain regions.
  1. Health
  • Make right to free health care justiciable through enactment of appropriate legislations at both Central and State levels.
  • Retain health services as a state subject with strong emphasis on federalism.
  • Public expenditure on health to be raised to at least 3.5 per cent in the short term and 5 per cent of the GDP in the long term, with at least 1% and 2% respectively coming from the Centre.
  • Out-of-pocket expenditure on health to be brought to below 25% of health spending expand and strengthen the public healthcare system to ensure free availability of quality health care at all levels, including entire range of medicines, diagnostics and vaccines, and accountability to local communities.
  • Scrap the government-funded PMJAY/Ayushman Bharat health insurance scheme and replace it with a Public-centred Universal Health Care system.
  • Reverse the privatisation of health care services and outsourcing of services through PPPs.
  • Reverse the re-branding of Health and Wellness Centres as ‘Arogya mandirs’.
  • Extend and reform the ESI scheme to effectively protect workers’ health in both organized and unorganized sector, and also covering occupational health.
  • Effectively regulate the private health care sector, especially corporate hospitals which should be brought under the Clinical Establishment Act. Modify the National Clinical Establishment Act, 2010 ensuring implementation of the Patients’ Rights Charter and standardization of reasonable rates and quality of various services.
  • Ensure right-based access to comprehensive treatment and care of persons with mental illness through integration of the revised District Mental Health Programme with the National Health Mission.
  • Adopt a people-centred, rational pharmaceutical policy with effective cost-based price controls, elimination of irrational and hazardous formulations, and a comprehensive generic medicines policy covering labelling, prescription and availability at all retail outlets; ensure availability of essential drugs free of cost at all public health care facilities.
  • Initiate programs to break monopolies of pharmaceutical multinational companies in critical areas.
  • Revive public sector pharmaceutical units to harness them for production of essential drugs and vaccines, and reverse privatization trends; reinstate Open-Source Drug Discovery (OSDD) programmes and collaborative R&D for affordable medicines; remove GST for life-saving and crucial medicines.
  • Strictly control and regulate clinical trials and prohibit unethical clinical trials; develop a justiciable charter of rights for clinical trial participants
  • Remove US government’s drug law enforcing agency USFDA’s offices and officials from India.
  • Resist dilution of India’s Patent of Laws and reject provisions in Free Trade Agreements that obstruct domestic production low-cost generic drugs.
  • Ensure effective, appropriate regulatory oversight of AYUSH system of medicine, while supporting evidence-based use of such systems.
  • Give priority to the setting up of new public colleges to train doctors and nurses, especially in underserved areas such as in the North East and in poorer States. Training institutes to be set up for health workers.
  1. Agriculture

            Right to land, water and commons for all

  • Provide equitable access to land and water: legislate for homesteads for the rural poor; grant land rights to landless for cultivation; promote kitchen gardens, backyard poultry, cattle sheds and group farming.
  • Place all above-ceiling land presently held by public or private entities under control of the state and union government for the redistribution to the landless.
  • Create a register of tenants and provide smallholders with secure tenancy. Give tenant farmers statutory support, recognise tenants as beneficiaries of schemes announced for individual benefits, and access to benefits from sector wide schemes financed through public investment.
  • Recognize women as farmers and grant them land rights, secure their tenancy rights over leased lands.
  • Recognize land rights of Adivasi farmers, implement Forest Rights Act (FRA), review all rejections under FRA, and roll back pro-corporate amendments to Indian Forest Act, 1927.

            Right to Food, Employment, Education, Health and Social Protection

  • Ensure job security and minimum wage by extending the number of workdays from 100 to 200 workdays in rural areas @ Rs. 800 wages per day, implement existing provision of 100 days of MGNREGA without creating digital hurdles.
  • Introduce a provision of 100 days of labour support for the SC, ST, and other small and marginal farmers for land development and for the adoption of integrated farming systems (IFS) including natural farming, thus 200 days of rural employment @ Rs. 800 wages per day.
  • Enact old age pensions.
  • Provide childcare and crèche facilities in agricultural workspaces.
  • Provide for separate courts for protection against caste, ethnic, religious, gender-based oppression.
  • Introduce Urban Employment Guarantee Act, guarantee employment for graduates from rural households in nearby towns.

            Right to public and bank finance, production inputs, knowledge and market

  • Guarantee extra budgetary resources to states from the 15th finance commission for raising the level of gross capital formation in agriculture as a percentage ford from the current level of 15.7% to 30%.
  • Guarantee primary producers’ freedom from debt by implementing complete(formal and informal) loan waiver, restore the right of primary producers to priority lending, stop co-lending to delink farmers from the high-cost economy in agriculture; reduce the risks faced from climate change in respect of pursuing agriculture & allied sector occupations.
  • Create a single-window loan facility for small holders to promote integrated farming, strengthen SHGs and Kudambashree-type of institutions to enable women farmers to access agriculture credit from public banking.
  • Guarantee remunerative prices for agricultural commodities establish an effective system of public procurement of all farm produce declared as essential produce/value added products by rural households through cooperatives for the promotion of sustainable rural livelihoods and for the creation of a universal public distribution system.
  • Guarantee access to publicly regulated markets purchasing the primary produce at the minimum support price (MSP) not lower than C2 costs plus 50 % for the products declared as essential commodities for production by state legislatures.
  • Take agriculture out of WTO, no more free trade agreements (FTAs), and no more patent like intellectual property rights (IPRs) on seeds.
  • Withdraw from the agreements signed by ICAR with Bayer, Amazon and otherness, guarantee research, advice, testing and extension through public sector undertakings, and pave the way for national ownership and control of infrastructure required for agri-digitalization and agri-tech delivery.
  • Reintroduce sectoral reservation through legislation for the products attracting AGMARK label to encourage value addition through cooperatives, micro and small businesses & PSUs in order to keep big business out of local markets.
  • Ensure agro-ecologically coupled integration of primary, secondary and tertiary industries, and restore state/district level planning by establishing statutory boards for scientific and equitable land use, area planning, market development, and promotion of value addition to co-products and by-products through group enterprises.
  • Separate Fisheries Ministry in Central and State Governments with the mandate to protect and promote sustainable fisheries and the livelihood of small-scale fish workers including fishers, fish farmers, fish vendors and other ancillary fish workers.
  • Establish a National Commission for Fisheries to look after policy implementation, inter-state disputes, protection and promotion of the rights and entitlements of small-scale fishing communities.
  • Create in every state “State Commissions for Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare”.
  • Stop entry of private Dairy Corporate Companies and import of foreign dairy products that threaten existence of India’s Dairy Cooperatives.
  • Abandon plan to open the Indian market by permitting Free Trade on milk and milk-based products.
  • Ensure remunerative prices for milk and milk products.

 

For clarifications contact:

Asha Mishra, General Secretary, AIPSN  gsaipsn@gmail.com, 9425302012, Twitter: @gsaipsn

Declaration and Resolution on Scientific Temper

Click here for English pdf  of the Declaration of Statement on Scientific Temper with signatories 

 

Other languages: Tamil Bengali Telugu

 

 

Click here for English pdf of the Resolution adopted along with the Declaration on Scientific Temper 

 

Other languages: Tamil    Bengali  

 

Leaflet/Powerpoint distributed about the Declaration/Resolution in  Tamil  Bengali 

 

 

 

Adopted at “Campaign for scientific temper culmination program and National convention for declaration on scientific temper”

held on 28th Feb 2024 at Kolkata

 

Statement on Scientific Temper in the Current Context

Executive Summary There is an urgent need for a renewed commitment to evidence-based reasoning, critical thinking and a scientific approach in India, especially amidst growing socio-political movements that challenge a scientific temper and universal knowledge production based on commonly agreed methods and understanding. Given the changes in society and technology since the earlier declarations on scientific temper in 1981 and 2011, we emphasise the importance of embracing natural and social sciences, humanities, and the rational experiences of ordinary people in the common endeavour to combat the post-truth culture, the intentional promotion of ignorance, and diminishing trust in science exacerbated by misuse of technology. We call for action across three fronts: the State’s role, the involvement of scientific and academic institutions, and combating the undermining of science by the State, the erosion of academic freedom, and the spread of pseudo-science and unscientific beliefs. We urge scientists, intellectuals, and other like-minded individuals to support evidence-based thinking and policy-making and to uphold constitutional values to foster a scientific temper.

Introduction Since the Coonoor Statement on Scientific Temper in 1981 and the Palampur Declaration in 2011, there have been significant socio-political changes in India and around the world. Briefly, these earlier statements had emphasised the importance of fostering a scientific attitude among the people for development and social advancement. Over time, movements promoting scientific temper in India have also evolved in accordance with changing public perceptions of science and technology (S&T).

Recently, new challenges have emerged in India and elsewhere in the world in the form of strong socio-political movements, backed by the State power, that seek to oppose any scientific approach, evidence-based reasoning or, indeed, any perspective that acknowledges universal scientific knowledge. Globally, a post-truth culture is spreading, marked by a deliberate spreading of ignorance and an anti-intellectual atmosphere, along with a diminishing trust in science. It is ironic that technology, part of the broad umbrella of science, is being harnessed to support these trends through social media, such that manufactured sentiment, prejudice, false narratives, baseless opinions and conspiracy theories gain acceptance as valid ways of thinking.

Against this background, the current situation requires a renewed commitment to robust evidence-based reasoning, drawing from accumulated knowledge in the natural and social sciences, and humanities, as well as from the know-how and rational experiences of working people. Such reasoning aligns with well-recognized methodologies of different disciplines, including emerging interdisciplinary research, applicable not only in academic environments, but also in public discourse and understanding. Both scientists and lay practitioners need to actively embrace and popularise these methods considering the new socio-political realities in India.

This contemporary statement on Scientific Temper has become essential, to address present challenges. This statement shall not undertake a critical review of the previous statements / declarations or debate their points. Instead, it acknowledges past debates and critiques, incorporating their essence into the current statement, recognizing the commonality of scientific disciplines and their methodologies. Rather than revisiting old debates, the focus here is on delineating the significant challenges faced in contemporary India for the constitutionally mandated task of promoting scientific temper, the spirit of inquiry, and humanism. Knowledge production and advancement through purposeful discovery and evidence-based reasoning, including thorough consideration of diverse opinions, is currently under severe threat both in academia and in society at large.

Dangerous new theatre As noted earlier, the arena for fostering scientific temper has evolved significantly in recent decades, becoming increasingly contested, including aggressive socio-cultural forces as well as governmental policies and administrative measures antagonistic to scientific temper. The current situation in India demands critical understanding and action on three interrelated fronts: the role of the State and polity, the character and function of scientific research and academic institutions, and malign influences in society and among the general public.

Article 51A(h) of the Constitution of India speaks of the duty of citizens to promote scientific temper. There is concern in some quarters that responsibilities of the State in this regard have not been adequately highlighted. While it might have been assumed that the State’s primary responsibility is implicit when citizens are called upon for certain duties, there is a need for a clearer delineation of the State’s role.

Note: In the declaration, the terms ‘scientists’ and ‘scientific institutions’ are used as terms denoting all natural sciences, social sciences and humanities disciplines, and those others following an evidence-based path of knowledge production and understanding.

Role of the State In the initial post-Independence decades, the Indian State placed significant trust in scientists1 and scientific institutions. Development policies were evidence-driven, with research institutions and centres of excellence enjoying high priority and prestige, and enjoying substantial autonomy. Documents like the Industrial Policy Resolution and a unique Scientific Policy Resolution were foundational to planned development, guided by a multidisciplinary group of experts in the Planning Commission. Independent scientists and social scientists, both from India and abroad, were involved in policy-making, underlining the importance given to science and evidence-based policy-making. Notably, religion played a minimal role in state affairs, and secularism, defined as non-discrimination and equal respect for all religions, was practised. However, the evils of casteism and communalism have never been properly eliminated.

However, in subsequent years, bureaucratism, elitism, and a techno-fix mentality crept into the system, creating something of a divide between scientists and the general public. Trust in scientific institutions also eroded as a perception grew that “establishment science” primarily served officialdom and corporate interests, rather than the public good as supported by verifiable data. During this period, academic, professional, and informed activist voices in civil society critiqued official narratives, influencing public opinion and contributing to critical thinking and evidence-based policymaking. While the State may not have proactively cultivated scientific temper, it engaged with and supported activities to popularise science among the wider public and children. The State also provided considerable space in governance and public discourse for non-official scientific, expert, and informed lay opinion.

Undermining science and a scientific approach   Presently, the State displays a stark departure from this earlier stance. Government and its various organs now actively oppose a scientific approach, independent or critical thinking, and evidence-based thinking and policy-making. This antagonistic stance is widely and persistently communicated to the public through various means, perpetuating such attitudes. State support for research and development (R&D), already below comparable countries as a percentage of GDP, has hit historic lows, raising serious concerns about India’s future in the knowledge era. Domestic assembly by cheap labour is misrepresented as self-reliance, thus also underplaying the need for research and knowledge production.

Funding, fellowships, and independent research face severe cuts in academic and research institutions, burdened by overpowering bureaucratic structures. Career advancement now favours adherence to dominant ideologies, sycophancy, and obedience to government directives over adherence to imperatives arising from domain expertise and research-based insights. Development data and India’s position in reputed international rankings are contested on spurious grounds. Similar data generated in India, even by government institutions, are rejected or manipulated to fit political narratives. On numerous issues, the government claims to lack data, but still proceeds with policy decisions. Open discussions in higher learning institutions are discouraged, hindering critical thinking, pluralism, and academic freedom.

Beyond image management, these tendencies undermine a scientific approach and evidence-based policymaking, demoralising the knowledge production community and fostering anti-intellectual attitudes.

The State and allied social forces directly undermine science and its methods among the public. Unscientific claims by prominent figures in political circles, boasting of imaginary technological achievements and exaggerated ideas about ancient Indian knowledge, are used to build and support a hyper-nationalist narrative. These assertions lack evidence, relying on ambiguous mythological references and dubious interpretations of ancient texts, often draped in quasi-religious cover so as to suppress dissenting voices. Such fanciful and boastful claims undermine many actual substantial contributions of ancient India emanating from various cultural streams and covering intellectual as well as artisanal and technical accomplishments. Critics of such claims are readily branded as anti-national or westernised, questioning both history and science, and undermining the scientific method. Dissent and plurality of opinion, known to be enabling conditions for intellectual progress, are presently under threat.

Assault on the education sector It is disheartening to witness these trends now being introduced into the formal education system, potentially influencing an entire generation unless effectively countered. School textbooks and readings in higher education are undergoing revisions that promote the idea of the unquestioned superiority of knowledge in ancient India, while downplaying the role of other civilizations and their groundbreaking contributions. Whereas addressing Euro-centrism and acknowledging the contributions from ancient India, China, and other “eastern” civilizations is essential, denying the emergence of modern science and technology and the industrial revolution, and the factors leading to it, is not only untruthful but also misleading. The giant strides of modern science and technology cannot be undermined or replaced by fictional narratives, as seen in revised school textbooks of agencies at the Centre and in various states.

These revised textbooks also omit chapters on crucial historical, societal, economic, and ecological issues in India. In an examination-oriented system not fostering critical thinking, this leaves students ill-prepared for higher studies or research and for their roles as informed citizens contributing to national development.

In higher education, mandatory courses on “traditional knowledge systems” are being introduced, presenting a-historical and distorted accounts of knowledge in ancient India. These courses exclusively glorify the Vedic-Sanskritic tradition, neglecting other cultural streams in ancient India and completely disregarding the significant generation of new knowledge in mediaeval India, out of prejudice against particular religious and cultural

streams. This deliberate slant aims to erase or rewrite historical evidence and obstruct critical thinking, leaving students and citizens vulnerable to bias and instilling a distorted view of syncretic Indian traditions and multicultural reality. In the long run, this will result in incalculable damage to the progress of Indian science and to social harmony.

Societal attack In recent decades, India has witnessed the growth of socio-religious orthodoxy, traditionalism, and revivalism, fueled by majoritarian socio-political forces. Traditional religious practices, festivals, and communal forms of organisation have proliferated. Numerous “Godmen” have emerged with substantial resources, sizable followings, and at times, significant political backing. These cults, despite projecting high-thinking spiritualism, have propagated superstitions, pseudo-scientific beliefs, and socio-religious orthodoxy.

Today, social forces aligned with the ruling establishment and supported by the State, disseminate pseudo-science and a belief in mythology as history. False narratives are being used to construct a unitary majoritarian religion and culture, contrary to the diverse religious beliefs even among the majority community. False and unscientific narratives, such as vegetarianism as a dominant “traditional” practice, are being promoted, contradicting scientific surveys conducted by official agencies.

During the COVID pandemic, superstitions and pseudo-scientific notions related to health were actively promoted under the guise of endorsing “traditional” or ancient Indian health systems while implicitly or explicitly criticising modern medicine. Highly placed authorities encouraged practices like lighting lamps and clanging utensils to ward off the virus, with social media amplifying purported “proof” of efficacy, such as recordings of “cosmic vibrations” by NASA. Other pseudo-scientific claims are similarly backed by false evidence supposedly coming from reputed scientific agencies. Artificial creation of long-lost legendary ancient rivers is being undertaken to perpetuate mythology. All these exploit the enduring respect common people hold for science and its truth value. The forces of unreason seek to sow confusion regarding evidence and scientific methods.

Social media and digital technologies play a pivotal role in the State-backed dissemination of unscientific and anti-scientific views, pseudo-science, false narratives, and conspiracy theories aimed at undermining a scientific approach.

In closing, it is important to address the idea that “other worldly” religious beliefs pose the only or major obstacle to fostering a scientific temper in India. Faith poses many challenges which science or rationalism may not always be able to tackle, insofar as faith itself may be defined or perceived as belonging to a non-physical domain. Freedom of religion or Individual faith may indeed be accorded due recognition. At the same time, discriminatory practices or those that impinge on others’ rights or affect public order, must be opposed, and their irrational basis explained. Obscurantism persists due to ongoing weaknesses in society itself, highlighting larger battles that need to be fought, of which the present one may be just a part. Given the organised challenges to a scientific approach discussed earlier, a more focused and targeted strategy is required for the campaign to promote or strengthen a scientific temper.

Declaration We scientists and intellectuals across disciplines, activists and all individuals passionate about spreading a scientific temper, acknowledge that the struggle to promote a scientific temper is wide-ranging and embraces many dimensions. Yet we also understand that, given the grave threats posed in the current context, the major challenge in this period is to combat and roll back these threats. We realise the imminent danger posed by organised multi-pronged attacks to undermine a scientific attitude among the populace. Such attacks not only disseminate pseudo-science, blind faith, and unreason but also promote obscurantism, communitarian prejudices, and discrimination, striking at the core of a humanist approach. False narratives, unfounded opinions, and a cloak of religiosity are wielded to instil adherence to a manufactured, homogenised, majoritarian idea of India.

We, the signatories of this declaration, re-attest the importance of working towards promotion of scientific temper in society. We recognise the grassroots work put in by people’s science movements, other like-minded organisations and dedicated individuals, and commit to support these and other similar efforts. We appeal to like-minded individuals in academia and research institutions, the bureaucracy, and the political class to take a stand upholding constitutional values.

 

List of Signatories given below 

 

 

 

 

 

For further information contact

Satyajit Rath  9868877399

Asha Mishra   9425302012

Arunabh Mishra  9831105979

Krishnaswamy 8012558638

Aniket Sule  9820273239

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Resolution adopted by the AIPSN along with the  “Statement on Scientific Temper Declaration”

in the  “Campaign for scientific temper culmination program and National convention for declaration on scientific temper”

held on 28th Feb 2024 at Kolkata

 

 

Convinced that India that is Bharat grew for several centuries as Hindostan, and where the people of various religions chose to live together after becoming politically independent from the British Empire and experiencing the partition, is not  a society of comparative and competitive religious fanaticism;

Certain that Hindostan is not the land of make-believe demands on Astha (the tradition of belief systems) alone, but that Hindostan is also the land of modern interpretations of religion;

Confident that Hindostan is the land of the rich tradition of syncretism (combining different traditions) and of seekers of the Universal Truths in religions, and that the people cherish civilizational heritage and celebrate the unity in diversity in food, dress and language on everyday basis;

Clear that Hindostan is the land where Nastiks and Astiks coexisted, materialistic philosophical traditions, for example, lokayata flourished, and the revolution of equality through Buddhism appealing to large sections of society took root, and where the traditions of rebellion and resistance grew through the teachings of Basava, Kabir, Nanak, Narayana Guru, Periyar and many more, promoted inclusiveness and syncretism of sufi and bhakti spiritual preachers;

Accepting that the people care for the legacy of the freedom movement, constitutional vision, national unity and integrity, and do not doubt that the majority is concerned about economic, ecological and social justice, and they continue to think about fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy enshrined in the Indian Constitution;

Recognizing that the people as bearers of historical knowledge, skills and culture, and as social carriers of agro-food diversity, culinary heritage, dietary selections, continue to enjoy variegated range of food, health and fitness practices, and they would be willing to stand up once again against the bearers of sectarian politics trying to take away their economic, social and political freedoms;

Recalling that the contributions to modern science & technology made by J C Bose,  M Visvesvaraya, P C Ray, C V Raman, M N Saha, P C Mahalanobis, S N Bose, S.S. Sokhey, SS Bhatnagar, Homi Bhabha,  Vikram Sarabhai, Satish Dhawan and by many others who challenged the colonial order in S&T, and the perspective and strategy of Scientific Policy Resolution (SPR, 1958) which cherished self-reliance and, embraced scientific approach to policymaking, the scientific and technological communities would not let the people suffer unreason and eliminate the space for pluralism and diversity from the world of higher education, science, technology and humanities;

Persuaded that as the post-independent India’s transformative impulses of self-reliance that accommodated the Gandhians, Nehruvians and Leftists to practice their own S&T heuristics for development in the parallel, gave a place to the ethos of scientific temper and humanism in the Indian Constitution, and in the National Curriculum Framework (2005) and in the Right to Education legislation (2008), the Indian S&T community and the people can be mobilized to defend these gains;

Knowing that the ecumenical (promoting unity among religions), cosmopolitan and modern traditions of scientific and technical practice have deep roots in India, the S&T community can be made to appreciate that the sources of ancient and medieval contributions to science involved multi-cultural interactions, and that the attempts to present mythology as history and fiction as science do not resonate well with the people, the vast majority of Indian people can be made to understand how the latest modern construction of the past traditions is to present an ideology that glosses over and hides the inequalities and exploitation based on caste, class, gender and community;

Recognising that as the people resisted Brahmanism and caste oppression in the ancient and medieval times, the latest attempts to cultivate and impose the irrational and unreasonable ideas on the Indian Women, Youth, Adivasis and Dalits can also be defeated among the people across North, South, East and West of India by mobilizing the people against the assault on scientific temper in the relevant spheres of school and higher education, scientific research and science popularisation;

Feeling alarmed at the Union Government’s blatant unconstitutional attempts to impose on the states the National Education Policy (NEP, 2020), that has the potential to damage irreparably the national character and destroy the secular and democratic contributions of Indian education, the Peoples’ Science Movements (PSMs) call upon the state governments to resist the efforts that sow the seeds of hatred and conformism deep into the mind of the young under the influence of the idea of Hindutava – a destructor of social progress and universal brotherhood/sisterhood, and rededicate themselves to developing quality education with public purposes of national importance

As PSMs,

We solemnly affirm our constitutional right to defend the integrity of Article 51 A(h), and to ensure that the investments in education, science, technology, humanities and arts are considerably enhanced and directed to work for the realization of the scientific temper/outlook[1], for the cultivation of linguistic and socio-cultural diversity, for the universally cherished message of love (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ – the world is one family’ ) and for the secular and socialist idea of India and for the reduction of inequalities;

We will contribute to the movements seeking economic, social and ecological justice, and work for the dignified livelihood for the Indian people as a whole through education and research, commit to redouble our own efforts for the promotion of progressive anti-imperialist nationalism, and to strengthen the role and contribution of Indian S&T institutions in the processes of decision making and evaluation of the socio-economic policies under implementation;

We continue with the work started by Dara Shikoh, Savitribai and Jyotriba Phule, Ramabai, Rabindranath Tagore, Nehru, Mahatma Gandhi, Periyar, Bhim Rao Ambedkar, EMS Namboodripad, Ashfaqullah, Bhagat Singh, Subhas Bose, Meghnath Saha, S.S Bhatnagar, Homi Bhabha, S.S. Sokhey, Vikram Sarabhai Husain Zaheer and many others who stood their ground and established the edifice of post-independence period modern S&T institutions, and helped the people to realize the idea of India and the legacy of progressive traditions of the freedom movement;

Mobilize the scientific community to stand up for academic freedom, and actively collaborate with the democratic movement and civil society to defend civil liberties and democratic rights, freedom of expression, organization, representation and struggle through constitutional means, and expose and isolate the forces supporting the babas spreading fatalism and unreason,

Collaborate and work with the rationalists, scholars, academics, scientists, technologists, social scientists, teachers of humanities and sciences,  and professionals about the way forward for the realization of the above stated goals of social progress, propose policies, build institutions and establish a standing mechanism to pursue the challenge of cultivation of scientific temper,  humanism and world peace.

[1] The term scientific temper is broadly defined as “a modest open-minded temper—a temper ever ready to welcome new light, new knowledge, new experiments, even when their results are unfavourable to preconceived opinions and long-cherished theories.

For further information contact

Satyajit Rath  9868877399

Asha Mishra   9425302012

Arunabh Mishra  9831105979

Krishnaswamy 8012558638

 

 

 

 

AIPSN Foundation Day Webinar series

 

Click here to see the link to Prabir’s talk from which two 5 minute excerpts were played in the Inaugural Webinar on AIPSN Foundation Day

 

11febPrabir

Earlier events

click here to download the poster for the Feb 11 storynar in English and in Hindi 

click here to download the book “Science for Social Revolution”

AIPSN Demands recall of NCERT special modules on Chandrayaan 3: Modules filled with Errors and Pseudoscientific Claims

Click here to see press coverage in Science

Click here for the PRESS RELEASE in English  

 

To see the pdf of the Statement click here English 

 

All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN) Statement

30 Oct 2023

 

AIPSN Demands recall of NCERT special modules on Chandrayaan 3:

Modules filled with errors and pseudoscientific claims

 

ON 17 October 2023, NCERT released a number of special modules in English and Hindi on Chandrayaan 3, for circulating to millions of school students as supplementary reading material. However due to severe criticism as seen in  press and media coverage the NCERT initially took down the webpage on the modules but after the Government defended the modules in a PIB release on 25 October saying “Mythology and philosophy put forward ideas and ideas lead to innovation and research” the website came back online!  These modules were targeted towards different learning stages as described in NEP 2020 (Foundational, Primary, Middle School, Secondary and Higher Secondary). Shockingly, many scientific and technical errors occur in the content of these modules, some of which are pointed out below. In addition, there are pseudo-scientific claims and misleading scientific content, and even a reference to a Nazi scientist, quite out of sync with the usual standards of material from NCERT, apart from numerous grammatical errors in the English versions.

There is a clear danger that this wrong information will be transmitted to students as-is and cause real harm. Or worse: the content is so badly written that students will be put off this exciting field.

Members of the scientific community and all rationally minded citizens should summarily reject this shoddily prepared material. The way NCERT reacted after the criticism to withdraw them and then put them back on after the government defended the mythology must not happen again. The demand is that NCERT recalls all these modules at once permanently.

 

 

List of Scientific Errors, Pseudoscientific claims and Falsehoods in the NCERT modules on Chandrayaan

 Foundational Stage (code 1.1F, kindergarten and grades 1-2):

    1. Text: (for Chandrayaan 2) … this time due to a malfunction in the parts of the rocket, it lost contact with the Earth …

Reality: The launcher rocket worked perfectly, and although the lander failed, the orbiter module of Chandrayaan kept working and ISRO kept receiving data.

  1. Primary Stage (code 1.2P, grades 3-5):
    1. Text: this rocket has two major parts—one is Rover and the other is Lander which send us information about the Moon.

Reality: The rocket (LVM3) carried the Chandrayaan 3 spacecraft. The spacecraft  itself had an orbiter and a lander. The rover was kept inside the lander to get released after landing on the Moon.

  1. Middle School Stage (code: 1.3M, grades 6-8):
    1. Text: Literature tells us that it can be traced back through Vymaanika Shastra: ‘Science of Aeronautics’, which reveals that our country had the knowledge of flying vehicles in those days (This book has mind boggling details of construction, working of engines and the gyroscopic systems).

Reality: It has been conclusively shown through research that the origin of the much touted Vymaanika Shastra text can only be traced to the early 20th century and the designs, engines and instruments described in it are completely imaginary, unscientific and useless.

  1. Text: The Vedas, … makes a mention of … these chariots could also fly. The Rig Veda (verses 1.16.47-48) specifically mentions “mechanical birds.” There are various mentions of flying chariots (Rath) and flying vehicles (Vimaan) which were used in battles and wars. All gods … travel from one place to another. These places included earth, heaven, planets and cosmic destinations called ‘Loks’. Such vehicles were said to travel effortlessly in space and without any noise. One such Vimaan is the legendary Pushpak Vimaan (literally the floral chariot) mentioned in Ramayana.

Reality: All these mentions of flying vehicles in various vedic texts and epics are understood to be products of the poets’ imagination. Almost all ancient cultures around the world have literary references about their gods flying in the sky. However, they are not taken as proof of the existence of flying vehicles in ancient times. There is no proof of any human leaving the Earth to travel to space before Uri Gagarin did it in 1961. And the Rgvedic reference given in the text is simply wrong as the 16th sukta of the 1st mandala of Rgveda does not even have 48 verses.

  1. Text: Literary inputs of nature stated above always gave Bharat, as a Nation, an advantage in understanding the significance of space science

Reality: As mentioned above such literary references could be found in multiple ancient cultures and Sarabhai and other scientists’ vision for the Indian space programme was not a product of these poetic inputs. Claiming so would be an insult to the legacy of Sarabhai and pioneering works of many contemporary scientists

  1. Text: It also has peaks that are in constant or near constant sunlight, which creates excellent opportunities for generating power to support lunar activities.

Reality: Although the lunar axis of rotation is almost perpendicular to the ecliptic plane, any mountain peak can be in ‘near constant sunlight’ only if it is almost at the south pole. The landing site of Chandrayaan 3 is more than 500 km away from the lunar south pole. Thus, finding such mountain peaks near the landing site is not possible.

  1. Text: (under activity 1) List out the indigenous materials used in making Chandrayaan-3 a budget-friendly mission.

Reality: ISRO has not publicly released any educational materials regarding this and hence this activity is just a game of guesswork and reproducing jargon from ISRO pages without any understanding.

  1. Text: The ancient Bharatiya texts and discourses contain treasures of scientific knowledge on various disciplines including aeronautics

Reality: As discussed above, these texts are either just poetic imaginations or not ancient at all.

  1. Secondary Stage (codes 1.4S-1.7S, grades 9-10):
    1. Text (code 1.4S): “Where is the Lunar South Pole?” The lunar south pole is the southernmost point on the moon, at 90 degrees south.

Comment: This is tautology, undesirable in any educational text.

  1. Text (code 1.4S): Based on the earlier mission, i.e., ‘orbital mission’ and ‘flyby mission’ it was found that certain dark craters in the south pole …

Comment: If a spacecraft passes close to a celestial body without entering in an orbit around that body, then it is classified as a ‘flyby mission’. Given this classification, no flyby lunar missions have explored the south pole of the moon.

  1. Text (code 1.4S): NASA has described the dark craters as, ‘full of mystery, science and intrigue’.

Comment: This and other similar instances of invoking NASA are name dropping exercises. Using the name to NASA does not add credibility to such nonsense.

  1. Text (code 1.4S): The lunar south pole has many mountains that are not facing earth and are the ideal place to receive such astronomical radio signals from a ground radio observatory.

Comment: This is not related to the Chandrayaan missions. Further, “receive signal from ground observatory” does not make any sense.

  1. Text (code 1.5S): Chaitra month is named after Chitrā nakshatra transiting the

Moon during the period.

Comment: The Nakshatras is the background and it is the moon that transits in the foreground.

  1. Text (code 1.5S): Folklore narrates that on this night, the Moon’s rays possess healing properties, bestowing health and vitality upon those who bask in its luminance.

Comment: Although authors attribute this belief to folklore, it should be  avoided here as it is irrelevant. If it must be mentioned there should be a clear assertion that this claim of the moon’s rays possessing healing properties is not supported scientifically.

  1. Text (code 1.6S): (Activity 1) Prepare a simulation model to make the solar system, planets and satellite. Specially placed the moon with their planets Earth.

Make a Solar System → Locate the sun at the centre of Solar System → Make the elliptical path that orbit the Sun → Locate the planets on each elliptical path → Locate the satellite on each planet that orbit the planet again → Show the Moon of our planet

Comment: Here the level of English is so poor that the meaning is completely lost. How “paths orbit the sun”, how “satellites are located on each planet”, everything is a mystery.  Sentences such as  “locate the satellite on each planet” are meaningless. This is a rehashed version of the activity which was already present in class 8 NCERT book and just retaining the same text as in that book would have been better than this text.

  1. Text (code 1.6S): There are many hypotheses and theories that explain the origin of the moon. The most expected theory suggested that …

Comment: What is meant by “the most expected theory suggested” makes no sense.

  1. Text (code 1.6S): The moon is the brightest and largest heavenly body in our night sky. There are many benefits Earth gets from the moon, the moon moderates Earth’s wobble in its axis, leading to a relatively stable climate. It also creates tides and protects Earth from solar winds, ideal for studying the universe.

Comment: This is a poorly written paragraph which creates a lot of misconceptions. The moon appears to be the largest body, but that is due to its proximity. Moon protecting the earth from the solar wind is also scientifically inaccurate and the second part of that sentence “ideal for studying the universe” does not have any connection to the first, and is meaningless here

  1. Text (code 1.6S): The mission (Chandrayaan 2) discovered an ice sheet in the lunar crater.

Comment: This is total mischaracterisation of the scientific results. The mission confirmed the presence of water molecules. Moreover, “Ice Sheet” refers to a thick layer of only ice, whereas the amount of water in lunar craters is too small to form ice sheets.

  1. Text (code 1.6S): The slogan Chanda mama door ke will be replaced by Chanda mama tour ke near in the near future

Comment: Completely misleading portrayal of how space research will develop in near future. Commercial space tourism is not a priority of ISRO and space tourism (even in near earth orbits) will remain prohibitively expensive for most of the human population at least for another generation or two.

  1. Text (code 1.7S): A rocket’s engine produces a thrust of 20,000 Newtons to lift a payload weighing 2,000 kg. If the gravitational force on Earth is approximately 9.81/29.81m/s2, will the rocket overcome Earth’s gravity to Ascend?
  2. Comment: Look at the second line of the question. It gives two numbers. Out of that 9.81 corresponds to gravitational acceleration at the earth’s surface and 29.81 is the earth’s orbital speed; they are followed by a unit of acceleration. But the question says this is the gravitational force. Does it make any sense?
  3. Text (code 1.7S): On Earth, it takes about 24 hours for the planet to make one rotation on its own axis. … This completes a full-day cycle on Earth. Similarly, one face of the moon remains exposed to sunlight for one lunar day which equals approximately 14 days on Earth.
  4. Comment: One lunar day is 27.3 Earth days. The 14 day period is approximately half a lunar day. Calling it one lunar day is inconsistent with the definition of earth day (24 hours) in the same text.
  5. Text (code 1.7S): 240.25 hours or 10 days and 0.25 hours (i.e., 10 days and 6 hours)
  6. Comment: The number in the bracket is 246 hours, not 240.25 hours.

 

  1. Higher Secondary stage (1.8HS-1.10HS, grades 11-12):
    1. Text (code 1.8HS): Once a rocket reaches the right altitude from the Earth, it injects the satellite or the spacecraft.

Comment: If one says the satellite is injected without mentioning that it is injected into orbit, the meaning of the sentence changes completely.
The correct wording should be: “Once a rocket reaches the right altitude from the Earth, it injects the satellite or the spacecraft into desired orbit.

  1. Text (code 1.8HS): Write a story about what you think who would be found on the moon.

Comment:“Who would be found on the moon”? Did we leave anyone there by mistake? Certainly wrong and a mystery. Perhaps the authors imply ‘what’.

  1. Text (code 1.9HS): These communication satellites are equipped with transponders spanning various frequency bands, including C-band, extended C-band, Ku-band, Ka/Ku band, and S-band.

Comment: Do students know what these bands are? Introducing terms without explanation is not educational.

  1. Text (code 1.9HS): AstroSat––India’s first astronomical space observatory, …

Comment: Funnily, this appears under the section “planetary research”.

  1. Text (code 1.9HS): On Earth, we have a day of 24 hours. It is because the Earth completes one rotation in 24 hours. However, the situation is not the same. It takes nearly 14 Earth days to complete one rotation. The date, August 23, 2023,

marked the commencement of the lunar day.

Comment: The lines should read as “However, the situation is not the same on the Moon. It takes nearly 27.3 Earth days to complete one rotation, so each location on the moon receives sunlight for about 14 earth days continuously. That date marked the commencement of the daylight period for the landing location.”

  1. Text (code 1.10HS): As we delve deeper into this cosmic odyssey, we cannot help but be inspired by the indomitable spirit of Wernher von Braun (father of rocket science), the visionary engineer who transformed dreams of reaching the stars into tangible rockets that breached Earth’s atmosphere. His towering achievements turned the boundless expanse of space into an attainable frontier, where humanity’s yearning for exploration could take flight

Comment: And with that we conveniently join USA to whitewash the fact that von Braun was a nazi scientist who built missiles V2 for Hitler.

  1. Text (code 1.10HS): The shape of the velodrome is like a frustum which a sliced cone is leaving its vertex like a bucket.

Comment: Will students be able to make sense of this grammatically incorrect senseless description?

  1. Text (code 1.10HS): … achieve a desirable speed so that it can reach up to the gravitational field of the moon.

Comment: It should have said “… so that it can reach the gravitational sphere of influence of the moon”, not gravitational field, as the gravitational field extends till infinity.

  1. Text (code 1.10HS): If satellite orbiting around a planet is comparable to the planet, then the binary system (say Earth and Moon) revolves around their common barycenter.

Comment: The bodies will ALWAYS revolve around their common barycenter. If one of the bodies is much more massive than the other body, then the barycenter of the system will be closer to the centre of the large body and hence its motion is not perceptible. That’s all.

  1. Text (code 1.10HS): Let’s assume bigger body (say Earth) is nailed at the origin.

Comment: How do you “nail” Earth at the origin?!

 

For clarifications contact:

Asha Mishra, General Secretary, AIPSN

gsaipsn@gmail.com, 9425302012, Twitter: @gsaipsn

NCERT special modules on Chandrayaan 3 which are full of errors and pseudoscientific claims

ON 17 October 2023, NCERT released ten  special modules in English and Hindi on Chandrayaan 3, for circulating to millions of school students as supplementary reading material. However due to severe criticism as seen in  press and media coverage the NCERT initially took down the webpage on the modules but after the Government defended the modules in a PIB release on 25 October saying “Mythology and philosophy put forward ideas and ideas lead to innovation and research” the website came back online!

The pdf link of the modules (English) are given in this page.

Our Chandrayaan-Foundational stage_1_1F

Mera pyara Chaanda – 1_2P

Bharat’s Expedition to Moon 1_3M

Chandrayaan- JTM 1_4S

Exploring the Moon Mission of Bharat-1_5S

Towards moon and beyond 1_6S

Exploring Chandrayaan -BLM 1_7HS

Bharat on the Moon 1_8HS

Bharat’s Space Mission-TCM 1_9HS

Physics of Chandrayaan 1_10HS

AIPSN Statement on Chandrayaan-3 – Press Release

Press coverage career360 newsclick

Read the press release pdfEnglish

See the press release with cover letter

27 Aug 2023

AIPSN Statement on Chandrayaan-3

The All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN) salutes the scientists, engineers, technical staff and all others at ISRO, its affiliated Institutions, and all associated PSUs, other companies and contractors for the grand success of the Chandrayaan-3 Mission’s soft landing on the moon by the Vikram Lander and the Pragyaan Rover. The precision, with which the Mission was executed from launch to lunar orbit, and especially the autonomous powered descent of the Lander to the lunar surface, was indeed remarkable. In particular, AIPSN congratulates the ISRO team and associated experts for their collective, transparent and goal-oriented analysis of the factors leading to the crash of the Lander during Chandrayaan-2, and the subsequent corrective measures taken with respect to testing, hardware and software. This process and the visible success of Chandrayaan-3 has been a commendable example of the scientific method, evidence-based reasoning and peer review, which should be widely communicated to students, media and the public at large. The success of the Chandrayaan-3 Mission s a tribute to the vision and leadership during the first few decades after Independence and the paths charted towards self-reliance in science and technology.

AIPSN views the Chandrayaan-3 Mission as an important milestone towards future missions, both robotic and crewed, to the moon and other extra-terrestrial bodies.  AIPSN notes that this demonstration of India’s capabilities in space technologies puts India in the vaunted company of a very few nations with such capabilities, and brings with it many opportunities and challenges. The success of the Chandrayaan-3 mission comes at a time of increased international interest in exploration of the Moon, including possible establishment of permanent or long-term crewed stations on the Moon or in orbit around it, which may later even be used as a gateway to exploration beyond our Moon. Such future activities carry with them great responsibilities and India, as one of the nations that would be participating in them, should prepare itself to shoulder these responsibilities on behalf of all humankind.

The Moon, our solar system, and outer space beyond it, are all a common good, knowledge about which belong to humanity as a whole, as the Prime Minister noted when he addressed the nation after the successful landing of the Vikram Lander.  The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967), notes that “exploration and use … shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind.” It further declared that “outer space…is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” AIPSN notes with concern that many countries, companies and others are speaking about exploiting their advanced space technology for commercial or strategic benefit. The US-led Artemis Mission explicitly accepts this possibility and, unfortunately, so does India’s new Space Policy which has not been placed or discussed in Parliament as such Policies should be. AIPSN calls upon the Government to clearly declare that it regards the Moon and other extra-terrestrial bodies as a common good of all humanity, and that it is opposed to national or corporate exploitation of any resources found in such bodies. India should also press for revitalization of the Outer Space Treaty and setting up of an international regulatory system under the United Nations to ensure that space remains a common good of all humankind.

The Government also needs to reconsider its naming of the Chandrayaan-3 landing site as “Shiv Shakti Point,” since this appears to run counter to the naming convention of the International Astronomical Union. The IAU requires that features of the moon be named after astronauts or scientists including physicists, mathematicians etc who have contributed to this field, e.g. Aryabhata and Homi Bhabha, which have been accepted by IAU in the past. The Government should propose such a name as would conform to IAU norms and therefore gain international acceptance.

 

For Contact:

Asha Mishra, General Secretary, AIPSN Mobile: 9425302012   Email: gsaipsn@gmail.com

  1. Raghunandan , Mobile: 9810098621

75 Years of Independence: Self Reliance, Idea of India and Road to the Future

Background Paper

AIPSN Campaign on 75 Years of Independence

click here to get the pdf of the background paper

 

Click here to get the long version of the brochure 

Click here to get the reduced version of brochure

 

75 Years of Independence: Self Reliance, Idea of India and Road to the Future

             Independent India was born on 15th August 1947 with the end of British colonial rule and unfurling of the tri-colour on the ramparts of the Red Fort in Delhi by the new nation’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. India’s journey over the next 75 years has been remarkable by any standards, but with many ups and downs along the way. While there is much to celebrate, there is also much to be disappointed about. Also, unfortunately, perspectives and actions under the current political dispensation are posing serious challenges to the very foundations of our nation laid during the freedom struggle, threatening the edifice of the Constitution and the very Idea of India forged collectively by the people’s movement for Independence and the efforts towards building of independent India. In this the 75th year of Independence, the Peoples Science Movement looks at how our independent nation started, what was achieved, what went wrong and what prospects and challenges lie ahead in the future.

Early years

Born out of the values and ideas forged during the freedom movement, and the wholehearted participation of all sections of the people, India as a poor, developing and highly diverse country with a massive poverty and deprivation burden, low literacy rates, poor health and other human development indicators, embarked on a path rarely seen among newly-independent nations of the time. The path India adopted comprised several core ideas of nationhood such as universal voting rights; equality of all citizens before the law; a secular state without discrimination between religions, castes, languages, ethnicities or gender; the idea of unity in this diverse country of multiple cultures and traditions; freedom of expression and plurality of opinion; and a commitment to build a modern welfare state with a citizenry imbued with scientific temper and critical thinking.

India’s Constitution adopted in 1950 including many subsequent amendments by the legislature, further advanced these Ideas of India in both concept and practice by the political executive i.e. the government, the legislature and the judiciary, and provided an institutional framework for democratic governance and safeguarding citizens’ rights. The Constitution provided for a popularly accountable and federated system of governance involving the Union of India and its States. It also provided for checks and balances, separation of powers between an independent legislature, executive and judiciary, as well as strong institutions of governance with autonomy from the political executive. The world watched in wonder and praised India as it progressed along this path, managing arguably one of the most socio-culturally diverse and complex countries, undoubtedly with many hiccups along the way.

Independent India adopted a policy framework of building a strong industrial base based on scientific and technological (S&T) self-reliance and public sector enterprises in core sectors of the economy, helping the country build an independent industrial base, and also build its own capabilities across sectors. Western countries with their neo-colonial mindsets by and large did not help India in this process of industrialization, whereas the then Soviet Union extended considerable assistance in basic and heavy industries especially through public sector units (PSU) in steel, petroleum, electricity and power generation equipment, coal, mining and related machinery, heavy machines, pharmaceuticals etc  including through technology transfer and R&D efforts to support India’s efforts to achieve self-reliance.

With a special determination, India also built capabilities, knowledge and technologies in frontier areas of space and atomic energy, as well as to a lesser extent in defence in collaboration with many countries and overseas companies. This enabled India to maintain strategic autonomy from major foreign powers and to play a leading role in building the Non-Aligned Movement along with most newly-independent and developing countries and other nations. The adoption by Parliament of the Industrial Policy Resolution in 1956 and the milestone Scientific Policy Resolution of 1958, a first such document among nations which heralded S&T-based enterprises and the obligation of the State to build a scientific temper among its citizens, underscored this trajectory of S&T self-reliance, economic progress and human resource development structured around modern industries in core sectors. Premier public institutions of research and higher education were established in the early post-Independence years, such as the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research and the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, and several IITs in collaboration with different countries as a crucial part of this endeavour.

The 1948 Bombay Plan prepared by private sector leaders had agreed that the state should take the lead in the core sector especially heavy industries, since the private sector did not have either the capital or the capability required. Private companies would then concentrate on consumer goods and light industries. Contrary to some propaganda and public perceptions, this perspective was not simply the result of a Nehruvian “socialist” vision, but the result of considered thinking by the captains of Indian industry and commerce.

This industrial foundation, along with central planning, propelled the country forward to a leading position among developing countries in the first few decades after independence.

Together, these bestowed India with an enviable position in the international community, substantial soft power and respect in the comity of nations.

Despite these strengths, several lacunae in both conception and implementation may be noted in this early period, many of which persisted in successive decades.

In the agreed division of industrial responsibilities, the private sector did not develop substantial autonomous capabilities and were content with protectionist policies against imports and entry of foreign firms, and profited from a captive domestic market for low-quality, low volume, uncompetitive goods. Thus the private sector did not make much contribution to self-reliance or national industrial advancement with only a few exceptions. Unfortunately, this tendency persists even to this day. While private sector companies have pushed their way into sectors formerly earmarked for the state sector, they have still not built autonomous domestic capabilities or invested in R&D and self-reliance, preferring foreign collaborations and lower-end technologies.

Agriculture was seriously addressed only in the 1960s in the 4th five-year Plan through the Green Revolution. The programme was a huge success as regards raising food grain production substantially, and almost eliminating major cereals imports. However, the high inputs strategy brought with it with many negative aspects as discussed in the next section, leaving major issues yet to be addressed in agriculture.

Low investment in school education and primary health held back the already impoverished masses, slowed the pace of development, and prevented the people especially the poor from achieving their true potential. Despite many efforts at different points of time, substantial weaknesses persist in social infrastructure.

In the period under discussion, industrial development was stagnating as noted earlier, unable to generate higher productivity and employment despite the protected economy.

The Middle Decades: hits and misses

Governments in the later 1960s to the 1980s undertook several initiatives to address the deficits mentioned above. It is useful to examine the successes and failures of this period in some detail, since it was followed by a prolonged period of neo-liberal policies till the present and enables an informed comparison.

Public sector industries continued their dominant position in the economy, but did not sufficiently modernize to the next generation of technologies that were already establishing a strong presence in the global economy but were constrained within a limited framework of import substitution. The private sector continued to flourish but in a heavily protected domestic market and, while complaining of a “license-permit raj” imposed by government, made little effort to overcome these constraints, as shown by the under-development of light engineering and consumer goods industries during these decades. In the context of economic and technological developments, especially in comparable economies in East and South-East Asia which were broadly on par with India in terms of development in the ‘60s and ‘70s, it is no surprise that the period is described as the “lost decade.” Combined with developments after liberalization of the Indian economy, the missed opportunities of this period, raises serious issues about what India needs to do in the contemporary context to at least catch up with other countries as regards self-reliance S&T in the knowledge era.

Several progressive economic measures were initiated during this period. While Insurance had been nationalized much earlier in 1956, 14 major Banks were nationalized in 1969, providing stable financial underpinnings to development, and extended banking services as well as credit availability to hitherto unserved sections, especially in rural areas. Many experts and commentators doubt if opening up of banking to the private sector since liberalization of the economy has been beneficial to the people especially in rural areas or to the economy as a whole.

Rural poverty was explicitly addressed only in the 5th five-year plan, notably through the then government’s “garibi hatao” programme and several poverty alleviation schemes such as IRDP, TRYSEM, SGSY and related self-employment Schemes over the next few Plans. Unfortunately even these could not achieve their objective, with some official evaluations showing that only 14% of beneficiaries were enabled to go above the poverty line, however without any assessment of how many later dropped below it later. It was only much later, under the UPA Government in 2006-10, that the effective demand-driven MNREGA wage-employment Scheme, which was introduced through enormous push by progressive forces and civil society organizations, provided much relief for the rural un-/ under-employed and which proved its usefulness during the pandemic. Yet rural-urban disparities and large-scale unemployment or under-employment persist to this day as structural problems.

The Asian Experience

During the 1970s and early 1980s, other South East Asian countries, who were at a par with India a decade earlier, galloped ahead economically and in human development indicators through rapid development of indigenous S&T capabilities in mass manufacturing, white goods, electronic goods, micro-chips and computers.

In Japan or South Korea this was not just a giant leap forward in manufacturing, but was built by domestic companies and product brands, mostly without foreign collaboration, supported by both applied and basic research such as in particle physics, materials, electronics, optics etc and was backed by substantial policy planning and financial support by their respective governments.

These experiences showed that the concept of self-reliance was not some antiquated “socialist” idea, but a practical policy for nations wishing to establish their strong and independent presence in the world economy, and developing the capability to deal with the next technological shift. These experiences have all shown the value of self-reliance and indigenous capability, which are not merely means to developing the domestic economy, but a means towards playing a leading role in the global economy instead of remaining dependent on others or playing a junior role lower down in the value chain.

It should also be noted that these SE Asian countries consistently invested around 4-5% or more of GDP on R&D, education and health.  In comparison, India’s investments in these three areas continue to languish at around 1-2%.  Things got no better in the 1990s or the decades thereafter, including after 2014 when grandiose promises were made to take India into the 21st century or become a developed country by 2025 or become a $5 trillion economy soon.

Agriculture

Agriculture was another sector relatively neglected in the early post-Independence decades, but continuing low food grain production, several near-famine years, and a devastating and frankly humiliating dependence on food aid notably from the US, prompted a major push to augment food grain production in the late 1960s onwards in the form of the so-called Green Revolution (GR). The new policy, supported by substantial financial and technological assistance from international organizations and developed countries especially the US, was focused on wheat and rice in the fertile and irrigated areas of Punjab, Haryana and West UP, and was based on high inputs of specially-developed high-yielding varieties, irrigation water, inorganic fertilizers and pesticides, and mechanization of operations. The policy brought dramatic improvements in wheat and rice production, and saw India become a major agricultural producer in the world and move towards minimal imports in only a few agricultural produce. Total production of food grains increased from 51 million tonnes in 1950-51 to close to 300 million tonnes at present with huge increases in yield per hectare, multiple crops each year and expansion of acreage under cultivation. GR therefore undoubtedly transformed food grain production and agriculture in general in India, but brought along with it many negative consequences now being felt in the country and which will haunt the country for decades to come unless several corrective measures are urgently taken.

Overuse of chemical fertilizers and new farming practices have resulted in serious depletion of soil health with related productivity losses. Over irrigation especially through excessive use of groundwater has resulted in severe depletion of water resources and water-logging. High input costs including mechanization have skewed agriculture in favour of larger farmers and have also led to high indebtedness. The emphasis on HYV of wheat and rice has led to loss of biodiversity especially indigenous varieties, besides sharp decrease in cultivation of millets and other ‘coarse’ grains to the detriment of nutritional status, crop diversification and over-reliance on just two crops with impact on returns. The recent farmers’ agitation over the government’s so-called agricultural “reforms” has been prompted in large part by the skewed socio-economic impacts of the Green Revolution.

GR has had several other undesirable impacts too. The policy was implemented vigorously through the active involvement of agricultural universities who contributed greatly in terms of S&T but also became deeply inter-twined with issues of rich farmers, mechanized and industrial farming and linkages with Western institutions. The famously successful system of extension workers that spread the message and practices of the GR collapsed when the main task was over and was never replaced, leaving farmers dependent on mostly MNC agri-businesses for extension services.

Other regions were neglected due to the overwhelming emphasis on the north-western states although a few sub-regions in the eastern Gangetic basin did benefit. However, crops other than wheat and rice, and agriculture in rainfed areas accounting to around 65% of farmers were not given due attention, even though the “brown revolution” or the ‘second green revolution” are bandied about. This has seen the continued neglect and impoverishment of eastern India, as well as to the narrowing of the food basket especially of poorer people.

It should be underlined that despite the much heralded success of the GR, and the “self-sufficiency” that India has supposedly attained, a large proportion of the Indian people still go to sleep hungry and do not get two square meals a day. According to a 2021 FAO Report, about 15% of India’s population or about 195 million people, are undernourished and ranks 101 out of 160 countries according to the World hunger Index 2021, ranking lower than Bangladesh (76) and Pakistan (92). All these reports indicate that India may not meet the millennium Development Goal of “zero hunger” by 2030. Clearly, the problems are not restricted to food production alone, but are related to socio-political policies governing inequalities and access.

These deficiencies and the negative consequences on Indian agriculture subsequent to the GR need to be addressed urgently, particularly R&D in raising productivity in rainfed areas, building climate resilience, and redressing the inequalities in food consumption and nutrition.

Environment

One sector where considerable effort and new initiatives were taken, which were not envisaged during the independence movement or during the first two post-Independence decades, was in environmental protection, conservation and regulation. This is hardly surprising since sensitivity to environmental issues had barely entered public consciousness, leave alone governance, in any part of the world, except for the forest conservation movement in Britain and colonial India in the 18th and 19th centuries and later in the US in order to ensure continued supplies of timber, and the setting up of nature and wildlife sanctuaries and national parks in the US in the early 20th century. The Club of Rome in the 1960s warned about the potential exhausting of the mineral resources that were the foundation of capitalism, but the panic was short-lived as capitalism itself evolved. However, the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden, for the first time brought the environment and its linkage with human development into governance concerns, and institutionalized international discussions and diplomacy on environmental regulation.

Then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, the only head of government to attend the historic summit, was said to have been deeply influenced by it, and initiated several policy measures in India broadly in tune with the Stockholm recommendations and those of other related global conferences. However, there is strong evidence supported by scholars that environmental regulations in India have evolved in response to both international diplomacy and, even more so, to pressure from civil society and social movements within the country. After Stockholm, the then government enacted a series of laws including major amendments to the Constitution as part of the series under the 42nd Amendment. Article 48A under Part IV obliges the state to protect and preserve the environment, while Article 51A (g) assigns citizens to do the same. The Air Act 1981, the Environment Protection Act 1986 and the Water Act 1976 also followed.

At the same time, the Chipko movement, the Silent Valley movement, and the movement to protect and advance forest rights of tribals and forest dwellers, all catalyzed major legislation, while the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, in which the Peoples Science Movement played a major role, catalyzed a raft of legislations and regulations governing industrial pollution, hazardous materials etc. All these movements broadened the scope of peoples participation in decision-making on developmental projects through mechanisms such as mandatory public hearings.

However, from the outset, environmental policies and their implementation in India have had a mixed record, as a result of pressure from corporate interests and supporting political and bureaucratic forces, and inadequate push from mainstream political formations for environmentally sustainable development policies. Despite victories in many battles for popular movements, the longer war continues and environmental regulations remain a theatre of daily confrontation calling for constant vigil by civil society and peoples movements such as the PSM. Forest rights continue to be threatened to this day, industrial accidents including those involving hazardous materials continue to occur due to lax if not collusive regulatory bodies. At present, environmental regulations are under severe attack, threatening the hard-won rights, laws and regulatory systems put in place over the decades. The intention, and the impact, is that the natural environment is being severely damaged, along with the lives and livelihoods of millions of people dependent upon it such as tribal people, other forest dwellers, fishers and many others.

Education

Investments in education, primary health and R&D continued to stagnate or even decline in real terms. Both in school and higher education the private sector expanded rapidly at the expense of the public system, including in rural areas. Private universities especially in engineering and medicine also proliferated with poor planning or regulation, leading to malpractices such as capitation fees, deficiencies in reservation, poor infrastructure and quality of education resulting in high unemployment or under-employment of graduates and, later, to closures leaving students in the lurch.

Ill-effects of the major failures during the early post-Independence decades in social infrastructure investments notably in health and education as noted earlier have become entrenched over the decades and have been worsened by the neo-liberal tendencies of withdrawal of the state from social services, and their privatization and commercialization.

The public education system certainly expanded in early decades after independence till India established the world’s second largest school system after China. However, despite all the attempts over the decades, and several new initiatives or special thrust programmes taken up from time to time, progress towards universal, free and compulsory education has been unsatisfactory in overall terms in both quantitative and qualitative terms. While enrolment rates in elementary stages have climbed steadily, crossing 90% about a decade ago, enrolment at higher stages of the education system have continued to drop off substantially to around 50% at the secondary stage, skewed even worse for female students. Teacher-student ratios are low and many surveys have shown quality of school education to be poor. Due to these weaknesses, and preferences and trend-setting by the middle-classes, private education has made major inroads over the years especially in secondary education, with enrolments in often English-medium private schools or even unrecognized private schools increasingly sharply in recent years at the cost of the public school system, including in rural areas, despite the regulations of the RTE Act of 2009 which, for the first time, made free education a constitutional right for children from 6 to 14 years of age. Inequalities between urban and rural areas, between better off and poor students, and between upper and lower castes have become deeply ingrained in the education system in India including at school level. These trends have only worsened in most States with the onset of neo-liberal economic policies and the withdrawal of the state from both social and physical infrastructure.  The new National Education Policy (NEP 2020), with its added and strong emphasis on privatization and virtual on-line education will mostly amplify these deficiencies in education and in higher education as well, making these the Achilles heel for India’s future.

Health

A public health system to deliver primary health care was, and remains, another major developmental and welfare measure which was neither taken up strongly in the early post-independence period nor strengthened later to make up for earlier failures. Till today, this remains one of the largest and most glaring failures of the 75 years of Indian independence, as starkly evidenced by India lagging behind even several of our neighbours in South Asia and other low-income countries as regards basic health indicators. In 2016, India ranked 145 out of 195 countries in a Health Care Quality Index reported in The Lancet in 2019, with a score of 41.2 improving considerably from 1990 but still well below the global average of 54.4, and still ranking below Bangladesh and Bhutan, sub-Saharan Sudan and Equatorial Guinea.

Health was unfortunately not accorded adequate priority in the early post-Independence decades and was not recognized as a constitutional even later as was done for RtE, despite the strong and detailed recommendations of the Bhore Committee 1943-46. Several subsequent high-powered committees followed, resulting in the National Health Policy of 1983 which was largely shaped by the 1978 Alma Ata Declaration of “Health for All by 2020.” While the new policy at least introduced some institutional structure for health care delivery and public health systems at different decentralized levels of society, subsequent early neo-liberal “reforms” introduced more disease-specific centralized vertical programmes and concepts like user fees, and diluted the earlier primary health care system. The ideas of Universal Health Care advocated internationally was also sought to be implemented in India, but remained on the shelf. Similarly the National Health Policy introduced by both the UPA and later the present BJP-NDA dispensation contain many ideas but few commitments and institutional arrangements.

Authoritarianism

Public resentment of the continuing failures of the government to address basic issues and growing authoritarian tendencies in the Union government, boiled over in 1974-75, when the country witnessed widespread popular unrest and the famous nationwide Railway strike, leading to the government headed by Mrs.Indira Gandhi declaring Emergency on 26 June 1975. Political and civil society opponents were arrested, all civil liberties and press freedom were suspended, freedom of expression and assembly by citizens and workers were curbed, States’ rights were trampled upon, and even independence of the judiciary in practice if not in law was constrained through the idea of a “committed judiciary.” At one stroke, the people found all their hard won rights for which they had struggled during the freedom movement were snatched away by an authoritarian government that dissolved the distinction between Executive Government and State. However, the people’s anger expressed itself forcefully in the general elections of 1977 when the incumbent government was defeated and democracy restored under the new and first-ever non-Congress government.

Constitutional experts and commentators, especially those who were witness to or had experienced the Emergency excesses and participated in resistance to them, term the current atmosphere of executive non-accountability, dominance over all institutions, flouting of Constitutional norms and intolerance of dissent in both the polity and civil society, to be like an “undeclared Emergency.” It is therefore important to recall the 1975 emergency and parallels between the present situation and that period.

.           Several changes from what may broadly be termed the “Nehruvian path of development” were initiated or experimented with by the non-Congress governments after Emergency and later when several non-Congress formations came to power during the later part of the 1980s, some with positive outcomes, others with mixed or questionable outcomes. In the developmental arena, greater emphasis was seen on the role of the private sector, enhanced civil society participation in policy-making and governance, and decentralization of governance favouring States and local self-government. However, the short life-spans of these governments did not allow for either a detailed appraisal of these policy shifts or indeed for any of these policies taking root. Some trends, however, do seem to have established themselves in the body politic, such as coalitions of like-minded forces around a common programme, assertion of a strong civil society role in governance and, till the current dispensation came to power, decentralization of governance institutions and mechanisms.

Neo-liberal phase

By the 1980s and 90s, commitment of the state to the initial direction and impetus of self-reliant development led by the public sector weakened gradually,  and  dominant forces in the economy and in the political class started moving towards courting foreign investment, downplaying or divestment of public sector units (PSUs), opening up different sectors to the private sector, and a gradual withdrawal of the State from public services, the social sector and many industrial sectors under the influence of the by now internationally dominant neo-liberal economic framework championed by the IMF, World Bank and other international agencies. The collapse of the Soviet Union also saw substantial changes in India’s non-aligned foreign policy and the pro-Western trend further intensified these economic policy changes. These trends climaxed with a full-fledged embrace of neo-liberal policies in the 1990s with the stated aim of unleashing the “animal instincts” of the domestic private sector, foreign investors and multi-national corporations (MNCs), who were provided numerous incentives of de-regulation and opening up almost all sectors of the economy.

Crisis-level economic problems in the early 1990s triggered a full-scale embrace of neo-liberal policies in the Narasimha Rao-Manmohan Singh decade and later in the “dream team” UPA decade, as well as the intervening Vajpayee-Arun Shourie-Jaswant Singh era. India no doubt experienced high GDP growth rates in this period, with some poverty reduction but with deepening inequality too. In pursuit of privatization, natural resources were handed over to private corporate houses in mining, minerals, petroleum and the airwaves, ports and other infrastructure, all at a pittance allowing for super-profits, and numerous key economic sectors were opened up to Multi-National Corporations (MNCs) and the domestic private sector, while simultaneously rival PSUs were systematically weakened or undermined, for example in telecom at the cost of BSNL and in aviation at the expense of Air India/Indian Airlines. A process of privatization of public utilities such electricity and water distribution was also set in motion following the World Bank-IMF prescription. While corporate classes and a small section of the middle-classes benefited from these economic changes, business magnates were the biggest gainers, with greater concentration of wealth at the top of the pyramid.  There was a boom in consumer durables, boosted by salary rises for government and public sector employees through successive pay commissions and prods to banks to hugely expand loan schemes on liberal terms. Foreign companies entered the Indian market in a big way, both directly and through portfolio investments, aided by generous taxation and other incentives.

Large Indian private manufacturing companies entered into collaborations with MNCs and other foreign companies taking advantage of these changes. But contrary to the promise that liberalization, privatization, globalization and FDI would bring in new technologies to the country, almost none of the private players absorbed these modern technologies and improved products, and launched their own globally competitive products and brands, or emerged as global players in their own right. For the most part, they remained junior partners of MNCs and other foreign companies. A few sectors displayed some dynamism, for instance in software and business processes, but it should be noted that most Indian companies were providing services for foreign clients rather than developing or promoting their own software products, in which India still has no major global presence or players.

The public sector, which had the capability and scale to absorb new or updated technologies, was hamstrung and deliberately held back. And no major gain was made during this entire period in enhancing self-reliance and autonomous capability by Indian private sector industries.

During the UPA dispensation, efforts were also made to adopt counter-balancing welfare-oriented positions closer to the older Congress orientation.

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, amendments to the Forest Rights Act, advances to the public distribution system in the form of the Food Security Act, and the impactful National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, and efforts to protect the environment and people’s rights from corporate inroads were some of the major rights-based welfare measures put in place during this period. Many of these legislative, executive or regulatory measures were taken in response to demands and push from progressive forces and civil society organizations. Other positive experiments included the campaign-based and mass mobilization volunteer-based Total Literacy Programme catalyzed and led by AIPSN/BGVS in the earlier period, and the later Right to Education (RtE) Act during the UPA dispensation. However, all these measures and other rights-based approaches saw headwinds and even reversals due to pressure from neo-liberal forces both within the government and outside, including during the successor BJP-NDA governments.

Pressure from the strong Left presence in Parliament supporting the UPA also provided some protection to the people from some potentially harmful neo-liberal policies, such as opening up insurance to the private sector and major modifications to the Indian Patents Act as demanded by global capitalism, measures that were resisted and rejected in Parliament. Provisions still retained in the Patents Act continue to enable effective self-reliance especially to the domestic pharma industry.

Present phase

As if with a vengeance, the BJP-led Governments of 2014 and 2019 have aggressively pushed neo-liberal economic policies since coming to power, along with retrograde social policies and serious undermining of “the idea of India” as embodied in the independence struggle and the Constitution, aided and abetted by non-State Hindutva forces.

Increasing inequality

It is no surprise that income inequalities have widened even further than before, and multi-billionaires and crony capitalists believed to be close to the ruling establishment have amassed huge additional wealth during recent years, even during the lockdown and nationwide economic slowdown. 50 new billionaires were added in India during 2020, and wealth of Indian billionaires increased by 35% or almost Rs.13 lakh crores during 2020 at a time when millions of Indians were without source of income or were walking thousands of kilometers to their original villages from cities where there was no work available. The World Inequality Report 2021 states that the top 10% of Indians hold 57% of the national income, and the bottom 50% hold just 13%. It also finds that the top 1% of the population own 33% of national wealth. Such is modern neo-liberal capitalism, avidly promoted by the present government and their supporters, along with promises of further concessions to MNCs and domestic corporates especially crony capitalists, de-regulation across all sectors, further dismantling and privatization of PSUs, virtual sale of national assets, de-unionization and casualization of labour and other “reforms.”

Demographic dividend or growing handicap?

India currently has a substantial youth population, what demographers call a “youth bulge,” with over 600 million persons under the age of 25. Development experts believe this ‘demographic dividend” can be a tremendous asset for the future, provided these youth receive proper basic and higher education and appropriate skills, especially since comparable countries including China have a rapidly ageing population. On the other hand, if India fails to build the capabilities of its young population, un-skilled and under-educated youth could also form the basis for deep social unrest and undesirable socio-political tendencies.

As things stand today, India’s higher education system, despite its considerable expansion in recent times albeit largely with private colleges and universities of uncertain quality, India’s higher education enrolment rates are 20% less than i.e. far below comparable middle-income countries like Brazil or China. Various studies have shown that over 60% of engineering graduates remain unemployed, and close to 50% of all graduates have been found to be unemployable in any skilled occupation! Other available statistics show that around 27% of India’s youth are thus excluded from education, employment or skills.

Unfortunately, neither the NEP 2020 nor the Science, Technology & Innovation Policy (STIP) address these inter-related issues of low access to quality education, deep inequities in education and employment, poor linkages between the education system and employment opportunities, and the urgent need to rapidly upgrade skills and education at all levels if India is to advance in the global economy in the knowledge era.

NEP 2020 contains no reference to the industrial and economic context, simply assuming that higher education in any form will somehow meet present and future demands. On the contrary, NEP’s proposal to terminate the system of affiliating universities with widely dispersed colleges will inevitably lead to closure of numerous colleges especially in smaller towns and rural or semi-urban areas, further exacerbating social inequities and reducing access to higher education for rural and other disadvantaged populations.

 

Privatization of Education & Health

During the neo-liberal phase including under the present dispensation, the health delivery and health education system has been increasingly tilting towards private players and tertiary curative services to the extent that around 75% of hospitals and tertiary health facilities in India are in the private sector, and thus oriented towards better-off sections who can afford these services. In this context, it is not surprising that insurance-based services have gained ground rapidly, and even government departments and PSUs are now reimbursing employees’ expenses at private hospitals etc, thus further strengthening the private health care sector rather than a more affordable and accessible public health system. The dominance of the private sector, and the weakness of the public health care system, is such that the common people of India have to incur over 60% of out-of-pocket expenditures on health.

All these structural weaknesses in public health have been cruelly in evidence during the Covid-19 pandemic, with the exception of Kerala which showed how a more effective public health system could be built and run even in India through long-term consistent public investments and decentralized administration.

The overall situation is made worse by serious deficits in doctors, nurses and other paramedical personnel. Whereas medical education has expanded considerably in recent decades, costs of such education have also increased substantially while, at the same time, quality of education has suffered. These trends have also led to brain drain of qualified personnel, and high costs in India have also driven students to seek medical education abroad and falling into a debt trap as a result.

Very similar processes are underway in engineering and technical education as well. The proliferation of poorly regulated private engineering colleges with poor facilities and equipment has resulted in producing under-qualified engineers who find it difficult to get suitable jobs, particularly when industries in India are so largely based on imported technologies requiring less engineering talent compared to indigenous industries based on innovative technologies.

The proposals in NEP 2020 will further aggravate these tendencies due to NEP’s emphasis on private universities and commercialization and “vocationalization” of educational services, without any correlation to demand for human resources, or industrial and developmental policies that would shape this demand, with a tacit assumption that the educational courses offered by universities would somehow correspond to evolving market demand. High fees of around Rs.2.5 lakhs for 4-year “vocational” undergraduate courses have already started in many Colleges/ Universities under NEP but with students not having any information about the acceptance of these qualifications by employers and the future potential of these qualifications.

Privatization of PSUs and State Assets

The Government is currently on a massive spree of privatization, handing over PSUs to the private sector for a song, selling or leasing infrastructure like ports, airports, roads, railways, railway stations and all kinds of assets which had been acquired through public resources over the decades. With a non-existent or toothless competition commission, not just huge corporations but also monopolies or duopolies are being created in sector after sector such as telecom, retail etc with MNCs or overseas companies or investors having a huge share. Private monopolies are far worse than state monopolies which are at least accountable to parliament, whereas the former leave consumers with no protection given poor regulation.

All these measures are being taken with little or no regulation, following the classical neo-liberal paradigm, not being followed any more in that undiluted form even by most advanced capitalist countries. In fact, in Europe, the UK and even the US, a process of re-nationalization or re-municipalization is underway in public utilities, railways etc. Regulatory capture is being practiced by the State itself, wherein the regulator does not act as a check on corporates, rather the regulator itself supports corporates in their ventures and in getting around government checks. In fact in most cases, the regulator’s mandate is itself is defined as including support to the growth of the private sector!

Dismantling Environmental Regulations

Even during the election campaign preceding the 2014 general elections, the party which was later to form the government made it clear that it believed that environmental regulations were an obstacle to economic growth through mining, other industries, infrastructure and commercial projects. This was translated into action soon after the new Government was installed by converting the different regulatory systems under the Ministry of Environment as bodies to facilitate corporate interests and projects in ecologically sensitive areas rather than protecting the latter. This was made a major element of the government’s efforts to improve its ranking in the global “ease of doing business” index.

Environmental de-regulation is now being pursued aggressively by the present Government through various means such as executive notifications modifying existing rules and procedures, packing decision-making expert committees, proposing major changes in rules and procedures. All these are being done without any legislative backing and, in those cases where the proposals are opened up for public response, the time given is extremely limited, often two weeks or so, even if the proposals involve major changes to existing regulations or potentially greater threats to the environment.

Major dilutions have been made to the Coastal Zone Regulations and so-called “linear projects” such as power-lines, pipelines, highways and railway lines have been given exception for passing through forests and even sanctuaries. Environmental Impact Assessments have been reduced to mere formalities, with project holders allowed to prepare their own EIA through consultants. Packed approval committees have made approvals the norm and rejections rare.

Attempt was made in 2020 in the midst of the pandemic to ram through sweeping changes in EIA requirements, approval conditions and procedures through a Draft EIA Notification Amendment 2020 which, initially, gave only 30 days notice for public comments. The Draft removed the very requirement for EIA and public hearings for a wide range of project types, did not permit public objections to EIA violations which were also sought to be condoned after minor fines, and placed a whole range of projects outside EIA purview on non-transparent grounds of “national security.” After huge protests, several extensions and large-scale negative comments including charges of the Notification being in explicit violations of apex Court orders, the Notification has been kept in abeyance.

However, its various provisions are now sought to be implemented in practice through executive actions and clear trickery to circumvent provisions, such as granting EIA to 100km stretches of the Char Dham Highway in the fragile Himalayan region rather than the whole highway project of close to 900km. Similar efforts were made recently through Amendments to the Forest Rights Act, seeking to circumvent rights of tribals and other forest dwellers by redefining different categories of Forests and procedures to allow easy approvals for violations and removing large areas from the definition of forests thus enabling conversion of large areas of forests into lands for commercial or industrial projects.

Wrong idea of Self-Reliance

The big belief, and break from the early post-Independence past, especially from the 1990s onwards has been that self-reliance is an outmoded concept, technologically an unnecessary effort to “reinvent the wheel” when any country can simply buy the latest technology from somewhere. This Government even believed it could build a modern defence industry in India through FDI! This policy has predictably fallen flat on its face for obvious reasons — no country will part with its advanced technology for love or for money. In India, the myth spread by the present dispensation is that domestic manufacturing of MNC or other foreign corporation’s products is self-reliance or “atma nirbharta!” It is not! Even when products are made in India, the MNC never parts with critical know-how, so that major technology always remains with the MNC. If true self-reliance were to be achieved, the know-how and technology is absorbed, and the Indian entity develops the next generation of the technology on its own. Contrary to the situation and endeavours during early decades of Indian independence and strenuous efforts, India is now well on its way towards technological dependence which will ultimately threaten the long cherished strategic autonomy.

India is today mostly a good market for foreign or MNC goods, even if they are sometimes made or assembled in India, such as automobiles or white goods or cell phones. Even the largest Indian private corporations, except a few in the single digits, are junior partners of MNCs or other foreign entities, have developed no autonomous S&T capabilities despite having been around for many decades, and make few products of global standard or own a global brand.

While the world is now on the verge of the “fourth industrial revolution” comprising 5G, AI, robotics and further automation, autonomous vehicles, electric or hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, renewable energy storage and so on, India has been left staring at a future where we are no higher up the technological or value ladder than we used to be. With the Indian private sector not interested in R&D or developing indigenous capability, and the government hell-bent on destroying the public sector who could have undertaken the tasks, as the few remaining PSUs in atomic energy, space, defence are showing even today, the future is not looking bright for the country. Other countries eyeing the future are investing huge amounts of public funds in R&D in strategically identified sectors, without which this task is next to impossible since even large global corporations find it difficult to carry the load by themselves.

The S&T and Innovation Policy (STIP) shows no acknowledgement of this, and continues to shy away from large public investment in R&D, and imagines that private and foreign investment would somehow appear. NEP too shows no real awareness of the research, human resources and institutional structures of the future economy and related technologies, both in white and blue collar education and skill development. In the present governance structure and in the neo-liberal paradigm, there is also no room for planning as such, with Niti Aayog as well as private and MNC consultancies engaging essentially in guess-work or following ideological prescriptions. The education system has deteriorated to the extent that industrialists repeatedly lament a lack of suitably skilled and educated manpower as the second of industry’s major problems in India along with poor infrastructure.

Changing the Idea of India

Apart from the economic, technological and social aspects, the present Government is also dragging the country far away from the Constitutional values and the Idea of India, marked by unity in diversity, plurality of cultures, language and lifestyles, freedom and pluralism of opinion, and promotion of scientific temper.

The imposition of the ruling dispensation’s  own ideology and core political beliefs on the whole nation, and the complete intolerance towards dissent and plurality of opinion, including evidence-based disputation, has been another characteristic of the present phase, marking a sharp departure from Constitutional values and the Idea of India.

This Government, aided by Hindutva forces, has put majoritarian Hindutva and “cultural nationalism” at the forefront, undermining the secular state, pluralism and unity in diversity which holds this country together and which is admired the world over. Over the past seven-odd years, the nation has been torn apart by majoritarian, discriminatory and often violently pushed policies like the CAA-NPR-NRC, brutal lynchings and harassment of minority community citizens on the pretext of cow-slaughter, “love jihad,” or any other pretext. Traditional food habits of many communities in different parts of the country, from the North-East to Kerala, are under attack. Attempts are being made to impose Hindi on non-Hindi speaking States in myriad ways, insisting that constructed Vedic-Sanskritic past is the repository of all knowledge, the only true “history” and the only worthwhile tradition worthy of respect and being called Indian. All these ideas are given pride of place in the NEP.

Leading lights of the government and the ruling dispensation have repeatedly sought to impose their unsubstantiated views on ancient Vedic-Sanskritic science on a par with modern science, such as availability of the internet during the Mahabharata, advanced cosmetic surgery as evidenced by Lord Ganesha’s elephant head fitting seamlessly on a human body etc. All critics of such views, and those who defend evidence-based reasoning and scientific temper, are attacked as westernized and anti-national. The Constitutional ideals of unity of diversity and respect for all religions and cultures in this vast country are sought to be drowned under a single monolithic majoritarian “Hindu-Hindi” culture. In parallel, the federated system of governance by States and the Union is being trampled under a new unitary structure, contrary to the Constitutional system and subsumed under numerous centralizing schemes such as “One Nation, one everything.”

Pluralism of opinion has been repeatedly attacked by the present dispensation in different ways and context. Universities such as in Hyderabad, JNU, IITs in Chennai and Mumbai have been under constant attack, including through organized physical assaults, including for hosting lectures on topics disliked by the ruling dispensation or encouraging critical thinking. Books, plays, poems and films have been attacked. Champions of scientific temper and critical thought such as Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, M.M.Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh were murdered allegedly by Hindutvavadi forces. All these are attacks not just on specific issues, but on pluralism of opinion and critical thinking itself. This is crucial, not just for the Peoples Science Movement but for scientific temper itself. Science and creative thinking cannot flourish without pluralism of opinion and freedom of expression, or in an atmosphere of blind subservience to authority.

The present dispensation consciously and deliberately refuses to follow evidence-based reasoning and governance. Instead, evidence is manipulated or manufactured to suit its own pre-conceived decisions, as revealed by withdrawal of governmental reports showing contrary data and hence conclusions, pressures on premiere autonomous research institutions to tailor data to suit government narratives.

This was clearly in evidence during the Covid-19 pandemic when even the opinions of leading scientists in government-appointment committees were repeatedly ignored. Numerous international scholars, human rights organizations and activists, have faced censorship, refusal of permission to enter or do research in India, with government attempting to require academic institutions to seek permission before organizing even virtual webinars! The present dispensation’s policy of communal and other polarizations raises paramount questions about the nation’s future. If a country is divided within itself, how can it work with a common zeal for the common good? If a country has no friends and a poor reputation internationally, with no soft power, how can it play a major leave alone leading role in the comity of nations and advance the interests of its citizens? If a country does everything it can to stifle critical thinking, how can its youth lead the country in the knowledge era?

India desperately needs to restore its post-independence identity as a forward looking country, building its autonomous self-reliant knowledge especially in science and technology for the global economy of tomorrow, promote its major public sector industries to achieve these goals along with those private entities with a commitment and dedication to achieve self-reliance in India. India desperately needs to re-establish Constitutional values of unity of diversity so that all States, cultures and people of all religions can move forward determinedly each in their own unique way. India needs to take forward its values of plurality, freedom of expression, autonomy of governance institutions, strong anti-discrimination laws, and a planned and well-regulated economy keeping in mind socio-economic equity, environmental sustainability, protection of historically underprivileged populations and demands of the future global economy and technological ecosystem. None of this can happen without a robust public education system and effective primary health care system. Employment and livelihoods need to be ensured for the masses along with appropriate safety nets. Together these call for systematic planning and a welfare state.

For the present dispensation, it seems GDP growth and the “ease of doing business” are far more important that raising the living standards and promoting livelihoods of the mass of people. The present Government’s fascination with high-cost, grandiose infrastructure and constructions projects while ignoring the travails of the poor is accelerating. Cases in point are the Ahmedabad-Mumbai bullet train, the Sardar Patel statue, the Central Vista and related projects in the national capital, Varanasi “beautification” projects even as the Ganga continues being filthy, the Sabarmati waterfront and, recently, the gaudy and incongruous Jalianwalabagh Memorial. An even more jazzed-up and unseemly Rs.1250 crores Memorial complex at Gandhi’s simple cottage structures in the Sabarmati Ashram. The long-standing goal of the Republic to establish a welfare state has been thrown to the winds in the most openly elitist and pro-business government since Independence.

Above all, no country can progress if its people are divided against each other. The British colonialists perpetuated their rule over the Indian sub-continent through their conscious policy of divide and rule, ultimately leading to partition of the country along religious lines. It was the strength of the independence movement that it brought together all religious, cultural, ethnic, linguistic and caste groupings together under a common umbrella to achieve the common goals of independence, progress and welfare of all, unity in diversity, equality before the law, freedom of expression and acceptance of pluralism and critical thinking. No country can progress if its people are divided against each other. 75 years after Independence, can we allow ourselves to be divided again?

The future beckons India, especially its youth. To achieve its due, India needs to re-generate, re-imagine and take forward the values and aspirations of its freedom movement in the contemporary context and learning from all the missteps, failures and missed opportunities over the years.

The Peoples Science Movement will take this message to the people during the year through grassroots dialogues and other mass contact programmes.

 

All India Save Education Day on 05th September Teachers Day

Click here to read the Press Release for Save Education Day 5th Sept 2021

 

Click here to read the related AIFUCTO Circular AIFUCTO GS Circular 26.08.2021

Time has come for more vigorous protest against the stubborn and undemocratic attitude of the Government of India and showing our teeth against undemocratic, unscientific, retrograde and exclusionary nature of NEP.

Joint Forum for Movement on Education (JFME) considering the gravity of the situation has a given a call for All India Save Education Day on 05th September, 2021 to be more demonstrative of our protest against NEP to Save Education, Save Campus and Save Nation.

Please where ever possible organize demonstrative action either in front of Rajabhavan or State Capital or university or college campus on the day.

Submit memorandum to the state as well as Central government on our stand on NEP and also highlights state issues.

Organize JFME at your level and carry on the program.

Click here to read the related JFME Circular JFMECircular-22.08.2021

Click here to read the related JFME Statement JFME Joint Statement July 25

Click to read the AIPSN Campaign note in English and Hindi 

On the draft STIP2020: Need for a people-centered and future-oriented STIP based on reality

click here to see the Gmail submission of AIPSN Response to draft STIP2020

click here for the AIPSN-response-DraftSTIP2020-30Jan2021 in English

 

30Jan2021

All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN) Response

 

On the draft STIP2020:

Need for a people-centered and future-oriented STIP based on reality

  1. During the ongoing pandemic, the Science Policy Forum and Department of Science and Technology initiated a series of discussions in different tracks to discuss various parts for formulating a draft STIP2020. On Dec 31st a draft was released in English online and a feedback response date of 25th Jan was given. Two days before the date, the deadline was extended to 31st Jan.
  2. In the economic transformation of Japan, South Korea and China their policies relating to Science, Technology and Innovation played a significant role in these countries’ development with advanced capabilities in technologies of the second and third industrial revolutions, poised to also develop such capabilities in 4th generation technologies expected to dominate the global economy over the next two decades. Several other Asian countries such as Singapore and Taiwan have also developed advanced manufacturing capabilities and know-how. All these nations have followed what we may broadly call a self-reliant pathway in S&T, consciously investing in developing their own knowledge, industrial and human resource capabilities over the years, as against depending on “Western” MNCs or companies for this. In the Global Innovation Index China now a rank 14th for the 2nd time in a row and remains the only middle-income economy in the GII top 30. India is at the 48th position. This follows the consistent growth of Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) with respect to the GDP in the case of China that grew from 0.6 in 1996 to 2.2 now, while in contrast India has remained hovering around 0.6 since 1996. GERD of the “Asian Tiger” economies follows a similar trajectory. It is also important to highlight the fact that China has used per capita GDP as a metric to measure its progress, thereby placing emphasis on the share of its working population in growth, rather than just GDP as India and many other countries do.
  1. The biggest weakness of draft STIP 2020 is that the policy is not rooted in the economic and industrial scenario of the country, and the direction in which these are visualized to transform over the next, say ten to fifteen years. Without such a vision, draft STIP2020 is cast in a vacuum. Further, the draft STIP2020 does not take cognizance of the present state of Science, Technology and Innovation in India, and put forward a policy that starts from where we are and leads to where we want to go. Similarly, the suggestions proposed do not also reckon with the institutional and systemic weaknesses or strengths. In this context, the very feasibility and utility of the draft STIP2020 are open to question, however nice this or that proposal sounds. Incidentally, STIP 2013 envisioned positioning India among the top 5 global scientific powers by 2020. Do we then presume that India has achieved that and now moves towards the top 3?
  1. A well thought out and designed policy that is sensitive to the needs of not only the people of India but of the world can make a tremendous difference. However, for inclusive and sustainable growth, it is important to first chart the practical steps for effective implementation of S&T policies. Such an approach is needed for balanced and integrated development taking into account the social and environmental aspects. In order to do this, it is important to first ensure the penetration of basic infrastructure of roads, electricity, communications and internet, water, public health, education and skills, to all parts of the country. Just as India’s R&D expenditure has historically been miserably low, so too has India’s investment in the health and education of the majority of its population and potential work force.  No less is the importance of a federated approach to take into account the geographical and developmental diversity amongst the States and Union Territories of India. A rigid one shoe fits all approach will not be useful. There has to be inbuilt flexibility in terms of structures, funding and implementation considering the developmental and infrastructural variations in different regions.
  1. The draft STIP2020 is not an authentic national STI policy. At best, it is like a policy for the Department of Science and Technology (DST). A transformational STI policy needs to bring on board all the government departments of the union Government, the state governments and the public in a collaborative mode for the formulation of STIP 2020 draft.
  1. The vision of the policy as mentioned “to build individual and institutional excellence in STI with the aspiration to achieve the highest level of global recognitions and awards in the coming decade” is completely flawed. One cannot have a national policy based only on awards and recognitions: if India does outstanding science and develops novel advanced technologies, awards and recognitions will follow. As the Nobel Laureate Venkatraman Ramakrishnan has said “Science flourishes when people are free to question authority”. But that cannot be built into a policy. It is an academic, research and society-wide culture and part of the scientific temper which is encouraged by our Constitution.
  1. The draft policy keeps referring to undefined Traditional Knowledge Systems and in one place links it with heritage. This along with references to undefined grassroots innovations is in dissonance with the vision to position India among the top three scientific superpowers in the decade to come. However, highlighting these in the draft STIP2020, in the context of what is currently being done in India under the rubric of these terms, does pave the way for significant funding for spurious and inefficacious efforts, often pulling in an opposite direction to the desired future-oriented STI.
  1. The draft STIP2020 is astonishingly filled with a plethora of new Institutions and Funding Schemes: the Capacity Building Authority, the STI Policy Institute, the overarching Strategic Technology Board, a Strategic Development Fund, a national STI Financing Authority, an STI Development Bank, the national STI governance mechanism, the National STI Observatory, Indian Science and Technology Archive of Research (INDSTA), Advanced Missions in Innovative Research Ecosystems (ADMIRE), a centralized database on all forms of Financial Incentives, and Inter-State Science, Technology and Innovation Council (IS-STIC). While it is necessary that funding mechanisms be centrally coordinated, the structural framework along with the control structure also needs to be decentralized in order to take into account the spirit of cooperative federalism envisaged in the Constitution of India.  These numerous new Institutions would only lead to additional bureaucratic structures in an already top-heavy science administration, draining even more funds from actual research. There is also no point creating new institutions and funding schemes without examining the problem of non-functioning or malfunctioning of existing ones.  It is ironic that these suggestions for new Institutions come at a time when the government is engaged in closing down many S&T Institutions and driving them to raise their own funds, therefore reducing the amount of research done, showing again how distanced the draft STIP2020 is from ground realities.
  1. The draft STIP2020 talks of attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in STI, reduction in corporate tax rates for foreign MNCs, fast track clearances, easing land acquisitions, adequate means for incorporating FDI etc. to be explored on a need basis. This is definitely detrimental to public  sector research in agriculture  aiming  to strive  for food  self sufficiency, security and especially nutritional security. Self-reliant STI can certainly not be built through FDI or by foreign MNCs who may manufacture in India but will not transfer technologies as experience hitherto has amply shown. Experience of Japan, S.Korea and China is exactly the same: they embarked on a self-reliant path precisely because MNCs and Western companies will never part with their technologies, since they know full well that it is knowledge and technology, which controls industry and the economy. This is yet another cardinal mistake in the draft STIP2020; following the present Governments idea that manufacturing in India by foreign companies/MNCs directly or through FDI in junior Indian partners, is also “Make in India” and also represents Atma Nirbhar Bharat. Nothing could be further from the truth. The draft STIP2020 is extremely permissive to imports, and by this route it plans to achieve ” Atmanirbhar Bharat” and India’s emergence as the third global power in STI! And for that, science is now given a new role: “S&T for diplomatic benefits” and “diplomacy for S&T development”! In this draft STIP2020, the Indian Diaspora are to serve as conduits in the mercantilist exploitation of science, in which India’s intellectual resources, like her scientists, will be the basic inputs in this Atmanirbhar Bharat’s Global Assembly Line.
  1. The long-term and continuing reluctance of the private sector in India to invest in R&D is notorious but is not meaningfully addressed in the draft STIP2020. Much of this is due to Indian corporates’ preference to take the easy route of foreign collaboration or technology imports repeatedly incentivized by industrial and taxation policies of successive governments, even further promoted by the current emphasis on FDI as the major engine of industrial and technological development. Minor policy incentives or inducements will not change this, and a thrust for genuine self-reliance is a must.
  1. The draft STIP2020 also provides an escape clause for the Central Government from the need for enhanced investments in R&D by proposing that all other stakeholders such as State governments, PSUs, SMEs, private sector, Universities, Research Institutions and so on would be required to set aside earmarked funds for R&D. This is a futile and sub-optimal exercise and would only lead to ineffectual “R&D” on paper, merely to satisfy some bureaucratic requirement. In the absence of mission-oriented R&D programmes at scale, the goal of transformative R&D to take India into a leading position in the 4th industrial revolution would remain a pipedream.
  1. There is no meaningful discussion of employment in a potentially changed capital and technology-intensive industrial scenario, and how the draft STIP2020 proposes to address this issue. There is therefore no mention of the working people, farmers, workers, migrants, unorganized workers, rural unemployed and under-employed. Nor is there any indication of how the STI is going to benefit and take them along in the process of inclusive and sustainable growth. This begs the question as to who this draft STIP2020 bell tolls for?
  1. Another big miss in the draft STIP2020 is the absence of addressing societal goals that can be targeted through S&T and by promoting scientific temper, issues that were emphasized in the Scientific Policy Resolution 1958 (SPR1958).Even in its mention of the SPR1958 document, the draft STIP2020 does not mention these aims of the SPR1958 and limits itself to stating that “S&T were seen as vehicles for the onward journey towards socio-economic transformation and nation building”. The role that S&T can play in alleviating hunger (India stands 102 among 117 countries in World Hunger Index), combating disease, ensuring health, hygiene, housing, employment and making the reach of science equitable are not addressed at all in the document.
  1. The draft STIP2020 is anything but what it says: “It is to be noted that the new STIP policy revolves around the principles of being decentralized, evidence-informed, bottom-up, experts-driven, and inclusive.” There are a lot of hollow claims of producing an evidence-driven, inclusive and bottom-up policy process steered and coordinated for the well being of the nation and its people with socio-economic and environmental considerations. The rambling draft policy makes all the right noises but lacks foundations of reality making it a catch all bucket list which without the grounding will remain wishful thinking. It is essential to cut the fluff and make it lean but meaningful.
  1. A major appreciative aspect of the draft STIP2020 is the very mention of LGBTQ+ and all that follows. But again it is dampened by the lack of specifics and arriving at how the changes can be made. The other aspect that is appealing is the talk of Open Science but the sheen is lost, due to not trying to figure out why it has not progressed, as needed, so far.
  1. The importance given to Science Communication is welcome, but it is disappointing to see the stress on scientists rather than on imbuing the lay citizen with scientific temper, critical thinking and the world view of science. It is puzzling that, rather than acknowledge and build upon the existing almost 40 year old people’s science movements in the country committed to and involved with activities towards this goal; this policy glibly seeks to “create” new science movements. Civil society organizations should be left to themselves and supported, but government-created “science movements” would be self-defeating and work against developing critical thinking which often requires looking at governmental S&T policies with a critical eye.
  1. The STIP will affect all sections of the public and, as mentioned in the draft STIP2020, it is meant to be inclusive. Moreover, it also intends to make science literature available in all languages and geographic regions. So a good starting point will be to make the draft STIP2020 available in all the Scheduled languages in the Constitution of India so that the public including researchers at all levels can meaningfully understand and discuss it to come forward with suggestions.
  1. There is no particular urgency to have the STIP brought out within the coming months especially in the time of the pandemic. It may therefore be a good idea to revise the Draft in a transparent manner taking into account comments received, and the revised STIP then placed before parliament allowing for scrutiny by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on S&T.

 

AIPSN demands for transforming the draft STIP2020

into a people-centered and future-oriented STIP based on reality:

 

a) The draft STIP2020 be made available officially on the website in all the Scheduled languages and propagated through social media and TV. After that is made available at least two months period should be given for wide dissemination and involvement in discussions. 

b) There should be a provision for giving feedback through hard copies also apart from only online as online access is still limited in the country. One contact person should be mentioned to ensure that the hard copies will be received correctly. 

c) All the suggestions received, as hard copies and online, must be put into an indexed publicly available online database so that there can be cross checking about incorporation in the STIP. 

d) The draft STIP2020 has to reduce the rhetoric and make it more realistic 

e) The NEP has not been debated in the Parliament. Therefore, endorsing or linking NEP in sections of the STI is not democratic. It is important to involve the Parliament in the STI through formation of a Parliamentary Standing Committee for STI. This is also one of the recommendations by UNESCO for countries to democratise the STIP. 

f) The many structures that are envisaged in the STI need to be decentralised, not in funding but in functionality and structure, taking into account the cooperative federalism which is the spirit of the Constitution. 

g) The four decades old popular science movements and some even older science popularization organizations in the country need to be acknowledged and built upon rather than artificially “creating” new science movements to act at the behest of the government. 

h) There were only limited online attempts to involve or seek the opinions of the wide thriving S&T community in the country. There needs to be more engaged consultations with such S&T communities distributed across the country to evolve this national policy. 

30Jan2021

 

For clarifications contact:

  1. Krishnaswamy 9442158638
  2. Rajamanickam, General Secretary, AIPSN

gsaipsn@gmail.com, 9442915101 @gsaipsn

 

 

‘Science for social revolution’: People’s Science Movements and democratizing science in India

click here for the pdf of the article   

Authors:

Venkateswaran T.V.

Abstract:

Often, new social movements engaged with science and society are characterised as contesting objectivity; the neutrality of modern science seeking to legitimise ‘lay perspectives’. It has been an article of faith among scholars to view third world movements as anti-science, anti-modernity and post-developmentalist. This commentary describes ideological framework, modes of action and organisation of the All India People’s Science Network (AIPSN), one of the People’s science movement (PSMs) active for more than the past four decades. They dispute the dominant development trajectory and science and technology-related policies for reinforcing the existing inequities. Nevertheless, they see ‘science’ as a powerful ally for realising their radical emancipatory vision of ‘science for social revolution’. Mobilising ‘science activists’ as unique alternate communicators, they strive for lay-expert collaboration. The canonical framing of third world social movements as postcolonial and anti-modern does not capture this unique case from India. Further studies are required to tease out such strands of social movements elsewhere.