बुधवार, 28 मार्च 2018

Science and Technology in India: Contemporary Challenge -1

In India, the post-independent science and technology (S&T) system emerged out of debates within members of the scientific aligned with the Nehruvian vision of modern India, who were also influenced by progressive ideologies promoted by those aligned with the Left of the political spectrum in pre-independence India. There was a dominant position in favour of the creation of a national system of science and technology which had autonomy from the market as well as the state. Discrimination shown by the British industry and government had strengthened the resolve to develop a politically independent system of S&T to meet the aspiration of actively contributing to the process of development. Colonial S&T system was largely limited to meeting narrowly defined needs of the British rulers. Their vision of a national S&T system was supportive of a politically independent path of “autonomous development” of industry, power, agriculture, medicine, education and science for post-independent India which would set its own directions and priorities. This vision was articulated in the national planning committee set up through the efforts of Meghnad Saha and others in the Science and Culture Group in 1938. The national planning committee functioned under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru. In the immediate period after independence the discourse on the role and contribution of science and technology took place through the columns of Current Science, published by the Indian Institute of Science from Bangalore and in the pages of Science and Culture published from Calcutta. The need to develop the human resource m 6 for science and technology and the practice of a culture of science in all creative endeavors was underlined by the a range of leaders across the political spectrum -- Nehruvian, Gandhian, Left, Ambedkarite, etc. The nationalist vision of S&T in independent India was anti-imperialist to the core. In 1948 the Higher Education Commission (Radhakrishnan Commission) set up by the post-independent government included the conceptions of how the higher education system should approach General Education, Technical Education and Education for Rural Development. This commission incorporated its longest chapter on rural university and had proposed its own conception of rural universities after reviewing models available for the development of agriculture and rural industries in United Kingdom, United States of America and Denmark. The proposed model was an outcome of debates carried out with the full participation of Nehruvians, Gandhians and left oriented scientists like Meghnad Saha. The paradigm of planning that the Indian government chose after gaining independence was mostly shaped by the Nehruvian perceptions of ‘self-reliance’ and ‘development’. Achievements were reflected in the development of the public sector in R&D and innovation. This was the period when centres for S&T promotion such as the Department of Atomic Energy, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Indian Council of Medical Research and Indian Institutes of Technology were set up. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) was shaped by the National Education Commission (Kothari Commission) which submitted its report in 1966. The vision of the rural university was drastically modified to suit the emerging needs of Indo-American collaboration in agriculture. The Nehruvian notions of national development were implemented in a way that strengthened domestic capital, helped expand the domestic market and fostered peasant capitalism, all as part of capitalist development during the period of 1950-1980 in India. Although developed primarily to promote Capitalist development, actors who were not part of the political mainstream aligned to the government, were provided space to struggle against mainstream policies. There was not only an accommodation of diversity in the experiments being undertaken on outside the public funded system, but also within publicly funded research and development organizations. The emerging scientific community, which had its own  heterogeneous interests and diverse visions to offer in the form of large multipurpose dams, national laboratories, rural university, public sector and cooperatives, had started its collaboration with the domestic industry before India became independent. Experiments being undertaken outside the mainstream system by the Gandhians and the Left had support from inside the system. Outsiders became insiders in many instances. When the people of India were mobilized to become the social carriers of science, technology and development on the ground (such as through setting up of enterprises such as Bengal chemicals and through associations such as the All India Village Industries Association) they were able to receive support from the scientific community in the mainstream system of S&T. The space existed for proposing innovations and different types of experiments motivated by different ideological visions and understanding of political strategy in India. There was an environment of active contestations taking place and the mainstream system allowed the scientific community and these visions to engage to some extent with each other. India was one of the first few countries in the postcolonial developing world to formulate an explicit scientific policy resolution and evolve policy instruments for the development of science and technology. The selected pathway to industrialization emphasized industrial upgrading wherein the production of capital goods, energy, metals and basic chemicals was to receive priority to reduce import dependence. This initial phase of accommodation of diversity in respect of institution building for knowledge production, knowledge mobilization and innovation-making proved to be helpful in not only uniting the country but also putting the country on its feet. It helped the country to create a base for the development of industry, agriculture, education and other sectors on which stand even the accomplishments of the post-1980 liberalisation phase of economic policies. 

कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:

एक टिप्पणी भेजें