Güven Sak, PhD - [Archive]

What happened at TÜBA happens at CERN 07/12/2012 - Viewed 1878 times

Losing space of autonomy, TÜBA has become an element of administrative organization during the rule of the current government.

Science does not like politics. Positive science has no ideology and abhors politics. Why?  Scientists draw conclusions on the subjects they study through experiments or existing evidence and take sides in discussions on the basis of those conclusions. Politicians by definition take sides from the very beginning. They consider a given issue from the perspective of their side and fabricate evidence accordingly. Science researches; politics produce materials for debate. This is why it is a bad idea to leave decisions on science policy and R&D expenditures to politicians alone. Politics likes producing policy-based evidence while science likes designing evidence-based policies. The priorities of a scientist and a politician therefore might not match.

As I said before, science does not like politics. Scientists do not like a science policy administration that is highly influenced by politics. And the recent debate on Turkey’s membership in the European Organization of Nuclear Research (CERN) is linked closely to the issue of science policy management. During the rule of the current government, the management of science policy has been put under political tutelage. The case of the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA) is the hallmark of the current government’s actions regarding science policy. Losing the space of autonomy, TÜBA has become an element of administrative organization. Whether this is a good thing or not is open to question, but this is the case.

Here is the first point to stress: the pressing weight of politics in science policy management despite the importance of autonomous boards composed of scientists is an issue being debated throughout the world. The issue is not unique to Turkey. Turkey recently affiliated the Scientific and Technological Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) with the newly established Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology. Today, Chile is on a similar pathway. The Chilean Science and Technology Research Commission (CONICYT) used to be affiliated with the Ministry of Education. Later, it was transferred to the Ministry of Economy, an event viewed with frustration by scientists. Like I said before, science does not like politics. Nor does it have a way with politics.

So, what is the aim of these politics? The solution politics has come up with is open to question, but I think the state tutelage over science has been increasing for a reason, which is that Turkey has been increasingly deindustrializing, and has become caught in the middle-income trap. So, here is the million-dollar question: was Turkey moved off the list of the world’s industrial giants from 2000 to 2010 because of its maverick science policy? In terms of the gross value added of the global manufacturing production, Turkey wasn’t even among the top 15 in 1980. Then came Turgut Özal, who moved Turkey up on the list of industrial giants. We were on the list in the 1990s and the first decade of the third millennia. As of 2010, Turkey is no longer on the list. This finding raised in McKinsey’s report “Manufacturing the Future: The Next Era of Global Growth and Innovation” matches the calculations of TEPAV economists: Turkey has been deindustrialized. Is the rising state tutelage over science policy in Turkey the correct prescription against skills erosion in Turkey? I really don’t think so.

The CERN discussion and the fact that state has a big say in the discussion do not bode well for Turkey. This is not the correct path to follow.

So, I have spoken and saved my soul.

This commentary was published in Radikal daily on 07.12.2012