The frail and very promising scientific research building built in Portugal in recent decades is at risk. Serious Hazard: in the short term because we come to retreat again to occupy the place of Europe in the tail. Centers, laboratories, research programs and grant applications have been affected by savage cuts in public funding, that could cause discontinuities and imposing blockades. But the worst is that this decline may be associated not only with the financial crisis facing the country and obviously understand, but the options in an area that is very little in state spending – and the Structural Funds of the European Union, it should be noted – and is a key lever for modernization of Portugal.
In parallel, the criteria and procedures for evaluating the tenders of the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) have proved somewhat clear and transparent. Especially, the evaluation of the tenders of 2013 caused a glaring injustice situations that need to be resolved. The constant changes of regulations, lack of planning, the changes permanent deadlines, bureaucratic confusion and attaches unfortunately characterize the programs that have been launched, which adds to the danger of a return to a clientele model and not meritocratic evaluation by peers.
will need to realize that the FCT has a functional structure capable of realizing the scientific edifice. For this, you need to put your finger on it and realize how far does the lack of resources, materials and especially humans, and how to avoid excessive reliance on circumstantial timetables imposed by the Ministry of Finance or the clientelist appetites for structural funds coming. Ie, how can the FCT create the conditions of stability to defend the autonomy of science?
also are concerned about the general confusion that have been treated with applications of the younger generations. They share expectations and commitments that are defrauded without complacency. The generation of between 30 and 40 – which has imposed curricula for their research guided by the highest standards – runs the risk of being wiped out, losing the investment made in the last two decades and is returning to the parish where delay left there is still very little time.
We are aware that when success rates in tenders for research (grants and projects) to lower laughable numbers, it would almost be better not to open the same competitions. Keep them equates to resume a semblance of “excellence” and “internationalization”, in which sometimes the cost of evaluators turns out to be higher than the number of grants awarded. Now, in “the house where there is bread” and where the rules are no longer clear, it created a whole climate of suspicion, a direct result of the divestment and the strengthening of the powers of clienteles.
supporting research depends on the strengthening of good institutions and good researchers and projects, and properly evaluated by strict criteria (another recent development that has nothing to do with the existence of minor features). We believe therefore that it would be crucial for institutions to reward the best and “reform” the worst.
research careers such as teaching in universities are closed. And the growth model of universities and research centers, if there is, it is at the expense of precarious work contracts a few years, coming up to five months to cover only the half. In turn, the risks of not foster autonomy and freedom in creation science are enormous, if not respect differing scales. For example, the simple binding of individual projects makes bags disappear subjects and objects of enormous innovative potential, which is not part of the “great teacher” agenda does not exist. The passage of all doctoral scholarships to universities eliminates the freedom of students to choose some high end international institutions in their areas. It is also feared that the research agendas progressively dominant in research centers, are increasingly the agenda of policy makers of circumstance and natural interests that support them. For all these reasons, it is appropriate to defend the autonomy of scientific freedom and fundamental research, guided by rigorous evaluation of the quality and impact in the community and society.
Why not accept that destroy the process of creating a higher education done in constant contact with scientific research, we fight for autonomy, but we can not do without the financial resources that sustain it. Nor can we accept that the future of the younger generations of highly skilled researchers be mortgaged and is, quite simply crashed.
It is natural that in a period of crisis, scarce resources are cannibalized by the most powerful interests, and the next year the funds of the European Union will certainly make it clearer. But we hope that the consensus is respected around the idea that investment in scientific research is, in fact, the most profitable for the country’s development is not only apparent.
Manuel Sobrinho Simões, António Costa Pinto, Diogo Ramada Curto
Researchers and teachers universitártios
No comments:
Post a Comment