Description |
Advancing scientific frontiers can indeed be accompanied by advances in
our responsibility towards socially marginalised communities. If this is
not happening enough in our society, then there may be a need to change
the parameters of scientific discourse in the country. As an example, we
have the accuracy/affordability trade-off: If every drug is screened at 1
or 5 per cent level of significance, it is obvious that many leads which
might have worked at 10 or 20 per cent level of significance would be
thrown out. If these rejected leads also were to provide solutions at
lesser cost, then we have implicitly made a trade off between accuracy and
affordability (assuming that there are no life saving implications or no
associated increase in side effects with reduction in accuracy). After
all, people take much bigger risks in real life every day, they will/might
prefer a drug which gives them 70 per cent chances of improvement at say
10 rupees per dose than 95 per cent chance at Rs.1000/- per dose. Similar
trade-offs have to be made in various disciplines. Many farmers develop
herbal pesticides or bio-control strategies for pest control which may
achieve 60-75 per cent effectiveness but at a very low or practically no
cost and adverse side effect. But the traction for such innovations by
farmers in institutional extensions is negligible if not altogether
absent.
Are the poor rich in some resources? Why has Honey Bee Network contributed
more than 90% of the 140,000 ideas, innovations and traditional knowledge
practices in the last two decades from over 550 districts. Twenty five
"Shodh Yatras" over the last thirteen years (lately in conflict prone
regions like Bastar, Puruliya, Koraput, Champaran, Araku valley, Anantnag
etc.) have demonstrated extraordinary richness in local knowledge,
institutions, culture and resources. But they also show extreme alienation
of state, civil society, market and science and technology institutions.
How else can one explain millions of people using technologies developed
thousands of years ago, with high drudgery and low efficiency. Why are
scientific peer groups not bothered by such inertia and insularity?
Can linking technically qualified youth with the problems and potential of
the informal sector provide a way ahead? Is there really a trade off
between good science and science for public good? Can "www.techpedia.in"
developed by SRISTI hosting more than 100,000 engineering projects by
close to 350,000 students from over 500 engineering colleges enable youth
to question institutionalised inertia, mediocrity and insularity?
|