May 11, 2010 International Interview http://www.research-europe.com/index.php/2010/05/professor-petr-mateju-president-of-the-czech-science-foundation/
The Czech Republic does not have the financial weight of some of its European counterparts; however, as GACR President Professor Petr Mateju, explains, through consistent excellence in scientific research, the country can compete on a global level.
The Foundation promotes progress in basic research in the Czech Republic. Could you begin by outlining its main aims and objectives?
Given its main mission, which is to provide funding for basic research in virtually all disciplines, the Czech Science Foundation’s main objective cannot be anything else than to use all available instruments to promote excellence in research. It may sound like a slogan, but in the Czech Republic, whose research potential is naturally limited by its population size and the financial resources that can be mobilised to support science and higher education, there is no other potentially successful strategy for success in global competition – which is increasingly based on innovation – than achieving excellence in research. While in some countries the focus on excellence in research may be a desirable strategy, in countries like the Czech Republic it is simply a necessity. Promoting basic research to achieve a level of excellence that, in the long-run, would raise the country’s innovation potential, while protecting it from short-sighted goals and interests, is not a simple task. The presidium of the Czech Science Foundation, which I have the privilege to lead, is determined to follow this strategy.
How broad is the range of disciplines in which the Foundation funds research? Are there any particular examples of research the Foundation is funding which you would like to highlight?
It is difficult to highlight any of the disciplines we are especially focused on or proud of and to be fair to the others. Due to our status and mission, we have to respect that it is the very nature of basic research to be driven by the curiosity of scientists themselves. Though certainly, all members of the presidium – who represent five broadly defined fields of research – have quite strong evidence about the strengths or weaknesses of basic research in their fields, we do not make any priorities. What we can do – and hopefully do with success – is to evaluate independently, objectively and stringently the quality of research proposals and researchers’ potential to accomplish their goals. Due to the changes in the evaluation rules and procedures we began to implement two years ago, we are witnessing in almost all disciplines significant progress in the quality of research proposals, as well as in projects’ results. That was our main goal and I’m glad to see that most members of the Czech academic community recognise that we are gradually achieving our aim.
The Foundation has been funding postdoctoral projects since 1997 and your EURYI project aims to support young scientists in pursuing their careers in Europe. How important do you consider nurturing the next generation of Czech scientists to be?
Investing in young scholars is equally important as funding the research carried out by world-class scholars. A science foundation that is not determined to nurture the next generation of scientists is in fact undermining future competitiveness, not only in basic research. That is why we still continue to fund postdoctoral research projects under the programme launched in 1997. This programme was originally designed to facilitate the launch of scientific careers by funding research carried out by individual postdoctoral researchers. Since science has increasingly become a team-based endeavour, we are currently considering ways to modify the programme in order to create better conditions for young scientists not only to carry out their own research, but also to learn and practice how to manage research teams.
Your Department of International Relations has been encouraging international cooperation since 2004 and the GACR is a member of the European Science Foundation (ESF) and the European Heads of Research Councils (EuroHORCs). How important is international collaboration for the Foundation, and more broadly for scientific research today?
Scientific research has become a truly international activity. Therefore, it would be a great mistake to act as a self-enclosed community. Strengthening international cooperation is undoubtedly the best strategy to succeed in international competition. Moreover, we should not forget that participation in collaborative projects helps small countries catch up with the science ‘superpowers’ by also raising standards for domestic grant competitions. International collaboration is therefore one of our priorities. Organisations like ESF and EuroHORCs certainly facilitate the participation of small academic communities, both in setting priorities for future collaborative research, and the formation of programmes bringing together national research funding organisations to support interdisciplinary research carried out by international research teams. The problem appears to be in designing and joining collaborative programmes when funding is based on principles that are not compatible with national legislations. The same holds for rules and procedures for the evaluation of research projects, which are not sufficiently harmonised among EU countries. Enormous progress has been achieved, namely by ESF and EuroHORCs, in addressing these problems and obstacles, but more has to be done now by policy makers both at European level and in individual countries.
Further to the last question, your programme of bilateral cooperation has created partnerships with Korea, Germany and Taiwan. What kind of opportunities does this present?
The bilateral cooperation programme was launched to facilitate collaboration with science foundations either in countries which historically have been our strong partners in research (eg. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) or in non-European countries in which research, development and innovation play an extremely strong role in building national strategies for competitiveness. Since the Czech Republic is striving to build such a strategy, countries like Korea and Taiwan – known for their significant improvements in overall competitiveness, nurtured in particular by a strong and very dynamic research and development sector – are naturally excellent partners for bilateral cooperation in scientific research. The Czech–Taiwanese workshop held a few months ago in Prague revealed areas in which future collaboration will be particularly rewarding for both partners. This is particularly in the bio-medical sciences, where Czech-Taiwanese collaboration already has great potential to achieve breakthrough results, and in the social sciences, where – quite surprisingly – we have found many common topics and themes for bilateral research projects addressing socioeconomic and political processes shaping our societies and economies. We therefore expect significant added value from collaborative research.
How important do you consider a multidisciplinary approach in research?
Up to now, the historical accumulation of knowledge has been based on increasing specialisation, fragmentation and deconstruction. It has led to the creation of new disciplines and subdisciplines. It is becoming increasingly evident that further progress in understanding our world will now depend on our capacity and determination to orientate scientific research to complexity, relationships and driving forces of change. Such a reorientation in scientific research, which definitely calls for multidisciplinarity, is also necessary in order to establish stronger links between basic research and innovation. In light of the strong processes underlying scientific development, we decided to design a new programme for funding long-term multidisciplinary research projects fitting the category of basic-oriented research, which – according to the Frascati manual – “is carried out with expectations that it will produce a broad base of knowledge likely to form the foundation of the solution to recognised or expected, current or future problems”.
Do you feel the GACR has more influence on European research policy since being a member of EuroHORCs?
Given the nature of our organisation, EuroHORCs has been our main partner on the international landscape. I became a member of EuroHORCs in 2009, and therefore my personal experience is not long enough to make any strong personal judgments about the effects of our membership on the role of the Czech Science Foundation at the national or international level. Also, in my first two years in office, the new presidium of the Czech Science Foundation devoted most of its time and energy to implementing a new system for evaluating research proposals, very much inspired by European Research Council, so we haven’t had enough time to strengthen our involvement in international activities as well. However, two things should be emphasised in this context. We are still benefiting greatly from the strong involvement of my predecessor, Professor Josef Syka, in EuroHORCs’ activities. Professor Syka was very active member of the EuroHORCs Steering Committee, particularly in facilitating collaboration with EU accession countries. As for the future, we strongly support the effort of EuroHORCs and ESF to work closely on reshaping the institutional landscape of the European Research Area, which – as we see and experience first-hand in our work – should bring more clarity, transparency and efficiency to the coordination and funding of collaborative research in Europe. We certainly wish to play an active role in this process.
How has the GACR’s funding been affected in light of the current financial slowdown? What role do you perceive scientific research has in aiding economic recovery?
The good news for Czech scientists is that the negative effects of the financial crisis on the Czech Science Foundation’s budget, at least so far, have been less severe than in other areas of public funding. To be specific, the real effect of the financial crisis on our budget was that it entailed a decline in the budget’s growth rate, rather than real cuts in the size of the budget. I hope that this trend will not turn around in years to come. I believe that there will be a strong consensus among policy makers, politicians and the academic community that supporting targeted funding of both the basic and applied research, based on credible and transparent evaluation processes, is one the most efficient strategies for creating great and long-lasting prospects for dynamic and innovation-based economic growth.
In the future, how would you like to see the role of the GACR develop?
If we want to be more competitive as a country, and if our competitiveness is to improve the quality of life and our standard of living, we must invest in science and development not only more, but also more effectively. This is simple and indisputable. The Czech Science Foundation can play a leadership role in this process only by sticking to bottom-up principles of funding basic research that have a high potential to achieve excellence, while gradually strengthening priorities that would create more opportunities and secure sufficient funding for ‘oriented’ basic research that can improve our innovation potential. In other words, as a small country, we can reach excellence and stand up to global competition only if we are able to establish the right balance of bottom-up and top-down principles in funding basic research. This will also have a positive – though rather indirect – impact on international collaboration. If we succeed in turning these ideas into practice, the Czech Science Foundation will contribute to our country’s success both in scientific and economic competition more than ever before.