Mr President of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Yury Osipov), colleagues and friends,
The general meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences is traditionally an important event for the entire academic community and our country as a whole. This is understandable, if we consider the academy's prestige and its place in Russian public life.
Today, you will sum up the academy's performance and that of its organisations throughout 2009. This was a difficult period for the academy and for all of us. Nevertheless, we did not revise our strategic goals even in the face of the global financial and economic crisis. Obviously, we are not abandoning our goals today, when the peak of the crisis, hopefully, has passed and when sustained economic growth is resuming. But we realise that leading global economies and our neighbours in the European Union still face many problems.
The government plans to overhaul key sectors of the Russian industry and the social system on a large scale. In the long run, this large-scale modernisation should improve basic living standards and increase the efficiency of the economy. Major projects in the fields of energy conservation, space, nuclear power, medicine, and information technology are currently being launched in Russia.
For 2010, we allocated nearly 1.1 trillion roubles, or over 10% of the federal budget, on fundamental and applied science, higher education and other federal innovation programmes involving, among others, organisations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
The Academy will receive 49.3 billion roubles in 2010, just as much as was received in 2008, in the successful time... This sum, however, is slightly lower than the funding from 2009, as we used the so-called anti-crisis funds last year. Despite some problems, we manage to maintain the academy's pre-crisis levels of funding.
Moreover, the Academy's extra-budgetary earnings totalled about 27 billion roubles in 2009.
As you would expect, the Russian Academy of Sciences and national science as a whole cannot shy away from the modernisation agenda. The academy has always been and must remain a key institution of national and social development - both as a generator of new fundamental knowledge turned toward the future and as an instrument for selecting and promoting Russia's intellectual elite.
And, finally, the reliable, long-term prediction of scientific and technological priorities is only possible with the involvement of the research community.
Certainly, a primitive and utilitarian understanding of science's role is unacceptable. Fundamental research is not a commercial project based on investment volumes or profit-making.
At the same time, the field of science in the modern world is based on a principle of encouraging tough competition and is characterised by a serious struggle for superiority. Leading states invest heavily in R&D projects in order to remain predominant in science. This concerns not only technology but also the humanities, politics and ideology.
Strengthening fundamental science and furthering its development are important in making an impression in the world and attracting investment, innovative business and intellectual resources.
In view of its global role, Russia cannot remain aloof from such competition, including competition in the field of fundamental knowledge, for this would mean lagging behind and occupying a place on the periphery of global development.
I want to emphasise that we have a high opinion of the academy's achievements. By way of example, I would like to mention serious results in medicine: A new process facilitating the biological production of genetically engineered human insulin has been developed.
The Kvazar-KVO complex of the Russian Academy of Sciences has contributed to the qualitative development of our Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS). I think we can be proud of how this project is turning out. We launched the project together with our European partners. I even proposed cooperation from the beginning. They declined and are working independently. We now have 25 satellites in orbit, and this will increase to 29-30 before the year is out. This improves global coverage. To the best of my knowledge, the Europeans partners still have only two satellites. But they have some advantages, which are linked to electronics and scientific support. We need your assistance here.
Russian specialists are also actively involved in major international research projects.
At the same time, our scientists now are 14th in the ranking defined by a quantitative criterion such as the number of articles published in widely recognised scientific journals.
In this, we are at the same level as the Netherlands and Brazil. Although we are in good company, this is still a downward trend as we were seventh in 1995. Of course, we must jointly rectify the situation.
Today, we are setting forth strict requirements for industry, the business community and other key public and economic institutions. This will require constant renewal and increased effectiveness. To be honest, this involves the issue of our national prospects.
Internal transformations in national science and in the system of the Russian Academy of Sciences are considered to be a matter of paramount importance. These will enable improved quality of R&D projects, the academic community's active involvement in training modern personnel and the creation of a scientific and technological backlog for the economy and the social sector.
Our plans are absolutely open. They are widely discussed in academic and educational circles. I am referring to the plans for creating a competitive base for science in Russia, for supporting strong and capable scientific schools, and focusing resources on priority areas.
Naturally, these plans should be implemented by identifying the leading institutions through open and transparent proposals, rather than by bureaucratic procedures or by the preference of an official.
In addition, bidding procedure, within the programmes executed by the presidium and various departments of the Academy of Sciences, should also be expanded.
We will also have to introduce independent auditing practices for scientific institutions and to learn how to use these mechanisms efficiently in order to improve Russian science. I believe that the Academy of Sciences should be the first to start using these mechanisms to assess the efficiency of its subordinate institutions.
It goes without saying that assessment criteria should be elaborated by the academic community that will be subjected to public discussion, being both comprehensible and objective.
Most importantly, after completing the audit, the academy should take certain financial and even organisational measures, redistributing funds to the more efficient research teams, and even reorganising some scientific institutions, if necessary.
These measures should all aim at the final result of making those specialists who are working in the Russian Academy of Sciences or in other scientific organisations feel that they are needed and that they can hope to see professional prospects and opportunities to achieve their full potential.
Specialists and young scientists should have the opportunity to work at state-of-the-art research centres where serious scientific activities are conducted and which have all the necessary facilities for them, including educational facilities. It is absolutely unacceptable to make them stagnate at institutions which only generate useless papers and waste budget funds.
As everywhere else in the world, we should facilitate integration between research, education and production activities. In fact, this issue has been very intensely discussed lately. We need to eliminate disagreement and inconsistency. That is another reason why the decisions we are making are meant to encourage scientists to teach and research at higher education institutions.
For example, special grants have been established this year to motivate respected scientists to work in Russian universities. Additional funds have been earmarked to develop innovative infrastructures in higher education institutions and to support research centres. The measures proposed provide for the investment of 39 billion roubles through 2012. I would like to emphasise that these funds have been allocated in addition to what we planned earlier.
Another document is currently being formulated that immediately relates to the academic community. In 2010 and 2011, we intend to spend 3 billion roubles on supporting jointly implemented projects between leading research organisations and higher education institutions.
We also expect the Russian Academy of Sciences to take an active part in the work of federal and national research universities. We need to ensure that research at these centres will be carried out at the proper level.
The government is maintaining an ongoing dialogue with the management of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Together we are searching for ways to resolve the pressing concerns of the scholarly community and the academy's employees...
As you know, the pilot project pertaining to salaries in the system of the Russian Academy of Sciences has been completed. Just as we planned, the average salary now exceeds 30,000 roubles, and leading research institutes pay substantially higher salaries.
Unfortunately, we failed to carry out some of our plans related to the material and technical aspects of these projects, establishing shared centres and purchasing certain devices and equipment.
Mr Osipov has asked us to address this issue and we will keep in touch with him about this. We have agreed to keep this issue in mind and return to it when our budget situation improves. And I am sure it will improve.
Another pressing issue is the provision of housing. I believe that one way to settle this issue, and we have discussed it already, is to use the plots of land managed by the academy for the construction of new housing... Especially given that the academy currently has more than 330,000 hectares of land. And these are rather good plots of land.
The government has instructed the relevant authorities to study the issue and introduce the necessary amendments to the legislation. These amendments will stipulate the future developers' obligation to sell a portion of the flats to the academy's employees at affordable prices. I would estimate the price at 30,000 roubles per square metre.
Colleagues, in conclusion I would like to thank the management and the staff of the Academy of Sciences for the large contribution they have made to the development of Russia. I hope we will continue our cooperative and constructive work.
As far as I can see, my words about the housing issue sparked some interest. We can discuss this issue more thoroughly, both during this meeting and later, with Mr Osipov. The numbers I mentioned are rough estimates. Both subsidies and financial aid are possible. I believe that in some special cases the academy, as supported by the government, can provide certain subsidies. All these possibilities can be discussed. The main thing is to begin the process.
Thank you very much for your attention.
* * *
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's closing remarks:
I know it's time for a break, but it would be wrong to take a break without first commenting on what Mr Osipov has just said, and so I'd like to make a few comments.
To begin with, we understand perfectly well that the main concern of this country's leaders, the scientific community and the country in general is effectiveness. If we're talking about the Academy of Sciences, it's the effectiveness of its research, solutions and their application. But there's a flip side to this argument.
Of course, new solutions must be effective and high-quality, but there also has to be demand for these solutions in the government and the economy.
You know, when I worked for a different service, in my past life, in the late 1980s - I remember it very well, and I think many of you here today also experienced it and will agree with me now - Soviet solutions and international solutions developed by your colleagues in other countries were not applied in the Soviet economy. There was not even the equipment necessary to apply them.
So we continued to work, trying our best to develop solutions, but it was just no use. We wondered how that helped the economy, and they'd only reply it was impossible to apply the solutions in the economy.
So before we blame those who develop ineffective solutions, we should ask whether these solutions are applicable today.
There's still a lot that the government, particularly the economic agencies, and the major companies must do to be able to capitalise on these innovations and new technologies.
Of course, these innovations and advanced technologies must meet all modern requirements or, better yet, exceed them.
It's true that this requires money. But the famous mathematician Grigory Perelman didn't need any money to release his solution on the internet and sign his name under it. He refuses to accept the prize money. We're trying to persuade him to take something at least, but he just refuses it.
But this doesn't mean that we should pull the plug on funding; on the contrary, we must support R&D institutions, and we're trying to do so. If you track the changes in funding over the past few decades ... Yes, it's changed, and considerably. Look at what it was like back in the early 1990s, and then look at what's happening now. Just look at the amount. But, of course, the economy and the budget have to be able to sustain it.
Mr Osipov showed the chart illustrating the increase in funding today. I know all these numbers pretty well. It is important that we concentrate our resources in the areas that have a potential for a breakthrough. The money shouldn't be spread too thin. This is our shared challenge. There are certain limitations on funding. We cannot focus on one area, for example the R&D projects of the Academy of Sciences only, while others go underfunded.
I'm sure you're all aware of the situation in the defence industry. Sometimes we just don't know what to do about it. So much money was spent on scientific research in the defence industry in the Soviet Union. But, actually, it was excessive. It caused the economy to collapse. Russians lost their sense of danger when the Soviet Union collapsed. The economy lay in ruins, so people thought that nothing worse could happen.
There has to be a balance in everything. Where these resources are concentrated partly depends on you. We need your advice.
As far as there being mistrust between government and scientists, I don't feel it at all. Maybe someone wants to breed this mistrust, but there is none. It's completely fabricated.
You know, we all face criticism from the day we are born until the day we die. I've been criticised so much over the past 10 years that I've gotten bored of responding to it. Such is life. The more important our undertaking, the more criticism we get. It's not such a bad thing, really. It keeps you on your toes.
There are, of course, inveterate critics, but we shouldn't let them bother us. There are people who make their living off of it. It's just their profession. Is it worth paying attention to? Academician Laverov said that you've developed a brain stimulant - Mr Osipov mentioned it as well. Could you just give this drug to the critics to calm them down a bit?
Thank you very much. Good luck!