UPSC Current Affairs Questions and Answer Writing – Mains Marathon – May 11

Comments

One response to “UPSC Current Affairs Questions and Answer Writing – Mains Marathon – May 11”

1. 

   Ak Ash

   May 11, 2017

   This is my first time posting the answer please review it

   1.Background

   In India there already exists systems of science governance which are robust with departments
   reporting to ministers who in turn report to the Union Cabinet. There is no lack of sound advisory
   bodies and committees within these departments. As for overarching bodies, we already have the
   Scientific Advisory Committee to the Prime Minister and the Principal Scientific Adviser to the
   Government of India.To realise India’s scientific ambitions, the science-heads of all of India’s
   scientific departments including Atomic Energy, Space, Earth Sciences, Science and Technology and
   Biotechnology proposed a new authority reporting to the Prime minister SPARK
   (Sustainable Progress through Application of Research and Knowledge), as it is tentatively
   called, will be a “nimble, empowered board and a quality staff.” .it will be an over-arching
   science and technology body that marries research and industry, and will report directly
   to the Prime Minister

   Do we really need it?

   When there already exists two overarching bodies whose recommendations have not yet yielded any
   concrete actions the question arises ,do we really need a third such body?The science departments
   are too different from one another to come under the purview of one “overarching” body like SPARK.
   The Department of Science and Technology and Department of Biotechnology are purely funding and
   outreach organisations. The Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) has a special and
   tricky mandate which involves interaction with industry.The goals of SPARK seem to be most closely
   attuned with NITI Aayog, and it might well be effective only within this parent organisation,
   taking inputs from various quarters such as industries, the ministries themselves and NGOs to
   make proposals, some of which could move forward to become major initiatives.Soothing yet
   baffling expedients to solve the problems of Indian science might make for good copy in the short
   run but they are not going to yield real results.Decisions on new initiatives like SPARK should
   not be taken within government departments in Delhi following a proposal from one closed
   administrative group to another. A broad-based consultation with stakeholders is a must.

   What we really need

   The bald fact is that we do not have so much to manage.The report of top science administrators
   that recommended the setting up of this independent authority is correct in that
   “the stature of Indian science is a shadow of what it used to be” but this is not because of
   “misguided interventions”. It is because there is a lack of scientific expertise across all levels.
   We have failed in our educational system to harness the enormous latent talent in our country and
   build a solid foundation of science.the report’s contention that “there is a huge support system”,
   and “global goodwill” which is “positive”. India does not need global goodwill to succeed in science.
   It needs hard work, honest management and a critically large base of experts. Indian science is
   certainly not in a good state of health today. But what is wrong is not the structure of the system.
   The wrongs emanate from the many sins of omission and commission over the years by the individuals
   who have led the system.