The Infosys Science Foundation Prize, popularly known as the Indian Nobel, recognises outstanding achievements of contemporary researchers and scientists across six categories, ranging from humanities to physical sciences. The winners, one of whom was the former governor of the RBI, Raghuram Rajan, also take home ₹65 lakh which makes it the biggest in the country which is tax free. In an interaction with BusinessLine , the trustee at the foundation as well as the co-founder of Infosys, Kris Gopalakrishnan spoke about the need to take a long term view on scientific research and how corporates should drive more scientific research in business.

Infosys is one of the few corporates in the country which encourages research in the area of sciences. Why has this not been the mainstay of other Indian corporates?

Corporates are doing their bit for research but it is more in the area of applied sciences. This is because applied sciences have a direct bearing on their business. However, corporates should look at basic sciences as an area to research. One needs to bear in mind that theoretical sciences often take a long time to bear results and many times may not even result in anything fruitful. For example, physicists took a century to understand some concepts around gravitational waves! So, companies need to brace up to these sorts of things.

Corporates spend 2 per cent of their annual revenues on CSR initiatives. Will a similar directive in research help?

I always believed that the 2 per cent can be used in a smart manner. For example, 1 per cent can be used to spend on problems of today like affordable healthcare etc. The other 1 per cent can be used to tackle the challenges of tomorrow like eradicating or curing certain diseases. In this way current and future challenges can be addressed without compromising one for the other.

Why is it that more number of women don’t win science awards? Is it because there is a smaller pool or is it because of the gender bias?

This time an equal number of men and women have won the awards. We believe that this will encourage more women to pursue sciences. It was not intentional though. It is entirely based on the recommendations of the jury. Interestingly, research is becoming increasingly interdisciplinary and is crossing traditional boundaries. The prize in the physical sciences went to Yamuna Krishnan, who did some ground-breaking work in the emerging field of architecture of the building blocks of life — the DNA. This category recognises work in varied branches like physics, chemistry and earth science combined.

Are there any plans to expand the field?

We want to keep the quality high and feel that the winning prize money is also testimony to the kind of quality we expect from the participants. If we diversify into more areas we will lose focus. There is a significant depth of scientific talent in this country, and this award intends to celebrate success in scientific research and stand as a marker of excellence in research. We believe that initiatives such as the Infosys Prize will certainly help recognize brilliant researchers across pure and social sciences, and related branches, thus creating role models in this field and inspiring bright young minds to take up scientific research as a career option. Ultimately the objective is to promote high quality research in the country.

If one looks at the big picture, there aren’t many world class research institutes in India. What could be the reason for this?

India spends 0.8 per cent of the GDP on research which is an abysmal amount. Out of this, government spends 0.6 per cent and the remaining is spent by private companies. In comparison, China spends 4 per cent and the US around 2 per cent. While some Indian government departments like ISRO have made terrific advances in research, along with IISc and IITs, the same cannot be said about other departments. We need to believe in our scientists and give them the freedom to work in areas of their choice, arm them with more financial assistance and do away with bureaucracy.

How much of a factor is rote learning in sciences playing in young people not wanting to take up the subject?

We need to move into experiential learning in sciences. Theory should not be the only priority for science education. We are going to launch an innovation challenge in India, in partnership with the New York Academy for Sciences for students 13-18 years old in 2018. We want to activate their science, technology, and engineering (STEM) skills, getting them to apply their scientific inquiry skills to solving defined, real world problems.

Do the previous winners engage with the foundation on a regular basis?

Yes. We take their feedback constantly. Some of the previous winners have even been in our jury.

Related Topics