History reveals a succession of many dawns and twilights, in different facets of human activity. Looking at the past, we can date and understand the reasons for the birth of science, specifically fundamental science. However, we do not know precisely when its twilight will take place. Nevertheless, clues of the advent of such twilight are already in the air. This article presents the underlying rationale suggesting that we are now past the golden age of pure science, and how we need to accommodate our research to this new era.
In this article, Vijendra Agarwal reflects on the role of collaboration in science and its recognition for awarding Nobel Prizes.
While India is increasingly producing science outputs, there are several steps back due to the scientific temperament of the political circles.
Between 2002 and 2017, 1,558 people across 50 countries were killed for defending their environments and lands, this is more than double the number of United Kingdom and Australian armed service people killed on active duty in war zones over the same period.
Although science constantly proves that people are more alike than different, racism continues to exist at every level and to increase sharply.
Basic scientific research gives rise to technological applications which shape modern society. Funding towards curiosity-driven science should be continuous and not in the hands of political and economical powers. Science and ethics have to keep the same pace for a sustainable future.
What do you think of when you hear the term “science”? White lab coats? Microscopes and Bunsen burners? STEM? While all of these relate to science, perhaps its most basic feature is observational evidence. Afterall, Read more […]
The second Eurasian Women’s Forum (EWF), which took place from September 19 to September 21, 2018, ended in St. Petersburg. Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke at the plenary session of the forum. The head of state noted that it is necessary to Read more […]
This article reviews the Nobel history since inception which shows that the Prizes in science conferred on individuals in the first 50 years are shifting to the Prizes being shared. It is,in part, because the science has become more complex, collaborative, expansive, and expensive. With the critical need for teamwork to tackle Big Science, we recommend that the policy of “no more than three” sharing the Prize be loosened on case by case basis and the nomination be made open for scientific organisations. We also suggest concrete steps for improving the gender gap among the Nobel Laureates. This necessitates proactive nominations of Nobel worthy work done by women and making structural changes in Nobel committees toward better gender ratio. Finally, our analysis shows that the U.S. is emerging as a Nobel Super Power leading to a divide not only with European countries but the world at large.
The balance between professional and personal life plays a key role for successful careers of European researchers, especially for women scientists. As far as employment and reconciliation of work and life are concerned, female employment rates remain low especially in Southern Europe and East Europe and in general even more for women with low education. Antidiscrimination laws have been adopted, but gender gaps are still large. Lack of child care services and care facilities for the elderly combined with rigid work arrangements make it hard to reconcile work and family life.
On April 22nd, on the eve of the first round of the French presidential elections, an event brought together more than one million citizens worldwide. In France, it was supported by more than forty scholarly societies, including the Académie des Sciences, Read more […]
March for Science Greece didn’t happen and here is the paradox in the land where science was born. An article by Vasiliki Michopoulou.