This meeting was part of the broader Aspen Initiative in Favor of Pure Science – a project aimed at raising awareness in civil society of the strategic importance of pure science, not only as relevant to scientific study but also in terms of its fundamental service to humanity in general.
The project unites Aspen Institutes around the world in the joint objective of placing science at the core of public and private policies, and of raising political and economic decision-makers’ awareness of the importance of investing in this field. Each institute contributes to drafting the global “Basic Research: Definition, Measurement and Policies” report on the status of science in the various countries and intended to provide a composite picture of current best practices and of ongoing and future projects. The report records the efforts at collecting and sharing ideas and proposals by a network of scientists, academics, researchers and representatives of economic and institutional spheres.
Funding being the most sensitive issue, it was emphasized that Europe has long had framework programs to which Italy has contributed, although investment in research remains among the lowest at 1% compared with other countries’ average of 2.5%. Nevertheless, the pandemic has accelerated debt sharing, which facilitates investments in key sectors. For the European Union and Italy as well, the Next Generation EU plan represents an essential step toward increased investments in basic research. Yet, those investments’ main goal is output, which means they hinge on the production of concrete and certifiable results. Their focus is basic research involving national research centers, research infrastructures and extended partnerships, and the opportunity they create is one not to be missed.
The Italian government earmarks 250 million euro annually to permanent and individual grants through the Italian Science Fund for basic research in line with the model of the European Research Council. Additionally, the Italian Fund for Applied Science is dedicated to innovation in spheres such as industrial and experimental development research. Moreover, within the month of March 2022, additional researchers are going to be assigned to industry in an effort to stimulate an exchange of skills. Public and private spheres will have to cooperate directly and transparently in processes and relations for the purpose of transferring results. Finally, a call for tenders for research partnerships is expected to be announced in the near future aimed at creating a value chain linking academies, research centers and industry.
The government will probably have to focus on who is effectively capable of handling funds rather than on the firms themselves. If, as a “social affair”, science becomes process, generating effective and efficient interaction with all the actors involved along the way will mark a true turning point.
It was observed that the government interface with the private sector must employ innovative means, facilitating tax credits, deductions and various systems for universities in order to stimulate enterprise. The importance was also underlined of creating new academic streams and adequate training for all operators, with the focus, above all, on young people and STEM studies. To that end, international cooperation is pivotal since it facilitates the generation of supranational networks and skill and knowledge exchanges. However, such complex forms of collaboration need streamlining, especially when it comes to regulation. In any case, some progress has been made at the European level and governments are increasingly promoting what has been defined “scientific diplomacy”.
The debate’s foremost theme, however, was the prevailing perception of a dichotomy between pure and applied science: pure science at the service of the common good; applied science focused on immediate returns on investment. The two concepts appear distant from one another, yet cultural change aimed at resolving that dichotomy does seem possible. Indeed, funding for a pure science spurred by “curiosity” and the urge to understand phenomena could conceivably dovetail with value chain-related research. Aggregating universities, research centers and industry within a framework of collaboration would facilitate the birth of start-ups and spin-offs, making dialogue between academic and industrial spheres easier, fostering innovation and exerting a positive influence on the country’s socioeconomic development.