发帖
雷达卡
Europe’s current financial squeeze defies easy solutions. Self-inflictedausterity has met popular restlessnessfor more tangible measures to revive economic growth and create jobs.Protesters vividly express widespread frustration with deepening inequality,and condemnation of privileges of a global financial elite comes uncomfortablyclose to implicating government.
In previous times, such a situation would have beendescribed as pre-revolutionary. In today’s world, the consequences may seemmore benign, but they are no less worrisome: a loss of solidarity,a return to nationalist insularity, andgreater scope for political extremism.
Europe’s image has suffered accordingly, notably from theperspective of Asia’s booming economies.Whereas China, India, and others have enjoyed continuingeconomic growth and investment in research and innovative capacity, Europe is perceived as being on the brink of decline,economically as well as politically. Worse still, Europealso seems intent on ignoring its persistent strengths.
Those strengths lie in Europe’sscience base, part of the cultural heritage that shapes European identity. Interms of numbers – whether of scientific publications, researchers, or overallaccess to high-quality tertiary education – Europe compares favorablywith its international partners (which are also competitors).
So why, critics ask, does Europeproduce many novel scientific ideas and discoveries, but fail to transform theminto marketable products?
In fact, that question is weddedto an obsolete linear model of innovation.What is lacking in Europe is public andofficial awareness of where the real potential of European science lies.Scientific curiosity, given sufficient space and autonomy, remains the mostpowerful driving force behind the completely unforeseeabletransformations in how our societies develop.
In order to understand what science can do for Europe, itis important to clarify what science – that is, curiosity-driven frontierresearch – cannot do for Europe:deliver results that can immediately be commercialized.
Frontier research, like innovation, is an inherently uncertain process. One doesnot know what one will find when working at the cutting edge and attempting topush into unknown territory. Any short-term economic benefits are welcomebyproducts, not the main “deliverables” thatcan be planned. Nor will science create much-needed jobs, except for those whowork in research organizations and universities.
Instead, cutting-edge research pioneers new ways ofworking (and models of future workplaces), which require novel skills andknowledge that will diffuse widely into society and transform production andservices. For example, it could lead to more environmentally friendly andresource-efficient uses of natural resources, or to investment in services thatare more responsive to human needs and better attunedto human interaction.
Science is the only civicinstitution with a built-in long-term time horizon – a feature that buildsconfidence in a fragile future. Modern science began in Europe300 years ago with relatively few people – perhaps no more than a thousand whenthe putative scientific revolution was in full swing. They began to engage in the systematicinquiry of how the natural world (and to a lesser extent, the social world)functioned. They obtained new knowledge of how to manipulate and intervene in natural processes. The experimentalpractices that they invented spread beyond the laboratories. Later, they beganto underpin and merge with progress in the crafts to drive forward the IndustrialRevolution.
The idea that we can only know what we can make gainedwide acceptance. New tools provide new means of investigation, enablingresearchers to speed up computation, for example, and hence increase theproduction of new knowledge. Science and technology mutually reinforce eachother, and both percolate through the socialfabric. This was the case in 1700, and it remains true today.
Let us now look forward towards the future. According tohealth statistician Hans Rosling, our planetwill probably be home to at least nine billion people by 2050. Six billion willlive in Asia, one billion in Africa, 1.5 billion in the Americas, and 500 million in Europe.By ensuring that the pursuit of new knowledge remains a high priority, Europe can safeguard the scientific revolution and retaina leading edge globally, despite having fewer people than other regions.
Europe’s scientific institutions are already evolving and adapting to new globalchallenges. People working within science and people working with science –ordinary citizens – will assure that the unendingquest for human betterment continues to bean important part of European identity.
Science alone will not save Europe.Rather, a Europe that knows how to put itsscience to work will not need to be saved.
京公网安备 11010802022788号
