News
The academic and 2021 Natural Sciences Prize winner asserts that "a stable science policy is needed, and it is very surprising that it does not exist. At this moment and in the years to come, science and technology are playing an important strategic role in the development of a country, which has to do with skills, with the development of new ideas, new companies, and new vocations.".
This distinguished academic from the Department of Ecology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile was awarded the National Prize for Natural Sciences this year. The laureate has over 45 years of experience in the field and became the eleventh recipient of this honor. In addition to his renowned work with algae in the Department of Ecology, he is the author of papers on the impact of Ibero-American science and has served as a Science and Technology advisor to the Ministry of Economy under Hugo Lavados during the Bachelet presidency. He is also a member of the Higher Education Council and worked at CONICYT, where he was one of the managers of the FONDAP program and worked on the FONDECYT program.
His key contribution to the development of marine ecology and botany in Chile, and his status as a world expert in the reproduction and dispersal of microalgae, made Bernabé Santelices González (66 years old) the winner of the 2012 National Prize for Natural Sciences.
Despite being a man of science through and through, he doesn't like to be solely dedicated to the laboratory. He prefers to intervene from the outside, exploring how the conditions for doing science in the country can be improved. "Besides enjoying doing science, I also like to think about how to improve what we do, not only from a scientific point of view but also from the perspective of how public policies are managed, and to see what can be changed.".
How do you see public policies in science and technology currently being addressed?
– I think there are some things the new government has done well in, and others where we're falling short. There have been decisions to strengthen certain science and technology instruments; for example, giving more resources to Fondecyt, increasing the number of approved projects, and having approved 50% grants for all submitted projects is a good measure. I think this has given people confidence to continue submitting their projects and pursuing their work, which undoubtedly results in a broader and larger pool of people working in science.
I mean,Are the advances in Science and Technology in Chile not keeping pace with the speed of the Knowledge Society?
"Of course, the problem is that we need a stable science policy, which is very surprising because it doesn't exist. Right now, and in the years to come, science and technology are playing a crucial strategic role in a country's development, which involves skills, the development of new ideas, new businesses, and new career paths. No country would consider having a strategic component without a medium-term policy behind it, one that isn't constantly changing with each new president. This isn't happening with science, which is a terrible oversight because we need a strategic development program for education, science, technology, and innovation. Industrialized countries wouldn't even consider this a possibility; it sounds incredibly far-fetched. We've been living like this for a long time.".
In this socio-political context, where and how do the CRUCH universities fit in?
Of the universities belonging to the Council of Rectors, six account for 751% of the research published in Chile. Rather than focusing on their placement or how they are included, I would say they are the driving force behind current research, and everyone knows it. These universities are the University of Chile, the Catholic University, the Austral University, the University of Santiago, the University of Concepción, and the Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaíso. An additional 251% of publications produced in Chile are generated by a core group of ten other universities, all members of the Council of Rectors of Chilean Universities (CRUCH), with the exception of Andrés Bello University. This is a very typical characteristic of Latin America: universities are the backbone of research, while businesses do not. Furthermore, universities produce a high number of patents, at least 301%, and the final product that universities generously offer to society is the training of highly skilled new scientists and technologists. In Chile, the universities belonging to the Council of Rectors of Chilean Universities (CRUCH) are leading the way in science. There's nowhere else where all this research is being done; it might be done marginally, with some institutes publishing 20 papers a year, but of the 1,300 papers published in Chile, 981 are produced by the Council's universities.
Regarding the training of Advanced Human Capital, you have trained many generations in Chile, how do you see the integration of the large number of PhDs who will return to Chile in the coming years?
A major problem is anticipated if it isn't addressed, and it will be very unpleasant. We have 800 young people returning to Chile in the next two or three years, a country with a high number of scientists. If we leave it to the market to solve this, it won't, or we'll end up with students driving taxis, as happened once in Spain, or returning to the countries where they were educated, due to the lack of a reintegration program to attract them back and place them in various universities or companies. I think we're going to lose some of our best students, who will prefer to stay abroad, where things are relatively secure, and that's a shame because we need the best. This should stop being a topic of discussion and start being a solution.
If you could solve this upcoming insertion problem, what would you do?
"I advised Economy Minister Hugo Lavados when the Becas Chile scholarship program (under former President Michelle Bachelet) was launched, and we drafted a proposal that, essentially, would have tied individuals back to their institutions and given many national institutions the opportunity to improve their staff, with the commitment that the scholarship recipients would return to work at those institutions for a period of time. But that never came to fruition, so let's dream: imagine how many young doctors could benefit if the hospitals or clinics where they work had access to these scholarships; think of all the people who manage the state's land and marine reserve systems (CONAF, the Undersecretariat of Fisheries, the Directorate of Fisheries, etc.); think of all the people who work at the Ministry of Agriculture—how could they not be improved?".
How do you see the education crisis in Chile, which has been expressed massively and publicly in recent years?
There are some things that are obvious in this country, and it really strikes me that people who observe public policies here don't find them so obvious. My parents gave me all the education they could, sparing no effort, and that was 50 years ago. That hasn't changed; it's one of the characteristics of this country: parents work themselves to the bone to put their children in a place where they can get a good education, and that's partly where the current debt comes from. Consequently, it's somewhat predictable, so it really strikes me that public policies at a certain point didn't take this into account and allowed things to get to the extreme they did. Now there's an interest rate that's being lowered; I hope it's approved and that it can continue to decrease, but what still strikes me, however, is: Where is the quality control? This is an elastic market, as economists say, and when you have that situation, there's always the risk that demand will be so high that anything even remotely similar to the product you're trying to create will sell out. So, it's true that the number of universities has increased significantly, but the quality of many of their offerings doesn't compare to those that are truly dedicated. It's incomprehensible that quality control, which is absolutely crucial in this matter, isn't being properly managed.
Do you believe that the government has addressed the social demand to make public education more equitable?
I believe that the various governments that take charge of a country's development have a list of priorities. This wasn't a list of priorities; this just exploded. This is an unforeseen event, like the 2010 earthquake. What strikes me most is our inability—those in government sitting down with those who aren't—to reach agreements. Imagine how difficult it was to reach the tax agreement. So, it bothers and worries me that it's taking such an exhausting fight to reach any agreement at all. You can't tell me that if you get three education experts, three economic experts, three experts of different kinds—experts who are primarily experts and not politicians—together, they won't have a solution to a problem like this. How can it not be possible, after the experts provide the solution, to add the necessary political context and negotiate how it will be implemented between both sides? We need to raise workers' salaries by 1,400 pesos, and we spend a month discussing it. Meanwhile, those same people who can't agree on anything are increasing their own salaries by two million pesos, without having to discuss or even think about how much it will cost the country. So, we're in a situation that, at least for me, is incomprehensible. There's a way of approaching problems that I haven't seen in Chile before, which I find very unfortunate and which doesn't lead to rational analysis or solutions. That's what's missing: rationality in the solutions.
*Photo: Ministry of Education
Spanish 
English