• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Journalof Scientific & Industrial Research Vol .58, Decemher 1999, pp 954-976 Changing Trends in Parliamentary Deliberations on Science and Technology Policy Nirmal Haritash and S A Nabi National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies, Dr K S Krishnan Marg, New Delhi 110 012, India Received: 06 April 1999; accepted:31 August 1999 In this paper an attempt has been made to throw light on the governance of Parliament on the policy issues of science in the making of S&T policy of the country.This has been studied through an examination of the S&T related issues deliberated at various forums of the Parliament. An overall view of the nature and trend of S&T issues deliberated in the Parliament reveals that throughout the years, since independence, almost all types of S&T related issues have been taken up for discussions at various forums of the Parliament. The issues have ranged right from the significance of the role of S&T in the fulfilment of various socio-economic objectives , resources for the development of S&T, priority areas for research , social environment for research in the research institutions, technology develop­ ment capabilities, strength of linkages between the industry and the research institutions, technology development and its utilization, international co-operation in S&T, etc. However, it has been observed that the proportion of discussions on various S&T policy-related issues deliberated over the period of time, since independence, have not remained static throughout, but has shown variations in the trend of S&T related issues discussed. Henceforth, in this paper, changing trends in the S&T related issues deliberated in the Parliament have been studied by considering: (i) The course which the developments in S&T have adopted, since independence, (ii) The political structure and the party in power having its specific ideology for the development of science along with the commitment of the political leadership to the role of science in the fulfilment of socio-economic objectives of the nation.The study, in turn, has suggested for various reforms in the Parliamentary institutions: (i) For the more effective participation of Memhers of Parliament in the Parliamentary deliberations on S&T related issues, and (ii) In influencing S&T policy decisions of the government in the larger interests. 1 Introduction lenges arising due to the increased developments in The worldwide knowledge expansion, rapid ad­ science and technology (S&T),' vances in information technology, a globalizing economy, rising standards of education, the change Also the Members of Parliament in Parliamentary from industry-based to service based employment, democracies are more frequently being challenged and some of the other fundamental structural shifts as to their personal performance, or to that of their confronting society have led people expressing their party or of their government.The questions confront­ concern about the ability ofthe governments in meet­ ing Members of Parliament include: (i) Are they, as ing their expectations. The broad question raised in elected Members, both individually and collectively the present times is whether conflicting and complex becoming more able or less able to identify and sat­ demands on government are becoming more com­ isfy public expectations? (ii) Are their skills and at­ plex, more frequent and more urgent. Perhaps it is titudes and the resources available to them are keep­ more important to ask whether the rate of change in ing up with the growing and changing community society is changing the very nature of government demands? (iii) Are the processes and structures of and the role of elected representatives. The basic ob­ government becoming outmoded? and (iv) Or can jective of the joint UNESCO and Inter - Parliamen­ they adopt quickly enough to meet current expecta­ tary Conference on Science, Culture and Communi­ tions and still sustain democracy?2 cation, held in Paris from 3 to 6 June 1996 was to Political scientists and scholars are spending much enable participants to identify the major world chal- of their time and energies on such questions. Advo- HARITASH & NABI : S & T POLICY 955 cates of the Public Management to v­ However, of lalc, the �cholarship in the has Nt�w reforms go US c rnanc\' that performance measurcs help dclibclaticJlls sugg�:�·,t \\'ill strc�:-:ccl tlk: i!JlpO! LiI1Ce ,,1' in Icgisla­ i mp the efficiency governmcnt cic<';�;iGn scholarly ro e hoth uf !!lC alld !;vc makillg. After many year.·; uf the ability the legislature to the public a resurgent emph as is on how discus­ of scrutinize neglect, (here i'i policies. The new accountabi lity tools at the c1isp('Isal sions of the public policies eg sla­ rllcrih or affect l i include : e r o anc c ind icaturs, t vc heh:, Inc\..::cd, oseph Bes�:ettc offe red of Iegislalor.;; P f rm i ViOll!'. J 1994 Benchmarking, Service standards, i zen ch:lrlerS, a frontal c al e e to the predominant bargaining C ti h l ng Business plans, Better audit and Evaluatioil. Lindquist on gr ss na decisil)n - m :.lk i ng rguin model of C e io l a g that this wi ll not, of course. re­ that Congress is better described as a deliberative in­ discusses propo.<;al move tenslOns and contrad ictions that will always stitution where legislatures pursue some conception the animate acco ntabil y scrutinizing networks. gu p ­ u t i wmmon good. Deliberations also f re rom i Hovv­ ofthc i i ever, Paul Thomas points out that better in contemporary normative cvaluation of the informat ion nently systems would help to better educa e t ­ legislatures. Writers frequently stress that care ful t legislators, ci i US zens, interest groups, journalists, and academics about deliberation is one of the key principles that ought to the organisations and programmcs they are goi n to guide legislative decision - making. Whereas, g legis­ srutinize.4 latures are judged in terms of the extent to which they Va rious studies empirical and acad mic , examin­ promote deliberations , and finding that they fall short, e ing the ro le of Parliament in the affairs of science are often linked with proposals for reform. A wide exhibit that Parliament in India and in other Parlia­ variety of reform measures ostensibly aimed at pro­ mentary de mocracies exercise little influence on moting deliberations have been advanced ,among major legislation and have no effective control over these measures are the number of committee assign­ S&T policies of their respective countries.:;'x Studies ments which set aside time for broad floor debate on conducted to exam ine the institutional mechan isms major issues at the beginning of each legislative ses­ and other facilities made available to the Members sion.!2 It is yet to be ascertained whether such schol­ of Parliament for participation on the pol icy issues of arly studies are available for promoting more relevant science brings out that Members lack the authentic S&T policy related deliberations in the Parliament. sources of information on S&T and there lack of is facilities for analysing and interpreting complex is­ 2 Objectives sues on S&T. Most Members complain that process The present study attempts to examine the delib­ of priority determination begins in the executive are­ erations at the Floor-of-the Indian Parliament to visll­ nas long before it comes to the Parliament? A study alize the role of these deliberations in the policy is­ Il) carried out in NISTADS to examine the factors af­ sues of S&T.In this context the study focuses on the fecting paiticipation of Members of Parliament in following aspects of the deliberations in both the S&T policy formulation revealed a general feeling HOllses (Lok sabha and Rajya Sabha) of the Parlia­ of disinterest among MPs in the affairs of science. A ment: majority of MPs perceived: (i) Lack of public pres­ (i) Nature of S&T policy related deliberations sure on S&T issues, (ii) Lack of adequate importance in the Parl iament. accorded to S&T issues by the political parties, (iii) (ii) Shift in the nature and trend of S&T issues Inadequate opportunities and facilities as the major deli berated. constraints in raising S&T issues in Parliament and (iii)Whether the deiiberations are true represen­ (iv) Lack of interest of MPs in S&T issues is also tatives of people's problems involving S&T evident from the nature of S&T issues discussed by related issues. them in and outside the Parliament. In fact, science (iv)Whether the issues deliberated in the Par­ dominated issues are given low priority among the liament have its impact on the S&T policy overall discussions held in the Parliament.!! of the Government. 956 J SCI IND RES VOL.58 DECEMBER 1999 Methodology agement and political support from Nehru; these 3 Taking questions and debates on S&T policy is­ scientists later on significantly contributed to the sues as indicator of interest shown by the Members development of science. Dr Bhabha strongly ad­ of Parliament in the development of S&T the ques­ vocated the need for the development of atomic tions and issues on S&T related matters discussed power as a major source of energy. Consequently, at the Floor-of-the-House have been content in 1948, the Atomic Energy Commission was es­ analysed. The content categories of policy issues on tablished, headed by Dr Bhabha. Dr Bhatnagar was S&T have been identified and used for analysis of made the head of the Council of Scientific & In­ questions and queries on S&T related matters de­ dustrial Research.14 liberated in the Parliament.

Load more

  23

Copy Link