Lino Barañao: "We now think that there is a right to be funded by science, but it is not always like that" – 04/07/2019

-How did you experience the descent from the ministry to the secretariat?

-It was not nice of course. It is politically understandable, but it does not affect the budget and we are moving with the same autonomy we had before. With Minister Finocchiaro, we have an excellent level of dialogue. So, in practice, it did not affect us. The main concern is to secure the budget needed to carry out what we need to do to ensure that the system not only survives but develops.

-But the budget, in the context of general adjustment, shrinks …

-The budget is small. What is not taken into account is that each quarter, we adjust positions and we record an increase in credits.

– Why not disseminate scientific statistics since 2015? What is the current investment in relation to GDP?

– Because the budget is adjusted. You can take the one approved by Congress and divide it by the GDP estimate that has a delay. These data are not updated at the speed that it should. Similarly, if we see that it reaches 1% of GDP, it does not mean much if the way of spending does not change qualitatively.

– In quantitative terms, how much are we?

-I do not know, any number would be a liar, because I do not know. We must be at plus or minus 0.5% of GDP.

– They said it was going to 1.5%.

-We also said that we would reduce inflation and poverty and this is not so easy. One thing is what one has as aspiration and another is what the reality indicates. But even this budget, expressed in pesos, does not say much because when you have a difference in the exchange rate similar to what we had, the purchasing power of subsidies decreases. We focus on achieving the largest possible budget and on the allocation in the best possible way. We have now achieved an increase that will allow us to complete the purchase of all equipment incurred for a dollar less than 20 dollars. Efforts to negotiate with the companies have been considerable to ensure that the equipment is delivered in stages and can make the payments. We try to minimize the negative impact of an economic crisis of unexpected magnitude. Personally, I did not think the situation would be so difficult. We have identified priorities that are generally not recognized, such as maintaining income as a researcher.

– How many researchers?

-In 450, 4 times more revenue than Spain today. In Spain, the waves have arrived and the system has been saturated because it has the limited ability to incorporate people.

-The initial plan was to reach more than 1000 researchers a year …

-But not only in Conicet. Because there are 60,000 full-time equivalent researchers in INTA, the national universities, the CONEA. What was happening was that the number of Conicet was increasing and decreasing in the universities. What did we do? We have managed to integrate almost 400 doctors in universities currently in deficit. A doctorate today has the possibility of entering the Conicet on three with exclusive dedication. Not to mention that you can enter the university, INTA, wherever you are. In the United States, if we take into account the number of doctors, the number of open positions in universities – the only ones they use for basic research – is 1 in 32. We are so not so bad in this setting. In addition, a physician does not necessarily have to focus on basic research, because if we all do basic research, we will invest in numbers and people and we will not see the result because knowledge does not flow spontaneously. What has happened historically is that knowledge is generated, that it goes to the northern hemisphere and benefits. In the United States, many companies have patents that cite works from Argentina.

-It is that science is international …

Yes Science is international, but not scientists. I can not work in the laboratory with public funds and say "I am interested in contributing to universal knowledge", ignoring that what I am doing will be used by a foreign company to widen the gap that separates us from these countries and then we buy them. technologies As a public official, my role is to effectively use the funds that I dedicate to the system, trying to get the most revenue possible. My commitment is with the citizen who can legitimately tell me "very well everything, but what has become of the $ 8 billion you have distributed over these 16 years?" How did it benefit me? "This question is torturing me.

– Do the country's investigators go?

– There is always a flow, they come and go. Maybe now they are not coming back, they are waiting for the thing to improve. The researchers took a big turn when we participated in the Raíces program. There are people who have left since 2001 and only after 2008 have started to think about coming back. Once the 1300s came back, the number of researchers who wanted to come back was much smaller. One thing that does not happen and that should happen is that today's researchers do not form externally. And it's a problem that people do not perceive.

– They do not go out together?

– According to statistics from two or three years ago, 62% of the applicants for the researcher career were presented in the same group or institute of the university in which they had been trained. This globally is unacceptable. Harvard does not take people who have graduated from the same university, the Waisman Institute of Israel needs 7 years of permanence abroad before reporting to Waisman. Because? Because the only way to bring new technologies and new contacts is to leave. In the 80s, it was unthinkable to present to Conicet if we had not had three or four years.

– Why is it happening?

-Because for a long time the conditions for doing science in Argentina improved remarkably, it was then very comfortable or very easy to continue working here. When I finished my thesis, there was no possibility, no grant system. People believe that science has always been like in the last 10 years. During my time as a Fellow, the director distributed grants at his convenience, from time to time, we linked a reagent. It is now clear that the right to funding for science and technology exists, which is good, but we must be aware that this has not always been the case. We hope it will be like this again but with certain criteria. Our concern is to be able to demonstrate that current investments in science – which are not superlative but important in the context of the country's economy – have a concrete impact on the well-being of the population.

– What did you feel when scientists like Alberto Kornblihtt, Diego de Mendoza and hundreds of other researchers strongly criticized national science policy?

– They complain that there is less money and that is true. There is less money. What must also be considered is the context. In the 90's, when I was a unionist, the country was pretty good and no one complained. The researchers earned $ 50 a month and there was no participation in the race. And it was difficult for me to gather 5 people to demonstrate in front of the Secretariat, there was very little involvement. Today, the country is going through a crisis that affects all sectors. All ministers and secretaries complain and consider me privileged.

-A privileged?

-And if. Nobody creates jobs every year in his department, factories shrink. Here we privileged the income to the career of researcher, we managed to introduce for the first time for a long time 400 exclusive dedications in the universities of the interior. In comparative form, we are not so bad. What researchers can not say in all honesty is that there is a selective attitude of disability of the scientific system, because it is not true. We are suffering the same consequences of economic and fiscal restraint from all sectors of government. But it makes sense that they complain, it helps me to do so to justify a request for a larger budget. I need the testimony of credible people who say "we really need more budget" and that I use as an argument. What I would like is that, coupled with the claim of a larger budget, there would be more commitment to achieving a more effective application of knowledge.

– You stated that you had defended the science against the members of the government who wanted to end the career of investigator and against La Campora, of the previous government, who wanted to dissolve the ministry. Do you feel the savior of science?

– More than a savior, I define myself as a heretic, in the sense that he thinks by himself. I am not getting married and I am opposed to what an activist would be. I am a free thinker and, in different contexts, I had to justify different positions in relation to the current government in which I was. I come from another club, I do not feel political clbad, I do not have political ambition. In the case of La Cámpora, the project was. They wanted to create a secretariat, whose functions were the same as ours and if they had not consulted us, it was because we intended to do the same thing. Under the current government, the last meeting of the Board of Directors of Coincet in 2015 decided that "everyone should come because we do not know what will happen". The contracts were signed and, if we did the bill, we did not give the capacity. We knew that with 450 revenues, the body is sustainable. The government said, "Can not we end the race for two or three years and spend the money on something else? The Colón Theater Symphony Orchestra does not generate any income every year, ballet does not replace people every year, and all conservatoire graduates do not intend to register. Why not those who are still working? "They did not say to throw people, but not to put more, I understood this position, but I explained that if I reduce revenues, the technological system would experience a crisis, as in Other countries: You can not open the jet to the maximum or close it You have to maintain a flow and they understood it.The following year, 450 entered Conicet and 400 universities.

That two governments which manage the state so differently have had the same person in science, can we not interpret that none of them are very interested in science?

-C & # 39; is a non-disposable interpretation. Science has never been an issue that decided elections. Now, when Cristina calls me, she says, "I want science to renew economic and industrial development, I want things to happen." When the government changes, Macri tells me "okay, we will continue to bet on science but I want results". Both things, positive and not surprising: the communist countries and the other extreme know that knowledge is needed today.

-What was the main difference between the two approaches?

– (silence) I think Cristina's problem is to be locked into her own obsequious world, since it was not necessary. In this government, the diversity of opinions is greater, but there was more ingenuity to think that things were simpler and an underestimate of the complexity of governance. It is not the same thing to run a business as a government.

A tightrope walker, between the laboratory and the government

Judging by the task and the role that he has played in recent years, Lino Barañao would have done nothing wrong. Train like a tightrope walker. Among those who take the most difficult routes and who must make all kinds of contortions to stay on their axis and not fall into the void. Especially since he's decided to become Minister of Science, now secretary. two administrations as different as those of Cristina and Macri. Exactly with a huge crack in the middle, in which anyone can fall.

But no. Since the young Barañao chose the scientific laboratory, perhaps inspired by the great diversity of trainings and professions that he has seen in his hometown of Boedo district, where the Barca shines, although that's not the only place in the world. he recognizes that he has no "football". Barañao recounts that he had lived with 12 uncles, with a father employed by the National Road Administration and a teacher mother, among whom there was everything from a deputy dean of the faculty from agronomy to carpenters, through dentists and chemists.

At age 17, Barañao was already studying chemistry in the exact sciences of the UBA. At 18, he was a teacher at this faculty. At 21, he started doing research. At 26, he went to the United States, he went through Germany and at 30, he returned to build his laboratory. "It was a hallway", remember

The Barañao who returned to Argentina in 84, complete democratic spring, was quite rebellious, as recalled by this other Barañao who is already 66 years old and there are several that the official offices of pisa. The scientists did not have enough funds, he recalls, and he created a guild of researchers from Conicet, which no longer exists. They made demonstrations, claimed, achieved their legal status.

Meanwhile, I was continuing the investigation. "I came up with the idea of ​​doing animal biotechnology, It was a vacant area. All my friends were dedicated to plants because it is easier to grow in pots than a cow in the laboratory, "he says.He succeeded: those who remember the news of the early 2000s can not forget than first cloned transgenic cow producing growth hormone in milk. Barañao was part of the team that also managed to innovate in the way he managed scientific research, alongside a company (Biosidus), which provided the investment.

In 2003, Barañao left the laboratories and was fully played by the civil service. Concluded by Daniel Filmus (then Minister of Education, Science and Technology), he headed the Agency for Scientific Promotion. In 2007, Cristina appointed him Prime Minister of Science. Barañao has never had political militancy although, he says, he has always been "socialist".

The secretary now claims that his main ambition is to convince people that it is possible to create scientific jobs. He says that's the heart of his current policy. And he thinks that, in a way, "it 's already time". Do you plan to continue after 2019 if you are called?, He asked him Clarin. "I see it is difficult, it seems healthy that there is a generation change," he says.

Route

Lino Barañao holds a PhD in Chemistry from the University of Buenos Aires. He has had a long career as a research scientist in Argentina, USA. and in Germany. He specializes in cell biology, reproductive physiology and animal biotechnology. In 2002, he participated in the team that made the first cloned calf of Latin America genetically engineered for the production of human growth hormone (hGH) milk. He was the first to hold the position of Minister of Science of the Nation. Since 2018, he is Secretary of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation.

Touch

A project

Inclusive Innovation Generating Work from Knowledge A Challenge Reaching This Goal

A dream

That my children live in a better country, a country of equal opportunity, with the upward social mobility that I have experienced when I was little

A memory

The childhood in Boedo, the carnival of San Juan and Boedo

A leader

I do not feel reflected in any

A hero

Sarmiento

A company that admires

The Nordic countries, as a political system, as a state structure. I would not want to live there

A meal

Carbonada

A beverage

Red wine

A squarer

Read in the garden drinking maté

A person who admires

Alfredo Bravo

A book

The myth of Sisyphus, by Albert Camus

A movie

Kaos, Taviani brothers

A series

Merli