Investment in fundamental research in any scientific field does not deserve to be measured in terms of proximate results (“ >India must look beyond neutrinos ,” June 22). As to the value of investment vis-à-vis the immediate needs of the poor in this country, many of us recognise the fact that India is a country of the poor. Yes, money is needed to feed famished mouths or providing roof over heads. But if addressed in an earnest way, it need not be at the cost of funding for research. Let us not be discouraged by the expenditure involved in fundamental or applied research, much of which can possibly result in vast commercial benefits. We need to keep moving ahead.
N.K. Mathur,
New Delhi
I disagree with Dr. Subramanian. He points out that reverse engineering of Western technology benefited the East Asian Tigers, but I believe that ‘reverse innovation’ will benefit us. It is a relatively new trend, that focusses on production of affordable technology for emerging markets, as the demand in India is growing. We should increase our spending in R&D so we come up with affordable technologies that suit local needs. This can then be upgraded to suit the needs of the West and sold at a lower cost, giving us a comparative advantage with other competitors, besides better market access and profits. The Mars Orbiter Mission is an example of the cost-efficient potential that we possess.
Swati Singh,
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh
I would like to point out that the collaborative effort behind INO comprises more than 20 research institutes, the IITs, and many other university departments. INO has always been advertised as an open collaboration model and we are proud of the fact that this is the only example in India with such a wide cross-section of member institutions. In fact, this is the reason why INO is being jointly funded by both the Department of Atomic Energy and the Department of Science and Technology. The article failed to mention this.
D. Indumathi,
Chennai
