Doing Science in Uncertain Times

A scientist living in Russia is often asked two questions: “Why haven’t you left?” and “Is it still possible to work there?” The best response to the fi rst question is, “Why should I?”—which either terminates the conversation or leads to a stimulating discussion about the fate of the world. The second question, however, deserves a serious answer. In fact, this is the question that every one of us keeps asking ourselves. There is no simple answer. The biggest problems we face are brain drain, inadequate infrastructure, and lack of money (or perhaps, lack of money, lack of money, and lack of money). In the Soviet Union, fundamental science was supported to a great extent by military expenditure. Thus, it is not surprising that Soviet physics and mathematics were more successful than other fi elds, such as biology. In the 1990s, military spending on science declined sharply, although the exact numbers are hard to estimate. This year, the direct funding of science constitutes only 1.78% of Russia’s national budget (an additional 0.46% is allocated to the space program), although the law stipulates that this fi gure should be at least 4%. Still, this funding amounts to 46.2 billion rubles (approximately US$1.6 billion), more than twice the amount spent in 2000. Although this fi gure looks negligible compared with spending on science in the United States and many European countries, it could still be suffi cient to support existing actively working groups at a reasonable level.