Cnr? Good but underfunded. Word of Giorgio Parisi
The words of Giorgio Parisi, Nobel Prize winner for physics in 2021, on the centenary of the National Research Council (Cnr) and the situation of the largest Italian public research body
The National Research Council (Cnr) is underfunded but despite this it has a long history of exceptional successes: what wonders could it achieve with adequate funding? This is the question posed by Giorgio Parisi (in the photo), Nobel Prize winner for physics in 2021 and president of the Lincei Physical and Natural Sciences Class, on the occasion of a conference organized yesterday at the Academy's headquarters in Rome to celebrate the 100 years since the birth of the Cnr. The supervisory minister, Anna Maria Bernini, is expected today for the conclusions of the work.
THE CNR IS UNDERFUNDED, SAYS PARISI
“The Cnr is a story of exceptional successes but despite these successes the Cnr, like the entire research sector, is underfunded,” said Parisi. The Italian physicist explained that direct state funding covers salaries and little more, while almost all research is done with funds obtained through Italian and European grants , contracts with public administrations and private individuals. This prevents the CNR from articulating both a strategic direction for research, as available internal funds are very limited, and adequate funding for basic research for those who are unable to attract external funds. A fact that also translates into the inability to attract foreign researchers, with a few exceptions. “The take-home message is not so much: great results, everything is fine,” concluded Parisi. “Rather, if we achieved all this with little research funding, what wonders would we be able to achieve with adequate funding?”
THE AGILE INSTITUTES AND THE HEAVYNESS OF THE CNR
The “Lincei – CNR” conference will be held on 17 and 18 October at Palazzo Corsini. One hundred years of collaboration for the progress of science". The two institutions have been in continuous synergy since, in 1923, Vito Volterra founded the CNR and established its first headquarters at the Academy of which he was then president. Volterra immediately afterwards also assumed the role of first President of the newly formed research body. Which today is still the largest Italian public scientific center, one of the largest in the world in terms of staff and budget. But after one hundred years – celebrated with conferences, exhibitions and various events – the multidisciplinary model spread across hundreds of locations appears to have aged. Even if there are other examples at an international level, we are now increasingly tending towards agile institutes, themed around projects and objectives, for which human and financial resources are gathered aimed at a specific result, so as to have greater control of the cost-benefit ratio .
Meanwhile, the National Research Council brings together physical, mathematical and natural sciences, and social and humanistic disciplines. From the beginning there were disagreements within it over the creation of a large national experimental laboratory, then it was overwhelmed by the war, involved in post-war reconstruction, organized for the self-government of the scientific community, with disciplinary committees. Contact with universities is no less controversial and complicated. He therefore had the task of preparing an annual report on scientific research. He dealt with energy but then ENEA was born, with space but then ASI came along. Today the greatest resources are allocated to studies on climate change and bio-medicine. “We have important, far-reaching scientific questions before us,” said President Maria Chiara Carrozza, whose shortcomings Start Magazine has covered in several articles . “One of the great current themes is that of the future of humanity and more generally the need to review the relationship between man and the planet”. But there are also many other competing bodies and universities on environmental issues. Every now and then there is talk of reorganizing the sector, but nothing is done.
ARE PARISI'S COMPLAINTS JUSTIFIED? ONLY PARTIALLY
“The centenary that is drawing to a close can therefore be the beginning of a new phase, in which awareness of the historical trajectory will certainly also be useful,” the Lincei write. Observing that, after years of poor funding, a reversal of trend has occurred in more recent years, further increased by the resources of the PNRR. Parisi's complaints are therefore only partially justified.
The CNR was the State funding agency for finalized projects, a function it no longer performs. Indeed, it is itself in a ravenous hunt for funding, since the approximately 500 million per year received directly, as mentioned, barely guarantee salaries, rents and bills. The fact that the other half of the budget comes from the scientific network determines the competitiveness of the institutes, and this is positive. But it ensures that the institutes, by procuring funding that the organization needs to survive, take precedence over the central administration; Furthermore, it obviously makes it difficult to coordinate research. You go where the money leads, to some extent. And then there are problems of transparency, of research evaluation, as highlighted by the "Our Cnr" website which, not surprisingly, calls for moving from the "top-down" model to a "circular" one.
THE ROLE OF GUN
In short, the CNR was established through progressive stratification, its strategic planning has changed over time. President Fabio Pistella, the last person appointed by a centre-right government, tried to implement this sort of federalism years ago, creating the current organization based on Departments, which coordinate scientific macro-areas. The reduction of the excessive power of the directors of the institutes, also by imposing the age limit on the activity, at the time caused a real revolt: Pistella, perhaps not surprisingly, was the subject of ferocious attacks and resigned early.
Another critical element is the sometimes insufficient control of the institutions. Some scandals remind us of this in particular. At the Institute of Clinical Physiology in Pisa an administrator (later fired) created false invoices with which he obtained financial advances; the Coastal Marine Environment Institute of Naples has instead seen research funds diverted for the purchase of materials for a playground. But the most famous case, the subject of Report broadcast services, occurred – again at the Institute for the Coastal Marine Environment – at Capo Granitola, an underused structure where Matteo Messina Denaro is suspected to have been a fugitive. This was said in a confidential (but recorded) conversation between the current director of the Institute and the then manager, nephew of the famous policeman Boris Giuliano.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRECARIOUS AND PERMANENT STAFF
A final permanent critical element is the relationship between temporary and permanent staff. The CNR should have remedied the situation with the last stabilization of around 2,000 people out of a total of 8,500 units, in 2021. Since then, however, it seems we have returned to a permanent use of precarious employment.
THE WORDS OF ORLANDINI
In his program Andrea Orlandini, a researcher candidate as a member of the board of directors, writes that "the Cnr collects significant funding through competitive tenders, partially balancing the lack of the Foe [the ordinary fund for research institutions, ed .]. This is in exchange for a cost that the staff pays by engaging in drafting and project development activities. It is important to encourage external funding collection activities, avoiding unjustified withdrawals, and facilitating management and reporting work".
“It is important”, adds Orlandini, “to create reserves of free research funds to offer to the network to guarantee economic independence.
THE CNR'S RESPONSE TO CRITICAL ISSUES IN PERSONNEL
Here is the full and official response from the Cnr administration: "With this note, the Administration of the National Research Council intends to transmit a brief update on topics that have an important impact on the professional prospects of many people and, therefore, on the life of 'Body, offering correct and timely information.
The selective procedures for the progression of research and technologist personnel certainly represent the most important activity at this moment, due to the breadth and validity of the measures that the current Board of Directors wanted to launch, with a prospect of level growth for over 2,500 researchers, male and female researchers, with over 800 progressions already carried out.
Added to these are the actions – through various tools – which also concern the technical and administrative staff, at the end of which there will be professional growth for around 1,300 colleagues.
The selection for the transition from the II to the I level of researcher and technologist is a measure widely shared with the entire CNR community as a qualifying element of this Administration's strategy aimed at enhancing human resources. This measure is not linked to any ministerial funding line, but the result of a precise will of the CNR. This initiative was characterized by a series of appeals, some in favor of the procedures initiated, others against, which caused the consequent slowdown of a path undertaken with great commitment by all the interlocutors involved.
It is important to specify that at this moment no revocation or suspension measure has been adopted in relation to the notices for progression to research manager and technologist manager.
All possible actions to overcome the critical issues raised by some appeals continue without interruption, including with an extensive discussion at all levels between the CNR, the trade union organizations that signed the CCNL and the ARAN in order to reach an authentic interpretation of the art. 15. The Administration has also initiated the necessary discussions with the highest levels of the State Attorney General also in order to support the decision-making bodies of the CNR regarding the valorisation of the organisation's staff.
No less important, in this phase, is the responsibility that falls on the entire scientific community of the CNR: that of recognizing itself, individually, as part of a whole, and focusing on the great contribution that each one can offer, collaborating, to strengthen and qualify the work of the Institution.
The country extremely needs a strong and competitive multidisciplinary body that is a point of reference on issues of great impact on society. It is up to the CNR to decide whether or not to be such a body, whether to look to the future with ambition or not, whether to grow and improve all together thanks to the resources and energies that can represent its main strength".
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/sanita/cnr-sottofinanziato-parisi/ on Wed, 18 Oct 2023 08:25:17 +0000.