Science Diplomacy Reviewfisd.in/sites/default/files/SDR 4 - November issue... · The Science...

(Continued on outside back cover)

Science Diplomacy ReviewVol. 1 | No. 4 | November 2019

EDITORIAL

ARTICLESMega Science and International Relations: A Case of International Nuclear Fusion Research and Engineering (ITER)Jyoti Sharma and Sanjeev Kumar Varshney

Biotechnology and STI DiplomacyDouglas Nascimento Santana

Suriname-India Cooperation in Rural Development: A Science Diplomacy PerspectiveDavid Abiamofo

PERSPECTIVELeveraging Scientific Diaspora to Strengthen National STI Ecosystem Amit Kumar

BOOK REVIEWScience and Technology Diplomacy: A Focus on the Americas with Lessons for the WorldRajiv Kumar Mishra

Science Diplomacy Review

EditorsSachin Chaturvedi Director General, RIS

Bhaskar Balakrishnan Science Diplomacy Fellow, RIS

Ravi Srinivas Consultant, RIS

Associate EditorNimita Pandey Research Associate, RIS

Kapil Dhanraj Patil Research Assistant, RIS

Science Diplomacy Review

Vol. 1 | No. 4 | November 2019

EDITORIAL 1

ARTICLESMega Science and International Relations: A Case of ‘International 3 Nuclear Fusion Research and Engineering (ITER)’Jyoti Sharma and Sanjeev Kumar Varshney

Biotechnology and STI Diplomacy 15Douglas Nascimento Santana

Suriname-India Cooperation in Rural Development: A Science Diplomacy 23 PerspectiveDavid Abiamofo

PERSPECTIVELeveraging Scientific Diaspora to Strengthen National STI Ecosystem 31Amit Kumar

BOOK REVIEWScience and Technology Diplomacy: A Focus on the Americas 37 with Lessons for the WorldRajiv Kumar Mishra

REPORTSynthetic Biology, Biotrade and Access and Benefit-Sharing 41Krishna Ravi Srinivas

NEWS UPDATES Science Policy• IAEAandFAOlaunchPlantMutationBreedingNetwork 45• PolicydraftonScientificSocialResponsibility(SSR) 45

Research and Development• IITMadrasDevelops‘GraspMan’–ARobot-equivalentofHumanHand 46

• TechnologydevelopedtodiagnoseearlyspreadofCancer 47

Science Diplomacy ReviewVol. 1 | No. 4 | November 2019

editorial

TheScienceDiplomacyReview’sNovemberissuemarksoneyearofitspublicationas apeer reviewed international journal specialising indiverseperspectivesrelated toScienceDiplomacy.Wearegreatlyencouragedby theenthusiastic

responsefromourreadersandthegrowinginterestamidresearchersandpractitionersforcontributingtothejournal.

In continuationof our efforts towards sharing experiences, instances andbestpracticesinsciencediplomacy,thisissuecontainsanumberofinterestingpapers.ThefirstpaperbyJyotiSharmaandSanjeevKumarVarshneyhighlightsthesignificanceofmegascienceprojectsforIndiaandotherdevelopingcountries,throughexamplessuchastheInternationalNuclearFusionResearchandEngineering(ITER).Itassertstheneedformultilateralscientificcooperation,acrosssocio-economic,geographicalandculturaldiversities,inordertoaddressissuesofcommoninterests.

The paper on the role of Science, Technology and InnovationDiplomacy inBiotechnologybyDouglasNascimentoSantanaexplores thediplomatic challengesandopportunities,inthewakeofrecentscientificadvancessuchasprecisiongenomeeditingusingCRISPRtechnology.Ithighlightshowglobalcollaborationsaresettingthefoundationofbiotechnology-ledinterventionsindefenceandsecurity.InanotherpaperbyDavidAbiamofo,India-SurinamerelationshavebeenexaminedinthecontextofpromotingcooperationtoachievetheSDGs,includinghealth,waterandsanitation,education, energyandagriculture.Thepaperproposes that throughbilateral andmultilateralrelations,STIcanbeleveragedforsustainabledevelopment.

InthePerspectivessection,thepaperbyAmitKumardelvesintotheimportanceofS&TDiasporasinstrengtheningthehomecountry’sSTIecosystem.Specificmodalitiesofengagementareoutlinedforthispurpose.Thisisanareaofconsiderableinteresttoallcountries,asincreasingmobilityofSTEMprofessionalsandglobalisationofSTIhaveledtointer-wovencomplexitiesofBrainDrain,BrainGainandBrainCirculation.

Thebookreviewsectionincludesareviewofathreevolumebookseriesbasedontheconferenceproceedingson‘ScienceandTechnologyDiplomacy:AFocusontheAmericaswithLessonsfortheWorld’,organisedattheUniversityofArizonainTucsoninFebruary2017.Itaimstobringtheideaoftechnologytransferandcapacitybuildingtotheforefront,particularlyincontextofdevelopingcountries.TheseriespresentsacomprehensivedocumentationtodelvedeeperintoS&Tdiplomacy,forresearchers,policymakers,sciencediplomats,technocrats,bureaucratsandstudents.

Thereportreviewof‘Synthetic Biology and its Potential Implications for Biotrade and Access and Benefit-Sharing’ publishedbyUNCTAD, captures theunderlyingpolicyimplicationsforgeneticresources.Thereviewsignalsmovestowardstakingcommon

SCIENCEDIPLOMACYREVIEW|Vol.1,No.4|November2019 │1

positionsoninvestmentandR&DinSyntheticBiology.Besidestheseinsightfulpapers,theNewsUpdatesectionshowcasesrecentdevelopmentsinS&T,SciencePolicyandScienceDiplomacy,bothatnationalandinternationallevels.

SDRhopes to attract awide range of contributions from thefield of ScienceDiplomacyacross theglobe, including stakeholders.We look forward tovaluablesuggestionsfromourreaders.


Sciencebyitsnaturefacilitatesdiplomacybecauseit strengthens political relationships, embodiespowerfulideals,andcreatesopportunitiesforall.

Theglobalmegaprojects,basedonscienceandtechnology,embraceglobalcooperation,accountability,meritocracyandbroad aswell asdemocratic participation.Megaprojects areable tobridgedeeppolitical and religiousdividesforaddressingbothdomesticandtheincreasinglytransnational problems confronting humanity in the21stcentury.Thereisagrowingrecognitionthatscienceand technologywill increasinglydrive the successfuleconomiesofthepresentera.

India’s Participation in Mega Science Innovative research in nearly all scientific fieldsrequireslargeandcomplexinfrastructure,cutting-edgetechnologiesandlong-termprojects.Majorcollaborativeefforts,ofteninternationalinscope,arethusbecomingacommonmeanstoreducecosts,sharerisk,andaugmentscientific expertise.Thegrowing importanceofglobalscientificengagementusuallyemphasisesitscomponentsofsynergy,sciencediplomacy,andbeneficialimpactsoneconomies.

TheIndiangovernmentiscommittedtofacilitatingIndian scientists, providing them an opportunity tolead at the global level and supporting academic-

Mega Science and International Relations: A Case of ‘International Nuclear Fusion Research and Engineering (ITER)’

JyotiSharma*SanjeevKumarVarshney**

article

SeniorScientist*,Head&Advisor**,InternationalBilateralCooperationDivision(IBCD),DepartmentofScienceandTechnology,MinistryofScienceandTechnology,Govt.ofIndia.

Jyoti Sharma

Sanjeev Kumar Varshney

4 │ SCIENCEDIPLOMACYREVIEW|Vol.1,No.4|November2019

industrypartnerships fordevelopmentof cutting-edge indigenous technologiesthroughparticipation inmegaprojects.TheScience,TechnologyandInnovation(STI) 2013 policy of India, released byDSTalsoadvocatesIndia’sparticipationinmega-science projects (DST, 2013).Active participation and billion-dollarinvestments inmega science projects,i.e. EuropeanOrganisation forNuclearResearch(CERN),FacilityforAntiprotonand IonResearch (FAIR), India-basedNeutrinoObservatory(INO),InternationalThermonuclear Experimental Reactor(ITER),LaserInterferometerGravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), SquareKilometreArray(SKA)andThirtyMeterTelescope depict India’s vision andunderstandingthatanysinglecountryisnotabletofund,executeandbeartheriskof theuncertainoutcomeof thesemegaprojects(Sharma&Varshney,2019).

ITER: A Good Example of ‘Technology Diplomacy’Allmegaprojects addressing thegrand

challengesinscienceandtechnologyareinherently international in scope andcollaborativebynecessity. Ina complexmulti-polarworld, relations aremorechallenging, thethreatsperhapsgreater,and the need for engagement moreparamount.ITER(ITERwasoriginallyanacronymforInternationalThermonuclearExperimentalReactor)isagoodexampleof technology diplomacy, starting in1985 for promoting the use of nuclearfusionforthepeacefuluseofenergyandovercomethepoliticaltensionsduringthecoldworldwar.TheUnitedStates andtheSovietUnionusedsciencediplomacyas a tool tomaintain communicationsandavoidmisunderstandingduringtheheightofthecoldwar.TheITERProject,an international fusion research anddevelopmentcollaboration,isaproductofthethawinsuperpowerrelationsbetweenSovietPresidentMikhailGorbachevandU.S.PresidentRonaldReagan(Fedoroff,2008).PresidentRonaldReagansentthefollowingmessagetoCongressonMarch22, 1982 (Harding,Khanna&Orbach,

Figure 1: India’s Participation In Mega Science

Source: VigyanSamagam,2019.


2012):“It is becoming increasingly important that we all reach beyond our borders to form partnerships in research enterprises. There are areas of science, such as high energy physics and fusion research, where the cost of the next generation of facilities will be so high that international collaboration among…nations may become a necessity. We welcome opportunities to explore with other nations the sharing of the high costs of modern scientific facilities”.

On 19November 1985, the Sovietleader shared his thought about anambitious programme of researchand experimentation on a subject onwhichscientistsofhiscountryhadbeendevotingmuchattention foryearswithhis counterpart. Immediately followingthe standoff overnucleardisarmamentattheReykjavikSummitinOctober1986,theITERproposalforthepeacefuluseofnuclearenergywasmadeandjoinedbytheUnitedStates,theEuropeanUnionandJapantotheSovietUnioninthefollowingyear(Harding,Khanna&Orbach,2012).Later, China, India and South Korea

joinedthisadventure.Alongjourneyofits conceptualisation, negotiations andestablishment of the ITERorganisationmakes an interesting case study in theintersectionofscienceanddiplomacyforlarge-scale,capital-intensiveinternationalprojects.

T h e j o u r n e y b e t w e e n t h econceptualisation of this idea to thefinal signingof the ITERAgreement inNovember2006hasgonethroughmanylegalandpoliticalchallengesconfrontedbytheparticipatingcountries.Therewerea number of difficult negotiations ondesign,financialobligations,constructionsites, the provision of privileges andimmunitiesandaformofagreementandorganisation thatwould allowpartnerswithdiversepolitical and legal systemsto work together on amega-scienceexperiment. The significant uncertaincost of ITER,multiple currenciesof theparticipatingcountriesandalongtimeofitsconstructionandoperationmakefundingcommitmentofallpartiesisoneofthekeylegalandpoliticalissues.However,itwas

Figure 2: ITER Site in France

Source: ITER,2019a


necessarythateachpartyhaveahighlevelofconfidencethateachoftheotherpartieswould remain committed financially.A series of negotiationswere alsoheldforwithdrawal anddispute settlementprovisions.ExceptfortheEU(hostparty)thatwaspushedforclear,legallybindingfunding commitments, others wereflexibleanddifferentonalmostallpoints,witheachpartyinterestedinformulationsthatweremost acceptable and familiarto its domestic system. Finally, on 17November2010,thefoundationstoneoftheexperimentalreactorwaslaidinFranceontheCadarachesite(Ruffini,2017).

Scientific Dimensions of ITER

Fusion ExperimentInthetremendousheatandgravityatthecoreofthestellarbodies,hydrogennucleicollide,fuseintoheavierheliumatomsandrelease tremendous amounts of energyintheprocess.Atextremetemperatures,electronsare separated fromnuclei andgasbecomesaplasma that is the fourthstateofmatter.Threeconditionsmustbefulfilledtoachievefusioninalaboratory:very high temperature of the order of150,000,000°(150million)Celsius;enoughplasmaparticledensity (to increase thelikelihood that collisionsdooccur); andsufficient confinement time (tohold theplasma,whichhasapropensitytoexpand,withinadefinedvolume)(ITER,2019b).

Twentieth-century fusion scienceidentified the most efficient fusionreaction in the laboratory setting to bethe reaction between two hydrogenisotopes, deuterium (D) and tritium(T). TheDT fusion reaction producesthehighest energygain at the “lowest”temperatures. Theplasmaparticles areheatedthatis,spedupbydifferenttypes

ofauxiliaryheatingmethods.Thefusionbetween deuterium and tritium (DT)nucleiproducesoneheliumnucleus,oneneutron, andagreat amountof energy(ITER,2019b).

Theadvantagesoffusionreactionarereleaseofabundantenergy,sustainability,nocarbon-di-oxide (majorby-product ishelium:aninert,non-toxicgas),nolong-livedradioactivewaste(couldberecycledor reusedwithin 100 years), limitedriskofproliferation (exploited tomakenuclearweapons), no riskofmeltdown (theplasmacoolswithinsecondsandthereactionstops)andappropriatecost.Thepoweroutputofthekindoffusionreactorthatisenvisagedforthesecondhalfofthiscenturywillbesimilartothatofafissionreactor,(i.e.between1and1.7gigawatts).Theaveragecostperkilowattofelectricityisalsoexpected tobesimilarorslightlymoreexpensiveatthebeginningwhenthetechnologyisnewandlessexpensiveaseconomiesofscalebringthecostsdown.

In terms of sheer scale, the energypotentialofthefusionreactionissuperiortoallotherenergysourcesthatweknowonearth.Fusingatomsinacontrolledwayreleasesnearly fourmillion timesmoreenergythanachemicalreactionsuchastheburningofcoal,oilorgasandfourtimesmorethannuclearfission.InITER,fusionwillbeachievedinaTokamakdevicethatusesmagneticfieldstocontainandcontrolthehotplasma.

TokamakTheterm“tokamak”comestousfromaRussianacronymthatstandsfor“toroidalchamber withmagnetic coils.” FirstdevelopedbySovietresearch inthe late1960s, the tokamak has been adoptedaroundtheworldasthemostpromisingconfigurationofmagneticfusiondevices.


Theheartofatokamakisadoughnut-shapedvacuum.Inside,undertheinfluenceof extremeheat andpressure, gaseoushydrogen fuel becomes a plasma—thevery environment inwhich hydrogenatom canbe brought to fuse andyieldenergy. The charged particles of theplasmacanbeshapedandcontrolledbythemassivemagneticcoilsplacedaroundthevessel;physicistsuse this importantpropertytoconfinethehotplasmaawayfromthevesselwalls.

The helium nucleus carries anelectric chargewhichwill be subject tomagneticfieldsofthetokamakandremainconfinedwithintheplasma,contributingto its continued heating. However,approximately80percentoftheenergyproducediscarriedawayfromtheplasmaby the neutronwhichhas no electricalcharge and is, therefore, unaffected bymagnetic fields. The neutronswill beabsorbedbythesurroundingwallsofthetokamak,wheretheirkineticenergywillbe transferred to thewalls asheat. Justlikeaconventionalpowerplant,afusionpowerplantwillusethisheattoproducesteam and then electricity byway ofturbinesandgenerators.

ITER Experiments: An OverviewITERwillbethefirstfusiondevicetotestthe integrated technologies,materials,andphysics regimes necessary for thecommercialproductionof fusion-basedelectricity.ITERwillnotproduceelectricity,but itwill resolve critical scientific andtechnicalissuesinordertotakefusiontothepointwhere industrial applicationscanbedesigned.Byproducing500MWof fusionpower from50MWofpowerinjected in the systems that heat theplasma—a“gainfactor”of10.ITERwill

be theworld’s largest tokamak—twicethesizeofthelargestmachinecurrentlyinoperation, (the JointEuropeanTorusin theUK) (ITER, 2019b). This uniqueexperimentalmachinehasbeendesignedto:• ITERisdesignedtoproduceaten-fold

returnonenergy (Q=10),or500MWoffusionpowerfrom50MWofinputheatingpower.

• Demonstratetheintegratedoperationoftechnologiesforafusionpowerplant

• Achieveadeuterium-tritiumplasmainwhichthereactionissustainedthroughinternalheating

• Test tritium breeding: The worldsupplyoftritium(usedwithdeuteriumto fuel the fusion reaction) is notsufficienttocovertheneedsoffuturepower plants. ITERwill provide auniqueopportunity to testmock-upin-vesseltritiumbreedingblanketsinarealfusionenvironment.

• Demonstratethesafetycharacteristicsofafusiondevice.

The ITER Project: Structure and StatusThousands of engineers and scientistshave contributed to the design of aninternational joint experiment of ITERsince its inception in 1985. The initialdesignofITERwasacircularcross-sectionformagnetic confinementwhichwaschanged to a ‘D’ shaped cross-sectionthatleadstomorestableoperation.ThischangeescalatesthecostsignificantlyandforcedtheUnitedStatestodiscontinueitsinvolvementinITER(Harding,Khanna,&Orbach,2012).

Aftersignificantdomesticdevelopmenttowards burning plasma experiments,


SecuringAmerica’s FutureEnergyActof 2001 andSnowmassworkshop,heldin the summerof 2002, encouraged theUnitedStatestore-jointhisinternationaleffortin2003.ChinaandSouthKoreaalsoexpressedtheirinteresttojoinITERinthesameyear,followedbyIndiaattheendof2005,bringingthe totalnumberof ITERmembers toseven.).Takentogether, theITERMembersrepresentthreecontinents,over 40 languages, half of theworld’spopulationand85percentofglobalgrossdomestic product. The ITERMembers(China, EuropeanUnion, India, Japan,Korea,RussiaandtheUnitedStates)arenowengagedina35-yearcollaborationtobuildandoperatetheITERexperimentaldevice and togetherbring fusion to thepoint where a demonstration fusionreactorcanbedesigned.

The ITER Organization has alsoconcluded non-Member technicalcooperation agreementswithAustralia(throughtheAustralianNuclearScienceandTechnologyOrganisation,ANSTO,in 2016) and Kazakhstan (throughKazakhstan’sNationalNuclearCentrein2017);aMemorandumofUnderstandingwith Canada agreeing to explore thepossibility of future cooperation and aCooperationAgreementwiththeThailandInstituteofNuclearTechnology(2018);aswellasover60CooperationAgreementswithinternationalorganisations,nationallaboratories,universitiesandschools.

TheworkoftheITEROrganisationissupervisedbyitsgoverningbody,theITERCouncil.TheITERCouncilisresponsibleby following the ITERAgreement, forthe promotion and overall directionof the ITEROrganisation. The ITERCouncilcomprisesrepresentativesofthesevenMembers.TheChairandVice-Chair

oftheCouncilareelectedfromamongstitsmembers.Meetings areheld at leasttwiceayear;apressreleaseisissuedaftereachmeeting.EachMemberhascreatedaDomesticAgencytofulfilitsprocurementresponsibilitiestoITER.Communicationbetween the ITEROrganizationCentralTeam and the Domestic Agencies isfacilitatedbystate-of-the-artcollaborativeCADdesigntools,integratedprojectteamsfor specific componentsorprojects, andvideoconferencing.TheworkinglanguagefortheprojectisEnglish(ITER,2019a).

Construction SiteThreepotential siteswereproposed atthe initial proposal: in France, Spain,and Japan.Later, itwas reduced to twopossible sites after theEuropeanUnionchose the French site (Cadarache) overthe Spanish site. In ameeting hostedbyEnergy Secretary SpencerAbrahaminDecember 2003 to take a collectivedecisionontheITERsite,Russia,China,and the EU supported theCadarache,France site, while the United States,SouthKorea, and Japan supported theRokkasho-mura, Japan site. Thiswasresolved through Broader Approachagreement.Underthisagreement,JapanagreedtowithdrawitsbidtohostITER,and theEUagreed toprocure a certainamountofITERmaterialsthroughJapan,supportadditionalJapanesestaffatITER,andthenominationofaqualifiedJapanesecandidate tobe thefirst ITERDirector-General (Harding,Khanna,&Orbach,2012).

Finally, the on-site constructionof the scientific facility began in 2010at Cadarache, France. The fabricationoflarge-scalemock-upsandcomponentsisunderwayinthefactoriesoftheseven


ITERMembers. The shipment of thefirst completed components began in2014 andwill continue into the 2020s.MachineassemblywillbeginassoonasthegiantTokamakComplexisreadyforoccupation. FirstPlasma isplanned forDecember2025.

TheCadaracheresearchcentre(CEA)playedaninstrumentalpartinsupportingsitestudiesandinrallyinglocalpoliticalplayers forwelcoming ITER to France.Thirty-ninebuildingsandtechnicalareaswillhousetheITERTokamakanditsplantsystems.TheTokamakBuilding,theheartof the facility, is a seven-story structurein reinforced concrete thatwill sit 13metresbelow theplatform level and60metresabove.Pre-assemblyofTokamakcomponentswilltakeplaceintheadjacentAssemblyHall.Otherauxiliarybuildingsin thevicinityof theTokamakBuildingwill include cooling towers, electrical

installations, a control room, facilitiesfor themanagement ofwaste, and thecryogenicsplantthatwillprovideliquidhelium to cool the ITERmagnets.Overthenextyearseachbuilding,asitbecomesreadyforoccupation,willbehandedoverto the ITEROrganization for the startofassemblyworks(ITER,2019a).

The successful integration andassemblyofoveronemillioncomponents(tenmillion parts) built in the ITERMembers’ factories around theworldanddeliveredtotheITERsiteconstitutea tremendous logistics and engineeringchallenge. An assemblyworkforce ofapproximately2,000peoplewillbeneededattheheightofassemblyactivities.Francehasprovidedthesitefortheprojectandcarriedoutpreparatoryworksincludingclearing and levelling, fencing, andnetworksforwaterandelectricity.Itcreatedaninternationalschoolforthefamiliesof

Main Components of ITERTokamak World’slargesttokamakwithaplasmaradius(R)of6.2mand

aplasmavolumeof840m3,weight23000tonnes.Magnets Ten thousand tonnes of magnets, with a combined stored

magneticenergyof51Gigajoules(GJ)VacuumVessels withaninteriorvolumeof1,400m³,

19.4metresacross(outerdiameter),11.4metreshigh,andweighapproximately5,200tonnes.

withtheinstallationoftheblanketandthedivertor,thevacuumvesselwillweigh8,500tonnes.

440blanketmodules Willcovertheinnerwallsofthevacuumvessel,protectthesteelstructureandthesuperconductingtoroidalfieldmagnetsfromtheheatandhigh-energyneutronsproducedbythefusionreactions.Eachblanketmodulemeasures1x1.5metresandweighsupto4.6tonnes

Divertor Situated at the bottom of the vacuum vessel, the divertorextractsheatandashproducedbythefusionreaction

Cryostat thelargeststainless-steelhigh-vacuumpressurechambereverbuilt (16,000 m³), weighs 3,850 tonnes—provides the highvacuum, ultra-cool environment for the ITER vacuum vesselandthesuperconductingmagnets.

Source:Authors’compilation.


ITERemployees,adaptedtheroadsalongtheITERItineraryforthetransportofITERcomponents and contributed (with theEuropeanDomesticAgency)tobuildingtheITERHeadquarters.AttheendoftheITERexperimentalphase,Francewillhavetheresponsibilityforthedismantlinganddecommissioningofthesite.

Cost AssessmentAs signatories to the ITERAgreement,concluded in 2006, the sevenMemberswillsharethecostofprojectconstruction,operat ion and decommissioning.They’ll also share the experimentalresults and any intellectual propertygenerated by the operation phase.Europe is responsible for the largestportion of construction costs (45.6 percent); the remainder is shared equallybyChina, India, Japan, Korea, RussiaandtheUS(9.1percenteach).Thelion’sshare(90percent)ofcontributionswillbedelivered“in-kind.”Thatmeans that intheplaceofcash,theMemberswilldelivercomponentsandbuildingsdirectlytotheITEROrganization. For the operationphase, the sharingof cost amongst theMemberswillbeasfollows:Europe34percent,JapanandtheUnitedStates13percent,andChina,India,Korea,andRussia10percent(ITER,2019a).

India’s Engagement in ITERIndiaformallyjoinedtheITERProjectin2005andtheITERAgreementbetweenthepartnerswassignedin2006. ITER-IndiaistheIndiandomesticagency,aspeciallyempowered project of the Institutefor Plasma Research (IPR), an aidedorganization under theDepartment ofAtomicEnergy.ITER-Indiaisresponsiblefor the delivery of the following ITERpackages: Cryostat, In-wall Shielding,

CoolingWaterSystem,CryogenicSystem,Ion-CyclotronRFHeatingSystem,ElectronCyclotronRFHeatingSystem,DiagnosticNeutralBeamSystem,PowerSuppliesandsomeDiagnostics.Additionally, relatedR&DandexperimentalactivitiesarebeingcarriedoutattheITER-IndialaboratoryinGandhinagar,Gujarat.ITER-Indiacarriesoutothercommonactivitiesinsupportof

Timeline for ITER Project

2005:DecisiontositetheprojectinFrance2006:SignatureoftheITERAgreement2007:FormalcreationoftheITEROrganization2007-2009:Landclearingandlevelling2010-2014:GroundsupportstructureandseismicfoundationsfortheTokamak2012:Nuclearlicensingmilestone:ITERbecomesaBasicNuclearInstallationunderFrenchlaw2014-2021:ConstructionoftheTokamakBuilding2010-2021:ConstructionoftheITERplantandauxiliarybuildingsforFirstPlasma2008-2021:ManufacturingofprincipalFirstPlasmacomponents2015-2023:LargestcomponentsaretransportedalongtheITERItinerary2020-2025:MainassemblyphaseI2022:Toruscompletion2024:Cryostatclosure2024-2025:Integratedcommissioningphase(commissioningbysystemstartsseveralyearsearlier)Dec 2025:First Plasma2026:Begininstallationofin-vesselcomponents2035:Deuterium-Tritium Operation begins

Source: Authors’ compilation.


In-Kind Contribution Package Cryostat:30mhighand30mdiameterOutervacuumshellofITER

Cryolines and cryo distribution system:4kmcryolines,7kmwarmlinesand7cryodistributionboxesforITERcryo-plantsofcapacities75kWat4.5K,1MWat80K&theirsupply

In wall shielding:~80%volumebetweenthetwoshellsofvacuumvesselisfilledwithboratedsteel(SS304B4,SS304B7)andferriticsteelforneutronshieldingandreducingtoroidalfieldripple.Requires~9000blocksfrom70,000precisioncutplates.

ITER – Cooling water and Heat Rejection System: 10 cells of Cooling Tower:Avg.510MW:Highestheatrejectioncapacity–Peak~1.2GW14 Plate type Heat Exchanger:70MWeach:Possiblyatthehighestrangeofdesign6 Air cooled Chillers:450kWeach:First,withrequirementofseismicqualificationfornuclearsite

ICRF source system:9RFsources:2.5MWatVSWR2.0/35-65MHz/CWOR3.0MWatVSWR1.5/40-55MHz/CW

Diagnostic neutral beam system:DetectHeashduringD-TphaseofITERplasmaandplasmadiagnosticsusing100keV20AHneutralbeam@20.7mfromtheionsource.Thisrequiresextractingandaccelerating100keV60AH-beamfromtheionsourceatanextractedcurrentdensityof35mA/cm2

Power supplies for DNB, ICRF and ECRF systems: DNB:10kV,140AExtractionPS90kV,70AAccelerationPSICRH Driver Stage:8-18kV,250kW,Endstage:27kV,2.8MWECRH:55kV,5.5MW

ECRH: 2 gyrotron sources:1MWpoweroutputat170GHzfor3600spulselength

Diagnostics:Essentialtomonitorplasmaimpuritiesandemission.PortsareneededtohousetheDiagnosticsystemsinpositionandactasshieldingfromneutrons.

X-RayCrystalSpectroscopy(XRCS):Setofspectrometers((X-raycrystals,Detectors,Vacuumchamber)

ElectronCyclotronEmission(ECE):SetofMichelsonInterferometers&Radiometers,Polarizationsplitterunit,Transmissionlines

CXRS:OpticalFibers,Detectors,VisibleSpectrometers,Opto-mechanicalcomponentslikefilters,mounts,I&C

Special material developmentCuCrZrwith%compositionscontrolledtoCr:0.6–0.8%;Zr:0.07%to0.15%;Cd:0.01%;Co:0.05%;totalimpuritiesnottoexceed0.1%

Source: ITER, 2019c.


the in-kinddeliveries andother relatedcommitments to theITEROrganisationswhich include project coordination,projectmanagement, quality control,assuranceandqualityaudit(ITER,2019c).

Indiaisoneofthesevenmajorpartnersof ITER that indicates India’s presencein cutting edge science and technologyat the global level.One of the biggestbenefits for India is ‘know-how’ andIntellectual PropertyRights (IPR) fromITERexperimentswhichare 90percentby giving 10percent only. This can beusedinexistingpowerplantstoenhancetheir capabilities. The other benefitsare the establishment of newhigh-endtechnologiesinIndianindustriesthroughITERexperiments.NowIndianindustriesandresearchinstitutionsareinvolvedinthemanufacturingof thosetechnologieswhichwerenotavailableinIndiabeforeITER.The1,250-tonnecryostatbase,thefirst two sections ofwhich have beenconstructed by conglomerate Larsen&Toubro (L&T), is India’s one of themost important contributions in ITER.Apart from technology development,our scientific community is getting anopportunity to interact andworkwiththebestbrainsofotherpartsoftheworld.

Training and Capacity BuildingThe ITER International School aims toprepareyoung scientists and engineersforworkinginthefieldofnuclearfusionand in research applications associatedwith the ITERProject. The adoptionofa“school”formatwasaconsequenceoftheneedtopreparefuturescientistsandengineersonarangeofdifferentsubjectsandtoprovidethemwithawideoverviewoftheinterdisciplinaryskillsrequiredbyITER.

Till date, a total ten ITER schoolshave been conducted on a variety ofsubjects: turbulent transport in fusionplasmas(Aix-en-Provence,France,2007),magnetic confinement (Fukuoka, Japan,2008);plasma-surfaceinteractions(Aix-en-Provence,France,2009);magneto-hydro-dynamics andplasma control (Austin,Texas (US), 2010); energetic particles(Aix-en-Provence,2011);radio-frequencyheating (Ahmedabad, India, 2012);highperformancecomputinginfusionscience(Aix-en-Provence,France,2014);transportandpedestalphysicsintokamaks(Hefei,China,2016);physicsofdisruptionsandcontrol (Aix-en-Provence,France, 2017);andthephysicsandtechnologyofpowerfluxhandling(Daejeon,Korea,2019)(ITERNewsline,2019).

The 11th ITER International SchoolwillbeheldfromJuly20toJuly24,2020atAix-MarseilleUniversity, France.Thesubjectofthisyear’sschoolis:“TheImpactandConsequencesofEnergeticParticlesonFusionPlasmas”.AsthestartofITERoperations approaches, it is timely toaddress thismultidisciplinary topic thatincludesplasma self-heatingby fusion-born alpha-particles, the influence ofenergeticparticlesonstability,diagnosingenergeticparticletransportandloss,andunderstanding runawayelectrons(ITERNewsline,2019).

Conclusion The challenges are huge and there isstill a longway to go using sciencediplomacy.Participants in internationalproject negotiations should expect thattherewillbesignificantculturalandotherdivides.However, ITER is an excellentexamplewhere sciencediplomacywasused inparallel to economydiplomacy


within countries that have differencestogether. Strong political will, trust,flexible international agreements andcommitmentsarethekeytocarryingsuchmegaprojects. Science andTechnologyis thehopeofSustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)andinternationalscientificcooperation is the new endeavour toachievethem.Allpartiesshouldmaintaina flexible spirit and political goodwillwhendifficultiesandmistrustariseandpromoteitratherthanplaceobstaclesinitsway.

ITER is an ambitious programmewhich demonstrates that diplomacycan be a catalyst for technologicaldevelopment.This is a globalplatformtofacilitatethecooperationoftheglobalscientificcommunityandindustrieswhiledeveloping commercial performance.This is the creationof ahigh-levelpoolof international technical expertiseand inspiration for diplomats andpolicymakers.Theupcoming$25billionplasma-based fusion reactor ITER, inwhichIndia isapartner, ishopeforthesource of tremendous, carbon-free andsafeenergyfortheworld.

ReferenceClaessens,M. 2020. Beyond Technology

Diplomacy. In ITER: The Giant Fusion Reactor(pp.199-209).Copernicus:Cham.

DST. 2013. “Science, Technology andInnovationPolicy-2013”.Accessedon

November2, 2019 fromhttp://www.dst.gov.in/sites/default/files/STI%20Policy%202013-English.pdf.

Fedoroff,N.V.2008.“MakingScienceDiplomacyMore Effective. USDepartment ofState”. AccessedonNovember25,2019from https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/stas/2008/105286.htm

Harding,T.K.,Khanna,M. J.,&Orbach,R.L. 2012. “International fusion energycooperation: ITER as a case study inscience and diplomacy”.Science and Diplomacy,9.

ITER, 2019a. “ITER inFrance”.AccessedonNovember17,2019fromhttps://www.iter.org/org/ITERinFrance

ITER.2019b.“ITER:TheWaytoNewEnergy”.Accessed onNovember 9, 2019 fromhttps://www.iter.org/

ITER. 2019c. “ITER: India”. Accessed onNovember8,2019fromhttps://www.iter-india.org/indias-contribution-iter

ITERNewsline.2019.‘11thITERInternationalSchool announced’. Accessed onDecember1,2019fromhttps://www.iter.org/newsline/-/3349

Ruffini, P. B. 2017. “What Is ScienceDiplomacy?”.Science and Diplomacy;pp.11-26

Sharma, J., & Varshney, S. 2019. ScienceDiplomacyandCooperationinScienceand Technology in India. Science Diplomacy Review,pp.Vol.1(2)

Sharma, J.,&Varshney, S.K. 2019. “VigyanSamagam: Showcas ing Ind ia ’ sParticipationinMegaScienceProjects”.Science Reporter

VigyanSamagam.2019.“VigyanSamagam”.AccessedonNovember23, 2019 fromhttps://www.vigyansamagam.in/


IntroductionThe convergenceofmethods forproducing scientificknowledgeandcreatingnewtechnologiesisincreasingamongthefieldsofchemistryandbiology,resultinginanewlyshapedbiotechnology.Itisnowpossibletoproducechemicalsbyusinglivingbeings,aswellastosynthesizebiologicalmoleculesthroughchemicalprocesses(Tucker,2010).Thetechnicaldevelopmentsthathasallowedtheapproachof these two sciences ismanifold:metabolicengineering; enzymatic engineering (biocatalysis);biopharming;traditionalDNA-recombinanttechnology;ClusteredRegularly Interspaced Short PalindromicRepeats(CRISPR)technology;DNAsynthesisandsemi-automatizedpeptide synthesis; “omics” technologies,such as genomics, transcriptomics, epigenomics,immunology, proteomics,metabolomics, and others(Khosla,2014;Ibrahim,Pasic&Yousef,2016.).

This technologicalconvergencebetweenchemistryandbiologythatunderpinsthecurrentstateoftheartofbiotechnologyexpandstherangeofproducts,servicesand solutions in the areas of health, agriculture andtheenvironment,fosteringeconomicdevelopmentandimprovements in the living standardsofpopulations.An illustrative example of how these technologicalconvergencescanspillovereconomicandsocialbenefitsisthedevelopmentofmoleculessimilartothepoliovirusthroughthegeneticmanipulationof the tobaccoplantaiming atmanufacturing vaccines at a lower cost(Marsianetal.2017).

However, itmight not be neglected as nuclearand ballistic missile technologies, biotechnologybreakthroughsposetheriskofdualuse,andmustremain

Biotechnology and STI DiplomacyDouglasNascimentoSantana*

Douglas Nascimento Santana

article

*CareerDiplomat,BrazilianMinistryofForeignAffairs.


underseverescrutinyofinternationalrulesofthecurrentsystemsofnon-proliferationofweapons ofmass destruction. Thedifficultyindiscerningthenature(whetherchemical or biological) of these newagents sparksdoubts aboutwhat is theappropriate institutional frameworkof surveillance for each case,whetherthe Chemical Weapons Convention(CWC)systemortheBiologicalWeaponsConvention(BWC)system(Trapp,2014).

Thispaperarguesthatsomeparametersforregulatinginnovationsinthefieldofbiotechnologycanstartat theagendaofScience,TechnologyandInnovation(STI)DiplomacytowardstheagendaofDefenseDiplomacy. Surveillance consideringexclusively securitypreoccupations canrestrict access to essential technologiesfor various sectors of the economy,especially indeveloping countries,withnoguaranteesofadditionalsecuritygains.Atfirst,thispaperwillbrieflypresenttherationalethathasrestrictedtheusebystatesoftechnologicaldevelopmentsinchemistryandbiologyfornon-peacefulpurposes,inorder to try to correctly evaluate risks,without alarms or negligence. Later, itwill be presented howdiplomats thatworkwithSTIDiplomacycancontributeto futurebiotechnologydevelopmentbyprioritisingprinciplesandalternativesthatare commonlyneglected in thepoliticaldiscussions focusedonminimising risksofmisusesofnewtechnologies.

N e w A d v a n c e m e n t s a n d Traditional PracticesDuringWorldWar I, the use of toxicgasesresultinginahighnumberofdeathsdemonstrated a`destructive potentialthatwouldbringchemicalandbiologicalweaponstobecategorizedasweaponsof

massdestruction.IntheperiodbetweentheFirstandSecondWorldWar,recognizingtheterrorthatthisthreatcausedandtheneed to extendhumanitarianprotectioninarmedconflicts, states acceded to theProtocolfortheProhibitionoftheUseinWarofAsphyxiating,PoisonousorOtherGases, and of BacteriologicalMethodsofWarfare, theGenevaProtocolof1925(Guillemin,2005).

Although it expressly prohibitedthe use of chemical and biologicalweapons, this conventionwas silent onthepossibilityofdevelopingoracquiringthem, so that some of its signatories,particularly the large industrialnations,setuprobustgovernmentprogrammesfortheproductionofthese“higherformsofkilling“(PaxmanandHarris,2011).Takingintoconsiderationthetechnicalfeasibilityof producing these armaments, whywere chemical and biologicalweaponsnotwidely used inWorldWar II andsubsequentinter-statewars?Thisquestionis important because it allows us tounderstand the rationality underlyingthecurrentreluctancetotheuseoftheseweaponsbystates.

Since themiddle of the twentiethcentury,thedevelopmentoflargearsenalsof chemical andbiologicalweapons bymajormilitary powers, the inability ofa state to defend itself against all themultiple typesof toxins andpathogenicgasesthatcanbeproducedbytheenemy,and thepermanent threat of retaliationwiththesametypesofweaponsinhibited- andhave inhibited - the so-calledfirststrike.Therearealsotechnicallimitationson the handling of theseweapons inrealcombatsituations.Theimpossibilityof determining the necessary dose ofthe toxic agent to be sprayed and the


difficulty topredict thewindflows thatwould spill over themwould attributeaninconceivablelogisticaluncertaintytothemilitaryplanningofapossibleattack(Guillemin,2005).

Inadditiontotheimbalancesamongnationsintheircapacitiestodevelopsuchweapons and the technical limitationsmentionedabove,themassiveexpressionofpublicopinion,especiallyindemocraticregimes, against attacks with lethalpoisonshadcurbedbelligerent impulses(Paxman&Harris, 2011). Thus, it canbe said that the decision on the use ofchemicalandbiologicalweaponsininter-statewarsisnow,ontheoneside,betweenthecertaintyofviolatinginternationallawandunacceptablebehaviour in termsofinternationalpublicopinionand,on theotherside,doubtsaboutmilitarysuccessoftheattackandthetypeofretaliationtobesuffered.Asaresult,thedecisionnottouse theseweaponshasbeenfoundtobethebestoption.

Themasteringofnucleartechnology,whoseuseasaweaponofmassdestructionwouldbemoreeffectiveandwithmorepredictable results, has definitivelydiscouraged the use of chemical andbiologicalweapons.As a consequence,throughoutthesecondhalfofthetwentiethcentury, military powers graduallyabandoned their offensiveprogrammesof chemical andbiological technologiesandpromotedadeepeningofnormsandinstitutionsthatguaranteetheiruseonlyforpeacefulpurposes(Guillemin,2005).

We argue that there is no reasonto believe that the rationale underlyingthe future application by states of newtechnological developments in biologyand chemistry is different from thishistoricallysettledrationale.Case-specific

controlmeasuresagainstdissidentgroupscanbeanappropriatealternativeinsteadof comprehensive interventions againstnations,evenwhentheformersarewell-conductedundertherulesoftheChapterVIIoftheUnitedNationsCharter(Sossai,2010).

STI Diplomacy: Alternative Pathways STIDiplomacy has been increasinglyrecognised as an important instrumentforstabilisingrelationsbetweencountriesandreducingrisksofdirectconflicts.Thetechnical knowledge and the apoliticallanguageofsciencearecapableofbringingerstwhilepoliticalenemiestothetableofnegotiationtohelpsolvingtransnationalproblems, suchas thenatural resourcesquarrelsinvolvingMiddleEastnationsortheaerospacedisputebetweentheUnitedStates and the SovietUnionduring theColdWar.

Despitethispotentialtohelpfreezingwarminternationalthemes,STIDiplomacyisstillfarfromtheHighPoliticsdiscussion,intheclassicalwordsofJosephNyer,suchasthatofmitigatingtherisksofthedualuse of biotechnologies breakthroughs.Notwithstanding, thispaperargues thata pro-activediplomatic stance towardspushingSTIDiplomacyintomajorsecurityissuescouldhelptacklingsomeproblemsofthefuturebiotechnologyagenda.

The first contribution that ScienceDiplomacycouldprovidetobiotechnologywould be to help deepening theinstitutionalisation of the regime ofnon-proliferation ofweapons ofmassdestruct ion by strengthening theimportanceofscientificknowledgeinthedecision-makingprocessofthesesystems.In order to improve the surveillance


measuresoftheCWCandBWC,diplomatsthatworkwith science, technologyandinnovation shall make the necessaryeffortstoguaranteethattechnicalreportsof specialists that systematicallyanalyzetheproductionof organicmolecules bybiological processes and the chemicalsynthesisofnatural toxinscouldprevailoverthesubjectiveopinionsofdiplomatsthatwork in the political area of theirchancellery.

The normative and institutionalsystem of CWC, which includes theOrganization for the Prohibition ofChemicalWeapons(OPCW),isconsideredexemplary in the area of disarmamentandnon-proliferation.Ithassucceededinalmostcompletelydestroyingthechemicalweapons stockpiles of its 190memberstateswithoutcreatingadditionalobstaclestothetechnicalandscientificprogressofthe chemical industry,which is alignedwiththeinterestsofdevelopingcountries(OPCW,2008;OPCW,2019b).

AsBWC lacks a formal verificationsystem, the burden of avoiding theproductionof lethal chemical agentsbybiotechnologyandofmonitoringchemicalprocessescapableofsynthesizingbiologicaltoxinswouldcomeundertheCWC.Thisconvention specificallyprovides for thetypesofindustrialplantstobeinspectedbytheOPCW.ThecurrentOPCWroutines(products listed in Schedules I, II andIII andOPCW inspections -productionfacilitiesofotherchemicals),however,donotcoververificationofthedevelopmentand production of these compounds(OPCW,2019a;Tucker,2010).

Given the need to create combinedmethodsofverificationwithintheBWC,including a declaration of activitiesby states, continuousmonitoring and

inspectionofsuspectedplants,itisessentialtoguidethedecision-makingprocessbyreliable scientific information (OPBW,2019;Goldblat,1997).AttheBWCReviewConferences, the apolitical language ofsciencemay be crucial in avoiding theintensification of the already existingrivalries betweenWestern Countries(WEOG)andtheNon-AlignedMovementCountries(NAM)regardingaprotocolforstrengtheningtheinstitutionalframeworkof the convention with verificationmechanisms1(Trapp,2014).

The second contribution of STIDiplomacy is to help inmodelling thefuture agenda of biotechnologywhichcould be related to themanagement ofrisksarisingfromthesharingoftechnicaldatavia specialized journalsor throughaccesstolargeonlinedatabasesbyhigh-level laboratories and research centers.The publication of research results isfundamental for themaintenanceof thepeer-reviewprocess that has graduallyimproved the science since its origin.Considering the multiple potentialapplications of the recent advances inbiotechnology, ensuring the peacefuluse of information becomes part ofthework of each researcher and eachknowledge-producing insti tution.Updatingtheexistingcodesofconductforthepublicationofscientificinformationisacrucialsteptoguaranteeanappropriateflowofknowledge.For thisobjective, itwouldbe important that STIdiplomatscould consider the building or revisionofthesecodesofconductnotamatterofprivate institutions relations but apartof theirwork topush forwardnationalinterestsinmanyinnovativeareas,suchasbiotechnology.Inthisregard,theycouldlead the process of negotiating broad


international agreements on scientificinformationsharing,acommonlyneglectedissue in political discussions betweendiplomatsaboutnon-proliferation.

Furthermore,itisimportantthatthesecodes could be guided by the premisethat vital information for the synthesis,replicationandinoculationofnewagentsmust be kept confidential. Due to theoperational nature of this information,this reservation does not compromisethe evaluation of the testability andfalsifiabilityof theories and conclusionswhichderivefromtheoriginalstudies.Ananalogoussystemofselectiveinformationdisclosurehasbeenpracticedinthefieldofquantumphysicssincethemid-twentiethcentury,with full success inpreventingtheproliferationofthecapacitytoproducenuclear artifacts by non-state agents(Miller&Sagan,2009).

AfinalcontributionofSTIdiplomatsto the peaceful use of biotechnologicalinnovationsistosupporttheconstructionof an international framework fortechnology control that encompassescomputer sys tems , robot i cs andnanotechnologywhichareappliedinthefieldofbiotechnology.The convergencebetweenscientificdisciplinesisevenmoreevidenthere.Tobiologyandchemistry,it ispossible toaddcomputing, roboticsandnanotechnology to forge a complexof scientificknowledgeproduction thatuses the most advanced equipmentand research inputs (VanHecke et al.,2002).Thelargenumberof internationalproducers and suppliersof these inputssparks the alternative of implementingtechnology control through a broadand unified international register thatassociates technological capacitywithsecurity risks. A similar risk-scaling

systemhas long been used tomanagetheavailabilityandcommercialisationofequipment that uses enricheduranium(Miller&Sagan,2009).

Future Biotechnology AgendaTechnology,asaninstrumentofthepracticalapplicationofscientificknowledge,cannotbeaprioristicallydefinedasbeneficialorharmful to thepopulation thatdevelopsit. The uses of technology are sociallydefined,inaccordancewithmoral,ethical,religious and cultural values aswell asphilosophicalconceptions((Balakrishnan,2017;NationalResearchCouncil, 2006).AftertheatrocitiespracticedwithchemicalweaponsbybothcontendingsidesduringWorldWarI,aconsensuswasgeneratedininternationalsociety,whichremainsstrongand intense, thatwhatever technologycouldbedeveloped, it shouldnever beused for the purpose ofmass killing.Together, theCWC andBWC systemshaveoffered a credible set of rules andinstitutions that have reinforced thepeacefuluseof chemical andbiologicalbreakthroughsforgenerations.

A new phenomenon has emergedin the last decade. The tendency totheoretical and empirical convergencebetween chemistry and biology is ahegemonicviewinthespecialisedscientificenvironment, constituting the so-calledChemicalBiology.Itisalsopossibletoaddinformatics,roboticsandnanotechnologyto this complex of disciplines (Khosla,2014;VanHeckeetal.,2002).Asaresult,since thebeginningof the 21st century,theinternationalsocietyhaswitnessedanexponentialgrowthinthepossibilitiesofbiotechnology intervention in therealityofpeople.Newdrugs,prostheses,typesoffood,chemicalandbiologicalagricultural


pesticides are traded and take part inthe daily lives of families, companiesand governments (National ResearchCouncil,2006).Consideringthis,itwoulddonoharmtothinkaboutreviewingandupdatingthenormativeframeworkofthesystemofnon-proliferationofweaponsofmassdestruction inorder to improvethesurveillanceovernewbiotechnologies.

Nevertheless, someprinciplesmustbe kept in mind if the internationalcommunityistostrengthentheCWCandBWC´s surveillancemethodswithoutundermining the economic and socialpotentialofbiotechnologybreakthroughs.Comprehensive restrictivemeasuresin the research, development andcommercialisationstagesofbiotechnologycan amplify barriers to the access ofadvancedequipmentandresearchinputs,especially fordeveloping countries thatdonotyetmanufacturethem,aswellastowiden the technological gapbetweendeveloped and developing countries.Furthermore, historical experience fromthenuclearregimefurtherdemonstratesthatcomprehensiverestrictionscanhavethe collateral effectofposingbarriers toaccesstotechnologyforpeacefulpurposes(Miller&Sagan,2009).

The aforementionedpreoccupationis a hotspot at the STI Diplomacyagenda.However, STIDiplomacy hasaminor role, if any, in the decision-making process of future changes inthenon-proliferation regime. It isup toSTI diplomats to demonstrate that anexclusive securityperspective is limitedin dealingwith the innovations in thearea of biotechnology.This battlemustbe fought inside chancelleries asmuchas in international fora. STI diplomatsmust engage in initiatives that present

thepotential of scientific knowledge tocontributetothetechnicalunderpinningofdecisionsinthenon-proliferationregimesof chemical and biological weapons;that foster negotiations of internationalcodesofconductforthedisseminationofscientific information;andthatcreateaninternationalframeworkforbalancedandrational technology control of computersystems, robotics and nanotechnologyappliedinbiotechnologyexperiments.

Conclusion Minimisingtherisksofnon-peacefulusesof new advances in biotechnology bycollaborationcomingfromoutsidetheareaofdefenseandsecuritycanhelpbalancingbroader tensions in bilateral relations;open new institutional and personalchannelsofcommunication;andincreasemutual trust amongnations. These arepossible positive externalities broughtbySTIDiplomacy,whoseimportanceforinternational relations canno longerbeneglected. These benefits have alreadyemergedfromnegotiationsinvolving,forexample, climate change andpandemiccontrol, so it is aspossible asdesirablethat they could also emerge from thenegotiationsinvolvingthefutureagendaofbiotechnology.

Endnotes1 InthecontextoftheConventionforthe

Prohibition of the Biological Weapons(BWC), the negotiations are polarizedby a political division between twounofficial regional groups that act asvoting blocs: 1) Western European andOthers Group (WEOG), composed byEuropean countries, Canada, Australia,New Zealand, Turkey and Israel asmembers, and the United States asobserver;2)theNon-AlignedMovement(NAM),composedsince1961byavariety


of countries, such as Colombia, Cuba,Iran, India, Indonesia and other, thatact against major blocs of power. Formore information, see: United NationsRegional Groups of Member States (in:https://www.un.org/depts/DGACM/RegionalGroups.shtml) and Morphet,2004

ReferencesBalakrishnan, B. 2017. “Technology and

InternationalRelations”.Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA).

Goldblat, J. 1997. The BiologicalWeaponsConvention:AnOverview.International Review of the Red Cross Archive,v.37(318),pp.251-265.

Guillemin,J.2005.Biological Weapons: from the invention of state-sponsored programs to contemporary bioterrorism.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

Ibrahim, R., Pasic,M., Yousef, GM. 2016.“Omics for personalizedmedicine:definingthecurrentweswimin”.Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics, 16(7),Pp.719-722.

Keohane,R.O.andJosephS.N.1977.Powerandinterdependence.

Khosla,C.2014.TheConvergenceofChemistry&HumanBiology.Daedalus,v.143(4),Pp.43-48.

Morphet, S. 2004.Multilateralism and theNon-AlignedMovement:what is theGlobal South doing andwhere is itgoing?.Global Governance,v.10(4),Pp.517-537.

Marisain,J.etal.2017.Plant-madepoliotype3stabilizedVLPs—acandidatesyntheticpoliovaccine. Nature Communications,v.8(1),p.245.

Miller,S.E.andSagan,S.D.2009.Nuclearpowerwithoutnuclearproliferation?.Daedalus,v.138(4),Pp.7-18.

NationalResearchCouncil.2006.Globalization, biosecurity, and the future of the life sciences.Washington,DC:NationalAcademiesPress.

OPBW. 2019a. “Summary report of the adhocGroup ofGovernmental Expertsto Identify and Examine PotentialVerificationMeasuresfromascientificand technical standpoint.AccessedonJanuary 7, 2019, from http://www.opbw.org/verex/docs/final_dec/verex%20final%20declaration.pdf

OPCW.2019b.ConvergenceofChemistryandBiology:ReportoftheScientificAdvisoryBoard’s TemporaryWorkingGroup.Accessed on January 7, 2019, fromhttps://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/SAB/en/TWG_Scientific_Advsiory_Group_Final_Report.pdf

OPCW. 2019c. Genesis and HistoricalDevelopment.Accessedon January7,2019, fromhttps://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/genesis-and-historical-development..

OPCW.2008.ReportoftheScientificAdvisoryBoard on Developments in ScienceandTechnology.NotebytheDirector-General.

Paxman.,J.andHarris,R.2011.A higher form of killing.RandomHouse.

Sossai , M. 2010. Drugs as weapons:disarmamenttreatiesfacingtheadvancesinbiochemistryandnon-lethalweaponstechnology.Journal of Conflict & Security Law,v.15(1),Pp.5-24.

Trapp,R.2014.ConvergenceattheIntersectionofChemistryandBiology—Implicationsfor theRegimesProhibitingChemicalandBiologicalWeapons.BiochemicalSecurity2030.Policy Paper Series, no. 6

Tucker,J.B.2010.Theconvergenceofbiologyand chemistry: Implications for armscontrolverification.Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,v.6(66),Pp.56-66.

VanHecke,G.R. et al. 2002.An integrationofchemistry,biology,andphysics:theinterdisciplinary laboratory. J. Chem. Educ,v.79(7),p.837.


Suriname and India Bilateral Relations: An Overview

The Republic of Suriname, located in SouthAmerica,was,until1975,partof theKingdomoftheNetherlands,andpriortothataDutchcolony.

Surinameisoneofthemostethnicallydiversecountriesintheworld.Dutchistheofficiallanguage.SurinameandIndiastartedtheirbilateraltiesin1975,theyearSurinamegained its independence.Both states are representedatthehighestdiplomatic level in eachother capital. ThemostimportantactivitieswithinthebilateralrelationsofSurinameandIndiainthepast16monthsare:

SurinamebecameamemberoftheInternationalSolarAlliance(ISA)inFebruary2018.ISAaimstomake‘scalingup’ a reality in thedeployment of solar energy in the121countrieswithstrongsunshinesituatedbetweentheTropicsofCancerandCapricorn.Thesecountriesrepresent73percentoftheworld’spopulation.

TheHonourablePresident of India ShriRamNathKovindandFirstLadySmt. SavitaKovindpaidavisittoSuriname in June2018.According to theEmbassyofIndia inParamaribo (Suriname’s capital), a totaloffiveMoU’sweresignedintheareasofCentreforITExcellence,cooperationbetween the electoral authorities,NationalArchives,cooperationbetweendiplomaticinstitutesandremunerativeemploymentofdependentsofthediplomaticpersonnelofthetwocountries.InadditiontwoLettersofCreditweresignedandprevioustothatIndiahadprovidedfour credit lines,worthUS$ 57million, to Suriname(EmbassyofIndia-Suriname,2019)

Suriname-India Cooperation in Rural Development: A Science Diplomacy Perspective

DavidAbiamofo*

DaViD abiamofo

article

*Lecturer,UniversityofSuriname,Suriname.


UndertheIndianTechnical&EconomicCooperationProgramme(ITEC)theslotsreservedforSurinameare50duringtheyear2018-2019.

An Agreement to set up a JointCommission(JC)wassignedin1992andsix JCmeetings have beenheld so far.Other areasof (continuous) cooperationare:economy,educationandculture.

Culture has a special place in thebilateral relations between Surinameand India. Themain reason is the factthat approximately 30 per cent of theSurinamesepopulationisofIndiandescent(Censusstatistieken 2012; ABS, 2019).The IndianCulturalCentre inSuriname(ICCR)wasopenedin1978anditactivelypursuessoft-powerdiplomacyinitiativesandthewholegamutofICCR’soutreachincluding,Hindilanguage,Kathak,Yogaandclassicalmusic.IndiaprovidesyearlygrantsforpromotionofHindiinSuriname.

IndiaandSurinamearelookalikesinmanyareas.Apart from the scales therearemany similarities. In thispaper thefocusisontheexistenceofrelativelypoorruralcommunitiesscatteredoverdifferentparts of the country. Their livelihoodsneedsustainableimprovementinseveralareas.Inthispaperthedisadvantagesintheareasofhealth,waterandsanitation,energy,education,andagriculturewillbetouchedupon.

Rural communities in Suriname and India

Suriname Ruralcommunitiesare foundinvillagesalong rivers in the tropical Amazonrainforest of Suriname. Unlike in theurbanareainthecoastalzone,manyruralareaslackbasicresourcesnecessaryfora

sustainablelivelihood.Theruralareasarebeing inhabitedbydifferent indigenousAmerindiantribesanddifferentMaroongroups.TheMaroonsaredescendantsofenslavedAfricanswho escaped slaveryand established sustainable self-ruledcommunitiesintheSurinameserainforest.

Although 95per cent of the overallpopulation is obtaining their drinkingwater from improved sources, largedisparities remain between the urbancoastal(98.6percent),ruralcoastal(95.9per cent) and rural interiorpopulations(70.7percent).Ofgreatconcernisthatlessthan10percentofhouseholdsusinganunimproveddrinkingwatersourceuseanappropriatemethodoftreatment,meaningthatthevastmajorityofthosehouseholdsare at risk fromwater-borne diseases.While91percentoftheoverallpopulationhasaccesstoimprovedsanitationfacilitiesthedisparitybetweenurban,ruralcoastaland rural interior areas is evenmorestriking. In the urban coastal area, 98per cent of households have improvedfacilities,andascomparedtoruralcoastalareaswhere94percentofhouseholdshavesuch facilities.However in rural interiorhouseholds,just42percentofhouseholdshaveaccesstoimprovedsanitation.Opendefecation is still themain practice ofnearlyhalfofallhouseholds(49.1percent)intheruralinterior(UNICEF2014).

Thismeansthat intherural interior,onethirdofhouseholdsdon’thaveaccesstosafedrinkingwater,andfewerthanhalfofallhouseholdshasaccesstoimprovedsanitation.According to itsmulti-yeardevelopmentplan (2017-2021), themaingoalofthegovernmentofSurinameistodevelopruralareassustainablywherebythequalityoflifeofthoselivingintheseareaswouldbe substantially improved(GovernmentofSuriname,2017).


IndiaIndiahas the largestpopulationofpoorpeople (Hegde, 2019) but communitydevelopmenthasassumedhighprioritybythegovernment.Theinitialprogrammesaimed at upliftment of the rural poorcovered agriculture, animalhusbandry,infrastructure, health, education andhousing. Though 30 per cent of ruralpopulationstilllivesinachronicconditionofpoverty,inthelastthreedecadessomeimprovement in the number has beenseen because of anti-poverty schemesandmigrationfromruraltourbanareas.Thegovernmentof Indianowadayshasmore progressive schemes, includingtheMahatmaGandhiNational RuralEmployment Guarantee Scheme, andtheNationalSocialAssistanceProgramme.AccordingtotheGlobalMultidimensionalPovertyIndex2018(ajointworkofOPHIandUNDP),between2005-2006and2015-2016 the incidenceofmultidimensionalpovertyinIndiaalmosthalved,climbingdownto27.5percentfrom54.7percent(OPHI,2018).TheWorldBankreportedin2016that80percentofIndia’spoorlivedinruralareas(WorldBank,2018).

Apart from poverty, othermajorissues in India’s rural areas include:poorsanitation, illiteracy,pooraccess tohealthcare,environmentalissues,etc

According toWorld Bank, India istheworld’sseventhlargesteconomyandamong the fastest growing large ones,with average annual growth of about7percent.Yet India isalsohometo theworld’slargestconcentrationofpoverty,withmore than 250millionpeople liv-ingbelowthepovertylineof$1.90aday(WorldBank,2018).

Science diplomacy and Sustainable development Thepracticeof sciencediplomacycouldbe dated back until the early days ofdiplomacy. According toLinkov et al.(2014) the idea of sciencediplomacy isitselfnotnew,withtheliteraturepointingout that theUSwas among thefirst tomake use of a science attaché, havingrepresentationinGermanyasearlyas1898(Linkov et al. 2014, as citedbyMasters2016).Thispractice couldbedefinedastheuseofscientificcollaborationsamonginternational communities to addresscommonscientificchallengesandtobuildconstructive global partnerships andcooperation(Saxena,2017).

Science diplomacy is not onlyconducted at the level of states.With agrowingdividebetweenthe“haves”and“havenots”, and theprominencegivento the role of science, technology andinnovationinaddressingissuesofhumansecurity,non-stateactors, includingcivilsociety,theprivatesector,academiaandresearchorganisations,havebeendrawninto internationaldebates and scientificcollaboration. In the case of India andSuriname,sciencecouldbeusedtobringtogetherexpertiseinpromotingresearchandtheuseofinnovationforthebenefitof rural communities in both nations.This leads to sustainable development.For countries to achieve sustainabledevelopment they need to engage inpartnerships to develop best policiesandpractices. Sustainabledevelopmentdiplomacy needs deeper participationof all relevant stakeholders and could,therefore,bedefinedastheengagementofdiplomaticandcivilsocietytocollaborateon addressing and tackling challengesthatavertthecreationorpreservationofsustainablelivelihoods.


Scope of Cooperation The areas of cooperation are selectedbasedonmutuality.Bothcountrieshavethesameproblemsintheirruralareas.Itwill benecessary forbothgovernmentsto share knowledge, experiences, andtechnology,byalsoengagingNGOs,theprivatesector,scientistsand(alllayersof)theruralcommunities.Thecurrentglobalindustrial revolutionhasanexponentialpace of technological change, buildingon new (mostly) digital technologiesand transforms, practices and systems.The both countries could engage inSustainable Development DiplomacyandScienceDiplomacytodeployscienceand technology to enhance livelihoodsand therebyguarantee sustainable ruraldevelopment. Some possible areas ofcooperationarediscussedinmoredetailbelow.

Health Although rural communities oftenhaveaccess to localhealthcare facilities, thereareother factors that contribute tohowthey canaccesshealthcare. Some factorsinclude cost of insurance and specialistservices, transport toand fromrequiredservices,timeandconfidenceinthequalityof services.A coordinated approach tohealthcare that incorporates technologysuchas artificial intelligence is an idealgoal for rural communities; for exampletechnologiesthatcanhelpdoctorsprovideeffective video consultation to patientsin rural areas. India and Suriname canpair to tackle healthcare challenges intheir rural areas.For exampleSurinameisverywell known in theAmericas forsuccessfullycombatingmalariawithinitsborders.According to theWorldHealth

Organization (WHO), in 2018, only 30indigenousmalaria caseswere reportedintheinteriorofSuriname(WHO,2019).Comparedtothe1712casesin2010thisissignificantlyalesseramount.

Ontheotherhandmalariais(accordingtotheWorldMalariaReport2017)amainthreatforIndia’shealthsystem.Intheyear2016,more thanhalf of thepopulation(698million)was at risk.According tothisreport,Indiaaccountedfor6percentof allmalaria cases in theworld, 6percentofthedeaths,and51percentoftheglobalplasmodium vivaxcases.Thereportestimates the total cases in India stoodat1.31millionanddeathsat23,990.ThebiggestburdenofmalariainIndiaisbornebythemostbackward,poorandremotepartsofthecountry,withbetween90to95percentofthecasesreportedfromruralareas(WHO,2017).

Water and SanitationAccesstocleanwaterandpropersanitationare basic human rights and are criticalsustainabledevelopmentchallenges.Thecauses are inmost cases are pollutingindustries, agriculture, households andenergygeneration. In the rural interiorof Suriname, fewer than 15per cent ofhouseholds have safe drinkingwaterpipedintotheirhouseholdsoryardsandfewerthanhalfhaveanyimprovedwatersourceontheirpremises(UNICEF,2015).Mostvillagesintheruralinteriorarebuilton river systems, and for generationspeoplehaveusedtheriverforalloftheirneeds,while open defecation is still acommonpractice.Rural India faces thesameproblems regarding access to safewaterandpropersanitation.


Education Themission for ensuring quality ofeducationandpromotinglifelonglearningdepends on a range of prerequisitesincluding,primarilyspiritforknowledge,relevantaswellasfuturisticcurriculum,andwell-trainedteachers.Asallthesefeedeachother,theyneedtoberealisedinanintegratedandholisticway.AccordingtoUNICEF,inSuriname,97percentofthechildrenareenrolledinprimaryeducation,but seriousdisparitiesexistbetween thecoastalandruralschoolsandthoseintheinterior(UNICEF,2017).Farlesschildrenintheinteriorenrollintheprimaryschoolsystemandpre-schoolstooarescattered.Otherbottlenecksoftheeducationsystemin those rural areas are thewidespreaduse of local languages instead of theDutch(theinstructionlanguage),thepoorfacilities,lackofelectricityandtheabsenceof qualified teachers. UNICEF (2017)reported that30percentof the teachersintheinteriorwerenotqualifiedtoteach,andinpublicprimaryschools5percentof them had not completed primaryeducationthemselves.Bothcountriescouldengageinasustainablecooperationwithmutualbenefitbysharingknowledgeandexperience.TheyfacethesamechallengesandtechnicalcooperationinthefieldsofthedevelopmentofnewcurriculumandtheuseofICT(theintroductionofdistancelearningconcepts,forexample)couldplayavitalroleinimprovingeducationinruralareas.

Energy Energy is central tonearly everymajorchallenge and opportunity theworldfacestoday.Beitforjobs,security,climatechange, foodproduction or increasingincomes, access to energy for all is

essential.Focusingonuniversalaccesstoenergy,increasedenergyefficiencyandtheincreaseduseofrenewableenergythroughnew economic and job opportunities iscrucial to creatingmore sustainableandinclusive communities and resilience toenvironmentalissueslikeclimatechange.Sustainableenergyisaboostforeconomicgrowth and is essential for creatingsustainable livelihoods. Furthermore,accesstoenergycreateshealthbenefitsandenablespeopletostudyorstartabusiness.India and Suriname could pair in thedevelopmentanduseofrenewableenergy.Scientists agree on the fact that energyfromrenewableresourcesaswind,water,solar andbiomass is clean.All of thesesourcesareavailableinbothcountries.

AgricultureAccording to the FAO, achieving foodsecuritywould require an integratedapproach that addresses all forms ofmalnutrition,theproductivityandincomesof small-scale foodproducers, resilienceof food systemsand the sustainableuseof biodiversity and genetic resources(FAO, 2019).Again both governmentscouldworktogetherwithscientists,localfarmers andmultilateral organisationstoguaranteefoodsecurity,nutritionandsustainable agriculturalpractices for therural communities. Because of, amongothers causes, theuseofold technology(if technology is beingused at all) thecommunitiesstickwithlow-productivityagriculture.

Barefoot College: A Successful Model ThesuccessofthebarefootmodelinIndiaiswidely recognised. BarefootCollegedemonstrates that illiteracy does nothavetobeabarriertopoorcommunities


developing themselves and that themost sophisticated technologies can bedisseminated by poor ruralmen andwomenwhocanbarelyreadandwrite.Assuch,thousandsofpeoplearetrainedeachyear to be teachers, doctors,midwives,dentists,healthworkers,solarengineers,water drillers and testers, hand pumpmechanics,architects,artisans,designers,masons, communicators, computerprogrammers, andaccountants (SchwabFoundation forSocialEntrepreneurship,2019).

TheBarefootCollege connects ruralcommunities to solar,water, education,professions and advocacy to helpcommunitiesandindividualstakecontrolof their lives and thewellbeingof theircommunities. In 2016 two SurinamesewomencompletedtheInternationalSolarTrainingProgrammeofBarefootCollege.Currently these twowomenare skilledenough to share their knowledge andexperienceswithotherlocalcommunitiesin remote villages in the interior ofSuriname.

This training programme began in2008 and is being supported by theITECProgramme.AccordingtoBarefootthis six-month programme, conductedtwice ayear, is a collaborative effort ofBarefootCollege,ITECandtherespectiveGovernments and NGOs (groundpartners) of theparticipating countries.Traineesareoftenilliterateorsemi-literategrandmotherswhomaintainstrongrootsin their rural villages andplay amajorrole in community development, andbringingsustainableelectricitytoremote,inaccessiblevillages. Solar electrificationreducesCO2emissions,slowthenegativeimpacts of deforestation and decreaseairpollutionfromburningfirewoodandkerosene.

Recommendations Basedonthefindingsofthispreliminarystudy, this paper concludeswith thefollowingrecommendations:• WhereasIndiahasdevelopedapolicy

onScienceDiplomacy,Surinamestillneeds to engageall stakeholders anddevelop an inclusive policy on thissubject. Themulti-yeardevelopmentdoesnotmentionScienceDiplomacyandtechnologicalcooperationisadhoc.TheMinistryofForeignAffairsisyettoinstallaScienceDiplomacydivision.

• Bothnationsclearlyneedtodobetterinengagingwithnon-stateactorswhocanplayavitalroleinbothSustainableDevelopmentDiplomacyandScienceDiplomacy. Improving livelihoodsofrural communities requires a broadlevelofcooperationincluding(alllevelsof) government, rural communities,universitiesandscientists,civilsocietyandprivatesector.

• Engagementwithalllayersoftheruralcommunities (includingwomen andyouth) in developing this policy ispivotal to ensure sustainability.Bothcountriescandobetterinengagingthecommunities in policydevelopmentandprioritysetting.

• Both nations can do a better job insharing knowledge, technology andsuccessstories.Improvinglivelihoodsofruralcommunitieshasbeenontheagendaofbothstatesfordecadesanditisplausiblethatsuccessfulmechanismsormodelsindifferentareashavebeendevelopedinthecourseoftheyearsandthatthosecouldbeshared.

• Inmanydeveloping states, there areconstraints on capacity. This alsolimits the options for internationalengagements. Suriname and India


have the structure and infrastructureto enhance their partnership.Apartfrom the presence in both capitals,the Joint Commission is a suitableenvironmenttofurtherengageinthisregard.ThefrequencyandoutputoftheJointCommissionmeetingsneedtobeincreasedaccordingly.

References ABS. 2019. “Algemeen Bureau voor de

Statistiek”. Retrieved on January 09,2019 fromhttps://statistics-suriname.org/nl/

AmazonConservationTeam.2015.“Barefoot”.Retrieved on January 11, 2019 fromht tp ://www.act - sur iname.org/barefoot/

Barefoot College. 2019. “At Barefoot, weharnessthepowerofthesun”.RetrievedonJanuary11,2019fromhttps://www.barefootcollege.org/solution/solar/

ContemporaryHistory,41(1);pp:169-186EmbassyofIndia,Suriname.2019.“Advisory”.

Retrieved on January 10, 2019 fromhttps://www.indembassysuriname.gov.in/pages.php?id=98

FAO.2019.“SustainableDevelopmentGoals:End hunger, achieve food securityand improvednutrition andpromotesustainable agriculture”.RetrievedonJanuary19,2019fromhttp://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/goals/goal-2/en/

Hegde,N. 2019. “CommunityDevelopmentin India:AnOverview”.RetrievedonJanuary11, 2019 fromhttp://baif.org.in/doc/scientific_papers_sustainable_rural_devt/Community%20Devt%20in%20India.doc

Kaur, R. 2013. “Causes of rural povertyandAnti-poverty schemes in India”.Retrieved on January 10, 2019 fromhttps://www.mapsofindia.com/my-india/society/causes-of-rural-poverty-and-anti-poverty-schemes

Masters, L. 2016. SouthAfrica’s two trackapproachtosciencediplomacy.Journal for Contemporary History,41(1),pp.169-186.

Oxford Poverty andHumanDevelopmentI n i t i a t i v e . 2 0 1 8 . “ G l o b a lMultidimensionalPoverty Index2018:TheMostDetailedPictureToDateoftheWorld’sPoorestPeople”,UniversityofOxford:UK

Panigrahi,HS.,andKumar,R.2018.“RelookatEducationforrealizingSDG4”.IndiaCSRNetwork.RetrievedonJanuary10,2019 fromhttp://indiacsr.in/relook-education-realizing-sdg-4/

Saxena,S.K.2017.“RoleofScienceinExportTrade”.Paperpresented atRIS,NewDelhi,India

SchwabFoundationforSocialEntrepreneurship.2019. “Social Entrepreneur: Sanjit(Bunker)Roy”.RetrievedonJanuary1,2019fromhttps://www.schwabfound.org/awardees/sanjit-bunker-roy

SurinamePlanningBureauFoundation.2017.“201-2021 PolicyDevelopment Plan”RetrievedonJanuary17,2019fromhttp://www.planningofficesuriname.com/wpcontent/uploads/2018/02/2017-2021-DEVELOPMENT-PLAN.pdf

Tasneem,G.2018.“Howcantechnologybenefithealthcareinruralcommunities”.OrionHealthblog.Retrievedon January10,2019 fromhttps://orionhealth.com/ca/knowledge-hub/blogs/how-can-technology-benefit-healthcare-in-rural-communities/

UNICEF. 2014. “Increasing access towater,sanitation andhygiene in Suriname’sruralinterior:AnAppreciativeInquiry”.Retrieved on January 11, 2019 fromhttps://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/f i les/Rural_WASH_progr_eval_Surinam_2010-14_-_Unicef_29.01.15.pdf

UNICEF.2017.“UNICEFAnnualReport2017Guyana andSuriname”.RetrievedonOctober 02, 2019 fromhttps://www.unicef.org/about/annualreport/files/Guyana_and_Suriname_2017_COAR.PDF

UnitedNations.2019.“Goal7-AffordableandCleanEnergy”.Retrieved on January14, 2019 fromhttps://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/energy

WHO. 2017. “WorldMalariaReport-2017”.Retrieved on January 10, 2019 from


h t tp ://www.who . in t/malar ia/p u b l i c a t i o n s /wo r l d -m a l a r i a -report-2017/en/

WHO. 2019. “The E-2020 Initiative of 21Malaria-EliminatingCountries: 2019ProgressReport”.RetrievedonOctober03, 2019 fromhttps://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/325304/WHO-CDS-GMP-2019.07-eng.pdf?ua=1

WorldBank.2018.WorldBankResearchDigest,Vol. 12(2).WorldBank:Washington,DC.RetrievedonJanuary13,2019fromhttps://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/31553License:CCBY3.0IGO


Theword‘diaspora’isderivedfromtheGreekword‘diaspeirein’,whichmeans“toscatter,spreadabout.”Diaspora has been defined in various different

ways.AccordingtoBarreet al(2003)‘diaspora’meansa‘self-organised group of expatriates’and‘scientificdiaspora’refersto‘all self-organised communities of expatriate scientists and engineers working to develop their home country or region, mainly in science, technology and higher education’.

Sincelastseveraldecades,emigrationofhighlyskilledprofessionalsfromtheglobalSouthtotheglobalNorthhascontributedsignificantlytotheS&T-driveninnovationandeconomicprogressinthedevelopedcountries(Saxenian,1999a;Burns,2013).However, increasinglythescientificdiasporasarebeenseenasagentsofdevelopmentintheircountryoforigin (Tejada, 2012).Barre et al (2003) andTejadaandBolay(2010)havearguedthattheincreasingrelevance anduseof knowledge-based activities in thedevelopmentprocesswithinthecountryoforiginhasopenupmanypossibilitiesofengagingthescientificdiasporatoleveragetheirexpertiseandsupport.

Barreetal(2003)statedthatthe‘scientific diaspora option’shouldbeincreasinglyconsideredtoharnesstheavailablepotential of such a highly-skilled section for nationaldevelopmentandinordertotakethisup,thehomecountryshould ‘publicly state the principle that S&T diasporas are actors in co-development in the scientific and technical arenas, and declare the principle of an official policy of support for S&T diasporas’.This‘option’advocatesfortheimplementationofstrategiesthatguidetheflowoftechnology,knowledgeandother resourcesof emigrated scientists and skilledprofessionalsforthepurposeofcatalysingtheeconomicandsocialtransformationsintheircountriesoforigin.

Leveraging Scientific Diaspora to Strengthen National STI Ecosystem

AmitKumar*

amit Kumar

PersPective

*ResearchAssociate,RIS,NewDelhi.


TheUNESCO(2010)ScienceReport,referredtotheseriousnessoftheexodusofhuman capital that somedevelopingcountries suffer. However, it alsorecognized the importanceofdiasporasas a useful departure point for the design of policies for more effective technology transfer and knowledge spillovers, eitherby returntothecountryoforiginorthroughtheirparticipation‘from a distance’(P.7).

Over a period of time, there hasbeen a change in the focus from ‘braindrain’ prevention to the possibility ofleveraging ‘brain circulation’ or ‘braingain’ (Meyer andCharum,1995;Meyer,2001).Cohen (1997) and Sheffer (1986)havearguedthat thediasporashavethecapacity tomakevaluable and creativecontributionstothecountryoforiginandtothecountryofdestinationatthesametime.Barre et al. (2003) andKuznetsovand Sabel (2006) stated that a certaingroupsof emigrant scientists, engineersand skilled professionals belonging tothe scientific diasporas or knowledgediasporas,tendtoorganisethemselvesinordertocreatecooperationopportunitieswith the aim of impacting the socio-economicdevelopmentoftheircountriesoforigin,particularly inareas related toscience,technologyandeducation.

Sharabati-Shahin (2009) put forththe perspective of ‘brain exchange’,wherebybraindrain is compensatedbycorrespondingbraingain.This ismadepossiblethroughtheexchangeofscholars,researchers and scientists.Within thisperspective, the emigrated intellectual,skilled and technological professionalswouldremainaninvaluableresourceforthedevelopmentof theirhome countrythrough the platforms of knowledgeeconomyandviaknowledgenetworksofglobalknowledgesocieties.

There are variousmodalities suchas remittances, business investmentand knowledge transfermechanisms,throughwhichthediasporamaintainsitsrelationshipwith their countryoforigin(LowellandGerova,2004).Theadvancesin ICT coupledwithbetter and cheaperair connectivityoptions, haveprovidedthe scientificdiasporas the opportunityto become transnational citizens; thusallowingthemtoconnectandcontributetothebusinessesandacademic/researchoftheircountryoforigin(Seguinet al,2006;MeyerandBrown,1999;Meyeret al.,1997).

Diaspora Knowledge Networks(DKNs) have emerged as a key tool toengagediasporamembersindevelopmentoftheirhomecountry.Meyeretal(1997)described the emergence of scientificDiasporaKnowledgeNetwork;wheretheyanalysedtheemergenceoftheColumbianRed Caldasnetwork,whichwasestablishedby the expatriate scientists to build theColumbianS&TcommunityandlinkthemtointernationalS&Tcommunities.Khadria(2003)hasprofiledmajorIndiandiasporanetworks in theUSAsuchasAmericanAssociationofPhysiciansofIndianOrigin(AAPI), Enterprising PharmaceuticalProfessionalsfromtheIndianSubcontinent(EPPIC),NetworkofIndianProfessionals(NetIP),GlobalOrganizationofPeopleofIndianOrigin(GOPIO),etc.

Seguin et al. (2006) argued that thecountrieswith“strong diaspora policies such as India and China, tended to have a greater number of self-identified diaspora networks focusing on knowledge transfer between their ‘host county’ and their country of origin.(P.83)”.

Saxenian(2002)statedthatinthe1990s,theUS-educated Indian professionals,who had established two the Silicon


Valley’smostvibrantassociations,viz.TheIndusEntrepreneur(TiE)andtheSiliconValley IndianProfessionalAssociation(SIPA)begantoactivelybuildbridgestoIndiabyopening local chaptersof theseassociationsinIndia.SuchnetworkingalsoplayedsomepartinIndia’semergenceasamajorexporterofsoftwareprogramminganddevelopmentskills(Saxenian,2002).

Variouswaysusedbyskilleddiasporasinthetransmissionofknowledgeincludethe following (Abdelgafar et al., 2004;Lucas,2001;Zhenzhenet al.,2004;Kapur,2001;Newland,2004):• organising joint annual conferences/

seminarswithinstitutionsfromcountryoforigin;

• providingconsultativeservicestothegovernmentofhomecountry;

• providing technology and technicalknow-howthroughlicenseagreements;

• assumingtopmanagerialpositionsincompanies/institutionsbasedinhomecountry;

• providing mentorship to start-upcompaniesattheircountryoforigin;

• providing venture capital/angelinvestments;and

• helping thedevelopmentofdiasporabusinessnetworks.Saxenian(1999b)inhisseminalstudy

highlightedtheroleofthistransnationalcommunityinthesuccessfuldevelopmentof Taiwan’s IT sector during the 1980sand1990s.Hecreditedthisdevelopment,toalargeextent,ontheAsian-Americanengineerswho could built the strongsocial and economic linkages betweenSiliconValley (USA) andHsinchuPark(Taiwan),withtheactivesupportfromtheTaiwanesegovernment.

Kapur (2001) elaborated upon thepoliciesand strategies adoptedby someselect countries such as India,RepublicofKorea,Taiwan,ChinaandMexico, toestablish andpromotediaspora linkagewith the home country. Though thestrategies vary across these countries,it clearlyhighlighted the critical role ofgovernmentinthisendeavour.

Khadria (2003) has very wel ldocumentedmany instances of specificcontributionsoftheIndiandiasporainthefieldofS&TinIndiaintheareassuchasIT,biotechnology,chemicalsciences,highenergyphysics,meteorological sciences,materialssciences,andmedicalscience.

Successfulpresenceofdiasporaalsohelps in building the reputation of thecountry of origin and trust among theforeigncompanies;whichoftenleadsthemtoestablishtheirR&Dcentresoutsidetheircountry.Kapur (2001) argued that thecompanieslikeYahoo,HPandGE,openedtheirR&DcentresinIndialargelybecauseoftheconfidencegainedbythepresenceofmanyIndiansworkingintheirUSAoffices.

Pandeyet al(2004),whileelaboratingtheimportantroleoftheIndiandiasporainthedevelopmentofITindustryinIndiain1990s,arguedthatby2000s,theybegantoplayavitalroleinfurtherdevelopingtheITandBPOindustryinIndia,eitherbystartingtheirowncompaniesinIndiaorbyinvestinginmanyIndiancompanies.

Nanda and Khanna (2009) basedon their found that that the local Indianentrepreneurswhohadpreviously livedoutside India reliedmore on diasporanetworksforbusinessleads,marketsandfundingespeciallywhentheircompanieswerebasedoutsidethesoftwarehubs.


Pande(2014)hasverywellarticulatedthe symbiotic relationship between theIndiandiasporaandtheIndianITindustry,wherebothhavereinforcedeachother’sgrowthoveraperiodoftime.TheIndianDiaspora brought in the gains in termsofenhancedskills,capital(human,socialandfinancial); inward remittances, FDIinflows, creation of networks/marketsand a high reputation of India;whichhelped the Indian IT industry a lot inleaping forward at theglobal arena.Atthe same time, the emerging Indian ITindustryprovidedforastrongincentivefor themobilityof skilledprofessionalswith the sense of an opportunity toengagewiththeirmotherland.ThissortofmutualbeneficialarrangementhelpedthegrowthofIndianITindustrytoanextent.TwelveoutoftoptwentyITfirmsinIndiahaveexpatriate Indiansas founders, co-founders,CEOsorManagingDirectors(Pande,2014).

Manyforeign-basedventurecapitalistsofIndian-originorVCfirmswithseniorIndian-originmanagingpartnerhavebeenactivelyfundingmanyIndiancompaniesand technology start-ups (Pandey et al,2004). Someof theprominent venturefirmsare,viz.WestbridgeCapital,NorwestVenturePartners,GreylockPartners,AccelPartners,MayfieldFund,InsightVenturePartners, andMenloVentures (Karnik,2015).

According to the recently releasedInternationalMigrantStock2019datasetby theUNDESA (2019), Indiahas beenrankedas the leading countryof originof international migrants with 17.5millionstrongdiaspora.AccordingtotheEconomicSurvey2018(MoF,2018),“there are more than 100,000 people with PhDs, who were born in India but are now working outside India (more than 91,000 in the USA

alone). From 2003 to 2013, while the number of scientists and engineers residing in the USA rose from 21.6 million to 29 million, the number of immigrant scientists and engineers rose from 3.4 million to 5.3 million. Of this, the number from India increased from just above half million in 2003 to 950,000 in 2013”(P.129). There have been effortsmadeto leverage thishuge resourceofhighlyskilled human capital for the nationalsocialandeconomicdevelopment.

The Report of the High LevelCommitteeontheIndianDiaspora(MEA,2001)hadacknowledgedthattheScientistsandTechnologistsofIndianOrigin(STIOs)haveearnedanameforthemselvesinthecuttingedgefieldsofS&Tacrosstheworldandmade several recommendations tocreatenewavenues to engageSTIOs toenhanceIndia’sexcellenceinS&T.

Variousmechanisms and schemeshave been launched toward thisendeavour.Specificgovernmentpoliciessuchastheprovisionofdualcitizenship,recognitionofPersons of IndianOrigin(PIO), organisation of annual PravasiBharatiyaDivas,RamanujanFellowshipScheme(SERB, 2019a),RamalingaswamiRe-entry Fellowship (DBT, 2019) andVAJRAscheme(SERB,2019b),haveaidedinknowledgeandhumancapitaltransferbyprovidingavenuestoqualifiedIndianresearchers residing in foreign countriestowork in Indian institutes/universitiesfor short-term or long-term basis. Theprospectsofattractiveacademic/corporatejobs in India,havealso servedasapullfactortobringbacksomeofthescientificdiaspora(SabharwalandVarma,2016).

According to Basu (2019), over 500applications have been receivedunderthe VAJRA (Visiting Advanced JointResearch)FacultySchemesince2017.TheprogrammeemphasisesonbringingNon-


ResidentIndians(NRI),PersonsofIndianOrigin(PIO)andOverseasCitizenofIndia(OCI) to public-funded academic andresearchinstitutionsofIndiatoundertakehighquality collaborative research andteaching. According to the scheme,VAJRAFacultymayalsobe involved intechnologydevelopment, start-ups, etc.Atleast75percentoftheselectedVAJRAfacultyinthelastacademicyearconsistedofprofessorsofIndianorigin.Thisimpliesthat there is a keen interest among theIndianscientificdiasporatocontributetotheteachingandresearchinIndia.

Leveraging scientif ic diasporais a vital component in the domainof science diplomacy (Royal Society,2010).Apart from fostering academic/researchengagementsandopportunities,there isneed to establishmore effectivemechanisms and spaces for interactionsbetween Indian academics, researchers,business leaders and start-ups fromabroadandwithinthecountrytoidentifyprojects andprocesses that can furtherthe interests of the communities andcontribute to the social and economicdevelopmentof the country.Aspart ofitsforeignpolicy,asub-policyonsciencediplomacy incorporating the need toengagemorewiththescientificdiasporacanbe envisagedby thegovernment toprovidethenecessarypolicysupportandguidance.

ReferencesAbdelgafar,B.,Thorsteinsdottir,H.,Quach,U.,

Singer, P.A. andA.S.Daar. 2004. “Theemergence of Egyptian biotechnologyfromgenerics”.Nature Biotechnology.Vol.22,Suppl.DC25–DC30.

Barre,Remi,ValeriaHernandez, Jean-BaptisteMeyerandDominiqueVinck(Eds.).2003.Scientific Diasporas. How can Developing Countries Benefit from their Expatriate

Scientists and Engineers?. Institute deRecherchepour leDéveloppement. IRDEditions.Paris.

Basu,Mohana. 2019. ‘ModiGovt claimsGoodresponse from Foreign Faculty to itsAdvancedJointResearchPlan’.The Print.24September.

Burns,WilliamJ.2013.“ThePotentialofScienceDiasporas”.Science and Diplomacy.Vol.2.No.4.AAAS.

Cohen, Robin .1997. Global Diasporas: An Introduction.UCLPress.London.

DBT. 2019. “Ramalingaswami Re-entryFellowship”. Accessed on September22. 2019 from http://dbtindia.gov.in/schemes-programmes/building-capacities/building-critical-mass-science-leaders/ramalingaswami-re

Kapur,Devesh.2001.“DiasporasandTechnologyTransfer”. Journal of Human Development.Vol.2.No.2.

Karnik,M. 2015. “Here are the best (sort of)Indianventure capitalists in theworld”.Accessed onNovember 12. 2019 fromhttps://qz.com/india/370484/here-are-the-best-indian-sort-of-venture-capitalists-in-the-world/

Khadria,Binod. 2003. “Case-study of the Indian Scientific Diaspora”. In Barré, Remi et al. (Eds.).Scientific Diasporas. How can Developing Countries Benefit from their Expatriate Scientists and Engineers?. InstitutedeRecherchepourleDéveloppement.IRDEditions.Paris.

Kuznetsov,YevgenyandC.Sabel.2006.“GlobalMobilityofTalent fromaPerspectiveofNew Industrial Policy:OpenMigrationChainsandDiasporaNetworks,”WIDER Working Paper Series144,WorldInstitutefor Development Economic Research(UNU-WIDER).

Lowell, B.L. andG.Gerova. 2004. “Diasporasand Economic Development: State ofKnowledge”.World Bank Publications.1-35.

Lucas, R.E.B. 2001.Diaspora and Development: Highly Skilled Migrants from East Asia.WorldBank.Washington,DC.

MEA. 2001.Executive Summary. TheReport oftheHighLevelCommitteeontheIndianDiaspora.Ministry of ExternalAffairs.GovernmentofIndia.

Meyer, J.B. and Brown,M. 1999. Scientific Diasporas: A New Approach to the Brain Drain.UNESCO-ICSU.Budapest.


Meyer,J-B.,B.D.,Charum,J.,Gaillard,J.,Granes,J.,Leon, J.,Montenegro,A.,Morales,A.,Murcia, C., Narvaez Berthelemot, N.,Parrado, L.S. and Schlemmer, B. 1997.“TurningBrainDrainintoBrainGain:theColombian experience of theDiasporaOption”.Science, Technology and Society.Vol.2,pp.286–315.

Meyer,Jean-Baptiste.2001.“NetworkApproachversus BrainDrain: Lessons from theDiaspora”;International Migration.Vol.39.No.5.Blackwell.Oxford.pp.91-110.

Meyer,Jean-BaptisteandJorgeCharum.1995.“IstheBrainDrainExhausted?ParadigmLostandNewperspectives”.Cahiers des Sciences Humaines.31(4).1003-1017.

MoF.2018.Economic Survey 2017-18.Volume1.MinistryofFinance.GovernmentofIndia.

Nanda, R. and T. Khanna. 2009. “DiasporasandDomestic Entrepreneurs: EvidencefromtheIndianSoftwareIndustry”.HBS Working Paper. 08-003.HarvardBusinessSchool.

Newland,K.2004. Beyond Remittances: the Role of Diaspora in Poverty Reduction in their Countries of Origin. Migration PolicyInstitute.Washington,DC.

Pande,Amba.2014.“TheRoleofIndianDiasporain the Development of the Indian ITIndustry”.Diaspora Studies.7(2).121-129.

Pandey,A.,Aggarwal,A.,Devane,R., andY.Kuznetsov.2004.India’s Transformation to Knowledge-based Economy: Evolving Role of the Indian Diaspora.Evalueserve.

Royal Society. 2010.New frontiers in Science Diplomacy.

Sabharwal,M. andR. Varma. 2016. “ReturnMigration to India: Decision-Makingamong the Academic Engineers andScientists”.International Migration.54(4).

Saxenian,A.1999a.Silicon Valley’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs. Public Policy Institute ofCalifornia.

Saxenian,A.1999b.“TheSiliconValley-HsinchuConnection:TechnicalCommunitiesandIndustrialUpgrading”. Industrial and Corporate Change.10(4).893-920.

Saxenian,A.2002.“TransnationalCommunitiesand theEvolutionofGlobalProductionNetworks:TheCasesofTaiwan,ChinaandIndia”.Industry and Innovation.9:3.183-202.

Seguin,B.,State,L.,Singer,P.A.andA.S.Daar.2006.“ScientificDiasporasasanOptionforBrainDrain:Re-circulatingKnowledgeforDevelopment”. Int. J. Biotechnology.Vol.8.Nos.1/2.78–90.

SERB.2019a.“RamanujanFellowship”.AccessedonNovember22,2019fromhttp://serb.gov.in/rnf.php

SERB.2019b.“VisitingAdvancedJointResearchFacultyScheme(VAJRA)”. AccessedonSeptember 08, 2019 fromhttps://www.serbonline.in/SERB/vajra

Sharabati-Shahin,MervatHatem.2009.The Role of Diaspora Entrepreneur in the Advancement of Science and Technology: Knowledge Economy Perspective. InAdvances inTechnology,Education and Development. WimKouwenhoven(Ed.)InTech.

Sheffer, Gabriel (Ed.) .1986. Diasporas in International Relations. StMartin’sPress.NewYork.

Tejada,GabrielaandBolay, Jean-Claude (Eds.).2010.Scientific Diasporas as Development Partner: Skilled migrants from Colombia, India and South Africa in Switzerland: Empirical Evidence and Policy Responses.PeterLangPublishers.Bern.

Tejada,Gabriela. 2012. “Mobility,KnowledgeandCooperation:ScientificDiasporasasAgents ofDevelopment”.Migration and Development,Vol.10.No.18.59-92.

UNDESA.2019.International Migrant Stock 2019.Department of Economic and SocialAffairs. Population Division. UnitedNations.

UNESCO .2010.Science Report 2010.UNESCO.Paris.

Zhenzhen,L.,Jiuchun,Z.,Ke,W.,Thorsteinsdottir,H., Quach, U., Singer, P.A. and A.S.Daar. 2004. “Health biotechnology inChina–reawakeningofagiant”.Nature Biotechnology.Vol.22.DC13–DC18.


This three volume book series is based on theconferenceproceedingson‘Science and Technology Diplomacy: A Focus on the Americas with Lessons for the

World’, organisedatUniversityofArizona.ItiseditedbyHassanA.Vafai,andKevinE.Lansey,withtheassistanceofStephaineZawadaandNicoA.Contreras.ThecontextoforganisationoftheeventintheUniversityofArizonawasbothintermsgeographicalandintellectualvantagepointofconnectionwithLatinAmerica.Moreover,oneofthekeyfocusesoftheconferencewasonsciencediplomacyonclimateandwaterissues,forwhichUniversityofArizonahasitsglobalpresence. Thekeydiscussionrevolvesaround“how and why scientific knowledge and policy is critical to effectively deal with the challenges and opportunities of the world”. For this, the core of thediscussion is the roleswithinscienceandtechnologydiplomacyforaddressingsomepressingglobalissues.Someofthethemesincludenuclear energy,publichealth, sustainabledevelopmentgoals(SDGs),climatechangeandengineeringsustainablesolutions.Someof theeminentpersonalitiesof thefielddiscussed the role of sciencediplomacy in addressingtheseissues.BeginningwithThomasPickering’sinsightson science being the ‘energizer of the world’,were theimportanceof sciencediplomacyandpolicy indealingwith Irannuclear energyagreement initiated the chainofdiscussions.BeingaformerUnitedStatesAmbassadorto theUnitedNations,hewaspartof the IranNuclearEnergyagreementdiplomaticnegotiations.Hisfirsthand

Science and Technology Diplomacy: A Focus on the Americas with Lessons for the World

RajivK.Mishra*

Book review

*Researcher,CentreforStudiesinSciencePolicy,SchoolofSocialSciences,JNU,NewDelhi


accounts of this crucial science baseddiplomatic negotiationswere brieflyreflected on the rapporteur scripts ofhis videopresentation.Moreover, eventhoughPickeringprovidedsomeinsightsonpublichealth,PeterAgre’sreflectionson‘opportunity’throughsciencediplomacytosolveglobalpublichealthcrisesexplicatedthe issue further, especially inwar tornAfricanregions.Certainlythereisaneedtounderstandtheglobalandgeographicalcontextofsolvinglargerproblemsaspartof the sustainable development goals(SDGs).ItisreflectedinthepresentationsofDavid Pietz, E.WilliamColglazierandNebojsaNakincenovic on the roleof science, technology and innovationdiplomacy for achieving SustainableDevelopmentGoals. To achieve them,the roleplayedby international bodieslikeUnitedNations and governments,being crucial for internationalisationofscience through events and forums onpressingconcernsofclimatechangeandsustainable future. In this regard,LidiaBrito Director of UNESCO RegionalOffice for Science for Latin Americaand Caribbean and Richard Roehrl’spresentationsshowcasedthe importanceofUnitedNationsandsub-bodies.Morespecifically, the roles of UNESCO ininternationalisation of science includecreating forums of communications,andplatforms fordiscussionsonSDGs,environmentalecosystemandtheapproachonclimatechange.Partofwhichwasakeyapproachonuseofsustainableandpeople-environmentcentricengineering.

In thisdirection,people,politicsand country specific science, technologyand innovation policy and diplomacyapproachfromLatinAmericancountriesisshown.FirstbeingthecaseofCostaRica’s

modelofnationalplanningforscienceandtechnologywithR&Das the coreof theeconomicgrowth.CostaRica’s storyonbuildingsciencecapacityanditsimpactinsciencediplomacyconnectionswithUnitedStateshighlightstheimportanceofpolicyandplanningforscienceandtechnologyforworking sustainable solutions forfuture.CostaRica is a unique countryin theworldwhich has abolished itsstandingarmyandhascompletelyfocuseduponuseof science and technology fornational development. Furthermore,as part of this it has invested onR&Dand channelised resources to engineerrenewable solutions to climate change.With constant science communicationanddiplomacywithUnitedStates,ithascreatedaspecialpositionforitselfintheLatinAmericanspace.Contrarytothis,thecaseofMexicohasthefocusontheneedforbuildingsciencediplomacycapacity,impedimentstoR&Dfundingandslowlygrowing international collaborations inscienceandtechnology.Moreso,theroleofpolitics,ideologyandhistoricalfactorsinbuilding trust andpartnershipbasedscience and technology collaborationswas presented in the case of sciencediplomatic relations between UnitedStates andCuba. Diplomatic relationsbetweenUnitedStates andCubabeganitsroughpatchfromearly1960s.Havingdifferingpoliticalideologies,UnitedStatesandCubadidnot share anydiplomaticrelations in the scienceuntil 1980whenCubanAcademyof Sciences revived itslinkwithSmithsonian Institute throughamemorandumofunderstanding.ThisfurtherdevelopedintoNorthAmerican-Cuban Scientific Exchange (NACSEX)developing throughout 1980s.Amidstthetroubledpast,thesciencediplomaticrelations between these two countries


grewstronger,andbylate2000sthroughanewrelationonexchangeofscientistandscholarswasbeingfacilitated.ThevolumesreflectontheimportanceoffacilitatingtheconnectionandcommunicationbetweenscientistandscientificcommunityaroundtheworldasanexamplefromAmericas;a caseof building sciencediplomacy inamultipolar contemporaryworld,withconflicting ideologies of governanceanddevelopment.This is reflectedwithpresentationsmentioningaboutpressingchallengesoftheworldintermsofnuclearcrisis anddisarmamentwith the caseofcountrieslikeIran,NorthKoreaandalsoabout coldwar tussles betweenUnitedStatesandformerSovietUnion.

Thisbecomesmore importantasthesubtitlefocusesonthe lessons fortheworld.Eventhoughthepresentationshavehighlightedhistoricalcontextandevolutionof science and technology diplomacy,clearassimilationand synthesisof theseideashavenotbeendonebytheauthors.Moreover, cases from Latin Americashowexamplesofthirdworlddevelopingcountrieshavingtheneedandrequirementof science and technology for economicgrowthanddevelopment.Thediscussionson scientific communication, exchangeof scientific communities and building

ofregionalnetworksofcollaborationdoprovidenuancesofsciencediplomacy,butaspectsoftechnologytransferandcapacitybuildingofdevelopingcountrieswerenotreflectedinabroadermanner.

Theeditedvolumecanhavewideraudienceofreadership,beitresearchers,policy makers, science diplomats,technocrats,bureaucratsandstudentswhomightwanttodevelopinterestinscienceand technologydiplomacy.Manyof theQ&Asafter thepresentationson sciencediplomacyaskedaboutthepointofentrytoresearchandstudysciencediplomacy.Onwhich some eminent personalitiesof the field pointed on being good atthe science and technology professiononeis involved in, and then entering thefield of science diplomacy, rather avery science centric approach.However,thepointwhich is beingmissed in therepliesandalsobyauthors is toanalysefrom science and society perspective,an approach trying to understandsciencediplomacywithhistorical, socialand cultural underpinnings; as JeffreyGoldberghighlightedinhispresentationwithanotetoengineeringstudentsontheimportanceofbeinggoodatthetechnicalmatterbutmorethanthatbeinggoodatunderstanding people.


ThereportfromUNCTADtitled,‘SyntheticBiologyand Its Potential Implications for Biotrade andAccess andBenefit-Sharing’1,dealswith an issue

thatisimportantfordevelopingnationsandLDCswithrich genetic diversity and have implementedAccessandBenefitSharing(ABS)mechanisms.WhileSyntheticBiologyorSynBioisanemergingtechnology,mostofthegeneticresources,particularly theplantbiodiversityareconsideredasnaturalresourceswhichhavebeenmodified,partiallyorotherwisebyhumans.AlthoughABSregimesare applicable for genetic resources covered by them,developmentsinSyntheticBiologyhaveimplicationsforallbiodiversity,irrespectiveofABSregulations.

Synthetic Biology has been defined as “a further development and new dimension of modern biotechnology that combines science, technology and engineering to facilitate and accelerate the understanding, design, redesign, manufacture and/or modification of genetic materials, living organisms and biological systems” bytheConventiononBiodiversityinthe13thConferenceofParties. In the literature therearereferencestopotentialpositivecontributionsofSyntheticBiologytosustainabledevelopmentandalsorecognisingtheissuesraisedbyanoveltechnologyandonregulatingit.TheCBD’s engagementwithCBDstarted fewyearsagoandanAdhocTechnicalExpertsGroupwasformed.DocumentshavebeenproducedaspartoftheprocessesatCBDandgreater clarity is expected to be available

Synthetic Biology, Biotrade and Access and Benefit-Sharing

Krishna Ravi Srinivas*

rePort

*Consultant,RIS,NewDelhi.

K. raVi SriNiVaS


after theCOP-MOP to beheld in 2020.The implications of Synthetic Biologyfor conservation, sustainable use ofbiodiversity,particularly the ecosystemsare being investigated. As SyntheticBiology in conjunction with DigitalSequenceInformation(DSI)canbeusedtodevelopnovelorganisms,theimplicationsofthisdevelopmentarealsoexaminedinliterature.

There are threemajor approachesin Synthetic Biology, viz. BioBrickengineering,GenomeEngineering, andMetabolicEngineering.Thisreportfocusesonthelattertwoastheyaremorerelevantforthestudy.InBioTradeandABSaccessto,anduseofandtradeofnaturalproductsand/ornaturalresourcesisthecoreissue.Butdue to technologicaldevelopments,substitutescanbedevelopedforproductsderivedfromnatureandthiscanbedoneinmanyways. Synthetic Biology hastaken this to thenext level. In additionto this by combining developments inSyntheticBiologywith tools inArtificialIntelligenceandbioinformatics,processesforutilisationcanbeacceleratedandnewproductsthatcouldcompetewithBioTradeproductscanbeproducedanddeveloped.It is true that thesedevelopmentsmayresultinbetterand/ormoreutilisationofgeneticresources,particularlyinSyntheticBiology research and development.But these can result In reduceduseof/demand forABSorBioTrade productsif only DSI and DNA Synthesis areutilized. It isworthpointingout that inthedebatesonDSIacommonconcerniswhetherwideradoptionofDSIwillresultin lesser demand for access to geneticresourcesor enablebypassing, fullyorpartially, theABSnorms, if informationcan be successfullyused to reduceuse

of genetic e-resources. Themodernbiosynthesisprocess ismoreeffective intermsof timeand costwhen comparedwith traditional synthesis. Althoughchemically synthesised compounds thatwereproducedwere identical in termsof compound structure and chemicalpropertiestheywereoftenlabelledasordistinguished as ‘artificial’ ordistinctlymarkedas ‘Synthetic’. biosynthesis andchemicalsynthesiscanbecombinedwithand are not necessarily exclusive. Buttheissueof labellingincaseofproductsfrom biosynthesis is more complexbecausewhether they shouldbe treatedand regulated asGeneticallyModifiedOrganisms(GMOs)ornot,isakeyissue.Coupledwiththisistheissueoflabelling.The regulatory norms are not uniformacross countries. So are the labellingnorms.

As this report points out citing theexample of Stevia, the issues are nothypotheticalbutvery real.For example,purifiedSteviaglycosides areusedandclassified,primarily as low-calorie,highintensity sweeteners.Many companieshave developed Synthetic Biologypathwaysforproducingsteviolglycosides.Thereportstates:

“DuetotheabilityofSynBiofirmstomarket their stevia glycosideproductsas natural, “products containing suchadditives could bemarketed in awaythatconsumerswouldthinktheproductis sweetened fromextractsof real stevialeaves”(P11).

It points out further that as of nowstevialeafisthemainresourceandtheirpricesarelowerthanthatofHFCS(HighFructoseCornSyrup)whichisusedasasweetener,extensively in foodproducts.Moreovertheirpuritycanbeasmuchas


98percentandscaleofproductionisnota limitation. But the report alsopointsoutthatproductionofSyntheticBiologycan be significant for farmers of sweetwormwoodastheonedevelopedusingSyntheticBiologycanresultinreductionofmarketoreliminationofnaturalproduct.Infact,whilesomecompoundshavebeencommercializedmany are in differentstagesofdevelopment.

Another key issue is that of foodlabelling,andvoluntarycertification.ThereportpointsoutthatinEuropeanUnionthere is no harmonised definition for‘natural’ inpersonal care and cosmeticsindustry.ThearrivalofSyntheticBiologyproducts can exacerbate the confusionaswhether theymeet the ‘truthfulness’criteria is not clear. Similarly, there arenew issues onNon-GMO certificationand voluntary certification. But thequestion is demand for and supply ofhowmany ingredientswillbe impactedbydevelopmentsinSyntheticBiology.Itishugeaccordingtoonedatabasewhichlists about 350 compounds/ingredients(SYNBIOWATCH,2019).

However, the catch is that thisdatabaseconsidersSyntheticBiologyproductsas GM 2.0 and the UNCTAD reportdoes not take this stand. This takes usto thekeypoint indebatesonSyntheticBiology.WhileNGOslikeFriendsofEarthandETCGroupargue that they shouldbe treated like GMOs, the opinion isdivided.Whethertheyhavetobetreatedas a separate category and regulated soisanimportantquestion.Shouldtheyberegulatedonthebasisofproductandnoton thebasisofprocess(es)ofproducingthem?Theopinionisdividedbecauseatthecoreofthisdebateistheproductvs.processapproachinregulationofGMOs.WhiletheUSAadoptsthefirstapproach,

EU adopts the second approach. Butirrespectiveoftheapproachadoptedthishasimplicationforlabellingandtrade.IncaseofSyntheticBiologythereisnomoveforaglobalregulationasofnow.

TheUNCTADreportcautionsaboutthe impacts and has come up withrecommendationsasbelow:

Recommendations• Providercountriesmaywanttoconsider

conducting socio-economic impactassessments fornationally importantvaluechainswhenasyntheticbiologyalternative appears on themarket inordertodetermineitspotentialimpactonjobsandlivelihoods.

• Wherethereisasignificantrisktojobsandlivelihoods,itmaybeappropriatefor provider countries to assistproducers to transition to differentBioTradevalue chains toprevent theimpactonlivelihoodsandbiodiversitythatwould result froma shift awayfromtheexistingvaluechain.

• Consider the need and potentialimplications of defining “naturalproduct” or “goods and servicesderived fromnative biodiversity” inthecontextofBioTrade.Thiswouldbeachallengingundertakinganditmaybepreferable to leavethis tonationaldecisionmakersandstandard-settingbodies.

• ConsideraddressinghowtheBioTradePrinciplesandCriteriaaddressspecifictypes of technologies or productsfalling under the broad scope ofsyntheticbiology.Thismayincludethequestionofwhetherabroadapproachis preferable, orwhether a case-by-caseapproachbasedonsustainabilitycriteriaisappropriate.


• Consider whether a case-by-caseapproach to the use of productsfabricatedwithgeneticallymodified/syntheticbiologyorganismsinBioTradeproductsisappropriatewheretheyaredemonstrablymore sustainable thantheir naturallyderived counterparts(e.g.wherethereisatradebanunderCITES,listedonIUCNRedList).

• Ifacase-by-caseapproachisadopted,consider the development of atraceabilitymechanismforingredientsthat are derived fromCITES-listedspecies toprove that theyhavebeenfabricatedusingSynBioprocessesandnotdirectlyfromthesespecies.”(P29)I t can be in ferred that these

recommendations arepragmatic andasthey neither take extremepositions onimpacts, nor create an impression thatSyntheticBiologyproductswillcreateonlyadverseimpactforBioTradeandABS,theydeserveseriousconsideration.

Inthelate1980sandearlytomid-1990s,Rural FundAdvancement International(RAFI, which renamed itself as ETCGroup)publishedaseriesofstudiesthatdevelopments in biotechnology couldharm interests ofdeveloping countries;products from biotechnology couldbecome substitutes or displace naturalproducts like vanilla, and, rubber. Butnothingofthatsorthappened.Whetheritwill bedifferent this time in the case

ofSyntheticBiology isyet tobeknown.Butfewpointscanbehighlighted.Oneisthattoday,itisnotjustSyntheticBiologybut its combinationwithbioinformatics,thatcanmakeahugedifference.Two,thedevelopmentsonDSIhave implicationsfornot justABSbutalso for sustainableuse and conservation of plant geneticresources.

This issue of impacts of SyntheticBiologyforBioTradeandABSorimpactsof DSI highlights how developmentsin S&T can have huge implications ofsharingofnatural resourcesparticularlygeneticresources.Howcountriesthatareproviders ofGeneticResources shouldrespond to thesedevelopments? Shouldthey join hands and take a commonposition even as someamong themarealso investing inSyntheticBiologyoratleast doingR&D in Synthetic Biology?Therearenoeasyanswersbutathoroughunderstandingoftheissuesandquestionsmayhelpindevelopingresponseswithoutgettinginfluencedby‘changeisinevitable,adjustorperish’approach,or,bydoomsdayscenarios.Thisreportwillbeveryusefulinunderstandingandresponding to theissuesandquestions.

Endnote1 The Report can be accessed at https://

unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditctedinf2019d12_en.pdf.


IAEA and FAO launch Plant Mutation Breeding Network

Geneticvariation lays the foundationof evolution andbreeding. Scientistshavelearnedovertheyears,tocreateandutilisemutation,throughdifferentapproachesandtechniques.Realisingthelimitationoftransgenicplantresearch,

mutationbreedinggrowninabigway,asitdoesnotposeanyethicalconcerns,relatedtohumanhealthandsustainability.Presently,differentvarietiesofrice,wheat,cotton,sugarcane,potato,cornandsoybeanhavebeenbredsuccessfullybymutationbreedingandarebeingusedforhumanconsumptioninmanycountries.Theseexhibitsuperioryielding and abiotic stress tolerant traits,which are geographically relevant. Thetechniquehasexponentialpotentialandcanbeharnessedthrougheffectiveknowledgesharingandcapacitybuilding.However,mutationbreedinghasalsosomelimitations,likebeneficialmutantfrequencyislowanditisdifficulttocontrolthedirectionandnatureofvariation.Hence,improvingthemutageniceffectiveness,rapididentificationandscreeningofmutantsandexploringthedirectedmutagenesisapproachesaresomeoftheimportantchallengesinthisareaofresearch.

Keepingsuchaspectsintoconsideration,theInternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA) and theFoodandAgricultureOrganizationof theUnitedNations (FAO)havelaunchedthePlantMutationBreedingNetwork(MBN)whichaimstoimproveefficienciesincropmutationbreedingacrosstheregion.Inadditiontostrengtheningtheirnationalcapacitiesinplantmutationbreedingandassociatedbiotechnologies,participatinggovernmentsareexpectedtoexchangenationalgermplasms.Presently,theconstitutionofMBNcomprisesofexpertsfromBangladesh,China,India,Indonesia,Lao PDR,Malaysia,Mongolia,Myanmar, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka,ThailandandVietnam.Theplatformwillfacilitatemulti-environmentfieldtrialsindifferentcountriestoassesstheproductivityofcropsandthesuitableecosystemfortheircultivation.Newspeedbreedingtechnologiesareexpectedtobesharedwithintheregionthroughworkshops,scientificvisits,knowledgeexchangeplatformsandfellowships.Thenetworkwillbeestablishingplatformstoenabletheexchangeofthetechnologyandknowngenesofinterest.Source: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/accelerating-growth-iaea-launches-plant-mutation-breeding-network-for-asia-and-the-pacific

Policy draft on Scientific Social Responsibility (SSR)

Sciencehasbroughtinunderstandingofthenaturalandphysicalworlds,withlimitedrecognitiontothesocialimpactitencapsulates.Realisingthisgap,thescience-societyconnecthasbeenadvocatedandrealisedthroughpolicyinterventionsat

national,regionalandgloballevels.Intoday’sera,scienceandtechnologyhasdeeplypermeatedacrossdifferentfacetsofthesociety,Science,TechnologyandInnovation(STI)areattheforefronttocatertodevelopmentprioritiesandsocietalgood,particularlytosolveproblemsrelatedtohealthcare,agriculture,energyandecologicalenvironment.There isa realisationamidgovernmentauthoritiespromotingS&Tpolicy, that thegapbetweenscience-societyshallbereducedbyassessingthesocialvalueofscientific

Science Diplomacy

news uPdates


advancements,throughimplementingSTIpoliciesthatareinclusive,demand-drivenandhaveemanatedfromscience-societylinkages.CountriesliketheUS,UK,JapanandChinahaveadoptedthismodel.

Takingforwardtheon-goingeffortstobringscienceandsocietyclosertoeachother,theDepartmentofScienceandTechnology,GovernmentofIndia,hasreleasedthepolicydraftonScientificSocialResponsibility(SSR).Thepolicyproposestoenhancelinkagesbetweenscienceandsociety,suggestsamechanismforaccesstoscientificknowledgeandproposesthatscientists/knowledgeworkerscommittospendatleast10daysinSSRrelatedactivities.Thedraftalsoindicatestheincentivesthathavetobeprovidedandsupportthatwouldbeneeded.ThedraftdefinesSSRas“theethicalobligationofknowledgeworkersinallfieldsofscienceandtechnologytovoluntarilycontributetheirknowledgeandresourcestothewidestspectrumofstakeholdersinsociety,inaspiritofserviceandconsciousreciprocity”.Thepolicydraftcanbeaccessedat:https://dst.gov.in/sites/default/files/Final%20SSR%20Policy%20Draft_2019.09.09_0.pdf

IIT Madras Develops ‘GraspMan’ – A Robot-equivalent of Human Hand

Roboticsandmachinelearninghaveopenedupadifferentarenaoftechnologicalinnovations and scientific breakthroughs.With the advent ofArtificialIntelligence(AI),thedigitalrevolutionhasgrownmanifolds,drawingfromthe

blendofcomputerscience,cognitivepsychologyandengineering.Variouscountriesare encouragingapplicationsofAI and itsdeployment in acrossdifferent sectors.However,challengesarearisingindevelopingtechnologicalcapabilitiesinthisdomainandharnessing themtoachievedevelopmentpriorities, throughcritical reflectionsonrisksandregulations.IntheIndiancontext,artificialintelligenceregulationisatanascentstage,whereastechnologicalinnovationsaretakingplaceinthepublicaswellasprivatesectors.Moreover,theuniversitiesarealsocomingforwardindevelopingtechnologies,whicharecosteffectiveandpossesssocietalrelevance.

OnesuchendeavourisundertakenbytheresearchersattheIndianInstituteofTechnology,Madras (IIT-Madras); theyhavedevelopedarobotwithgraspingandlocomotionabilitieslikeahumanhand.Thehumanhandrobotcanbeusedforindustrialpurposesandinsearchandrescueoperations.Themultimodalroboticsystemnamed‘GraspMan’comprisesapairofgraspers(machine-equivalentofhumanhands)thatenableittoconformtothegeometryofanobjectbeinggrasped.Themotivationbehindthisresearchistomakearobot,withminimumdesignforspecifictasks,capableofnavigating andmanipulating acrossdifferent environments. The combination oflocomotionandmanipulationgives it theability toholdanobject andwalk, arm-

Research and Development

news uPdates


swinginglikebaboons(brachiation).Inindustrialuse,itcanclimbonpipes,holdthemandassemble.Besides,itcanaidmachinesusedinsearch-and-rescueoperationsandlocomotoryapplications.Source: https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/iit-madras-researchers-develop-industrial-and-field-robot-graspman/article29090999.ece

Technology developed to diagnose early spread of Cancer

AgroupofPune-basedscientistshavedevelopeda‘liquidbiopsy’technologyto detect early spread of cancer and claim it is the fastest in theworld.The ‘OncoDiscover’ technologyhas been approvedby theCentralDrugs

StandardControlOrganisation, thenational regulatorybody forpharmaceuticalsandmedicaldevices.Thistechnologyisexpectedtorevolutionisetheearlydiagnosisandmanagementof cancerpatients in India, andhasbeen launchedbyActoriusInnovationsandResearch,aPune-basedstart-up.OncoDiscoveristhefirst-of-its-kindtobelicensedtomanufactureforsaleunderthenewMedicalDeviceGuidelines,2017,for earlydetectionofmetastasis in epithelial origin cancers.The start-uphasbeenfundedforhigh-riskinnovationsbytheBiotechnologyIndustryResearchAssistanceCouncil, an industry supportwingof theDepartmentofBiotechnology.A teamofscientistsworkedtocrackthetechnologicalchallengesindetectingcirculatingtumorcells(CTCs)fromlung,breast,colorectal,headandneckcancers.WhileasimilarCTCdetectiontestapprovedbytheUSFDAcostsUSD1,000andisunaffordableformostIndians,OncoDiscovercomesatafractionofthatcost.ThetestisnowavailableinPuneattheOncoDiscoverLiquidBiopsyTechnologylabforcancerpatientsinIndia.Thenewtechnologyhasbeenpatentedinternationallyandvalidatedviamultipleclinicaltrials.Toknowmoreabouttheresearchinthisregard,pleasevisithttps://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.e14516Source: https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/diagnostics/pune-scientists-develop-tech-to-detect-early-spread-of-cancer/70739264

Call for ContributionScience Diplomacy Review (SDR), amultidisciplinary, peer-reviewedjournal, aims to capturedevelopments,updates andeventson sciencediplomacy.We invite contributions from interested readers on issuesrelated toScienceDiplomacy, in theoryandpractice.Reviewsof latestpublications–researcharticles,essays,books,monographs,reports-arealsowelcome.ThecontributionscanbesenttoManagingEditor,ForumforIndianScienceDiplomacyReview,ResearchandInformationSystemforDevelopingCountries(RIS),Core4B4thFloor,IndiaHabitatCentre,LodhiRoad,NewDelhi110003,India(Email:[email protected];Tel.+91-11-24682177-80;Fax:+91-11-24682173/74).

Forsoft-copyofSDR,editorialinformation,contributions,feedbackandcomments,email: [email protected] and [email protected]

Guidelines for Authors1. Submissions should contain institutional affiliationandcontactdetailsof author(s), including email address, contactnumber, etc.ManuscriptsshouldbepreparedinMS-Wordversion,usingdoublespacing.Thetextofmanuscripts,particularlyfulllengtharticlesandessaysmayrangebetween4,000-4,500words.Whereas,bookreviews/eventreportshallrangebetween1,000-15,00words.

2.In-textreferencingshouldbeembeddedintheanthropologicalstyle,forexample‘(Hirschman1961)’or‘(Lakshman1989:125)’(Note:Pagenumbersinthetextarenecessaryonlyifthecitedportionisadirectquote).Footnotesarerequired,asperthediscussionsinthepaper/article.

3.Use‘s’in‘-ise’‘-isation’words;e.g.,‘civilise’,‘organisation’.UseBritishspellings rather thanAmerican spellings.Thus, ‘labour’not ‘labor’.Usefigures(ratherthanword)forquantitiesandexactmeasurementsincludingpercentages(2percent,3km,36yearsold,etc.). Ingeneraldescriptions,numbersbelow10shouldbespeltoutinwords.Usefullerformsfornumbersanddates—forexample1980-88,pp.200-202andpp.178-84.SpecificdatesshouldbecitedintheformJune2,2004.Decadesandcenturiesmaybespeltout,forexample‘theeighties’,‘thetwentiethcentury’,etc.

Referencing Style: References cited in themanuscript andprepared aspertheHarvard styleofreferencingandtobeappendedattheendofthemanuscript.Theymustbetypedindoublespace,andshouldbearrangedinalphabeticalorderbythesurnameofthefirstauthor.Incasemorethanoneworkbythesameauthor(s)iscited,thenarrangethemchronologicallybyyearofpublication.

Invitation to Join Mailing ListInterestedreaders,whowishtoavailthesoft-copyversionofScienceDiplomacyReview(SDR),maykindlysenddetails,alongwithinstitutionalaffiliationtoscience.diplomacy@ris.org.in.Alsospecifyifhard-copyisdesired.

About FISDAspartof itsongoingresearchstudiesonScience&TechnologyandInnovation(STI),RIStogetherwiththeNationalInstituteofAdvancedStudies(NIAS),BengaluruhasendeavouredamajorprojectforScienceDiplomacy this year, supportedby theDepartment of Science andTechnology.Theprogrammewas launchedon 7May2018 atNewDelhi.TheForumforIndianScienceDiplomacy(FISD),undertheRIS–NIASScienceDiplomacyProgramme, envisagesharnessing sciencediplomacyinareasofcriticalimportancefornationaldevelopmentandS&Tcooperation.

ThekeyobjectiveoftheFISDistorealisethepotentialofScienceDiplomacybyvariousmeans,includingCapacitybuildinginsciencediplomacy,developingnetworksandSciencediplomacyforstrategicthinking.ItaimsforleveragingthestrengthsandexpertiseofIndianDiasporaworkinginthefieldofS&TtohelpthenationmeetitsagendainsomeselectS&Tsectors.

Published by:

Core IV-B, Fourth Floor, India Habitat CentreLodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003, India.Ph. 91-11-24682177-80 Fax: 91-11-24682173-74-75Email: [email protected] Website: www.ris.org.in

Follow us on:

www.facebook.com/risindia @RIS_NewDelhi www.youtube.com/RISNewDelhi

CONTENTS (continued from outside front cover)

Forum for IndianScience DiplomacyFISD

/FISD-Forum-for-Indian-Science-Diplomacy @fisd19 /RISNewDelhi

Follow us on:

REPORTSynthetic Biology, Biotrade and Access and Benefit-SharingKrishna Ravi Srinivas

NEWS UPDATES Science Policy• IAEAandFAOlaunchPlantMutationBreedingNetwork

• PolicydraftonScientificSocialResponsibility(SSR)

Research and Development• IITMadrasDevelops‘GraspMan’–ARobot-equivalentofHuman

Hand

• TechnologydevelopedtodiagnoseearlyspreadofCancer

Science Diplomacy Reviewfisd.in/sites/default/files/SDR 4 - November issue... · The Science...

Documents

Transcript of Science Diplomacy Reviewfisd.in/sites/default/files/SDR 4 - November issue... · The Science...