Nature: «gli scienziati italiani non sentiranno la mancanza di Matteo Renzi»

«Il più giovane leader italiano non è riuscito a passare dalle parole ai fatti quando si è trattato di promuovere la ricerca, dicono gli accademici». A scriverlo è la rivista Nature, che stila un bilancio della politica universitaria e della ricerca  messa in atto dal Governo Renzi. La sensazione di energia e di ottimismo dei primi tempi ha ceduto il posto al disappunto: la spesa pro-capite per università e ricerca, tra le più basse in Europa (nonostante una produttività scientifica più alta della media),  non ha subito incrementi significativi. Disattese anche le promesse di riduzione della burocrazia. “Most controversial” – estremamente controverso – il progetto Human Technopole. Che non solo concentra ingenti fondi in un’unica sede quando la maggior parte degli istituti pubblici è alla fame, ma è stato pianificato a porte chiuse insieme a pochi scienziati selezionati dalla politica. Un’ingerenza politica che non è piaciuta anche per quanto riguarda le cosiddette “Cattedre Natta“, contestate da una lettera aperta firmata da migliaia di accademici. «La nomina dei presidenti delle commissioni da parte del Primo ministro è semplicemente inaccettabile» ribadisce la Medaglia Planck Giorgio Parisi. Il quale contesta anche l’allocazione di 271 milioni del Fondo di finanziamento ordinario per premiare i 180 dipartimenti che, a giudizio dell’Anvur, dimostrano la miglior performance scientifica: «le università più deboli del mezzogiorno perderanno ancor più finanziamento e questo sarebbe un disastro sociale». Un bye-bye senza troppi rimpianti, insomma: «La politica italiana è in subbuglio dopo le dimissioni del primo ministro Matteo Renzi, ma i ricercatori dicono di non essere particolarmente tristi nel vederlo andare via».

link: Italian scientists won’t miss departing Prime Minister Matteo Renzi

Italian politics is in turmoil after the resignation of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi — but researchers say that they are not particularly sad to see him go.

In his almost three years in charge, Renzi promised improvements for universities and science but failed to raise the status of research in the country, according to scientists who complain that he also directly interfered in academic affairs.

“Renzi became prime minister at a time of serious economic and social crisis, and he injected a sense of energy and optimism into the university and research sector,” says biologist Cesare Montecucco of the University of Padua. “Our expectations were raised, but they were mostly disappointed.”

[…]

Most controversial has been Renzi’s decree in November 2015 creating a €1.5-billion (US$1.7-billion) centre for genomics in Milan. Known as the Human Technopole, […] The new budget foresees annual funding of well over €100 million beginning in 2018. Although some are grateful for the research funding, many scientists have complained that the major investment in a single new project is inappropriate when most other public research institutes are starving for cash. They also strongly objected to the fact that it was planned by Renzi with a few chosen scientists behind closed doors.

[…]

In September 2016, Renzi floated the idea of creating 500 elite professorships known as Natta chairs (after Italian chemist and Nobel laureate Giulio Natta), to be awarded mainly to Italians working abroad. They would be selected through 25 evaluation panels whose chairs the prime minister would nominate. Thousands of academics signed an open letter in October complaining that Renzi designed the programme without discussing it with universities — and protesting the involvement of politics in the selection.

[…]

“Nomination of panel chairs by the prime minister is just not acceptable,” says physicist Giorgio Parisi of the University of Rome La Sapienza, a prominent critic of the process.

[…]

Parisi is also unhappy with aspects of the 2017 universities budget. In particular, a €271-million portion of it will now be reallocated to the university departments that are judged by the national evaluation agency ANVUR to have the best research performance. Parisi thinks that new money should be made available to reward high performers, rather than being transferred from the general university budget, which is already stretched thin. “This government reallocation means that weaker universities in the south will lose even more money, and this would be a social disaster,” he says

[…]

Populist and protest parties, particularly the Five Star Movement led by comedian Beppe Grillo, are likely to make substantial gains in the next election.

These parties do not have strong scientific agendas. Italian senator-for-life Elena Cattaneo, who is also a neuroscientist at the University of Milan, is taking a wait-and-see perspective. “One or two populists in the current parliament have shown themselves to be more open to discussion on scientific topics than members of mainstream parties,” she says.