I welcome the opportunity to communicate with readers of Nature Network from Santiago, Chile. I am a developmental biologist with a faculty position at the largest Chilean university (Universidad de Chile), specifically at the Department of Biology of the Facultad de Ciencias. Besides discussing my scientific interests, I would like to use this forum to explore issues faced by Chilean and Latin American science today and to exchange views about the use of biotechnology in our countries. I hope to stimulate colleagues from both the region and globally to join me in this discussion.

Well known for its wines, fruit and poets, Chile is not particularly famed for its science, at least that carried out locally. Most Chilean scientists have historically trained abroad and only part of this contingent eventually returns to become established in the country. Those of us who have are facing interesting times. The country is presently trying to upgrade its scientific base as part of a strategic plan to achieve a higher level of economic development. While there is a consensus that this is a good thing, how to do it has been a matter of conflict. Last year, for the first time, scientists took to the streets to protest a reduction in the budget of one of the most reliable basic science programs in the country, the FONDECYT program. (Fortunately, this decision was reversed; for articles in Spanish reporting on the affair see this and this). Other programs, that emphasize association of basic scientists with the private sector, and therefore require that the latter supply significant amounts of fresh funds, have been created. A focal point of the criticisms has been the lack of clear and centralized leadership that can formulate a scientific policy for the long term that is accepted by all of the participants. Some look with envy across our border to Argentina, where a new Ministry of Science (with a scientist at its head) was created with the new government. Chile does have a Council for Innovation, in charge of suggesting uses for fresh funds obtained from a mining royalty, though the influence of academia and the universities (where 80-90% of the research is carried out) on decisions has been limited.

It is against this backdrop that I will be attempting to generate a discussion among my peers and other actors with the simple aim of examining the merits of the different points of view that exist on the topic. I admit I am neither an expert nor do I have any answers, but rather I’m curious on whether such an exercise can generate meaningful ideas that can translate into proposals.