In a conversation with the president of the NAS, Kanat Abdrakhmatov, we discussed what changes are expected in the Academy of Sciences in light of the new version of the law.
- How do you assess the changes that have occurred in the NAS after the adoption of the new version of the law in 2025?
- In practice, we have not yet felt the changes, as the law was adopted in July of the previous year.
After that, we needed to develop subordinate legislation, including the charter of the Academy of Sciences. This document is necessary to begin our work. We spent a long time coordinating it with several ministries, particularly the Ministry of Science and New Technologies and the Ministry of Justice. There were serious comments, and the charter was returned for revision several times, which extended the coordination period.
As a result, we discussed it with the ministries for almost six months. The charter was published last week and will come into effect 15 days after publication. We expect to start working under the new charter in 10 days.
According to the new charter, the functions of the Academy of Sciences are significantly expanded. One of the most important changes is the restoration of the management vertical: whereas previously the president of the Academy was elected at a general meeting, now he will be appointed by the president of the Kyrgyz Republic.
The procedure for appointing heads of scientific institutes has also changed. Previously, they were elected by the staff for a term of 5 years, but now I, as president of the Academy, can appoint directors of departments and institutes. This is a significant step towards increasing accountability, as poor performance can now lead to dismissal.
Additionally, changes have affected the age limit. Previously, there were restrictions for election as academicians and corresponding members. We proposed to set a limit of up to 70 years to rejuvenate the Academy, but the Cabinet of Ministers opposed it, and the age limit was abolished. Now anyone can nominate themselves, and the community of academicians has the right to make decisions independently.
The procedure for electing academicians and corresponding members has also changed. In 2021, the elections were held with violations, causing dissatisfaction among the scientific community. Previously, elections were conducted at the level of the Academy's departments, but now they will take place at a general meeting, which should reduce corruption risks.
Furthermore, the Academy of Sciences now has the right to retain funds received from the rental of premises and land, which were previously transferred to the State Property Fund. This created many difficulties. Now this situation has improved.
Recently, our building underwent renovations. If you saw its condition a few years ago, you can appreciate the improvements we can now offer for hosting guests and conducting events.
- Can we say that with the enactment of the charter, reform in the Academy of Sciences will begin?
- Yes.
- Can the leadership of the Academy change?
- Yes.
- Are there already decisions on this matter? Will you resign or will the president decide this?
- I believe the decision should be made by the president.
- Was there a meeting with the president?
- No, there was no meeting. I am not expecting one, but if I am invited and told that I have done my job, I will return to my native Institute of Seismology and continue to work on seismic hazards.
- How many institutes are currently part of the Academy of Sciences?
- The Academy includes 19 institutes.
- Many do not understand what the Academy of Sciences does. You often mention that decisions in ministries are made without scientific justification.
- The Academy of Sciences has not been taken seriously for a long time, as it has been ignored for 30-33 years.
An example is the first president of Kyrgyzstan, who, upon becoming president, never visited the Academy and did not pass laws to promote its development, despite being an academician.
The attitude towards the Academy of Sciences has deteriorated, and we found ourselves in a situation where we are neither developing nor closing down. Perhaps some benefit from the Academy disappearing, and the building being used for other purposes.
With the arrival of Sadyr Nurgozhoevich, the situation changed. Unlike previous presidents, he visited the Academy of Sciences 5 times during his presidency. This indicates his attention to science.
With his support, salaries were raised, which had not increased for a long time, and major renovations were carried out. All of this gives hope for serious changes.
- How will scientific work change?
- In China, from 1996 to 2020, investments in science grew by 3299%, allowing the country to take leading positions in various fields. In Kyrgyzstan, however, the Academy of Sciences and science as a whole receive only about 0.05% of the gross domestic product. Compare these figures — they speak for themselves.
- Is an increase in funding expected?
- This is a complex question. Funding is gradually increasing. At a recent off-site meeting of the Jogorku Kenesh committee, issues of state orders were discussed.
In 2023, 300 million soms were allocated for projects that should be beneficial for the national economy. In 2025, an additional 110 million soms will be allocated. But even if you convert these amounts to dollars, they seem insignificant. For example, in 1997, the budget of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was about 6 billion dollars. Compare that with our situation.
- What is the nature of the state order?
- I believe that the state order is formed incorrectly. It should look like this: the state says it needs, for example, new medicines, and allocates funds for their development. We discuss whether we can fulfill such an order and create temporary scientific teams.
Now, however, we propose topics that we consider useful, and the government chooses from them. This provides additional funds for carrying out work, but there is often a demand for immediate effects for the national economy. However, academic science requires time to produce results.
Unfortunately, science is often approached with a business logic that does not correspond to its essence.
Nevertheless, we have projects that can yield results within 3-5 years. For example, the Institute of Geology is developing technologies for using local mineral resources that can significantly increase agricultural yields. But for this, investments or interested businesses are needed.
There are also institutes whose contributions cannot be measured in monetary terms. For example, the Institute of Language or the Aitmatov Institute, which are engaged in preserving language and culture.
Because of this, the attitude towards the Academy of Sciences from people who are used to measuring everything in money is often dismissive.
- Have relations with ministries improved?
- Absolutely. We actively cooperate with the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, and other agencies.
However, understanding that the state cannot allocate large sums for science, we are increasingly focusing on international cooperation, joint projects with developed countries, and internships for young scientists. This is the only way to bridge the gap.
Modern research requires expensive equipment. For example, microscopes for nanotechnology cost between 200,000 to 300,000 dollars, which is unaffordable for us.
We work under conditions of limited funding and understand how far we lag behind global science. The main reason is the low salaries, which do not attract young people to science. Last year, the average salary in the Academy of Sciences was about 13,000 soms.
- How much do young employees earn?
- A new employee can earn about 8,000 soms. Even our cleaner earns 25,000 soms for two hours of work in a café. I have worked for 17 years, but my experience is not valued.
- How are we doing with forecasting, considering global warming?
- We have the Institute of Water Problems and Hydropower, which deals with issues of glacier reduction and water problems. The forecasts are not encouraging: if the world temperature has increased by 1.5 degrees, then ours has increased by 2-3 degrees. This could lead to the disappearance of glaciers.
Recent discussions have focused on the state of Lake Issyk-Kul, which suffers from anthropogenic pollution and shrinking size. This could lead to catastrophic consequences.
The issue of the ecological capacity of Issyk-Kul is also important. We need to understand how many tourists the lake can withstand and the condition of its treatment facilities.
I was born on Issyk-Kul and remember how the rivers used to flow with abundant water. Now they are practically gone, as the glaciers have disappeared. This is a big problem that requires government intervention and a strict program.
- What decisions were made at the meeting of the Jogorku Kenesh committee?
- Instructions were given to the ministries for closer cooperation with the Academy of Sciences, so that our proposals are considered more carefully. The Ministry of Finance was also instructed to take the Academy's requests more seriously. However, I cannot say that these are specific instructions; as always, everything is quite vague.
