When one’s there, at the lab, one needs to get the biggest amount of useful information just taking into account the stock of holdings. Here, we find the very same process. The advantage is, as one’s been out there, on the other side, one knows the issues and the characteristics of our system and one also understands several bureaucratic procedures that one used to critized before”, says Lino Barañao, stepping out of the  National Agency of Scientific and Technological Promotion’s leading position (just as the organism was reaching its decade of existence) to be the head of the newly created Ministry of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation. In this exclusive interview for Information Technology, the new minister shows his enthusiasm about the software industry’s possibilities, speaks about his old job at the Agency, talks on the topic of universities and their relationship with enterprises, and the constant need to promote original investigations.
Computer services is ranked in the third place as regards destiny of funding in the Fontar. If Fonsoft’s recent creation is taken into account, this is absolutely eye-catching. How is it that software, as a topic, and computer services are embedeed in the funding policy of the Agency?
This is true and we can call it a young phenomenon; in fact, it is the fastest-growing area together with the foundation of Fonsoft and the Software Law. We had already invested Fonsoft resources to finance the area as well in the past, we are now waiting for Fonsoft to take on that funding, so we can get organized. But what we are missing is basic investigation in the technology, computing and communications, representing only a 2,4 per cent of the total amount in our last recall and facing clearly remarkable areas, as for example the biomedicine section, which is using practically half of the whole funding.
Have you performed any specific policy?
Yes, we have. We have lowered down the cut line so that we could compensate, letting not only excellent projects participate, but good ones and very good ones, too. Because I believe we lack of original investigation in the software area. If I start analyzing projects, I can conclude that there is a lot of technology related to existing software, adaptations and all that kind of important things as regards short-term administration, but if wanting a transcendental development here in Argentina, we need to invest in original investigation. There’s also an important desire to encourage young professionals so that they complete a PhD degree. There are very few software doctors and competing with the private area salaries has become a hard task to achieve, then worrying about getting an academic formation is, actually, an investment that doesn’t seem to be profitable, but is absolutely necessary for the software industry. There is no need of specifying and talking about being awarded with a doctor’s degree, a great deal of them don’t even finish their studies...
That’s the way things are, and we want to retrieve companies by financing them and making them encourage the staff to finish academic studies. We are analyzing the situation to see if we cant put into effect the action through Fonsoft. There are two different issues: one is to let the professional people finish the studies. And two, is to give the opportunity to train the personnel, that work force that has been in the company for years and has no chance of getting updated through studies.
How would you deal with that?
We are thinking of a sort of scholarship covering half of the salary, so that that person can actually go to work part-time and leave that free time to get trained and learn new things. In that case, the organization wouldn’t be dealing with additional costs: we would be compesating the difference. We are analyzing different alternatives to put this into practice, because we clearly identify this issue as a main problem to be solved.

Ideas and patenting
Why is it that there is very few original investigation as regards software?
Because of a number of different factors: there is no academic tradition, companies highly demand trained employers, and, as a consequence, there is no residence of this topic at universities: there are no projects involved. We have few doctors, and to be able to introduce this type of projects, it is requested for the official investigator to have a doctor’s degree: that is registered as a restriction. On the other hand, we are funding integrated projects and there is one in particular that has two different node elements: one in Santa Fe and another one in Tandil. We are also helping in the creation of a cluster of computers at the Hard Science Graduate School and schedulling a workshop to be launched next year, to be able to show grid applications in the medicine area.
Are the developments done here in Argentina patented? In several occasions, there are investigational groups working altogether with other investigational groups and finally leading to an international patenting...
That is a huge problem and that is why we are financing the patenting. We have created an intellectual property office and we are generating node elements all over the country to form human resources as regards intellectual property.
There is no “patenting culture” in the software area, the only existing thing is a copyright law and not every author respects it.
Perhaps it’s not that important in software issues... not locally speaking, for example, because if we take into account what happens in the United States, litigations over software patenting are based on millions of dollars. It’s even interesting to analyze the different viewpoints between the software section and the biotechnology one. There are projects dealing with changes in the legislation that restrict complaints as regards the specific value of software included in an application and not to the application itself. Software companies think that’s appropriate. But the biotechnological industry believes it is a terrible thing, because it is regular that different developed areas base themselves in the summary of particular taxes and in several cases a company is funding a marginal tax; that is where pre-existing knowledge is deducted from innovation value, there is nothing left to be protected by the organization. We need to watch closely this debate of two technological or it might lead to a rethinking of different aspects of intellectual property. What we cannot do is ignore this situation, because whether we agree or not, knowledge has value itself and if you don’t realize and just give it away, someone would gain money from that knowledge. We cannot see this through out ingenuous eyes.
How can you avoid the fact that many investigators might devote an important portion of their academic life to a subsidiary job of global projects?
Investigation is already globalized, the thing is finding the agenda and who is behind that “earning money” with that product reaching its last levels of development, or if someone is able to claim for a share of that developing already done. It is a complicated issue: a lot of huge projects are subcontracted in countries like Argentina and the final product might not be profitable for the country itself, but through out carrying this out and training people, there is also a positive effect. Some of them then gain independence and found other companies, there’s no need to analyze the inmediate result. What actually worries me is how to promote the creation of original contents. An evaluating system based on papers publication has a marked problem: it forces the investigators to work on subsidizes issues, having the possibilities to publisize in order to follow their carrers. We have to provide them with mechanisms so that they can face an original investigation, because if we only have investigators contributing in a marginal way, Argentina won’t appear in the world map of investigation schemes. On the other hand, if we have few but important contributions, that places us as knowledge generators.
And is something being done at the moment?
There is a cultural issue, an stablished system. I’m not saying you ought to lift requirements of international publications, but maybe we should finance respectable investigators in the lorg-term, just like other countries do. I believe that the theoretical area related to software has in particular huge possibilities of development here in Argentina. We are of the opinion that is correct to signal that we are interested in the productivity and in how original is a published product, letting creativy flow and no letting projects drown. I believe that can be done inside the evaluation system, allowing flexibility. Support an investigator is he or she has a innovating idea, because our system tends to go to safer places and that is precisely a cost that in the midtime is paid through out redundant investigation.

What is missing
How is the relationship between universities and companies evolving? Lately, some strong critics have made appearence as regards universities offering consultancy services, leading to a base of advantages when hiring personnel from the public sector.
I’m of the opinion that consultancy services should be maked out at universities, in order to avoid these kind of competitive situations. Universities should be looking with favor on the creation of new organizations instead of competing with other institutions. The whole concept.of linking up is spoiled if an actor starts playing a role it should not be playing. This attitude is only justified in specific cases when a conflict of interests appear, or confidential or strategical issues occur.
You have mentioned biotechnology, nanotechnology and software as strategical and potential areas to be promoted. What is missing in order to have new companies with this characteristics in the spotlight?
In Argentina, some funds of venture capital are appearing in a growing level and projects are missing. The State should advantage the foundation of new projects and finance them in the earlier stages, those with higher financial risks, so that they can leave a group of projects already revised and technically and economically checked so that the venture capitals have the opportunity of investing. The Fonsoft has just closed up an invitation to create new organizations, through out a subsidy specially made for young professionals who want to start their fresh new companies. It is called Emprendedores Fonsoft and it cover 50 per cent of the project. We know some projects might not prosper, but I believe that software will succeed. There are a lot of opportunities as regards software applied to agriculture, the oil industry or health care. Nowadays it’s easy to innovate having the chance to used technological advances in the development and creation of an instrument. So, the creation of specific new software is required in order to fulfill this. Medical instrumental is a very potential area because it goes together with our country profile. I always say that if we want to sell argentinian watches, no one would buy them because we are well-known for being impuntual people, but everything that has to do with health care is a sort of respected tradition here in Argentina, and the software is becoming well-known too, so we have to get the best of our potential advantages.

 

RECUADRO
Chemistry Doctor, official Conicet investigator, teacher and brilliant new Minister of Science, Technology and Productive Innovation, Lino Barañao is 52 years old and he previously was the head of the National Agency of Scientific and Technological Promotion. At the beginning, we was first rumoured to possibly reach the most important position at the Science and Technique Secretary (SeCyT), but his now new designation as a minister in Cristina Kirchner’s cabinet has worked up an enthusiasm among members of the scientific community and technological companies.