Last year, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) launched Chandrayaan-3, the country’s most recent lunar exploration mission. Over a span of a few months, people around India tracked its progress and, later, its scientific findings. The lander’s soft-landing was telecast on several channels, making it one of the largest demonstrations of a live scientific experiment in India.
Overall, coverage of Chandrayaan-3 was an exemplar of the public communication of advanced science, and likely contributed to the widespread understanding and discourse around the endeavour.
India had a similar focus on scientific information during the COVID-19 pandemic. Even as governments implemented disaster management laws, the States’ as well as experts’ communication of scientific and healthcare-related information became significant. A good example is the manual on homemade masks issued by the Office of the Principal Scientific Advisor to the Government of India, which accelerated the use and adoption of reusable and affordable masks. Similarly, the ‘Indian Scientists’ Response to COVID-19’ initiative shared evidence-based perspectives from experts on social media.
But in spite of these initiatives, the pandemic exposed serious lacunae in the reliable communication of scientific information in India – particularly vis-a-vis accurate data reporting, vaccine hesitancy, and prediction of the resurgence of infections.
Contrasting endeavours
A space mission involves a well-defined and largely one-way relay of scientific information, and has the advantage of an inherent visual appeal, aspirational intent, and national sentiment. On the other hand, science communication in a pandemic is an interdisciplinary effort built around a grim, protracted, and evolving situation, and intended to promote public compliance with good ‘pandemic habits’ like physical distancing, masking, and vaccination.
These contrasting communication endeavours underscore the diverse nature of contemporary science engagement.
Science communication involves all forms of communication around science, scientific work, its outcomes, discussions on its ethical, societal, or political impacts, and direct conversations with scientists as well as diverse audiences. Today, ‘science communication’ is an umbrella term that also includes the exchange of scientific knowledge, institutional outreach, and public engagement with science.
Government’s science communication efforts
The history of state-backed science communication in post-independence India can be traced to a series of policy resolutions and government-led programmes. In 1951, the government established the Publications & Information Directorate (PID) under the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The PID published the national science magazines Vigyan Pragati (Hindi), Science Reporter (English), and Science Ki Duniya (Urdu).
The government followed up with an attempt to define India’s scientific heritage and the cause of promoting science education through the Birla Industrial and Technological Museum in Calcutta in 1959. In 1976, Parliament passed the 42nd amendment to the Constitution. This included Article 51 A(h) and its statement: “It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to develop a scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of enquiry and reform.”
Soon after, the sixth Five Year Plan (1980-1985) promoted the need to popularise science and nurture scientific thinking in India, and established the National Council for Science and Technology Communication (NCSTC). In 1989, the Department of Science and Technology set up Vigyan Prasar, an autonomous organisation to popularise science at large.
Science communication in India
India’s contemporary science communication landscape looks different. In 2021, the government set up the CSIR-National Institute of Science Communication and Policy Research (CSIR-NIScPR) by merging two previous institutions. Nearly all national science funding agencies have science communication divisions, which issue press releases, conduct social media campaigns, and garner support for exhibitions, popular lectures, etc.
Science communication activities from research organisations, universities, social enterprises, non-profit organisations, and professional collectives have also picked up. They include efforts to bridge science communication and journalism, science education and outreach, and even art and science.
On the other hand, despite its remarkable achievements, the government closed Vigyan Prasar in early 2023.
Taken together, science communication in India has new opportunities today – even as it exposes old and new lacunae as well as reinforces the need for a larger conversation we need to have on science communication training, practice, and strategy in the country.
Communication as part of science
For one, science communication in India is currently not backed by formal education and training. A few institutes in India, including NIScPR, offer a PhD in science and technology communication while other organisations offer shorter training programmes. Also, while science communication research has grown significantly worldwide, it has yet to gain substantial focus in India.
Expanding science communication degree programmes in India at the masters’ and doctoral levels could support training and research in the field. This will also lead to a trained cadre of science communicators with an informed understanding of the needs, perspectives and the consequences of their work in diverse educational, linguistic, and cultural contexts in the country.
Second, it’s important to make the practice of science communication a part of the scientific process itself. This involves building student-, scientist- and institutional-level approaches to effectively communicate science in constantly changing social, scientific, and political environments.
Other possibilities include rewarding scientists for communicating science, nourishing public engagement, building institutional outreach programs, and translating research papers to regional languages, while building reflective and reflexive evaluation into these initiatives.
Cut across disciplines
Third, given the role of scientific solutions to national challenges – such as antimicrobial resistance, air pollution, and energy diversification – India needs a large-scale science communication strategy. This could start with a professional organisation with experts from many fields that works closely with government-level science departments and offices, and other partners and stakeholders, to build communication frameworks we can use to respond to challenges, as well as long-term plans to foster scientific rationale and public understanding of science.
These frameworks will have to cut across disciplines – of science, medicine, disaster-management, national security, and diplomacy groups as well as media formats, communication networks, and demographic groups.
Ankita Rathore is the Program Manager-Science Communication at IndiaBioscience. Karishma Kaushik is the Executive Director of IndiaBioscience.
- The pandemic exposed serious lacunae in the reliable communication of scientific information in India – particularly vis-a-vis accurate data reporting, vaccine hesitancy, and prediction of the resurgence of infections.
- Nearly all national science funding agencies have science communication divisions, which issue press releases, conduct social media campaigns, and garner support for exhibitions, popular lectures, etc.
- Science communication activities from research organisations, universities, social enterprises, non-profit organisations, and professional collectives have also picked up. They include efforts to bridge science communication and journalism, science education and outreach, and even art and science.
- On the other hand, despite its remarkable achievements, the government closed Vigyan Prasar in early 2023.
