The Swiss National Science Foundation is 50 years old 2002
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The Sw i s s Na t i ona l S c i ence Founda t i on i s 50 y ea r s o l d
2002
2002 >
The SNSF i s 50 y ea r s o l dSwiss National Science Foundation
Preface
4 50 yea r s o f Shap i n g t he Fu tu r e
International workshop
6 Ma jo r Cha l l e nges f o r Resea r ch Fund i n g Agenc i e s
Official Jubilee Day Ceremony
8 Sc i ence and Cu l t u r e Honou r SNSF
10 Pe te r von Ma t t – B l o s soms Sp r i n g f r om A r i d G round
Closed Meeting of the NRC
20 The Po l i t i c a l Ro l e o f t he Na t i ona l Resea r ch Counc i l
Symposia
22 D i v i s i on I – Iden t i t ä t und Ku l t u r en
24 D i v i s i on I I – Sc i ences e t t e chno l og i e s : nouve l l e s pe r spec t i v e s
26 D i v i s i on I I I – L i f e S c i ences and Soc i e t y
28 D i v i s i on I V – Sc i en za de l l a comun i ca z i one e comun i ca z i one de l l a s c i en za
Communication and public relations
30 Meet i n g t he pub l i c
Tab le o f Contents
He id i D i g ge lmann P res i den t o f t he Na t i ona l Resea r ch Counc i l
Hans Pe te r He r t i g D i r e c to r
For 50 years, the Swiss National Science Foundation has been committed to basic research of top quality.
2002, its anniversary, offered the opportunity to reflect on its mission and services, to meet its clients, the
research community, and the public. This brochure allows some memorable moments of the anniversary
to pass in review.
A jubilee emphasizing the future, as its slogan “50 Years of Shaping the Future” demonstrates. After the
celebration of “its” National Day – SNSF was created on 1 August, 1952 – by presenting its strategy, SNSF
hosted an international workshop attended by over twenty sister organizations from all five continents. More
than 200 personalities representing political, cultural, economic and research bodies came together on the
occasion of the official ceremony on 29 August. The meeting of the National Research Council at Interlaken
on 15 and 16 October was devoted to discussions of the political role of SNSF. The anniversary was also an
occasion for the research community in Switzerland to celebrate: the divisions of the National Research Council
organized interdisciplinary conferences in Lausanne, Zurich, Lugano and Basle.
Around the jubilee the SNSF undertook a major effort in communications by publishing the history of the
birth of SNSF and a brochure illustrating 50 years of activities, by several media campaigns, and by organizing
a public exhibition in Berne.
International, open, committed: keywords and guidelines for SNSF in its answers to the challenges for
tomorrow’s research in Switzerland.
50 years o f Shap ing the Future
5
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
Ma jo r Cha l l e nges f o r Resea r ch Fund i n g Agenc i e s
The SNSF i n vo l v ed t he s c i en t i f i c commun i t y i n i t s ann i v e r sa r y b y o r gan i z i n g an
i n t e r na t i ona l wo rk shop on s c i ence po l i c y w i t h r ep re sen ta t i v e s o f o t he r r e sea r ch
f und i n g i n s t i t u t i on s f r om a l l o ve r t he wo r l d .
The discussions centred on four topics. Firstly,
multidisciplinary research, a high priority for insti-
tutions that fund research. Research funding
agencies, that are organized by discipline, do not
necessarily have to undergo fundamental restruc-
turing. However, they must be able to manage and
encourage promising multidisciplinary scientific
projects with more flexible approaches and
processes.
Enabling researchers to pursue projects away
from the well-trodden paths of science, high-risk
research is a strategic element of science-promo-
tion policy. At the same time the entire education
and training system needs to encourage intelli-
gent people with original ideas to take up a scien-
tific career.
Research funding agencies are all focused on the
position of women in science and are undertaking
various measures in an attempt to improve the sit-
uation. In general they are achieving their objec-
tive, but there is still a lot to be done.
6
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
I n ternat iona l workshop , 5 –7 August 2002, Berne
High-ranking representatives of morethan 20 research-funding agencies on fivecontinents responded to the SNSF’s invi-tation; they came from countries at thecutting edge of research and from organi-zations with which the SNSF has a spe-cial relationship.
Bilateral negotiations and a number ofinformal discussions took place on theedge of the event. The SNSF, for example,concluded an agreement with the SouthAfrican National Research Foundation(NRF) with the aim of reinforcing scientif-ic and technical cooperation between thetwo countries. Specifically, the agreementwill permit the development of scientificpartnerships managed by researchersfrom the two countries.
More t han 20 s i s t e r o r gan i z a t i on s t ook pa r t
i n t he i n t e r na t i ona l wo rk shop i n Be rne .
H i g h - ca l i b r e gues t s
The fourth topic addressed by workshop partici-
pants was international scientific cooperation.
Here, the instruments used to promote science
must make greater allowance for the variety of
problems faced by scientists. They need to adopt
appropriate and more flexible measures which will
enable them to respond rapidly to new challenges
at international level.
7
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
He id i D i g ge lmann , p r e s i den t o f t he
Na t i ona l Resea r ch Counc i l , s ummar i z ed
the d i s cus s i ons du r i n g t he c l o s i n g
s e s s i on .
J ohn O ’Re i l l y, c h i e f e xecu t i v e o f t he Eng i nee r i n g
and Phy s i c a l S c i ences Resea r ch Counc i l (GB) ,
t a l ked abou t f und i n g h i g h - r i s k r e sea r ch .
Sc i ence and Cu l t u r e Honou r SNSF
More than 200 persona l i t i e s f rom sc ience and academia , po l i t i ca l ,
economic and cu l tu ra l c i r c l es a t tended the ce remony to mark
SNSF ’s 50th ann i ve rsa ry, wh i ch was ded i ca ted to the d i a logue
between sc i ence and cu l tu re .
Director Hans Peter Hertig wanted SNSF’s anniversary to be a festival
of science and culture as well as an occasion to bridge the gap between
these two worlds. Peter von Matt, writer and literary scientist, pointed out
the resemblance and subtle differences in their nature and function (see
pp. 10–19).
Openness towards the Arts and the City: According to Federal Councillor
Ruth Dreifuss the necessary independence of the SNSF has as its corollary
a more open and forward looking dialogue with society, which is “oriented
towards the choices waiting to be made rather than to those already
widely accepted”. A demand that SNSF will comply with, announced Fritz
Schiesser. The president of the Foundation Council is convinced that SNSF
is well-prepared for the challenges ahead. The institutional reform of 2002,
which allows for a better sharing of responsibilities, is evidence of this.
8
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
O f f i c i a l Jub i l ee Day Ceremony, 29 August , Berne
“Be tween t he demands o f i ndependen t
s c i ence on t he one hand , and o f po l i t i c s ,
e conom i c s and soc i e t y on t he o t he r, a c t -
i n g i s no t a lways s e l f - e v i den t . Succes s
en t i r e l y depends on t o l e r ance , e spec i a l l y
b y po l i t i c s , t owa rds an o r gan i z a t i on t ha t
somet imes appea r s somewha t pecu l i a r
and s t ubbo rn , i n o t he r wo rds a m i r r o r
o f t he wo r l d o f s c i ence and s cho l a r sh i p . ”
Hans Pe te r He r t i g , d i r e c to r, e x t r ac t
f r om h i s message t o Fede ra l Counc i l l o r
Ru th D re i f u s s .
“On t he day o f i t s ann i v e r sa r y t he i n s t i -
t u t i on i s i n good f e t t l e , bu t i t mus t no t
become h i g h - sp i r i t ed , i t mus t no t f l a g and
i t c anno t a f f o rd t o r e s t on i t s l a u r e l s . I t s
s cope o f a c t i v i t i e s i s t oo demand i ng and
too comp l ex . ” Fr i t z Sch iesser, p r e s i den t
o f t he Founda t i on Counc i l
“An anniversary such as this in the first placemeans looking forward into the future of sciencein our country. There is no future for our countrywithout creative, inventive and shared intelli-gence.
I call upon you to use your independence well! It is the basis of creativity! But, in a world ofinequity, you also have the duty to voice construc-tive social criticism based on this independence.As A. Jaccard says, scientific research has to beoriented towards both goals, efficacy and lucidity.It is urgent to have a clear view of the actualstate of humanity, of the dangers it runs and ofthe destiny it could give itself.”
f . l . t . r. : Pe t e r von Ma t t , Ru th D re i f u s s , F r i t z S ch i e s se r and
He i d i D i g ge lmann , i n f r on t o f t he i n v i t ed gues t s i n “Ku l t u r -
Cas i no” , Be rne .
To strengthen research in Switzerland, however, Swiss National Science
Foundation must be able to count on more generous public funding. As
Heidi Diggelmann, president of the National Research Council, insisted, we
have to render science attractive to young people and to support the
younger generation of scientists and scholars more actively. SNSF regularly
reviews its promotion instruments to optimally gear them to the needs of
top research. It makes sure of high-quality peer review and of programme
management, achieving to create an atmosphere of trust between the
researchers and “their” SNSF, despite ever more demanding evaluation pro-
cedures …
SNSF, Sw i t z e r l a nd , S c i enceand t he Fu tu r e
9
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
An i n t e r na t i ona l mus i ca l s e t t i n g , w i t h Tr i o Aba ton
f r om New Yo rk (pho to ) , Ka tha r i na Webe r f r om Be rne ,
S . Abbüh l & Ap r i l f r om Ro t t e rdam (pho to page 8 ) and
the A . Quas imov Ensemb l e f r om Baku .
Ex t r ac t s f r om an add res s b y Fede ra l Counc i l l o r Ru th D re i f u s s
“Ra i s i n g pub l i c awa reness becomes more
and more impo r t an t . We cons i de r a c r i t i -
c a l , b r oad l y ba sed po l i t i c a l a nd soc i a l
dec i s i on -mak i n g p roces s one o f t he ke y
e l emen t s o f a r e spons i b l e deve l opmen t
o f s c i ence . ” He i d i D i g ge lmann , p res ident
o f the Nat iona l Research Counc i l
Madame Federal Councillor, Ladies and Gentlemen
I have an assignment. I have been asked to talk about the
relationship between science and culture. As comprehen-
sively as possible, but under no circumstances for longer
than thirty minutes. The restriction is humane. But academ-
ically it is questionable. It springs from a will to form. And
the truth is required to bow to it here. All the truths I would
undoubtedly find my way to, were I allowed to speak for
two hours, must become secondary to the elegant balance
of the occasion. That, one might say, is culture. It places
form above knowledge. It is elegant and decorative. And
10
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
P e ter von Matt
Address for the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Swiss
National Science Foundation for the promotion of scientific research
on 29 August 2002 in Berne
Blossoms Spring from Arid Ground
11
20
02
TH
E S
NS
F I
S 5
0 Y
EA
RS
OL
D
given the idea of a two-hour lecture, there is surely no one
in this hall who would not declare him- or herself a sworn
champion of culture. Although everyone has come to cele-
brate an institution that serves uncompromising, unvar-
nished scholarly and scientific knowledge.
And with that I have already fallen into a trap. The
trap of definition. Never has culture been mentioned as
often, and never has the concept been as nebulous as it is
today. Only by keeping it nebulous can we bandy it about
as we choose and talk about it anytime we like.
Cu l t u r e , a mosa i c o f p r ec i s e con t r ad i c t i on s
I come from the humanities. That, as you know, makes me
an officially recognised symptom of crisis. But as a scholar
and philologist, I am honour-bound to be precise. I am inter-
ested in words and what they mean and the effect they have
on the world. I cannot liberate nebulously used words from
their nebulousness as long that nebulousness is what
enables them to function in public. But I can observe them.
I can, for example, observe the word “terrorism” determin-
ing the course of history precisely because its definition is
fuzzy and must remain so. I can observe people dying
because of this word, and I can observe political power con-
sisting partly in having the monopoly on defining key
words. Sovereignty is not merely “the power to decide on
a state of emergency”, as Carl Schmitt notoriously put it;
sovereignty is also the power to decide on the meaning of
key words. That is where philology becomes a matter of life
and death.
Studying the word culture, I discover behind the thick
haze a mosaic of precise contradictions. In an older, original
sense, culture refers to the overall state of a society, its state
in regard to how far removed it is from barbarism. That is
also how Sigmund Freud interpreted the term when he pon-
dered “Civilization and its Discontents”. So, in this sense,
culture is a phenomenon of distance. It is something that
was achieved with effort, that is in constant jeopardy, that
can erode, that must be preserved. The opposite of this
form of culture is the state of nature, the state of the savage,
of primitive existence. And as soon as I utter this thought I
realise: aye, there’s the rub. For we don’t use the word
“primitive” anymore. We forbid ourselves to. And if, at an
unguarded moment, the word slips out, we flinch, blush,
look round to make sure there is no journalist within
earshot.
The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes went out
from the model of culture as a phenomenon of distance and
also described its opposite, the state of nature. The pas-
sage about the way human beings lived before the advent
of culture is famous and pithily powerful: “No arts, no let-
ters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and
danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor,
nasty, brutish, and short.” 1 This horrifying vision helped
spark the Enlightenment in Europe. Gaining the greatest
possible distance to such a state was one of its original
mottoes.
But the “rub” I spoke of is a product of the Enlight-
enment as well. Rousseau and Herder radically revalued this
terrible state of nature. And in so doing, they created a sec-
ond concept of culture, which they set polemically against
the first. And it is this second concept that causes us to
wince when today someone unthinkingly speaks of primi-
tive peoples.
For Rousseau and Herder, “primitive” means good
and right. The human being in a state of nature is not soli-
tary, poor, nasty and brutish. No, in his way he lives a
serene, communitarian, well-ordered, humane life. Now
culture ceases to consist in the great achievement of over-
coming vile origins. Now the origins themselves constitute
the absolute value – the value that present-day society
should measure itself by. And any form of original culture is,
in its way, right and honourable.
Admittedly, it was considerations of this kind that
prompted the great Enlightenment rationalist Voltaire to
call the great Enlightenment romantic Rousseau a perfect
fool. Voltaire believed in culture as a phenomenon of dis-
tance, born of discontinuity from the barbarism of nature;
Rousseau believed in culture as primitive authenticity born
of closeness to good nature. And it is this dilemma that con-
tinues to trouble us. From case to case we all oscillate
between the Voltairean and the Rousseauian – never as the
result of a clear decision, but as a vague back and forth, as
vague as the term culture has meanwhile become for us.
The multiculturalism with which immigration from all the
countries and regions of the world confronts us can send us
into Rousseauian raptures over colourful headscarves and
the smoky sound of the syrinx, but the very next day we fly
into a Voltairean rage over Muslim women in headscarves
teaching in our enlightened classrooms. We appear to be in
an inescapable dilemma.
The headscarf question can be resolved pragmatical-
ly, from case to case, even if every solution makes one new
enemies, enemies on the side of passionate political cor-
12
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
1 T homas Hobbes , Lév i a t han
( 165 1 ) , c hap . I , X I I I , 9 .
13
20
02
TH
E S
NS
F I
S 5
0 Y
EA
RS
OL
D
rectness or on the side of a liberal school system. But where
we quickly lose all Rousseauian sympathies is in the ques-
tion of violence. The worst thing about the state of nature –
according to Hobbes – was the constant fear of unbridled
violence: continual fear and danger of violent death. And
nowhere are we so quickly forced to return to the idea of cul-
ture as a phenomenon of distance than in questions of vio-
lence. Blood feuds, vendettas, the ready flick-knife, the
mutilation of women, the matter-of-factness with which
they are repressed in brutal patriarchal family systems:
faced with all this, we rapidly lose our awe of cultural other-
ness. Forget the syrinx. This is where we become resolute
Voltaireans and theoreticians of distance. For it is, in fact,
the transformation of violence into justice, the transference
of the licence to kill to the democratically governed state
and the principle of equal rights for all that constitute the
most fundamental pillars of that overall social condition we
are privileged to call culture, in its broadest sense.
Why am I telling you all this? After all, I have no head-
scarf problems to solve, no fathers wanting to marry off
their daughters as child-brides to contend with. I am a sim-
ple philologist. But I see how, wherever we use it, the con-
cept of culture harbours this strange paradox, this unre-
solved difference between thinking in terms of distance and
in terms of original authenticity, between Voltaire and
Rousseau, between criticising the mullahs and respecting
the shamans, between a universal and an ethnic image of
the human being, between insisting on the rightness of
one’s own way and understanding the ways of others,
between the glittering colours of Romanticism and the even
light of the Enlightenment.
D i s t ance l a i d back away f r om ba rba r i sm
In this regard, the sciences would seem to be home and dry.
Day after day they unabashedly define themselves in terms
of distance. Gaining distance is their stock in trade: dis-
tance from previous errors and ignorance. A physiology of
the human organism that knows nothing about blood circu-
lation cannot be compared to a physiology that is familiar
with blood circulation. A chemistry based on the four ele-
ments of water, fire, earth and air as the irreducible compo-
nents of the world cannot be compared to a chemistry that
has recognised air and water as compounds and fire as an
oxidation process. And a biological anthropology that
defines human beings according to race – as nineteenth-
century biology, the dominant science of the time, did – can-
not be compared to present-day microbiological anthropol-
14
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
ogy, which knows that, whatever the pigmentation of their
epidermis, all human beings share 99.9 per cent of their
genetic code. One is right, the other wrong; and the wrong
view is old, the right one new. Science posits a temporal
axis of knowledge. It is a Voltairean phenomenon. This tem-
poral axis is what we call progress.
But that takes me out of the frying-pan into the fire.
Progress has a bad reputation. As enthusiastically as the
Expo 64 (Swiss National Exhibition in 1964) emblazoned it
on its banners, so demonstratively did the Expo 02 (Swiss
National Exhibition 2002) avoid the term. It is one of the
paradoxes of the present that we harbour profound doubts
about progress and yet commit ourselves wholeheartedly to
only those sciences that, in regard to the temporal axis of
knowledge, exhibit the most spectacular difference
between the errors of yesterday and the truths of today.
Unlike science, art knows no progress. Art experi-
ences shifts and changes, innovations and breakthroughs,
but not that constant transition from wrong to right, error to
truth. The obsolescence of scientific knowledge is like the
sell-by date on an invisible bar-code; but a work of art can
be more timely, affecting, revealing a thousand years after
its creation than on the day of its completion. Its truth does
not expire. There is no difference between a portrait of
Rembrandt and a portrait of Francis Bacon to which the cat-
egory of “progress” might apply. Don Quixote was not
superseded by Moby Dick, nor Moby Dick by Ulysses or
Ulysses by The Tin Drum. So have we finally discovered the
difference between culture and science that I am supposed
to talking about for thirty minutes?
I could make it easy for myself and say: absolutely.
After all, it might be maintained that culture does ultimately
refer only to the domain of the arts, though in the very
broadest sense: not only sublime works of art, but every-
thing that Homo ludens, the human being at play, produces.
As the mood takes him, this Homo ludens translates his
experience of the world, all the sorrow and the bliss of his
existence, into images and signs, sounds, dances and sto-
ries. Playfully, Homo ludens demonstrates to earnest Homo
faber the power to which all human beings are subject, the
love that liberates them, and the death that comes to every-
one in the end. He reveals joy and misery and how the two
are connected and how there cannot be one without the
other.
This happens equally in the Jupiter Symphony and the
sounds of the alphorn, in children’s drawings and in
Picasso’s Guernica. The complexity may be different and the
15
20
02
TH
E S
NS
F I
S 5
0 Y
EA
RS
OL
D
historical standing incomparable, but the original impulse
is similar. And it even takes place in the kitchen, where, with
a painter’s sense of harmony and a musician’s sense of time,
Homo ludens can subject the raw materials of his daily
nutritional needs to a transformation that grants us a fleet-
ing encounter with perfection. All this, one might say, is cul-
ture, as are the Brünig wrestling festival and a sophisticat-
ed Ronaldo goal. Homo ludens is omnipresent, and to
enable him to indulge in the playfulness by which we can
orient ourselves in joy and sadness, we ultimately need fed-
eral authorities and cantonal commissions and sponsors
and foundations and a culture per cent and Pro Helvetia.
Precisely the way Homo faber, as researcher and scientist,
needs the Swiss National Science Foundation..
So now we have finally arrived at a practicable dis-
tinction: when we talk about culture today, we are almost
always thinking in the general direction of the Homo
ludens’s pastimes. If only it weren’t for that awkward thesis
of distance. If only it weren’t for the idea that, in aggregate,
“arts and letters and society” are continually being rescued
from the threat of barbarism and can only be grasped in
terms of their distance from it. As a doctrine of the evil state
of nature, this barbarism is a theoretical construct. As a
latent threat to civilisation, it is a reality that need not be
described in greater detail to people who have lived in the
twentieth century.
The multiculturalism that anchors the innate value of
all cultures and every ethnic trait in modern consciousness
has eliminated the naive equation of barbarism with the
savage or primitive, in parallel to an enlightened attitude to
the various religions and in application of the idea of toler-
ance towards the differences between tribes and peoples.
One of the most cogent arguments – and a rhetorically mar-
vellous proof – was the vision of the Noble Savage, who
was a better man than the arrogant, supercilious European.
“We savages are the better people!” says the earnest
Amerindian in a once oft-quoted poem by Johann Gottfried
Seume, composed around 1800. The ballad begins with the
words: A Canadian not yet aware / of Europe’s courteous
veneer, / Who in his breast could feel the heart, / that God
had given him, free still from culture …2
There, in a nutshell, we have the whole of
Rousseauian criticism of culture as understood by Hobbes
and Voltaire. But as familiar as the image of the Noble
Savage still is – which of us never rode the prairies with
Winnetou or faithful Tonto? – so little do we know that even
the century of Enlightenment could not shift this Noble
2 J o h a n n G o t t f r i e d S e u m e :
«De r Wi l de » . I n : J . G . Seume ’ s
sämmt l i c he We rke , pub l . b y
Ado l f Wagne r, L e i p z i g 1 837 ,
p . 5 72
16
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
Savage into general consciousness without supplying the
opposite example as well. And at the time it was the natives
of Tierra del Fuego that were designated for the purpose.
Until well into the nineteenth century they were viewed as
the epitome of the vilest sort of human being: ugly,
deformed, base. As such they were as proverbial as Seume’s
noble Huron. And when the great philosopher Hegel wrote
about black Africans, he, too, resorted to similar terms,
characterising them as subhuman, for pages on end: “There
is nothing human to be found in this character.” 3 So even
the very first Romantic enchantment with multiculturalism
was secretly forced to pay tribute to the venerable Thomas
Hobbes.
I mention this to show that we can never quite escape
the view of culture as a phenomenon of distance. Where it is
not distance to a theoretically contrived state of nature or to
historically documented collapses of the cultivated world –
the barbarism of the eras of Hitler and Stalin or the export-
ed barbarism of the colonial Europeans – it is, as in Freud’s
idea of culture – the distance of the conscious subject to its
own instinct-driven psyche, which would like to act out
directly its impulses for power and possession, killing and
sexual violence. In Freud’s theoretical construct of the
unconscious and the “It”, the old doctrine of the state of
nature – solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short... – returns
as an interior human reality. A reality from which the arts,
the variegated activities of Homo ludens, are by no means
disengaged. In fact their purpose is to transform the ener-
gies of this most human of states of nature and to trans-
mute savage wishes into images and signs, sounds, dances
and stories. And in this way every single work of art, in its
own way, generates and testifies to the distance achieved
from barbarism, just as every football game generates and
testifies to the distance achieved from battle to the death.
With that, culture as the multifarious activities of
Homo ludens is ineluctably connected with culture as the
totality of humane, dignified and just conditions. We can dis-
pense with the hackneyed distinction between civilisation
and culture. In most languages the two concepts are virtual-
ly interchangeable. The attempt to play them off against
each other is reserved for the nationalistic polemics of inim-
ical nation states, which specialise in ascribing inspired cul-
ture to themselves and superficial civilisation to others. A
remnant of this ideological nonsense, which once fuelled the
fatal Franco-German enmity, lives on in European anti-
Americanism.
3 Geo r g Wi l h e lm F r i ed r i c h Hege l :
V o r l e s u n g e n ü b e r d i e P h i l o s o -
p h i e d e r G e s c h i c h t e , p u b l . b y
F. B r u n s t ä d , L e i p z i g n . d . ,
p . 1 4 2
17
20
02
TH
E S
NS
F I
S 5
0 Y
EA
RS
OL
D
Ar t , s c i ence and po l i t i c s : f o r good o r i l l , d ependend on each o t he r
But if culture in every sense retains the aspect of a phenom-
enon of distance, then it can in no sense be viewed as the
contrary of science. Both contribute to the goal of a
humane, dignified and just society. The creativity of Homo
ludens, which gives rise to a thousand games and the occa-
sional unique work of art, is by no means as far removed
from the creativity of research scientists as it may look. And
in both fields there is a danger of the distance breaking
down and evil savagery making inroads into the humane
order of things. There was no political barbarism in the
twentieth century to which both the sciences and the arts
did not offer, and render, their services. But there has also
never been an occurrence of political barbarism that did
not, as its very first act, brutally suppress artistic and scien-
tific freedom, along with the freedom of the media.
So we are justified in using the vague term “culture”
and in blithely understanding it as that which the arts and
sciences have in common and which makes them kith and
kin. Just as both domains are, in the last analysis, inter-
linked and interwoven with politics as well. Otherwise you,
ladies and gentlemen, would not be sitting here. Politics is
a ceaseless process of transforming violence into just law
and preserving just law from violence. That makes politics,
too, a phenomenon of distance, the prime and highest one,
in fact, for without this ceaseless process, the rest would
not exist, neither research nor art nor even the alphorn play-
er with flushed face, swollen cheeks and sound-intoxicated
soul.
Ladies and gentlemen. I have entitled my remarks
“Blossoms spring from arid ground”. You recognise the
allusion. Rare is the prolonged discourse on culture in
Switzerland that does not quote Gottfried Keller’s state-
ment: “Switzerland is arid ground for culture.” But when we
hear or read this sentence, we are never told where it is
from. We simply know that Keller said it, and that’s enough.
I always found that somehow suspect. And, being a scholar
and committed to precision, I finally managed to search out
the original. It sounds slightly different.
The statement is taken from a letter Keller wrote in
Heidelberg in 1849, at the age of thirty. Keller was a well-
known problem case in his hometown of Zurich – a failure
at school and a failure as an artist. Until well into adult-
hood, he sponged off his impoverished mother and by the
age of thirty had achieved nothing but the publication of a
slim volume of poems. And yet he received a grant from the
government of Zurich. Its purpose was to enable him to
travel, to attend universities, to gain a broader education.
An unconventional grants policy! Today – when what looms
on the horizon is the designer student, who is expected to
study according to a fixed schedule and, being equipped
with a built-in time clock, is expelled if he flouts the four-
year plan, for instance by daring to engage in a little reflec-
tion rather than doing his assignments – this grant seems
almost an aberration. But the money did give the incredibly
slow-blooming Keller the opportunity to find himself intel-
lectually and artistically and, ultimately, to bring forth some
of the most wonderful prose ever written in the German lan-
guage, a cornerstone of Swiss literature and gem of
European art.
Three months after his arrival in Heidelberg, Keller
wrote a letter to his friend Wilhelm Baumgartner. It was a
confessional letter of eminent significance, politically,
philosophically and literarily. In conscious parallels to polit-
ical republicanism, Keller emancipates himself from the rule
of an absolute God and gains his faith in the world. He has
reconciled himself to mortality and is happy about a world
that radiates only earthly beauty, but all the more powerful-
ly for that. And in the course of his musings, he notes: “My
short stay here has done me so much good, I have made so
many useful acquaintances, that I almost prefer to prowl
about Germany for another year or two. (...) If I had come
here three or four years ago, as soon as I had had the first
poems printed, I would probably be a different person
today, inside and out; because for a poet, Switzerland is
arid ground.” 4
That is the statement in its original context. There is
no hint of a blanket condemnation of Switzerland as a cul-
tural desert. The sentence merely says that, in this country,
writing poetry is not necessarily enough to awaken general
respect. It is a reservation, nothing more. And this reserva-
tion is persuasively offset by the fact that the government
supported this particular poet for many, many years, with-
out any guarantee that something would come of it, and
given the likelihood that there would be little change to the
tortoise-like speed of his development. At the very moment
Keller was writing: “... for a poet, Switzerland is arid
ground”, he himself was conspicuous evidence to the con-
trary. He had begun to blossom on sand.
There is no question that Keller’s affecting metaphor
can serve us as a warning; but to read it as an accurate diag-
nosis of Switzerland’s cultural life would be more than ill-
advised. It is true that Keller would not have received the
grant had he not been a noisy champion of radical politics
and even, as a guerrillero of less than convincing battle-
worthiness, taken part in two campaigns as an irregular.
18
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
4 To W i l h e l m B a u m g a r t n e r,
2 8 J a n u a r y 1 8 4 9
19
20
02
TH
E S
NS
F I
S 5
0 Y
EA
RS
OL
D
The arid ground blossomed only because so much dust had
already been raised by the march of politics. But that only
points again and conclusively to the overarching connection
between art and science and politics. For good or ill, they
depend on each other. All three feed on each other, and,
scrutinised closely, none is indebted to the other. They blos-
som together or they do not blossom at all. All three are
striving for the same higher goal: a humane, dignified and
just society, a humanity that is more than a Eurocentric
extravagance. The discoveries of modern-day molecular
biology, revealing the extent of the genetic identity of all
human beings, discoveries that clear away so many old prej-
udices, also lay new foundations for the idea of human dig-
nity and human rights. How much of that is ultimately cul-
ture, how much is science or politics, and exactly where the
boundaries between them run – those are questions we can
safely pass over.
Translation: Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart, Riehen
The Po l i t i c a l Ro l e o f t heNa t i ona l Resea r ch Counc i l
Seve ra l e va l ua t i on s s how t ha t SNSF has t o p l a y a mo re a c t i v e r o l e i n r e sea r ch po l i t i c s .
Bu t wha t i n s t r umen t s hou l d i t p l a y i n t he f ede ra l i s t conce r t o f Sw i s s i n s t i t u t i on s? Ano the r
a spec t c u r r en t l y unde r d i s cus s i on i s i t s commi tmen t t o t he s c i en t i f i c c ha l l e nge .
During the jubilee session of the National Re-
search Council (NRC), a magnificent present was
celebrated: the latest Swiss Nobel Prize Award to
Kurt Wüthrich. This 364th meeting of the NRC was
intended as an informal gathering and as a time-
out for reflection on the political role to be
assumed by SNSF.
As a consequence of its commitment to the auton-
omy of science by a system of self-governance of
research, SNSF enjoys high credibility among the
research community. As “Conscience of Science”,
SNSF must ensure this independence in research
promotion. On the one hand, the members of the
NRC keep an eye on the scientific quality of
research proposals, on the other hand, they are
also engaged in political, economic and social
debates of scientific activities and of grooming
new generations of scientists. This latter field
makes for a heavy load, with projects such as the
formation of a European research area, the legisla-
tive work on genetic engineering or yet the future
law on research conducted on humans.
20
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
C l osed Meet ing o f the Nat iona l Research Counc i l , 15 and 16 October 2002, i n In ter laken
We l l - ea rned f e s t i v e momen t s be tween e va l ua t i on
o f p roposa l s and t ime f o r r e f l e c t i on f o r t he
82 membe r s o f t he NRC a t t he Ho te l V i c t o r i a -
J ung f r au i n I n t e r l a ken .
At its reflection meeting the NRC discussedthe necessary improvements to its promo-tion instruments in favour of young womenresearchers.
The question was approached by a discus-sion of the of more general context of thecontinuous reproduction of inequalitiesbased on gender. A lecture and an ensuingdebate clarified the mechanisms of this “science game” with its rules often laid downby and for men. These rules are inheritedfrom “objective” structures, such as theemployment market, but also from “subjec-tive” structures, such as the tendency toattribute behavioural solidarity to women,whereas science is ruled by competition.
Resea r ch : a man ’s g ame
As an assembly of scientists, the NRC is an ideal
forum for debate – e.g. in consensus conferences
– opportunities and risks and the sensitive topics
of research politics. Through its diversity and rep-
resentative membership the NRC reflects its open-
ness to public and political dialogue.
21
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
He id i D i g ge lmann , p r e s i den t o f t he NRC ,
we l comes t he membe r s t o t he j ub i l e e n i g h t
o f SNSF.
A r r i v a l o f membe r s o f t he Na t i ona l
Resea r ch Counc i l .
I d en t i t ä t und Ku l t u r en
The i n te rd i sc ip l i na ry sympos ium o f D i v i s i on I “Human i t i es and Soc ia l Sc i ences” was he ld
a t the Un i ve rs i t y o f Bas le . Fe l l owsh ip p ro fessors exchanged the i r exper i ences and A le ida
Assmann , p ro fessor o f l i t e ra tu re , conc luded the event by p resent i ng the va r ious fo rms
o f memory.
Basle University, steeped in humanist tradition,
but according to Rector Ulrich Gäbler, the Swiss
university with the highest percentage of stu-
dents in natural sciences, hosted the fourth
Jubilee conference which focused on the theme of
“Identity and Cultures”.
Heidi Diggelmann, president of the National
Research Council, and Daniel Paunier, president of
Division I of the National Research Council, wel-
comed the participants. Hubert Herkommer and
Emil Angehrn, members of the Research Council,
introduced and chaired the round table discussion
with five SNSF Fellowship professors. Thomas
Schneider, egyptologist, Christine Walde, philolo-
gist, Michael Stolz, medievalist, Martin Stingelin,
germanist, and Susanna Burghartz, historian,
talked about their career and research work.
The ensuing discussion focused on the issue of
the social duty of the humanities. Although the
individual positions varied – the participants were
unanimous in demanding a more offensive self-
perception than philosopher Odo Marquard in his
“Theory of Compensation” stipulates for the
humanities as a future-oriented research disci-
pline. The humanities cannot be reduced to filling
the gaps left by the natural sciences. Both disci-
plines are in need of “active acquisition of knowl-
edge”, according to Susanna Burghartz. This
aspect is easily lost from view in today’s defensive
rhetoric.
22
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
S ympos ium o f D i v i s i on I o f the NRC, 21 November 2002, Bas le
In her concluding remarks Aleida Assmann, professor of English literature and literary science at ConstanceUniversity, talked about ”Four Types of Memory”. Shedistinguishes between individual memory and threetypes of collective memory, into which the former isintegrated: the social memory of a village or town,which changes with the changing generations; the polit-ical memory, which selectively fixes specific memories,and the cultural memory, which forms a social long-term memory in the same way as the political memory,but is more complex and less uniform and definite.According to Assmann, continually updating interpre-tation in the context of memory is the main task of cultural sciences.
A l e i da A s smann , who t eaches Eng l i s h
l i t e r a t u r e and l i t e r a r y s c i ence , t a l k ed
abou t memory a s an impo r t an t p r e -
r equ i s i t e f o r human i den t i t y.
F ou r Types o f Memory23
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
The Con f e r ence a t Bas l e Un i v e r s i t y
was a p l a t f o rm f o r young a cade -
m i c s . T he p i c t u r e s hows A l e xande r
Z schokke ’s “Mas te r and D i s c i p l e”
i n f r on t o f t he un i v e r s i t y ’s ma i n
bu i l d i n g .
ecular and micro-/nanometric level. The discover-
ies made possible by this research will play a
major role in our future.
Five specialists were invited to present the poten-
tials of development related their research work.
David Bishop made a fiery start. The head of Micro
Engineering at Bell Laboratoires & Lucent Tech-
nologies presented his research activities in the
field of micro-electro-mechanical systems (see
Sc i ences e t t e chno l og i e s : nouve l l e s pe r spec t i v e s
For the i n te rd i sc ip l i na ry sympos ium, wh i ch was he ld a t the Sw i ss Federa l I ns t i tu te o f Tech -
no logy i n Lausanne , D i v i s i on I I “Mathemat i cs , Natu ra l Sc i ences and Eng ineer i ng” o f fe red
ins i gh t i n to the doma in o f research towards a p romis i ng f u tu re .
“Science and Technologies: New Perspectives”.
On 11 October 2002 this theme opened the cycle of
four conferences organised to mark the anniver-
sary of SNSF. The theme is all the more important
since at all times scientific progress has been, is
and will be closely linked to the need of man to
push back the limits to his knowledge and to his
capacities. Nowadays, these limits are on the mol-
24
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
S ympos ium o f D i v i s i on I I o f the NRC, 11 October 2002, Lausanne
Dav i d B i s hop , head o f Be l l L abo ra to r i e s
M i c ro - eng i nee r i n g Depa r tmen t p r e sen t -
i n g t he po ten t i a l o f t he f amed MEMS
(m i c ro - e l e c t r o -mechan i ca l s y s t ems) .
J é rôme Fa i s t , p r o f e s so r o f mesoscop i c
phy s i c s , e xp l a i n i n g t he f unc t i on i n g o f
t he quan tum-cascade l a se r, o f wh i ch he
i s co - i n ven to r.
Small, fast and inexpensive “they will change our con-ception of the term appliance,” challenges David Bishopof Bell Laboratories & Lucent Technologies (New Jersey,USA). These appliances are micro-electro-mechanicalsystems (MEMS) comprised of miniaturised parts, com-bining electronic, mechanical and optical functions.They are manufactured using the same technologies asfor integrated circuits (IC). Their potential is immense –their market potential is estimated at several billionswithin five years – and their uses numerous. The teamaround Dr. Bishop has, for example,developed opticalcrossroads, where several optical fibres meet. Micro-metric mirrors, activated by minute levers, reflect lightrays, carrying information to any other fibre at will.“The only limit to the development of MEMs is ourimagination,” commented Dr. Bishop.
inset). Majed Chergui, professor of physics of
condensed matter at Lausanne University, pre-
sented next his real time studies of light induced
deformations of the structure of solids, which may
lead to the synthesis of new materials. In the after-
noon, Jérôme Faist, professor of mesoscopic
physics at Neuchâtel University gave an insight
into his advances in the field of photo instruments
such as the quantum-cascade laser of which he is
co-inventor. Finally, Wolfgang Junge, head of the
biophysics department of Osnabruck University
briefed his audience on nanomotors at the molec-
ular level.
Mic ro - e l e c t r o -mechan i ca l s y s t ems w i t h eno rmous po ten t i a l
25
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
L i ve l y exchanges a t l unch be tween
the r esea rche r s and t he pa r t i c i -
pan t s o f t he con fe rence o rgan i zed
by t he Sw i s s Fede ra l I n s t i t u te o f
Techno logy (EPFL) a t Lausanne .
A l be r t Mat te r, p res i den t o f D i v i s i on
“B io l ogy and Med i c i ne” , opened the
con fe rence .
Fo rmer g r an t - ho l de r s d i s cus s t he i r e xpe r i ence
o f SNSF suppo r t p rog rammes f o r young s c i en t i s t s .
L i f e S c i ences and Soc i e t y
The Sw i s s F ede ra l I n s t i t u t e o f Techno l og y i n Z u r i c h ( ETHZ ) was t he chosen venue
on t he 1 8 and 19 Oc tobe r 2002 f o r t he i n t e rd i s c i p l i n a r y s ympos i um o f D i v i s i on I I I
“B i o l o g y and Med i c i ne” , ded i ca t ed t o : “L i f e S c i ences and Soc i e t y” – no t on l y a
l ook i n r e t r o spec t bu t a l s o a v i s i on o f t he f u t u r e .
In the first part of the conference former grant
holders shared their experiences in the different
promotion programmes of the SNSF. The mostly
young audience, who are at the beginning of their
academic careers, were given a – personal – view
of the Marie-Heim-Vögtlin-fellowship, of individ-
ual fellowships for promising and advanced
researchers, of fellowship professorships and of
programmes such as SCORE/PROSPER, TANDEM,
START and MD-PhD. The talks given by scientists
who have left their laboratory and made their
career as fond manager, PR consultants, heads of
enterprises or as scientific journalists also met
with great interest.
The second half of the programme was dedicated
to the fascinating results of biological and medical
research. Hansjakob Müller talked about the pos-
sibilities of today’s human genetics, Annette
Oxenius presented the latest results of AIDS-
research, and Roger Nitsch reported on new thera-
pies for Alzheimer’s disease. Adriano Aguzzi gave
26
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
S ympos ium o f D i v i s i on I I I o f the NRC, 18 and 19 October 2002, Zur i ch
He i n i Mu re r, p r e s i den t o f D i v i s i on
“B i o l o g y and Med i c i ne”, opened
the con f e r ence .
What are the effects of the nuclear disaster at Tchernobyl on flora and fauna? Togetherwith her team the Basle researcher BarbaraHohn of the Friedrich Miescher Institutedeveloped a reliable and simple method tomeasure exposure to radiation: a geneticallymodified variant of Arabi-dop-sis thaliana or thale cress with a built-in marker gene.Radiation damage to the DNA activates thegene, which triggers changes in the colour of the leaves. These colour changes varyaccording to the extent of radioactive conta-mination. Former methods of measuring thiscontamination were more complicated andless precise.
A P l an t a s Ge i ge r Coun te r
an overview of the state of research on BSE and on
its human variant, Creutzfeld-Jacob disease, and
Michel Aguet sketched scenarios of future cancer
therapies. Barbara Hohn followed with the use of
genetics in the research on environmental influ-
ences on plants (see box). Christina Körner dis-
cussed possible consequences of the increased
CO2 contents in the atmosphere on the forest as an
ecological system, and, finally, Laurent Keller drew
parallels between the social systems of ants and
humans.
27
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
Anne t t e Oxen i u s f r om t he I n s t i t ue o f
M i c rob i o l o g y o f t he E THZ p r e sen t s
r ecen t r e su l t s i n A IDS r e sea r ch .
How does one measu re t he
rad ioac t i ve po l l u t i on p roduced by
the Tche rnoby l acc i den t?
28
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
Marco Bagg io l i n i , p res i den t o f
US I and D i v i s i on “Ta rge ted
Resea rch” o f t he NCR , opened
the con fe rence .
S c i e n za de l l a comun i ca z i one e comun i ca z i one de l l a s c i en za
The i n t e rd i s c i p l i n a r y s ympos i um o f D i v i s i on I V “ Ta r ge ted Resea r ch” ,
t ook p l a ce a t t he Un i v e r s i t à de l l a S v i z z e r a I t a l i a na (US I ) i n Lugano .
The d i s cus s i ons f o cused on t he s c i ences o f commun i ca t i on and
i n f o rma t i on on r e sea r ch r e su l t s a imed a t t he gene ra l pub l i c .
Sympos ium o f D i v i s i on IV o f the NRC, 23 October 2002, Lugano
How does science communicate with a wider audience?
Who translates the scientific language for the benefit of
the public? A wide array of specialists at the conference
attempted to answer these and other questions.
Following the welcoming address by Marco Baggiolini,
president of USI, and the introductory remarks of Heidi
Diggelmann, president of the National Research
Council, Edo Poglia, dean of the Communications
Faculty (USI) pointed out the growing importance of
communications as a discipline. Marcel Dascal, profes-
sor at Tel Aviv University, talked about the three types
of science communications: communications within
the research community, between the disciplines and
between the science world and the public.
Science communications including the media arelargely responsible for the public image of science.The conference took this into account. The conceptwas developed in cooperation with the radio andtelevision network of the Italian-speaking part ofSwitzerland (RTSI) and Rete 2 (RSI) – Radio 2 –broadcast live from the conference. An informationstand completed the presence of RTSI at the confer-ence.
During the round-table discussion, representativesof the press debated the responsibilities of the mediain scientific communication. Intensive collaborationwith the media contributed, without a doubt, to thepositive echo to the Tessin conference.
A g r ea t v a r i e t y o f o r gan i s a t i on s p ro f -
i t ed f r om t he occas i on t o p r e sen t
t hemse l v e s i n t he con tex t o f s c i ence
and commun i ca t i on s .
C l o se coope ra t i on w i t h t he med i a
29
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
The theme of the conference was also highlighted
from other perspectives than that of science.
Representatives of Ferrari, IBM, Novartis and
Mouton-de-Gruyter illustrated the pivotal role of
communications from the point of view of industry.
Professor Barone-Adesi chose finance to demon-
strate the grave consequences its communica-
tions have on the present economic situation. To
Ambassador – and journalist – Sergio Romano,
communications are a decisive weapon in politics.
He underlined his point with examples of commu-
nication techniques utilised by political actors
such as dictators and diplomats.
Meet i n g t he pub l i c
The t heme o f 1 Augus t 2002 , t he Sw i s s Na t i ona l Ho l i d a y,
was s c i ence . T he SNSF l a unched a ma j o r pub l i c r e l a t i on s
e f f o r t t o ma rk i t s ann i v e r sa r y.
In addition to a book on the history of the creation
of the SNSF and a commemorative publication
illustrating its 50 years of activity, the SNSF ran a
number of media campaigns and public relations
projects.
During the summer, the SNSF issued a series of
press releases and an edition of its Horizons mag-
azine to publicise important moments in scientific
research in Switzerland during these 50 years.
Having reviewed its past, the SNSF took advan-
tage of the country’s National Holiday – which was
also the Foundation’s 50th anniversary – to pub-
lish its plan of action for the period 2004–2007
and to present its strategy for the future to the
media. These activities met with an excellent
response in the national and international press,
particularly in the context of the “political ground-
work” being done on the Federal Council’s state-
ment on education, research and technology.
The SNSF is keen to improve the dialogue on sci-
ence and its developments and to promote critical
public opinion in Switzerland. In this context it
intends to continue promoting scientific PR.
Besides intense media-relations work, it took
advantage of its anniversary to reinforce contacts
with scientific journalists in Switzerland; these
individuals are the central players in transmitting
30
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
C ommun icat ion and pub l i c re la t i ons
Gree t i n g s f o r Be rne . I t was on l y r i g h t t ha t t he
SNSF, ba sed i n Be rne , s hou l d t u r n t he spo t l i g h t on
the f ede ra l c ap i t a l du r i n g i t s ann i v e r sa r y c e l eb ra -
t i on s . I n J une , Loeb , a ma j o r s t o r e , o f f e r ed t he
SNSF 34 me t r e s o f w i ndow d i sp l a y f o r i t s p r e sen ta -
t i on o f a b r i e f h i s t o r y o f s c i ence i n Sw i t z e r l a nd .
The federal government voted to create the SNSFin August 1952. Antoine Fleury and Frédéric Joye,two historians from Geneva, have written thestory of this birth.
At the start of the 20th century Switzerland didnot have a national scientific research organisa-tion other than the Swiss Federal Institution ofTechnology in Zurich. The federal governmentmade its first attempts to fund scientific researchin the 1930s with a programme to fight unem-ployment and get the economy going again. Thefirst attempt to establish a national organisation during the war came to nothing, and it wasn’tuntil the conflict had ended that the process ofcreating the SNSF was restarted successfully byAlexander von Muralt.
“Les débu t s de l a po l i t i q ue de r e che r che en Su i s se . H i s t o i r e de
l a c r éa t i on du Fonds na t i ona l s u i s se de l a r e che r che s c i en t i f i q ue
( 1934–1952)” ( The ea r l y da y s o f r e sea r ch po l i c y i n Sw i t z e r l a nd .
The h i s t o r y o f t he c r ea t i on o f t he SNSF, 1 934–1952) . Ob ta i nab l e
f r om : L i b r a i r i e D ro z , Geneva , www.d ro z . o r g ( F r ench v e r s i on ) /
H i e r+Je t z t Ve r l a g , Baden , www.h i e r und j e t z t . c h (Ge rman ve r s i on ) .
scientific information to the public. The SNSF
offered them a seminar which will be repeated in
the future.
In an entirely different form of PR, the SNSF organ-
ised an exhibition in the shop windows of Loeb in
Berne, showcasing some of the scientific high-
lights during the 50 years in which the SNSF has
been funding research. The federal elections, the
climate and prion research were among the topics
illustrated. Passersby were able to see at a glance
how women vote, the role played by wood in cli-
mate analysis, and the support provided by the
SNSF in developing a test to detect “mad cow dis-
ease”.
Fund i n g r e sea r ch : t he po l i t i c a l a nd e conom i c s t akes
31
20
02
TH
ES
NS
FIS
50
YE
AR
SO
LD
Hund reds o f p r e s s cu t t i n g s , do zens
o f TV p rog rammes and b roadcas t s on
na t i ona l a nd r e g i ona l r ad i o t e s t i f i e d t o
t he pos i t i v e pub l i c r e sponse t o t he
SNSF ’s ann i v e r sa r y.
Impr in t
Publisher
Sw i s s Na t i ona l S c i ence Founda t i on
Wi l dha i nweg 20 , CH -3001 Be rne
Phone +41 (0)3 1 308 22 22 , f a x +41 (0)3 1 30 1 30 09
www. sn f . c h
Editor and production
Pres s and I n f o rma t i on Se r v i c e
Ph i l i ppe Tr i n chan ( r e sp . ) , E r i k a Buche l i , An i t a Vonmon t ,
He l en J a i s l i , O l i v i e r Des s i bou r g , Ve ron i ka R i e sen
© Visual concept
Ate l i e r R i c hne r, Be rne
Design, layout and typesetting
Ate l i e r R i c hne r, Be rne
Lithos
As t + Jakob , Be rne
Paper
Cove r : B i be r A l l e g ro , wh i t e , h a l f -ma t , 2 50 gm 2
Con ten t : B i be r A l l e g ro , wh i t e , h a l f -ma t , 1 35 gm 2
Printing, binding and dispatch
S tämp f l i AG , Pub l i c a t i on s , Be rne
Provenance of illustration
Sw i s s Na t i ona l Sc i ence Founda t i on Cove r, pages 4 , 7 , 8 ,
9 , 10 , 2 0 , 2 1 , 2 4 , 2 5 , 2 6 , 2 7 , 2 8 , 2 9 , 3 0 , 3 1 H i s t o r i c a l
M u s e u m , B e r n e Page 22 H . R . B r amaz Page 24 CERN
Page 25 KEYSTONE Pages 2 1 , 22 , 23 , 27 , 3 1 L i sa
Schäub l i n Pages 6 , 28 Un i v e r s i t y o f Geneva Page 26
A l e i da A s smann Page 23 Pe te r A rmbrus te r, Bas l e r
Ze i t ung Page 23
© 2003
Sw i s s Na t i ona l S c i ence Founda t i on , Be rne
ISBN 3–907087–17–8
Schweizerischer NationalfondsFonds national suisseSwiss National Science FoundationFondo nazionale svizzero
Related Documents
