ecological and political costs of river diversion

Sir — Reading the Commentary “Culturalreflections” by Mu-ming Poo, on thesubject of Chinese science (Nature 428,204; 2004), I was struck by the similaritiesbetween science in China and in India.

Poo concludes that mediocrity inChinese science should be attributed tocultural factors such as conformity andrespect for authority, rather than to pureeconomics. India, like other Asiancountries, is at a crossroads. It is time forthese countries to free themselves from the burden of their past and to develop amodern structural framework for fosteringoriginal scientific research.

Both India and China are emerging intomodernity. Each has a booming urbaneconomy (with vast problems in the ruralareas) and India’s gross domestic product(GDP) has suddenly increased in recentyears, thanks to liberalization and privateentrepreneurship. India’s overall funding inbasic research has also improved, and nowit is 1.2% of GDP.

Yet although India has a considerablenumber of scientists, it cannot be countedas a major world player in basic sciences,

notwithstanding its performance in spaceand nuclear technologies.

Not a single recent issue of CurrentScience, India’s premier science journal,has appeared without at least one critiqueof India’s performance in basic sciences, forexample concluding that India and Chinaface very similar problems (P. BalaramCurr. Sci. 86, 755–756; 2004).

Twenty years ago, John Maddox wrote,about science in India, “Among developingnations, India has by far the best chance ofsucceeding” (Nature 308, 581–584; 1984).However, he also wrote, “India has setambitious goals for science and technology— self-reliance and the relief of poverty.Some great things have been accomplished,but much effort is frustrated.”

The Pakistani physicist and Nobellaureate Abdus Salam has been quoted assaying during a visit to India in 1981, “Nota drop … has been added by India andother developing countries to ‘the pool ofworld knowledge’,” (H. Narain Curr. Sci.65, 739–742; 1993).

I believe that nothing much haschanged during the intervening years.

correspondence

NATURE | VOL 429 | 3 JUNE 2004 | www.nature.com/nature 501

Why cannot India and China, two Asiangiants, break the mediocrity barrier, despitetheir strong fundamentals?

Culture is a major impediment, as Poopoints out. Although India is a democracy,the Asian tradition of respecting authorityand hierarchy remains strong in oursociety, spawning conformity andnepotism. Creativity in science can befostered only in a free and unfetteredintellectual environment.

Cultural shifts take time. Meanwhile, Ibelieve structural changes can help thesefast-developing Asian countries to achievemore in terms of high-impact scientificresearch, whatever the level of investment.

Starting with universities and othercentres of higher learning, such measuresshould include introducing innovativecourses in basic sciences at post-graduatelevels (in India, the institutes of technologyare a good place to start) and fosteringbetter links between research organizationsand industries.C. P. Rajendran Centre for Earth Science Studies, Akkulam,Trivandrum 695031, India

Ecological and politicalcosts of river diversionSir — In the Commentary “Agriculture of the future” (Nature 428, 215; 2004),T. C. Tso discusses the problems faced byChina’s agricultural sector and suggestsseveral possible approaches to the problemof feeding the world’s largest population.We support many of the suggestedsolutions, such as reducing farmers’ costs,providing more funds for agriculturalresearch and adopting new techniques toimprove agricultural products.

However, we strongly oppose Tso’sproposal to divert water from southwestChina to its northern and eastern areas,especially the idea of diverting water fromthe ‘big U-turn’ of the Yarlung Zangboriver in Tibet.

The ‘big U-turn’ is located in thegeologically fragile region of the Himalayamountains where the Indian Plate meetsthe Eurasian Plate. The problems ofgeologic instability and frequent landslidesalone are enough to make any hugehydraulic projects difficult or evenimpossible. Additionally, the YarlungZangbo is an international river, passingthrough China, India and Bangladesh. Adiversion project will undoubtedly changethe hydrological conditions, especially the

volume of water available to the lowercountries, and is likely to cause aninternational dispute. Moreover, the ‘bigU-turn’ is located in one of the world’sbiodiversity hotspots. Tso’s proposedwater-diversion project would irreversiblydamage the ecosystems of the world’sdeepest and longest canyon, particularlythe aquatic fauna.

Finally, we believe that China’s waterproblems would be best addressed by theadoption of sound water planning andmanagement, water conservation andefficient irrigation techniques — not bylarge-scale diversions.Anping Chen*, Changdu Chen†*Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology,Princeton University, Princeton,New Jersey 08544-1003, USA†Department of Ecology, Peking University,Beijing 100871, China

Turing’s war work countsfor more than computersSir — John L. Casti, in his fine review ofAlan Turing: Life and Legacy of a GreatThinker, edited by Christof Teuscher(“Touring artificial minds” Nature 428,258; 2004), proposes that Turing had moreimpact on everyday life than the man

named by Time magazine as Person of theCentury, Albert Einstein (Time 154, 27;1999). Casti suggests that Turing’s 1936paper provided the “theoretical backbone”for all computers to come.

Although Turing, a hero of mine,certainly was one of the greatest, we shouldkeep in mind that his paper essentially justelegantly rephrased Kurt Gödel’s 1931results and Alonzo Church’s extensionthereof. It did not have any impact on theconstruction of the first working program-controlled computer. That was made inBerlin by Konrad Zuse in 1935–1941 andwas driven by practical considerations, nottheoretical ones.

In fact, the greatest impact that AlanTuring made on daily life was probablythrough his contribution to cracking the Enigma code, used by the Germanmilitary during the Second World War,which is sometimes cited as a decisiveevent of the war.Jürgen SchmidhuberDalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence(IDSIA), Galleria 2, 6928 Manno-Lugano,Switzerland

correspondenceContributions to Correspondence may be submitted to corres@nature.com. They should be no longerthan 500 words, and ideally shorter. Published contributions are edited.

Cultural weight dragging at Asian giants’ feetScientific progress is impeded by a tradition of conformity and respect for authority.

3.6 correspondence 501 MH 28/5/04 4:20 pm Page 501

© 2004 Nature Publishing Group