In a country where institutional support for scientific platforms is often inconsistent, Kerala’s commitment to an annual science congress is genuinely commendable (Illustration: Gireesh)
The Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (KSCSTE) deserves credit for sustaining this flagship gathering without interruption since its inception in 1989. By: TV Sajeev Keralam’s flagship science gathering is straining under its own monolithic format—it must evolve from a centralised mega-event into a network of specialised, discipline-led conclaves When the century-old Indian Science Congress quietly disintegrated in recent years, weighed down by organisational lethargy, political controversies and an erosion of scientific credibility, it marked the unceremonious end of what was once the subcontinent’s premier academic gathering. That the Kerala Science Congress has not only survived this national collapse but is now preparing for its 39th edition is a remarkable testament to the state’s enduring scientific ethos. For nearly four decades, while other regional and national platforms faltered, KSCSTE has preserved the Congress as an annual forum for young researchers, university faculty and postgraduate students to present their work. In a country where institutional support for scientific platforms is often inconsistent, Kerala’s commitment to an annual science congress is genuinely commendable. Yet survival alone cannot become an excuse for complacency. The continued existence of the Kerala Science Congress, even as the Indian Science Congress has disappeared, is a triumph of institutional persistence. But it also places a greater responsibility on Kerala’s scientific leadership. An uncomfortable question must now be asked: Has the format of the Kerala Science Congress itself become archaic?
Because of KSCSTE’s institutional commitment, the Kerala Science Congress has survived. By adopting a decentralised, discipline-focused model for its 39th edition, the Kerala Science Congress can ensure that science does more than showcase its achievements—it can actively shape the state’s development agenda. (The writer is chief scientist, Kerala Forest Research Institute) You Can Also Check: Gold Rate in Kochi | Silver Rate in Kochi | Bank Holidays in Kochi | Public Holidays in Kochi Stay updated with the latest Kochi news. Has the annual gathering devolved into a ritualistic mega-fair that exhausts organizational energy while delivering diminishing academic and policy returns? To ensure that the upcoming 39th Kerala Science Congress becomes an engine of transformative change rather than a repetitive calendar exercise, we must confront the structural weaknesses of its current model and embrace a bold, decentralized architecture. The anatomy of an archaic model The traditional structure of the Kerala Science Congress was designed for an era when the scientific community was smaller, and communication channels were limited. The most glaring drawback is the overwhelming logistical burden. Organizing accommodation, meals, registration, and intra-city transit for thousands of delegates places immense strain on the host institution and organizing committees. Vast amounts of intellectual energy and administrative manpower are consumed by managing catering logistics and transport schedules rather than curating high-quality scientific discourse. Furthermore, the academic programme has become fragmented. In the rush to accommodate hundreds of papers across parallel sessions, disparate subdisciplines are routinely lumped together despite limited comparability. A researcher presenting work on molecular immunology might find themselves sharing a brief slot with a study on macro-invertebrate taxonomy, leaving little room for rigorous, comparable peer review or meaningful technical critique. Discussions inevitably remain hurried, superficial, and constrained by tight schedules. Another concern is the disproportionate emphasis on ceremonial pomp. Considerable institutional effort often goes into VIP protocols and securing high-profile political inaugurations. Once the inaugural speeches are over and dignitaries leave, however, the academic proceedings often loses much of their momentum. Sessions intended to facilitate interaction with postgraduate students can similarly become formal exercises rather than opportunities for sustained mentoring. Perhaps the most critical failure of the current design is the absence of policy translation. Every year, expert panels draft well-meaning recommendations, yet there exists no structured process to monitor, evaluate, or enforce their implementation within state planning, allowing crucial insights to dissolve until the next Congress convenes. A decentralised, discipline-led Congress The Kerala Science Congress should move away from its monolithic structure towards a decentralised, discipline-focused model. Instead of bringing every scientific field together in one crowded venue, the Congress could be organised in two coordinated phases. In the first phase, major scientific disciplines could hold dedicated three-day conclaves at leading institutions with expertise in those areas. Life sciences and biotechnology could be hosted by specialised biological research institutions; physical and chemical sciences by leading university departments; engineering and computational sciences by technical institutions; and agricultural sciences by agricultural universities and research campuses. Such discipline-specific conclaves would allow researchers to present their work before genuine peers. Sessions could be organised around narrower subdisciplines, providing more time for technical discussion, peer evaluation, collaboration and mentoring of young researchers. The smaller and more specialised format would also allow institutions to focus resources on academic quality rather than large-scale logistics. The Congress could simultaneously expand its public outreach. Memorial lectures honouring eminent scientists could be organised at colleges across different districts during the conclave period. This would take science beyond the main venues and encourage wider participation among students and the public. Each disciplinary conclave should also be required to produce a concise set of evidence-based recommendations identifying research priorities and addressing pressing policy challenges in that field. In the second phase, following the conclusion of all discipline-wise sessions, a focused, one-day central event should be held in Thiruvananthapuram. This culminating event would replace logistical chaos with governance impact by having the consolidated recommendations from all disciplines presented directly before top govt officials and the chief minister. Presenting discipline-specific policy recommendations directly to administrative decisionmakers would also help bridge the persistent gap between scientific research and state governance. Distributing sessions across institutions in different parts of Kerala would widen participation among researchers and students, making the state’s premier scientific platform more accessible and inclusive. The Indian Science Congress collapsed after remaining tethered to an outdated model that prioritised spectacle over substance. To honour that legacy, Kerala must now demonstrate how a regional scientific congress can reinvent itself as an agile, relevant and policy-oriented institution. Download the TOI App.
Today, attempting to pack every branch of modern inquiry—from genomics and nanotechnology to agrarian systems and civil engineering—into a single three-day event in one host city has created insurmountable bottlenecks.
It would also host the state-level research prize distributions and young scientist awards. Crucially, this new framework must institute a structured follow-up mechanism, wherein the recommendations from each discipline are documented and their implementation status is formally reviewed at the next year’s Science Congress, ensuring continuous accountability. Quality over quantity The advantages of such a structural overhaul are substantial. Decentralising the sessions would ease the logistical pressure on a single host city, allowing participating institutions to devote their resources to academic quality rather than the demands of managing a large gathering. Smaller, discipline-focused sessions would put quality ahead of quantity, enabling deeper technical scrutiny, meaningful academic exchange and more valuable feedback for young researchers.