Nataliia Zinevych , Olha Kaida , Roman Kabachii , Roman Horbyk , Anna Anakumova , Olha Zhmurko , Mykhailo Miskun , Larysa Yrkha-Zvarun
Currently, we are at an existential point in survival of our sector and our country. However, possibly for the first time, our problems are of interest to the outside world, which is rediscovering Ukraine.
Science in Ukraine is in the greatest crisis of the century in the conditions of an unprecedented war and humanitarian catastrophe. The functioning of science in general, scientific organizations and scientists in such extreme conditions is associated with many risks. They fundamentally disrupted the usual procedure of scientific activity and pose a threat to the lives of Ukrainian scientists.
This is exacerbated by numerous pre-existing problems of insufficient funding of Ukrainian science, scientists being forced to barely get by, as well as ineffective, inconsistent and incomplete attempts of institutional reforms. There is not enough clear interaction and cooperation with international organizations.
Expertise on preserving science in crisis is developed by individual institutions, essentially under fire — it is important to communicate this anti-crisis experience to the world scientific community and reflect on the experiences of other countries that can be emulated.
Now is the time to start working towards a relaunch of the Ukrainian science after the war.
Ukrainian science needs high-quality communication, that is, one that would clearly outline its boundaries, possibilities and limitations, sincere communication. This is possible only if communication is carried out while maintaining Ukraine’s agency. It is critical to tell the world stories about Ukrainian science and Ukrainian expertise. Currently, this task is assigned not to the designated ministry, not to the international departments of universities and research institutes, but to the Ukrainian Institute under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as one of many facets of cultural diplomacy.
The most successful practices of communication support for reforms in Ukraine and the world have not been analyzed.
Attitudes and stereotypes about Ukrainian science have not been identified.
Institutional support tools have not been developed, there are no models of how to do it.
No tools or practical recommendations for scientist groups have been collected.
The state should adapt more flexibly and use international institutional Science at Risk networks.