Although we are in just the fourth year of existence of the National Institute for Cancer Research (NICR), it is the last year of financing of the project period. The partners have promised to guarantee its sustainability for at least another three years, but the sources of financing are not yet clear, neither at the level of individual partners, nor at the level of the state. This is not just an issue of a continued existence of the research teams but above all a problem for sustainability of the entire structure and the joint activities that started thanks to NICR. And it is quite clear that activities such as summer schools, congresses, and collaboration with patient organisations or secondary school students (potential future scientists) cannot be realised by individual teams without a central support.
The NICR project was launched in 2021 with the aim of interconnecting leading institutions that focus on cancer research both at universities and within the Czech Academy of Sciences (CAS) and in order to boost the visibility and internationalisation of our academic oncology and support the development of this area. This project, which in a competition won financing within the Excellence call of the EU, had led to the creation of a large network of over 70 scientific teams. Although it is only in the fourth year of its existence, one can already point to remarkable results of numerous teams involved and a stable consolidation of most of the participating groups into a (within the Czech Republic unique) integrated structure with a large potential. The success of NICR has been recognised not only on the national level but also by an international evaluation body, the International Supervisory and Advisory Board (ISAB), which in its evaluation reports regularly confirms the progress achieved in terms of results, philosophy, and strategy of the entire consortium. The ISAB is also very rational and critical, and its reports show a clear insight into the contribution of the individual groups and partners.
For future competitiveness of Czech science
Along with the NICR, four other ‘distributed’ national institutes were created in the Czech Republic thanks to European sources from the National Recovery Plan, namely NIVB, NEURIN, SYRI and CarDia. The approach based on the creation of networks of academic competence within a particular area had shown that integration of basic, applied, and translational research brings advantages which go over and above what a mere sum of the participating institutions could deliver. In view of these experiences, four of the five abovementioned national institutes have already agreed on a memorandum on collaboration, which not only supports effective interdisciplinary scientific cooperation but also creates space for mutual inspiration, for instance in terms of good practice in addressing administrative challenges, which are in research environment rather common and complex.
NICR has a direct impact on future experts (bachelor, master, and doctoral students) and future senior lecturers and professors active in cancer research. One of the key aspects of NICR’s success has been its ability to attract and motivate young talents, both Czech and international ones. Sustainability of NICR is therefore crucial not only for research but also for the education and further training of future experts. If we do not support the professional development of both young and established researchers, we risk their demotivation, stagnation, and generally loss of competitiveness of Czech science. By the way, at meetings of the Board of NICR, which oversees its individual research programmes, one can also sometimes hear traditionally Czech but unfortunately experience-based views along the lines of ‘They are once again trying to figure out how to appoint the resources and they will once again come up with something just for the sake of using the resources and having them in the accounting.’ I will not go into who the notorious ‘they’ are, but it is quite clear that to keep pace with international standards and in order to at least a little suppress our traditional national scepticism, we need to create and maintain a stable long-term structure comprehensible for researchers across age categories and geographical locations.
For the future reputation of the Czech Republic
The NICR project is fully in line with the objectives defined in national strategic documents such as the National Policy of Research, Development, and Innovation or the RIS3 strategy. And it is in line with priorities set by the Czech government for the future of research. It would be therefore difficult to justify, factually and politically, why an institute created in line with the strict demands of the call and the provider should be ‘disbanded’ after just four years of existence during which it has established itself as a highly effective and productive structure. Such step would be counterproductive both for cancer research and for the reputation of Czech science in general. It would send a bad message about our ability and will to rationally organise science within the Czech scientific ecosystem.
If we cannot provide support for NICR, we risk the loss of a large part of the results it has achieved. The responsibility for sustainability of NICR and the four abovementioned ‘distributed’ national institutes rests not only on the scientific community and the quality of its outputs but also on the quality of managerial support of their partners and on the state institutions. Now is the time to take crucial decisions in order to secure stability and further development of the entire system. We should not waste this opportunity, because otherwise, one could only say après nous, le déluge…
Aleksi Šedo, Director of NICR