Agenda Profile: Irja Lutsar
Overview of the state of Research and Development and government policy in this field.
2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
Political Position
The most crucial issue is the vital necessity of investing in domestic science and the need to guarantee stable funding (at least 1% of GDP). The political stance strongly supports maintaining and increasing science funding, opposing proposals to cut the science budget during a crisis. The approach is policy- and value-driven, emphasizing the role of knowledge in securing the nation's existence and sustaining innovation. The position regarding the science budget is firm and protective.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
Profound expertise in science funding systems (small vs. large grants, core funding), researcher career models, and the daily challenges encountered in scientific work. Uses specific terminology ("knowledge transfer," "core funding") and provides examples of the role of science during crises (COVID-19, the energy debate). Emphasizes the superiority of evidence-based decisions over emotion-driven ones.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The tone of the speech is factual, analytical, and convincingly logical, emphasizing the superiority of knowledge-based decisions over those rooted in emotion. It uses examples from recent crises and the daily lives of scientists (grant writing, failures) to support its arguments. The style is formal and focuses on problem-solving, while simultaneously warning about the danger of scientists leaving.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Insufficient data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism is aimed at the government and decision-makers proposing cuts to science funding, which sends alarming signals throughout the scientific community. Opposition is also focused on excessive bureaucracy (reports, public procurement, permits) and the current grant system, which leaves many researchers unfunded. The criticism is both procedural and policy-based, centered on issues of inefficiency.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Recognition is given to the efforts of previous governments in achieving science funding goals, pointing to a certain consistency in policy. Cooperation with scientists and physician-scientists is also emphasized, and the speaker conveys their concerns and proposals (e.g., the need for small grants).
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is heavily placed on the national level (Estonia, being a small country, must use its wits) and the international level (the movement of researchers and EU requirements). It is stressed that the entire world is open to scientists, meaning Estonia must compete fiercely to retain talent.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
It advocates for robust public investment in science (1% of GDP) as the foundation for economic viability and innovation, essential for training qualified specialists. It criticizes the funding system, which operates on an "all or nothing" principle, and calls for reduced bureaucracy to save scientists' time.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
It focuses on retaining scientists and specialists in Estonia, emphasizing the need to provide them with job security, recognition, and good working conditions to prevent the emigration of the "best and brightest." Research is seen as a prerequisite for domestic higher education and the training of specialists.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main focus is on reforming the science funding system ("another stocktake"), including bringing back small grants and increasing core funding. There is also a call for reducing bureaucracy regarding public procurement and reporting, specifically by avoiding the gold-plating of EU requirements.
1 Speeches Analyzed