Agenda Profile: Margit Sutrop

The speaker strongly supports the government’s commitment to the 1% R&D agreement, but sharply criticizes the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications’ (MKM) plan to establish a new applied research center. This center, they argue, would duplicate the work of universities and compete for scarce resources. The political focus must be directed toward increasing funding for science and higher education and resolving structural issues, such as academic succession and the regulation of research ethics. The speaker stresses the necessity of increasing actual public sector R&D funding, which they estimate stands at 0.7% of GDP, rather than the statistically calculated 1%.

The speaker demonstrates profound expertise in the field of science policy and science statistics, citing data from Essential Science Indicators (ESI), referencing academics (Allik, Lauk, Tamm), and mentioning specific scientific disciplines (medicine, genetics, economics). He/She uses data to illustrate Estonia's scientific productivity (4th place globally by citation count) and the problem of the aging academic staff. Special emphasis is placed on the necessity of developing artificial intelligence (AI) and social sciences (including educational science).

The speech is formal, analytical, and heavily data-driven, balancing praise for the top achievements of Estonian science with a tone of concern regarding structural issues. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on statistics and expert citations, and direct questions are posed to the prime minister. The style is academically precise, utilizing technical terminology (e.g., base funding, ALLEA code).

All speeches took place on a single day (2024-01-23) during the Riigikogu session, indicating participation in the discussion of a specific agenda item. The speaker refers to previous events, such as the science policy conference held in the Riigikogu in October 2023.

The criticism is directed at the political decision made by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications (MKM) to establish an applied research center based on Metrosert, a move that jeopardizes the human resources of universities. Furthermore, the speaker expresses a differing opinion from the President of the Academy of Sciences regarding the selection of the scientific ethics code, favoring the Estonian Code of Good Scientific Practice over the ALLEA code. The criticism is rooted in policy and procedure.

The speaker emphasizes cooperation and consensus, highlighting the universities' gratitude to the government for fulfilling the 1% research agreement. He also refers to the unanimity between members of the Riigikogu and researchers regarding the use of artificial intelligence in establishing Estonia's competitive advantage.

The focus is distinctly national and international, centering on the global competitiveness of Estonian science and drawing comparisons with other nations (Iceland, Singapore, Panama, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland, Sweden). There is no emphasis placed on specific local or regional projects.

The speaker strongly supports increasing public sector spending on science and higher education to ensure economic growth and competitiveness. He/She notes as a positive development the growing contribution of the private sector (especially information and communication companies) to R&D, but criticizes the government's budgetary accounting, which distorts the actual level of public sector R&D funding.

The main social concern is the aging of academic staff and the lack of new talent, emphasizing that only 30% of academic employees are under the age of 40. He/She directly links the funding of educational research to teacher satisfaction and the simplification of their work, referencing PISA studies and ongoing strikes.

The most important legislative priority is the adoption of the new Law on the Organization of Research and Development and Innovation (TAIKS). This law should streamline the network of research institutions and address the question of the national organization of ethics committees, regarding which the speaker prefers light regulation. The speaker is a strong supporter of the initiation and adoption of the law.