A Crisis in Science: Bureaucracy, Disrespect, and the Marginalisation of Researchers in Bangladesh
Dr. Md. Shaifur Rahman :
Founded in 1973 to drive national development through peaceful nuclear technology, the Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC) inherited a legacy of research that began in the then East Pakistan in 1962—an era when atomic energy commissions in South Asia, notably in India and Pakistan, rose to become elite institutions under the direct authority of their Prime Ministers.
These bodies gained global acclaim, with their scientists honored as national icons.
Yet, in stark contrast, Bangladesh’s post-independence leadership subjected BAEC to bureaucratic subordination under shifting ministries—first Energy, then Education, and now Science and Technology—rather than granting it the strategic autonomy it deserved.
This foreign-influenced policy direction not only diminished the institutional prestige of BAEC but also reflected a troubling disregard for scientific leadership in shaping the country’s future.
Today, the BAEC remains Bangladesh’s foremost institution for nuclear science research and services, staffed by some of the nation’s brightest minds—individuals who consistently top university merit lists and excel across academic milestones.
Despite limited funding and outdated equipment, these humble, publicity-shy scientists have worked with quiet dedication for over five decades, enduring neglect and bureaucratic hurdles. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear-capable states—should Bangladesh not aspire to a similar stature?
For the sake of our future generations, we must commit to building a secure and enlightened nation—one where intellectual courage, advanced scientific knowledge, and enduring human values allow us to stand tall for centuries to come. Science knows no boundaries. Scientists engage in research for the collective welfare of humanity.
Every major discovery in the world has resulted from cumulative efforts by the global scientific community. However, the way of application of scientific discoveries is not the responsibility of scientists alone.
Rather, it depends on a nation’s technological and economic capacity, as well as the vision and mindset of its policymakers.
For instance, over the past two decades, China has not been the originator of many groundbreaking discoveries. Yet it has risen to the forefront of global advancement by effectively utilising scientific knowledge generated elsewhere.
This remarkable progress was made possible by freeing scientists from bureaucratic harassment and by implementing policies focused on modern science and technology.
Bangladesh has long suffered from a systemic disregard and institutional neglect toward fundamental research and scientific publication. This stems largely from an inability to appreciate the long-term benefits of science and technology, coupled with chronic budgetary constraints for research.
Despite these challenges, scientists within the BAEC have made significant contributions, publishing hundreds of articles in internationally recognized journals and developed innovations such as Juton, the biodegradable Sonali Bag, automated radio-Tm99 production, and ISO-certified methods for Wilson’s disease detection.
BAEC scientists have expertly supervised hundreds of Master’s, MPhil, and PhD theses each year, with their graduates now holding esteemed positions around the world.
Yet bureaucratic inertia continues to block these advances from benefiting the public—ironically gaining more interest abroad than at home. A question: Since independence, has any government in Bangladesh developed and implemented short- or long-term science and technology policies that align with the country’s needs?
What percentage of the GDP has truly been allocated to science and technology? Beyond colonial-era bureaucratic harassment, how much genuine respect and institutional support have university faculty and researchers received?
A particularly troubling practice is the oversight of PhD and postdoctoral researchers by bureaucrats, often from unrelated fields. This is not only absurd but also indicative of a deeply unhealthy institutional mindset.
In the past 15 years, postdoctoral scholars and PhD holders have been appointed as election officers, assigned duties far removed from their lab—often under duress, simply because they are perceived as “soft-spoken,” “polite,” or “harmless.”
This exploitation of intellectual capital has left lasting psychological scars and led to a shameful waste of national talent.
Rather than supporting cutting-edge scientific research, ministries have often used scientists merely to implement infrastructure projects—essentially reducing them to construction supervisors.
The underlying message: “Be a mason, not a scientist.” This is a system where a junior scientist, despite being a Fulbright or JSPS fellow researching nuclear waste management or regenerative cranial implants from iPS cells, faces obstruction.
International collaborations, even when fully funded by prestigious organizations like the NIH, are routinely blocked by administrative red tape. This is not governance—it is suppression. Critics argue that these 2 scientists were educated abroad on the state’s dime.
In truth, BAEC provides essential, life-saving services at minimal cost: nuclear medicine, radiation therapy, food irradiation testing, cancer diagnostics, bone and cranial grafts, and much more.
Over 20 nuclear medicine centers under BAEC benefit thousands of patients with cancer, thyroid disease, and burn injuries—at rates 15 to 20 times cheaper than in Western countries. These services extend from elite hospitals in the capital to remote government clinics.
Were BAEC to prioritize profit, it could generate millions in revenue—but it chooses instead to prioritize public health. Sadly, even many policymakers remain unaware of this infrastructure made and run by BAEC, mistaking these centers as being under the Ministry of Health.
Despite all odds, Bangladesh’s scientists remain committed to serving the nation. They are striving to build a modern, science-based country—free from bureaucratic interference. Through the most disciplined and peaceful protest in their history, they are showing that protest need not take to the streets. They are not against the state; they are its greatest allies.
The time has come for the state, for policymakers, university faculty, journalists, and citizens alike to ask: Are we truly valuing science and technology? Or are we merely chanting slogans while our future slips away?
The future of Bangladesh hinges on our ability to empower our scientific community and allow them to reach their full potential. This is a call to action—for all to rally together and create a future where science and technology can thrive. Let us not look back in regret when it is too late to change the course of our nation’s destiny. And then, as always, we will lament: “We failed to recognize our best minds—until it was too late.”
(The author is a Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Researcher, Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission.)
