Academy of Sciences Malaysia at 30: A true shaper of our future, or mere commentator? — Ahmad Ibrahim

JUNE 27 — As the Academy of Sciences Malaysia (ASM) marks its 30th anniversary this year, it’s worth pausing to ask: has it truly become the change maker it aspired to be?

From an inaugural cohort of 50 distinguished Fellows to a current membership exceeding 500, ASM’s growth is undeniable.

Its ambition to position itself as the nation’s foremost science thought leader, however, remains a work in progress — both promising and fraught with challenges.

A champion of thought leadership?

In its early years, ASM was envisioned as a high-level, non-partisan body providing independent, science-based advice to the government and society.

Its founding principles mirrored those of national academies in advanced economies: a sanctuary for scientific intellect, an honest broker in policy deliberations, and a custodian of national scientific direction.

To its credit, ASM has produced landmark policy studies, convened dialogues on pressing issues such as water management, energy security, food sustainability, and climate resilience, and provided input for national policies like the 10-10 Malaysian Science, Technology, Innovation, and Economy (MySTIE) Framework.

In recent years, ASM’s push for circular economy discourse and emphasis on sustainability science are encouraging signs of a body striving to remain relevant in a volatile and rapidly transforming global landscape.

Yet, one must ask — has ASM succeeded in embedding itself into the nation’s decision-making DNA? Or has it been more of a boutique advisory institution, heard selectively and conveniently by policymakers when alignment suits?

The challenges that linger

Despite its achievements, ASM faces several structural and operational challenges if it is to claim — and sustain — the mantle of a true change maker.

One is about maintaining independence in a politicised environment. The Malaysian policy ecosystem has, for decades, been characterised by the politicisation of expertise.

The risk for any government-linked body is the temptation to play it safe.

ASM must guard its independence vigorously, ensuring its advice remains evidence-based, candid, and unafraid to challenge the status quo — even when politically inconvenient.

Bridging science and society is a challenge. While ASM has been relatively successful in engaging the government, its footprint among the Malaysian public remains modest.

In an era where misinformation and pseudoscience spread rapidly, a thought leader must also be a public educator. ASM must broaden its outreach, becoming a household name associated with credible, accessible science communication, especially on controversial issues like climate change, vaccines, and emerging technologies.

ASM must invest in storytelling — framing science not as abstract, elite knowledge, but as a lived, daily experience that touches livelihoods, aspirations, and fears of ordinary Malaysians. — Picture by Unsplash/Takashi Miyazaki

Funding and talent sustainability continue to be a concern. Sustainable, apolitical funding remains a chronic issue for most academies in developing countries.

ASM must diversify its revenue base, perhaps through partnerships, endowments, and commissioned studies, to maintain operational independence and attract top-tier, diverse expertise beyond the conventional academic establishment.

Reinventing for the next generation remains an important agenda. The Academy’s Fellow demographic still skews towards senior academics, many of whom have spent careers in public universities.

While their experience is invaluable, ASM must actively create pathways for young, diverse voices — including social scientists, technologists, entrepreneurs, and civic scientists — to shape national discourse.

Many agree ASM should become a convenor of difficult conversations.

Moving forward, Malaysia’s biggest challenges — from energy transition to artificial intelligence ethics to food security — demand interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral deliberations.

ASM is uniquely positioned to convene these difficult, and often contentious, conversations. But it must be prepared to navigate political sensitivities, institutional inertia, and public scepticism.

The path forward

The time is ripe for ASM to reimagine its role not just as an advisor, but as a national conscience for science, technology, and innovation.

Its next chapter should see it adopting a more activist stance: proactively setting national agendas, identifying blind spots in policy, and mobilising scientific communities towards socially inclusive outcomes.

ASM must also invest in storytelling — framing science not as abstract, elite knowledge, but as a lived, daily experience that touches livelihoods, aspirations, and fears of ordinary Malaysians.

Only then can it earn the trust capital needed to be a genuine change maker.

In marking its 30th year, ASM stands at a strategic crossroads. It has history, credibility, and a platform.

Whether it evolves into a bold, independent, and people-centred academy, or remains a polite policy appendage, depends on its willingness to embrace discomfort, dissent, and diversity in pursuit of national progress.

That, ultimately, will decide if ASM will shape Malaysia’s future — or merely comment on it. At the end of the day, ASM must strive to deliver its tagline, Think Science, Celebrate Technology and Inspire Innovation.

* Prof Datuk Dr Ahmad Ibrahim is affiliated with the Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies at UCSI University and is an associate fellow at the Ungku Aziz Centre for Development Studies, Universiti Malaya.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.