Kuala lumpur: 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.
According to BERNAMA News Agency, ASM was envisioned in its early years as a high-level, non-partisan body providing independent, science-based advice to the government and society. The 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. ASM has produced landmark policy studies and convened dialogues on pressing issues such as water management, energy security, food sustainability, and climate resilience. It has also 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 global landscape. Yet, questions linger about ASM’s success in embedding itself into the nation’s decision-making DNA. Has it been more of a boutique advisory institution, heard selectively and conveniently by policymakers when alignment suits?
ASM faces several structural and operational challenges if it is to claim-and sustain-the mantle of a true change maker. One challenge is maintaining independence in a politicised environment. The Malaysian policy ecosystem has long been characterised by the politicisation of expertise. ASM must guard its independence vigorously, ensuring its advice remains evidence-based and unafraid to challenge the status quo-even when politically inconvenient.
Furthermore, bridging science and society is another challenge. While ASM has been relatively successful in engaging the government, its footprint among the Malaysian public remains modest. In an era where misinformation spreads rapidly, ASM must broaden its outreach and become a household name associated with credible, accessible science communication, especially on controversial issues like climate change and emerging technologies.
Funding and talent sustainability are ongoing concerns. ASM must diversify its revenue base through partnerships, endowments, and commissioned studies to maintain operational independence and attract diverse expertise beyond the conventional academic establishment. Reinventing for the next generation is also crucial. The Academy’s Fellow demographic still skews towards senior academics. ASM must create pathways for young, diverse voices to shape national discourse.
Looking forward, ASM is uniquely positioned to convene interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral deliberations on Malaysia’s biggest challenges, such as energy transition and food security. It must navigate political sensitivities and public scepticism.
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: setting national agendas, identifying policy blind spots, and mobilising scientific communities towards socially inclusive outcomes. ASM must invest in storytelling, framing science as a lived, daily experience that touches the lives of ordinary Malaysians.
In marking its 30th year, ASM stands at a strategic crossroads. 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. Ultimately, ASM must strive to deliver its tagline, Think Science, Celebrate Technology and Inspire Innovation.