It will not be this time that a woman will assume the Scientific Directorate of the São Paulo State Research Foundation (Fapesp). Agricultural engineer Marcio de Castro Silva Filho, in the position since April 2023, was appointed for a new three-year term by decree published this Wednesday (11). He headed the shortlist submitted by the Fapesp Superior Council to Governor Tarcísio de Freitas, which also included the name of chemical engineer Ana Maria Frattini Fileti, the first woman to be nominated, and physicist Luiz Nunes de Oliveira. “I remain happy at Unicamp,” says Frattini, who will complete two years at the head of the Pro-Rectorate for Research (PRP) of the University in April.
Frattini's connection with Unicamp is long-standing: it dates back to the first half of the 1980s, when the now-full professor at the Faculty of Chemical Engineering (FEQ) became a student at the Campinas Technical College (Cotuca). It was there, at Cotuca, that the then-young student discovered her inclination towards the industrial sector. "I realized, while interning at a soft drink factory, that I wanted to work in mechanical or chemical engineering," she recalls. "I didn't want to be restricted to the food industry, which was the area of my technical course. Even as a teenager, it was a very lucid choice."
Frattini began her journey at FEQ as an undergraduate student. Although there were few women in her class, she felt comfortable among her colleagues and professors. "I didn't see any hostility within the academy," she says. In the industries where she did internships, however, the situation was quite different. "The environments were very masculine. This was never a problem for me, but there was a lack of respect and trust. In contacts with suppliers, they always thought I was the engineer's secretary."
The difficulties faced during her internships led Frattini to choose to remain at FEQ after graduating. She enrolled in a master's program and then a doctoral program, during which she developed software for controlling chemical processes based on artificial intelligence – something so new at the time that some journals hesitated to publish the results of her work. "The journals asked me to explain why I hadn't used classical mathematics," she recalls.
Daughter and niece of professors from the traditional Campinas school Culto à Ciência, Frattini had never considered following in her father's and aunt's footsteps, but ended up developing a taste for the art of transmitting knowledge during her postgraduate studies. She took a competitive exam, passed, and became a professor at FEQ. Her research in artificial intelligence quickly attracted the attention of industries interested in increasing the efficiency of their production processes. "The status of professor at Unicamp gave legitimacy to my work," she says.
Frattini has developed numerous projects in partnership with companies over the past decades, which have resulted in patents and technology licensing agreements for Unicamp, as well as internal and external recognition for the professor. Honored with the 2020 Petrobras Inventor Award for developing an ultrasonic system for monitoring two-phase flows in industrial processes, she was invited the following year to take on the role of executive director of Unicamp's Innovation Agency (Inova), a position she left in April 2024 to assume leadership of PRP.
In this interview with Journal of UnicampFrattini outlines the national science, technology, and innovation system, recounts her experiences in university administration, and explains how the presence of women in leadership positions in academia can contribute to increasing female participation in research.
Journal of Unicamp (JU) - Based on her experience as CEO of Inova and her long career Regarding the history of research partnerships with the productive sector, what is your assessment of... What is the Brazilian system of science, technology, and innovation?
Ana Frattini – Brazil consistently ranks between 11th and 15th in international scientific production rankings. However, in innovation rankings, the country falls to 50th place. This means we are failing to convert scientific research into innovation for industry or society. Unicamp stands apart from other Brazilian universities in terms of its contact with companies (public or private), even when considering only the reality of São Paulo, a state unlike any other. Because of the extensive university-business trust built over the years, contact here is much more intense. We transfer 25 to 35 technologies per year. That's no small feat. This is an example of effective collaboration towards achieving the country's technological sovereignty.
JU – Why is Unicamp so far ahead of other Brazilian universities in innovation indicators?
Ana Frattini – For a long time, the pressure on universities was to produce scientific publications, in addition to training human resources. Now, there is an understanding in society that producing articles or any other written material is fundamental, but not sufficient. People want the knowledge generated in academia to help improve their lives and solve regional problems, such as social inequality, and global problems, such as climate change. External pressure for different indicators will bring universities outside the state of São Paulo closer to the innovation ecosystem, but this will not happen overnight, because the culture of scientific production has been very strong in the last 20 years. At Unicamp, the cultural shift is more mature. We already have a portfolio of more than 1.300 patents. We haven't stopped doing basic research, but the researchers who dedicate themselves to this activity, which is very important, do not look unfavorably upon colleagues who want to generate new technologies, bring products to market, or develop new public policies.
JU – What aspects would you highlight from your management at Inova?
Ana Frattini – Rector Antonio Meirelles invited me to head the Innovation Agency precisely because I knew how to communicate with companies. Inova, which was created in 2003, had already reached a good level of maturity, but there was a need, pointed out by a study from the University's Attorney General's Office, to transfer the agency's administrative management to the Unicamp Development Foundation (Funcamp). I was tasked with implementing this change. We standardized the contracts of all Inova professionals and created a plan for the different work teams, establishing specific actions and goals for each one. The plan is still in effect today and receives minor adjustments whenever necessary. Some goals had to be expanded because Unicamp faculty have already understood how the innovation system works. The number of patent applications and agreements with companies has increased in recent years, and there is more money from the private sector entering the University.
JU – You left your position as executive director of Inova in 2024 to replace Professor João Marcos Travassos Romano as head of PRP. How was your adaptation to the new role?
Ana Frattini – When I arrived at PRP, with my background as an engineer and former director of Inova, I needed to study a bit to understand how the more technological areas, which I know better, could interrelate with fundamental research, with research in the humanities. Today I perfectly understand that our International Hub for Sustainable Development (HIDS), for example, should be a living laboratory not only to test prototypes of equipment and new technologies for clean energy production, but also for researchers in the humanities to assess the possible impact of these innovations on society. No matter how efficient and profitable a technology is, it cannot be installed in a particular location if it harms the population or the environment of that region. I learned to look at things more broadly here at PRP, also including the diverse range of activities in the health field.
JU – What were the main achievements of the PRP in her almost two years in office as pro-rector?
Ana Frattini – Since I arrived at PRP, we have been conducting a diagnostic assessment of the actions necessary for Unicamp to continue to be recognized as a strong research university. Staying at the top depends on organization. One of the first points that caught my attention was a study by PRP and SBU [Unicamp Library System], which had just been released, showing that Unicamp's scientific output was predominantly male. We investigated why this was happening and found that the percentage of women in teaching positions decreased at the higher levels of their careers, although it was similar to that of men at the entry level. In other words, women were falling by the wayside. We then decided to launch the "More Women in Research" call for proposals to strengthen research groups with female leadership. We will maintain it as an online call for proposals for as long as necessary. We also identified the need to facilitate access for students entering Unicamp through the Indigenous Entrance Exam to the Institutional Program for Scientific Initiation Scholarships (PIBIC), which is highly competitive. We launched a specific call for proposals for these students. The recipients are receiving financial support to develop research related to their respective communities of origin. The launch of these two calls for proposals was possible because, in a joint action with the PRDU [Vice-Rectorate for University Development], we managed to increase the budget of Faepex [Fund for Support of Teaching, Research and Extension] by 50%. I would also highlight the diagnosis that it was necessary to standardize the operating mode of the different institutional research support offices existing at the University. We prepared and issued a resolution to guide the teams of the offices regarding the activities expected of these bodies. This provided a legal framework to support the responses of the staff to the demands they receive from the faculty.
JU – What other actions would you like to implement within the scope of the PRP?
Ana Frattini – We are asking research coordinators to act as our facilitators in their respective units regarding the promotion of a culture of shared spaces and equipment, a practice very strong abroad. For a long time, money and human resources were invested so that each professor could work in their own niche. Now, we see that research yields better results when it is done in a multidisciplinary way. The culture of isolation does not allow us to be at the forefront of knowledge. We want sharing to be increasingly accepted by our research groups because we believe this is the future of the university, as well as a way to optimize resources. It makes no sense to replicate equipment in different units, much less in two or more research laboratories within the same unit. We need to work hard to make people understand that this is a time of tighter budgets and smaller investments. We need to make better use of what we have, institutionally, both in terms of equipment and human resources, otherwise we will not be able to meet everyone's needs. This is my vision for the short term.
JU – How do you view the presence of women in the Brazilian science, technology, and innovation system today? To what extent can increasing the number of women in strategic positions help to broaden female participation in research?
Ana Frattini – Women are increasingly well-represented. Today, several universities have female rectors. There is a cultural shift happening, but, as with innovation, things happen more naturally in some places than in others. It will take time before women are easily heard in any forum. I am not a scholar on the subject, but I see that women are still very critical of themselves and their colleagues. We always ask ourselves if we should occupy the position we occupy, if we deserved to receive this invitation or that nomination, if we are on the right track, if we are not exaggerating in this or that… Here at PRP, I hesitated to launch the “More Women in Research” call for proposals because I didn't want to give the impression that I was legislating in my own self-interest. It took an advisor insisting that the call for proposals was necessary to solve a real problem that had already been diagnosed. Being in the upper echelons of university administration or funding agencies, we have to show that we need to stop being so critical of ourselves and that women should take more leadership positions in research groups. We can be wherever we want, and there should be no suffering in case of distrust regarding our work. I don't like clashes or confrontations. I only reflect, and my answers always come with actions. It may have been a coincidence, but when I left Inova, there were more female engineers looking for the agency, more women interested in internships or working there. I hope this effect will multiply throughout the University, given my current position.
Cover photo:
