India's scientific potential: Breaking barriers to breakthroughs
This article is authored by Ashutosh Sharma and Dhananjay Tiwary.
Why is India, a nation bursting with brilliant minds and world-class institutions, not leading in transformative scientific discoveries? The global stage is filled with groundbreaking technological marvels, from Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolutionising industries to quantum computing redefining possibilities. Yet, India remains an underdog in the race for Nobel prizes and cutting-edge advancements.
The issue isn’t just about inadequate funding or bureaucratic inefficiencies—though these certainly don’t help. The real problem is more systemic and lies in the very process to support scientific discoveries and nurturing innovations.
Efforts by funding agencies to reform the system have largely focused on adding new programmes within the existing organisational structure and processes, achieving limited impact on the underlying systemic issues. In a radical shift to improving efficiency, department of science and technology (DST) introduced highly decentralised funding model by establishing 25 Technology Innovation Hubs (TIHs) across premier scientific institutions. Each TIH functions as a mini-DST, equipped with administrative and financial authority to drive a specific scientific theme by integrating an end-to-end chain of activities, from basic research and translational work to industrial partnerships, technology development, startups, commercialisation, and skills development. This decentralised funding model offers distinct advantages by providing a comprehensive view of each thematic area, responsiveness to evolving scientific needs, creating collaborative opportunities and enhancing operational efficiency. They can bypass typical bureaucratic delays and quickly establish high-impact international partnerships. This mini-DST structure moves beyond the constraints of traditional centralized systems, creating a more efficient model for advancing innovation and technological progress. But this process innovation needs scaling—and fast.
India's research funding model could benefit from a strategic shift. Scientists compete for grants through a peer review process, where only a limited number of projects—those with the highest and above-average scores—receive funding in each cycle. This approach concentrates resources within elite institutions, as high-performing researchers and institutions are more likely to secure recurring grants, leaving countless promising projects and innovative scientists unfunded. This isn't just a missed opportunity; it's a continual leakage of potential.
We need to democratise access to research funds. How? Allocate at least 30% of the budget to support underrepresented talent in second- and third-tier institutions, securing grant to nurture this talent for at least three years. This funding approach would shield these institutions from the disadvantage of competing against elite counterparts in a centralized system. Instead, it nurtures talent through alternative funding channels, fostering competitive growth within their peer groups in smaller universities and colleges. Basic eligibility criteria and minimal paperwork requirements can be used to distribute funds, empowering more scientists to perform effectively and build on their ideas. This could unlock a wave of innovation by activating talent that has long been latent and overlooked. A more inclusive funding model, paired with substantial grants to top-performing scientists without requiring them to navigate the conventional grant-seeking process, could diversify India’s research ecosystem and amplify its scientific output.
Even when scientists manage to secure funding, they face delays in receiving disbursements and must navigate bureaucratic obstacles within their institutions to utilise these funds effectively. Sidestepping institutional bureaucracy, funding agencies should secure agreements directly with the providers who can supply necessary research resources, build infrastructure, or complete other tasks as required in a project. Independent auditors could verify project milestones before funds are released to the providers with incentive. By deferring payments until work is verified and having providers cover upfront costs, this approach reduces reliance on government budget cycles, minimizes uncertainties, and strengthens project resilience. This not only streamlines operations but also lets scientists focus on their real job: advancing science.
To truly revolutionise our scientific ecosystem, we need to disrupt the entrenched governance structures of our funding agencies. Imagine if at least 40% of the staff in institutions like the department of science & technology or the department of biotechnology were active, practising scientists on fixed three-year terms. These are people who know what it takes to innovate, unlike career technocrats in funding agencies, who tend to get caught up in procedural and bureaucratic quicksand. Developing a framework to integrate these experts into the system would ensure efficient and impactful contributions. Pairing up with this idea, make also a provision to ensure that at all times, at least 10% of the core staff in funding agencies rotate out to academic institutions for a set period, enhancing their expertise while fostering closer ties between research administration and academia. Infusing fresh perspectives regularly would ensure these agencies remain dynamic and adaptable. Sunset clauses for positions and processes would further break the cycle of stagnation. At regular intervals, the system would get a shot of new energy, enabling agencies to pivot quickly and remain aligned with the needs of the scientific community.
The world is moving forward at breakneck speed. India has the talent, the intellect, and the ambition to be at the forefront of global scientific discovery. But incremental changes won’t cut it. Embracing new approaches to support discovery ecosystem and rigorously evaluating their impact on scientific productivity is crucial for all funding agencies. This is often more feasible in emerging organisations like the Anusandhan National Research Foundation, where innovative processes can be tested without the constraints of legacy system.
The choice is simple: Disrupt the status quo or continue to watch others claim the scientific breakthroughs that could have been ours.
This article is authored by Ashutosh Sharma, president, Indian National Science Academy (INSA), Chair Professor, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, and former secretary, Govt of India, Department of Science & Technology and Dhananjay Tiwary, senior fellow, Brown University, US, currently on leave from adviser, Department of Biotechnology, Govt of India.