THE PROBLEM WITH INDIA’S SCIENCE MANAGEMENT

THE CONTEXT: The government is overhauling India’s science establishment, which includes setting up the new National Research Foundation (NRF) and restructuring the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO). In this scenario, a comprehensive assessment of the current administrative ability to optimise Indian science’s efficiency and resilience is necessary.

ISSUES

• Low expenditure on research: One of the major issues constraining scientific outcomes in India is its low expenditure on research and development which is around 0.7% of GDP, compared to 3.5% for US and 2.4% for China. Added concern is inability to commit to long-term steady funding of critical projects when faced with the inevitable occasional failures.
• Failure of scientific administration: The scientific administration is failing in India, for example, even the space programmes is witnessing narrowing leads. As in 2022, ISRO stood a very behind on launch numbers, with foreign startups racing ahead on key technologies such as reusable rockets. Likewise, the lead in nuclear energy has been fading away from being latecomers to small modular reactors to unutilisation of thorium ambition. On critical science and technology themes such as genomics, robotics, and artificial intelligence, the situation is even more alarming.
• Domination of public sector: India’s science sector is dominated by the public sector. There are generic irritants associated with governmental bureaucracy, such as delay in approval of crucial time-dependent funding, or equitable decision making across different funding levels.The direction and organisation of science is inconsistent and unfit for the vital role which science must play going ahead.
• Outsized role played by scientists: The defining feature of India’s science administration is the centrality of its senior scientists. However, there is another race going on there, with scientist trying to fit in the role of administrator as many try to become directors, vice-chancellors and secretaries to the Government of India. Therefore, top scientists rather than government bureaucrats are at the helm of India’s science administration.
• Administrative efficiency: There is an argument that only scientists can appropriately run scientific institutions, considering the importance and technical rigours of the science that is supposed to go on in these places. The actual performance of these institutions is proof enough that this paradigm is faulty. This leads to shelved projects, loss of time and financial resources.
• Lack of training: The lack of comprehensive training in selecting which particular metrics are appropriate under what circumstances leads to absurdities such as an entire project getting derailed due to a single invoice or acquisition. Administration is the art of translating policy into outcomes and scientists are simply not trained to prioritise between time, cost, or precision.
• Conflict of interest: The scope for conflicts of interest in the present scenario and system is huge. Being an academic within the same institution in which one wields administrative control does not go well. Thus, scandals such as high plagiarism rates, paid publications in disreputable journals, and under-the-table dealings to garner government funding have become normalised.
• Institutional capture and Factionalism: The culture of Indian science has descended into shoddy quality control and projects of scientific and strategic importance have been devastated due to reasons that range from competition to egotism. The fact that there is no system of all-India transfers of both scientists and science administrators only magnifies institutional capture and factionalism. Only few institutions have exclusive access to certain equipment which lead to emergence of system of gatekeepers. Many bright scientists’ careers and lives have been destroyed due to their conflicts with this oppressive network of gatekeepers.

THE WAY FORWARD

• Focussing on positive funding balance: Considering such a low expenditure, there is a need to focus on allocating money wisely by emphasising on high-impact projects. Proper funding exhibit a significant drive towards supporting initiatives with the potential for commercial translation of products or services.
• Freeing up scientist from administration: Administering an organisation as complex as a national lab or a university cannot be relegated to becoming a side-project of a ‘working’ scientist doubling up as a director or vice-chancellor. In this scenario, there is a need to free up scientist from administration, this will lessen the burden of scientists and will help use their expertise in research.
• Separation of administration and scientific management: There is a need for separation between administration and scientific management. The separation of administrators and scientists is something which most robust science establishments generally embrace. Administration requires a particular skill set, most importantly, the allocation of money, resources and time. Indeed, attributes associated with good scientists, such as individuality, constructive ego, and erudition, have little congruence with the demands of administration tact, realism, flexibility and firmness.
• International experience: An American middle-way arrangement can be adopted in this regard, where scientists are selected and trained in an all-India pool of a science administration central service. In U.S., with labs being embedded in the university ecosystem and run by scientists, selects scientists for an administrative role quite early on in their careers. Such selected science administrators only carry out administrative tasks thereon, and are groomed for the task, with very few of them ever going back to active science.
• Cultivating a supportive ecosystem: A flourishing research ecosystem thrives on funding, infrastructure and a critical mass of expertise. Enhancing the quantum of allocation of research funds through government grants, which are the primary support for Indian researchers can result in more ideas coming to life. Enabling research exposure at the undergraduate level can motivate more youngsters to pursue research as a career.
• Building trust: Scientists often prioritise delving into the fundamental aspects of a problem, and publishing their observations, sometimes sidelining the application of their findings. However, recognising the value of impactful outcomes, researchers can make significant contributions by formulating research proposals that address pressing societal needs. By bridging this gap between fundamental exploration and real-world innovation, the innovation pipeline gains momentum.

THE CONCLUSION:

Administration is something which has to be taught and practised separately from the subject matter being administered. Without addressing these core concerns, India’s science establishment will continue to do injustice to its economic and strategic aspirations. Research thrives when scientists can devote their time and energy to solving problems in science rather than administration. India presents a promising landscape of research and scientist need to strike the delicate balance between administrative tasks and their core research to achieve outstanding scientific outcomes.

UPSC PREVIOUS YEAR QUESTIONS

Q.1 How is science interwoven deeply with our lives? What are the striking changes in agriculture triggered off by science-based technologies? (2020)

Q.2 Scientific research in Indian universities is declining, because a career in science is not as attractive as our business operations, engineering or administration, and the universities are becoming consumer-oriented. Critically comment. (2014)

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION

Q.1 The administrative setup of any complex organisation is its central nervous system, and the same is true for science establishments. Examine the statement in light of challenges of administration in the arena of science and technology in India.

SOURCE: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-problem-with-indias-science-management/article67757103.ece