Why in News
- A growing research fraud epidemic in India’s higher education sector was highlighted recently, characterized by a rapid increase in both the number of journal publications and retractions.
- This crisis is attributed primarily to the pervasive ‘publish or perish’ culture and the institutional bias of the University Grants Commission (UGC) and Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) towards prioritizing faculty publishing over teaching duties for career advancement, thereby undermining academic integrity and neglecting student learning needs.
Context: Drivers of Research Fraud
Research fraud is recognized as a global problem exacerbated by the growing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), but its acuteness in India is linked to specific institutional incentives that reward quantity over quality.
Institutional Bias: Publishing over Teaching
- Preference for Publishing: The fundamental issue identified is the institutional preference given by the UGC and HEIs to publishing, which is distinct from actual research, over teaching for faculty members to advance their careers.
- Incentive Structure: Faculty members are incentivized to publish papers, receiving rewards such as promotions and other benefits at the workplace, while no significant incentives are provided for achieving better teaching outcomes.
Rationale for Privileging Publishing
The institutional bias is primarily driven by two key considerations: university rankings and the presumed research-teaching link.
- University Rankings:
- Ubiquitous Value: National and global university rankings have become ubiquitous, considered of great value by the government, HEIs, and students.
- Ranking Metrics: These rankings predominantly reward publications but not teaching.
- Student Attraction: HEIs, particularly private universities concerned with student admissions, are incentivized to insist that faculty publish to achieve higher rankings than competitors and attract more and better students; public institutions also do not want to be left behind.
- Dubious Research-Teaching Link:
- Widespread Belief: A widespread belief exists that faculty members conducting research improves teaching and consequently student learning outcomes.
- Lack of Consensus: However, voluminous research on the research-teaching link reveals no broad consensus that the relationship between them is significant or even present, with the context often determining the outcome.
UGC Policy and Quantifiable Metrics
- API Introduction: Both ranking considerations and the belief in the research-teaching link likely contributed to the UGC’s decision to introduce the Academic Performance Indicator (API) in 2010 as part of the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for faculty promotions.
- Bias Establishment: The API established a clear bias for publications in assessing faculty members.
- Persistence of Focus: Despite several amendments over the years, no fundamental change to the API in terms of the emphasis on publications has occurred, ensuring the publishing madness remains ascendant for now. The 2025 UGC draft regulations claim focus on quantifiable metrics such as publications will be reduced.
Ethical and Practical Grounds for Questioning Research Emphasis
When context is considered, the overwhelming emphasis on research and publishing in India’s HEIs is rendered questionable on both ethical and practical grounds.
Lack of Contextual Consideration
- Universal Expectation: Faculty members at all types of HEIs are expected to publish, regardless of the institution’s primary function, such as colleges devoted to undergraduate teaching, teaching-cum-research institutions, or specialized research centres.
- Missing Infrastructure:No thought is given to whether the HEI possesses the necessary elements for meaningful research:
- Physical infrastructure (e.g., libraries and laboratories).
- Human capital (e.g., research-capable faculty members).
- Academic environment (e.g., sufficient population of postgraduate students and academics).
- Sufficient research funding.
- A fair or reasonable balance between teaching, research, and administrative responsibilities of faculty members.
- Meaningless Emphasis: Most HEIs fall short on many of these parameters, rendering the emphasis on research and publishing meaningless.
Predictable Negative Outcomes
- Fraudulent Output: Given the limitations of most HEIs, the idea of ‘publish or perish’ is taken quite literally, resulting in faculty members and even students churning out fraudulent papers instead of carrying out actual research.
- Scam Drivers: The fraudulent output serves two primary drivers: HEIs secure university rankings and faculty members secure individual benefits.
- Complicity: Publishers also monetarily benefit from these publications and participate in the scam.
Neglect of Student Needs
- Undergraduate Majority: Eighty percent of students at India’s HEIs are undergraduates who primarily need better teachers rather than competent researchers.
- Dubious Link and Capability Gap: Given that the research-teaching link is dubious and that most HEIs do not have the necessary research capabilities, it should logically follow that faculty teaching at undergraduate institutions should focus primarily on teaching.
- Logic of Preference: The only apparent logic for preferring research over teaching is to aid HEIs in attaining university rankings and to help faculty members secure individual gains, neither of which contributes to India’s knowledge sector.
Way Forward: Rebalancing Priorities and Restructuring Assessment
Addressing the research fraud epidemic and restoring academic integrity requires a fundamental restructuring of incentives and a return to teaching as a primary academic function, ensuring better alignment with the actual needs of the student population and institutional capabilities.
Reforming Faculty Assessment and Incentives
- Decoupling Promotion from Publication Count: The UGC and HEIs must fundamentally revise promotion criteria to de-emphasize quantifiable metrics such as publication count and impact factor in the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS), as tentatively suggested by the 2025 UGC draft regulations.
- Prioritizing Teaching Excellence: Significant incentives and assessment weightage must be provided for demonstrably better teaching, including student feedback, innovative teaching methodologies, curriculum development, and improvement in student learning outcomes.
- Context-Specific Roles: Differentiation of academic roles should be implemented based on institutional context (e.g., undergraduate colleges versus research universities), allowing faculty in teaching-focused institutions to advance their careers primarily through excellence in pedagogy and mentoring.
Strengthening Research Integrity and Infrastructure
- Mandatory Ethics Training: Rigorous and mandatory training in research ethics and academic integrity must be integrated into all postgraduate and faculty development programs to foster a culture of honest scholarship.
- Verifiable Research Output: Emphasis must be placed solely on original, high-quality research that is subject to credible peer review and replicability, potentially by adopting open research practices that require data and methodology sharing.
- Infrastructure Assessment: Mandatory assessment of physical infrastructure (libraries, laboratories), human capital, and research funding availability must be conducted before any HEI is permitted to mandate research or PhD programs, ensuring that research activity is meaningful and not forced.
Focusing on Undergraduate Education Needs
- Teaching-Focused Institutions: Colleges and universities primarily dedicated to undergraduate teaching must be institutionally encouraged to focus their resources and faculty energy on improving the quality of instruction, recognizing that the majority of India’s students are undergraduates.
- Resource Allocation: Resources currently consumed by the pursuit of meaningless publications (e.g., article processing charges, predatory journal fees) must be redirected towards enhancing the physical infrastructure and learning resources available to undergraduate students.
Conclusion
- The epidemic of research fraud in Indian higher education is a direct consequence of an institutional bias that sacrifices academic integrity and the quality of undergraduate teaching at the altar of university rankings and individual faculty gains.
- Rectification necessitates courageous political vision to replace the current ‘publish or perish’ mandate with a system that champions teaching excellence, ensures context-appropriate academic expectations, and validates research based on quality and integrity rather than mere quantifiable volume.
- The UGC must fundamentally reset its regulatory framework to foster an academic environment where faculty members are motivated to serve the primary educational needs of the nation’s vast student population.
Indian Research Ecosystem
The Indian research ecosystem encompasses universities, publicly funded research institutions, private R&D centres, start-ups, and the policy-regulatory framework that governs scientific output, innovation, and knowledge creation.
With India now the 3rd largest producer of scientific papers (after China and USA) and having climbed to 36th rank in Global Innovation Index 2024 (from 81st in 2015), the ecosystem has expanded rapidly. Yet, persistent concerns over quality, integrity, plagiarism, predatory publishing, low patent output, and negligible translation into societal impact continue to undermine its global credibility.
Constitutional and Legal Framework
- Article 51A(h): Fundamental duty to develop scientific temper, humanism, and spirit of inquiry.
- Article 51A(j): Duty of every citizen to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity.
- Entry 66, Union List: Coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions.
- Entry 25, Concurrent List: Education, including technical and university education.
- Key Policy Instruments:
- Scientific Policy Resolution 1958 → Technology Policy Statement 1983 → Science & Technology Policy 2003 → Science, Technology & Innovation Policy 2013 → Draft National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2020 → National Education Policy 2020 → Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) Act 2023.
Evolution of India’s Research Ecosystem
| Phase | Period | Key Features & Milestones | Paradigm Shift |
| Colonial & Early Years | 1851–1950 | Geological Survey of India (GSI) in 1851, IISc (1909), CSIR (1942), Indian Academy of Sciences (1934), Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (1945) | Elite, curiosity-driven science |
| Nehruvian Era | 1950–1980 | Atomic Energy (1954), Space (1963), DRDO (1958), ICAR modernisation, Five-Year Plans with S&T allocation | Nation-building through Big Science |
| Technology Missions | 1980–1995 | Drinking water, immunisation, oilseeds, telecom, literacy missions | Applied research for mass impact |
| Liberalisation Phase | 1995–2010 | Rise of IT/pharma services, private universities, UGC-API (2010), CSIR-800, DST’s Nano Mission | Quantity explosion, global outsourcing hub |
| Quality & Innovation | 2015–Present | NEP-2020, Institution of Eminence, National Research Foundation (ANRF 2023), GATI, STARS, IMPRINT-II, Atal Innovation Mission, Start-up India | Shift towards quality, multidisciplinary research, innovation, integrity |
Present Status (2024–25)
- Research Output
- India publishes ≈ 2.5 lakh papers/year (Scopus 2024) – 3rd globally.
- Share of world publications: 5.8% (2023).
- Citation impact remains low: Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) ≈ 0.85 (below world average of 1.0).
- R&D Expenditure
- GERD/GDP: Stagnates at 0.64–0.69% for over a decade (world average 1.8%; China 2.4%; Israel 5.4%; South Korea 4.9%).
- Private sector contribution: Only 36–37% (vs 65–75% in OECD countries).
- Human Resources
- Researchers per million population: 253 (China 1,300; USA 4,600).
- PhD output: ≈ 40,000/year (2nd after USA).
- Patents & Commercialisation
- India ranks 5th globally in patent filings (2024) but >70% filed by foreign MNCs in India.
- Indigenous patent grants low; technology transfer from public labs <5%.
- Retractions & Integrity Crisis
- India consistently among top 5 countries in retracted papers (Retraction Watch 2024).
- Predatory journals: >4,000 Indian-origin predatory journals listed in Beall’s/updated lists.
Significance of a Strong Indian Research Ecosystem
A robust research ecosystem is not merely academic — it is the backbone of Atmanirbhar Bharat and Viksit Bharat @2047. Its strategic importance can be understood under the following dimensions:
- Economic Growth & Job Creation
- Every 1% increase in R&D intensity adds 0.6–1.2% to long-term GDP growth (World Bank studies).
- High-skill research jobs and deep-tech start-ups (India now has >100 unicorns in deep-tech/AI/biotech/space) are direct outcomes.
- National Security & Strategic Autonomy
- Indigenous development in defence (DRDO), nuclear (DAE), space (ISRO), cyber, and semiconductors reduces critical import dependence.
- Examples: BrahMos, Agni series, Chandrayaan-3, Covaxin, iDEX, SEMICON India.
- Public Health & Inclusive Development
- Affordable vaccines (Serum Institute, Bharat Biotech), generic medicines (India = “pharmacy of the world”), agricultural breakthroughs (Green & White Revolutions), clean energy solutions.
- Global Standing & Soft Power
- Vaccine Maitri (supplied vaccines to 100+ countries), International Solar Alliance, Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, leadership in Quantum, AI, 6G standardisation.
- Climate Change Mitigation & Sustainable Development Goals
- Leadership in renewable energy research, Li-ion battery recycling, green hydrogen mission, climate-resilient crops.
- Demographic Dividend Utilisation
- With the world’s largest youth population, converting human capital into knowledge capital is the only way to avoid the middle-income trap.
Major Challenges Facing Indian Research Ecosystem
- Abysmally Low R&D Investment
- GERD/GDP stuck at 0.64–0.69% for two decades (2024) against required 2–2.5%.
- Private sector contribution only 36–37% (vs 70%+ in USA, Germany, South Korea, Israel).
- Publish-or-Perish Culture & Research Integrity Crisis
- UGC-API and promotion system reward quantity over quality.
- India among top 5 nations in retracted papers (Retraction Watch 2024).
- Proliferation of predatory journals, paper mills, AI-generated content, image manipulation, gift authorship.
- Structural Rigidity & Institutional Silos
- Sharp separation of teaching universities vs research institutes.
- Only <2% of India’s 1,100+ universities do serious research; bulk remain teaching shops.
- Human Resource Bottlenecks
- Faculty vacancy in central universities: 35–50%.
- Researcher density: 253 per million (China 1,300; USA 4,600).
- Persistent brain drain; low return rate of overseas PhDs.
- Poor Translation & Commercialisation
- Technology transfer from public labs: <5%.
- Weak Technology Transfer Offices, complex IPR rules, risk-averse industry.
- Regional & Social Imbalance
- Research concentrated in 6 states (Maharashtra, Karnataka, TN, Delhi-NCR, Telangana, Kerala).
- Gross under-representation of women (only 14–18% in STEM research leadership).
- Regulatory Overload & Lack of Autonomy
- Multiple overlapping regulators (UGC, AICTE, ICMR, DBT, DST, CSIR, DRDO) with conflicting mandates.
Global Best Practices
| Country | Key Feature | Lesson for India |
| USA | Strong industry funding, Bayh-Dole Act (1980), Stanford OTL model | Flexible IPR, revenue sharing |
| Germany | Fraunhofer model of applied research institutes | Industry-oriented public labs |
| South Korea | GERD/GDP >4.9%; chaebol-university partnerships | Aggressive public-private investment |
| Israel | Yissum (Hebrew Univ), military-academia linkage | Compulsory tech transfer, start-ups |
| Singapore | Block funding + performance contracts | Autonomy with accountability |
Indian Best Practices & Recent Positive Initiatives
- IISc Bangalore, IIT Bombay/Delhi – Strong research culture, industry partnerships.
- IISERs & NISER – Integrated BS-MS + PhD model.
- Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) 2023 –Aims to boost funding (with an outlay of ₹50,000 crore over five years), foster collaboration, and diversify funding across government, industry, and philanthropic sources.
- IMPRINT, Uchhatar Avishkar Yojana, SPARC, GIAN, VAJRA – Targeted collaboration schemes.
- Prime Minister’s Science, Technology, and Innovation Advisory Council (PM-STIAC): Promotes synergistic research in mission mode. Establishment of Research and Development (R&D) Cells in HEIs (as per UGC guidelines).
- Atal Innovation Mission (AIM): Promotes a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship through Atal Tinkering Labs and Incubation Centres. RDI Scheme (approx. ₹1 lakh crore): Launched to catalyze private sector participation in high-impact R&D.
- Institution of Eminence (IoE) tag – Greater autonomy and funding.
- National Education Policy 2020 – Establishment of Academic Bank of Credits, multidisciplinary education, NRF vision.
- One Nation One Subscription (ONOS) Scheme: Provides universal digital access to top global scholarly journals to all educational institutions.
- SERB-Power, KIRAN, WISE-KIRAN – Women scientist schemes.
National Education Policy (NEP) 2020: The Research Roadmap
The NEP 2020 is the most significant policy reform aimed at institutionalizing research culture and shifting the focus from simply teaching to research and innovation-driven education.
Key Research Provisions of NEP 2020
- Establishment of the ANRF: The apex body for funding, mentoring, and building the research capacity of HEIs. It will strategically fund research across STEM, Social Sciences, and Humanities.
- Multidisciplinary Education: Encouraging the merger of institutions and adoption of a multidisciplinary approach to research, fostering interdisciplinary solutions to complex problems.
- Institutional Restructuring: Transforming HEIs into Research-Intensive Universities (RUs) and Teaching-Intensive Universities (TUs), with a clear focus on strengthening research in all institutions.
- Clarity in Governance: Proposing a unified regulatory body, the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI), to streamline regulation, accreditation, and standard setting, allowing universities greater academic autonomy for research.
- Research-driven Teaching: Promoting faculty development and acknowledging research output as a criterion for faculty promotion and institutional accreditation.
Way Forward
- Raise R&D Investment Aggressively
- Target 2% GERD/GDP by 2030 and 2.5% by 2047 through budgetary increase + Production-Linked Incentive for corporate R&D + mandatory 2% CSR for R&D.
- Replace API with Balanced Scorecard
- 50% weight to teaching & mentoring, 30% quality research (high-impact journals + patents), 20% societal outreach & industry collaboration.
- Establish Differentiated Institutional Mandates
- Category I: Research Universities (top 100)
- Category II: Teaching + Regional Research Universities
- Category III: Primarily Undergraduate Teaching Institutions
- Strengthen ANRF as Apex Funding & Integrity Body
- ₹50,000 crore corpus (2023–28) to be doubled.
- Create National Research Integrity Bureau under ANRF for investigations and public database.
- Revamp Research Career Pathways
- Expand PM Research Fellowship to 10,000 fellows.
- Introduce tenure-track system, start-up grants for young faculty, attractive returnee packages.
- Boost Industry-Academia Partnership
- Allow industry-sponsored projects to count towards promotion.
- Set up 100 Fraunhofer-type applied research centres in mission mode.
- Reform IPR & Commercialisation Ecosystem
- Implement Indian Bayh-Dole Act with revenue sharing (40:30:30 model).
- Mandate functional TTOs in all central institutions.
- Promote Gender & Regional Equity
- Scale up KIRAN, GATI, WISE-KIRAN schemes.
- Dedicated funding windows for Northeast, Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh.
- Adopt Global Best Practices in Evaluation
- Sign DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) at national level.
- Shift from journal-based to article-level + societal impact metrics.
- Create Enabling Ecosystem for Deep-Tech Start-ups
- Expand Atal Innovation Mission, establish 100 university-linked incubators, launch Sovereign Patent Fund.
Conclusion
- India possesses the world’s largest scientific manpower and the third-largest publication base, yet remains trapped in a low-investment, low-quality, low-translation cycle.
- The vision of Viksit Bharat @2047 cannot be realised without transforming the research ecosystem from a paper-producing factory into a global innovation powerhouse.
- The ongoing reforms under NEP-2020 and ANRF provide a historic window — what is now required is bold political will, massive funding increase, ruthless enforcement of integrity, and dismantling of the publish-or-perish culture.
UPSC MAINS PYQs
- “Scientific research in Indian universities is declining, because a career in science is not as attractive as business professions, engineering or administration, and the universities are becoming consumer-oriented. Critically comment.” (2014)
- “What are the areas of prohibitive labour that can be sustainably managed by robots? Discuss the initiatives that can propel research in premier research institutes for substantive and gainful innovation.” (2015)
