Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
 

Can PM Narendra Modi work his magic on Indian science?

Author: Hari Pulakkat
Publication: The Economic Times
Date: January 14, 2015
URL: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/can-pm-narendra-modi-work-his-magic-on-indian-science/articleshow/45861240.cms?prtpage=1

Prime ministers' speeches are seldom discussed beyond a day or two, and their addresses at the annual Science Congress are discussed still less. Successive prime ministers have waxed eloquent many times at the Science Congress, praising Indian scientists and promising better funding for their research. But without any specific proposals and follow-up action, their speeches and ideas were forgotten quickly, to be remembered and forgotten again in the next Science Congress. This year, however, seems to be different.

 At the Science Congress, Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not promise to increase funding for science. Instead he listed the main challenges for the country — water, energy, healthcare... — and talked about how they should determine our national priorities in science. He spoke of international collaboration in science and how he was personally involved in developing them. He also hinted, in generous terms, of what he intended to do for Indian science. "This is the best speech I have heard from a prime minister at the Science Congress," says T Ramasami, former secretary at the Department of Science and Technology (DST).

 Many scientists now sense a real opportunity to communicate what they want to the prime minister, and expect quick measures from him to invigorate research in India. They are hoping Modi will rapidly address their biggest pain point in doing research: excessive control from finance departments. Specifically, the scientific community is excited by Modi's articulation of their most serious problem, in words that could not have been more eloquent: "We want our scientists and researchers to explore the mysteries of science, not of government procedures."

 This statement was the result of communication from scientific departments and leading scientists about how badly bureaucratic control is stifling science, and how the problem has rapidly deteriorated in recent times. Modi has been meeting scientists on and off, privately in his office and on the sidelines of public functions. Although he has focussed on economic matters most of the time, his mind reportedly has not gone away completely from science and technology. To many scientists in the country, it seemed that Modi was keenly aware of what needed to be done to energise Indian science: de-bureaucratise, stimulate demand for scientists, and bring in the youth. "I was awestruck by his speech," says National Research Professor RA Mashelkar.
 "I expect action because it was based on an unusual understanding of the pain points in Indian science." Modi had been communicating — in no uncertain terms — on how he wanted to bring in young leaders to the Indian scientific establishment. Sources say it started in visible terms when he visited the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) soon after taking over as prime minister. Almost every leader he met there was retired and on extension. An agitated Modi made it clear that he wanted young leaders in all scientific departments, probably in all government departments. This set in motion an agenda that has been reverberating through all government departments, and specifically in scientific departments.

 When the government took over in May last year, two science departments were languishing without heads: the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) and the Department of Science and Technology (DST). Samir Brahmachari had retired on December 31, 2013, as the secretary of DSIR and the director general of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), and the selection of his successor was not accepted by the science and technology minister. T Ramasami retired as the secretary of DST in April 2014, and there was no immediate effort to appoint a full-time successor to him. Ramasami was already serving an extension to his appointment when he retired.

 When their selection process was under way a few months ago, there was a clear instruction from the prime minister: the committees have to look for young leaders, preferably around 50 years old. This should have been easy in a country of India's size, but it turned out to be difficult in practice.

 Promotions in government departments were slow, and scientists did not become directors of labs till in their mid-50s. The partial exception was CSIR, which had a tradition of inducting leaders when young. The selection committees finally found young people to lead DST and CSIR.
 For the DST leadership, the selection committee chose Ashutosh Sharma, a 53-year-old professor at the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur. Sharma is considered as one of the country's best 'nanoscientists', and a winner of the Infosys Prize. For CSIR, the committee chose 48-year-old Rajesh Gokhale, director of the CSIR Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology. Gokhale is considered as one of India's best biologists, and is also an Infosys Prize winner. Sharma took over as the DST secretary three days ago. The selection of CSIR director general was cancelled due to allegations of conflict of interest, as he had founded a company called Vyome Biosciences. The selection is to be done again, and Gokhale is still a strong candidate if he is willing to be considered. Many others on the list are also reportedly in their early 50s.

 Modi's insistence on youth may have caused a delay in the selection of the chairman of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO). K Radhakrishnan retired as chairman of ISRO last month, and a successor was not appointed immediately for the first time in ISRO's history. All the directors of ISRO labs are either older than 60 years or close to 60 years, and so it was not easy to find a replacement under 55 years of age. But Modi has made an exception for ISRO, and okayed the appointment of Kiran Kumar Alur Seelin, director of the Space Applications Centre in Ahmedabad, as the chairman.

 While the process of infusion of youth in science leadership is under way, there is no clear evidence yet about the government's willingness to solve a serious problem in the country: excessive bureaucratic control of science. The problem has been recognised by the government and prime ministers for a long time. At the Science Congress at Lucknow in 2002, prime minister Vajpayee had said, "Bureaucratism is an enemy of a result-oriented approach and must be shunned." His advisors had set to work immediately after the speech, but they could not bring about any change in the system. The finance ministry had held firm.

 Scientists in the country are unanimous in articulating the problem of bureaucratic control. Money takes too long to arrive after a project is approved, as the finance departments raise one query after another. Quite often, as is likely in a rapidly-changing world, the project proposal would be no longer relevant or need to be revised by the time the money arrives. The science departments are the nodal agency for funding science projects, but financial advisors indebted to the finance ministry go through the paperwork with a fine tooth comb at every stage before money is released. This system, in place since independence, is hard to change because the finance ministry is quite powerful. To make matters worse, the ministry also cuts budgets arbitrarily in mid-year.
 All budgets were approved and announced in July, but the finance ministry ordered cuts of 30% last month. Now science departments are left with little money to fund even research that has been approved.

 To take a specific example, three bioclusters were supposed to be funded in Bangalore, Faridabad and Mohali. These were announced in the budget speech, with a funding of `100 crore. Their proposals were approved initially, but the money that was released was short by about 30%, with no explanation about why it was cut.


In spite of this setback, say scientists, things have got better as the money flow has improved. Transforming the bureaucratic control of science is a difficult task that could stretch Modi's administrative abilities. It is not just the finance ministry that is the problem, as the science departments themselves have too much to oversee. Science departments, for example, have to approve about 18,000 small or big proposals a year, each requiring anywhere from four to 12 signatures. A few thousand of them are just approvals for scientists' foreign travel.

India's research establishment has grown significantly in the past decade-and-a-half. New institutions have been built, and older institutions like IITs have expanded their research capabilities. While the number of research proposals has increased substantially, the support system for research has not kept pace with it, and the ministries in Delhi find it difficult to deal with the sheer volume of work. Technology is not yet used intensely enough to clear proposals. Motivating the support staff is not easy either. Combine all these problems, and it is easy to see why science in the country has slowed down.
 Modi articulated this issue directly, and scientists expect him to follow up. Even within the past six months, there are slight hints that things are speeding up in the government. "There is a definite trend that we are moving from circling complex topics to actually taking decisions," says department of biotechnology secretary K VijayRaghavan. "The introduction of vaccines in the immunisation programme is an example. While the ground work was done earlier, there was a definite change in mood that allowed decisions to be taken."

 In July, India introduced four new vaccines — rotavirus, rubella, polio and Japanese encephalitis — to its immunisation programme. India's scientific community has noticed Modi's indirect comments as well, and consider them equally important. "Not just scientific departments, but every other department in the government should see how to apply science and technology and promote research to improve their work," he said, adding that every department should have someone looking at science and technology, and should allocate a portion of their budget for this activity. This activity has begun in space research.

 After Modi made a speech at an ISRO rocket launch, 60 government departments have come forward with proposals on how to use space technology in their own domain, a six-fold increase in the user departments if they are all executed. "Use of space technology needs to be scaled up now," says former ISRO chairman K Radhakrishnan. "I expect and hope science becomes pivotal in all ministries," says VijayRaghavan. While this will create more demand from government, what the country would need, according to many senior scientists, is a demand increase for science from the private sector.

 India's investment in education and R&D has increased significantly in the past decade, thereby also increasing the number of PhDs produced. This number stands roughly at about 8,000 a year in science and engineering, and will go up or probably double in the next decade. Unless the private sector invests in R&D, the new PhDs may not find employment in the country. "The government has created an increase in the supply side of science," says S Sivaram, former director of the National Chemical Laboratory and now Bhatnagar Fellow, "but it needs to improve the demand side as well." An expansion of the manufacturing sector should able to create this demand, particularly if it is globally competitive. Such an expansion is one of Modi's priorities. The scientific establishment will watch his progress carefully.
Asia to be new R&D hub

 Consider these statistics for a moment. While the rest of the world is debati n g and struggling to increase their R&D investment, China has managed to double its investments in just five years from 2008. According to a recent report from the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), China will become the top nation in the world for R&D spending soon. It overtook Japan in 2008, the European Union (even when taken as a single entity) in 2013, and is set to overtake the US in 2018.

The report, which came out in November, has a few more interesting statistics. China and Korea are destinations for American scientists, producing a net brain gain from 1996 to 2011. The BRICS countries along with Indonesia produced 12% of the top quality publications in 2013, a doubling of their share a decade ago. Korea became the most R&D-intensive country in the world, overtaking Israel. The share of OECD countries in R&D fell from 90% to 70% within a decade.

 The US is still the dominant figure, and there is considerable difference in quality between the US and China, but this difference is reducing rapidly.

  There are other Asian nations investing in R&D like Singapore and Taiwan. The obvious conclusion from these figures: global R&D is shifting to Asia. India is not yet in this league. Its universities do not figure in the top 200 in the world, while a few each in China, Hong Kong and Singapore are in the top 100. If we assume that 21st century innovation will be powered by science and engineering, how much can the current government do to correct this anomaly?

 

 
«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements