• Sustained economic progress on a national scale is intricately linked to scientific advances translated into deployable technologies.
• The Indian government is currently revamping its science establishment, exemplified by initiatives like the National Research Foundation (NRF) and the restructuring of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).
• However, a critical analysis of the current administrative capacity is necessary to optimise the efficiency and resilience of Indian science.

Obstacles to India’s Scientific Progress

• Low Research and Development Expenditure
• India''s commitment to research and development (R&D) is reflected in its modest investment constituting approximately 0.7% of the GDP.
• This expenditure is significantly low in comparison to global leaders like the United States (3.5%) and China (2.4%).
• Budgetary Constraints
• The limited financial commitment to R&D arises from broader budgetary constraints, competing priorities, and a historical focus on immediate socio-economic needs.
• As a result, India is facing the challenge of nurturing a robust scientific ecosystem on a constrained budget.
• Inability of Current Scientific Administration in Budget Allocation
• The current scientific administration has struggled to identify and invest in high-impact projects.
• In 2022, the Indian Space Research Organisation ranked eighth in the number of space launches, while foreign startups excelled in important technologies like reusable rockets.
• Similarly, India fell behind in nuclear energy, especially in adopting small modular reactors, and its plans for using thorium have not materialised.
• In crucial areas like genomics, robotics, and artificial intelligence, India faces alarming challenges in science and technology.
• The management and focus of scientific efforts are inconsistent and not well-suited for the essential role that science needs to play in the future.
• Lack of Strategic Planning and Execution
• The challenge goes beyond the quantum of expenditure; it extends to the strategic planning and execution of scientific projects.
• The failure to adapt swiftly to emerging technologies and allocate resources judiciously has resulted in India lagging in crucial fields.
• Lack of Consistent Long-Term Funding
• A significant problem is the lack of consistent long-term funding for vital projects, especially when faced with occasional setbacks.
• This ability to provide steady funding despite occasional failures is crucial for a strong and effective scientific management system.

Role of Senior Scientists in India’s Science Administration

• Dispersion of Focus Due to Diverse Responsibilities
• Senior scientists in India often are engaged in various responsibilities, ranging from academic pursuits to administrative duties.
• This diversity includes attempts to maintain international academic standing, micromanaging institutional finances, participation in various committees across different institutions, and seeking administrative positions such as directors, vice-chancellors, and government secretaries.
• This dispersion of focus can lead to inefficiencies and a lack of dedicated attention to critical administrative tasks.
• Scientists May Not Have Skills to Be an Effective Administrator
• The common belief that successful scientists can effortlessly become competent administrators ignores the crucial difference between the skills needed for scientific work and those necessary for effective administration.
• Managing complex institutions, distributing resources, and making organisational decisions involve a specific set of skills that may not match the qualities typically linked to accomplished scientists.
• The Lack of Comprehensive Training
• The lack of thorough training makes it harder for scientists to take on administrative roles.
• Tasks like choosing the right metrics, handling conflicts of interest, and setting priorities often demand skills that are not naturally cultivated through scientific training.
• Administration is the art of translating policy into outcomes — scientists are simply not trained to prioritise between time, cost, or precision, and certainly not in what proportions.
• The Issue of Conflicts of Interest and Quality Control
• The intertwined roles of scientists as academics and administrators can foster conflicts of interest within institutions.
• Academic rivalries, bureaucratic red tape, and compromised quality control can emerge, resulting in detrimental consequences such as high plagiarism rates, unethical publication practices, and compromised scientific outcomes.
• The Absence of Nation-Wide Transfer System
• In a more harmful manner, the progress of scientific careers and important projects has been severely damaged by factors such as competition and egotism.
• The absence of a nationwide transfer system for both scientists and science administrators only amplifies the control certain institutions have and contributes to internal divisions.
• Allowing those within the system to also regulate it can lead to clear drawbacks.

Historical Roots

• Concentration of High-End Equipment
• The economic constraints faced by India in the aftermath of Independence led to a pragmatic decision to concentrate high-end scientific equipment in a handful of institutions, notably the IITs.
• This concentration created a system of gatekeepers who controlled access to critical resources, giving rise to a hierarchical structure where a select few institutions held disproportionate influence and power.
• The Concept of Gatekeepers and Institutional Captures
• Over time, these gatekeepers solidified their positions, accumulating power, government patronage, and institutional control.
• This gatekeeping system created an environment where young scientists had to navigate a complex web of influence, paying nazranas or tributes to those who controlled access to essential resources.
• Impact on Scientific Careers
• The gatekeeping system not only influenced access to resources but also dictated career trajectories.
• The nexus between institutional power and individual careers became a defining feature, with appointments, awards, and foreign accolades often contingent on maintaining favourable relations with the gatekeepers.
• Scientists who found themselves in conflict with this system faced significant hurdles, leading to the destruction of promising careers and stifling genuine scientific outcomes.
• Normalisation of Unethical Practices
• The gatekeeping system has normalised unethical practices within Indian science.
• Instances of high plagiarism rates, paid publications in disreputable journals, and under-the-table dealings to secure government funding have become ingrained in the culture.
• This erosion of ethical standards has not only compromised the quality of scientific research but has also perpetuated a system where personal connections hold more sway than merit.

Comparison with the U.S. Model

• In the US, Scientists selected for administrative roles are identified early in their careers and undergo specific training for managerial tasks.
• The emphasis is on maintaining a clear division between scientific pursuits and administrative responsibilities.
• In contrast, India''s science administration has traditionally involved senior scientists assuming administrative roles without a clear separation between the two functions.
• This integration has led to challenges, as the skill sets required for effective scientific research often differ from those essential for efficient administration.

Conclusion

• As India strives for economic and strategic advancement, reforming its science administration emerges as a critical imperative.
• Addressing challenges such as low research expenditure, the outsized role of senior scientists, historical gatekeeping practices, etc., can pave the way for a more efficient and resilient science establishment.
• The separation of scientists and administrators, coupled with comprehensive training and a strategic overhaul, is crucial to realising India''s scientific potential and achieving its ambitious goals.