Full Professor at Indian Institute of Science (IISc) || Co-founder at AGNIT Semiconductors Pvt. Ltd. || Investigator, GEECI a.k.a. GaN Fab || Ex-Intel || Ex-IBM || Ex-Infineon || Ex-IIT Bombay || MIT TR-35 Awardee
𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚 𝐂𝐚𝐧'𝐭 𝐆𝐞𝐭 𝐚 𝐍𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐞 (2/𝐍) This is my second post in this series. While it's a difficult question, I thought of writing about another major gap in our ecosystem, which I hope the stakeholders address soon. Many of the world's most significant inventions have emerged from scientific communities actively seeking to address complex challenges, thereby extending the frontiers of knowledge and technology. Their continual advancement is largely attributed to the proactive support from their governments and industries in aspiring to be innovation leaders. In contrast, Indian industries and several government agencies/committees have shown a tendency towards caution, primarily investing in established technologies rather than exploring the uncharted territories of futuristic research. This conservative approach keeps us far from being at the forefront. Furthermore, attempting to address scientific problems initially identified and tackled by communities in more technologically advanced countries, places Indian researchers at a significant disadvantage. By the time these problem statements become apparent to Indian policymakers, academics in these advanced nations have often already made considerable progress in addressing them. This dynamic results in a perpetual state of playing catch-up, making it challenging for India to lead in pioneering new and groundbreaking innovations. Being in a constant race scenario restricts Indian researchers' ability to contribute to futuristic problems. Another pivotal aspect is the risk-taking behavior of Indian industries (and to an extent funding agencies). Industries and governments in advanced nations have a history of betting on unproven technologies and future science, a gamble that has often paid off. Indian industries and govt. agencies, on the other hand, tend to play it safe, focusing on mature, established technologies. Also, to align with the socialist principles that emphasize benefits for a broader section of society, our agencies have often prioritized the distribution of funds across a wide array of projects over a few high-risk high-reward projects. This approach may inadvertently dilute the focus on the quality and potential impact of the research being funded. High-quality, impactful research necessitates not only adequate funding but also stringent quality control. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝: These problems are not insurmountable. To break this cycle, India (both the govt. and Industries) must foster a more risk-taking culture, increase investment in futuristic research, and encourage to fund academic research of futuristic nature. Additionally, building an infrastructure that supports high-level research and nurturing a policy environment conducive to innovation are crucial. Besides, a shift towards a quality-centric funding model is essential for fostering an environment where cutting-edge, impactful research can thrive and not the mediocre ones.
ManyMangoes 🥭
7mo
Insightful perspective! Have you considered leveraging collaborative research platforms to engage global experts, thereby bypassing geographical and funding limitations? ManyMangoes believes in harnessing the power of diverse international intelligence to fast-track innovation and breakthroughs.
Nobel Prize laureates are renowned for their extraordinary intellect and unwavering dedication. However, in today's environment, individuals who aspire to such achievements often face significant challenges in securing desirable positions. Difficulty in finding employment at reputable institutions limits access to resources and opportunities. Therefore, aspirations for the Nobel Prize may seem unattainable, as the entrenched culture of lobbying within our scientific community tends to undermine and discourage aspiring individuals. Are you truly convinced that Indians respect Indian intellect, given the prevalence of lobbying and favoritism in the scientific community? When hiring processes are marred by bias and favoritism, driven by the influence of referees or external factors, the prospect of Nobel Prize recognition becomes increasingly distant. Unfortunately, this perpetuates a cycle where talented and innovative minds struggle to secure employment or access resources, ultimately leading many to abandon their aspirations. This narrative reflects the harsh reality of our Indian society, underscoring the need for systemic reforms before aspirations for the Nobel Prize can be realized.
Jayakumar S
9mo
Hello Dr., Let's set aside the Nobel Prize and focus solely on the AI space, which is a global phenomenon. Are there any research papers or works from students and professors in so-called top institutions that are widely referenced in this field? Acknowledgment comes with innovative contributions and associated efforts. However, in AI, numerous courses are being initiated, and certificates are being issued. Where is AlexNet from Toronto University? Where are these AI certificates? Mediocrity has infiltrated or there is no energy to innovate? Best Regards, jk
Putting a slightly different point of view...We are in a time where influencers openly tell on social media that those who study well are useless and are not successful. The irony is that such influencers end up winning national awards. Being a college dropout is considered fascinating and getting higher education is considered mediocre stuff. We celebrate social media influencers, sportsmen, politicians, and actors, but mostly, scientists are not celebrated. People who get into research are thought to be those who cannot do anything else in their lives. After PhD, researchers struggle for good employment opportunities. Well, nothing against anyone, but I don't think this kind of culture is conducive to the promotion of research, motivating good students to take research as a career and do the level of research needed for a Nobel prize.
Binay Tripathy
9mo
It was a nice post professor. One more thing can be added. It is untrue that our industry are not risk taking. But they dont invest much on research because of lack of funds and the necessity. Their business work well without investing in research. It is also because we don't have reserves currency status like the united state. Most of the innovation in USA are funded by money printing machine with very low interest because Dollar is the defacto reserve currency for whole world. And Debt is considered as best form of capital. Our industry don't have that luxury and too much debt is not considered a right approach for business in India. Funding by Government might solve the issue to a larger extent. Surely large business have to put some part of profit into research in the future.
I'm just an amateur history enthusiast, but the development of empiricism in Europe preceded by Renaissance thinking and followed by the Scottish Enlightenment seem to be powerful factors behind the modern scientific movement in the West. A combination of forces including mercantilism, colonialism and a large pool of tinkerers and hobbyists from the leisure class has contributed to the growth of the research mindset in these parts of the world. Education and free exchange of ideas was also easier in these geographic locations. I believe India is still recovering psychologically from the survival struggles of the pre-independence era. Perhaps that explains the aversion to risk though those who have emigrated have a strong record of innovation.
Deepak Maun
9mo
Unfortunately, we are moving in opposite direction. Just revisit the way previous 2-3 editions of National Science Congress have proceeded. And the last one was simply canceled. To top it all, look at the way academic freedom is being trampled (sadly, this is not limited to India but across the world). We have PhD students paying money to do research or getting 8000 inr a month as stipend. And growing performativity by faculty focused on increasing count of publications instead of doing quality publications. Of course, there may be some exceptions but so rare are these that to expect a few of them to change direction of Science and social science research in country is to expect too much.
Wasi Uddin
8mo
Prof. Mayank Shrivastava We should analyze the last 15 years Nobel(respective category) and look for following: 1. Have the used most advanced tools flr research 2. How many research institutes collaborated for the research. 3. How much time it took to get to the conclusion. 4. Why it was worth Nobel Prize. 5. On a lighter note, Prof. Mayank Shrivastava can we write a joint review article on last 15 year Nobel in Physics.
Scientists in India, never aspire for the Nobel prize because of their "mindset" and "govt. policies". Mindset: For example, Recruiters (premier institutes) never appreciate the research work of India over research someone did in foreign institutes. So, he/she always follows and continues the existing work in foreign countries (rather own creativity). So, Indians become a contributors but not creators in research. The best example of a lack of mindset is " Nobel prize on the discovery of graphene and quantum dots" Govt policies: Govt. never trusts early career researchers as you mentioned not risk-taking. When GoI (unlike foreign universities) trying to be with all ( chosen caste over science in asst. professor recruitment) , the Nobel prize becomes a daydream in india..
IIT Tirupati
9mogood take though. here are two alternative thoughts which have been pronounced by thinkers of modern science, for example David Bohm in Creativity book. The creativity of the Nobel level starts from inspiration. There are many invention of Nobel laureates which started somewhere with inspiration. And that has eventually lead to invention and creation of new solutions. This is the primary focus where we as country must be giving. The culture of research should be based on inspiration. The other point is problem formulation. We are lacking well formulated problems (not to misunderstand with welformed formula of logic). Recall the example of Hilbert's 23 problems which has led to many ground breaking advancement of science/math/computation. Who should be doing this job? The experience professors or scientists who have seen the world of knowledge are the right people who can throw a challenge to the next gen to solve the problems. This we are yet to see as a research culture in India. Inspiration and formulated problems are the key apart from the points you have mentioned.