Contents
Introduction
India ranks 40th on the Global Innovation Index 2024, yet persistent gaps in research funding, fellowships, basic infrastructure, and industry–academia linkages show that STEM advancement requires strengthening foundational systems rather than chasing glamorous technological breakthroughs.
Necessity of Strengthening the ‘Roots’ of STEM Education in India
- Basic Research is the Foundation of Future Innovation: Scientific innovation typically arises from decades of foundational inquiry. The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physics stemmed from work on quantum mechanics done in the 1980s—long before quantum computing existed. India’s own success stories—ISRO’s cryogenic engine, Green Revolution technologies, CSIR drug discovery platforms—originated from sustained basic research, not quick-fix missions. Thus, long-term national technological capacities require a strong base of curiosity-driven research.
- Structural Weaknesses Undermine India’s Research Ecosystem
- Fellowship Delays and Poor Funding (Hygiene Factors – Herzberg’s Theory): Government fellowships often arrive after months of delay, demotivating researchers. Non-NET fellowships remain at ₹8,000/month since 2012, below minimum wage, forcing scholars into extra jobs and reducing time for research. Basic financial stability is a hygiene factor essential for meaningful scientific output.
- Weak University Infrastructure: Over 70% of India’s PhD students are in state universities where lab infrastructure, libraries, and supervisory capacities are inadequate (AISHE, 2023). Strong roots require strengthening these institutions, not only elite IITs or IISERs.
- Over-politicisation and Narrow Topic Selection Hampers Scientific Temper: Restricting research topics to “national priorities” only addresses present needs, not future unknowns.
Advanced scientific nations—from the U.S. (Bell Labs) to Japan—succeeded by allowing researchers freedom to explore non-applied questions. Innovation emerges from ecosystems, not command-and-control research agendas. - Disconnect Between Industry and Academia: India suffers from: Minimal industry-funded PhDs (almost none outside IITs), Weak R&D expenditure (0.65% of GDP, OECD 2023), Poor collaborative culture. Strengthening roots requires building translational research ecosystems, research parks, and industry-ready PhD training—not announcing glamorous “quantum missions” without foundational capacity.
- Need to Strengthen Non-STEM Disciplines for High-Quality STEM: Humanities and social sciences enable ethical reasoning, social analysis, design thinking, and policy understanding essential for STEM leadership. Countries with strong STEM capabilities—Germany, South Korea—invest equally in critical thinking and liberal arts. Weakness in these disciplines narrows scientific imagination.
Why Fundamental Improvements Must Be Prioritised Over Glamorous Scientific Pursuits
- Without Basics, Megaprojects Collapse: Ambitious missions in AI, quantum, space, semiconductors or biotech require: Stable scholarships, Strong university laboratories, High-quality supervisors and transparent funding mechanisms. Without these roots, high-tech missions become dependent on foreign technology.
- Glamour Cannot Substitute Systemic Repair: Announcing new missions while researchers go unpaid for months is counterproductive. Sustained progress needs: Predictable funding cycles, Meritocratic selection of supervisors, Upgraded labs. Reliable procurement systems
These ensure scientific continuity. - Long-term National Competitiveness Relies on Foundational Quality: Countries like China built world-class technology by first investing massively in: PhD training, Faculty hiring, Research funding and university ecosystems. India must replicate this foundational model, not only aspire for high-end technological milestones.
Conclusion
As K. VijayRaghavan notes in The Scientific Indian, enduring innovation emerges from strong ecosystems, not sporadic breakthroughs. Strengthening India’s STEM roots is indispensable for genuine scientific self-reliance and long-term technological leadership.
