Choose Report Type
Publication Date
Report Upload
download
(64.31 MB)
vertical
Science & Technology
PDF Text
Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 1 V. K. Saraswat, V.K. Singh, A. A. Sonkusare, Thyagaraju B.M., N.Suroor, S. Kaur, D. Narang, P. Chanana,
T. Agarwal, A. Dhamija,
Science & Technology Division, NITI Aayog
S.Bhattacharya
Adjunct Professor, School for Sustainable Futures, Amrita University; & Former Chief Scientist, CSIR-NIScPR
P. Arora
Former Adviser, Department of Science & Technology (DST), New Delhi
A.Kanaujia
Scientist-C, CSIR-NIScPR, New Delhi
ISBN No: 978-81-991080-8-0
Disclaimer: The information presented in this report is based on insights gathered from an extensive consultation
process comprising open-ended inputs, survey, regional consultative meetings, and a series of brainstorming sessions
on “Ease of Doing R&D”. The objective of this report is guided by the principle of Removing Obstacles, Promoting
Enablers, and in the efforts the report presents a compilation of various obstacles faced by R&D practitioners, along
with a set of recommendations to address them. Thus, the report is a reflection of the collective wisdom of different
role players in the R&D ecosystem.
© 2026 Science & Technology Division, NITI Aayog. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, distributed, modified, reposted, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means
mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without due attribution to the report, as suggested
herein. Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 4 VC Message Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 7
S&T Minister Message Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 11 Foreward Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 14 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers i
Acknowledgement
This report is a reflection of insights and collective wisdom of various stakeholders in the Science,
Technology and Innovation ecosystem of the country. The inputs on various aspects of the R&D
systems and processes, and the action roadmap has been developed through a consultative process
involving institutional leaders, policy practitioners, industry leaders and distinguished scientists
and researchers.
First of all, we would like to express sincere gratitude to Shri Suman K. Bery, Hon’ble Vice
Chairman, NITI Aayog, who has been a constant source of encouragement for the various
initiatives towards improving the Science & Technology ecosystem of the country, including the
Ease of Doing R&D exercise. We are equally grateful to the guidance and support provided by
Ms. Nidhi Chhibber, CEO, NITI Aayog and Shri BVR Subrahmanyam, Former CEO, NITI
Aayog, throughout the entire exercise.
We take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude to esteemed dignitaries, namely Smt.
Anandiben Patel, Hon’ble Governor of Uttar Pradesh; Shri Jishnu Dev Varma, Hon’ble
Governor of Telangana; Shri Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar, Hon’ble Governor of Kerala;
and Dr. Jitendra Singh, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Science
and Technology, for their august presence and inspiring addresses during the different regional
consultative meetings.
We would like to record our deepest respect and gratitude to distinguished guests and participants
in the regional consultative meetings, including Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Former Chairman of the
Atomic Energy Commission; Dr. R. A. Mashelkar, Former Director General, CSIR; Dr. N.
Kalaiselvi, Director General, CSIR & Secretary DSIR; Dr M. Ravichandran, Secretary, MoES;
Prof. Ashutosh Sharma, Former President, INSA; Prof. Vinod Kumar Singh, President, NASI;
and Dr Shekhar Mande, President, INSA & Former DG, CSIR; for their guidance and suggestions.
We extend our profound thanks and appreciation to distinguished institutional leaders for their
pivotal role in hosting and co-organizing the regional consultation meetings, including Shri
Sudhir M. Bobde, Addl. Chief Secretary to the Hon’ble Governor of UP; Dr. Harender Singh
Bisht, Director, CSIR-IIP; Prof. M. S. Gaur, Director, IIT Jammu; Ms P. Bharathi, Secretary,
DST, Gujarat and Dr. Narottam Sahoo, Member Secretary, GUJCOST; Dr. Srinivasa Reddy,
Director, CSIR-IICT Hyderabad; Prof. Devendra Jalihal, Director, IIT Guwahati; and Prof. N.V.
Chalapathi Rao, Director, NCESS, Thiruvananthapuram.
We gratefully acknowledge the invaluable contributions of the eminent institutional leaders
– Directors of National laboratories, Vice-Chancellors and Heads from National Institutes,
Universities, Research laboratories, Scientific ministries, who participated in the regional
consultative meetings and the brainstorming sessions to deliberate on various aspects of Ease
of Doing R&D. Their collective insights were instrumental in enabling us to accurately identify
and compile the challenges currently faced by the Indian research community, and develop a
suggestive action roadmap. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers ii
We would also like to thank the State Support Mission team of NITI Aayog, for their generous
financial support, the R&N Division, Communications Cell and creative graphics team of NITI
Aayog, for their indispensable roles in this whole exercise.
Finally, the authors acknowledge the collective efforts of every stakeholder who contributed to
this endeavor, through active consultation or passive support; their involvement at different stages
was vital to the successful completion of this exercise and preparation of this report. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers iii
Executive Summary
India’s science, technology, and innovation ecosystem has evolved significantly over the past few
decades, emerging as a major contributor to global knowledge production and innovation. The
steady rise in research publications, improved performance in global innovation indices, and the
rapid expansion of the startup ecosystem reflect the growing depth of India’s scientific capabilities.
This progress has been achieved despite relatively modest levels of investment and persistent
structural inefficiencies. With Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) remaining
well below that of leading economies, and with bottlenecks affecting researchers throughout the
research lifecycle, there is a clear need to re-examine and strengthen the enabling environment
for R&D in the country. Improving the “Ease of Doing Research & Development (EoDR&D)” is
therefore central not only to enhancing research productivity, but also to ensuring that scientific
efforts translate effectively into technological and socio-economic outcomes aligned with India’s
long-term vision of becoming a knowledge-driven economy.
This report is the outcome of a comprehensive exercise conducted by NITI Aayog to identify
key barriers affecting the R&D ecosystem and develop a set of actionable recommendations. The
exercise draws on a wide evidence base, including open-ended inputs from research institutions,
a structured nationwide survey of researchers conducted in collaboration with national science
academies, eight regional consultative meetings covering diverse geographies and institutional
types, and a series of focused brainstorming sessions with government departments, funding
agencies, and industry stakeholders. This multi-layered approach has ensured that the analysis
captures both systemic issues and the experiences of researchers, administrators, and institutional
leaders across the country. The findings point to a set of deeply interlinked challenges that span
funding, human resources, institutional processes, translational capacity, access to resources,
regional disparities, and governance mechanisms.
A central concern emerging from the analysis is the nature and utilization of R&D funding in India.
While overall allocations have increased in absolute terms, the level of investment relative to GDP
remains low, and the funding ecosystem continues to be heavily dependent on public sources, with
limited participation from the private sector and philanthropic institutions. This is compounded
by inefficiencies in the way funds are allocated, disbursed, and utilized. Researchers face complex
and often repetitive application processes across multiple funding portals, long delays in proposal
evaluation and fund release, and rigid financial rules that limit flexibility during project execution.
The current fund flow mechanisms, coupled with accounting and compliance requirements, often
result in delays, disruptions, and underutilization of resources. Issues such as limited overhead
provisions and cumbersome procurement procedures further constrain the effective use of funds,
ultimately affecting the pace and quality of research.
Equally significant are the challenges related to human resources, which form the backbone
of any research ecosystem. Despite India’s large pool of young talent, the overall density of
researchers remains low, and the system struggles to attract and retain high-quality human capital.
The postdoctoral ecosystem is particularly underdeveloped, limiting the continuity and depth of
research. Delays in fellowship disbursal, rigid recruitment processes, and a large number of unfilled
positions in institutions further weaken the research base. At the same time, career pathways Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers iv
in R&D remain uncertain and often unattractive, especially in comparison to opportunities in
the private sector and emerging technology domains, further reducing research productivity and
discouraging long-term engagement in R&D careers.
Institutional structures and internal processes also emerge as a major area of concern. In many
institutions, the absence of dedicated and professionally managed R&D offices results in
fragmented administrative systems, placing a significant burden on researchers to manage non-
scientific tasks. The lack of standardized guidelines and clear operating procedures leads to
inconsistencies and delays in approvals, procurement, and project management. Decision-making
processes are often overly centralized, with limited delegation of authority, which slows down
routine operations and reduces institutional agility. At a broader level, there is limited emphasis on
leadership accountability, strategic prioritization of research areas, and periodic self-assessment
of institutional systems and processes. The absence of clear and enabling policies for faculty
entrepreneurship further limits the ability of institutions to translate research outcomes into
tangible innovations.
The gap between knowledge creation and its translation into products and technologies remains
another critical challenge. While India performs strongly in terms of publications and patents, the
conversion of these outputs into commercially viable solutions is relatively weak. This is due to
a combination of factors, including ineffective technology transfer mechanisms, lack of clarity in
intellectual property management, and limited access to prototyping and validation infrastructure.
Financial and policy constraints, including limited availability of translational funding and
disincentives in areas such as taxation, further inhibit the commercialization of research. As a
result, a substantial portion of research outcomes does not progress beyond the laboratory stage.
Access to knowledge and research resources also presents a significant constraint, particularly
for institutions outside the top tier. While premier institutions may have relatively better access
to scientific databases, journals, and advanced infrastructure, a large number of universities and
research institutions, especially at the state level or those in the private sector, face limitations in
accessing these essential resources. High costs of journal subscriptions, limited availability of
shared infrastructure, and fragmented access mechanisms create disparities in research capability
across institutions. These gaps not only affect the quality of research but also limit opportunities
for collaboration and interdisciplinary work, which are increasingly important in contemporary
science and technology.
The challenges faced by state institutions deserve particular attention, given their critical role in
expanding the research base of the country. Many of these institutions operate under significant
resource constraints, with limited funding, inadequate infrastructure, and high teaching loads
that leave little time for research. They often face barriers in accessing national-level funding
opportunities and lack the institutional support systems required to build and sustain research
programs. As a result, there are pronounced regional and institutional disparities in research
capacity, which, if left unaddressed, could limit the overall growth and inclusiveness of India’s
R&D ecosystem.
Finally, the report highlights gaps in monitoring, evaluation, and policy administration that affect Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers v
the overall effectiveness of the R&D ecosystem. Existing systems are largely compliance-oriented
and do not adequately capture research outcomes, institutional performance, or the impact of
policy interventions. There is limited use of data-driven approaches to inform decision-making,
and coordination across different agencies and stakeholders remains fragmented. In addition, there
is a lack of structured capacity-building mechanisms for research administrators, which further
constrains the efficiency of institutional processes.
Taken together, these challenges point to the need for a systemic and coordinated reform effort
aimed at removing procedural bottlenecks and creating a more enabling environment for research
and innovation. The report outlines a comprehensive set of recommendations anchored in the
principle of “Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers”, with a focus on enhancing investment
in R&D, streamlining funding and administrative processes, strengthening human resource
systems, improving institutional governance, enabling technology translation, expanding access
to resources, and building robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks. A key emphasis is placed
on moving towards a more trust-based and outcome-oriented governance model, supported by
digital public infrastructure and greater institutional autonomy.
By addressing the structural and systemic constraints identified in this report, India can unlock
the full potential of its scientific talent, accelerate the translation of knowledge into impact, and
position itself as a global leader in innovation. Such a transformation will be critical to achieving
the broader vision of Viksit Bharat @2047, where science, technology, and innovation serve as
key drivers of economic growth, societal progress, and national self-reliance. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Contents
S. No.TitlePage No.
Acknowledgementi
Executive Summaryiii
1. Introduction1
1.1
1.2
1.3
Ease of Doing Research & Development Initiative
Objectives
Methodology
3
4
4
2. The Consultation Process7
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Open Ended Inputs
Survey in association with the National Science Academies
Regional Consultative Meetings
Brainstorming Sessions
8
9
10
23
3. Challenges & Recommendations25
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
R&D Funding and Utilization
Attracting and retaining quality Human Resource
Institutional Structures and Processes
Technology Development, Translation & Commercialization
Access to Knowledge & Resources
R&D in State Institutions
Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building and Policy Administration
26
34
38
44
51
53
59
4.
Charting the Road Ahead: Towards a robust & future-ready
R&D Ecosystem
63
4.1
4.2
Summary of Recommendations and Actions
Towards an Enabling R&D Ecosystem
64
69
Appendix
Appendix 1: List of Participants of Regional Consultative
Meetings
70 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 1
1
Introduction Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 2
India has made significant progress in Science, Technology and Innovation during the last few
decades. It is now ranked among the world’s leading producers of scientific knowledge, as
reflected in the steady growth of research publications and a marked increase in patent filings.
India’s performance in the Global Innovation Index (GII) has also shown consistent improvement,
alongside a rapid expansion of the startup ecosystem, positioning India among the largest
startup hubs globally. These trends underscore the growing depth and breadth of India’s science,
technology and innovation capabilities.
Despite these gains, the funding structure in India’s STI ecosystem remains heavily skewed towards
public investment. As against the pattern in leading knowledge economies, in India the government
funding continues to account for the dominant share of R&D expenditure, while private sector
participation remains relatively modest. As a result, India’s Gross Expenditure on Research and
Development (GERD) stands at approximately 0.65% of GDP, which is significantly lower than
that of countries such as the United States (~3.5%), China (~2.4%), and the Republic of Korea
(~4.5%). This comparatively low level of investment constrains the capacity and scale required
for sustained technological advancement. In addition, India’s researcher density, measured in
full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers per million population, remains far below levels observed
in both developed and emerging economies. This highlights a structural gap in human capital
availability for R&D.
This unique phenomenon of India’s higher innovation output with lower inputs has also been noted
in the Global Innovation Index report 2025, which characterises India as an “overperformer” on
innovation outputs relative to its inputs. The GII 2025 report cautions, however, that without
addressing persistent gaps in R&D investment, human resources, and institutional capacity, India
risks stagnation or decline in its relative global innovation standing. Therefore, it is very important
to address relevant systemic and structural aspects of the Indian STI ecosystem.
India’s STI ecosystem nevertheless possesses substantial untapped potential. With focused policies
and programs, improved implementation mechanisms, and impactful reforms aimed at easing the
Research and Development (R&D) processes, this potential can be systematically unlocked. By
addressing structural and systemic issues, streamlining administrative and financial processes, and
improving the overall ease of doing R&D, India can achieve a more robust STI ecosystem capable
of effectively translating scientific capabilities into national outcomes. Such measures are central
to India’s long-term vision of Viksit Bharat @ 2047, which envisages technological self-reliance,
sustained economic growth, and the evolution of India into a vibrant knowledge-based economy.
Achieving these objectives will require focused and time-bound interventions over the coming
decades, particularly in mobilising resources and modernising R&D governance and institutional
frameworks. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 3
1.1 Ease of Doing Research & Development Initiative
The initiative on improving the Ease of Doing Research & Development (EODR&D) in the STI
ecosystem draws its motivation from the long standing call for reforms by the academic and
research communities. In the 102nd Indian Science Congress (2015), the Hon’ble Prime Minister
(PM) remarked about ‘Ease of Doing Science’, highlighting the needs- (a) To help scientists focus
on R&D rather than spending hours on administrative procedures, (b) To incentivise research
activities thereby attracting talent, and (c) Expanding the S&T ecosystem. These remarks were
reiterated by the Hon’ble PM in the Prime Minister’s Science, Technology, and Innovation
Advisory Council (PM-STIAC) meeting of 2020. Similarly, in the Anusandhan National Research
Foundation (ANRF) Board Meeting held on 11th September 2024, the Hon’ble PM emphasized
on the need to reshape India’s R&D landscape by identifying and removing barriers in the R&D
ecosystem.
At the 108th Indian Science Congress held in January 2023, the Hon’ble PM again emphasized the
need to foster an environment of “Ease of Doing Science” in India. He emphasized on minimizing
bureaucracy and red tape to make it easier for scientists to conduct research, and called for an
enabling institutional framework to make India the most advanced laboratory of modern science
during the “Amrit Kaal” (the 25-year period leading up to 100 years of independence). The
PM urged young scientists to focus on futuristic areas, including quantum computing, artificial
intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and semiconductor research. He
further stressed that scientific efforts should move out of laboratories and reach the land (“Jameen”),
ensuring that the impact of research is visible in real life.
Several initiatives have been taken during the last few years to support ease of doing science.
These include creation of Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) in 2023, launch of
Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) in 2025, and notifications of special provisions
for scientific departments/ ministries in the Government Financial Regulations (GFR) during
2023-2025. However, India’s current R&D ecosystem still faces several challenges, including
complex administrative processes, bureaucratic systems, rigid financial procedures, inefficient
resource utilization etc. Other challenges include the lack of standardization, disparities in grant
management and compliance processes across institutions, poor monitoring and evaluation, and
accountability gaps. Above all, there exists a significant trust deficit between the R&D project
granting agency and researchers due to several reasons. The researchers are often not able to
utilize their time purely for R&D activities without being worried about the administrative issues.
There are also issues of capacity as well as rigidities in the science administration systems, which
are largely internal to the institutions.
In view of the importance of the issue and the magnitude of problems it is causing, NITI Aayog has
carried out a systematic and comprehensive study towards identifying the major barriers in doing
R&D in India, addressing the overall ecosystem for R&D in the country. The exercise focused
on all major aspects of the R&D ecosystem in detail, including funding and support structure at
national and state level, regulatory & policy frameworks, and the administrative structures &
processes governing the allocation and utilization of R&D grants. A multi-dimensional approach
was taken to understand major impediments and develop recommendations for corrective action. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 4
1.2 Objectives
The EODR&D exercise was guided by an overarching goal and framework, termed as ‘Removing
Obstacles, Promoting Enablers (ROPE)’. While the systematic methodological framework
used helped in identifying obstacles, extensive consultations with relevant stakeholders guided
development of actionable insights and suggestions.
More specifically, the exercise attempted to:
● identify key obstacles affecting the R&D ecosystem across all dimensions (funding, regulatory
processes, institutional structures, systemic barriers etc.), and
● develop a strategic roadmap to overcome the challenges through concrete interventions, policy
reforms, and institutional support mechanisms required to strengthen the R&D ecosystem.
While addressing these objectives, the two critical dimensions of the R&D ecosystem and the
constituent organisations have been underscored. One is the internal factors localised within the
academic and research institutions such as structures and processes of the individual organisation/
Institute. The other is the external factors which are outside the institutional systems and involve
broader aspects related to funding, policies, rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the
government(s) and regulatory bodies.
1.3 Methodology
Building on existing efforts and responding to the persistent challenges in the R&D ecosystem,
NITI Aayog adopted a systematic approach comprising open-ended inputs, a structured survey,
regional consultations, and multiple brainstorming sessions. The entire exercise was thus structured
around following four key components:
● Gathering Open-ended Inputs from R&D laboratories across different ministries and
departments,
● Deploying a structured survey in association with the two national science academies to
capture ground-level insights directly from scientists and academicians,
● Region-wise consultative meetings guided by a focused and outcome-oriented agenda, and
● Organizing involved brainstorming sessions with government departments, funding
agencies, regulatory bodies, Industry leaders and different Industry associations, to develop
actionable recommendations.
The exercise started with gathering open-ended inputs from R&D labs under different ministries
and departments. The initial effort to obtain open-ended inputs not only provided an informed
account of the overall STI ecosystem and associated challenges, but also gave the confidence that
the EODR&D initiative is extremely important, timely and worth pursuing. The inputs obtained
helped shape further activities, which involved the regional consultative meetings and the survey
through the national science academies. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 5
The regional consultative meetings were then planned in such a manner that they facilitated a
correct and comprehensive identification of the various challenges associated with doing R&D,
across different regions and institutional setups in India. Each regional consultative meeting
involved consultations with institutional leaders and senior research administrators from all kinds
of R&D institutions, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) under central and state governments,
institutions managed by private bodies, and industrial R&D units etc. located in the region.
The structured survey complemented the regional consultative meetings in the sense that
while regional consultative meetings saw participation of directors, vice chancellors and other
institutional leaders, the survey was targeted to reach individual researchers to gather their inputs
and insights. The survey questionnaire was designed jointly by NITI Aayog and Indian National
Science Academy (INSA) and conducted in online mode through the two science academies-
INSA and The National Science Academy of India (NASI). Some of the participants of the
regional consultative meetings also took part in the survey, as the survey and regional consultative
meetings overlapped in time.
The inputs and suggestions obtained through the open-ended inputs, structured survey, and the
regional consultative meetings, were then discussed extensively with various stakeholders through
multiple brainstorming sessions. These sessions involved participation of senior officials from
relevant government departments/ ministries, leaders from science academies, Industry leaders,
and representatives from different Industry associations etc. The brainstorming sessions helped
in detailed analysis, prioritizing key areas and developing recommendations for the strategic
roadmap. The entire consultation process is described in more detail in chapter 2.
The whole exercise underscores ‘Ease of Doing R&D’ as a systems level function of the R&D
ecosystem. The focus is on identifying impediments that affect researchers’ ability for knowledge
creation, translation and application and come up with key actions that are required to create
enabling opportunities for reducing the challenges faced by researchers across the entire research
life cycle. The analysis and outcomes from the four activities of the exercise are organized in
following seven key pillars: (a) R&D Funding and Utilization, (b) Attracting and retaining quality
Human Resource, (c) Institutional Structures and Processes, (d) Technology Development,
Translation & Commercialization, (e) Access to Knowledge & Resources (f) R&D in State Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 6
Institutions, and (h) Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building & Policy Administration. Each
of the pillars corresponds to a key dimension of ‘Ease of Doing R&D’, and serve as the structural
subsection of the analysis. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 7
CHAPTER 2
THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
The Consultation Process
2 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 8
To develop a grounded and holistic assessment of challenges faced by R&D practitioners in India,
NITI Aayog adopted a comprehensive process of consultations. This involved incorporating inputs
from key stakeholders, results from a large-scale survey of researchers conducted with national
science academies, extensive discussions in the regional consultative meetings, and deliberations
in the brainstorming sessions. Together, these efforts ensured that the assessment reflects both
systemic issues and experiences across the diverse R&D landscape.
2.1 Open Ended Inputs
The EODR&D exercise began with obtaining open-ended views from selected R&D institutions
in the country. About 200 R&D institutions under different scientific ministries/ departments of
the central government were contacted through an email to the Director of the institution. The
email aimed to know from each contacted R&D institute if their researchers face some major
difficulties in carrying out R&D activities. They were suggested to respond with special reference
to problems related to availability of R&D funding, regulatory framework and administrative
processes, and the institutional structures in place for R&D, along with any key suggestions they
may like to share. The key goal behind this process was to assess if the lack of ‘Ease of Doing
R&D’ exists as a major concern for researchers. Responses were requested in about three weeks
time and in this short duration, about 60+ R&D institutions shared their inputs.
The responses received were analysed in detail to understand both, the major areas of concern
and the magnitude of problems. The key concerns flagged in the inputs were mainly systemic in
nature and revolved around inadequate and delayed R&D funding, complex and rigid processes of
procurement of equipment and recruiting human resources, and weak institutional structures and
mechanisms for fostering collaboration and technology transfer & commercialization. The Image
1 presents a word cloud plot derived from the input text. The size of the words in the picture is
proportional to their frequency of occurrence in the combined inputs from all the institutions.
The analysis of open-ended inputs indicated the existence of a wide variety of problems in the R&D
ecosystem, which in turn suggested the need for a detailed and comprehensive exercise to assess
the ‘Ease of Doing R&D’. The open-ended input exercise did not include the Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs), which is another major institution category engaging in R&D activities.
Accordingly, the next set of steps were thought and planned for carrying out a comprehensive
exercise involving all relevant stakeholders in the R&D ecosystem. This included in-person
regional consultative meetings and online survey on Ease of Doing R&D. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 9
Image 1. Word Cloud plot drawn from open ended inputs
2.2 Survey in association with the National Science Academies
To supplement the individual-level data to the open-ended inputs, a structured survey questionnaire
was formulated in consultation with the Indian National Science Academy (INSA), New Delhi. The
objective was to get inputs about R&D experience and environment from individual researchers
and scientists. The survey questionnaire was circulated to a select set of established researchers/
scientists across the country by utilizing the rich network of learned Fellows and Associate fellows
of INSA and the National Academy of Sciences, India (NASI), Prayagraj. Some of the participants
of the regional consultative meetings (detailed in next section) also participated in the survey, as
both exercises overlapped in time. The sample population thus represented established researchers
and scientists across different subject areas as well as different geographic regions. The sample
also had inherent diversity in terms of types of institutions, nature of the research, and the gender
of participants.
The survey questionnaire comprised a set of 53 questions organized into 05 sections. A mix of
quantitative and qualitative questions were included, with some requiring selecting one or more
options and others asking for a rating or score. After completing a pilot, the survey was rolled out
in online mode through a Web-based form. A total of 878 successful responses were received and
analysed.
The survey findings highlighted issues of unavailability of adequate and timely funding for
research, limited access to research facilities and shared infrastructure, the rigid administrative
systems in the institutions, the burden of regulations and compliances, aspects related to challenges
in fostering collaborations and translational research etc. The Image 2 presents a network
visualization of some of the key aspects highlighted by participants of the survey. The complete
findings and analysis of the survey have been compiled and presented in a separate report to
provide a more detailed analysis of the responses and also for the purposes of better visualization
and interpretation. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 10
Image 2. Network Visualization of Key aspects highlighted in the survey
2.3 Regional Consultative Meetings
To assess and examine the challenges faced by the R&D practitioners in a much more detailed and
comprehensive manner, a series of regional consultative meetings were organized. The purpose
of the regional consultative meetings was to understand the major issues faced by the R&D
ecosystem.
To identify the various types and the extent of problems faced by the R&D practitioners across the
different types of the institutions located in different geographic regions and focusing on different
scientific disciplines; a systematic approach was taken in planning and organizing the regional
consultative meetings. A total of eight regional consultative meetings were organized across different
parts of the country. Each regional consultative meeting invited participants from institutions
located in a select set of states. The invited participants in each meeting represented institutional
leaders (directors of R&D and academic institutions and Vice Chancellors of Universities) and
some distinguished academicians, researchers and academic/ R&D administrators.
The eight regional consultative meetings combined, featured participation of 430+ distinguished
institutional leaders, academicians and researchers representing major R&D institutions and HEIs
under central and state governments as well as selected private institutions. Almost all major R&D
laboratories under CSIR, DST, DBT, MoES, DRDO, DAE, DoS were represented across different
meetings. Similarly, all major HEIs such as IITs, IISERs, NITs, IIITs, Central Universities and Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 11
State Universities had their institutional leaders attending the consultative meetings. Each regional
consultative meeting had a mix of institutional leaders from different types of institutions located
in that region.
Table 1 presents a quick summary of the key details of the eight regional consultative meetings
organized, and the Image 3 shows the geographical spread of the regional consultative meeting
venues. More details of the eight regional consultative meetings are provided next.
Table 1: Key details of the eight regional consultative meetings
S. No. Date & PlaceKey Sessions
States
Covered
1
27-28 May 2025
at Governor House,
Lucknow
The meeting consisted of four Technical
Sessions:
- Funding and support structures,
- Regulatory and administrative processes,
- Strengthening institutional mechanisms,
- Reforms to enhance Ease of Doing R&D.
Each session included expert presentations
and structured discussions to capture
stakeholder inputs.Uttar
Pradesh
Bihar
2
3-4 June 2025
at CSIR-IIP, Dehradun
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Funding and support structures,
- Regulatory and administrative
frameworks,
- Institutional mechanisms facilitating
R&D.
Uttarakhand
3
14-15 July 2025
at IIT Jammu, Jammu
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Accelerating R&D in academic
institutions,
- Enabling R&D personnel for cutting-edge
research,
- Translating publications and patents into
products.
An Open Forum was also included to
enable broader stakeholder interactions in a
semi-formal setting to get deeper feedback.
Jammu and
Kashmir
Punjab
Himachal
Pradesh
Ladakh Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 12
4
6
th
August 2025
at NITI Aayog,
New Delhi
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Global best practices in R&D,
- Institutional benchmarking for Ease of
Doing R&D,
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems through
funding, infrastructure, and regulatory
reforms.
The programme concluded with consolidated
discussions aimed at identifying actionable
recommendations
Delhi NCR
Haryana
5
12-13 Aug 2025
at Science City,
Ahmedabad
The meeting consisted of four focused
Technical Sessions:
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems (funding
and regulation),
- Access to knowledge resources,
- Institutional structures and processes,
- Applied and translational research.
These sessions were complemented by
two panel discussions synthesising cross-
cutting issues and recommendations
Gujarat
Madhya
Pradesh
Rajasthan
Maharashtra
6
10-11 Sep. 2025
at CSIR – IICT,
Hyderabad
The meeting consisted of four Technical
Sessions:
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems (funding
and regulation),
- Enhancing access to knowledge
resources,
- Institutional structures and processes,
- Applied and translational research.
These sessions were complemented by a
panel discussion and a special session with
senior leadership.
Telangana
Orissa
Andhra
Pradesh
Jharkhand
Chhattisgarh
Goa Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 13
7
15-16 Oct. 2025
at IIT Guwahati,
Guwahati
The meeting consisted of five Technical
Sessions:
- Process streamlining for R&D efficiency,
- Attracting and retaining human resources,
- Technology translation and
commercialization,
- Fostering collaboration and mobility,
- Measuring Ease of Doing R&D.
These sessions were complemented by a
panel discussion on the way forward,
focusing on reform priorities, including
specific issues for the North East Region.
Assam
Arunachal
Pradesh
Manipur
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Sikkim
Mizoram
Tripura
West Bengal
8
30-31 Oct. 2025
at NCESS,
Thiruvananthapuram
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Strengthening the R&D ecosystem,
- Attracting and retaining quality human
resources,
- Technology translation and
commercialization.
The technical sessions were complemented
by a special session highlighting key
findings from surveys and regional
consultations, and a panel discussion on the
way forward to identify reform priorities.
Kerala
Tamil Nadu
Karnataka
Puducherry Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 14
Image 3: Geographical Mapping of EODR&D regional consultative meetings Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 23
2.4 Brainstorming Sessions
To deliberate on the inputs that were received from the survey and the regional consultations, a set
of brainstorming sessions were conducted with the key scientific departments, funding agencies,
and industry stakeholders. The sessions focused on developing recommendations for reform
actions and enabling pathways for Ease of Doing R&D.
Consultations with the senior officials of the Department of Science and Technology (DST),
Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR),
and Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) were first to begin with. This provided an
opportunity to examine the grant mechanisms and disbursement systems, institutional autonomy,
regulatory mechanisms, support structures for translation, and monitoring mechanisms. It further
helped in assessing the operational mechanisms of project approvals and fund disbursals, aligning
the recommendations that emerged with the policy and programmatic initiatives that were already
underway.
Structured interactions were also conducted with industry leaders and industry associations to better
comprehend the challenges faced by the private sector for contributing in R&D, and challenges in
academia-industry collaboration. Further review and guidance were provided through interactions
with the Standing Consultative Committee on EoDR&D, which pondered on the emerged findings,
and helped refine the prioritisation of the recommendations.
The brainstorming sessions were an important part in the consultation process, ensuring that the
closing recommendations are feasible, aligned across stakeholders, and can be implemented in a
time-bound manner. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 25
CHAPTER 3
CHALLENGES & RECOMMENDATIONS
Challenges &
Recommendations
3 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 26
This chapter presents major identified challenges faced by scientists and researchers across the R&D
ecosystem of the country. The analysis draws on insights shared by stakeholders who participated
in the consultation process, as detailed in the previous chapter. The chapter is organized into
seven sections, each section listing out the major identified challenges and relevant suggestions
for corrective actions.
3.1 R&D Funding and Utilization
The research and development activities do not solely depend upon researchers but also rely
broadly on research infrastructure, access to knowledge and tools, and a conducive environment
for creation and application of knowledge. To support these critical requirements, sufficient and
sustained R&D funding and its proper utilization play a critical role, which eventually lead to
shaping the nation’s innovation capacity, technological self-reliance, and long-term economic
growth.
R&D funding is usually sourced in two ways: (a) extramural, which involves funding provided by
various Government departments and funding agencies, and (b) intramural, which is supported by
internal resources of the institution or its parent organization. The major part of extramural R&D
funding in India is provided by different government funding agencies, such as Department of
Science and Technology (DST), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research (CSIR), Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF), and University
Grants Commission (UGC). There are also certain mission mode programs to support R&D in
different areas of national priority. While the absolute allocation for R&D has increased over
time, India’s Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) has remained low at 0.6
to 0.7% for quite some time. The Government Financial Rules (GFR) and the complex fund flow
and accounting systems create further problems in utilization of the already limited R&D funds.
The consultation process has highlighted several systemic and operational challenges across all
three components of the R & D process, namely Fund Availability, Fund Flow and Fund Utilization.
Table 3.1 presents a top-level overview of the key dimensions of the R&D Funding challenges.
Table 3.1: Key Dimensions of R&D Funding Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Fund Availability
Low GERD, Weak private sector participation, Limited Philanthropic
contribution to R&D, Funding concentration in select institutions.
Fund Flow and Governance
Cumbersome proposal formats, Duplication of schemes and funding
calls, Long processing times, Fund disbursement delays, Complex fund
flow mechanism for low value grants, Year-end automatic withdrawal,
Reconciliation challenges.
Financial and Administrative
Rigidities affecting Utilization
Rigid budget heads, GFR restrictions, Procurement delays of routine
R&D consumables, Absence of gatekeeping on GeM, High GST on
R&D equipment, Limited overhead costs, Repeated submissions of UC
and SE. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 27
3.1.1. Inadequate R&D Funding
India’s overall R&D funding pool has remained largely unchanged, as reflected in India’s low
value of GERD (hovering around 0.6 to 0.7% for over a decade). This is significantly lower than
countries like China (2.6%), USA (3.4%), and South Korea (5.3%). Though the absolute R&D
funding has increased, it has not been effective due to several reasons including inflation, increase
in the number of institutions, and reduced institutional funds for R&D. In fact, there is now much
higher competition for R&D grants than ever before, with application to grant ratio declining
to under 10% across several R&D funding agencies. Therefore, the available R&D funds are
insufficient to meet the R&D appetite of the institutions and researchers.
Another important aspect in India’s R&D funding is that it is heavily dependent on public funding
(with about 64% contribution), unlike the case in several leading innovation economies which
have more than 60% of the R&D budget contributed by the private sector (https://www.pib.gov.
in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2153547). Further, the culture of philanthropic contribution to
scientific research is still in its nascent stage. Absence of attractive fiscal incentives is one major
factor inhibiting private sector and philanthropic contribution.
3.1.2. Skewed Funding
The consultation process brought forward the issue of a higher concentration of R&D funding
in selected premier institutions (for instance, the IIT system is known to receive more than 80%
of ANRF’s R&D funding). While uniformity in R&D funding is neither expected nor desirable,
over-concentration of funding in only a selected set of institutions reduces the funding opportunity
for researchers working in other R&D institutions and HEIs. It may be noted that ANRF has a
specific mandate for supporting R&D in state institutions, however, this goal is far from being
achieved. Participants in the consultative meetings also highlighted that most of the expert
committees on ANRF do not have suitable representation from outside the IIT system, which may
be unintentionally resulting in skewed funding decisions.
3.1.3. Cumbersome Process of R&D Grant Applications
Researchers seeking R&D funding are required to navigate through multiple portals or systems
by different ministries or funding agencies, each portal being independent of others. Therefore,
researchers end up making repetitive data entries about their CV and institution details etc., each
time they submit a proposal. Several times, these proposal formats are very lengthy asking for
undesired routine information, which does not actually help in assessing the proposals. Long
proposal formats also create a burden for review committees. Therefore, it is desirable to have
a unified portal for R&D calls of Govt of India. In this context, NITI Aayog has already taken
an initiative for the design of a Unified Architecture for Project Management System (UPMS).
The system under development by National eGovernance Division, Ministry of Electronics &
Information Technology, will provide a unified view of R&D calls, a simplified interface for
proposal submission and management, and various other value added services like researcher
microsite, individual and institutional expertise mapping, ease of financial reporting etc. (Refer
Box 1). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 28
Box 1
Unified Architecture for Project Lifecycle Management (UPMS)
UPMS is a national initiative of strategic importance, one that seeks to bring systemic improvement to the way
research, development, and public investment projects are conceptualized, monitored, and delivered across
Ministries and Departments. By enabling a unified, interoperable, and digitally empowered architecture,
UPMS will significantly strengthen transparency, efficiency, and real-time decision-making across the
Government ecosystem.
UPMS is proposed as a unified and modular architecture for end-to-end project lifecycle management, taking
into account technical, operational, and financial considerations. The architecture will support the creation
of multiple sibling and child instances, allowing ministries and agencies to retain contextual and operational
flexibility while operating within a common national framework. The system will enable both vertical
and horizontal API-level integration to facilitate seamless data exchange across schemes, departments,
and institutions. The platform will be hosted on a secure and scalable cloud infrastructure to ensure high
availability, resilience, and on-demand scalability. Reporting, monitoring, and analytics capabilities will
be embedded by design from the outset, enabling real-time visibility into funding flows, project progress,
institutional participation, and thematic overlaps.
To ensure coordinated progress, a dedicated Inter-Ministerial Committee is constituted, and a core
implementation team is overseeing the platform’s architecture, development, and phased rollout. The
National e-Governance Division (NeGD) under the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology is
being empowered with the necessary resources to advance this important national initiative in a timely and
effective manner. The pilot system is to be deployed soon.
3.1.4 Duplication of Schemes and Calls
Limited cross-departmental visibility has resulted in multiple ministries and agencies supporting
similar R&D activities and issuing near-identical funding calls, sometimes even within the same
ministry. For example, in areas like Hydrogen Energy, Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage etc.,
both DST and CSIR are supporting R&D projects. Similarly, there are several areas where ANRF
is simply duplicating the efforts of DST. As an example, ANRF calls on Centre for Excellence
for STI Indicators and Analytics proposes to explore topics which are already a long-standing
mandate of NSTIMIS division of DST. Given that R&D funds are already limited, there is a need
to avoid such duplication and provide for more judicious and optimized utilization of R&D funds.
3.1.5. Long Proposal Processing Times
At present most of the funding agencies are taking a long time in evaluation of R&D project
proposals and disbursement of grants for approved projects. In a rapidly changing science &
technology landscape, long delays in the processing of R&D proposals pose a risk of the proposal
becoming outdated. Unlike global best practices that allow year-round submissions or call for
proposals with periodic decision cycles, India’s current approach results in extended waiting Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 29
periods, reducing responsiveness to emerging scientific opportunities. The delays in proposal
processing are often attributed to administrative complexities, difficulties associated with the
current fund flow system, smaller size of expert committees, and limited scientific manpower in
funding agencies. Timeliness of R&D is a very critical factor and therefore necessary corrective
steps are required to significantly reduce proposal processing times.
3.1.6. Delayed Fund Disbursal and Misaligned Accounting System
The success of R&D initiatives depends critically on timely and seamless provision of financial
support. Facilities such as biobanks, data centers, and high-end equipment require sustained, long-
term investment. In the current extramural funding landscape, the continuity of sustained fund
flow is primarily disrupted by two major factors: (a) delays in the release of the fund, and (b)
complex or misaligned accounting systems.
(a) Delay in Release of Funds
● At present, even after a scientific decision is taken on a project proposal, it takes more than 3-6
months (sometimes even more) for the release of the grant. Thus, the already long processing
time of R&D proposals gets affected further, often resulting in turnaround times of more than
a year or more. It is desirable that fund disbursal tasks may be handled by a dedicated Project
Management Unit (PMU) comprising professionals trained for such tasks. This may allow the
turnaround delays to be minimized and more judicious utilization of time of scientific staff.
● Frequent changes in the fund distribution mechanism during the last few years have also created
difficulties and introduced delays at different stages. Institutions find it difficult to adjust with
frequent changes in the fund flow system.
(b) Misaligned Accounting Systems
● In the current accounting system, extramural R&D projects with low financial requirements
are also required to pass through the same complex fund flow mechanisms involving TSA
or Hybrid-TSA models that are used in larger fund allocations. It may be noted that the total
financial outlay for extramural R&D (accounting for about 40,000 projects a year) across all
ministries and departments is only about Rs. 4,000 Cr annually.
● Due to a large number of sanctions and the corresponding authorization and fund flow
complexities, the fund disbursal for approved R&D projects gets significantly delayed. The
large number of sanctions and transactions, which otherwise are of small value, stresses the
complete system.
● The funds allocated are automatically withdrawn at the end of the financial year under the
current “use it or lose it” budgeting framework, and then it often takes another 2-3 months in
the reassignment of funds. This is constraining the institutional systems resulting in periodic
discontinuity of R&D activities, non-payment of fellowships to research personnel for a few
months, and repeated efforts for assignment and reassignment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 30
● The automatic withdrawal of funds in March and the reassignment of that fund from next
year’s budget of the funding agency, is resulting in an undesired loop of cumulative committed
liabilities for funding agencies and are reducing their capability to fund new R&D activities.
● The expenditure monitoring for jointly funded R&D projects with external funding sources is
not possible in the case of TSA or Hybrid TSA systems. The Hybrid TSA system has some other
operational difficulties, such as those related to making advance payments for the procurement
of specialised scientific equipment and international services.
● In cases where payments are failed or some inadvertent error happens, reconciliation or
resolution is a time-consuming and cumbersome process, leading to delays in the release of
subsequent tranches of funds.
● The fund processing often becomes extremely slow on the 30th & 31st of March, resulting in
the inability to upload bulk payment files on the PFMS portal.
● The strict mapping of R&D funds with specific projects in TSA or Hybrid TSA has taken away
the institutional capacity to leverage available overall R&D funds to temporarily meet funding
gaps in other R&D projects.
3.1.7. Challenges in Fund Utilisation & Reporting
Ease of utilization of R&D grants is an essential component for any STI ecosystem, more so in
a system having fund availability constraints. However, there are several challenges that R&D
practitioners face due to rigid financial rules, constraints with the GeM portal, limited institutional
autonomy, and restrictive delegation of financial powers. Some of the key issues highlighted
during the consultation are as follows:
(a) Rigid Head-wise Allocation of R&D Grants: R&D activities have an inherent component
of risk and uncertainty. New findings, expert feedback, or changes in technology often require
some adjustments or realignments during the project duration. However, in the current system,
most of the R&D grants come with strict head-wise budgets, such as equipment, manpower, or
consumables. Once approved, there is no or limited flexibility of reappropriations, including
even for intra-major-head realignments. Each time such reappropriation becomes necessary,
the researchers have to seek approval of the funding agency, which takes a lot of time. This
sometimes results in ineffective fund utilization.
(b) Complex Process for Procurement of Routine R&D Consumables: In the current
framework, the same standard procurement procedures designed for general government
purchases, are used even for low value repetitive purchase of R&D consumables. As a result,
even small value repeated procurements become time taking and difficult. International best
practice allows institutions autonomy in low-risk, repetitive procurement, subject to audit
and accountability norms. Therefore, for an efficient and uninterrupted execution of R&D
activities procurement of small value R&D consumables may be eased by greater authority to
researchers and the institutions. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 31
(c) High GST Burden: R&D grants are mostly government-to-government transfers, but a high
GST is still applied on procured research items, which reduces the effective funds available
for actual research activities. The R&D related procurements were eligible for GST at 5% slab
till June 2022. However, now institutions are required to pay GST as per actuals for all R&D
related procurements. This reduces the actual availability of already limited R&D funds.
(d) Insufficient Overhead Component: The extramural R&D support provided to institutions
usually has an overhead component. This overhead is used by the institutions to provide basic
facilities required by the R&D personnel to carry out research activities associated with R&D
projects. These include electricity, air conditioning, maintenance of facilities etc. However,
in view of the rising cost of electricity, services and maintenance, the overhead charges at
the current usual rate of 5% to 10% of the project cost do not suffice. As a result, it becomes
difficult to maintain laboratories and facilities.
(e) Financial Reporting: The R&D grants are usually allocated in a yearly fashion and the release
of the next installment requires submission of Utilization Certificate (UC) and Statement of
Expenditure (SE). Many times researchers are required to submit UC and SE multiple times
and as a result they end up putting in a good amount of time which could have been otherwise
utilized in actual R&D work. During the consultation process it was pointed out that since
all procurement and payments in R&D projects are now done through the Public Financial
Management System (PFMS), there should be a provision of automatic generation of UC and
SE from the system.
Major Recommendations
3.1 (a) Enhance Gross Expenditure on R&D to at least 2% in a phased manner
To strengthen India’s R&D ecosystem, there is an urgent need to significantly enhance the national
investment in R&D, from the current level of 0.64% to at least 2% of GDP, in the next four to five
years.
3.1 (b) Attract Private R&D Investment through well-designed Incentives Framework
India needs to introduce time-bound, incremental fiscal incentives to boost private sector
investment in R&D, both the in-house industrial R&D and collaborative R&D with public R&D
labs and HEIs. The target should be to attract half of the targeted GERD from the private sector.
3.1 (c) Add optional reporting head of R&D Expenditure under Schedule III (Balance Sheet &
Statement of profit & Loss) of Companies Act 2013
Adding reporting head of R&D Expenditure under Schedule III (Balance Sheet & Statement of
profit & Loss) of Companies Act 2013, Section 129, can provide for better data about private
sector investment in R&D and also sensitize them to consider higher investments. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 32
3.1 (d) Enhance Philanthropic and CSR Support for R&D
In order to meet the requirement of a higher fund availability for R&D, a more bold and forward-
looking approach is required to attract philanthropic support for R&D. This in turn calls for
strengthening and effectively leveraging CSR provisions under the Companies Act, as well as
providing higher deduction (say at least 125%) for individual contributions to funds supporting
R&D, under Sec. 133 (Deduction in respect of donations to certain funds, charitable institutions,
etc.) of the Income Tax Act 2025.
3.1 (e) Create Inter-departmental Coordination Committee to Minimize Overlaps
It is necessary to create an inter-departmental Committee within the Ministry of Science &
Technology, that meets at regular intervals, to target synergy and complementarity of schemes and
calls across constituent departments and funding agencies, and ensure avoiding or minimizing
duplication of schemes across departments.
3.1 (f) Introduce Round the year Call for proposals with six months cap on processing time
The R&D funding agencies should introduce round the year call for proposal submissions,
preferably with two periodic review and processing cycles in a year. The proposal reviews can
start immediately after they are submitted, thereby reducing the proposal processing and decision
times.
3.1 (g) Establish Dedicated Project Management Units (PMUs)
R&D funding agencies should establish dedicated PMUs to handle post-grant approval
administrative and financial activities, including fund disbursal and compliance. This will ensure
clear separation of scientific and administrative roles, reduce burden on scientific staff, and
expedite fund release. The PMUs, in due course, may leverage functionalities in the UPMS portal
being developed.
3.1 (h) Provision Direct Fund Transfer for Extramural R&D
For extramural R&D projects, which have relatively small approved financial outlays, a direct grant
transfer mechanism to institutional accounts need to be adopted. Larger or core grants may continue
to be disbursed through the TSA or Hybrid TSA system. This approach will significantly ease and
speed up the fund disbursement, ensure continuity of funding and enable effective monitoring for
jointly funded projects, thereby significantly benefitting a large number of researchers.
3.1 (i) Enable Grant Re-appropriation at Institutional Level
Researchers or Institutions should be permitted to undertake intra-major head grant reappropriations
at their own level. This flexibility will support timely decision-making, reduce the need for repeated
approvals, and improve overall project execution efficiency. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 33
3.1 (j) Ease Procurement of Routine R&D Consumables
Procurement of consumables for R&D being routine and repetitive in nature, while at the same
time of small value, may be eased either by excluding R&D consumables under GFR Rule 143 or
by enabling institutions to provision annual rate contracts at their own level.
3.1 (k) Consider Restoring 5% GST Slab for R&D procurement
A lower GST slab of 5%, as available till June 2022, may be considered for all R&D-related
procurements, so as to increase effective usable funds to R&D institutions.
3.1 (l) Enhance Institutional Overhead Component
Introduce a more enabling overhead structure, at a rate of about 20% instead of the current rate
of 5 to 10%, to allow grantee institutions to sustain R&D activities and effectively maintain R&D
equipment and infrastructure.
3.2 Attracting and Retaining Quality Human Resource
Human resource is viewed as “human capital” whose creativity and specialized skills determine
how effectively knowledge is created and translated into a tangible product that serves industry
and society. India has a demographic dividend and is often regarded as a powerhouse of talent.
However, the support base for young talent involved in R&D activities somehow remains low.
This issue is further evidenced by the Global Innovation Index (GII) report 2025, which shows
that the number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) researchers in India remains as low as 262 per
million, compared to Switzerland (5,552), the UK (4,821), the USA (4,821), China (1,585), etc.
Though various national programmes along with doctoral and postdoctoral fellowships supported
by DST, DBT, CSIR, and other agencies, have played a role in expanding the pool of trained
researchers for science & technology, they fall short of creating a critical mass of researchers for
India’s technological needs.
Several challenges related to availability of competent human resources for R&D, career pathways
for R&D professionals, limited institution autonomy, lack of mid-career training, absence of inter-
institutional mobility etc. were highlighted during the consultation process. Table 3.2 provides a
top level overview of the key dimensions of human resources related challenges for R&D. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 34
Table 3.2: Key Dimensions of Human Resource Related Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Research Talent Supply Gaps
Low FTE per million, Weak postdoctoral ecosystem, Delayed
fellowship disbursals.
Institutional Rigidity &
Recruitment Constraints
Limited hiring flexibility, Rigid post structures, Delayed
recruitments, Vacant sanctioned posts.
Retention, Incentives & Career
Pathways
Lack of incentives, Unattractive career pathways, Policy gaps in
faculty entrepreneurship.
Mobility, Skill Development &
Workload Imbalance
Limited inter-institutional mobility, Non-uniform pay levels and
nomenclatures, Weak mid-career training, Unbalanced teaching and
research loads.
3.2.1. Weak Postdoctoral Research Ecosystem
While support for startups has increased, the support system for R&D human resources in the
R&D institutions and HEIs remains suboptimal, leading to a low FTE. The postdoctoral research
ecosystem is quite weak with very limited support in terms of fellowships. While the doctoral
research fellowships have increased over time and India is now among the top three countries in
Ph.D. produced, the support at the next level for taking the knowledge generated forward into a
translation journey, needs to be instituted. Currently, the overall post-doctoral fellowships support
from all departments and agencies combined together is about 2,500 per year. This is too low as
compared to what is needed for a robust STI ecosystem capable of translating knowledge into
usable products and socio-economic goods.
3.2.2. Delayed Disbursal of Fellowships
Though there are now over 20,000+ Ph.D. fellowships available per year through combined support
of multiple departments and agencies, there are often instances of delays in scholars’ receiving
their fellowships. The time taken in release of the first fellowship instalment at present is about
four to five months. Similarly, there are other intermittent delays, either due to fund reassignment
delay with change in financial year or temporary unavailability of funds.
3.2.3. Limited Institutional Autonomy in Human Resource Mapping
R&D institutions and HEIs often face difficulties in need-based recruitment of manpower in
desired areas. This is mostly due to difficulties associated with posts being rigidly tied to specific
departments and hierarchical levels (such as professor, associate professor, scientist, etc.). At
the moment, any effort to change the mapping of a faculty or research position is seen as the
‘creation of a new post’ which has associated restrictions and a long approval process going
up to the Department of Expenditure (DoE). This has created problems in the system of rolling
advertisements in institutions. Institutions are not able to rationalize or dynamically manage their
faculty/ researcher allocation, even though such exercise may not change the overall financial
outlay needed for salaries. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 35
3.2.4. Delays in Recruitment
A significant number of sanctioned positions in Indian R&D institutions and HEIs remain vacant
for long periods. This constrains the functioning and performance of institutions as they have to
manage with a suboptimal number of researchers, technical staff, and administrative staff in the
institutions. Consultations suggested that the majority of the delays in recruitment are largely due
to administrative reasons. In the case of state institutions, these delays are also due to financial
reasons as well, i.e., state governments often do not have enough financial resources to provide for
salaries and allowances of the total sanctioned staff strengths of their institutions.
3.2.5. Retention Challenges for Human Resource
The Indian STI ecosystem lacks suitable incentives or attractive career pathways to young
professionals engaged in R&D activities. There is a high volume of STEM Ph.D. graduates
being trained from Universities and R&D institutions, but the post-Ph.D. career pathways are
not well-developed. The already limited number of full-time faculty/ researcher positions remain
vacant due to administrative reasons, which discourages young professionals from going for R&D
careers. Moreover, government pay scales in emerging high-skill sectors like AI, Semiconductors,
Biotechnology etc. are not as attractive as the private sector. As a result, Ph.D. graduates often
gravitate towards the private sector opportunities in the country and outside.
Another aspect observed is that the faculty members in HEIs often limit their R&D activities
to publications and patents and do not attempt to translate them into products in absence of
any incentive to do so. In fact, HEIs not only lack incentives but also lack clarity about faculty
entrepreneurship policy.
3.2.6. Limited Inter-institutional Mobility
Limited mobility of research personnel across institutions under different government departments,
including sometimes between the institutions under the same department/ ministry, restricts
opportunities for exchange of knowledge and collaboration among researchers. Scientists from
different government institutions but working in related areas find it difficult to move from one
institution to another in their career. There are variations in pay scales, pay levels and nomenclatures
across Administrative and Technical cadres in different autonomous R&D institutions. This
limits inter-institutional mobility. Better opportunities for inter-institutional mobility, including
those for short fixed-term stays, can help provide opportunities for cross-fertilisation of ideas,
interdisciplinary learning, exposure to diverse research environments, and increased collaboration
opportunities.
3.2.7. Absence of Mid-Career Training
Scientists in R&D institutions and faculty members in HEIs do not get adequate opportunities
of periodic mid-career training. In HEIs, faculty development programs (FDPs) try to address
this to some extent, but they lack depth and effectiveness. In R&D institutions, the mid-career
training opportunities are usually in the form of short-term programs conducted by outside Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 36
bodies, which are infrequent and ad hoc in nature unlike the practice of well-designed mid-career
training programs in many countries. For example, the University of California has a “Mid Career
Development Program” for junior faculty, which includes $75K per year, mentorship, sponsorship,
and networking activities. Therefore, there is a need for a suitable structural mechanism for regular
periodic training of scientists, researchers and University faculty. Indian Science academies may
play an important role here.
3.2.8. Unbalanced Teaching and Research Load
Faculty members in Indian Universities are often heavily engaged in teaching responsibilities
and administrative duties, leaving them with very limited time for R&D activities. This reduces
research productivity and leads to inefficiencies in research outcomes. Therefore, a more balanced
time allocation framework is needed for University faculty. Options like Research-focused and
Teaching-focused tracks, with associated performance evaluation framework, may provide a more
conducive environment for a greater R&D intensity in institutions.
Major Recommendations
3.2 (a) Enhance the number of Postdoctoral Fellowships
DST, ANRF, DBT, DSIR, DHE, ICAR and ICMR may consider increasing the number of post-
doctoral fellowships in S&T, by 20% every year, for the next few years. This may significantly
strengthen the post-doctoral research ecosystem of the country.
3.2 (b) Create ‘Vigyan Nidhi’- a unified Fellowship system
To address the gaps in fellowship funding and disbursal delays, a unified and streamlined funding
architecture with digital public infrastructure, may be created. This system can streamline
fellowship disbursal and help attract funds to finance an enhanced number of fellowships (Refer
Box 2). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 37
Box 2
Vigyan Nidhi
Objective
A unified, efficient, and uninterrupted funding architecture for research fellowships and personnel support
across India’s scientific ecosystem is needed. It can support post-doctoral fellowships, under competitive grants,
institutionally or industry-supported fellowships, and mobility and short-term research enhancement grants. All
centrally funded fellowships can be progressively routed through the Vigyan Nidhi mechanism.
Funding Architecture
A Government of India seed grant (say of ₹1,000 crore) may be instituted as initial working capital to function as
a revolving buffer for uninterrupted fellowship disbursal, capable of supporting approximately 20,000 research
personnel for one year at prevailing norms. Ministries and Departments will continue to sanction fellowships under
their respective schemes, with sanctions issued through the Vigyan Nidhi digital platform and funds transferred
in periodic tranches. Additional resources in the corpus may be mobilised through industry contributions with
tax incentives, philanthropic and institutional funding, and voluntary individual contributions routed through the
platform. Institutions may also be allowed to use the portal for their fund raising initiatives.
Digital Public Infrastructure and Governance
Vigyan Nidhi may be underpinned by a robust digital public infrastructure comprising a unified sanction module,
an automated DBT-based payment system, a national fellowship dashboard, real-time monitoring and impact
analytics, and fully digital institutional reporting. The fund will be managed by a designated Government
administrative body responsible for fund administration, inter-ministerial coordination, digital platform
operations, donor engagement, compliance, audit, and monitoring and evaluation.
Expected Outcomes
In the short term, Vigyan Nidhi can eliminate delays in fellowship disbursal and ensure seamless continuity of
support for research personnel through uniform digital processes. In the medium term, it will significantly expand
India’s FTE researcher base, strengthen the post-doctoral ecosystem, and increase industry and philanthropic
participation in research manpower development. In the long term, it will enhance national research capacity
and output, improve innovation outcomes, strengthen global competitiveness, and establish a sustainable talent
pipeline aligned with India’s future scientific and technological priorities.
Summary
Vigyan Nidhi may address a core structural bottleneck in India’s science and innovation ecosystem by creating
a unified, reliable, and scalable mechanism for research manpower support. Complementing ANRF and the RDI
framework, it places human capital at the centre of India’s long-term national innovation architecture and enables
predictable, transparent, and dignified funding pathways for researchers. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 38
3.2 (c) Provide Institutional Autonomy for Faculty/ Researcher Mapping
R&D institutions and higher education institutions should be empowered to rationalise faculty
and researcher allocations across departments and subject areas at their own level, within their
approved salary budgets. This can speed up the hiring process and the need-based human resource
deployment.
3.2 (d) Incentivize quality R&D Outcomes
A structured mechanism for incentivizing high quality research outcomes should be developed.
This may include performance-based incentives and/ or the provision of holding equity in startups
to encourage translation of knowledge into useful technologies and products.
3.2 (e) Explore uniformity in pay scales and cadre nomenclature across different Autonomous
R&D institutions
Uniformity in pay scales, pay levels and cadre nomenclature may be instituted across all
autonomous R&D institutions under different scientific ministries, beginning with the autonomous
R&D institutions in the Ministry of Science & Technology. This can provide greater flexibility in
recruitment and increased inter-institutional mobility and collaboration.
3.2 (f) Provision Focused Mid-career Training & Capacity Building
Indian Science academies may be entrusted with developing intensive and focused training
programs for scientists, researchers, research administrators, and University faculty. This may be
further complemented by the National Institute for Science Policy and Governance (NISPG), as
proposed in Section 3.7.
3.2 (g) Create Teaching and Research focused tracks in Universities
UGC, AICTE and other regulatory bodies may explore creating teaching and research focused
tracks in Universities. This can help in role based recruitment and better evaluation frameworks.
3.3 Institutional Structures and Processes
The effectiveness of a national R&D ecosystem depends not only on funding and talent, but also
on the institutional structures and internal processes that shape how R&D is planned, supported,
evaluated, and translated into societal and economic outcomes. At present many research-
performing institutions continue to operate within governance and administrative frameworks
that have not kept pace with the needs of contemporary research systems. As a result, institutional
arrangements that were once adequate now constrain agility, innovation, and impact.
At the institutional level, there are several challenges ranging from rigid administrative and
financial rules to absence of necessary substructures to promote R&D. Researchers often Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 39
spend substantial time dealing with obtaining different approvals, hiring of research staff, and
procurement of consumables and equipment etc. Institutions often do not have well-defined
guidelines and templates to speed up such processes. Further, there are limited opportunities for
faculty entrepreneurship and performance-based incentives. The key institutional and governance
challenges are highlighted in this section, with a top level overview presented in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Key Dimensions of Institutional & Governance Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Research Administration
Fragmented R&D management, absence of unified R&D offices, limited
professional expertise, weak administrative processes.
Institutional Decision
Making
Inconsistent guidelines, unclear SOPs, audit-centric orientation,
procedural delays, over-centralisation, limited delegated authority.
Strategic Leadership,
Institutional Focus &
Research Direction
Weak core competence strategy, Limited leadership accountability and
performance-linked pay, absence of periodic institutional self-assessment,
no structured Ease of Doing R&D (EoDR&D) assessment framework.
Entrepreneurship &
Commercialisation
Support
Weak faculty entrepreneurship policies, uneven implementation of
Knowledge Equity OM, limited commercialization orientation.
3.3.1 Absence of Effective R&D Offices
R&D activities are carried out by a wide variety of institutions, including R&D labs and HEIs under
central or state governments or in the private sector. Sometimes, the institutions either do not have
a dedicated R&D office or they are not effective and professionally managed. In the absence of
such well-designed professional offices, administrative and management responsibilities of R&D
are either distributed across multiple administrative units or devolved informally to individual
researchers. As a result, researchers are routinely required to put in time and effort to handle
administrative work of R&D activities, along with their scientific responsibilities. This not only
takes away researchers’ core scientific time, but also increases the risk of procedural errors. The
limited presence of effective R&D Offices also constrains effective institutional engagement with
funding agencies.
3.3.2 Lack of Professional Expertise in Research Administration
The personnel assigned with the tasks of administrative management of R&D projects often lack
systematic exposure to evolving research funding norms and the operational realities of laboratory
and field-based research. As a result, administrative processes often get more focused towards
the procedural aspects than the considerations of research timelines, uncertainties, and adaptive
project management. Scientists face delays in approvals, procurement, and staffing that directly
affect project outcomes, while administrators operate without clear mandates or incentives linked
to research performance. This disconnect reinforces a compliance-driven culture rather than a
facilitative and solution-oriented approach. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 40
3.3.3 Inadequate Institutional Guidelines and SOPs
In a large number of R&D institutions and HEIs, there are no well-defined guidelines and
standard operating procedures (SOPs) for handling administrative and financial aspects of R&D
projects. Even if such guidelines exist, they are either outdated or unevenly articulated. In some
cases, guidelines and templates exist only for select functions, such as financial compliance or
procurement. Several other critical aspects of research activity, including collaborative research
agreements, research personnel hiring, technology transfer, are addressed through ad hoc decisions.
The absence of comprehensive, up-to-date, and enabling institutional guidelines with well-defined
templates, often creates problems for both researchers and administrators. This situation leads to
uncertainty at multiple levels and causes delays in decision-making.
3.3.4 Institutional Leadership Accountability and Over-Centralization Issues
In many institutions, researchers or Heads of Departments/ Divisions are not given enough
administrative and financial powers. Therefore, even routine matters involving small procurements
or temporary hiring, are sent to the Vice Chancellor/ Director for approval. The practice of self-
declaration or self-certification by researchers for administrative tasks associated with R&D
projects, as adopted in several countries, is not well-developed at present. This unnecessarily
causes delays in different R&D activities.
In some cases, leadership focus may not be aligned with research growth and long-term R&D goals
of the institution. This is due to limited linkage between institutional leadership performance and
measurable research outcomes of the institution. Unlike practices followed in several advanced
research systems internationally, performance-linked remuneration and accountability based on
clearly defined targets for institutional heads are generally absent in the Indian context.
3.3.5 Institutional Divergence from the Core Research Focus
Many R&D institutions lack a clear strategy for identifying and strengthening their core areas
of expertise. R&D efforts are sometimes spread across too many themes without deliberate
prioritisation or long-term planning. This results in scattered activities rather than focused and
deep growth in selected domains. While HEIs may maintain multiple focus areas, the R&D labs
are expected to be more focused so as to develop as centres of excellence having expertise and
excellence in a selected domains.
Without a defined institutional focus, it becomes difficult to build critical mass, create specialised
infrastructure, or attract high-quality faculty and doctoral scholars in priority areas. Research
proposals tend to reflect individual interests instead of a coordinated institutional direction,
limiting the ability to undertake large, mission-driven or nationally aligned programmes. Over
time, this weakens the institutional unique strength, reduces competitiveness for major grants, and
limits the ability to emerge as a recognised centre of excellence. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 41
3.3.6 Absence of Periodic Assessment of Ease of Doing R&D in the Institutions
Most institutions do not have a structured system to regularly assess the difficulties faced by
researchers in managing administrative and financial aspects of R&D projects. There is a limited
culture of feedback or internal review to identify delays and operational bottlenecks. Suggestion
boxes placed in institutions are often not taken seriously by the leadership or management, and
are seldom used to address systemic shortcomings or difficulties. As a result, the procedural
complexities and inflexibilities in institutions remain unaddressed. Given the growing presence
of private and foreign HEIs with more flexible processes, it is especially important for publicly
funded institutions to undertake periodic self-assessment to remain competitive, efficient, and
research-oriented.
Similarly, at the national level, there is no focused assessment or rating framework dedicated to
Ease of Doing Research & Development, either as a standalone exercise or integrated within an
existing mechanism such as National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) or the accreditation
by National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC). It is desirable that institutions should
conduct periodic self-assessments, which may be integrated within an existing mechanism. Such
benchmarking can promote internal reforms, strengthen institutional culture, encourage healthy
competition, and enhance the ability of institutions to attract quality faculty and research funding.
Over time, such scores may also be used by funding agencies in multiple ways, such as for time-
bound R&D needs and large grant decisions.
3.3.7 Lack of Faculty/ Researcher Entrepreneurship Policy
Many R&D institutions do not have clear and enabling policies to support faculty or researcher-led
entrepreneurship. For the majority of HEIs, the institutional focus has traditionally remained on
teaching and fundamental research, with limited emphasis on productisation or commercialization,
based on research outcomes. This gap persists despite the need being formally recognised as
early as 2009 through the DSIR notification on “Knowledge Equity,” which encouraged equity
participation and technology commercialization. In the present context of rapidly changing R&D
landscape, a greater need is felt for productizing R&D outcomes. Therefore, it is necessary that
the 2009 notification may be updated to align with present-day innovation ecosystems and market
realities. All the R&D institutions may adopt suitable entrepreneurship policies to ensure that
research outcomes are effectively translated into products and enterprises.
Major Recommendations
3.3. (a) Establish Strong R&D Offices in Institutions
R&D institutions and HEIs Institutions should set up professional R&D Offices as single-window
hubs for grant management. DST, DBT, DSIR/CSIR and DHE may develop a model structure for
their institutions. These offices should have adequate authority and operational freedom. (Refer
Box 3). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 42
Box 3
R&D Offices in Institutions
Objective and Scope
Institutions should create an R&D Office that can serve as a centralized unit to manage and accelerate the research
with efficient mechanisms. This office can also help researchers in assisting the TRL assessment and knowledge
translation. Institutions which already have such an office may further strengthen and empower the office with the
structural elements suggested here. The institute should periodically monitor and define clear SOPs and timelines
for various administrative tasks to strengthen the overall R&D ecosystem.
Structure of R&D Office
R&D office in institutions may have following units:
A. Sponsored Research Unit
● Acts as a bridge between funding agency and PI
● Identifies the funding opportunities
● Supports in budget preparation and submission
● Administrative and financial coordination
B. Consultancy Unit
● Helps in understanding formal agreements, applying for grants, financial approvals and compliance
● Offers market surveys or reports to meet the institutional research with industry needs.
● Standardizing the MoU templates.
C. Incubation Centre
● Provide support for startups or entrepreneurship initiatives like facilitating with cost effective office
space, shared resources and access to labs.
● Provides initial funding to avoid early-stage risks.
● Develops an understanding of business management and risk mitigation.
D. Patent Facilitation Unit
● Provides training and workshops on IPR
● Identifies patentable research
● Assistance in drafting, filing and maintenance
● Coordination with patent offices
● Ensures legal compliance of the research output with the patent regime.
E. Technology Transfer Offices (including TRL Assessment)
● Assisting TTOs in determining when a technology is sufficiently mature for licensing
● Evaluating market needs and negotiating licensing agreements with existing companies
● Managing various legal agreements, including Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), Material
● Transfer Agreements (MTAs), and license contracts
● Helping to identify technical or developmental gaps and potential deployment risks
● Establishing an efficient communication among researchers, investors, and policymakers, about
technology status clearer and more effective. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 43
F. Coordination & Ranking
● Aligning research to national goals
● Data collection and coordination with agencies for national or international accreditations
● Monitoring and updating research performance indicators
G. Staff and Professionals
● The R&D office should be handled by a competent academician, and one dedicated person should be
made in-charge of all the above functions.
● The office should have professional staff including research administrators, project managers, IP
analysts, incubation managers, and data analysts.
3.3. (b) Professionalise Research Administration
Structured induction and continuous training programmes should be introduced to sensitize and
familiarise administrative staff with research funding norms, scientific procurements, contract
management, and regulatory frameworks etc. The Indian Science Academies may design and
deliver such training modules.
3.3. (c) Develop Standard Research Governance Guidelines
R&D institutions and HEIs should adopt standard internal guidelines covering all major aspects
of research governance. These guidelines should define roles, responsibilities, timelines, and
approval pathways, along with required templates. Scientific ministries/ departments may develop
model guidelines to coordinate such efforts in their institutions.
3.3. (d) Promote a Trust-based R&D Framework
Administrative systems must transform from a compliance-centric orientation towards trust-based
administration. Majority of the administrative functions should suffice with self-declaration or
self-certification by researchers, with financial statements being the only possible exceptions
requiring institutional endorsement.
3.3 (e) Ensure Leadership Accountability and Performance-linked Governance
Institutional leaders should be provided with clearly defined and measurable performance
targets on taking charge. Performance-linked incentives may be considered to align leadership
accountability with institutional R&D outcomes.
3.3 (f) Decentralize Decision-making through Delegation of Power
Institutions should adopt a clear decentralization framework by delegating defined administrative
and financial powers for R&D to Heads of Departments or to individual researchers. Routine
approvals should be resolved at the unit/ institutional level, with only exceptional or high-level
policy matters escalated to the Head of the Institution/ Governing Council. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 44
3.3. (g) Institutions to Identify and Align with their Core Research Competence
R&D institutions should clearly identify priority research areas based on their existing strengths,
faculty/ researcher expertise, and national relevance, so as to allow them to develop as centres
of excellence in chosen area(s). Recruitment, infrastructure investment, funding allocation, and
collaborations may be aligned with these identified focus areas.
3.3 (h) Conduct Periodic Assessment of Ease of Doing R&D in Institutions
Institutions should conduct periodic self-assessment of their R&D management processes. A
structured Ease of Doing Research & Development Assessment Framework may be developed to
facilitate this.
3.3 (i) Enable Entrepreneurship Policy for Faculty / Researcher
Institutions should notify clearly defined faculty and researcher entrepreneurship policies with
flexible norms for time allocation and liberal, transparent revenue-sharing arrangements. The
2009 DSIR notification on “Knowledge Equity,” should be updated to reflect current innovation
ecosystems, startup models, and market realities and re-notified. This may subsequently be adopted
by all R&D institutions and HEIs.
3.4 Technology Development, Translation & Commercialization
India has made significant progress in terms of knowledge outputs, measured in terms of
publications and patents. However, the translational ecosystem continues to remain weak. As a
result, a significant part of the knowledge generated by R&D institutions and HEIs does not get
converted into usable products, technologies and socio-economic goods. This is due to several
reasons, including limited translational expertise, weak industry engagement, and lack of incentives
for productization. As India advances towards a knowledge-driven economy, greater emphasis is
needed on creating enabling conditions that allow scientific outcomes to move from laboratories
to industry and society. Developing indigenous technologies and capabilities is critical for a
country to achieve technological self-reliance, reduce import dependence, and strengthen national
competitiveness across strategic sectors. Table 3.4 highlights the key dimensions of the issues
highlighted regarding technology development, translation and commercialization. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 45
Table 3.4: Key Dimensions of Technology Development, Translation and
Commercialisation Challenges
DimensionCore Issues
Institutional Technology
Transfer Systems
Weak TTOs, weak IP cells, ownership ambiguity, IP issues in co-
funded research.
Prototyping, Testing &
Regulatory Infrastructure
Limited access to TRL 3–6 facilities such as facilities for prototyping
and pilot scale validation, Absence of domestic certification
mechanisms and high validation costs, Absence of Regulatory
Sandbox provision.
Industry Linkages &
Enterprise Innovation
Capacity
Weak problem articulation, limited co-development, fragmented
MSME support, low industry absorption, overall weak university
industry linkage and lack of innovation culture in MSMEs.
Talent Enabler &
Translational Finance
Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) taxation burden, limited
researcher mobility, Technology Indigenization gaps.
3.4.1 Lack of Effective Technology Transfer Support in Institutions
While many institutions have a setup for facilitating technology transfer outside the lab, they
are not very effective. Few R&D institutions, such as CSIR labs, have Independent Business
Divisions (IBD) which takes care of the translational aspect of the technologies developed in
the lab. However, in order to be more effective, they need to be further strengthened in terms of
capacity and resources. In case of HEIs, a dedicated Technology Transfer Office (TTO) usually
does not exist. Further, the R&D offices in HEIs do not possess capability and resources beyond
management of research projects. Transfer of technology and commercialization is a complex
process involving administrative, legal, business related issues, and hence the TTOs across R&D
institutions and HEIs have to be adequately strengthened with the required capacity and resources.
3.4.2. Weak Industry-Academia Linkage
There is a general disconnect between academia and industry in R&D space. The R&D institutions
and HEIs usually do not have an active interaction framework with Industry. Similarly, many times
the industry does not trust the capabilities of R&D institutions and HEIs. While the situation has
started to change lately, there is still a long way to go. The R&D institutions and HEIs need to realize
that translating the knowledge created in their labs, and scaling up the prototypes developed within
the institution, need active support of industry for successful products. Accordingly, an enabling
framework for greater interaction between the two is becoming altogether more important.
Standard MoU and NDA templates define roles, responsibilities, budgets, timelines, and
confidentiality upfront, reducing ambiguity and delays. However, such standardised templates are
largely absent in the institutional ecosystem, leading to prolonged negotiations and discouraging
collaboration. Therefore, design of suitable templates for MOUs, NDAs and IP Co-ownership can
play an important role here. The model adopted by DRDO could serve as a useful starting point. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 46
3.4.3. Limited Mobility between Academia and Industry
The R&D institutions and HEIs currently lack structured support for both in-bound and out-bound
researcher mobility, unlike advanced economies where well-defined frameworks enable seamless
movement across universities, public labs, and industry. The current mobility initiatives remain
fragmented and small-scale. Programmes such as AICTE’s Industry Fellowship Programme, and
models like Professor of Practice are positive steps but lack scale, consistency, and sustained
support. Therefore, there is a need to develop a suitable framework to enable increased mobility.
Further, a larger number of support schemes may be provisioned for enhanced mobility between
academia and industry, and vice-versa.
3.4.4. Lack of Prototyping, Testing & Assessment Facilities
The R&D ecosystem suffers from lack of access to high-quality prototyping, testing, validation,
and certification facilities. The absence of shared, prototyping and validation platforms, delays the
translation of research outputs from laboratory stage to proof-of-concept and pilot demonstration
stage. In many cases, researchers struggle with long wait times and limited technical support
for product refinement and standards compliance. This disproportionately affects early-stage
innovators working at TRL 3–6. Therefore, there is a clear need for setting up adequate facilities
for the purpose.
3.4.5. Weak IP Ownership Norms for Co-Funded Research
While India has a large number of R&D institutions and HEIs that are engaged in R&D activities, the
collaboration with industry remains limited, due to various reasons, including uncertainties around
intellectual property ownership and access rights. This is especially critical as ANRF prepares to
launch co-funded schemes. Clearly spelt and well-defined IP ownership is very important for
an increased engagement between public funded and private institutions. The recently launched
Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) also calls for clear provisions in this regard.
The Rule 233 of the General Financial Rules (GFR), which governs intellectual assets created
through public funding, therefore, needs to be reviewed and adapted for government-industry co-
funded projects.
3.4.6. Need for ESOP Taxation Rationalising to Strengthen Deep-Tech Talent Retention
The current scheme of taxation of ESOPs (Employee Stock Option Plan) at the point of exercise
imposes a cash-flow burden on employees, due to the fact that the tax liabilities arise before any
real economic gain is realised. This adversely affects the ability of deep tech startups to attract
and retain highly skilled scientific and engineering personnel. Early taxation of ESOPs creates an
immediate personal cash-flow requirement for employees which makes this instrument of stock
option unattractive. The issue is particularly acute for deep-tech startups, where long development
cycles, high risk, and delayed liquidity mean shares often cannot be monetised for many years. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 47
3.4.7. R&D and Innovation Challenges in Startups and MSMEs
In the current market linked innovation ecosystem, research outcomes have limited value unless
they are translated into market ready products. This is where startups and MSMEs play a critical
role and contribute in reducing import dependence and enhancing exports for the country. MSMEs
can bridge the manufacturing gap by enabling scale up and production, together ensuring effective
productization of research outcomes. However, startups and MSMEs face several challenges,
including limited second level incubation support comprising expertise in finance, legal/ regulatory,
marketing, and social innovation alongside technical mentoring. Other challenges include low
diversity in funding, and a general lack of the culture of Innovation in MSMEs. Similarly,
startups and MSMEs face challenges due to the absence of domestic certification and validation
mechanisms in several technology domains, compelling them to rely on foreign agencies. This
leads to higher costs and delays commercialisation.
3.4.8. Absence of a Systematic effort for Technology Indigenization
Development of indigenous technologies and capabilities in selected priority areas is critical
for a country. Achieving technological self-reliance in critical areas can not only help reduce
import dependence, but strengthen national competitiveness in those sectors. India has shown its
capabilities in indigenization through several landmark programs such as Tejas, nuclear submarine,
the BrahMos missile, and the rapid development and deployment of the COVID-19 vaccine
etc. However, these are isolated cases and a systematic framework in this regard does not exist.
Despite significant investments in R&D, much of the innovation ecosystem still relies on imported
technologies or foreign collaborations for high-end solutions. Strengthening domestic innovation
requires focused support for the full technology lifecycle from fundamental research to prototype
development. In order to address the challenges faced in the indigenization of technologies, a
dedicated national centre may be set up to promote technology indigenization. This centre may be
tasked with analysing the technology import trends and identifying technologies to be indigenized,
along with enablers needed to accelerate the process.
3.4.9. Lack of a widely accepted TRL Assessment Framework and Nodal Institutions
The recently launched Research, Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) is an ambitious
program initiated by the government, allocating a funding corpus of ₹1 lakh crore to enhance
R&D and innovation in emerging and strategic sectors. It has been observed that large industry
players in India are generally not constrained by access to capital and, therefore, may be hesitant
with the equity or debt financing proposed in RDIF. However, the RDIF is likely to be very
effective in supporting MSMEs and startups, for whom access to capital remains a key constraint
in scaling research-driven innovations. The RDIF is primarily focused on supporting technologies
from TRL-3 onwards, which demands a robust mechanism to assess and classify technologies by
their appropriate TRL levels. For this purpose, dedicated technical manpower and domain experts
are required for correct assessments. Common standards and capabilities need to be developed for
an authentic and well-accepted assessment of TRL for technologies under development. While
self-disclosures may be accepted by RDIF fund managers, there should be some nodal institutions
to intervene in case of disagreements on assessment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 48
3.4.10. Absence of Regulatory sandbox provision in deep-technology domains
Deep-tech startups operate at the frontier of innovation, where existing regulatory frameworks
are often not designed to accommodate emerging technologies. A regulatory sandbox allows
temporary relaxation of regulations so that innovators can test new products under controlled
real-world conditions, while ensuring adequate safeguards. Sandboxes help reduce uncertainty
for startups by providing regulatory clarity at early stages, thereby lowering compliance costs and
accelerating time to market. They also allow regulators to better understand new technologies,
assess associated risks, and develop informed, adaptive regulations based on evidence rather than
assumptions. MeitY has taken an early lead in the country by framing this provision within IoT
and AI based technology. Other examples include RBI’s lead in FinTech and DoT’s efforts on 6G
technologies. However, widespread adoption of the framework, specially in deep tech is required.
Major Recommendations
3.4. (a) Embed Technology Transfer Functions in R&D Offices
Establishing/ Strengthening TTOs and embedding them in R&D offices with clear policies,
standardized revenue-sharing models, transparent governance mechanisms, and the ability to
establish innovation-support entities such as Section 8 companies is critical to building a robust
research-to-market ecosystem.
3.4. (b) Design standard model/ guiding templates for MOUs
Design of standard model/ guiding templates for MOUs related to technology co-development can
strengthen Academia Industry interactions, and reduce times.
3.4. (c) Develop a framework for Industry-Academia mobility of scientists and researchers
Researcher mobility policy/ framework may include provisions of joint appointments, flexible
affiliations, and seamless movement across academia, public research institutions, and industry.
Dedicated funding windows and harmonised service rules should be introduced to incentivise
cross-sector mobility, strengthen knowledge transfer, and accelerate the translation of research
into innovation and industrial impact.
3.4. (d) Establish RDI Clusters
Establish State-level RDI Clusters by integrating HEIs, R&D institutions, MSMEs, PSUs, and
industry. These clusters should provide shared IP, TTO, incubation, and R&D infrastructure,
coordinate Central and State schemes, and progressively move toward self-sustainability and
global collaboration. The Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) may be leveraged
for developing such facilities in PPP mode (Refer Box 4). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 49
Box 4
Research, Development and Innovation Clusters
Objective
RDI Clusters are proposed to create, promote, and accelerate research and development activities, strengthen
innovation ecosystems, and support technology development and deployment within the State. These clusters can
serve as integrated hubs for research, scientific & technology-based facilities operating on a triple-or quadruple-
helix model in which academia and universities, industry, research institutions, public agencies and civil society
collaborate to generate shared value for the state.
Location of the Clusters should be strategic, where existing State/Central Universities, R&D Institutes could be
benefitted. Also, it can be anchored in an industrial cluster, enabling faster commercialization. Cluster should
be able to house several science and technology firms, government agencies, centres of academic institutions,
startups and non-profits. Thereby, promoting cooperation between universities and industry. These clusters must
bring together and connect all major R&D institutions as well as academic institutions. MSMEs, CPSEs, PSUs,
industry in the state must become members of these clusters. Industry associations must also join. These RDI
Clusters can be sector specific.
A Specialized cell for Technology Indigenisation should be an integral component of each cluster, to identify
import dependent technology portfolios and promote the indigenisation of identified technologies, keeping in
context the regional capacity and priorities. This would require active participation from MSMEs and startups
in the respective state, thereby providing them with new opportunities and further strengthening the domestic
innovation ecosystem.
Operational Scope
Existing research funding largely supports discovery and basic research, while industry incentives are primarily
oriented towards scale-up. As a result, the critical intermediate stage focused on prototyping, testing, certification,
IP support and early validation remains inadequately addressed. RDI Clusters can bridge this gap by housing
shared, specialised facilities such as:
● Advanced instrumentation centres
● Second-level incubation with prototyping and pilot manufacturing capabilities
● Testing and validation infrastructure
● Value Addition Centres
● Coordination platforms and Information Sharing Facilities
● Accelerated quality and compliance certification services
● Innovation accelerators offering structured mentorship, technical validation and market access, and
Business and market development advisory services
Execution Mechanism
State S&T Council may be empowered and made the operational/executive organizations for anchoring these
clusters in the respective states. A part support from RDIF may be explored. These clusters can be set up in PPP
mode with a shared initial investment in the ratio of 40:40:20 participation from Centre, State, and industry
partners, respectively, excluding the cost of land and facilities to be supported by the state. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 50
3.4. (e) Enable Better IP Ownership Norms for Co-funded R&D
A clear and standardised IP framework for co-funded research needs to be developed to address
joint government-industry funding scenarios. A suitable provision in Rule 233 of the GFR for co-
sharing of IPR may be introduced for jointly funded R&D projects between industry and public
funded institutions.
3.4.(f) Consider amending ESOP Taxation Provision for employees in Deep-tech startups
The ESOP taxation provisions may be amended to allow employees in deep-technology startups
to discharge tax liabilities at the time of actual monetisation rather than at the point of exercise.
3.4.(g) Broaden the mandate of Technology Business Incubators
It is required to broaden the mandate of Technology Business Incubators to deliver end-to-end,
cross-disciplinary support from innovation to commercialisation. Mentoring Scope of TBIs
should include expertise in finance, legal/ regulatory, marketing, and social innovation alongside
technical mentoring etc.
3.4.(h) Create a linking framework for Incubators
A linking framework for incubators across ministries/ departments should be developed, possibly
by Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) or the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal
Trade (DPIIT), for enhancing capacity, integration and synergy across the incubation ecosystem.
3.4.(i) Strengthen domestic certification mechanisms
Strengthening domestic certification mechanisms can help improve market access for deep-
technology startups and MSMEs. Further, it can reduce costs and delays in commercialisation due
reliance on foreign agencies for the purpose.
3.4. (j) Establish a Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI)
The Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI) can help identify priority technologies for
indigenization through analysis of import trends and national priorities, and maintain a centralized
repository. It can coordinate with MSMEs to facilitate indigenization of relevant technologies.
3.4. (k) Develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework and notify Nodal Institutions
It is necessary to develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework and notify suitable
institutions (such as NRDC, BIRAC, and TDB) as nodal institutions for the purpose of addressing
disagreements/ disputes in assessment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 51
3.4. (l) Develop regulatory sandbox provision in deep-technology domains
Develop a legally anchored, cross-sectoral regulatory sandbox framework for deep-technology
domains with defined eligibility norms, inter-agency coordination mechanisms, and time-bound
evaluation and exit pathways.
3.5 Access to Knowledge & Resources
Innovations and discoveries in STI are rarely developed in isolation; they build upon earlier
research, existing knowledge, and prior experimental findings. For scientists and technologists
to generate high-quality and original work, it is essential that they remain continuously updated
about global developments, emerging trends, and advances in their respective fields. This
requires reliable and timely access to scholarly journals, digital libraries, patent databases, and
other knowledge repositories that provide comprehensive and curated information. Without such
access, researchers risk duplication of effort, gaps in understanding, and reduced competitiveness.
Strengthening access to high-quality knowledge resources is therefore fundamental to fostering
innovation, improving research outcomes, and ensuring that the STI ecosystem remains globally
relevant. Table 3.5 presents a top level overview of the key dimensions of access and collaboration
related challenges, which are then discussed in detail.
Table 3.5: Key Dimensions of Challenges related to Access & Collaboration
DimensionCore Issues Identified
National Knowledge Access,
Platforms & Tools
ONOS coverage gaps such as exclusion of major scholarly &
patent databases and lack of access for private universities, limited
institutional access to high-cost research software, fragmented and
ineffective institutional repositories.
Publishing & Research Data
Governance Ecosystem
Weak culture of research data sharing and reuse, absence of national or
centralised platforms for hosting multidisciplinary research datasets,
weak indigenous academic publishing ecosystem with limited high-
quality platforms for regional and India-specific research.
3.5.1. Gaps in Access to Journals, Databases and Software
India has rolled out a very ambitious program - One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)- to provide
access to journals and periodicals from a set of reputed publishers to researchers and academicians
across the country. This initiative has not only broadened the access, but also optimized associated
costs. However, the ONOS has not included access to scholarly and patent databases (such as Web
of Science, Scopus, Derwent etc.) in its current version. Further, ONOS is currently not extended
to private universities and institutions, which are also producing good research outcomes, and are
an important part of the STI ecosystem. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 52
Beyond publications, a large number of universities and research institutes lack access to essential
high-cost research software, advanced modelling tools, and simulators - including platforms such
as COMSOL, etc, and bioinformatics suites like Schrödinger. The absence of institutional or
national-level licensing arrangements/ or agreed rates limits faculty and researchers from adopting
globally competitive research methodologies.
3.5.2. Limited Opportunities for Hosting Pre-prints to support Open Access
The DST-DBT Open Access Policy of 2014 mandates that research publications coming out of
public funded research projects should be made openly accessible. A similar policy has been
adopted by CSIR. Uploads of pre-print/ post-print to archives is considered a potential route to do
so. To facilitate the process, different central repositories have been created by different ministries/
departments. This includes Science Central, CSIR Central, KrishiKosh etc. However, neither the
policies are enforced, nor the repositories created are effective. Most of the repositories in India
do not provide for automatic discovery by Web Crawlers, as a result articles uploaded on these
repositories do not appear in search results of different Web search engines. Therefore, there is a
need for creation of an effective, Web discoverable National Repository that can host pre-prints
and post-prints of researchers from different institutions in India. Such a repository can create
an environment where all Indian research outcomes can be hosted for open access to all Indian
researchers, thereby reducing the dependence on foreign journal publishers at least for access to
Indian research outputs.
3.5.3. Weak Research Data Sharing Ecosystem
The current R&D ecosystem is characterised by a weak culture of research data sharing and
reuse. While research insights and recommendations are frequently disseminated through reports,
publications, and policy briefs, the underlying datasets are often poorly structured, inadequately
documented, and often remain inaccessible. This significantly limits their integration into future
research, cross-disciplinary use, and secondary analysis by other researchers. One possible reason
for this is the absence of suitable national or centralised platforms for hosting the research data
generated across institutions and sectors. Existing repositories are limited by visibility and scale.
Therefore, there is a need for scaling up the current limited number of such repositories (like the
Indian Biological Data Centre (IBDC) at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB) and the
AI Kosh under MeitY). An interlinked national data repository framework capable of hosting
multidisciplinary datasets can significantly enhance data reuse, collaboration across disciplines,
and improve the overall quality and impact of research.
3.5.4. Limited publication platforms for Regional and Country Specific Research
A significant amount of R&D effort in a country is often targeted at solving local and regional
problems. However, much of this work fails to achieve wider visibility and dissemination,
as international journals usually do not entertain such research. A natural choice would be to
publish such research outcomes in national journals. However, there are not enough high-quality
publication platforms that can publish regional and India-specific research outcomes. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 53
Many national journals face challenges such as slow or inconsistent peer-review processes,
limited international indexing, and low citations, which reduces their credibility and discourages
researchers from publishing in them. These structural limitations collectively restrict the translation
of regionally relevant research into broader academic, policy, and practice-oriented learning.
Therefore, there is a clear need to establish/ strengthen the national journal publishing system,
that is professionally managed, appropriately indexed, and designed to disseminate high-quality
regional and country specific research, while meeting global standards of academic publishing.
Indian Science academies may play an important role here.
Major Recommendations
3.5 (a) Expand ONOS coverage to include Publication and Patent Databases and widen coverage
ONOS coverage should be expanded to include subscriptions to high-quality publication & patent
databases, and its coverage may be widened to include private institutions on a reasonable cost-
sharing basis.
3.5 (b) Explore Licensing high-cost software, tools and resources
Explore institutional or national level licensing arrangements or price discovery mechanisms for
essential high-cost research software, advanced simulation & modeling tools, to ensure equitable
access, cost efficiency, and wider utilisation across universities and research institutions, on the
lines of ONOS.
3.5 (c) Explore creating a National R&D Repository
Explore developing a large-scale, integrated, and Web discoverable National Repository to provide
open access and seamless sharing of Indian research output and data to Indian researchers. In due
course, such a repository may be integrated with UPMS being developed.
3.5 (d) Develop quality National Journals
It is required to develop a professionally managed ecosystem to support quality indexed national
journals. The expertise and domain knowledge of Indian Science academies may also be leveraged
for the purpose.
3.6 R&D in State Institutions
R&D in state institutions and region-specific STI lie at the intersection of local priorities, institutional
capacity and national ambitions. The Science Technology and Innovation Policy 2013 articulated
a clear mandate for strengthening the STI ecosystem in states, particularly through strengthening
State Science & Technology Councils. However, the implementation of policy imperatives has Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 54
been uneven, and as result the progress in the state STI ecosystem remains limited more than
a decade later. Therefore, a substantial effort is still required to catalyse and strengthen the STI
ecosystem across the states.
India has an inherent culture of innovation, where the community and its innovators try to
address the local and regional problems in their own ways. Such (grassroots) innovations are
deep rooted in the communities and regions, often characterized by the bottom-up approach of
innovation. Strengthening state institutions is therefore not just important, but urgent, as they form
the foundation on which sustainable and inclusive national outcomes are built. As is said, Viksit
Bharat will happen only through Viksit Rajya. A number of unique challenges specific to state
universities and state-funded research institutions were identified during the consultation process.
They are grouped under some key dimensions in Table 3.6, which are further discussed in detail
subsequently.
Table 3.6: Key Dimensions of R&D Challenges in State Institutions
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Systemic & Institutional
Capacity Gaps, Funding
constraints in State STI
Ecosystems
Capacity gaps, Low extramural funding, Weak R&D culture,
disparities across states, insufficient infrastructure, weak S&T
Councils, administrative gaps, Burden of affiliations, Limited
autonomy, Geographic & Connectivity constraints.
Human Resource & Academic
Ecosystem Constraints
Vacancies, adhoc appointments, pay disparities, teaching overload,
weak PhD ecosystem, attrition.
Grassroots Integration Weak grassroots support, limited NIF integration.
Centre–State Coordination
Gaps
Poor collaboration with central institutions, PAIR limitations,
equipment transfer gaps.
3.6.1. Capacity Gaps in State Science and Technology Councils
The State Science and Technology Councils, created through enabling support from DST, function
as nodal agencies at the state level for planning, promoting, and coordinating science and technology
(S&T) activities. State universities and colleges often look forward to support and funding from
State S&T Councils, given their role in capacity development and financial assistance. However,
Councils themselves face considerable limitations in capability and resources, making it difficult
for them to play an important role. Therefore, it is essential to enhance their capacity and improve
the overall governance structure. This need has also been recognized by NITI Aayog in its 2025
report, “A Roadmap for Strengthening State Science & Technology (S&T) Councils”, which
outlined measures to significantly empower State S&T Councils, enhancing their capacity and
funding mechanisms. Effective implementation of the report’s recommendations is essential for
strengthening the state S&T Councils. The recent initiatives by the state of Andhra Pradesh in
S&T domain is an excellent example to be followed by other states. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 55
3.6.2. Lack of Institutional Support for Grassroots Innovation in States
India’s grassroots innovators contribute significantly in addressing the local and regional problems
through technological innovations. While grassroots innovations play an extremely valuable role,
many promising technologies developed by communities, individuals and informal innovators, do
not have the support system for validation and scaling. In some states, the state S&T councils have
established connections with the National Innovation Foundation (NIF) to promote grassroots
innovators in the state, however, these are only initiative driven and not embedded in the councils
systematically. By acting as nodal agencies, the State S&T councils, can on one hand support
decentralised grassroots innovation activities, and on the other link these efforts with national
institutions and programs. The NIF can play a major role in supporting grassroots innovations,
however, it needs to be strengthened to be able to support a distributed network across states for
supporting grassroot innovators.
3.6.3. Weak R&D Culture and Capacity in State Institutions
The STI capabilities of states and state institutions remain underdeveloped due to inadequate
funding, limited research infrastructure, faculty shortages and overall weak R&D culture. The
major issues affecting the R&D culture and capability of state institutions are following:
(a) Poor R&D funding: State Universities and Institutions have very poor internal R&D funding
and lesser opportunities of attracting extramural R&D funding. This limits their ability to
undertake good quality research, upgrade laboratories, and support faculty and students. Another
major challenge is the limited availability of seed funding, which is crucial for initiating new
research ideas, establishing basic laboratory infrastructure, and generating preliminary results
to develop strong proposals for securing competitive extramural R&D grants.
(b) Weak R&D Infrastructure: State institutions often have limited or outdated research equipment
and laboratories, which reduces exposure of researchers to state-of-the-art equipment. Even
where facilities exist, poor maintenance limits their use. As a result, researchers in these
institutions remain dependent on access to facilities in the central R&D institutions located
in geographical proximity, which is not an easy task. There is a need to improve research
infrastructure, improve connections between existing facilities, and actively establish new
R&D facilities in state institutions.
(c) Burden of Affiliations: Most state universities now have a major role as affiliating bodies for
a large number of colleges. Managing and maintaining the affiliation activity takes a lot of
time and energy of faculty and administration of Universities, leaving very little time to focus
on research activities and institutional capacity building. Incentives and institutional support
for good quality research are also inadequate, limiting the shift of culture in state institutions
from teaching to active research. Faculty face restricted funding for conferences, professional
development, and sabbaticals; hindering research, training, and collaboration.
(d) Vacant regular teaching positions: A significant proportion of the sanctioned regular faculty
positions in the state institutions often remain vacant. Universities make ad hoc arrangements in Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 56
the form of engaging contractual, ad-hoc, guest or other temporary appointments. The salaries
of such appointees are often not attractive or at par with regular appointees, discouraging good
candidates from taking up such assignments. Further, the prevailing rules of funding agencies
make such appointees ineligible for extramural R&D funding. In many cases such appointees
are not even considered eligible for any seed grants that may be provided by institutions from
their own resources.
(e) Weak doctoral research ecosystem: State universities face a lack of doctoral students due to
inadequate funding for fellowships and low focus on research. Low doctoral enrolment and
the migration of research scholars to centrally funded institutions (particularly to IIT’s and
other central institutions), further depletes research manpower and undermines the vitality of
state-level R&D systems. A complete absence of a post-doctoral ecosystem further weakens
research capability and quality.
3.6.4. Administrative Misalignments and Financial Rigidities in State Institutions
Researchers and scientists, in state institutions, often face several unique challenges in managing
R&D activities and processes, due to administrative and financial misalignments. Some of the key
bottlenecks are discussed below:
(a) Administrative Misalignments due to Dual Control Structures: In many State institutions,
Registrar, Finance Controller, and similar administrative positions are occupied by members
of the state civil services. While the functional authority rests with the Vice-Chancellor, the
actual control and accountability of such officers often remains with the State government.
This duality leads to reduced administrative authority and autonomy of institutional leadership,
which delays decision making.
(b) Inefficient Financial Procedures: State institutions often operate under rigid financial norms
that do not distinguish adequately between routine administrative procurement and research
oriented procurement. Further, special provisions/ relaxations provided by the Government of
India for scientific departments (e.g., those under GFR and GeM frameworks) are often not
operationalized at the state level due to absence of enabling state-level circulars or lack of
awareness.
3.6.5. Weak Centre-State Collaboration in STI
As the STI ecosystem has expanded, a dense network of centrally funded R&D institutions and
HEIs has emerged across states. However, physical presence alone has not translated into effective
integration with state academic and R&D systems. A state may be hosting numerous central
institutions and yet there may be no or a minimal collaboration between these institutions and the
state universities and R&D institutions. The following issues need to be addressed in this regard:
(a) Lack of a suitable Collaboration Framework: At present there is no mandate or a well-
defined framework to support collaboration of central R&D labs and HEIs located in a state,
with the state government institutions. As these institutions are under administrative control of Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 57
different governments, there is no straightforward connection between them. As a result, the
opportunities of application of the collective knowledge and expertise of such institutions to
state specific problems reduce significantly.
(b) Absence of mechanism for Equipment transfer: As central institutions upgrade infrastructure,
some functional equipment often becomes surplus and is underutilised or scrapped, despite
being valuable for resource-constrained state institutions. There are no mechanisms at present
to identify and transfer functional surplus R&D equipment from centrally funded institutions to
smaller state institutions and universities, instead of disposing of them as scrap. Such transfers
may enhance research and training capacity at low cost in state institutions, with minimal
budgetary support for maintenance and operation.
(c) ANRF’s PAIR Program Issues: Recently, ANRF introduced the Hub and Spoke model
through the Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research (PAIR) programme to
promote research activities in state institutions. However, its current design tends to concentrate
equipment and research infrastructure at hub institutions. The absence of explicit provisions
for infrastructure creation at state partners, limits sustained capacity building. Therefore,
suitable updates are needed in the PAIR programme to provide greater equipment support to
state institutions.
3.6.6. Geographic and Connectivity Constraints
There are several R&D institutions and HEIs located in a geographically remote, high-altitude, or
a high-humidity region, where a conducive environment for R&D activities is not straightforward.
Researchers working in such environments often face harsh and extreme climatic conditions that
directly affect health and productivity. Poor connectivity and long travel times create excess
barriers which in turn make people feel secluded and isolated from the rest of the country. This
weak physical and digital connectivity limits access to skilled manpower and creates a sense of
instability in researchers. Institutions located in regions such as Ladakh, the North-East, and J&K
often have these constraints. Further, eligible candidates from the local population from the tier
3 cities in such regions enter scientific R&D careers at a later stage, which could restrict their
eligibility under existing “age-based” recruitment criteria.
Major Recommendations
3.6 (a) Empower State S&T Councils
State Science and Technology Councils need to be strengthened in capability and resources so that
they are able to identify state specific STI needs, support R&D projects in state institutions, and
help evolve a vibrant STI ecosystem in the state. NITI Aayog’s 2025 report on the subject presents
a roadmap to do this. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 58
3.6 (b) Create a cell for supporting grassroots innovation in each State S&T Councils
Creating a dedicated Grassroot innovation cell within each State S&T Council will provide a
platform to coordinate and support grassroots innovation across the state.
3.6 (c) Strengthen National Innovation Foundation (NIF)
A strengthened NIF can create a distributed network across states (with state S&T councils), for
supporting grassroots innovators, and hence play a more effective role in promoting and supporting
grassroot innovations in diverse areas ranging from engineered tools to traditional knowledge.
3.6 (d) Recruit Faculty on Regular Basis against sanctioned posts in State Universities
Appointment of regular faculty in state institutions would greatly strengthen the state research
ecosystem by improving access to funding, ensuring continuity of research, and enhancing overall
institutional capacity.
3.6 (e) Develop a suitable framework for collaboration between centrally funded R&D
institutions/ HEIs with the state level HEIs and S&T institutions.
It is required to develop a suitable collaboration framework for strengthening collaboration
and synergies between centrally funded R&D institutions/ HEIs with state institutions. Such
collaborations can help improve the culture of R&D in state institutions and sensitize scientists
and researchers in the central institutions to work on state level S&T challenges as well.
3.6 (f) Improve and expand the PAIR program
The PAIR program guidelines may be updated to include a higher level of equipment support to
participating state institutions, in addition to mentoring. Further, more PAIR networks may be
created, preferably one in each large state.
3.6 (g) Develop an enabling mechanism to transfer some of the functional R&D equipment in
central institutions to state institutions
Transfer of additional (including old but functional) equipment in central institutions to state
institutions can help provide access to costly equipment for researchers and students in state
institutions. This can help improve their comfort level of working on high end equipment.
3.6 (h) Institute special Human Resources provisions for Hard Areas
Instituting attractive special provisions/ incentives for researchers working in institutions and labs
situated in hard areas can help longer stay in such places, which in turn will help create a better
sense of continuity and belongingness required for engaged R&D activities. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 59
3.7 Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building and Policy
Administration
Effective governance of the STI ecosystem requires well-designed institutional mechanisms that
systematically monitor policy implementation, generate reliable data for decision making, and
strengthen both scientific and administrative capacities across institutions. The pathway towards
developing a robust STI ecosystem calls for creation of stronger and more coordinated STI
policy governance mechanisms, to ensure accountability, improving programme effectiveness,
and facilitating timely policy correction. At present several specific challenges persist in the
monitoring and evaluation, capacity building and training of personnel, and the administrative
management of STI activities. These challenges are enumerated at a higher level in Table 3.7, and
discussed later in detail.
Table 3.7: Structural Dimensions of Monitoring, Evaluation and Policy Administration
Challenges in the STI Ecosystem
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Policy Monitoring and
Evaluation Frameworks
Absence of systematic mechanisms to track implementation, Limited
feedback loops between programme outcomes and policy design,
Lack of clearly defined output & impact indicators, Weak integration
of evaluation findings into future policy formulation.
STI Data Systems and
Analytical Capacity
Fragmented and delayed STI data collection, Limited institutional
capacity for regular and standardized analytics, Gaps in
benchmarking and global reporting.
Capacity Building for Science
Policy and Administration
Limited opportunities for structured training of scientists and
science administrators, Absence of mid-career programmes in
science governance and policy evaluation, Inadequate institutional
mechanisms to build administrative capabilities for managing
complex STI programmes.
3.7.1. Absence of an effective framework to monitor effective implementation of policies
The existing STI management framework largely follows a linear flow, with limited feedback
mechanisms to systematically monitor progress, and assess on-ground outcome & impact of
policies, programmes, and funded projects. Policies and missions are often designed in absence
of up to date and robust baseline data or foresight analysis. The implementation of projects is also
often difficult to track in absence of clear outcome and impact indicators. Since, the outputs and
outcomes of R&D programs and projects are not measured in an effective manner, lessons from
past programs are not fed back into future policy design. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 60
One of the best practices adopted worldwide is development of a set of STI indicators and
maintaining scoreboards/dashboards for benchmarking and trend analysis (example: EU/JRC
scoreboards and OECD indicator). It also helps in embedding continuous programme/mission
reviews so that the policies may be adjusted to include emerging technologies and societal needs
(as practiced by KISTEP/ STEPI). Similarly, UKRI also uses explicit evaluation frameworks for
monitoring and evaluation feed back into programme design (https://www.ukri.org/publications/
uk-research-and-innovation-evaluation-strategy/ukri-evaluation-strategy/). It also maintains a
repository of past evaluations; synthesis reports and best practices case studies so new programmes
don’t repeat past mistakes. Such mechanisms can help improve the STI ecosystem.
3.7.2. Lack of a setup for systematic and periodic STI Data Collection and Analytics
Current operating mechanisms in STI data collection and analytics in the country exhibit variability
in approach and consistency. The national-level exercises, primarily STI surveys and commissioned
bibliometric studies are undertaken by DST, to systematically collect, analyse, and compile data
on the country’s science, technology, and innovation ecosystem. However, often these exercises
are delayed and some of them are even carried out occasionally and hence the updated data for the
country is not fed into relevant sources for different global indices and benchmarks (such as Global
Innovation Index). Therefore, there is a greater need to strengthen systemic capabilities for STI
data collection and analytics in a standardised, timely, and independent manner. Japan’s NISTEP
is a good example of such a dedicated institute. The Science & Technology Policy Institute of
South Korea is another example. Several OECD countries also have this type of capability.
3.7.3. Limited Opportunities of Periodic Training of Scientist and Science Administrators
A widely observed issue across different scientific ministries and departments is the absence of
a regular training and capacity building mechanism for science administrators. Most of the staff
members may be very good scientists in their domains/disciplines, but they may lack the science
administration skills, more so when it comes to managing and advancing programs in newer
and critical areas of Science and Technology. Science administrators and scientists in scientific
ministries and departments do not get suitable opportunities for periodic training and capacity
building. Therefore, there is a need for a dedicated setup to support and coordinate training in
policy design, program evaluation, and science governance roles, along with periodic capacity
building in new and emerging areas of science & technology.
Major Recommendations
3.7 Establish a National Institute for Science Policy and Governance (NISPG)
The proposed institute can bridge gaps in analytics, policy design, monitoring, regular capacity
building, and governance across the STI ecosystem (Refer Box 5). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 61
Box 5
National Institute for Science Policy and Governance
Objective
To bridge policy, implementation and monitoring gaps in India, a National Institute for Science Policy and
Governance (NISPG) may be established as a leading national nodal institution, or as an autonomous institute
or attached office under DST, with a high degree of functional autonomy. It may help in standardisation of
evaluation frameworks, impact assessment processes and policy coherence mechanisms, similar to STEPI
(South Korea) and NISTEP (Japan).
Operational Scope
Major roles of such an institute may include (but not limited to):
I. STI Data Collection and Analytics
II. Monitoring and Evaluation
III. Policy and Governance
IV. Capacity Building of science administrators.
For roles (i) and (ii), NISPG will be the central hub/repository for STI data collection, analytics, foresight,
monitoring and evaluation across the full R&D lifecycle-inputs, outputs, outcomes and societal impact. It will
develop national STI indicators, and implementation/compliance scorecards for all scientific ministerial and
inter-departmental policies and missions. For (iii), it will strive to benchmark Indian STI governance against
global standards and rankings (indices) taking insights from their best practices.
With respect to the capacity-building role (iv), NISPG can serve as India’s premier training institute for
capacity building of science administrators and scientific leadership in R&D institutions. The institution
can provide induction as well as mid-career training and organize focused workshops on topics of national
importance. Two examples from other sectors include the AJNIFM and the NCGG. The proposed institution
can also bring in active participation of the Indian science academies and also liaison with relevant international
organizations and bodies like OECD, ISSI, CWTS etc. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 63
CHAPTER 4
Charting the Road Ahead:
Towards a robust & future-ready R&D Ecosystem
Charting the Road Ahead:
Towards a robust & future-ready
R&D Ecosystem
4 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 64
4.1 Summary of Recommendations and Actions
A vibrant research ecosystem thrives when administrative and financial systems function as
enablers rather than controllers. The consultations undertaken as part of the EoDR&D initiative
clearly emphasized that our scientific potential is not constrained by talent or ambition, but often
by procedural rigidity, disorganized processes, and delayed decision-making. Through structured
consultations, including eight focused meetings with researchers, institutional leaders, funding
agencies; the critical bottlenecks affecting India’s R&D landscape were identified and examined
in depth.
The recommendations presented in this section are aimed at transitioning the R&D framework from
a compliance-driven architecture, to a systematic, facilitation-oriented, trust-based, and outcome-
focused system. These recommendations seek to enhance agility in funding and procurement,
strengthen institutional capacities, enable talent mobility and retention, improve technology
translation, and embed robust monitoring mechanisms aligned with national priorities. Together,
these measures are intended to create an enabling ecosystem where researchers can operate with
greater autonomy, accountability, and confidence - thereby positioning the R&D system to meet
emerging scientific and technological challenges.
The major recommendations emerging from the consultative process, detailed in Chapter 3, are
outlined below in Table 4.1, along with the proposed mapping for action by relevant Ministries/
Departments/ Agencies.
Table 4.1: Summary of Recommendations
S.N. TopicRecommendation
Action/
Implementation By
1
R&D Funding and
Utilization
(Ref. Section 3.1)
Raise GERD from 0.64% to at least 2% of GDP, in the
next four to five years to strengthen India’s research
base and achieve Viksit Bharat 2047 goals.
DST and DoE
Introduce time-bound incremental fiscal incentives
linked to additional R&D spend and promote industry-
led research centres within public institutions.
DSIR and DoR
Introduce an optional R&D Expenditure reporting
line under Schedule III of the Companies Act, 2013
(Section 129) to improve visibility of private sector
R&D investments and encourage higher spending.
MCA
Strengthen CSR provisions under the Companies
Act and provide higher tax deductions for individual
donations to R&D-supporting funds under Section 133
of the Income Tax Act, 2025 to enhance philanthropic
and CSR funding for R&D.
DSIR and DoR
Create an inter-departmental coordination committee
to regularly align schemes and funding calls across
departments and minimize duplication.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 65
1
R&D Funding and
Utilization
(Ref. Section 3.1)
Mandate a maximum six-month processing timeline for
R&D proposals, with a four-month target to improve
predictability and reduce delays.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Create dedicated Project Management Units
within funding agencies to manage post-approval
administration, ensuring faster disbursal and reduced
burden on scientists.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Adopt direct grant transfers for extramural R&D to
expedite fund flow, while continuing TSA/ Hybrid
models for larger institutional grants.
DST and DoE
Allow institutional flexibility for reallocation within
capital and revenue heads to enable timely project
execution without repeated approvals.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Enable streamlined procurement of research
consumables through expanded exclusions or
facilitating institutions to do rate contracts.
DST and DoE
Consider a reduced 5% GST slab for R&D-related
procurements to maximise effective utilization of
limited research grants.
DSIR and DoE
Provide higher overheads to support infrastructure
maintenance and long-term equipment sustainability.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, & ANRF
2
Attracting and
Retaining Quality
Human Resource
(Ref. Section 3.2)
Increase the number of postdoctoral fellowships in S&T
by 20% annually, for the next few years, to strengthen
the national postdoctoral research ecosystem.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
DHE, ICAR, ICMR
Establish Vigyan Nidhi, a digital fellowship platform
enabling direct benefit transfers and structured support
for postdocs, mobility grants, and industry-linked
research positions.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Empower institutions to rationalise faculty allocations
and adopt flexible hiring models within approved
budgets to accelerate recruitment and improve FTE
strength.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Introduce performance-linked incentives and equity-
based models to reward excellence and promote long-
term research commitment.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Standardise pay structures across autonomous R&D
institutions and offer competitive packages for mission-
critical national initiatives.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, and ANRF
Develop focused mid-career training and capacity-
building programs for scientists, researchers, and
university faculty.
Indian Science
Academies with
DST
Implement clearly defined teaching-focused, research-
focused, and administrative tracks to align roles with
expertise and enhance institutional productivity.
DHE Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 66
S.N. TopicRecommendation
Action/
Implementation By
3
Institutional
Structures and
Processes
(Ref. Section 3.3)
Set up professionally staffed R&D Offices as single-
window hubs for grant management, compliance,
procurement, and funding agency coordination.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Create dedicated research administrator roles with
defined career pathways, specialised training, and
performance metrics aligned with research facilitation
outcomes.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop and periodically update clear institutional
guidelines covering IP, industry collaboration,
infrastructure sharing, and research governance
processes.
DST and DHE
Transform administrative systems from a compliance-
centric orientation towards trust-based administration.
Majority of the administrative functions should suffice
with self-declaration or self-certification by researchers.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Establish clearly defined performance targets for
institutional leaders and consider performance-linked
incentives to strengthen accountability and improve
institutional R&D outcomes.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Adopt a decentralized decision-making framework by
delegating defined administrative and financial powers
for R&D to Heads of Departments and enabling trust-
based self-certification for routine research processes
to reduce procedural delays.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Institutions
R&D institutions should clearly identify priority
research areas based on their existing strengths, faculty/
researcher expertise, and national relevance.
Institutions under
DST, DBT, DSIR
Develop an Ease of Doing R&D assessment framework
and require institutions to conduct periodic self-
assessments, with a standardized national scoring
mechanism integrated into existing benchmarks or as
a separate system.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, DHE and
NITI Aayog
Implement faculty and researcher entrepreneurship
policies with flexible time allocation, transparent
revenue-sharing, and an updated framework reflecting
current innovation and startup ecosystems.
DSIR to notify
knowledge equity
policy and DST,
DBT, CSIR and
DHE to adopt Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 67
4
Technology
Development,
Translation &
Commercialization
(Ref. Section 3.4)
Embed and strengthen Technology Transfer Offices
(TTOs) within R&D institutions to facilitate effective
research commercialization.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop standard model/guiding templates for MoUs
on technology co-development to strengthen academia-
industry collaboration and reduce timelines.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop a framework to enable industry-academia
mobility of scientists and researchers through joint
appointments, flexible affiliations, and dedicated
support mechanisms.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Create State-level RDI Clusters by integrating HEIs,
industry, and MSMEs under a Centre-State model
to provide shared TTO, IP, incubation, and TRL
infrastructure.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE,
coordinated by
NITI Aayog
Establish a standardised IP framework for co-funded
research with clear ownership, revenue-sharing, and
access norms to enhance industry participation.
DST and DoE
Amend ESOP taxation provisions to allow employees
in deep-tech startups to defer tax liability until actual
monetisation of shares rather than at the time of
exercise.
DoR with CBDT
Broaden the mandate of Technology Business
Incubators to provide end-to-end, cross-disciplinary
support from innovation to commercialisation,
including mentoring in finance, legal/regulatory,
marketing, and social innovation.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR
Develop a linking framework across incubators
under different ministries and departments to enhance
capacity, integration, and synergy within the incubation
ecosystem.
Atal Innovation
Mission (AIM),
NITI Aayog or
DPIIT
Strengthen domestic certification mechanisms to
improve market access for deep-tech startups and
MSMEs and reduce reliance on foreign certification
agencies.
DPIIT
Establish a Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI)
to identify priority technologies for indigenization,
maintain a centralized repository, and coordinate with
MSMEs to support domestic capability development.
DST
Develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework
and notify nodal institutions to address disputes in TRL
assessment.
DST
Develop a legally anchored, cross-sectoral regulatory
sandbox framework for deep-technology domains with
clear eligibility norms, inter-agency coordination, and
time-bound evaluation mechanisms.
DPIIT Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 68
5
Access to
Knowledge &
Resources
(Ref. Section 3.5)
Expand ONOS to include private institutions on a cost-
sharing basis and integrate high-quality journal and
global patent database subscriptions.
DHE
Negotiate national or consortia-based licenses for
advanced research software and simulators to ensure
equitable access and cost efficiency.
DHE
Explore establishing a National R&D Repository to
enable integrated, web-discoverable access and sharing
of Indian research outputs and data.
DST
Develop quality indexed Indian journals through a
professionally managed ecosystem, leveraging the
expertise of Indian science academies.
DST and CSIR
6
R&D in State
Institutions
(Ref. Section 3.6)
Strengthen State S&T Councils through enhanced
project-based funding and technical support to improve
coordination and implementation capacity.
State Governments,
and DST
Establish dedicated grassroots innovation cells within
State S&T Councils to identify, mentor, and scale local
innovations.
State S&T Councils,
and DST
Provide enhanced resources to NIF to build a
coordinated state-level innovation support network in
partnership with State S&T Councils.
DST
Recruit regular faculty against sanctioned posts in
State Universities to strengthen research capacity and
continuity in the state research ecosystem.
State Governments
Develop a framework to enable collaboration between
centrally funded R&D institutions/ HEIs and state-level
HEIs and S&T institutions, with State S&T Councils
acting as facilitators.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE in
collaboration with
NITI Aayog and
State Government
Expand and strengthen the PAIR programme to include
targeted equipment support for participating state
institutions.
ANRF
Institutionalise mechanisms for transferring usable
surplus equipment from central institutions to resource-
constrained state universities.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE,
State Government
Institute special human resource incentives for
researchers working in institutions located in hard areas
to promote longer tenure and strengthen continuity in
R&D activities.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 69
7
Monitoring,
Evaluation,
Capacity Building
and Policy
Administration
(Ref. Section 3.7)
Set up a National Institute for Science Policy and
Governance (NISPG) to bridge the Analytics, Policy,
Monitoring, Governance and capacity building gaps.
DST to setup
4.2 Towards an Enabling R&D Ecosystem
As India advances towards the vision of Viksit Bharat @ 2047, it is equally important to improve
research quality, accelerate technology development and translation, increase industry participation,
and develop globally competitive scientific institutions across the country. Achieving this will
require sustained commitment, inter-governmental coordination, and measurable implementation
outcomes. To support sustained progress and accountability, a structured Ease of Doing Research
and Development (EoDR&D) Assessment Framework may be developed to systematically evaluate
how effectively institutions enable and support R&D activities. Over time, such assessments
should become intrinsic to the R&D culture of institutions, promoting continuous improvements
in research governance and institutional practices. The framework should also be periodically
reviewed and updated,in coordination with relevant national agencies, to reflect evolving R&D
dynamics and ensure its continued effectiveness in the national and global context.
Institutions should undertake periodic self-assessments based on defined parameters covering
research administration, funding processes, collaboration frameworks, infrastructure, and
translational support. At the national level, a standardized scoring mechanism may be introduced,
either embedded within existing institutional benchmarking systems such as NIRF, NAAC, or
through a dedicated independent assessment framework. Such an approach would help create
transparent performance benchmarks, incentivise institutional reforms, and enable continuous
monitoring of improvements in the research ecosystem. NITI Aayog may coordinate this exercise
in collaboration with different scientific departments and agencies.
By systematically removing procedural bottlenecks and reinforcing enabling conditions with the
recommendations highlighted in the report, India can strengthen the operational foundations of
its R&D ecosystem. Such reforms will be crucial in enhancing research productivity, attracting
and retaining high-quality talent, improving translational outcomes, and ensuring that scientific
advancement contributes effectively to long-term national development priorities. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 71
Appendix 1: List of Participants of
Regional Consultative Meetings
A. Elaya Perumal
Director
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Nagaland
A. N. Shriram
Scientist E
ICMR-Vector Control Research Centre
(VCRC), Puducherry
A. Manjula
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
A. Ravinder Nath
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Kashmir, Ganderbal,
Jammu & Kashmir
A. S. Nain
Director Research
G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and
Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand
A. Sabu
Member Secretary
KSCSTE, Kerala
Abha Chhabra
Scientist
ISRO-Space Applications Centre (SAC),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Abhay Kumar
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Agartala, Tripura
Abhilash Mandloi
Associate Professor
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat
Abhishek Acharya
Associate Professor
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat
Aditya Sinha
Executive Director
C-DAC Mumbai, Maharashtra
Aditya Sinha
Associate Director
FAST-India, Delhi
Ajay K Sharma
Director
National Institute of Technology Delhi, New
Delhi
Ajay Kumar
Director
Instruments Research & Development
Establishment (IRDE), Dehradun,
Uttarakhand
Ajaz Ahmed
Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Ajit Kumar Shasany
Director
CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute
(NBRI), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Akash Deep
Director (Additional Charge) DBT-
Institute of Nano Science and Technology
(INST), Mohali, Punjab
Akhilesh Nimje
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Akhil Kumar Pathak Superintending
Surveyor
Survey of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Akhil Ranjan Garg
Vice Chancellor
Bikaner Technical University, Bikaner,
Rajasthan
Alok Kumar Rai
Vice Chancellor
University of Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Alok Sinha
Professor
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM),
Dhanbad, Jharkhand
Amitesh Kumar
Professor
National Institute of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Jharkhand
Amit Kumar Patra
Director
National Atmospheric Research Laboratory,
Andhra Pradesh
Amit Prashant
Dean R&D
Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar
(IIT-GN), Gujarat
Amit Rastogi
Chairman & Managing Director
National Research Development
Corporation (NRDC), New Delhi
Amiya Kumar Rath
Vice Chancellor
Biju Patnaik University of Technology,
Odisha
Anand Bhadalkar
Director
DST-Savli Technology & Business Incubator,
Gujarat
Anandi Iyer
Director
Fraunhofer Office, New Delhi
Anil Bhardwaj
Director
Physical Research Laboratory (PRL),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Anil Kakodkar
Former Chairman
Atomic Energy Commission
Anil Kumar Singh
Director Research
Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural
University, Bihar
Anil Kumar Tripathi
Director
Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research (IISER), Mohali, Punjab
Anindya Biswas
Head of Physics Department
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Sikkim
Anju Bhasin
Dean Academic Affairs
University of Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir
Ankit Magotra
Deputy Director Research SKUAST,
Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 72
Ankit Sheth
Senior Scientist
ICMR- National Institute of Occupational
Health (NIOH), Gujarat
Anupam Shukla
Director
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Gujarat
Aparjita Marwah
Senior Program Associate
FAST-INDIA, Delhi
Appala Naidu
Associate Professor
C R Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics
Statistics and Computer Science (AIMSCS),
Telangana
Archana B Siva
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Centre for Cellular & Molecular
Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, Telangana
Areejit Samal
Professor
Institute of Mathematical Sciences (IMSc),
Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Arun Anand
Director R&D Cell
Sardar Patel University, Gujarat
Arupjyoti Choudhury
Vice Chancellor
Madhabdev University, Assam
Arun Kumar Tripathi
Vice Chancellor
Uttarakhand Ayurved University,
Uttarakhand
Arup Misra
Chairman
Pollution Control Board, Assam
Arvind
Dean Industry Collaboration & Sponsored
Research
IIT Palakkad, Kerala
Arvind C Ranade
Director
National Innovation Foundation (NIF),
Gujarat
Arvind Kumar
Scientist G & Head
National S&T Management Information
System (NSTMIS), New Delhi
Arvind M T
Chief Innovation Officer
IIT Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir
Arvind Yadav
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Ashish Kumar Singh
Joint Director
ICAR- National Dairy Research Institute,
Karnal
Ashish Mohan
Executive Director
CII, Delhi
Ashok Kumar Ganguli
Director
Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research (IISER), Odisha
Ashok Mondal
Director
National Institute of Design, Gujarat
Ashu Rani
Vice Chancellor
Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra,
Uttar Pradesh
Ashutosh Sharma
Former President
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
Delhi
Ashwani Pareek
Executive Director
BRIC-National Agri Food Biotechnology
Institute (NABI), Mohali, Punjab
Aswathy M G
Assistant Director
State Dairy Lab, Pattom, Kerala
Avishek Bhattacharjee
Scientist E
MoEFCC- Botanical Survey of India, West
Bengal
B. K. Rout
Director
B K Birla Institute of Engineering &
Technology (BKBIET), Rajasthan
B. R. Kamboj
Vice Chancellor
Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana
Agricultural University, Haryana
B. S. Ramesha
Scientist D
Karnataka State Sericulture Research
& Development Institute (KSSRDI),
Thalaghattapura, Karnataka
B. S. Satyanarayana
Vice Chancellor
Dayanand Sagar University, Karnataka
B Santhosh
Principal Scientist & Head ICAR - Central
Marine Fisheries Research Institute,
Kerala
Basab Bijoy Roychowdhury Head (State
Government Business),
HPE India
Basanta Kumar Das
Director
ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research
Institute, West Bengal
Battu Satyanarayana
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Karnataka,
Karnataka
Bharat Kakti
Dean
Assam Science and Technology University,
Assam
Bhavesh Modi
Director
ICMR -National Institute of Occupational
Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Bhavini Patel
Assistant Professor
Indrashil University, Rajpur, Gujarat
Bibhas Deb
Vice Chancellor
Maharaja Bir Bikram University (MBBU),
Tripura
Bibhuti Bhusan Biswal
Vice Chancellor
Odisha University of Technology and
Research, Odisha
Bidyadhar Subudhi
Director
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal, Telangana
Binod Kumar Kanaujia
Director
B R Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar, Punjab
Binod Kumar Singh
Director
DST - National Atlas & Thematic Mapping
Organisation, West Bengal
Biswajit Ganguly
Senior Scientist & Head
CSIR - Central Salt & Marine Chemicals
Research Institute, Gujarat
Bobo Thongam
Cybersecurity Expert
National Institute of Electronics &
Information Technology (NIELIT), Manipur Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 73
Brajesh Pandey
Executive Director
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
Brenda Fernandes
Member Secretary
Goa State Council for Science &
Technology, Goa
C. A. Mawlong
Dean
School of Social Sciences North Eastern
Hill University (NEHU), Meghalaya
C. Anandharamakrishnan
Director
CSIR -National Institute for Interdisciplinary
Science and Technology, Kerala
C C Tripathi
Director
National Institute of Technical Teachers
Training and Research (NITTTR),
Madhya Pradesh
C. D. Mungyak
Director cum Member Secretary
Arunachal Pradesh State Council for
Science & Technology (APSCS&T),
Arunachal Pradesh
C. N. Bhende
Dean (PG&RP)
IIT-Bhubaneswar, Odisha
C. R. Asha Devi
Scientist F
Centre for Marine Living Resources &
Ecology, Kerala
C. Raghunathan
Scientist F
MoEFCC-Zoological Survey of India, West
Bengal
C. Venkateswarlu Nettem Distinguished
Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Caitlin Searle
Counsellor
Department of Industry Science and
Resources Australian Consulate General,
Karnataka
Chaitanya G Joshi
Director
DST-Gujarat Biotechnology Research
Centre (GBRC), Gandhinagar
Chanchal Sarbajna
Head
Minerology Petrology Geochemistry Group
Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration
and Research, Telangana
Chandra Shekhar Yadav Assistant
Professor
National Forensic Sciences University
(NFSU), Guwahati Campus, Assam
Chinky M Marak
Programme Officer
State Council of Science Technology &
Environment (SCSTE), Meghalaya
Chuni Lal
Principal Scientist
ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley
Research (IIWBR), Karnal
Ciza Thomas
Vice Chancellor
Digital University Kerala, Kerala
D. S. Pandey
Senior Professor
Banaras Hindu University BHU, Uttar
Pradesh
D. V. L. N Somayajulu
Director
National Institute of Technology, Manipur
Dadasaheb M Kokare
Director Research and Development Cell
Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur
University, Maharashtra
Debdas Barik
Scientist B & Academic Head NIELIT,
Agartala, Tripura
Deepak Saxena
Director
Indian Institute of Public Health Gandhinagar
(IIPHG), Gujarat
Denis Ashok S
Director
Sponsored Research and
Consultancy(SPORIC), VIT, Tamil Nadu
Devasish Chowdhury
Professor
DST-Institute of Advanced Study in Science
& Technology (IASST), Guwahati, Assam
Devendra Jalihal
Director
IIT Guwahati, Assam
Devika P Madalli
Director
Information and Library Network
(INFLIBNET), Gujarat
Dhanapati Deka
Vice Chancellor
Bhattadev University Pathsala, Assam
Dharmendra Singh
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Vadodara, Gujarat
Dilip Patil
Scientist E
ICMR-National Institute of Virology
(NIV),
Maharashtra
Dimple Kasana
Director
MoH&FW- Central Research Institute,
Solan, Himachal Pradesh.
Dinesh Chandra Rai
Vice Chancellor
B R Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur,
Bihar
Divya Arya
Deputy Director
CII, Delhi
Diwan S Rawat
Vice Chancellor
Kumaun University, Nainital Uttarakhand
Doni Jini
Senior Scientist
ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region
Arunachal Unit Basar, Arunachal Pradesh
Durgesh Pant
Director General
Uttarakhand Science & Technology
Council Dehradun Uttarakhand,
Uttarakhand
Famida Khan
Project Scientist II
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
Fazal A Talukdar
Professor
NIT Silchar, Assam
Ferdous Ahmed Barbhuiya
Dean-Admin
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT) Guwahati, Assam
G. M. Nair
President
Kerala Academy of Sciences (KAS), Kerala Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 74
G. P. Vadodaria
Principal
Government Engineering College Bhavnagar,
Gujarat
G. Umapathy
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Centre for Cellular & Molecular
Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad
Gangan Prathap
Former Director (NISCAIR)
Honorary Professor -
APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University,
Kerala
Gautam Makwanu
Associate Professor
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Geetanjali Sachdeva
Director
ICMR-National Institute for Research
in Reproductive and Child Health
(NIRRCH), Mumbai, Maharashtra
Girishkumar M S
Scientist F
Indian National Centre for Ocean
Information Services, Telangana
G Narahari Sastry
Dean Sponsored Research and Consultancy
Indian Institute of Technology,
Hyderabad, Telangana
Gopal Joshi
Executive Director
ONGC- Keshava Deva Malaviya Institute
of Petroleum Exploration, Dehradun
Uttarakhand
Gopal Lal
Acting Director
ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural
Research Management, Telangana
Gouranga Kar
Director
ICAR-Central Research Institute for Jute and
Allied Fibres, Barrackpore Kolkata, West
Bengal
Gourav Rao
Scientist E
Institute of Technology Management,
Mussoorie Uttarakhand
H. B. D. Prasada Rao
Scientist E
National Institute of Animal Technology,
Hyderabad
Harender Singh Bisht
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum,
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Harish Kumar Sardana
Director
Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Raichur,
Karnataka
Hemant Deepak Shewade Scientist E
Division of Health Systems Research,
ICMR -National Institute of Epidemiology
(NIE), Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Hemant Kumar Pande
Scientist F
Defence Electronics Applications Laboratory
(DEAL), Dehradun Uttarakhand
Hemant Kumar Shukla
Chief Scientist & Head -
RPBD Division
CSIR -Advanced Materials & Process
Research Institute (AMPRI), Bhopal,
Madhya Pradesh
Hirendra Nath Ghosh
Director
National Institute of Science Education and
Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar, Odisha
Inderpal Singh Kanwal
Scientist
DRDO-Centre for Fire, Explosive and
Environment Safety (CFEES), Delhi
J. P. Pandey
Vice Chancellor
A P J Abdul Kalam Technical University,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
J. Poorani
Principal Scientist
ICAR- National Research Centre for
Banana, Tamil Nadu
Jai Prakash Saini
Vice Chancellor
Madan Mohan Malaviya University of
Technology, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
Jayakara S M
Vice Chancellor
Bangalore University, Karnataka
Jayraj Sarvaiya
Professor
School of Engineering and Technology
National Forensic Sciences University,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Jhuma Saha
Assistant Professor
Indian Institute of Technology, Gandhinagar,
Gujarat
Jignesh Bhatt
Associate Professor
Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Vadodara, Gujarat
Jitendra Bhatia
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Jitendra Kumar
Managing Director
Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance
Council (BIRAC), Delhi
Jitesh Choudhary
Scientist E & Centre Head
Centre for Development of Advanced
Computing, Silchar, Assam
Joel Lalbiakkima
Scientific Officer
Mizoram Science Technology & Innovation
Council (MISTIC), Aizawl, Mizoram
Johney Johnson
Director
IQAC,
Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam,
Kerala
Joshi Catherine K
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
Jyotesna Maurya
Senior Project Associate
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
K. D. Nayak
Former Director General DRDO-
Microelectronics and Computational Systems,
New Delhi
K. Gopinath
Scientist H & Associate Director
Defence Metallurgical Research
Laboratory, Telangana
K. Hari Kishan Raju
Senior Technical Officer
ICMR -Vector Control Research Centre
(VCRC), Puducherry
K L Ganapathi
Faculty in Charge-R&D
National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra,
Haryana
K. Naganjaneyulu
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
K P Singh
Vice Chancellor
Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Rohilkhand
University, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 75
K. Satish Kumar
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
K. Sarat Kumar
Member Secretary
Andhra Pradesh State Council of Science
& Technology (APCOST), Andhra
Pradesh
K. Suresh Babu
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
K V Swamy
Registrar
Adikavi Nannaya University, Andhra Pradesh
Kailash Chandra Khulbe
Chief Scientist & Head RPBD CSI
-Indian Institute of Toxicology Research,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Kajal Chakraborty
Director
ICAR-National Bureau of Fish Genetic
Resources Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Kalaivani Ganesan
Nodal Officer
Biotechnology Research and Innovation
Council (BRIC), New Delhi
Kamal Kishore Pant
Director
IIT Roorkee, Uttarakhand
Kanad Das
Director
MoEFCC-Botanical Survey of India, West
Bengal
Kishorsinh N Chavda
Vice Chancellor
Veer Narmad South Gujarat University, Surat,
Gujarat
Krishna Nandanan
Assistant Professor
School for Sustainable Futures Amrita
Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Tamil Nadu
Krishnan Baskar
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Manipur
L. C. Mangal
DS & DG -Technology Management (TM)
DRDO, Delhi
Labani Ray
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
Lakshmi Eswari
Scientist G
Centre for Development of Advanced
Computing, Hyderabad, Telangana
Leena Kukreja
Science and Technology Counsellor
Swissnex India, Karnataka
Lige Sora
Assistant Professor
Arunachal Pradesh University Pasighat,
Arunachal Pradesh
M G Valu
Research Scientist
ICAR-Cotton Research Station Junagadh
Agricultural University, Junagadh, Gujarat
M Krishnan
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Tamil Nadu (CUTN),
Tamil Nadu
M Ravichandran
Secretary
MoES, Delhi
M Srinivas
Director
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
(AIIMS), New Delhi
M S Gaur
Director
IIT Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Mahavir Singh
Vice Chancellor
Himachal Pradesh University Shimla,
Himachal Pradesh
Mahendra P Patil
Chief Scientist and Chair Waste
Management Division
CSIR-National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur,
Maharashtra
Mahesh G Thakkar
Director
DST-Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeosciences,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Manabendra Dutta Choudhury
Vice Chancellor
Rabindranath Tagore University, Hojai,
Assam
Manan Pathak
Senior Manager
Gujarat Energy Research and Management
Institute, Gujarat
Manash Ranjan Sahoo
Vice Chancellor
Odisha University of Health Sciences, Odisha
Mani Kant Paswan
Director
Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering &
Technology (SLIET), Longowal, Punjab
Manisha Ghate
Scientist G
National Institute of Translational Virology
and AIDS Research, Pune, Maharashtra
Manisha Madkaikar
Director
ICMR- National Institute of
Immunohaematology, Maharashtra
Manish R Joshi
Secretary
University Grants Commission (UGC),
New Delhi
Manmohan Parida
Director
Defence Research & Development
Establishment (DRDE), Gwalior, Madhya
Pradesh
Manohar Ganpat Chaskar
Vice Chancellor
Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada
University, Nanded, Maharashtra
Manoj Choudhary
Vice Chancellor
Gati Shakti Vishwavidyalaya, Vadodara,
Gujarat
Manoj Kumar
Director
Aerial Delivery Research & Development
Establishment (ADRDE), Agra, Uttar
Pradesh
Manoj Kumar Dhaka
Director
DRDO-Defence Electronics Applications
Laboratory (DEAL), Dehradun,Uttarakhand
Manoranjan Mohanty
Director
ICAR- Indian Institute of Soil Science
(IISS), Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Manoranjan Parida
Director
Central Road Research Institute (CRRI),
New Delhi Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 76
Manwendra Tripathi
Associate Professor
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
Maridusmita Barooah
HoD
Assam Science and Technology University
Guwahati, Assam
Minakshi Kumar
Head Academics
ISRO-Indian Institute of Remote Sensing
(IIRS), Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Mini Thomas
Dean (Faculty of Engineering & Technology)
Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi
Mini Shaji Thomas
Professor
Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi
Mohammad Mobin
Vice Chancellor
Cluster University Srinagar J&K, Jammu &
Kashmir
Mohanan Kunnummal
Vice Chancellor
University of Kerala, Kerala
Mrutyunjay Mohapatra
Director General
Indian Meteorological Department, Delhi
Mukesh Kumar Gupta
Director
National Animal Resource Facility for
Biomedical Research, Telangana
Mukesh Kumar Meghvansi Scientist F
Defence Research & Development
Establishment (DRDE), Gwalior, Madhya
Pradesh
Mukeshkumar Nariya
Head
Pharmacology Institute of Teaching and
Research in Ayurveda,
Jamnagar, Gujarat
Mukesh Pandey
Vice Chancellor
Bundelkhand University, Uttar Pradesh
Muruganandam
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Soil and Water
Conservation, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
N J Muthukumar
Director General
Central Council for Research in Siddha
(CCRS), Tamil Nadu
N Kalaiselvi
Director General
CSIR, Delhi
N K Lokanath
Vice Chancellor
University of Mysore, Karnataka
N V Chalapathi Rao
Director
National Centre for Earth Science Studies
(NCESS), Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
N Venuh
Pro-Vice Chancellor
Nagaland University, Lumami HQ
Zunheboto, Nagaland
Nalin Sharma
UCOST, Uttarakhand
Naman Agrawal
Senior Policy Advisor Netherlands
Embassy in India, Delhi
Narendranath S
Director
North Eastern Regional Institute of Science
and Technology (NERIST), Nirjuli,
Arunachal Pradesh
Narendra S Chaudhari
Vice Chancellor
Assam Science and Technology University,
Guwahati, Assam
Narendra Shah
Member Secretary
Rajiv Gandhi Science and Technology
Commission, Maharashtra
Narinder Singh Jassal
Sr Principal Scientist
CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments
Organisation (CSIO), Chandigarh,
Chandigarh
Narottam Sahoo
Advisor & Member Secretary
Gujarat Council for Science & Technology
(GUJCOST), Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Neelu Rohmetra
Dean Research Studies University of
Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Neha Singh
Faculty Incharge (R&D)
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Nilay Khare
Professor & Dean (R&C)
Maulana Azad National Institute of
Technology (MANIT), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Nilesh M Desai
Director
Space Applications Centre (SAC),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Nilofer Khan
Vice Chancellor
University of Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu &
Kashmir
Nimisha Sharma
Director (Research & Consultancy)
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,
Delhi
Niranjan Patel
Vice Chancellor
Sardar Patel University, Vallabh
Vidyanagar, Gujarat
O P Chaurasia
Director
DRDO-Defence Institute of High Altitude
Research (DIHAR), Leh, Ladakh
Om Prakash Mishra
Director
National Centre for Seismology, Delhi
Onkar Singh
Vice Chancellor
Veer Madho Singh Bhandari Uttarakhand
Technical University, Dehradun
Uttarakhand
P. Bharathi
Secretary
DST-Govt of Gujarat
P. Harinarayanan
Sr. Principal Scientist
Kerala State Council for Science, Technology
and Environment, Kerala
P K Dhakephalkar
Director
Agharkar Research Institute, Pune,
Maharashtra
P. Mangala Gowri
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad, Telangana Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 77
P Manickam
Scientist F
ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology
(NIE), Chennai, Tamilnadu
P. Raveendran
Vice Chancellor
University of Calicut, Kerala
P R Sudhakaran
ASM fellow Emeritus Scientist
Central University of Kerala, Karyavattom,
Trivandrum, Kerala
Parul Gupta
Senior Manager
Higher Education British Council UK India
Education and Research Initiative (UKIERI),
New Delhi
Parveen Kumar Saluja
Senior Environmental Engineer Punjab
Pollution Control Board, Punjab
Payal Wadhwa
Assistant Professor
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Vadodara, Gujarat
Peeyush Mehta
Dean (Faculty & Research)
Indian Institute of Management (IIM)
Calcutta, West Bengal
Poonam Tandon
Vice Chancellor
Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur
University, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
Pragati Kumar
Vice Chancellor
Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra,
Jammu & Kashmir
Prakash Kumar
Director
National Geophysical Research Institute,
Hyderabad
Prakash Mahanwar
Vice Chancellor
Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Solapur
University, Solapur, Maharashtra
Pramod Yeole
Vice Chancellor
Rajasthan University of Health Sciences
(RUHS), Rajasthan
Pranab Dutta
Chairman
DBT-College of Post Graduate Studies in
Agricultural Sciences (CPGSAS), Central
Agricultural University (CAU), Imphal,
Manipur
Prasanna Venkatraman
Deputy Director
ACTREC-Cancer Research Institute,
Mumbai, Maharashtra
Prashant S Bokare
Vice Chancellor
Gondwana University Gadchiroli,
Maharashtra
Pranav Haridas
Assistant Professor
Kerala School of Mathematics, Kerala
Prashasti Singh
Assistant Professor
Shri Ram College of Commerce,
University of Delhi, Delhi
Pratap Kumar Pati
Head of Biotechnology Department
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar,
Punjab
Pratap Kumar S
Director
National Institute of Electronics &
Information Technology, Calicut, Kerala
Pratima Tatke
Director (R&D Cell)
SNDT Women’s University, Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Praveen Kumar Rai
Head Technology (Research &
Development)
Ministry of Education, GoI, Delhi
Pritpal Singh
Executive Director
Punjab State Council for Science &
Technology, Mohali, Punjab
R Balamuralikrishnan
Director
Defence Metallurgical Research
Laboratory, Hyderabad
R Joseph Bensingh
Director & Head
Central Institute of Petrochemicals
Engineering & Technology (CIPET),
Bengaluru, Karnataka
R M Mashelkar
Former DG
CSIR, New Delhi
R Pradeep Kumar
Director
CSIR-Central Building Research Institute
(CBRI), Roorkee, Uttarakhand
R Ratheesh
Director
Centre for Materials for Electronics
Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana
R Vijay
Director
ARCI-International Advanced Research
Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New
Materials, Hyderabad, Telangana
Rabindra Kumar Panda
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Water Management,
Odisha
Rabindra Kumar Panigrahy Scientist E
DST, New Delhi
Radha Krishan Dhiman
Director
Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of
Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Radha Rangarajan
Director
CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute
(CDRI), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Radhey Lal
Joint Director
Council of Science & Technology Uttar
Pradesh, (CSTUP), UP
Rahul Katna
Counsellor
CII, New Delhi
Raja Angamuthu
Associate Dean (R&D)
IIT Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Rajanish K Kamat
Vice Chancellor
Homi Bhabha State University, Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Rajbir Singh
Vice Chancellor
Maharshi Dayanand University, Haryana
Rajendra Jena
Chief Geomatics Officer
DST-North East Centre for Technology
Application & Reach, Shillong,
Meghalaya
Rajesh A Thakkar
Director (R&D cell)
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 78
Rajesh Gokhale
Secretary
Department of Biotechnology (DBT), New
Delhi
Rajesh Pathak
Secretary
TDB, DST, New Delhi
Rajesh Sharma
DDG (Research)
Indian Council of Forestry Research and
Education (ICFRE), Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Rajesh V Nair
Dean
Faculty Affairs & Administration
IIT Ropar, Punjab
Raj Kumar Mittal
Vice Chancellor
Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Rajul K Gajjar
Vice Chancellor
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Rajneesh Rai
DGM
Indian Renewable Energy Development
Agency (IREDA), New Delhi
Rakesh Singhai
Vice Chancellor
Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Madhya
Pradesh
Ramannuj
Director
CSIR-Institute of Minerals and Materials
Technology (IMMT), Bhubaneswar
Rama Shanker Verma
Director
MNNIT Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
Ramcharan Bhattacharya Director
National Research Centre on Plant
Biotechnology, New Delhi
Ramji Koona
Vice Chancellor
Krishna University, Andhra Pradesh
Ranjana Aggarwal
Outstanding Scientist
National Institute of Science Communication
& Information Resources, New Delhi
Ranjana Arya
Assistant Professor
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Ranjana Jha
Vice Chancellor
Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical University
for Women, New Delhi
Ranjan Bose
Director
Indraprastha Institute of Information
Technology (IIIT Delhi), New Delhi
Ranojoy Basu
Chairperson R&D Committee Indian
Institute of Management, Udaipur,
Rajasthan
Rashna Bhandari
Staff Scientist
Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and
Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad, Telangana
Ratan Tiwari
Director
Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley
Research, Karnal, Haryana
Ravikumar Dumpala
Associate Dean Research Visvesvaraya
National Institute of Technology (VNIT),
Nagpur, Maharashtra
Ravindra Kulkarni
Vice Chancellor
University of Mumbai Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Ravindra M. Kumbhar
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Rejnish Kumar R
Director
Regional Cancer Centre, Trivandrum,
Kerala
Rekha P D
Director (R&D)
Yenepoya University, Mangalore, Karnataka
Resmi T R
Senior Scientist
Centre for Water Resources Development and
Management (CWRDM), Kozhikode, Kerala
Ridonhok Khongsar
Assistant Programme Officer State
Council of Science Technology &
Environment (SCSTE), Meghalaya
Rintu Banerjee
Deputy Director
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
(IIT KGP), Kharagpur, West Bengal
Rohit Mehra
Dean Research & Consultancy
Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of
Technology, Jalandhar, Punjab
S. N. Sridhara
Vice Chancellor
Hindustan Institute of Technology and
Science,
Tamil Nadu
S. Nagarajan
Dean Academics
Central University of Tamil Nadu, Tamil
Nadu
S. P. Aggarwal
Director
DoS-North Eastern Space Applications Centre
(NESAC), Barapani, Meghalaya
S R Khochey
Joint Director -Admin
Arunachal Pradesh State Council for
Science & Technology (APSCS&T)
Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh
S. Ramesh
Sr. Scientist
National Institute of Ocean Technology,
Tamil Nadu
S Sandeep
Principal Scientist and Head
Kerala Forest Research Institute, Thrissur,
Kerala
S S Manral
UCOST, Uttarakhand
S Vincent
Member Secretary
Tamil Nadu State Council for Science and
Technology, Tamil Nadu
S V Prasanna
Scientist E
Anusandhan National Research Foundation
(ANRF), New Delhi
Sachin Gajjar
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Sachin Patwardhan
Dean R&D
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
(IITB), Mumbai, Maharashtra Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 79
Samarendra Hazarika
Director
ICAR- Research Complex for NEH Region
Umiam Barapani, Meghalaya
Samsher
Vice Chancellor
Harcourt Butler Technical University,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Sandeep Gupta
Chief Scientist
CSIR-National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad, Telangana
Sandeep Kumar
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,
New Delhi
Sandeep Srivastava
Additional Surveyor General
Survey of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Sandip Ghosh Chowdhury
Director
National Metallurgical Laboratory,
Jharkhand
Sandip K Chakrabarti
Director
Indian Centre for Space Physics (ICSP),
Kolkata, West Bengal
Sangeeta Giri
Assistant Professor
Indrashil University, Rajpur, Gujarat
Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay
Director
Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, West
Bengal
Sanjay Behari
Director
Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical
Sciences & Technology, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala
Sanjeev Aggarwal
Dean (Research & Development)
Kurukshetra University, Haryana
Sanjeev Khosla
Director
CSIR-Institute of Microbial Technology
(IMTECH), Mohali, Punjab
Sanjeev Kumar
Dean
Rajiv Gandhi University, Arunachal Pradesh
Sankalp Sinha
Member
The Federation of Indian Chambers of
Commerce & Industry (FICCI), New
Delhi
Sankar Prasad Das
Director
ICAR-National Research Centre for Orchids
(NRCO), Pakyong, Sikkim
Santosh Kumar Balivada
CEO
Centre of Excellence for Additive
Manufacturing, Andhra Pradesh MedTech
Zone (AMTZ) Vizag, Andhra Pradesh
Santosh K V
Deputy Director
Manipal Academy of Higher Education,
Karnataka
Sarit Kumar Chaudhuri
Vice Chancellor
Alipurduar University, Alipurduar, West
Bengal
Satinder Kaur
Dean (Research Studies)
Cluster University of Jammu, Jammu &
Kashmir
Satish Kumar
Dean R&C
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand
Satya Prakash Dobhal
Director
DRDO-Institute of Technology Management
Mussoorie, Uttarakhand
Seema Joshi
Assistant Professor
GTU Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Seema Paroha
Director
National Sugar Institute, Kanpur, Uttar
Pradesh
Senthil M
Deputy Director (SBV Innovation
Ecosystem)
Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Puducherry
S Geethalakshmi
Vice Chancellor
MGR Educational and Research Institute,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Shailendra Saraf
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
Education and Research (NIPER),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
& Hyderabad, Telangana
Shakil Ahmad Romshoo
Vice Chancellor
Islamic University of Science and
Technology, Awantipora, Jammu & Kashmir
Shakti Kumar Gupta
Director
AIIMS
Vijaypur, Jammu & Kashmir
Shantanu Bhattacharya
Director
CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments
Organisation (CSIO), Chandigarh
Sharmila Bapat
Director
DBT-National Centre for Cell Science
(NCCS), Pune, Maharashtra
Shaurya Darbari
Assistant Professor
AIIMS, Jammu & Kashmir
Sheel Kapoor
Chief Executive Officer
FAST-India, New Delhi
Shikha Thakur
Professor
North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional
Institute of Health and Medical Sciences
(NEIGRIHMS), Shillong, Meghalaya
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman
CEO
Anusandhan National Research Foundation
(ANRF), New Delhi
Shobi Veleri
Scientist F
National Institute of Nutrition, Telangana
Shubhini A Saraf
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
and Educational Research (NIPER), Rai
Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh
Shweta Dave
Principal
Government Engineering College
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Shyama Rath
Member Secretary
AICTE, New Delhi
Sivaprasad K
Vice Chancellor
APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University,
Thiruvanthapuram, Kerala Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 80
Smitha B R
Scientist E
Centre for Marine Living Resources &
Ecology, Kochi, Kerala
Souvik Maiti
Director
Institute of Genomics and Integrative
Biology (IGIB), Delhi
Srinivas Nanduri
Professor
National Institute of Pharmaceutical and
Educational Research (NIPER), Hyderabad,
Telangana
S. Raisuddin
Dean Academics
Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi
Srinivasa Reddy
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad, Telangana
Srinivas Tavva
Head (ABM Division and SIC PME Cell)
National Academy of Agricultural Research
Management, Telangana
Sriram Seshadri
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Subeer S Majumdar
Director General
Gujarat Biotechnology University,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Subhendu Sekhar Bag
Professor
IIT Guwahati, Assam
Subhash Ghosh
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Subhratanu Bhattacharya
Head Physics
University of Kalyani, West Bengal
Sudesh Kumar Yadav
Director
CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource
Technology, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh
Sudhir Kumar Awasthi
Pro Vice Chancellor
Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj University,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Sudhir M Bobde
Addl Chief Secretary
Governor UP Raj Bhawan, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh
Sukanta Roy
Dean Academics
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Aizawl, Mizoram
Sullip K. Guwahati
Head
ICAR-Regional Centre CIFRI, Assam
Sumant Vyas
Director
ICAR - Central Arid Zone Research
Institute (CAZRI) Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Sumya Pathak
Senior Scientist
CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal
Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Sunil Doley
Joint Director
ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region
Mizoram Centre, Kolasib, Mizoram
Sunil Kumar Singh
Director
National Institute of Oceanography, Goa
Supriya Chakraborty
Dean
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Suashant Kumar Dey
Executive Director
Indian Renewable Energy Development
Agency (IREDA), New Delhi
Suresh Gosavi
Vice Chancellor
Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune,
Maharashtra
Suresh Kumar
ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research
Institute (CSSRI), Karnal, Haryana
Suresh Kumar Singhal
Director
Pt B D Sharma Post Graduate Institute of
Medical Science, Rohtak, Haryana
Surinder Singh
Dean R&C
Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering
and Technology (SLIET), Longowal,
Punjab
Susheel Mittal
Vice Chancellor
I K Gujral Punjab Technical University,
Jalandhar, Punjab
Sushil Kumar Gupta
Director Research,
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural
Sciences and Technology, Jammu & Kashmir
Swagata Dasgupta
Vice President
Indian Academy of Sciences (IASc),
Karnataka
T Balasubramanian
Member Executive Council & Advisor
Chettinad Academy of Research and
Education, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
T. Gunendra Singh
Director
National Institute of Electronics and
Information Technology, Aizawl, Mizoram
T. N. Nagabhushana
Vice Chancellor
Kishkinda University, Karnataka
T. R. Santhosh Kumar
Director (Add. Charge)
Integrated Cancer Research Rajiv Gandhi
Centre for Biotechnology, Kerala
Tapas Samanta
Head (Technology Transfer & Coordination
Division)
DAE-Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre,
Kolkata, West Bengal
Tarak Nath Kundu
Dean R&C
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Sikkim
Tarun Kant
Director
ICFRE- Arid Forest Research Institute
(AFRI), Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Tarun Kumar Misra
Dean (R&C)
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Agartala, Tripura
Tasneem Habib
Advisor, Former Chief Scientist and
Executive Director
Madhya Pradesh Council of Science &
Technology (MPCOST), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Tejimala Gurung Nag
Vice Chancellor
Darjeeling Hills University, Darjeeling,
West Bengal Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 81
Timir Tripathi
Professor
North Eastern Hill University (NEHU),
Shillong, Meghalaya
Tomo Riba
Vice Chancellor
Arunachal Pradesh University, Pasighat,
Arunachal Pradesh
Tomtisama Meetei
Associate Professor
CPGSAS-CAU, Imphal, Manipur
Tushar Panchal
Group CEO
GTU Ventures GISC-GTU Incubator, Gujarat
U Suryanarayana Murty
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
Education and Research (NIPER)
Guwahati, Assam
Ujjwal Sen
Director
DAE-Harish Chandra Research Institute,
Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh
Umesh Chandra Garirola
Director
Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal
University, Srinagar, Uttarakhand
Utpal S Joshi
Vice Chancellor
Saurashtra University, Rajkot, Gujarat
V. Arunachalam
Director
Jawaharlal Nehru Tropical Botanic Garden
and Research Institute (JNTBGRI), Kerala
V. Dinesh Kumar
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Oilseeds Research,
Telangana
V. K. Sharma
Scientist G & Centre Head
CDAC, Mohali, Punjab
V. K. Sinha
Head
Global Centre for Nuclear Energy
Partnership, Haryana
V. Palanimuthu
Director
National Institute of Food Technology
Entrepreneurship and Management, Haryana
V. Sachithananda Shenoi
Director
DRDO-Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan
V. S. Prasad
Head
National Centre for Medium Range Weather
Forecasting, Noida, Uttar Pradesh
V Uma
Vice Chancellor
Sri Padmavati Mahila Visvavidyalayam,
Andhra Pradesh
V Venkata Basava Rao
Vice Chancellor
Rayalaseema University, Andhra Pradesh
Vaibhav Bhatt
Director
GTU Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Vandana Singh
Vice Chancellor
Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University,
Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh
Varun Aggarwal
Founder
FAST India, Delhi
Venu Gopal Achanta
Director
National Physical Laboratory, Delhi
Vibha Tandon
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Biology,
Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal
Vijay J Fulari
Vice Chancellor
Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada
University, Aurangabad, Maharashtra
Vijay L Maheshwari
Vice Chancellor
Kavayitri Bahinabai Chaudhari North
Maharashtra University Jalgaon,
Maharashtra
Vikash Singh
Professor
IGNTU Amarkantak
Madhya Pradesh
Vikas Shende
Principal Scientist
Madhya Pradesh Council of Science &
Technology (MPCOST), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Vikrant Gupta
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal
Aromatic Plants, Uttar Pradesh
Vinay K Nandicoori
Director
Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology,
Telangana
Vinita S Sahay
Director
Indian Institute of Management (IIM),
BodhGaya, Bihar
Vinod Kumar Singh
President
National Academy of Sciences (NASI), New
Delhi
Virendra R Tiwari
Director
MoEFCC-Wildlife Institute of India
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Vishnupriya Kolipakam
Scientist D
MoEFCC-Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Vivek Khaneja
Executive Director
CDAC, Noida
Vivek Kumar Gupta
Director
ICAR- National Research Centre on Pig Rani
Garbhanga, Assam
Y Roja Ramani
Director (Research & Development)
Odisha University of Health Sciences,
Odisha
Zabeer Ahmed
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Integrative
Medicine (IIIM) Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Zahid Ashraf
Dean
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi NOTESNOTES NOTESNOTES NOTES NOTES Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 86
T. Agarwal, A. Dhamija,
Science & Technology Division, NITI Aayog
S.Bhattacharya
Adjunct Professor, School for Sustainable Futures, Amrita University; & Former Chief Scientist, CSIR-NIScPR
P. Arora
Former Adviser, Department of Science & Technology (DST), New Delhi
A.Kanaujia
Scientist-C, CSIR-NIScPR, New Delhi
ISBN No: 978-81-991080-8-0
Disclaimer: The information presented in this report is based on insights gathered from an extensive consultation
process comprising open-ended inputs, survey, regional consultative meetings, and a series of brainstorming sessions
on “Ease of Doing R&D”. The objective of this report is guided by the principle of Removing Obstacles, Promoting
Enablers, and in the efforts the report presents a compilation of various obstacles faced by R&D practitioners, along
with a set of recommendations to address them. Thus, the report is a reflection of the collective wisdom of different
role players in the R&D ecosystem.
© 2026 Science & Technology Division, NITI Aayog. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, distributed, modified, reposted, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means
mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without due attribution to the report, as suggested
herein. Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 4 VC Message Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 7
S&T Minister Message Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 11 Foreward Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 14 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers i
Acknowledgement
This report is a reflection of insights and collective wisdom of various stakeholders in the Science,
Technology and Innovation ecosystem of the country. The inputs on various aspects of the R&D
systems and processes, and the action roadmap has been developed through a consultative process
involving institutional leaders, policy practitioners, industry leaders and distinguished scientists
and researchers.
First of all, we would like to express sincere gratitude to Shri Suman K. Bery, Hon’ble Vice
Chairman, NITI Aayog, who has been a constant source of encouragement for the various
initiatives towards improving the Science & Technology ecosystem of the country, including the
Ease of Doing R&D exercise. We are equally grateful to the guidance and support provided by
Ms. Nidhi Chhibber, CEO, NITI Aayog and Shri BVR Subrahmanyam, Former CEO, NITI
Aayog, throughout the entire exercise.
We take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude to esteemed dignitaries, namely Smt.
Anandiben Patel, Hon’ble Governor of Uttar Pradesh; Shri Jishnu Dev Varma, Hon’ble
Governor of Telangana; Shri Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar, Hon’ble Governor of Kerala;
and Dr. Jitendra Singh, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Science
and Technology, for their august presence and inspiring addresses during the different regional
consultative meetings.
We would like to record our deepest respect and gratitude to distinguished guests and participants
in the regional consultative meetings, including Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Former Chairman of the
Atomic Energy Commission; Dr. R. A. Mashelkar, Former Director General, CSIR; Dr. N.
Kalaiselvi, Director General, CSIR & Secretary DSIR; Dr M. Ravichandran, Secretary, MoES;
Prof. Ashutosh Sharma, Former President, INSA; Prof. Vinod Kumar Singh, President, NASI;
and Dr Shekhar Mande, President, INSA & Former DG, CSIR; for their guidance and suggestions.
We extend our profound thanks and appreciation to distinguished institutional leaders for their
pivotal role in hosting and co-organizing the regional consultation meetings, including Shri
Sudhir M. Bobde, Addl. Chief Secretary to the Hon’ble Governor of UP; Dr. Harender Singh
Bisht, Director, CSIR-IIP; Prof. M. S. Gaur, Director, IIT Jammu; Ms P. Bharathi, Secretary,
DST, Gujarat and Dr. Narottam Sahoo, Member Secretary, GUJCOST; Dr. Srinivasa Reddy,
Director, CSIR-IICT Hyderabad; Prof. Devendra Jalihal, Director, IIT Guwahati; and Prof. N.V.
Chalapathi Rao, Director, NCESS, Thiruvananthapuram.
We gratefully acknowledge the invaluable contributions of the eminent institutional leaders
– Directors of National laboratories, Vice-Chancellors and Heads from National Institutes,
Universities, Research laboratories, Scientific ministries, who participated in the regional
consultative meetings and the brainstorming sessions to deliberate on various aspects of Ease
of Doing R&D. Their collective insights were instrumental in enabling us to accurately identify
and compile the challenges currently faced by the Indian research community, and develop a
suggestive action roadmap. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers ii
We would also like to thank the State Support Mission team of NITI Aayog, for their generous
financial support, the R&N Division, Communications Cell and creative graphics team of NITI
Aayog, for their indispensable roles in this whole exercise.
Finally, the authors acknowledge the collective efforts of every stakeholder who contributed to
this endeavor, through active consultation or passive support; their involvement at different stages
was vital to the successful completion of this exercise and preparation of this report. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers iii
Executive Summary
India’s science, technology, and innovation ecosystem has evolved significantly over the past few
decades, emerging as a major contributor to global knowledge production and innovation. The
steady rise in research publications, improved performance in global innovation indices, and the
rapid expansion of the startup ecosystem reflect the growing depth of India’s scientific capabilities.
This progress has been achieved despite relatively modest levels of investment and persistent
structural inefficiencies. With Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) remaining
well below that of leading economies, and with bottlenecks affecting researchers throughout the
research lifecycle, there is a clear need to re-examine and strengthen the enabling environment
for R&D in the country. Improving the “Ease of Doing Research & Development (EoDR&D)” is
therefore central not only to enhancing research productivity, but also to ensuring that scientific
efforts translate effectively into technological and socio-economic outcomes aligned with India’s
long-term vision of becoming a knowledge-driven economy.
This report is the outcome of a comprehensive exercise conducted by NITI Aayog to identify
key barriers affecting the R&D ecosystem and develop a set of actionable recommendations. The
exercise draws on a wide evidence base, including open-ended inputs from research institutions,
a structured nationwide survey of researchers conducted in collaboration with national science
academies, eight regional consultative meetings covering diverse geographies and institutional
types, and a series of focused brainstorming sessions with government departments, funding
agencies, and industry stakeholders. This multi-layered approach has ensured that the analysis
captures both systemic issues and the experiences of researchers, administrators, and institutional
leaders across the country. The findings point to a set of deeply interlinked challenges that span
funding, human resources, institutional processes, translational capacity, access to resources,
regional disparities, and governance mechanisms.
A central concern emerging from the analysis is the nature and utilization of R&D funding in India.
While overall allocations have increased in absolute terms, the level of investment relative to GDP
remains low, and the funding ecosystem continues to be heavily dependent on public sources, with
limited participation from the private sector and philanthropic institutions. This is compounded
by inefficiencies in the way funds are allocated, disbursed, and utilized. Researchers face complex
and often repetitive application processes across multiple funding portals, long delays in proposal
evaluation and fund release, and rigid financial rules that limit flexibility during project execution.
The current fund flow mechanisms, coupled with accounting and compliance requirements, often
result in delays, disruptions, and underutilization of resources. Issues such as limited overhead
provisions and cumbersome procurement procedures further constrain the effective use of funds,
ultimately affecting the pace and quality of research.
Equally significant are the challenges related to human resources, which form the backbone
of any research ecosystem. Despite India’s large pool of young talent, the overall density of
researchers remains low, and the system struggles to attract and retain high-quality human capital.
The postdoctoral ecosystem is particularly underdeveloped, limiting the continuity and depth of
research. Delays in fellowship disbursal, rigid recruitment processes, and a large number of unfilled
positions in institutions further weaken the research base. At the same time, career pathways Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers iv
in R&D remain uncertain and often unattractive, especially in comparison to opportunities in
the private sector and emerging technology domains, further reducing research productivity and
discouraging long-term engagement in R&D careers.
Institutional structures and internal processes also emerge as a major area of concern. In many
institutions, the absence of dedicated and professionally managed R&D offices results in
fragmented administrative systems, placing a significant burden on researchers to manage non-
scientific tasks. The lack of standardized guidelines and clear operating procedures leads to
inconsistencies and delays in approvals, procurement, and project management. Decision-making
processes are often overly centralized, with limited delegation of authority, which slows down
routine operations and reduces institutional agility. At a broader level, there is limited emphasis on
leadership accountability, strategic prioritization of research areas, and periodic self-assessment
of institutional systems and processes. The absence of clear and enabling policies for faculty
entrepreneurship further limits the ability of institutions to translate research outcomes into
tangible innovations.
The gap between knowledge creation and its translation into products and technologies remains
another critical challenge. While India performs strongly in terms of publications and patents, the
conversion of these outputs into commercially viable solutions is relatively weak. This is due to
a combination of factors, including ineffective technology transfer mechanisms, lack of clarity in
intellectual property management, and limited access to prototyping and validation infrastructure.
Financial and policy constraints, including limited availability of translational funding and
disincentives in areas such as taxation, further inhibit the commercialization of research. As a
result, a substantial portion of research outcomes does not progress beyond the laboratory stage.
Access to knowledge and research resources also presents a significant constraint, particularly
for institutions outside the top tier. While premier institutions may have relatively better access
to scientific databases, journals, and advanced infrastructure, a large number of universities and
research institutions, especially at the state level or those in the private sector, face limitations in
accessing these essential resources. High costs of journal subscriptions, limited availability of
shared infrastructure, and fragmented access mechanisms create disparities in research capability
across institutions. These gaps not only affect the quality of research but also limit opportunities
for collaboration and interdisciplinary work, which are increasingly important in contemporary
science and technology.
The challenges faced by state institutions deserve particular attention, given their critical role in
expanding the research base of the country. Many of these institutions operate under significant
resource constraints, with limited funding, inadequate infrastructure, and high teaching loads
that leave little time for research. They often face barriers in accessing national-level funding
opportunities and lack the institutional support systems required to build and sustain research
programs. As a result, there are pronounced regional and institutional disparities in research
capacity, which, if left unaddressed, could limit the overall growth and inclusiveness of India’s
R&D ecosystem.
Finally, the report highlights gaps in monitoring, evaluation, and policy administration that affect Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers v
the overall effectiveness of the R&D ecosystem. Existing systems are largely compliance-oriented
and do not adequately capture research outcomes, institutional performance, or the impact of
policy interventions. There is limited use of data-driven approaches to inform decision-making,
and coordination across different agencies and stakeholders remains fragmented. In addition, there
is a lack of structured capacity-building mechanisms for research administrators, which further
constrains the efficiency of institutional processes.
Taken together, these challenges point to the need for a systemic and coordinated reform effort
aimed at removing procedural bottlenecks and creating a more enabling environment for research
and innovation. The report outlines a comprehensive set of recommendations anchored in the
principle of “Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers”, with a focus on enhancing investment
in R&D, streamlining funding and administrative processes, strengthening human resource
systems, improving institutional governance, enabling technology translation, expanding access
to resources, and building robust monitoring and evaluation frameworks. A key emphasis is placed
on moving towards a more trust-based and outcome-oriented governance model, supported by
digital public infrastructure and greater institutional autonomy.
By addressing the structural and systemic constraints identified in this report, India can unlock
the full potential of its scientific talent, accelerate the translation of knowledge into impact, and
position itself as a global leader in innovation. Such a transformation will be critical to achieving
the broader vision of Viksit Bharat @2047, where science, technology, and innovation serve as
key drivers of economic growth, societal progress, and national self-reliance. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Contents
S. No.TitlePage No.
Acknowledgementi
Executive Summaryiii
1. Introduction1
1.1
1.2
1.3
Ease of Doing Research & Development Initiative
Objectives
Methodology
3
4
4
2. The Consultation Process7
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Open Ended Inputs
Survey in association with the National Science Academies
Regional Consultative Meetings
Brainstorming Sessions
8
9
10
23
3. Challenges & Recommendations25
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
R&D Funding and Utilization
Attracting and retaining quality Human Resource
Institutional Structures and Processes
Technology Development, Translation & Commercialization
Access to Knowledge & Resources
R&D in State Institutions
Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building and Policy Administration
26
34
38
44
51
53
59
4.
Charting the Road Ahead: Towards a robust & future-ready
R&D Ecosystem
63
4.1
4.2
Summary of Recommendations and Actions
Towards an Enabling R&D Ecosystem
64
69
Appendix
Appendix 1: List of Participants of Regional Consultative
Meetings
70 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 1
1
Introduction Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 2
India has made significant progress in Science, Technology and Innovation during the last few
decades. It is now ranked among the world’s leading producers of scientific knowledge, as
reflected in the steady growth of research publications and a marked increase in patent filings.
India’s performance in the Global Innovation Index (GII) has also shown consistent improvement,
alongside a rapid expansion of the startup ecosystem, positioning India among the largest
startup hubs globally. These trends underscore the growing depth and breadth of India’s science,
technology and innovation capabilities.
Despite these gains, the funding structure in India’s STI ecosystem remains heavily skewed towards
public investment. As against the pattern in leading knowledge economies, in India the government
funding continues to account for the dominant share of R&D expenditure, while private sector
participation remains relatively modest. As a result, India’s Gross Expenditure on Research and
Development (GERD) stands at approximately 0.65% of GDP, which is significantly lower than
that of countries such as the United States (~3.5%), China (~2.4%), and the Republic of Korea
(~4.5%). This comparatively low level of investment constrains the capacity and scale required
for sustained technological advancement. In addition, India’s researcher density, measured in
full-time equivalent (FTE) researchers per million population, remains far below levels observed
in both developed and emerging economies. This highlights a structural gap in human capital
availability for R&D.
This unique phenomenon of India’s higher innovation output with lower inputs has also been noted
in the Global Innovation Index report 2025, which characterises India as an “overperformer” on
innovation outputs relative to its inputs. The GII 2025 report cautions, however, that without
addressing persistent gaps in R&D investment, human resources, and institutional capacity, India
risks stagnation or decline in its relative global innovation standing. Therefore, it is very important
to address relevant systemic and structural aspects of the Indian STI ecosystem.
India’s STI ecosystem nevertheless possesses substantial untapped potential. With focused policies
and programs, improved implementation mechanisms, and impactful reforms aimed at easing the
Research and Development (R&D) processes, this potential can be systematically unlocked. By
addressing structural and systemic issues, streamlining administrative and financial processes, and
improving the overall ease of doing R&D, India can achieve a more robust STI ecosystem capable
of effectively translating scientific capabilities into national outcomes. Such measures are central
to India’s long-term vision of Viksit Bharat @ 2047, which envisages technological self-reliance,
sustained economic growth, and the evolution of India into a vibrant knowledge-based economy.
Achieving these objectives will require focused and time-bound interventions over the coming
decades, particularly in mobilising resources and modernising R&D governance and institutional
frameworks. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 3
1.1 Ease of Doing Research & Development Initiative
The initiative on improving the Ease of Doing Research & Development (EODR&D) in the STI
ecosystem draws its motivation from the long standing call for reforms by the academic and
research communities. In the 102nd Indian Science Congress (2015), the Hon’ble Prime Minister
(PM) remarked about ‘Ease of Doing Science’, highlighting the needs- (a) To help scientists focus
on R&D rather than spending hours on administrative procedures, (b) To incentivise research
activities thereby attracting talent, and (c) Expanding the S&T ecosystem. These remarks were
reiterated by the Hon’ble PM in the Prime Minister’s Science, Technology, and Innovation
Advisory Council (PM-STIAC) meeting of 2020. Similarly, in the Anusandhan National Research
Foundation (ANRF) Board Meeting held on 11th September 2024, the Hon’ble PM emphasized
on the need to reshape India’s R&D landscape by identifying and removing barriers in the R&D
ecosystem.
At the 108th Indian Science Congress held in January 2023, the Hon’ble PM again emphasized the
need to foster an environment of “Ease of Doing Science” in India. He emphasized on minimizing
bureaucracy and red tape to make it easier for scientists to conduct research, and called for an
enabling institutional framework to make India the most advanced laboratory of modern science
during the “Amrit Kaal” (the 25-year period leading up to 100 years of independence). The
PM urged young scientists to focus on futuristic areas, including quantum computing, artificial
intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and semiconductor research. He
further stressed that scientific efforts should move out of laboratories and reach the land (“Jameen”),
ensuring that the impact of research is visible in real life.
Several initiatives have been taken during the last few years to support ease of doing science.
These include creation of Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) in 2023, launch of
Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) in 2025, and notifications of special provisions
for scientific departments/ ministries in the Government Financial Regulations (GFR) during
2023-2025. However, India’s current R&D ecosystem still faces several challenges, including
complex administrative processes, bureaucratic systems, rigid financial procedures, inefficient
resource utilization etc. Other challenges include the lack of standardization, disparities in grant
management and compliance processes across institutions, poor monitoring and evaluation, and
accountability gaps. Above all, there exists a significant trust deficit between the R&D project
granting agency and researchers due to several reasons. The researchers are often not able to
utilize their time purely for R&D activities without being worried about the administrative issues.
There are also issues of capacity as well as rigidities in the science administration systems, which
are largely internal to the institutions.
In view of the importance of the issue and the magnitude of problems it is causing, NITI Aayog has
carried out a systematic and comprehensive study towards identifying the major barriers in doing
R&D in India, addressing the overall ecosystem for R&D in the country. The exercise focused
on all major aspects of the R&D ecosystem in detail, including funding and support structure at
national and state level, regulatory & policy frameworks, and the administrative structures &
processes governing the allocation and utilization of R&D grants. A multi-dimensional approach
was taken to understand major impediments and develop recommendations for corrective action. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 4
1.2 Objectives
The EODR&D exercise was guided by an overarching goal and framework, termed as ‘Removing
Obstacles, Promoting Enablers (ROPE)’. While the systematic methodological framework
used helped in identifying obstacles, extensive consultations with relevant stakeholders guided
development of actionable insights and suggestions.
More specifically, the exercise attempted to:
● identify key obstacles affecting the R&D ecosystem across all dimensions (funding, regulatory
processes, institutional structures, systemic barriers etc.), and
● develop a strategic roadmap to overcome the challenges through concrete interventions, policy
reforms, and institutional support mechanisms required to strengthen the R&D ecosystem.
While addressing these objectives, the two critical dimensions of the R&D ecosystem and the
constituent organisations have been underscored. One is the internal factors localised within the
academic and research institutions such as structures and processes of the individual organisation/
Institute. The other is the external factors which are outside the institutional systems and involve
broader aspects related to funding, policies, rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the
government(s) and regulatory bodies.
1.3 Methodology
Building on existing efforts and responding to the persistent challenges in the R&D ecosystem,
NITI Aayog adopted a systematic approach comprising open-ended inputs, a structured survey,
regional consultations, and multiple brainstorming sessions. The entire exercise was thus structured
around following four key components:
● Gathering Open-ended Inputs from R&D laboratories across different ministries and
departments,
● Deploying a structured survey in association with the two national science academies to
capture ground-level insights directly from scientists and academicians,
● Region-wise consultative meetings guided by a focused and outcome-oriented agenda, and
● Organizing involved brainstorming sessions with government departments, funding
agencies, regulatory bodies, Industry leaders and different Industry associations, to develop
actionable recommendations.
The exercise started with gathering open-ended inputs from R&D labs under different ministries
and departments. The initial effort to obtain open-ended inputs not only provided an informed
account of the overall STI ecosystem and associated challenges, but also gave the confidence that
the EODR&D initiative is extremely important, timely and worth pursuing. The inputs obtained
helped shape further activities, which involved the regional consultative meetings and the survey
through the national science academies. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 5
The regional consultative meetings were then planned in such a manner that they facilitated a
correct and comprehensive identification of the various challenges associated with doing R&D,
across different regions and institutional setups in India. Each regional consultative meeting
involved consultations with institutional leaders and senior research administrators from all kinds
of R&D institutions, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) under central and state governments,
institutions managed by private bodies, and industrial R&D units etc. located in the region.
The structured survey complemented the regional consultative meetings in the sense that
while regional consultative meetings saw participation of directors, vice chancellors and other
institutional leaders, the survey was targeted to reach individual researchers to gather their inputs
and insights. The survey questionnaire was designed jointly by NITI Aayog and Indian National
Science Academy (INSA) and conducted in online mode through the two science academies-
INSA and The National Science Academy of India (NASI). Some of the participants of the
regional consultative meetings also took part in the survey, as the survey and regional consultative
meetings overlapped in time.
The inputs and suggestions obtained through the open-ended inputs, structured survey, and the
regional consultative meetings, were then discussed extensively with various stakeholders through
multiple brainstorming sessions. These sessions involved participation of senior officials from
relevant government departments/ ministries, leaders from science academies, Industry leaders,
and representatives from different Industry associations etc. The brainstorming sessions helped
in detailed analysis, prioritizing key areas and developing recommendations for the strategic
roadmap. The entire consultation process is described in more detail in chapter 2.
The whole exercise underscores ‘Ease of Doing R&D’ as a systems level function of the R&D
ecosystem. The focus is on identifying impediments that affect researchers’ ability for knowledge
creation, translation and application and come up with key actions that are required to create
enabling opportunities for reducing the challenges faced by researchers across the entire research
life cycle. The analysis and outcomes from the four activities of the exercise are organized in
following seven key pillars: (a) R&D Funding and Utilization, (b) Attracting and retaining quality
Human Resource, (c) Institutional Structures and Processes, (d) Technology Development,
Translation & Commercialization, (e) Access to Knowledge & Resources (f) R&D in State Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 6
Institutions, and (h) Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building & Policy Administration. Each
of the pillars corresponds to a key dimension of ‘Ease of Doing R&D’, and serve as the structural
subsection of the analysis. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 7
CHAPTER 2
THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
The Consultation Process
2 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 8
To develop a grounded and holistic assessment of challenges faced by R&D practitioners in India,
NITI Aayog adopted a comprehensive process of consultations. This involved incorporating inputs
from key stakeholders, results from a large-scale survey of researchers conducted with national
science academies, extensive discussions in the regional consultative meetings, and deliberations
in the brainstorming sessions. Together, these efforts ensured that the assessment reflects both
systemic issues and experiences across the diverse R&D landscape.
2.1 Open Ended Inputs
The EODR&D exercise began with obtaining open-ended views from selected R&D institutions
in the country. About 200 R&D institutions under different scientific ministries/ departments of
the central government were contacted through an email to the Director of the institution. The
email aimed to know from each contacted R&D institute if their researchers face some major
difficulties in carrying out R&D activities. They were suggested to respond with special reference
to problems related to availability of R&D funding, regulatory framework and administrative
processes, and the institutional structures in place for R&D, along with any key suggestions they
may like to share. The key goal behind this process was to assess if the lack of ‘Ease of Doing
R&D’ exists as a major concern for researchers. Responses were requested in about three weeks
time and in this short duration, about 60+ R&D institutions shared their inputs.
The responses received were analysed in detail to understand both, the major areas of concern
and the magnitude of problems. The key concerns flagged in the inputs were mainly systemic in
nature and revolved around inadequate and delayed R&D funding, complex and rigid processes of
procurement of equipment and recruiting human resources, and weak institutional structures and
mechanisms for fostering collaboration and technology transfer & commercialization. The Image
1 presents a word cloud plot derived from the input text. The size of the words in the picture is
proportional to their frequency of occurrence in the combined inputs from all the institutions.
The analysis of open-ended inputs indicated the existence of a wide variety of problems in the R&D
ecosystem, which in turn suggested the need for a detailed and comprehensive exercise to assess
the ‘Ease of Doing R&D’. The open-ended input exercise did not include the Higher Education
Institutions (HEIs), which is another major institution category engaging in R&D activities.
Accordingly, the next set of steps were thought and planned for carrying out a comprehensive
exercise involving all relevant stakeholders in the R&D ecosystem. This included in-person
regional consultative meetings and online survey on Ease of Doing R&D. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 9
Image 1. Word Cloud plot drawn from open ended inputs
2.2 Survey in association with the National Science Academies
To supplement the individual-level data to the open-ended inputs, a structured survey questionnaire
was formulated in consultation with the Indian National Science Academy (INSA), New Delhi. The
objective was to get inputs about R&D experience and environment from individual researchers
and scientists. The survey questionnaire was circulated to a select set of established researchers/
scientists across the country by utilizing the rich network of learned Fellows and Associate fellows
of INSA and the National Academy of Sciences, India (NASI), Prayagraj. Some of the participants
of the regional consultative meetings (detailed in next section) also participated in the survey, as
both exercises overlapped in time. The sample population thus represented established researchers
and scientists across different subject areas as well as different geographic regions. The sample
also had inherent diversity in terms of types of institutions, nature of the research, and the gender
of participants.
The survey questionnaire comprised a set of 53 questions organized into 05 sections. A mix of
quantitative and qualitative questions were included, with some requiring selecting one or more
options and others asking for a rating or score. After completing a pilot, the survey was rolled out
in online mode through a Web-based form. A total of 878 successful responses were received and
analysed.
The survey findings highlighted issues of unavailability of adequate and timely funding for
research, limited access to research facilities and shared infrastructure, the rigid administrative
systems in the institutions, the burden of regulations and compliances, aspects related to challenges
in fostering collaborations and translational research etc. The Image 2 presents a network
visualization of some of the key aspects highlighted by participants of the survey. The complete
findings and analysis of the survey have been compiled and presented in a separate report to
provide a more detailed analysis of the responses and also for the purposes of better visualization
and interpretation. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 10
Image 2. Network Visualization of Key aspects highlighted in the survey
2.3 Regional Consultative Meetings
To assess and examine the challenges faced by the R&D practitioners in a much more detailed and
comprehensive manner, a series of regional consultative meetings were organized. The purpose
of the regional consultative meetings was to understand the major issues faced by the R&D
ecosystem.
To identify the various types and the extent of problems faced by the R&D practitioners across the
different types of the institutions located in different geographic regions and focusing on different
scientific disciplines; a systematic approach was taken in planning and organizing the regional
consultative meetings. A total of eight regional consultative meetings were organized across different
parts of the country. Each regional consultative meeting invited participants from institutions
located in a select set of states. The invited participants in each meeting represented institutional
leaders (directors of R&D and academic institutions and Vice Chancellors of Universities) and
some distinguished academicians, researchers and academic/ R&D administrators.
The eight regional consultative meetings combined, featured participation of 430+ distinguished
institutional leaders, academicians and researchers representing major R&D institutions and HEIs
under central and state governments as well as selected private institutions. Almost all major R&D
laboratories under CSIR, DST, DBT, MoES, DRDO, DAE, DoS were represented across different
meetings. Similarly, all major HEIs such as IITs, IISERs, NITs, IIITs, Central Universities and Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 11
State Universities had their institutional leaders attending the consultative meetings. Each regional
consultative meeting had a mix of institutional leaders from different types of institutions located
in that region.
Table 1 presents a quick summary of the key details of the eight regional consultative meetings
organized, and the Image 3 shows the geographical spread of the regional consultative meeting
venues. More details of the eight regional consultative meetings are provided next.
Table 1: Key details of the eight regional consultative meetings
S. No. Date & PlaceKey Sessions
States
Covered
1
27-28 May 2025
at Governor House,
Lucknow
The meeting consisted of four Technical
Sessions:
- Funding and support structures,
- Regulatory and administrative processes,
- Strengthening institutional mechanisms,
- Reforms to enhance Ease of Doing R&D.
Each session included expert presentations
and structured discussions to capture
stakeholder inputs.Uttar
Pradesh
Bihar
2
3-4 June 2025
at CSIR-IIP, Dehradun
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Funding and support structures,
- Regulatory and administrative
frameworks,
- Institutional mechanisms facilitating
R&D.
Uttarakhand
3
14-15 July 2025
at IIT Jammu, Jammu
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Accelerating R&D in academic
institutions,
- Enabling R&D personnel for cutting-edge
research,
- Translating publications and patents into
products.
An Open Forum was also included to
enable broader stakeholder interactions in a
semi-formal setting to get deeper feedback.
Jammu and
Kashmir
Punjab
Himachal
Pradesh
Ladakh Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 12
4
6
th
August 2025
at NITI Aayog,
New Delhi
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Global best practices in R&D,
- Institutional benchmarking for Ease of
Doing R&D,
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems through
funding, infrastructure, and regulatory
reforms.
The programme concluded with consolidated
discussions aimed at identifying actionable
recommendations
Delhi NCR
Haryana
5
12-13 Aug 2025
at Science City,
Ahmedabad
The meeting consisted of four focused
Technical Sessions:
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems (funding
and regulation),
- Access to knowledge resources,
- Institutional structures and processes,
- Applied and translational research.
These sessions were complemented by
two panel discussions synthesising cross-
cutting issues and recommendations
Gujarat
Madhya
Pradesh
Rajasthan
Maharashtra
6
10-11 Sep. 2025
at CSIR – IICT,
Hyderabad
The meeting consisted of four Technical
Sessions:
- Strengthening R&D ecosystems (funding
and regulation),
- Enhancing access to knowledge
resources,
- Institutional structures and processes,
- Applied and translational research.
These sessions were complemented by a
panel discussion and a special session with
senior leadership.
Telangana
Orissa
Andhra
Pradesh
Jharkhand
Chhattisgarh
Goa Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 13
7
15-16 Oct. 2025
at IIT Guwahati,
Guwahati
The meeting consisted of five Technical
Sessions:
- Process streamlining for R&D efficiency,
- Attracting and retaining human resources,
- Technology translation and
commercialization,
- Fostering collaboration and mobility,
- Measuring Ease of Doing R&D.
These sessions were complemented by a
panel discussion on the way forward,
focusing on reform priorities, including
specific issues for the North East Region.
Assam
Arunachal
Pradesh
Manipur
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Sikkim
Mizoram
Tripura
West Bengal
8
30-31 Oct. 2025
at NCESS,
Thiruvananthapuram
The meeting consisted of three Technical
Sessions:
- Strengthening the R&D ecosystem,
- Attracting and retaining quality human
resources,
- Technology translation and
commercialization.
The technical sessions were complemented
by a special session highlighting key
findings from surveys and regional
consultations, and a panel discussion on the
way forward to identify reform priorities.
Kerala
Tamil Nadu
Karnataka
Puducherry Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 14
Image 3: Geographical Mapping of EODR&D regional consultative meetings Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 23
2.4 Brainstorming Sessions
To deliberate on the inputs that were received from the survey and the regional consultations, a set
of brainstorming sessions were conducted with the key scientific departments, funding agencies,
and industry stakeholders. The sessions focused on developing recommendations for reform
actions and enabling pathways for Ease of Doing R&D.
Consultations with the senior officials of the Department of Science and Technology (DST),
Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR),
and Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) were first to begin with. This provided an
opportunity to examine the grant mechanisms and disbursement systems, institutional autonomy,
regulatory mechanisms, support structures for translation, and monitoring mechanisms. It further
helped in assessing the operational mechanisms of project approvals and fund disbursals, aligning
the recommendations that emerged with the policy and programmatic initiatives that were already
underway.
Structured interactions were also conducted with industry leaders and industry associations to better
comprehend the challenges faced by the private sector for contributing in R&D, and challenges in
academia-industry collaboration. Further review and guidance were provided through interactions
with the Standing Consultative Committee on EoDR&D, which pondered on the emerged findings,
and helped refine the prioritisation of the recommendations.
The brainstorming sessions were an important part in the consultation process, ensuring that the
closing recommendations are feasible, aligned across stakeholders, and can be implemented in a
time-bound manner. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 25
CHAPTER 3
CHALLENGES & RECOMMENDATIONS
Challenges &
Recommendations
3 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 26
This chapter presents major identified challenges faced by scientists and researchers across the R&D
ecosystem of the country. The analysis draws on insights shared by stakeholders who participated
in the consultation process, as detailed in the previous chapter. The chapter is organized into
seven sections, each section listing out the major identified challenges and relevant suggestions
for corrective actions.
3.1 R&D Funding and Utilization
The research and development activities do not solely depend upon researchers but also rely
broadly on research infrastructure, access to knowledge and tools, and a conducive environment
for creation and application of knowledge. To support these critical requirements, sufficient and
sustained R&D funding and its proper utilization play a critical role, which eventually lead to
shaping the nation’s innovation capacity, technological self-reliance, and long-term economic
growth.
R&D funding is usually sourced in two ways: (a) extramural, which involves funding provided by
various Government departments and funding agencies, and (b) intramural, which is supported by
internal resources of the institution or its parent organization. The major part of extramural R&D
funding in India is provided by different government funding agencies, such as Department of
Science and Technology (DST), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research (CSIR), Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF), and University
Grants Commission (UGC). There are also certain mission mode programs to support R&D in
different areas of national priority. While the absolute allocation for R&D has increased over
time, India’s Gross Expenditure on Research and Development (GERD) has remained low at 0.6
to 0.7% for quite some time. The Government Financial Rules (GFR) and the complex fund flow
and accounting systems create further problems in utilization of the already limited R&D funds.
The consultation process has highlighted several systemic and operational challenges across all
three components of the R & D process, namely Fund Availability, Fund Flow and Fund Utilization.
Table 3.1 presents a top-level overview of the key dimensions of the R&D Funding challenges.
Table 3.1: Key Dimensions of R&D Funding Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Fund Availability
Low GERD, Weak private sector participation, Limited Philanthropic
contribution to R&D, Funding concentration in select institutions.
Fund Flow and Governance
Cumbersome proposal formats, Duplication of schemes and funding
calls, Long processing times, Fund disbursement delays, Complex fund
flow mechanism for low value grants, Year-end automatic withdrawal,
Reconciliation challenges.
Financial and Administrative
Rigidities affecting Utilization
Rigid budget heads, GFR restrictions, Procurement delays of routine
R&D consumables, Absence of gatekeeping on GeM, High GST on
R&D equipment, Limited overhead costs, Repeated submissions of UC
and SE. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 27
3.1.1. Inadequate R&D Funding
India’s overall R&D funding pool has remained largely unchanged, as reflected in India’s low
value of GERD (hovering around 0.6 to 0.7% for over a decade). This is significantly lower than
countries like China (2.6%), USA (3.4%), and South Korea (5.3%). Though the absolute R&D
funding has increased, it has not been effective due to several reasons including inflation, increase
in the number of institutions, and reduced institutional funds for R&D. In fact, there is now much
higher competition for R&D grants than ever before, with application to grant ratio declining
to under 10% across several R&D funding agencies. Therefore, the available R&D funds are
insufficient to meet the R&D appetite of the institutions and researchers.
Another important aspect in India’s R&D funding is that it is heavily dependent on public funding
(with about 64% contribution), unlike the case in several leading innovation economies which
have more than 60% of the R&D budget contributed by the private sector (https://www.pib.gov.
in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2153547). Further, the culture of philanthropic contribution to
scientific research is still in its nascent stage. Absence of attractive fiscal incentives is one major
factor inhibiting private sector and philanthropic contribution.
3.1.2. Skewed Funding
The consultation process brought forward the issue of a higher concentration of R&D funding
in selected premier institutions (for instance, the IIT system is known to receive more than 80%
of ANRF’s R&D funding). While uniformity in R&D funding is neither expected nor desirable,
over-concentration of funding in only a selected set of institutions reduces the funding opportunity
for researchers working in other R&D institutions and HEIs. It may be noted that ANRF has a
specific mandate for supporting R&D in state institutions, however, this goal is far from being
achieved. Participants in the consultative meetings also highlighted that most of the expert
committees on ANRF do not have suitable representation from outside the IIT system, which may
be unintentionally resulting in skewed funding decisions.
3.1.3. Cumbersome Process of R&D Grant Applications
Researchers seeking R&D funding are required to navigate through multiple portals or systems
by different ministries or funding agencies, each portal being independent of others. Therefore,
researchers end up making repetitive data entries about their CV and institution details etc., each
time they submit a proposal. Several times, these proposal formats are very lengthy asking for
undesired routine information, which does not actually help in assessing the proposals. Long
proposal formats also create a burden for review committees. Therefore, it is desirable to have
a unified portal for R&D calls of Govt of India. In this context, NITI Aayog has already taken
an initiative for the design of a Unified Architecture for Project Management System (UPMS).
The system under development by National eGovernance Division, Ministry of Electronics &
Information Technology, will provide a unified view of R&D calls, a simplified interface for
proposal submission and management, and various other value added services like researcher
microsite, individual and institutional expertise mapping, ease of financial reporting etc. (Refer
Box 1). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 28
Box 1
Unified Architecture for Project Lifecycle Management (UPMS)
UPMS is a national initiative of strategic importance, one that seeks to bring systemic improvement to the way
research, development, and public investment projects are conceptualized, monitored, and delivered across
Ministries and Departments. By enabling a unified, interoperable, and digitally empowered architecture,
UPMS will significantly strengthen transparency, efficiency, and real-time decision-making across the
Government ecosystem.
UPMS is proposed as a unified and modular architecture for end-to-end project lifecycle management, taking
into account technical, operational, and financial considerations. The architecture will support the creation
of multiple sibling and child instances, allowing ministries and agencies to retain contextual and operational
flexibility while operating within a common national framework. The system will enable both vertical
and horizontal API-level integration to facilitate seamless data exchange across schemes, departments,
and institutions. The platform will be hosted on a secure and scalable cloud infrastructure to ensure high
availability, resilience, and on-demand scalability. Reporting, monitoring, and analytics capabilities will
be embedded by design from the outset, enabling real-time visibility into funding flows, project progress,
institutional participation, and thematic overlaps.
To ensure coordinated progress, a dedicated Inter-Ministerial Committee is constituted, and a core
implementation team is overseeing the platform’s architecture, development, and phased rollout. The
National e-Governance Division (NeGD) under the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology is
being empowered with the necessary resources to advance this important national initiative in a timely and
effective manner. The pilot system is to be deployed soon.
3.1.4 Duplication of Schemes and Calls
Limited cross-departmental visibility has resulted in multiple ministries and agencies supporting
similar R&D activities and issuing near-identical funding calls, sometimes even within the same
ministry. For example, in areas like Hydrogen Energy, Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage etc.,
both DST and CSIR are supporting R&D projects. Similarly, there are several areas where ANRF
is simply duplicating the efforts of DST. As an example, ANRF calls on Centre for Excellence
for STI Indicators and Analytics proposes to explore topics which are already a long-standing
mandate of NSTIMIS division of DST. Given that R&D funds are already limited, there is a need
to avoid such duplication and provide for more judicious and optimized utilization of R&D funds.
3.1.5. Long Proposal Processing Times
At present most of the funding agencies are taking a long time in evaluation of R&D project
proposals and disbursement of grants for approved projects. In a rapidly changing science &
technology landscape, long delays in the processing of R&D proposals pose a risk of the proposal
becoming outdated. Unlike global best practices that allow year-round submissions or call for
proposals with periodic decision cycles, India’s current approach results in extended waiting Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 29
periods, reducing responsiveness to emerging scientific opportunities. The delays in proposal
processing are often attributed to administrative complexities, difficulties associated with the
current fund flow system, smaller size of expert committees, and limited scientific manpower in
funding agencies. Timeliness of R&D is a very critical factor and therefore necessary corrective
steps are required to significantly reduce proposal processing times.
3.1.6. Delayed Fund Disbursal and Misaligned Accounting System
The success of R&D initiatives depends critically on timely and seamless provision of financial
support. Facilities such as biobanks, data centers, and high-end equipment require sustained, long-
term investment. In the current extramural funding landscape, the continuity of sustained fund
flow is primarily disrupted by two major factors: (a) delays in the release of the fund, and (b)
complex or misaligned accounting systems.
(a) Delay in Release of Funds
● At present, even after a scientific decision is taken on a project proposal, it takes more than 3-6
months (sometimes even more) for the release of the grant. Thus, the already long processing
time of R&D proposals gets affected further, often resulting in turnaround times of more than
a year or more. It is desirable that fund disbursal tasks may be handled by a dedicated Project
Management Unit (PMU) comprising professionals trained for such tasks. This may allow the
turnaround delays to be minimized and more judicious utilization of time of scientific staff.
● Frequent changes in the fund distribution mechanism during the last few years have also created
difficulties and introduced delays at different stages. Institutions find it difficult to adjust with
frequent changes in the fund flow system.
(b) Misaligned Accounting Systems
● In the current accounting system, extramural R&D projects with low financial requirements
are also required to pass through the same complex fund flow mechanisms involving TSA
or Hybrid-TSA models that are used in larger fund allocations. It may be noted that the total
financial outlay for extramural R&D (accounting for about 40,000 projects a year) across all
ministries and departments is only about Rs. 4,000 Cr annually.
● Due to a large number of sanctions and the corresponding authorization and fund flow
complexities, the fund disbursal for approved R&D projects gets significantly delayed. The
large number of sanctions and transactions, which otherwise are of small value, stresses the
complete system.
● The funds allocated are automatically withdrawn at the end of the financial year under the
current “use it or lose it” budgeting framework, and then it often takes another 2-3 months in
the reassignment of funds. This is constraining the institutional systems resulting in periodic
discontinuity of R&D activities, non-payment of fellowships to research personnel for a few
months, and repeated efforts for assignment and reassignment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 30
● The automatic withdrawal of funds in March and the reassignment of that fund from next
year’s budget of the funding agency, is resulting in an undesired loop of cumulative committed
liabilities for funding agencies and are reducing their capability to fund new R&D activities.
● The expenditure monitoring for jointly funded R&D projects with external funding sources is
not possible in the case of TSA or Hybrid TSA systems. The Hybrid TSA system has some other
operational difficulties, such as those related to making advance payments for the procurement
of specialised scientific equipment and international services.
● In cases where payments are failed or some inadvertent error happens, reconciliation or
resolution is a time-consuming and cumbersome process, leading to delays in the release of
subsequent tranches of funds.
● The fund processing often becomes extremely slow on the 30th & 31st of March, resulting in
the inability to upload bulk payment files on the PFMS portal.
● The strict mapping of R&D funds with specific projects in TSA or Hybrid TSA has taken away
the institutional capacity to leverage available overall R&D funds to temporarily meet funding
gaps in other R&D projects.
3.1.7. Challenges in Fund Utilisation & Reporting
Ease of utilization of R&D grants is an essential component for any STI ecosystem, more so in
a system having fund availability constraints. However, there are several challenges that R&D
practitioners face due to rigid financial rules, constraints with the GeM portal, limited institutional
autonomy, and restrictive delegation of financial powers. Some of the key issues highlighted
during the consultation are as follows:
(a) Rigid Head-wise Allocation of R&D Grants: R&D activities have an inherent component
of risk and uncertainty. New findings, expert feedback, or changes in technology often require
some adjustments or realignments during the project duration. However, in the current system,
most of the R&D grants come with strict head-wise budgets, such as equipment, manpower, or
consumables. Once approved, there is no or limited flexibility of reappropriations, including
even for intra-major-head realignments. Each time such reappropriation becomes necessary,
the researchers have to seek approval of the funding agency, which takes a lot of time. This
sometimes results in ineffective fund utilization.
(b) Complex Process for Procurement of Routine R&D Consumables: In the current
framework, the same standard procurement procedures designed for general government
purchases, are used even for low value repetitive purchase of R&D consumables. As a result,
even small value repeated procurements become time taking and difficult. International best
practice allows institutions autonomy in low-risk, repetitive procurement, subject to audit
and accountability norms. Therefore, for an efficient and uninterrupted execution of R&D
activities procurement of small value R&D consumables may be eased by greater authority to
researchers and the institutions. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 31
(c) High GST Burden: R&D grants are mostly government-to-government transfers, but a high
GST is still applied on procured research items, which reduces the effective funds available
for actual research activities. The R&D related procurements were eligible for GST at 5% slab
till June 2022. However, now institutions are required to pay GST as per actuals for all R&D
related procurements. This reduces the actual availability of already limited R&D funds.
(d) Insufficient Overhead Component: The extramural R&D support provided to institutions
usually has an overhead component. This overhead is used by the institutions to provide basic
facilities required by the R&D personnel to carry out research activities associated with R&D
projects. These include electricity, air conditioning, maintenance of facilities etc. However,
in view of the rising cost of electricity, services and maintenance, the overhead charges at
the current usual rate of 5% to 10% of the project cost do not suffice. As a result, it becomes
difficult to maintain laboratories and facilities.
(e) Financial Reporting: The R&D grants are usually allocated in a yearly fashion and the release
of the next installment requires submission of Utilization Certificate (UC) and Statement of
Expenditure (SE). Many times researchers are required to submit UC and SE multiple times
and as a result they end up putting in a good amount of time which could have been otherwise
utilized in actual R&D work. During the consultation process it was pointed out that since
all procurement and payments in R&D projects are now done through the Public Financial
Management System (PFMS), there should be a provision of automatic generation of UC and
SE from the system.
Major Recommendations
3.1 (a) Enhance Gross Expenditure on R&D to at least 2% in a phased manner
To strengthen India’s R&D ecosystem, there is an urgent need to significantly enhance the national
investment in R&D, from the current level of 0.64% to at least 2% of GDP, in the next four to five
years.
3.1 (b) Attract Private R&D Investment through well-designed Incentives Framework
India needs to introduce time-bound, incremental fiscal incentives to boost private sector
investment in R&D, both the in-house industrial R&D and collaborative R&D with public R&D
labs and HEIs. The target should be to attract half of the targeted GERD from the private sector.
3.1 (c) Add optional reporting head of R&D Expenditure under Schedule III (Balance Sheet &
Statement of profit & Loss) of Companies Act 2013
Adding reporting head of R&D Expenditure under Schedule III (Balance Sheet & Statement of
profit & Loss) of Companies Act 2013, Section 129, can provide for better data about private
sector investment in R&D and also sensitize them to consider higher investments. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 32
3.1 (d) Enhance Philanthropic and CSR Support for R&D
In order to meet the requirement of a higher fund availability for R&D, a more bold and forward-
looking approach is required to attract philanthropic support for R&D. This in turn calls for
strengthening and effectively leveraging CSR provisions under the Companies Act, as well as
providing higher deduction (say at least 125%) for individual contributions to funds supporting
R&D, under Sec. 133 (Deduction in respect of donations to certain funds, charitable institutions,
etc.) of the Income Tax Act 2025.
3.1 (e) Create Inter-departmental Coordination Committee to Minimize Overlaps
It is necessary to create an inter-departmental Committee within the Ministry of Science &
Technology, that meets at regular intervals, to target synergy and complementarity of schemes and
calls across constituent departments and funding agencies, and ensure avoiding or minimizing
duplication of schemes across departments.
3.1 (f) Introduce Round the year Call for proposals with six months cap on processing time
The R&D funding agencies should introduce round the year call for proposal submissions,
preferably with two periodic review and processing cycles in a year. The proposal reviews can
start immediately after they are submitted, thereby reducing the proposal processing and decision
times.
3.1 (g) Establish Dedicated Project Management Units (PMUs)
R&D funding agencies should establish dedicated PMUs to handle post-grant approval
administrative and financial activities, including fund disbursal and compliance. This will ensure
clear separation of scientific and administrative roles, reduce burden on scientific staff, and
expedite fund release. The PMUs, in due course, may leverage functionalities in the UPMS portal
being developed.
3.1 (h) Provision Direct Fund Transfer for Extramural R&D
For extramural R&D projects, which have relatively small approved financial outlays, a direct grant
transfer mechanism to institutional accounts need to be adopted. Larger or core grants may continue
to be disbursed through the TSA or Hybrid TSA system. This approach will significantly ease and
speed up the fund disbursement, ensure continuity of funding and enable effective monitoring for
jointly funded projects, thereby significantly benefitting a large number of researchers.
3.1 (i) Enable Grant Re-appropriation at Institutional Level
Researchers or Institutions should be permitted to undertake intra-major head grant reappropriations
at their own level. This flexibility will support timely decision-making, reduce the need for repeated
approvals, and improve overall project execution efficiency. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 33
3.1 (j) Ease Procurement of Routine R&D Consumables
Procurement of consumables for R&D being routine and repetitive in nature, while at the same
time of small value, may be eased either by excluding R&D consumables under GFR Rule 143 or
by enabling institutions to provision annual rate contracts at their own level.
3.1 (k) Consider Restoring 5% GST Slab for R&D procurement
A lower GST slab of 5%, as available till June 2022, may be considered for all R&D-related
procurements, so as to increase effective usable funds to R&D institutions.
3.1 (l) Enhance Institutional Overhead Component
Introduce a more enabling overhead structure, at a rate of about 20% instead of the current rate
of 5 to 10%, to allow grantee institutions to sustain R&D activities and effectively maintain R&D
equipment and infrastructure.
3.2 Attracting and Retaining Quality Human Resource
Human resource is viewed as “human capital” whose creativity and specialized skills determine
how effectively knowledge is created and translated into a tangible product that serves industry
and society. India has a demographic dividend and is often regarded as a powerhouse of talent.
However, the support base for young talent involved in R&D activities somehow remains low.
This issue is further evidenced by the Global Innovation Index (GII) report 2025, which shows
that the number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) researchers in India remains as low as 262 per
million, compared to Switzerland (5,552), the UK (4,821), the USA (4,821), China (1,585), etc.
Though various national programmes along with doctoral and postdoctoral fellowships supported
by DST, DBT, CSIR, and other agencies, have played a role in expanding the pool of trained
researchers for science & technology, they fall short of creating a critical mass of researchers for
India’s technological needs.
Several challenges related to availability of competent human resources for R&D, career pathways
for R&D professionals, limited institution autonomy, lack of mid-career training, absence of inter-
institutional mobility etc. were highlighted during the consultation process. Table 3.2 provides a
top level overview of the key dimensions of human resources related challenges for R&D. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 34
Table 3.2: Key Dimensions of Human Resource Related Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Research Talent Supply Gaps
Low FTE per million, Weak postdoctoral ecosystem, Delayed
fellowship disbursals.
Institutional Rigidity &
Recruitment Constraints
Limited hiring flexibility, Rigid post structures, Delayed
recruitments, Vacant sanctioned posts.
Retention, Incentives & Career
Pathways
Lack of incentives, Unattractive career pathways, Policy gaps in
faculty entrepreneurship.
Mobility, Skill Development &
Workload Imbalance
Limited inter-institutional mobility, Non-uniform pay levels and
nomenclatures, Weak mid-career training, Unbalanced teaching and
research loads.
3.2.1. Weak Postdoctoral Research Ecosystem
While support for startups has increased, the support system for R&D human resources in the
R&D institutions and HEIs remains suboptimal, leading to a low FTE. The postdoctoral research
ecosystem is quite weak with very limited support in terms of fellowships. While the doctoral
research fellowships have increased over time and India is now among the top three countries in
Ph.D. produced, the support at the next level for taking the knowledge generated forward into a
translation journey, needs to be instituted. Currently, the overall post-doctoral fellowships support
from all departments and agencies combined together is about 2,500 per year. This is too low as
compared to what is needed for a robust STI ecosystem capable of translating knowledge into
usable products and socio-economic goods.
3.2.2. Delayed Disbursal of Fellowships
Though there are now over 20,000+ Ph.D. fellowships available per year through combined support
of multiple departments and agencies, there are often instances of delays in scholars’ receiving
their fellowships. The time taken in release of the first fellowship instalment at present is about
four to five months. Similarly, there are other intermittent delays, either due to fund reassignment
delay with change in financial year or temporary unavailability of funds.
3.2.3. Limited Institutional Autonomy in Human Resource Mapping
R&D institutions and HEIs often face difficulties in need-based recruitment of manpower in
desired areas. This is mostly due to difficulties associated with posts being rigidly tied to specific
departments and hierarchical levels (such as professor, associate professor, scientist, etc.). At
the moment, any effort to change the mapping of a faculty or research position is seen as the
‘creation of a new post’ which has associated restrictions and a long approval process going
up to the Department of Expenditure (DoE). This has created problems in the system of rolling
advertisements in institutions. Institutions are not able to rationalize or dynamically manage their
faculty/ researcher allocation, even though such exercise may not change the overall financial
outlay needed for salaries. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 35
3.2.4. Delays in Recruitment
A significant number of sanctioned positions in Indian R&D institutions and HEIs remain vacant
for long periods. This constrains the functioning and performance of institutions as they have to
manage with a suboptimal number of researchers, technical staff, and administrative staff in the
institutions. Consultations suggested that the majority of the delays in recruitment are largely due
to administrative reasons. In the case of state institutions, these delays are also due to financial
reasons as well, i.e., state governments often do not have enough financial resources to provide for
salaries and allowances of the total sanctioned staff strengths of their institutions.
3.2.5. Retention Challenges for Human Resource
The Indian STI ecosystem lacks suitable incentives or attractive career pathways to young
professionals engaged in R&D activities. There is a high volume of STEM Ph.D. graduates
being trained from Universities and R&D institutions, but the post-Ph.D. career pathways are
not well-developed. The already limited number of full-time faculty/ researcher positions remain
vacant due to administrative reasons, which discourages young professionals from going for R&D
careers. Moreover, government pay scales in emerging high-skill sectors like AI, Semiconductors,
Biotechnology etc. are not as attractive as the private sector. As a result, Ph.D. graduates often
gravitate towards the private sector opportunities in the country and outside.
Another aspect observed is that the faculty members in HEIs often limit their R&D activities
to publications and patents and do not attempt to translate them into products in absence of
any incentive to do so. In fact, HEIs not only lack incentives but also lack clarity about faculty
entrepreneurship policy.
3.2.6. Limited Inter-institutional Mobility
Limited mobility of research personnel across institutions under different government departments,
including sometimes between the institutions under the same department/ ministry, restricts
opportunities for exchange of knowledge and collaboration among researchers. Scientists from
different government institutions but working in related areas find it difficult to move from one
institution to another in their career. There are variations in pay scales, pay levels and nomenclatures
across Administrative and Technical cadres in different autonomous R&D institutions. This
limits inter-institutional mobility. Better opportunities for inter-institutional mobility, including
those for short fixed-term stays, can help provide opportunities for cross-fertilisation of ideas,
interdisciplinary learning, exposure to diverse research environments, and increased collaboration
opportunities.
3.2.7. Absence of Mid-Career Training
Scientists in R&D institutions and faculty members in HEIs do not get adequate opportunities
of periodic mid-career training. In HEIs, faculty development programs (FDPs) try to address
this to some extent, but they lack depth and effectiveness. In R&D institutions, the mid-career
training opportunities are usually in the form of short-term programs conducted by outside Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 36
bodies, which are infrequent and ad hoc in nature unlike the practice of well-designed mid-career
training programs in many countries. For example, the University of California has a “Mid Career
Development Program” for junior faculty, which includes $75K per year, mentorship, sponsorship,
and networking activities. Therefore, there is a need for a suitable structural mechanism for regular
periodic training of scientists, researchers and University faculty. Indian Science academies may
play an important role here.
3.2.8. Unbalanced Teaching and Research Load
Faculty members in Indian Universities are often heavily engaged in teaching responsibilities
and administrative duties, leaving them with very limited time for R&D activities. This reduces
research productivity and leads to inefficiencies in research outcomes. Therefore, a more balanced
time allocation framework is needed for University faculty. Options like Research-focused and
Teaching-focused tracks, with associated performance evaluation framework, may provide a more
conducive environment for a greater R&D intensity in institutions.
Major Recommendations
3.2 (a) Enhance the number of Postdoctoral Fellowships
DST, ANRF, DBT, DSIR, DHE, ICAR and ICMR may consider increasing the number of post-
doctoral fellowships in S&T, by 20% every year, for the next few years. This may significantly
strengthen the post-doctoral research ecosystem of the country.
3.2 (b) Create ‘Vigyan Nidhi’- a unified Fellowship system
To address the gaps in fellowship funding and disbursal delays, a unified and streamlined funding
architecture with digital public infrastructure, may be created. This system can streamline
fellowship disbursal and help attract funds to finance an enhanced number of fellowships (Refer
Box 2). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 37
Box 2
Vigyan Nidhi
Objective
A unified, efficient, and uninterrupted funding architecture for research fellowships and personnel support
across India’s scientific ecosystem is needed. It can support post-doctoral fellowships, under competitive grants,
institutionally or industry-supported fellowships, and mobility and short-term research enhancement grants. All
centrally funded fellowships can be progressively routed through the Vigyan Nidhi mechanism.
Funding Architecture
A Government of India seed grant (say of ₹1,000 crore) may be instituted as initial working capital to function as
a revolving buffer for uninterrupted fellowship disbursal, capable of supporting approximately 20,000 research
personnel for one year at prevailing norms. Ministries and Departments will continue to sanction fellowships under
their respective schemes, with sanctions issued through the Vigyan Nidhi digital platform and funds transferred
in periodic tranches. Additional resources in the corpus may be mobilised through industry contributions with
tax incentives, philanthropic and institutional funding, and voluntary individual contributions routed through the
platform. Institutions may also be allowed to use the portal for their fund raising initiatives.
Digital Public Infrastructure and Governance
Vigyan Nidhi may be underpinned by a robust digital public infrastructure comprising a unified sanction module,
an automated DBT-based payment system, a national fellowship dashboard, real-time monitoring and impact
analytics, and fully digital institutional reporting. The fund will be managed by a designated Government
administrative body responsible for fund administration, inter-ministerial coordination, digital platform
operations, donor engagement, compliance, audit, and monitoring and evaluation.
Expected Outcomes
In the short term, Vigyan Nidhi can eliminate delays in fellowship disbursal and ensure seamless continuity of
support for research personnel through uniform digital processes. In the medium term, it will significantly expand
India’s FTE researcher base, strengthen the post-doctoral ecosystem, and increase industry and philanthropic
participation in research manpower development. In the long term, it will enhance national research capacity
and output, improve innovation outcomes, strengthen global competitiveness, and establish a sustainable talent
pipeline aligned with India’s future scientific and technological priorities.
Summary
Vigyan Nidhi may address a core structural bottleneck in India’s science and innovation ecosystem by creating
a unified, reliable, and scalable mechanism for research manpower support. Complementing ANRF and the RDI
framework, it places human capital at the centre of India’s long-term national innovation architecture and enables
predictable, transparent, and dignified funding pathways for researchers. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 38
3.2 (c) Provide Institutional Autonomy for Faculty/ Researcher Mapping
R&D institutions and higher education institutions should be empowered to rationalise faculty
and researcher allocations across departments and subject areas at their own level, within their
approved salary budgets. This can speed up the hiring process and the need-based human resource
deployment.
3.2 (d) Incentivize quality R&D Outcomes
A structured mechanism for incentivizing high quality research outcomes should be developed.
This may include performance-based incentives and/ or the provision of holding equity in startups
to encourage translation of knowledge into useful technologies and products.
3.2 (e) Explore uniformity in pay scales and cadre nomenclature across different Autonomous
R&D institutions
Uniformity in pay scales, pay levels and cadre nomenclature may be instituted across all
autonomous R&D institutions under different scientific ministries, beginning with the autonomous
R&D institutions in the Ministry of Science & Technology. This can provide greater flexibility in
recruitment and increased inter-institutional mobility and collaboration.
3.2 (f) Provision Focused Mid-career Training & Capacity Building
Indian Science academies may be entrusted with developing intensive and focused training
programs for scientists, researchers, research administrators, and University faculty. This may be
further complemented by the National Institute for Science Policy and Governance (NISPG), as
proposed in Section 3.7.
3.2 (g) Create Teaching and Research focused tracks in Universities
UGC, AICTE and other regulatory bodies may explore creating teaching and research focused
tracks in Universities. This can help in role based recruitment and better evaluation frameworks.
3.3 Institutional Structures and Processes
The effectiveness of a national R&D ecosystem depends not only on funding and talent, but also
on the institutional structures and internal processes that shape how R&D is planned, supported,
evaluated, and translated into societal and economic outcomes. At present many research-
performing institutions continue to operate within governance and administrative frameworks
that have not kept pace with the needs of contemporary research systems. As a result, institutional
arrangements that were once adequate now constrain agility, innovation, and impact.
At the institutional level, there are several challenges ranging from rigid administrative and
financial rules to absence of necessary substructures to promote R&D. Researchers often Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 39
spend substantial time dealing with obtaining different approvals, hiring of research staff, and
procurement of consumables and equipment etc. Institutions often do not have well-defined
guidelines and templates to speed up such processes. Further, there are limited opportunities for
faculty entrepreneurship and performance-based incentives. The key institutional and governance
challenges are highlighted in this section, with a top level overview presented in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Key Dimensions of Institutional & Governance Challenges
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Research Administration
Fragmented R&D management, absence of unified R&D offices, limited
professional expertise, weak administrative processes.
Institutional Decision
Making
Inconsistent guidelines, unclear SOPs, audit-centric orientation,
procedural delays, over-centralisation, limited delegated authority.
Strategic Leadership,
Institutional Focus &
Research Direction
Weak core competence strategy, Limited leadership accountability and
performance-linked pay, absence of periodic institutional self-assessment,
no structured Ease of Doing R&D (EoDR&D) assessment framework.
Entrepreneurship &
Commercialisation
Support
Weak faculty entrepreneurship policies, uneven implementation of
Knowledge Equity OM, limited commercialization orientation.
3.3.1 Absence of Effective R&D Offices
R&D activities are carried out by a wide variety of institutions, including R&D labs and HEIs under
central or state governments or in the private sector. Sometimes, the institutions either do not have
a dedicated R&D office or they are not effective and professionally managed. In the absence of
such well-designed professional offices, administrative and management responsibilities of R&D
are either distributed across multiple administrative units or devolved informally to individual
researchers. As a result, researchers are routinely required to put in time and effort to handle
administrative work of R&D activities, along with their scientific responsibilities. This not only
takes away researchers’ core scientific time, but also increases the risk of procedural errors. The
limited presence of effective R&D Offices also constrains effective institutional engagement with
funding agencies.
3.3.2 Lack of Professional Expertise in Research Administration
The personnel assigned with the tasks of administrative management of R&D projects often lack
systematic exposure to evolving research funding norms and the operational realities of laboratory
and field-based research. As a result, administrative processes often get more focused towards
the procedural aspects than the considerations of research timelines, uncertainties, and adaptive
project management. Scientists face delays in approvals, procurement, and staffing that directly
affect project outcomes, while administrators operate without clear mandates or incentives linked
to research performance. This disconnect reinforces a compliance-driven culture rather than a
facilitative and solution-oriented approach. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 40
3.3.3 Inadequate Institutional Guidelines and SOPs
In a large number of R&D institutions and HEIs, there are no well-defined guidelines and
standard operating procedures (SOPs) for handling administrative and financial aspects of R&D
projects. Even if such guidelines exist, they are either outdated or unevenly articulated. In some
cases, guidelines and templates exist only for select functions, such as financial compliance or
procurement. Several other critical aspects of research activity, including collaborative research
agreements, research personnel hiring, technology transfer, are addressed through ad hoc decisions.
The absence of comprehensive, up-to-date, and enabling institutional guidelines with well-defined
templates, often creates problems for both researchers and administrators. This situation leads to
uncertainty at multiple levels and causes delays in decision-making.
3.3.4 Institutional Leadership Accountability and Over-Centralization Issues
In many institutions, researchers or Heads of Departments/ Divisions are not given enough
administrative and financial powers. Therefore, even routine matters involving small procurements
or temporary hiring, are sent to the Vice Chancellor/ Director for approval. The practice of self-
declaration or self-certification by researchers for administrative tasks associated with R&D
projects, as adopted in several countries, is not well-developed at present. This unnecessarily
causes delays in different R&D activities.
In some cases, leadership focus may not be aligned with research growth and long-term R&D goals
of the institution. This is due to limited linkage between institutional leadership performance and
measurable research outcomes of the institution. Unlike practices followed in several advanced
research systems internationally, performance-linked remuneration and accountability based on
clearly defined targets for institutional heads are generally absent in the Indian context.
3.3.5 Institutional Divergence from the Core Research Focus
Many R&D institutions lack a clear strategy for identifying and strengthening their core areas
of expertise. R&D efforts are sometimes spread across too many themes without deliberate
prioritisation or long-term planning. This results in scattered activities rather than focused and
deep growth in selected domains. While HEIs may maintain multiple focus areas, the R&D labs
are expected to be more focused so as to develop as centres of excellence having expertise and
excellence in a selected domains.
Without a defined institutional focus, it becomes difficult to build critical mass, create specialised
infrastructure, or attract high-quality faculty and doctoral scholars in priority areas. Research
proposals tend to reflect individual interests instead of a coordinated institutional direction,
limiting the ability to undertake large, mission-driven or nationally aligned programmes. Over
time, this weakens the institutional unique strength, reduces competitiveness for major grants, and
limits the ability to emerge as a recognised centre of excellence. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 41
3.3.6 Absence of Periodic Assessment of Ease of Doing R&D in the Institutions
Most institutions do not have a structured system to regularly assess the difficulties faced by
researchers in managing administrative and financial aspects of R&D projects. There is a limited
culture of feedback or internal review to identify delays and operational bottlenecks. Suggestion
boxes placed in institutions are often not taken seriously by the leadership or management, and
are seldom used to address systemic shortcomings or difficulties. As a result, the procedural
complexities and inflexibilities in institutions remain unaddressed. Given the growing presence
of private and foreign HEIs with more flexible processes, it is especially important for publicly
funded institutions to undertake periodic self-assessment to remain competitive, efficient, and
research-oriented.
Similarly, at the national level, there is no focused assessment or rating framework dedicated to
Ease of Doing Research & Development, either as a standalone exercise or integrated within an
existing mechanism such as National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) or the accreditation
by National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC). It is desirable that institutions should
conduct periodic self-assessments, which may be integrated within an existing mechanism. Such
benchmarking can promote internal reforms, strengthen institutional culture, encourage healthy
competition, and enhance the ability of institutions to attract quality faculty and research funding.
Over time, such scores may also be used by funding agencies in multiple ways, such as for time-
bound R&D needs and large grant decisions.
3.3.7 Lack of Faculty/ Researcher Entrepreneurship Policy
Many R&D institutions do not have clear and enabling policies to support faculty or researcher-led
entrepreneurship. For the majority of HEIs, the institutional focus has traditionally remained on
teaching and fundamental research, with limited emphasis on productisation or commercialization,
based on research outcomes. This gap persists despite the need being formally recognised as
early as 2009 through the DSIR notification on “Knowledge Equity,” which encouraged equity
participation and technology commercialization. In the present context of rapidly changing R&D
landscape, a greater need is felt for productizing R&D outcomes. Therefore, it is necessary that
the 2009 notification may be updated to align with present-day innovation ecosystems and market
realities. All the R&D institutions may adopt suitable entrepreneurship policies to ensure that
research outcomes are effectively translated into products and enterprises.
Major Recommendations
3.3. (a) Establish Strong R&D Offices in Institutions
R&D institutions and HEIs Institutions should set up professional R&D Offices as single-window
hubs for grant management. DST, DBT, DSIR/CSIR and DHE may develop a model structure for
their institutions. These offices should have adequate authority and operational freedom. (Refer
Box 3). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 42
Box 3
R&D Offices in Institutions
Objective and Scope
Institutions should create an R&D Office that can serve as a centralized unit to manage and accelerate the research
with efficient mechanisms. This office can also help researchers in assisting the TRL assessment and knowledge
translation. Institutions which already have such an office may further strengthen and empower the office with the
structural elements suggested here. The institute should periodically monitor and define clear SOPs and timelines
for various administrative tasks to strengthen the overall R&D ecosystem.
Structure of R&D Office
R&D office in institutions may have following units:
A. Sponsored Research Unit
● Acts as a bridge between funding agency and PI
● Identifies the funding opportunities
● Supports in budget preparation and submission
● Administrative and financial coordination
B. Consultancy Unit
● Helps in understanding formal agreements, applying for grants, financial approvals and compliance
● Offers market surveys or reports to meet the institutional research with industry needs.
● Standardizing the MoU templates.
C. Incubation Centre
● Provide support for startups or entrepreneurship initiatives like facilitating with cost effective office
space, shared resources and access to labs.
● Provides initial funding to avoid early-stage risks.
● Develops an understanding of business management and risk mitigation.
D. Patent Facilitation Unit
● Provides training and workshops on IPR
● Identifies patentable research
● Assistance in drafting, filing and maintenance
● Coordination with patent offices
● Ensures legal compliance of the research output with the patent regime.
E. Technology Transfer Offices (including TRL Assessment)
● Assisting TTOs in determining when a technology is sufficiently mature for licensing
● Evaluating market needs and negotiating licensing agreements with existing companies
● Managing various legal agreements, including Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs), Material
● Transfer Agreements (MTAs), and license contracts
● Helping to identify technical or developmental gaps and potential deployment risks
● Establishing an efficient communication among researchers, investors, and policymakers, about
technology status clearer and more effective. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 43
F. Coordination & Ranking
● Aligning research to national goals
● Data collection and coordination with agencies for national or international accreditations
● Monitoring and updating research performance indicators
G. Staff and Professionals
● The R&D office should be handled by a competent academician, and one dedicated person should be
made in-charge of all the above functions.
● The office should have professional staff including research administrators, project managers, IP
analysts, incubation managers, and data analysts.
3.3. (b) Professionalise Research Administration
Structured induction and continuous training programmes should be introduced to sensitize and
familiarise administrative staff with research funding norms, scientific procurements, contract
management, and regulatory frameworks etc. The Indian Science Academies may design and
deliver such training modules.
3.3. (c) Develop Standard Research Governance Guidelines
R&D institutions and HEIs should adopt standard internal guidelines covering all major aspects
of research governance. These guidelines should define roles, responsibilities, timelines, and
approval pathways, along with required templates. Scientific ministries/ departments may develop
model guidelines to coordinate such efforts in their institutions.
3.3. (d) Promote a Trust-based R&D Framework
Administrative systems must transform from a compliance-centric orientation towards trust-based
administration. Majority of the administrative functions should suffice with self-declaration or
self-certification by researchers, with financial statements being the only possible exceptions
requiring institutional endorsement.
3.3 (e) Ensure Leadership Accountability and Performance-linked Governance
Institutional leaders should be provided with clearly defined and measurable performance
targets on taking charge. Performance-linked incentives may be considered to align leadership
accountability with institutional R&D outcomes.
3.3 (f) Decentralize Decision-making through Delegation of Power
Institutions should adopt a clear decentralization framework by delegating defined administrative
and financial powers for R&D to Heads of Departments or to individual researchers. Routine
approvals should be resolved at the unit/ institutional level, with only exceptional or high-level
policy matters escalated to the Head of the Institution/ Governing Council. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 44
3.3. (g) Institutions to Identify and Align with their Core Research Competence
R&D institutions should clearly identify priority research areas based on their existing strengths,
faculty/ researcher expertise, and national relevance, so as to allow them to develop as centres
of excellence in chosen area(s). Recruitment, infrastructure investment, funding allocation, and
collaborations may be aligned with these identified focus areas.
3.3 (h) Conduct Periodic Assessment of Ease of Doing R&D in Institutions
Institutions should conduct periodic self-assessment of their R&D management processes. A
structured Ease of Doing Research & Development Assessment Framework may be developed to
facilitate this.
3.3 (i) Enable Entrepreneurship Policy for Faculty / Researcher
Institutions should notify clearly defined faculty and researcher entrepreneurship policies with
flexible norms for time allocation and liberal, transparent revenue-sharing arrangements. The
2009 DSIR notification on “Knowledge Equity,” should be updated to reflect current innovation
ecosystems, startup models, and market realities and re-notified. This may subsequently be adopted
by all R&D institutions and HEIs.
3.4 Technology Development, Translation & Commercialization
India has made significant progress in terms of knowledge outputs, measured in terms of
publications and patents. However, the translational ecosystem continues to remain weak. As a
result, a significant part of the knowledge generated by R&D institutions and HEIs does not get
converted into usable products, technologies and socio-economic goods. This is due to several
reasons, including limited translational expertise, weak industry engagement, and lack of incentives
for productization. As India advances towards a knowledge-driven economy, greater emphasis is
needed on creating enabling conditions that allow scientific outcomes to move from laboratories
to industry and society. Developing indigenous technologies and capabilities is critical for a
country to achieve technological self-reliance, reduce import dependence, and strengthen national
competitiveness across strategic sectors. Table 3.4 highlights the key dimensions of the issues
highlighted regarding technology development, translation and commercialization. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 45
Table 3.4: Key Dimensions of Technology Development, Translation and
Commercialisation Challenges
DimensionCore Issues
Institutional Technology
Transfer Systems
Weak TTOs, weak IP cells, ownership ambiguity, IP issues in co-
funded research.
Prototyping, Testing &
Regulatory Infrastructure
Limited access to TRL 3–6 facilities such as facilities for prototyping
and pilot scale validation, Absence of domestic certification
mechanisms and high validation costs, Absence of Regulatory
Sandbox provision.
Industry Linkages &
Enterprise Innovation
Capacity
Weak problem articulation, limited co-development, fragmented
MSME support, low industry absorption, overall weak university
industry linkage and lack of innovation culture in MSMEs.
Talent Enabler &
Translational Finance
Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP) taxation burden, limited
researcher mobility, Technology Indigenization gaps.
3.4.1 Lack of Effective Technology Transfer Support in Institutions
While many institutions have a setup for facilitating technology transfer outside the lab, they
are not very effective. Few R&D institutions, such as CSIR labs, have Independent Business
Divisions (IBD) which takes care of the translational aspect of the technologies developed in
the lab. However, in order to be more effective, they need to be further strengthened in terms of
capacity and resources. In case of HEIs, a dedicated Technology Transfer Office (TTO) usually
does not exist. Further, the R&D offices in HEIs do not possess capability and resources beyond
management of research projects. Transfer of technology and commercialization is a complex
process involving administrative, legal, business related issues, and hence the TTOs across R&D
institutions and HEIs have to be adequately strengthened with the required capacity and resources.
3.4.2. Weak Industry-Academia Linkage
There is a general disconnect between academia and industry in R&D space. The R&D institutions
and HEIs usually do not have an active interaction framework with Industry. Similarly, many times
the industry does not trust the capabilities of R&D institutions and HEIs. While the situation has
started to change lately, there is still a long way to go. The R&D institutions and HEIs need to realize
that translating the knowledge created in their labs, and scaling up the prototypes developed within
the institution, need active support of industry for successful products. Accordingly, an enabling
framework for greater interaction between the two is becoming altogether more important.
Standard MoU and NDA templates define roles, responsibilities, budgets, timelines, and
confidentiality upfront, reducing ambiguity and delays. However, such standardised templates are
largely absent in the institutional ecosystem, leading to prolonged negotiations and discouraging
collaboration. Therefore, design of suitable templates for MOUs, NDAs and IP Co-ownership can
play an important role here. The model adopted by DRDO could serve as a useful starting point. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 46
3.4.3. Limited Mobility between Academia and Industry
The R&D institutions and HEIs currently lack structured support for both in-bound and out-bound
researcher mobility, unlike advanced economies where well-defined frameworks enable seamless
movement across universities, public labs, and industry. The current mobility initiatives remain
fragmented and small-scale. Programmes such as AICTE’s Industry Fellowship Programme, and
models like Professor of Practice are positive steps but lack scale, consistency, and sustained
support. Therefore, there is a need to develop a suitable framework to enable increased mobility.
Further, a larger number of support schemes may be provisioned for enhanced mobility between
academia and industry, and vice-versa.
3.4.4. Lack of Prototyping, Testing & Assessment Facilities
The R&D ecosystem suffers from lack of access to high-quality prototyping, testing, validation,
and certification facilities. The absence of shared, prototyping and validation platforms, delays the
translation of research outputs from laboratory stage to proof-of-concept and pilot demonstration
stage. In many cases, researchers struggle with long wait times and limited technical support
for product refinement and standards compliance. This disproportionately affects early-stage
innovators working at TRL 3–6. Therefore, there is a clear need for setting up adequate facilities
for the purpose.
3.4.5. Weak IP Ownership Norms for Co-Funded Research
While India has a large number of R&D institutions and HEIs that are engaged in R&D activities, the
collaboration with industry remains limited, due to various reasons, including uncertainties around
intellectual property ownership and access rights. This is especially critical as ANRF prepares to
launch co-funded schemes. Clearly spelt and well-defined IP ownership is very important for
an increased engagement between public funded and private institutions. The recently launched
Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) also calls for clear provisions in this regard.
The Rule 233 of the General Financial Rules (GFR), which governs intellectual assets created
through public funding, therefore, needs to be reviewed and adapted for government-industry co-
funded projects.
3.4.6. Need for ESOP Taxation Rationalising to Strengthen Deep-Tech Talent Retention
The current scheme of taxation of ESOPs (Employee Stock Option Plan) at the point of exercise
imposes a cash-flow burden on employees, due to the fact that the tax liabilities arise before any
real economic gain is realised. This adversely affects the ability of deep tech startups to attract
and retain highly skilled scientific and engineering personnel. Early taxation of ESOPs creates an
immediate personal cash-flow requirement for employees which makes this instrument of stock
option unattractive. The issue is particularly acute for deep-tech startups, where long development
cycles, high risk, and delayed liquidity mean shares often cannot be monetised for many years. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 47
3.4.7. R&D and Innovation Challenges in Startups and MSMEs
In the current market linked innovation ecosystem, research outcomes have limited value unless
they are translated into market ready products. This is where startups and MSMEs play a critical
role and contribute in reducing import dependence and enhancing exports for the country. MSMEs
can bridge the manufacturing gap by enabling scale up and production, together ensuring effective
productization of research outcomes. However, startups and MSMEs face several challenges,
including limited second level incubation support comprising expertise in finance, legal/ regulatory,
marketing, and social innovation alongside technical mentoring. Other challenges include low
diversity in funding, and a general lack of the culture of Innovation in MSMEs. Similarly,
startups and MSMEs face challenges due to the absence of domestic certification and validation
mechanisms in several technology domains, compelling them to rely on foreign agencies. This
leads to higher costs and delays commercialisation.
3.4.8. Absence of a Systematic effort for Technology Indigenization
Development of indigenous technologies and capabilities in selected priority areas is critical
for a country. Achieving technological self-reliance in critical areas can not only help reduce
import dependence, but strengthen national competitiveness in those sectors. India has shown its
capabilities in indigenization through several landmark programs such as Tejas, nuclear submarine,
the BrahMos missile, and the rapid development and deployment of the COVID-19 vaccine
etc. However, these are isolated cases and a systematic framework in this regard does not exist.
Despite significant investments in R&D, much of the innovation ecosystem still relies on imported
technologies or foreign collaborations for high-end solutions. Strengthening domestic innovation
requires focused support for the full technology lifecycle from fundamental research to prototype
development. In order to address the challenges faced in the indigenization of technologies, a
dedicated national centre may be set up to promote technology indigenization. This centre may be
tasked with analysing the technology import trends and identifying technologies to be indigenized,
along with enablers needed to accelerate the process.
3.4.9. Lack of a widely accepted TRL Assessment Framework and Nodal Institutions
The recently launched Research, Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) is an ambitious
program initiated by the government, allocating a funding corpus of ₹1 lakh crore to enhance
R&D and innovation in emerging and strategic sectors. It has been observed that large industry
players in India are generally not constrained by access to capital and, therefore, may be hesitant
with the equity or debt financing proposed in RDIF. However, the RDIF is likely to be very
effective in supporting MSMEs and startups, for whom access to capital remains a key constraint
in scaling research-driven innovations. The RDIF is primarily focused on supporting technologies
from TRL-3 onwards, which demands a robust mechanism to assess and classify technologies by
their appropriate TRL levels. For this purpose, dedicated technical manpower and domain experts
are required for correct assessments. Common standards and capabilities need to be developed for
an authentic and well-accepted assessment of TRL for technologies under development. While
self-disclosures may be accepted by RDIF fund managers, there should be some nodal institutions
to intervene in case of disagreements on assessment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 48
3.4.10. Absence of Regulatory sandbox provision in deep-technology domains
Deep-tech startups operate at the frontier of innovation, where existing regulatory frameworks
are often not designed to accommodate emerging technologies. A regulatory sandbox allows
temporary relaxation of regulations so that innovators can test new products under controlled
real-world conditions, while ensuring adequate safeguards. Sandboxes help reduce uncertainty
for startups by providing regulatory clarity at early stages, thereby lowering compliance costs and
accelerating time to market. They also allow regulators to better understand new technologies,
assess associated risks, and develop informed, adaptive regulations based on evidence rather than
assumptions. MeitY has taken an early lead in the country by framing this provision within IoT
and AI based technology. Other examples include RBI’s lead in FinTech and DoT’s efforts on 6G
technologies. However, widespread adoption of the framework, specially in deep tech is required.
Major Recommendations
3.4. (a) Embed Technology Transfer Functions in R&D Offices
Establishing/ Strengthening TTOs and embedding them in R&D offices with clear policies,
standardized revenue-sharing models, transparent governance mechanisms, and the ability to
establish innovation-support entities such as Section 8 companies is critical to building a robust
research-to-market ecosystem.
3.4. (b) Design standard model/ guiding templates for MOUs
Design of standard model/ guiding templates for MOUs related to technology co-development can
strengthen Academia Industry interactions, and reduce times.
3.4. (c) Develop a framework for Industry-Academia mobility of scientists and researchers
Researcher mobility policy/ framework may include provisions of joint appointments, flexible
affiliations, and seamless movement across academia, public research institutions, and industry.
Dedicated funding windows and harmonised service rules should be introduced to incentivise
cross-sector mobility, strengthen knowledge transfer, and accelerate the translation of research
into innovation and industrial impact.
3.4. (d) Establish RDI Clusters
Establish State-level RDI Clusters by integrating HEIs, R&D institutions, MSMEs, PSUs, and
industry. These clusters should provide shared IP, TTO, incubation, and R&D infrastructure,
coordinate Central and State schemes, and progressively move toward self-sustainability and
global collaboration. The Research Development and Innovation Fund (RDIF) may be leveraged
for developing such facilities in PPP mode (Refer Box 4). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 49
Box 4
Research, Development and Innovation Clusters
Objective
RDI Clusters are proposed to create, promote, and accelerate research and development activities, strengthen
innovation ecosystems, and support technology development and deployment within the State. These clusters can
serve as integrated hubs for research, scientific & technology-based facilities operating on a triple-or quadruple-
helix model in which academia and universities, industry, research institutions, public agencies and civil society
collaborate to generate shared value for the state.
Location of the Clusters should be strategic, where existing State/Central Universities, R&D Institutes could be
benefitted. Also, it can be anchored in an industrial cluster, enabling faster commercialization. Cluster should
be able to house several science and technology firms, government agencies, centres of academic institutions,
startups and non-profits. Thereby, promoting cooperation between universities and industry. These clusters must
bring together and connect all major R&D institutions as well as academic institutions. MSMEs, CPSEs, PSUs,
industry in the state must become members of these clusters. Industry associations must also join. These RDI
Clusters can be sector specific.
A Specialized cell for Technology Indigenisation should be an integral component of each cluster, to identify
import dependent technology portfolios and promote the indigenisation of identified technologies, keeping in
context the regional capacity and priorities. This would require active participation from MSMEs and startups
in the respective state, thereby providing them with new opportunities and further strengthening the domestic
innovation ecosystem.
Operational Scope
Existing research funding largely supports discovery and basic research, while industry incentives are primarily
oriented towards scale-up. As a result, the critical intermediate stage focused on prototyping, testing, certification,
IP support and early validation remains inadequately addressed. RDI Clusters can bridge this gap by housing
shared, specialised facilities such as:
● Advanced instrumentation centres
● Second-level incubation with prototyping and pilot manufacturing capabilities
● Testing and validation infrastructure
● Value Addition Centres
● Coordination platforms and Information Sharing Facilities
● Accelerated quality and compliance certification services
● Innovation accelerators offering structured mentorship, technical validation and market access, and
Business and market development advisory services
Execution Mechanism
State S&T Council may be empowered and made the operational/executive organizations for anchoring these
clusters in the respective states. A part support from RDIF may be explored. These clusters can be set up in PPP
mode with a shared initial investment in the ratio of 40:40:20 participation from Centre, State, and industry
partners, respectively, excluding the cost of land and facilities to be supported by the state. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 50
3.4. (e) Enable Better IP Ownership Norms for Co-funded R&D
A clear and standardised IP framework for co-funded research needs to be developed to address
joint government-industry funding scenarios. A suitable provision in Rule 233 of the GFR for co-
sharing of IPR may be introduced for jointly funded R&D projects between industry and public
funded institutions.
3.4.(f) Consider amending ESOP Taxation Provision for employees in Deep-tech startups
The ESOP taxation provisions may be amended to allow employees in deep-technology startups
to discharge tax liabilities at the time of actual monetisation rather than at the point of exercise.
3.4.(g) Broaden the mandate of Technology Business Incubators
It is required to broaden the mandate of Technology Business Incubators to deliver end-to-end,
cross-disciplinary support from innovation to commercialisation. Mentoring Scope of TBIs
should include expertise in finance, legal/ regulatory, marketing, and social innovation alongside
technical mentoring etc.
3.4.(h) Create a linking framework for Incubators
A linking framework for incubators across ministries/ departments should be developed, possibly
by Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) or the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal
Trade (DPIIT), for enhancing capacity, integration and synergy across the incubation ecosystem.
3.4.(i) Strengthen domestic certification mechanisms
Strengthening domestic certification mechanisms can help improve market access for deep-
technology startups and MSMEs. Further, it can reduce costs and delays in commercialisation due
reliance on foreign agencies for the purpose.
3.4. (j) Establish a Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI)
The Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI) can help identify priority technologies for
indigenization through analysis of import trends and national priorities, and maintain a centralized
repository. It can coordinate with MSMEs to facilitate indigenization of relevant technologies.
3.4. (k) Develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework and notify Nodal Institutions
It is necessary to develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework and notify suitable
institutions (such as NRDC, BIRAC, and TDB) as nodal institutions for the purpose of addressing
disagreements/ disputes in assessment. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 51
3.4. (l) Develop regulatory sandbox provision in deep-technology domains
Develop a legally anchored, cross-sectoral regulatory sandbox framework for deep-technology
domains with defined eligibility norms, inter-agency coordination mechanisms, and time-bound
evaluation and exit pathways.
3.5 Access to Knowledge & Resources
Innovations and discoveries in STI are rarely developed in isolation; they build upon earlier
research, existing knowledge, and prior experimental findings. For scientists and technologists
to generate high-quality and original work, it is essential that they remain continuously updated
about global developments, emerging trends, and advances in their respective fields. This
requires reliable and timely access to scholarly journals, digital libraries, patent databases, and
other knowledge repositories that provide comprehensive and curated information. Without such
access, researchers risk duplication of effort, gaps in understanding, and reduced competitiveness.
Strengthening access to high-quality knowledge resources is therefore fundamental to fostering
innovation, improving research outcomes, and ensuring that the STI ecosystem remains globally
relevant. Table 3.5 presents a top level overview of the key dimensions of access and collaboration
related challenges, which are then discussed in detail.
Table 3.5: Key Dimensions of Challenges related to Access & Collaboration
DimensionCore Issues Identified
National Knowledge Access,
Platforms & Tools
ONOS coverage gaps such as exclusion of major scholarly &
patent databases and lack of access for private universities, limited
institutional access to high-cost research software, fragmented and
ineffective institutional repositories.
Publishing & Research Data
Governance Ecosystem
Weak culture of research data sharing and reuse, absence of national or
centralised platforms for hosting multidisciplinary research datasets,
weak indigenous academic publishing ecosystem with limited high-
quality platforms for regional and India-specific research.
3.5.1. Gaps in Access to Journals, Databases and Software
India has rolled out a very ambitious program - One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)- to provide
access to journals and periodicals from a set of reputed publishers to researchers and academicians
across the country. This initiative has not only broadened the access, but also optimized associated
costs. However, the ONOS has not included access to scholarly and patent databases (such as Web
of Science, Scopus, Derwent etc.) in its current version. Further, ONOS is currently not extended
to private universities and institutions, which are also producing good research outcomes, and are
an important part of the STI ecosystem. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 52
Beyond publications, a large number of universities and research institutes lack access to essential
high-cost research software, advanced modelling tools, and simulators - including platforms such
as COMSOL, etc, and bioinformatics suites like Schrödinger. The absence of institutional or
national-level licensing arrangements/ or agreed rates limits faculty and researchers from adopting
globally competitive research methodologies.
3.5.2. Limited Opportunities for Hosting Pre-prints to support Open Access
The DST-DBT Open Access Policy of 2014 mandates that research publications coming out of
public funded research projects should be made openly accessible. A similar policy has been
adopted by CSIR. Uploads of pre-print/ post-print to archives is considered a potential route to do
so. To facilitate the process, different central repositories have been created by different ministries/
departments. This includes Science Central, CSIR Central, KrishiKosh etc. However, neither the
policies are enforced, nor the repositories created are effective. Most of the repositories in India
do not provide for automatic discovery by Web Crawlers, as a result articles uploaded on these
repositories do not appear in search results of different Web search engines. Therefore, there is a
need for creation of an effective, Web discoverable National Repository that can host pre-prints
and post-prints of researchers from different institutions in India. Such a repository can create
an environment where all Indian research outcomes can be hosted for open access to all Indian
researchers, thereby reducing the dependence on foreign journal publishers at least for access to
Indian research outputs.
3.5.3. Weak Research Data Sharing Ecosystem
The current R&D ecosystem is characterised by a weak culture of research data sharing and
reuse. While research insights and recommendations are frequently disseminated through reports,
publications, and policy briefs, the underlying datasets are often poorly structured, inadequately
documented, and often remain inaccessible. This significantly limits their integration into future
research, cross-disciplinary use, and secondary analysis by other researchers. One possible reason
for this is the absence of suitable national or centralised platforms for hosting the research data
generated across institutions and sectors. Existing repositories are limited by visibility and scale.
Therefore, there is a need for scaling up the current limited number of such repositories (like the
Indian Biological Data Centre (IBDC) at the Regional Centre for Biotechnology (RCB) and the
AI Kosh under MeitY). An interlinked national data repository framework capable of hosting
multidisciplinary datasets can significantly enhance data reuse, collaboration across disciplines,
and improve the overall quality and impact of research.
3.5.4. Limited publication platforms for Regional and Country Specific Research
A significant amount of R&D effort in a country is often targeted at solving local and regional
problems. However, much of this work fails to achieve wider visibility and dissemination,
as international journals usually do not entertain such research. A natural choice would be to
publish such research outcomes in national journals. However, there are not enough high-quality
publication platforms that can publish regional and India-specific research outcomes. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 53
Many national journals face challenges such as slow or inconsistent peer-review processes,
limited international indexing, and low citations, which reduces their credibility and discourages
researchers from publishing in them. These structural limitations collectively restrict the translation
of regionally relevant research into broader academic, policy, and practice-oriented learning.
Therefore, there is a clear need to establish/ strengthen the national journal publishing system,
that is professionally managed, appropriately indexed, and designed to disseminate high-quality
regional and country specific research, while meeting global standards of academic publishing.
Indian Science academies may play an important role here.
Major Recommendations
3.5 (a) Expand ONOS coverage to include Publication and Patent Databases and widen coverage
ONOS coverage should be expanded to include subscriptions to high-quality publication & patent
databases, and its coverage may be widened to include private institutions on a reasonable cost-
sharing basis.
3.5 (b) Explore Licensing high-cost software, tools and resources
Explore institutional or national level licensing arrangements or price discovery mechanisms for
essential high-cost research software, advanced simulation & modeling tools, to ensure equitable
access, cost efficiency, and wider utilisation across universities and research institutions, on the
lines of ONOS.
3.5 (c) Explore creating a National R&D Repository
Explore developing a large-scale, integrated, and Web discoverable National Repository to provide
open access and seamless sharing of Indian research output and data to Indian researchers. In due
course, such a repository may be integrated with UPMS being developed.
3.5 (d) Develop quality National Journals
It is required to develop a professionally managed ecosystem to support quality indexed national
journals. The expertise and domain knowledge of Indian Science academies may also be leveraged
for the purpose.
3.6 R&D in State Institutions
R&D in state institutions and region-specific STI lie at the intersection of local priorities, institutional
capacity and national ambitions. The Science Technology and Innovation Policy 2013 articulated
a clear mandate for strengthening the STI ecosystem in states, particularly through strengthening
State Science & Technology Councils. However, the implementation of policy imperatives has Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 54
been uneven, and as result the progress in the state STI ecosystem remains limited more than
a decade later. Therefore, a substantial effort is still required to catalyse and strengthen the STI
ecosystem across the states.
India has an inherent culture of innovation, where the community and its innovators try to
address the local and regional problems in their own ways. Such (grassroots) innovations are
deep rooted in the communities and regions, often characterized by the bottom-up approach of
innovation. Strengthening state institutions is therefore not just important, but urgent, as they form
the foundation on which sustainable and inclusive national outcomes are built. As is said, Viksit
Bharat will happen only through Viksit Rajya. A number of unique challenges specific to state
universities and state-funded research institutions were identified during the consultation process.
They are grouped under some key dimensions in Table 3.6, which are further discussed in detail
subsequently.
Table 3.6: Key Dimensions of R&D Challenges in State Institutions
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Systemic & Institutional
Capacity Gaps, Funding
constraints in State STI
Ecosystems
Capacity gaps, Low extramural funding, Weak R&D culture,
disparities across states, insufficient infrastructure, weak S&T
Councils, administrative gaps, Burden of affiliations, Limited
autonomy, Geographic & Connectivity constraints.
Human Resource & Academic
Ecosystem Constraints
Vacancies, adhoc appointments, pay disparities, teaching overload,
weak PhD ecosystem, attrition.
Grassroots Integration Weak grassroots support, limited NIF integration.
Centre–State Coordination
Gaps
Poor collaboration with central institutions, PAIR limitations,
equipment transfer gaps.
3.6.1. Capacity Gaps in State Science and Technology Councils
The State Science and Technology Councils, created through enabling support from DST, function
as nodal agencies at the state level for planning, promoting, and coordinating science and technology
(S&T) activities. State universities and colleges often look forward to support and funding from
State S&T Councils, given their role in capacity development and financial assistance. However,
Councils themselves face considerable limitations in capability and resources, making it difficult
for them to play an important role. Therefore, it is essential to enhance their capacity and improve
the overall governance structure. This need has also been recognized by NITI Aayog in its 2025
report, “A Roadmap for Strengthening State Science & Technology (S&T) Councils”, which
outlined measures to significantly empower State S&T Councils, enhancing their capacity and
funding mechanisms. Effective implementation of the report’s recommendations is essential for
strengthening the state S&T Councils. The recent initiatives by the state of Andhra Pradesh in
S&T domain is an excellent example to be followed by other states. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 55
3.6.2. Lack of Institutional Support for Grassroots Innovation in States
India’s grassroots innovators contribute significantly in addressing the local and regional problems
through technological innovations. While grassroots innovations play an extremely valuable role,
many promising technologies developed by communities, individuals and informal innovators, do
not have the support system for validation and scaling. In some states, the state S&T councils have
established connections with the National Innovation Foundation (NIF) to promote grassroots
innovators in the state, however, these are only initiative driven and not embedded in the councils
systematically. By acting as nodal agencies, the State S&T councils, can on one hand support
decentralised grassroots innovation activities, and on the other link these efforts with national
institutions and programs. The NIF can play a major role in supporting grassroots innovations,
however, it needs to be strengthened to be able to support a distributed network across states for
supporting grassroot innovators.
3.6.3. Weak R&D Culture and Capacity in State Institutions
The STI capabilities of states and state institutions remain underdeveloped due to inadequate
funding, limited research infrastructure, faculty shortages and overall weak R&D culture. The
major issues affecting the R&D culture and capability of state institutions are following:
(a) Poor R&D funding: State Universities and Institutions have very poor internal R&D funding
and lesser opportunities of attracting extramural R&D funding. This limits their ability to
undertake good quality research, upgrade laboratories, and support faculty and students. Another
major challenge is the limited availability of seed funding, which is crucial for initiating new
research ideas, establishing basic laboratory infrastructure, and generating preliminary results
to develop strong proposals for securing competitive extramural R&D grants.
(b) Weak R&D Infrastructure: State institutions often have limited or outdated research equipment
and laboratories, which reduces exposure of researchers to state-of-the-art equipment. Even
where facilities exist, poor maintenance limits their use. As a result, researchers in these
institutions remain dependent on access to facilities in the central R&D institutions located
in geographical proximity, which is not an easy task. There is a need to improve research
infrastructure, improve connections between existing facilities, and actively establish new
R&D facilities in state institutions.
(c) Burden of Affiliations: Most state universities now have a major role as affiliating bodies for
a large number of colleges. Managing and maintaining the affiliation activity takes a lot of
time and energy of faculty and administration of Universities, leaving very little time to focus
on research activities and institutional capacity building. Incentives and institutional support
for good quality research are also inadequate, limiting the shift of culture in state institutions
from teaching to active research. Faculty face restricted funding for conferences, professional
development, and sabbaticals; hindering research, training, and collaboration.
(d) Vacant regular teaching positions: A significant proportion of the sanctioned regular faculty
positions in the state institutions often remain vacant. Universities make ad hoc arrangements in Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 56
the form of engaging contractual, ad-hoc, guest or other temporary appointments. The salaries
of such appointees are often not attractive or at par with regular appointees, discouraging good
candidates from taking up such assignments. Further, the prevailing rules of funding agencies
make such appointees ineligible for extramural R&D funding. In many cases such appointees
are not even considered eligible for any seed grants that may be provided by institutions from
their own resources.
(e) Weak doctoral research ecosystem: State universities face a lack of doctoral students due to
inadequate funding for fellowships and low focus on research. Low doctoral enrolment and
the migration of research scholars to centrally funded institutions (particularly to IIT’s and
other central institutions), further depletes research manpower and undermines the vitality of
state-level R&D systems. A complete absence of a post-doctoral ecosystem further weakens
research capability and quality.
3.6.4. Administrative Misalignments and Financial Rigidities in State Institutions
Researchers and scientists, in state institutions, often face several unique challenges in managing
R&D activities and processes, due to administrative and financial misalignments. Some of the key
bottlenecks are discussed below:
(a) Administrative Misalignments due to Dual Control Structures: In many State institutions,
Registrar, Finance Controller, and similar administrative positions are occupied by members
of the state civil services. While the functional authority rests with the Vice-Chancellor, the
actual control and accountability of such officers often remains with the State government.
This duality leads to reduced administrative authority and autonomy of institutional leadership,
which delays decision making.
(b) Inefficient Financial Procedures: State institutions often operate under rigid financial norms
that do not distinguish adequately between routine administrative procurement and research
oriented procurement. Further, special provisions/ relaxations provided by the Government of
India for scientific departments (e.g., those under GFR and GeM frameworks) are often not
operationalized at the state level due to absence of enabling state-level circulars or lack of
awareness.
3.6.5. Weak Centre-State Collaboration in STI
As the STI ecosystem has expanded, a dense network of centrally funded R&D institutions and
HEIs has emerged across states. However, physical presence alone has not translated into effective
integration with state academic and R&D systems. A state may be hosting numerous central
institutions and yet there may be no or a minimal collaboration between these institutions and the
state universities and R&D institutions. The following issues need to be addressed in this regard:
(a) Lack of a suitable Collaboration Framework: At present there is no mandate or a well-
defined framework to support collaboration of central R&D labs and HEIs located in a state,
with the state government institutions. As these institutions are under administrative control of Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 57
different governments, there is no straightforward connection between them. As a result, the
opportunities of application of the collective knowledge and expertise of such institutions to
state specific problems reduce significantly.
(b) Absence of mechanism for Equipment transfer: As central institutions upgrade infrastructure,
some functional equipment often becomes surplus and is underutilised or scrapped, despite
being valuable for resource-constrained state institutions. There are no mechanisms at present
to identify and transfer functional surplus R&D equipment from centrally funded institutions to
smaller state institutions and universities, instead of disposing of them as scrap. Such transfers
may enhance research and training capacity at low cost in state institutions, with minimal
budgetary support for maintenance and operation.
(c) ANRF’s PAIR Program Issues: Recently, ANRF introduced the Hub and Spoke model
through the Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research (PAIR) programme to
promote research activities in state institutions. However, its current design tends to concentrate
equipment and research infrastructure at hub institutions. The absence of explicit provisions
for infrastructure creation at state partners, limits sustained capacity building. Therefore,
suitable updates are needed in the PAIR programme to provide greater equipment support to
state institutions.
3.6.6. Geographic and Connectivity Constraints
There are several R&D institutions and HEIs located in a geographically remote, high-altitude, or
a high-humidity region, where a conducive environment for R&D activities is not straightforward.
Researchers working in such environments often face harsh and extreme climatic conditions that
directly affect health and productivity. Poor connectivity and long travel times create excess
barriers which in turn make people feel secluded and isolated from the rest of the country. This
weak physical and digital connectivity limits access to skilled manpower and creates a sense of
instability in researchers. Institutions located in regions such as Ladakh, the North-East, and J&K
often have these constraints. Further, eligible candidates from the local population from the tier
3 cities in such regions enter scientific R&D careers at a later stage, which could restrict their
eligibility under existing “age-based” recruitment criteria.
Major Recommendations
3.6 (a) Empower State S&T Councils
State Science and Technology Councils need to be strengthened in capability and resources so that
they are able to identify state specific STI needs, support R&D projects in state institutions, and
help evolve a vibrant STI ecosystem in the state. NITI Aayog’s 2025 report on the subject presents
a roadmap to do this. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 58
3.6 (b) Create a cell for supporting grassroots innovation in each State S&T Councils
Creating a dedicated Grassroot innovation cell within each State S&T Council will provide a
platform to coordinate and support grassroots innovation across the state.
3.6 (c) Strengthen National Innovation Foundation (NIF)
A strengthened NIF can create a distributed network across states (with state S&T councils), for
supporting grassroots innovators, and hence play a more effective role in promoting and supporting
grassroot innovations in diverse areas ranging from engineered tools to traditional knowledge.
3.6 (d) Recruit Faculty on Regular Basis against sanctioned posts in State Universities
Appointment of regular faculty in state institutions would greatly strengthen the state research
ecosystem by improving access to funding, ensuring continuity of research, and enhancing overall
institutional capacity.
3.6 (e) Develop a suitable framework for collaboration between centrally funded R&D
institutions/ HEIs with the state level HEIs and S&T institutions.
It is required to develop a suitable collaboration framework for strengthening collaboration
and synergies between centrally funded R&D institutions/ HEIs with state institutions. Such
collaborations can help improve the culture of R&D in state institutions and sensitize scientists
and researchers in the central institutions to work on state level S&T challenges as well.
3.6 (f) Improve and expand the PAIR program
The PAIR program guidelines may be updated to include a higher level of equipment support to
participating state institutions, in addition to mentoring. Further, more PAIR networks may be
created, preferably one in each large state.
3.6 (g) Develop an enabling mechanism to transfer some of the functional R&D equipment in
central institutions to state institutions
Transfer of additional (including old but functional) equipment in central institutions to state
institutions can help provide access to costly equipment for researchers and students in state
institutions. This can help improve their comfort level of working on high end equipment.
3.6 (h) Institute special Human Resources provisions for Hard Areas
Instituting attractive special provisions/ incentives for researchers working in institutions and labs
situated in hard areas can help longer stay in such places, which in turn will help create a better
sense of continuity and belongingness required for engaged R&D activities. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 59
3.7 Monitoring, Evaluation, Capacity Building and Policy
Administration
Effective governance of the STI ecosystem requires well-designed institutional mechanisms that
systematically monitor policy implementation, generate reliable data for decision making, and
strengthen both scientific and administrative capacities across institutions. The pathway towards
developing a robust STI ecosystem calls for creation of stronger and more coordinated STI
policy governance mechanisms, to ensure accountability, improving programme effectiveness,
and facilitating timely policy correction. At present several specific challenges persist in the
monitoring and evaluation, capacity building and training of personnel, and the administrative
management of STI activities. These challenges are enumerated at a higher level in Table 3.7, and
discussed later in detail.
Table 3.7: Structural Dimensions of Monitoring, Evaluation and Policy Administration
Challenges in the STI Ecosystem
DimensionCore Issues Identified
Policy Monitoring and
Evaluation Frameworks
Absence of systematic mechanisms to track implementation, Limited
feedback loops between programme outcomes and policy design,
Lack of clearly defined output & impact indicators, Weak integration
of evaluation findings into future policy formulation.
STI Data Systems and
Analytical Capacity
Fragmented and delayed STI data collection, Limited institutional
capacity for regular and standardized analytics, Gaps in
benchmarking and global reporting.
Capacity Building for Science
Policy and Administration
Limited opportunities for structured training of scientists and
science administrators, Absence of mid-career programmes in
science governance and policy evaluation, Inadequate institutional
mechanisms to build administrative capabilities for managing
complex STI programmes.
3.7.1. Absence of an effective framework to monitor effective implementation of policies
The existing STI management framework largely follows a linear flow, with limited feedback
mechanisms to systematically monitor progress, and assess on-ground outcome & impact of
policies, programmes, and funded projects. Policies and missions are often designed in absence
of up to date and robust baseline data or foresight analysis. The implementation of projects is also
often difficult to track in absence of clear outcome and impact indicators. Since, the outputs and
outcomes of R&D programs and projects are not measured in an effective manner, lessons from
past programs are not fed back into future policy design. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 60
One of the best practices adopted worldwide is development of a set of STI indicators and
maintaining scoreboards/dashboards for benchmarking and trend analysis (example: EU/JRC
scoreboards and OECD indicator). It also helps in embedding continuous programme/mission
reviews so that the policies may be adjusted to include emerging technologies and societal needs
(as practiced by KISTEP/ STEPI). Similarly, UKRI also uses explicit evaluation frameworks for
monitoring and evaluation feed back into programme design (https://www.ukri.org/publications/
uk-research-and-innovation-evaluation-strategy/ukri-evaluation-strategy/). It also maintains a
repository of past evaluations; synthesis reports and best practices case studies so new programmes
don’t repeat past mistakes. Such mechanisms can help improve the STI ecosystem.
3.7.2. Lack of a setup for systematic and periodic STI Data Collection and Analytics
Current operating mechanisms in STI data collection and analytics in the country exhibit variability
in approach and consistency. The national-level exercises, primarily STI surveys and commissioned
bibliometric studies are undertaken by DST, to systematically collect, analyse, and compile data
on the country’s science, technology, and innovation ecosystem. However, often these exercises
are delayed and some of them are even carried out occasionally and hence the updated data for the
country is not fed into relevant sources for different global indices and benchmarks (such as Global
Innovation Index). Therefore, there is a greater need to strengthen systemic capabilities for STI
data collection and analytics in a standardised, timely, and independent manner. Japan’s NISTEP
is a good example of such a dedicated institute. The Science & Technology Policy Institute of
South Korea is another example. Several OECD countries also have this type of capability.
3.7.3. Limited Opportunities of Periodic Training of Scientist and Science Administrators
A widely observed issue across different scientific ministries and departments is the absence of
a regular training and capacity building mechanism for science administrators. Most of the staff
members may be very good scientists in their domains/disciplines, but they may lack the science
administration skills, more so when it comes to managing and advancing programs in newer
and critical areas of Science and Technology. Science administrators and scientists in scientific
ministries and departments do not get suitable opportunities for periodic training and capacity
building. Therefore, there is a need for a dedicated setup to support and coordinate training in
policy design, program evaluation, and science governance roles, along with periodic capacity
building in new and emerging areas of science & technology.
Major Recommendations
3.7 Establish a National Institute for Science Policy and Governance (NISPG)
The proposed institute can bridge gaps in analytics, policy design, monitoring, regular capacity
building, and governance across the STI ecosystem (Refer Box 5). Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 61
Box 5
National Institute for Science Policy and Governance
Objective
To bridge policy, implementation and monitoring gaps in India, a National Institute for Science Policy and
Governance (NISPG) may be established as a leading national nodal institution, or as an autonomous institute
or attached office under DST, with a high degree of functional autonomy. It may help in standardisation of
evaluation frameworks, impact assessment processes and policy coherence mechanisms, similar to STEPI
(South Korea) and NISTEP (Japan).
Operational Scope
Major roles of such an institute may include (but not limited to):
I. STI Data Collection and Analytics
II. Monitoring and Evaluation
III. Policy and Governance
IV. Capacity Building of science administrators.
For roles (i) and (ii), NISPG will be the central hub/repository for STI data collection, analytics, foresight,
monitoring and evaluation across the full R&D lifecycle-inputs, outputs, outcomes and societal impact. It will
develop national STI indicators, and implementation/compliance scorecards for all scientific ministerial and
inter-departmental policies and missions. For (iii), it will strive to benchmark Indian STI governance against
global standards and rankings (indices) taking insights from their best practices.
With respect to the capacity-building role (iv), NISPG can serve as India’s premier training institute for
capacity building of science administrators and scientific leadership in R&D institutions. The institution
can provide induction as well as mid-career training and organize focused workshops on topics of national
importance. Two examples from other sectors include the AJNIFM and the NCGG. The proposed institution
can also bring in active participation of the Indian science academies and also liaison with relevant international
organizations and bodies like OECD, ISSI, CWTS etc. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 63
CHAPTER 4
Charting the Road Ahead:
Towards a robust & future-ready R&D Ecosystem
Charting the Road Ahead:
Towards a robust & future-ready
R&D Ecosystem
4 Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 64
4.1 Summary of Recommendations and Actions
A vibrant research ecosystem thrives when administrative and financial systems function as
enablers rather than controllers. The consultations undertaken as part of the EoDR&D initiative
clearly emphasized that our scientific potential is not constrained by talent or ambition, but often
by procedural rigidity, disorganized processes, and delayed decision-making. Through structured
consultations, including eight focused meetings with researchers, institutional leaders, funding
agencies; the critical bottlenecks affecting India’s R&D landscape were identified and examined
in depth.
The recommendations presented in this section are aimed at transitioning the R&D framework from
a compliance-driven architecture, to a systematic, facilitation-oriented, trust-based, and outcome-
focused system. These recommendations seek to enhance agility in funding and procurement,
strengthen institutional capacities, enable talent mobility and retention, improve technology
translation, and embed robust monitoring mechanisms aligned with national priorities. Together,
these measures are intended to create an enabling ecosystem where researchers can operate with
greater autonomy, accountability, and confidence - thereby positioning the R&D system to meet
emerging scientific and technological challenges.
The major recommendations emerging from the consultative process, detailed in Chapter 3, are
outlined below in Table 4.1, along with the proposed mapping for action by relevant Ministries/
Departments/ Agencies.
Table 4.1: Summary of Recommendations
S.N. TopicRecommendation
Action/
Implementation By
1
R&D Funding and
Utilization
(Ref. Section 3.1)
Raise GERD from 0.64% to at least 2% of GDP, in the
next four to five years to strengthen India’s research
base and achieve Viksit Bharat 2047 goals.
DST and DoE
Introduce time-bound incremental fiscal incentives
linked to additional R&D spend and promote industry-
led research centres within public institutions.
DSIR and DoR
Introduce an optional R&D Expenditure reporting
line under Schedule III of the Companies Act, 2013
(Section 129) to improve visibility of private sector
R&D investments and encourage higher spending.
MCA
Strengthen CSR provisions under the Companies
Act and provide higher tax deductions for individual
donations to R&D-supporting funds under Section 133
of the Income Tax Act, 2025 to enhance philanthropic
and CSR funding for R&D.
DSIR and DoR
Create an inter-departmental coordination committee
to regularly align schemes and funding calls across
departments and minimize duplication.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 65
1
R&D Funding and
Utilization
(Ref. Section 3.1)
Mandate a maximum six-month processing timeline for
R&D proposals, with a four-month target to improve
predictability and reduce delays.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Create dedicated Project Management Units
within funding agencies to manage post-approval
administration, ensuring faster disbursal and reduced
burden on scientists.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Adopt direct grant transfers for extramural R&D to
expedite fund flow, while continuing TSA/ Hybrid
models for larger institutional grants.
DST and DoE
Allow institutional flexibility for reallocation within
capital and revenue heads to enable timely project
execution without repeated approvals.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
ANRF & other
scientific ministries
Enable streamlined procurement of research
consumables through expanded exclusions or
facilitating institutions to do rate contracts.
DST and DoE
Consider a reduced 5% GST slab for R&D-related
procurements to maximise effective utilization of
limited research grants.
DSIR and DoE
Provide higher overheads to support infrastructure
maintenance and long-term equipment sustainability.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, & ANRF
2
Attracting and
Retaining Quality
Human Resource
(Ref. Section 3.2)
Increase the number of postdoctoral fellowships in S&T
by 20% annually, for the next few years, to strengthen
the national postdoctoral research ecosystem.
DST, DBT, DSIR,
DHE, ICAR, ICMR
Establish Vigyan Nidhi, a digital fellowship platform
enabling direct benefit transfers and structured support
for postdocs, mobility grants, and industry-linked
research positions.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Empower institutions to rationalise faculty allocations
and adopt flexible hiring models within approved
budgets to accelerate recruitment and improve FTE
strength.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Introduce performance-linked incentives and equity-
based models to reward excellence and promote long-
term research commitment.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Standardise pay structures across autonomous R&D
institutions and offer competitive packages for mission-
critical national initiatives.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, and ANRF
Develop focused mid-career training and capacity-
building programs for scientists, researchers, and
university faculty.
Indian Science
Academies with
DST
Implement clearly defined teaching-focused, research-
focused, and administrative tracks to align roles with
expertise and enhance institutional productivity.
DHE Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 66
S.N. TopicRecommendation
Action/
Implementation By
3
Institutional
Structures and
Processes
(Ref. Section 3.3)
Set up professionally staffed R&D Offices as single-
window hubs for grant management, compliance,
procurement, and funding agency coordination.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Create dedicated research administrator roles with
defined career pathways, specialised training, and
performance metrics aligned with research facilitation
outcomes.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop and periodically update clear institutional
guidelines covering IP, industry collaboration,
infrastructure sharing, and research governance
processes.
DST and DHE
Transform administrative systems from a compliance-
centric orientation towards trust-based administration.
Majority of the administrative functions should suffice
with self-declaration or self-certification by researchers.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Establish clearly defined performance targets for
institutional leaders and consider performance-linked
incentives to strengthen accountability and improve
institutional R&D outcomes.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Adopt a decentralized decision-making framework by
delegating defined administrative and financial powers
for R&D to Heads of Departments and enabling trust-
based self-certification for routine research processes
to reduce procedural delays.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Institutions
R&D institutions should clearly identify priority
research areas based on their existing strengths, faculty/
researcher expertise, and national relevance.
Institutions under
DST, DBT, DSIR
Develop an Ease of Doing R&D assessment framework
and require institutions to conduct periodic self-
assessments, with a standardized national scoring
mechanism integrated into existing benchmarks or as
a separate system.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR, DHE and
NITI Aayog
Implement faculty and researcher entrepreneurship
policies with flexible time allocation, transparent
revenue-sharing, and an updated framework reflecting
current innovation and startup ecosystems.
DSIR to notify
knowledge equity
policy and DST,
DBT, CSIR and
DHE to adopt Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 67
4
Technology
Development,
Translation &
Commercialization
(Ref. Section 3.4)
Embed and strengthen Technology Transfer Offices
(TTOs) within R&D institutions to facilitate effective
research commercialization.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop standard model/guiding templates for MoUs
on technology co-development to strengthen academia-
industry collaboration and reduce timelines.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Develop a framework to enable industry-academia
mobility of scientists and researchers through joint
appointments, flexible affiliations, and dedicated
support mechanisms.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE
Create State-level RDI Clusters by integrating HEIs,
industry, and MSMEs under a Centre-State model
to provide shared TTO, IP, incubation, and TRL
infrastructure.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE,
coordinated by
NITI Aayog
Establish a standardised IP framework for co-funded
research with clear ownership, revenue-sharing, and
access norms to enhance industry participation.
DST and DoE
Amend ESOP taxation provisions to allow employees
in deep-tech startups to defer tax liability until actual
monetisation of shares rather than at the time of
exercise.
DoR with CBDT
Broaden the mandate of Technology Business
Incubators to provide end-to-end, cross-disciplinary
support from innovation to commercialisation,
including mentoring in finance, legal/regulatory,
marketing, and social innovation.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR
Develop a linking framework across incubators
under different ministries and departments to enhance
capacity, integration, and synergy within the incubation
ecosystem.
Atal Innovation
Mission (AIM),
NITI Aayog or
DPIIT
Strengthen domestic certification mechanisms to
improve market access for deep-tech startups and
MSMEs and reduce reliance on foreign certification
agencies.
DPIIT
Establish a Centre for Technology Indigenization (CTI)
to identify priority technologies for indigenization,
maintain a centralized repository, and coordinate with
MSMEs to support domestic capability development.
DST
Develop a widely accepted TRL assessment framework
and notify nodal institutions to address disputes in TRL
assessment.
DST
Develop a legally anchored, cross-sectoral regulatory
sandbox framework for deep-technology domains with
clear eligibility norms, inter-agency coordination, and
time-bound evaluation mechanisms.
DPIIT Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 68
5
Access to
Knowledge &
Resources
(Ref. Section 3.5)
Expand ONOS to include private institutions on a cost-
sharing basis and integrate high-quality journal and
global patent database subscriptions.
DHE
Negotiate national or consortia-based licenses for
advanced research software and simulators to ensure
equitable access and cost efficiency.
DHE
Explore establishing a National R&D Repository to
enable integrated, web-discoverable access and sharing
of Indian research outputs and data.
DST
Develop quality indexed Indian journals through a
professionally managed ecosystem, leveraging the
expertise of Indian science academies.
DST and CSIR
6
R&D in State
Institutions
(Ref. Section 3.6)
Strengthen State S&T Councils through enhanced
project-based funding and technical support to improve
coordination and implementation capacity.
State Governments,
and DST
Establish dedicated grassroots innovation cells within
State S&T Councils to identify, mentor, and scale local
innovations.
State S&T Councils,
and DST
Provide enhanced resources to NIF to build a
coordinated state-level innovation support network in
partnership with State S&T Councils.
DST
Recruit regular faculty against sanctioned posts in
State Universities to strengthen research capacity and
continuity in the state research ecosystem.
State Governments
Develop a framework to enable collaboration between
centrally funded R&D institutions/ HEIs and state-level
HEIs and S&T institutions, with State S&T Councils
acting as facilitators.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE in
collaboration with
NITI Aayog and
State Government
Expand and strengthen the PAIR programme to include
targeted equipment support for participating state
institutions.
ANRF
Institutionalise mechanisms for transferring usable
surplus equipment from central institutions to resource-
constrained state universities.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE,
State Government
Institute special human resource incentives for
researchers working in institutions located in hard areas
to promote longer tenure and strengthen continuity in
R&D activities.
DST, DBT, DSIR/
CSIR and DHE Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 69
7
Monitoring,
Evaluation,
Capacity Building
and Policy
Administration
(Ref. Section 3.7)
Set up a National Institute for Science Policy and
Governance (NISPG) to bridge the Analytics, Policy,
Monitoring, Governance and capacity building gaps.
DST to setup
4.2 Towards an Enabling R&D Ecosystem
As India advances towards the vision of Viksit Bharat @ 2047, it is equally important to improve
research quality, accelerate technology development and translation, increase industry participation,
and develop globally competitive scientific institutions across the country. Achieving this will
require sustained commitment, inter-governmental coordination, and measurable implementation
outcomes. To support sustained progress and accountability, a structured Ease of Doing Research
and Development (EoDR&D) Assessment Framework may be developed to systematically evaluate
how effectively institutions enable and support R&D activities. Over time, such assessments
should become intrinsic to the R&D culture of institutions, promoting continuous improvements
in research governance and institutional practices. The framework should also be periodically
reviewed and updated,in coordination with relevant national agencies, to reflect evolving R&D
dynamics and ensure its continued effectiveness in the national and global context.
Institutions should undertake periodic self-assessments based on defined parameters covering
research administration, funding processes, collaboration frameworks, infrastructure, and
translational support. At the national level, a standardized scoring mechanism may be introduced,
either embedded within existing institutional benchmarking systems such as NIRF, NAAC, or
through a dedicated independent assessment framework. Such an approach would help create
transparent performance benchmarks, incentivise institutional reforms, and enable continuous
monitoring of improvements in the research ecosystem. NITI Aayog may coordinate this exercise
in collaboration with different scientific departments and agencies.
By systematically removing procedural bottlenecks and reinforcing enabling conditions with the
recommendations highlighted in the report, India can strengthen the operational foundations of
its R&D ecosystem. Such reforms will be crucial in enhancing research productivity, attracting
and retaining high-quality talent, improving translational outcomes, and ensuring that scientific
advancement contributes effectively to long-term national development priorities. Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 71
Appendix 1: List of Participants of
Regional Consultative Meetings
A. Elaya Perumal
Director
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Nagaland
A. N. Shriram
Scientist E
ICMR-Vector Control Research Centre
(VCRC), Puducherry
A. Manjula
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
A. Ravinder Nath
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Kashmir, Ganderbal,
Jammu & Kashmir
A. S. Nain
Director Research
G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and
Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand
A. Sabu
Member Secretary
KSCSTE, Kerala
Abha Chhabra
Scientist
ISRO-Space Applications Centre (SAC),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Abhay Kumar
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Agartala, Tripura
Abhilash Mandloi
Associate Professor
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat
Abhishek Acharya
Associate Professor
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat
Aditya Sinha
Executive Director
C-DAC Mumbai, Maharashtra
Aditya Sinha
Associate Director
FAST-India, Delhi
Ajay K Sharma
Director
National Institute of Technology Delhi, New
Delhi
Ajay Kumar
Director
Instruments Research & Development
Establishment (IRDE), Dehradun,
Uttarakhand
Ajaz Ahmed
Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Ajit Kumar Shasany
Director
CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute
(NBRI), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Akash Deep
Director (Additional Charge) DBT-
Institute of Nano Science and Technology
(INST), Mohali, Punjab
Akhilesh Nimje
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Akhil Kumar Pathak Superintending
Surveyor
Survey of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Akhil Ranjan Garg
Vice Chancellor
Bikaner Technical University, Bikaner,
Rajasthan
Alok Kumar Rai
Vice Chancellor
University of Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Alok Sinha
Professor
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM),
Dhanbad, Jharkhand
Amitesh Kumar
Professor
National Institute of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Jharkhand
Amit Kumar Patra
Director
National Atmospheric Research Laboratory,
Andhra Pradesh
Amit Prashant
Dean R&D
Indian Institute of Technology Gandhinagar
(IIT-GN), Gujarat
Amit Rastogi
Chairman & Managing Director
National Research Development
Corporation (NRDC), New Delhi
Amiya Kumar Rath
Vice Chancellor
Biju Patnaik University of Technology,
Odisha
Anand Bhadalkar
Director
DST-Savli Technology & Business Incubator,
Gujarat
Anandi Iyer
Director
Fraunhofer Office, New Delhi
Anil Bhardwaj
Director
Physical Research Laboratory (PRL),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Anil Kakodkar
Former Chairman
Atomic Energy Commission
Anil Kumar Singh
Director Research
Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural
University, Bihar
Anil Kumar Tripathi
Director
Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research (IISER), Mohali, Punjab
Anindya Biswas
Head of Physics Department
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Sikkim
Anju Bhasin
Dean Academic Affairs
University of Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir
Ankit Magotra
Deputy Director Research SKUAST,
Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 72
Ankit Sheth
Senior Scientist
ICMR- National Institute of Occupational
Health (NIOH), Gujarat
Anupam Shukla
Director
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of
Technology (SVNIT), Gujarat
Aparjita Marwah
Senior Program Associate
FAST-INDIA, Delhi
Appala Naidu
Associate Professor
C R Rao Advanced Institute of Mathematics
Statistics and Computer Science (AIMSCS),
Telangana
Archana B Siva
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Centre for Cellular & Molecular
Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, Telangana
Areejit Samal
Professor
Institute of Mathematical Sciences (IMSc),
Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Arun Anand
Director R&D Cell
Sardar Patel University, Gujarat
Arupjyoti Choudhury
Vice Chancellor
Madhabdev University, Assam
Arun Kumar Tripathi
Vice Chancellor
Uttarakhand Ayurved University,
Uttarakhand
Arup Misra
Chairman
Pollution Control Board, Assam
Arvind
Dean Industry Collaboration & Sponsored
Research
IIT Palakkad, Kerala
Arvind C Ranade
Director
National Innovation Foundation (NIF),
Gujarat
Arvind Kumar
Scientist G & Head
National S&T Management Information
System (NSTMIS), New Delhi
Arvind M T
Chief Innovation Officer
IIT Jammu,
Jammu & Kashmir
Arvind Yadav
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Ashish Kumar Singh
Joint Director
ICAR- National Dairy Research Institute,
Karnal
Ashish Mohan
Executive Director
CII, Delhi
Ashok Kumar Ganguli
Director
Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research (IISER), Odisha
Ashok Mondal
Director
National Institute of Design, Gujarat
Ashu Rani
Vice Chancellor
Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Agra,
Uttar Pradesh
Ashutosh Sharma
Former President
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
Delhi
Ashwani Pareek
Executive Director
BRIC-National Agri Food Biotechnology
Institute (NABI), Mohali, Punjab
Aswathy M G
Assistant Director
State Dairy Lab, Pattom, Kerala
Avishek Bhattacharjee
Scientist E
MoEFCC- Botanical Survey of India, West
Bengal
B. K. Rout
Director
B K Birla Institute of Engineering &
Technology (BKBIET), Rajasthan
B. R. Kamboj
Vice Chancellor
Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana
Agricultural University, Haryana
B. S. Ramesha
Scientist D
Karnataka State Sericulture Research
& Development Institute (KSSRDI),
Thalaghattapura, Karnataka
B. S. Satyanarayana
Vice Chancellor
Dayanand Sagar University, Karnataka
B Santhosh
Principal Scientist & Head ICAR - Central
Marine Fisheries Research Institute,
Kerala
Basab Bijoy Roychowdhury Head (State
Government Business),
HPE India
Basanta Kumar Das
Director
ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research
Institute, West Bengal
Battu Satyanarayana
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Karnataka,
Karnataka
Bharat Kakti
Dean
Assam Science and Technology University,
Assam
Bhavesh Modi
Director
ICMR -National Institute of Occupational
Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Bhavini Patel
Assistant Professor
Indrashil University, Rajpur, Gujarat
Bibhas Deb
Vice Chancellor
Maharaja Bir Bikram University (MBBU),
Tripura
Bibhuti Bhusan Biswal
Vice Chancellor
Odisha University of Technology and
Research, Odisha
Bidyadhar Subudhi
Director
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal, Telangana
Binod Kumar Kanaujia
Director
B R Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar, Punjab
Binod Kumar Singh
Director
DST - National Atlas & Thematic Mapping
Organisation, West Bengal
Biswajit Ganguly
Senior Scientist & Head
CSIR - Central Salt & Marine Chemicals
Research Institute, Gujarat
Bobo Thongam
Cybersecurity Expert
National Institute of Electronics &
Information Technology (NIELIT), Manipur Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 73
Brajesh Pandey
Executive Director
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
Brenda Fernandes
Member Secretary
Goa State Council for Science &
Technology, Goa
C. A. Mawlong
Dean
School of Social Sciences North Eastern
Hill University (NEHU), Meghalaya
C. Anandharamakrishnan
Director
CSIR -National Institute for Interdisciplinary
Science and Technology, Kerala
C C Tripathi
Director
National Institute of Technical Teachers
Training and Research (NITTTR),
Madhya Pradesh
C. D. Mungyak
Director cum Member Secretary
Arunachal Pradesh State Council for
Science & Technology (APSCS&T),
Arunachal Pradesh
C. N. Bhende
Dean (PG&RP)
IIT-Bhubaneswar, Odisha
C. R. Asha Devi
Scientist F
Centre for Marine Living Resources &
Ecology, Kerala
C. Raghunathan
Scientist F
MoEFCC-Zoological Survey of India, West
Bengal
C. Venkateswarlu Nettem Distinguished
Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Caitlin Searle
Counsellor
Department of Industry Science and
Resources Australian Consulate General,
Karnataka
Chaitanya G Joshi
Director
DST-Gujarat Biotechnology Research
Centre (GBRC), Gandhinagar
Chanchal Sarbajna
Head
Minerology Petrology Geochemistry Group
Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration
and Research, Telangana
Chandra Shekhar Yadav Assistant
Professor
National Forensic Sciences University
(NFSU), Guwahati Campus, Assam
Chinky M Marak
Programme Officer
State Council of Science Technology &
Environment (SCSTE), Meghalaya
Chuni Lal
Principal Scientist
ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley
Research (IIWBR), Karnal
Ciza Thomas
Vice Chancellor
Digital University Kerala, Kerala
D. S. Pandey
Senior Professor
Banaras Hindu University BHU, Uttar
Pradesh
D. V. L. N Somayajulu
Director
National Institute of Technology, Manipur
Dadasaheb M Kokare
Director Research and Development Cell
Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur
University, Maharashtra
Debdas Barik
Scientist B & Academic Head NIELIT,
Agartala, Tripura
Deepak Saxena
Director
Indian Institute of Public Health Gandhinagar
(IIPHG), Gujarat
Denis Ashok S
Director
Sponsored Research and
Consultancy(SPORIC), VIT, Tamil Nadu
Devasish Chowdhury
Professor
DST-Institute of Advanced Study in Science
& Technology (IASST), Guwahati, Assam
Devendra Jalihal
Director
IIT Guwahati, Assam
Devika P Madalli
Director
Information and Library Network
(INFLIBNET), Gujarat
Dhanapati Deka
Vice Chancellor
Bhattadev University Pathsala, Assam
Dharmendra Singh
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Vadodara, Gujarat
Dilip Patil
Scientist E
ICMR-National Institute of Virology
(NIV),
Maharashtra
Dimple Kasana
Director
MoH&FW- Central Research Institute,
Solan, Himachal Pradesh.
Dinesh Chandra Rai
Vice Chancellor
B R Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur,
Bihar
Divya Arya
Deputy Director
CII, Delhi
Diwan S Rawat
Vice Chancellor
Kumaun University, Nainital Uttarakhand
Doni Jini
Senior Scientist
ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region
Arunachal Unit Basar, Arunachal Pradesh
Durgesh Pant
Director General
Uttarakhand Science & Technology
Council Dehradun Uttarakhand,
Uttarakhand
Famida Khan
Project Scientist II
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
Fazal A Talukdar
Professor
NIT Silchar, Assam
Ferdous Ahmed Barbhuiya
Dean-Admin
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT) Guwahati, Assam
G. M. Nair
President
Kerala Academy of Sciences (KAS), Kerala Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 74
G. P. Vadodaria
Principal
Government Engineering College Bhavnagar,
Gujarat
G. Umapathy
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Centre for Cellular & Molecular
Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad
Gangan Prathap
Former Director (NISCAIR)
Honorary Professor -
APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University,
Kerala
Gautam Makwanu
Associate Professor
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Geetanjali Sachdeva
Director
ICMR-National Institute for Research
in Reproductive and Child Health
(NIRRCH), Mumbai, Maharashtra
Girishkumar M S
Scientist F
Indian National Centre for Ocean
Information Services, Telangana
G Narahari Sastry
Dean Sponsored Research and Consultancy
Indian Institute of Technology,
Hyderabad, Telangana
Gopal Joshi
Executive Director
ONGC- Keshava Deva Malaviya Institute
of Petroleum Exploration, Dehradun
Uttarakhand
Gopal Lal
Acting Director
ICAR-National Academy of Agricultural
Research Management, Telangana
Gouranga Kar
Director
ICAR-Central Research Institute for Jute and
Allied Fibres, Barrackpore Kolkata, West
Bengal
Gourav Rao
Scientist E
Institute of Technology Management,
Mussoorie Uttarakhand
H. B. D. Prasada Rao
Scientist E
National Institute of Animal Technology,
Hyderabad
Harender Singh Bisht
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Petroleum,
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Harish Kumar Sardana
Director
Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Raichur,
Karnataka
Hemant Deepak Shewade Scientist E
Division of Health Systems Research,
ICMR -National Institute of Epidemiology
(NIE), Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Hemant Kumar Pande
Scientist F
Defence Electronics Applications Laboratory
(DEAL), Dehradun Uttarakhand
Hemant Kumar Shukla
Chief Scientist & Head -
RPBD Division
CSIR -Advanced Materials & Process
Research Institute (AMPRI), Bhopal,
Madhya Pradesh
Hirendra Nath Ghosh
Director
National Institute of Science Education and
Research (NISER), Bhubaneswar, Odisha
Inderpal Singh Kanwal
Scientist
DRDO-Centre for Fire, Explosive and
Environment Safety (CFEES), Delhi
J. P. Pandey
Vice Chancellor
A P J Abdul Kalam Technical University,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
J. Poorani
Principal Scientist
ICAR- National Research Centre for
Banana, Tamil Nadu
Jai Prakash Saini
Vice Chancellor
Madan Mohan Malaviya University of
Technology, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
Jayakara S M
Vice Chancellor
Bangalore University, Karnataka
Jayraj Sarvaiya
Professor
School of Engineering and Technology
National Forensic Sciences University,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Jhuma Saha
Assistant Professor
Indian Institute of Technology, Gandhinagar,
Gujarat
Jignesh Bhatt
Associate Professor
Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Vadodara, Gujarat
Jitendra Bhatia
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Gujarat
Jitendra Kumar
Managing Director
Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance
Council (BIRAC), Delhi
Jitesh Choudhary
Scientist E & Centre Head
Centre for Development of Advanced
Computing, Silchar, Assam
Joel Lalbiakkima
Scientific Officer
Mizoram Science Technology & Innovation
Council (MISTIC), Aizawl, Mizoram
Johney Johnson
Director
IQAC,
Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam,
Kerala
Joshi Catherine K
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
Jyotesna Maurya
Senior Project Associate
Indian National Science Academy (INSA),
New Delhi
K. D. Nayak
Former Director General DRDO-
Microelectronics and Computational Systems,
New Delhi
K. Gopinath
Scientist H & Associate Director
Defence Metallurgical Research
Laboratory, Telangana
K. Hari Kishan Raju
Senior Technical Officer
ICMR -Vector Control Research Centre
(VCRC), Puducherry
K L Ganapathi
Faculty in Charge-R&D
National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra,
Haryana
K. Naganjaneyulu
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
K P Singh
Vice Chancellor
Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Rohilkhand
University, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 75
K. Satish Kumar
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
K. Sarat Kumar
Member Secretary
Andhra Pradesh State Council of Science
& Technology (APCOST), Andhra
Pradesh
K. Suresh Babu
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
K V Swamy
Registrar
Adikavi Nannaya University, Andhra Pradesh
Kailash Chandra Khulbe
Chief Scientist & Head RPBD CSI
-Indian Institute of Toxicology Research,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Kajal Chakraborty
Director
ICAR-National Bureau of Fish Genetic
Resources Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Kalaivani Ganesan
Nodal Officer
Biotechnology Research and Innovation
Council (BRIC), New Delhi
Kamal Kishore Pant
Director
IIT Roorkee, Uttarakhand
Kanad Das
Director
MoEFCC-Botanical Survey of India, West
Bengal
Kishorsinh N Chavda
Vice Chancellor
Veer Narmad South Gujarat University, Surat,
Gujarat
Krishna Nandanan
Assistant Professor
School for Sustainable Futures Amrita
Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Tamil Nadu
Krishnan Baskar
Director
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Manipur
L. C. Mangal
DS & DG -Technology Management (TM)
DRDO, Delhi
Labani Ray
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR- National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad
Lakshmi Eswari
Scientist G
Centre for Development of Advanced
Computing, Hyderabad, Telangana
Leena Kukreja
Science and Technology Counsellor
Swissnex India, Karnataka
Lige Sora
Assistant Professor
Arunachal Pradesh University Pasighat,
Arunachal Pradesh
M G Valu
Research Scientist
ICAR-Cotton Research Station Junagadh
Agricultural University, Junagadh, Gujarat
M Krishnan
Vice Chancellor
Central University of Tamil Nadu (CUTN),
Tamil Nadu
M Ravichandran
Secretary
MoES, Delhi
M Srinivas
Director
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
(AIIMS), New Delhi
M S Gaur
Director
IIT Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Mahavir Singh
Vice Chancellor
Himachal Pradesh University Shimla,
Himachal Pradesh
Mahendra P Patil
Chief Scientist and Chair Waste
Management Division
CSIR-National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur,
Maharashtra
Mahesh G Thakkar
Director
DST-Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeosciences,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Manabendra Dutta Choudhury
Vice Chancellor
Rabindranath Tagore University, Hojai,
Assam
Manan Pathak
Senior Manager
Gujarat Energy Research and Management
Institute, Gujarat
Manash Ranjan Sahoo
Vice Chancellor
Odisha University of Health Sciences, Odisha
Mani Kant Paswan
Director
Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering &
Technology (SLIET), Longowal, Punjab
Manisha Ghate
Scientist G
National Institute of Translational Virology
and AIDS Research, Pune, Maharashtra
Manisha Madkaikar
Director
ICMR- National Institute of
Immunohaematology, Maharashtra
Manish R Joshi
Secretary
University Grants Commission (UGC),
New Delhi
Manmohan Parida
Director
Defence Research & Development
Establishment (DRDE), Gwalior, Madhya
Pradesh
Manohar Ganpat Chaskar
Vice Chancellor
Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada
University, Nanded, Maharashtra
Manoj Choudhary
Vice Chancellor
Gati Shakti Vishwavidyalaya, Vadodara,
Gujarat
Manoj Kumar
Director
Aerial Delivery Research & Development
Establishment (ADRDE), Agra, Uttar
Pradesh
Manoj Kumar Dhaka
Director
DRDO-Defence Electronics Applications
Laboratory (DEAL), Dehradun,Uttarakhand
Manoranjan Mohanty
Director
ICAR- Indian Institute of Soil Science
(IISS), Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Manoranjan Parida
Director
Central Road Research Institute (CRRI),
New Delhi Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 76
Manwendra Tripathi
Associate Professor
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
Maridusmita Barooah
HoD
Assam Science and Technology University
Guwahati, Assam
Minakshi Kumar
Head Academics
ISRO-Indian Institute of Remote Sensing
(IIRS), Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Mini Thomas
Dean (Faculty of Engineering & Technology)
Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi
Mini Shaji Thomas
Professor
Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi
Mohammad Mobin
Vice Chancellor
Cluster University Srinagar J&K, Jammu &
Kashmir
Mohanan Kunnummal
Vice Chancellor
University of Kerala, Kerala
Mrutyunjay Mohapatra
Director General
Indian Meteorological Department, Delhi
Mukesh Kumar Gupta
Director
National Animal Resource Facility for
Biomedical Research, Telangana
Mukesh Kumar Meghvansi Scientist F
Defence Research & Development
Establishment (DRDE), Gwalior, Madhya
Pradesh
Mukeshkumar Nariya
Head
Pharmacology Institute of Teaching and
Research in Ayurveda,
Jamnagar, Gujarat
Mukesh Pandey
Vice Chancellor
Bundelkhand University, Uttar Pradesh
Muruganandam
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Soil and Water
Conservation, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
N J Muthukumar
Director General
Central Council for Research in Siddha
(CCRS), Tamil Nadu
N Kalaiselvi
Director General
CSIR, Delhi
N K Lokanath
Vice Chancellor
University of Mysore, Karnataka
N V Chalapathi Rao
Director
National Centre for Earth Science Studies
(NCESS), Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
N Venuh
Pro-Vice Chancellor
Nagaland University, Lumami HQ
Zunheboto, Nagaland
Nalin Sharma
UCOST, Uttarakhand
Naman Agrawal
Senior Policy Advisor Netherlands
Embassy in India, Delhi
Narendranath S
Director
North Eastern Regional Institute of Science
and Technology (NERIST), Nirjuli,
Arunachal Pradesh
Narendra S Chaudhari
Vice Chancellor
Assam Science and Technology University,
Guwahati, Assam
Narendra Shah
Member Secretary
Rajiv Gandhi Science and Technology
Commission, Maharashtra
Narinder Singh Jassal
Sr Principal Scientist
CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments
Organisation (CSIO), Chandigarh,
Chandigarh
Narottam Sahoo
Advisor & Member Secretary
Gujarat Council for Science & Technology
(GUJCOST), Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Neelu Rohmetra
Dean Research Studies University of
Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Neha Singh
Faculty Incharge (R&D)
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
Nilay Khare
Professor & Dean (R&C)
Maulana Azad National Institute of
Technology (MANIT), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Nilesh M Desai
Director
Space Applications Centre (SAC),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Nilofer Khan
Vice Chancellor
University of Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu &
Kashmir
Nimisha Sharma
Director (Research & Consultancy)
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,
Delhi
Niranjan Patel
Vice Chancellor
Sardar Patel University, Vallabh
Vidyanagar, Gujarat
O P Chaurasia
Director
DRDO-Defence Institute of High Altitude
Research (DIHAR), Leh, Ladakh
Om Prakash Mishra
Director
National Centre for Seismology, Delhi
Onkar Singh
Vice Chancellor
Veer Madho Singh Bhandari Uttarakhand
Technical University, Dehradun
Uttarakhand
P. Bharathi
Secretary
DST-Govt of Gujarat
P. Harinarayanan
Sr. Principal Scientist
Kerala State Council for Science, Technology
and Environment, Kerala
P K Dhakephalkar
Director
Agharkar Research Institute, Pune,
Maharashtra
P. Mangala Gowri
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad, Telangana Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 77
P Manickam
Scientist F
ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology
(NIE), Chennai, Tamilnadu
P. Raveendran
Vice Chancellor
University of Calicut, Kerala
P R Sudhakaran
ASM fellow Emeritus Scientist
Central University of Kerala, Karyavattom,
Trivandrum, Kerala
Parul Gupta
Senior Manager
Higher Education British Council UK India
Education and Research Initiative (UKIERI),
New Delhi
Parveen Kumar Saluja
Senior Environmental Engineer Punjab
Pollution Control Board, Punjab
Payal Wadhwa
Assistant Professor
Indian Institute of Information Technology
(IIIT), Vadodara, Gujarat
Peeyush Mehta
Dean (Faculty & Research)
Indian Institute of Management (IIM)
Calcutta, West Bengal
Poonam Tandon
Vice Chancellor
Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur
University, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh
Pragati Kumar
Vice Chancellor
Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra,
Jammu & Kashmir
Prakash Kumar
Director
National Geophysical Research Institute,
Hyderabad
Prakash Mahanwar
Vice Chancellor
Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Solapur
University, Solapur, Maharashtra
Pramod Yeole
Vice Chancellor
Rajasthan University of Health Sciences
(RUHS), Rajasthan
Pranab Dutta
Chairman
DBT-College of Post Graduate Studies in
Agricultural Sciences (CPGSAS), Central
Agricultural University (CAU), Imphal,
Manipur
Prasanna Venkatraman
Deputy Director
ACTREC-Cancer Research Institute,
Mumbai, Maharashtra
Prashant S Bokare
Vice Chancellor
Gondwana University Gadchiroli,
Maharashtra
Pranav Haridas
Assistant Professor
Kerala School of Mathematics, Kerala
Prashasti Singh
Assistant Professor
Shri Ram College of Commerce,
University of Delhi, Delhi
Pratap Kumar Pati
Head of Biotechnology Department
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar,
Punjab
Pratap Kumar S
Director
National Institute of Electronics &
Information Technology, Calicut, Kerala
Pratima Tatke
Director (R&D Cell)
SNDT Women’s University, Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Praveen Kumar Rai
Head Technology (Research &
Development)
Ministry of Education, GoI, Delhi
Pritpal Singh
Executive Director
Punjab State Council for Science &
Technology, Mohali, Punjab
R Balamuralikrishnan
Director
Defence Metallurgical Research
Laboratory, Hyderabad
R Joseph Bensingh
Director & Head
Central Institute of Petrochemicals
Engineering & Technology (CIPET),
Bengaluru, Karnataka
R M Mashelkar
Former DG
CSIR, New Delhi
R Pradeep Kumar
Director
CSIR-Central Building Research Institute
(CBRI), Roorkee, Uttarakhand
R Ratheesh
Director
Centre for Materials for Electronics
Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana
R Vijay
Director
ARCI-International Advanced Research
Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New
Materials, Hyderabad, Telangana
Rabindra Kumar Panda
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Water Management,
Odisha
Rabindra Kumar Panigrahy Scientist E
DST, New Delhi
Radha Krishan Dhiman
Director
Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of
Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Radha Rangarajan
Director
CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute
(CDRI), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Radhey Lal
Joint Director
Council of Science & Technology Uttar
Pradesh, (CSTUP), UP
Rahul Katna
Counsellor
CII, New Delhi
Raja Angamuthu
Associate Dean (R&D)
IIT Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Rajanish K Kamat
Vice Chancellor
Homi Bhabha State University, Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Rajbir Singh
Vice Chancellor
Maharshi Dayanand University, Haryana
Rajendra Jena
Chief Geomatics Officer
DST-North East Centre for Technology
Application & Reach, Shillong,
Meghalaya
Rajesh A Thakkar
Director (R&D cell)
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 78
Rajesh Gokhale
Secretary
Department of Biotechnology (DBT), New
Delhi
Rajesh Pathak
Secretary
TDB, DST, New Delhi
Rajesh Sharma
DDG (Research)
Indian Council of Forestry Research and
Education (ICFRE), Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Rajesh V Nair
Dean
Faculty Affairs & Administration
IIT Ropar, Punjab
Raj Kumar Mittal
Vice Chancellor
Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Rajul K Gajjar
Vice Chancellor
Gujarat Technological University (GTU),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Rajneesh Rai
DGM
Indian Renewable Energy Development
Agency (IREDA), New Delhi
Rakesh Singhai
Vice Chancellor
Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Madhya
Pradesh
Ramannuj
Director
CSIR-Institute of Minerals and Materials
Technology (IMMT), Bhubaneswar
Rama Shanker Verma
Director
MNNIT Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
Ramcharan Bhattacharya Director
National Research Centre on Plant
Biotechnology, New Delhi
Ramji Koona
Vice Chancellor
Krishna University, Andhra Pradesh
Ranjana Aggarwal
Outstanding Scientist
National Institute of Science Communication
& Information Resources, New Delhi
Ranjana Arya
Assistant Professor
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Ranjana Jha
Vice Chancellor
Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical University
for Women, New Delhi
Ranjan Bose
Director
Indraprastha Institute of Information
Technology (IIIT Delhi), New Delhi
Ranojoy Basu
Chairperson R&D Committee Indian
Institute of Management, Udaipur,
Rajasthan
Rashna Bhandari
Staff Scientist
Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and
Diagnostics (CDFD), Hyderabad, Telangana
Ratan Tiwari
Director
Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley
Research, Karnal, Haryana
Ravikumar Dumpala
Associate Dean Research Visvesvaraya
National Institute of Technology (VNIT),
Nagpur, Maharashtra
Ravindra Kulkarni
Vice Chancellor
University of Mumbai Mumbai,
Maharashtra
Ravindra M. Kumbhar
Senior Principal Scientist
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Rejnish Kumar R
Director
Regional Cancer Centre, Trivandrum,
Kerala
Rekha P D
Director (R&D)
Yenepoya University, Mangalore, Karnataka
Resmi T R
Senior Scientist
Centre for Water Resources Development and
Management (CWRDM), Kozhikode, Kerala
Ridonhok Khongsar
Assistant Programme Officer State
Council of Science Technology &
Environment (SCSTE), Meghalaya
Rintu Banerjee
Deputy Director
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
(IIT KGP), Kharagpur, West Bengal
Rohit Mehra
Dean Research & Consultancy
Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of
Technology, Jalandhar, Punjab
S. N. Sridhara
Vice Chancellor
Hindustan Institute of Technology and
Science,
Tamil Nadu
S. Nagarajan
Dean Academics
Central University of Tamil Nadu, Tamil
Nadu
S. P. Aggarwal
Director
DoS-North Eastern Space Applications Centre
(NESAC), Barapani, Meghalaya
S R Khochey
Joint Director -Admin
Arunachal Pradesh State Council for
Science & Technology (APSCS&T)
Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh
S. Ramesh
Sr. Scientist
National Institute of Ocean Technology,
Tamil Nadu
S Sandeep
Principal Scientist and Head
Kerala Forest Research Institute, Thrissur,
Kerala
S S Manral
UCOST, Uttarakhand
S Vincent
Member Secretary
Tamil Nadu State Council for Science and
Technology, Tamil Nadu
S V Prasanna
Scientist E
Anusandhan National Research Foundation
(ANRF), New Delhi
Sachin Gajjar
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Sachin Patwardhan
Dean R&D
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
(IITB), Mumbai, Maharashtra Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 79
Samarendra Hazarika
Director
ICAR- Research Complex for NEH Region
Umiam Barapani, Meghalaya
Samsher
Vice Chancellor
Harcourt Butler Technical University,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Sandeep Gupta
Chief Scientist
CSIR-National Geophysical Research
Institute (NGRI), Hyderabad, Telangana
Sandeep Kumar
Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University,
New Delhi
Sandeep Srivastava
Additional Surveyor General
Survey of India, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Sandip Ghosh Chowdhury
Director
National Metallurgical Laboratory,
Jharkhand
Sandip K Chakrabarti
Director
Indian Centre for Space Physics (ICSP),
Kolkata, West Bengal
Sangeeta Giri
Assistant Professor
Indrashil University, Rajpur, Gujarat
Sanghamitra Bandyopadhyay
Director
Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, West
Bengal
Sanjay Behari
Director
Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical
Sciences & Technology, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala
Sanjeev Aggarwal
Dean (Research & Development)
Kurukshetra University, Haryana
Sanjeev Khosla
Director
CSIR-Institute of Microbial Technology
(IMTECH), Mohali, Punjab
Sanjeev Kumar
Dean
Rajiv Gandhi University, Arunachal Pradesh
Sankalp Sinha
Member
The Federation of Indian Chambers of
Commerce & Industry (FICCI), New
Delhi
Sankar Prasad Das
Director
ICAR-National Research Centre for Orchids
(NRCO), Pakyong, Sikkim
Santosh Kumar Balivada
CEO
Centre of Excellence for Additive
Manufacturing, Andhra Pradesh MedTech
Zone (AMTZ) Vizag, Andhra Pradesh
Santosh K V
Deputy Director
Manipal Academy of Higher Education,
Karnataka
Sarit Kumar Chaudhuri
Vice Chancellor
Alipurduar University, Alipurduar, West
Bengal
Satinder Kaur
Dean (Research Studies)
Cluster University of Jammu, Jammu &
Kashmir
Satish Kumar
Dean R&C
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand
Satya Prakash Dobhal
Director
DRDO-Institute of Technology Management
Mussoorie, Uttarakhand
Seema Joshi
Assistant Professor
GTU Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Seema Paroha
Director
National Sugar Institute, Kanpur, Uttar
Pradesh
Senthil M
Deputy Director (SBV Innovation
Ecosystem)
Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Puducherry
S Geethalakshmi
Vice Chancellor
MGR Educational and Research Institute,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Shailendra Saraf
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
Education and Research (NIPER),
Ahmedabad, Gujarat
& Hyderabad, Telangana
Shakil Ahmad Romshoo
Vice Chancellor
Islamic University of Science and
Technology, Awantipora, Jammu & Kashmir
Shakti Kumar Gupta
Director
AIIMS
Vijaypur, Jammu & Kashmir
Shantanu Bhattacharya
Director
CSIR-Central Scientific Instruments
Organisation (CSIO), Chandigarh
Sharmila Bapat
Director
DBT-National Centre for Cell Science
(NCCS), Pune, Maharashtra
Shaurya Darbari
Assistant Professor
AIIMS, Jammu & Kashmir
Sheel Kapoor
Chief Executive Officer
FAST-India, New Delhi
Shikha Thakur
Professor
North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional
Institute of Health and Medical Sciences
(NEIGRIHMS), Shillong, Meghalaya
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman
CEO
Anusandhan National Research Foundation
(ANRF), New Delhi
Shobi Veleri
Scientist F
National Institute of Nutrition, Telangana
Shubhini A Saraf
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
and Educational Research (NIPER), Rai
Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh
Shweta Dave
Principal
Government Engineering College
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Shyama Rath
Member Secretary
AICTE, New Delhi
Sivaprasad K
Vice Chancellor
APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University,
Thiruvanthapuram, Kerala Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 80
Smitha B R
Scientist E
Centre for Marine Living Resources &
Ecology, Kochi, Kerala
Souvik Maiti
Director
Institute of Genomics and Integrative
Biology (IGIB), Delhi
Srinivas Nanduri
Professor
National Institute of Pharmaceutical and
Educational Research (NIPER), Hyderabad,
Telangana
S. Raisuddin
Dean Academics
Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi
Srinivasa Reddy
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad, Telangana
Srinivas Tavva
Head (ABM Division and SIC PME Cell)
National Academy of Agricultural Research
Management, Telangana
Sriram Seshadri
Associate Professor
Nirma University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Subeer S Majumdar
Director General
Gujarat Biotechnology University,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Subhendu Sekhar Bag
Professor
IIT Guwahati, Assam
Subhash Ghosh
Chief Scientist
CSIR- Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology (IICT), Hyderabad
Subhratanu Bhattacharya
Head Physics
University of Kalyani, West Bengal
Sudesh Kumar Yadav
Director
CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource
Technology, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh
Sudhir Kumar Awasthi
Pro Vice Chancellor
Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj University,
Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Sudhir M Bobde
Addl Chief Secretary
Governor UP Raj Bhawan, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh
Sukanta Roy
Dean Academics
National Institute of Technology (NIT)
Aizawl, Mizoram
Sullip K. Guwahati
Head
ICAR-Regional Centre CIFRI, Assam
Sumant Vyas
Director
ICAR - Central Arid Zone Research
Institute (CAZRI) Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Sumya Pathak
Senior Scientist
CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal
Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Sunil Doley
Joint Director
ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region
Mizoram Centre, Kolasib, Mizoram
Sunil Kumar Singh
Director
National Institute of Oceanography, Goa
Supriya Chakraborty
Dean
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Suashant Kumar Dey
Executive Director
Indian Renewable Energy Development
Agency (IREDA), New Delhi
Suresh Gosavi
Vice Chancellor
Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune,
Maharashtra
Suresh Kumar
ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research
Institute (CSSRI), Karnal, Haryana
Suresh Kumar Singhal
Director
Pt B D Sharma Post Graduate Institute of
Medical Science, Rohtak, Haryana
Surinder Singh
Dean R&C
Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering
and Technology (SLIET), Longowal,
Punjab
Susheel Mittal
Vice Chancellor
I K Gujral Punjab Technical University,
Jalandhar, Punjab
Sushil Kumar Gupta
Director Research,
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural
Sciences and Technology, Jammu & Kashmir
Swagata Dasgupta
Vice President
Indian Academy of Sciences (IASc),
Karnataka
T Balasubramanian
Member Executive Council & Advisor
Chettinad Academy of Research and
Education, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
T. Gunendra Singh
Director
National Institute of Electronics and
Information Technology, Aizawl, Mizoram
T. N. Nagabhushana
Vice Chancellor
Kishkinda University, Karnataka
T. R. Santhosh Kumar
Director (Add. Charge)
Integrated Cancer Research Rajiv Gandhi
Centre for Biotechnology, Kerala
Tapas Samanta
Head (Technology Transfer & Coordination
Division)
DAE-Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre,
Kolkata, West Bengal
Tarak Nath Kundu
Dean R&C
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Sikkim
Tarun Kant
Director
ICFRE- Arid Forest Research Institute
(AFRI), Jodhpur, Rajasthan
Tarun Kumar Misra
Dean (R&C)
National Institute of Technology (NIT),
Agartala, Tripura
Tasneem Habib
Advisor, Former Chief Scientist and
Executive Director
Madhya Pradesh Council of Science &
Technology (MPCOST), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Tejimala Gurung Nag
Vice Chancellor
Darjeeling Hills University, Darjeeling,
West Bengal Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 81
Timir Tripathi
Professor
North Eastern Hill University (NEHU),
Shillong, Meghalaya
Tomo Riba
Vice Chancellor
Arunachal Pradesh University, Pasighat,
Arunachal Pradesh
Tomtisama Meetei
Associate Professor
CPGSAS-CAU, Imphal, Manipur
Tushar Panchal
Group CEO
GTU Ventures GISC-GTU Incubator, Gujarat
U Suryanarayana Murty
Director
National Institute of Pharmaceutical
Education and Research (NIPER)
Guwahati, Assam
Ujjwal Sen
Director
DAE-Harish Chandra Research Institute,
Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh
Umesh Chandra Garirola
Director
Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal
University, Srinagar, Uttarakhand
Utpal S Joshi
Vice Chancellor
Saurashtra University, Rajkot, Gujarat
V. Arunachalam
Director
Jawaharlal Nehru Tropical Botanic Garden
and Research Institute (JNTBGRI), Kerala
V. Dinesh Kumar
Principal Scientist
Indian Institute of Oilseeds Research,
Telangana
V. K. Sharma
Scientist G & Centre Head
CDAC, Mohali, Punjab
V. K. Sinha
Head
Global Centre for Nuclear Energy
Partnership, Haryana
V. Palanimuthu
Director
National Institute of Food Technology
Entrepreneurship and Management, Haryana
V. Sachithananda Shenoi
Director
DRDO-Defence Laboratory, Jodhpur,
Rajasthan
V. S. Prasad
Head
National Centre for Medium Range Weather
Forecasting, Noida, Uttar Pradesh
V Uma
Vice Chancellor
Sri Padmavati Mahila Visvavidyalayam,
Andhra Pradesh
V Venkata Basava Rao
Vice Chancellor
Rayalaseema University, Andhra Pradesh
Vaibhav Bhatt
Director
GTU Ahmedabad, Gujarat
Vandana Singh
Vice Chancellor
Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University,
Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh
Varun Aggarwal
Founder
FAST India, Delhi
Venu Gopal Achanta
Director
National Physical Laboratory, Delhi
Vibha Tandon
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Biology,
Jadavpur, Kolkata, West Bengal
Vijay J Fulari
Vice Chancellor
Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada
University, Aurangabad, Maharashtra
Vijay L Maheshwari
Vice Chancellor
Kavayitri Bahinabai Chaudhari North
Maharashtra University Jalgaon,
Maharashtra
Vikash Singh
Professor
IGNTU Amarkantak
Madhya Pradesh
Vikas Shende
Principal Scientist
Madhya Pradesh Council of Science &
Technology (MPCOST), Bhopal, Madhya
Pradesh
Vikrant Gupta
Chief Scientist
CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal
Aromatic Plants, Uttar Pradesh
Vinay K Nandicoori
Director
Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology,
Telangana
Vinita S Sahay
Director
Indian Institute of Management (IIM),
BodhGaya, Bihar
Vinod Kumar Singh
President
National Academy of Sciences (NASI), New
Delhi
Virendra R Tiwari
Director
MoEFCC-Wildlife Institute of India
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Vishnupriya Kolipakam
Scientist D
MoEFCC-Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun, Uttarakhand
Vivek Khaneja
Executive Director
CDAC, Noida
Vivek Kumar Gupta
Director
ICAR- National Research Centre on Pig Rani
Garbhanga, Assam
Y Roja Ramani
Director (Research & Development)
Odisha University of Health Sciences,
Odisha
Zabeer Ahmed
Director
CSIR-Indian Institute of Integrative
Medicine (IIIM) Jammu, Jammu & Kashmir
Zahid Ashraf
Dean
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi NOTESNOTES NOTESNOTES NOTES NOTES Ease of Doing Research & Development in India - Removing Obstacles, Promoting Enablers 86