Is the PMRF scheme a viable option in plugging the drain of our innovators?
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, in his budget speech on February 1, announced the Prime Minister’s Research Fellowship Scheme for the engineers and scientists of the country. It has an outlay of ₹16.5 billion that are to be spent over a seven-year period. It will be available to about a 1000 best students who have completed (or are in the final year of) B.Tech or Integrated M.Tech or M.Sc. in Science and Technology streams from IISc/IITs/NITs/IISERs/IIITs. They will be offered a direct admission into a PhD programme in the IITs and IISc. They will be offered a fellowship of ₹70,000 per month for the first two years, ₹75,000 per month for the third year, and ₹80,000 per month in the fourth and fifth year.
Commenting on the scheme, Human Resource Minister Prakash Javadekar stated that this scheme would improve the quality of research in the country. He was hopeful that this would attract the best talent from across the nation. It would go a long way in tapping the talent pool for carrying out research indigenously in cutting-edge science and technology domains. Such talents could then address ‘national priorities’ on one hand, and fill the dire shortage of quality faculty in the premier institutes. This would convert brain drain to brain gain, said the minister. It is certainly a step forward in the right direction, but to say that it would immediately convert brain drain to brain gain would be a bit of an overstatement.
To know why that is so, we may need to look at what prompts these young minds to shift their base in the first place. I’d like to quote Walter Isaacson, who wrote the famous biography on Steve Jobs, one of the biggest change-makers of our generation, here. In an article in The New York Times, he wrote:
“China and India are likely to produce many rigorous analytical thinkers and knowledgeable technologists. But smart and educated people don’t always spawn innovation. America’s advantage, if it continues to have one, will be that it can produce people who are also more creative and imaginative, those who know how to stand at the intersection of the humanities and the sciences. That is the formula for true innovation, as Steve Jobs’ career showed.”
Not only America, the same could be said about the technologically advanced states of Europe, like Switzerland or Germany. Our school and work culture prohibits free thinking. We have always had an affinity for math and science, but are rarely taught to innovate and invent, the reason why these countries are reaping the benefits. National Science Foundation carried out a study in 2013 titled ‘Immigrants’ Growing Presence in the US Science and Engineering Workforce: Education and Employment Characteristics in 2013’, and found that of all the immigrant scientists and engineers in the United States in 2013, 57 percent were born in Asia.
“There are so many PhD scholars enrolled in our engineering institutes. It is not fair to pick
and choose only a thousand of them for a higher pay. How are they going to choose people?
Although increasing the salaries for all would be a welcome move”
-Brinda Karat, CPI (M) Politburo Member
Providing a thousand researchers with a higher pay when there are about 25,000 PhD scholars enrolled across the 23 IITs, and completely overlooking the numerous students enrolled in research in other engineering institutes, is like adding a drop to the ocean.Moreover, there is no clearly objective method of choosing a candidate.Owing to these reasons, B.Tech graduates either enter into high paying corporate jobs or simply go abroad to finish their research. They often get a higher pay and better research facilities there.
Innovators could come from any field. People’s dynamism in every field should be recognized and given a boost. Instead, we are choosing to focus only on the STEM sectors.Investment in research has the power to boost economies. But there should not be a disparity as glaring as the present one.
