A comparative analysis with global research systems further exposes the precarious position of India. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom have well-established, decentralized research evaluation mechanisms, but they are backed by strong institutional support and funding. The UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) and the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) ensure quality control in journal selection without stifling academic freedom. Germany maintains a centralized model through the German Research Foundation (DFG), while China mandates journal listings approved by government agencies to ensure research credibility.
Dr. Viswanath Pandey
(DFG), while China mandates journal listings approved by government agencies to ensure research credibility. India’s haphazard shift towards decentralization, in contrast, lacks the foundational infrastructure needed for such a transition to be successful.
The broader question that emerges is whether India’s research ecosystem is being deliberately weakened. Between 2000 and 2014, India made significant strides in research under various governments. The establishment of premier institutes, enhanced funding for research projects, and international collaborations saw a gradual rise in India’s academic influence. However, post-2014, experts have noted a steady decline in research output and quality. Government data shows that India’s research funding as a percentage of GDP has stagnated at around 0.65%, significantly lower than China’s 2.4% and the U.S.’s 2.8%. In absolute terms, China’s research and development (R&D) expenditure was nearly 25 times that of India in 2022. The lack of consistent funding, coupled with bureaucratic hurdles, has stifled innovation and made it increasingly difficult for Indian researchers to compete on a global stage.
The implications of this neglect are dire. A study published by the Stanford Center for International Development revealed that India’s contribution to high-impact research remains dismally low, with only 3% of the world’s top-cited papers originating from Indian institutions. Meanwhile, China and the U.S. dominate the academic landscape, securing over 40% of such publications. The dismantling of structured journal evaluation mechanisms only exacerbates this issue, making it harder for Indian researchers to gain recognition in the international academic community.
Critics argue that the government’s decision to end the UGC-CARE list is yet another example of the systemic underinvestment in higher education. Instead of strengthening research institutions and providing better funding, the government has chosen to abdicate its regulatory role under the guise of promoting academic freedom. The financial justification provided—that decentralization will reduce administrative costs—is seen as a mere pretext for cutting expenses at the cost of academic excellence. No concrete data has been released on the projected cost savings, making the argument even weaker.
The academic community is already witnessing the fallout of this decision. Universities are struggling to establish their own criteria for evaluating journals, leading to discrepancies in what is considered a “reputable” publication. This creates an unfair playing field where researchers from well-funded institutions may have access to better evaluation mechanisms, while those from underfunded universities will be left to navigate the murky waters of predatory journals on their own. Such a fragmented system threatens to increase academic inequality, disproportionately affecting scholars from smaller institutions and marginalized communities.
International comparisons reveal the flawed logic behind this move. While decentralization is not inherently bad, successful models function only when backed by substantial institutional support. The U.S., for example, has independent journal evaluations conducted by multiple agencies, but each institution has extensive research funding, clear evaluation frameworks, and a rigorous peer-review culture. In contrast, India’s academic ecosystem lacks such safeguards, making decentralization a risky experiment that could backfire. Educationist Prof. Ramesh Thakur warns, “We are trying to replicate Western models without the infrastructure to support them. This will only lead to confusion, manipulation, and a decline in research credibility.”
The argument that the previous UGC-CARE list was flawed holds merit. The list was criticized for bureaucratic inefficiencies, inclusion of predatory journals, and delays in updating the database. However, instead of reforming the system, dismantling it entirely seems like an extreme step. A more pragmatic approach would have been to strengthen oversight, introduce transparent evaluation criteria, and integrate international best practices to refine the journal selection process.
The broader question remains: Is India’s research sector being intentionally weakened, or is this a case of misplaced priorities? The government’s focus on infrastructure development, digital initiatives, and industrial growth is commendable, but the neglect of higher education and research will have long-term consequences. A robust research ecosystem is the backbone of national progress, driving innovation, technological advancement, and global competitiveness. Without strategic investment in academic research, India risks falling further behind in the knowledge economy.
The discontinuation of the UGC-CARE journal listing is a decision fraught with risks. While the intention to decentralize journal evaluation may sound progressive, the lack of supporting infrastructure makes this move a perilous one. The impact on PhD researchers, the growing threat of predatory journals, and the overall decline in research quality paint a grim picture of India’s academic future. The government must reconsider its approach and engage with experts, universities, and researchers to develop a more balanced, well-structured system that upholds academic integrity without compromising accessibility. Failing to do so will not only weaken India’s research sector but also diminish the country’s standing in the global academic community.
(Writer, a Ph.D. in Sociology, is a well-recognised author and columnist. For past over three decades, he has served in various administrative and academic capacities at Banaras Hindu University. He can reached pandeyvpn@gmail.com)
