Page 45 - EW-January-2026

praisal Committee (GEAC) under the Ministry of Environ- tions. Professors are evaluated based on publications in
ment must approve it. If it involves recombinant DNA, the academic journals, not on industry impact. A professor
Department of Biotechnology’s Recombinant DNA Advi- who spends half her time on industry research experiences
sory Committee is involved. If the trial tests a device rather lower evaluations than a professor who publishes obscurely
than a drug, the Central Drugs Standard Control Organi- but frequently. UGC reinforces this through accreditation
zation (CDSCO) has different rules. If it’s an agritech trial and funding criteria. The result: faculty focusing on theory
involving drones, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation rather than practice.
(DGCA) must approve. If it uses wireless spectrum, TRAI But the market prefers innovators. Leading compa-
must concur. And if the startup accesses any government nies — TCS, Infosys, Wipro, and newer startups — are shift-
land, the Ministry of Defence gets involved. ing to capability-based hiring. They hire for demonstrated
One startup. Seven government agencies. No unified ability rather than pedigree. Tech companies are hiring
window. No coordinated timeline. bootcamp graduates into meaningful roles. The market is
But change is possible and beginning. The RBI’s fin- already accepting alternative credentials; formal recogni-
tech sandbox, launched in 2019, proved that regulatory tion will likely follow. Some IITs are experimenting with
flexibility works. UPI succeeded precisely because govern- industry partnerships where professors spend time in com-
ment created specific regulatory space for it. GIFT City’s panies while maintaining academic positions. These are not
financial sandbox has achieved remarkable results — 68 widespread yet, but they signal that capability-based evalu-
percent of all Web3 and fintech unicorns launched in India ation is possible even within the existing system. Alterna-
in 2025 are headquartered in GIFT City, not Bangalore. tive credentials like bootcamps exist, but UGC and AICTE
This demonstrates that when regulatory bodies get flexibil- don’t formally recognize them. This regulatory gatekeeping
ity to experiment, innovation accelerates. The challenge is protects the existing system at the expense of merit-based
that these sandbox successes remain exceptions rather than hiring.
standard practice. They need to be systematized across bio- Brain drain paradox. India mourns the exodus of tal-
tech, autonomous systems and green energy sectors. ent to the US, Canada, and the UK as if it’s a betrayal. It’s
Bias toward three cities. India’s innovation is suffocat- not. It’s a rational choice made by individuals responding
ing under concentration in Bangalore, Delhi, and Mumbai. to perverse government incentives.
This creates an illusion of an ecosystem while hollowing Indian Ph Ds in nanotechnology earn 5x more, working
out rest of the country. The structural bias is real: venture in world-class labs in the US, and contribute to cutting-edge
capital, top talent, and regulatory familiarity are concen- research. Of course they leave. What’s tragic is that India’s
trated in three metros. government institutions have made conditions so uncom-
The Ministry of Science and Technology, working petitive that remaining feels irrational. Salaries in India’s
through DST and DSIR, has historically funded research research institutions are laughably low compared to private
institutions in metro areas. CSIR laboratories are concen- industry. Lab infrastructure is outdated. Career advance-
trated in Delhi, Bangalore, and Hyderabad. The IITs are ment requires navigating committee approvals rather than
predominantly in cities with existing infrastructure. This demonstrating capability. The Department of Science and
isn’t because Tier-2 cities lack talent; it’s because govern- Technology and DSIR have budgets, but much of it flows
ment funding followed historical infrastructure. Centraliza- to bureaucratic overhead rather than researcher salaries
tion has become self-reinforcing. or lab equipment.
Yet Tier-2 cities are already emerging as innova- Path forward: accelerating reforms that already
tion hubs despite systemic neglect. Pune hosts 3,200 exist. India’s higher education and innovation challenges
startups and seven unicorns, driven by strength in edtech aren’t mysterious. They are rooted in specific government
and enterprise software. Ahmedabad has 2,100 startups bodies — UGC, AICTE, DCGI, DBT, DST, and DSIR — op-
specializing in agritech and fintech, backed by state funds erating without coordination, without outcomes-based
and GIFT City’s ecosystem. Hyderabad has emerged as a accountability, and without incentives to change. The Na-
pharma and biotech hub with 384 funded deals since 2014. tional Education Policy 2020, the National Research Foun-
These didn’t happen by accident; they happened because dation, regulatory sandboxes, and distributed innovation
talent found these cities, capital followed talent, and com- hubs represent genuine reform attempts. But implementa-
panies found problems worth solving locally. tion has been inconsistent and underfunded. The question
Talent pipeline. UGC controls degree standards. AICTE isn’t whether these reforms are needed; it’s whether India
controls which technical programs are offered where. Be- will commit to accelerating them.
tween them, they’ve built a system where your college de- Uncomfortable truth. The uncomfortable truth is that
termines your ceiling more than your capability. In the US, India’s higher education and innovation system won’t
a school dropout can start a company. In India, not having change until the bodies responsible for its dysfunction face
an IIT degree closes most doors. consequences for implementation delays. UGC has com-
The 1.5 million engineering graduates India produces missioned reviews concluding it needs reshaping. AICTE
annually are mostly underemployed or unemployable. This has acknowledged its overlap with UGC. The Ministry of
isn’t a skills shortage; it’s a quality crisis rooted in how UGC Science and Technology has proposed reforms. Yet sub-
and AICTE define competence. They measure it through stantive change remains marginal because nobody is held
exam scores, not through ability to solve real problems. You accountable for implementation. Budget reviews happen,
can graduate from an IIT without having built anything, proposals are made, reports are filed — and the system per-
designed anything, or contributed to any market-relevant sists largely untouched.
project. (Roy Aniruddha is Founder & Chairman, TechnoStruct Academy, San
The IITs themselves are constrained by UGC regula- Francisco, USA)

JANUARY 2026 EDUCATIONWORLD 45