Commented on Does Indian Science Suck?

@VR Suresh: The blog started out by saying that neither my special report nor this accompanying blog aims to be a constant lament on how things are in Indian science. (That applies to the media as well which is in equally bad shape and the fact that we at Forbes India are trying to do sincere journalism in areas that we can, speaks of my belief.) I am a short term pessimist and a long-term optimist. I don't believe in whining and groaning. I agree CNR Rao, for all the long years that he has been in influential positions, he could have done lot more for Indian science, and I don't mean setting up new institutions, but reforming policies and how science is conducted. As for Desiraju, I remember having spoken to him when he was at Hyderabad Central University and he thought IISc was one snobbish place. Look where he landed! At IISc. So some change, even if at select centres, is better than no change.

Commented on Does Indian Science Suck?

http://www.nature.com/news/indian-science-in-need-of-overhaul-1.9750 Check out these positive, "inspired" sound bites by "eminent scientists". The above Nature news article states that: (START OF ARTICLE) 'the PM, advised by his scientific advisory council chaired by CNR Rao, said ' "The problems are not down to funding alone, “but the overall environment for innovation and creative work�. Singh was told that a crisis in leadership is also looming, with not enough young people to take on such roles. The council presented a plan to improve the situation. To solve the leadership crisis, the advisers urge Singh to send as many as 1,000 young people to advanced centres abroad for PhD and postdoctoral studies. It also recommends removing mediocrity from educational and scientific institutions, eliminating bureaucracy, making structural changes for better administration and creating “a large number of small centres of excellence� around outstanding individuals. “This is a real bottom-up approach,� says Lingadahalli Shashidhara, a developmental biologist at the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research in Pune. “It is good to push the average standards upwards; it is key to the success of Indian science.� He adds that he hopes India will also provide well-funded, flexible research positions for foreign researchers. Gangan Prathap, director of the National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources in New Delhi, says that the suggestions are “implementable and long overdue�. Mamannamana Vijayan, a biophysicist at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore and former president of the Indian National Academy of Sciences, agrees. He says that the move for structural changes is laudable, because the existing structure of Indian science is “the single most important hurdle obstructing the flowering of Indian science�. But some are sceptical about how these changes will be implemented. “All this has been seen before but the will to implement it is totally missing,� says Gautam Desiraju, a chemist at the Indian Institute of Science. “As long as the present dispensation continues in the present way, no progressive change can be expected.� Rao says he has indications that the government is taking the panel’s advice seriously. "It has asked us to prepare a set of priority recommendations for rejuvenating science and the structural reforms needed for the purpose," he says. "We have just sent these and we are promised that these will be given place of importance in the coming 5-year plan." ' END OF NATURE NEWS ARTICLE If the flower of Indian science is not already nipped in the bud, the "existing structure" for all their sound bites will definitely do it before they go. If these changes are so important, why didn't they implement them already, especially since they pride themselves on being so far-sighted? There is no system or structure for people who return from abroad and who graduate here, how will it help to send people abroad--or will they be sending favorites abroad on taxpayers' money? When India cannot even assure good opportunities to Indian researchers, should we be speaking of foreign researchers? "Small centres of excellence� around outstanding individuals: beware of these, they already exist and some of these "eminent scientists" already have a stake in these. Such centers are built on funding from taxpayers' money given to certain individuals who have absolutely no accountability and whose misconduct goes completely unchecked by funding agencies and because of the over-generous funding, also by the universities that house these centers. This does not fulfill the mandates of these scientific agencies and bodies to train more researchers and promote Indian research because these central "outstanding" cult figures completely strangle everybody around them and do not allow any intellectual freedom for anybody, not students, not faculty. These centers only promote the careers of these tyrants, their flunkies and their cronies.

Commented on India's Poverty Estimates: Don't just get Outraged, Understand them!

Dear Vishal, there is no fallacy in the argument. The example i gave was to illustrate the broader argument. But that does not mean the example is the exact replica of the Indian economy. By the way, neither is your example the exact replica. There is a rather robust middle class in India unlike your example where there is none. Perhaps we can agree that Prof Tendulkar and his team of experts knew better than both of us as to where the line should be drawn since they knew the data best. But please try to understand the larger argument i am making. The point is not to quibble over a number. The idea behind ascertaining the poverty line is to map the lowest 20% to 30% of the population. It is not to suggest that those immediately above the poverty line in India are terribly well off. I hope many of my responses in the previous comments have made that point clear. Please understand, the debate in India should, esp for the sake of the poor, move away from just quibbling over a poverty number to focussing on improving the efficiency of the poverty alleviation schemes, education and health services - and that these should not be tagged with the poverty line. I hope you understand my view better.

Commented on India's Poverty Estimates: Don't just get Outraged, Understand them!

The fallacy with your argument lies in the example you have taken. Your example- total income in the economy is Rs 100 out of which A earns Rs 35, B earns Rs 30, C earns Rs 20 and D and E earn Rs 10 and Rs 5 respectively. A real example - Total income in the economy is 100 out of which A earns 50, B earns 30, C earns 5, D earns 4, E earns 4, F earns 4 and G earns 2 and H earns 1. Now putting a cap at 2 is not an ideal poverty line for an elevation plan which includes the very poor but does not provide for those who are not in any other way better off. When absolute poverty limits are a dollar a day, as announced by the world bank, keeping such a low poverty line only allows the government to show a smaller figure as the poor as in encompasses lesser number of people and allow for easier window dressing in its reports.

Commented on India's Poverty Estimates: Don't just get Outraged, Understand them!

Great post. Grameen Foundation, where I work, has developed the PPI (Progress out of Poverty Index- a simple 10 question tool based on the NSSO data that is stastically accurate) that can be used by NGOs, development agencies and other stakeholders to reach, target, measure and track changes in poverty levels of beneficiaries, we have to really work hard to get the message across. You must visit our website http://www.progressoutofpoverty.org/india . Would be happy to work with you on an article on this innovative tool that we have developed and which many NGOs and MFIs are now using to transparently evaluate their work rather than rely on anecdotal stories of beneficiaries.