Journal of Science Policy & Governance
​Volume 22, Issue 01 | March 6, 2023

Workshop Report: Workshop on Research Assessment Practices in Indian Funding Agencies 

Bhattacharjee Suchiradipta, Moumita Koley, Jahnab Bharadwaj
  1. DST-Centre for Policy Research, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
​
Corresponding author: b.suchiradipta@gmail.com ​
Keywords: research assessment; science funding; research excellence; SCOPE framework ​
 https://doi.org/10.38126/JSPG220110 ​

Executive Summary

Major funding agencies in India mainly determine the national research agenda. They remain essential stakeholders in research assessment and fund a significant number of projects across the nation. The Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India convened a workshop on April 21, 2022 to understand how the funding agencies assess research projects, where these agencies stand in addressing the inherent challenges of evaluating impactful research, and how to ensure a responsible research culture. The workshop had two objectives: to understand the current research assessment practices of India’s funding agencies and to explore the adoption of broad-based assessment criteria beyond journal-based matrices, incorporating national priorities, Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) targets, and the societal impact of research into the research assessment frameworks. This report discusses the workshop's objective and structure, each component of the workshop and its intended outcomes, and policy recommendations for funding agencies in the research ecosystem.

-Read the full article through download.-

Background header image courtesy of IIHR
Bhattacharjee Suchiradipta is a social scientist with a Ph.D. in Agricultural Extension. Her work revolves around understanding what it takes to sustainably transition to better food systems in low- and middle-income economies. She focuses on theory building and providing evidence for sustainable food system transformation from an agricultural innovation systems perspective in the context of climate change. 
​
Moumita Koley is a scientist who worked in the wet lab, synthesized new biologically active compounds, and designed novel synthetic routes using metal and enzyme as catalysts. Now, she is exploring a few questions: how to make the research ecosystem more responsible, how to make research respond to local problems, and how to drive and fund the research that matters most. 

Jahnab Bharadwaj is currently engaged as a Project Intern for the DORA Community Engagement Grant funded project “Exploring current research assessment practices in Indian academia.” He completed his Masters in Sociology from Delhi School of Economics in 2022.

References

  1. Aksnes, Dag, Liv Langfeldt, and Paul Wouters. 2019. Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open, 9(1), p.2158244019829575. 
  2. Declaration on Research Assessment. 2022. “San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.” sfdora.org, February 23, 2022. https://sfdora.org/read/ 
  3. Department of Science and Technology. 2020. “Draft 5th National Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy.” Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India. https://dst.gov.in/draft-5th-national-science-technology-and-innovation-policy-public-consultati on 
  4. Hicks, Diana, Paul Wouters, Ludo Waltman, Sarah de Rijcke, and Ismael Rafols. 2015. “Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics.” Nature 520, no. 7548 (April 1, 2015): 429–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a. 
  5. INORMS Research Evaluation Group. 2021. “The SCOPE Framework: A five-stage process for evaluating research responsibly.” inorms.net/research-evaluation-group. Accessed July 10, 2022. https://inorms.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/1 1/21655-scope-guide-v9-1636013361_cc-by.pdf 
  6. Jay Bhattacharya and Mikko Packalen. 2020. “Stagnation and Scientific Incentives.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26752. 
  7. Kamps, Rick, Rita Brandão, Bianca Bosch, Aimee Paulussen, Sofia Xanthoulea, Marinus Blok, and Andrea Romano. 2017. “Next-Generation Sequencing in Oncology: Genetic Diagnosis, Risk Prediction and Cancer Classification.” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 18(2): 308. 
  8. Kraemer-Mbula, Erika. “Gender Diversity and the Transformation of Research Excellence,” in Transforming Research Excellence: New Ideas from the Global South, edited by Erika Kraemer-Mbula, Robert Tijssen, Matthew L. Wallace and Robert McLean, 79-91. African Minds. https://www.africanminds.co.za/wp-content/upl oads/2019/12/AMT-Research-Excellence-FINALWEB-02012020.pdf 
  9. Langfeldt, Liv, Ingvild Reymert, and Dag W Aksnes. 2021. “The role of metrics in peer assessments.” Research Evaluation, 30(1): 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa032. 
  10. McKiernan, Erin C., Lesley A. Schimanski, Carol Muñoz Nieves, Lisa Matthias, Meredith T. Niles, and Juan P. Alperin. 2019. “Meta-Research: Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations” eLife. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.47338 
  11. Taylor and Francis. 2023. “The use of metrics in research assessment: share your views. Editor Resources. Accessed on 12.02.2023. https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/pe ersupport/the-use-of-metrics-in-research-assessment/. 
  12. United Nations Organization. 2022. Sustainable development. Accessed July 10, 2022. https://sdgs.un.org/goals 
  13. Wouters, Paul. 2014. “The citation: From culture to infrastructure,” in Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact, edited by Blaise Cronin and Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 47-66. The MIT Press.
DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions published herein are solely attributed to the author and not necessarily endorsed or adopted by the Journal of Science Policy and Governance. Articles are distributed in compliance with copyright and trademark agreements.

ISSN 2372-2193
© 2022 Journal of Science Policy & Governance, Inc. All rights reserved. The opinions, findings and conclusions from JSPG publications and events do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal.