© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Manindra Agrawal, Director of IIT Kanpur, on AI, systematic flaws driving India’s coaching boom and the changing face of India’s research ecosystem. This session was moderated by Deputy Editor Amitabh Sinha.
Technology is changing our lives dramatically. Technology that was not even known 10 years ago has seeped into our lives so much today that we don’t really pay attention to it. The current generation cannot imagine life without mobile phones but many of us know that we lived perfectly well without them.
When it comes to India, initially, we relied on technology being developed and produced outside. We just adapted to it, there were no real innovations happening. But things are changing. Aadhaar was the beginning. Unified Payments Interface (UPI) was certainly a remarkable innovation that brought huge changes.
As we go forward, we need to become increasingly self-reliant on at least critical technologies. One cannot hope to produce all the technologies but we need to have sovereignty over certain critical technologies. The academia, industry and the government need to join hands, especially when it comes to critical technologies that require significant investment and a long gestation period.
It has started happening. For example, in 2020 the National Mission on Interdisciplinary Cyber-Physical Systems (NM-ICPS) nucleated a lot of activity across India. We now have the National Quantum Mission (NQM, 2023), IndiaAI Mission (2024), India Semiconductor Mission and several others that have either started or are in the pipeline.
This is complemented by the Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Fund, which is led by the Anusandhan National Research Foundation. It is targeting the development of key technologies and will be led by industry and supported by academia.
On cloud seeding in Delhi | ‘On the day we did the seeding, we were very aware that the cloud moisture content was quite low, below 15 per cent. We knew that it was not going to rain. We did it as an experiment — to collect data’
Story continues below this ad
Amitabh Sinha: The trend, not very long ago, was to go in for international cooperation on most frontline technologies. What has prompted a reversal and emphasis on self-reliance now?
The movement has changed, to an extent. Ten years ago, the general belief was that major countries, apart from a few exceptions, will cooperate when it comes to key technologies. There were barriers to nuclear and some defence technologies — that was understandable — but otherwise the belief was that there will be cooperation for key technologies. Now that belief has been shaken.
For instance, when the European Union (EU) sanctioned certain Indian companies for importing Russian oil and based on that Microsoft blocked the software access to a company called Nayara Energy, no one expected this could happen. That matter got sorted out but the key takeaway was that if the US decides to have an adversarial relationship with India tomorrow, they can simply instruct US-based companies to cut off access and we cannot do anything. All our data will be gone and that is a scary thought. Some may say that is an extreme thought and it’s not going to happen but we have to be mentally prepared for such an eventuality. It is not an unthinkable situation.
Amitabh Sinha: Should Indian companies then be developing operating systems (OS), business suites and office software? Recently, several government applications shifted to software made by an Indian company. Is that the way forward? Do we have enough expertise and resources to build these on our own?
We do have expertise and the ability. It is after all Indian talent which has developed the software in the US, not exclusively Indian but a lot of them originated from India.
What we need is significant investment and patience. If you are looking to develop an OS, it’s a long haul. Also, the model has to be correct. There have been attempts to develop an Indian OS. Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC) developed an Indian OS called Bharat Operating System Solutions.
However, it is one thing to develop the software and a completely different ballgame to maintain and keep upgrading it. There has to be a large group of people committed towards this. It can neither happen in the government sector nor in academia. It has to happen in the private sector. The government’s role is to nudge for this to happen. They cannot mandate it, but they can certainly facilitate it.
On developing critical technologies | ‘One cannot hope to produce all the technologies but we need to have sovereignty over certain critical technologies. The academia, industry and the government need to join hands’
Amitabh Sinha: What are the few technology areas where India needs, and has the capability, to become a world leader?
These have to be strategic areas that are absolutely critical to the way we function. Foundational software like an operating system, email or browser, the things that we use every day. On the hardware side, we need to start making chips. Making a processor chip can wait because we are still far off from there but we can at least start designing and making other chips. There has been some progress towards that. Another critical domain is space. The way space is being used for various strategic activities, we cannot afford to be left behind.
Then, of course, AI. It’s not just limited to large language models (LLMs) but essentially the ability to develop and use models for major tasks. Everyone is talking about the very futuristic Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). It is not coming anytime soon but it is something we must develop our expertise in. Cyber security is another very important domain.In the healthcare sector, we should be developing many of the devices and medicines ourselves.
These are just some of the things that immediately come to mind, but I’m sure there are others too.
Nikhil Ghanekar: IIT Kanpur has been questioned about the timing of the recent cloud seeding experiment in Delhi. How prudent was it to carry out such an experiment outside the monsoon season?
Cloud seeding is an SOS measure. It is not a permanent solution to the pollution problem. Doing it during the monsoon defeats its purpose because there is barely any pollution at that time.
On the day we did the seeding, we were very aware that the cloud moisture content was quite low, below 15 per cent. We knew that it’s not going to rain. We did it as an experiment — to collect data and improve our understanding. We wanted to collect data on the changes that would happen with the amount of seeding material we pumped in when the conditions were the way they existed at that time. We would like to continue doing this to understand what works and what doesn’t.
Amitabh Sinha: Are there any efforts to make it more attractive for Indian talent abroad to return and work in India? What opportunities are being created for foreign professionals to come here and contribute to technology development?
We can be grateful for one effort, done in the US, which forced a lot of Indians living there to think about coming back to India. From our side, there is a proposal, which I think is almost finalised by the Government of India, to create a very attractive offer for well-accomplished people who have a strong track record regardless of their age, to bring them back to Indian academic institutions. There is a special package which will be offered to help them settle down and set up their labs.
Amitabh Sinha: Are premier institutions like IITs and other scientific institutions doing enough to offer a real challenge to academics to move back to India?
I would say, partly yes. There was a time when the academia was primarily focused on teaching, and rightly so. In those days, we wanted to train more people. Then the effort was directed towards doing research, publish papers and guide PhD students. Many institutions have done quite well in that direction but there wasn’t much interaction with the industry. However, since the last decade, there has been a growing realisation in academia that one must not only research but also look at the aspects of translating that research from the lab to a solution which is impactful on the ground.
The Government of India has taken a conscious decision to promote this. A large amount of funding has been pumped into missions, with a very clear mandate that the output cannot just be research papers but also technologies. The academia is responding to it.
Ritika Chopra: What are the important changes that India must bring in its academic and research ecosystem to retain foreign faculty?
While we do provide freedom to our faculty to pursue their own activities, we have broadly a very permissive attitude towards non-performance. There are some positive aspects of this and some negative. The positive side is that it does not create too much unhappiness in the system. But the downside is that the faculty who need some amount of push to do well end up, perhaps, not achieving that much.
We consider ourselves a meritocracy in academia. The merit has to be kept front and centre. We have to evolve ways of making that happen. We don’t have to go to the level in certain US universities, where everyone is competing against everyone. We need to adopt certain very good practices that are followed there, which keep the edge going in the academic world.
Another thing would be facilities. The government also has to step in there. We get some funding and create a certain set of facilities for doing research. It is equally important to upgrade equipment. There is often little money available for that purpose. That has to change. If that doesn’t get fixed, we will not be able to provide a strong setup or environment for these researchers to work.
Harish Damodaran: How many startups have you incubated?
Our incubator has just crossed 500 startups since its beginning, which was 25 years ago. Generally, a startup is incubated for two-three years in our incubator. Many of our faculty, around 50 out of 570, have nucleated their own startups. Some of them are on the way to becoming very successful. These are primarily the younger faculty who are moving in that direction.
Pallavi Smart: You spoke about the government encouraging academic institutions to seek funds from the industry. Do you see industry players focusing on certain commercial ideas or those with lesser periods of translating into technology?
This is a transition period, so there are still challenges and the industry is also undergoing a transformation. Earlier the use of technology was not so predominant. A lot of services were there. Some products were two generations behind what was available. Those things are changing.
Staying at the cutting edge requires constant R&D (research and development) and academia is best suited for that. So that kind of relationship or partnership is now getting formed. However, Indian academia is still primarily an unproven resource for the industry. If they need a critical problem to be solved, and they have money to spend, they tend to go to a university with a proven track record, and these are often found in the US. There is a lack of confidence — not necessarily the ability — in Indian academia solving their problem in a timely fashion.
Amitabh Sinha: You have previously spoken against over-reliance on coaching. What is wrong with the system that makes coaching institutes so successful?
Whenever there is significant gap between demand and supply, things like coaching will come in. We certainly have a significant gap in the number of students wanting high-quality engineering education and the number of such seats available. The total seats available in IITs, NITs and IIITs would be less than 50,000 and the number of students wanting to get in is 10 or 20 times more.
What also doesn’t help is the admission test. That is quite amenable to coaching, in the sense that with coaching you can do significantly better than without. In theory, there is nothing wrong with coaching. But what has been happening because of the way the tests are, the coaching institutes teach students tricks to produce the correct solution without actually solving the problem. So when they enter the IITs, their ability for problem-solving is not developed properly. We also find it challenging to teach them.
We should have a better way of testing students. I’ve been championing that along with some other faculty members. If we can, then we may get better students because there is certainly a group of students who are bright but for some reason they are not able to either afford coaching or simply are not interested in that two years of very painful preparation.
Harikishan Sharma: Several children who do coaching go to dummy schools from class nine onwards. What kind of behavioural challenges do you face with such students?
Because they are just too focused on coaching in their formative years, many children do not fully develop the ability to interact, work together, and end up being loners in campuses. Moreover, because of the very protective environment they have grown up in, many also find it somewhat challenging to deal with difficult situations. At times it gives rise to mental heath difficulties, depression and other problems. We are seeing that increasingly now.
The mode of interaction has changed from earlier generations. The ability to be in a difficult situation and manage it has also changed and this is leading to certain challenges. Add to that a significant increase in the student population on campus. It is putting a lot of stress on the institute’s resources in terms of keeping their mental health sound. We are all struggling to address it.
Amitabh Sinha: You said the number of quality engineering seats are still very few. There are 23 IITs. Is there a need for more? Also, what is your assessment of the newer IITs?
One has to give the new IITs some time. We now have three generations of IITs. There is the old generation. Then there is a generation which started around 2008 or so — these are Gandhinagar, Ropar, Patna and Hyderabad. Then another generation of IITs started around 2015-16 — IIT Goa, IIT Dharwad and so on. The third generation, I would say, needs some time to really come up to speed.
Many of the second generation IITs are doing quite well. Of course, the first generation of IITs is doing quite well. For a country the size of India, there should be many more high-quality institutions. The challenge is getting the right faculty for them. If you don’t set up that culture, the processes, the right approach of the faculty initially, and this institution starts evolving differently, then it becomes a big challenge to correct that. So that’s where the key bottleneck is.
Abhinaya Harigovind: Several foreign universities are now setting up campuses in India and two IITs have also opened abroad. How do you access the impact of foreign universities setting up campuses here? Are there any concerns?
If good universities come here, they provide good education. It’s a net positive because clearly the demand is far more than what we can address so far. The concerns do remain that one would hope that they don’t treat this whole exercise as just a way to make money because then the quality of education will suffer, they will only sell their name. That is something I hope that everybody involved is going to take care of.
