Agricultural Science & Technology

Indicators (ASTI) -

(Indian Perspective)

R. Kalpana Sastry

B. Ganesh Kumar

ASTI in the past

• ASTI

– a comprehensive and trusted source of information onagricultural R&D systems across the developing world.

• Public agricultural R&D

– is almost completely funded by the federal and stategovernments.

• Strong government commitment has resulted in

– a near doubling of public investment in agricultural R&D sincethe mid-1990’s.

• ASTI, so far,

– focused on measuring inputs into agricultural R&D thanoutputs and outcomes.

Structure of Public AgR&D System

• India is well known

– for its committed largest and well-coordinated public

agricultural research systems in the world.

• Has considerable investment during the past few

decades (Pal and Singh, 1997).

• Ranks fourth in total investments in public

agricultural R&D in the world.

• Past evidences indicate

– high rate of returns from agricultural R&D investments.

Investment in AgR&D

ASTI, recent study

• NAARM in collaboration with IFPRI collected data on

– agricultural research capacity, investment and outputs fromthe entire NARS.

• From the entire NARES

– 161 institutions participated

– for the period, 2009-2014.

• Datasets created on

– human resources

– financial resources

– research focus

– outputs.

• Both primary sources and secondary sources were used inthe study.

Results

• The results and policy implications presented under

the following sub-heads:

– Time Allocation of Researchers

– Research Capacity

– Research Expenditure

– Research Focus

– Research Outputs

Time Allocation of Researchers

62.7

35.9

6.2

34.9

15.917.4

7.67.2

7.7 4.6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

ICAR SAU

Others

Administration/Management

Training & Extension

Teaching

Research

• ICAR research staff devoted : 62.7% of their time in research

– Needs to be enhanced ; Suggest for mechanisms to reduce their time spent on

administrative aspects

• AU research staff devoted more time on research (35.9%), followed by teaching

(34.9%) and extension (17.4%)

– Suggest for more time on extension than on research, as per mandated role to cater directly

to the needs of farmers through technological solution

Research Capacity

Total Number of Researchers

2331 31 31

28

97103

110

120114

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

ICAR AU

Ave

rage

nu

mb

er p

er in

stit

ute

FTE Researchers Strength in Public Agricultural R&D Institutions

• Steady Increase in number of researchers working per ICAR institute

• In case of AUs, a steep increase in the initial phase of this period

– May attribute to establishment of many new universities on different sub-sectors

– Leading to recruitments of new faculty

• More number of doctorate qualified candidates enter in ARS-ICAR service compared to

entrants in AUs

• ICAR encourages their scientists to get them qualified with PhD at the initial stages of

their career due to their favourable study leave policy.

Distribution of researchers by Qualification

84%

16%

0%

ICAR

Doctorates

Masters

Bachelors 62%

32%

6%

AU

Doctorates

Masters

Bachelors

Distribution of Researchers by Age

• In ICAR, maximum number of doctorates fall in the age group of 41-50 years, while in AUs,

the same belonged to the age group of 51-60 years.

• Indicates that more number of researchers get qualified with Ph.D. at relatively younger

age in ICAR than in AUs.

• ICAR also a stable manpower policy in terms of recruitment and promotion.

1 20

10 9

65

20

27

21

2

8

1 0

32

7

2

6

1 0

34

5

21 0 0

21

7

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Doctorates Masters Bachelors Doctorates Masters Bachelors

ICAR AU

Ave

rage

nu

mb

er p

er in

stit

ute

FTE Researchers by Age (Years) in Public Agricultural R&D Institutions

<31

31-40

41-50

51-60

>60

Share of Researchers by Gender

• Hesitation of female candidates to take up ARS and the domestic and cultural

compulsions of female researchers.

• Could negatively result in in-breeding of researchers.

• Need to attract them into the system to enhance the overall productivity, as they have

the inherent strength and advantages of taking up research in certain disciplines.

82%

18%

ICAR

Male

Female

79%

21%

AU

Male

Female

Share of Researchers by Gender among Broad

Disciplines of Agriculture

• Agricultural research is carried predominantly by male researchers in both ICAR and AU systems.• In ICAR, the share of female researchers is more in fisheries (32%), followed by social sciences (21%).

- Location of two large fisheries research institute in the state of Kerala, where sizeable share of the researchers are females.

• In AUs, the same is more in social sciences (28%), followed by veterinary (20%). - Most of the AUs has a college or faculty in home sciences which are preferred mostly by women candidates.

80 8291

68

8779

100

8190

8087 85

72 71

20 189

32

1321

0

1910

2013 15

28 29

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%A

gric

ult

ure

Ho

rtic

ult

ure

Vet

erin

ary

Fish

eri

es

Agr

icu

ltu

ral E

ngi

ne

erin

g

Soci

al S

cie

nce

s

Oth

ers

Agr

icu

ltu

re

Ho

rtic

ult

ure

Vet

erin

ary

Fish

eri

es

Agr

icu

ltu

ral E

ngi

ne

erin

g

Soci

al S

cie

nce

s

Oth

ers

ICAR AU

Female

Male

Technical Support Services to Researchers

• Continuous decline is because of not much recruitment of technical staff services in

ICAR system for the past many years due to policy decision.

0.81

0.69 0.670.62 0.64

0.21

0.100.07 0.09

0.11

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Teh

nic

al s

taff

to

Re

sear

che

r ra

tio

Technical Support Services to Researchers in Public Agricultural R & D Institutions

Administrative Support Services to

Researchers

• The reason here is the same as in the case of technical staff recruitment.

0.83

0.67 0.66 0.64 0.63

0.42

0.15 0.150.18

0.29

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Ad

min

istr

ativ

e s

taff

to

Re

sear

che

r ra

tio

Administrative Support Services to Researchers in Public Agricultural R & D Institutions

Other Support Services to Researchers

• Not much recruitment

• Outsourcing and engagement of contractual services

1.34

1.131.10 1.08

1.22

0.52

0.20 0.18 0.17

0.42

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Oth

er

sup

po

rt s

taff

to

Re

sear

che

r ra

tio

Other Support Services to Researchers in Public Agricultural R & D Institutions

HRD Programmes undergone by Researchers

• ICAR: Large scale capacity building programmes implemented by NAIP during the period.

• AU: Perhaps due to the lack of funding for HRD of researchers and unavailability of such

opportunities.

5.8 7.7 9.5 10.8 9.7

56.2

76.6

46.7

64.2

48.0

0.8 1.1 1.8 1.2 2.2

13.2 15.110.5 9.5 8.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

ICAR SAU

Ave

rage

nu

mb

er p

er in

stit

ute

National International

Research Expenditure

Total Research Expenditure

Institutes 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2013-14 2014-15

ICAR 181272.6 198908.4 223281.9 232117.3 253861.8

Agricultural

Universities188370.1 242687.9 291542.2 332716.1 354640.1

Total 369642.7 441596.3 514824.1 564833.4 608501.9

(in lakhs INR adjusted to FTE)

• Expenditure increased in nominal terms. But, the rate of increase

– 88% in AUs

– 40% in ICAR.

• Because several new AUs were formed during this period and more allocation was made

towards creation of infrastructure and payment salaries for the newly recruited staff.

• The increase follows the long term trend in budget outlays for agricultural R&D in the

country.

Share of Cost Components in Research

Expenditure

• Indicates that there is a better and efficient allocation of budget towards research in

the former than in the latter.

• It is also understood by the nature of mandates and activities carried out by these two

categories of institutions in our country.

61%

24%

15%

ICAR

Salaries and benefits for all personnel

Operating and program costs

Capital investments

66%

17%

17%

AU

Salaries and benefits for all personnel

Operating and program costs

Capital investments

Sources of Research Funding

• Major source of funding for research was core government funding.

• The share was more and stable in case of ICAR and less and declining in AUs.– The decline in share from state governments is offset by increasing share from other government sources, which is

mainly ICAR itself through its Education division and other external funding agencies.

• ICAR channels a significant portion of funding to AU as development grants and funding for

AICRP (Pal et al. 2012).

• The significant increase in core government funding in ICAR was due to creation of several

new KVKs during this period .

85.7 82.6 85.7 81.5 83.589.9 86.2

74.968.0

62.0

8.8 11.9 9.69.9

12.17.8

7.720.3

26.527.7

5.2 5.2 4.5 8.3 4.2 1.9 5.0 4.4 5.0 9.5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

ICAR AU

Government (core funding) Government (other) Loans from development banks

Bilateral and multilateral donors Sale of goods and services Other

Research Focus

Time Allocation of Agricultural Researchers

by Commodity

8.9

3.4

6.3

1.9

2.1

1.8

5.7

8.6

2.1

5.4

0.3

0.1

0.0

3.1

18.6

8.1

4.0

14.8

4.9

13.6

7.5

4.8

0.8

1.2

0.1

4.7

3.1

0.6

1.6

0.9

0.6

0.0

1.0

32.7

9.6

3.3

6.3

7.7

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

Cereals

Pulses

Oilseeds

Roots and Tubers

Sugar crops and Sweetners

Nuts

Vegetables

Fruits

Flowers and Orchids

Fibres

Spices

Fodder crops

Stimulant crops

Tobacco, rubber and other crops

Livestock and Poultry

Fisheries

Off farm post harvest

Non commodity categories

Others

Average % per institution

AU

ICAR

Time Allocation of Agricultural Researchers

by Commodity

• ICAR Researchers devoted– more time on agricultural crops (49.7%), including horticultural crops

– livestock and poultry (18.6%),

– non-commodity categories (14.8%)

– fisheries (8.1%).

• ICAR researchers devoted considerable time– non-commodity categories such as natural sources, social sciences, frontier sciences,

etc.

• AU Researchers devoted– more time on agricultural crops (40.4%),

– livestock and poultry (32.7%),

– fisheries (9.6%)

– non-commodity categories (6.3%).

• AU Researchers devoted more time– cereals (13.6%) and pulses (7.5%) than their colleagues in ICAR.

• Relatively more share of time on research on livestock, poultry and

fisheries– might be due to the creation of several new universities separately for these faculties.

Time Allocation of Agricultural Researchers

by Thematic Area

14.9

10.6

9.7

1.5

2.7

1.5

2.4

3.8

2.2

1.0

0.7

0.8

2.1

1.6

1.3

0.7

7.0

5.5

6.0

1.5

2.2

2.2

13.0

2.1

3.0

11.7

11.0

8.8

1.3

5.2

7.6

5.5

13.1

2.9

2.2

2.1

2.5

2.7

2.5

2.9

0.7

1.7

2.4

2.5

1.2

1.2

2.1

4.3

0.4

1.5

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0

Crop genetic improvement

Crop production (incl. agronomic aspects, fertilizer research, INM, etc.)

Crop protection

Other crop-related themes

Animal genetic improvement

Livestock management

Pastures / animal nutrition / feed management

Livestock health

Other livestock related themes

Fish genetic improvement

Fish nutrition

Fish health

Fish resources management (both marine and inland, incl. stock…

Soil

Water

Other natural resources

Biodiversity, germplasm conservation

Frontier areas (nanotechnology, biotechnology, etc.)

On-farm storage, post harvest management and processing

Food safety

Agricultural engineering / Farm mechanization

Farming systems

Socio-economics and policy research, Extension, Information science,…

Gender

Other

Average % per institution

AU

ICAR

Time Allocation of Agricultural Researchers

by Thematic Area

• ICAR devoted slightly more time (14%) on research in the thematic

areas of crop genetic improvement than AUs (11.7%).

• Both devoted equal share of their time on crop production (10.6% and

11%) and crop protection (9.7% and 8.8% respectively).

• As understood, ICAR researchers spent considerable time on research

– biodiversity and germplasm conservation

– frontier areas

– food safety

– on-farm storage, post-harvest and farm mechanization

– socio-economic research than their counterparts in AUs.

• AUs work more on

– variety and breed improvements for extension to the public stakeholders.

Research Outputs

Development of new crop varieties, new animal /

poultry / fish breeds, strains, lines, transgenics and

new agricultural technologies

Category

Number of

Institutes

Reported

No. of the developed products/

varieties/ breeds

Total Average

ICAR

Crops 22 339 15.41

Animals 9 40 4.44

Microbes/ Transgenics /Lines 6 90 15.00

Technologies/ Products 52 607 11.67

AUs

Crops 08 161 20.1

Animals 08 19 2.4

Technologies/ Products 14 280 20

• It is one of the very important indicators of agricultural R&D outputs by the

NARS system.

Publications, 2009-10 to 2013-14

• The productivity of researchers in terms of research papers in national and international

journals and e-publications/open access articles in ICAR witnessed a positive trend. On an

average, the researcher in ICAR produces 1.97 and 0.87 papers in national and

international journals per annum respectively.

0.380.54

0.69 0.730.87

0.73

1.45

1.09

0.72

1.070.99

1.331.50

1.63

1.97

3.35 3.31

4.59

3.94

3.59

0.08 0.040.21

0.060.17

0.010.16 0.16 0.08 0.13

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

ICAR SAU

Research articles in international journals Research articles in national journals e-publications / open access articles

Recognitions and Awards received by

Researchers, Teachers, Extension specialists

and Institutes

• An increasing trend is seen towards the recognitions and awards especially from the

Professional Societies and national awards.

• The award pattern in AUs were similar to ICAR.

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

ICAR AU

Rec

ogi

nit

ion

s p

er r

esea

rch

er

International Award National Award State Award Awards from professional societies

Policy Recommendations

Research Capacity ICAR AUs

i. Manpower Current efforts on manpower

requirement should be

continued in a phased manner.

Shortfall in positions of faculty

in AUs needs to be

augmented.

ii. Study Leave Policy Current study leave policy

should be continued.

AUs warrant a more

favourable study leave policy.

iii. Gender Need to develop adequate

policy for recruitment such as

special drive, choice of

posting, preference for certain

disciplines, etc. to attract more

women researchers into ICAR.

Need to develop adequate

policy for recruitment such as

special drive, choice of

posting, preference for certain

disciplines, etc. to attract more

women researchers into AUs.

iv. Job Profile More time should be devoted

on research by the scientists.

Efforts should be made by the

faculty to enhance their

activities on extension.

Policy Recommendations

Research Expenditure ICAR AUs

Investments on R&D Investments on operating

and programme costs

should be enhanced to

improve the research

efficiency in ICAR.

Investments on operating

and programme costs

should be enhanced to

improve the research

efficiency in AUs.

Policy Recommendations

Research Focus ICAR AUs

Thematic area Continue focus on issues of

national importance

particularly in areas of

biodiversity conservation;

Post harvest technology-

storage and management;

frontier areas to give

stewardship of broad areas

in agricultural research.

More focus on applied

research viz. varietal

development and plant

protection measures for

adoption to the

requirements of the

state/region.

Policy Recommendations

Research Outputs ICAR AUs

Publications Encourage the current trend

of increase of papers in

peer-reviewed journals and

open access periodicals.

Faculty need to publish

more on NAAS rated

journals to improve their

research productivity.

• Need to institutionalize the initiative of recording these vital information in NARES

• AUs should start the system of publishing Annual Reports as in the case of ICAR

• ICAR could think of sensitizing the higher authorities of AU system about the utility of the information generated for convincing the poliy makers and donors

• Private sector which considerably supports the Agricultural R&D should be covered in future surveys

Future Directions

Thank You