India's share of world research output in clinical medicine was a paltry 1.9% in 2010, psychiatry (0.5%), neurosciences (1.

4%), immunology (1.8%), molecular biology (2.1%) and environmental research (3.5%). In mathematics, India's share of world output stood at around 2% in 2010, In case of materials sciences, India's share of world research was at 6.4% in 2010 India's research on physics was 4.6% in 2010 India's largest shares of world research output were in chemistry (6.5%), materials science (6.4%), agricultural sciences (6.2%), pharmacology and toxicology (6.1%), microbiology (4.9%), physics (4.6%) and engineering (4.2%). Only 2.4% of global research on computer sciences was from India in 2010 India's global share of research in economics stood at 0.7% in 2010 while in social sciences it was worse at 0.6%. The biggest declines in volume of research between 1981 and 2010 were in plant and animal sciences (-2.2%) and agricultural sciences (-1.6%). The most significant expansions were in pharmacology and toxicology (+4.2%), microbiology (+3.2%) and materials sciences (+3.1%) It pointed out that India's share of world output in engineering fell from 4.3% in 1981 to 2.2% by 1995. Later, India regained its lost share, increasing to 4.25 by 2010 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-01/india/34197401_1_computersciences-india-research

Although the first half of 2013 has seen a pronounced economic uptick, the global recovery is not as strong as anticipated last year. Economic growth in emerging markets and high-income economies is uneven: growth prospects for many low- and middle-income economies continue to be good, but many high-income economies continue to struggle towards recovery http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/content.aspx?page=gii-full-report-2013

There is need for Indian universities to catch up with their counterparts in the quality of teaching and research. "The number of patent applications by Indians comprised only 0.3 per cent of the total applications filed in the world, a disappointing figure for a country with a share of 17 per cent of the world population "According to an international survey of universities, not a single Indian university figures in the list of top 200 universities in the world. While in the global list we did not figure at all, we had only 11 institutes in the best 300 Asian universities the young workforce of the country should be tapped and the country should "channelise the productive energy of youth" which has the potential to transform the economic fortunes. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-04-29/news/38904530_1_patentapplications-top-200-universities-indian-universities

Highlights of the Recent Thomson Reuters Report

In 2010, Indias share of world research output was 3.5%. Indias share of worlds research output was on a decline from 3.1% in 1981 till the mid-1990s, and regained the 3.1% mark only in 2007. The current trend is therefore an ascending one. [As a benchmark, Chinas share of world publications increased from 2.5% in 1996 to 11.7% in 2010, placing it at #2 globally!]. In terms of disciplines, Indias share of world publications was highest in Agricultural Sciences, Plant and Animal Sciences and Chemistry in 1981. In 2010, the three disciplines in which India had the highest shares were Chemistry, Materials Science and Agricultural Sciences. Indian research still has relatively low impact, though this has improved over time. In 1981-85, Indias citation impact was 0.35 (compared to a world average of 1). By 2006-10, this had improved to 0.68. The disciplines in which Indian research has the highest citation impact are Psychiatry/Psychology (0.99), Engineering (0.95) and Physics (0.82). This means that the citation impact of research in India is below the world average in every discipline, but in at least two disciplines we are approaching the world average, In the period 2006-10, 20% of Indian papers received more than the world

average of citations, and 35% received less than the world average. 45% of Indian papers received no citations at all. 2.7% of Indias papers received more than 4 times the world average of citations, and are labeled as highly cited papers. In 2006-10, Engineering had the highest proportion of highly cited papers (6.5%) and shows an upward trend on this dimension, while both Chemistry and Physics showed a downward trend in highly cited papers. India has 2.3% of the worlds researchers and accounts for 1.6% of world spending on R&D. Indias spending on R&D per researcher is about 80% more than that of China, but about half that of the US (in 2007, in PPP dollar terms). What Needs to be Done

The good news from this report is clearly that the downward trend of research output that began in 1981 was arrested by the mid-1990s, and Indias research output has subsequently been on an upward trajectory. It is important that this trajectory be maintained.

The efforts in recent years to improve funding for Science & Technology, enhance the working conditions in academia and research institutions, and evangelise science education appear to have paid off. The government has programmes like INSPIRE that provide encouragement to budding young scientists. Tighter accreditation of the universities under the revised NAC guidelines and the new appraisal processes for faculty introduced by the UGC should also create pressure to enhance research output across disciplines. So, overall, I suspect that volume increases will not be difficult to sustain.

However, increasing quality is a much trickier issue. Here a more focused effort may be required. The Thomson Reuters report has classified different fields according to a combination of output and impact. There are three fields Engineering, Physics and Materials Science that are the stars, i.e. above the Indian average on both share of world research output and citation impact. These may be the best bets for the future. Three other fields Psychology, Computing and the Social Sciences are above average on citation impact but not on output these offer the opportunity to scale up without losing quality. Of course, a more careful examination of resources, distinctive research opportunities from India, and the existence of a critical mass of researchers will be required before research priorities can be decided upon.

Having higher impact is also related to which journals you publish in. Journals with high impact factors tend to have larger citation impact. Building the right research agendas, being a part of the right networks, skills and aspirations to publish in the top journals are important to be successful in such an endeavor. Some incentivisation to target higher impact journals may also help. At IIMB, our research incentives that are sharply skewed in favour of publishing in higher ranked journals have had some positive impact.

In expanding research output, we need to take some precautions as well. One is to make sure that we guard against fraud. Increased pressure for research performance and incentives linked to output will put our academics whose research skills are poor or rusty at a disadvantage. Some of them may be tempted to resort to fraud to meet institutional requirements for promotion. India is already known as a major source of research fraud, and we will need to put in place better verification and validation processes if we need to prevent this from spreading. A second and related measure is to put in place support systems like mentoring and faculty development programmes to help faculty sharpen their research skills http://jugaadtoinnovation.blogspot.in/2013/07/indias-research-output-quantity.html

For comparative tables, openhttp://www.dst.gov.in/whats_new/whats_new12/report.pdf

To foster innovation, India must become the beacon, the safe haven that respects and rewards intellectual property, a society that upholds and strengthens international commitments, and one that protects intellectual property rights with a vengeance to spur and incentivise innovation. The Indian government, recognising the power of innovation to kick-start socio-economic transformation, declared 2010-2020 as the "Decade of Innovation."

Just last year, the Government of India released its draft National IPR strategy, which is comprehensive. Still, over
the same period, India has erected barriers to international trade and investment across the full range of IP-intensive industries. Its limitations on foreign direct investment and preferential market access policies have limited investment in critical ICT infrastructure development and trade in high-tech products, limiting India's ability to compete in the global innovation economy.

The Indian Patent Controller has revoked patents and has compulsorily licensed biopharmaceutical products, creating an unpredictable environment for future investment in innovation and R&D. There are grave concerns about intellectual property protection in India. The need for innovation is essential to the well-being of every nation.

[https://www.google.co.in/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAB&ur l=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rediff.com%2Fmoney%2Fslide-show%2Fslideshow-1-column-why-india-lags-behind-in-innovation %2F20130708.htm&ei=gmYfUt3lG8T7rAf4n4CIAQ&usg=AFQjCNF3sXna7yk pXyYWpbwMJki6uoMwiA&sig2=ujY529Os6cvS1suOmN6gvg]

India fails to deliver on promises to boost science budget

In January, prime minister Manmohan Singh said the country should aim to double its research expenditure by 2017, to reach 2% of its gross domestic product. Under a new policy on science, technology and innovation, India was supposed to be increasing its number of scientists by 66% by 2017, and enhance private-sector participation in research; the spending targets were also proposed in a five-year plan released in December 2012. But the governments proposals in Indias 201314 budget, released last week, indicate that it is actually trying to cut research spending. Nine research departments* share some US$6.9 billion, a mere 4% more than budgeted for 201213, and below the rate of inflation. the previous years budget for those departments was subsequently revised downwards by some 30%, so that some reports

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2013/03/indiafailstodeliveronpromisestoboostscienceb udget.html

Budget 2013: Hidden rural innovations to get Rs 200 crore fund

He started an edible oil business quickly, but his mind was ticking even as he watched the business grow. All around him in the state were cassava processing plants that were energyintensive, water-intensive, and polluting. With over 800 functioning units, cassava-processing was a big business in Tamil Nadu. Could he make them more economical and environmentfriendly? By 1998, he had developed a machine that uses substantially less water and less energy, but he needed money to commercialise it. He got his break in 2006, when he got a Rs 5.45 lakh grant from the department of science and technology (DST) to apply for a patent. Last year, he got an award of Rs 5 lakh for the best commercialisable patent. On budget day, Finance Minister P Chidambaram announced a special Rs 200-crore fund to scale up inventions like Rayar's grinding machine. He has closed his edible oil business and is now operating a 20-tonne-per-day cassava-processing plant, and is all set to take his invention to the market. "It takes Rs 50-60 lakh of investment to set up a commercial plant," says Rayar. Villages of India are teeming with innovations that go unnoticed, as many of them fall by the wayside through lack of funding. Anil Gupta's fund, for example, has about 70 inventions ready for commercialisation.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/emerging-businesses/startups/budget-2013hiddenrural-innovations-to-get-rs-200-crore-fund/articleshow/18784677.cms graph of patents- http://www.teriin.org/div/briefing_paper_patents.pdf

imp link- http://idjankit.wordpress.com/tag/lack-in-research-and-innovation/