The First Governing Board Meeting of ANRF: A Milestone for India's Research Future
The Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) held its first governing board meeting on September 10, 2024, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Key decisions included the launch of two pivotal programs—Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research (PAIR) and the Mission for Advancement in High-impact Areas (MAHA).
The Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research (PAIR) is a key initiative launched under India's Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF). It aims to promote collaboration between top-tier research institutions and smaller, under-resourced ones. The program operates on a mentorship model, encouraging institutions with strong research capabilities to partner with those lacking such resources. The goal is to enhance research output across the board by sharing expertise, infrastructure, and resources. PAIR is expected to democratize research excellence, ensuring that innovation spreads throughout India’s academic ecosystem.
The Mission for Advancement in High-impact Areas (MAHA) is a strategic initiative under the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) that focuses on fostering research in priority-driven, high-impact fields. The goal is to support solution-oriented research addressing critical scientific and technological challenges through multi-institutional and interdisciplinary collaborations.
Priority areas for the MAHA program include emerging sectors like EV mobility and advanced materials, aiming to advance India's global competitiveness in cutting-edge research and innovation. This initiative encourages applied research to solve real-world problems and propel India’s technological development.
Impact on India’s Ecosystem: The decisions taken in this meeting could transform India’s research landscape by fostering collaborative research between top-tier institutions and under-resourced ones. This mentorship model can democratize research excellence across institutions and regions. The focus on emerging fields like EV mobility and advanced materials could position India as a global leader in these critical sectors. If executed correctly, this ecosystem can unlock India's vast potential for scientific and technological innovation.
However, the challenge lies in implementation. Past initiatives in India have often been hampered by bureaucratic inefficiencies and a lack of accountability. For the ANRF to truly drive innovation, it must ensure that funding is distributed efficiently, that research is tied to real-world applications, and that institutions collaborate effectively.
Are We Too Late to implement ANRF? The Missed Opportunities in India's Research History. Can ANRF Bridge India’s Research Gap
While the launch of ANRF is a positive step, it begs the question—why now? India gained independence 78 years ago, yet initiatives to create a structured research framework like this have only emerged now. The delay has possibly cost India its global competitiveness in many sectors. Countries like the USA, UK, and Germany have long enjoyed the benefits of strong research ecosystems, allowing them to become leaders in technology and innovation.
Why was ANRF not launched earlier?: This delay could be attributed to a historically low investment in research and development (R&D) as a percentage of GDP, inconsistent policy frameworks, and a fragmented research infrastructure.
While India has excelled in areas like IT services and pharmaceuticals, its academic and institutional research system has remained underdeveloped due to a lack of centralized support and an industry-academia disconnect.
Historical Challenges in Indian Academic and Institutional Research System
India’s academic and institutional research system has faced several longstanding challenges that have limited its global competitiveness and innovation output. From insufficient funding and fragmented research infrastructure to the disconnect between academia and industry, these obstacles have slowed progress in developing a world-class research ecosystem. Additionally, bureaucratic hurdles and brain drain have further compounded these issues, making it difficult for Indian institutions to retain top talent and conduct impactful research.
Let's explores the key historical challenges that have shaped India's research landscape and the systemic issues that the ANRF seeks to address in order to transform the country into a global research powerhouse.
Low R&D Investment: India has historically underfunded research, investing less than 1% of its GDP in R&D, significantly lower than global leaders.
Fragmented Research Ecosystem: Lack of coordination between institutions and industries, resulting in silos of knowledge and disconnected research agendas.
Limited Infrastructure: Many institutions, particularly smaller ones, lack the advanced infrastructure needed for high-quality research.
Talent Retention: Brain drain, with top talent often seeking opportunities abroad due to limited domestic research funding and facilities.
Administrative and Bureaucratic Hurdles: Researchers often face extensive bureaucratic processes that delay projects and restrict creativity.
Low Global Competitiveness: Indian research has lagged in global rankings, with few universities consistently appearing in the top tier globally.
How ANRF Aims to Solve These Challenges
India’s research landscape has long been hindered by issues such as underfunded infrastructure, fragmented collaboration between academia and industry, and a lack of global competitiveness.
The Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) is designed to address these challenges head-on. Through initiatives like Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research (PAIR) and Mission for Advancement in High-impact Areas (MAHA), ANRF aims to foster collaboration, increase funding, and streamline processes.
By bridging the gap between top-tier and under-resourced institutions, enhancing infrastructure, and focusing on high-impact areas, ANRF is set to create a more inclusive and competitive research ecosystem that can elevate India’s standing on the global stage.
Increased R&D Funding: ANRF will boost research funding, distributing resources more equitably across a wide range of institutions.
Collaborative Ecosystem: Initiatives like PAIR encourage collaboration between top-tier and under-resourced institutions, breaking down silos and enhancing research capacity across the country.
Infrastructure Development: Through programs like Centres of Excellence (CoE), ANRF will provide advanced research facilities and tools to institutions across India.
Talent Development and Retention: By fostering a vibrant research ecosystem and providing greater opportunities, ANRF aims to retain domestic talent and attract global researchers to India.
Streamlined Processes: ANRF plans to simplify funding applications and administrative procedures, freeing researchers to focus more on innovation rather than bureaucratic processes.
Global Competitiveness: Through targeted research in high-impact areas like EV mobility and advanced materials (under the MAHA program), ANRF aims to elevate India’s global standing in research and innovation.
How Universities Can Align with ANRF Goals for Research Excellence
To fully capitalize on the opportunities presented by the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF), universities in India need to proactively align their research strategies with ANRF’s vision. By focusing on collaboration, innovation, and national priorities, institutions can elevate their research impact and secure vital funding.
1. Participate in Collaboration Initiatives (PAIR):
Engage in partnerships with top-tier institutions to access advanced infrastructure, mentorship, and research support.
Smaller institutions should actively seek partnerships to upgrade their research capabilities.
2. Align Research with National Priorities:
Focus on research areas prioritized by MAHA (e.g., EV mobility, advanced materials), aligning projects with national goals to access greater funding and support.
3. Establish Centres of Excellence (CoE):
Apply for funding to create or enhance Centres of Excellence, building a strong research infrastructure that attracts top talent and global collaborations.
4. Strengthen Industry-Academia Ties:
Actively engage with industries to foster research that has a direct impact on societal needs, ensuring that university projects are aligned with national and global economic goals.
5. Improve Grant Writing and Project Proposals:
Train researchers and faculty in effective grant writing and project proposal submissions to maximize success in obtaining ANRF funding. Institutions should focus on impact-driven projects with clear societal benefits.
6. Leverage Multi-disciplinary Research:
Promote multi-disciplinary collaboration within the institution and with external bodies, particularly in high-impact areas identified by ANRF.
7. Create Administrative Support Structures:
Streamline administrative processes to support researchers in preparing grant applications, managing project timelines, and complying with funding requirements.
8. Foster a Research Culture:
Prioritize the development of a strong research culture across faculty and students, encouraging long-term projects with potential for innovation.
These steps will position universities to take full advantage of ANRF’s funding, infrastructure, and collaborative opportunities, fostering innovation and growth within the institution.
Currently, there is no publicly available detailed platform where universities can directly apply to the ANRF. However, it is expected that the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) will launch a formal application process, possibly through an online portal, where universities and researchers can submit proposals for funding, participate in programs like PAIR and MAHA, and apply for the establishment of Centres of Excellence (CoE).
As announcements unfold, universities should stay updated through official government portals or the Department of Science and Technology (DST) website for specific application details.
Global Comparison: When Did Other Countries Launch Similar Initiatives?
India’s launch of the Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) in 2024 marks a pivotal moment in the country’s effort to elevate its research ecosystem. However, other nations have long-established frameworks that have driven their global leadership in research and innovation. Countries like the UK, USA, China, and Australia have implemented structured research-assessment systems for decades, allowing them to stay ahead in producing ground-breaking discoveries, technological advancements, and high-impact research.
This section explores the timelines of when these countries introduced their own research frameworks, highlighting how they have benefited from sustained, strategic investments in research excellence. Understanding these global models provides valuable insights into how India can position itself competitively in the international research arena.
Other countries have been leading research innovation for decades through centralized frameworks or grant-based systems:
UK: Research Excellence Framework (REF) – Launched in the late 1980s.
USA: Federal Grant System through agencies like NSF and NIH – Functioning since the mid-20th century.
Australia: Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) – Introduced in 2010.
China: Double First-Class Initiative – Launched in 2015.
Italy: Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca (VQR) – Launched in 2003.
Netherlands: Standard Evaluation Protocol (SEP) – Introduced in 2003.
Hong Kong: Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) – First launched in 1993.
France: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) – Established in 2005.
Germany: Excellence Strategy – Started in 2019.
These countries established their frameworks well before India’s ANRF, reaping the benefits of continuous innovation and technological advancement. India's delayed entry into this ecosystem means that it will need to work faster and more strategically to catch up.
Achievements of Countries with Research Frameworks
Countries that have implemented structured research frameworks have consistently reaped the rewards of sustained innovation and technological leadership. Nations like the UK, USA, China, and Australia have leveraged these systems to drive groundbreaking research across fields such as AI, biotechnology, environmental science, and space exploration.
These frameworks have enabled universities to produce world-class research, earn global recognition, and contribute significantly to societal and economic advancements. This section delves into the specific achievements of these countries, showcasing how their research frameworks have paved the way for global leadership in innovation and excellence.
UK (REF): The UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) has been instrumental in driving world-class research. It has produced groundbreaking work in fields like genomics, physics, and environmental sciences. UK universities, such as Oxford and Cambridge, consistently rank among the world’s best and have produced many Nobel laureates.
USA (NSF/NIH): The USA has been a global leader in AI, biotechnology, space exploration, and medicine. Research funded through NSF and NIH has led to pioneering developments like the internet, GPS, CRISPR gene editing, and COVID-19 vaccines. Prestigious institutions like MIT, Harvard, and Stanford have consistently contributed to technological advancement.
Australia (ERA): The Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) has helped the country excel in environmental science, medicine, and biomedical research. Australia is globally recognized for its work on cancer research, climate change, and marine biology, contributing to significant innovations in sustainability and public health.
China (Double First-Class Initiative): China’s Double First-Class Initiative has rapidly boosted its global standing in AI, quantum computing, and advanced manufacturing. The initiative has helped Chinese universities make significant strides in green technology and biotech, placing China among the global leaders in scientific publications and innovation output.
Italy (VQR): Italy's Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca (VQR) has driven excellence in engineering, pharmaceuticals, and cultural research. Italian universities have contributed significantly to global advancements in artificial intelligence and robotics, as well as to historical and cultural studies.
Netherlands (SEP): The Standard Evaluation Protocol (SEP) has established the Netherlands as a leader in water management, agriculture, and sustainable energy. Dutch universities excel in innovative environmental research and renewable energy technologies, and they have played a key role in global solutions to environmental challenges.
Hong Kong (RAE): The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) has enabled Hong Kong to excel in biomedical sciences, urban planning, and financial technologies. Hong Kong’s institutions, like the University of Hong Kong (HKU), are well-regarded for their innovation in public health and technological infrastructure.
France (ANR): France's Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) has significantly advanced research in nuclear energy, public health, and space technologies. French institutions have contributed to breakthroughs in nuclear physics, digital security, and pharmaceuticals, making it a global hub for research in sustainability and biotech.
Germany (Excellence Strategy): Germany’s Excellence Strategy has promoted innovation in engineering, automotive technologies, and renewable energy. German universities are globally recognized for cutting-edge research in quantum mechanics, medical technology, and industrial engineering, maintaining their position as world leaders in precision manufacturing.
Detailed Overview of Each Research Framework
Research frameworks across the globe have been instrumental in shaping the academic and technological prowess of nations. From the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) to China’s Double First-Class Initiative, each country has tailored its system to drive research quality, innovation, and global competitiveness.
These frameworks set clear criteria for evaluating research outputs, societal impact, and institutional performance, guiding the allocation of resources and recognition. In this section, we provide a comprehensive overview of each country’s research framework, examining how they function, their evaluation methods, and the unique characteristics that define their approach to fostering research excellence.
Understanding these models offers a comparative lens through which we can assess the potential of India’s ANRF.
Here’s a breakdown of how each country manages its research:
1. UK (REF - Research Excellence Framework)
Objective: To assess the quality of research in UK universities and allocate government funding accordingly.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research outputs (publications), societal impact, and research environment.
Frequency: Every 5-7 years.
Impact: Institutions are ranked based on performance, which influences funding and reputation. It encourages high-impact publications and applied research that benefits society, but it has faced criticism for fostering a competitive, output-driven culture.
2. USA (Federal Grant System - NSF/NIH)
Objective: Distribute competitive research funding through agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Key Areas of Evaluation: Innovation, feasibility, societal impact, and prior performance.
Frequency: Grants are awarded based on research proposals, often for multi-year periods.
Impact: This decentralized system promotes innovation across universities, encouraging long-term projects. However, it leads to intense competition for grants, which can make research funding unpredictable.
3. Australia (ERA - Excellence in Research for Australia)
Objective: Benchmark Australian research against international standards to guide funding.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research outputs, global relevance, and research environment.
Frequency: Conducted every few years.
Impact: ERA has enhanced Australia’s global research visibility and encouraged institutions to align their outputs with global standards, focusing heavily on quality over quantity of publications.
4. China (Double First-Class Initiative)
Objective: To build world-class universities and disciplines, enhancing China's global academic competitiveness.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research outputs, global rankings, and innovation.
Frequency: Ongoing initiative with periodic assessments.
Impact: China has seen rapid growth in scientific publications and innovations, particularly in AI, biotechnology, and green energy. The framework is heavily output-driven but provides significant resources to the top universities.
5. Italy (VQR - Valutazione della Qualità della Ricerca)
Objective: Evaluate the quality of research in Italian universities and allocate funding based on performance.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Quality of research outputs and their societal and economic impact.
Frequency: Every few years.
Impact: The VQR has helped improve accountability and focus research on areas of societal relevance, but it has also introduced pressure to publish in high-impact journals, which can limit more exploratory or interdisciplinary work.
6. Netherlands (SEP - Standard Evaluation Protocol)
Objective: Encourage long-term strategic research development over competitive rankings.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research quality, impact, and institutional viability.
Frequency: Evaluations occur every six years.
Impact: The SEP emphasizes institutional development and innovation over rankings, encouraging universities to focus on long-term research goals rather than short-term outputs, fostering a more collaborative research culture.
7. Hong Kong (RAE - Research Assessment Exercise)
Objective: Assess research outputs of Hong Kong’s higher education institutions to improve global competitiveness.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research outputs, policy impact, and institutional environment.
Frequency: Every six years.
Impact: RAE has helped Hong Kong universities improve global rankings and foster innovation in biomedical and urban planning research, though it mirrors the competitive pressures seen in the UK.
8. France (ANR - Agence Nationale de la Recherche)
Objective: Promote innovation by funding projects aligned with national and industrial priorities.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Project feasibility, innovation, and societal impact.
Frequency: Continuous funding cycles through competitive grants.
Impact: The ANR drives significant innovation in areas like nuclear energy and public health, but it also fosters competition, similar to the US federal grant system.
9. Germany (Excellence Strategy)
Objective: Support top-performing universities and improve their global competitiveness.
Key Areas of Evaluation: Research outputs, global visibility, and institutional development.
Frequency: Every seven years, with additional reviews.
Impact: The Excellence Strategy has strengthened Germany’s top universities and contributed to global leadership in engineering, renewable energy, and automotive technologies. However, its focus on elite institutions may widen the gap between well-funded and under-resourced universities.
Evaluation Criteria for all major Research Frameworks in the Globe, Including ANRF
Research frameworks across the world use diverse sets of criteria to evaluate and fund research activities, ensuring that the most impactful and high-quality projects receive support. These criteria not only determine how resources are allocated but also influence the direction of research and innovation in each country.
Common evaluation factors include research outputs, societal impact, innovation, and institutional support. In this section, we explore the specific evaluation criteria used by research frameworks in the UK, USA, China, Australia, and other leading nations, while also examining how India’s ANRF aligns with and differs from these global standards.
This comparison helps to highlight the strengths and potential challenges of ANRF’s approach to fostering research excellence.
Each framework of respective Countries has its own criteria for assessing research:
1. UK (REF)
Research Outputs: Quality of publications and outputs (60% weight).
Societal Impact: Contributions of research to society, economy, and culture (25%).
Research Environment: Institutional support for sustaining research (15%).
2. USA (NSF/NIH)
Innovation: Originality and potential for advancement.
Feasibility: Research methodology and execution plans.
Impact: Societal benefits and relevance to national priorities.
Past Performance: Track record of the researcher or institution.
3. Australia (ERA)
Research Outputs: Internationally benchmarked publications.
Global Relevance: How research contributes to global knowledge.
Research Environment: Infrastructure and support for research.
4. China (Double First-Class Initiative)
Research Outputs: Quality and quantity of publications.
Global Competitiveness: Positioning of institutions on global rankings.
Innovation: Research addressing key technological and scientific advancements.
5. Italy (VQR)
Research Quality: Peer-reviewed publications and research outcomes.
Societal Impact: Research’s impact on economy and society.
Institutional Support: Quality of research infrastructure.
6. Netherlands (SEP)
Research Quality: Long-term impact and originality.
Institutional Viability: Strategic vision and infrastructure.
Societal Impact: Contributions to policy and societal needs.
7. Hong Kong (RAE)
Research Outputs: Quality of publications and peer-reviewed results.
Policy Impact: Contributions to regional and national policies.
Research Environment: Institutional ability to support sustainable research.
8. France (ANR)
Innovation: Creativity and originality of proposed projects.
Alignment with National Needs: Societal and economic relevance.
Feasibility: Methodological soundness and execution capability.
9. Germany (Excellence Strategy)
Research Outputs: Global competitiveness in research.
Strategic Development: Long-term institutional research goals.
Collaboration: National and international partnerships.
10. India (ANRF)
Research Outputs: Quality and relevance of publications.
Societal Impact: Alignment with national priorities, industrial needs.
Collaboration: Partnerships between institutions and industry.
Innovation: Research advancing technology and national development goals.
Comparison of ANRF with Global Frameworks
The Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF), recently launched in India, is a transformative initiative aimed at boosting research and innovation across Indian universities.
While it draws inspiration from established frameworks like the UK’s REF and China’s Double First-Class Initiative, ANRF is unique in its emphasis on collaboration between elite and under-resourced institutions. This approach sets it apart from many global counterparts that tend to concentrate resources in top-tier universities.
However, like other metrics-driven systems, ANRF may inadvertently foster competition and pressure on researchers, potentially prioritizing short-term outputs over groundbreaking, long-term research.
Below is a detailed comparison of ANRF with global research frameworks, highlighting similarities and differences in their goals, evaluation criteria, and challenges.
Key Takeaways from the Comparison:
Collaboration and Inclusivity:
ANRF stands out by emphasizing collaboration between elite and smaller institutions. This contrasts with frameworks like the UK’s REF, China’s Double First-Class, and Germany’s Excellence Strategy, which tend to concentrate resources in well-established universities.
Metrics-Driven Approach:
Similar to frameworks in the UK, Australia, and China, ANRF uses a metrics-driven approach, focusing on research outputs and societal impact. However, such an approach may create competition and pressure on researchers to prioritize high-impact, short-term research, potentially limiting the scope for long-term innovation.
Equitable Funding:
ANRF aims to provide equitable funding across a wide spectrum of institutions, making it more inclusive compared to countries like China and Germany, where top universities dominate funding. This is more aligned with Netherlands’ SEP, which emphasizes long-term strategic development across institutions.
Global Competitiveness vs. National Needs:
While ANRF is designed to boost global competitiveness, it places a strong focus on national and societal needs. This differentiates it from frameworks like China’s Double First-Class and the USA’s Federal Grant System, where global competitiveness is prioritized without as much focus on domestic collaboration.
Innovation Focus:
ANRF encourages innovation in high-impact areas (e.g., EV mobility, advanced materials), akin to Germany’s Excellence Strategy and France’s ANR, which focus on advancing technology in national priority areas. However, ANRF places a higher emphasis on equitable collaboration, which makes it distinct.
The ANRF is unique in its collaborative and inclusive approach, offering equitable distribution of resources across a wider range of institutions compared to more exclusive, ranking-focused frameworks like those in China or the UK. However, its metrics-driven nature could introduce competitive pressure similar to what is seen in Australia and the UK, potentially prioritizing short-term research outcomes over long-term, high-risk innovation. To balance competitiveness with inclusivity, ANRF must ensure that exploratory research and long-term goals remain key parts of its strategy, while still fostering global competitiveness.
Understanding ANRF
The ANRF seeks to revolutionize research in India by fostering collaboration between institutions and aligning research with societal and industrial needs. The PAIR and MAHA programs are designed to support both fundamental and applied research.
ANRF will also establish Centres of Excellence (CoE) that will serve as premier hubs for cutting-edge research.
Launched in 2024: The Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) is a pivotal initiative to boost research and innovation across India’s academic and industrial sectors.
Collaboration Focus: ANRF emphasizes collaboration between elite and under-resourced institutions through programs like PAIR (Partnerships for Accelerated Innovation and Research).
Equitable Funding: Aims to distribute research funding equitably across a wide spectrum of institutions, ensuring inclusive growth in the research ecosystem.
High-Impact Areas: Through the MAHA (Mission for Advancement in High-impact Areas) initiative, ANRF focuses on emerging sectors like EV mobility, advanced materials, and clean energy.
Centres of Excellence (CoE): ANRF supports the establishment of Centres of Excellence to enhance infrastructure, promote cutting-edge research, and attract global talent.
Industrial Relevance: Aligns research with national and industrial priorities, ensuring projects contribute to India’s economic growth and technological advancement.
Metrics-Driven Approach: Evaluates research based on measurable outcomes like research outputs, societal impact, and innovation.
Inclusive Research Ecosystem: Encourages multi-disciplinary and cross-institutional research, fostering a diverse and collaborative academic culture.
Global Competitiveness: Aims to position India as a global leader in innovation by enhancing the global standing of Indian universities and research institutions.
Challenges of Pressure: While fostering competitiveness, ANRF’s metrics-driven system may introduce pressure on researchers to prioritize short-term, high-impact projects, similar to challenges seen in global frameworks like the UK’s REF.
Advantages and Challenges for Researchers
Advantages:
Increased funding and infrastructure support.
Opportunity for cross-institutional collaboration.
Focus on national priorities like clean energy and advanced materials.
Challenges:
Pressure to produce high-impact research may result in short-termism.
Bureaucratic hurdles, as seen in global counterparts, could dampen creativity.
As noted in the Nature article, there could be significant mental health pressures due to the competitive nature of the framework.
Challenges Expected in ANRF and Pressure on India’s Academic Ecosystem
ANRF might face several challenges:
Pressure to Perform: Researchers will likely face pressure to meet metrics related to publications and impact, similar to the issues faced by researchers under the UK’s REF and Australia’s ERA.
Funding Competition: Smaller institutions may struggle to compete with larger, better-resourced universities for funding.
Balancing Long-term vs. Short-term Goals: The emphasis on immediate impact could stifle the innovation needed for long-term breakthroughs.
What Needs to Change in ANRF
For the ANRF to avoid the pitfalls seen in other countries:
Encourage High-Risk, High-Reward Research: Create specific funding streams for long-term, exploratory research that may not yield immediate results.
Reduce Bureaucratic Load: Simplify reporting and funding application processes.
Support Innovation over Metrics: Balance the pressure to produce high-impact publications with the need for creative and transformative research.
India’s launch of the ANRF is a bold move toward enhancing its research capabilities, but it must learn from the experiences of other countries. By fostering collaboration, supporting innovation, and balancing metrics with long-term goals, ANRF has the potential to transform India into a global research powerhouse. However, it must be cautious about replicating the pressures and challenges seen in established frameworks, ensuring that researchers have the freedom to innovate without being burdened by excessive competition and bureaucracy.
For more information, please feel free to contact me in the order of my preference:
WhatsApp: +91 8086 01 5111
Email: mail@deepeshdivakaran.com
Phone: +91 8086 01 5111
Comments