Scientific research has many cheater cocks
The ongoing case of scientific misconduct against Deepak Pental, former vice-chancellor of Delhi University and a leading scientist engaged in genetically modified (GM) research, has once again brought into focus the enormity of this problem in India. All such episodes which involve plagiarism of research papers, falsification of research data and mishandling or theft of sensitive research material such as GM seeds fall in the category of scientific fraud or scientific misconduct. The number of such cases is on the rise.
Not long ago, this paper reported how agriculture scientist KC Bansal made a false patent claim relating to his work on GM brinjal, based on which he won the top award of the Indian Council of Agriculture Research. The council not only ignored the charge but promoted Bansal as director of the national gene bank. Director of another ICAR institute, Keshav Kranthi too faced plagiarism charges over research papers on GM cotton co-authored by him and a junior scientist. The most recent case is of scientists from Hyderabad-based National Research Centre on Meat filing patent applications on already known technologies and winning awards based on such claims. The story of developing an indigenous variety of GM cotton is filled with misconduct and fraud, as exposed in the Sopory Committee report, but the scientific establishment has not just ignored the findings but has been protecting those named in the report.
The common threads in all cases of misconduct are research papers and patents. The system of incentives, awards and promotions in Indian scientific institutions depends of number of research papers published and patents obtained by a scientist. That’s the reason scientists many a times go in for short cuts to inflate the number of papers to their credits and file half-baked patent claims. They tout patent applications as their achievements in annual reports, institute websites and applications for awards fully knowing that not all applications become patents. Unfortunately, we have no institutional mechanism to deal with scientific or research misconduct. Most of the time complaints are made to institute directors or government agencies which tend to hush up the cases as it reflects poorly in their oversight mechanism. Sometimes institute directors or their cronies are involved. Funding agencies like the Department of Science and Technology and the Department of Biotechnology or science academies have no framework to address the problem.
It is high time the government sets up an independent authority to handle cases of scientific frauds, on the lines of America’s Office of Research Integrity. It is important that such a body is made independent of funding agencies and research councils for it to remain free of influence of top scientists.
At present, several cases of misconduct are being investigated by the Society for Scientific Values (SSV), but it has no teeth and is a voluntary effort. Till a permanent scientific fraud office is established, SSV may be officially empowered to investigate cases of scientific misconduct.