The government has introduced significant changes to the operational procedures of the country's largest agricultural research network—the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). The system, which previously allowed scientists to receive promotions simply by demonstrating voluminous reports and scientific articles in closed offices, is now undergoing a radical transformation.
Now, the career advancement of scientists will be determined not only by extensive degrees or old influence but also by alignment with practical needs of the position and the results of work conducted directly in the field. This new system aims to link scientists' activities directly to the interests of farmers, thereby refuting their paper bureaucracy.
These transformations are the result of an initiative by Agriculture Minister Shivaj Singh Chauhan. He is convinced that scientific research is useless until its benefits reach the field of the last farmer in the country. This is why this historic decision was made, intended to implement the slogan 'from laboratory to land.'
Chauhan constantly emphasizes that higher degrees and research conducted in closed rooms are not meant to remain only in files. Until agriculture receives help in solving everyday problems, such as root rot in sugar beets or cotton pests, scientists have no right to claim promotion. The minister's firm stance has clearly signaled to scientists that the criterion for advancement will be solely the well-being and progress of farmers.
To implement these fundamental changes, a high-level commission was established in July 2025 under the leadership of Professor Veda Prakash, former Chairman of the University Grants Commission (UGC). After discussions and investigations, the commission presented its report in December 2025, which has now been fully approved and implemented.
The most revolutionary change is the abolition of individual awards in favor of providing 'remote area bonus points' to diligent scientists who work directly among farmers in remote, underdeveloped, and challenging regions, helping them save crops.
Why were the rules changed? Years ago, our agricultural scientists failed to address basic problems such as onion rot, extending the shelf life of mangoes and lychees, or red rot of sugar beets. The main reason was that scientists' research was limited to controlled laboratories, pots, or small plots within their research centers.
When these technologies are applied in a real farmer's field, exposed to weather, they prove completely ineffective. Scientists never attempted to find permanent or reliable biological solutions to these diseases. Instead, they found new 'shortcuts' by 'changing crop varieties,' which stopped working themselves after three or four years. Their true science amounted to copying foreign technologies and involving farmers in a vicious cycle of expensive seeds and toxic chemicals from multinational corporations. This is why farmers' problems remain unresolved despite billion-dollar budgets.
Some scientists received national awards too quickly and were appointed to high positions. But this game ends now; they must work for the benefit of farmers to reap the rewards of promotion.
This historic and strict decision was made considering the real needs of the country's agricultural sector and eliminating the shortcomings of the old system. It is necessary to understand why the rules were changed.
The old system was entirely personality-oriented, where scientists were appointed to high posts based on their extensive diplomas and personal achievements. Now, the system has become position-oriented, to clarify whether the scientist meets the duties and practical work of that specific position.
Previously, influence or lobbying during interviews was widespread. To ensure transparency and impartiality, the ratio of scores between the evaluation card and the interview is now completely fixed.
Scientists were occupied only with brilliantly designing their profiles and publishing theoretical scientific papers. The goal of the new rule is to take scientists out of laboratories and direct them toward farmer-oriented and industry-needs research so that farmers receive direct benefits.
It is necessary to stimulate practical and field research instead of scattered investigations in areas such as agronomy, animal husbandry, and biotechnology. This will allow for finding precise solutions to serious problems such as climate change, food security, and the water and land crisis, preventing the loss of farmers' crops.
To ensure impartiality in the interview, the score ratio is completely fixed depending on the position. For managerial positions (such as Director, DDG), 70% of the score is based on the evaluation card, and 30% on the interview results. For semi-managerial positions, the ratio is 75% based on the card plus 25% based on the interview, while for the position of principal scientist, it is determined by an 80:20 principle.
