THE Higher Education Commission initiated a programme Start-up Research Grant Programme (SRGP). Fresh PhD faculty appointed under interim placement of fresh PhDs (IPFP) is eligible to apply for a research project that enables them to experience developing basic research infrastructure.

The applicant becomes in-charge of the project, technically called principal investigator, whereas principal investigator is the permanent faculty member from the institution where the principal investigator is inducted.

The execution of the project that includes release of funds, purchase of items, setting up experiments, optimisation of protocols, etc., takes at least nine to 10 months, hence little time is left for actual research as IPFP agreement is only for 12 months.

The HEC tells the universities that the IPFP appointees should be given a chance to continue by advertising the position and follow the selection procedure. But this is exploited by the universities and positions are hardly advertised. Even they are advertised the IPFP appointees are not preferred.

The situation becomes worse when the IPFP faculty has to leave the university and the project is shifted to co-principal investigator. All the benefits go to the institution’s permanent faculty leaving the IPFP faculty nowhere.

The new principal investigator (permanent faculty member) completes the project, produces MPhil or PhD students and gets credit on his/her curriculum vitae at the cost of intellectual property of the young IPFP.

The principal investigator should be given time to complete the project and submit the final report followed by publication. The original principal investigator should have the right to publish the research paper as main corresponding author of the any publication that comes out from the proposal submitted by the IPFP grantee. This will provide some justice to the young PhDs at the start of their career.

The HEC should ensure that IPFP appointees are given a fair chance.

Dr Nazia Kanwal

Lahore

Published in Dawn, April 22nd, 2019

Opinion

In defamation’s name

In defamation’s name

It provides yet more proof that the undergirding logic of public authority in Pakistan is legal and extra-legal coercion rather than legitimised consent.

Editorial

Mercury rising
Updated 27 May, 2024

Mercury rising

Each of the country's leaders is equally responsible for the deep pit Pakistan seems to have fallen into.
Antibiotic overuse
27 May, 2024

Antibiotic overuse

ANTIMICROBIAL resistance is an escalating crisis claiming some 700,000 lives annually in Pakistan. It is the third...
World Cup team
27 May, 2024

World Cup team

PAKISTAN waited until the very end to name their T20 World Cup squad. Even then, there was last-minute drama. Four...
ICJ rebuke
Updated 26 May, 2024

ICJ rebuke

The reason for Israel’s criminal behaviour is that it is protected by its powerful Western friends.
Hot spells
26 May, 2024

Hot spells

WITH Pakistan already dealing with a heatwave that has affected 26 districts since May 21, word from the climate...
Defiant stance
26 May, 2024

Defiant stance

AT a time when the country is in talks with the IMF for a medium-term loan crucial to bolstering the fragile ...