How effective is PMRF?

The main point of discussion is the huge disparity in fellowship amounts between PMRF (Prime Minister Research Fellowship) and regular PhD fellowships. Let's break down the problem into parts and address them separately.

1. Why does someone choose PhD in the first place? People who are curious about things are likely to choose the PhD route. However, financial responsibility owing to family situations becomes a deciding factor in the decision to pursue PhD or not for many. PMRF may help this category of students. In my guess, the percentage of PhD students falling into this category is not high. Another solution, in my opinion, is to encourage direct PhDs (PhD directly after BTech) and shorten the duration of PhD.

2. How does someone decide whether to stay in India or go abroad? One of the main motivations behind the PMRF scheme was to reduce brain drain. How successful has it been so far? Money is not the only reason why students go abroad for PhD. Other reasons include experiencing a different culture, better work opportunities, and better labs, for which PMRF is ineffective. In my guess, the majority of students who go abroad for PhD fall into the "other reasons" category.

3. High performance should be incentivized. However, the challenge is evaluating performance. CPI is not at all a good measure of the skills required for research. My colleague Subimal (on X) has suggested awarding PMRF after the second year of PhD, which is an excellent idea. It will be easier to filter out high-performing students after they have performed some work.

Overall, in my opinion, there needs to be in-depth studies evaluating the usefulness of PMRF. I am not sure if there has been any empirical study to assess the actual impact of PMRF.