Stock of Indian S&T Manpower
Science and Technology (S&T) plays very important role in the growth and development of any country and S&T manpower act as the most important ingredient for scientific and technological activities. It is also an indicator of technological competitiveness of a country, which is most important in the 21st century. The manpower outturn and stock is also an important input while designing science policy and during its execution. The knowledge of existing stock also plays a crucial role in education and in manpower planning. It is therefore necessary to study the existing stock of S&T manpower and analyze the patterns of change in it. In this section an attempt is made to look at the stock of Indian manpower in Science & Technology (S&T). Following is the methodology used for stock calculations.
Selection of Fields: In general, NSF and OECD both include engineers, natural scientists, social scientists and technicians in its definition of S&T workforce(See Appendix); but in this section, social scientists have been excluded. Moreover, NSF considers field of education in non-S&E (Science & Engineering) field, but we have included it in our definition of S&T manpower. We have included following fields in our calculations – agriculture & forestry, engineering, education, medicine (allopathy), dental, paramedical (nursing), apprentices, science (general) and veterinary science.
Graduate Stock Calculations: For most of the fields, data was available from 1971 to 2002-03, with some missing values. For agriculture & forestry, education, science (general) and veterinary science, data on enrollment was available for various years. Based on this, out-turns for relevant years were estimated. The enrolment to outturn ratio was taken as 0.8426 based on observed average ratio of engineering degree courses over the years. Care was taken to relate the year of enrollment to year of outturn based on the duration of the course e.g. 4 years for engineering, 4 years for agriculture and forestry, 3 years for science (general) etc. Wherever required, values were estimated using liner regression.
It is assumed that a graduate or equivalent remains active participant in the economy for about 35 years or more on average. Therefore, for graduate stock calculations, total outturns were added for last 35 years (e.g. 1966 to 2000 for getting stock for year 2001). For getting relevant ratio, it was divided by relevant active population (age group 20-59).
PhD Stock Calculations: For PhD, data was available (from other research project by NISTADS scientist) from 1974 to 1999. Data for other years (backward till 1971 and forward till 2007) was estimated using linear regression method. It is assumed that a PhD or equivalent remains active participant in the economy for about 30 years or more on average. Therefore, for PhD stock calculations, total out-turn for last 30 years (e.g. 1971 to 2000 for getting stock for year 2001) was added. For getting relevant ratio, it was divided by relevant active population (age group 25-59) of that particular year
Table 1: Estimated S&T Manpower Stock and Ratio
Year |
PhD 30 Yr Stock* |
Graduate 35 Yr Stock* |
Pop 25-59 (in 000) |
Pop 20-59 (in 000) |
PhD Ratio per 100000 |
Graduate Ratio per Thousand |
2001 |
116564 |
21258229 |
409381 |
502228 |
28.4732 |
42.3278 |
2002 |
121164 |
22705587 |
416207 |
510602 |
29.1116 |
44.4682 |
2003 |
125765 |
24214410 |
422975 |
518906 |
29.7334 |
46.6643 |
2004 |
130365 |
25854682 |
429704 |
527161 |
30.3384 |
49.0451 |
2005 |
135228 |
27648704 |
436405 |
535381 |
30.9868 |
51.6430 |
2006 |
139958 |
295669 |
443079 |
543569 |
31.5876 |
54.3941 |
2007 |
144878 |
31287861 |
449720 |
551717 |
32.2151 |
56.7100 |
Fig 1: Indian S&T Manpower Stock and Ratio
Sources: (i) India Yearbook 2008 Manpower Profile, IAMR, (ii) UN Population Data (iii) Respective governing bodies (UGC, MHRD, Medical Council of India, Dental Council of India, Nursing Council of India)
Here it can be observed that over the last few years, rate of growth of highly specialized (PhD) manpower is much less than growth in graduate S&T manpower.
But an added problem is the migration of this manpower to other countries. Table 2 shows the enrolment of immigrant students from India and China in US higher education system, in absolute numbers and percentages. Fig 2 presents the results in graphical form
Table 2: Migration of Students to US
Year |
Total Students(W) |
Students from India(I) |
Students from China(C) |
I/W (%) |
C/W (%) |
1998 |
564683 |
25543 |
54617 |
4.52 |
9.67 |
1999 |
567146 |
28335 |
57281 |
5.00 |
10.10 |
2000 |
659081 |
39795 |
68628 |
6.04 |
10.41 |
2001 |
698595 |
48809 |
72823 |
6.99 |
10.42 |
2002 |
646016 |
48708 |
68722 |
7.54 |
10.64 |
2003 |
624917 |
50884 |
56870 |
8.14 |
9.10 |
2004 |
620210 |
51191 |
63940 |
8.25 |
10.31 |
2005* |
1046421 |
61146 |
54574 |
5.84 |
5.22 |
2006* |
1168020 |
69790 |
70503 |
5.98 |
6.04 |
2007* |
1330959 |
88918 |
95698 |
6.68 |
7.19 |
Fig 2: Migration of Indian and Chinese Students to US
Source: Yearbook of respective years, Office of Immigration Statistics, USA
In this figure it can be noted that in terms of number of students going to US, a decade back there was significant difference between India and China but now they are comparable. Similar trend can be observed in case of percentage of having Indian or Chinese student as compared to all students from the world going to US. Such a share, although, is indicative more of US immigration policy than of the quality of students. In fact, 2005 onwards, India and China exhibit nearly same value in percentage.
Table 3 below shows foreign recipients of U.S. S&E doctorates, by country/economy of origin for the duration 1985–2005. Here it can be seen that India was 4th in terms of its student getting doctorate degrees from US, whereas China was at the top with more than double the number of Indian doctorates.
Table 3: Foreign recipients of U.S. S&E doctorates, by country/economy of origin: 1985–2005
Country/economy |
Number |
Percent |
All foreign recipients |
189,346 |
100.0 |
Top 10 total |
122,046 |
64.5 |
China |
41,677 |
22.0 |
Taiwan |
19,187 |
10.1 |
South Korea |
18,872 |
10.0 |
India |
18,712 |
9.9 |
Canada |
6,231 |
3.3 |
Turkey |
3,957 |
2.1 |
Thailand |
3,479 |
1.8 |
Iran |
3,386 |
1.8 |
Japan |
3,295 |
1.7 |
Mexico |
3,250 |
1.7 |
All others |
67,300 |
35.5 |
Table 4 and Fig 3 below show the domestic as well as US out-turn of Indian PhD students for the period 1985-2005. It is remarkable to note that for engineering, the ratio is nearly same for out-turns in US and India. For the year 2005 it is somewhat better. If we add outturns of Indian PhD students in US and India in 2005 and then take the ratio, those completing PhD in the US still comprise one third of the total out-turn. This should be a matter of great concern. Even if India can manage to call back half of the doctorate degree recipients in engineering field, our S&T manpower will be increased greatly.
Table 4: Domestic and US PhD Outturn for Engineering and Science Subjects for Indian Students (1985-2005)
Outturn |
1985-2005 |
2005 |
||
Engineering |
Science Including Agriculture |
Engineering |
Science Including Agriculture |
|
Outturn in India |
8130 |
91510 |
1058 |
6744 |
Outturn in US |
8172 |
10540 |
505 |
598 |
Total Outturn |
16302 |
102050 |
1563 |
7342 |
Outturn in India (% of Total) |
49.87 |
89.67 |
67.69 |
91.86 |
Outturn in US (% of Total) |
50.13 |
10.33 |
32.31 |
8.14 |
Fig 3: Out-turn of Indian Students in Engineering and Science - Domestic and US
Note: En-Engineering, Sc-Science, Numbers Inside Show Numbers of Doctorate Recipients.
Sources: National Science Foundation, Survey of Earned Doctorates, special tabulations (2006), http://www.nsf.gov/, accessed on March 20, 2009;National Science Foundation, S&E Doctorate Awards: 2005, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf07305/, accessed on March 23, 2009; Research and Development Statistics at a Glance 2007-08, department of Science & Technology, government of India
Table 5 shows the recipients of S&E doctorate degree by fields for major Asian countries. Overall, performance and perhaps enrolment of Indian students in biology, mathematics and physical sciences was very poor; only in computer science India fared relatively better. In engineering subjects Indian position was not as bad as in biology and mathematics. Assuming that immigrant stock is a resource, Indian resource in the USA is far less than what a small country such as Taiwan or Korea could boast. Mainland China’s stock is very large especially in biology. This situation should be indicative of the domestic institutions. In other words: biology and mathematics, the two generic areas, suffer from poverty in India. Engineering resources could be secured from USA
Table 5: Asian recipients of U.S. S&E doctorates, by field and country/economy of origin: 1985–2005
Field |
Asia |
China |
Taiwan |
India |
South Korea |
All fields |
153,117 |
44,345 |
22,914 |
21,623 |
24,139 |
S&E |
130,426 |
41,677 |
19,187 |
18,712 |
18,872 |
Engineering |
48,166 |
12,784 |
8,816 |
8,172 |
7,273 |
Science |
82,260 |
28,893 |
10,371 |
10,540 |
11,599 |
Agricultural sciences |
5,313 |
1,313 |
709 |
434 |
728 |
Biological sciences |
20,973 |
9,957 |
2,658 |
2,668 |
2,132 |
Computer sciences |
5,850 |
1,360 |
970 |
1,515 |
745 |
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences |
2,947 |
1,345 |
388 |
243 |
366 |
Mathematics |
6,236 |
2,692 |
739 |
575 |
829 |
Medical/other life sciences |
4,026 |
813 |
753 |
727 |
413 |
Physical sciences |
19,735 |
8,934 |
2,234 |
2,479 |
2,429 |
Psychology |
2,005 |
297 |
297 |
238 |
318 |
Social sciences |
15,175 |
2,182 |
1,623 |
1,661 |
3,639 |
Non-S&E |
22,691 |
2,668 |
3,727 |
2,911 |
5,267 |
If attention is drawn to Science (Psychology and Social Science have not been included, unlike in the US; although much part of cognitive and other psychologies belong to hard core areas) subjects, comparison is shown in Fig 4. Because of the unavailability of the data of these countries on their domestic out-turn, the outturns were compared based on number of doctorate recipients in US.
Fig 4: Immigration of Asian Students to US in Science Area
Note: Ag-Agricultural Sciences, Bio-Biological Sciences, CS-Computer Sciences, ES- Earth atmospheric and ocean sciences, Math-Mathematics, Med- Medical/other life sciences, Phy-Physical Sciences
Source: National Science Foundation, Survey of Earned Doctorates, special tabulations (2006),http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/tables.htm
To make the comparisons more realistic, the numbers of students were normalized with their active population (Age group 15-59; Source: UN Population Data) for the year 2000. Table 6 and Fig 5 present the number of recipients of U.S. science doctorates, normalized by per million persons in home country.
Table 6: Recipients of U.S. Science doctorates normalized by per million active population
Field |
China |
Taiwan |
India |
South Korea |
Agricultural sciences |
1.61 |
45.51 |
0.71 |
23.09 |
Biological sciences |
12.22 |
170.60 |
4.39 |
67.62 |
Computer sciences |
1.67 |
62.26 |
2.49 |
23.63 |
Earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences |
1.65 |
24.90 |
0.40 |
11.61 |
Mathematics |
3.30 |
47.43 |
0.95 |
26.29 |
Medical/other life sciences |
1.00 |
48.33 |
1.20 |
13.10 |
Physical sciences |
10.97 |
143.39 |
4.08 |
77.04 |
Fig 5: Recipients of U.S. Science doctorates normalized by per million active population in home country
Note: Ag-Agricultural Sciences, Bio-Biological Sciences, CS-Computer Sciences, ES- Earth atmospheric and ocean sciences, Math-Mathematics, Med- Medical/other life sciences, Phy-Physical Sciences
Source: National Science Foundation, Survey of Earned Doctorates, special tabulations, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/tables.htm,
Here it can be clearly seen that in terms of doctorates recipients per million persons, India is far behind Taiwan and South Korea. Basically, this focuses attention on the serious lacuna in S&T manpower generation and this should be an area of importance when designing policies for higher education.
National Science Foundation USA includes following fields in its definition of Science & Technology (S&T) occupations – engineering, life sciences, computer/mathematical sciences, physical sciences, social sciences, technical managers and technicians/programmers. Sometimes it is also called STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). Discussions of the S&E labor force sometimes use broader definitions, referring to the S&T or the STEM labor force. These broader definitions usually include technicians, computer programmers, and technical managers, along with those occupations that NSF considers to be S&E. The broader aggregate may thus be thought of as S&E occupations plus individuals who directly manage S&E activities and the technical workers who support those in S&E occupations.
OECD definition also covers both natural sciences (including agricultural and medical sciences) and engineering (NSE) and social sciences and humanities (SSH).
Source: National Science Foundation USA,http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/tables.htm, accessed on March 20, 2009
Source: OECD Main Science & Technology Indicators, Volume 2007-1
Go back to Home Page of 'India, Science & Technology:2008'