When science leads to a desk job — a systemic failure?

In an ideal world, science students should be at the forefront of innovation, research, and technological advancements. Yet, in Nagaland and India as a whole, a troubling trend persists—most science graduates are choosing bureaucratic careers or desk jobs over research and innovation. This phenomenon is not just a matter of individual preference; it is a reflection of deep-rooted systemic failures in how science education and careers are prioritized.

The core issue lies in the way science is perceived and pursued. For many, science is not a path toward discovery but a stepping stone to secure a government job. The prevailing mindset equates stability with success, leading talented science graduates to abandon their fields in favor of administrative roles. While bureaucracy is essential for governance, a system that channels its brightest scientific minds into office work instead of laboratories, research centers, and industries is fundamentally flawed.

One of the biggest reasons for this misdirection is the lack of research opportunities and infrastructure. In Nagaland, scientific research is almost non-existent, with barely any institutions equipped to encourage innovation. Even at the national level, India’s investment in R&D remains dismally low compared to global leaders. Without strong incentives, young scientists see little value in pursuing research when more lucrative and stable options exist elsewhere.

Moreover, the education system itself is complicit in this failure. Science education is often reduced to rote learning and exam preparation rather than fostering curiosity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. When innovation is not encouraged from an early stage, it is no surprise that science students see little motivation to pursue careers in research.

The consequences of this misplacement of talent are significant. A country or region that does not invest in science and technology risks stagnation. The absence of homegrown innovation forces dependence on external technological advancements, limiting economic growth and self-sufficiency. Nagaland, for instance, remains heavily reliant on imported technology and expertise, a direct result of not nurturing its own scientific community.

Addressing this issue requires a multi-pronged approach. The government must prioritize research funding, establish institutions that encourage innovation, and create policies that make scientific careers more viable and rewarding. Educational institutions need to move beyond rote learning and instill a research-oriented mindset in students. Most importantly, society must recognize that the true value of science lies not in securing a stable job but in pushing the boundaries of knowledge and discovery.

If Nagaland and India continue to direct their brightest scientific minds into bureaucratic roles, they risk losing out on progress and innovation. It is time to rethink our priorities and create an environment where science students can thrive in the fields they were meant to transform.

MT