India’s Rise in Global University Rankings: Progress Beyond the Numbers

India’s rising presence in global higher education rankings highlights both progress and persistent challenges. With 54 universities featured in the QS World University Rankings 2026 and strong showings in the Times Higher Education list, India is gaining recognition worldwide. Yet, behind this upward trend lie deeper issues in research funding, faculty recruitment, innovation, and campus infrastructure. To transform numerical gains into lasting global competitiveness, India must invest in systemic reforms that strengthen academic ecosystems, foster innovation, and build sustainable research capacity, turning its growing visibility into genuine academic excellence on the world stage.

The Research Funding Crisis

One of the most critical barriers to India’s higher education advancement is insufficient research funding. India’s Gross Expenditure on Research and Development as a percentage of GDP has remained between 0.6 and 0.7 percent, significantly lower than developed nations like the United States, which invests 3.5 percent, China at 2.4 percent, and Israel at 5.4 percent. This gap reflects not just a numerical shortfall but a fundamental structural problem in how India prioritizes research and development.​

The research funding landscape in India has been further complicated by policy inconsistencies. Between 2020 and 2024, funding for scholarships and research fellowships in higher education institutions declined by over 1,500 crore rupees. Despite Budget 2025 announcements regarding a 1 lakh crore financing pool for private sector-driven research, only 74.5 crore rupees were actually utilised in the previous fiscal year from allocated research initiative budgets of 355 crore rupees, exposing a significant gap between policy announcements and implementation. This implementation deficit undermines the entire research ecosystem and prevents universities from conducting the kind of cutting-edge research that distinguishes world-class institutions.​

The compartmentalization of research funding further exacerbates the problem. Elite institutions like the Indian Institutes of Technology, Indian Institutes of Management, and central universities receive substantial funding, while state universities and colleges serving the vast majority of India’s student population are left critically underfunded. This creates a two-tiered system where only a small segment of the academic landscape can engage in meaningful research, while institutions educating the broader population struggle with basic research infrastructure.​

Faculty Shortages and Their Cascading Effects

The shortage of faculty across Indian higher education institutions represents another critical challenge that numerical rankings cannot fully capture. The scale of this problem is staggering. Over 56 percent of professorial positions lie vacant across India’s top institutions, with associate professor positions having a 38.28 percent vacancy rate and assistant professor positions at 18 percent. These are not marginal shortfalls but systemic failures that directly impact the quality of education, mentoring, and research output.​

The faculty shortage problem extends across all institutional categories. Central universities operate with only 52 percent of sanctioned positions filled, and state universities face similar challenges due to budgetary constraints. This forces institutions to rely on temporary contractual staff and guest faculty, undermining both the stability of academic programs and the quality of mentoring available to students. When there are fewer faculty members, the student-to-teacher ratio deteriorates. India currently operates with a pupil-to-teacher ratio of 30:1, compared to 12.5:1 in the United States and 19:1 in China. This disparity means that in Indian classrooms, individual students receive significantly less personalized attention, mentoring, and research guidance.​

Recruitment processes themselves have become mired in bureaucratic complexity. Multiple stakeholders, including the University Grants Commission, regulatory bodies, state governments, and courts, compete for influence over faculty appointments, making the process unnecessarily rigid and time-consuming. The emphasis on quantified metrics has eroded the academic flexibility that universities should possess in recruiting eminence and talent. In contrast, leading global universities can directly recruit distinguished scholars and practitioners without navigating the extensive procedural hurdles that characterize the Indian system.​

Infrastructure and Innovation Ecosystem Gaps

While India’s universities have made efforts to establish innovation infrastructure through incubation centers and startup accelerators, these initiatives remain fragmented and unevenly distributed. The success of innovation ecosystems depends on multiple interconnected elements, including incubation facilities, mentorship networks, funding support, leadership commitment, and favorable academic regulations. However, many Indian institutions lack adequate investment in advanced laboratories, prototyping facilities, and testing infrastructure necessary for translating research into commercial applications.​

The infrastructure challenge extends to basic facilities. Many universities still operate with outdated laboratories, limited digital resources, and insufficient access to cutting-edge technology platforms. While initiatives like DIKSHA, a digital platform serving over 50 million users, represent progress in technology-enabled education, comprehensive infrastructure development across all institutions remains inadequate. Building world-class innovation infrastructure requires sustained investment in both physical facilities and digital platforms, coupled with industry-academia partnerships that are currently underdeveloped in most regions.

Comparative Analysis: Learning from Global Leaders

Countries that perform better in higher education rankings have made sustained investments in research, faculty development, and infrastructure. The United States leads globally with institutions like MIT, Harvard, and Stanford consistently holding top positions, supported by robust research funding mechanisms and private sector investment exceeding 70 percent of total research expenditure. The United Kingdom maintains strong representation through Oxford and Cambridge, while Germany, Canada, and Australia have all invested heavily in research infrastructure and international collaborations.​

China presents an interesting case for comparison, as it shares demographic similarities with India. While China had 135 universities in the 2025 QS Asia Rankings compared to India’s 162, Chinese universities often rank higher individually. This reflects China’s strategic focus on concentrating resources in flagship institutions and making sustained investments in research output and international visibility. China’s higher education system has achieved greater strides through competitive faculty recruitment, disciplined institutional management, and significant government investment in cutting-edge research facilities.​

The experience of these countries demonstrates that global competitiveness in higher education requires three essential elements: adequate and stable research funding, competitive faculty compensation and recruitment processes, and investment in modern infrastructure. India’s ranking progress suggests the country has begun this journey, but the gains remain superficial without addressing these deeper structural issues.

Practical Reforms Needed

For India to transition from incremental ranking improvements to genuine global competitiveness, several practical reforms are necessary. First, research funding must be substantially increased and more effectively utilized. The government should establish long-term research funding frameworks independent of annual budget cycles, allowing institutions to plan and conduct sustained research projects. Private sector participation in research funding should be incentivized through tax benefits and collaborative funding mechanisms, gradually shifting India’s research expenditure closer to the three percent of GDP target that developed nations maintain.

Second, faculty recruitment processes must be simplified and accelerated. Universities should be granted greater autonomy in hiring decisions, allowing them to directly recruit eminent scholars and practitioners without excessive bureaucratic procedures. Competitive salary structures aligned with global standards would help Indian institutions attract and retain top talent. The vacancy crisis must be addressed through systematic position-filling combined with support for continuous professional development and research sabbaticals for faculty.

Third, infrastructure development requires strategic prioritization and investment. Beyond expanding physical facilities, universities need access to advanced computational resources, digital libraries, and collaborative research platforms. Public-private partnerships can play a crucial role in developing infrastructure that serves both academic and commercial innovation needs. Special emphasis should be placed on equalizing infrastructure access across elite and non-elite institutions to prevent further entrenchment of disparities.

Fourth, multidisciplinary approaches must be genuinely implemented rather than remaining policy aspirations. The National Education Policy 2020’s vision of multidisciplinary institutions has merit, but implementation requires restructuring curricula, training faculty in interdisciplinary teaching, and creating incentive structures that reward cross-disciplinary collaboration. Breaking down traditional academic silos is essential for addressing complex real-world problems through innovation.

Finally, industry-academia partnerships need strengthening through sustained engagement mechanisms. Universities should establish formal channels for collaboration with industries on applied research projects, student internships, and commercialization of innovations. These partnerships create practical benefits for both sectors and help bridge the gap between academic research and market needs.

Conclusion

India’s rising visibility in global higher education rankings reflects genuine progress in recent years. The emergence of Indian institutions in top ranking bands, the expansion of research output, and increased international recognition demonstrate that the country’s higher education system possesses inherent strengths. However, the numerical improvements mask deeper systemic challenges that prevent India from becoming a true global leader in higher education.

The path forward requires moving beyond the satisfaction of ranking improvements to make substantive investments in research funding, faculty development, and infrastructure. It demands reforming bureaucratic processes that hinder institutional innovation and attracting talent. Most importantly, it requires acknowledging that sustainable global competitiveness cannot be achieved through ranking arbitrage or selective institutional promotion but only through systematic, equitable enhancement of the entire higher education ecosystem.

When India addresses these fundamental issues, the ranking improvements will not just be numerical gains but genuine reflections of world-class institutions capable of producing cutting-edge research, nurturing exceptional talent, and contributing meaningfully to global knowledge creation.

Source: The Research Funding Crisis & World University Rankings 2026,

Read Also: Supreme Court Scolds IITs and IIMs for Ignoring Order on Student Suicide Survey & The Future of Work: Will AI Agents Replace Traditional Jobs?