Dr.N.Sriram,

Founder & CEO, Genesis Research Labs, S.R.Nagar, Hyderabad.

Introduction

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has made a controversial decision to discontinue the UGC Consortium for Academic and Research Ethics (UGC-CARE) list, a quality control mechanism introduced in 2018 to standardize academic publishing. This move has received mixed reactions from the academic community, with many questioning its impact on research quality, transparency, and integrity.

While UGC defends the decision as a step towards decentralization and academic freedom, several academicians argue that it opens the door to misuse and a decline in research standards.

So, is this a necessary reform or a risky decision that could harm the academic ecosystem? Let’s explore the debate in detail.

Why Was the UGC-CARE List Introduced?

The UGC-CARE list was introduced in 2018 to combat the rise of predatory journals and ensure that faculty and students publish their research in reliable, peer-reviewed journals. It served several key functions:
✔️ Quality Assurance: Identified trusted academic journals.
✔️ Promotion & Evaluation: Ensured faculty promotions were based on credible research.
✔️ Institutional Ranking: Helped determine institutional credibility based on publications.
✔️ Research Grants & Recognition: Provided a standardized benchmark for funding agencies.

However, the UGC has now replaced this system with suggestive parameters, allowing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to develop their own mechanisms for evaluating journal quality.

The Decision to Scrap UGC-CARE: The Justification

According to UGC Chairman Mamidala Jagadesh Kumar, the UGC-CARE list was abolished due to concerns over:

• Excessive Centralization: The top-down approach limited institutional flexibility.
• Lack of Transparency: Unclear processes for adding and removing journals.
• Assessment Inefficiencies: The list did not always guarantee quality research.

The new policy suggests “parameters for peer-reviewed journals”, focusing on criteria like:
📌 Editorial Transparency – Clear information about the editorial board.
📌 Journal Visibility – Wider recognition in academic circles.
📌 Peer-Review Policy – A rigorous review process.
📌 Research Ethics – Adherence to ethical publishing standards.

“This decentralized approach allows HEIs to tailor their evaluation processes to suit their specific needs,” said Kumar. “Researchers will no longer be constrained by a centralized list of journals, allowing for greater academic freedom.”

Backlash from the Academic Community

While UGC argues that decentralization will enhance academic flexibility, several academicians disagree, calling the decision a step backward.

🔴 Fear of Research Quality Decline

B Manohar, professor at Osmania University, emphasized:
“The UGC-CARE list was introduced to curb the practice of publishing in predatory journals. Now, without a mandatory list, faculty and students may publish in subpar journals just to meet requirements.”

Rajesh Gacche, HOD of Biotechnology at SPPU, echoed similar concerns:
“Most universities in India lack the infrastructure for high-quality research. Now, they will assemble their own list of journals that suit them. This will compromise research quality.”

🔴 Risk of Manipulation and Unethical Practices

Sunita Salunkhe, professor at SPPU’s Department of Chemistry, warned:
“If universities are allowed to create their own journal lists, I can start my own journal and publish in it. This right should not be given to universities; it should be a national standard.”

She also argued that SCOPUS-based journals should be made compulsory for research credibility.

🔴 Confusion Among Researchers

Ankit Rawal, HOD of the Sanskrit Department at Fergusson College, stated:
“Without a central list, researchers will struggle to identify reliable journals. This could lead to misuse and manipulation.”

Similarly, Mahesh Dawange, assistant professor at SPPU’s Hindi Department, added:
“A lack of regulation will create inconsistencies—some journals will be considered credible in one city but not in another. This will create unnecessary academic disputes.”

Some Support the Decision

Not everyone is against the removal of UGC-CARE. Some academicians argue that the list was flawed and lacked transparency.

D Ravinder, former Vice-Chancellor of Osmania University, pointed out:
“Journals were often added or removed from the CARE list based on professor recommendations, without a clear process. A peer-review-based system, as used worldwide, is a better approach.”

Additionally, Md Shakir Shaikh, HOD of Hindi at Poona College, argued:
“Even before ISSN and ISBN numbers existed, research was published and read. Good research speaks for itself, regardless of where it is published. The CARE list also had long waiting times, making publishing difficult.”

Potential Consequences of the Decision

✅ Possible Benefits:

✔️ More flexibility in journal selection.
✔️ Encouragement of independent evaluation instead of a predefined list.
✔️ Academic freedom to publish in diverse journals.

❌ Possible Risks:

❌ Increase in predatory publishing, making it easier for low-quality research to be recognized.
❌ Lack of standardization, leading to academic disparities across universities.
❌ Risk of favoritism, as universities might approve their own journals for faculty promotions.

Final Verdict: A Step Forward or Backward?

The decision to scrap the UGC-CARE list is a double-edged sword.
🟢 If HEIs develop robust evaluation mechanisms, this could improve research quality and academic freedom.
🔴 However, if quality control is weak, this move could lead to a rise in substandard and predatory publishing.

At a time when India is positioning itself as a global research hub, this decision could either democratize publishing or lower research credibility.

What’s Your Opinion?

💬 Should the UGC-CARE list have been removed?
💬 Will this decision improve research freedom or harm academic standards?
Drop your thoughts in the comments below! 🚀📚

Prof. N. Sriram, M.Pharm., PhD

Editor,

Pharmachroncles.

Hyderabad

pharmachronicles@gmail.com

+91 9704361947