RPA SCHEME FROM 2001-02 TO 2009-10

The scheme for award of RPA to productive scientists and engineers was introduced in year 2001-2002. The first criteria approved by the Finance Division for disbursement of the RPA was:-

Evaluation of research was based on following parameters:

1. Journal Impact Factor (JIF)
2. National Citation Index (NCI)

REVISED CRITERIA FOR THE RPA SCHEME 2010-11 TO 2011-12:

In order to broaden the scope and to include applied research in the scheme in year 2009, the committee was constituted by the Ministry of Science and Technology to revise the criteria. The revised criteria for the award of RPA as recommended by the review committee headed by Dr. Qasim Jan was approved by the Federal Minister for Science and Technology. The scheme was rationalized to broaden its base on the basis of annually achievable JIF+CI scores. The following categorization based on JIF+CI scores and the corresponding amounts of the award persuaded was:

The scheme was renamed as Research Productivity Award, as it is an award by an independent agency and not an allowance paid by the parent organization. The output of applied research in the form of products and processes that are patented nationally or internationally and approved crop varieties were also considered.
Researchers working in the universities and institutions in the private sector and Foreign faculty working in Pakistani universities in the private as well as the public sector were also considered eligible for RPA, as their research papers published from Pakistani institutions contribute to the total number of international research publications from the country and it encourage the institutions in the private sector to give more emphasis to research, which would eventually lead to raising the quality of education in these institutions.

REVISED CRITERIA FOR THE RPA SCHEME 2013-14:

A committee constituted by the Ministry of Science and Technology to evaluate and review the scheme of Research Productivity Award under the Chairmanship of Prof. Dr. Atta-ur- Rahman (FRS, TI, SI HI, NI), Patron-in-Chief, University of Karachi revised the criteria of Research Productivity Award (RPA).

The new scoring of the RPA criteria as result of this revision include:

• International Books
• Patents Granted
• Research Supervision
• Research Grants Won
• International Publications
• Applied Research Output

REVISED CRITERIA FOR THE RPA SCHEME 2015-16:

Minutes of the meeting of the Committee for Review of Research Productivity Award (RPA) and Directory of the Productive Scientists Of Pakistan (PSP)

A meeting of the Research Productivity Award (RPA) Review Committee was held on October 15, 2015 at 09:30 a.m. in the Committee Room of the Pakistan Council for Science and Technology (PCST). The list of participants who attended the meeting is given at the end of this document.

The meeting commenced with the recitation of few verses from the holy Quran. Prof. Dr. Anwar-u-Hassan Gilani, Chairman, PCST after giving a brief introduction of the RPA requested the participants to choose Chair before formally beginning the proceedings of the review process. Prof. Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhary proposed the name of Prof. Gilani, Chairman, PCST for the Chair which was unanimously agreed by the other participants. Later, the participants formally introduced themselves. Mr. Farid Bakhtiar gave a presentation to the house on the revision of RPA scheme after which the chair opened the floor for discussions and deliberations. The participants thoroughly reviewed the existing parameters of the RPA and the way they can be improved to address the wider concerns of the scientific community and Ministry of Science and Technology.

Decisions/Recommendation w.r.t. the RPA Scheme:

1. Divisibility of the number of contributing researchers is restored.
2. Weightage of Impact Factor publications be reduced from 40 points to 30 points.
3. Weightage of citations raised from 20 points to 30 points, thus making equal weightage of impact factor and citations.
4. Period of citation increased from 1 year to 3 years.
5. The Approved Crop Varieties continue to carry 10 points. However, Engineering Design/process and Medical devices be also considered along with the Approved Crop Varieties, which will be assessed by committees comprising experts from the respective fields with representatives from Pakistan Council for Science and Technology and Commercialization Cell, Ministry of Science and Technology.
6. Weightage of PhD Supervision be reduced from 10 points to 05 points. The following distribution of scores be adopted in case of sole or multiple supervisors (supervisor and co-supervisors).

a) Solo Supervisor: 05 Points

b) Supervisor with Co-supervisor(s):

Supervisor: 50% weightage i.e. 2.5 Points

Co-supervisor(s): 50%/n (where ‘n’ is number of Co-supervisors)

7. The total weightage of Research Grants be reduced from 10 to 05 points. A minimum threshold limit of 0.5 million be considered for External Research Grants. However, the following distribution of scores be adopted in case of sole or multiple investigators.

a) Solo Project Incharge: 05 Points

b) Project Incharge(P.I) with Co-Project Incharge(s)(Co-P.I(s))

P.I.: 50% weightage i.e. 2.5 Points

Co-P.I(s): 50%/n (where ‘n’ is number of Co-P.Is(s)

8. Books published by the reputed publishers only be considered. Books published by black listed publishers will not be considered. Since there is no clear identifiable distinction between the principal author and co-author(s) of books, therefore, the total score may be equally divided into number of contributing authors.
9. The distinction between local and international patents be abolished, as the process of local patents is also cumbersome and that the high fees for international patents are not affordable to a large majority, particularly the younger scientists.
10. Patent granted will carry 10 points while commercialized patents/products be given 05 additional points. Since there is no clear identifiable distinction between the patentee and co-patentee(s), therefore, the total score may be equally divided into number of contributing researchers. Similar distribution be made for commercialized patents/products; however, for the assessment of commercialization, a separate committee will be constituted, to be chaired by Commercialization cell of the MoST.
11. The web of knowledge will be used to assess citations.
12. Scaling of the RPA applicants will continue to be followed.

The weightage for different research areas under the revised RPA criteria is as under:

Deliberations and decisions regarding Directory of Productive Scientists of Pakistan (PSP)

1. Same parameters and weightage be used for PSP and RPA except for addition of Award (National & International ) as a new parameter in case of PSP, based on the fact that PSP is the lifetime achievement, whereas RPA is yearly exercise. Furthermore Awards category be given 5% weightage. The weightage of granted patents be reduced from 10 points to 5 points to adjust addition of awards category in PSP.
2. The total weightage of citation i.e. 30% in both RPA and PSP would be assessed and calculated by consideration of equal weightage of total citations and h-Index (15% each).
3. Scaling be applied to all parameters of PSP as in the case of RPA.
4. A separate ranking in the directory may be provided for young productive scientists having threshold year limit of 40 years and below.
5. Reputed international Publishers be considered for the published books. In this regard a committee be constituted to evaluate the published books in due course of time.
6. Any scientist who is black listed by the Higher Education Commission based on plagiarism may not be considered for both RPA and PSP.
7. Any publisher who is black listed by the Higher Education Commission may not be considered. The list of awards (National and International) used for previous editions of PSP and slightly updated in the meeting is annexed.

The weightage for different research areas under the revised PSP criteria is as under:

List of Participants of RPA Review Committee Meeting held on 15-10-2015

Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee to Peer Review the “Books Published / Edited” for Research Productivity Award (RPA) 2015-16

A meeting of the sub-committee to Peer Review "Books Published/Edited" component of the Research Productivity Award (RPA) 2015-16 was held on 29th April, 2015 under the chairmanship of Prof. Dr. Anwar-u-Hassan Gilani, Chairman PCST. The list of participants who attended the meeting is in the section to follow.

The meeting started with the recitation of the Quran-e-Hakim. Prof. Dr. Anwar-ul-Hassan Gilani, in his welcome address extended a warm welcome and his sincere gratitude to all the participants of the meeting and then gave an overview of the Research Evaluation activities of PCST including RPA and PSP.

Decisions:

Giving general guidelines, it was agreed that in addition to other criteria the following books would also not be considered for RPA/PSP:

1. Books having No ISBN number
2. Thesis
3. Books claimed without proofs
4. Monographs of HEC
5. Books In Press
6. Manuals
7. Proceedings of Conferences etc. should be removed
8. Abstracts
9. Guidelines

List of Participants of RPA Review Committee

Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee to Peer Review the “Applied Research Output” for Research Productivity Award (RPA) 2015-16

A meeting of the sub-committee to Peer Review the "Applied Research Output" for Research Productivity Award (RPA) 2015-16 was held on 28th April, 2016 under the chairmanship of Prof. Dr. Anwar-u-Hassan Gilani, Chairman PCST. The list of participants who attended the meeting is in the section to follow.

The meeting started with the recitation of the Holy Quran. Prof. Gilani, in his welcome address extended a warm welcome and his sincere gratitude to all the participants of the meeting and then stated that the purpose of the meeting is to evaluate the "Applied Research Output" component of the Research Productivity Award. He then gave a brief overview of the research evaluation activities of PCST and highlighted that that one of the main activities carried out by PCST is to evaluate and rank the scientists / researchers doctors and engineers of Pakistan.

Later on three sub-committees were constituted to evaluate the applied research component of the applications for the RPA 2015; in the following three categories namely:

1. Engineering
2. Medical
3. Applied Crop variety

A. ENGINEERING SUB-COMMITTEE

The Engineering sub-committee comprised of the following members:

• Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali, Executive Director, HEC
• Engr. Dr. Nasir M. Khan, Add. Registrar, PEC,
• Dr. Syed Shahid Hussain, Executive Director, Commercialization Cell, MoST
• Mr. Ajmal Sharif, GM , EDB, (On behalf of Dr.Tariq Chaudhry, CEO, EDB)
• Mr. Ijaz Ahmed, GM, EDB, (On behalf of Dr.Tariq Chaudhry, CEO, EDB)
• Engr. Farid Bakhtiar, PRO, PCST (assisted the committee)

Decisions regarding the RPA 2015-16 applications:

After evaluation, No claims made under the "Engineering" discipline of the "Applied Research Component of RPA 2015" were approved by the committee.

Recommendation regarding criteria for future:

The following suggestions were proposed with regard to the Evaluation Criteria for Applied Research in the field of Engineering Designs/Products/Technologies.

1. Whether product/ technology/ design/process has been developed as per need of local industry and/or market?
2. Status of Patent application, if any
3. Whether the developed product / technology / process /design has been commercialized (transferred / leased out to industry/ entrepreneur etc)
4. Technical details alongwith Quality and Efficiency of the developed product/ technology / design and its comparison with similar technologies / products etc existing/ available in the market.
5. Benefit to Industry including number of beneficiaries, cost- saving (especially in case of import substitute), value addition (in case of improvement in the existing technology), number of jobs created, availability of local technical support after transfer of technology, etc
6. Investment attracted (amount)
7. Revenue generated (amount)
8. Overall impact of the given research out-put on Society

B. MEDICAL SUB-COMMITTEE

The Medical sub-committee comprised of the following members:

1. Maj. Gen. (R) Prof. Muhammad Aslam, Vice Chancellor, University of Health Sciences, Lahore
2. Maj Gen (R) Farooq Ahmad Khan, Former Commandant AFIP/ President College of Pathologist, Islamabad
3. Dr. Muhammad Arif Munir, PHRC (On behalf of Dr. Huma Qureshi, ED, PHRC, Islamabad)
4. Dr. M. Arif Nadeem, PHRC (On behalf of Dr. Huma Qureshi, ED, PHRC, Islamabad)

Decisions regarding the RPA 2015-16 applications:

After evaluation, No claims made under the “Medical” discipline of the “Applied Research Component of RPA 2015” were approved by the committee.

Recommendation regarding criteria for future:

The following suggestions were proposed with regard to the Evaluation Criteria for Applied Research in the field of Medical / Health Sciences.

1. The criteria for consideration of  applied research output in the field of medicine/health need to be clearly defined.
2. The claims made in this sub-category should be supported with documentary evidence giving all technical details.

C. CROP VARIETY SUB-COMMITTEE

The Crop Variety sub-committee comprised of the following members:

1. Dr. Ahmad Baksh Mahar, Member/ Incharge Plant Sciences Dept. PARC
2. Dr. Najeeb U Siddiqi, Director Federal Seed Certi. & Regist. Dept.
3. Dr. Abdul Ghafoor, (assisted Member PARC)
4. Dr. Saima Nasir, SRO, PCST (assisted the committee)

Decisions regarding the RPA 2015-16 applications:

Three crop varieties for which documentary evidence was available in the form of minutes of Provincial seed Committees / notification of Federal Seed Certification & Registration Council were approved.

Recommendation regarding criteria for future:

1. Only those varieties will be considered for RPA/PSP for which notification has been issued by Federal Seed Certification & Registration Council.
2. The committee unanimously decided that the minutes of provincial seed council can be considered at present as valid proofs.
3. The applicant should provide proofs of all the relevant steps including Distinctness, Uniformity & Stability (DUS), National Uniform Yield Trial (NUYT), Variety Evaluation Committee (VEC), Minutes of Provincial Seed Council and notification of Federal Seed Certification & Registration Council.

The term “Agricultural Research” should be used in future instead of crop variety to include animal breeds, agricultural production technology, natural resources, etc in addition to crop varieties.

List of Participants of Peer Review the “Applied Research Output”

REVISED CRITERIA FOR THE RPA SCHEME 2017-18:

Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee to Peer Review Criteria for the Research Productivity Award/ Productive Scientists of Pakistan

A national level committee meeting to review the criteria for the Research Productivity Award (RPA) and the directory of Productive Scientists of Pakistan (PSP) was held on 7th September, 2017 at 12:00 pm in the Committee Room of the Pakistan Council for Science and Technology (PCST), under the headship of Prof. Dr. Anwar ul Hassan Gilani, Chairman PCST.

The meeting commenced with the recitation of the Holy Quran followed by a round of introduction and welcome remarks by Chair.

Prof. Gilani gave a brief introduction of PCST to the house and made a presentation on the schemes of PSP and RPA highlighting the history, importance and existing criteria for both the schemes, explaining that revision of RPA/PSP schemes is a regular exercise based on the feedback received from the scientific community. Members were apprised that we received positive feedback on the existing criteria of PSP/RPA from the scientific community with growing ownership, reflective from the highest number of participants/ registrations i.e. more than 3000 in 2016-17 compared to 2257 in 2015-16. At the same time there were some useful suggestions from the scientific community including those members of the review committee, who could not attend. Following points were placed before the committee for discussion:

1. 1. Comparative weight of Impact Factor and Citations: Currently, the major weightage (60%) is given to publications which includes impact factor of journals for respective papers (30 %) and citations (30%, which includes 15 % each for total citations and h-index). Based on the growing trend giving more importance to citations, Dr. N.M. Butt and Dr Qasim Jan (written suggestion, while he could not attend meeting being out of country) proposed increasing the weightage of citations and decreasing the weight of impact factor if not completely eliminating the impact factor. There were arguments both against and in favour of increasing the value for citations and reducing the weightage for impact factor. Dr. Arshad Ali, Dr. M. Aslam Baig, Dr. Tasawar Hayat and Dr. Muhammad Ashraf (through verbal communication with Chair, before going abroad for a meeting), voted in favour of gradual reduction in IF and increasing value of citation. Dr. Qasim Jan also conveyed his proposal to include credit for (a) “Highly Cited Authors”, (b) Highly cited papers and (c) per paper citations. After thorough discussion following decisions were made through consensus.
   DECISIONS:
   1a. Citations per article be added to the existing criteria and the weight of impact factor be reduced from 30 % to 20% .
   1b. The 10 % marks saved from impact factor be allocated to a new parameter i.e. citations per article.
   1c. The other components, such as total citations (15% for PSP and 30% for RPA) and h-index (15% for PSP only) remain unchanged.

2. 2. Addressing Cross Discipline Variations: It was observed that there is large variation from subject to subject in impact factor and citations. Journals in some disciplines such as Medicine and Molecular Biology have higher impact factor and the articles receive more citations, while for some others, such as Agricultural, Earth and Engineering Sciences, the journals have relatively less impact factor. Some disciplines such as Chemistry have a high potential for developing patents while some others do not. Similarly, some subjects require extensive lab work and research funding to produce a paper, whereas some subjects like Mathematical Sciences do not; hence number of publications in some subjects may be exceptionally high and it is not fair to compare all subjects with the same yardstick. Hence, a strong case was made in favor of ranking the subjects within the discipline for RPA, like already done for the directory of PSP. While accepting the concern positively, a point was raised regarding the large variation in number of applications from subject to subject, which needs consideration for allocation of number of RPA winners for each subjects.
   Further, point was raised that it may not be justified using the benchmark based on the highest score of an individual scientist belonging to a specific discipline, and perhaps there is need to rationalize the benchmarks using the mean of the highest scores from each subject.
   DECISIONS
   2a. Like PSP, RPA also be categorized subject wise, and the number of awards in each subject will be proportionate to the number of applicants.
   2b. Benchmarks for different parameters will no longer be based on the highest score of an individual; rather the benchmarks will be rationalized using the mean of the highest scores in each subject. Scaling shall be applied in a way that everyone scoring higher than the mean benchmark shall be given 100% of that parameter.
   2c. Despite of some overlapping in the subjects, the change of subject from year to year is not encouraged, and any change, if at all, needs to be justified in a written application.

3. Category of Innovation/Applied Research and Commercialized Patents: There were no eligible claims in the area of commercialized patent in the last cycle. While component of commercialization of research is already covered in applied research output/innovation. Knowing that it may take a few years to have the culture of patent commercialization, and that the revised structure for innovation/ applied research covering wider areas have a similar scope, this category of commercialized patents be abolished for the time being, as the commercialization of patented research is getting additional credit so it should be included in the category of innovation/applied research output. This allocation (5%) may be utilized by increasing the value of competitive external research grants to from existing 5% to 10%.
   DECISIONS
   3a. A separate category of "Patent Commercialized" be abolished for the time being, as its scope is already covered as a part of Innovation/Applied Research Output ,the total allocation (5% for PSP and 10% for RPA) to this category will remain unchanged.
   3b. The 5% weightage saved from commercialized patents will be added to the weightage of extramural, competitive research grants which will be increased from 5% to 10%.

4. It was agreed that all the other decisions as taken in RPA/PSP review 2015 will remain effective including divisibility and scaling.

5. Revised Scoring Scheme for RPA/PSP is given below:

   S#	Parameters	PSP	RPA
   a.	Cumulative Impact Factor	20%	20%
   b.	Citations -Total citations -h-index -Citations per article	15% 15% 10%	30% NA 10%
   c.	Patents Granted	05%	10%
   d.	Ph.D. Supervised	05%	05%
   e.	Books Published / Edited	05%	05%
   f.	External Research Grants	10%	10%
   g.	Applied Research Output/Innovation	10%	10%
   h.	Awards	05%	NA

List of Participants of List of Participants - RPA/PSP Review Committee Meeting – 2017
(Arranged Alphabetically)

*Not attended the meeting

RPA STATISTICS: