China is experimenting with a radical shift in doctoral education. Under reforms effective January 1, 2025, select PhD programs in engineering, semiconductors, AI, and advanced manufacturing allow candidates to earn degrees by submitting working prototypes, industrial solutions, or patent-linked technological systems instead of traditional written dissertations.
The reform reflects China’s growing concern over the global research integrity crisis, where publication-focused evaluation systems have fueled “paper mills,” fabricated data, and low-quality outputs. For years, Chinese academia rewarded researchers based on publication volume and citation counts, producing scholars with impressive metrics but minimal real-world innovation — dubbed “paper generals.”
The practical PhD model addresses this by asking a simple question:What did you build?Candidates must demonstrate functioning solutions validated by industry mentors alongside academic supervisors. Early implementations at institutions like Harbin Institute of Technology and Southeast University show promising results, though numbers remain small relative to China’s 90,000 annual PhD graduates.
Globally, research misconduct has surged, with record retractions linked to manipulated peer reviews and fraudulent papers. India faces similar challenges, including predatory journals, pay-to-publish platforms, and fabricated peer reviews. Mandatory publication requirements for academic promotions have created perverse incentives that sometimes encourage low-quality or unethical work.
A practical PhD model in India could focus on engineering, applied sciences, and deep-tech sectors, encouraging students to solve real industrial problems while reducing pressure to publish for metrics. However, safeguards are needed to ensure rigorous evaluation, prevent new biases, and preserve theoretical research in fields where practical prototypes are not feasible, such as humanities and fundamental sciences.
China’s approach underscores a key lesson:academic incentives shape behavior.When output is overvalued and integrity undervalued, ecosystems of shortcuts thrive. By emphasizing demonstrable impact and innovation, practical PhDs could curb the worst excesses of “publish or perish,” aligning education with strategic national goals and industry needs.
For India, the takeaway is not to mimic blindly, but to rethink reward structures, balance metrics with real-world impact, and cultivate research integrity across disciplines. The debate over practical PhDs is ultimately about whether education produces scholars or paper producers.
