It is known that industrialisation and the progress of well-developed countries around the world are fueled by research and development enterprise in universities and institutes of higher learning. It is also important to realise that the benefits humanity is harvesting today in the form of renewable energy, regenerative medicine, precision agriculture, e-commerce, e-governance and precision in warfare are all based on fundamental research conducted in various disciplines during the first half of the previous century. As an example from my own field, genetically engineered crops and DNA based therapeutic interventions in humans originate from basic bench work in the science laboratory during the last fifty years. Countries who invested in basic research and have successfully developed an ecosystem for quality research and education during the last two hundred years are now leading the world’s economy. Countries such as India and China who invested in basic research during the last fifty years have now started harvesting these dividends. It is quality education and research in all disciplines in institutes of higher learning which produce well-trained, competent and skilled individuals who can take up challenges of industry and academia and consequently trigger and incite the development of a society. Quality education and research is not possible without generous and institutionalised support provided by the government. For example, Pakistan experienced a boom in funding for higher education with billions allocated for higher education every year since 2002. During the first ten years of its inception, Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission (HEC) was awash with enormous funds and powers to devise a strategy to change the landscape of higher education in the country. It was meant to develop an ecosystem for research and development in universities to sow seeds for long-term change in the academia. However, HEC miserably failed in demonstrating a clear vision and mission in which quality should have been the sole criterion. Instead of evolving as a research-based and data driven organisation to enhance standards of quality higher education in Pakistan, HEC rather emerged as a bureaucratic, regulatory body with no clear vision and goals in sight over the last two decades. In the first decade, it focused on the mushroom growth of universities with a mere inkling of the quality of education meted out to the students. Since the focus was on quantity rather than quality, the exercise managed to catapult the numbers of PhDs produced, research publications were continually growing and in a foreign PhD scholarships program, thousands of students were sent abroad for PhDs in various second and third tier universities. The selection was devoid of any attempts of gauging the aptitude of a student for doctoral studies. Moreover, each PhD was required to sign a bond and come back immediately after finishing PhD abroad while at the same time, the HEC failed to devise a plan to accommodate and provide jobs to the returning scholars. In principle, these PhDs should have been asked to go through 2-4 years postdoctoral fellowship which they could seek on their own. It is the most obvious next step in a scholar’s career and they should eventually return to Pakistan. This post-doctoral stint could have broadened their horizons and capability to become potential teaching Faculty in Pakistan. There is no doubt that Pakistan has managed to have a large majority of university level faculty qualified as PhDs but even after spending billions, the country still lacks in quality. What is the reason that despite the sheer number of PhDs available in our universities, the quality of our graduates, even those produced by our highest ranked universities, has never been so poor. Unfortunately, both the quality of indigenous PhDs produced, and the research published by our faculties is on the average, sub-standard. Universities should be funded to focus on select areas and themes in which they believe they can create an impact in fundamental research During the last ten years of my life in Pakistan, I have interacted with a huge number of students at undergraduate and graduate levels. These interactions were in the formal class room environment, meetings and conferences, interviews as part of admission processes or in oral exams as an external examiner. In addition, I also had an opportunity to interview more than three hundred applicants while establishing the Biology program at LUMS. What I missed most in all these times was the quality of the scholarship level, or the narrowness of the mission (if any) demonstrated by the graduates and faculty applicants. It may surprise all that we could hardly find ten individuals who met the bar of a quality faculty whom we could recruit from a list of more than 300 applicants in initial eight years of faculty search. We were simply looking for three things: an in-depth knowledge of the fundamentals of the subject, potential to teach and ability to develop an independent research program in the immediate area of the candidates’ expertise. Unfortunately, an overwhelming majority of all these faculty applicants were HEC returning scholars who were fully funded by HEC for foreign PhDs. Their demonstration of basic knowledge of the subject in most cases were extremely poor. Many faculty aspirants could not simply define a research question they would like to pursue in their career as faculty or principal investigator. They can best be rated as mere instrumentalists or workers following instructions in a laboratory, rather than thoughtful scholars who should inspire students, speak wisdom and generate new knowledge in their areas of expertise. Even more shocking were my interactions with students who had obtained MS degrees from the best universities within Pakistan. Many of these students faltered when it came to answering some questions, one would expect from a simple bachelors students and sometimes even an intermediate student. Fox example, they could hardly describe differences between a bacterial and a human cell. They also did not know how bacterial genes are different than human genes. Now, I don’t at all blame students because I know they are all hard working and ambitious but it’s the teaching and research quality in their universities which do not instill even a semblance of critical thinking and analytical skills to these students. It is now apparent that Pakistan and particularly HEC has lost an excellent opportunity to develop a culture where quality should have been the sole criterion. Its policies and actions during last sixteen years has resulted in loss of billions and produced enormous amounts of intellectual roughage which will become a dead weight till retirement, perpetuating mediocrity and celebration of the status quo. Nearly two decades gone, we are yet to see a single high-quality cluster or a group of researchers emerging in Pakistan who may have created an impact in any field. It is not that we lack such individuals, but the fact of the matter is that HEC did not emerge as an institute with a vision and enough research-based decision-making process which could identify such individuals or develop programs which could have created an impact. For example, it is also ironical that after nearly two decades, HEC still lacks basic processes like quality peer review for grant proposals and it cannot ensure the smooth flow for already approved research funds. A promise not kept is worse than a promise not made. With sluggish and uninspired processes for supporting higher education and the lackluster attitudes towards developing world class research programs, we are bound to harm us more through the empty sloganeering of research than we could benefit from it. It is high time that the Government of Pakistan and the HEC developed a vision solely based on quality which is futuristic and has clear tangible milestones. Importantly, high quality basic research programs in sciences and engineering should be among its top priorities. Quality undergraduate and graduate programs in social sciences are equally important if we wish to produce next generation of scientists, who are socially responsible and ethical. Both undergraduate and graduate curriculum should be revised, a comprehensive exercise should be initiated, and the common overarching theme should be the introduction of high quality interdisciplinary education programs. Our universities are miserably failing in their ability to deliver high quality, dynamic, interdisciplinary curriculums. We are still teaching outdated, obsolete curriculums in our science and engineering programs which create students with a tunnel vision. It is equally important that faculty training programs should be envisioned in which existing faculty should be trained on how to teach fundamentals and mentor their students equipping them with fundamental knowledge and prevent them from falling into the trap of applied research at the cost of a basic understanding. This is a rosy motto but can become wishy washy and lead to superficiality if applied work is done at the cost of letting go of the sound fundamental knowledge. In this exercise, university teachers should be learning how to impart and foster the ability to think critically in their students. This is a challenging task because the existing faculty in our universities is burdened in unnecessary trivia, is mired in a state of strife amidst a lullaby of mediocrity. It should be encouraged that a faculty applicant for an Assistant Professor position in a university should have sound postdoctoral training in his/her discipline. Young faculty should be groomed and mentored in their early tenure track and they should not be allowed to teach more than two courses in a year for their initial three years so that they can develop high quality courses as well as pay attention in developing their independent research programs. Moreover, research universities should allocate ample funds to give as start-up seed grants for a new faculty who should secure extramural funds within the initial three years. Three years is the time when the first comprehensive performance review should be conducted. The review should not be led by the Department Chair alone but by peers and experts. Faculty promotions and career development should be based on high quality research programs they develop indigenously in Pakistan and their potential rather than number of mediocre publications as prescribed by HEC. It should be ensured that HEC accepts proposals from young faculty year around. Also, it should ensure quality peer review like NIH, NAS, DFG, SNF instead of just focus on reviewing the size and proper allocation of budgets and its assignments to the set buckets. Presently, the amounts awarded are peanuts and one should not expect any quality research with these meagre funds. It will only result in the vicious cycle of wasting precious money. Hence, it is important to increase the amount of funds approved for a proposal and it should be according to international benchmarks. The Government of Pakistan should also create an environment in which research grade chemicals can be produced in Pakistan and readily sourced, imports facilitated, duties and taxes on scientific merchandise are waived, and customs is routed through a swift green channel. Without governmental support of this kind, all funds available to faculty and support of HEC will be meaningless because making research cumbersome will take away the charm and incentive of doing this in the first place, let alone striving to reach the highest global standards of creating genuine useful knowledge. Universities should be funded to focus on select areas and themes in which they believe they can create an impact in fundamental research. Faculty and graduates lacking fundamentals will never be able to give you any product worth a patent or for eventual use for industry or market deployment. No more funds and money should be wasted in the name of product development and applied research because during last 70 years of country’s history we have produced not a single product, a vaccine, medicine, pesticide, diagnostic kit etc. despite the disproportionate funding in the name of “applied research”. When people lack fundamentals of a subject they can never develop a cutting-edge product whose design from scratch obviously requires a solid grasp of the underlying principles. Establishment of quality basic research programs takes time and requires patience. Initially, in our context, it may take double the time as compared to established places around the world, but we should stay focused and never compromise on quality and vision we have set for our programs in a university. Each department within a university should also have external review boards and performance of faculty should be reviewed positively for quality indigenous research programs established. The recent initiative of the HEC for funding Centers and National Laboratories in select themes and areas is the right approach but again quality and only quality in basics of a proposal should be sole criterion for awarding these funds. The singular aim should be to develop and nurture islands of excellence in fundamentals in the form of these Centers but if we are blindly expecting the development of commercial products, then rest assured we are losing yet again an opportunity and wasting billions again. Besides the commercialization of research is not even the government’s ambit, is the creation of mechanisms that support and build capacity that can last for generations instead of triggering the appearance of products with limited half-lives in the market! It’s never too late but it could be the last opportunity and I hope Government of Pakistan and HEC finally acts with a clear vision for quality fundamental research programs. Otherwise, with every passing day it will be impossible to fix HEC and higher education in Pakistan, like so many other institutes and organizations which use trillions but contribute nothing to the national economy or the national psyche. If we act today, we may harvest dividends in fifty years in the form of a continuous stream of critical thinkers, genuine problem solvers, socially responsible and ethical graduates coming out of our universities. It has become imperative that we indulge in new knowledge generation indigenously to ignite our economy and eventually fuel industrial development in the decades and centuries to come. In case of failure to act and compromising on quality education, we will never have a knowledge-based economy and our industry will always be struggling to find highly trained individuals aware of the fundamentals who are genuine problem solvers. Hence, we will always remain a consumer market and will never be manufacturing goods like computers, mobile phones, solar panels, disease resistant crops, chemical pesticides, medicines or helping in improving the quality of life or elevating our index for human development. The writer is an Associate Professor in Biology at LUMS, Lahore. He is an expert in the field of epigenetics and gene regulation