RESEARCH has long been the quiet but decisive fault line separating universities that merely produce graduates from those that produce knowledge. In Bangladesh, higher education has traditionally leaned more towards teaching than inquiry, more towards classrooms than laboratories. Yet recent data suggest that this balance is slowly shifting, particularly within the private university sector. The change is neither accidental nor insignificant. It reflects a growing realisation that without research, the promise of quality higher education remains largely rhetorical.
According to the University Grants Commission’s Annual Report 2023, private universities spent Tk 139.31 crore on research in the last fiscal year. In 2017, that figure stood at Tk 93.36 crore. In six years, research expenditure has increased by nearly one and a half times. On the surface, this looks like a reassuring trend. In a country where higher education expansion has often been criticised for prioritising quantity over quality, rising research investment signals a potential course correction. Yet the more important question is not whether spending has increased, but whether it is sufficient, strategic and transformative.
To put this figure in perspective, Bangladesh now has more than 100 private universities serving hundreds of thousands of students. Divided across institutions, Tk 139 crore is modest by international standards. Even leading Asian universities spend several times that amount individually each year. Research-intensive universities elsewhere treat research funding not as a discretionary expense but as a core operational necessity. In Bangladesh, research still competes with infrastructure, marketing and administrative costs for limited institutional resources. The increase, therefore, should be seen as a beginning rather than a breakthrough.
Another indicator of research capacity is faculty qualification. The number of PhD-holding teachers in private universities has risen from 3,416 in 2017 to 3,603 today. Currently, 20.61 per cent of private university teachers hold doctoral degrees out of a total faculty strength of 17,479. This growth is positive but incremental. A 1 per cent rise over several years suggests slow structural change rather than rapid transformation. Moreover, the distribution of PhD-qualified faculty remains uneven. A handful of universities such as North South University, Independent University Bangladesh and East West University report that nearly half of their teachers hold PhDs, while many others lag far behind.
This concentration matters because research culture does not emerge evenly. It clusters where incentives, infrastructure and leadership align. Universities with higher proportions of doctoral faculty tend to produce more research output, attract international collaborations and perform better in global rankings. Those without such capacity often remain teaching-focused, with research treated as an optional or symbolic activity. If the private sector as a whole aims to elevate national higher education quality, this gap must be addressed through targeted faculty development, doctoral training support and meaningful career incentives linked to research productivity.
Publication data further illuminate both progress and imbalance. In recent years, private universities have become increasingly visible in Scopus-indexed research outputs, a key metric in global university rankings. In 2025, Bangladeshi researchers contributed to 18,613 scientific publications across journals, conference proceedings and review articles. Among private institutions, Daffodil International University has emerged as a leading contributor, followed by BRAC University and North South University. Several others including AIUB, IUBAT, East West University, AUST, UIU, IUB, BUBT, Southeast University, Islamic University of Technology and University of Asia Pacific also feature prominently.
This growing presence challenges the long-standing perception that research excellence in Bangladesh is confined to a few public universities. It also underscores the role of institutional strategy. Universities that have invested in research offices, publication incentives, collaborative projects and postgraduate expansion are reaping measurable benefits. However, an overreliance on publication counts carries its own risks. When rankings reward volume, institutions may prioritise quantity over impact, short-term output over long-term inquiry, and safe topics over socially relevant but complex research questions.
The fixation on global rankings deserves critical scrutiny. Metrics such as Scopus publications, QS rankings, and Times Higher Education indicators undeniably shape international perception. Yet they also reflect a particular model of higher education that may not fully align with national priorities. Bangladesh faces urgent challenges in public health, climate vulnerability, urban planning, governance, agriculture and social inequality. Research that directly addresses these issues may not always translate into high-impact international journal publications but can be far more valuable for national development.
Private universities increasingly speak the language of international standards, accreditation and global competitiveness. This is evident in their pursuit of domestic and international accreditation, curriculum modernisation, industry linkages and specialised research centres. Such initiatives signal ambition and institutional maturity. They also reflect a competitive environment where universities vie for students, faculty and recognition. Competition can drive improvement, but it can also incentivise superficial compliance rather than substantive reform.
The real test lies in whether research is embedded into the academic ecosystem or treated as an add-on. Genuine research universities cultivate inquiry at every level, from undergraduate classrooms to doctoral laboratories. They encourage critical thinking, tolerate intellectual risk and protect academic freedom. They invest not only in publishing papers but also in mentoring young researchers, funding exploratory projects and building interdisciplinary platforms. Without these foundations, an increased spending risks becoming performative rather than transformative.
Another overlooked dimension is the relationship between research and teaching. In theory, research-active faculty enhance classroom learning by exposing students to current knowledge and analytical methods. In practice, heavy teaching loads, limited research grants and administrative burdens often constrain faculty research time. Many private university teachers teach multiple sections to sustain institutional revenue, leaving little space for sustained inquiry. Without structural adjustments, the expectation of increased research output may lead to burnout or superficial compliance.
There is also the question of equity. Elite private universities with stronger financial bases can invest more in research infrastructure, attract PhD holders and support publication costs. Smaller or newer institutions struggle to keep pace, potentially widening the quality gap within the sector. A national research policy that supports collaboration rather than pure competition could help mitigate this divide. Shared research facilities, joint grants and inter-university doctoral programmes could pool resources and expertise more effectively.
The state, too, has a role beyond regulation. While private universities are largely self-funded, national research priorities require coordinated public investment. Competitive research grants open to both public and private institutions, transparent evaluation mechanisms and incentives for industry-academia collaboration could amplify the impact of existing efforts. Without such support, private research growth will remain uneven and vulnerable to market fluctuations.
The recent upward trend in research spending and output should, therefore, be read with cautious optimism. It signals a shift in mindset, an acknowledgement that credibility in higher education increasingly depends on knowledge creation. Yet progress measured only in budgets and publication counts risks missing deeper structural weaknesses. Research excellence cannot be fast-tracked through rankings alone. It demands patience, integrity and a long-term commitment to intellectual development.
If private universities are to play a transformative role in Bangladesh’s higher education landscape, they must move beyond the performative pursuit of metrics and embrace research as a public good. The question is no longer whether private universities can contribute to research, but whether they can do so in ways that are rigorous, relevant and rooted in the country’s realities. The answer will determine not only their place in global rankings, but their legitimacy in shaping Bangladesh’s future knowledge economy.
HM Nazmul Alam is an academic, journalist, and political analyst based in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Currently he teaches at IUBAT.
