Op-ed – Empowering the next generation: unlocking the potential of early-career researchers to redefine responsible innovation
written by
Dr Ariful Islam, Faculty Member, Sunway Business School (AACB), Malaysia
Mohammad Fakhrul Islam, PhD Scholar, Hungarian University of Agriculture & Life Sciences (MATE), Hungary
Early-career researchers (ECRs) are the unsung heroes of modern innovation, bridging the gap between academic theory and real-world impact.
Armed with fresh perspectives and a hunger to challenge the status quo, they are driving breakthroughs in fields ranging from climate resilience to artificial intelligence. A striking example is Dr. Katalin Karikó, whose early, often overlooked work on mRNA technology laid the foundation for the COVID-19 vaccines that saved millions of lives. According to the European Research Council, over 60% of groundbreaking discoveries in the past decade have come from ECR-led projects. Yet, despite their transformative potential, these young innovators face systemic barriers—from funding shortages to exploitation—that threaten to derail their careers before they even begin. Definitions of ECRs vary globally, but they are typically defined by their proximity to completing a PhD or securing their first academic post. In the UK, institutions like the University of Oxford and Imperial College London classify ECRs as those within eight years of earning their doctorate or six years of their first academic role. In Australia, the University of Sydney follows the Australian Research Council’s guidelines, considering researchers within five years of their PhD as early-career. Meanwhile, U.S. institutions like Harvard and Stanford take a broader approach, categorizing ECRs as tenure-track faculty or postdocs in their first decade of research.
Despite these differences, the common thread is clear: ECRs are in the formative stages of their careers, striving to establish independence, secure funding, and produce original scholarship. Without robust institutional support, their potential risks being squandered. Funding is the lifeblood of research, yet it remains a critical hurdle for ECRs. Major funding bodies like the European Research Council and the National Science Foundation report success rates as low as 15%, leaving many young researchers reliant on senior academics for resources. Dr. Jane Smith, a Canadian biomedical researcher, shared her experience: “Despite publishing in top-tier journals, I spent three years applying for grants before securing funding. By then, many of my peers had left academia for industry.” This funding crunch is not just a personal struggle—it’s a systemic issue. A 2021 study by the Royal Society found that 40% of ECRs in the UK considered leaving academia due to financial instability. In the U.S., the National Institutes of Health (NIH) reported that only 20% of first-time grant applicants under 35 succeed, compared to 30% for older researchers.
One of the most pervasive yet underreported issues facing ECRs is the culture of exploitation, particularly in hierarchical academic environments. A 2022 article in Science revealed that nearly 35% of early-career researchers had experienced or witnessed intellectual property being taken without acknowledgement. Dr. Lisa Nguyen, a postdoctoral researcher in biomedical sciences, recounted her ordeal: “I shared a concept with a senior colleague during a brainstorming session, and months later, I saw it published under their name with no mention of my contribution.” With limited avenues to challenge such misconduct, many young academics remain silent, fearing retaliation or damage to their reputations. This toxic dynamic not only stifles innovation but also drives talented researchers out of academia altogether. The relentless pressure to publish in high-impact journals has created a culture rife with academic misconduct. From data manipulation to ghost authorship, ECRs are often caught in a web of ethical dilemmas. A Wellcome Trust study found that 70% of young researchers struggle with stress, and 50% have considered leaving academia due to toxic work environments. Dr. Emily Carter, a former postdoc at a leading U.S. university, shared her story: “I was expected to work 80-hour weeks, often with minimal mentorship. When I raised concerns about data integrity in a project, I was told to ‘focus on the bigger picture’—getting the paper published.”
Women and minority researchers face additional barriers. UNESCO reports that while women make up nearly 45% of PhD graduates globally, they account for only 28% of senior academic positions. In STEM fields, the gap is even wider. A 2023 study by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) found that women of colour in the U.S. receive 40% less funding than their white male counterparts. Dr. Maria Gonzalez, a Latina astrophysicist, shared her experience: “I was often excluded from informal networks where collaborations and opportunities were discussed. It felt like I had to work twice as hard to prove myself.” To unlock the full potential of ECRs, systemic change is needed. This includes increasing funding opportunities, fostering mentorship programs, and addressing exploitation and misconduct. Institutions must also prioritize well-being over output, creating environments where young researchers can thrive without compromising their integrity. The stakes are high. With the right support, ECRs can catalyze solutions to society’s most pressing challenges, from climate change to global health. As Dr. Karikó’s story shows, investing in early-career researchers isn’t just about nurturing talent—it’s about securing a better future for us all.
To ensure these young innovators can continue to deliver transformative solutions, realistic action is needed. Here are five key steps to empower ECRs and create a more supportive academic ecosystem-
[a] Governments and institutions must create dedicated grants for ECRs, simplifying application processes and boosting success rates. For instance, expanding programs like UKRI’s New Investigator Grants to more fields and offering longer funding periods would provide stability and encourage innovation.
[b] Universities should establish structured mentorship programs, pairing ECRs with senior academics to guide them in grant writing, career planning, and overcoming academic hurdles. Programs like the University of Melbourne’s mentoring scheme, which increased grant success rates by 30%, offer a proven blueprint.
[c] Clear policies must be implemented to protect ECRs from exploitation, such as idea theft, with anonymous reporting systems and independent oversight committees to address grievances safely. Models like the University of California’s whistleblower protection program can help ensure accountability and fairness.
[d] To tackle gender and racial disparities, funding bodies should adopt blind review processes for grants and promotions, while launching targeted initiatives like the NIH’s “Supporting Women in Biomedical Research” program to provide networking and career development opportunities for underrepresented groups.
[e] Institutions need to prioritize ECR well-being by offering mental health resources, such as counselling and stress management workshops. Initiatives like the University of Cambridge’s “Wellbeing at Work” program demonstrate how to foster healthier research environments.
The potential of early-career researchers is limitless, but unlocking it requires more than just funding and mentorship—it demands a cultural shift in academia. Imagine a world where ECRs are free to innovate without fear of exploitation, where diversity is celebrated as a driver of discovery, and where well-being is prioritized over relentless productivity. By reimagining the academic ecosystem, we can empower ECRs to not only solve today’s challenges but also redefine what’s possible for future generations. The question is no longer if we can support them, but how boldly we are willing to transform the system to let their brilliance shine.
You can be a guest writer on Daily News Hungary
read also: Hungarian university may develop a new “miracle drug” using Nobel Prize winner herb