Are Co-Guides Mandatory in Interdisciplinary PhD Topics?

Introduction

In today’s research environment, interdisciplinary studies are no longer a rarity—they are becoming central to innovation. From artificial intelligence in healthcare to environmental economics, the merging of disciplines is transforming how scholars frame their doctoral research. Yet this integration also raises practical questions about supervision. A common concern for Indian PhD scholars is whether the University Grants Commission (UGC) and other statutory bodies require co-guides (also known as co-supervisors) for interdisciplinary PhD topics. This blog explores the issue in depth, examining UGC rules, institutional practices, and the lived experiences of doctoral candidates.

Understanding the Role of a Co-Guide

A co-guide is a faculty member who shares supervisory responsibility with the principal guide. While the primary guide usually belongs to the candidate’s home department, the co-guide often represents another discipline relevant to the research. For example:

• A PhD in Physics exploring computational models may appoint a co-guide from Computer Science.
• A doctoral student in Economics studying agricultural policies may require guidance from a scholar in Environmental Studies.

Thus, co-guides add disciplinary depth, help clarify methodologies, and ensure that the research maintains academic integrity across domains.

UGC Regulations and Co-Guides

The UGC Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of PhD Degree Regulations (2016, revised in 2022) provide guidelines for doctoral supervision but stop short of declaring co-guides mandatory. The regulations mention that:

1. A guide must be from the relevant faculty/department.
2. Interdisciplinary research may involve co-supervisors if recommended by the doctoral committee or research advisory committee.
3. Universities retain autonomy to frame additional rules about co-supervisors.

In practice, this means that UGC does not enforce a blanket rule making co-guides compulsory. Instead, the requirement depends on the nature of the research and the policies of individual universities.

University-Level Practices in India

Universities interpret UGC regulations differently. Some have institutional statutes requiring a co-guide for interdisciplinary PhDs, while others allow flexibility. Examples include:

• Central Universities such as Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) often recommend co-guides for interdisciplinary topics but do not make them compulsory.
• IITs and IISc follow a case-by-case approach, depending on whether the student’s research spans multiple departments.
• State Universities sometimes mandate co-guides to ensure adequate expertise is available for evaluating complex research proposals.

This variation means scholars must check their university’s PhD ordinances rather than relying solely on UGC norms.

Advantages of Having a Co-Guide

Even if not compulsory, appointing a co-guide has several practical advantages:

1. Access to Expertise: Co-guides bring specialized knowledge that helps refine theoretical frameworks and research tools.
2. Academic Networking: They expand the scholar’s access to research labs, conferences, and publications across disciplines.
3. Balanced Evaluation: The presence of a co-guide ensures that the thesis is reviewed with fairness, avoiding bias toward one field.
4. Methodological Clarity: In quantitative–qualitative mixed-method studies, co-guides help in integrating approaches seamlessly.

Challenges in Appointing Co-Guides

At the same time, mandatory co-guides can create complications:

• Administrative Delays: Approval of co-guides requires additional paperwork and committee consent.
• Coordination Issues: Students may face conflicting suggestions from the guide and co-guide.
• Workload Distribution: Some universities restrict the number of PhD candidates per faculty; including co-guides may affect these limits.

Thus, while beneficial, co-guides also require careful planning to avoid supervisory conflicts.

Global Practices for Comparison

Looking beyond India, we see diverse models:

• In the UK, interdisciplinary PhDs often have supervisory panels, which can include multiple guides.
• In the US, doctoral committees, rather than a single co-guide, handle interdisciplinary inputs.
• In Australia, universities require a minimum of two supervisors for all PhDs, regardless of the discipline.

Compared to these systems, India offers greater flexibility but places the responsibility on scholars and institutions to decide when co-guides are necessary.

Perspectives from Scholars

Doctoral candidates in India often view co-guides as helpful but sometimes burdensome. Many report that co-guides provide critical access to resources such as datasets, lab equipment, or external funding. Others, however, highlight challenges when guides and co-guides hold differing opinions on methodology or publication strategies.

Are Co-Guides Mandatory, Then?

To answer directly: No, co-guides are not mandatory in interdisciplinary PhD topics under UGC regulations. However, they are strongly encouraged in cases where the research requires expertise across two or more domains. The final decision usually lies with:

• The Research Advisory Committee
• The Board of Studies/Doctoral Committee
• University-specific ordinances

Thus, while not compulsory, co-guides are often practically unavoidable in interdisciplinary PhD work.

Practical Tips for PhD Scholars

If you are beginning an interdisciplinary PhD, here are some steps:

1. Clarify Early: Ask your department whether co-guides are required under university rules.
2. Choose Wisely: Select co-guides who are not only subject experts but also approachable and collaborative.
3. Formalize Roles: Define supervisory responsibilities clearly to avoid conflict.
4. Maintain Communication: Regular meetings with both supervisors can prevent contradictory advice.
5. Balance Expectations: Use the co-guide’s expertise for subject-specific guidance while allowing the principal guide to remain the academic anchor.

Conclusion

In interdisciplinary PhD research in India, co-guides are not legally mandatory under UGC rules but are often essential in practice. Universities exercise discretion in enforcing this requirement, depending on the subject, departmental capacity, and research complexity. For doctoral scholars, appointing a co-guide can significantly strengthen research quality, provided roles and responsibilities are managed effectively. Ultimately, while the UGC leaves room for flexibility, the evolving landscape of research suggests that co-guides will continue to play an important role in ensuring academic rigor in interdisciplinary PhD supervision.