The bureaucracy in a university has direct impact on research culture of university because of national and international accreditation processes that expect that university administration promote and practice highest standards of research culture in their universities but also collaborate with others in similar location or even distant regions.

My following paper discuss it in the Pakistani context.

http://kspjournals.org/index.php/TER/article/view/1429

it depends upon the style and functioning of government/s is/are concerned. normally in a democracy bureaucracy do not directly intervene in the research work, but, well, sometimes it has been observed that in some social aspects, if any research work or article violates the social integrity of a nations then they intervene. generally, good practices are followed in good governance.

You need more time to fill in administrative forms than you can spend on your research creativity and productivity, i.e. bureaucracy and legitimatory procedures put a brake on scientific creativity.

In this sense, they serve as a means to control thinking and not as part of rationalization procedures.

# Academic and administrative autonomy of University in India along with academic autonomy of faculty and students at their ends.

# Academic fraternity of India has excellent intangible bonding with English speaking Democracies with respect to human capital and leading Journals or conferences of repute.

# Bureaucracy via Governance in India may not imposed any restrictions guaranteed by Article 21 of Constitution of India quoted by Supreme Court of India in a subjective Judgement dated on 25th January, 1975.

# Academic performance is under Liberty of Thought and Expression at par for the betterment of democratic values in society.

*****

Bureaucracy is a real brake on scientific progress.

First, the money spent on maintaining the bureaucracy often exceeds the cost of scientific research. The number of bureaucratic employees is often excessive. To justify their salaries, they constantly invent new documents that supposedly regulate the scientific process. The scientist has to spend a lot of time servicing these papers.

Secondly, bureaucrats from science are usually people who have not written a single article themselves. Therefore, they do not understand how the scientific process works. Because of this, they come up with mechanisms that they think should improve the conditions for scientific work. But in fact, they are just an extra link, which often terribly interferes with scientists. For Russia, bureaucracy is a terrible disaster (and not only in science).

There are still "third" and" fourth", but the first two reasons are enough.

Daniel, tell me please why there was such a question?