|
Low-Level Technology: Growth Obstacle Author : CA A. K. Jain   -Chapter Headings- * Preamble
*
Research Institutions Promoted by the British Government
*
Post Independence Government Promoted Research Institutions
*
Managing the Low Technology Challenge
*
Government Action Plan
*
Deficiencies in Government Schemes
*
Government Technological Disappointments
*
Technology Adoption: India vs. Developed Countries Preamble India, a country renowned for its rich cultural heritage and diverse landscape, has emerged as a global economic force in recent decades. However, despite significant progress in various sectors, the nation still grapples with the impediment of low-level technology hindering its full developmental potential. At the heart of India's economic conundrum lies the prevalence of outdated technology across multiple industries. From agriculture to manufacturing, many sectors continue to rely on obsolete machinery and processes, stifling productivity and innovation. This stagnation not only hampers domestic competitiveness but also undermines India's position in the global market. In agriculture, the backbone of India's economy employing a significant portion of its workforce, outdated techniques contribute to inefficiency and yield fluctuations. Insufficient access to modern farming equipment, irrigation systems, and crop management technologies perpetuates the cycle of low productivity and income instability for farmers. Similarly, the manufacturing sector, a crucial driver of economic growth and employment generation, faces hurdles due to outdated machinery and inadequate technological advancements. This translates to subpar quality products, higher production costs, and limited capacity to meet evolving consumer demands, both domestically and internationally. Moreover, the lack of technological prowess extends to crucial areas such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, impeding progress and exacerbating socio-economic disparities across the nation.  Research Institutions Promoted by the British Government The British colonial administration in India established several research institutions to further their economic and administrative interests. These institutions played a significant role in shaping the scientific landscape of the country. 1. Botanical Survey of India (BSI) : Played a crucial role in documenting the flora of India, which was vital for exploiting natural resources such as timber and medicinal plants. BSI Identified several economically important plants that contributed to British commercial interests. 2. Geological Survey of India (GSI) : GSI was key in discovering coal reserves, which were crucial for powering the railways and industries during British rule. GSI Produced extensive geological maps, laying the groundwork for India’s mining and mineral industries. 3. Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) : IARI developed high-yield varieties of crops like wheat and rice, contributing to agricultural productivity. Its research laid the groundwork for the Green Revolution in India post-independence. 4. Survey of India : SOI Established a comprehensive geographical understanding of the Indian subcontinent. It enabled better land revenue management, military planning, and infrastructure development.
5. Indian
Institute of Science (IISc) : 6. Imperial Bacteriological Laboratory (IVRI) : IVRI promoted advanced veterinary science in India by developing vaccines and treatments for livestock diseases. IVRI supported the agrarian economy by improving animal health and productivity. While these institutions made significant contributions to scientific research and laid the groundwork for several industries in India, their establishment was primarily driven by the colonial administration’s need to extract and exploit India’s resources. The focus on areas that benefited British commercial and strategic interests often meant that the research did not always address the needs of the Indian population. However, these institutions did provide a foundation upon which independent India could build, and many of them continue to play a vital role in the country’s scientific and industrial development. In conclusion, the research institutions established by the British government in India were both a product of and a contributor to the colonial economy. While they did achieve notable successes and laid important foundations for future development, their legacy is also marked by the limitations imposed by their colonial context. Post Independence Government Promoted Research Institutions Since independence, India has established numerous research institutions to drive scientific research, technological innovation, and industrial growth. These institutions have played a pivotal role in the country's development by contributing to various sectors, including agriculture, medicine, space, defence, and industry. These are some key research institutions, including their achievements, challenges, and contributions to Indian industry and business. 1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) : CSIR was established in 1942 .Its prime achievements include development of Swaraj tractor, the first Indian tractor, development of India's first supercomputer, "Flosolver," development of generic drugs, reducing dependency on imports. Overall it has made significant contributions to the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and chemical industries. CSIR also faces Challenges like limited industry-academia collaboration, bureaucratic hurdles and lack of autonomy in decision-making and funding constraints leading to slow commercialization of research.
2. Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) : This was established in 1969. The key achievements include launch of Mars Orbiter Mission (Mangalyaan) in 2013, launch of various satellite programs like INSAT and GSAT, Chandrayaan and Gaganyaan missions, marking India's presence in space exploration. It has also contributed to the growth of sectors like telecommunications, broadcasting, and meteorology.
ISRO also faces
Challenges like competition from private space companies globally, budgetary
constraints affecting the pace of innovation, limited commercialization of space
technologies.
3. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) : This was established in 1929 and renamed and relocated in 1947. Its key achievements include development of high-yielding varieties of wheat and rice, contributing to the Green Revolution, advances in biotechnology leading to improved crop resilience and productivity, played a key role in the White Revolution, making India the largest milk producer. ICAR boosted agricultural productivity and food security, benefiting agro-based industries. It is also instrumental in promoting agricultural exports. ICAR also faces Challenges like Limited adoption of advanced agricultural technologies by farmers, inadequate funding for research on emerging agricultural issues like climate change, fragmented research efforts with insufficient collaboration among different ICAR institutes.
4. Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) : This was established in 1958. Its key achievements include development of indigenous missile systems like Agni, Prithvi, and BrahMos, advanced research in radar and electronic warfare systems. It has significantly contributed to the development of Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas. It has also collaborated with private sector firms to develop and manufacture defence equipment. ICAR also faces Challenges like delays in project timelines, leading to cost overruns, dependence on foreign technology for critical components, challenges in retaining talent due to competition from the private sector.
ICAR also faces Challenges like high faculty-to-student ratio affecting the quality of research, limited industry collaboration, particularly with SMEs, brain drain, with many graduates moving abroad for better opportunities.
The research institutions promoted by the Government of India have made significant contributions to the country's industrial and technological advancement. However, challenges like funding constraints, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and limited industry collaboration need to be addressed to fully harness their potential. With strategic reforms, these institutions can play a more pivotal role in driving India’s global competitiveness in science, technology, and industry. Managing the Low Technology Challenge Addressing the challenge of low-level technology requires a multi-faceted approach encompassing policy reforms, investment initiatives, and fostering innovation ecosystems. 1. Policy Reforms : The government must prioritize policies that incentivize the adoption of modern technology across sectors. This could involve providing subsidies for the purchase of advanced machinery, implementing tax breaks for technology upgrades, and streamlining regulatory processes to facilitate easier access to cutting-edge solutions. To harness this potential, the government needs to implement strategic policy reforms that foster technological innovation and adoption.
2. Investment in Research and Development : A robust ecosystem for research and development (R&D) is imperative for technological advancement. Increased public and private investment in R&D initiatives can spur innovation, leading to the development of indigenous technologies tailored to India's unique needs. 3. Skill Development and Education : Bridging the digital divide requires a skilled workforce equipped with the knowledge to harness modern technology effectively. Investing in education and vocational training programs focused on digital literacy and technical skills will empower individuals to adapt to evolving technological landscapes and drive innovation in their respective fields. 4. Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) : Collaboration between the government, private sector, and academia can accelerate technological adoption and innovation. PPP initiatives can facilitate knowledge exchange, funding opportunities, and infrastructure development, fostering a conducive environment for technological advancement. 5. Promotion of Entrepreneurship : Encouraging entrepreneurship and start-ups in the technology sector can catalyze innovation and disrupt traditional industries. Providing support in the form of incubation centres, funding schemes and mentorship programs will nurture a vibrant ecosystem of tech-driven enterprises, driving economic growth and job creation. 6. Infrastructure Development : Investing in digital infrastructure, such as high-speed internet connectivity and smart grids, is essential to enable the seamless integration of technology across sectors. Robust infrastructure lays the foundation for digital transformation, unlocking new opportunities for growth and development. Government Action Plan The Indian government has been taking various initiatives to address the challenge of low technology adoption in the Indian industry, aiming to spur economic development and enhance competitiveness. Here are some key strategies and initiatives along with relevant facts and figures: 1. National Policy on Electronics : The National Policy on Electronics (NPE) was formulated by the Government of India to position the country as a global hub for Electronics System Design and Manufacturing (ESDM). The policy aims to promote domestic manufacturing, create employment in the ESDM sector, encourage research, development, and innovation in the electronics sector, attract investments in the electronics sector, provide a conducive regulatory environment for the growth of the ESDM sector, enhance the availability of skilled manpower in the ESDM sector, foster the creation and protection of intellectual property rights in the electronics sector, ensure quality standards and certifications for electronic products manufactured in India. Under this policy, initiatives like the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme have been introduced, which offers financial incentives to boost domestic production. As of January 2022, the government had approved PLI schemes worth Rs. 2.46 lakh crore ($33 billion) to promote electronics manufacturing. A. Policy Implementation : The implementation of the NPE has seen several initiatives and schemes launched by the government to promote the electronics sector: a. Modified Special Incentive Package Scheme (M-SIPS): Provided financial incentives to offset disabilities and attract investments in the ESDM sector. b. Electronics Manufacturing Clusters (EMC): Established clusters to provide world-class infrastructure for attracting investments. c. Production Linked Incentive (PLI) Scheme: Launched to boost large-scale electronics manufacturing. d. Scheme for Promotion of Manufacturing of Electronic Components and Semiconductors (SPECS): Provided financial incentives for manufacturing electronic components and semiconductors. e. Electronics Development Fund (EDF): Aimed at promoting R&D and innovation in the electronics sector. f. Skill Development Initiatives: Various programs to enhance the skill set of the workforce in the electronics sector.
B. Challenges in the NPE Policy : Despite the initiatives, there are certain deficiencies and challenges in the implementation of the NPE. To address these deficiencies, the following improvements are suggested: Government may increase investment in infrastructure to support electronics manufacturing clusters and provide high-quality logistics and connectivity facilities. Further, enhanced collaboration between industry and educational institutions will help in development of tailor skill programs. Increase in funding for vocational training programs and R&D supported by higher tax incentives for companies investing in R&D will immensely help. It is also essential to streamline regulatory processes to reduce approval time and implementation of a single-window clearance system for setting up new manufacturing units. Simultaneously, IPR protection and enforcement mechanisms related to IPR should be strengthened. For better branding of products quality certification and standardization of electronic products is also important. The National Policy on Electronics (NPE) has the potential to transform India's electronics manufacturing landscape. By addressing the identified deficiencies and implementing the suggested improvements, India can enhance its position as a global leader in the ESDM sector.
2. Make in
India : Launched by the Government of India in September 2014, the "Make in
India" initiative aims to transform India into a global manufacturing hub by
encouraging both multinational and domestic companies to manufacture their
products within India. The primary objective of the scheme is to increase
manufacturing sector's GDP Contribution from 16-17% to 25% and generation of
additional 100 million jobs in manufacturing sector. The scheme also plans to
attract foreign investments to boost the manufacturing ecosystem.
A.
Implementation of the "Make in India" Policy
B. Challenges
and Deficiencies in Make in India Policy b. Slow Growth in Manufacturing Contribution to GDP : The contribution of manufacturing to GDP has only marginally increased, hovering around 17-18%, far below the target of 25%. c. Skill Development Gaps : The pace of skill development has not kept up with industry demands, leading to a mismatch between available skills and the needs of the manufacturing sector. d. Dependence on Imports : Despite efforts to boost domestic manufacturing, India remains heavily reliant on imports for high-tech and capital-intensive goods, particularly in sectors like electronics and defence. e. Bureaucratic Hurdles : Despite improvements, bureaucratic red tape, land acquisition issues, and regulatory uncertainties continue to pose challenges to investors and businesses.
C. Suggestions
for Improvement b. Enhance Infrastructure Development : Development of industrial corridors is required to provide world- class infrastructure, including transportation, power, and communication networks. Development of smart manufacturing hubs with integrated facilities, including research and development (R&D) centres will attract high-tech industries. c. Strengthen R&D and Innovation : Tax incentives and grants will encourage R&D investments in manufacturing. Establishment of new innovation clusters will bring together research institutions, start-ups, and manufacturing units to foster industrial growth. d. Improve Regulatory Environment : Streamlining of approval process, particularly in land acquisition and environmental clearances will reduce delays. Strong legal mechanisms will ensure timely enforcement of contracts, reducing the risk for investors. The "Make in India" policy has been a pivotal initiative in boosting India's manufacturing sector. While it has achieved some success, particularly in improving the ease of doing business and attracting FDI, significant challenges remain in job creation, skill development, and reducing import dependency. Addressing these challenges through targeted reforms and investment in infrastructure, skills, and innovation is essential to realizing the full potential of the "Make in India" policy.
3. Technology Up- Gradation Fund Scheme : The Technology Up gradation Fund Scheme (TUFS) was launched by the Government of India in 1999 to facilitate the modernization and technological advancement of the textile and jute industries. The scheme aimed to make these sectors globally competitive by providing financial assistance for upgrading technology in existing units and setting up new units with modern equipment. Over time, the scheme has undergone several revisions to address the evolving needs of the industry.
A. Objectives :
B. Phases of TUFS : C. Implementation and Success of TUFS :
TUFS has significantly contributed to the modernization of the textile industry, making it more competitive in the global market. The scheme has facilitated a marked increase in the quality of textiles, leading to higher exports. Through technology upgrades, the scheme has sustained and generated employment, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas. TUFS has attracted substantial private investment in the textile sector, contributing to overall economic growth. D. Deficiencies in Implementation : There have been significant delays in the disbursement of subsidies, leading to financial strain on companies. This has discouraged small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from fully benefiting from the scheme. The process for applying for subsidies under TUFS is complex, with multiple layers of bureaucracy. Smaller companies often struggle to navigate the process, resulting in lower uptake of the scheme. TUFS has primarily benefited larger companies, with limited impact on micro and small enterprises. This has created an uneven playing field, with smaller units unable to compete effectively. The scheme has not fully embraced new and emerging technologies such as AI, IoT, and sustainable practices. This limits the potential for innovation and long-term competitiveness in the global market.
E. Suggestions for Improvement :
b. Expanding Coverage to SMEs : Introduce special provisions and higher subsidies for SMEs to encourage their participation in TUFS. Providing a higher percentage of capital subsidy to micro and small enterprises compared to larger companies. c. Focus on Emerging Technologies : Expand the scope of TUFS to include financial support for adopting AI, IoT, and sustainable technologies. Create a separate fund under TUFS for companies investing in green and digital technologies. d. Monitoring and Feedback Mechanism : Establish a robust monitoring and feedback mechanism to assess the impact of TUFS and make real-time adjustments. Conduct periodic surveys and audits to gather insights from beneficiaries and address any challenges faced. e. Streamlining Disbursement Processes : Implement a more transparent and efficient disbursement process with clear timelines. Government may introduce a digital portal where companies can track the status of their subsidy applications in real time. The Technology Up gradation Fund Scheme has been instrumental in modernizing the Indian textile sector, but its full potential is yet to be realized. By addressing the identified deficiencies and implementing the suggested improvements, the scheme can play a pivotal role in enhancing the competitiveness of India's manufacturing sector, particularly under the broader 'Make in India' initiative. The integration of new technologies and a focus on SMEs will be crucial in ensuring that TUFS continues to contribute to India's economic growth. 4. Atal Innovation Mission : The Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) was launched by the Government of India in 2016 with the primary objective of promoting a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship across the country. AIM is an umbrella initiative that fosters innovation through various programs and schemes, targeting different sectors, including manufacturing. The mission aims to create an ecosystem of innovation in India that will contribute to the country’s economic growth and global competitiveness, particularly under the 'Make in India' policy. AIM fosters research and development (R&D) activities, particularly in technology-intensive sectors. It includes initiatives such as Atal Tinkering Labs (ATLs) in schools, Atal Incubation Centres (AICs), and Atal New India Challenges (ANICs) to support start-ups and innovators.
A. Key Initiatives under AIM : b. Atal Incubation Centres (AICs) provides support to start-ups by offering them the infrastructure and resources needed to innovate and scale. This supports manufacturing startups in product development, scaling, and commercialization. c. Atal Community Innovation Centres (ACICs) promotes innovation in underserved regions of India. It helps in the decentralization of manufacturing hubs by encouraging local innovation and production. d. ARISE supports innovative startups solving societal problems with an emphasis on MSMEs. This facilitates the creation of new manufacturing solutions, particularly for small and medium enterprises. B. Implementation challenges for AIM : AIM has been largely successful in its implementation, with thousands of ATLs, AICs, and other initiatives established across the country. However, the implementation of AIM, particularly in the manufacturing sector, has encountered certain challenges and deficiencies. a. Lack of Focused Support for Advanced Manufacturing : While AIM has promoted general innovation, there is a need for more focused support on advanced manufacturing technologies such as AI, automation, and Industry 4.0. b. Regional Disparities : The distribution of AIM resources is uneven, with more urban areas benefiting compared to rural and semi-urban regions. This has led to regional imbalances in the growth of the manufacturing sector. c. Limited Collaboration with Industry : AIM's initiatives, while fostering innovation, often lack sufficient collaboration with established industries, which could provide valuable insights and resources for scaling manufacturing innovations. e. Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation : There is a lack of a robust framework to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of AIM initiatives, leading to inefficiencies and underutilization of resources.
C. Suggestions for Improvement b. Address Regional Disparities : Set up more ACICs in underserved regions with a focus on local manufacturing needs. This would promote balanced regional development and decentralize manufacturing activities. c. Strengthen Industry Collaboration : Establish partnerships between AICs and major manufacturing firms to facilitate the commercialization of innovations. Such collaboration can provide start-ups with practical insights, market access, and funding opportunities. d. Implement Robust Monitoring Mechanisms : Develop a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework with clear KPIs for AIM initiatives. This would ensure that resources are effectively utilized and the mission's objectives are met. The Atal Innovation Mission has played a crucial role in enhancing innovation and entrepreneurship in India’s manufacturing sector. While there have been notable successes, particularly in start-up creation and regional expansion, the mission can be further optimized by focusing on advanced manufacturing technologies, reducing regional disparities, strengthening industry collaboration, and improving monitoring mechanisms. Implementing these suggestions would make AIM more effective in contributing to the 'Make in India' policy and achieving the broader economic goals of the country. 5. National Skill Development Mission : The National Skill Development Mission was launched by the Government of India on July 15, 2015, as part of the larger Skill India initiative. By 2022, NSDM had trained over 10 million youth in different skills, including information technology and electronics. The mission's primary objective is to create convergence across sectors and states in terms of skill development, to rapidly scale up efforts to meet the demand for skilled labour across various industries, and to improve the overall employability of the Indian workforce. The NSDM aims to provide an institutional framework to implement and coordinate all skill development activities across the country..
A. Key Features of NSDM : b. Skill Development Programs : NSDM includes a range of programs such as the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY), National Apprenticeship Promotion Scheme (NAPS), and the Skills Acquisition and Knowledge Awareness for Livelihood Promotion (SANKALP). c. Focus Areas : The mission focuses on skills relevant to industry needs, including emerging areas such as AI, robotics, and automation, which are critical for the manufacturing sector. NSDM targets youth, women, and marginalized sections of society, aiming to provide them with market- relevant skills. d. Impact on the Manufacturing Sector : The manufacturing sector is a critical component of India's economy, contributing approximately 16-17% to the GDP. The sector has been identified as a key driver for employment generation, and the success of initiatives like 'Make in India' is heavily dependent on the availability of a skilled workforce. NSDM aims to bridge the gap between the demand for skilled labour in manufacturing and the supply of trained workers. e. Skilling for Manufacturing : Under NSDM, specific courses and training modules have been designed to meet the needs of the manufacturing sector. These include training in precision engineering, CNC machining, welding, quality control, and other specialized skills. f. Alignment with Industry Needs : The mission has made efforts to align its training programs with the needs of the manufacturing industry by partnering with industry associations like CII, FICCI, and various sector skill councils. g. Apprenticeship Programs : The National Apprenticeship Promotion Scheme (NAPS), a component of NSDM, has been particularly beneficial for the manufacturing sector by providing hands-on training opportunities to youth in real work environments. B. Implementation challenges of NSDM : While the NSDM has made significant strides in improving the skill levels of the workforce, its implementation has faced several challenges: a. Quality of Training : There is a significant disparity in the quality of training provided across different regions and training centres. Some centres lack adequate infrastructure, qualified trainers, and updated curricula, which affects the overall effectiveness of the training programs. b. Mismatch between Training and Industry Needs : Despite efforts to align training with industry requirements, there is still a gap between the skills imparted and the actual needs of the manufacturing sector. This has led to situations where trained individuals are not immediately employable in the industry. c. Low Enrollment in Apprenticeship Programs : Although apprenticeship programs are crucial for the manufacturing sector, the enrollment rates in these programs remain low. This is partly due to a lack of awareness among potential candidates and employers, as well as bureaucratic hurdles in the apprenticeship registration process. d. Limited Reach in Rural Areas : The mission has had limited success in penetrating rural areas, where the majority of the unskilled and semi-skilled workforce resides. This geographical imbalance has restricted the mission's impact on the manufacturing sector, which often relies on labour from these areas. e. Retention of Skilled Labour : There is a high attrition rate among skilled workers in the manufacturing sector, partly due to better opportunities in other industries or regions. This has resulted in a shortage of skilled labour in manufacturing hubs.
C. Suggestions for Improvement : b. Industry-Academia Collaboration : Strengthen partnerships between industry players and academic institutions to create more industry-relevant courses and certifications. This will help bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application. The integration of industry-led training programs in technical universities and polytechnics, as seen in Germany’s dual education system, could be adapted to the Indian context. c. Increase Awareness and Accessibility of Apprenticeships : Launch targeted awareness campaigns to promote the benefits of apprenticeship programs among both youth and employers. Simplify the registration process and provide incentives for companies to hire apprentices. The success of the UK's "Get In Go Far" campaign, which significantly increased apprenticeship participation, can be a model for India. d. Focus on Rural Outreach : Develop mobile training centres and digital platforms to reach rural areas, ensuring that the rural workforce has access to skill development opportunities. Special incentives should be provided to training providers who operate in these areas. The Mobile Skill Training Units (MSTUs) launched in Gujarat could be expanded to other states, bringing training directly to rural populations.
e. Retention Strategies for Skilled Labour :
Develop policies to retain skilled labour within the manufacturing sector by
offering better wages, career advancement opportunities, and social security
benefits. Encourage companies to adopt employee retention practices like skill
up gradation programs and continuous learning opportunities. The introduction of
retention bonuses and career progression plans by companies like Tata Steel has
helped in reducing attrition rates among skilled workers.
The National Skill Development Mission has played a crucial role in skilling India’s workforce, particularly for the manufacturing sector. However, several challenges in its implementation need to be addressed to fully realize its potential. By focusing on improving training quality, fostering industry-academia collaborations, increasing rural outreach, and retaining skilled labor, the mission can contribute more effectively to the growth of the manufacturing sector in India. 6. Digital India : Launched in 2015, the Digital India initiative aims to transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy. The initiative's primary objectives include providing digital infrastructure, delivering government services digitally, and promoting digital literacy. For the manufacturing sector, Digital India serves as a crucial enabler of technological advancements, enhancing productivity, efficiency, and competitiveness.
A. Impact on the Manufacturing Sector b. Promotion of Industry 4.0 : Digital India has promoted the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies, including IoT, AI, and big data analytics, in manufacturing. This has led to smarter manufacturing processes, predictive maintenance, and reduced downtime, ultimately enhancing productivity. The initiative has facilitated the up skilling of the workforce in digital technologies, making them more adaptable to the changing demands of the manufacturing sector. c. Ease of Doing Business : The digitization of regulatory processes, such as company registration, tax filings, and compliance procedures, has reduced the time and effort required for manufacturers to start and operate businesses in India. The widespread adoption of digital payment systems under Digital India has improved transaction transparency and reduced the reliance on cash, benefiting manufacturers in terms of efficiency and financial inclusion.
B. Implementation Issues : b. Technology Adoption : There has been notable progress in the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies, particularly among large manufacturers and in urban areas. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) still face challenges in adopting these technologies due to the high initial investment and lack of technical expertise. c. Skill Development : Digital literacy programs under Digital India have trained millions of individuals in basic digital skills. However , there remains a gap in advanced digital skills, particularly in rural areas, which hinders the effective adoption of digital technologies in manufacturing. d. Digital Divide : Despite efforts to improve digital infrastructure, a significant digital divide persists between urban and rural areas. This disparity limits the reach of digital technologies to rural manufacturers and SMEs. e. Lack of Tailored Solutions for SMEs : The initiative has not sufficiently addressed the unique needs of SMEs in the manufacturing sector. High costs and lack of access to affordable digital solutions remain significant barriers. f. Inadequate Focus on Advanced Skill Development : While basic digital literacy has improved, there is an insufficient focus on developing advanced skills required for the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas. g. Slow Implementation of Infrastructure Projects : Delays in implementing key infrastructure projects, such as the BharatNet project, have hindered the full realization of Digital India’s benefits for the manufacturing sector.
C. Suggestions for Improvement : b. Tailored Digital Solutions for SMEs : Introduce a dedicated platform for SMEs to access affordable digital tools and technologies, similar to the 'Start-up India' initiative. Provide financial incentives and low-interest loans to SMEs for the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies. c. Focus on Advanced Skill Development : Launch specialized training programs in partnership with industry leaders to impart advanced digital skills relevant to the manufacturing sector, similar to the 'Future Skills Prime' initiative. Create regional centres of excellence to provide hands-on training in Industry 4.0 technologies. The Digital India initiative has positively impacted the manufacturing sector by enhancing connectivity, promoting Industry 4.0, and simplifying business processes. However, challenges such as the digital divide, lack of tailored solutions for SMEs, and slow infrastructure implementation remain. Addressing these deficiencies through targeted interventions and faster project execution can further amplify the initiative's benefits, driving growth and competitiveness in the Indian manufacturing sector. Government Investment on Technology Development The Government of India has been steadily increasing its focus and investment in technology development over the years. These expenditures are aimed at fostering innovation, supporting research and development (R&D), and promoting technology adoption across various sectors. The government’s spending on technology development encompasses various ministries and departments, including the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), and others. The funding supports R&D projects, technology incubators, and initiatives under flagship programs like Digital India, Make in India, and Start-up India. Key Allocations for Technology Development : This data provides insight into the government’s priorities and the sectors that are likely to receive continued focus in the coming years.
The Government of India's growing investment in technology development reflects its strategic emphasis on leveraging technology as a driver of economic growth and global competitiveness. Continued investments in emerging technologies and infrastructure are crucial for sustaining this momentum and achieving long-term technological leadership. Deficiencies in Government Schemes 1. Lack of Effective Implementation : One of the major challenges faced by government schemes is the ineffective implementation at the ground level. Despite allocation of funds and resources, the intended benefits often fail to reach the targeted beneficiaries due to bureaucratic hurdles, corruption, and lack of accountability. A 2021 survey by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) found that 60% of respondents faced delays in getting government grants for R & D. 2. Insufficient Funding : Many schemes suffer from inadequate funding, limiting their reach and impact. This results in a lack of infrastructure development, research and development initiatives, and technology adoption in industries. The Technology Up gradation Fund Scheme (TUFS) aimed to facilitate the modernization and up gradation of the textile industry by providing financial assistance. However, the allocated funds might not have been adequate to address the needs of all eligible beneficiaries, leading to disparities in technological advancement across the sector. 3. Limited Focus on SMEs : Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) constitute a significant portion of the Indian industrial sector. However, government schemes often overlook the specific needs and challenges faced by SMEs in adopting and integrating new technologies. A 2022 study by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) found that only 12% of MSMEs accessed formal credit channels for technological up gradation. 4. Skill Gap : The success of technological improvement schemes heavily relies on the availability of skilled workforce capable of leveraging new technologies. However, there is often a significant gap between the skills demanded by emerging technologies and the skills possessed by the workforce, hindering the effective implementation of such schemes. A 2023 report by National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) stated a skill gap of 2.3 crore in the manufacturing sector alone. 5. Lack of Industry-Academia Collaboration : Limited interaction between research institutions and industries leads to a disconnect between developed technologies and industry needs. A 2020 report by the Department of Science and Technology (DST) highlighted a low commercialization rate of research done in universities. 6. Regulatory Bottlenecks : Complex regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic red tape can impede the smooth implementation of technological improvement schemes. Delays in approvals, compliance requirements, and ambiguous policies create uncertainty and hamper the willingness of industries to invest in technology upgrades. The Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) sector, which is crucial for technological advancement in India, often faces such challenges. Despite various schemes aimed at supporting MSMEs, bureaucratic processes can deter them from accessing the benefits in a timely manner. Make in India programme launched in 2014 aimed to boost domestic manufacturing and attract foreign investment by improving the ease of doing business and promoting innovation. However, despite its ambitious goals, the initiative faced criticism for its inability to create substantial job opportunities and for failing to address key structural challenges such as infrastructure deficiencies and regulatory hurdles.
National Manufacturing Policy introduced in 2011, aimed to increase the share of
manufacturing in India's GDP to 25% and create 100 million jobs by 2022.
However, the policy fell short of achieving its targets due to inadequate
infrastructure, complex labor laws, and lack of focus on technology upgradation
in the manufacturing sector. Government Technological Disappointments While the Government of India has made significant strides in promoting technological advancement and innovation in various sectors, there have been instances where failures or shortcoming have been observed. Here are some examples: 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam and Mahanagar Telephone Nigam : BSNL and MTNL, the state-owned telecommunication companies, have struggled to keep pace with private competitors in terms of technological advancements.Despite being early players in the telecom sector, their inability to adapt to changing technologies like 4G and fiber optics has led to declining market share. 2. Air India : This was once a state-owned airline, that faced numerous technological challenges impacting its efficiency and competitiveness. Outdated reservation systems and inadequate integration of modern technologies have led to operational inefficiencies and higher costs. Failure to upgrade its fleet with fuel-efficient aircraft and advanced navigation systems has further exacerbated its financial woes. 3. Public Sector Banks : Several PSBs in India have struggled to adopt cutting-edge technologies in their banking operations. Outdated core banking systems and infrastructure have hindered their ability to compete with private banks and fintech companies. Instances of cyber attacks and data breaches due to inadequate cyber security measures highlight the technological vulnerabilities within these banks. 4. Indian Railways : This is one of the largest railway networks in the world, has faced challenges in leveraging technology to improve efficiency and passenger experience. Delayed implementation of modern signaling systems, such as the Train Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), has contributed to safety concerns and operational inefficiencies. Lack of investment in high-speed rail infrastructure and modernization projects has hindered the railways' ability to keep up with global standards. 5. Food Corporation of India : FCI, responsible for food grain procurement and distribution, has struggled with technological inefficiencies in its operations. Outdated procurement methods and storage facilities have led to significant food wastage and logistical challenges. Delayed adoption of digital platforms for procurement and distribution has hindered transparency and accountability in FCI's operations. These examples highlight instances where the Government of India has faced challenges in driving technological improvement in various sectors, leading to inefficiencies, operational shortcomings, and diminished competitiveness. Technology Adoption: India vs. Developed Countries Technology adoption refers to the process through which societies incorporate new technologies into their daily lives, economies, and industries. The pace, efficiency, and impact of this adoption can vary significantly between countries, particularly between developing nations like India and already developed countries such as the United States, Japan, or Germany.
Factors Influencing Technology Adoption 2. Infrastructure : Developed countries have well-established infrastructure, including advanced communication networks, transportation systems, and energy grids, facilitating seamless integration of new technologies. In India, although infrastructure development is a priority, challenges such as inconsistent electricity supply, limited broadband access in rural areas, and underdeveloped transportation networks impede rapid technology adoption. 3. Education and Skill Levels : In developed countries higher education levels and a skilled workforce enable quicker adaptation to new technologies. Continuous training and development programs keep the workforce up-to-date with technological advancements. While in India large pool of talented professionals, the overall education and skill levels across the population vary. This disparity can delay technology adoption, especially in industries requiring specialized skills. 4. Government Policies and Support : In developed countries, Governments often provides substantial incentives, subsidies, and policy support for adopting new technologies. Examples include tax breaks for R&D and grants for start-ups. In India, the Indian government has initiated several programs to promote technology adoption, such as Digital India, Start-up India, and Make in India. However, bureaucratic hurdles, inconsistent policy implementation, and a slower pace of reform can sometimes limit their effectiveness. 5. Cultural and Social Factors : In developed countries societies are more open to embracing technological change due to higher levels of awareness and exposure to global trends. In India, cultural conservatism, resistance to change, and digital divides in rural vs. urban areas can slow down the acceptance and integration of new technologies. 6. Internet Penetration : In developed countries like South Korea and Japan have nearly 100% internet penetration, with high-speed broadband widely available. This widespread access facilitates the rapid adoption of technologies such as IoT (Internet of Things) and AI-driven services. Whereas, in India as of 2024, internet penetration is around 60%, with significant gaps between urban and rural areas. This disparity impacts the adoption of advanced digital services and limits the reach of e-governance initiatives. 7. Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Healthcare : U.S. and European countries have integrated AI into healthcare systems, improving diagnostics, patient care, and operational efficiency. The availability of large datasets and advanced computing infrastructure supports this integration. In India AI adoption in healthcare is growing, particularly in urban centres. However, challenges such as data privacy concerns, lack of standardized electronic health records, and insufficient infrastructure in rural areas slow down its widespread adoption.
While India is making significant strides in adopting new technologies, it faces distinct challenges compared to developed countries. Addressing issues related to infrastructure, education, and policy implementation can accelerate technology adoption in India, enabling it to close the gap with more developed nations. Continued government support, public-private partnerships, and international collaboration will be crucial in this endeavour. Conclusion Overcoming the obstacle of low-level technology is imperative for India to realize its full economic potential and achieve sustainable development. By implementing proactive policies, fostering innovation, and investing in human capital and infrastructure, India can position itself as a global leader in the technological landscape. Embracing the digital age will not only drive economic growth but also foster inclusive development, empowering every segment of society to thrive in the 21st century economy.
 **********Disclaimer: The information and statistics presented in this article have been compiled from various sources deemed reliable. However, readers are advised to independently verify the accuracy and relevance of the data before making any decisions or taking action based on the information provided herein. The author and publisher do not assume any responsibility or liability or any consequences resulting from reliance on the information presented in this article. 2024/08/13 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment