Introduction
The country is entering the age of knowledge when increasing returns would be ubiquitous. Surpassing the boundaries of traditional modes of industry based upon decreasing returns, the knowledge based generation of income and wealth should now permeate into agriculture, education and services. At this crossroad the demands on S&T are novel and ambitious. Such expectations require beyond a hefty raise in the allocated percentages of gross national products to the S&T, a deep as well as expansive redrawing of institutions that are dedicated to S&T, but more importantly of other economic social and educational institutions as well. Situated within this backdrop of expectations the ambition of offering a set of S&T indicators for the Indian system was given up in favour of a broad set of analytic descriptions of states-of-affairs, because any dedicated set of indicators must apprehend the potential future while describing the past. This future is currently contested. Old institutions primarily of decreasing returns are overwhelmingly dominant and the indicators would therefore portray a skewed picture. This report thus draws upon facets of economic, social and educational life; where S&T has its footprints.
The democratic governance structures of this country have evolved, over the course of six decades, sets of complex institutions systems and practices that bind or otherwise relate S&T to the other spheres. With about four thousand research and development organizations, large organized systems of knowledge production, millions of knowledge workers and an even larger number of citizens engaging in knowledge-based activities ranging from agriculture through semi-skilled workers to industrial workers, coupled with the fact of the country being especially gifted with immense diversity in natural resources –– the opportunity set of potential outcomes are immense and invigorating.
Coordination and governance
Governance of S&T is currently intertwined with governance of other institutions. One strategic shift that knowledge age demands is about putting S&T at the helm of governance. Such a shift could address together the twin related issues of governance of S&T and of other systems and institutions. The desired restructuring, in for example economic or educational institutions, could be achieved through allocating to S&T a strategic fraction of the total funds dedicated to economic restructuring. Fund based coordination could indeed offer better solutions to the problem of bridging, for example, the gap between S&T and the economic entities. Over the last few years this country has adopted a few such fund-based mechanisms. Coordination through fund dedicated to a national problem such as TB offers important learning’s.
At present several key executive governance systems of the country, at several tiers of government from the central to the local, have absences of S&T participation. Most executive functions however, employ S&T in practice. The country has thus generated multiple islands of knowledge generation and utilization. Coordination between such knowledge agencies could bring about strategic focusing of S&T, while allowing fulfilment of democratic aspirations in the formulation of contesting S&T agendas. Directed research and in particular directed basic research would open up novel possibilities. Fund based in contrast to executive dependent directedness opens up even finer variations. The federated executive of the country has historically employed diversity in adopting agenda, making decisions and in evaluating outcomes. S&T especially has enriched from diversity of research agendas. Indeed this country can exhibit to the global societies how diversified S&T agendas could be functional and remain governed. Indian achievement in democratizing the agenda formulation of S&T is possibly amongst the best in the world. However, India has miles to travel to embolden the feeble voice of poor millions and express their aspirations as well as demands from the S&T, in shaping research agenda or the S&T outcome.
The long twentieth century in Indian S&T based developmental experiments, in particular at grass roots, has thrown up immense volumes of data, facts and artifacts. The governance system, however, failed short of accumulating such results and giving shape to such experiments in the country’s S&T based planning processes. Participation of district non-governmental organizations or self-help groups and similar social forms in the governance process offers potentially rewarding outcomes. Similarly, the flow of demands bottom-up from within S&T organizations would offer another important envelope of developmental alternatives based upon S&T. Indeed, today one major challenge to the country is how to support transition of currently existing S&T organizations from states of relative inactivity to imaginative centres of resources.
Inclusive growth and well being
In spirit and since the early years of the formulation of S&T policies and plans, this country often tacitly accepted that S&T based restructuring and innovation are redistributive and justice could be brought about through S&T and innovation. This radical definition of innovation as the key to undertaking redistribution of income and rights to assets and to generation of future assets opens up the door. Innovation can be thus several. This definition informs that there are several non-corporate innovators ranging from individuals through social groups to tiny or small enterprises. Innovation accordingly offers not simply profit but more importantly asset outcomes that by definition would be sustainable over a period.
Bringing about inclusive growth and well being for the country’s population are the agenda of S&T based innovations. Enabling the ignorant with S&T driven skills, offering the potential entrepreneur and self help groups with S&T based innovative product or process solutions, empowering the country’s population to shift consumption frontiers to the innovated products and services, and helping sustain regeneration of resources for inter-generational justice are among the few important goals of S&T driven inclusive growth.
Geographies and balance
A related dimension of justice and accesses to resources, current and future, is shaped by the geographical outcomes. Regions and states in the knowledge-age specialize more intensely, spill over happens with greater ease and opportunities are offered differentially in different areas. Such a movement has been happening through inter-country movements of resources that have different values and across districts, regions and states within the country. Geography based specializations and inter-geography competitive balance through several modes of commerce, therefore become leading determinants of development of S&T.
Globalization of high value resources, such as the highly trained human resources or special skills and products including of finance are currently shaping up the contours of geographic capacities and capabilities. This country has in germinal form several types of inter-geographic consultation mechanisms and instruments for transfer of resources, while the country has in lesser strength similar functionaries to address globalization and inter-country regionalization. On both counts Indian efforts would need strengthening up.
Agencies for S&T and innovation
An important mode of redistribution has been the profit motives of corporations and their large shareholders. This country faces now the challenge from managerial corporations and finances; and yet much of recent policies suggest that Indian initiatives in S&T and innovation have recognized the importance of redistribution achievable through entrepreneurship and several forms of social networks and groups. Increasing returns grow and vanish with ultra rapidity. Contemporary S&T institutions need to recognize such features.
For long organizations have remained agents undertaking S&T and innovation. Corporate valuation and transfers of resources have remained the most significant drivers of growth. Nevertheless it has been organizations again who as incumbents fiercely resisted innovative changes. Increasing returns based institutions in contrast often depended less on large corporations, while drawing sustenance from nimble small entities and social networks. In recognition Indian S&T and related institutions have initiated steps. Yet much would be demanded in the coming years.
R&D as the set aside
An important proof of efforts towards generation of new resources has been the set asides defined as investments in R&D. With continuous lowering of R&D life cycles especially in corporate accounting practices along with opportunistic definitions on what constitutes R&D, a time has arrived where public investment for long term set asides assume greater importance. The closest to such long term investments are achieved in training very highly skilled human resources. In contrast the most liquid investments are made in very short life cycle S&T and skill-development education. Investments in generic high technologies offer rather long term scopes. The preparedness of a country to withstand radical shocks brought about by ultra quick changes in knowledge and skills is an important determinant of technology strength to withstand scorched earth blitzkrieg.
Permeating and widespread capacities to undertake R&D and similarly permeating capacities to educate and undertake S&T would thus prove essential for the future. Investments in S&T and related institutions of education and skill as well as in instruments and in workshops, for the long term would provide the strongest bulwark against vicissitudes of technological changes.
S&T data
A crucial issue emerges from this investigation. The country very badly needs a strong mechanism to capture data related to S&T and innovation right from the regulatory or executive levels to source-points where S&T output or innovations get generated. Indian economics statistics is enviably good. Borrowing from the success of that economic data system, the country needs to put in place a similar system of data capture, transmission, processing and distribution of S&T data.
The roadmap
This Report presents several facets of Indian S&T. In lieu of attempting the development of a set of traditionally known indicators of S&T, the attempt here has been to capture multiple facets of Indian economy and society where S&T makes contributions. With unstated theoretical bases, contributors presented research conclusions in the form of several portrayals. Given the fact that S&T interfacing the economy and society has very large dimensions this Report could take up only a handful. Such a collage offers albeit a picture of where Indian S&T is located.
Divided over six broad themes –– human resources, finance, structures and infrastructure, industry, output and rural India –– the presentation might appear to offer a linear approach to S&T and innovation where inputs processed through a black-box offer the desired output. The complex of Indian S&T, however, is not amenable to such simple linear flows. This Report thus is crisscrossed with mentions of resources of skills, for example, at the putative input stage, black-box system phase as also in output phase. Similarly finance or output appears in multiple locations where output becomes an input or output becomes an indicator of capacity and capability.
For convenience of a reader the Report presents a ready-reckoner on nearly all aspects of Indian S&T. Contributors refrained from highlighting achievements and presented in each case syntheses of previous research on that subject as- is done in a review of the state-of-art, while not loading a contribution at all with academic footprints. This document is targeted at a wide readership ranging from policy makers and advisors to academic readers as well as the common person.
This map of Indian S&T therefore captured facets of human resources, for example, with greater emphases on issues of quality, performance right from high school, access, migration, vocational education or specialized education including the investments the country has been making. Similarly, the subsequent theme took up financing of S&T by multiple agencies especially post-liberalization, in multiple areas including on higher education and specific areas of research, distributive dimensions of financing, the investments in R&D and on S&T, definitional ambiguities, issues of funding related to coordination and governance.
The third theme takes up structures and thus the infrastructure of S&T in the country. Laying great emphasis on hastened investment needed in S&T infrastructure this theme looks into the relation of governance with the structure. It brings out issues of coordination, the complex web of Indian S&T structures, description of sector targeted structures and policy instruments in particular on high technology areas, the S&T parks, the structures of technology transfers, and similar others. The S&T structure diffuses into the public space where science is talked about and with brief exposures the media presence of S&T, and the access to S&T resources have been presented. The next theme on industry and S&T begins with the macro view and then looks into economy-wide and inter-sector aspects of technological changes, and high technology trade. This theme looks further into two dimensions of S&T interfacing with industry: first mode captures the R&D and the second mode presents non-R&D aspects. On R&D including on data capture and definitions this theme presents the impact of policy instruments that are primarily fiscal in nature. The non-R&D dimension asserts that for a developing country the productivity raising aspects of innovation are important and a detailed sector wise map gets presented. Further down this theme are issues of specific sectors, achievements of fund-based technological changes as in textiles, and then other sectors of telecommunication, biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, automobiles, biomedical offer instances of learning’s from Indian S&T sector policies.
The fifth theme is about tangible outputs from the S&T system. Detailed analyses offers pictures of publications and patents, the two most central forms of outputs, and offer glimpses into regional achievements, agency wise evaluations, inter-country comparisons and research collaborations, and sectors where the country has been performing. The patent picture similarly offers a look into post-liberalization activities, and dips into sectors such as biotechnology or information and communication technologies; and finally glosses on the capability of this country to appropriate its knowledge assets. The last theme is related to S&T for rural areas. Contributors consciously refrained from delving into S&T for farming. The focus is on non-farm areas and particularly on manufacturing generative as well as agriculture-integrative areas where S&T can quickly but sustainably, offer scopes for income and employment generation, asset generation and resources regeneration. Beginning with mapping out rural off-farm potentials this theme looks into aspects of low cost housing, farm implements and hand tools, fisheries, mushroom, horticulture, tiny scale manufacturing, biopesticides, sericulture, and similar others. Brief discussion on public programs and schemes and policy mechanisms offer a look into the preparedness of the country to bring into the developmental fold most of its poor people.
Endnote:
This Report is the first of its kind from this country. An earlier attempt was made by the INSA and was undertaken at the NCAER. The present Report is the first in this series, which plans to bring out similar reports at two year intervals.
Back to Home Page of 'India, Science & Technology: 2008'