Breaking the Colonial Steel Frame for a Deep-Tech Future

Syllabus: Governance

Source: IE

Context : India has achieved global leadership in fintech and digital penetration, yet it remains import-dependent in semiconductors, aerospace, and advanced technologies. Realising the Viksit Bharat 2047 deep-tech vision requires dismantling colonial-era bureaucratic, regulatory, and judicial legacies that constrain innovation.

India’s Deep-Tech Ambition

• In his Independence Day 2025 address, the Prime Minister highlighted self-reliance in semiconductors, clean energy, nuclear technology, jet engines, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and space exploration.

• Key Achievements: UPI transactions have crossed 14 billion per month (NPCI, 2025); IndiaStack is being adopted in Singapore, UAE, and France. Over 800 million smartphone users, with the lowest mobile data costs globally (~₹10/GB). Global deep-tech companies such as Nvidia, IBM, and Microsoft maintain R&D centres in Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Pune.

• UPI transactions have crossed 14 billion per month (NPCI, 2025); IndiaStack is being adopted in Singapore, UAE, and France.

• Over 800 million smartphone users, with the lowest mobile data costs globally (~₹10/GB).

• Global deep-tech companies such as Nvidia, IBM, and Microsoft maintain R&D centres in Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Pune.

• Persistent Gaps: Semiconductor imports amounted to ₹1.2 lakh crore in 2023–24 (Commerce Ministry). India contributes less than 5% to global AI patents (WIPO, 2024). Critical defence technologies still rely on foreign collaborations, e.g., GE–HAL partnership for Tejas jet engines (2023).

• Semiconductor imports amounted to ₹1.2 lakh crore in 2023–24 (Commerce Ministry).

• India contributes less than 5% to global AI patents (WIPO, 2024).

• Critical defence technologies still rely on foreign collaborations, e.g., GE–HAL partnership for Tejas jet engines (2023).

Colonial Roots of Governance Constraints

• Bureaucracy – The Westminster-style “steel frame,” designed for colonial rule, remains largely unchanged. Recruitment through UPSC continues to emphasise generalist skills. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission recommended lateral entry and enforceable ethics codes, but implementation has been partial.

• The Second Administrative Reforms Commission recommended lateral entry and enforceable ethics codes, but implementation has been partial.

• Regulatory Structures – India’s system is compliance-heavy, with over 39,000 compliances across sectors (DPIIT). The Deregulation Commission was tasked with pruning these, but progress has been limited.

• The Deregulation Commission was tasked with pruning these, but progress has been limited.

• Judiciary – Over 5 crore cases are pending (SC E-Committee, 2025), and contract enforcement averages 1,445 days (World Bank, 2020). Weak intellectual property enforcement further discourages deep-tech innovation.

Challenges

• Political–Administrative Balance – Bureaucratic insulation slows policy execution, unlike the US DARPA model where political leadership ensures direction with minimal red tape.

• Federal Deficit – Deep-tech clusters rely on State policies such as the UP-Semiconductor Policy and the Bengaluru–Chennai Corridor, but centralisation restricts their autonomy.

• Private Sector and Start-ups – Although India has the third-largest start-up ecosystem (100+ unicorns), fewer than 10% are deep-tech due to uncertain regulations and slow approvals. The Drone Rules, 2021 liberalised licensing, but bottlenecks remain.

• Human Capital Management – Over two lakh STEM students migrate abroad annually (MEA), reflecting weak domestic retention. Public labs face rigid hierarchies and limited incentives.

• Global Standards Gap – India risks being a rule-taker. Frameworks like the EU AI Act (2024) and the US CHIPS and Science Act already shape global norms, while India lacks comparable regimes.

• Cultural Ethos – Colonial proceduralism prioritises control and hierarchy over outcomes, discouraging risk-taking and innovation.

Implications

• Economic – Semiconductor and aerospace import dependence raises the current account deficit and constrains export competitiveness.

• Strategic – Foreign reliance heightens vulnerability. The US ban on advanced chip exports to China highlighted risks of dependence.

• Social – Limited deep-tech jobs risk excluding India’s youth from Industry 4.0 opportunities.

• Governance – Delayed reforms weaken state capacity, reducing efficiency in digital service delivery and eroding institutional trust.

• Innovation Ecosystem – Weak regulatory and judicial support deters venture capital inflows and IP creation, leading to continued dominance of multinational corporations in India’s deep-tech sector.

Way Forward

• Civil Service Reform – Redesign UPSC to emphasise domain expertise; institutionalise lateral entry; enforce a Public Service Code of Ethics.

• Regulatory Modernisation – Adopt risk-based regulation; expand regulatory sandboxes (as RBI piloted in 2019 for fintech) to AI and biotech; establish single-window approvals for deep-tech.

• Judicial Transformation – Strengthen commercial courts under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015; deploy AI-enabled case management; bolster IP tribunals.

• Federal Empowerment – Provide States fiscal incentives for semiconductor fabs, e.g., Gujarat’s Micron facility (2023); expand localised skilling through Skill India 2.0.

• Global Leadership – Shape norms on AI, digital trade, and data governance at G20, BRICS, and UN platforms; champion open-source deep-tech for the Global South.

• Cultural Reset – Replace colonial “file-pushing” with innovation-first, outcome-oriented governance, echoing the Prime Minister’s 2022 call to shed the “colonial mindset.”

Conclusion

India’s digital achievements highlight its transformative capacity, but deep-tech leadership requires dismantling colonial-era governance legacies. Comprehensive reforms in bureaucracy, regulation, and judiciary are indispensable for realising Viksit Bharat 2047.