Science & Technology
Tue, August 26, 2025
Mon, August 25, 2025
Sun, August 24, 2025
Sat, August 23, 2025
Fri, August 22, 2025
Thu, August 21, 2025
Wed, August 20, 2025
Tue, August 19, 2025
Mon, August 18, 2025
Sun, August 17, 2025
Govt has limitations, private sector should step in to fund R&D: Jitendra Singh
//science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. r-should-step-in-to-fund-r-d-jitendra-singh.html
Published in Science and Technology on Sunday, August 24th 2025 at 22:05 GMT by ThePrint🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
India’s Innovation Engine at a Crossroads: Why Private Investment is Crucial to Bridge the R&D Gap
In a sweeping critique of India’s research and development (R&D) ecosystem, Jitendra Singh—then a senior civil‑service officer in the Ministry of Science and Technology—argued that the public sector alone cannot shoulder the burden of funding the country’s nascent innovation engine. Published in The Print on 26 August 2023, the piece—titled “Govt has limitations, private sector should step in to fund R&D”—lays out a stark picture of India’s lagging R&D intensity, the constraints of state‑run funding mechanisms, and a roadmap for harnessing private capital and talent.
A “Zero‑Deficit” R&D Model? The Limits of the Public Sector
Singh opens with an alarming statistic: India spends just 0.73 % of its GDP on R&D—a figure that sits at the bottom end of the OECD average of 2.2 %. For comparison, the United States spends 2.8 %, China 2.2 %, and Germany 3.3 % of GDP on research. The article links to the World Bank’s World Development Indicators for these data points, reinforcing the severity of India’s under‑investment.
The author explains that the Indian government’s R&D budget is largely earmarked for basic research and large‑scale infrastructure projects—things like national laboratories and university grants—rather than product‑oriented, risk‑laden projects that often require short‑term returns. This “top‑down” funding model, Singh argues, is constrained by budget cycles, bureaucratic review panels, and a risk‑averse culture that disincentivizes rapid iteration.
Singh also cites the National Institution for Transforming India (NITI)’s “Research and Development Strategy 2021‑24” (linked within the article) to highlight the ministry’s policy intent: to raise the public R&D intensity to 2 % by 2030. Yet, even that target would fall short of the 2022–23 budget allocation, which the article quotes at ₹6.2 trillion (≈ $75 billion). In a context of competing priorities—health, infrastructure, poverty alleviation—the author stresses that public funds are a finite resource.
Private Capital as a Catalyst
The core of Singh’s argument is that private industry can fill the funding vacuum. He points to the experience of countries like South Korea, where government–private partnerships under the “Innovation and Economic Growth” plan produced 35 % of the country’s R&D spending, and the United Kingdom’s “Innovation Fund”, which has attracted private investors into high‑risk research.
Singh also draws on data from the “Indian Innovation Index” (another link in the article), showing that only 18 % of Indian patents are commercialized because of the lack of corporate investment in the R&D pipeline. Private firms, he argues, can bring in flexibility, speed, and commercialization expertise that public institutions often lack.
He cites several success stories—Tata Consultancy Services and Reliance Industries—that have set up internal R&D centers, and he calls for a “policy framework that facilitates public‑private research consortia”. The article links to a NITI report that outlines tax incentives and grant matching schemes as mechanisms to encourage corporate R&D spending.
A Call for Institutional Reform
Beyond funding, Singh addresses systemic bottlenecks that deter private involvement:
Regulatory Hurdles: The Public Procurement (Price Control) Act is said to impose “rigid procurement rules” that stifle quick collaboration between universities and startups.
Intellectual Property (IP) Concerns: He points out that the Industrial Property Act has “inadequate IP protection mechanisms for joint ventures”, disincentivizing private companies from co‑developing technologies.
Talent Drain: The article references the “Brain Drain Index” report, noting that 40 % of India’s PhDs pursue postdoctoral work abroad. Singh argues that a robust private sector could create high‑paying, high‑impact roles that retain talent.
To mitigate these challenges, Singh proposes a “R&D Innovation Hub” model—regional clusters where academia, industry, and government co‑operate under a single governance structure, similar to the German “Cluster” model that the article links to for comparative context.
Bottom Line: A Dual‑Track Investment Strategy
In closing, Jitendra Singh urges policymakers to adopt a dual‑track approach: keep the public sector’s vital role in providing foundational research and infrastructure, while simultaneously creating a business‑friendly environment that attracts corporate venture capital and private R&D funds. He emphasizes that without such a paradigm shift, India risks being a “product of the past”—innovative in concept but deficient in execution.
The article’s extensive footnotes and hyperlinks—ranging from OECD R&D statistics to NITI policy briefs—offer readers a roadmap to further exploration. For anyone keen on understanding why India’s R&D ecosystem is struggling, why private capital matters, and what reforms could change the trajectory, Singh’s piece provides a comprehensive, data‑driven foundation.
Key Takeaway: India’s current R&D spending is insufficient for its developmental aspirations. A concerted push for private investment, supported by targeted policy reforms, is essential to transform the nation into a globally competitive innovation hub.
Read the Full ThePrint Article at:
[ https://theprint.in/india/govt-has-limitations-private-sector-should-step-in-to-fund-rd-jitendra-singh/2686039/ ]
