N※N

India Invests INR12 Billion to Propel a National Gene-Editing Strategy

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. -to-propel-a-national-gene-editing-strategy.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Saturday, November 29th 2025 at 8:34 GMT by ThePrint

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-29 179 x 224 / 12292 Bytes

2025-11-29 225 x 224 / 14604 Bytes

2025-11-26 179 x 224 / 13210 Bytes

2025-11-29 251 x 201 / 15707 Bytes

India’s Gene‑Editing Revolution: How the Modi Government Is Winning Over Skeptics

In a world where gene editing is poised to rewrite the rules of medicine, agriculture, and even the very fabric of life, India is emerging as a formidable contender. A recent piece in ThePrint chronicles how the Modi administration has been quietly, but decisively, propelling the nation’s gene‑editing agenda forward—despite vocal opposition from various quarters of Indian society and academia. The story is one of policy, funding, ethical debate, and, ultimately, a race to be the first superpower in a field that could reshape the planet.

1. The Policy Framework: From “Regulation” to “Regime”

The article opens by noting that India’s Gene Editing policy is still a draft, but that the government has already taken concrete steps to operationalize it. The National Biotechnology Development Strategy (NBDS), launched in 2020, now includes a dedicated “Gene Editing” pillar, earmarking ₹12 billion (about $160 million) for research and development. This budgetary commitment is a clear signal that the government sees gene editing as a strategic national priority—an investment in future economic growth, global leadership, and national security.

To institutionalise the push, the government has formed a Gene Editing Policy Advisory Board that sits under the Ministry of Science and Technology. The board includes prominent Indian scientists (such as Dr. Rakesh Mishra from the Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology) and international advisors. It is tasked with drafting a detailed regulatory framework that balances innovation with bio‑security and ethical safeguards.

2. Building the Human Capital: Training the Next Generation of Gene‑Editors

One of the biggest hurdles in any cutting‑edge scientific endeavour is talent. The article notes that the government has rolled out a “CRISPR Fellowship” programme, which offers stipend‑granted, year‑long training to young researchers at premier institutes like the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, and the National Institute of Biological Sciences (NIBS). Over 200 fellowships were awarded in 2023 alone, ensuring a steady pipeline of skilled gene editors.

Beyond academic training, the government has also established a National Gene‑Editing Consortium (NGEC), a partnership between universities, public research institutes, and private biotech firms. This consortium is designed to facilitate data sharing, joint labs, and collaborative grants—an ecosystem that mimics the successful biotech clusters in the U.S. and Europe.

3. Industry Support: Start‑ups, Patents, and Market Entry

While academia receives a large share of the funding, the article underscores the Modi administration’s push to stimulate industry. Several biotech start‑ups—most notably CRISPR Therapeutics India and GeneXpert—have received seed funding from the Biotechnology Innovation and Investment Board (BIIB), a public‑private partnership that has already helped India secure 12% of global gene‑editing patents in 2024.

The government’s policy also encourages public‑private partnerships (PPPs) in creating CRISPR‑based diagnostics and therapeutics. A notable example is the CRISPR‑COVID initiative, which partnered with the Serum Institute of India to develop rapid, CRISPR‑based tests that were deployed during the pandemic’s second wave.

4. Addressing the Ethical Concerns: A Two‑Pronged Approach

The article spends a significant amount of space on the internal critics—social activists, ethicists, and certain scientific bodies—who fear that unchecked gene editing could lead to “designer babies,” ecological imbalance, or bioweapon proliferation. Two key responses from the government are highlighted:

1. Ethics Advisory Board: This independent body, chaired by Dr. B. R. Chakraborty of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), has issued a series of guidelines on human germ‑line editing, gene drives, and the use of CRISPR in agriculture. The guidelines emphasize strict oversight, public disclosure, and the establishment of a National Gene‑Editing Ethics Committee.

2. Public Engagement Campaign: Through a series of town‑hall meetings, webinars, and a dedicated website (geneeditingindia.gov.in), the government is inviting public input on policy drafts. The aim is to create a participatory framework, ensuring that the public’s concerns are reflected in regulatory decisions.

While some critics still see these measures as inadequate, the article notes that the transparency and institutional backing have dampened the intensity of the backlash.

5. International Collaborations: Positioning India on the Global Stage

Gene editing is a truly global endeavour, and the article stresses how India is leveraging diplomatic ties to secure its place among the world’s leading biotechnological hubs. Notable partnerships include:

• Joint research grants with the European Union’s Horizon Europe programme that fund CRISPR‑based crop improvement projects.
• Collaborations with the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) focusing on rare disease gene therapies.
• Co‑funded clinical trials with the UK’s NHS for CRISPR‑edited T‑cell therapies for cancer.

These alliances are more than just scientific collaborations; they provide India with critical access to advanced CRISPR tools, patents, and clinical expertise that would otherwise take years to develop domestically.

6. The Road Ahead: Challenges and Opportunities

The article ends by acknowledging that the journey is far from over. Key challenges remain:

• Regulatory Lag: Even with a policy framework in place, actual implementation across states may lag, creating inconsistencies.
• Bio‑security Risks: The potential misuse of gene editing tools in the hands of non‑state actors remains a real threat, especially given India’s geopolitical environment.
• Public Perception: Despite transparency measures, a segment of the populace remains wary of “tampering with nature.”

Yet, the opportunities are enormous. The government’s bold investment in gene editing is expected to:

• Boost Agriculture: CRISPR‑edited rice and wheat varieties resistant to pests and drought could increase yields by up to 20%.
• Advance Medicine: Early‑stage gene therapies for sickle cell disease and beta‑thalassemia are already in Phase I trials.
• Create Jobs: The biotech cluster projected to grow at a CAGR of 12% by 2030, creating thousands of high‑skill jobs.

Bottom Line

The Print article paints a nuanced picture: the Modi government has not merely “pushed” gene editing; it has systematically built an ecosystem that combines robust funding, talent development, industry incentives, ethical oversight, and international collaboration. The internal critics—though still vocal—appear increasingly out‑matched by the government’s comprehensive strategy. If India can maintain this momentum, it may soon find itself at the helm of a global gene‑editing revolution—an outcome that could redefine the nation’s scientific and economic destiny.