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

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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).

Colonial Roots of Governance Constraints

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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

1. Political–Administrative Balance – Bureaucratic insulation slows policy execution, unlike the US DARPA model where political leadership ensures direction with minimal red tape.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Human Capital Management – Over two lakh STEM students migrate abroad annually (MEA), reflecting weak domestic retention. Public labs face rigid hierarchies and limited incentives.
5. 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.
6. Cultural Ethos – Colonial proceduralism prioritises control and hierarchy over outcomes, discouraging risk-taking and innovation.

Implications

1. Economic – Semiconductor and aerospace import dependence raises the current account deficit and constrains export competitiveness.
2. Strategic – Foreign reliance heightens vulnerability. The US ban on advanced chip exports to China highlighted risks of dependence.
3. Social – Limited deep-tech jobs risk excluding India’s youth from Industry 4.0 opportunities.
4. Governance – Delayed reforms weaken state capacity, reducing efficiency in digital service delivery and eroding institutional trust.
5. 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

1. Civil Service Reform – Redesign UPSC to emphasise domain expertise; institutionalise lateral entry; enforce a Public Service Code of Ethics.
2. 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.
3. Judicial Transformation – Strengthen commercial courts under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015; deploy AI-enabled case management; bolster IP tribunals.
4. Federal Empowerment – Provide States fiscal incentives for semiconductor fabs, e.g., Gujarat’s Micron facility (2023); expand localised skilling through Skill India 2.0.
5. 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.
6. 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.