menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

India’s Innovation Gap and the Rise of Sovereign AI

45 0
19.06.2026

For three decades, India has been celebrated as an emerging technological power. It has one of the world’s largest pools of engineers, a globally respected information technology sector, a successful space program, and a fast-growing digital economy. Yet beneath these achievements sits a persistent contradiction: India trains enormous numbers of technically skilled people but has historically produced few globally dominant platforms, foundational technologies, or frontier research ecosystems of its own. In the age of artificial intelligence, where technological leadership increasingly determines economic, military, and geopolitical power, this contradiction has become harder to ignore, and, as the data below shows, it is now finally being addressed, late and unevenly, but in earnest.

The argument of this essay is that India’s innovation gap is best explained by institutional incentives (inadequate), capital structures (poor), and political economy (asymmetrical).

The Investment Gap, in Numbers

The single most-cited and most glaring problem is India’s chronically low R&D intensity. India’s R&D investment as a percentage of GDP stands at roughly 0.64%, far below China’s 2.41%, the United States’ 3.47%, and Israel’s 5.71%. South Korea spends close to 4.93% and Japan 3.30%. India is not merely behind the frontier economies, it also trails middle-income peers like Turkey and Egypt in R&D-to-GDP ratio despite ranking seventh in the world in absolute R&D spending, a sign of how much scale alone can mask intensity.

This gap is compounded by who is doing the spending. Private industry contributes only 36.4% of India’s gross R&D expenditure, compared with roughly 77% in China and 75% in the United States. In the countries that successfully climbed the technology ladder, the state seeded research and industry then took over financing and scaling it. In India, the government remains the primary funder decades after liberalization, indicating that the institutional conditions that make deep research commercially attractive remain underdeveloped. The issue is not simply a shortage of capital but an ecosystem problem: venture finance is concentrated in faster-return sectors, exit markets for research-intensive firms remain shallow, university-industry linkages are weak, and intellectual-property protection does not consistently translate innovation into durable economic rents. Together, these factors reduce the incentives for private capital to finance high-risk, long-gestation research at scale.

This pattern also reflects the incentives shaping Indian capitalism. A significant share of private investment has historically flowed toward sectors where profits derive from access to markets, land, regulation, natural resources, or financial intermediation rather than from sustained technological innovation. Under such conditions, firms rationally prioritize short- to medium-term returns over the uncertain payoffs of frontier research, producing a private sector that is often adept at commercialization and adaptation but less willing to bear the risks associated with original technological discovery.

The trajectory is improving. India’s Global Innovation Index rank rose from 81st in 2015 to 40th in 2023, and further to 38th in 2025, but the base it is improving from is exceptionally low, and the private-sector financing gap has not closed nearly as fast as the publication count has grown.

The Publication-Commercialization Gap, Measured

The thesis that India produces papers but not products is not just intuition, it shows up clearly in patent-to-publication ratios. India’s share of high-quality research articles climbed 44% between 2019 and 2023, reaching 1,494.27, yet in the same period China and the United States each produced roughly 23,000 and 20,000 high-quality articles, respectively, a gap far larger than the underlying difference in research spending alone would predict, suggesting structural barriers in how Indian research gets converted into protectable, monetizable output.

The country’s own........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)