1. INDUSTRIAL POLICY IN INDIA:
ISSUES, OBJECTIVES & EXPERIENCE
M.H. Suryanarayana

2. Structure
• Industrial Policy: Objectives & Evolution
• Current Status
• Evaluation

3. Background:
• Planning and Industrial policy evolution highly inter-twined:
– Objectives of industrial policy articulated in the Industrial
Policy Resolutions of 1948 and 1956
– Specific priorities and strategies spelt out in successive five
year plans to be implemented by:
– A system of licensing provided for by the Industries
(Development & Regulation) Act, 1951; and
– A system of import licensing and foreign trade policies meant
to promote import substituting industrialization
– Licensing ensured realization of physical targets for capacity
set by the plan, trade policy sought to promote domestic
industrialization by physical allocation of imports by
products.
•

4. Industrial Policy Resolution 1948
• Outlined the approach to industrial growth and
development
• Emphasized the importance of securing a
continuous increase in production and ensuring its
equitable distribution.

5. Industrial Policy Resolution 1948
Progressively active role for the State in the
development of Industries.
• State monopoly: Arms and ammunition, atomic
energy and railway transport
• State exclusively responsible for the establishment of
new undertakings in six basic industries-except where,
in the national interest, the State itself found it
necessary to secure the cooperation of private
enterprise.

6. Industrial Policy Resolution 1948
• Rest of the industrial field open to private
enterprise though the State would also
progressively participate in this field.

7. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
• After the adoption of the Constitution and the
socio-economic goals, the Industrial Policy was
comprehensively revised and adopted in 1956.
• Sought to accelerate the rate of economic growth
and speed up industrialization to achieve a
socialist pattern of society.
• Capital was scarce & the base of entrepreneurship
not strong enough. Hence, the gave primacy to the
role of the State to assume a predominant and
direct responsibility for industrial development.

8. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
• Objectives:
– Improvement in living standards and working
conditions for the mass of the people.
– Reduction in income and wealth disparities
– Prevention of private monopolies and
concentration of economic power in different
fields in the hands of small numbers of
individuals.

9. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
– Progressively predominant and direct
responsibility for the State in setting up new
industrial undertakings and for developing
transport facilities
– Undertake State trading on an increasing scale.
– Equal opportunity for the private sector to
develop and expand.

10. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
– Private sector to develop on the principle of
cooperation; increasing proportion of the
private sector activities to develop on
cooperative lines.
– The adoption of the socialist pattern of society
as the national objective.
– The need for planned and rapid development.

11. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
– Public sector: All industries of basic and
strategic importance, or in the nature of public
utility services.
– The State can undertake any type of industrial
production.

12. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
• Categorization of industries:
i) Set of industries the future development of
which will be the exclusive responsibility of the
State
• ii) Category of industries which will be
progressively state-owned and in which the State
will, therefore, generally take the initiative in
establishing new undertakings, but in which
private enterprise will also be expected to
supplement the efforts of the State.

13. Industrial Policy Resolution 1956
• iii) Rest of industries left to the initiative and
enterprise of the private sector.
• Stress the role of cottage and village and small
scale industries in the development of the national
economy.
• Disparities in levels of development between
different regions should be progressively reduced.

14. Industrial Policy 1973
• Certain structural distortions called for policy
changes in IPR 1956
• Provide for a closer interaction between the
agricultural and industrial sectors
• Highest priority to the generation and
transmission of power.
• Identify products to be reserved for the small scale
sector: list of industries exclusively reserved for
the small scale sector expanded from 180 items to
more than 500 items.

15. Industrial Policy 1973
• Within the small scale sector, a tiny sector was also
defined with investment in machinery and
equipment up to Rs.1 lakh & located in towns
with a population < 50,000 according to
1971 census figures, and in villages.
• Proposal for special legislation to protect cottage
and household industries

16. Industrial Policy 1973
• Compulsory export obligations, merely for
ensuring the foreign exchange balance of the
project, would no longer be insisted upon while
approving new industrial capacity.
• In the areas of price control of agricultural and
industrial products, the prices would be regulated
to ensure an adequate return to the investor.

17. Industrial Policy 1977
• Emphasis on
– producing inputs needed by a large number of
smaller units and making adequate marketing
arrangements.
– upgrading the technology of small units.
– Promoting the development of a system of
linkages between nucleus large plants and the
satellite ancillaries

18. Industrial Policy 1977
• Emphasis on:
– the development of small scale industries, the
investment limit in the case of tiny units was enhanced
to Rs.2 lakh, of a small scale units to Rs.20 lakh and of
ancillaries to Rs.25 lakh.
– building buffer stocks of essential raw materials for the
Small Scale Industries for operation through the Small
Industries Development Corporations in the States
and the National Small Industries Corporation in
the Centre.

19. Industrial Policy 1977
• Emphasis on:
– Industrial processes and technologies involving
optimum utilization of energy or the exploitation of
alternative sources of energy for giving special
assistance, including finance on concessional terms.

20. The Industrial Policy Statement 1980
• Formulated wrt the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1956 to
provide for
(i) Optimum utilization of installed capacity;
(ii) Maximum production and achieving higher
productivity;
(iii) Higher employment generation;
(iv) Correction of regional imbalances;
(v) Strengthening of the agricultural base through agro
based industries and promotion of optimum inter-sectoral
relationship;
• (vi) Promotion of export-oriented industries;

21. The Industrial Policy Statement 1980
• (vii) Promotion of economic federalism through equitable
spread of investment and dispersal of returns;
• (viii) Consumer protection against high prices and bad
quality.

22. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Govt . recognizes the need for
– social and economic justice, to end poverty and
unemployment and to build a modern, democratic,
socialist, prosperous and forward-looking India
– India to grow as part of the world economy and not in
isolation
– Greater emphasis placed on building up ability to pay
for imports through our own foreign exchange
earnings
– development and utilization of indigenous capabilities
in technology and manufacturing as well as its
up gradation to world standards.

23. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Sound policy framework encompassing
encouragement of entrepreneurship, development
of indigenous technology through investment in
research and development, bringing in new
technology, dismantling of the regulatory system,
development of the capital markets and increasing
competitiveness for the benefit of the common
man.

24. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• The spread of industrialization to backward areas
of the country will be actively promoted
through appropriate incentives, institutions and
infrastructure investments.
• Government will provide enhanced support to the
small-scale sector so that it flourishes in an
environment of economic efficiency and
continuous technological up gradation

25. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Foreign investment and technology collaboration
will be welcomed to obtain higher
technology, to increase exports and to expand the
production base.
Government will endeavor to abolish the
monopoly of any sector or any individual
enterprise in any field of manufacture, except on
strategic or military considerations and open all
manufacturing activity to competition.

26. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• The Government will ensure that the public sector
plays its rightful role in the evolving
socioeconomic scenario of the country.
Government will ensure that the public sector is
run on business lines as envisaged in the Industrial
Policy Resolution of 1956 and would continue to
innovate and lead in strategic areas of national
importance.

27. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Government will fully protect the interests of
labour, enhance their welfare and equip them in
all respects to deal with the inevitability of
technological change
Labour will be made an equal partner in
• progress and prosperity
• Workers’ participation in management will be
promoted

28. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Workers cooperatives will be encouraged to
participate in packages designed to turn around
sick companies.
• The major objectives of the new industrial policy
package will be to build on the gains already
made, correct the distortions or weaknesses that
may have crept in, maintain a sustained growth in
productivity and gainful employment and attain
international competitiveness.

29. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Need to preserve the environment and ensure the
efficient use of available resources.
• Government’s policy will be continuity with
change

30. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• In pursuit of the above objectives, Government
have decided to take a series of initiatives in
respect of the policies relating to the following
areas.
A. Industrial Licensing.
B. Foreign Investment.
C. Foreign Technology Agreements.
D. Public Sector Policy.
E. MRTPAct.

31. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Industrial licensing:
– Modified industrial licensing policy to ease restrictions on
capacity creation, respond to emerging domestic & global
opportunities by improving productivity
– Abolished industrial licensing for most industries but for 18
categories
– Small scale sector reserved
• Foreign Investment:
– FDI (up to 51% foreign equity) permitted in high priority
industries (high investment and advanced technology) &
export oriented companies

32. INDUSTRIAL POLICY 1991
• Foreign Technology Agreements:
• Towards technological dynamism, automatic approval
for technological agreements related to high priority
industries; eased procedures for hiring foreign technical
expertise
• Public Sector Policy:
Restructuring pubic sector units, raise resources
through pubic participation PSUs, refer sick units to
Board of Industrial & Financial Reconstruction
• MRTPAct:
• Abolished scrutiny of investment decision of MRTP companies etc.

33. Current Scenario:
• Substantial changes:
– Only six industries require compulsory licensing
– Only three industries reserved for the public sector
– Relation of restriction on FDI: FDI up to 100 % under
automatic route for most manufacturing activities in
Special Economic Zones; FDI ceiling in pvt banking
sector up to 74%; oil exploration (100%); natural gas
and LNG pipelines (100%); telecom (74%)
• Small Scale industries sector: reduced # of items
reserved from 821 (1991) to 506 (2005)

37. Lessons from India:
• Industrial Policy should not be about:
– Controlling Prices
– Controlling Quantity
– Specifying Geographical Location of Activity
– Preemption by Public Sector
– Policy Body, Regulatory Body and Service Provider
being Government Agencies

38. Industrial Policy cannot be Viewed in Isolation
Education • Schooling → Vocational Technical Education → Entry into
Workforce → Employment ↔ Life Long Learning
• Typology of Higher Education Institutions
Innovation • Public – Private – Partnership Models
• Open Science Model, Licence Model, Innovation Model
• Industry – Academia Collaboration
• Office of Sponsored Projects: Funding agreements
• Office of Technology Transfer: Patenting and licensing
technology
Global
Cooperation
• Open Source Drug Discovery is a CSIR Team India Consortium
with Global Partnership with a vision to provide affordable
healthcare to the developing world. http://www.osdd.net/
Fiscal • Tax Incentives for R&D Expenditure
• Funding for Industry – Academia Collaboration
• Transparent Process (Metrics for Evaluation) for Funding Basic
Research Vs Applied Research

39. Industrial Policy cannot be Viewed in Isolation
Infrastructure
& Industrial
Policy
• Infrastructure Sectors -
• Heavy Industries -
• Local Infrastructure Development needs to be Dovetailed with
Industrial Structure
• Cluster Program
• Specialization, Flexibility in Production, Linkages, Sub-
contractors, Cooperation among Firms, Economies of Scale
and Scope
• Knowledge Transfer on Best Practices
• Research Parks in the Industrial Cluster

40. • 1999 to 2009 – 57 percent increase in number of students attending a
university outside their home countries (Size: 3 million)
• Since 1990 – Doubling of cross-border scientific collaboration
(measured by co-authored journal articles)
• Half of the world's top physicists no longer work in their home countries
• 60 percent increase in number of “branch campuses" (operating outside
national borders) in just five years.
Global Universities are Reshaping the World: Ben Wildavsky
Internationalization of Higher Education
Source: Joseph Klafter (2010) Together, we’re better, The Times Higher Education July 1, 2010

41. 1. To facilitate the transfer of university created discoveries into new products and
services for public use and benefit.
2. To promote regional economic growth and job creation.
3. To reward, retain, and recruit faculty and graduate students.
4. To create (new) relationships with industry.
5. To generate net royalty income for the TO, inventors, and the university.
6. To generate new funding support for the university and/or faculty from sponsored
research funding, consulting opportunities for faculty, and donations of money or
equipment.
7. To serve as a service center to the university, faculty, students, and staff on all
areas related to intellectual property, including providing seminars and
consulting assistance when requested.
8. To actively facilitate formation of university-connected start-up (spinout)
companies
Mission of Office of Technology Transfer
Source: Gilles Capart and Jon Sandelin (2004) Models of, and Missions for, Transfer Offices from Public Research Organizations
http://otl.stanford.edu/documents/JSMissionsModelsPaper-1.pdf

42. 1. Universities should reserve the right to practice licensed inventions and to allow
other non-profit and governmental organizations to do so
2. Exclusive licenses should be structured in a manner that encourages
technology development and use
3. Strive to minimize the licensing of “future improvements”
4. Universities should anticipate and help to manage technology transfer related
conflicts of interest
5. Ensure broad access to research tools
6. Enforcement action should be carefully considered
7. Be mindful of export regulations
8. Be mindful of the implications of working with patent aggregators
9. Consider including provisions that address unmet needs, such as those of
neglected patient populations or geographic areas, giving particular attention to
improved therapeutics, diagnostics and agricultural technologies for the
developing world
Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology
Source: In the Public Interest: Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology 2007
http://www.autm.net/Nine_Points_to_Consider.htm

43. How do Research Universities Contribute?
Open Science Model
Licence Model
Innovation Model
- No IPR retained by
universities (Contract Work,
Publications)
Licence Model
- FY2001: Over 494 new
companies based on an
academic discovery were
formed, and over $1 billion
in royalty income
-Stanford University TTO
1970 – 1980 ($4 mn)
1981 – 1990 ($40 mn)
Since 1990 ($ 500 min)
- Demonstration of proof of
principle of the utility of
such inventions
Innovation Model
- Collaborative
research with industry
- Creation of spinout
Subsidiaries
More developed in certain
European countries (UK,
Scandinavian countries,
Netherlands and Belgium)
Source: Gilles Capart and Jon Sandelin (2004) Models of, and Missions for, Transfer Offices from Public Research Organizations
http://otl.stanford.edu/documents/JSMissionsModelsPaper-1.pdf

44. Approaches: 1. Licensing to established companies
2. Facilitation of start-up companies to develop
university inventions
Source: University Technology Transfer in the U.S: History, Status and Trends
Spinouts from U.S. universities- Some Issues
Assistance with preparation of
business plans
Help in incorporating the company
Directly providing or finding early
stage investment
Help in recruiting management team
members.
Requires significant resources &
compensation systems
Potential for faculty conflict of
interest
Possibility for adverse public reaction
and adverse media exposure
Risk of involvement in product
liability lawsuits.
• One spin-out company is created for every
• $15 million in research spending in UK universities
• $44 million for U.S. universities.
• 54% of UK universities have business incubators.
Source: U.K Department of Trade and Industry Research Management Briefing, No. 9, March 8, 2004
44

45. Related Illustrations