Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/
India loves to boast about being the next tech superpower, but try asking who in this country invented something the world actually bought. You’ll be met with a long silence, interrupted only by bureaucrats waving a list of CSIR patents no one licensed. While Germany’s Fraunhofer turns ideas into industries and royalties, our premier research network turns taxpayer money into research papers destined for dusty cupboards. We’re running a 21st-century race with a 20th-century research bureaucracy—and calling it innovation.
The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) was founded in 1942 with noble intentions: nation-building through science. Over eight decades, it has delivered some notable successes—from green revolution breakthroughs to affordable generic drugs and aerospace components. But the uncomfortable truth is this:
CSIR remains a grant-fed bureaucracy in a world where research earns its keep. It runs on annual government handouts of about ₹6,300 crore (~$760 million), with nearly 90% of funding guaranteed irrespective of technology uptake, licensing, or market success. Success is measured not in royalties earned or products adopted, but in papers published and patents filed—internal KPIs designed to secure promotions, not markets.
Contrast this with Germany’s Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, founded in 1949, now a global leader in applied research with 76 institutes, 30,000 scientists, and a €3.4 billion annual budget. The crucial difference? Fraunhofer earns 70–80% of its revenue from industry contracts, competitive grants, and technology licensing. When Fraunhofer invented the MP3 audio format or co-developed H.264 video compression, it didn’t just file patents—it licensed them globally, earning royalties that funded further breakthroughs. Their scientists are entrepreneurial problem-solvers, rewarded for ideas that reach factories and consumers, not just conference halls.
In India, the joke among insiders goes: “A CSIR scientist’s promotion depends on publishing a paper no one reads, filing a patent no one licenses, and attending a conference no one remembers.” Meanwhile, Indian industries queue up in Germany, Israel, or the US to buy ready-made technologies that our own labs could never commercialize. We proudly export nurses, drivers, and coders—while importing high-value tech that should have been born here.
This is not about talent. Indian scientists are world-class when they escape this system. It’s about the model: CSIR functions like a welfare scheme for science, not an engine for innovation. Labs behave like government departments, not agile R&D outfits. Scientists have little incentive—or autonomy—to chase risky, market-driven projects. IP sits idle because commercialization isn’t in anyone’s performance appraisal. The private sector barely invests in CSIR because the culture doesn’t speak the language of business.
If India wants to lead in AI, quantum computing, green hydrogen, or biotechnology, we can’t keep running labs like ration shops and expecting rockets. We need structural reform:
- Flip the funding model: Within 10 years, target a 50:50 split between public grants and competitive revenue from industry, global contracts, and licensing.
- Tie promotions to impact, not paperwork: Measure success in royalties earned, start-ups spun out, and global patents enforced—not publications.
- Allow entrepreneurial leadership: Turn CSIR labs into semi-autonomous, sector-focused institutes with CEOs accountable to boards that include industry leaders.
- Hire global talent: Pay market salaries to attract star researchers from anywhere in the world. India cannot lead by clinging to pay scales designed for clerks.
- Go global: Open CSIR innovation hubs in Silicon Valley, Munich, Tokyo, and Singapore to chase international projects, not just domestic grants.
The shift is not optional. India spends just 0.7% of its GDP on R&D, far below the US, China, and Germany. What little we spend gets trapped in bureaucracies obsessed with internal metrics. The world is not waiting for us. Fraunhofer is already working on next-generation batteries, smart manufacturing, quantum encryption. We’re still filing patents on yesterday’s science and congratulating ourselves for “output.”
Science that lives on grants dies in the marketplace. If we don’t break this cycle, India will keep dreaming of becoming a technology superpower while financing a research ecosystem that behaves like a 20th-century government department run by ‚babus’ in a 21st-century tech warzone. Fraunhofer sells science & innovation to the world. CSIR sells PowerPoint presentations to clowns in ministries. Guess who wins the future?
Mohan MURTI, Advocate & International Industry Arbitrator; Former Managing Director-Europe; Reliance Industries Ltd. Germany; Member of Supervisory Board; Innoplexus AG, Germany
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.