New Delhi:
Gururaj ‘Desh’ Deshpande
, an adviser to US President
Barack Obama
on innovation and entrepreneurship,
said in an interview that more attention should be paid to low-cost
innovation in India. The founder of Sycamore Networks also set up the
Deshpande Center for Technological Innovation at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT), besides heading non-governmental
organization Akshaya Patra, which was started a decade ago as an
initiative to feed school children in Bangalore. Deshpande spoke about
building innovative ecosystems for social empowerment in India. Edited
excerpts:
What is the role of governance in making the environment conducive for innovative entrepreneurship?
You
have to create the culture of innovation. When you experiment, only a
few will succeed. It will promote innovation, the penalty of failure
should be small. In the US, if you start a company, and it doesn’t work,
you can file for bankruptcy and start over. In fact, if you are a
failure, you are valued higher because it is like being a (veteran)
soldier in a war. In India, we need to clean up the legal environment.
At present, if a company fails, there are investors, creditors etc., and
it is not easy to walk away. Since entrepreneurs need to give a lot of
personal guarantees, when they fail it is very hard for him to start
something else. We need that. That’s part of a maturing economy.
To
build a company, you need a good idea, a good entrepreneur, a good
mentor and easy access to capital. Effective governance would be in
reducing the friction in these four aspects. The only mistake the
government can commit is that when they come up (for) money, they start
picking who to fund and who to not fund. Government officers are not in
the business of figuring out who wins or who loses. They should be in
the business of encouraging innovation. In India, all four aspects are
there, but a lot needs to be done.
What is the type of innovation required in India to meet social challenges given the fiscal constraints?
Typically,
people relate innovation to hardware/software, little start-ups in
basements. Sometimes innovations are profound technological
breakthroughs which are patentable—the kind we do at the centre in the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology—but other times it is social
innovation. This might not be a breakthrough or a patentable innovation
but, like Akshaya Patra, social innovations cannot be undermined. MIT is
a powerhouse of innovation but if I ask them to replicate something
like Akshaya Patra, they will come up with a $5 meal and think it is
very affordable. Because they don’t have the Indian context. So, there
is a space for social innovation and then there is technological
innovation and we need them both.
Do you think the regulatory environment in India fosters innovation?
The
regulatory ecosystem for innovation is a work in progress. It is
evolving. I graduated from IIT (Indian Institute of Technology) Madras
in computer science in the 1970s but had never seen a computer before.
The first wave of innovation was when IT companies were set up in India
to solve international problems. The next wave is here now when
companies in India choose a problem to solve and then they innovate
accordingly. So, that is a very different approach to innovation. A lot
more patentable ideas are required. Where India will shine is low-cost
innovation and skill set that will drive everything. So the solutions
that people come up with—telecom, health etc.—will have a level of
innovation that cannot be ignored globally.
I had
two of MIT’s presidents visit India recently. It is very clear that if
MIT does not observe what is happening in India, the US will miss the
bus. They will be sitting in a bubble and coming up with solutions like a
$5 meal and thinking it is a good solution, while people in India will
be running away with 12 cents a meal. As long as you have an innovative
culture—not all may work—but government policies should encourage a lot
of this activity. The government should be in the business of letting a
lot of people innovative.
In the past year, several patent cases have gone against multinational companies. Do you think India’s patent laws are hostile?
Encouraging
patents is a good thing, particularly in global competition. I think
China now has more patents than the US. First, the government has to
encourage innovation that is relevant to the Indian context and then
patents should be encouraged. It should not be the other way round.
The
number of patents in a country cannot be a measure of innovation,
otherwise every university professor will get patents but it won’t solve
any problems.
Is it right to say that in the US, India has acquired an image of not respecting patents?
Actually, they trust India a lot more than they trust China right now.
That does not say much.
That
is the nature of the developing market. The only time you will start
seeing courts and patent laws in India is when there is enough
innovation within India. When Indian companies will spend a lot of money
(on research and development) and start getting patents, then the law
will start protecting these patents automatically. It is not happening
right now because there is not enough innovation. Or at least there are
not enough patentable innovations. Right now, people don’t need huge
innovations to get into business. In fact, globally, businessmen are
jealous of entrepreneurs in India because they don’t need to come up
with profound ideas to start a company. Examples like Red Bus (a bus
ticketing site) are big ideas, but are not patentable. It is not that we
don’t need patents, but it will just take time. Once you do 10 Red
Buses, you will need something little bit more profound. It is a
question of maturing economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment