India a tech giant? Well no...

The catalytic impact of the diffusion of technology and innovation in promoting economic growth is widely acknowledged. Although India has achieved resounding success in specific technology-intensive areas such as telecommunications and software exports, it fares poorly in most cross-country comparisons of scientific and technological excellence.

Unfortunately, the effectiveness of the Indian educational system in providing quality instruction in science and technology is patchy at best. The electoral slogan "it is the economy, stupid" coined during Bill Clinton's 1992 successful presidential campaign against incumbent George H W Bush has spawned several variants drawing attention to core issues.

I would venture that widespread use of appropriate and high-end technology would help sustain long-term growth in India and hence, the title of this article.

The media in India provides prominent coverage of the net-worth of individuals and pronouncements on the Indian economy, particularly by externally resident pundits. Last month there was a hilarious RK Laxman cartoon in which a VVIP is annoyed for listening to a well-dressed person because he mistook him for a non-resident Indian.

In contrast, there is inadequate attention paid to the state of technical education or significant work by Indian scientists and engineers. Maybe there isn't all that much to report on a regular basis. Consequently, all the more reason to urgently augment human capital in disciplines related to the physical sciences and engineering.

One indication of the quality of innovative work in a country is the number of patents filed by it annually. Table I details the numbers of patents filed in the last five years by select countries and India lags behind the developed countries, ROK and China.

There is no Indian firm, in terms of patents filed in 2006, among the top 20 companies. The top companies, in descending order of the number of patents filed, are: Philips (Netherlands), Matshushita (Japan), Siemens (Germany), Nokia (Finland), Robert Bosch (Germany), 3M (US), BASF (Germany), Toyota (Japan), Intel and Motorola (US).

The World Bank has designed a Knowledge Economy Index, which covers 132 countries on a scale of zero to ten. Each country's KEI rating is based on the extent to which:

• Its economic and institutional regime promotes entrepreneurship;
• It has an educated and skilled population;
• It is able to adapt global knowledge to local needs; and
• Its information and communication technology can "facilitate effective creation, dissemination and processing of information".

Table II indicates that India's KEI rating is lower than the global average and well below the G-7 average.

Falling standards? Table I: Number of patents filed

Country	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
USA	41,296	41,029	43,350	46,772	50,089
Japan	14,063	17,414	20,264	24,864	26,906
Germany	14,326	14,662	15,216	16,009	16,866
France	5,089	5,171	5,185	5,745	6,109
South Korea	2,520	2,949	3,558	4,687	5,935
China	1,018	1,295	1,706	2,449	3,910
India	525	764	724	679	780
Brazil	201	219	278	280	328
Mexico	132	131	118	141	176

Various institutions rank universities on a global and regional basis. For instance, Shanghai Jiao Tong University's rankings favour universities whose alumni have won Nobel prizes, Fields Medals in mathematics or are highly cited researchers. The Jiao Tong University rankings for the world's top 20 universities include 17 US universities (Harvard, Stanford, MIT, etc.) and two British universities (Cambridge and Oxford) and one Japanese university.

According to the Webometrics ranking of universities, which is put together by a public research body in Spain, the top 50 universities in Asia are made up overwhelmingly of universities in Singapore, Japan, China and South Korea. IIT Mumbai is ranked 33rd and the Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore, is ranked 35th.

In another list of the top 50 universities in the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) group of countries, most of the top positions are taken up by universities in Brazil, Russia, and China. Only three Indian institutions make it to the top 50 and these are IIT Mumbai, Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore, and IIT Kanpur at the 19th, 22nd and 45th positions, respectively.

A study titled "Seeing through preconceptions: A deeper look at China and India," co-authored by Wadhwa, Gerefi, Rissing and Ong (Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University), has examined the number and quality of engineering graduates from China, India and the US.

One of the conclusions of the study is that while the quality of Indian engineers is inconsistent, most become productive with additional training in the US. In this context, about 80,000 Indian students, from all disciplines, went to the US alone last year. This large number indicates that some in India can fund their studies abroad and also that the number of seats in Indian institutions of higher learning is insufficient.

In April this year, India successfully launched a commercial space satellite and the Agni III missile. Periodically, however, there is criticism about the slow pace at which India is moving towards self-reliance in fields such as atomic energy and defence.

Table II: KEI ratings

Country	KEI
	Recent	1995
USA	8.74	9.13
Germany	8.48	8.63
Japan	8.42	8.63
South Korea	7.60	7.56
Russia	5.98	8.85

Country	KEI
	Recent	1995
Brazil	5.10	4.73
China	4.26	2.83
India	2.71	2.80
G-7	8.50	8.78
World	5.59	6.07

An institution similar to the Union Public Service Commission with technical support from institutions such as the Tata Institute for Fundamental Research (Mumbai) and the Indian Institute of Sciences could conduct all-India based examinations and interviews to select talented science and technology post-graduates and doctorates. A transparent selection system could feed two streams - those who would teach and the rest who would be absorbed by the public sector and industry.

To summarise, the average quality of education in science and technology is relatively low in India and, compared to our population, the number of seats for superior training in these fields is wholly inadequate.

An indispensable requirement in a globalising world is that the average quality of our human resources has to be higher than the global average. On a country-wide basis we have to effect greater selectivity in choosing teachers, particularly in the scientific and technical disciplines, and their compensation package has to include assured housing and generous medical, retirement benefits.