In India's ambition to become a global manufacturing powerhouse, quality has become a defining policy objective. From factory floors and industrial corridors to trade negotiations and industrial strategy, the message is consistent: Indian products must be safer, more reliable and globally competitive.
Increasingly, that ambition is being pursued not only through incentives and industrial schemes but also through regulation. Few policy instruments illustrate this shift more clearly than Quality Control Orders (QCOs), which have evolved from technical quality regulations into a central feature of India's industrial policy.
That evolution raises an important policy question. As QCOs extend across an expanding range of products and industries, are they simply strengthening quality assurance, or are they also creating regulatory barriers that could undermine the competitiveness they are intended to promote?
From Quality Assurance to Industrial Policy
QCOs were introduced under the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act, 2016 to ensure that products sold in India meet prescribed standards of safety, performance and reliability. Their purpose is straightforward: protect consumers, safeguard public health and encourage higher-quality manufacturing.
Few would dispute those objectives.
What has changed is the scale and significance of the framework. More than 700 QCOs now span nearly 100 sectors, covering products ranging from toys, steel, chemicals and textiles to electronics, telecom equipment, kitchenware, automotive components and industrial inputs. What began as a targeted quality assurance mechanism now shapes much of India's manufacturing and trade environment.
Supporters argue that this expansion addresses a long-standing vulnerability. India can no longer remain exposed to low-quality imports, while domestic manufacturers deserve protection from unfair competition based on inferior standards. The toy industry is frequently cited as evidence of the policy's effectiveness, with imports declining sharply after mandatory certification requirements were introduced.
The underlying logic is straightforward: higher standards should improve product quality, strengthen consumer confidence and encourage firms to upgrade manufacturing practices.
Yet once quality regulation becomes a major instrument of industrial policy, it must be assessed against a broader set of objectives. The question is no longer only whether standards improve product quality, but also how they influence investment, competitiveness, exports and India's integration into global value chains.
The Compliance Challenge
Every expansion of the QCO regime also expands the compliance obligations facing manufacturers.
Both domestic and foreign producers must obtain BIS certification before their products can be sold in India. For overseas manufacturers, this typically involves factory inspections, product testing under Indian standards, extensive documentation and certification procedures that may take several months.
The burden, however, is not evenly distributed. Large multinational firms are generally better positioned to absorb additional compliance costs and administrative requirements than smaller manufacturers with more limited resources.
Foreign suppliers have also raised concerns about India's limited acceptance of internationally accredited testing reports, arguing that duplicate testing increases certification costs, delays approvals and creates greater uncertainty over market entry.
These concerns extend beyond individual firms. As countries compete for investment and global value chain participation, the efficiency and predictability of regulatory systems increasingly shape where companies choose to manufacture, source components and establish long-term operations.
Beyond Imports
The implications are no longer confined to foreign suppliers. Increasingly, Indian manufacturers are encountering similar implementation challenges.
The steel sector provides a useful illustration. Recent QCOs extended mandatory certification beyond finished products to include intermediate goods and raw materials. The move immediately created uncertainty for importers and downstream manufacturers dependent on these inputs. Shipments already in transit faced compliance difficulties, raising concerns over financial losses, production disruptions and supply shortages. Following representations from industry, the government deferred implementation to provide additional time for adjustment.
The episode highlights an important lesson. Expanding regulatory coverage requires more than issuing new standards. It also demands administrative preparedness, regulatory certainty and transition periods that reflect industry readiness.
Similar concerns have emerged across textiles, chemicals, electronics and engineering. While industry broadly supports quality standards for finished products, extending mandatory certification to raw materials, components and intermediate inputs can create bottlenecks across production networks and increase costs throughout the manufacturing chain. The burden is particularly significant for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), many of which lack dedicated compliance teams and have limited capacity to absorb additional certification costs or disruptions in input supplies. For these firms, predictable implementation becomes as important as the standards themselves.
Competitiveness Depends on Predictability
Compliance, however, is only part of the story.
India's broader industrial strategy seeks deeper integration into global value chains through initiatives such as Make in India, Atmanirbhar Bharat and the Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme. Although these programmes differ in design, they share a common objective: attracting investment, expanding exports and strengthening India's position as a preferred manufacturing destination.
Achieving those ambitions depends on both higher standards and the quality of the regulatory environment. Investors increasingly assess regulatory predictability alongside production costs, infrastructure and market size. Certification systems that are efficient, transparent and aligned with internationally accepted practices strengthen investor confidence, while prolonged uncertainty, duplicative compliance requirements or inconsistent implementation can weaken India's competitive appeal.
The same considerations shape the views of India's trading partners.
At the World Trade Organization, India's QCOs have become a recurring subject of discussion. The United States, the European Union, Japan, Canada, South Korea and several other economies have questioned whether aspects of India's technical regulations create unnecessary obstacles to trade. Their concerns focus less on the legitimacy of quality standards than on implementation and the extent to which India's requirements align with internationally recognised practices.
These issues have implications beyond technical compliance. As India negotiates trade agreements and positions itself as a trusted manufacturing partner, perceptions of regulatory predictability and proportionality increasingly influence investment decisions, supply-chain integration and confidence in India's regulatory institutions.
Designing Regulation That Supports Competitiveness
None of this diminishes the importance of quality regulation. Product standards remain essential for consumer protection, public safety and industrial upgrading. Well-designed regulatory systems encourage innovation, improve market confidence and strengthen long-term competitiveness.
The challenge is therefore no longer whether India should pursue higher standards, but how those standards are implemented. As the QCO framework continues to expand, greater attention must be paid to regulatory design. Certification systems should be efficient, proportionate and predictable. Transition periods should reflect industry readiness, while conformity assessment procedures should minimise unnecessary duplication wherever equivalent international practices exist. Most importantly, quality regulation should reinforce India's broader objectives of export growth, investment attraction and deeper integration into global manufacturing networks
As India strengthens its manufacturing base, the effectiveness of its quality regime will increasingly be judged by how well it combines high standards with regulatory predictability. The long-term success of the QCO framework will depend on institutions that can implement quality regulation efficiently, proportionately and with the confidence of both industry and trading partners.