A background note can be accessed here: NITI Aayog Roadmap Targets Semiconductor Self-Reliance
The roadmap argues that India should move beyond being a participant in global semiconductor supply chains and instead become an indispensable ecosystem player through advanced packaging, mature-node manufacturing, design IP, and compound semiconductors. To what extent does this strategy represent a more viable pathway to technological sovereignty than pursuing leadership in leading-edge fabrication?
The roadmap’s approach is in the right direction. A significant share of semiconductor demand today, particularly from automotive, industrial, power management, telecom and defence applications, continues to be served by mature-node logic and analog chips rather than leading-edge nodes. India should therefore focus on scaling mature-node manufacturing, advanced packaging, design intellectual property (IP) and compound semiconductors such as silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN). These are areas where the country can realistically develop competitive advantages in the near term while reducing import dependence.
At the same time, technological sovereignty should not be interpreted as complete self-sufficiency. The semiconductor industry remains deeply globalised, and even advanced economies depend on specialised capabilities distributed across countries. Given the high capital costs, technological complexity and long gestation periods associated with sub-6 nanometre fabrication, directly competing with established leaders may not be the most efficient use of resources today.
However, India should continue investing in research and development (R&D) related to advanced-node manufacturing and next-generation semiconductor technologies. This creates a balanced pathway: build strength in commercially relevant segments today while steadily developing the capabilities required for future technological leadership. In that sense, the roadmap strikes a pragmatic balance between strategic autonomy and global interdependence.
The report estimates that building a globally competitive semiconductor ecosystem will require USD 135-180 billion in investments, with the government expected to play a major de-risking role. How should policymakers evaluate the appropriate balance between public support and market-led investment in such a capital-intensive sector?
Government support is necessary in a capital-intensive sector such as semiconductors, but policymakers should think beyond capital subsidies, interest subvention and other financial de-risking measures. The more important signal to investors is whether India can consistently supply the skilled workforce required to operate, expand and upgrade semiconductor facilities over time.
Alongside funding support, the government should present a clear roadmap for talent creation through specialised semiconductor curricula, industry-oriented training programmes, research centres and partnerships between higher education institutions and industry. As new fabrication, packaging and testing facilities come online, investors need confidence that technicians, engineers, researchers and managerial talent will be available at scale.
A credible talent strategy also addresses concerns around subsidy dependence. Financial incentives can help attract projects, but long-term investment decisions are shaped by the availability of human capital and the ability of firms to expand operations without facing skill shortages. By demonstrating a sustained commitment to workforce development, the government can reduce execution risks, strengthen investor confidence and improve the returns on public support.
Ultimately, ecosystem success will depend not only on how much capital is deployed, but also on whether India can build the talent base needed to support the industry over the coming decades.
The roadmap places equal emphasis on frontier R&D, design intellectual property, talent development, and manufacturing infrastructure through its five-pillar strategy. How should India sequence these objectives to avoid creating production capacity without corresponding innovation depth?
India should sequence this in a way that talent and innovation come first, manufacturing scales next, and all three evolve together rather than in isolation. The roadmap is right to place equal emphasis on frontier R&D, design IP, talent development and production because semiconductor manufacturing without a strong innovation base is unlikely to remain competitive over the long term.
The roadmap itself highlights the need for India to move from a services-led design base to a producer of differentiated IP, semiconductor architectures and integration technologies. Achieving that transition requires strong research institutions, sustained R&D investment and mechanisms that translate scientific knowledge into commercially relevant technologies.
New fabrication and packaging facilities should therefore be closely linked to universities and research ecosystems. A structured university-industry partnership can train people for the full range of roles like fab technicians, process engineers, packaging specialists, materials scientists and solution architects, so manufacturers get job-ready talent and universities gain real industry relevance. Preference should be given, where possible, to institutions with strong international collaborations, as these partnerships can accelerate capability development and strengthen research quality.
The right sequence is therefore to build talent, develop IP, anchor R&D within institutions and expand manufacturing on top of that foundation. That is what ultimately creates depth, resilience and long-term competitiveness in a semiconductor ecosystem.