To Bolster Manufacturing, India Tries the China Way

In an effort to build the country’s manufacturing base, the Indian government is planning to establish seven national manufacturing and investment zones (NMIZ) — large industrial parks that, similar to counterparts in China, promise to ease the compliance and tax burdens of doing business.

The zones are part of a national manufacturing policy, the country’s first, unveiled by the Indian government on October 25. Officials hope to create 100 million jobs over the next decade and to help spur growth in a sector where India lags behind other nations.

Conventional wisdom is that China is the factory to the world while India is the back office; the country’s strengths have traditionally been in providing outsourcing services in areas including information technology, business processes and health care. Currently, manufacturing only contributes 15% to 16% of Indian GDP, compared to 34% in China, 28% in South Korea and 27% in Indonesia. The goal of the new policy is to raise the share in India to 25% by 2022.

Anand Sharma, Union minister of commerce and industry, has been steering the manufacturing policy through different layers of the political arena and the government for nearly two years now. “The policy is a reality today,” he told Indian financial daily Business Standard. “All of us understand that this was needed.” But three critical issues related to the NMIZs that have generated controversy in recent times — labor, land acquisition and environmental clearance — have been left for the states to handle.

And many critics note that, unlike China, India doesn’t have enough funds to finance the infrastructure needed to make the NMIZs a success. “China’s manufacturing success is because of three reasons: cheap logistics, cheap labor and cheap money,” says C.R. Sasikumar, chief executive officer of the Shanghai branch of the State Bank of India. The Chinese government was able to build roads, extend power supplies and offer other incentives to bring in foreign companies, adds E.B. Rajesh, chief representative of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) in China.

Instead of trying to follow the exact path of the Chinese, many analysts say that India must concentrate on the strengths it can bring to the table, such as innovation and what Renault CEO Carlos Ghosn described as “frugal engineering.” For example, a Renault joint venture with the Mahindra conglomerate produced the Logan, a compact sedan. Local engineers managed to cut 15% of the production price.

But trying to compete on innovation won’t rid India of China as a competitor. Weimin Yao, vice president for corporate affairs at Shenzhen-based telecommunications and networking firm Huawei Technologies, predicts that China’s days of being purely a manufacturer of other countries’ products are coming to an end. “Our new thrust is research and development,” he says.

This entry was posted in Finance and Investment, Knowledge@Wharton Today, Law and Public Policy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
  • http://twitter.com/Vickramg Vickram Gopaal

    ‘frugal engineering’ will not help employment of mass migrating unskilled and semi-skilled workers from the farms into the urban areas.
    Manufacturing is critical. And the Govt is responsible to ensure that there is clear focus on mass employment generation.

  • Anonymous

    The reason why manufacturing did not come to India has been archaic land & labor laws. In the early to mid-1990s I could get a number of US & EC companies to shift part of their manufacturing to India based on “more open society, English language, democracy” besides skills at low costs. 
    But they were askance at our labor laws and the fact that most companies use “contract labor” just because you can not hire & fire people.

  • Anonymous

    The reason why manufacturing did not come to India has been archaic land & labor laws. In the early to mid-1990s I could get a number of US & EC companies to shift part of their manufacturing to India based on “more open society, English language, democracy” besides skills at low costs. 
    But they were askance at our labor laws and the fact that most companies use “contract labor” just because you can not hire & fire people.

  • Ehteshamul Haque

    We may discuss till eternity on SEZ /FEZ or any other tax incentive, fact of the matter is we have to get basics right to be destination of choice in manufacturing;
    @ Infrastructure: Ecosystem of industries, Land, Power, Road, Logistics etc..
    @ Labor Laws: Agility to adjust upsize/downsize swiftly and economically as per demand
    @ Technical Skills: Qualified “Technicians” (Welder/Fitter/Machinist etc.)
    @ Policy Issue: Consistency of policy and confidence that it will not change next year
    @ Industry & University Liaison: We have total disconnect between what is taught and what is needed in industry, synergic research is far cry from it. We need to channelize our intellectual capital to solve industry focused issues.    
    We have these and we will see Indian entrepreneurial energies focused on manufacturing and deliver results apart from foreign investors.
    Else we will see pseudo industry growth similar to what we see when state governments offer exemptions from “Excise Duty”. In the name of manufacturing assembly/packing is done in these zones, part of the tax exemptions is consumed by inefficient logistics and rest is enjoyed by entrepreneur.    

  • http://captainjohann.myopenid.com/ captainjohann

    First India must build world class infrastructure. The Indian Railway engines are found to be superior to Chinese that Pakistan has placed urgent order for 50 of them.Chinese also dump low quality goods in Indian and third world markets. Indians must go for High quality production like Japnese,South korean or Swedish do but in cheaper way.