NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY | VOL 9 | JULY 2014 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 491

commentary

At a long-awaited turning pointArindam Ghosh and Yamuna Krishnan

Research in nanotechnology in India is on an upswing given the substantial investments in the past two decades. Making an impact globally will now require investing in education, entrepreneurship, translational science, infrastructure for manufacturing, and changing the administrative mindset.

India has a unique cultural, ethnic and demographic diversity, as well as a large variety of natural resources and societal

demands. Perennial abundance of sunlight across the country offers ample scope for clean-energy generation. At the same time rampant infant mortality and malnutrition indicate the necessity for clean water and rapid, low-cost diagnostic machinery for over 200 million people. The innate interdisciplinary nature of nanotechnology fits seamlessly with India’s needs, but that is not all. The country’s rapid economic growth demands a new kind of industrialization that requires the appropriate urban and rural infrastructure1 (Fig. 1a). It also needs technological self-reliance in strategic

sectors such as defense and anti-terrorism. Given a supportive administrative thrust and political will, nanotechnology can play a leading role in building a knowledge-based economy by leveraging distinct advantages that India has in human resources and in manufacturing potential.

The nanotechnology landscapeThe need to promote nanotechnology in India was realized early in the millennium, when the NanoScience and Technology Initiative (NSTI) under the Department of Science and Technology was launched with a core funding of Rs. 600 million (equivalent to US$15 million). The NSTI remained the main source of funding for nano research

until 2006. In 2007, the Nano Mission, a five-year programme with over US$250 million of government funding, was formed with the mandate to promote basic research, develop human resources and research infrastructure, catalyse international collaboration and nurture nano-enabled technologies2. Since then, nanotechnology has evolved as a multi-agency effort with the Department of Information Technology, Defense Research and Development Organization, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, and Department of Biotechnology emerging as the main funding bodies. By February 2014, the Nano Mission alone had funded nearly 350 individual research projects (Fig. 1b), and established 12 Units of Nanoscience,

Figure 1 | Nanotechnology in numbers. a, A perspective of human resources and investment (accompanied by global rankings) in nano research in India1. GDP, gross domestic product; PPP, purchasing power parity. b, The scientific emphasis of nano-research projects sanctioned by the Nano Mission to individuals in research institutions or universities2. c, The geographical distribution of nano-research-related infrastructure development in India2. The year indicates the time of sanction of the unit or centre. Panel c, © Daniel Kaesler/Alamy.

15

10

5

02007 2008 2009 2010

Year2011 2012 2013

Indi

vidu

al n

ano-

rese

arch

pr

ojec

ts

Materials science: synthesis, growth, computational Applied materials research: metrology, sensing, agricultureNanomaterials for energy, environment and health Fundamental phenomena and processes in nanoscienceNanodevices and nanomanufacturing

Population R&Dresearcher

GDP GDP (PPP) Nano R&Dexpenditure

1.23 billion(Rank 2)

136 per million(Rank 49)

US$1,800 billion(Rank 10)

US$4,800 billion(Rank 3)

US$300 million(2001–2012)

a

b

cc

2009: Units of Nanoscience 2011: Thematic Units of Excellence

2007: Centers for Nanotechnology

© 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved

492 NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY | VOL 9 | JULY 2014 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

commentary

7 Centers of NanoTechnology, 10 Thematic Units of Excellence and one Centre for Computational Materials Science (Fig. 1c). The Department of Information Technology, in addition, funded two parallel National Centers of Nanofabrication and NanoElectronics at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore and Indian Institute of Technology in Mumbai to the cumulative tune of nearly US$70 million. Institutions dedicated to nanoscience research, such as the Institute of Nano Science and Technology at Mohali and the National Centre for Molecular Materials Research at Thiruvananthapuram, were created to specifically explore the application potential of nanoscience in agriculture, energy, environment and medicine. These efforts have resulted in the creation of new infrastructure, including high-end clean-room facilities for materials and device processing, as well as in several advanced electron microscopes for materials characterization. It seems that now is a good time to reflect on whether these efforts have yielded results that are commensurate with the investment.

Sobering facts and ground realitiesThe investments have yielded significant results because in terms of the sheer number

of publications in nanoscale science and technology India stands sixth in the world with over 23,000 papers published between 2008 and 2013. In fact, in 2013, India published 6,324 papers — behind only China and the USA with 25,738 and 16,020 papers, respectively1,3 (Fig. 2). Materials science (30%), physical chemistry (20%) and applied physics (19.7%) are the leading areas of nanoscale research in India, which reflects the funding pattern over the past seven years3 (Fig. 1c). The numbers in the brackets indicate the percentage of the total number of publications corresponding to that field. In addition to research papers, technology transfer has received a boost too, with over 300 patent applications filed at the Indian Patent Office in 2013, nearly ten times that in 2006 (Fig. 2a). Over 650 PhD degrees were awarded under Nano Mission funded projects, in addition to over 800 Master’s degrees. The Nano Mission has allocated funding for Indian scientists to utilize international neutron and synchrotron radiation sources, and nanotechnology is consistently represented as an area of cooperation with almost every nation. Despite such impressive progress, a closer inspection reveals a need for improvement in several areas.

Investments in the worldwide context. Even though nanoscience and nanotechnology funding in India has increased, it is miniscule compared with investment in the US (US$1.8 billion in 2013 alone)4, Japan (US$2.8 billion from 2006–2010)5, France (US$3 billion during 2009–2014)6 and China, which outspent the US with a net funding of US$2.25 billion (corrected for purchasing power parity) in nanotechnology in 20117.

Stagnant research quality. Despite the increase in funding from 2007 (the NSTI phase) to 2014 (the Nano Mission phase), the average impact factor of a nanoscience publication from India grew only from 2.69 to 2.95. In 2012, India was ranked sixteenth in the world in terms of the h-index of these publications (Fig. 3a). Only 16 of the nano-related publications from India featured in the top 1% cited papers in nanoscience and technology in 2011, leaving the country’s global ranking in this aspect essentially unchanged since the pre-Nano Mission era8 (Fig. 3b). This trend is reflected in technology transfer as well. In spite of the recent surge in the number of patents filed at the Indian Patent Office, India’s presence at the global platform is near negligible, with less than 0.2% share at the United States Patents and Trademark Office (Fig. 3c).

Insufficient human resources. Despite the positive public perception of nanoscience and technology, with several universities offering undergraduate degrees on this subject, nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India does not seem to offer substantial career prospects. Only 22 postdoctoral fellowships were granted by the Nano Mission over five years. In terms of the number of PhD students, there is tremendous scope for improvement compared with the current output of about 150 PhD students per year (in nanoscience and technology), which is a very small number compared with the target of producing 10,000 PhD students annually over the next decade articulated by the Ministry of Human Resource Development9.

Weak links with the private sector. Private industries have been largely indifferent to nanoscience and technology research and development (R&D). This is particularly evident if we consider that, for example, nearly 30% of R&D in the information technology industry is funded by the private sector10. There have been several demonstrations of the enormous potential impact of nanotechnology applications in the Indian market by academic institutions. For example, researchers

Figure 2 | Research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology. a, Number of nano-research-related publications from India and patents filed at the Indian Patent Office over the past decade (data from ref. 1 and P. Asthana, personal communication). b, Number of publications in ISI-approved nanoscale-related journals in 2013. Inset: India’s rank in nanoscale research output over the past decade3.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

China

USA

India

South Korea

Germany

Japan

Iran

France

England

Italy

a

b

Number of publications in 2013 (×1,000)

Year

Year

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

200

400

Publ

icat

ions

Glo

bal r

ank

Patents

13579

20052006

20072008

20092010 2011

20122013

© 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved

NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY | VOL 9 | JULY 2014 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 493

commentary

at the Indian Institute of Technology-Madras (IIT-Madras) have used a silver-based alumina–chitosan nanocomposite for arsenic decontamination of water11 (Fig. 4). In another instance, highly stable silver-nanoparticle-based antimicrobial finish (from IIT-Delhi and International Advanced Research Center in Hyderabad) and water-based self-cleaning nanofinish (from IIT-Delhi) technologies have already been passed on to local textile industries. In light of this potential, the reluctance of the industry to increase their investment in nanotech R&D is a matter of concern12.

Strategies to enable the next inflectionNanoscience and technology could potentially become a powerful medium for access, equity and inclusion for the heterogeneous population of India. This could be achieved through a multi-pronged approach.

Funding models. Although funding for nanotechnology needs to be increased to match global standards, it is equally critical to implement more creative funding models that could make the same funds go further13. The three (occasionally five) year funding models have been helpful in developing local infrastructure, but in addition to funding largely individualistic efforts, it is now essential to identify priority/strategic areas in nanoscience and technology, and allocate long-term sustained funding to develop a coherent research programme, with few but well-defined deliverables of both national and international relevance.

The Centers for Quantum Computation and Communication Technology, instituted by the Australian Research Council, are good examples of sustained funding models for directed nano research. The Wyss Institute at Harvard University represents a creative funding model that has yielded successful examples of new biological nanotechnologies over a comparatively short timescale14. The recently instituted Thematic Units of Excellence in India are interesting steps in this direction, but would need more focused mandates to achieve perceptible impact. Such units would benefit from more specific objectives of strong global relevance, and meticulous monitoring of progress.

Nationwide coherence and collaboration. It is imperative to nurture a culture of collaboration in the nanoscience and technology community in India. Even the Thematic Units that currently consist of multiple investigators are, by and large, collections of independent activities and still need to progress into regimes that are truly synergetic. This might be enabled in two ways: first, we must promote research initiatives around highly equipped centralized facility clusters that embody a wholesome interdisciplinary research ecosystem. In addition to direct governmental support to run these facilities, resources also need to be allocated to individual research projects to ensure well planned and productive usage of the infrastructure, equipment or computation time. Second, inter-institutional collaborative activities are almost

negligible, and the time is now ripe to build coherence in research endeavours between the best research institutions. Thematic Units involving multiple institutions and universities will not only allow an expanded resource of appropriate expertise and research specificity, but also foster a nationwide collaborative culture.

Administrative support. The academic R&D sector needs to actively minimize administrative red tape and bureaucracy to enable the efficient practice of nanoscience and technology in India15. There are two main issues in this context: in India, project sanction times are unacceptably long, ranging anywhere between 6 to 12 months, sometimes longer. In the context of intense global competition slow sanction times often makes the proposed research itself irrelevant, or at best, incremental when the projects are finally sanctioned. Second, the financial structure of the contractual workforce, such as postdoctoral researchers and skilled facility managers/technologists, could greatly benefit from a complete overhaul. We must acknowledge also, that it is absolutely critical to create a thriving postdoctoral culture16. Excellent postdocs would also form potentially high-quality faculty candidates for the expanding number of research institutions in India. Similarly, the development of new infrastructure throughout the country also demands dedicated human resources to run and maintain these facilities efficiently and continuously to maximize their usage and productivity. The design of attractive

Figure 3 | Indian nanoscience and nanotechnology in scientific literature. a, h-index of nanoscience-related publications1. b, Fraction of highly cited papers on nanoscience and technology from India8. c, Patent share at the United States Patents and Trademark Office1.

India (0.2%)

Japan

South Korea

Germany

Taiwan

USA

France China

The Netherlands Others

0 10 15 20 25 30 35h-index (2012)

(Rank 16)

Year Top 1% cited papers (Rank) Top 10% cited papers (Rank)

2005 6 (14) 41 (15)

2009 26 (13) 168 (9)

2011 16 (14) 317 (9)

a

b

c

India

...

Spain

Japan

South Korea

Singapore

UK

Germany

China

USA

© 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved

494 NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY | VOL 9 | JULY 2014 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

commentary

and prestigious ‘packages’ to draw highly skilled and motivated personnel both from within and outside India could prove truly transformative to nano research in India. An interesting example of such a programme are the DBT (Department of BioTechnology)–Wellcome Trust India Alliance Early Career Fellowships that have managed to attract and retain excellent postdoctoral researchers in India. These are, however, a very small number.

Nanomanufacture and prototyping. Although significant emphasis on the synthesis and characterization of nanomaterials has been evident over the past decade (Fig. 1b), translating research to nanodevices and commercializable prototypes needs immediate attention. Only one out of ten Thematic Units is dedicated to nanodevice technology. Centers for Nano-Electronics, such as those in Bangalore and Mumbai, are now developing nanodevice-based sensing and monitoring methods for health, energy and environment applications, but the number of such centres is far below critical. Expanding the existing nanofabrication centres and creating newer ones, will allow prototyping at the laboratory level, which, in turn, will facilitate indigenous manufacturing capabilities to be developed.

Global networking. Greater emphasis on international networking is another core element to develop and sustain a healthy perspective of Indian science. Funding of research projects needs to include provision for international travel, as appropriate, which would enable participation in international conferences to enhance the visibility of Indian nanoscale research on a global platform. Mechanisms that allow scientists to choose their collaborators at their own discretion through direct interaction would prove beneficial. Concrete efforts to engage a global nanoscience and

technology workforce spanning every level, both of Indian and non-Indian origin could prove game-changing. This could be achieved by creating dedicated nanoscience and technology fellowships for overseas visitors, in the spirit of the recently instituted Jawaharlal Nehru Science Fellowships by the Department of Science and Technology.

Industry engagement. New initiatives to expand the domain of nanotechnology in industry beyond bulk synthesis of nanomaterials would be important. Owing to the shortage of both prototyping machinery as well as a knowledgeable workforce there is very little understanding of ‘prior art’ and the nature of nanotech development. The problem is compounded by weak intellectual property safeguarding policies. Further, regulatory structures for nano research, such as waste management and ethics are virtually non-existent. A central guideline on these issues, which is transparent and fair, is required for new nano-based industrialization to occur17. Entrepreneurial activities need explicit support, both as part of the basic curriculum for students, as well as in dedicated funding opportunities for academia–industry links2.

The years aheadIndia needs to complement its service-based economy with indigenous manufacturing capability. Nanotechnology offers an opportunity for India to assume global leadership in new-age electronics to biomedical technologies. Phase II of the Nano Mission has now been approved and extended until 2017 with a new and ambitious agenda. Initiatives towards a National Regulatory Framework Roadmap for Nanotechnology have been recently started. While the international community fiercely debates the future of nanotechnology and the scale of its impact on human life and society, the nanoscience and technology

scenario in India dons a completely different relevance. With growing public awareness, India could exploit nanotechnology as a versatile hub to educate and create new infrastructure. This will not only inject highly skilled human resources needed for the knowledge-based economy of the future, but will also prepare India for the global nanotech revolution — if and when it occurs. ❐

Arindam Ghosh is in the Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore 560012, India. Yamuna Krishnan is at the National Centre for Biological Sciences, TIFR, GKVK, Bellary Road, Bangalore 560065, India. e-mail: arindam@physics.iisc.ernet.in; yamuna@ncbs.res.in

References1. http://statnano.com/2. http://nanomission.gov.in/3. Patel, V. Nanotech Insights 4, 37–40 (2013).4. http://www.nano.gov5. http://nis.apctt.org6. http://www.fondation-nanosciences.fr7. http://www.cientifica.com/8. Bhattacharya, S. et al. CSIR-NISTADS Policy Brief: Nanotechnology

Research and Innovation in India: Drawing Insights from Bibliometric and Innovation Indicators (11 July 2012); available via http://go.nature.com/QUpbxt

9. Avadhani, R. Kakodkar Committee fixes target of 10,000 Ph.D. scholars a year. The Hindu (16 March 2013).

10. Krishna, V. V. Paralysis in science policies. The Hindu (7 February 2014).

11. Sankar, M. U. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 8459–8464 (2013).

12. Purushotham, H. Tech Monitor 23–33 (October–December, 2012).13. Desiraju, G. R. Nature 484, 159–160 (2012).14. http://wyss.harvard.edu/15. Joseph, M. & Robinson, A. Nature 508, 36–38 (2014).16. Desiraju, G. R. & Ghosh, A. Nature India

http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nindia.2010.73 (2010).17. The Energy and Resources Institute Nanotechnology Development

in India: The Need for Building Capability and Governing the Technology (2010): http://www.teriin.org/div/ST_BriefingPap.pdf

AcknowledgementsWe thank P. Asthana, Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, S. V. Joshi, International Advanced research Centre for Powder Metallurgy & New Materials (International Advanced Research Center), and T. Pradeep, Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, for their valuable input during the preparation of this article.

Figure 4 | Promising example of commercialized nanotechnology. a, A silver nanocomposite, Ag-BM, used for metal decontamination of water, formed from silver nanoparticles (yellow spheres) embedded in a matrix of alumina (brown rods) templated on chitosan fibrils (ochre filaments). b, A resulting product for arsenic and metal decontamination of water named AMRIT, undergoing installation in the arsenic- and iron-affected regions of the Murshidabad District, West Bengal (inset), and currently serving 30,000 people. The technology has resulted in the incubation of the Indian Institute of Technology Chennai-based company InnoNano Research. Panel a adapted with permission from ref. 11, © 2013 NAS. Inset, © Daniel Kaesler/Alamy.

a b

© 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved