Environment

FSI scholars approach their research on the environment from regulatory, economic and societal angles. The Center on Food Security and the Environment weighs the connection between climate change and agriculture; the impact of biofuel expansion on land and food supply; how to increase crop yields without expanding agricultural lands; and the trends in aquaculture. FSE’s research spans the globe – from the potential of smallholder irrigation to reduce hunger and improve development in sub-Saharan Africa to the devastation of drought on Iowa farms. David Lobell, a senior fellow at FSI and a recipient of a MacArthur “genius” grant, has looked at the impacts of increasing wheat and corn crops in Africa, South Asia, Mexico and the United States; and has studied the effects of extreme heat on the world’s staple crops.

-

Bennett Freeman is a managing director in the Washington, DC office of Burson-Marsteller, where he leads the firm's Global Corporate Responsibility practice advising multinational corporations on issues ranging from human rights and labor practices to the environment and sustainable development. Prior to joining Burson-Marsteller in May 2003, Freeman advised companies, international institutions and NGOs on corporate responsibility and human rights as Principal of Sustainable Investment Strategies. In 2002, he co-authored an independent Human Rights Impact Assessment of the BP Tangguh project in Papua, Indonesia, the first such assessment undertaken in advance of a major energy project in the world.

Freeman served as a presidential appointee in three positions in the State Department across the full span of the Clinton Administration. As U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor from 1999 to early 2001, Freeman led the State Department's bilateral human rights diplomacy around the world under Assistant Secretary Harold Koh. In that capacity, he was the principal architect of the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, the first human rights standard forged by governments, companies and NGOs for the oil and mining industries. Previously he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs and chief speechwriter for Secretary of State Warren Christopher from early 1993 to early 1997.

A buffet lunch will be available to those who reserve with Debbie Warren dawarren@stanford.edu by Friday, November 12.

Oksenberg Conference Room

Bennett Freeman former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
Lectures
Authors
Ronald I. McKinnon
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Are federal fiscal deficits accelerating deindustrialisation in the United States? APARC's Ronald McKinnon considers the problem.

Are federal fiscal deficits accelerating deindustrialisation in the United States? For four decades, employment in U.S. manufacturing as a share of the labour force has fallen further and faster than in other industrial countries. In the mid-1960s, manufacturing output was 27 per cent of gross national product and manufacturing's share of employment was 24 percent. By 2003, these numbers had fallen to about 13.8 percent and 10.5 percent respectively. Employment in manufacturing remains weak, with an absolute decline of 18,000 jobs in September shown in the Labor Department's payroll survey.

At the same time, the orgy of tax-cutting, with big revenue losses, continues unabated. On October 6, House and Senate negotiators approved an expansive tax bill that showers businesses and farmers with about $145bn in rate cuts and new loopholes -- on top of what were already unprecedented fiscal deficits. These are principally financed by foreign central banks, which hold more than half the outstanding stock of US Treasury bonds. Moreover, meagre saving by American households is forcing US companies also to borrow heavily abroad.

The upshot is a current account deficit of more than $600 billion a year. America's cumulative net foreign indebtedness is about 30 percent of gross domestic product and rising fast. How will this affect manufacturing? The transfer of foreign savings to the US is embodied more in goods than in services. Outsourcing to India aside, most services are not so easily traded internationally. Thus when U.S. spending rises above output (income), the net absorption of foreign goods -- largely raw materials and manufactures -- increases. True, in this year and last the high price of oil has also boosted the current account deficit. However, since the early 1980s, the trade deficit in manufactures alone has been about as big as the current account deficit -- that is, as big as America's saving shortfall (for more detail, see http://siepr.stanford.edu).

If U.S. households' and companies' spending on manufactures is more or less independent of whether the goods are produced at home or abroad, domestic production shrinks by the amount of the trade deficit in manufactures. The consequent job loss depends on labor productivity in manufacturing, which rises strongly through time. If the trade deficit in manufactures is added back to domestic production to get "adjusted manufactured output", and labor productivity (output per person) in manufacturing stays constant, we get projected manufacturing employment. In 2003, actual manufacturing employment was just 10.5 percent of the US labor force, but it would have been 13.9 percent without a trade deficit in manufactures: the difference is 4.7m lost jobs.

In the 1980s, employment in manufacturing began to shrink substantially because of the then large current account deficit attributed to the then large fiscal deficit: Ronald Reagan's infamous twin deficits. With fiscal consolidation under Bill Clinton, the savings gap narrowed but was not closed because personal saving weakened. Now under George W. Bush, the fiscal deficit has exploded while private saving is still weak. The result is heavy borrowing from foreigners and all-time highs in the current account deficit. The main component remains the trade deficit in manufactures, intensifying the shrinkage in manufacturing jobs.

Is there cause for concern? Note that I do not suggest that the trend in overall employment has decreased, but only that its composition has tilted away from tradable goods -- largely manufactures. In the long run, growth in service employment will largely offset the decline in manufacturing. However, the rate of technical change in manufacturing is higher than in other sectors. It is hard to imagine the US sustaining its technological leadership with no manufacturing sector at all.

More uncomfortably, more Congressmen, pundits and voters feel justified in claiming that foreigners use unfair trade practices to steal U.S. jobs, particularly in manufacturing, and hence in urging protectionism. The irony is that, if imports were somehow greatly reduced, this would prevent the transfer of foreign saving to the United States and lead to a credit crunch, with a possibly even greater loss of US jobs.

The answer is not tariffs, exchange rate changes or subsidies to manufacturing that further increase the fiscal deficit. The proper way of reducing protectionist pressure and relieving anxiety about U.S. manufacturing is for the government to consolidate its finances and move deliberately towards running surpluses -- in short, to eliminate the U.S. economy's saving deficiency.

All News button
1

Wednesday, January 14

Welcoming Remarks

2:00 Michael Armacost, Shorenstein APARC

Security Dimension of the Alliances

2:10-4:00

Chair: Daniel Okimoto, Senior Fellow, SIIS and Shorenstein APARC

The Changes in the US's Strategic Doctrine

Kurt Campbell, Senior Vice President & Director, International Security Program, Center for Security and International Studies

What key elements of change in American strategic doctrine have been introduced by the Bush Administration? What implications do they have for US alliances in Northeast Asia?

The China Dimension

Michael Lampton, Director, China Studies Program, Johns Hopkins University

What implications would improved Sino-US relations have on America's alliances in Asia?

Jing Huang, Associate Professor of Political Science, Utah State University

How have Chinese attitudes and policies toward America's Northeast Asian alliances changed over the past five years or so? What accounts for those changes? What implications have they for the future of these alliances?

Discussant: William Perry, Michael and Barbara Berberian Professor, School of Engineering, Stanford University and the 19th Secretary of Defense for the United States

4:30-6:00 The Future of America's Alliances in Northeast Asia

Admiral Thomas Fargo, Commander, US Pacific Command

Keynote and Public Address

Introduction to be made by William Perry

Bechtel Conference Center, Encina Hall, first floor

Thursday, January 15

Changing View of the Regional Security Environment and the Alliances

8:00-10:15

Chair: Michael Armacost, Shorenstein APARC

The Japanese Government's Views on the Alliance

Kuriyama Takakazu, Ambassador, retired

How have the views of the Japanese government changed in recent years with respect to the regional security environment and the mission and strategic focus of the US-Japan alliance? How have they changed with respect to the security responsibilities? Should Japan be prepared to shoulder on these responsibilities on its own outside the contours of the alliance?

The View of the Republic of Korea's Government of the Alliance

Kim Won-soo, Visiting Scholar, Shorenstein APARC & former Secretary to the President of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Office of the President, Republic of Korea

How have South Korean government perception and policies changed in recent years vis-à-vis the regional security environment and the mission and strategic focus of the US-ROK alliance? How have they changed with respect to the security responsibilities that South Korea is expected to shoulder on its own, outside the contours of the alliance?

The US Government's Views on the US-Japan Alliance

Rust Deming, Distinguished Visiting Fellow, National Defense University & Ambassador, retired

How have American government perceptions and policies changed in recent years vis-à-vis the mission and strategic focus of the US-Japan alliance?

The US Government's View on the U.S.-Republic of Korea Alliance

Victor Cha, D.S. Song Associate Professor of Government and Asian Studies, Georgetown University

How have American government perceptions and policies changed in recent years vis-à-vis the mission and strategic focus of the US-Japan alliance?

Discussant: Christopher LaFleur, Cyrus Vance Fellow in Diplomatic Studies, Council on Foreign Relations

The Changing Domestic Politics of the Alliance

10:30-12:15

Chair: Gi-Wook Shin, Director, Korean Studies Program, Shorenstein APARC

Japanese Domestic Views of the Alliance

Nakanishi Hiroshi, Professor, Graduate School of Law, Kyoto University

Since the mid-1990s, what noteworthy changes have surfaced in domestic support or opposition to the US-Japan alliance? What changes in support or opposition to the bilateral cooperation on security issues in Asia and elsewhere?

The Changes in South Korean Domestic Views of the Alliance

Lee Chung-min, Professor, Graduate School of International Studies, Yonsei University

How have domestic political dynamics and public attitudes toward the US-ROK alliance and bilateral cooperation on security issues changed in recent years? What accounts for those changes? What implications do they have for US alliances in Northeast Asia?

American Domestic Views of the US-Republic of Korea Alliance

Donald Gregg, President, The Korea Society

How have American public attitudes (as reflected in public opinion polls, press reporting, and Congressional actions) evolved toward the US-ROK alliance and bilateral defense cooperation in recent years? What accounts for these changes? What are their implications for the future of the alliance?

Discussant: Daniel Okimoto, Senior Fellow, SIIS and Shorenstein APARC

Adjustments in the Operational Arrangement for Defense Cooperation

1:30-3:45

Chair & Discussant: Henry Rowen, Senior Fellow Emeritus, SIIS and Shorenstein APARC

Japanese Adjustments in US-Japan Defense Cooperation

Yamaguchi Noboru, Major General, Japan Ground Self Defense Force

What adjustments have occurred in recent years in the operational arrangements underpinning US-Japan defense cooperation? What further changes would the Japanese Government like to promote?

US-Japan Defense Cooperation

Ralph Cossa, President, Pacific Forum, Center for Strategic and International Studies

What adjustments have occurred in recent years in the operational arrangements underpinning US-Japan defense cooperation? What additional changes is the Bush Administration likely to promote?

US-Republic of Korea Defense Cooperation

William Drennan, Deputy Director, United States Institute of Peace

What adjustments have occurred in recent years in the operational arrangements underpinning US-Japan defense cooperation? What additional changes is the Bush Administration likely to promote?

US-Republic of Korea Defense Cooperation

Kim Jae chang, General, Joint Korea-US Command, (retired) and Co-Chairman, Council on ROK-US Security Studies

What adjustments have occurred in recent years in the operational arrangements underpinning US-ROK defense cooperation? What further changes would the Republic of Korea like to promote?

Where Do We Go From Here? Conclusions

4:00-5:00

Michael Armacost, Shorenstein Distinguished Fellow & Ambassador, retired

Daniel Okimoto, Senior Fellow, SIIS and Shorenstein APARC

Henry Rowen, Senior Fellow Emeritus, SIIS and Shorenstein APARC

Robert Scalapino, Robson Research Professor of Government, Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley

Oksenberg Conference Room

Conferences
Paragraphs

As seen in the previous sections, China's reformers, more than anything, have followed a
strategy based on providing incentives through property rights reforms, even though in China the shift to private ownership is today far from complete. The reforms started with the Household Responsibility System (HRS), a policy of radical decollectivization that allowed farmers to keep the residual output of their farms after paying their agricultural taxes and completing their mandatory delivery quotas. Farmers also began to exercise control over much of the production process (although in the initial years, the local state shared some control rights and in some places still do today). In this way the first reforms in the agricultural sector reshuffled property rights in an attempt to increase work incentives and exploit the specific knowledge of individuals about the production process (Perkins, 1994). In executing the property rights reforms, leaders also fundamentally restructured farms in China. Within a few years, for example, reformers completely broke up the larger collective farms into small household farms. In China today there are more than 200 million farms, the legacy of an HRS policy that gave the primary responsibilities for farming to the individual household. McMillan, Whalley and Zhu (1989), Fan (1991), Lin (1992) and Huang and Rozelle (1996) have all documented the strong, positive impact that property rights reforms had on output and productivity. 

In addition to property rights reform and transforming incentives, the other major
task of reformers is to create more efficient institutions of exchange. Markets-whether
classic competitive ones or some workable substitute-increase efficiency by facilitating
transactions among agents to allow specialization and trade and by providing information
through a pricing mechanism to producers and consumers about the relative scarcity of
resources. But markets, in order to function efficiently, require supporting institutions to
ensure competition, define and enforce property rights and contracts, ensure access to
credit and finance and provide information (John McMillan, 1997; World Bank 2002).
These institutions were either absent in the Communist countries or, if they existed, were
inappropriate for a market system. Somewhat surprisingly, despite their importance in
the reform process there is much less work on the success that China has had in building
markets and the effect that the markets has had on the economy.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Food and Agricultural Organization
Authors
Scott Rozelle
Paragraphs

Excerpt:

Q (T L Sankar): Why do utilities charge different rates to different consumers?

A (Rafiq Dossani): Firstly, the cost-to-serve for each category of consumer varies depending on several factors. There are technical reasons such as power factor, voltage of supply and so on which are set out in the Electricity Supply Act, 1948. There are also commercial reasons. In some situations, the total quantity of power available could not be sold, unless some categories of consumers we are charged a lower tariff. There are also considerations of equity or the need to meet the merit wants of the poorer population, which prompted differential pricing.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
IIMB Management Review
Authors
Rafiq Dossani
-

Daniel Scheinman is the senior vice president of Corporate Development at Cisco Systems. He is responsible for business development, strategic alliances, strategic technology policy, and corporate public relations. As head of corporate development, his role has grown to include responsibility for mergers and acquisitions, strategy, major partnerships and alliances, and advanced Internet projects. Dan, who joined Cisco in 1992, was a founder of the company's legal and government affairs departments. Dan is responsible for leading the company's acquisition and strategic partnership strategies. Cisco's acquisition strategy is among the most acclaimed in the industry and has resulted in the company's successful entry into several new arenas. Over the past ten years with Cisco, Dan has worked with organizations around the world to help redefine the way public and private sectors work together. He has helped facilitate an ongoing dialogue between government and private sector leaders about the Internet economy. A thought leader in the use of media within the corporate environment, Dan pioneered a Web-based multimedia news room called News@Cisco. In addition to his responsibilities at Cisco, Dan is a founding member of TechNet. TechNet's mission is to build bipartisan support for policies that strengthen America's leadership of the New Economy. The National Law Journal has named him one of the 100 most influential lawyers in the United States, and he is on the board of visitors at Duke University Law School. Dan holds a Juris Doctorate degree from Duke University Law School and a political science degree from Brandeis University.

Philippines Conference Room, Encina Hall

Dan Scheinman Senior VP, Corporate Development Cisco Systems
Seminars
Authors
Michael H. Armacost
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael H. Armacost observes that economic and political ties are now displacing a deep-seated and longstanding rivalry between China and Japan.

China's government has sentenced two of its citizens to life in prison for their role in securing prostitutes for hundreds of male Japanese visitors in the southern city of Zhuhai last autumn. The Chinese government is also pressuring Tokyo to turn over the Japanese businessmen who allegedly requested the prostitutes. This story made headlines around the world, and fits well with how the world press typically covers Sino-Japanese relations. Regrettably, such incidents recur with enough regularity to feed the media machine that continues to stir a nationalism rooted in conflicting historical memories. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's annual visits to the Yasukuni Shrine -- which is widely viewed as a symbol of Japan's former militarism -- is a conspicuous example of this. The publicity that the press gives to these visits has helped impede an invitation to Koizumi from China's leaders for a state visit. Recently, the discovery of mustard gas canisters left behind by Japanese forces during World War II has also served to keep memories of the Imperial Japanese Army's wartime conduct alive among older Chinese. Moreover, rival Sino-Japanese claims to the Senkaku (or Diao Yutai) Islands resurfaced last year when the Japanese government leased three islets in the chain from private parties. The action, purportedly undertaken to reduce the prospect of landings and demonstrations by Japanese right-wingers, set off a brief, though frenzied, reaction in China, as well as in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Meanwhile, differences over Taiwan also foster tensions periodically, such as when former Taiwanese President Lee Teng-hui sought to visit Japan for medical treatment. But this is not the whole story. Although such incidents reveal a troubling level of mistrust between the Chinese and Japanese that is not merely a product of media coverage, it is noteworthy that both governments have worked consistently, diligently, and with considerable success to resolve such problems and contain their political fallout. Of course, official relations between the two countries are marked by much political and economic competition -- some of it healthy, some of it a possible harbinger of future strategic rivalry. The competitive strain in Sino-Japanese relations is especially visible in energy politics. Demand for oil in Asia is growing rapidly, and with China and Japan increasingly dependent upon imports, each has naturally sought to improve its energy security by diversifying sources of supply. Both countries covet access to Russian reserves, especially those located in the Angarsk fields of Siberia. Last spring, China appeared to have locked up a Russian commitment to build a pipeline to service the China market at Daqing. Japan, however, raised the ante with new offers of financial incentives. Its bid for an alternative pipeline to Nakhodka to serve Japanese, Korean and other markets remains alive, creating another point of competitive friction. In their rivalry for leadership in promoting Asian regional cooperation, meanwhile, China has taken an early lead. Nearly two years ago, China trumped Japan by offering a Free Trade Agreement to the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, while front-loading its own tariff concessions. But this backdrop of contention and competition masks emerging collaborative aspects of Sino-Japanese relations that are profoundly important. For example, trade and investment flows continue to expand rapidly. Bilateral trade topped $100 billion in 2003, as Japan's exports to China increased by more than 10 percent, fueled by semiconductors, electrical equipment and automobiles. Meanwhile, China replaced the United States as Japan's biggest source of imports, and is now one of the few non-members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries with which Japan runs a trade deficit. Similarly, direct investment by Japanese firms is increasing as they relocate production facilities to China to capitalize on lower labor costs and high-quality engineering talent. Of course, there is no assurance that today's expanded commerce will preclude eventual strategic rivalry, or succeed in erasing lingering wartime animosity. But both countries now place a premium on extending their economic interdependence. Ultimately, the historical wounds that have long divided China and Japan, and the more current diplomatic flash points that the global media inevitably trumpet, tell only part of the Sino-Japanese story. There are economic and geopolitical rivalries between China and Japan that dwarf in importance the high-profile insults to national pride that make headlines. But there are also compelling economic and political inducements toward cooperation that prevent these rivalries from developing into full-blown crises.

All News button
1
-

India?s national elections for its 14th parliament must take place by October 2004, and will probably happen by April. They will be held in the context of a new environment for the country: recognition of its nuclear capability, a new global order post 9/11, and its rising economic power. Yet many parts of the country still have very low levels of social development. Social divisiveness also continues to threaten civic stability. In the context of these opportunities and challenges, this seminar will discuss the electoral strategies of the main political parties and likely outcomes. Professor Pradeep Chhibber studies party systems, party aggregation, and the politics of India. His research examines the relationship between social divisions and party competition and the conditions that lead to the emergence of national or regional parties in a nation-state. Professor Chhibber received an M.A. and an M.Phil. from the University of Delhi and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles. He is currently the Indo-American Community Chair in India Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. Tea and samosas will be served.

Philippines Conference Room

Pradeep Chhibber Associate Professor of Political Science University of California, Berkeley
Seminars
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
APARC's Rafiq Dossani comments on offshoring U.S. jobs to India, the so-called "reverse brain drain."

Silicon Valley cannot be replicated-not even in the US, leave alone India.

But there is no underestimating the complex and high end nature of information technology work that's increasingly being done in India.

There is almost nothing that is not doable, except certain high investment, high value manufacturing, like microprocessors.

This year stands out for the speed with which India, still very much a poverty ridden developing country, has emerged as a partner of mature econom-ies in a wide ranging field that covers information technology, business processes and research and development.

Unsurprisingly, such a major development has been accompanied by drama, excitement, anguish and misunderstanding. The rapid acceleration in trends, which in some cases date back to over 10 years, has given little time to players on both sides to rationally assess and adjust to new realities.

Some don't seem to know what has hit them and have therefore gone on to make unrealistic assumptions.

In the west, particularly in the US, there is a backlash against outsourcing to countries like India, China, the Philippines and Russia, with India being the most visible and so taking most of the rap.

Correspondingly, there is an element of euphoria in India in the belief that it has arrived. Some are making unrealistic assumptions that it is on the way to becoming a new Silicon Valley to the world.

Significantly, the knowledgeable and those who are in the vortex of change have a realistic view of what exists on the ground and an enlightened foresight of the shape of things to come.

In this survey of opinion leaders in the information technology industry, we try to come to grips with the new, rapidly emerging reality what is the exact nature of the high tech work taking place in India in information technology and what are the precise contours of the emerging cross border partnerships?

First, the Silicon Valley red herring. Sridhar Mitta, managing director of the incubating firm e4e Labs, almost snorts at the mention of Silicon Valley.

He recalls how the good professors at Stanford University started to get too many visitors who came and asked the same questions what makes Silicon Valley tick and can we replicate it in our country?

They undertook a methodical study for a couple of years and helped define the uniqueness of the creative process that occurs in a small geography 30 miles by 10 miles, near the Californian city of San Francisco.

To Mitta, the Valley's defining characteristic is that some of the best brains in the world are concentrated in a small geography. "It is an innovative high tech cluster. There is an ecosystem of companies which add value to each other."

In Silicon Valley people are willing to share ideas and are not worried about theft. Business discussions are concluded very fast as people want to get on with a project. A project can be started in a week.

There is no concern over individual ideas being stolen as it is assumed that if you are bright you will have many more worthwhile ideas. In the Valley, people don't care about religion, creed or nationality. "There is only one religion, business," Mitta says.

Another industry insider concurs. "Silicon Valley is not a service, but a risk taking model, whereas the Indian software model is largely based on cost effective and efficient delivery of services," he differentiates.

Many of tomorrow's problems are first defined in US universities and then get crystalised as business opportunities. "Firms in the Valley work closely with those universities to quickly grasp the business ideas that emerge from diagnosing and solving a technical problem, for example."

Where does Indian expertise and capability stand then? "The Indian environment still lacks the original ideas that create the new business models. This is because of the lack of proximity to markets," the industry insider explains.

"Once an engineering problem is defined, it can be executed in India." The key and growing Indian competency now is that it has crossed the technical hurdle, there is little that cannot be technically done in India.

If Silicon Valley scores 100 for the purpose of our present discussion, Mitta gives Bangalore 15.

"Bangalore has passed criticality in technical prowess but is still abysmally low in interaction. The culture of networking is better in Bangalore than in the rest of India but nowhere near what exists in the Valley. Here a major part of the load is carried by multinationals which guard their secrets very jealously," Mitta says.

Bangalore also scores on its educational institutions which can deliver the raw materials or skills. Like the Valley, it has some of the best brains, relatively speaking, and some companies have reached criticality of size. Some complex work gets done here in a serial way within companies.

"I know that a US company can start a complex work group here which involves doing many things, though not all. But I don't know what the company on the floor above mine is doing," notes Mitta.

Subroto Bagchi, COO of MindTree Consulting, who is based in the US, explains that in the 1990s people thought that any work that required a high degree of customer knowledge and collaboration, design and architecting had to be done exclusively in the US.

"Anything that required innovation had to be done near the water cooler. So now there is hardware, software and wetware the coffee machine and what's between your two ears, as most of the human brain is water."

But the big change has come with the availability of high bandwidth which has made the water cooler virtual.

"If earlier we looked at India for just development or maintenance work, now we are able to look at co-development and co-architecting," Bagchi notes.

Till two human beings meet, trust is not established. Innovation-related activity, co-development and co-architecting are not done by two entities but by two human beings.

Two techies have to accept each other as "buddies" before they can innovate together. "That happened after Y2K. It established the cross cultural comfort. In a nutshell, India has become legitimate," Bagchi adds.

Higher value add projects are now coming to India and company boards across the world are increasingly being asked, 'What is your India strategy?' Investors in venture capital funds are asking them, 'What are your plans for India,' and they in turn are asking companies 'What are your India development plans?'

The software insider says India's current role is to "complement" not "replace" Silicon Valley. "If present trends continue, maybe India can equal Silicon Valley in seven to 10 years. But the approach cannot be 'We versus they.'"

Another authority adds his support to this scenario, making a deft distinction between what is on and not on.

Says Madhukar Angur, David M French distinguished professor at the Flint School of Management, University of Michigan: "Today almost nothing is too high-tech for India. In technology (IT, designing, R&D) India has taken significant strides. It is pretty close to self-sustaining growth. But it is not quite there. So MNCs will look at India as a location for startups but not standalone ones."

So they will also seek out partners, as Intel has done with startups like Tejas Networks.

The cooperation and joint development approach is underlined by K P Balaraj, managing director of WestBridge Capital Partners.

He feels that "the vast majority of the work being done by start-ups in India is led by teams located in the Valley. What is changing though is the timing of an India ODC (overseas development centre) which is being set up much earlier in the life cycle or even at the seed stage."

What is more significant is that as multinationals which follow the example of early leaders such as GE, TI, Intel, Oracle and others start to do more cutting edge work here, there will be a large base of India-based engineers and managers who will have the experience of building and bringing a world-class product to global markets, primarily the US.

"From this base, we will see a future generation of product entrepreneurs emerge who will have the vision and market credibility to attract high quality VC funding for their plans," Balaraj adds.

Innovation means developing new technology or products. Product development in India is already taking place but as a secondary exercise.

Sanjay Kalra, CEO of the HCL-Deutsche Bank joint venture DSL Software, explains the sequence of what came first and then what followed. At any point of time more than 70 percent of spending takes place on sustaining investments in existing technologies.

This, like work on new technologies, also requires high end work that is innovative. But a majority of the effort is in tasks that are process and procedure bound.

In such tasks, innovation is focused on how to deliver the subcontracted tasks better (process improvement, quality).

High end startups are now beginning to allocate and locate a high percentage of employees (or contractors) in India.

In the past it was the large technology players that leveraged the lower costs and high availability of talent. The smaller startups would contract to small and large players on a need basis.

But of late a lot of smaller startups are also beginning to factor in India as an integral part of their business plans right from the beginning.

What is more, several start-ups are now using India as the base to also conceptualise and then produce in India for markets in Asia.

The good news on products is that Intel is in India in a big way and is going in for the joint effort startups that hold the key to the future. Intel's own agenda, says Ketan Sampat, president of Intel India, is to establish leading edge design capability.

Says Sampat: "At Intel's development centre (its largest non-manufacturing site outside the US), we are engaged in some of the most advanced development activities not just in India but anywhere in the world. For example, the flagship next-generation enterprise processor that Intel will have in volume production is being designed entirely in Bangalore."

But he sees an important milestone that has to be crossed Indian firms still have not broken into the ranks of product companies with their own intellectual property and branded product lines.

"The i-flex's of the world are still too few and far between," Sampat says. So Intel Capital, the company's strategic investment programme, has been an investor in several Indian technology companies. Sampat mentions the investment in Sasken Technologies.

"Its product GSM/ GPRS software stacks complements our "Manitoba" (wireless Internet on a chip) product and it has customers worldwide."

He also mentions another telecom company, Tejas Networks. "It is starting with the Indian market which is sizeable now and is using it as a springboard to the global market."

Sanjay Nayak, CEO, Tejas Networks, sees only the beginnings of high end startups in India, like his company. "It will take some time before we see a major shift in startups originating in India, though the enablers are all there."

The most common trend is to have an "engineering backend" in India of a US originating startup. Within this, the major amount of work that is being done is "software" centric not much system design or hardware design work is done.

He expects that "once we have a few success stories of high-end product companies from India, it will accelerate the trend." In the past, countries like Israel and Taiwan have witnessed such trends.

Srini Rajam, chairman and CEO of Ittiam, another startup product company, sees high end start ups becoming increasingly dependent on designs done in India.

"There is a strong push coming from the investors of the start ups to locate a large part of their design team in India or source their key designs/IP from Indian companies, in order to improve R&D budget utilisation and time-to-market."

He sees early revival worldwide in one segment-the semiconductor and embedded systems. "This is in turn is enabling the growth of chip design, embedded software and system design activities in India."

Several factors are likely to encourage more high end work to come to India and help it become an increasingly important partner of Silicon Valley.

First, the reverse brain drain or brain gain that has been taking place in the last few years, especially since the tech bubble burst in early 2000 and the recession that set in in Silicon Valley.

One person who has been plotting it carefully is Rafiq Dossani, a senior research scholar at the Asia-Pacific Research Centre of Stanford University.

"My guess is that 6,000 jobs have been lost from Silicon Valley in IT to India. Looking ahead, the flow will depend on both opportunities in India and here."

The Silicon Valley economy is picking up rapidly and hiring should soon increase, feels Dossani. In addition, it remains unbeatable on new product development because of its global reach of talent and proximity to markets.

So the younger and more innovative will be attracted to the Valley. India will continue to attract those in the 30-40 age group interested in raising families in India and those interested in a rapid rise up the executive ladder through a stint at a senior level in India.

Also, a key security factor is enabling high end work to shift to India, argues Angur. India will be a country of choice for location of partnerships on considerations of economic stability.

"Multinationals gamble on technology but are cautious on geography. Even China and Taiwan have a security downside. India-Pakistan relations is indeed perceived as a security risk but still India is on the preferred US list."

He sees a significant historical parallel. Technology and IT will be to India what the automobiles industry was to the US.

"One out of every three in the US has something to do with automobiles. The IT revolution has the seeds of becoming something like that. In the immediate future mutlinationals will consider India more and more for high-tech startups and there will be more high tech jobs."

Bagchi shares a deeper insight rooted in Indian history and social development. India, he feels, has two cards up her sleeve: "One is the power of diversity and two the power of pluralism, imparted to it by its institutions."

The future of the global economy is in more trade but post 9/11, the west is also looking for a sense of comfort a degree of security and cultural fit.

How many countries are there with world class capability in IT services from which an American company can source? Out of the choices available, how many countries are both diverse, so that there is a democratic-cultural fit, and believe in institutional pluralism - executive, judiciary, legislative system? "These institutions give a guarantee of continuity," he says.

To become an innovation partner to Silicon Valley, an economy must innovate. Innovation is invariably linked to diversity. The US has been at the cutting edge of technologies because it has such a pro-immigration policy.

"We did IT services for 15 years and moved up the value chain. But the next big value chain is about innovation. That innovation depends on the fertility condition on the ground. That condition is necessarily about diversity," Bagchi adds.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Environment