Critically evaluate the objectives and implementation status of the India Semiconductor Mission.

Approved by the Union Cabinet in December 2021 with an outlay of ₹76,000 crore, the Semicon India Programme, steered by the India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) under MeitY, seeks to end India's near-total import dependence in chips [1]. Nearly five years on, it has secured substantial investment, but the ecosystem it has built remains tilted towards the lower end of the value chain.

Objectives

• Build a full-spectrum ecosystem — silicon fabs, display fabs, compound semiconductors, assembly-testing-packaging and chip design — with fiscal support of up to 50% of project cost [1].
• Nurture domestic design capability through the Design Linked Incentive (DLI) Scheme for start-ups and MSMEs [1].
• Establish ISM as a specialised, industry-expert-led nodal agency for seamless scheme implementation [2].
• Strategic aim of supply-chain resilience as global chip manufacturing diversifies away from a few concentrated geographies [2].

Implementation: achievements

• 12 projects approved, cumulative investment of about ₹1.64 lakh crore across six states [3].
• Portfolio spans a silicon fab, a silicon carbide fab, an integrated GaN micro-LED display fab and nine packaging units serving automotive, telecom, power and aerospace electronics [3].
• ISM 2.0, announced in Budget 2026-27 with ₹1,000 crore for FY 2026-27, extends the mission to equipment, materials, full-stack Indian IP and skilling [4].
• Spillover demand is visible in ancillary sectors — ultrapure water treatment, specialty gases and chemicals — clustering around fab locations.

Implementation: limitations

• Nine of twelve approvals are packaging/ATMP, the lowest value-added segment; leading-edge logic fabrication is still absent [3].
• Core technology is largely licensed from foreign partners, a gap ISM 2.0 itself now seeks to close through indigenous IP [4].
• Execution and skilled-manpower shortages, not demand, cap the scale-up — hence ISM 2.0's industry-led training centres [4].
• A 50% capital subsidy raises fiscal-efficiency questions [1], while fabs' water and power intensity strains already water-stressed clusters.

ISM has credibly shifted India from a design-services player to an emerging assembly and packaging base, though the move from "made in India" to "designed and owned in India" is only beginning. If ISM 2.0 is sequenced towards materials, equipment and indigenous IP, and paired with skilling and sustainable water-energy infrastructure at fab clusters, the ₹76,000 crore commitment can mature into a durable strategic asset rather than a subsidised assembly line.