Data-driven benchmarking has become NITI Aayog's principal instrument of competitive federalism. Examine with reference to the India S&T Scoreboard.

NITI Aayog does not give out grants the way the Planning Commission did, so it shapes what States do mainly by ranking them. The India S&T Scoreboard, launched on 3 November 2026, is the latest of these rankings. The Vice Chairman, NITI Aayog presented it as an example of cooperative and competitive federalism [1]. Benchmarking pushes States to improve, but it changes outcomes only when funding and institutions back it up.

Why benchmarking is NITI's main lever

• It works through comparison and reputation, not money. Earlier examples include the India Innovation Index, prepared with the Institute for Competitiveness [2].
• One platform: the Scoreboard puts scattered data in one place. It covers the research ecosystem (universities, R&D labs, deep-tech startups, incubators) and outputs (publications, patents) for every State and UT [1].

How the Scoreboard furthers federalism

• Competitive: States can compare themselves with each other and track their own progress over time [1].
• Cooperative: States can learn from each other's good practices. State S&T Councils are the main channel for this [1].
• Quality over volume: it also measures research impact, collaboration and open access [1].
• Three-sector view (academia, government labs, industry): it shows who produces research in each State [1].

Limits of benchmarking

• Rewards existing wealth: States paid for only 6.4% of national R&D spending in 2017–18, and eight States accounted for over 60% of it [3]. Rankings may credit States for research they did not fund, and the gap may widen.
• No like-with-like grouping announced: the Innovation Index 2021 ranked Major, North-Eastern/Hilly and UT groups separately [2]. The Scoreboard's launch release does not mention any such grouping [1].
• Year-to-year comparison: the Innovation Index grew from 36 to 66 indicators between editions [2], so its scores could not be compared across years.
• Weak bodies to act on the data: NITI's 2025 Roadmap found State S&T Councils have little autonomy, weak staffing and no performance-linked incentives [4].
• Low private R&D: most R&D money is public, and NITI's 2026 report seeks much more private investment [5].

To sum up, the Scoreboard shows that data now drives cooperative-competitive federalism, but rankings alone cannot fix structural gaps. NITI should:

• rank States on rate of improvement and within peer groups;
• keep a fixed method;
• link central support to making State S&T Councils stronger;
• add fiscal incentives for private R&D.

These steps would turn benchmarking from a league table into a tool for capacity-building, in line with Viksit Bharat@2047.