Innovation at the base of the pyramid, says former administration director.
By Deepak Chitnis
WASHINGTON, DC: Nishith Acharya recently left the Obama administration, where he was Director of Innovation & Entrepreneurship and Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Commerce, to take up a position as Senior Advisor to Northeastern University, where he is assisting the University with its global education strategy.
In his 18-month stint with the administration, Acharya led the President’s efforts to nurture economic growth through innovation, entrepreneurship and commercialization. As part of his work, he managed the President’s National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship – a group of nationally known investors, entrepreneurs and university presidents. He engaged with 26 federal agencies to provide over $100 million in funds to universities, research centers and companies to increase the commercialization of federally-funded research. He also engaged with over 500 universities and colleges across the United States to boost their programs supporting innovation, entrepreneurship and commercialization.
Prior to that, Acharya served as Executive Director of the Deshpande Foundation, a prominent American philanthropy focused on innovation, entrepreneurship and scalability around the world.
At present, Acharya also serves as a Member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bretton Woods Committee, The Indus Entrepreneurs, and the Clinton Global Initiative. He also served as a Board member of Akshaya Patra USA and the United Way Worldwide Global Advisory Board.
In an interview to Global India Newswire, Acharya discusses why he left the administration to take up service in the private sector, innovation in India, and the argument over intellectual property rights. Excerpts from the interview:
Why did you leave the Department of Commerce earlier this year? What’s your next step?
I left the Obama Administration to pursue some interesting opportunities in the private sector. During my time in the Obama Administration, it became clear to me that the change we want to see in the world will be coming from outside of government – in particularly the private and non-profit sectors. The federal government, in particular, is not currently well suited to identify game-changing innovations or nimble enough to transform those innovations into organizations that improve society. But more than the challenges facing the government, it was the opportunities of the private sector that excited me.
Currently, I plan to take some time as a Senior Advisor at Northeastern University and as a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress to think about innovation policy worldwide. In addition, I will be helping Northeastern University develop relationships in India. Long term, I am excited to work with the startups to address important issues in areas like education and financial services – both in the United States and India.
At the Commerce Department you worked on innovation and entrepreneurship. How do you view innovation in India?
We viewed India as a country to watch. At one level, there is important innovation occurring in India that is globally relevant. There is a growing number of Indian companies that are being asked to solve global problems and are doing so with cutting edge innovation.
India also leads the world in innovation related to the base of the pyramid. India has a very vibrant group of innovators focused on the problems of the poor – in education, financial services, agriculture and health. It is the strong innovation ecosystem for development in the world. Interestingly, this innovation is being driven by many young leaders who were trained at the Indian companies that are globally relevant. So they are now applying the principals they learned in the corporate sector towards great societal challenges.
Institutionally, however, India was viewed as an emerging research power. Its universities need to develop their capability to conduct research and the government needs to clarify its role in supporting R&D in India. American universities and research organizations are excited to conduct research in India because of its size and diversity. But they have been frustrated with the partnerships they have developed to date. That is an area for greater US-India collaboration.
India and the United States have a lot of differences on the issue of intellectual property rights. What’s your take on that?
Intellectual property is actually a critical area of disagreement and negotiation between most countries. In the case of India, I think we need to divide things into three categories. In the long term, I think IP will recede as an issue between the two countries as India develops its capabilities to innovative. As its researchers and companies seek to use IP to their competitive advantage they will embrace the framework of the US IP system. Secondly, Indian objections to recognizing IP in certain key areas, particularly in public health, are understood by all. Although many Americans do not support Indian policy, it is certainly understood. However, many American companies make the point that IP goes hand in hand with the development of business models. They suggest recognizing the patents and letting private companies determine how to sell their products. In the immediate term, there will continue to be disagreements about the use of IP in areas that are strategically relevant to both countries.
What made you want to get into government in the first place?
This was my second political appointment. I served in the Clinton White House in the 1990’s before joining the Obama Administration in 2011. In both cases, it was a great opportunity to serve President’s that I admire, and to work on issues of critical importance to the United States and the world. I am a strong believer in the role of government to impact significant change in the world. Government has the unique ability to have huge impact and to scale ideas quickly. In fact, when done correctly, government is the only entity that can do this. In the case of innovation, I believe that the federal government is well positioned to boost innovation in the United States because it is the main funder of research and innovation and because it can, through its own programs and funding, effect commercialization of technologies across industries. So government can make a huge impact for the positive in people’s lives, and I was happy to serve. (Global India Newswire)