‘Indian IT services and consultations organized by AI rules risk losing their grip of global market’ Photo Credit: Reuters
At the center of Bengaluru, software developers find themselves running against time for Chinese rivals for the chief. artificial intelligence (AI) Projects with International Customers. Despite being part of a skilled workforce, the abilities often remove the deals. Indian firms fought for the match. This is not just a dilemma of a developer. This is a glimpse at the intersection of India.
Three-way races were faced to catch with Silicon Valley during being chased by China and South East Asia, India is subject to harsh competition. But, if this AI wants to move at the forefront, India will have to recognize that the challenge is not that businesses like the local or foreign AI platform, but will market rules inadvertently stop India’s pace.
Issues in india
Export competitiveness rests on nationwide deployment of productivity enhancing technologies. Indian services and consultations should include AI technologies to maintain their major status in the global market. But concerns are higher than the large -scale damage of regular jobs, discriminatory algorithm decision making and negative risks of human immunization. In particular, “deepfec” reduces confidence by spreading misinformation, and destroying political processes that destroy rapid reliability.
AI adoption issues such as misinformation and mediator are at the forefront of AI discussion in India, as digital platforms have become primary condensed for information spread. The general opinion among startups in India is that middlemen – usually foreign technical giants – often determine the rules of engagement, which makes it challenging to compete for local startups.
Recently, Indian app developers have increased tension with a complaint against Google before the Competition Commission of India. However, by putting regulatory and administrative pressure on those companies, it is not necessary to solve the main problem of monopoly business practices. Regulating AI will interfere with technical adaptation, which will have undesirable results on India’s relative competition.
India has already localized an important part of the AI price chain, and additional AI-related compliance costs may obstruct India’s ability to beat commercial rivals such as China and the United States, which have decided to leave AI irregular.
Navigate the global AI race
India’s position as the world’s IT powerhouse gives it a unique benefit in the AI era. There is an attempt to control and regulate AI as industrial nations compete globally for industrial leadership. The European Union (EU) opted for strict regulation to address risk and social impacts. In contrast, the US holds more hand-off stance, giving priority to innovation. India finds itself in a delicate balance act between these two paths. But quickly as soon as a limited set of limited risk is disturbed as soon as the old market rules are disturbed quickly, better India can focus on beating commercial rivals like China and America
There are very good reasons that the European Union has chosen to make laws through binding laws, mainly due to its unique structural deficiencies. The European Union lacks a supernational constitution that protects human rights and protects citizens against AI-based monitoring or policing by its member-states. Therefore, unlike India, the European Union should implement the binding rules by the National Governments to pre-implement the AI laws that will otherwise fragment their single market.
Additionally, the cost of regulatory failure is very high if India’s export capabilities are at stake, especially Chinese dominance in hardware and cloud technologies. India has earlier taken inspiration from the European Union or American laws. However, he should follow his own paths and pursue his national interests based on his service-operated industrial profile.
AI may introduce regulatory efforts that disrupt development of AI development in India, allowing businesses to repatriation from India and transfer IT development and software research and development in other countries with more AI-friendly rules. In other words, Indian IT services and counseling organized by AI regulations at risk of losing their grip of the global market.
Instead, the Government of India may use its diplomatic effects to ensure that the open-source models remain open, accessible and commercially viable, added with international strategic partnership for energy security, computing resources and international standardization.
A case for regulator clarity
Construction on AI’s expected strong adoption, public officials have the responsibility of listening to political and social concerns. While India is clearly not pursuing the east-devious product regulation on AI Akin for Europe (or already planned in California), various agencies have introduced conflicting policies, resulting in a minor power struggle, resulting in a fragmented policy landscape.
The lessons learned from the European Union and the US indicate the need to strengthen the existing laws and proof of future rather than producing new ones. The current transitional guidelines have shown a possible route to avoid overlapping liability or regulatory blindspots by re -explaining the existing law. India has an extensive outline for antitrust, corporate liability, free speech and public order that covers cases of AI development and use. India may not require AI-specific rules and laws like IT Act.
India should choose its way according to its national interests. The challenge is not that businesses prefer a local or foreign AI platform, but to adopt rapid adoption and to fix learning in their IT industry and support accessible open-sources and other options to learn.
Badri Narayanan Gopalakrishnan is visiting Senior Fellow, Center for Social and Economic Progress (CSEP), New Delhi. Hosuk Lee Makiyama is the director of the European Center for International Political Economy (ECIPE). Expressed views are personal
Published – March 01, 2025 12:08 am IST