The union government introduced the National Medical Devices Policy, 2023 to augment the capacity, capabilities and competence of the domestic medical devices manufacturing industry. However, the policy has many lacunae and missing links, which could undermine the aims to foster a strong domestic medical devices manufacturing. There is a need for reform, in line with the existing policy initiatives and to constitute a separate law and regulatory body for the industry. The policy needs to enhance the accessibility by changing the existing procurement system for the public health sector. It further needs to scale up domestic manufacturing capabilities, through production-linked incentives, to ensure affordable medical devices for all citizens.
The union government introduced the National Medical Devices Policy, 2023 to augment the capacity, capabilities and competence of the domestic medical devices manufacturing industry. However, the policy has many lacunae and missing links, which could undermine the aims to foster a strong domestic medical devices manufacturing. There is a need for reform, in line with the existing policy initiatives and to constitute a separate law and regulatory body for the industry. The policy needs to enhance the accessibility by changing the existing procurement system for the public health sector. It further needs to scale up domestic manufacturing capabilities, through production-linked incentives, to ensure affordable medical devices for all citizens.
The authors are thankful to an anonymous referee for making very constructive comments and useful suggestions on the earlier version of the paper and the Alagappa University, Karaikudi for providing research assistance for writing this paper from the RUSA Phase 2.0 Scheme. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own. A Narayanamoorthy (narayana64@gmail.com) is senior professor and head, K S Sujitha (sujithakiran861@gmail.com) is research associate, R Suresh (saga42.suresh@gmail.com) is an assistant professor, and P Jothi (jothi5050@gmail.com) is adjunct lecturer at the Department of Economics and Rural Development, Alagappa University, Tamil Nadu.
The authors are thankful to an anonymous referee for making very constructive comments and useful suggestions on the earlier version of the paper and the Alagappa University, Karaikudi for providing research assistance for writing this paper from the RUSA Phase 2.0 Scheme. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own. A Narayanamoorthy (narayana64@gmail.com) is senior professor and head, K S Sujitha (sujithakiran861@gmail.com) is research associate, R Suresh (saga42.suresh@gmail.com) is an assistant professor, and P Jothi (jothi5050@gmail.com) is adjunct lecturer at the Department of Economics and Rural Development, Alagappa University, Tamil Nadu.
The authors are thankful to an anonymous referee for making very constructive comments and useful suggestions on the earlier version of the paper and the Alagappa University, Karaikudi for providing research assistance for writing this paper from the RUSA Phase 2.0 Scheme. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own. A Narayanamoorthy (narayana64@gmail.com) is senior professor and head, K S Sujitha (sujithakiran861@gmail.com) is research associate, R Suresh (saga42.suresh@gmail.com) is an assistant professor, and P Jothi (jothi5050@gmail.com) is adjunct lecturer at the Department of Economics and Rural Development, Alagappa University, Tamil Nadu.
The authors are thankful to an anonymous referee for making very constructive comments and useful suggestions on the earlier version of the paper and the Alagappa University, Karaikudi for providing research assistance for writing this paper from the RUSA Phase 2.0 Scheme. The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own. A Narayanamoorthy (narayana64@gmail.com) is senior professor and head, K S Sujitha (sujithakiran861@gmail.com) is research associate, R Suresh (saga42.suresh@gmail.com) is an assistant professor, and P Jothi (jothi5050@gmail.com) is adjunct lecturer at the Department of Economics and Rural Development, Alagappa University, Tamil Nadu.
Gini coefficients show that the level of inequality was 0.303 in 2014 and declined to 0.261 in 2021, which fluctuates in the initial years and shows a decreasing trend after 2017. Most notably, the regression-based decomposition approach reveals that the level of education emerges as the primary contributor to explaining the level of inequality, playing a vital role in its reduction. This research highlights the urgent need for the government to intensify its focus on improving education levels in order to reduce the inequality in India effectively.
Gini coefficients show that the level of inequality was 0.303 in 2014 and declined to 0.261 in 2021, which fluctuates in the initial years and shows a decreasing trend after 2017. Most notably, the regression-based decomposition approach reveals that the level of education emerges as the primary contributor to explaining the level of inequality, playing a vital role in its reduction. This research highlights the urgent need for the government to intensify its focus on improving education levels in order to reduce the inequality in India effectively.
Gini coefficients show that the level of inequality was 0.303 in 2014 and declined to 0.261 in 2021, which fluctuates in the initial years and shows a decreasing trend after 2017. Most notably, the regression-based decomposition approach reveals that the level of education emerges as the primary contributor to explaining the level of inequality, playing a vital role in its reduction. This research highlights the urgent need for the government to intensify its focus on improving education levels in order to reduce the inequality in India effectively.
This article draws on findings from a project at the Centre for Women’s Development Studies (an ICSSR institute) conducted between July 2019 and February 2020 titled “Women Negotiating for Family Housing and Work: A Study on Quasi-Live-in Domestic Workers.” The author gratefully acknowledges valu
