The present article aims to analyse empirically the national innovation system (NIS) of India. Specifically, the objectives were to (a) examine the different innovation-related input and output variables that reflect the structure of NIS over the years, and (b) examine the factors determining NIS. However, it was very difficult to identify the variables that could reflect the NIS of the country. Individual indicators of innovation, both from input and output side, are largely inconclusive. However, relatively more reflective indicators were chosen for the period 1980–2012. It was found that although India’s GDP has increased over the years, but its share in total world’s GDP was very meagre. Further, it was also found that as compared to major developed and comparable emerging economies, India lagged behind in both innovation inputs variables like expenditure on R&D and S&T manpower; and innovation output indicators like patents, proportion of high-tech manufacturing exports, etc. Further, for the second objective of the article concerning the determinants of NIS, a modified version of the Crepon, Duguet and Mairesse (CDM) model (1998) was used. The estimation using three-stage least square (3SLS) estimator for simultaneous equations shows that expenditure on R&D by government, stock of science and technology personnel, world’s stock of patents and openness index have positive impact on innovation performance indicators. Therefore, policies should be framed in a manner that they emphasize more on innovation inputs like expenditure on R&D and building human capital in the form of S&T personnel.

中文翻译：

---

印度国家创新体系的实证分析

本文旨在实证分析印度的国家创新体系（NIS）。具体而言，目标是（a）研究反映创新产品结构的不同创新相关输入和输出变量，以及（b）研究确定创新产品的因素。但是，很难确定出可以反映该国NIS的变量。从投入和产出两个方面来看，创新的各个指标在很大程度上是不确定的。但是，在1980-2012年期间选择了相对更具反思性的指标。研究发现，尽管印度的国内生产总值多年来一直在增长，但是它在世界国内生产总值中所占的份额却很小。此外，还发现与主要的发达经济体和可比较的新兴经济体相比，印度在两个创新投入变量（例如研发和科学技术人力支出）方面都落后于印度。此外，对于涉及NIS决定因素的文章的第二个目标，Crepon，Duguet和Mairesse（CDM）模型（1998）的修改版是用过的。使用三阶段最小二乘（3SLS）估计器进行联立方程式的估计表明，政府的研发支出，科技人员的存量，世界专利的存量和开放度指数对创新绩效指标有积极影响。因此，应该以这样一种方式来制定政策，使其更加强调创新投入，例如用于研发的支出和以科技人员形式建立人力资本。