Adoption Drivers of Indigenous Semiconductor chips for IoT in India: An Exploratory Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/0.15680/IJCTECE.2026.0902016Keywords:
Indigenous semiconductors, SHAKTI processor, IoT, RISC-V, semiconductor policy, IndiaAbstract
India’s strategic objective of achieving self-reliance in semiconductor technology has gained urgency following global supply-chain disruptions and the rapid expansion of Internet of Things (IoT) applications. Despite hosting extensive semiconductor design capabilities, India remains dependent on imported microprocessors for most electronic systems. This study examines the factors shaping the acceptance of indigenously developed semiconductor chips for IoT applications in India, with specific reference to the SHAKTI processor ecosystem. Using a quantitatively supported grounded theory approach, data were collected from industry experts, policymakers, manufacturers, and ecosystem stakeholders through interviews, surveys, and document analysis. The findings indicate that acceptance is driven by four interrelated dimensions: design capability, manufacturing readiness, go-to-market strategy, and policy support. While India demonstrates strong design competence and policy intent, gaps persist in manufacturing scale, supply-chain robustness, and market confidence. The study contributes to the limited empirical literature on semiconductor ecosystem development by proposing a holistic, non-technical framework to accelerate adoption of indigenous processors in IoT deployments.
References
1. Agrawal, S., Mani, S., Aggarwal, S., et al. (2020). Energy-efficient appliances and residential electricity consumption in India. Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW).
2. Asanović, K., & Patterson, D. A. (2014). Instruction sets should be free: The case for RISC-V. IEEE Micro, 34(5), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1109/MM.2014.90
3. Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabito, G. (2010). The Internet of Things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54(15), 2787–2805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010
4. Bora, S., & Paily, R. (2021). Power-efficient processor architectures for IoT applications: A RISC-V perspective. Microprocessors and Microsystems, 82, 103876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2021.103876
5. Chaudhuri, S., & Sanyal, S. (2021). India’s electronics manufacturing ecosystem: Policy challenges and prospects. Economic and Political Weekly, 56(12), 45–53.
6. Chowdhury, S. R., Mukherjee, A., Kumar, S. M., Anand, K., Narayanan, N. S., & Raman, S. (2021). Security evaluation of IoT systems using open-source processors. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 8(9), 7421–7434. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.3035128
7. Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2012). Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41(10), 1757–1769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.022
8. Ernst, D. (2014). Global production networks and industrial upgrading: A knowledge-centered approach. East-West Center Working Papers, 25, 1–40.
9. Fuller, D. B. (2016). Cutting off our nose to spite our face: US policy towards China’s semiconductor industry. Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 14(3), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2016.1212970
10. Government of India. (2019). National Policy on Electronics 2019. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY).
11. Guerreiro, N., Silva, J., & Santos, M. (2022). Open-source hardware adoption: Opportunities and challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176, 121478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121478
12. IndustryARC. (2023). Global semiconductor market forecast 2023–2030.
13. Kamakoti, V. (2022). Indigenous microprocessor development in India: Challenges and opportunities. Current Science, 122(9), 1053–1059.
14. Lee, K., & Lim, C. (2001). Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: The findings from the Korean industries. Research Policy, 30(3), 459–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00088-3
15. Manyika, J., et al. (2015). The Internet of Things: Mapping the value beyond the hype. McKinsey Global Institute.
16. Mathews, J. A., & Cho, D. S. (2007). Tiger technology: The creation of a semiconductor industry in East Asia. Cambridge University Press.
17. Mazzucato, M. (2018). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. Penguin Random House.
18. MeitY. (2024). Annual Report 2023–2024. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India.
19. Moore, G. E. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, 38(8), 114–117.
20. Patterson, D. A., & Ditzel, D. R. (1980). The case for the reduced instruction set computer. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 8(6), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/641914.641917
21. Porter, M. E., & Heppelmann, J. E. (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 93(10), 96–114.
22. Rodrik, D. (2004). Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. Harvard Kennedy School Working Paper.
23. Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA). (2022). State of the U.S. semiconductor industry.
24. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2
25. Waterman, A., & Asanović, K. (2019). The RISC-V open-source instruction set architecture. Communications of the ACM, 62(5), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1145/3296979
26. Zhao, J., Yang, H., & Xu, L. (2020). RISC-V based processor design for low-power IoT devices. IEEE Access, 8, 212345–212356. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3041234
27. ASML Holding. (2023). Annual report 2023.
28. Intel Corporation. (2023). Intel annual report 2023.
29. NVIDIA Corporation. (2023). Form 10-K Annual Report.
30. Qualcomm Incorporated. (2023). Annual report 2023.
31. Texas Instruments. (2023). Annual report 2023.
32. World Economic Forum. (2022). Global semiconductor supply chain resilience.
