Intellectual property rights and informal sector innovations: Exploring grassroots innovations in India

Abstract

The primary driver for innovations in the formal sector is credited to the institution of patenting. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) as the extrinsic motivational factor have supported innovations by firms and industries which have a large market and resources to commercialise their products. Grassroots innovations, on the other hand, represent a culture of individual innovators outside formal sector who innovate out of adversity, curiosity and needs. Most of the innovators have cited intrinsic motivation behind the innovation and are unaware of IPR.However, there is a paucity of literature on the relation between IPR and innovations in the informal sector. Drawing on the literature on IPR and innovations in the formal sector, we examine whether the same theories and rationales apply to a different nature of innovations in the informal sector. This is an exploratory study and to map the current scenario of patenting for grassroots innovations secondary data were collected from the National Innovation Foundation (NIF) website. To understand the innovators' perception, we interviewed them through various means and on different sites. The study finds that although there was no initial intention to innovate for extrinsic incentives like patenting, there is an increasing trend in filing patents for grassroots innovations by the NIF in India. K E Y W O R D S grassroots innovations, India, informal sector innovations, intellectual property rights, patents

Commercialising innovations from the informal economy

“…It is without a doubt that these innovations could not have been commercialised to the extent they are without the support of external organisations like the NIF, GIAN and others. These organisations provide the innovators with help and suggestions related to product design, product testing, micro-finance support, the filing of IPR and others (Sharma and Kumar, 2018). In all the cases mentioned in this study, NIF or other agencies have filed a patent on behalf of the innovators to protect their intellectual property.…”

“…It is important to mention that access to grassroots innovators in India is very difficult as they are spread all across the country, and mostly coming from hinterlands, language becomes another barrier (Bhaduri and Kumar, 2011; Kumar, 2014; Sharma and Kumar, 2018). Researchers get limited occasions, mainly events organised by NIF such as award functions, Shodh Yatra , conferences and food festival, to interact with them (Bhaduri and Kumar, 2011; Kumar and Bhaduri, 2014; Nair et al , 2017).…”

“…The need for financing is also a big challenge as industrial production and distribution of the innovations as a final product can be an expensive procedure. Finally, intellectual property rights are also unclear for these grassroots innovations as intellectual property protection are often expensive and complex procedures (Sharma and Kumar, 2018).…”

“…Creativity at the grassroots has taken a pivotal position in the discourse of sustainable socio-economic development, especially in the developing world. Despite the conceptual ambiguity around the term “grassroots innovations”, a growing body of literature has emerged on the innovations from the informal sector focusing on various dimensions such as understanding the local context, behaviour of the innovators and impact of various institutional mechanisms on these innovations (Bhaduri and Kumar, 2011; Abrol and Gupta, 2014; Kumar and Bhaduri, 2014; Kumar, 2014; Sheikh, 2014; Joshi et al , 2015; Gupta, 2016; Nair et al , 2017; Sharma and Kumar, 2018). An important point of consensus found in various definitions on grassroots innovations is that they are scarcity-induced innovations, using locally available resources by the people outside formal setup, and developed to meet a need often ignored by the formal sector (Srinivas and Sutz, 2008; Bhaduri and Kumar, 2011; Nair et al , 2017).…”

RRI Beyond Its Comfort Zone: Initiating a Dialogue with Frugal Innovation by ‘the Vulnerable’

“…18 In addition, the IPR, when granted, may have consequences, which are undesirable from a normative standpoint. Sharma and Kumar (2018) show how filing the IPR required an innovator to replace the locally available raw materials (often scraps) by better/standardised materials. This exercise might raise the cost of the product, putting it beyond the reach of the very community whose needs had inspired the innovation in the first place.…”