PIB: Published on 6 September 2026
Union Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal used the Bharat Health Global Expo 2026 in New Delhi to deliver a clear strategic message: India’s pharmaceutical and healthcare sector must evolve from its current strengths into a more resilient, innovation-driven and globally integrated industry if the country is to meet the ambitions of Viksit Bharat 2047.
The speech, delivered alongside Minister of State Jitin Prasada and Commerce Secretary Rajesh Agarwal, framed healthcare not merely as a domestic priority but as a core pillar of India’s economic and diplomatic positioning.
Core Themes
Goyal’s central argument was that supply-chain resilience is non-negotiable, yet it must not slide into protectionism. India earlier lost ground in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) and Key Starting Materials (KSMs). The corrective path, he said, is diversification across geographies and suppliers rather than total self-reliance. Imports will continue where necessary; the goal is to ensure no single country or company can disrupt continuity. At the same time, he urged an outward-looking posture;Indian firms should invest overseas for local value addition, last-mile delivery and job creation, particularly in Africa and other emerging markets.
On the innovation front, Goyal was blunt: success in generics is no longer enough. The sector must prioritise original research, new molecules, biosimilars and biotechnology. He pointed to existing instruments such as the Research and Development Innovation Fund and called for a regulatory environment that attracts clinical trials, patenting and new product introductions. Regulatory convergence with developed-country standards, he argued, is essential if India is to be taken seriously as an innovation destination rather than only a low-cost manufacturing base.
Medical value travel received specific attention. With an estimated $8 billion global opportunity and Indian hospitals already equipped with modern infrastructure and skilled professionals, Goyal urged the industry and bodies such as SEPC, CII and FICCI to treat the segment as a mission-mode priority. Government support through export promotion and brand equity mechanisms was offered for credible proposals.
Infrastructure and medical devices formed another strand. Bulk drug parks in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh are progressing, and 100 new industrial parks can earmark zones for pharma and healthcare. On devices, the minister called for a shift from assembly to full indigenous component and ecosystem development, noting that a larger domestic market share would strengthen export competitiveness. MSMEs were positioned as natural partners for component indigenisation.
Ayush was mentioned as a traditional strength still largely limited to raw-herb exports; greater scientific validation is required for broader global acceptance.
Trade and Investment Context
Goyal placed the healthcare agenda within India’s broader trade strategy. Preferential market access already covers roughly two-thirds of the global market. Ongoing negotiations for another 8–10 agreements could push that figure toward 75 percent. He contrasted the pre-2014 situation;FTAs covering markets with a combined GDP of about $10 trillion;with the current set of agreements that open access to roughly $60 trillion across 38 developed economies. The message was that policy has unlocked opportunity; industry must now raise ambition, quality and speed.
Analysis: Opportunities and Constraints
The speech correctly identifies the dual challenge facing Indian pharma. On one hand, the country remains the “pharmacy of the world” for generics and has demonstrated reliability during crises. On the other hand, continued heavy reliance on a limited set of suppliers for critical intermediates exposes the sector to geopolitical and logistical risk;an exposure that became visible during the pandemic and subsequent supply disruptions.
The outward-looking resilience model is pragmatic. Full indigenisation of every input is neither feasible nor efficient; building redundant, multi-country supply options and selective overseas manufacturing footprints better balances security with competitiveness. Encouraging Indian firms to invest in Africa and other markets for local production also aligns with longer-term diplomatic and commercial goals.
The innovation imperative is harder. Moving from process excellence in generics to discovery-led R&D, biosimilars and novel biologics requires sustained capital, talent retention, predictable regulation and faster clinical-trial approvals. Regulatory convergence with higher-income jurisdictions is therefore not optional; without it, India risks remaining a manufacturing hub rather than an innovation one. The call for an “open and inviting” stance on clinical trials and patenting is necessary but will need concrete follow-through on timelines, data protection and dispute resolution.
Medical value travel offers a relatively near-term growth avenue if quality, patient experience, insurance linkages and post-treatment follow-up can be systematised. Plug-and-play industrial infrastructure and dedicated zones in new parks can lower entry barriers, particularly for mid-sized firms and device-component manufacturers.
Potential friction points remain. Domestic industry may resist faster regulatory alignment if it raises compliance costs in the short term. Overseas investment by Indian firms will compete with the parallel need to deepen domestic capacity. And competition for capital is intensifying: the United States, Europe, Japan, Korea and others are also courting pharmaceutical and biotech investment as part of their own resilience agendas. India’s value proposition must therefore rest on more than cost;speed, scale, talent and policy predictability will matter.
Bottom Line
Goyal’s intervention positions healthcare and pharmaceuticals as strategic industries whose success is tied to both national development goals and global supply-chain realignments. The prescription;resilient yet open supply chains, a decisive shift toward original innovation, aggressive pursuit of medical value travel, and full use of expanded trade access;is coherent.
Delivery will depend on whether regulatory reform, R&D incentives, infrastructure execution and industry ambition move in tandem. If they do, India can progress from being a reliable generics supplier to a broader “health stack” for the world. If they lag, the sector risks plateauing at its current, still-impressive but incomplete, level of capability.
