Swadeshi and the art of guarded globalisation

India’s approach to swadeshi is rooted in continuity rather than abrupt change.

In 2025, swadeshi is not a rejection, but a recalibration. India’s economic nationalism is designed less to erect a wall and more to extract value from global capital inflows by converting foreign investment into domestic capability.

The pivot is no longer the producer but the consumer. Indian consumers are aspirational, pragmatic, and global-facing. Pride amplifies purchase decisions only when tethered to world-class quality. This consumer realism must discipline swadeshi rhetoric into actual economic reform.

From ‘Make in India’, ‘Vocal for Local’ to Atmanirbhar Bharat, the idiom of self-reliance has been a consistent part of India’s social, political and economic discourse.

Anti-colonialism to industrial capability

What was once the language of anti-colonial protest has now been reframed as a policy toolkit for industrial capacity and consumer mobilisation.

India’s approach to swadeshi is rooted in continuity rather than abrupt change. While slogans have evolved, the core principles have endured through different governments namely to prioritise local enterprise, limit over-reliance on imports, and provide selective protection for domestic industries.

The key transformation lies in how the concept is now representing itself.  Previously, swadeshi was associated with a self-contained, inward-looking model of self-sufficiency. Today, it is reimagined as ‘guarded globalisation’.

This is a nuanced approach that welcomes foreign investment, pursues new trade partnerships, and engages in global value chains. Yet, India also protects critical sectors, enforces local-content requirements in public procurement, and strengthens strategic industries with production-linked incentives.

The Production-Linked Incentive schemes now span 14 sectors with more than $26 billion in subsidies. At the same time, India attracted $70.9 billion in FDI in FY 2022–23, one of the highest inflows globally. The paradox is insulation and openness deliberately operating in tandem.

The hybrid model

This strategy of balancing openness with protectionism, warrants a closer examination. India’s current path blends global integration with targeted safeguarding of domestic interests, creating a uniquely hybrid model. It is not isolationism, nor is it classically a free-market operation. Rather, it is a calibrated mix of protecting some sectors, opening others. It aims to welcome investment, but on India’s terms.

We desperately need to reduce vulnerabilities in critical supply chains across electronics, solar, defence, and pharmaceuticals. Electronics alone account for 10% of India’s total import bill, a third of it sourced from China. There are nearly 900 million internet users by 2025, with global platforms (Google -YouTube, Instagram-Facebook) capturing the lion’s share of digital attention and advertising.

Politically saleable because it speaks the language of self-reliance, swadeshi quietly acknowledges that India cannot afford autarky. The hope is that it may be economically defensible because it uses protection tactically rather than indiscriminately. 

Yet, there is a risk. What begins as a tactic can harden into a strategy with our back to the wall. Temporary safeguards can become permanent shelters, diluting competitiveness.

The politics of swadeshi

The political dividends are obvious since it resonates with voters, especially in a climate where consumers are more willing than ever to express pride in Indian brands.

Swadeshi provides a unifying slogan that appeals to small entrepreneurs, farmers, and middle-class consumers alike. It gives government the cover to privilege local industry without attracting significant backlash. The ideological roots of swadeshi in the Sangh tradition also reinforce this political comfort.

Beyond rhetoric, the real test is economic performance. Can swadeshi build globally competitive capacity or merely entrench inefficiency?

The crucial consumer lens

As a marketer, I believe one must listen to the Indian consumer. Pride is real, but so is pragmatism. Deloitte’s 2023 survey showed 60% of Indian consumers’ express pride in buying Indian brands, but quality and affordability remain the top purchase drivers. Over 75% of smartphones sold in India are of Chinese-origin. Almost every social media platform Indians use is American. This is not because consumers lack patriotism. It is because they demand quality, affordability, and innovation.

Swadeshi ought not to be reduced to a binary of “buy Indian” versus “buy foreign.” It has to enable domestic products to win on merit, not merely sentimentality. For consumers, self-reliance is meaningful only if it produces goods that are world-class. Otherwise, pride soon yields to disappointment.

Reconciling contradictions

There is also the policy paradox of reconciling swadeshi with the aggressive courting of foreign investment. We must talk of maximising domestic value-add not rejection of foreign goods. An Apple iPhone assembled in India with rising local content is, in this sense, a swadeshi product. So is a foreign-invested solar plant that deepens local supply chains.

The debate is about dependence and capability. Swadeshi that walls off India from global flows is self-defeating. Swadeshi that uses global flows to build domestic strength is strategically sound.

The way forward

Swadeshi is best seen as a means, not an end. It is an instrument to build competitiveness, not a substitute for it. The guardrails must be clear and protection should be time-bound; incentives linked to performance; pride tethered to quality.

Given the political environment, swadeshi will gain momentum. It taps into deep reservoirs of cultural memory and national sentiment. Its viability depends on whether it leaves India with thriving brands and stronger firms.

The consumer is the ultimate arbiter. By delivering value, swadeshi will endure as both policy and practice. Done well it can strengthen India’s equity, soft power and economic strength.

Alternately, it could remain a slogan that flatters pride but fails to deliver tangible gratification.

(Shubhranshu Singh is a business leader, cultural strategist and columnist. He has managed Indian brands globally and deployed global brand portfolios in India.)

Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.