Governance Framework of Digital India: Fit for the Era of Convergence?

In an era where digital technologies permeate every aspect of life, the digital ecosystem stands as a testament to rapid innovation and vast potential. Comprising physical infrastructure like cables, mobile towers, satellites, data centres, and consumer devices such as smartphones and sensors, alongside virtual elements including emails, webpages, videos, and apps, this ecosystem is a complex web of connectivity and content, overlaid with hues and nuances of conduct.

The landscape has changed significantly over the past three decades. However, so has its governance mechanism, particularly in India. Even as India embraces advancements like the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and quantum computing, issues such as cybersecurity, data protection, sustainability and competition demand urgent attention. The core challenge lies in balancing growth with regulation amidst the rapid evolution of technology and business models.

The core challenge lies in balancing growth with regulation amidst rapid evolution of technology and business models.

At present, there are three core ministries – namely, the Ministry of Communications, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Besides these three core ministries and the NITI Aayog, many functions are extended or assigned to others. These include the Home Affairs, Defence, Health, External Affairs, Consumer Affairs, Commerce and Industry, etc. It is noteworthy that while telecommunications and broadcasting are union subjects but the IT has become a de facto concurrent subject, considering every state has its own IT policy and IT department.

While the legacy institutions have been evolving since their debut in the mid-nineteenth century, the current architecture is unwieldy to enable and leverage convergence across the three vertical domains of telecommunications, information technology and broadcasting – a trend that had been duly enunciated in the National Telecom Policy, 1999.

Even as new instruments like the National Digital Communications Policy 2018, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 and the Telecommunications Act 2023 have been introduced and there are ongoing consultations for a new telecom policy and a new broadcasting law, the vertical fragmentation continues.

Such an arrangement discourages business investment, stifles new services, and amplifies risks in critical sectors. As the digital economy is expected to contribute a trillion-dollar value addition to the GDP and become a key enabler in realising the vision of Viksit Bharat 2047, the time is ripe for a refresh.

To navigate this complexity, a structured and holistic approach is needed.

The 3Cs Framework: A Lens for Digital Activities

Digital ecosystem comprises 3Cs – Carriage, Content, and Conduct.

Carriage refers to the underlying infrastructure that enables data transmission, encompassing wireline technologies like copper, optical fiber, and coaxial cables, as well as wireless modes such as cellular networks, Wi-Fi, point-to-point links, and satellites.

Content includes the voice, data and video that traverse over this infrastructure, with possibilities for even touch, smell, and taste as long as these can be digitised.

Conduct encompasses the broader regulatory dimensions, including competition, data protection, data governance, cybersecurity, quality of service (QoS), and sustainability.

This framework highlights the interconnectedness of the ecosystem. Actions in one area ripple across others, affecting the political economy, society, and environment. For all the stakeholders, clarity is crucial.

India’s Institutional Landscape: Evolution and Complexity

Responding to the technological advancements and the political economy, the governance has been evolving since the mid-19th century with the establishment of the Telegraph Board in 1853 and the enactment of the Electric Telegraph Act in 1854, While the central legislations like the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, provide the foundation, the state-level IT departments tailor policies to local contexts. In fact, broadcasting was carved out from communications pre-Independence.

The prevailing division of responsibilities—shaped by historical legacies, technological imperatives, and influential personalities— has resulted in a patchwork. In addition, ministries like Defence and Health intersect with digital health records and secure communications, while External Affairs navigates international data flows. NITI Aayog plays a pivotal role in strategic planning, promoting inclusive digital transformation.

The prevailing division of responsibilities—shaped by historical legacies, technological imperatives, and influential personalities— has resulted in a patchwork.

Recent updates underscore this evolution. In 2024-2025, India has advanced its AI regulation, with a comprehensive analysis involving government, industry, and civil society. The Digital Competition Bill, 2024 aims to balance innovation and fairness in the digital market. The government had also proposed the Digital India Act in 2023, to address emerging challenges.

Gaps and Overlaps: Hindrances to Progress

Despite these advancements, gaps and overlaps plague the system. Parallel efforts among agencies lead to inconsistent outcomes, resource wastage, and litigation. For example, convergence of telecom, broadcasting, and IT blurs boundaries, causing regulatory ambiguity and overreach. Inadequate state capacity exacerbates difficulties in business operations and stakeholder confusion.

These issues are not unique to India but are amplified amidst rapid digitisation and digitalisation in the country.

Parallel efforts among agencies lead to inconsistent outcomes, resource wastage, and litigation.

Besides the three core ministries, India has multiple statutory entities. For instance, competition is overseen by both CCI and TRAI. Data protection and AI fall primarily under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) with shared oversight from NITI Aayog, the office of the Principal Scientific Advisor, and the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT). Cybersecurity spans across the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS), Department of Telecommunications (DoT), MeitY, and Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Online content is governed by both MeitY and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB). Sustainability is governed by the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) alongside MeitY and DoT.

This multiplicity of institutions and instruments has resulted in gaps and overlaps. These include inadequate state capacity, ambiguity around ownership and accountability, unease of doing business, confusion amongst stakeholders and regulatory outreach. Opportunity costs include delayed innovation in AI and IoT, heightened cybersecurity risks and environmental concerns. Addressing these requires agile institutions and responsive instruments to minimise adverse impacts while leveraging opportunities.

This multiplicity of institutions and instruments has resulted in gaps and overlaps.

Global Benchmarking: Lessons from Abroad

Globally, digital governance varies widely. The U.S. adopts a laissez-faire, market-driven approach, fostering tech giants through liberal policies. The EU prioritises individual rights and digital sovereignty with prescriptive regulations like GDPR, imposing compliance burdens but ensuring privacy. China emphasises state control and innovation, integrating surveillance into its framework.

India’s “techno-nationalism” seeks a middle path: using technology for inclusive, equitable, and sustainable development while exporting IT services and globalising the concept of digital public infrastructure. This provides regulated flexibility to global companies, while maintaining India’s outsourcing leadership. Recent calls at the Global Standards Regulator (GSR) 2025 for a shift from reactive to proactive governance align with this, advocating flexible, public-good-oriented frameworks.

Transitioning existing licenses demands legally sound pathways, but timely implementation could accelerate India’s digital transformation.

Reimagining Institutions: Pathways Forward

To overcome challenges, three options emerge. The status quo, with enhanced coordination and information-sharing, leverages existing expertise but risks persistent gaps. A dual-ministry model—separating Carriage and Content—could consolidate regulation, transferring licensing to a statutory body akin to financial services.

The boldest is a unified Ministry of Digital Ecosystem (MoDE), with one law, regulator, and tribunal covering all domains. This could eliminate conflicts, spur innovation, and improve service delivery, though it risks power concentration. State and local governments must be integrated via NITI Aayog for community engagement on issues like right-of-way.

Transitioning existing licenses demands legally sound pathways, but timely implementation could accelerate India’s digital journey.

Conclusion: A Future-Ready Ecosystem

By applying the 3Cs framework of Carriage, Content and Conduct; and, drawing on India’s own as well as global lessons, reforms such as a unified ministry could bridge gaps, foster innovation, and support sustainability.

India’s digital ecosystem holds immense promise, but fragmented governance may impede progress. India’s digital ecosystem holds immense promise, but fragmented governance threatens its realisation. By applying the 3Cs framework of Carriage, Content and Conduct; and drawing on India’s own as well as global lessons, reforms such as a unified ministry could bridge gaps, foster innovation, and support sustainability.

As technologies converge, unified forward-looking institutions and policy instruments can empower citizens, businesses, and the economy. The recent strides in data protection and digital infrastructure signal progress; now, holistic restructuring is essential to make the most of emerging opportunities in this dynamic landscape, while mitigating risk.

The million, er, trillion-dollar question is – are we as a nation ready for this transformation?