For much of the last decade, Make in India has been about scale. The priority was clear: localise production, expand capacity, reduce import dependence, and prove that India could manufacture at volume. That phase delivered. India today has industrial depth across metals, energy, automotive, defence, and infrastructure that would have been difficult to imagine a generation ago.

But the global environment in which Indian manufacturing now competes has changed fundamentally. The next phase of Make in India will not be judged by how much the country produces, but by whether the world trusts how it is produced.

This is where sustainability stops being a reporting requirement and starts becoming a strategy.

Across major markets, sustainability has moved from aspiration to enforcement. The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism entered its definitive phase on 1 January 2026, turning carbon intensity into a measurable trade cost rather than a reputational risk. The United Kingdom will follow with a similar regime from 2027, and discussions are already underway in other jurisdictions. For exporters, this effectively means that access to global markets will increasingly depend on verified, product-level emissions data. Carbon is becoming a border.

For India, this is not a distant policy debate. It is a test of readiness. If Make in India’s first phase was about building factories, its second phase is about building confidence among regulators, buyers, investors, and global partners that Indian manufacturing can meet the world’s tightening standards.

Few materials sit closer to the centre of this transition

Aluminium is paradoxical by nature. It is indispensable to modern industry, and yet one of the most energy-intensive materials to produce. Globally, aluminium accounts for close to 2% of total greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, it is central to the energy transition itself enabling lighter vehicles, renewable energy infrastructure, rail and metro systems, defence platforms, and aerospace structures.

What makes aluminium strategically unique, however, is its circular potential. Aluminium can be recycled indefinitely with minimal loss of properties. Secondary aluminium production uses roughly 5% of the energy required for primary metal and reduces emissions by as much as 90–97%, depending on the energy mix. In a world where carbon efficiency is becoming a prerequisite rather than a differentiator, this matters.

India is already a major aluminium producer, with output of over 4 million tonnes annually and the fifth-largest bauxite reserves globally. It also has something many countries lack: an integrated ecosystem that spans mining, smelting, casting, component manufacturing, and recycling, supported by strong domestic demand across energy, transport, defence, and infrastructure. On paper, this should place India in a strong position as global supply chains reconfigure.

Yet the challenge is not one of scale. It is one of credibility.

Much of India’s aluminium production remains carbon-intensive due to reliance on coal-based power. While several producers have begun transitioning to renewable energy and introducing low-carbon aluminium offerings, adoption is uneven. More importantly, the ability to measure, verify, and communicate carbon performance across the value chain remains fragmented.

This is where the next phase of Make in India will be won or lost. Sustainability cannot be addressed only at the top of the pyramid. It must be embedded across the ecosystem from large integrated producers to mid-sized foundries, component manufacturers, and recyclers that collectively define India’s manufacturing depth.

Three shifts are therefore essential

First, India must invest seriously in carbon intelligence. Global trade is moving toward product-level transparency, where buyers expect digital, verifiable emissions data across the lifecycle of a material. This requires robust monitoring, reporting, and verification systems, supported by digital platforms that can track carbon intensity from mine to market. Without this infrastructure, even low-emission production risks being invisible and therefore commercially irrelevant.

Second, the transition must be inclusive. Sustainability cannot become a moat that only a few large players can cross. MSMEs and downstream manufacturers form the backbone of India’s aluminium value chain and its export competitiveness. Bringing them into the green transition will require shared infrastructure, access to clean energy, technical support, and skill development. If the base of the pyramid is excluded, the system will fracture under global scrutiny.

Third, the economics of green aluminium must be made viable. While government subsidies and renewable incentives already exist, scaling adoption will require more sophisticated financial instruments from concessional lending and green bonds to demand-side incentives that make low-carbon aluminium easier to buy, not just easier to produce. Sustainability cannot succeed if it is treated only as a cost; it must be structured as a market advantage.

If India gets this right, the upside is significant. A credible, low-carbon aluminium ecosystem would not only protect export access but also stimulate domestic consumption, attract sustainability-linked capital, and strengthen India’s position in sectors where reliability and responsibility increasingly go hand in hand. It would also help close the gap between India’s per capita aluminium consumption and global benchmarks, supporting long-term industrial growth.

Make in India’s first decade proved that the country can build. The next decade will test whether it can lead in a world where leadership is defined not just by capacity, but by accountability.

Aluminium, with its industrial indispensability and sustainability potential, offers India a chance to do both. The question is whether India will shape sustainability on its own terms or be shaped by it.

Source link : View Article