'The Next Decade Belongs to Wearables and Circular Economy'

In an era defined by knowledge economies and global competition for talent, higher education has become a strategic national asset. Few scholars embody this transformation better than Professor Seeram Ramakrishna, an internationally renowned expert in nanotechnology and materials science, and the senior- most professor at Tsinghua University. With academic roots spanning Cambridge, Harvard, Japan, and Singapore, he has built a distinguished global career at the forefront of research and innovation. During his recent visit to Nepal, he spoke with New Business Age Editor-in-Chief Madan Lamsal about the shifting global academic landscape, the geopolitics of knowledge, and what Nepal must do to position itself in an innovation-driven global economy. Excerpts:

Q. In one of your previous interviews, you said Nepal has the potential to become a global trailblazer in sustainable business. What unique economic or  industrial opportunities does Nepal possess that could set it apart from other countries?

Since the signing of the Paris Agreement, countries around the world have committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 or 2060. We are now halfway to those deadlines. Although progress slowed somewhat in recent years, many nations are now accelerating their net-zero transitions.

A central part of reaching net zero is shifting to renewable energy and finding nature-based  materials to replace synthetic ones. Every product in the world requires materials, and both energy  use and material production generate significant emissions. As a result, countries and companies  are actively seeking green, sustainable solutions to reduce their carbon footprints.

Nepal is uniquely positioned to benefit from this global shift. Its geography provides abundant  natural resources and significant renewable energy potential, much of which remains untapped. The opportunity is substantial, and the timing is ideal. Twenty years ago, the necessary technologies were not advanced enough to fully harness these resources. Today, however, technological advancements make it entirely feasible for Nepal to capitalize on sustainability, carbon neutrality, and the circular economy.

These areas are closely interconnected, which further strengthens Nepal’s strategic position. By  leveraging its natural assets alongside modern technology, Nepal can enhance its economic  independence and reduce reliance on neighboring countries. This unique combination of natural  wealth and favorable technological timing positions Nepal to become a global leader in green and 
sustainable business.

Q. Many people argue that quality and scalability are major challenges for Nepal. How can these  issues be addressed?

Quality and scalability are indeed among the biggest hurdles Nepal faces. However, if we look at China as an example, we can see what is possible with the right strategy and commitment. China has successfully scaled up renewable energy technologies to capture roughly 70% of the global market. At the same time, it has managed to grow rice in extremely challenging terrains, and not just one harvest per year, but three or even four. This has been made possible by effectively harnessing solar energy to create optimal growing conditions and extend cultivation cycles.

The same principle can be applied to biomass or any other sector. When the entire ecosystem—government, private sector, researchers, and local communities—aligns around a shared goal and commits to sustained effort, scaling up becomes achievable and quality standards can improve significantly.

Nepal has the potential to follow a similar path. With clear priorities, coordinated action, and  long-term commitment, the country can expand its industries while simultaneously raising quality to meet global standards.

Q. Some argue that resource constraints can actually be an advantage, creating opportunities for  innovation and more sustainable business models. What is your view on that?

I have lived in  Singapore for 30 years. It is a country with virtually no natural resources—no water, no domestic energy sources, very limited land, and initially very little capital. Everything had to be built through innovation, discipline, and long-term planning.

Nepal, by contrast, is richly endowed with natural resources—abundant water, vast hydropower  potential, forests, biodiversity, agricultural land, solar energy, and more. In that sense, Nepal  is already blessed.

The traditional narrative of “constraint as advantage” does not fully apply to Nepal in the same way it did to Singapore. Instead, the real opportunity lies in reframing the challenge: Nepal has the resources, but it must urgently innovate in how those resources are harnessed, managed, and transformed into higher-value products and services in a sustainable way.

That is where the true breakthrough lies: turning natural wealth into high-quality, scalable, and long-term prosperity through smarter systems, better technology, and strong execution.

Q. Do you believe resource constraints are an advantage, or do they create opportunities for  innovation and more sustainable business models?

I would frame my response based on my 30 years of experience in Singapore. Singapore has virtually no natural resources—it lacks water, domestic energy sources, and has very limited land. Yet the country has thrived through innovation, efficiency, and long-term strategic planning.

In contrast, Nepal is already blessed with abundant natural resources. Compared to a resource-constrained country like Singapore, Nepal begins from a position of strength.

This means the narrative that Nepal is resource-constrained needs to be reconsidered. That may have been an older way of thinking, but today the more accurate perspective is that Nepal has  significant resources—the real need is innovation in how those resources are harnessed and managed.

Singapore was forced to innovate out of necessity for survival. Nepal, on the other hand, has the  opportunity to innovate to maximize and sustainably leverage the natural wealth it already  possesses.

Q. Based on your observations during your visit to Nepal, which sectors are most ready to benefit  from advanced materials and engineering innovation?

Nepal is a relatively small economy and cannot afford to focus only inward. It must adopt a balanced approach—strengthening domestic sectors while remaining outward-looking. Being outward-oriented means understanding the forces shaping the global economy. Currently, the United States and China dominate, with a combined economic output of nearly $70 trillion. Both are in intense competition to shape the next phase of industrial transformation—what many describe as Industrial Revolution 5.0. From my position at a leading university in China, I have witnessed firsthand how both nations are investing heavily in innovation to secure future leadership. Nepal must understand this broader context while defining its own strategy.

Domestically, agriculture should be the first priority because it employs the largest share of  Nepal’s population. However, the objective should go beyond self-sufficiency toward global competitiveness. Countries like New Zealand and Australia have shown how specialized, high-quality agricultural products can become globally recognized exports. Nepal should aim not only to feed its own population, but to serve even 1% percent of the global market. By applying advanced knowledge, improved standards, and modern engineering to farming, agriculture can evolve from subsistence activity into a high-value export industry.

Nepal’s complex terrain has historically created logistical challenges. However, recent advances in  the “low-altitude economy,” including drone and autonomous aerial systems, can transform transportation and supply chains. Productivity is the engine of economic growth, and efficient logistics are essential for productivity. By adapting technologies suited to its unique geography, Nepal can overcome long-standing structural barriers.

Renewable energy is another critical sector. Nepal has vast hydropower and solar potential that  remains underutilized. During my time in Singapore, despite limited high-quality sunlight due to  frequent cloud cover, we pursued solar energy for reasons of national security and energy  independence. Through collaboration with global partners, Singapore built a billion-dollar solar  industry that continues to thrive today. Nepal can adopt a similar model by forming strong  international partnerships across the renewable energy value chain and accelerating the development of its vast hydropower and clean energy resources.

Another unavoidable frontier is Artificial Intelligence (AI). Major global corporations are  investing trillions of dollars into AI, and it will soon be integrated into nearly every human  service. Nepal has a unique opportunity to adopt AI quickly and creatively. In the past, software development was concentrated in a handful of countries. Today, AI tools have democratized development, enabling broader participation.

This is costly because AI infrastructure requires energy-intensive data centers. However, since  global technology companies already operate such infrastructure, Nepal can focus on developing localized applications that run on existing global platforms. A solution initially built for Nepal—perhaps in the Nepali language—can later be adapted for international markets. That is how scalable innovation works.

In particular, healthcare should be a strategic focus. Although Nepal currently has a young population, it will eventually confront the challenges of aging. A healthy population is essential for productivity. By integrating AI into healthcare services, Nepal can improve medical outcomes, increase efficiency, and eventually export health-tech solutions. This would not only strengthen the public health system but also open significant opportunities for private sector growth.

In summary, agriculture, renewable energy, logistics innovation, AI-driven services, and especially 
healthcare are sectors most ready to benefit from advanced materials and engineering innovation. 
With the right vision and partnerships, Nepal can transform these sectors into globally competitive 
industries.

Q. What about the manufacturing and construction industries? What are some of the simplest  sustainability innovations that could deliver both profitability and positive environmental impact? 

A major shift is already underway in the construction industry. Over the past 30 years, buildings  have been dominated by steel and concrete. However, many advanced economies are now transitioning toward engineered wood and other bio-based materials. Countries such as Australia, the United States, and Japan are leading this change.

For example, at the recent Expo 2025 Osaka, one of the most striking features was the extensive use of wood in large-scale structures. Japan certainly does not lack steel or aluminum, yet it deliberately chose wood to showcase sustainability and innovation in construction.

Nepal is exceptionally well positioned to benefit from this trend. The country has abundant bamboo and timber resources, along with deep traditional expertise in building with these materials. By combining this indigenous knowledge with modern engineering—such as advanced treatment methods, laminated timber technology, and international safety standards—Nepal could produce durable, high-quality, and globally competitive sustainable construction materials. This would reduce reliance on imported steel and cement, lower carbon emissions, and create domestic economic value.

As for manufacturing more broadly, it is a vast sector, and strategic focus is essential. Nepal should begin with low-capital, high-value-added manufacturing, particularly in areas aligned with its natural resources and craftsmanship. This approach minimizes financial risk while maximizing profitability and brand differentiation. Once sufficient capital and industrial capability have been built, the country can gradually expand into more capital-intensive industries.

Ultimately, the simplest sustainability innovation is not necessarily high-tech—it is about intelligently upgrading what Nepal already has. By modernizing what it already has, Nepal can achieve both profitability and environmental sustainability.

 

Q. We have discussed how sustainability is no longer optional for businesses. How will advanced  materials and the circular economy reshape future business models, particularly in emerging  economies like Nepal?

Over the past 20 years, companies listed on stock exchanges were primarily expected to report on CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility). More recently, in countries like Singapore, all listed companies are now required to disclose their ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) performance, which must be certified by independent third parties.

To maintain a strong ESG rating, businesses must have clear decarbonization strategies. This makes renewable energy and sustainable materials essential. Companies and economies that understand and effectively leverage these ESG requirements will gain a significant advantage in the modern market.

Nepal, in particular, has a unique opportunity through its natural carbon sinks. The country’s vast forest resources can be monetized via the global carbon market—not by selling the land itself, but by offering carbon credits. Essentially, Nepal can tell the global market: “These are carbon sinks we are protecting for you.” Companies then purchase these credits, and Nepal provides verified data annually—using remote sensing and other technologies—to demonstrate that the forests are being preserved.

This approach allows Nepal to transform its conservation efforts into a direct economic asset, linking sustainability with measurable financial returns. It is a clear example of how the circular economy and advanced environmental strategies can create value while supporting global climate goals.

Q. There is a growing discussion around social enterprises— ventures that may not always maximize profit but aim to create broader social and environmental impact. As you mentioned, these often rely on local raw materials. What is your perspective on the role of such enterprises?

One night, while walking near my hotel in Kathmandu after 10 pm, I noticed large piles of garbage made up of plastics and packaging. People were eating and discarding waste right on the street. Of course, packaging is unavoidable—it is essential for food preservation and reducing spoilage—but the environmental impact is clear.

One solution is to replace petrochemical-based materials with natural, environmentally friendly  alternatives. Another is to use social enterprises to collect and channel plastic and electronic waste into formal recycling streams. For example, I visited a highly successful recycling company in Thailand. When I asked what made them successful, they said the most critical factor was ensuring a consistent “feed” of raw materials. A recycling plant needs tons of plastic to operate, but the material must be pre-sorted; otherwise, the machines cannot function efficiently.

To achieve this, they rely on local networks. This model works well even in high-income places like Hong Kong. Rag pickers, known locally as “Karung Guni,” go from household to household collecting waste for profit. Similarly, Singapore has a beverage container return scheme, inspired by successful models in Scandinavia, where consumers pay a small deposit at purchase and get it back when they return the container.

Nepal has a wealth of opportunities for social enterprises in packaging and waste management. By 
adapting these proven models to the local context, such ventures can create both social impact and 
sustainable business value.

Q. What do you see as the biggest gap between universities and industry in countries like Nepal?

I believe we should always look to global best practices. With over 30,000 universities worldwide, even top-tier institutions often struggle with strong university-industry collaboration. The most persistent gap lies in communication and alignment. Industries often fail to clearly articulate their challenges for researchers, while researchers often lack a deep understanding of how to translate their work into practical solutions for companies. At the same time, the private sector is often hesitant to invest in academic research. This lack of mutual engagement represents a significant missed opportunity. True success comes from bridging this gap—where industry provides clearly defined problems and funding, and universities deliver actionable solutions. Closing this loop is what sets globally competitive ecosystems apart.

Q. You recently left the National University of Singapore, which is well known for translating  research into startups and industry solutions. What key practices should Nepali universities adopt  to support innovation that drives growth?

During my time as Director at NUS Enterprise, I witnessed firsthand how we built an ecosystem to incubate startups and help them scale into unicorns. This model has been highly successful and is now emulated globally.

One key lesson we learned is that high-quality, innovative ideas alone are not enough. Many researchers excel in their technical fields and assume they are ready for the market, but the business world operates under a completely different set of rules. To bridge this gap, we paired innovators with experienced mentors who could provide guidance, helping them navigate the complexities of commercialization.

Beyond mentorship, connecting startups to global networks proved essential. By linking local innovators to hubs like Silicon Valley, we ensured they were not working in isolation and could access international expertise, markets, and opportunities.

Finally, financial support is critical. The steady growth of the Singapore Venture Capital Association provided the necessary funding ecosystem. While smaller than Silicon Valley, it has become a robust and effective source of capital for a country of Singapore’s size.

Nepali universities can adopt these three practices—mentorship to bridge technical and business gaps, global network integration, and a supportive funding ecosystem—and create an environment where research translates into innovation-driven growth.

Q. Nepal is currently experiencing a significant talent outflow. Realistically, what policy and 
institutional changes are needed to retain talent and attract skilled Nepali professionals back 
home?

The strategy rests on two pillars: retention and attraction. Retention begins with building world-class universities, as top talent needs sophisticated infrastructure and an enabling environment to thrive. At the same time, we must shift the narrative from “brain drain” to “brain gain” to encourage Nepalis abroad—and global talent more broadly—to return.

Thirty-five years ago, before I left for Cambridge, I discussed this with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. I explained that while India had immense talent, it lacked enough job density to support everyone. Working abroad did not mean leaving India behind; it meant becoming a global competitor capable of channeling resources and goodwill back home.

Today, the Nepali diaspora can play a similar role. Nepal has changed significantly over the past two decades, making it a more viable destination for returnees. However, the government must implement policies that facilitate this reconnection, such as incentives for returnees, streamlined professional recognition, and opportunities for entrepreneurial engagement.

China offers a compelling example on this front. Over the past 15 years, it has successfully leveraged its diaspora to drive domestic economic growth, demonstrating the potential impact of coordinated policy and institutional support.

Q. What kind of policy and governance environment should Nepal’s higher education institutions have to support economic growth, entrepreneurship, and job creation?

Having observed different countries and policy systems, I believe the most important requirement is that policies must be transparent and clear. If a policy is vague, people struggle to understand it. Not everyone is a lawyer, and not everyone is an expert in every field. Ideally, people should be able to understand the rules simply by reading the document.

If a policy is so convoluted that you need a PhD to explain it, then you have already lost the  audience. The key is to simplify policies and make their application obvious. I am sure Nepal already has good policies in place, but the challenge is that they are not fully transparent, and their interpretation is often unclear. Addressing this gap by clarifying and simplifying policy can create the most significant progress in supporting higher education, entrepreneurship, and economic  growth.

Q. From an employer’s perspective, what skills should Nepali graduates possess? Success requires a combination of deep technical skills, real expertise, and a global mindset. Without a global perspective, it is difficult to communicate effectively across cultures.

For example, during a ceremony I attended recently, a new graduate shared a story: during her studies, a student was bitten by a snake, and the university immediately provided care. Can you 
imagine that happening in New York or Singapore? Students there might have no idea what to do. They may never even encounter a snake and there is no standard “snake bite” protocol at universities abroad.

People in different cultures often lack perspective on other ecosystems unless they are exposed to them. Experiencing another culture broadens your thinking, changes how you approach problems, and improves your ability to communicate and build genuine relationships.

In my view, a global mindset is essential, but it must be paired with deep expertise. To earn respect and make an impact, you need to have something of real value to contribute—strong core skills in your field are the foundation for that.

Q. In a rapidly changing global economy, what core skills and mindsets should Nepali graduates develop to stay relevant and competitive?

Fifteen years ago, I wrote a book on the changing nature of innovation. I am not a historian or an expert on the history of science, but I noticed that many young people worldwide feel predisposed to be non-innovative. They often lack confidence, perhaps due to cultural norms, traditions, or the belief that their society or history is not “innovative.”

Looking at how innovation has evolved over the last 5,000 years, my central message is that innovation is not limited by the size of your community or your geography. Anyone can innovate—but confidence is essential. Confidence alone is not enough; you must also acquire the necessary skills, whether scientific, technical, or business-related. Equally important is maintaining an open, global mindset and practicing critical thinking. These ensure that, no matter what others say, you have your own clarity and the ability to develop original, impactful solutions.

Q. Your work spans nanofibers, smart materials, AI, and wearables. Which of these emerging 
technologies do you believe will have the greatest commercial impact over the next decade?

The next decade clearly belongs to wearables. To illustrate, one of my mentees—a 40-year-old European professor—recently joined me on a project in Thailand. During a conversation, he mentioned that he had not slept well the previous night but was confident he would sleep better that night. When I asked why, he explained that a specific device was arriving in his luggage that day. He showed it to me. It was a wearable, worn like a neckband and connected to his mobile phone. It adjusts frequencies to send  soothing vibrations to aid sleep.

I saw another example in China. Relationships and social dinners are very important there. A junior 
colleague wanted to participate in one of these to build connections with local leaders. However, he had a low biological tolerance for alcohol. To engage fully, he needed to drink, which worried me. He reassured me, explaining that his smartwatch monitored his blood pressure and oxygen levels in real time. He had set thresholds in consultation with his doctor, so he knew precisely when to stop.

Now imagine a future where data from all five senses is captured—and the sixth sense is the brain. 
We often think of the brain as a processor, but it is also a sensor. Once we can measure brain  activity directly, combining it with data from the other five senses—the “5 + 1” approach—will be 
incredibly powerful. Even with close family or best friends, we do not always share everything about how we feel. Wearables can provide an objective assessment of our state, helping us decide how to act.

This is why the real competition in the coming decade is no longer about mobile phones—it will be 
about wearables.

Q. In the Nepali context, how could materials science or intelligent wearables help address  pressing challenges in healthcare, energy, or environmental sustainability?

Even without direct data, it is reasonable to assume that Nepal faces significant challenges related to diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular diseases, and likely mental health issues as well. Globally, we see a rising number of people affected by anxiety, stress, and related conditions. All of these areas require technological solutions. This is precisely where materials science and intelligent wearables can make a meaningful contribution. These technologies can monitor health in real time, provide actionable insights, and support preventive care, ultimately improving outcomes and reducing strain on the healthcare system.

Q. You have published over 500 papers and hold more than 70 patents. What advice would you give to young researchers?

Research is highly interdisciplinary and often expensive. It is far more effective to collaborate widely rather than working alone. While there may be a few niche areas where solo research is possible, most scientific breakthroughs require expertise from multiple disciplines. My primary advice to young researchers is to embrace collaboration.

Equally important is maintaining close ties with industry and the business community. They understand market gaps and know how to scale research into real-world applications. A strong network with industry partners makes implementation much easier, while lacking that network can make the process far more challenging.

Q. You have served on various international committees and spoken at the UN. How can countries like Nepal connect more effectively with global research and innovation networks?

Over the past 15 years, a significant number of Nepalis have moved around the world. I believe they can serve as bridges by connecting Nepal to global research networks. Even if they are not working in the exact same field, they provide vital points of contact.

Second, seeing is believing. I want to share an example. After I joined Tsinghua University, I met a colleague at Beijing University of Chemical Technology. She had secured an international grant for a collaboration between China and Russia, partnering with a Russian professor in her late 50s or 60s. The Chinese professor invited her to visit and even offered to take her to other cities beyond Beijing. The Russian professor replied, “I only want to go to Beijing.” When asked why, she explained that, to her knowledge, only Beijing was safe. She considered all other cities dangerous.

This illustrates an important point: even brilliant scientists are not always “world-aware.” Some remain in their own bubbles and may hold outdated or exaggerated stereotypes about other countries. The most effective solution is to bring them here—because once they see for themselves, perceptions change. Exposure  and firsthand experience are key to connecting Nepal more
effectively with global research and innovation networks.

(This interview was originally published in March 2026 issue of New Business Age magazine.)