Standardisation: Reframing Ayurveda for a Global Audience
Standardisation has become central to the globalisation of Ayurveda, marking a departure from its pluralistic adaptive nature. Historically, Ayurveda thrived as a dynamic system of oral traditions and diverse regional practices. The 20th-century revivalist movement, however, redefined Ayurveda by prioritising canonical Sanskrit texts, particularly the
Charaka Samhita and
Sushruta Samhita, over the fluidity of its folk traditions.
Chithprabha Kudlu (2022) identifies this as the foundation of Ayurveda’s modern identity, which was to be instrumentalised for global recognition.
The establishment of national regulatory frameworks such as the
Department of AYUSH in 1995 and
evolving government policies aimed at integrating Ayurveda into global markets have amplified this trajectory in recent decades. Standardisation ensures compliance with international norms, positioning Ayurveda as a credible and competitive alternative to biomedicine. However, as
Kudlu (2022) asserts, this process is not merely about scientific rigour; it also reflects cultural-nationalist aspirations to position Ayurveda as a unified medical system that embodies India’s heritage.
Ayurveda as a Tool of Cultural Diplomacy
The global branding of Ayurveda aligns with India’s broader strategy of leveraging cultural heritage as a form of
soft power. Through Ayurveda and
yoga, India constructs itself as a wellness destination, offering holistic and spiritual alternatives to Western biomedical paradigms. This narrative draws on
orientalist tropes that depict India as a repository of ancient wisdom and natural healing. By foregrounding
Ayurveda’s Vedic roots, policymakers tap into its symbolic potential to appeal to global audiences while reinforcing a sense of national pride.
Andrew Graan’s (2013) study on national branding illuminates the pitfalls of such an approach. As
Graan (2013) argues, branding of this kind relies on monolithic representations that obscure internal complexities and marginalise dissenting voices. Ayurveda’s branding exemplifies this tendency. While it enhances marketability, it simplifies and commodifies Ayurveda, overshadowing its
pluralistic traditions. By catering to global wellness trends, this approach risks privileging Ayurveda’s exotic appeal over its historically contextual practices, reducing it to a mere commodity in the international health market.
The Paradox of Globalisation: Uniformity and Marginalisation
Standardisation, while essential for global recognition, introduces significant challenges to Ayurveda’s identity and practice. The emphasis on uniformity marginalises smaller practitioners and regional manufacturers who lack the resources to meet stringent regulatory standards. This transition disproportionately benefits large-scale, market-dominating pharmaceutical companies, sidelining the grassroots diversity that has historically sustained Ayurveda.
Moreover, the focus on canonical texts for formulating standardised medicines often disregards the ecological and cultural specificities that define traditional Ayurvedic practices.
Kudlu (2022) notes that such epistemological shifts risk creating a homogenised version of Ayurveda, catering to international markets at the cost of its inherent adaptability. This homogenisation is not merely an outcome of globalisation but also reflects internal sociopolitical agendas that seek to assert India’s cultural and economic superiority over other nonconventional health practices on the global stage.
These processes represent an epistemic loss, where diverse knowledge systems integral to Ayurveda are subsumed under a singular narrative. The pursuit of a unified Ayurvedic identity aligns with nationalist projects but also highlights a broader paradox: while seeking to globalise Ayurveda, these efforts erode the very pluralism that has defined its authenticity and resilience over time.
Ayurvedic practices are undergoing increasing standardisation. [Image credit: PNWCA]
The globalisation of Ayurveda exemplifies a critical juncture where tradition intersects with modernity, creating a dynamic but contested terrain. This tension manifests in the dual imperatives to preserve Ayurveda’s traditional ethos and meet the desire for international recognition.
Shwetha C Pondomatti and others (2024) underscore the need for a balanced approach of this kind, one that would integrate Ayurveda’s scientific dimensions with its sociocultural heritage.
Such integration requires policymakers and health care practitioners to recognise the value of regional variations and context-specific uses. By moving beyond the binary of tradition versus modernity, Ayurveda can be reimagined as a living knowledge system capable of adapting to contemporary demands without losing its pluralistic essence.
Preserving Pluralism in a Globalised Context
The future of Ayurveda lies in its ability to reconcile the demands of globalisation with the imperative to preserve its pluralistic heritage. While the economic potential of Ayurveda as a global wellness system cannot be overlooked, its transformation into a globally marketable entity must account for its cultural and historical specificities. Policymakers must address the marginalisation of smaller practitioners and regional traditions, fostering an environment where diverse voices can contribute to Ayurveda’s global narrative.
This requires moving beyond the current emphasis on standardisation to create spaces for dialogue and collaboration between traditional practitioners, pharmaceutical industries, and global stakeholders. By adopting such an inclusive approach, Ayurveda can retain its authenticity while adapting to the challenges and opportunities of a globalised world.
Conclusion
The globalisation of Ayurveda offers both opportunities and challenges, reflecting the complex interplay of cultural identity, economic ambition and modernity. While the emphasis on standardisation has facilitated its integration into global markets, this has also introduced significant tensions, particularly concerning the preservation of Ayurveda’s pluralistic traditions. This post underscores the need for a nuanced approach that balances these competing imperatives, ensuring that Ayurveda’s transformation respects its historical and cultural roots. Ultimately, the future of Ayurveda lies in its ability to evolve as a living knowledge system, retaining its relevance and authenticity while addressing the demands of a rapidly changing global landscape. If its complexity and diversity are embraced, Ayurveda can continue to thrive and offer a compelling alternative to biomedical paradigms.
Purbita Das is a Senior Research Fellow (PhD) in the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IISER Bhopal. Her doctoral thesis explores the representation of HIV/AIDS and COVID-19 in Indian literary and cultural texts in the current century. Her research area includes Literary Medical Humanities, Environmental Humanities, Gender Studies and Sexuality and Care Studies.
