Article Archives - Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies

Hindustan Times | Rohini Nilekani writes: India’s biodiversity is a strategic advantage

Biodiversity markets are deepening, with a growing demand for high-quality carbon credits with biodiversity safeguards

As India’s geopolitical future sways with the swings of the global political pendulum, it is worth reflecting on the constant in the chaos, a North Star among spinning constellations. India’s biodiversity can be that sanctuary, that bank which helps us remain aatmanirbhar (self- reliant). Natural wealth is immune to trade and tariff wars, a trump card in climate diplomacy. It is a sacred vault which can future-proof our ambitions to be an abundant society by 2047.

India is one of very few countries with an unbroken culture of 5,000 years that is animated with the understanding that we are part of nature; that it is our privilege and duty to nurture and enrich all life on earth. That sacrality may be dimming in the face of a young population and polity demanding rapid, modern economic development. So, we must weave anew the stories, craft again the culture, the rituals, and behaviours that restore ecological belonging. Biodiversity is no longer a nice-to-have natural heritage. It could be a differentiator in the global arena, as scarcity mindsets take over with the climate crisis. If we act now, if we protect now, societal gains and economic rewards will accrue over time.

Biodiversity markets are deepening, with a growing demand for high-quality carbon credits with biodiversity safeguards. There is a strong pushback from environmentalists. Yet, if done right, it could allow first mile communities to be rewarded for conservation practices, to improve their lives and livelihoods.

The European Space Agency has launched a mission to map global biomass, penetrating dense forests to assess stored carbon. The Global Biodiversity Standard may push biodiversity monitoring further. This, in turn, will fuel the demand for verified ecosystem services provided by natural environments. The time is ripe to enhance our national, natural biodiversity.

India’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) commits us to 3 billion tonnes of CO2 sinks through additional forest cover by 2030. This is both a moral obligation and a strategic imperative for us. In 2023 alone, the Earth lost 3.7 million hectares of tropical forest, which accounted for 6% of global CO2 emissions. By one estimate, in just one year, the climate crisis has led to population weighted GDP loss of 6.3%, disproportionately affecting Southeast Asia. If we do not take this seriously, however, our economic growth can stall, with cascading impacts on well-being. All economic activity stands on the foundation of ecological security. We have been and will remain a biomass-based society for a long time to come. Whether or not we participate in biodiversity markets, it is in our self-interest to regenerate this land.

Luckily, despite more than three decades of fast-tracked development, inevitably swallowing up natural capital, India retains high biodiversity. The Forest Rights Act recognises the critical role of indigenous communities in conservation. Centuries of stewardship ensured that only four mammals — the Asiatic cheetah, the Javan rhinoceros, Sumatran rhino, and the banteng — have become extinct in India, though many are now endangered.

India is still blessed with vast floral and faunal species. We boast 13% of global bird species, and part of the world’s largest mangrove forest. Though nearly half our land is under cultivation, there is significant co-existence with wildlife; 300 species were documented just in the agricultural lands of the Ganga basin. Outside our forests, pastoral lands, tea and coffee plantations and even urban parks hold untold biodiversity.

Protect our plants, and we protect critical water sources that are an insurance against disrupted monsoon patterns. Forests slow down water, and they do it for free. The cost of man-made infrastructure for the same service has been prohibitive and repetitive — a Sisyphean task. Protect our animals, and we protect pharmaceutical innovation and the health care of our citizens. The drugs of the future are waiting to be discovered in our biota.

Much has been newly understood about zoopharmacognosy — how animals use plants as natural medicine. Most primates, big cats and even domesticated cattle and dogs still have the nutritional wisdom to seek out worm-destroying shrubs and grasses. We can learn much from the animal world about protecting human health.

Biodiversity research also offers remediation against new pollutants. University of Wuhan researchers found that a sponge made of cotton and squid could absorb 99.9% of microplastics in water. Indian universities must urgently ramp up such research, leveraging the opportunity from fleeing global talent.

If forests are a storehouse for genetic resources, new materials, and biomimicry-based innovations, trees also create microclimates that mitigate the impact of extreme heat; 2024 was the hottest year on record. Churu, Rajasthan recorded a maximum of 50.5°C. At those temperatures, people can die. We need shady cover more than ever.

There is a price to be paid for inattention. Bees, essential for pollinating half of all food crops, are declining worldwide. Honeybee deaths have hit record highs, including in Punjab. Commercial beekeepers in the US have lost 60% of their colonies, valued conservatively at $139 million this year.

We are entangled with nature even as we drive species extinction. For today’s generations, we need to spell out that entanglement. Can we go beyond GDP to better account for our natural capital?

Recently, the Indian Institute of Forest Management, in collaboration with the National Tiger Conservation Authority, conducted an economic valuation of India’s tiger reserves, using Stanford University’s open source InVest methodology. The study estimated that each of the 10 tiger reserves monitored generated about $1.2 billion to $4.0 billion in ecosystem services every year. Imagine what we will uncover about the inherent value of other ecological assets, by using indigenously refined models.

When we do, it will be easier to make better development trade-offs. A highway through a forest? A mega dam across a life generating river? Let’s consider smarter alternatives.

Measuring biodiversity is only one way to enhance public appreciation of the ecological legacy we borrow from future generations. If we as shareholders are inspired to become trustees of India’s natural capital, it will become a kamadhenu — a gift that keeps on giving.

Rohini Nilekani, chairperson, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies, is the author of Samaaj, Sarkaar Bazaar – A citizen first approach. The views expressed are personal.

Hindustan Times

The Times of India | Rohini Nilekani Writes: Silver Can Be The New Swag

In 25 years, India will have 300mn elders. It’s time for a mental reset – from making second careers possible, to recognising hours of caregiving they provide, to finding ways to keep them socially active.

Recently, a parliamentary committee proposed that the age criteria for Ayushman Bharat Vay Vandana Card, the health insurance scheme for elders, be reduced from 70 to 60 years of age, and coverage doubled from 5L to 10L. Whether or not that suggestion is implemented, it points to the importance of the demographic transition in India.

In 2020, almost 90% of the country’s population was below the age of 60 years. Young, vibrant India was able to reap an economic dividend for the past 30 years or so. However, with the birth rate rapidly declining, the proportion of young people is expected to decrease significantly. Longer lifespans compound this effect. By 2047, we will have 300mn older adults, roughly equal to US’s population, with almost 50mn aged above 80. By 2067, we’ll surpass China to have the world’s largest cohort of older adults.

Politics already reflects the anxiety around the reduced productive workforce. Will we become old before we become rich? In south India that has already fallen below replacement rates, politicians have begun to speak up about encouraging couples to have more children. Although, in other rapidly ageing countries like South Korea and Japan, such a strategy has not worked.
It is critical, then, to focus on what’s possible. How can we shift our mental models? Do we understand the needs and aspirations of elder adults? How can we focus on the opportunity for an older population rather than be weighed down by the threat?

Older adults can be significant contributors to their families and to society. One in three is working well into their 60s, though mostly in the informal and agricultural sectors. They contributed 3.3% of the estimated real GDP in 2023-24. Businesses run by older adults Calvin & Hobbes employ 63mn individuals countrywide. Even after retirement from the formal sector, urban seniors especially are using digitech innovations to pursue second careers or new hobbies. Society thinks of the aged as needy. Yet, they spend about 14bn hours a year providing care to their grandchildren or other family members. One of three wants to actively volunteer and contribute to their communities.

It’s time to change the story of old age. In a study on longevity, elder adults across the board expressed their need for freedom, for economic and physical security, and for well-being, including social connectedness. This is an opportune moment to invest in these areas to be prepared for the seismic demographic shift to come. The state can focus on appropriate physical and digital infra, improved access to social protections (only 8.6% of older adults receive any form of work- related pension now), better healthcare and structured capacity building for willing and able elders. Business can tap into the potential of the silver economy, which in US is estimated to be $8.7bn and gro- wing. Today, there are about 100 Indian startups focusing on the 60-plus. With the right venture capital, there could easily be 1,000 such endeavours, with the potential to integrate over 25mn more people into the economy.

Lastly, civil society can greatly help. The Niti Aayog Darpan portal lists over 39,000 CSOs focusing on- older adults. Several organisations with support from philanthropies have done exemplary work to provide support and help change the narrative on ageing. More philanthropists are paying attention to the needs of an ageing demographic. For example, Kris Gopalakrishnan and Ashok Soota support neuroscience research to unlock better understanding of the ageing brain and mental health, critical in a country where the population of seniors with depression may cross 16% in 20 years.

Yet, the journey into later years is very individual and can be very difficult. In India, 40% of older adults live close to the poverty line, and are more likely to be female, with 70% of older women dependent on others for their basic needs. In this digital age, only 14% can use the Internet. Isolation may rise, with fewer than 5% being part of any formal social network or organisa- tion – 38mn seniors already live either alone or with their spouse in increasingly nuclear families. Lastly, India’s healthy life expectancy is 58 years, far below its life expectancy of 73 years.

There’s much catching up to do before the lived reality of the majority of older adults meets their rising aspirations. Can India take the lead in positively redefining what it means to be an older adult? Can it be done in time for what’s coming, ready or not? As we celebrate our youth and rising prosperity, we can be future smart-welcome the oncoming longevity to unlock a different but stronger idea of a mature developed society. One that is mentally and physicall sound, economically secure, and an exemplar for a ageing world.

Silver can become the new black.

The writer is chairperson, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies and co-founder/director of EkStep Foundation.

The Times of India

IDR | A question for all of us who care about change

How do we resist the pull towards control and instead lean into the messiness of connection?

– Gautam John (CEO, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropries)

In an earlier piece on IDR, I explored connection and abstraction as two distinct approaches to systems change. That framing was meant to start a conversation, to ask what it takes to build what I call a rainforest of change in a world so often drawn to the efficiency of plantations. A rainforest conjures images of abundance, resilience, and diversity—a thriving ecosystem in which each element plays a role in sustaining the whole. A plantation, by contrast, symbolises uniformity, control, and extraction, where the goal is not thriving but harvesting.

Since writing that piece, I’ve been reflecting on the ways connection and abstraction interact, not as binaries but as polarities. They’re not opposites; they’re interdependent. The tension between them doesn’t have to pull us apart. It can hold us in balance, like the dance between the roots and branches of a tree.

This follow-up piece builds on that idea. It draws on recent conversations and experiences to look more deeply at the relationship between connection and abstraction, the role of trust and language, and what it means to lead in a way that honours both.

In a recent conversation with Rajesh Kasturirangan at Socratus, I spoke about the concept of terroir. It wasn’t his framing, but it became a starting point for our dialogue about connection, abstraction, and systems change. I used terroir to describe how deeply place matters—how the soil, history, relationships, power dynamics, and culture of a community create a unique context that resists replication, and how this context must be understood and respected. Just as wine reflects the terroir of the vineyard, change reflects the terroir of the community—and in systems change, we cannot treat every community as a blank slate.

Rajesh pushed back not to dismiss the value of connection or terroir, but to emphasise that abstraction matters too. His point was that we shouldn’t think of them as oppositional. Rather, they are part of the same ecosystem, each enriching the other.

This brought me back to a widely used metaphor when comparing systems work with project-based approaches: the rainforest versus the plantation.

Systems work as rainforests

The rainforest is the model we often hold up as an ideal—diverse, resilient, and alive with connection. But saying we want to create rainforests of change means little unless we understand what it actually takes to nurture one. Rainforests are the result of countless unseen relationships of roots, fungi, and microbes all working together in ways we cannot always observe or control.

Contrast that with a plantation. It’s certainly efficient, but only in a narrow sense. It replaces diversity with monoculture, relationships with extraction, and adaptability with rigidity.

The more I think about it, the more I see how much of our work risks becoming plantation-like when we lean too heavily on abstraction. Frameworks can flatten the complexity of the systems we’re working in, turning vibrant ecosystems into neatly pruned rows—useful, but also brittle.

Rajesh offered an important clarification here: patterns, he said, are not the frameworks themselves, nor are they abstract blueprints. Instead, they are regular, repeated forms that emerge from the underlying structures, whether in nature or communities. They arise when the conditions of connection, trust, and collaboration allow something meaningful to grow.

This idea of patterns as a bridge between connection and abstraction is powerful. It suggests that while abstraction helps us recognise patterns, it is connection that makes those patterns meaningful and rooted.

How we lead

Two podcast conversations I listened to recently, one with Jim Dethmer and another with Karen Kimsey-House, offered language that deepened the idea of leadership for me. They discussed different ways of showing up: ‘to me’, ‘by me’, ‘through me’, and ‘as me’. It struck me how closely these ideas map onto the tension between connection and abstraction.

‘To me’ is an approach of helplessness where life is something that happens to us. There’s little agency here, only reaction. ‘By me’ is where most of us spend our time as leaders. It’s about taking charge, creating outcomes, and owning our role in the process. It is empowering, but it can also lead to overcontrol and trying too hard to shape the world to our will.

The shift to ‘through me’ feels like the key here. It’s a practice of letting go, not of responsibility but of attachment. Karen expresses this well: when we lead ‘through me’, we allow the frameworks to recede into the background. They don’t disappear; they’re still there, but they no longer dictate the moment. Instead, we make room for what’s emerging. This requires trust, not in the sense of blind faith, but in a kind of grounded confidence that the system knows what it needs, that the connections will hold.

What stood out most to me was this idea of invisible networks. In a rainforest, the mycelial web is what connects everything, shuttling nutrients and information between species. In systems change, those networks are the relationships, trust, and shared purpose that hold a system together. The networks are not always visible, but they’re essential. And they can’t simply be transplanted from one place to another. They have to be cultivated, nurtured over time. Trust plays a key role in this—it is not a soft variable, but the primary infrastructure of flourishing, resilient systems, as relational theorists suggest. However, for trust to thrive, belonging alone is insufficient; action is necessary too. Belonging is foundational, but it cannot substitute for action. Trust deepens when it is made visible through showing up, following through, and co-creating the future together.

Donella Meadows touches on this in her reference to Wendell Berry’s concept of ‘tyrannese’—language that abstracts so much it loses its grounding in lived experience. Meadows, echoing Berry, warned that our words, if we’re not careful, can become tools of control rather than connection.

But language can also be expansive. It can help us make the invisible visible and give shape to the networks we sense but can’t always see. This ties back to Rajesh’s emphasis on trust as a foundational virtue, one that not only connects people but also allows the emergence of empathy, justice, insight, and complexity.

The idea of trust

The podcasts also touched on something else that feels relevant here: the idea of trust. To lead ‘through me’ is to trust not just the system, but ourselves. Jim talked about the work it takes to get there, the inner stability we need to stop outsourcing our sense of ‘okayness’ to external markers of approval or control. That’s not easy. It means letting go of certainty, of the need to be right, of the urge to cling to frameworks as a safety net. But it’s also freeing. When we trust, we make space for something new to emerge.

This is where connection and abstraction can meet—not as opposites, but as complements. Abstraction helps us see patterns, while connection reminds us that those patterns are rooted in place, in relationships, in the invisible networks that sustain life. The art lies in holding both, in knowing when to let the framework guide us and when to let it go.

This isn’t just a question for leaders; it’s a question for all of us who care about change. How do we resist the pull towards control and instead lean into the messiness of connection? How do we create systems that honour the terroir of each place while still learning from one another? How do we trust in the mycelial web of the rainforest, even when we can’t see it?

These aren’t easy questions, but they’re the ones I want to sit with. Maybe it begins with simply noticing when we reach for control, and when we might lean into trust instead. And today, as large-scale technologies increasingly abstract people’s lived realities, the need to restore connective language and practice feels even more urgent.

Because the more I think about it, the more I believe that the work we’re trying to do—whether it’s in leadership, systems change, or simply in being human—can’t be done without them. Connection and abstraction, roots and branches—what grows between them is what we call change, and like any living thing, it needs care, attention, and time.

India Development Review

The Indian Express | Jan Vishwas 2.0 and 3.0 will find the ‘madhyam marg’ between trusting and punishing citizens

The current system also blurs the lines between minor infractions and serious crimes. It can award lesser punishment for serious offences and severe punishment for lesser offences…

Good laws make for good societies. The recently announced Jan Vishwas Bill 2.0 at the Union government level, soon to be followed by Jan Vishwas 3.0 bills by various state governments, is critical to enabling this maxim.

A new database by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy shines a bright light on 174 years of legislative enactment across 882 central laws. Of these, 370 have criminal provisions for 7,305 crimes. Of these crimes, 5,333 attract jail terms, 982 attract mandatory minimum jail terms, 433 attract life imprisonment, and 301 attract the death penalty. Criminal justice laws like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, National Security Act, etc, only account for about 25 per cent of crimes. The rest are laws governing many aspects of ordinary life, such as parent and child care, gathering in assembly and mobility. India has steadily moved up in international rankings in improving the ease of doing business and is working on employer decriminalisation. The next phase of change involves raising the ease of living for our 1.4 billion nagariks by making humane laws that are easy to follow and enforce.

Currently, our plethora of criminal provisions for citizens is undoubtedly excessive; you can be arrested for milking a cow or buffalo on the street, failing to report the death of an animal within three hours, removing corpses by unprescribed routes, neglecting to provide proper exercise to a pet dog, distributing feeding bottles even to a mother who cannot breastfeed, and for simply storing e-cigarettes. These are just some inexplicably harsh punishments for common human failings that do not cause grave public harm. Cases using these provisions are rarely filed, and don’t often reach courts. Yet, having such provisions on the books increases the potential for the arbitrary exercise of power.

The current system also blurs the lines between minor infractions and serious crimes. It can award lesser punishment for serious offences and severe punishment for lesser offences. For example, the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 prescribes six months of jail for failing to maintain records and fulfil reporting obligations. It also recommends the same jail time for performing brain surgery for mental illness without the consent of the patient and the Board. Similarly, running a red light while driving can incarcerate you for as long as if you forced a person to labour against his will. This disproportionality between crime and punishment can severely distort incentives across society.

Often, citizens simply do not know that these jail provisions and fines even exist across all these laws. That gives corrupt public officials a convenient handle to make them disappear. As the Vishnu Sahasranamam anticipated: Saha-srarchi sapta-jihvah sapta-dha sapta-vahanah, Amoorti ranagho chintyo bhaya-krudbhaya-nashanah (amateur translation: Fear was created so it could be taken away). No wonder citizens fall for digital arrest scams, as we saw recently, where petrified citizens paid up to prevent arrest for crimes they had not committed.

A multi-stakeholder consultation recently organised by Vidhi made it apparent how hard the road to decriminalisation may be. Participants gave examples of how harsh provisions affect poor people the most. Conviction rates are low; the process is the punishment. Courts are hesitant to pass sentences that does not pass a common sense test. Most importantly, it was recognised that the over-reliance on criminalisation in governance reflects the frustrations of trying to impose a modern state on an ancient civilisation. This is only a sarkaar or state-sanctioned system, not a samaaj or society-sanctioned process, and therefore likely to fail.

The proposed Jan Vishwas 2.0 bill can be a powerful gift to the nation. It must go beyond the framework used for version 1.0, where asking civil servants to give up jail provisions led to meagre outcomes. They say nobody surrenders a stick; it must be taken away. If we are serious about writing clear, concise, consistent, comprehensible, and implementable laws, and if we want to decriminalise existing laws with disproportionate punishments, we need a public consensus around an updated framework of values and guardrails.

The Vidhi report proposes four principles, including some that already direct criminal law. First, the protection of value (criminalisation must protect a specific value vital for the existence of society and the larger public interest). Second, protection against clear, identifiable and substantial harm (criminalisation must be justified only by a direct and reasonable apprehension of harm) Third, an effective and efficient solution (criminalisation must be deployed as the sole means to achieve the legitimate purpose of the law). Lastly, proportionate response (criminalisation must be a proportionate response based on the gravity of the harm).

After Jan Vishwas 2.0 adopts these four principles, every criminal provision must also be assessed for its impact on human rights, society, fiscal impact, and justice system capacity. Criminal law has a profound impact on the lives of citizens, whether they recognise it or not. Poor laws affect poor people the most, as they are most vulnerable to the power of the police and small courts. Sure, there will always be crimes that require putting people in jail. Yet a justice system must aim to be restorative and rehabilitative rather than retributive. As Paracelsus, one of the founders of modern medicine, said, “The dose makes the poison.” Anything powerful enough to help has the power to hurt. In India, 75 per cent of prison inmates are undertrials; they have not been convicted of the alleged crime that sent them to jail. We have 3.5 crore pending criminal cases arising from the 5,333 crimes identified in our myriad laws.

As we look ahead to Viksit Bharat by India@100, it is the right time to focus on the ease of living for our citizens. We have faith that Jan Vishwas 2.0 and Jan Vishwas 3.0 will find the madhyam marg between trusting and punishing citizens.

Rohini Nilekani is a philanthropist and Manish Sabharwal is an entrepreneur.

The Indian Express

The Times of India | Rohini Nilekani writes: Our children have told us a wonderful story

Aser 2024 shows govts succeeded in minimising Covid impact on learning gaps. Rural kids are doing better & govt schools are teaching better than low-fee private schools.

A moment comes, not too often, when a society can sense joyful satisfaction. Not elation but a quiet happiness. I believe we should savour such a moment now.

The recently released Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2024, spearheaded for 20 years by Pratham, with the participation of tens of thousands of volunteers across more than 605 districts calls for celebration. After years of disappointment that the country’s children were not learning as well as they should despite serious efforts of sarkaar and samaaj, results show there’s a clear uptick in both language and arithmetic skills. This is especially clear in the lower grades up to Class 5. We’re nowhere near where we want to be, with 100% of children at grade level efficiency. But we seem to be at a tipping point, where reversal looks unlikely. Most children seem to have bridged the pandemic deficit, and states like UP have done particularly well.

A lot of credit must go to both Centre and state govts. Focus on foundational learning and numeracy (FLN) is yielding results — 80% of schools reported they had received both training and materials for basic learning. Interestingly, gains in competence were consistently higher in govt schools across the country, than in rural budget schools.

The focus on little ones is critical. Brain development science tells us more than a million new neural connections are formed every second in the first few years of life. Connections that form early provide either a weak or a strong foundation for connections that form later. Early experiences shape brain architecture, which then determines future learning, behaviour and health too. What happens to 0-to 8-year-olds matters greatly. The National Education Policy has set a goal of universal coverage for all 3- to 6-year-olds to be in high-quality learning environments by 2030. We’re well on the way. Aser tells us that of all rural children, 77.4% of 3-year-olds and 83.3% of 4-year-olds are enrolled in pre-school or Aanganwadis.

It is hard to attribute this shift to any one cause. But the pandemic created a nationwide jolt to the system. The school system had to go digital. Govt’s ‘Diksha’ platform swung into action. Teachers were trained overnight with new skills. Virtual classrooms and processes were set up. There was a country wide consensus that children were in danger of falling behind. Everything that could be done would be done to prevent this.

Suddenly, families became bigger stakeholders in the process. Especially young mothers, who’re themselves more educated than their mothers, with tremendous hopes pinned on their children. They taught themselves to teach. They learned to go online. They saw how play itself became an opportunity for exploration. How the home could be a laboratory for learning. Across the country, people shared notes about their frustrations and their discoveries. Not all the loss could be prevented. The inherent disadvantage of spending two years without formal teaching is showing up in middle school. The learning levels of children in grades 6,7 and 8 seem to have remained flat across the previous Aser reports. We will need to pay very special attention to these students to bring them up to speed. These are already difficult puberty years and children, if not sensitively engaged with, can fall prey to low self-esteem. There is much work ahead.

But there is other good news. Less than 3% of 14- to 16-year-olds were found to be out of school. The majority, 89%, of school-goers have a smartphone at home, of whom 82% know its use reasonably well.
Perhaps the native digital citizens now in middle school can leapfrog through new digital tech powered by AI that allows for better self-learning journeys, in language and math. This is already being tried at some scale and success in Tamil Nadu.

Meanwhile, younger children need to learn less through screens and more through play. Albert Einstein believed that ‘Play is the highest form of research. If all of samaaj participated in this process of celebrating childhood learning through free play, maybe we could soon achieve what most countries only dream of —enabling every child to learn how to learn, with joy, agency and dignity.

Recently, a nationwide ‘Bachpan Manao’ campaign has been launched. Together with several civil society organisations, including our Ekstep Foundation, it will aim to enthuse communities, schools and families to encourage free play, and get a broader understanding of how it cements future learning skills. GOI has a popular kit for schools called ‘Jadui Pitara’ to unleash imaginative play-based learning. We hope this will become a strong societal mission, just as Aser has become a citizen’s movement to take public stock of children’s learning.

Current 3-year-olds, almost all already enrolled in preschool, will be the nation builders of 2047. We have a unique opportunity to nurture this generation of 0–to 8-year-olds, to make them strong lifelong learners, adapted to a fast-changing environment. With big leaps accomplished, this is the quiet happiness moment society can relish and be rejuvenated for the task ahead.

The writer is Chairperson, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies.

The Times of India

IDR | Do finance and compliance in the social sector need a makeover?

Complex and changing financial rules often make it difficult for nonprofits to sustain their work. To turn finance into a strength rather than a burden, organisations need better training, peer support, and accessible tools.

– By Suresh Ponnappa (Chief Financial Officer, RNP) & Shruti Sundaresan (Comms & Community Engagement Lead, RNP)

In August 2024, Dasra convened a workshop for chief financial officers (CFOs) from philanthropic foundations, nonprofits, and various intermediaries for a CFO Community of Practice (CoP) in Guwahati. This initiative was supported by Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies (RNP).

Recognising that finance and governance are the pillars of organisational resilience, the workshop focused on themes such as compliance, risk management, process excellence, and regulatory adaptation to enhance the sector’s sustainability. The event also offered cross-learning opportunities and expert-led sessions on topics such as social finance, the Social Stock Exchange, and impact bonds.

The prevailing consensus at the convening was that financial matters are not solely the responsibility of the finance team, but of the organisation as a whole. This indicated the need for a fundamental shift in how the nonprofit sector views financial management—to recognise it not merely as a support function but also as a strategic driver of organisational sustainability.

While programmatic successes often take centre stage, sound financial management is the backbone of a nonprofit’s credibility and operational resilience. Integrating financial insights into organisational development leads to better use of resources and adaptation to changing conditions. Ultimately, this builds trust and attracts donors and partners.

Navigating complex regulations

In the social sector, organisations are driven by the urgency to address critical societal challenges, yet their ability to create impact is often hindered by the weight of financial scrutiny and regulatory demands.

Behind every initiative lies a complex web of audits, compliance requirements, and funding regulations.

The Centre for Asian Philanthropy and Society’s Doing Good Index 2020 suggests that 43 percent of nonprofits in India are struggling with fundraising due to new foreign contribution restrictions, which have affected their operations. Moreover, between 2013 and 2023, Schedule VII of the Companies Act, 2013—which determines what activities can qualify as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives—was amended several times. These changes have been accompanied by numerous clarifications and FAQs that have often altered the law’s application. Nonprofits incur significant costs in complying with multiple regulations, reporting to various authorities, fulfilling donor requirements, and adhering to social security laws.

These financial and regulatory constraints not only put a strain on daily operations but also limits the limits the longevity and growth of nonprofits.

In this context, it’s time to rethink how financial systems interact with the goals of the social sector. As compliance systems grow more complex, these might often feel disconnected from the sector’s mission.

This prompts certain important questions: Can we reimagine finance and compliance as tools for empowerment? What are some practical ways to strengthen financial capacity, build a peer-driven network of practitioners, and reinforce foundational systems that can ensure stability and meaningful impact over time?

Our experience shows that even minor lapses in compliance, financial management, or documentation can have significant consequences, often undermining years of work and creating fiduciary challenges in fund disbursement.

Registrations under Section 12A and 80G of the Income Tax Act are essential for nonprofits to maintain their charitable and tax-exempt status. Non-compliance with requirements can lead to cancellation of registration, exposing the organisation to taxation at the maximum marginal rate, and affecting its financial viability. For Section 80G, which enables tax deductions for donors, stricter compliance rules require nonprofits to file Form 10BD by May 31 each year. Failure to do so prevents donors from claiming deductions, risking donor confidence and relationship with the organisation.

With respect to nonprofits registered under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, or FCRA, one of the key reasons that could result in cancellation of registration, penalties, or even prosecution is delayed or neglected annual return filings. As of February 2025, more than 20,000 FCRA licenses in India have been cancelled, while approximately 15,000 are deemed expired.

Several nonprofits often face difficulties in staying up to date with their compliance duties, including the need to continuously update financial policies and to provide timely training to their staff to manage compliance independently. Maintaining proper documentation and ensuring regular internal financial reporting are persistent challenges, leading to gaps in transparency and internal controls. Additionally, issues in expenditure controls, procurement policies, and segregation of financial responsibilities further hinder effective financial management.

It is vital that nonprofits undertake periodic and structured desk reviews of their compliance towards governance, finance, and administrative practices. Here’s how organisations, and the sector at large, can assist in better financial management.

1. Building capacity at multiple levels

Capacity-building initiatives for finance teams play a pivotal role in strengthening individual capabilities and, by extension, the sector.

Last year, RNP partnered with Saathi Development Services to conduct a 10-week course on statutory compliance and financial management, benefitting 120 participants from 60 nonprofits within its grantee network. Recently, VANI’s regional capacity-building workshop in Bangalore featured a session on accounts and financial management, and ISDM’s Dialogues on Development Management organised a masterclass on governance and compliance.

These examples highlight the increasing prioritisation of finance and compliance themes in sectoral discussions and events. There seems to be growing recognition of the fact that empowering finance teams with the right skills and knowledge is not just an operational necessity but also a strategic investment.

Capacity-building programmes have strengthened financial management systems within organisations while simultaneously enhancing individual management skills. Key focus areas in financial capacity building include strategic planning and budgeting; consolidating financial systems and processes; improving fundraising capabilities; ensuring accountability and compliance; and implementing robust monitoring, evaluation, and risk management practices. These initiatives enable finance teams to adopt best practices, identify gaps in existing processes, and implement continuous improvements. Additionally, participation in learning programmes fosters peer networks, facilitating ongoing knowledge exchange and professional support.

2. Creating a resilient community of practitioners

Finance roles can often feel isolating, as they focus heavily on regulations, audits, and reporting, with limited opportunities for peer engagement and knowledge exchange. Without dedicated spaces for collaboration, finance professionals may find it difficult to stay updated on latest regulations, address complex issues, and build a strong support network.

While programme leads and senior leadership may find opportunities to collaborate and learn from one another through their work or via social forums, this level of interaction and cross-learning is rarely extended to finance teams. Stand-alone webinars, events, or workshops certainly offer value, but they often fall short of addressing the complexities of an evolving finance and compliance landscape. Sustained engagement and credible, practitioner-oriented information in a simple and accessible form are essential.

Based on this need, we imagined a community-driven platform tailored to finance, developed by professionals within the sector. This led to the creation of the People’s Alliance for Trust & Transparency in Civil Society Organisations (PATTIC)—a collaborative, practitioner-driven platform anchored by Saathi Development Services and Aikyam Fellows and supported by RNP.

PATTIC is envisioned as a resource hub offering a multilingual knowledge base for financial and legal compliance for nonprofits. The platform includes a library, a forum for expert interactions, FAQ and audio repositories, real-time sectoral and compliance-related updates and reminders, and a dedicated WhatsApp channel to cultivate a community of practitioners. The discussion forum also shares resources such as lists of key government portals useful for nonprofits and other organisations.

In essence, it serves as a space for professionals to ask questions, seek clarifications, and stay updated on the latest compliance regulations relevant to the social sector. In fact, many of the questions raised by community members have resonated with finance professionals across the sector, highlighting shared concerns and information needs. PATTIC is accessible in 15 Indian languages, ensuring that reach and engagement extend beyond English-speaking audiences.

Becoming strategic partners

With strong financial and compliance frameworks becoming increasingly important, how can we ensure that our finance teams move from being compliance enforcers to strategic partners in social impact?

For this, nonprofits must prioritise learning and development and allocate funds to strengthen financial capacity. This could include investment in human resources through upskilling initiatives for finance teams to acquire new skills, enabling collaborations at the ecosystem level for sharing best practices, and encouraging periodic reviews of regulations by both finance and non-finance teams through internal meetings and refresher sessions.

Funders can facilitate this process by investing in finance and compliance training, just as they do in programme-related initiatives. Finance professionals could also join peer-learning networks like PATTIC to stay updated and have support.

Making a conscious shift from working in silos to collective action can help ensure that nonprofits not only navigate regulations but also thrive in their mission.

India Development Review

The Indian Express | Rohini Nilekani writes: Vultures, now have more than carrion to feed on — plastic

With the population pressure on land and the unmanageable byproducts of our economic growth, new conflicts emerge. How can we better manage this new tension between humans and animals, between conservation and consumption?

A wedding and a suggestion led to an unexpected rendezvous recently. It was an early morning in Bikaner, Rajasthan, when we set off to the Jorbeer Conservation Reserve. The experience was utopian and dystopian in equal measure.

Established more than 100 years ago by Maharaja Ganga Singh, then ruler of Bikaner, as a site suitable for discarding cattle carcasses, far from the palace community, Jorbeer continues to be a graveyard for thousands of animals — camels, goats and sheep, but specially for cows and bulls.
Ironically, in a country that has unwittingly killed most of its vultures, due to the indiscriminate use of diclofenac for cattle health, this 3,000-acre dumping ground is now host to visiting vultures from Siberia, Mongolia and other parts of Central Asia, Europe and the Himalayas.

In the space of an hour, we saw hundreds of them, including white-headed Egyptian vultures, glistening blackcinereous vultures, Eurasian griffons, Himalayan griffons and more. Sometimes maligned as inauspicious, these bald-headed, strong-beaked scavengers have incredible eyesight, a keen sense of smell to tell edible, decomposed flesh from meat that is too rotten to eat, and enough acid in their digestive system to demolish the worst of bacteria. Along with the powerfully beautiful vultures, there were other magnificent migratory raptors — imperial and steppe eagles, tawny eagles and greater spotted eagles. We even watched a lone white stork, one of Europe’s biggest and most recognisable birds, foraging on the ground.

What with all that, and species I don’t get to see in my hometown, Bangalore — the yellow-eyed pigeons and the white-eared bulbuls, the yellow-footed green pigeons and the red collared doves — I was a birder in paradise. Until I tore my eyes away from my binoculars, to see plastic everywhere, as far as the head could turn. Years and years of untreated solid waste curled around trees, some buried below the sandy soil, thanks to gusty desert winds that cover up past sins.

The most heartbreaking scene was at the open wasteland, where cattle bones lay in the winter sun, feral dogs making a feast of the leftovers. All around the carcasses were remains of plastic bags. The huge birds hopped clumsily around ghostly white clumps, searching for flesh. “Why do people come here to throw plastic, all the way from the city,” I asked our birding guide. The answer was shocking.

Most of the plastic came from inside the stomach of the animals. Each cow has at least 30 kg of plastic in her stomach, our guide informed us, his voice resigned and sombre. All over India, cows are feeding on plastic, as they look for edibles in our carelessly discarded garbage. Many veterinarians speak of the harm and pain it causes these animals.

Despite laws on extended producer responsibility, bans on certain plastics and increased budgets for solid-waste management, this problem seems to be running ahead of solutions.
It is now harming every form of life on our land, with microplastics in our food, leaching chemicals into our water, coupled with the stench of burning plastic in the air. I have seen elephant dung in the deep forest laced with strands of plastic. There is no longer any escape from it, anywhere.

This article is not aimed to offer solutions, though there are many organisations across India working on solid-waste management, be it Clean Coonoor in the Nilgiris or Waste Warriors in the Himalayas — that need to be supported. This essay is about the surreal picture emerging in our countryside. Thanks to our millennia-old cultural tradition of respecting our natural heritage, as well as successful recent conservation efforts, we still have incredible biodiversity in this nation. We continue to welcome thousands of migrant species from across the world.

But with the population pressure on land and the unmanageable byproducts of our economic growth, new conflicts emerge. How can we better manage this new tension between humans and animals, between conservation and consumption? Can we spur innovation to solve the complexities arising out of the successes in our economy?

For that, we need to look unflinchingly at life around us — the ants and the bees, the butterflies and the frogs, the elephants and the leopards. We will then begin to understand and then learn to respect, love and nurture such life.

The Jorbeer Conservation Reserve is an amazing place, especially for children to visit, where their eyes can feast on the stunning vultures, nature’s greatest waste warriors that play a crucial role in keeping wildlife and humans healthy.

We are now trying and beginning to succeed by bringing sarkaar and samaaj together, in retrieving indigenous species from the brink. In a shrinking world, we should also welcome those that come from afar, for they do the work nobody else can and rest the bones of India’s most sacred
animal. They deserve better carrion than our plastic waste.

The writer is chairperson, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies, and author of ‘Samaaj, Sarkaar, Bazaar – a citizen-first approach’.

First Published in The Indian Express

Mongabay India | Centring local communities in digital climate technologies

By Tanya Kak (Climate & Environment Portfolio Lead, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies) and Maya Chandrasekaran (Co-Founder, Green Artha)

Key Ideas:

Digital technologies hold promise for climate action, but their deployment often raises questions of equity, inclusivity, and sustainability.
Climate tech must be built from the ground up, integrating local knowledge and social networks to ensure long-term adoption and meaningful impact.
Reimagining technology as an enabler, not a standalone solution, is essential to create need-based, contextually relevant innovations for a sustainable future.

Have you ever wondered why the cyclone days predicted by artificial intelligence (AI) is different from those predicted by the fisherfolk who’ve read the tides for generations? Precision agriculture promises to optimise water and fertiliser use with drones and sensors, yet smallholder farmers are burdened with high financial costs to use these technologies and partake in ‘tech-driven sustainable farming’. And, while algorithms analyse biodiversity loss, mining for rare earth metals that power these systems can sometimes threaten the ecosystems they aim to protect.

The promise of digital tech is dazzling, but behind every climate dashboard is a set of hard questions about equity, sustainability, and who gets to steer this digital revolution. How do we make sense of the challenge and the opportunity that comes with developing and deploying digital innovations for climate action?

There is a sense of disconnect and even dissonance between what was considered climate technology and what is experienced and needed by communities. At its core lies a critical tension: the interplay between innovation and inclusivity, efficiency and equity, and progress and preservation.

As governments, civil society, and markets navigate this space, there are questions around ethics and equity when shaping the use of digital technologies for climate action. Many of these ideas emerged in a discussion hosted by Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies, examining the impact of co-developing digital technologies with communities and asking: Whose digital future is it anyway?

In the race to innovate, the persistent digital divide looms large, raising urgent questions about accessibility and fairness. Are we building bridges or inadvertently deepening chasms, particularly for those on the frontlines of climate change and systemic inequities?

Equity isn’t just a checklist — it’s a compass, constantly demanding recalibration.

Governance, ownership and community

Donors and technologists often try to find the most cost-effective and impactful innovation to test on the ground. However, what happens to the communities and the ecosystems much after the projects and funding run out? Communicating how the data was used, what has worked and what hasn’t, back to the communities to facilitate stewardship becomes important. Equally, can the role of communities be reimagined from passive recipients of digital technologies for climate action to co-owners of these technologies and data from the get-go?

Technology is never neutral — it carries the imprints of its creators, and sometimes, their blind spots. How do digital tools honour the depth of local knowledge and traditions, rather than flattening them into uniform algorithms? There’s a delicate dance taking place between fostering collective action and unintentionally isolating individuals behind screens.

Can the digital age keep its sustainability promises?

Sustainability isn’t just about longevity, it’s about adaptability, resilience, and the ability to grow with shifting environmental, social, and technological landscapes. Given the speed and scale of the climate challenge, we are quick to measure success for digital technologies with narrow and tangible metrics. Are we just counting downloads and clicks, or are we also able to pause and measure meaningful, lasting change?

Today, a distinction can be made between non-digital innovations (such as solar-powered dryers and cold storages), deep-tech (such as direct air carbon capture), and digital innovations (such as platforms and Digital Public Infrastructure or DPI), and the role and opportunities for each to support and enable community resilience in the context of climate change. DPIs in particular can help in creating the building blocks or infrastructure on top of which other innovations could be built and value created both exponentially and by the ecosystem.

By centring the community lens, a very different imagination is possible of what this infrastructure could encompass and who could build it.

CoRe stack (Commoning for Resilience and Equality), is a digital public good with participatory tech platforms. It takes a similar ecosystem view to community-based DPI. It views innovations as a network of co-creation, or a collaboration between researchers, product developers, community, and eventually policymakers/government programmes. Starting with the questions about the community’s use-case and how it can build genuine empowerment, the CoRE stack uses an equity lens to understand ecosystem vulnerability and build participatory tools and processes. It envisions distributed problem-solving and a more democratic access and use of data to generate ready-to-use outputs for many common use-cases. Central to this co-creation is the tenet that end goals are articulated first-hand by the community, not the market or state.

A key point behind the philosophy of CoRE stack is that of empowering rather than merely creating additional efficiencies. The Open Agriculture Network for example, is an interconnected and future-ready agricultural supply chain network (Unified Krishi Interface 2024). Envisioned as a platform to enable more efficient transactions across stakeholders, reduce acquisition costs, increase access to services, and increase trust and credibility, the OAN intends to reshape agriculture with the farmer’s lived experience at the centre of all features.

Collaboration between climate technologies and communities is of critical importance. Climate digital technologies need to build from the ground up, with community needs at the forefront, and communities need to leverage emerging technologies and platforms to innovate on top of existing infrastructure, strengthen their impact, resilience, and ultimately create value for each other.

But there is concern about the guard rails provided for the use of emerging and often cutting-edge innovations and the unintended consequences they can have. There is a need for combining scientific rigour, best efforts, and the importance of post-intervention validation, quantification, and scientific data to inform the application of any climate technology.

While technology is crucial for accelerating climate action, technical robustness alone doesn’t guarantee adoption or impact. Even the most well-tested technologies can falter when influenced by human behaviour and social networks, which shape their co-development and deployment within specific ecosystems. Therefore, incremental, localised solutions are essential to form a foundational layer on which climate tech innovations can rest.

In that sense, creating a web of carefully planned inter-operable solutions that are need-based and contextually relevant becomes crucial. Instead of everyone rushing to think digital-first, can we re-imagine a world where technology can serve as an enabler for local knowledge and human connection to drive climate innovation rather than a solution in search of a problem?

CITATION:

Vijendra Kumar, Vaibhav Sharma, Naresh Kedam, Anant Patel, Tanmay Ram Kate, Upaka Rathnayake. (2024, August). A comprehensive review on smart and sustainable agriculture using IoT technologies. Science Direct. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772375524000923

Thompson, T., & Nature magazine. (2023, October 31). How AI can help save endangered species. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-ai-can-help-save-endangered-species/

De Domenico, M., & Baronchelli, A. (2019). The fragility of decentralised trustless socio-technical systems. a https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.04192

First published in Mongaybay India

LiveMint | How to create an ADHD accessible workspace

As awareness of ADHD among adults increases, diagnosed individuals need greater understanding and support from those around them

– By Natasha Joshi, Associate Director, RNP

In the last five years, google searches for “ADHD” in India have increased 614%. The rates of diagnosis in both children and adults have also increased in the same period. What was virtually unknown as a condition in India 20 years ago is now on many lips, with many people wondering if they have ADHD—attention deficit hyperactivity disorder—or diagnosing themselves with it. Social media has played an important role in putting ADHD on the map, but credible information is still hard to come by.

Understanding ADHD

At Mannotsava, a national mental health festival co-hosted by Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies, NIMHANS (National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences) and NCBS (National Centre for Biological Sciences), late last year, Dr Eesha Sharma of NIMHANS helpfully outlined what ADHD is.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a developmental delay that typically reveals itself in early childhood, and relates to a child’s diminished ability for focus, self-regulation and impulse control in a way that is considered appropriate for their age.

The key aspect here is “age appropriateness”. Expecting three-year-olds to sit still or focus on any task for more than a few minutes is unrealistic. Asking that of seven-year-olds is understandable. According to Dr Sharma, “developmental abilities, if they become problematic, become problematic in a context.” Unlike mental illnesses where the difficulty is the same no matter what the environment, ADHD being a developmental disorder, turns into dysfunction when the developmental ability doesn’t match what one is expected to do.

Similarly, the converse is also true. Parents can be permissive in a way that fails to identify areas where the child is developing more slowly. An example given by Dr Divya Nallur, consultant psychiatrist, Amaha Health, illuminates this point. As someone working on adult ADHD, she cites instances of parents being unable to recall any issues when the person was a child. On probing, they might confirm that their child did display some behaviours linked with ADHD, but they thought those behaviours were normal. In those instances, it is often the children who, as young adults, approach clinicians for an evaluation; a trend that is growing as more people are coming across online posts on ADHD.

Most people exhibit some degree of behaviours typical to ADHD—we all forget things, we can be impulsive or procrastinate endlessly. What distinguishes these from a clinically diagnosed disorder is the level of severity. That and the context within which a behaviour is manifesting are incredibly important. Shuffling feet, jerking one’s arms and moving around rapidly is okay at a dance party but might be a symptom of ADHD if it happens at say, a funeral or a more sober occasion.

A thorough clinical evaluation is the gold standard when it comes to diagnosing a psychiatric disorder. Such evaluations do not just take into account the exhibited behaviour of an adult, they include the testimony of families, deep observations, household histories and many other contextual variables, which when put together, gives a better idea of the level and nature of dysfunctionality.

Time to evaluate

A crucial thing to note is that ADHD emerges before the age of 12. It can remain undiagnosed, but one cannot develop ADHD suddenly as an adult. For children, parents and educators are the primary observers, so schools can play a vital role in building awareness among teachers and parents. ADHD doesn’t always show up in the form of learning delays. Children with ADHD often struggle socially and it’s helpful to understand those aspects from their point of view.

Any kind of truancy should not be automatically termed “ADHD”. For adults, approaching qualified clinicians is an option. Educating oneself is also a good idea, provided one resists oversimplified or bite-sized content on social media. Modifying one’s environment, using time management apps or other tools can be useful too. In terms of “treatment”, ADHD is not something to be cured. As a developmental condition, ADHD can be managed well with guidance from an experienced clinician. When it comes to pharmacological interventions for mental disorders, ADHD medication appears to show good results in terms of reducing symptoms, and the benefits seem to outweigh the risks of taking medicines.
In the presence of substance use, behaviours can become harder to parse. Dr. Nallur explained that even if someone has mild ADHD, the struggles they have might be a result of other things and not a result of ADHD. “I have young people come to me convinced they have ADHD, and after three-four sittings it comes out they have been using cannabis for 18 months,” Dr. Nallur said. Again, proper diagnosis is key.
Labels can be freeing. To finally have a word or an explanation for a behaviour can feel deeply relieving. Yet, labelling oneself incorrectly can re-direct attention away from the real cause or issue that needs to be addressed.

A supportive environment

Dr Vidita Vaidya, a neurobiologist at Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, talked about the importance of sleep and exercise for mental well-being, as borne out in her research with rodents. Keeping to the circadian rhythm can be a powerful intervention for the brain and it may be time for schools to evaluate whether classes can start a bit later, something research has found to be particularly beneficial for teenagers. The key finding from the research on the benefits of exercise is that benefits accrue when the exercise is done voluntarily or is enjoyed. Access to sunlight and green spaces is another low hanging fruit.

Similarly, incremental changes at the workplace can go a long way in improving employee well-being. Offices can allow people to switch off after a certain hour in the evening, which will allow them room to incorporate voluntary movement and better sleep routines into the second half of their day. Given the link between nutrition and mental well-being, even smaller interventions like stocking the office pantry with seeds and nuts, instead of sodas and chips, can help.

Whether one is clinically diagnosed with a mental disorder or not, caring and flexible environments benefit everyone. Given that the mental health paradigm has shifted away from mental illness being the primary lens, more dialogue is needed to arrive at practical ways in which neurodiversity and overall well-being can be accommodated.

First Published in LiveMint

IDR | Connection, not abstraction

Philanthropy’s most important role is not to abstract solutions by distilling them into replicable frameworks. It is to nurture the connections that make them possible.

– By Gautam John (CEO, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies)

The cool November air in Pune carried the aroma of chai, mingling with the low hum of conversation and occasional laughter in the foyer of the Global Opportunity Youth Network (GOYN) Global Convening¹. This gathering of youth leaders, philanthropists, and practitioners had been buzzing with energy all day, but now the crowd was quieter and more reflective. American law professor and civil rights scholar John Powell had just delivered a keynote that left everyone thinking.

“Belonging isn’t about inclusion,” he had said. “It’s about co-creation—about creating the systems where everyone can thrive together.”

I lingered on the edges, mulling over his words. Around me, opportunity youth leaders² spoke animatedly, sharing their experiences of navigating systemic barriers and reimagining futures. Alejandra, a young leader from Colombia, recounted how her community had rallied to co-create a youth innovation fund. “The fund goes beyond money,” she explained. “It’s a way for us to invest in one another’s ideas, to show that our creativity and solutions matter.”

Change emerges when communities lead

Alejandra’s words crystallised a realisation I’d been circling for years: Change is not something we deliver to communities—it’s something that emerges when communities lead. Her story was echoed by Nandita, an artist-activist from India, who shared how her initiative to revive the Warli painting tradition had grown into a movement connecting tribal youth with global audiences. “It’s not about preserving art in a museum,” she said. “It’s about living it, evolving it, and letting it speak to today’s struggles.”

Both stories reflected a shift from prescriptive solutions to systemic transformation rooted in identity and agency. These youth-led efforts focused not on extracting abstract lessons or scaling a fixed model but on weaving connections, fostering belonging, and enabling environments where communities could thrive on their own terms.

This tension—between abstraction and connection—was the thread John had pulled at, challenging my assumptions about how change happens.

The programme trap

In philanthropy, it is easy to think in terms of programmes and singular solutions. The logic is clean, almost comforting: Define a problem, design a solution, and measure its impact. For years, we donors have funded initiatives that followed this model across education, health, sanitation and other areas. But time and again, we encountered the same limitation—no single intervention could meaningfully shift outcomes in a complex, interconnected system.

Take the example of education. We have poured resources into teacher training, remedial education, and curriculum enhancements, believing these would improve learning outcomes. But these efforts didn’t account for the realities outside the classroom. Hungry children couldn’t concentrate; anxious children couldn’t thrive. Teachers were overwhelmed by challenges that no amount of professional development alone could solve. The strands of nutrition, mental health, infrastructure, and community support were deeply interwoven. Addressing one issue in isolation unravelled others.

This programmatic approach had a second, subtler flaw: abstraction. When we tried to replicate success by distilling it into frameworks, we froze something dynamic into a static snapshot—a moment in time divorced from the ongoing evolution of the work. The problem isn’t just that abstraction simplifies; it also misrepresents.

When intermediaries step in to codify and distribute learnings, they often capture a single version of the work at a particular moment in its evolution. But the work itself continues to change, informed by new challenges, insights, and relationships. These static frameworks, though widely distributed, fail to reflect the dynamic nature of the work and risk reinforcing outdated approaches.

What we need isn’t a better intermediary or a sharper snapshot. We need spaces and venues where people with common values can find each other, forge deep personal connections, exchange ideas, co-learn in real time, and co-create enduring solutions. For social change to occur, it is relationships that must serve as the scaffolding for growth. This relational foundation is not a secondary feature; it is the essence of meaningful, adaptive change.

The shift to connection

John’s keynote articulated something I had sensed but was struggling to name: the distinction between ‘bridging’ and ‘breaking’ solutions. ‘Breaking’ solutions separate ideas from their origins, freezing them in time. ‘Bridging’, on the other hand, creates spaces where stories, ideas, and relationships flow freely, evolving as they connect with new contexts.

This shift from abstraction to connection isn’t theoretical. It’s already happening. The 24×7 ON Court initiative in Kollam, spearheaded by the Kerala High Court and supported by the nonprofit mission PUCAR, is a promising example of how trust and alignment can fuel collaboration.

A collective of lawyers, technologists, and policymakers, PUCAR is working to unstick a justice system bogged down by outdated processes and inefficiencies. Their goal is to make dispute resolution faster, fairer, and more accessible for everyone. The 24×7 ON Court in Kollam, India’s first fully digital court, is one example of this vision in action. The court handles cheque dishonour cases entirely online, enabling litigants to file cases, attend hearings, and receive judgements without stepping into a courtroom.

Though still in its early days, the initiative has already seen strong participation from the local bar association. Far from being a centrally orchestrated roll-out, the project has been a collaborative, co-created effort. Lawyers at the bar association have taken ownership and are not only implementing the system but also actively contributing to its evolution. Their inputs—ranging from practical tools such as payment calculators and drafting templates to systemic process improvements—have enhanced the platform’s relevance and responsiveness.

The high court’s leadership in setting the stage, combined with the bar association’s stewardship, has allowed this initiative to develop as a relational ecosystem—one where tools and processes are refined through connection, dialogue, and shared purpose. This isn’t a top-down roll-out masked as collaboration; it’s a genuinely co-created ecosystem in which the focus is on trust and working towards a shared purpose. Instead of imposing solutions, the different actors are focused on constant dialogue and iteration. The lawyers are more than just users of the system—they are stewards who are refining the platform so that it fits the real needs of their community.

While much remains to be seen, early signs suggest that when trust and ownership intersect, innovation can take root in ways that are both meaningful and enduring.

Belonging as a systemic lens

At the GOYN convening, I witnessed the principle of connection in action. Rather than being passive recipients of interventions, opportunity youth leaders were co-creators of solutions deeply rooted in their own communities. Whether tackling unemployment, education, or mental health, these young leaders were not building programmes but ecosystems of support.

For example, in Mexico City, young people worked with more than 90 institutions to push for inclusive employment policies. The intention was to go beyond job placements and build a network of public, private, and civil society partners committed to creating real pathways to meaningful livelihoods.

This, I realised, was the essence of John’s idea of belonging: co-creating systems where everyone feels seen, valued, and empowered to contribute. Belonging isn’t something you can deliver through a single intervention. It is the foundation of systemic change, the thread that ties individual outcomes to collective transformation.

John’s call to create systems where belonging is a design principle invites us to broaden our understanding of orchestration. Orchestration refers to the coordination and management of multiple components, programmes, and stakeholders in the service of achieving a common impact goal. Effective systems orchestration, while critical, can risk becoming overly reliant on abstraction if it loses sight of the people and relationships at its core.

To catalyse transformation, we must pair orchestration with a deep commitment to the messiness of human connection, the unpredictability of relationships, and the humility of shared learning. This balance allows us to build systems that are not brittle frameworks but resilient networks—forests capable of weathering any storm. Belonging, therefore, isn’t just a moral imperative; it’s a practical one.

Philanthropy’s role in connection

For philanthropy, this committing to connection means moving beyond prescriptive approaches. It requires trust, humility, and a willingness to relinquish control; letting communities lead, and paving the way for solutions to emerge organically. The challenge lies in navigating the shift from linear, programmatic approaches to non-linear, systemic change.

John’s concept of targeted universalism offers a way forward. It starts with a universal goal—such as equitable education or dignified livelihoods—but acknowledges that different communities require different pathways to reach it.

For philanthropy to embrace this shift, it needs to rethink its role entirely. Instead of designing and deploying solutions, it must become a facilitator of connection. Here’s what this involves:

Investing in ecosystems: Supporting the holistic conditions that allow communities to thrive, rather than having a narrow focus on isolated outcomes. For instance, in the city of Mombasa in Kenya, youth leaders avoided quick fixes for unemployment. Instead, they co-created initiatives such as the County Revolving Fund and ICT hubs, building an ecosystem that combined skills training, government partnerships, and long-term economic support.
Creating collision spaces: Building platforms for practitioners, community members, and youth leaders to share, adapt, and evolve insights. At Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies (RNP), we’ve seen this in action through convenings designed as containers for connection. At a recent retreat, we avoided packed schedules, allowing unhurried, iterative dialogue where participants—not intermediaries—shaped the conversation. Insights from day one dynamically informed day two discussions, fostering a network of ideas and relationships that remained alive and adaptive long after the event.
Trusting the process: Accepting that systemic change is non-linear and unpredictable, and that the best solutions often emerge from the ground up.

A vision for belonging

John’s call to action at the GOYN convening was to create systems where everyone belongs. Philanthropy has the power to catalyse this kind of belonging, but it requires a leap of faith. It means stepping back from the comfort of frameworks and into the uncertainty of human relationships. It means seeing communities not as beneficiaries but as collaborators. And it means understanding that the best solutions are co-created, not prescribed.

As the convening wound down, I observed Alejandra animatedly exchanging ideas with Nandita, their conversation flowing effortlessly between laughter and deep intent. Around them, other youth leaders, funders, and practitioners lingered, chai in hand, their discussions unhurried and vibrant. The scene felt alive—a living ecosystem where connections, rather than outcomes, were the driving force.

This, I realised, is what connection looks like. Not abstraction, not a framework, but a dynamic, evolving web of relationships. And in that moment, I understood that philanthropy’s most important role is not to abstract solutions, but to nurture the connections that make them possible.

—

Footnotes:

The GOYN Global Convening is an annual event that brings together global and community partners, as well as opportunity youth leaders, to collaborate on strategies for youth empowerment and economic inclusion. The 5th Annual GOYN Global Convening took place in Pune, Maharashtra, in November 2024. Hosted by the Lighthouse Communities Foundation in collaboration with the Pune Municipal Corporation and Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation, the theme of the 2024 convening was “Transforming Youth Livelihoods: Pathways to Full Potential”. The event focused on co-creating pathways toward personal success, well-being, and financial sustainability for young people worldwide.
In India, the term NEET (not in education, employment, or training) is used to describe opportunity youth.

First Published in the India Development Review