Type: Article

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:

  1. 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.
  2. In India, the term NEET (not in education, employment, or training) is used to describe opportunity youth.

First Published in the India Development Review

ET | Rohini Nilekani writes: #25 For 2025 – Will donors collaborate more to make India’s wealth inclusive?

Indian philanthropy is innovating with growing wealth, particularly through women-led initiatives and professional donors. Collaboration among givers is increasing, focusing on education, health, and institutional strengthening. New intermediaries are assisting in scaling efforts, leading to significant societal impact and an unstoppable momentum in India.

Indian philanthropy is growing steadily, though not as much as it should, given the extreme wealth creation in the country. Yet, as it becomes ever clearer that the rich have a moral imperative to drive a more inclusive society, the wealthy have begun to innovate, Indian style.

Women-led philanthropy is finally gaining prominence even though women have historically held less wealth As salaried professionals become wealthier, they seem more keen than traditional business community donors to invest in strengthening ecosystems and building institutions.

All of this is excellent news to bring serious risk capital into various unfulfilled societal missions.

But if there is a trend one can specifically highlight, it is collaboration. More Indian givers are talking more to each other, figuring out how to share concerns, experiences, and hopes. They are learning to find ways to work together, either as co-donors to various societal missions, such as education and health, or as partners in other ways. We have better understood that we cannot do anything significant by ourselves; that there is plenty of talent around; that some foundations specialise in certain areas and are willing to lend their expertise-whether on convening, technology, government partnerships, talent management, and more.

For me, that is the most heartening trend I have witnessed in the past year. I have attended numerous meetings where philanthropists, young and old, mature and inexperienced, have met to seriously discuss an impactful way forward. More intermediaries too have come in to help Indian donors make a start, to scale their work, or to figure out impact.

This has also helped several civil society organisations to strengthen their institutions and scale their outreach as never before.

India looks unstoppable now in every way.

First Published in The Economic Times

Supporting Society’s Bridge Builders

In a world of increasing complexity and polarization, system orchestrators drive collective action to achieve outsized impact.

– By Don Gips, Tulaine Montgomery, Rohini Nilekani & Cristiane Sultani

We are living in a period of human history rife with paradoxes: Societal challenges like climate change, economic inequality, and social injustice are deeply entrenched and getting worse. Our collective ability to respond to these challenges is increasing, but the problems continue to outpace available resources and solutions. This moment has brought many impact-oriented leaders, including this article’s coauthors, to a shared understanding that linear problem-solving is not enough.

We need more system orchestrators to meet the moment. System orchestrators play a critical role in bringing about transformational social change by knitting together actors and institutions, providing backbone infrastructure, and mobilizing collective change efforts across ecosystems, sectors, and geographies. Along the way, they shape new paradigms, leverage system-wide resources, and navigate complexity, all to create forward momentum and progress at societal scale.

System orchestrators are often overlooked because of the complex, collaborative, and behind-the-scenes roles they play in long-term systems-change efforts. Consequently, many in the social innovation field describe this multifaceted role with different names. The Bridgespan Group refers to these actors as “field catalysts.” Others call them “system catalysts,” “system stewards,” and “ network entrepreneurs.” Despite the disagreement on terms, Bridgespan’s research indicates a key truth: If you want to drive equitable systems change, investing in system orchestrators is among the highest-leverage investments that the philanthropic sector can make.

What does system orchestration look like in practice? Spanning sectors and ecosystems, Health Care Without Harm (HCWH) is illustrative of the indispensability of system orchestrators to systemic change. HCWH works globally at the intersection of human and planetary health to transform the health-care sector and drive equity and climate action. HCWH partners with the World Health Organization, governments, hospitals, and community-based organizations to secure commitments to design low-carbon health systems on a path to zero emissions. Its orchestration approach incubates, connects, and scales grassroots initiatives to create systems-level shifts in policy and practices.

The eGov Foundation in India is a philanthropic organization that works to better lives by transforming public health infrastructure, creating a sanitation value chain, improving public finance management, and tackling climate change—all backed by open digital infrastructure and ecosystems. To achieve its goal of putting people first and bringing the government closer to the people it serves, it helps the state deliver services that are accessible, affordable, and inclusive. To date, eGov Foundation has delivered benefits to two billion people and more than 200 organizations in 10 countries have used its assets.

Systems orchestrators know that leadership duties—and the power that goes with them—should be shared among multiple people, including other types of social innovators, government officials, and C-suite executives.

GirlTREK, the largest public health nonprofit for Black women and girls in the United States, mobilizes community members to organize local walking crews and lead a health movement that centers healing intergenerational trauma and fighting systemic racism. Working closely with many organizations including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Council on Exercise, and Sierra Club, GirlTREK developed a world-class training program for Black women looking to serve as health advocates and coaches. The organization set the bold goal of increasing the life expectancy of Black women in the United States by 10 years. To that end, it currently engages more than 1.3 million Black women in the United States alone, with crews emerging across the Caribbean and West Africa.

The work that these system orchestrators do to bridge, connect, and knit together individuals and institutions across sectors and roles is indispensable to transforming societies for the better. We have seen firsthand the huge leverage that system orchestrators create for our partners and ecosystem actors—and the value of funding and partnering with them over the long term. That is why we have come together—the Skoll Foundation with a global lens, New Profit from the United States, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies from India, and Instituto Beja from Brazil—to support system orchestrators in their efforts to fix inequitable systems around the world.

One of the misconceptions that we are working to address among funders is the notion that skillful and proximate system orchestrators are few and far between. In fact, it’s the funding that has been scarce; the pipeline of system orchestrators and the opportunities to support them is flourishing.

Our hope is that by coming together, we can accelerate our collective learning journey, build a shared understanding of what is working and what is needed, and provide resources for other funders who want to provide scaled-up and sustained funding and other support to system orchestrators.

We have observed the following three hallmarks of the most successful system orchestrators we’ve worked with to remake entire systems around education, health care, environmental sustainability, protecting democracy, and economic equity.

Focused on driving collective action and impact. | System orchestrators are the connective tissue that holds different parts of a system together. They identify, validate, and support solutions worth further exploration and scaling. They also understand the financial, policy, legal, and cultural barriers that are often overlooked or only addressed in isolation. They know that shifting mindsets around societal challenges and potential solutions is part of the work. The result is that people rely less on individual heroism and more on coalitions that can accelerate solutions at scale.

Bridge builders and enablers of other leaders in the system. | System orchestrators know that leadership duties—and the power that goes with them—should be shared among multiple people, including other types of social innovators, government officials, and C-suite executives. These leaders demonstrate high levels of credibility and are trusted as stewards to build bridges between communities and institutions of power to drive equity, inclusion, and change. Given the challenges of coming together in a polarized world, they are often content to lead through others and receive no public recognition.

Capable of deploying the full range of tools available to them. | They understand that there is no single solution to large-scale societal issues and that money alone won’t solve our problems. In addition to direct funding, they employ strategies such as convenings, relationship-building, and knowledge-sharing to influence policy, resource flows, decision-making pathways, and mindset and behavior shifts.

Now is the time to come together to drive deeper investment in system orchestration. In 2022, The Bridgespan Group surveyed approximately 100 system orchestrators—including many in our networks—who mobilize and galvanize myriad actors across a social-change movement, or field, to achieve a shared goal for equitable systems change. The survey found that these organizations believed they could achieve their ambitious systems-change goals within two decades with a median size of 10 staff and annual operating budget of $5 million. This is despite being seriously underfunded, with the median funding gap for each organization estimated at $2.5 million per year.

Closing this funding gap would help these organizations transform systems for the better. In addition to unlocking more resources, we believe we can cocreate opportunities for system orchestrators to learn from each other, and for other funders and partners to join the effort.

As funders, we believe it’s critical to listen to and learn from social innovators on the front lines; they know best how we can better support their work. This level of partnership is critical, because by any measure, system orchestration work is ambitious, highly complex, and requires the bridging of many gaps and sectors.

We launched the Centre for Exponential Change (C4EC) to mobilize around system orchestration. C4EC is a global action network that creates spaces and marshals resources for system orchestrators. These resources, including design expertise, paradigm grants, leadership development, and technology, are used to reimagine solutions and ecosystems that create resilient, collaborative responses to new challenges as they arise.

It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which the big, audacious goals of society can be achieved without system orchestrators. If philanthropy provides them the wraparound, long-term support they deserve, we may never have to.

Philanthropist Rohini Nilekani and Skoll Foundation CEO Don Gips discuss the role of philanthropy in addressing entrenched global challenges and creating change at scale. Listen to their conversation at the 2024 Skoll World Forum in the video below.

Don Gips is CEO of the Skoll Foundation.

Tulaine Montgomery is CEO of New Profit.

Rohini Nilekani is Chair of Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies.

Cristiane Sultani is Founder and President of the Board of Directors of Instituto Beja.

First Published in the Stanford Social Innovation Review

The EdelGive Hurun India Philanthropy List 2024

The EdelGive – Hurun India Philanthropy List 2024 has named Rohini Nilekani, Chairperson – Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies , the ‘most generous woman philanthropist‘, with a personal donation of INR 154 crores for FY’24.

She is a part of the list of top 10 philanthropists in terms of overall giving, while also featuring in the list of top 5 Indian philanthropists donating entirely out of their personal wealth.

Hurun India Media Release
The Economic Times

The Hindu | The Nilgiris is a Shared Wilderness

Exactly 20 years ago, in the summer of 2004, I fell in love again. First with a tree, then with a mountain, and, eventually, with a whole biosphere. On an exploratory journey in Coonoor, Tamil Nadu, my husband and I landed up in a beautiful colonial bungalow with an enormous blue gum eucalyptus at the entrance. Until that moment, I had thought of the species as foreign, as invasive, as water greedy. All its negative labels disappeared as I gazed in astonishment at the girth of this giant, its ghostly branches, and its perfectly balanced canopy. Soon, we had a second home in the Nilgiris, and a new commitment to the conservation of this remarkable ecozone.

The Nilgiri biosphere is the first UNESCO-declared biosphere in the country, covering over 5,500 square kilometres across the three States of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. From the iconic Doddabetta, rising 2,637 metres into the sky, to the 260-m depth of the Moyar gorge, it encompasses a rich biodiversity. It has endemic flora and fauna seen nowhere else in the world, such as the medicinal Baeolepis nervosa plant used by the Irula tribe, the Nilgiri Chilappan, and the star-eyed bush frog.

More human activity, new challenges

Of late, this biosphere has seen more human activity than ever before. Known primarily for its colonial-era tea plantations, it now boasts a thriving agriculture and tourism economy. While both sectors bring in much needed livelihoods, they have also brought in new challenges.

The tourism is less sustainable than local communities and the State would like, with day-trippers adding to the waste and the traffic snarls. Farmers increasingly use heavy pesticides and fertilizers, which contaminate once pristine water sources.

In the face of such rapid change, local communities have galvanised themselves to protect their home. Many civil society organisations in the district have innovated for sustainability, such as ‘Clean Coonoor’, a public-private partnership that creates a circular economy for growing solid waste. And the Keystone Foundation, which empowers indigenous and local communities for climate resilience.

The State government and the district administration too have advanced aspirations for the Nilgiris, including the three hill stations of Ooty, Coonoor and Kotagiri, which attract visitors from across the country.

They plan to go carbon neutral, stop plastic waste, conserve endemic species such as the Nilgiri tahr that roam the high shola grasslands and reduce invasives such as Lantana camara and pine to restore native shola species in the valleys.

Alongside, there is an increasing interest in the culture and the history of the ancient Nilgiris. The settlements of the indigenous Toda community, who have lived in the Blue Mountains for millennia, are a must on the tourism trail. Unfortunately, only a few hundred people remain today, a frail link to the ecological knowledge of ancestors past.

Conservation success, helping the state

A measure of the success of conservation efforts is in the numbers of wild animals that thrive in the Nilgiri Biosphere, the largest forest expanse in the country with protected areas including Mudumalai and Mukurthi.

Increasing wildlife numbers have led to wide dispersal outside protected areas. Wildlife is everywhere now, in new ecological niches created by global warming. Plants and animals have successfully adapted to living almost incognito among us. The best example is that of the elusive leopard, which has developed quite an appetite for domestic dogs.

You can find the Indian gaur in the tea plantations, wild pigs in the garbage dumps, and sloth bears and leopards prowling around bungalows at night. Last year, a rather clever sloth bear broke into our home, wandered around the house, and, no doubt, disappointed by the lack of food, left the house jumping from the first-floor balcony. We were away, but our CCTV cameras recorded the entire adventure.

Neighbours have had wild encounters too, with porcupines and mouse deer, elephants and leopards. Surprisingly, people seem to have adjusted to this development, though human-wildlife conflicts hit the news every so often.

This is part of an emergent global culture where billions of people are becoming nature lovers. They are rediscovering wonder. Citizen science has become a movement. Thanks to democratising technologies, people can share the beauty around them with one click; they can raise issues of concern, about shrinking habitats and human-animal conflict.

Clear evidence has emerged through the work of non-governmental organisations such as the Nature Conservation Foundation and WWF, that simple, yet powerful, technologies, which include early warning systems through mobile phone-based alerts, cameras and GPS tracking of animals, have helped reduce dangerous wildlife encounters.

When animals are so widely loved and so closely tracked, poaching becomes much riskier. Poaching thrives in secrecy, away from the public gaze. When tourists and wildlife enthusiasts wish to immerse themselves in wilderness, there is economic incentive locally to ensure that nature flourishes.

If we want to continue to conserve this unique biosphere, it must be with the help of society, of the samaaj. We have to align also with the bazaar — represented by plantations, farmers, traders and the tourism industry. The state, including the Forest Department, cannot be the sole steward of the wild.

It is impossible for sarkaar to take whole and sole accountability, even if the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972/ The Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022 says all wild animals belong to the state. The perception that animals are the government’s responsibility creates a great disaffection in the public mind. Farmers get angry with the forester. Plantation owners become wary. “If these are your animals, you keep them. Why are they eating my crops, or injuring our workers?”

Yet, hard boundaries, fences and walls are neither feasible nor desirable, to keep animals inside the forests.

Instead, what if we assumed that we are all in this together? What if we created a trust network of everyone interested in the conservation of our biodiversity? What if we took advantage of all emerging technologies such as sensitive cameras, satellite imagery, sensors and artificial intelligence, both within and outside of protected areas? What if all citizens of our country were engaged in the regeneration of our natural wealth?

The pivotal role of storytelling

As I have discovered in my 40-year ecological journey, to conserve nature, we first must learn to love. To love, we have to sense. It is not a mere intellectual exercise. If we see the beauty and the frailty of the wild, its flora and fauna — from the tiniest ant to the mightiest elephant, our wonder is ignited. We want to protect, to nurture and be nurtured.

Not everyone can visit every area of wilderness they wish to explore.

Storytelling by the few who can is critical to the process of creating communities for conservation. Our ancestors in the Nilgiris knew this well. In Sigur and Vellerikombai, the rock art created thousands of years ago still celebrates the relationship between humans and animals.

Charcoal and chalk have been replaced by cameras and pixels, but the urge remains the same. To share, to connect, to preserve.

Tomorrow, November 3, is International Day for Biosphere Reserves. In a first such documentary, we at Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies, together with Felis Films, are proud to present The Nilgiris – A Shared Wilderness. We have dedicated this film to the communities of the Nilgiris and to Forest Departments across the biosphere.

We hope it will spark more curiosity, evoke more affection and spur more action across samaaj, sarkaar and bazaar for the continued protection of the precarious and precious Nilgiris.

Rohini Nilekani is Chairperson, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies and the author of Samaaj, Sarkaar, Bazaar – A Citizen First Approach

First Published in The Hindu

The Climate Finance Report – 2024 | Funding for Conservation, Community Resilience, and Climate Adaptation

By Tanya Kak – Portfolio Lead, Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies

Farmers for Forests, a Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies (RNP) partner, is working on a mission to increase and protect India’s biodiverse forest cover, while also working on farmers’ livelihoods using a payment for ecosystem services model. While their entry point was forest protection, their community members often asked them, “Aren’t you here to help? Then why aren’t you helping us with our houses and fields being destroyed by elephants and getting better prices for our agricultural and forest produce?” However, the community’s demands quickly helped them understand that working for conservation and climate change is intrinsically linked to the daily livelihood challenges these communities face.

At RNP, our funding approach adopts a holistic lens to deal with the twin challenges of conservation and climate change, while supporting the livelihoods of those most affected. In the initial years, our curiosity led us to expand from the conservation of individual species to looking at wider ecosystems and habitats. At the same time, the reality of climate change meant a certain urgency was attached to addressing these challenges with speed and at scale.

While philanthropic capital can be catalytic and fund riskier innovations, it has allowed us to take a long-term perspective to invest in building resilient networks, local capacities of communities, and facilitating systemic transformation. For example, while India is one of the world’s 17 megadiverse countries, many species are threatened, and land degradation continues to be a challenge. We have also seen multiple small and independent organisations carrying out valuable restoration work and amassing a wealth of experience. In order to make these rich insights accessible beyond the fragmented silos in which they exist, and to create a community of practice that is able to leverage and action this information readily, Rainmatter Foundation and RNP supported the emergence of a platform called Ecological Restoration Alliance (ERA), India. ERA partners are a group of organisations and individuals who have directly engaged in the practice of ecological restoration and generating knowledge about ecosystem restoration. Currently, they operate in 24 states, have over 350 individual members, and 8 institutional partners. From coastal ecosystems to high-altitude mountainous terrains, the alliance’s biggest strength lies in the diversity of practice, the expertise, and the varied landscapes that its members operate in. ERA
has moved from just being a network to a movement that addresses hyper-local restoration challenges while enabling replication and scale through local innovations and peer networks.

This example showcases how philanthropy can support ecosystem-building efforts. We have also found the following levers to be useful in our funding journey:

Multi-year, unrestricted grants: Climate change is a series of compounding risks that will be felt globally as a social and economic reality. Philanthropic efforts need to mirror these concerns by balancing a sense of urgency with the patience and flexibility that is required to affect such long-term changes. With this in mind, the majority of the grants at RNP are multi-year, unrestricted grants that allow us to act as co-learning partners to our grantees. In a survey that we recently concluded with 90+ partners across our different focus areas, almost all of them highlighted how the unrestricted grants have given them the freedom to experiment and innovate with new solutions, provided the cushion to respond to regular organisational challenges, and be agile enough to adapt to future needs, and make new pivots. One of our partners, WELL Labs, highlighted, “The unrestricted support gives us the freedom to experiment; it allowed us to raise 3X the amount of program funding than the previous year”.

Rethinking traditional methods of doing monitoring and evaluation: As we have learned from giving
unrestricted grants, the impact can be a spectrum of tangible outcomes such as collaboration, enhanced reach and scale and intangible behavioural change such as feeling empowered, living with dignity etc. Being tied to traditional notions of evaluating progress on key performance indicators or rigid project metrics can be limiting. Instead, funders can help by focusing on building the resilience of their partners and adopting a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods to look at progress.

Supporting networks and platforms that leverage collective wisdom: The climate crisis affects everyone globally, and hence, cannot be solved by one individual or organisation in isolation. While targeted interventions are important, a network that brings different actors together to build and sustain vast, reciprocal connections that enforce mutual growth and leverage collective wisdom is crucial. For example, in 2020, Tata Trusts, McArthur Foundation, Edelgive Foundation, and Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies came together to build a first-ofits-kind climate philanthropy collaborative, India Climate Collaborative (ICC). Building bridges between a diverse set of actors – governments, philanthropies, businesses, civil society organisations, and research institutions, the ICC helped to mobilise domestic funds, scale impactful solutions, and facilitate collaboration across the ecosystem to enable climate action. Given all of these efforts, domestic donors are emerging in the Indian context to catalyse climate action; India has witnessed a 2.2X increase in total philanthropic capital towards climate-related action in the period between 2018-2023.

India faces the challenge of having to respond to climate change while balancing its developmental needs. Philanthropy has the opportunity to root India’s climate story in both – equity and efficacy. Its unique ability to hedge risks, support innovations, and pave the way for other funding makes it well-suited to take on this mandate.

The Climate Finance Report, Climate Capital Network (CCN)

The Indian Express | Rohini Nilekani writes: Can India ensure that its elderly are taken care of?

India needs to take the lead in redefining what it means to be an older adult

What do you think of if someone asks you to describe old age?

At a recent interaction with community service organisations (CSOs) working on longevity, I learnt that your answer would probably depend on how old you are. Younger respondents quickly conjure up words like walking stick, grey hair and nursing home. Financially secure seniors cite freedom from responsibility, travel, the joy of grandchildren, and spirituality. This difference in mental models is important to internalise as India turns from a young country with 50 per cent below the age of 25 years to a country with the largest population of elderly in the whole world.

We are still struggling to reap the demographic dividend of our broad youth base. Soon, we will have to figure out how hundreds of millions of senior citizens can contribute to and be cared for in our society.

Just recently, I turned 65. So did lakhs of other people in India. Sixty-five seems different to me — a new way of feeling old. The country’s average lifespan is 67.2 years. I am sharply aware of both my mortality and my privileges. I can access the best medical care, the best fitness options and nutrition. I can continue to write and work actively. I meditate, I pray. I stay positive with the blessing of many friendships, and a loving family. These are all things that global research has proven to produce better outcomes as one ages.

So, I am determined to make this the best decade of my life yet. To be part of a positive revolution in the mindset on ageing. To give at least as much as I receive; to cultivate and spread faith in human innovation and to nurture gratitude for the miracle of life.

This is what older people want to do for themselves and society — but not everyone gets to do it. In India, 40 per cent of older adults experience poverty, compared to less than 10 per cent of the general population. Only 14 per cent can use the Internet, and less than 5 per cent report being part of a social organisation. The elderly are more likely to be female, have much less education and live more in rural areas. More than one in three seniors still do not have the luxury of retiring, and many continue to do unpaid work, 65 per cent of those in agriculture and allied activities. Those who do retire can feel a sudden lack of purpose, a loneliness. With the rapid nuclearisation of families, in just 20 years, an estimated 80 million elderly will live alone or with just a spouse.

There are reams of data on how much will change in our demographics, and what we can reasonably predict about the quality of life and care, social security, and public amenities. We can share the estimates of mental health disorders among the elderly.

But data do not tell the whole story, or the only story. The good news is that samaaj-based institutions have been very active in India for decades. HelpAge India was set up in 1978 and works with two million elderly, actively advocating better state intervention. Since 1999, the Agewell Foundation has worked with a network of 80,000 volunteers across 768 districts to reach 25,000 seniors daily. Carers Worldwide aims to reduce the burden of 2,00,000 unpaid senior caregivers. The list goes on. These organisations do not just want to help seniors, they want to change the narrative on ageing. Grey Shades showcases many intrepid seniors who are giving back gracefully. Like army veteran and psychiatrist Rajinder Singh, 91, who is setting up a third mental well-being centre to address addiction in young people in Punjab. Like Harbhajan Kaur, 99, who realised her ambition to earn some income by becoming a cooking sensation at the age of 90. CSOs are trying to normalise these exceptions so that longevity and health spans are reimagined in a society that takes the elderly for granted. It shouldn’t. One in three seniors want to actively volunteer and contribute to their communities if they can find the opportunity.

Can India take the lead in redefining what it means to be an older adult? Can we do it in time for the seismic shift in our demographics? It depends. So far, the state is only just beginning to wake up. Less than 5 per cent of senior citizens get any reliable social security payments or services. Some policies, including the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 are simply unimplementable. There is a long way to go.

The private sector has still not tapped the potential of senior citizens to keep contributing productively. Nor has it stepped in to provide better living and recreational facilities, even though the “silver economy” is currently pegged at $7 billion. We have nothing like the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), a strong advocacy body with 38 million members that markets must reckon with in providing senior citizen products and services.

It is the society that must lead the way. And private philanthropy is critical to kickstart the multi-sectoral innovation we need.

At 65, I often turn to the Beatles song that captured the angst of a whole generation. “When I get older losing my hair, many years from now…Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I’m sixty-four?”

The country will soon have to answer that question to hundreds of millions of folks, on whose shoulders it now stands.

The Indian Express

The Indian Express | Rohini Nilekani writes: How philanthropy can tilt scales towards a more equitable society

The wealthy are not as reviled by the general public as in many other countries. This is a crucial moment for Indian funders to take ownership of our development narrative and make the country the world’s third-largest economy…

Recently, I participated in four unusual philanthropy-related events over just two days in Mumbai. Each one was well-attended, well-executed and well-liked. The diversity was incredible. There were men and women philanthropists from three generations, foundation heads, business leaders, government spokespersons, politicians, foreign invitees, intermediary organisation representatives, researchers and academics, and civil society experts. There were sharp presentations, deep listening and sharing with a cocktail of hope and despair at the state of the world.

In my three decades in the civil society/philanthropy space, I have never seen anything quite like it.

It gave me pause to think. And to celebrate that we are at the cusp of a big wave in Indian philanthropy. This has long been coming, but there is now a convergence of many forces that promises to reshape the landscape of giving.

We all know that there has been a strong culture of giving across all communities and all levels of our samaaj across centuries. But since liberalisation, a new form of giving began to emerge among the newly wealthy, and the old wealthy with new wealth. Yet, it was restrained by some uncertainty about the future. Today, with the sustained rally in the stock markets, and the increasing opportunities for wealth creation in a booming economy, the rich are finally feeling secure enough about their wealth to think of larger issues. I now believe that India’s wealthy elite is turning a collectively serious mind to giving more, better and faster.

And what timing! A report by AIP-BCG titled ‘Wealth with Purpose: A Report on Private Indian Philanthropy’ suggests that if ultra-high net worth (UHNI) individuals would channel just 5 per cent of their annual incremental wealth, they could contribute over Rs 75,000 crores annually, which is five times the total CSR spend in 2023.

Perhaps no time has been as critical for the country’s wealthy to step up. According to a recent report published by Niti Aayog, despite a robust annual growth of around 13 per cent in social sector spending, we will still fall short on the targets needed to meet the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) goals by 2030.

At the same time, foreign funding to the social sector is receding. Thousands of organisations have lost their FCRA licences, which allows them to receive such money. Some international donors are shutting down their India operations. Many others would love to fund in India, especially on climate mitigation and adaptation, but their voice and motives are seen sometimes as inimical to India’s needs. But that means we are turning away hundreds of millions of dollars. Indian philanthropy has a chance to fill some of that gap. Indian funders can take ownership of our development narrative; we can help craft approaches suited to our context and aspirations.

The wealthy in India are not as reviled by the general public as in many other countries, where the growing inequality has unleashed societal conflict, and a resentment towards the rich. In India, people still believe that they too can climb the economic ladder. There is hope and optimism. Recently, millions of people vicariously enjoyed the Ambani wedding celebrations. There was as much pride in their achievements as there was criticism of the use of wealth.

But things can turn. It is up to the wealthy to show the country why wealth creation has been a net positive in India. No society or country will tolerate for too long the continued accumulation of wealth in a few hands, unless that private wealth works and is seen to work for the public good.

The elite can sense the consequence of extreme inequality. It is beginning to respond systematically. The Dasra-Bain India Philanthropy Report 2024 highlights a shift from traditional, faith-based giving to more strategic and impactful engagements led by young, first-generation wealth creators.

Systems thinking is the new mantra. Though it is incredibly hard to actually move the levers on systems change, the very fact that philanthropy is putting in serious risk capital and creating a shared vocabulary around it is both encouraging and exciting.

There is also a clear tilt towards more collaboration among Indian givers. My husband Nandan and I are part of several local and global giving collaboratives, with diverse models such as pooled funding, co-funding and direct funding for exponential change. Funders are also showing more curiosity and sharing more knowledge than ever before. The silos have broken down.

For example, the India Climate Collaborative (ICC), co-founded by several donors including myself, and incubated by the Tata Trusts, is moving strategically to increase Indian investments in the climate sector, in both mitigation and adaptation. It convenes samaaj, sarkaar and bazaar to deepen research, build capacity and create investable opportunities. Overall, India’s fund flows towards climate action have grown 2.3 times during 2017-23. Best of all, new funders like Mirik Gogri are entering the space with bold new ideas.

Intermediary organisations such as Dasra, Sattva and Accelerate Indian Philanthropy (AIP) have also been very effective in opening up minds, hearts and pockets. Decades of patient handholding is finally paying off. For example, Dasra’s GivingPi has more than 300 families signed up for their philanthropy journey, and are willing to invest in under-invested areas such as gender and sports. Family giving was up 15 per cent last year.

At a time when civil society in India is facing multiple crises, the new philanthropic engagement could not be more critical. More trust still needs to be built on all sides, especially with the government. But my Mumbai visit has convinced me that this too can be worked upon.

If we want India to become the world’s third-largest economy, it has to also be the world’s most equitable one. Otherwise, we will not get the peace dividend from economic growth.

Philanthropy done right can tilt back the scales from lopsided wealth creation to equal opportunities for all. The wealthy seem readier to be rainmakers.

The Indian Express