Time to Panic?

The vicious cycle every financial paper is reporting is hardly surprising.

That they’ve downgraded forecasts and ratings? Of course they have- they’re just predictions- it’s their job. That people pull their money out and cause banks and growth to falter? Of course they do, they’re scared.

Is it in anyway unexpected that after all the panic reported in the industry people worry and lose faith in the economy? In a way it’s irresponsible reporting- this is when we need investment. How do they expect growth by scaring investors away?

If you think about it, and ignore the doomsayers (who don’t have anymore of a crystal ball then you do) it doesn’t make sense at all to not invest. This is the time to be pumping money in-this is when companies are the cheapest.

Education

What is it that University is supposed to teach you?

A few commonly agreed answers are: how to frame a problem, how to ask the right questions, how to connect different sources of information into a coherent story that leads somewhere new, that contributes.

I think while I have learned these things, however incompletely, having a mixed biology/development background has notably contributed to the way I break down information. My science background taught me to memorize and retain a great deal of facts, as well as state problems and information clearly- but it's the social sciences that have made me think more critically, and care more about balance and sources.

I can see why Americans propagate the liberal arts, it's a shame most universities in other countries are so rigid about syllabi and force you to stick to one subject.

Last Names

Lots of women these days see no reason to change their last names to their husband's, and end up keeping their own name, or hyphenating it with their husband's.
The first option is perfectly reasonable, but seems rather unromantic, and the second leads to a mouthful of a surname.

Surely it seems more fair to combine their last names, so that both partners change their last names to an amalgamation of the two? After all, a marriage is supposed to be a union.

Restaurant Chains

England's largest cities have a shocking number of food chain restaurants on their 'high streets' as they call them- but these aren't your typical fast food chains, the way America has Arby's and Wendy's. These are chains pretending to be nice/posh restaurants, and charging pretty steep prices, such as Zizzi's and Browns.

I'm not against chains in general, and i don't think 'corporations are evil'. But there's something fundamentally wrong with these places pushing out other medium-priced restaurants, leaving space only for high-end boutiques. Fast food chains aren't much better, but at least they occupy a different bracket from family run restaurants that are being forced to shut down by this variety of food.

Do we really want to eat mass-produced meals? Already, we're starting to dress the same around the globe- but are we going to conform when it comes to food too? It's important to encourage sustainably sourced, locally produced food more than ever now- and while a few of these restaurants profess to do this, it's beginning to seem like a variation of the empty 'fair-trade' labeling Starbucks and other chains around the world now propagate.

Summer Fiction

I’ve been reading a lot of fiction over the holidays: two books that have really stuck with me are ‘Every Last One’ and ‘Skippy Dies’.

Every Last One paints everyday life in suburbia with a comforting warm glow, even while detailing family life and growing pains beautifully- and then in a couple of pages the entire novel twists on itself, suddenly terrifying.
While making you appreciate mundane life and all its bumps and trials a little more, it’s also managed to make me worry about who I let into my life quite a lot more.

Skippy Dies is a tale of growing up, and tragedy, the real world, dreams and the power of young love. It’s a contemporary sketch of society and life, unabashedly dealing with drugs, the first World War, porn, failure, the Big Bang theory, disappointment and blow jobs. It tells one tale from different viewpoints, with a startling prologue. It’s worth reading for its perspective; of its reminder of what growing up really means, and fighting for your dreams.

Songs

I've been listening to two songs on repeat-

The first is a cover by Ed Sheeran- only 20, but has been struggling to make a name for himself since he was 14. He's recently broken through with his 'I Don't Need You', which deserves to at the very least be nominated for Best Video

The second is by Tori Amos- she's outdone herself on the soundtrack of the movie 'Great Expectations'. It's such a beautifully haunting song.

A Fair Price?

Fair-trade, organic farming, sustainably sourced. These are such buzzwords these days- but do they actually ensure the farmer gets a fair price?

The fundamental question is- who decides food prices? Corporations do, but so do consumers. In the end, it's a market, and we can only be charged what we're willing to pay. So how come we all seem to have agreed to pay good money for clothes but not food? At what point did farming becoming synonymous with poverty?

We aren't willing to pay a fair price, but continue to debate the future of food, and sustainable farming techniques. Surely we need to provide the right incentives to motivate farmers that go beyond publishing the merits in journals that a few hundred people world-wide will read (skim)?

Marketing

I just saw 'Love and Other Drugs'- and while the movie itself was passably decent, there were quite a few important lessons in there about selling.

No one wants to part with their money, they're automatically suspicious when you ask them to, and rightly so- they know you have to meet a quota. So what's to be done?

-Firstly, you have to be their friend. You have to build relationships- and it can't be done in one night. Keep turning up, they need to start recognizing you. Then repeat again.
-Once they do know you, stand out. You have to remembered.

-Make friends with the secretaries, and other gate-keepers- you need access.
-But don't waste too much time- find a key client, a real decision-maker, someone others follow, and convert them. Spend as much time on them as you would on ten clients.

-Be friendly, fun, happy. You need to absolutely confident, and always more relaxed than the other person. How will you convince them if you can't convince yourself?
-Information is key- it's your biggest weapon. You need to know your product backward or forward- but also your client. What do they need and want? Find out, and fill it. If you don't get repeat business and referrals, you're toast.

Organizing the Viewing

A little more on organizing flat viewings, based on the mistakes I made:

-Always call before the viewing, confirm the address, and ask questions that are deal-breakers on the phone. Are you not going to take the flat if there's not enough wardrobe space? Then don't bother going. Taking the underground is expensive and much more exhausting than you'd think.

-Confirm the interview on the day- they're showing tens of people around a week, they will lose track.

-Ask if it's a basement flat on the phone- the ones in the best locations sometimes are buried inside- which is why it seems you can afford it.

-Walk. Central London is tiny. The tube map makes it seem much larger than it is- stations are built minutes away from each other, for some reason I still haven't managed to fathom. ESPECIALLY if it involves switching lines- you'll end up walking the same distance underground anyway.

The World of Flatshare

I can’t believe how hard finding an apartment in London has been. Since I was willing to pay a decent price for the right room, and knew the turnover rate was high at this time of the year, I thought it would be a breeze. However I found myself getting increasingly fussy as I saw more rooms. I ended up e-mailing roughly 300 people, and went for over 20 flat viewings.

On the flipside, the potential flatmates turned out to be fussier than I expected too. I was repeatedly questioned about my background, personal life and interests. Most unexpectedly, I had to undergo multiple rounds of various sorts of interviews- one-on one, panel discussion, group discussions- you name it. I’ve finally managed to find a beautiful flat, but I thought I’d share my experience to save you some of the pain.

First off, I wouldn’t recommend going through an agent if you’re interested in renting a room. You’re small fry to them- they’d much rather be selling bigger properties or at least renting out multi-bedroom apartments. They have a limited choice themselves too of course- why restrict yourself? I was disappointed by every room I saw through an agent- and this is not taking into account their signing fee that ranges from 200 to 400 quid on average.

The flatshare websites are amazing, there’s a surprising amount of choice out there, and numerous way to whittle down your search- smoking, sexual preference, age group, profession, south of the river, and so on. I’d highly recommend flatshare.com- easyroommate.co.uk and moveflat.com are worth considering too.

Nevertheless, finding a flat to share with others is as hard and sticky and uncertain as starting a new relationship- which of course you are doing. Not only are you going to have to live with these people for an extended period of time- you skip the dating phase and move directly to a live-in relationship.

A word of advice- make your profile on these websites as attractive as possible. It’s worth spending a little time and effort as this way interesting offers will come to you, instead of you having to spend hours searching for them. Call the really good places, don't bother e-mailing them- I learnt this the hard way. The best apartments go within hours, so make sure you get in there and schedule a viewing as soon as possible. One of the people I interviewed with showed me his phone- he had 80 people e-mail him within two hours of his putting his ad up, and was only able to set up viewings with the first twenty people to cal him.

Moreover, there are so many things to consider- of course location is key. London is very defined when it comes to areas, so it's fairly easy to decide where you'd like to stay, after doing a bit of research. Pull out the tube map, and try and make sure you don't have to change lines while getting to work, if possible. Clearly, living in zone one means you pay a few hundred a month more, add a few more hundred if you expect your own bathroom. It's hard to recommend an area as it really depends on your life-style- are you willing to spend a thousand pounds to rent a tiny room in Pimlico or Marylebone but live in an absolutely lovely area, or would you rather have a large room in West Hampstead, and pay for the space by commuting to work? Would you rather live in edgy and ‘cool’ Shoreditch, or in fashionable Fulham?

After the obvious considerations of location and price though, there are key details that will make or break your stay. Are bills included or not in the price quoted? Does that include council tax? Who is they landlord? Does the landlady stay in? Reconsider this if they do- remember you’ll be in their home and they have full control. I had a few landladies who seemed perfectly nice on the surface show nastier sides when we came closer to signing the contract. Are they willing to let you share their living room? How much shelf-space will they give you? How long is the lease? Will your name be on it? What’s the notice period? How easily can they through you out? What utilities are included? Is there Internet? Does the shower work? Do they have a washing machine? What’s the storage space like?

Then there's the wholly more complicated issue of flatmates. How many people are you willing to share with? How many people are sharing a bathroom? What are their work timings? What do they do? What are the rules for bringing people over? What sort of lifestyle do they want and expect? Try to meet all the flat mates at least once. Go for as many viewings as you can- it’s hard to get an idea of space and price and quality until you’ve seen a few places.

The pressure game’s important to remember- many people will tell you have to pay now- and unfortunately its true. Until you put a deposit down, they’re going to keep showing the flat to others- and there’s a good chance someone will get there before you. Try not to select the first place you see, but when you do like something, don’t hesitate, make an offer on the spot.

It’s awkward meeting new people- be friendly and polite. Dress nicely; make sure your hair and nails look god. They’ll be assessing your suitability and cleanliness- your appearance counts. It's disturbing how many people told me they were relieved to talk to someone ‘normal’- there’s a lot of weirdos out there, and this is not the time to be opinionated or interesting.

During the interview itself, be as honest as possible. Don't lie about your lifestyle or preferences,they're going to find out anyway. Why waste time and effort finding a place, only to be asked to leave? Try and make them laugh, and find common interests. Neverthless, if its awkward or not working, move on- if you cant spend twenty minutes with them, you don’t want to live them.

Good luck- you'll need it.

Simplify

There are thousands of self-improvement books in the market, that attempt to show you the path to happiness- but I think in the end, it comes down to two simple principles:

1) Do good work: We can't be happy unless we're productive (or at least we feel like you are). We need to contribute to something bigger, to feel like we're making a difference, and be genuinely proud of our work.

2) Have a good time: We need to surround ourselves with people we genuinely like and can be ourselves with. Is there anything more thrilling than being understood, and being liked for who we are? Too many people try to hang out with people they want to be more like, instead of who they are like.

The key is to stop lying to yourself. Don't pretend that you're working hard when you hate what you're doing. Don't spend time with people you can't stand just because they're well connected.

If you're genuinely doing what you want to do, it shows. People want to help you. Things fall into place. There's nothing stopping us from being happy besides ourselves.

Was Malthus Right?: The Relevance of Carrying Capacity

Will we be able to feed the world’s burgeoning population? The heated debate about whether we will be able to grow enough food to feed the world’s ever-growing population has raged for centuries. There is a large literature on the debate over world agricultural futures, and projections differ broadly based on assumptions of yield growth. Expert opinion is divided into two camps. The survivalists believe the Earth has limits that we are fast approaching. The Prometheans, on the other hand, believe we can produce more than enough food due to technological innovation and continued investment of human capital (Dryzek, 1998).

Environmental problems have famously been cast in terms of the capacity of Earth to support life, human life in particular. In 1798, Thomas Malthus wrote an ‘Essay on the Principle of Population’, stating that the population was held in check by ‘misery, vice and moral restraint’. He maintained that ‘population when unchecked increased in a geometrical ratio, and subsistence for man in an arithmetical ratio’ (Malthus, 1798).

This argument received fresh stimulus in the 1960’s, when the earth was viewed from space for the first time. This image of ‘spaceship Earth’ stressed the finiteness of the planet and our resources (Jacobs, 1991). This image coincided with Ehlrich’s warning of the ‘population bomb’ (1968) that was going to exhaust natural capital stocks. Hardin’s influential essay on ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’ was published in the same year. Both stressed that the growing population and environmental degradation due to rapid economic growth meant that we were going to exceed the global ecosystem’s boundaries. In 1972, ‘Limits to Growth’ which contained a computer generated projections of the global future was published, that projected that we were very close to overshooting these limits. Simply put, this camp argues that exponential growth cannot go on forever in a finite system. This argument rests on the concept of carrying capacity.

In ecology, ‘carrying capacity’ is defined as ‘the maximum number of individuals of a species that an ecosystem can sustain’ (Beeby, 1993). Carrying capacity can also be defined as ‘the maximum population of a given species that can be supported indefinitely in a defined habitat without permanently impairing the productivity of that habitat’ (Rees, 1991). This concept suggests that no living populating can grow forever. The competition between species for space, food and other resources impose a natural limit on the number of individuals of a population that any ecosystem can support. When population biologists turn to human affairs they see identical possibilities (Catton, 1980). According to Hardin (1993; 207), the ecologist’s Eleventh Commandment is ‘though shalt not transgress the carrying capacity’.

It has been argued that the concept of carrying capacity make sense at a global level but not at a regional level, Even if cities vastly exceeded carrying capacity of their local ecosystems they can exploit distant resources and sinks for their pollutants in order to support large and sometimes growing populations (Rees, 1992). According to Rees (1996) ‘ecological locations of human settlements no linger coincide with their geographic location. Since for every material flow there must be a corresponding ecosystem source or sink, the total area of land/water required to sustain these flows of a continuous basis is the true ‘ecological footprint’ of the referent population on earth’. But it has been noted that the supposed increase in carrying capacity as a result of trade is illusory. ‘Trade may release a local population from carrying capacity constraints in its own home territory, but this merely displaces some fraction of that population’s environmental load to distant export regions. The net effect is to create unsustainable dependences on enhanced material flows while reducing long term carrying capacity’ (Rees, 1996). In fact, this may even result in reduced global carrying capacity if access to cheaper food lowers the incentive for people to conserve their own agricultural land, and this leads to the accelerated depletion of natural capital in distinct export regions. Current prices are also not an adequate measure of the value of future shortages of resources and of current and future harm, as we do not know the ecological value of exports and imports. Unfortunately, prevailing economic models of growth and sustainability ‘lack any representation of the materials, energy sources, physical structures and time dependent processes basic to an ecological approach’ (Christensen, 1991). Ecological economists reason that neoclassic economic models cannot properly address this question as they do not take into account ecological structure and function (Costanza, 1994).

As Dryzek (1997) notes, we still do not have a consensus as to how seriously impaired the world ecosystems are, or what the potential for continued development for the growing population is. The good news seems to be that we can feed more than 6.5 billion people. The bad news, however, is that we seriously compromising our life support systems to accomplish this. Feeding a growing world population may be feasible technologically but the economic and environmental costs may prove too great for poor countries. Additionally, a more troublesome question is, is this technological enhancement at acceptable environmental costs? For example, the green revolution during the first 35 years doubled grain production but at a high environmental cost. While the revolution increased per capita food production, increasing the yield per hectare requires abundant quantities of fertilizer and water, and thus this increase was achieved at reasonable cost (Tilman, 1998). Ecologists have warned us that the imprudent of natural resources may irreversibly reduce the carrying capacity of the planet for in the future (Harris, 1994).

Sustainable Urban Development?

Repeated alarmist projections portending urban explosion and catastrophe in cities of unimaginable size can be repeatedly found in the literature (Davis, 2007). Megacities can be defined as urban agglomerations of 10 million habitants or more. It is projected that there will be 22 megacities by 2015, 17 of which will be in the global South. However, these megacities are home to only 9% of world’s population, and are growing more slowly than small and medium sized cities (UN, 2008). The rate of urban growth has been slower than predicted in the 1980’s. Despite popular misconceptions, small and middle size urban settlements will continue to absorb the bulk of urban growth in the coming decade (UN, 2006). It is also important to differentiate between urbanization and urban growth. Urbanization refers to a rising proportion of a nation’s population living in urban areas, while urban growth refers to an increase in the absolute size of a nation’s urban population. It is possible to urbanize without urban growth, and vice versa. While rural urban migration is commonly thought to be the case of this growth, it has been argued that a natural increase in urban population plays a major role in contributing to this growth (Beall, 2009).

There is much uncertainty about the scale and pace of future urban growth, and it is worth evaluating current projections critically. As Satterthwaite (2007) has repeatedly pointed out, different countries use different definitions to categorize cities. Of the 228 counties tracked by the UN, 36% use administrative criteria for classification, 25% use population size and 11% have no definitive criteria (UN 2004; 104). In addition, this data homogenizes and masks great regional differences. There is a vast difference in the pattern of urbanization between regions and in the extent and rapidity with which individual cities are growing. Latin America is far more urbanized than Asia and Africa, and thus the rate of urbanization is far more rapid in the latter (Cohen, 2004).

The temptation to borrow from the experiences of developed countries is strong, and indeed it has been pointed out that the Nigeria legislation is very similar to the British 1932 Town and Country Planning Act, and the Malaysian 1976 Town and Country Planning Act is almost identical with the British 1971 Act. However, each developing country needs it own growing pains and debate of planning system, and must take its own social and economic circumstances local cultural norms into account (Satterthwaite, 2001). Indigenous solutions are needed to local planning, For instance, Kampong Improvement Programme (KIP) was initiated in 1969 to improve living conditions in Indonesian cities through upgrading infrastructure, and was reorganized to include local residents in planning and maintenance of facilities. It is considered one of the world’s most outstanding slum improvements programs due to the local enthusiasm with which the project was taken up, and the manner in which responsibility was distributed (UNCHS 1987).

Urban development within developing world was traditionally seen as the responsibility of the government. Over the past couple of decades however, there has been a shift away from a centralized top down decision-making approach. Increasingly, a government’s role is thought to be its creation of an environment that allows urban residents to solve their own problems (Satterthwaite, 2001). The need to involve community in planning and supply of urban service provision, and to developing local solutions to local urban problems is frequent in urban planning literature. Some cities like Porto Alegre in Brazil have grown rapidly, but managed to maintain high quality living environments through a dedication to encouraging citizen participation and greater government accountability (Menergat, 2002). This city has integrated a wider ranging environmental management policy into its participatory budgeting policy, which remains grounded in inclusive regional environmental analysis (Menegat, 2002). Such innovations are driven by local democracies and arise due to the ability of citizen groups to organize effectively. Burra (2003) observes that there is both the need to acknowledge the capabilities of community organizations and adapt structures to promote them.


It must be kept in mind that the relationship between cities and development is complex. The transformation to an urban world has enormous cultural social and political consequences, whose long-term effects are difficult to foresee. In order to promote a more inclusive and redistributive form of urban development, both urban theory and policy need to be re-examined to tackle the diversity of activities and interests in cities (Robinson 2006). To promote urban development in the global South, urban planning must be based on a framework for understanding the city that transcends limitations posed by static conceptualizations of the city. This framework needs to be built explicitly around the principle of urban change, and how we can influence that change. The process of development is a continual process, which must be cast in terms of the ongoing processes of urbanization and social transformation (Read 2010).

Urban Growth & the South

For the first time in history more people around the world live in urban areas than in rural ones. The UN (2008) projects that 60 percent of the world’s population will live in cities by 2030. This trend towards an increasingly urban world is driven primarily by urbanization and urban growth in low and middle-income countries, especially in Africa and Africa. From urban development policy and practice this is crucial. Much is made of the rise in urban poverty, overurbanization, the rise of mega cities and unprecedented growth in the South, fuelling fears about negative social and political impact of urban growth (Gugler, 1997). The dramatic difference in the timing and rate of demographic transition in the North and South (Livi-Bacci, 2001), along with the decoupling of the historical relationship between urbanization and industrialization has caused much alarm.

It seems clear that we live in a world that is fundamentally different to the world we have known over the history of mankind. However predicting either development or urban growth is notoriously difficult, and predicting both together is a task fraught with uncertainty. Both are dynamic processes that are continual and ever varying. However, through effective governance and policy structures, we have the power to affect the way the story of the city goes forward. While rapid urban growth has resulted in pressing developmental issues that need urgent attention, some myths must be dispelled in order to think clearly about the future of cities in the global South. We need to reframe urban policy and practice to steer progress in a sustainable, equitable direction.

Environmental Policy & the Public

It has grown commonplace to assert that the public should be engaged in discussions concerning environmental policy. It is usually taken for granted that `the public' in this case includes everyone apart from policymakers, or everyone except experts (Owens, 2005). However, as delineating the public into `expert' and ‘lay’ populations can be deceptive, Blake (1999) advocates that ‘the `public' is best defined in terms of alienation from dominant political or knowledge regimes in a particular context’. Dewey, on the other hand, has noted that the existence of a public is by no means self-evident. Publics only form themselves around particular problems if the conditions are beneficial (Marres, 2007).

The governance of environmental problems has evolved to include a wider range of publics and given way to more open and deliberative policy making forums (Bulkeley and Mol, 2003) over the past two decades. We must move beyond conventional political processes to deal with the unique nature of emerging environmental problems and include more deliberative and inclusive forms of democracy. However, there is no guarantee that more democratic processes lead to sustainable, green policies. While public deliberation is an important tool, it must be wielded carefully and in the correct context.

It is important to note that participation includes not just representing people, but also the ideas and values they carry. Critically, as Owens (2001) points out, we must shift our focus from the degree of participation to the crucial issues of ‘what kind of participation, by whom, and to which purposes’ (Owens 2005). The current discourse on environmental politics is plagued by the fact that it has been alienated from the cultural dimension of environmental politics. Given that environmental discourse emerged in large part as a cultural critique of modern society, this is more than a little ironic(Guha et al., 1997). How we comprehend and frame environmental problems is inextricably connected to the methods by which we choose to tackle them (Jasanoff, 1998). Hence, it is important to note the particularity of the way societies relate to the natural environment in environmental politics and to study particular approaches to environmental policy (Jasanoff and Martello, 2004).

Young ( 2000) points out that exclusions produced by the current model for critical deliberation fails to recognize cultural specificity and other hegemonic baggage in the assumption of disengaged reason as the basis of the deliberative process’ in the public domain. Different voices and styles of communication must be recognized, as an increasingly diverse set of actors is being engaged in debate, with new coalitions and alliances being built, which transcend conventional boundaries.

Garbage to Gold

Mumbai faces the critical problem of solid waste management. Mumbai produces around 6,000 tonnes of garbage every day. Although the BMC has employed 25,000 workers to collect and dump garbage, and spends Rs.400 crores annually on garbage collection, the staff strength is not sufficient to meet the city's needs.
Moreover, like any other municipality in a developing country, the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai does not do any recycling on its own. The corporation still views solid waste management from the traditional perspective of waste collection, transport and disposal.
With waste quantity rising and landfills shrinking, recycling and reuse may be the only solution. Smart businesses could find gold in this garbage. At present, the waste-market industry, potentially worth billions, is still at the embryonic stage.
Before recycling and reuse, our basic problem is decentralizing waste management and getting households to learn to separate dry waste from wet waste and not having the Bombay Municipal Corp garbage trucks mix both together.
To overcome this problem of solid waste management, we came up with the idea of introducing segregated trash compactors that allow recycling of organic wastes and plastics across the city.
These trash compactors will be segregated into PET (polyethylene terepthalate) plastic, non PET plastic and biodegradable waste. These collected wastes can then be converted into reusable material and energy. Mumbai has no large scale method for segregating wet waste and plastic-this will be the first model of its type.
The obvious advantages of this idea is that it will increase awareness about recycling, along with reducing pressure on landfills, conserving natural resources and reducing our carbon footprint.
The conversion of these wastes into material and energy has the potential to yield huge profits. Biodegradable waste can be converted to methane to produce electricity, as well as composted to produce fertilizers. It can also be converted into a fuel known as green coal which has a high calorific value. Non PET plastics are toxic and can be converted to diesel by closed loop restrictive distillation. PET plastics, on the other hand, can be converted into fibres and woven into sacks.

This is all very well, but how do we ensure that the majority of the waste the city generates actually reaches these compactors? To motivate citizens and ragpickers to dispose of collected waste in these trash compactors, we plan to introduce a coin dispensing mechanism to dispense Rs 10 for each kilo of trash deposited in these compactors placed at strategic positions around the city.
Mumbai’s waste-pickers are very crucial in keeping Mumbai 'clean and healthy'. The garbage economy of Mumbai offers work to over 20,000-25,000 waste-pickers and scrap collectors, 80 per cent of whom are dalit women. These women are mostly migrants. They search through garbage from public dustbins and salvage scrap from the rubbish, which is later recycled through scrap traders. They earn an average of Rs 50 a day to sustain their whole family.
A network of ragickers from associations such as Stree Mukti Sangathana (SMS) and Forum for Recycling Community & Environment (FORCE) who will greatly benefit from the steady income can be employed to collect segregated trash from homes, who will then empty the rubbish into the trash compactors. These households will be charged a nominal fee of Rs 100 per month.
These women will earn a steady income through this scheme, as well as the income they generate by selling the dry trash collected such as paper, metal and glass to scrap collectors.
The compacted and segregated trash will then be sold to various companies that convert the waste to useful materials and energy.
We also plan to tie up with the BMC and the media to promote awareness about the urgent need -of recycling and spread the message to various housing societies, shopkeepers associations, schools and colleges.

Feynman for Indian Villages

"Indian science will be finished in the next five years. Our universities have dried up.” When this grim warning is by C.N. Rao, the Prime Minister's own science advisor, it’s time for India to sit up and take notice.
With an impressive history of scientific discovery spanning over thousands of years and no shortage of manpower, why is the future of Indian science so bleak?
One of the major factors for the decline in science over the past few years is the dismal quality of science education imparted to students. Science textbooks are shockingly outdated. College labs are poorly equipped and experiments are infrequently conducted. As faculties at Indian universities are rarely involved in research work their students have no exposure to scientific methods or thinking.
India undoubtedly does have a few excellent institutions for science & technology such as IISc, TIFR and the famed IIT’s, but these are far too few and selective to lift Indian science out of the doldrums. International systems of schooling such as the IB are replacing Indian boards such as ICSE and CBSE in cities, but most of the Indian population cannot dream of affording these exclusive schools.
The country needs a homegrown solution that reaches out to the masses if it hopes to resurface as a global leader in basic sciences. Of a population of over a billion, 400 million Indians are illiterate. Seventy five percent of them live in rural areas and have no access to basic resources or funds for education. Properly motivated, this staggeringly large 'unexploited brainpower' can be transformed to generate massive economic and social returns for the country.

Igniting Young Minds: Sparking a Science Revolution in India

“Why is the sky blue? Where do babies come from?”

Children are innately interested in how the world works. We all have the makings of a scientist at some age, but our urge to explore and to wonder is slowly killed through rote learning. How can we get students to revive their interest in science and enjoy this essential subject?
An enterprising organization, Agastya International Foundation (AIF) in rural India has some unique answers.

Ramji Raghavan, the founder of AIF, tapped the brains of India’s leading scientists to devise a model to bring resourceful, hands-on methods of teaching science to remote Indian villages. Its mission is to spark creativity in children in rural India. His organization is revolutionizing the way science is taught in the rural South.
Agastya runs about 20 science mobile science labs which travel across the south, teaching children science through experiments. The foundation equips its students with scientific knowledge, but more importantly, it teaches them to think independently.

Agastya uses simple, easily available, inexpensive tools which allow students to perform scientific experiments for themselves. In addition, students are taught to demonstrate experiments to other children, and persuaded to ask as well as answer questions. After all, science is as much about asking the right questions as it is about finding answers to them.
“I did not know much science, but through Agastya’s Mobile Lab experiments I have learned about the solar eclipse, lunar eclipse and how days, nights and seasons occur. Before Agastya I had never seen any lab equipment. Now I enjoy the thrill of using the tools of science and explaining things to others.” says Danamma, a 14 year old student from Kuppam, one of the South’s rural districts.

These novel mobile labs provide education at the doorstep of children in rural India who have no access to formal teaching. Each lab reaches 50,000 children per year and has inspired millions of children, instilling in them that spark of ingenuity and scientific observation which is so desperately needed in India today.
Raghavan has the right idea. India needs more such low cost, flexible models which focus on teaching science by “learning through doing “. If these techniques can ignite a science revolution in rural India with such limited resources, what heights can it reach in a city with plenty of innovation and capital such as ours? The country has to unite to foster vision and experimentation in today’s young minds.

Complex Finance?

A lot of us are intimidated by the financial world. They seem to have their own language and code- I didn't understand a word of what people around said during my first internship in the industry, and naturally thought it was because everyone around me was so much smarter.
The more I read and time I spend though, it seems like things are needlessly complicated, and can be explained much more simply.
I think this world has been intentionally complicated by those in it for three fundamental reasons:

1) They need people to hire them- if people figured out how easy it was to read basic financial statements, and didn't hire advisors, they'd be out of a job
2) They don't want competition- if they demystify the markets and everyone invests themselves, they'll be much less well paid; they need to maintain an air of secrecy/confidence
3) They want to make money- they make money from money. A whole field called financial engineering deals with designing complex financial products that are basically 'notional'- contracts to help the finance sector benefit from the markets.

And honestly, who can blame them? Don't lawyers (almost every profession for that matter) do the same thing?
There's nothing wrong with this, as long as you don't get fooled into thinking that you can't handle your own money.

Astrology and Market Movement

One of the best financial news websites in India now has an astrology columnn.
This is a professional site, great for tracking your portfolio and crunching numbers-that aims to provide signifcant data to inform people how to best invest their money-what sort of message does this send?
No one in the world, not even Buffet can tell you whether a stock is going to go up or down the next day, and constellations in the sky certainly aren't going to hold the answer.
I's sad that these sites are propagating the myth of market prediction, helping contribute to the hysteria around market movement, instead of helping investors judge the quality and value of listed companies.

Market Messiness

All this talk of the debt crisis and contagion in Europe-
The way journalists are reporting the events (even in the FT and Economist) it's easy to panic. There aren't that many actual numbers being reported regularly- sure they tell you how many points the markets fell by, but how many people can tell you what the underlying numbers that lead to the panic are?
And also, of course the markets continue to fall, if they're going to convince anyone that reads the financial news at all that Europe's in grave danger.
It's a vicious cycle- they say the markets going to plummet, people read the news, panic and pull the money out, and markets plummet.
Then even more people are forced to pull their money out whether they believe the situation is unstable or not, because they're losing too much of it, and then this is used as an example of the lack of confidence people have in Europe being able to save itself- leading to further chaos.
I'm not saying that there's no cause to panic- clearly someone somewhere is going to have to pay for the debt eventually, no matter how many times they pass it around and restructure it.
But: the markets aren't magic, all they do is indicate what people think- and it would help if the papers didn't spook the public, helping cause the crisis.

Sales

I've been reading about marketing, and thinking about the people I've truly enjoyed buying things from.
To get people to part with their money, and do it regularly, you have to truly believe you're selling a good product. Integrity shows.
You need to do your homework, know as much as possible about the product, be able to field questions.
You have to convince the buyer you have their best interest, and they will honestly profit from buying the product.
Also, they have to like you. Be honest, admit the drawbacks, nothing's perfect. Tell them the shortcomings and what you're doi]ho improve, admit when you don't know something. Keep in touch with them, develop a relationship.
Listen to what they're saying and how you can best help them.
The marketing head of a wealth management copmany recently told me (and this is advice worth following) that your loyalty should lie with your clients first, and then your company. If a product isn't worth buying, don't sell it.The relationships you develop should last a lifetime- no matter where you work or live.

Triple Bottom Line

Three books anyone intahted in sustainable business/social investing must read:

1) Natural Capitalism by Hawken: Strong argument for taking the social and environmental bottom-line into consideration and outlines examples of such innovation.
2) Cradle to Cradle by McDonough: Why 'less bad' is not better than 'bad'; advocates sustainable design, and a new practical approach to environmentalism
3) Biomimicry by Benyus: Outlines ways in which we can use inspiration from nature to build more environmentally friendly products; great examples.

Each has given an inspiring TED talk if you don't enjoy reading.

Reflexivity

Since I've been forced to think about reflexivity for my thesis, I can't believe how little it's a requirement in the pure sciences or in any profession- whether it's finance or law.
How can we learn, if we don't question how we learn, what our basic premises and assumptions are, and what the limits to our knowledge are?
The markets and laws aren't neutral either- power and knowledge flows affect them as much as they do the 'social world'. Can we really draw a line dividing the social and natural world, as texts discussing epistemology often do?
I keep coming back to the conclusion that philosophy needs to be taught in schools- how can we truly study anything without knowing how and why the subject evolved?

Writing

Clearly I've been spending a lot of time thinking about what makes good writing- I spent a while picking up random books about history, politics, fiction and anthropology in the library to try and identify what makes for interesting reading, regardless of the topic.
The most obvious element seems to be having something honestly interesting to say- whether its connecting different schools of thoughts, facts, interviews and sources, or coming up with a new argument or spin for an already established event.
Clarity and a strong voice is important as discussed previously- as is building an argument. The pace of writing is important- you have to set the context, and slowly give the reader new information. You can't drag it out too long without saying something new, or dump too much information on the reader at the same time.

Getting Things From People

It seems a little silly, but the best way to get something from someone- whether it's a contact, job or favor is to act like you don't need it.
People don't like neediness or being asked for help.
If you're relaxed and confident, people think you're successful, and want to help you without you asking for it.
The best you can do is do your homework, and then go out (to the right places) and have a good time. Things will fall into place.

Academia

Another valuable thing I've learnt this year, besides constructing arguments and finding my own voice is learning how universities function- and how academics think. I've begun to understand what being an academic is, and the purpose of academia itself.
Context is key, building an argument is half the battle. You add small bits of new information and thought into previous arguments. Breakthroughs either involve turning an argument or viewpoint on its head is a rare or synthesizing ideas and concepts from different fields and history. So many interesting philosophies have been lost in all the information we have access to- it seems entire schools of thought are fads.

Epistemology

Cambridge has taught me more than how to think- it's allowed me to understand what it is I think already.
I think that's why I enjoyed this year- I came across things I've always thought, but I have a name for them now.
What more can an education do than teach you how to look for information, think about it critically and connect different strands of thought?
No argument is wrong, because nothing can be entirely disproven, including this argument itself.

What They Don't Tell You

I recently attended an event organized by Newnham alumnus on how to make the most of your work experience- and they stressed the importance of networking, following up, not complaining no matter what the work is, and making yourself indispensable.
We spoke quite a lot on how to find an internship, and on working hard- but what they neglected to say was that the key to doing well is having people like you.
Why would anyone want to help you out or give you a job if they don't want you around?
Being positive, smiling and enthusiastic is key when you're just starting out- and is a tall order when all you're doing is making coffee and running to deliver mail.
Another key thing is to stand out. If they don't remember you, if you're just a cog in the wheel, how can you get called back? Be different, speak up, contribute.

Freedom

You can do absolutely anything you want, in every aspect possible.
You think the way you do because of your influences- and they can be changed.
There is no right, certain or established way to do anything. Everything's good as long as you're proud of it and enjoy it.

Unexpectations

The best things are the unexpected ones.Make an effort to exceed expectations.
Do your work early, do more than what's required, do it before it's asked for, anticipate the next step.
Keep ahead. No one does well for doing what they're supposed to.
Enjoy the process, it's always worth it.

People/Networks

No one is successful by themselves. Your work and its recognition is based on others, and it can't be good without their sacrifice and support.
It's important to have people believe in you, to push you, to give you something to work for and towards.

You get support, help and inspiration from the most unexpected sources.
Talk to as many people as you can, have an open mind. Everyone is interesting, has a story and has things to teach you.

Work hard, your work has to be worth noticing.
When you're done go out and enjoy yourself. Sign up to as many events as you can, don't turn down invitations. Who knows who you'll meet, and where it'll take you?

Be nice to everyone, but don't fake it.
Genuinely want to help people, go out of your way to do it. They'll remember.

Smile, laugh, enjoy yourself.
People want to be around happy people; and you can't be happy if you're not productive.


One conversation, idea, person can change your life. Let it.

Any Sort of Writing

Whether you're writing for a journal, newspaper or yourself, you have to work your work interesting.
Of course the content has to be valid and appropriate, but your writing style is every bit as important.
Your work is interesting if you're interested- and it shows.
Even in academic writing, it's always a better read if bits of yourself show through.
Your reader is human, why shouldn't your writing be?
A catchy title, unexpected sentences, pictures and good formatting helps.
You can put a spin on anything.
Keep them wanting more, anticipating what's next. Reel them in, surprise them , be punchy.
Don't be afraid to be different, they need to remember your work.

Academic Writing Continued

1) Say what you will and will not do. Outline the scope of your work.
2) Be as neutral and balanced as possible. Contrary views and cases are important.
3) Talk about the limitations, constraints and gaps.

Academic Writing

What makes good academic writing? What IS academic writing? I've been struggling with this question the whole year, and I think I may be getting the hang of it.

1) Make an argument: say something new
2)Back it up: put it in context; build on previous work
3) Guide the reader: tell them what to expect, what you're saying, where you're going
4) Be clear/concise: make it easy and quick to read
5) Connect facts/events/fields: again: you have to be original
6) Be balanced: don't make sweeping statements- you can't say anything that can't be verified. There are no absolutes

Writing

This has been said many times before, I don't know why I never listen:

The only way to write is to write.

1)Starting:

All that advice about finding inspiration, getting into the mood, freeing your mind, choosing the setting? It doesn't work until you actually begin. And once you begin, it doesn't really matter.

2)Getting stuck:

My thesis draft is virtually unrecognizable from my first write. It was hard, I got stuck, I wasn't sure how to proceed.
But there are books out there on how to write in virtually any format. I found reading and speaking to people was key to organizing my own thoughts- I wasn't sure what I thought until I read it somewhere or told someone, and then things just clicked.

3) Effective reading:

Another thing I've learnt is to never read and copy out the relevant points aimlessly.
Make notes of what you read, save the references, organize the readings, and then write.

4) Trust yourself and your voice:

Your structure will change many times, but you need to be confident about what you've read, what you know, your material. Your confidence and insecurities show through clearly.
Don't use references as a clutch, use them to back up what YOU think.
Always make it easy for the reader- tell them where they're at and where they're going.

5) Editing takes time:

Your edits will change your entire piece. Give yourself enough time to go through your work repeatedly, and ask for feedback.

6) Make it look good:

Formatting, fonts and color matter. No one wants to read massive amounts of text. Make it sound AND look interesting.

Getting Clients

1) Reply promptly to e-mails: it shows you're efficient and on the ball. And you get to them before anyone else does.
2) Organize: Have a list of key points about your clients that you update regularly. Having a database makes your life easier, and impresses clients when you don't have to keep asking them for information.
3) Provide free samples: Prove that you're good at what you can do, and earn their trust. A little goodwill goes a long way.
4) Make it easy to pay: Have a well organized easy to access website. If they're giving you their money, make it easy for them.

Holding Back

I think one of the biggest differences I see in myself this year, is not a different way of thinking or speaking- but having the confidence to express my thoughts.
I used to hold myself back, second-guess myself, try to fit in, and now I just can't be bothered. WHy shouldn't I be as critical or questioning as I want to be?
And ironically, people seem to enjoy it too. All those wasted years of false agreement, sigh.

Cutting Edge

I just had a really interesting conversation with a friend who's doing her thesis on the effects of health on decision making in politics- and it's so freaking interesting.
It seems like the only things worth doing and studying are those at the boundaries- combining health/biology, the environment, development and markets? Hm.

The Fear of Fat

There seems to be a correlation between education and body size.
Everyone here is so THIN- both the academics and the students.
The only overweight people I ever see anymore are the ones that work in cafes, restaurants, colleges.
I suppose education does make you aware of the benefits of healthy eating and exercise- but come on, you can get that advice from any magazine too.
I think it's more a sign of commitment, drive, ambition.
They're in control of the rest of their lives, they're motivated, directed.
Why wouldn't they be in control of their body size too?

Freewrite

You know that feeling of floating, or free falling, of there being no limits, nothing to hold you? Nothing to hold onto. It's hard to know what ends and when it begins. We're so trapped by time and schedules, when you take it away, you're free, you see. You begin to be. And rhyme, apparently.

Markets

Instead of criticizing the markets, monetization and the meaning of value- why don't we create our own systems of trade? There's nothing stopping us from defining our own values and forms of distribution.

Seeing India

This course has changed my way of seeing.
When I went back home this summer, everything was different, even though nothing was the same.

It's confusing that I had to leave the country, to learn about it, to notice things about it. Distance does give you perspective. But I worry that in a way, it's just a form of recolonizing my mind, isn't it?

If I think the way this system wants me to, am I caught in Spivak's paradox? But just having had the opportunity to be here probably disqualified me anyway.

Academia

My course has basically been self- study.

I feel like I was put in a place with a million books, and thousands of fascinating people, handed a set of assignments, and left to get on with it.

I would have maybe liked more support, guidance, been taught how to write a great social science essay before getting my grades back- but in the end, how do you learn and grow, really?

If the point of a University is to provide an education- then this year has given me access to all the sources of learning I could have wanted.And I'd like to think I've made the most of it.

I've learnt so much through conversation- both about my subject and myself, my way of thinking.

Just as I'm getting my bearings, and getting on my feet, it's time to leave- but isn't that a sign I should be moving on anyway? Can't afford to get complacent.

This Year

I've learnt so much, grown so much this year.
I can see the difference in the way I think, speak, live.

It's partly my course, and partly my environment.
For the first time in what feels like ever, I feel absolutely free to be myself. And that's the key- that confidence, the lack of bullshit brings liberation with it.

People sense that, and want to be around you.
Nothing attracts people like happiness.

Writing a First Draft

The only way to write is to write. But you can't write if you don't read.

Take your time reading, diversify your sources and authors. Take notes, record your thoughts. Once you've organized your reading, form an argument or story.

Break the piece down into subheadings, and group your notes into these different boxes/categories.

Write freely. Make coherent sentences. The rest will come.

Have your own voice, be strong. Guide your reader, tell them where you're going.

Make it easy for them, you know more than they do.

The Art of Conversation

I'm constantly reminded by how essential it is to have good people skills. If you can talk to people, or more importantly- listen, doors will open for you.

People like feeling like they've been heard. Isn't having a great conversation the best buzz you can have?

It's easy when you break it down:

1) Make people feel interesting- Make eye contact, smile, laugh.
2) Make them feel like they can trust you- Be non-judgmental. Keep your expression neutral.
3) Keep them talking- Ask them questions, don't relate what they say back to yourself immediately
4) Be interesting- See other sides, don't take what they say at face value. Respond with something unexpected;they have to remember you.

There's more than one story, more than what they're telling you. Dig deeper- ask for history, context, comparisons.

Framing

I can't believe that development language is still automatically used to dissect policy making in the South.
There's a lot of what Escobar says that I disagree with- I'm all for enjoying the fruits of modernity as much as the next person- but honestly, language is absolutely key- and if the people who 'care' continue to degrade the South in this way, it's just creating obstacles for us to overcome when we have enough.
Perception isn't everything, but it says a lot about the authors themselves.

Development

What happened to the Second World?
What about the Islamic view of the World?
Where are the indigenous authors and texts?
And can we not resort to using the terms 'local knowledge' and 'indigenous people' everytime we discuss the South?

Networking in the City

1) Look good. Spend money. Wear make-up. Lose weight.
2) Cut the bullshit. Be direct, ask for what you want.
3) Show that you know exactly what you're talking about.
4) Smile and laugh a lot.
5) Do your homework. Ask questions. Be interested.

Disconnect

There's such a disconnect between assimilation and creation. The more I know, the more reluctant I am to put it down. Can you be too self- critical?

I think the key is to create before thinking about creation.
Have something out there, and then thinking about it will lead places.