Deepmala

Deepmala 41 – Lucky Accidents in Scientific Research


In science it is not only well planned research that leads to new breakthroughs. Sometimes we reach unknown destinations in science accidentally. This has happened for centuries. In 1786, Luigi Galvani noticed the accidental twitching of a frog’s leg and discovered the principle of electric battery. In 1858, William Henry Perkins was trying to synthesize Synthetic quinine from coal tar and he came across a coloured liquid, a synthetic dye. This was the beginning of the modern chemical industry. Leo Bakeland was looking for synthetic shellac and he accidentally found Bakelite. That was the beginning of the modern plastics industry. This is called serendipity when it knocks on your door, you have to hear the knock and respond to it, as did Galvani, Perkins and Bakeland.

Sometimes serendipity knocks on your door, but you do not hear it. The discovery of Superglue, is a classical case. Harry Coover of Eastman Chemical Company was assigned the problem of finding an optically clear plastic from which precision gunsights could be cast. He was working with some chemicals but everything these chemicals touched stuck to everything else, which he recorded. However, he didn’t see this as serendipity, just as a severe pain! The adhesive qualities of these chemicals were a serious obstacle in his path.

Moving ahead a few years to 1951, there was a need to discover stronger, tougher and more hear-resistant polymers for jet plans canopies. Coover was now supervising a new crop of eager young chemists. Someone in the group prepared what he thought was a pure sample of chemical and decided to measure its refractive index in order to characterize its purity. The measurement was made and recorded. When the scientists attempted to separate the prisms, they could not! They were worried that the prisms were ruined. Coover, however, suddenly realized that what they had was not a useless instrument, but a unique adhesive. Serendipity had given him a second chance, but this time his alert mental process led to inspiration. Immediately, Coover asked the scientists for a sample of his this chemical and began gluing everything he could lay his hands on – glass plates, rubber stoppers, metal spatulas, wood, paper, plastic – in all combinations. Everything stuck to everything, almost instantly, and with bonds that could not break apart. In that one afternoon new adhesives were conceived, purely as the result of serendipity. These adhesives not only had a significant impact on consumer and industrial applications, but also became a promising answer to a surgeon’s dream of a tissue adhesive.

One cannot help wondering as to how many potentially important inventions lie dormant in the recorded observations of scientists, which at the time were judged to be irrelevant to their research objective. This should serve as a reminder to all of us to be open-minded and curious enough to pursue unexplained events and unexpected results that may unlock new secrets and lead to new and exciting discoveries in the future.

The greatest accident was in 1929. When a gust of wind blowing over Alexander Flemings moulds, contaminated them. The clues he had from this led to the discovery of Pencillian and the new antibiotic age. As a proud Indian, it worries me as to why such a wind did not blow over the laboratories of Indian innovators! Why did we not get one breakthrough, which had the potential to lead India to such a new industry or even an entirely new product through such accidents? Does this mean that those lucky accidents did not at all take place in India? Or if they did take place, were we equipped enough to spot them? What should not be forgotten is that a trained mind is required to spot these accidents. Eyes do not see what the mind does not know. Our training of our young students in science has to change so that they continue to look for the unexpected. Then only will we have such breakthroughs. I hope that what we missed in twentieth century will happen in the twenty first century.

Deepmala 40 – Rewarding the Problem Solvers for the Poor


Practice invariably comes first and science, which explains as to why that practice works, follows later. The technology often came first – science followed. We knew how to make a wheel first and the science of motion developed later. The steam engine come first and thermodynamics followed later. We learnt to ear the food first and the science of nutrition followed later. The technological driven process of scientific inquiries empowers doers, and then the thinkers follow and extend the logic of what has been done. If we try to do just the opposite, as oftentimes seems to be the case, we extend scientific concepts and then see where can these be applied. These sometime work, but most of the time, these attempts end up creating a divide between the scientific community and the day-to-day concerns of millions of people. Let me explain this by taking a very simple example of drawing water from a well.

We should ask as to why the design of a pulley to draw water from a well remained unchanged for two thousand years? Millions of women in drawing water from wells, feel fatigued and sometimes need to rest to catch their breath. But all this time, they have to keep holding the rope with a water-filled bucket or vessel tied to it. Not surprisingly all it takes is a momentary loosening of one’s grip to result in the bucket falling into the well. Although communities have devised ways of retrieving a fallen bucket out of well, for example, by using hooks tied to another rope, this did not prevent the bucket falling into the well. This was the situation until an artisan when posed with this challenge solved this problem by attaching a small lever on the pulley. The lever did not get in the way while pulling on the rope, but the moment the tension on the rope slackened, the lever pressed against it and arrested the downward movement thus keeping the water-filled bucket in its position. Now an old lady or an ill person could take rest, chat and then resume the pulling operation. Thousands of such pulleys are now being installed all across the Gujrat Villages. These designs will spread to the rest of India soon. Can you imagine the relief this will bring to millions of poor women, who draw water from wells in India everyday.

Why did such problems that affect millions of people every day not get solved through the use of the existing scientific models? This example challenges us to consider the changes we need to make in the way scientists are taught and trained so that we do not so to say throw the baby out with bathwater. In other words we do not in any way seek to alienate the outstanding scientists that we do have in various disciplines in at least some of our countries. Rather the aim is to harness their talent so as to add value to the local, indigenous ability to solve problems. In the example of this pulley, we should remember that navigators had used a similar concept while pulling the ropes in setting oars in the boats, and a chain pulley system in the construction industry also used similar concepts. Thus the concept was not new but its application in a real life problem did not happen. This shows that the problems that society faces did not receive as much attention in the formal science programs. While it is possible that the problem was with the society that it did not push for its problems getting addressed. Or equally possible it may be the way the scientist was taught and trained that is the problem stemming from little encouragement to pursue science that solves every day problems while at the same time extending the frontiers of science.

We must create a new value system, where problem solving for the poor and the disadvantaged becomes the mission, and those who contribute to it are made into the national heroes. That is why an illiterate artisan, who developed this pulley system was acknowledged and rewarded by the National Innovation Foundation that was set up under my Chairmanship last year. We need more such innovations, which will solve the problems of the poor.

Deepmala 39 – Global Knowledge for Global Good through Global Funding


Today we are concerned about generation of knowledge, which will be relevant to the poor, for example, new knowledge, which impacts on the diseases of the poor, and so on. Development of technology for the poor people is generally neglected. Take the diseases of the poor as an example. In 1998, the global spending on health research was $ 70 billion, but just $ 300 million was dedicated to vaccines for HIV/AIDS and about $ 100 million to malaria research. Of 1,223 new drugs marketed worldwide between 1975 and 1996, only 13 were developed to treat tropical diseases – and only 4 were the direct results of the research done by pharma industry. The lesson is that not only the funding of research in rich countries is skewed but also the priorities, as they largely deal with the needs of the rich.

The access to drugs at affordable costs has been on the agenda of poor nations. It is interesting to note that the issue of ‘patents and the patients’ had taken the shape of ‘patents vs. the patients’. What has brought this issue into sharp focus is the HIV/AIDS case in South Africa. CIPLA from India offered a cocktail of three anti-retroviral drugs for US $ 350 for a treatment for one year, as against the multinational drug pharma companies, whose offer was have been around $ 10,000. Eventually these companies were forced to bring down the cost of the treatment to less than $ 600. This has raised the issue of availability of medicines at an affordable price to the poor of the world

But another question that arises is also about the necessity of finding ways and means by which drugs of interest to the poor of the world, be it Malaria, TB and so on, could be created. The key question is, who will work on these? It is obvious that there is a pressure on large drugs and pharma companies to provide the maximum value to their shareholders rather than provide value to the poor of the developing nations. Their research portfolio is obviously heavily slanted towards drugs, which bring in maximum profits to the firms and not towards the drugs for the poor. Therefore, there is no substitute to creating new drugs for the poor excepting through public funding (national as well as international) and also through meaningful public/private partnerships.

Drugs for Malaria is a good example. If one goes to the market, one finds that the drugs for Malaria available today have been largely developed by CSIR laboratories like Central Drug Research Institution in Lucknow. Can this model be extended beyond India. What about countries like Africa, who neither have the money to buy the medicines nor do they have the scientific capacity that countries like India have a new model. For this we require.

I propose that the solution is to create a global knowledge pool for global good through global funding. The global fund should be created and managed by an international body. The funding would be given for creating new knowledge and products for identified diseases of concern to the poor. The research agenda will be set and programs monitored by this body. The norms for sharing the intellectual property arising out of this could be decided in such a way that the access at affordable prices to the poor is ensured. For this to happen, a new awakening will have to arise in the global community about concerns of the poor. India could be an ideal destination for this, since although it is economically poor, it is intellectually rich.

Deepmala 38 – Who should be our Role Model: Mahatma Gandhi or Bill Gates?


I gave an address at the University of Roorkee, some four years ago. There was a gathering of about 1500 students. There was a question-answer session. One student asked me a difficult question. He wanted to know who should be the role model for the new generation of scientists, engineers and other professionals like him. Should it be Mahatma Gandhi or Bill Gates?
Bill Gates has converted knowledge into wealth and has become the richest man in the world. Mahatma Gandhi on the other hand provided a model which, may be considered totally opposed to Bill Gates, because Gandhiji applied eternal values to life without any material gain.

In the new world order, there seem to be almost unlimited possibilities of harnessing knowledge for material gain. The fine art of converting wealth out of knowledge has been demonstrated by Bill Gates. He has become the idol of the new generation of professionals, who gain specialised knowledge in their respective fields.

If Mahatma Gandhi’s model is used, they would have to, the student felt, go for denial of material progress, which would make them lose out in the global economic race.
This dilemma has to be especially resolved in the Indian situation. I recollect, in this context, an incident at a seminar, organised by CSIR with Unilever, a large multinational corporation in Bangalore some time ago.

The Seminar was inaugurated by Mr. P. Chidambaram, former Union Finance Minister, who was India’s leading light for liberalisation and had worked hard to ensure that India gets her rightful place in the global economy. The traditional lamp had to be lit for the inauguration of the seminar. Mr. P. Chidambaram took off his shoes to light the lamp.
This is what India is all about: Indian values such as this, which make the country’s Finance Minister take off his shoes to light the traditional lamp. The symbol of light which represents divinity, harmonises with modem science and technology. This harmony provides us the guiding principle which is based on Indian values.

This is what Mahatma Gandhi’s role model is also all about: the application of eternal values of life to the business of living. Mahatma Gandhi had said that religion divorced from life has no meaning.
We can have enduring success in the new global order only by applying the eternal principles of life and values, embodied in our culture and ethos. Bill Gates may be successful in material terms, but his success is based on the principle of material success at any cost. Such wealth cannot be sustained. The means are as important as the end, as Mahatma Gandhi had taught us. It is only by applying this principle of rightful ends for rightful means, that we should strive to make our place in the new global order.
Thus in my view, I answered the student, Mahatma Gandhi should be the role model for our new generation of scientists, technologists and other professionals, in the new economic order. Only then would the success of Bill Gates eventually not only follow, but would also be sustained. As the Bible says, “Seek ye first the kingdom of righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you”. I do not know as to whether the student was satisfied but on reflection after four years, and especially as I am getting older, I am even more convinced about this answer!

Deepmala 37 – Evolving a True Universal Human Civilsation


The sheer rapidity of technological change has given rise to a number of social and psychological problems. In the opinion of many people, this makes the modern world, for all its technological marvels, an uncomfortable and an unfulfilling place to live. As Robert Wright has pointed out recently, the rates of depression have been doubling in some industrial countries every ten years and suicide is the third most common cause of death among young adults in North America, after car accidents and homicides. Wright goes on to assert that pathological alienation is a hallmark of advanced and rich countries. The new technologies and their products, such as cars, refrigerators, television and suburbia are creating a growing feeling of social isolation and erosion of bonds of neighbourly interdependence.

There is a growing feeling that the modern acquisitive society often prevents human beings from cultivating the warm, affiliative side of human nature. And this feeling is no longer confined to people in the developed countries. It is fast spreading to poor countries, as they experience uncoordinated and unbalanced urbanisation and development.

In several countries, the growing feelings of insecurity, uncertainty and persistent social deprivation are contributing to the rise of religious fundamentalism of a perverse kind which claims an exclusive monopoly of knowledge and wisdom and emphasises rigid uniformity rather than harmony in a culturally pluralistic setting.

What are the true implications of these developments for the future of India? As I see it, we cannot disown the use of modern science and technology to improve the human conditions. Indeed, without a purposeful use of modern science and technology, we cannot get rid of chronic poverty, ignorance and disease, which still afflict millions of people in our country.

Thus we have to combine the use of science and technology with a new spiritual awakening so that increased material well being and leisure are not wasted in costly excitements catering to the needs of the body. To the contrary, they must, but become important means to rekindle the higher impulses, both for self-perfection and social reform, including reform of religious practices. This must be based on the dignity of the individual human being, compassion, tolerance, gentleness, truthfulness and non-violence. 11 September in USA, 13 December in New Delhi, the Godhra incident in Gujarat and recent carnages in Kashmir are grim reminders, coming as they did in a span of less than one year, of the self-inflicted pain and misery that we forcing an ourselves.

There is another issue about wealth, power and wisdom. Nehru had reflected :

“….What I am concerned with is not merely our material progress, but the quality and depth of our people. Gaining power through industrial process, will they lose themselves in the quest of individual wealth and soft living? That would be a tragedy for that would be a negation of what India has stood for in past and, I think, in the present time also as exemplified by Gandhi, power is necessary, but wisdom is essential. It is only power with wisdom that is good.”

Can we combine the progress of science and technology with this progress of the mind and spirit also? We cannot be untrue to science, because that represents the basic fact of life today. Still less can we be untrue to those essential principles for which India has stood in the past throughout the ages. Let us then remember that material riches without tolerance and compassion and wisdom may well turn to dust and ashes.

India can make a powerful contribution to the evolution of a truly universal human civilisation of the future, based both on reason and morality and a synthesis of science and spirituality. Einstein had probably this synthesis in mind when he stated that science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.

Deepmala 36 – The Essence of Creativity


One of the major challenges before the nation is that of inducing creative thinking amongst our young people. The young budding inventors can learn a lot from the legendary career of the inventor Thomas Alva Edison. He was granted a record of 1,093 patents for inventions ranging from light bulb, typewriter and electric pen to his phonograph and motion-picture camera. His career illustrates how creativity can be cultivated. His work methods reveal that the real keys to unlocking creativity are an open-minded approach to learning and perseverance. Edison used his creativity not only for developing new inventions but also for bringing them to the market and winning out financially over competitors.

When Edison died in 1931, he left 3500 note books which read like a turbulent brainstorm. It shows Edison’s mind at work spanning most of his six-decade career. They offer fresh clues as to how Edison, who received virtually no formal education, could achieve such an astounding unrivalled record of inventiveness. The notebooks illustrate how Edison conceived his ideas from their earliest inceptions and show in great detail how he developed and implemented them.

How do ideas get generated? Curiosity provides the stimulus for the production of ideas. Curiosity prompts us to ask questions and explore further. As Einstein said ” He who cannot wonder, cannot feel curious about things around him, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle”. Edison was curios and therefore he could generate new ideas.

Edison believed that in order to discover one good idea, you have to generate many. His perseverance was tested from the fact that he made more than 50,000 experiments to invent the alkaline storage cell battery and as many as 9,000 to perfect the light bulb. Creative thinking depends on continuing the flow of ideas long enough to purge common and habitual thoughts and produce unusual and imaginative ones.

Edison felt that his lack of formal education was, in fact, a ‘blessing’. This enabled him to approach his work with far fewer assumptions than his more educated competitors, who included many theoretical scientists, renowned doctorates and engineers. He approached any idea or experience with wild enthusiasm and was prepared to try anything out of ordinary material.

When an experiment failed, Edison would always ask what the failure revealed and would enthusiastically record what he had learnt. He had an enormous talent for appropriating ideas that may have failed in one instance and using them for something else. Whenever he succeeded with a new idea, he would review his notebooks to rethink ideas and inventions abandoned in the past in light of what was recently learnt. He would often jot down ideas others had come up with in other fields.

The lessons that we learn from Edison’s life are simple. First, challenge the assumptions continuously. Do not have a preset or prejudiced mind. Let the windows of your mind be always open. Second, you can learn more from your failures than you can from your successes. So do not be afraid to fail. Take risks. Third, patience and perseverance pays. Fourth, nothing is final. Strive for creating products that are better than the best. And displace your products yourself. If you do not do it, then your competitors will do it for you. If our academics, industry and society adopt this approach, then India can certainly emerge as a leader among the creative nations.

Deepmala 35 – Listening to the Poor


I remember giving a lecture in Hindustan Lever Research Centre in 1978. Dr. Menon, the Director of the Centre, introduced me to the audience, but he did it in an unusual way. He said ‘Mashelkar’s biodata is well known. I need not read it out to you. But there is one great quality of the man the biodata does not include. I found during the day that he is a great listener’. I was rather surprised to hear this remark. Later I asked him as to why he said what he said. His response was ‘Very rarely do I meet people who are not interested in only listening to themselves. Very few realise that good learning can come only through good listening. You have that quality’. This observation set me thinking about this importance of this process of listening in one’s life.

Listening is the first activity in the complex process called interaction with the external universe. It is listening that creates a bond for us with the world around. Learning cannot happen without attentive listening. A baby listens to its mother’s speaking for days and months religiously and picks up her language. Later it speaks fluently its mother tongue

Attentive listening is a complex neurological activity with a purpose. The words through the ears reach the brain for a complex but quick processing and the results on the person are amazing. Attentive listening delves deep into the words and sentences to fishout the metaphoric or figurative meanings. Active listening is a difficult exercise, more difficult than what we assume it to be because human thinking is much faster a capacity than listening.

Listening to the teachers, to the elders, to the leaders is something that we understand well. But do we understand what we mean by ‘listening to the poor’ and what benefits this can entail in the development process? Let me explain.
Effective communication involves listening as well as talking – a simple truth too often overlooked in development work. People who work for donor governments, multilateral institutions, and developing-country governments recognise that there is much knowledge that the poor do not processes. But in their eagerness to give them this knowledge, they forget that the poor know a great deal that they do not. Like all people, the poor know their own circumstances, their own needs, and their own worries and aspirations better than anybody. They often have information about where they live – whether savanna or slum – that is not readily apparent to outsiders.

Listening to the poor means more than simply showing up and asking what is on their minds – although this, too, can be worthwhile. It means giving the poor the means to speak, through schooling and communications. It means learning systematically from household surveys and other instruments and incorporating what is learned in the design of policy. It also means involving beneficiaries in project design and implementation. By listening and by responding in ways that show that they have heard, donors and governments alike increase the odds that they will earn the trust of those they are trying to help. Trust is important to the poor as they select, apply, and adapt the knowledge most appropriate to their circumstances. If we give the poor vice, if we learn about the poor from the poor, if we communicate through local channels, and if we provide the information the poor need then we can really make a difference.

Deepmala 34 – Value Based Education


We are living in an increasingly globalising environment. We are told that Asia will be the focus of development in the new millennium and India will be one of the lead players in this process. From all accounts it appears to be the truth. India is not a poor country but a rich country with lots of poor people. India has the potential to become a land of splendid opportunities if only the human resources are properly developed and a disciplined work culture is cultivated. Our problems are corruption, reluctance to work hard and lack of scientific temper. If education can help overcome these handicaps, we can eradicate poverty from this land and provide opportunities for every citizen to develop to his or her full potential. This is where values become important in education and personality development.

Today the society in general and the youth in particular are passing through a state, which portends danger for the future. Education should condition the mind to enable individuals to function effectively and to have a fulfilling life. In a situation in which children spend less and less time with parents and are bombarded with quick fix solutions for every problem through an aggressive media culture, it is important that centres of higher learning devise ways to promote ethical choices to the educated persons who are expected to be thinking individuals .

Values become important for an educated person in the context of the emerging forces of globalisation converting everything to the naked fury of the market forces. Knowledge bereft of values can be dangerous. Look at the way organized crime, financial frauds and terrorist violence are being perpetrated by some of the best minds endowed with the best of educational and technical attainments. Look at the way even the members of the learned professions indulge in scandalous unethical conduct to make money in total disregard of their professional obligations and social responsibilities.

The need for value based education is central to all forms of education; but there are differences of opinion among teachers and educational administrators on how to organise it in the curriculum. The result is that it is not attempted at all and is left to individual judgment based on one’s own perception and experience. This is not a happy situation especially in a multicultural, multireligious and multi-ethnic society like ours. One can interpret secularism differently to suit one’s point of view; but there is no alternative to multiculturalism if India is to survive as one nation. This would mean that tolerance as a value must be imbibed in the personality of every individual whether he or she belongs to a majority or minority group. Fundamentalism is inimical to scholarship and progress. Education must enable individuals to be tolerant of differences and lead people to renounce violence and resolve disputes through socially acceptable ways. This is what India of the olden days did but we seem to have gone astray now. It is time that we rethink on this issue and set an example for the rest of the world.

Deepmala 33 – Globalisation in an unequal world


We can look at the problem of poverty at four specific levels. The first is poverty at the level of individual or the family. The second is poverty at the community level, where the whole community is poor, not only in terms of money, but also in terms of basic human needs. The third level of poverty is at the social level. This is a situation where despite rising above poverty as an individual or a family, one may still encounter poverty of another kind – due to lack of social respect. The fourth is poverty at the national level. As individual may be rich, but will still belong to a poor country if his country is poor.

The challenge for developing countries is in giving a decent and dignified existence to their poorer sections. The poor have to be brought into the mainstream of social and economic activities. The would imply improvement in their living standards, as well as sustained access to resources for maintaining their improved standards of living. Only then would they experience social upliftment and feel as much a part of the nation as their better off counterparts.

Does globalisation have the ability to serve this purpose ? It certainly does. But its success in reducing poverty would depend upon how individual countries approach the issue of globalisaitoin. The fear regarding globalisation is not entirely unfounded. This is because, unfortunately, we live in a world where inequality continues to be a major divisive force.

At the end of the 90s, one fifth of the world’s population living in the richest countries had access to 86 per cent of the total world output. Another one fifth of the world’s people, living in the poorer countries could enjoy only 1 per cent of the world output. The world’s 200 richest people more than doubled their net worth in four years to 1998 to more than one trillion dollars. The assets of the top three billionaires of the world are more than the combined Gross Natural Product of all the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) comprising of 600 million people.

The issue of equity is central to the debate surrounding globalization. Poorer countries do not have a level playing field in today’s world. If globalization is to succeed, then the world has to become a more equal place. If the inequalities are not taken care of then globalization will continue to be challenged and will keep on encountering intellectual and popular discontent.

While the developed countries have a key role to play in ensuring success of globalization, the challenge is equally daunting for developing countries. It is important to realize in this context that globalization will play a somewhat marginal role in the developmental process of a country. It cannot be a substitute for the efforts of the people. For poorer countries, it is essential to adopt policies ensuring maximum people’s participation and benefits for the poorer sections, without putting them into additional difficulties.

The ideal of globalisation in the Indian context can be considered on the lines of the thoughts of Rabindranath Tagore, which form the basis of Vishwa Bharathi. He had said “We must build up relationship with the whole world, to serve, and be served to give and to receive, we want to be one with the world’s learning”. If globalisation is taken in this spirit then it will certainly create a world that is more peaceful, tolerant and prosperous.

Deepmala 32 – Development : What does it really mean?


The word ‘Development’ has become a global term. It has been used to rank countries as ‘developed’, developing’, and ‘under developed’. These are mainly economic indicators. The implicit reasoning in this ranking is that the state of the ‘developed’ countries is what all other countries should aspire for. It is assumed that the problems of poverty and standards of living will be tackled by following the path of the ‘developed’ countries. What does one commonly understand by ‘development’? Basically it is all about mass mechanisation and industrialisation, high levels of output of goods and services, super affluence in material goods, high consumption of natural resources, increased leisure time, fast communication, creating of an atmosphere where mental and intellectual skills alone become more and more valued.

The economic growth has to happen through industrialisation and so ‘modernisation’ and ‘progress’ have become equated with industrialisation. This has limited the meaning of ‘development’ and somehow led to the devaluing of the people themselves. Paradoxically, it is often forgotten that is the people who are the real focus of development. Development is the growth of people, of people’s capacities and strengths, of people’s participation and self-reliance, of people’s equality. No nation can develop unless people develop.

The world considers India as a nation that is not developed. I fail to understand how a nation whose people have produced -Taj Mahal be called backward? The exquisite embroidery of Kutch and Rajasthan is in great demand in the boutiques of Paris, the Madhubani paintings of women of Bihar are in the international markets, how can one call them backword? Yes, they are poor and illiterate but poverty and illiteracy are necessarily not backwardness. Why should such talented people of ours remain poor and illiterate, that is the question, we need to answer.

Let us, therefore, redefine ‘backwardness’, understand better what we want when we say ‘progress’ and ‘modern’. Yes, we do want to progress, industrialise, modernise, globalise let us do it in our Indian way.

For that, we have to understand our cultural institutions, the displacing effect of new technologies on the work, culture and identity of our people, understand our mode of work which most often is self employment; we have to identify the forces which encourage concentration of resources in the hands of a few and destroy the decentralised traditional system. We have to think and act with utmost urgency to come out of poverty without damaging our ecosystem, our values, our identity. We have to develop and nurture a sense of pride in our own life styles and value systems instead of running them down as ‘backward’. My plea is that let us redefine ‘ a new development paradigm’ for the India of our dreams.