Mostly Economics

I just participated in a 3-day Programme at IIM Ahmedabad from 16-18 March 2026 on Strategic Legacy Management: Using History to Create Business Value (SLM). The next year’s programme dates are already out and it is from 17-19 March 2027.

The SLM programme is one of its kind. The introduction on the website sums the programme:

All organisations carry a legacy. Young or old, they are what they are because of the road they have travelled and the experiences they’ve amassed. In India, thousands of organisations are more than thirty years old, with many over fifty or even a hundred years old. Yet, most do not actively engage with their heritage. They don’t have an archive or a systematic documentation of their past, let alone practices that enable them to leverage their legacy as a strategic resource. This is unfortunate, since an organisation’s legacy can provide significant business and organisational advantages. Organisations of all kinds can use their legacy as a strategic asset, as it is where their uniqueness lies, setting them apart from the competition.

This programme is designed to address the unmet need of systematic business and institutional legacy management. It aims at harnessing the power of an organisation’s past to enhance brand value, strengthen employee connects and manage transitions and risks in an ever-changing world. Participants will be exposed to frameworks and practices for documenting, disseminating and transforming organisational legacies into valuable assets that unlock new potential for growth.

The programme is conducted by Prof Chinmay Tumbe, faculty of economics and history at IIMA. This year he was supported by Vrunda Pathare, chief archivist of Godrej Archives and Anders Sjöman, CEO of Centre of Business History at Sweden.  The three faculty members bring their own set of expertise: Chinmay brings rich insights into Indian stories, Vrunda digs deep into building archives at Godrej and Anders connects so many dots from Sweden and all around the world.

The day-wise prog summary is as follows:

Day one: Is like a warm up to the overall idea of using legacy as a strategic tool. One is taken to the Godrej case study (A) when the archives were first set up in 2006. The key questions back then were how to build an archive and how to position it within the organisation. After discussion amidst participants, Vrunda takes one through the challenges and opportunities. You get ideas on what it takes to build an archive. There are sessions by Anders on what all goes into an archive and how to monetize the archive. In the evening, there is a tour to IIMA Archives, one of its kind archive of an educational institute. They have records or all students, faculties, programs and what not. The way the archives re being used to tell the history of IIMA and Ahmedabad in general is quite something. IIMA has a deep legacy and the archives magnify the legacy multifold.

Day two:  One is taken to part (B) of the Godrej case. The archives were successfully established and have built a legacy over last 20 years. The question in 2026 is how to take the archive forward. What to do of the digitalization deluge where all kinds of records are coming to the archives creating issues of storage, security and privacy. There is discussion on importance of oral history and storytelling. One is then taken on a tour in Ahmedabad to see following: CEPT Archives, Zydus Corporate museum, Gandhi Ashram Archives and an exhibit on Anasuya Sarabhai. All these four were as different as chalk and cheese.  The participants get ideas on different ways one can archive, present histories and take the legacy forward.

Day Three: Anders takes you through what it means to think through celebrating corporate/organizational anniversaries. Is it going to be a one-time party or a deeper engagement? For anything deeper, one needs an archive. There were examples on how business/organisations go about looking at their anniversaries.

The highly diverse pool of participants and discussions highly enrichened the experience. Add IIMA facilities & hospitality and you have an amazing three days at the campus of reflection and learning.

I recommend the SLM highly especially to those involved in their businesses or working in organisations looking for answers on building heritage and taking legacies forward. At the end of the day, most if not all businesses seek and strive to create their legacies. The programme helps you understand the nuances, challenges and opportunities of building this very legacy.

Humans keep killing humans everywhere and hide their mass killings.

Teklehaymanot G. Weldemichel of University of Manchester writes on mass killings in Ethiopia.

The Tigray region in Ethiopia’s north has endured one of the world’s deadliest armed conflicts of the 21st century. Between 2020 and 2022, as many as 800,000 people were killed (out of a regional population of about 7 million). This rivals estimates from recent major conflicts, including those in Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan and Syria.

The war was fought between Tigray’s security forces and the allied forces of Ethiopia and Eritrea, along with ethnic militias from different regions of Ethiopia.

This period was marked by organised massacres. There was also systematic sexual violence and mass displacement. Ethnic cleansing and prolonged siege conditions devastated civilians.

Despite its unparalleled scale, the Tigray crisis remained largely invisible to the world. Factors such as race and the peripherality of the region made the Tigray conflict a blind spot in global geopolitics. But these explanations are not sufficient.

He says the govt used 4 ways to hide attrocities:

The Ethiopian government and its allies employed four major tactics to create a “zone of invisibility” – a deliberate effort to obscure what was happening:

• • communication shutdowns
  • restrictions on journalists and humanitarian agencies
  • physical blockades that limited access to information and evidence
  • and narratives that reframed the Tigrayan population as legitimate targets of violence.

These measures allowed atrocities to unfold with limited external scrutiny

Not very different from hiding mass killing episodes in other countries.

Peter Redford writes on RWER Blog that he has nothing to say about Epstein files as it gets nauseatic. However, he still ends up saying much:

I have been busy, so I have not been here lately …

But:

I have nothing to say about the Epstein files.

Except: that the Epstein files have a lot to say about America [and the western world generally]

Those files are a testimony to the enormous corruption of our elite.  It has capitulated to greed and venality as something not just to accept, but to normalize to a degree that it becomes invisible to the ethical gaze of the insiders soaked in its mire.  And they are, by and large, supposed to be our leaders.  No wonder we have no leadership.

Our elite saw fit to ignore explicit immorality and corruption and to turn a blind eye to levels of venal behavior that would be unacceptable in any morally secure civilization.

Why?

Because it has become so self-referential, self-sustaining, and self-involved that is has lost all touch with decency.  It genuinely believes it has rules and modes of behavior that need not conform to those of society at large.

This descent into abominable behavior began in earnest as an unintended consequence of the pursuit of profit and power unleashed back in the late 1970s and early 1980s.  It is an aspect of the great reactionary movement that drove a wedge between the elite and society at large based on the acceptance of great inequalities explicit in the elevation of neoliberal — rather than liberal — ideas.  In a twisted and debased reading of Adam Smith, greed was suddenly accepted as a socially beneficial goal.  

We have lost all moral grounds:

Read the rest of this entry »

Kurian Mathew of Madras Courier on 20 years of RTI:

When the Right to Information Act was passed by Parliament in 2005, it was hailed as a major victory for democracy. For the first time, activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens could formally demand answers about how the government functions.

Over the years, thousands of RTI requests have revealed details about public spending, policy decisions, and administrative failures—sometimes to the embarrassment of those in power.

But two decades later, the law that once empowered citizens is facing a quiet erosion. Through legislative amendments, institutional changes, and administrative practices, the central government has expanded the grounds for refusing information and weakened the system meant to enforce transparency.