Coffee and Concept Notes

May 18, 2026 Leave a comment

There is a very specific kind of person who measures time through cups of tea/coffee consumed, number of smokes, and versions of concept notes. I am that person. My day does not begin at 9 AM like everybody else. It begins when the first sip of tea and a drag of smokes hits my bloodstream and convinces my brain that solving structural poverty through a two-page document is a reasonable life goal. By the third sip/drag, I am ready to change the world. By the fourth, I am opening last year’s concept note and renaming it “Final_Updated_Latest_UseThisOne_v3.0.”

There is something deeply optimistic, almost delusional, about writing a concept note. It always starts innocently: ‘Let’s improve livelihoods in rural communities.’ Twenty minutes later, I find myself writing sentences like, ‘This integrated, community-led, multi-stakeholder convergence model seeks to catalyse sustainable socio-economic transformation…’ At this point, I pause and admire my own ability to say absolutely nothing in 21 words. Concept notes exist in a strange parallel universe where every problem is solvable, every intervention is scalable, every outcome is measurable, and every budget is ‘indicative.’ Of course, the reality is sitting quietly in the corner, waiting for implementation to begin so it can laugh.

Starting a concept note is a ritual that starts with my caffeine fix, opening a blank document, and staring at it as if it owes me money. The blinking cursor is not neutral as it blinks with judgment. ‘Go on,’ it seems to say, ‘design systemic change.’ So I begin with writing a suitable title, then change it, make it sound more ‘strategic,’ add the word ‘transformative,’ remove it because it feels too ambitious, and then add it back because the funder likes ambition. Thirty minutes later, the only thing I have finalised is the font.

At some point in my career as a fundraising professional, I have accepted that coffee/tea is a programmatic input and not just a beverage. Without caffeine/nictone fix, there is no Theory of Change, no LFA, no pathway to impact. With the ‘fix’, there are frameworks, diagrams, and a dangerous amount of confidence. This fix makes me believe things like, ‘Yes, we can align community aspirations with institutional frameworks through participatory convergence.’ Without the fix, I would simply say, ‘We will try our best and see what happens,’ but that is not a fundable language.

Every concept note reaches an uncomfortable moment, usually around page two. I have written the problem statement, objectives, and proposed intervention, and now I am staring at the section titled ‘Expected Outcomes.’ This is where things get philosophical. Will this actually work? Are we solving the problem, or just describing it better? Is this impact, or just well-structured optimism? I leave my desk, go for a quick fix, and look at the skies as if answers are stored there, but they are not.

If you have written enough concept notes, you develop ‘the donor voice’ in your head as your second personality. It appears uninvited and asks uncomfortable questions like, ‘Can you make this more scalable?’ ‘What is the innovation here?’ ’How will you measure impact?’ ‘Can you reduce overheads?’ The last one hurts the most. So I return to the document and start adjusting reality. I make things more efficient on paper, outcomes more certain, risks more ‘mitigated.’ At some point, I realise that I am not just writing a concept note, instead I am negotiating between truth and fundability.

Have you heard about a fine art in fundraising called strategic vagueness? You must say enough to sound intelligent, but not so much that you become accountable. Instead of writing, ‘We will train 1000 farmers,’ you write, ‘We will build the capacity of local stakeholders through targeted interventions.’ Who are these stakeholders? What interventions? That is a journey for another day.

One of my favourite moments is when a concept note meets the field. In the document, community participation is enthusiastic, systems respond efficiently, and timelines are respected. In reality, the meeting starts late, half the participants are confused, and the system is ‘on leave today.’ And yet, the report will still say, ‘The intervention was successfully initiated with active community engagement.’ Because technically, there was engagement, and someone did show up!

Concept notes also have a strange relationship with time, as they do not end, but they evolve. There is Draft, Final Draft, Final_Final, Final_Reviewed, Final_Reviewed_Updated, and the legendary ‘Final_Reviewed_Updated_Latest with version 1.0 to versions n.n. And just when you think you are done, someone sends an email saying, ‘Can we make a few small changes?’ This is how legends are born.

What concept notes really offer is the illusion of control. You design inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impact, and everything flows neatly in arrows and boxes. But development work is not a flowchart; it is more like a messy, unpredictable, human conversation. And yet, we keep drawing boxes, because boxes are fundable.

Every now and then, after multiple cups of coffee, endless sticks of ‘(un)holy smoke’ and several minor existential crises, something magical happens, which is clarity. I suddenly see the program for what it is, what matters, what is unnecessary, what is real. I delete half the document, simplify, and write something honest. For a brief moment, the concept note feels true, and then, almost instinctively, I complicate it again. My colleagues say that I write in Russian! (No offence to Russians here). Because honesty is risky, I add a framework, a diagram, and a few strategic words, and just like that, I am back in the safe zone.

Despite everything, including the caffeine and nicotine dependency, the document gymnastics, and the existential crises, we keep writing concept notes. Somewhere in between the jargon and the formatting, there is a real intention. A belief that things can improve, systems can shift, and people can live better. The concept note is simply the translation of that belief into a language that institutions understand. At the end of the day, I close my laptop. The concept note is sent, the cup is finished, and the existential questions remain unresolved. And still there’s satisfaction, not because the document is perfect, but because I tried to make sense of something complex. Tomorrow, there will be another concept note, another fix, and another moment of staring at a blinking cursor. And I will begin again because this is what we do. We drink coffee and smoke cigarettes, we write concept notes, and occasionally, we question the meaning of it all, preferably before the next deadline.

If this article made you think differently about development, work, or life choices, subscribe to my blog for one article every week in your mailbox.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organisation, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others. This is a humorous attempt, and not angst, and certainly no disrespect for fellow fundraisers, donors and funders of social impact.)

(Cover image is generated using AI)

Filed under humour, Opinions, Social Impact Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Circular economy solution for India’s cooking crisis

May 11, 2026 Leave a comment

For the past decade, India’s clean cooking revolution was symbolised by a powerful image in the form of a woman in a rural village receiving her first LPG connection under the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY). It represented dignity, health, convenience, and liberation from the unpaid drudgery of firewood collection, respiratory illness, and smoky kitchens where women spent hours inhaling toxic fumes while cooking over firewood and dung cakes. And to be fair, it was a transformational policy intervention because it solved a critical access problem by expanding LPG connections to millions of low-income households. But as is often the case with development policy, solving access did not fully solve sustainability. 

The recent conflict in West Asia has disrupted global energy supply chains and exposed India’s dangerous dependence on imported cooking fuel. With tensions around Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, India, where nearly 60% of LPG demand is met through imports, and over 90% of those imports typically transit through Hormuz, has found itself in an avoidable crisis. LPG supplies have tightened, transportation costs have increased, and delays in refill deliveries have become common in many rural districts and smaller towns. In several places, households are reportedly waiting over 40 days for a cylinder refill. Prices have surged, black market sales have flourished, and many low-income families are being pushed back toward firewood, charcoal, and kerosene. India is facing its first wave of ‘energy migrants’ as LPG shortages and soaring fuel prices have triggered reverse migration from cities to villages, especially from the major industrial hubs, including Delhi, Mumbai and Surat. A clean cooking transition built on imported fossil fuel has suddenly begun to look alarmingly vulnerable.

India imports a substantial share of its LPG requirements, and a large portion of these imports move through geopolitically sensitive shipping routes. While India is considered a leader in clean cooking access, millions of households remain dependent on an international supply chain shaped by wars, shipping disruptions, currency fluctuations, and global oil politics. The rural poor, as always, bear the highest burden of this volatility. A delayed LPG refill in an urban apartment may be an inconvenience, but in rural India, it often means a family returns to collecting wood, spending additional hours on unpaid labour, or cutting back on cooked meals altogether. Small roadside eateries reduce their menu options, and migrant workers spend more on food. Development gains achieved over the years begin reversing quietly, one delayed cylinder at a time.

Today, the villages struggling with LPG shortages often possess enormous untapped energy resources sitting in plain sight. Across rural India, cattle dung, agricultural residue, poultry waste, kitchen scraps, and other organic materials are abundantly available. India has one of the world’s largest livestock populations, producing massive quantities of dung every single day. Much of this waste is either left to decompose openly, releasing methane into the atmosphere, or converted into traditional dung cakes that burn inefficiently and create harmful smoke. What if this waste could instead become a reliable source of clean cooking fuel? That is precisely where biogas emerges not merely as an alternative, but as a strategic necessity.

Biogas is produced through anaerobic digestion, a process where organic waste decomposes in oxygen-free chambers and releases methane-rich gas that can be used for cooking. The leftover slurry becomes high-quality organic fertiliser. This is an excellent circular economy model where households generate fuel from waste while simultaneously reducing fertiliser costs for farming. For rural families, this means lower dependence on LPG refills, lower household expenditure, improved sanitation, reduced smoke exposure, and additional agricultural benefits. Unlike LPG, biogas is hyperlocal as it does not depend on international shipping routes, refinery outputs, or geopolitical stability. Unlike firewood, it burns cleanly. Unlike solar cookers, it works regardless of weather or time of day. Unlike electric induction stoves, it does not depend on stable electricity supply, which remains inconsistent in many rural areas. In a world increasingly shaped by supply chain disruptions, biogas offers resilience.

India does not need to invent this model from scratch because proven examples already exist. In parts of Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, Punjab, and several other Indian states, communities have successfully adopted household and community biogas systems. Villages linked to dairy cooperatives have demonstrated how cattle waste can be transformed into reliable cooking fuel. Some communities have significantly reduced their dependence on LPG altogether. During recent supply disruptions, such villages and farming households were largely insulated from shortages because their cooking fuel was produced locally. No waiting for gas agencies, no inflated black-market prices, and no dependence on international conflict. Their kitchens continue to function because their fuel is local.

What makes India’s underinvestment in biogas particularly frustrating is that the policy architecture already exists. The government has long operated biogas programs through the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, and initiatives like Sustainable Alternative Towards Affordable Transportation (SATAT) have promoted compressed biogas (CBG). Yet these efforts have often remained fragmented, underfunded, and treated as niche rural welfare programs rather than core components of national energy security. India tends to think big when discussing energy with large refineries, strategic petroleum reserves, international supply agreements, and mega infrastructure. These are important; however, true resilience often comes from decentralisation. A household biogas unit in a rural village may seem small compared to an oil refinery, but millions of such units can collectively create enormous national resilience.

Imagine if even a quarter of India’s livestock-owning rural households had access to functional biogas systems. Or village-level community digesters serving clusters of homes where individual ownership is not feasible. Imagine schools, Anganwadis, hostels, and community kitchens using biogas generated from local organic waste. Think of self-help groups running maintenance services for biogas units as local enterprises. Imagine MGNREGA funding village-level renewable energy infrastructure. Suddenly, biogas can move from being a sustainability experiment to becoming a serious economic and strategic asset.

The climate benefits further strengthen this strategy. Methane emissions from unmanaged livestock waste contribute significantly to global warming. Capturing this methane for productive use helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Every cubic meter unit of biogas reduces 2 tons CO2e/year. Reduced firewood usage can lower deforestation pressures. Bio-slurry reduces dependence on chemical fertilisers, moving towards sustainable agriculture. Lower LPG consumption reduces fossil fuel imports. Biogas sits at the intersection of climate policy, rural livelihoods, women’s empowerment, waste management, and energy security, a rare policy intervention that solves multiple problems simultaneously. Biogas directly contributes to SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), and Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL). It also delivers results that contribute to SDG 1 (Poverty Eradication), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

The current LPG crisis should serve as a warning. The war in the Middle East did not create India’s vulnerability, merely exposed it. A country aspiring to become a global economic power cannot allow millions of household kitchens to remain hostage to international conflict. Energy security cannot only be discussed in terms of crude oil imports and electricity generation. It must also include the daily cooking needs of ordinary citizens. The woman waiting 40 days for an LPG cylinder in a rural village is experiencing energy insecurity in its most human form. India’s future energy strategy must become far more diversified. LPG will continue to play an important role, particularly in urban areas and transitional markets. But it cannot remain the singular answer for rural cooking energy. Biogas offers India local control that imported LPG can never provide. It transforms waste into wealth, dependency into resilience, and vulnerability into self-reliance. In a century likely to be shaped by geopolitical instability, climate disruptions, and fragile global supply chains, the most strategic energy resource may not be buried deep underground or shipped across oceans. It may be sitting quietly in rural backyards, waiting for India to finally recognise its potential.

If this article made you think differently about energy security, sustainability, or India, subscribe to my blog for one article every week in your mailbox.

(Cover image has been generated using AI)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the views or opinions of any organisation, foundation, CSR, non-profit or others.)

Filed under Green, Opinions Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The cost of ‘free’ in India

May 4, 2026 Leave a comment

The word ‘free’ carries a unique emotional and political charge in India. It signals relief, generosity, access, and sometimes even justice. In a country marked by deep inequality and historical deprivation, the idea of receiving something without having to pay for it feels not just attractive but morally right. Free school meals, free healthcare camps, free ration, free mobile data, free apps, free advice—these are not fringe phenomena but central features of everyday life. Yet as ‘free’ becomes more pervasive, it becomes more urgent to interrogate what it actually costs in reality. Because nothing in this world is truly free. Even when money is not exchanged, value is still transferred, quietly, unevenly, and often invisibly.

The digital revolution has made ‘free’ feel natural, even inevitable. India’s smartphone explosion, driven by affordable devices and some of the world’s cheapest mobile data, has brought hundreds of millions online in a short span of time. For first-time internet users, free apps are often the internet itself. Messaging platforms, video-sharing apps, digital wallets, navigation tools, shopping platforms, and learning apps promise unlimited access at zero cost. Downloading them requires no financial transaction, only a tap on a screen. This apparent absence of cost masks a different economy altogether, one where data, attention, and behaviour are the currencies being traded.

Every free app extracts value as it collects personal information, tracks usage patterns, studies preferences, and monitors behaviour across platforms. In return for convenience and access, we surrender fragments of our digital selves, often without fully understanding the implications. In India, where digital literacy has not kept pace with digital adoption, this exchange is especially asymmetrical. We routinely accept terms and conditions that we cannot realistically read or comprehend, granting permissions that would be alarming if framed in simpler language. Location data, contact lists, browsing habits, voice samples, and even biometric identifiers become assets in a vast data economy. We do not pay in rupees, but we pay in terms of our privacy, autonomy, and long-term exposure.

This is not a small concern, as data is power, and not merely information. When aggregated at scale, it allows companies to predict behaviour, shape consumption, influence opinion, and nudge decision-making. In India, where hundreds of millions engage daily with free digital platforms, this concentration of behavioural data in private hands has far-reaching consequences. It affects what we see, what we buy, how we think, and even how we vote. The cost of free apps is not just about individual privacy but collective vulnerability to influence and manipulation. What appears to be a harmless trade in terms of free services for data becomes a structural imbalance when we lack meaningful choice or awareness.

Free apps are designed to maximise engagement because engagement drives advertising revenue. Endless scrolling, autoplay videos, push notifications, algorithmic recommendations, and gamified feedback loops are not accidental features; instead, they are engineered mechanisms to capture and hold attention. Time spent on these platforms is monetised elsewhere, converted into impressions, clicks, and behavioural insights. For us, this translates into hours lost daily to digital consumption. The opportunity cost is immense in terms of time not spent on learning, work, rest, relationships, or reflection. In a country where time poverty is already acute for large sections of the population, the extraction of attention is a high but rarely acknowledged cost of ‘free.’

Alongside free apps, free government schemes occupy a central place in India’s public imagination. Welfare programs offering free food, free electricity, free healthcare, free education, and direct cash transfers are often framed as moral imperatives in a society with widespread poverty. And indeed, many such schemes have had transformative impacts. Free school meals have improved nutrition and attendance. Subsidised healthcare has saved lives. Social security schemes have provided safety nets in times of crisis. To dismiss free schemes outright would be both inaccurate and unjust.

However, the scale and politics of ‘free’ in governance demand scrutiny. Government schemes are funded by public money, either through taxation or borrowing. When services are offered for free, the cost is distributed across society, including future generations. Fiscal resources are finite, and every rupee allocated to a subsidy is a rupee not spent elsewhere. The real question is not whether the state should provide support, but how that support is designed, targeted, and sustained. Poorly designed free schemes can strain public finances, crowd out long-term investments, and create distortions that are difficult to reverse.

One of the most persistent risks associated with free government schemes is the shift from empowerment to dependency. When benefits are delivered without clear pathways to capability-building, translating into skills, livelihoods, ownership, or agency, they can trap beneficiaries in cycles of reliance. This is not a failure of intent but of design. Welfare that does not evolve into opportunity risks becoming permanent relief rather than temporary support. Over time, political incentives can encourage the expansion of free entitlements without corresponding investments in productivity, institutional capacity, or economic growth. The cost, then, is borne in slower development, rising debt, and reduced fiscal flexibility.

There is also a less visible social cost when citizens begin to relate to the state primarily as a provider of free goods rather than as a facilitator of opportunity, and expectations shift. Accountability becomes transactional, and long-term policy thinking gives way to short-term appeasement. This dynamic can erode democratic deliberation, reducing complex governance challenges to simplistic promises of free distribution. In such an environment, the language of rights is often mixed with the politics of giveaways, weakening the deeper idea of citizenship rooted in participation, contribution, and shared responsibility.

In India, ‘free’ advice is abundant and rarely priced. Friends, relatives, colleagues, social media influencers, and anonymous online forums dispense guidance on everything from investments and careers to health, parenting, and mental well-being. At one level, this reflects strong social bonds and collective problem-solving. Knowledge-sharing has always been part of Indian society. But in the contemporary context, the proliferation of free advice, especially online, has begun to undermine the value of expertise itself. Professional knowledge is produced through years of education, training, practice, and ethical accountability. When expert advice is expected to be free, its perceived value diminishes. Professionals are pressured to give away labour without compensation, while advice-seekers are encouraged to treat complex problems as easily solvable through quick opinions. The result is often superficial guidance applied to situations that demand nuance. In fields like finance, law, and health, the consequences can be serious, resulting in misdiagnoses, financial losses, legal complications, and long-term harm.

Digital platforms have amplified this problem dramatically. Social media rewards confidence, not competence. Algorithms favour content that is engaging, simplified, and emotionally charged. As a result, the loudest voices often drown out the most qualified ones. Free advice becomes entertainment, stripped of context and accountability. Influencers monetise indirectly through advertising, brand deals, or lead generation, while audiences consume advice under the illusion that it is altruistic. The hidden cost here is the ability to distinguish reliable knowledge from persuasive noise.

Behavioural economics shows that people disproportionately favour free options, even when they are inferior to low-cost alternatives. The absence of price triggers a sense of gain that overrides rational evaluation. In India, this bias plays out repeatedly when users choose free digital services with weak privacy protections over modestly priced, safer alternatives,  beneficiaries prefer immediate free benefits over long-term investments in capability, or individuals trust free advice over paid expertise because payment itself is mistaken for bias. These patterns are not signs of ignorance but of how human psychology interacts with scarcity and aspiration.

Free social media platforms, while enabling connection, intensify comparison. Carefully curated images of success, beauty, and happiness circulate endlessly, shaping aspirations and insecurities. The cost is stress, anxiety, and diminished self-worth, especially among young users. These effects are not accidental side-effects but structural outcomes of platforms designed to maximise engagement rather than well-being.

When platforms subsidise services to gain scale, smaller players struggle to compete. Local businesses, creators, and service providers are often forced into ecosystems where they generate value but capture little of it. Revenue flows upward and outward, concentrating power in a few large entities. Price signals weaken, making it difficult for sustainable, high-quality alternatives to emerge. Over time, consumers accustomed to free access become resistant to paying for quality, undermining the viability of independent work and innovation.

Yet it would be a mistake to conclude that free is inherently harmful. Free education, free public healthcare, free libraries, and free public infrastructure have historically been among the most powerful tools for social progress. The issue is not free versus paid, but opaque free versus conscious free. When free services are transparent about costs, respectful of users, and oriented toward empowerment rather than extraction, they create genuine public value. When free becomes a strategy to harvest data, attention, votes, or dependency, its costs far outweigh its benefits.

The challenge for India is to develop a more mature relationship with ‘free.’ This requires stronger regulation of digital platforms, particularly around data protection, transparency, and competition. It requires better design and evaluation of welfare schemes, ensuring they build capabilities and not just deliver consumption. It requires cultural shifts that restore respect for expertise and recognise that paying for knowledge is not exploitation but investment. And most importantly, it requires citizens to ask harder questions when something is offered at no cost.

Who is paying for this? What am I giving up? Who benefits in the long run? Is this making me more capable or more dependent? These questions are not cynical, but are of utmost importance. In a complex society, the absence of price does not mean the absence of cost. It only means the cost has been displaced onto privacy, time, dignity, judgment, or the future. India’s relationship with ‘free’ will shape its developmental trajectory in profound ways. If used wisely, then free access can level the playing field and unlock human potential; else it can deepen inequalities, hollow out institutions, and quietly extract value from those least equipped to see it. Free is never just an economic choice; instead, it is a moral, political, and social one. And in a country as large and consequential as India, the true cost of free is something we can no longer afford to ignore.

If this article made you think differently about time, work, or society, subscribe to my blog for one article every week in your mailbox. No spam. Just ideas worth stealing :)

(Cover image is generated using AI)

Filed under Opinions Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Ghost Eye

April 27, 2026 Leave a comment

Author: Amitav Ghosh | 336 Pages | Genre: Fiction | Publisher: HarperCollins | Year: 2025 | My Rating: 8/10

“Seems to me that you’ve gotta be in a place you know well, and if that place knows you too, it’ll help you.”
― Amitav Ghosh, Ghost Eye

Ghost Eye by Amitav Ghosh is an intriguing addition to his body of work, blending his characteristic climate change concerns with elements of magical realism, memory, and metaphysical inquiry. Known for novels such as The Shadow Lines, River of Smoke and Jungle Nama, Ghosh has consistently explored the intersections of history, migration, and environment. In Ghost-Eye, he extends this exploration into more experimental terrain, weaving together reincarnation, psychological investigation, and climate activism into a multi-layered non-linear narrative that spans continents and decades.

At the heart of the novel lies a deceptively simple yet deeply unsettling premise of a young girl named Varsha Gupta, raised in a strict vegetarian Marwari household in late-1960s Calcutta, who suddenly insists on eating fish, which is entirely alien to her upbringing. More disturbingly, she claims to remember a past life in which fish was part of her staple diet, suggesting that she may be a ‘case of the reincarnation type.’ This premise immediately situates the novel within a liminal space between rationality and spiritual belief, a tension that drives much of the narrative.

In the early sections of the book, Ghosh meticulously constructs the world of the Gupta household, capturing the cultural rigidity and social milieu of Calcutta’s elite Marwari community. The disruption caused by Varsha’s insistence on fish is not merely dietary but existential as it challenges the family’s worldview and opens a door to questions they are ill-equipped to answer. Enter Dr Shoma Bose, a psychologist studying reincarnation cases, whose rational framework is gradually destabilised by Varsha’s revelations. Through Shoma, Ghosh explores the limits of scientific reasoning when confronted with phenomena that resist empirical categorisation.

What elevates Ghost Eye beyond a simple psychological mystery is its expansive temporal and spatial scope. The narrative moves fluidly between 1960s Calcutta, Sundarbans, and contemporary Brooklyn, where the story resurfaces decades later through Shoma’s nephew, Dinu. This dual timeline allows Ghosh to play with past and present, tradition and modernity, belief and scepticism. The transition is seamless, and the intergenerational narrative adds depth to the central mystery, transforming it into a broader meditation on memory and continuity.

Ghosh uses the motif of reincarnation not merely as a plot device but as a lens through which to examine ecological and ethical questions. The idea of cyclical existence mirrors the cycles of nature, suggesting an interconnectedness between human lives and the environment. As the narrative unfolds, it becomes increasingly clear that Varsha’s story is linked to larger concerns about environmental degradation and climate change. The involvement of environmental activists in the latter part of the novel underscores this connection, tying the metaphysical elements of the story to urgent real-world issues.

Ghosh’s descriptions of Calcutta and the Sundarbans are vivid and immersive, evoking a strong sense of place. The sensory richness in the depiction of food, landscapes, and everyday life grounds the more fantastical elements of the narrative, making them feel plausible within the world he has created. The novel’s magical realism is subtle rather than overt, emerging organically from the characters’ experiences rather than being imposed upon them.While the buildup is compelling and the thematic layers are rich, the ending feels somewhat rushed and less satisfying than the preceding narrative. The resolution of the central mystery, which promises a profound revelation, instead arrives with a sense of abruptness, leaving some threads insufficiently explored. Despite this limitation, Ghost Eye succeeds in pushing the boundaries of Ghosh’s narrative style. It represents a departure from his more historically anchored novels, venturing into speculative and metaphysical boundaries between science and spirituality, memory and imagination, human life and the natural world. The blending of genres creates a unique reading experience that is both engaging and thought-provoking. 

Filed under Books Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why can’t you have it all

April 20, 2026 2 Comments

We grew up on a promise that if we worked hard enough, planned carefully, and optimised intelligently, we could have it all. Modern culture reinforces this belief on a daily basis that we can have a successful career, a loving family, financial security, good health, lasting friendships, purpose, and inner peace. Social media displays curated snapshots of people who appear to be excelling simultaneously in every domain of life. We have been hearing since our childhoods that balance is achievable with the right morning routine of ‘early to bed, early to rise, makes a person healthy, wealthy and wise’. Yet beneath this narrative lies a simple truth that you can’t have it all, at least not all at once, not at full intensity, and certainly not without significant trade-offs. The reason is not a lack of ambition or discipline, but scarcity, which is the most fundamental principle governing both economics and human life.

Scarcity is often associated with money, but today, the scarcest resources are time, energy, and attention. Every human being, regardless of wealth or status, receives the same twenty-four hours each day, making time the most democratic of all constraints. No one can accumulate unused hours or borrow from the future without cost. We speak casually about ‘managing time,’ yet time itself cannot be managed as it flows at a constant pace. Every hour invested in one activity is an hour unavailable for another, managing only the choices between time availability. The professional who chooses to work late trades time that could have been spent with family. The parent who prioritises caring for children may delay career advancement. The entrepreneur who pours weekends into building a venture sacrifices leisure and rest. These trade-offs are often invisible in the moment, but they accumulate quietly over the years. Life does not unfold in parallel tracks where everything progresses simultaneously. It unfolds sequentially, through seasons that demand different commitments.

If time is the vehicle of life, energy is its fuel. Two individuals may possess identical schedules yet operate at dramatically different capacities. Energy fluctuates with sleep, nutrition, stress, age, emotional well-being, and sense of purpose. Modern ambition frequently assumes that energy can be summoned indefinitely through willpower, caffeine/nicotine, or motivation. But biology imposes limits, cognitive fatigue reduces clarity and creativity, and emotional exhaustion diminishes patience and empathy, while physical depletion erodes resilience. Burnout is not a failure of time management but is the inevitable consequence of sustained energy misallocation. Many high achievers discover that even when their calendars appear optimised, their internal reserves are depleted. They attempt to excel in multiple demanding roles of being a professional, parent, partner, and friend simultaneously without acknowledging that each role draws from the same finite energy pool. Over time, the system protests, sleep suffers, health declines, and relationships strain. The pursuit of ‘having it all’ quietly converts into chronic exhaustion.

Perhaps more than time or energy, attention defines scarcity. In the digital age, attention has become a commodity aggressively competed for by corporations and platforms. Notifications, news feeds, emails, and endless streams of content fragment focus into micro-intervals, with us being connected to everything and fully present in almost nothing. Attention determines lived experience; whatever captures our focus becomes our reality. When attention is scattered across dozens of stimuli each hour, depth disappears, and conversations become half-engaged exchanges. Work becomes interrupted bursts of activity, and leisure becomes simultaneous scrolling. Creativity, which requires uninterrupted thought, struggles to emerge in fragmented environments. Intimacy, which depends on sustained presence, weakens under constant distraction. The desire to ‘have it all’ often leads to diluted attention spread thinly across many domains, leaving none fully nourished.

Technology reinforces the thinking that multitasking is efficient, but cognitive science consistently demonstrates the cost of task switching. Each shift of focus consumes mental energy and reduces performance quality. We may believe we are building a career, nurturing relationships, maintaining fitness, staying informed, and cultivating a side project all at once. We may be engaging partially in each, achieving adequacy but rarely excellence. To choose one path intensely is to decline others, at least temporarily, as excellence is exclusive by nature and rewards those willing to concentrate rather than diversify endlessly.

The pressure to ‘have it all’ is further amplified by comparison, especially as digital platforms present curated narratives where achievements are showcased without context. We compare our daily struggles to others’ peak moments and conclude that we are falling behind. Yet every visible success rests upon invisible trade-offs. The CxO with rapid career progression may have sacrificed personal time. The entrepreneur enjoying autonomy may endure financial uncertainty. The individual projecting calm online may be filled with anxiety privately. Role overload has become a defining feature of modern adulthood. We inflate our identities, attempting to be accomplished professionals, devoted family members, socially conscious citizens, physically fit individuals, and culturally relevant participants all at once. Without conscious prioritisation, this multiplicity breeds internal conflict.

Trade-offs are not signs of failure but are expressions of values. Every yes carries an implicit no. When we resist acknowledging trade-offs, we drift into reactive living, responding to emails, obligations, and external demands rather than intentional priorities. Economics teaches that scarce resources must be allocated toward what yields the highest perceived value. The same principle applies to life, and time, energy, and attention must be directed consciously. Without deliberate allocation, they will be consumed by urgency rather than importance. The question shifts from ‘Can I have it all?’ to ‘What is worth the cost?’ Clarity transforms scarcity from limitation into guidance.

Fragmentation carries hidden consequences as shallow engagement reduces satisfaction. When attention is dispersed continuously, creativity declines and emotional presence weakens. We may touch many aspects of life but rarely hold any deeply. The paradox of modern abundance is experiential thinness. Surrounded by options, we struggle to experience fullness. Having everything available does not equate to inhabiting it meaningfully.

Perhaps the problem lies in our definition of ‘having it all.’ If it means maximising every measurable domain simultaneously, which is unattainable. But if it means living in alignment with consciously chosen priorities, it becomes possible. Fulfilment may not require expansion in all directions, but it does require coherence. When time, energy, and attention align with core values, life feels integrated even if certain ambitions are deferred. We may not achieve extreme wealth, recognition, and perfect physical condition simultaneously, yet we may experience deep contentment through purposeful work, loving relationships, and sustainable health practices.

Designing a life within scarcity requires discipline and ruthless prioritisation to clarify which domains deserve peak focus. Protecting energy through sleep, movement, and boundaries preserves capacity. Practising attention hygiene, limiting digital intrusion and creating focused blocks enhances depth. Strategic neglect acknowledges that some areas will temporarily receive minimal investment without inducing guilt. Redefining success as alignment rather than accumulation reduces external pressure. These practices do not eliminate scarcity, but teaches us to navigate it wisely.

There is liberation in accepting limits, where comparison loses some of its sting when we acknowledge that no human can optimise every dimension simultaneously. Even the most accomplished individuals operate within constraints. Everyone trades something. The artist may trade financial stability for creative freedom. The corporate leader may trade time for influence. The activist may trade comfort for impact. The parent may trade professional acceleration for presence. No path is without a cost, and recognising this universal truth fosters humility and self-compassion.

Ultimately, the longing to ‘have it all’ often masks deeper desires for security, significance, love, belonging, or meaning. When these needs are identified clearly, excess pursuits lose their urgency. One may discover that respect matters more than status, intimacy more than visibility, and contribution more than accumulation. You cannot maximise career, family, health, wealth, friendships, and personal growth simultaneously at peak intensity. Human existence is bounded by time, powered by finite energy, and shaped by limited attention. Yet within those boundaries lies possibility. You may not have everything, but you can choose what receives your best. In a culture obsessed with expansion, the rare act is deliberately selecting what truly matters and committing to it fully. You cannot have it all, but you can have enough, deeply experienced and consciously chosen. And in the arithmetic of a scarce world, that may be the closest approximation of abundance available to us.

(Cover image is generate using AI)

Filed under Opinions Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Stay informed with curated content and the latest headlines, all delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now to stay ahead and never miss a beat!

Skip to content ↓