Bringing people together is essential to bridge divides, says expert
By SUNDER KATWALA, Director, British Future Dec 06, 2022
HOW should we talk about a changing Britain? The 2021 census gives us the facts about who we are today. It is up to us to decide how to respond.
Any constructive argument about how to respond to our changing demographics would need to meet three simple tests. Does it start from where we are now? Is it addressed to Britons of every colour and creed? Can it answer the question: what could we all do now to make this work well?
Nigel Farage failed each of those tests, by making his core point that the ethnic minority population of Birmingham, London and Manchester is much too high.
Nigel Farage (Photo: Twitter)
Any advice that begins with ‘first, invent your time machine’ is of no real world use. Those arguing 'we were never asked' about the ethnic diversity of Britain sound as though they are contesting the political choices of the British Nationality Act of 1948, and the rejection of Enoch Powell’s reactionary 1968 call for mass repatriation, more than the expansion of the EU in 2004 or the policy choices that have seen non-EU migration rise after Brexit.
In the 2020s, it is legitimate to debate the right level and mix of future migration – and to propose what could happen in education, housing and beyond to strengthen shared identities.
But Farage’s argument is that there are too many Asian and black people in the major cities. What cannot be legitimate in the 2020s is to be arguing about whether the parents and grandparents of the Jude Bellingham, Marcus Rashford and Bukayo Saka generation should have made their homes in Britain several decades ago.
Almost all of England will unite behind this talented young multi-ethnic team as they take on France in the World Cup quarter-final next Saturday. But this is not an argument that depends on sporting success. Whatever happens on the football pitch, we should be able to recognise that the ethnic diversity that has grown up in Birmingham, Manchester and London is fully part of the home team now.
The multi-ethnic world cup team of England is a benchmark for the growing ethnic diversity in the UK (Photo by Julian Finney/Getty Images)
Those who insist on only keeping the ‘white British’ score can miss this foundational point.
Yet, I think liberal commentators, who are positive about Britain’s diversity also make a mistake if they declare there is nothing worth noticing or talking about at all. That is to miss the challenge - of how to broaden confidence in a changing Britain - and the opportunity too, to promote the practical agenda that could help us to manage change fairly, across minority and majority groups alike.
Ted Cantle at the Belonging 2022 conference on Dec 2 (Photo: Twitter)
What we can do practically to promote social integration was the central theme of the Belonging 2022 conference in Manchester last week. Ted Cantle, looking back on two decades since his report into parallel lives in the mill towns, could see more action to promote contact. His frustration was that governments tend to be spurred by a crisis or riot, but sustained action can slip down the agenda.
Sara Khan, currently reviewing social integration for the Levelling Up department, noted that Prime Ministers have often left office regretting that they did not give social integration a higher priority. It would be a missed opportunity if Rishi Sunak, Britain’s first British Asian Prime Minister, did not champion the importance of integration for unlocking Britain’s full potential. But with just a half-term in office before the General Election, and a Downing Street in-tray dominated by economics, energy and International crises, he may find it challenging to break that pattern.
Both Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer are, by instinct, bridgers rather than polarisers on issues of identity and culture, though they may face contrasting pressures from their own party audiences. Both have said much more about immigration – who gets a visa to come to Britain – than about social integration and how we make a changing Britain work.
Sunder Katwala (right) at the panel of the Belonging 2022 conference (Photo: Twitter)
But having an effective policy agenda for integration will matter more in tougher economic times. Without an effective policy framework, the patchwork of efforts to foster social connection could do as much to exacerbate social divides as to bridge them.
The paradox of social connection is that, left to their own devices, voluntary efforts will most often flourish in areas with most social capital already, without sufficient effort to foster social connection where it would matter most.
The Talk Together public engagement exercise, conducted by British Future for the Together coalition, demonstrated a strong public consensus on key priorities. A shared language is a common- sense foundation. Mixed schools that promote contact, and other places where we meet and mix, are part of the public consensus on what makes a difference.
Yet despite that broad public appetite for a constructive integration agenda, it lacks the profile and excitement of culture war clashes.
How we talk about a changing Britain matters. The key challenge for those who want to bridge our divides is to ensure we act, as well as talk, on what can bring people together.
MISINFORMATION and disinformation are not new in the age of social media, but India’s mainstream news channels peddling them during a time of war was a new low.
Hours after India launched Operation Sindoor, most channels went into overdrive with ‘breaking news’ meant to shock, or worse, excite.
Channels beamed blurry images of the Pakistan attack on Indian territory with nearly 400 drones last Thursday (8) night, on a loop, and news tickers announced an Indian advance into enemy territory.
They claimed a Pakistani fighter pilot had been captured alive in Punjab, only to revise it a while later to say that not one, but two were in India’s custody. Minutes later came reports of an aerial attack in Islamabad, right next to the house of Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, and claims that he had taken shelter in a bunker.
Before one could process why India, known for its restraint, would escalate tensions at this scale on just the second day of attack, the next salvo of misinformation was launched – the Indian Navy had ‘destroyed’ the Karachi port, accompanied by images of a ravaged facility.
The next report claimed Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir had been ousted in a coup and was being held in ‘custody’ (by whom was anybody’s guess). These ‘news’ items painted a picture of unprecedented aggression by one nuclear state against another.
Except, none of these stories were true. The defence press briefing last Friday (9) made no mention of captured pilots, an attack on Karachi port, or any development concerning Munir.
Indian fact-checkers debunked the videos of the Karachi port attack aired by some channels as footage from a 2020 BBC report from Gaza.
Last Sunday (11), clarity emerged when India’s director general of naval operations said that Indian battleships were stationed “with full readiness and capacity to strike select targets, including Karachi,” laying to rest speculation of an attack on the port. The Indian defence establishment also confirmed it had ‘downed’ Pakistani fighter jets, but made no mention of any ‘captured’ pilots.
The Indian news channels’ false reporting was called out by social media users within hours, prompting many to backtrack and apologise. A few also faced criticism for their warmongering – one ‘expert’ on a channel declared mazaa (fun) would begin when Pakistan attacks India.
Another example of the channels’ insensitivity was the use of AI-generated images and graphics – one depicting an enraged Indian prime minister Narendra Modi trampling a cowering Sharif – which trivialised the conflict and framed it as little more than a high-stakes cricket match between the two nations.
Some Indian media houses reported that similar fake news was being broadcast by Pakistani outlets. However, for someone in India, where I live, it has become nearly impossible to verify what the media is reporting on the other side of the border, as the government has banned access to Pakistani news channels, including Dawn and Geo News.
Several Indian news websites, including The Wire – co-founded by a former editor of The Hindu – also faced bans (in this case, the restriction was lifted a day later).
Amid all this, the mainstream print media, both in English and regional languages, has remained largely responsible and sober, refraining from whipping up passions. Many news websites have done the same.
If the ceasefire doesn’t hold, this could become the first major war that Indians witness in the age of private news channels and social media. Whether the screens will make the proverbial fog of war even thicker remains to be seen.
A vivid depiction of the Kurukshetra battlefield, where Arjuna and Krishna stand amidst the chaos, embodying the eternal conflict between duty and morality
War and peace have exercised the minds of human beings for as far back as history goes. It is no wonder then that the Mahabharata war, which took place over 5,000 years ago, became a moment of intense discussion between Lord Krishna and Arjuna.
Hundreds of thousands of people on either side were ready to begin battle on the site of Kurukshetra. Seeing the armies and his near and dear combatants, Arjuna lost the will to fight. How could he fight his grandfather Bhisma and his guru Dronacharya? He asked Krishna what all the bloodshed would achieve.
Krishna replied that every effort to resolve the conflict had been blocked by Duryodhana. Duryodhana had refused to give the Pandavas even a needlepoint of land, despite Lord Krishna's peace proposal that they accept just five villages. Krishna urged and convinced Arjuna that it was his dharma to fight a righteous war, even if it came with painful consequences.
While war is characterised by violence and destruction, it can also be a catalyst for peace negotiations and treaties.
Charles Minard's iconic flow map illustrating Napoleon's ill-fated invasion of Russia, highlighting the vast distances and severe lossesAge of Revolution
The great political master Chanakya (350–275 BCE), guru of Chandragupta of the mighty Maurya empire, wrote the famous treatise Arthashastra. In it, he describes in detail the steps one must take to wage war. Kautilya suggested four policies: conciliation (sama), compensation (dana, or gifts to adversaries to pacify them), dissension (bheda, creating divisions within adversaries), and force (danda, attack). These could be used singly or in combination, depending on the context.
However, like Krishna, Chanakya advocated war only when all other alternatives were exhausted.
According to Von Clausewitz, a military theorist (1780–1831), “War is merely continuation of a policy by other means.” He believed military objectives that support political aims fall into two broad types: wars to achieve limited goals, and wars to disarm the enemy—rendering them politically helpless or militarily impotent.
After suffering years of terrorist violence and the recent brutal killings of Hindus in Kashmir, India feels it has exhausted all avenues of peace with Pakistan.
There has also been a school of thought which rejects war altogether. Leo Tolstoy, author of War and Peace, had strong anti-war sentiments, expressed through his writings and personal life. In his book, he chronicled the French invasion of Russia in 1812, led by Napoleon Bonaparte.
Vivid depiction of the Kurukshetra battlefield, showcasing Arjuna and Krishna in the chariot amidst the chaos of warAmazon
Tolstoy himself fought in the Crimean War (1853–1856), a conflict between the Russian Empire and an alliance of the Ottoman Empire, the Second French Empire, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont. Sardinia is an island and autonomous region of Italy.
Tolstoy believed war was inherently unjust and a product of government actions, rather than the people's interests. He emphasised the importance of love—both human and divine—as a force for peace and against the brutality of conflict.
Christians have a concept called a Just War, taken up only as a last resort. They also had the doctrine of holy wars called the Crusades, meant to recapture occupied territories. This idea is now considered a shibboleth.
The current Russia-Ukraine war has brought some interesting observations, according to Benjamin Jensen, director of the Futures Lab and senior fellow for the Defence and Security Department at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
He points out that the war has shown the rise of drone warfare and electronic warfare as defining features of modern conflict. Long-range attack drones have played a crucial role.
After the Russian invasion in February 2022, then-Ukrainian ambassador to India, Igor Polikha, urged PM Modi to help stop the war. He said India had qualified in diplomacy through Kautilya several thousand years ago, when Europe had no civilisation.
Unfortunately, President Zelensky of Ukraine has presided over the destruction of his country, having failed on both diplomatic and military fronts.
(Nitin Mehta is a writer and commentator on Indian culture and philosophy. He has contributed extensively to discussions on Hinduism, spirituality, and the role of Gurus in modern society. You can find more of his work at www.nitinmehta.co.uk.)
Keep ReadingShow less
Fresh eyes can expose what the Curse of Knowledge has hidden.
Leadership today can feel like flying a plane through dense fog.
You’re managing priorities, pressures, and people. You’re flying through turbulence, and the instruments keep changing. And still, you’re expected to chart a clear course, adapt to change in real time, and help others do the same.
But what if the biggest threat to your trajectory isn’t external? What if it’s how your own experience shapes what you can no longer see?
When experience becomes a blindfold
The Curse of Knowledge is a cognitive bias that occurs when we become so familiar with something that we stop examining it. Once we “know” something, our brains tag it as settled. We make it part of the mental autopilot.
That’s helpful for getting through a busy day. But it’s dangerous in an environment that demands change.
Here’s how it shows up:
“That’s how we’ve always done it.”
“We already tried that.”
“Our customers wouldn’t go for it.”
These aren’t facts. They’re filters — installed by past experience, running quietly in the background. We don’t notice them because they feel like truth. But the real problem is that we stop questioning them.
The Curse of Knowledge makes it harder to see new solutions, new paths, and new ways to solve the new challenges you’re facing.
And in a business like yours — where competition is fierce, timelines are tight, and customer expectations keep evolving — that can cost you dearly.
From obstacle thinking to possibility thinking
There’s a different way to lead through uncertainty, and it starts with possibility thinking.
Possibility thinkers don’t assume that the first roadblock is the end of the road. They’re willing to look again. To question what seems fixed. To ask, “What else could be true?”
This isn’t wishful thinking. It’s disciplined curiosity.
And in industries balancing new technologies, workforce dynamics, economic pressures, and rapid change, curiosity is one of the most underutilised competitive advantages available.
Here are three practical ways to break out of the Curse of Knowledge and shift from “obstacle” to “opportunity”:
1. Assumption smashing
Most of what limits your thinking isn’t a real rule. It’s a made-up one — created by your brain based on all your past experience and expertise.
People absorb assumptions from their own history: what’s worked, what hasn’t, what got praised, what got shut down. But just because something was true once doesn’t mean it’s true now.
Assumption smashing is the act of surfacing those invisible “rules” and breaking them on purpose.
In innovation sessions, it often takes just one bold move — and it shifts the entire room. Once someone questions what others were treating as non-negotiable, it unlocks the permission to do the same.
One person’s reframing can become everyone’s breakthrough.
As a leader, that person needs to be you. You go first — and show others that it’s not only allowed to question assumptions, it’s expected.
2. Change the question
If a team is stuck, the problem might not be the problem. It might be how it’s being defined.
Small changes in language lead to big differences in thinking. Let’s say the goal is to reduce customer churn. It could be framed as:
“How can we retain customers?”
…or:
“How can we surprise our customers?”
“How might we create something they’d brag about?”
“What would make them stay, even if a competitor charged less?”
Each question sends the brain down a different path.
The goal isn’t to wordsmith. It’s to find the frame that leads to fresh possibility.
3. Borrow a brain
Sometimes teams are simply too close to the problem.
That’s why bringing in someone who doesn’t “know how it works here” can be so powerful. They’re not stuck inside the same patterns. They don’t carry the same assumptions.
Invite a colleague from another department. Pair up a veteran with a next-generation team member. Ask a new hire what they see.
Fresh eyes can expose what the Curse of Knowledge has hidden.
You’re already flying — just don’t forget to check the map.
Pilots check their instruments constantly. They don’t assume. They cross-check. They adjust course when needed.
As a leader, that same discipline matters.
The Curse of Knowledge isn’t a flaw. It’s a cognitive bias — a natural part of how human brains work. But it doesn’t have to decide what’s possible. It can be challenged, and others can be led to do the same.
You’re already flying the plane.
Now ask yourself: Are you still headed in the right direction?
The most dangerous limits are rarely external.
They’re the ones that go unquestioned.
Susan Robertson empowers individuals, teams, and organisations to more nimbly adapt to change, by transforming thinking from “why we can’t” to “how might we?” She is a creative thinking expert with over 20 years’ experience speaking and coaching in FTSE 500 companies. As an instructor on applied creativity at Harvard, Susan brings a scientific foundation to enhancing human creativity. To learn more, please visit: SusanRobertsonSpeaker.com.
In a world increasingly defined by scarcity, one resource is emerging as the most quietly decisive factor in the future of industry, sustainability, and even geopolitics: water. Yet, while the headlines are dominated by energy transition and climate pledges, few companies working behind the scenes on water issues have attracted much public attention. One of them is Gradiant, a Boston-based firm that has, over the past decade, grown into a key player in the underappreciated but critical sector of industrial water treatment.
A Company Born from MIT, and from Urgency
Founded in 2013 by Anurag Bajpayee and Prakash Govindan, two researchers with strong ties to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Gradiant began as a scrappy start-up with a deceptively simple premise: make water work harder. At a time when discussions about climate change were centred almost exclusively on carbon emissions and renewable energy, the trio saw water scarcity looming in the background.
Their insight was that some of the world’s largest industries—semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, food and beverage—were facing acute water-related challenges long before the general public grasped the issue. “Without water, these industries don’t just slow down; they stop,” Bajpayee has often remarked. What Gradiant offered was not just a way to save water, but a way to rethink how it is used, recycled, and valued.
The Engineers Behind the Mission
Anurag Bajpayee, the company’s CEO, whose academic path took him to MIT, where he completed a PhD in Mechanical Engineering focused on water treatment technologies. It was there that he met Govindan, a fellow engineer and now Gradiant's co-founder and COO, whose expertise complemented his in fluid mechanics and process engineering.
Unlike many founders who drift towards the language of venture capital and corporate strategy, Anurag Bajpayee and his team remained grounded in the technical problem: how to make industrial water treatment more efficient, more affordable, and more sustainable. The company still bears the imprint of its founders’ engineering roots. Gradiant is less Silicon Valley startup and more MIT lab, albeit one that has quietly expanded across Asia, the Middle East, Europe and North America.
What Gradiant Actually Does
The company specializes in designing and building bespoke water treatment and reuse systems for industrial clients. Its technologies are aimed at enabling factories and plants to reclaim water that would otherwise be discarded as waste, reducing both the amount of water withdrawn from natural sources and the volume of contaminated water discharged.
At the heart of Gradiant’s portfolio are proprietary technologies such as Counter Flow Reverse Osmosis (CFRO), Carrier Gas Extraction (CGE) and Selective Ion Recovery (SIR), developed from the Gradiant founders’ early research at MIT. Unlike traditional methods like reverse osmosis, these systems are designed to handle highly contaminated or complex wastewater streams, enabling clients to extract clean water even from previously unusable sources.
But Gradiant does not sell “one-size-fits-all” machines. Each project is tailored to the customer’s unique needs. For a semiconductor plant in Singapore, this might mean achieving ultrapure water reuse levels of 98%; for a food and beverage factory in Texas, it might be about safely treating wastewater for discharge while minimising energy consumption. The company's approach—sometimes called "solutioneering" internally—is both its competitive advantage and its raison d'être.
Expansion Without the Usual Hype
Gradiant’s growth has been quietly impressive. From its first commercial project in the oil and gas sector, it has gone on to complete over 500 installations worldwide. The company has raised more than $400 million in funding from a mix of institutional investors and private equity firms, achieving so-called “unicorn” status, with a valuation reportedly over $1 billion.
Unlike many green tech firms, Gradiant’s expansion has not been accompanied by flashy marketing campaigns or grandiose statements. Instead, the company has preferred to build credibility client by client, particularly in Asia, where water-intensive industries and growing environmental pressures make its services indispensable. Anurag Bajpayee, never one to speak in superlatives, frames the company’s expansion as a “response to urgent need” rather than a triumph of business.
Inside Gradiant’s Operations
At its core, Gradiant is still an engineering-first company. Anurag Bajpayee and Govindan, both technically trained and heavily involved in the company’s operations, have instilled a culture where R&D is not just a department but the lifeblood of the business. The firm currently holds more than 250 patents globally, a testament to its ongoing commitment to innovation.
But Gradiant’s success is not just about technology. The company has differentiated itself by offering not just equipment but full-service solutions, including project design, construction, operations, and maintenance. This full-stack approach has been particularly attractive to clients in highly regulated industries, who need water management solutions that work seamlessly and reliably without requiring deep in-house expertise.
Gradiant’s clients include some of the world’s largest manufacturers, including Fortune 500 companies in sectors like microelectronics, pharmaceuticals, and energy. Some, like semiconductor producers, rely on Gradiant to help them meet stringent water reuse targets while maintaining ultra-clean production environments.
Navigating a Changing World
Gradiant operates at the intersection of several converging trends: climate change, regulatory pressure, and industrial decarbonisation. In many regions, water scarcity has become the limiting factor for industrial growth, sometimes more than energy availability or supply chain constraints.
While public attention often focuses on domestic water use, it is industries that consume the lion’s share of freshwater. Gradiant's pitch is straightforward: industries will have to do more with less, and Gradiant offers the tools to make that possible.
Anurag Bajpayee is keenly aware of the paradox that water, despite being vital, is often underpriced and undervalued, especially when compared to energy. “We don’t pay what it’s worth, only what it costs,” he told an audience at a recent conference. Yet, the landscape is shifting. Regulators, investors, and companies themselves are increasingly acknowledging water as both a business risk and a social responsibility.
What's Next for Gradiant?
Looking ahead, Gradiant appears poised to play a central role as industries adapt to water scarcity. Yet, Anurag Bajpayee remains cautious about the hype cycle. "The problem we’re working on isn’t going anywhere," he says. "It’s not a question of innovation alone, but of execution—of making sure these solutions actually reach the places that need them most."
In an era where water risk is increasingly material to business, Gradiant’s quiet, technically grounded approach may prove to be exactly what is needed.
(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Eastern Eye. The publication does not endorse or take responsibility for the accuracy of any statements made by the author.)
Keep ReadingShow less
Malnutrition is the underlying cause of almost 50 per cent of child deaths around the world
The word “nutrition” can mean many things. In the UK, the word might conjure images of protein powders or our five-a-day of fruit and veg. But nutrition is much more than that. Nutrition plays a crucial role in shaping the health and life chances of people around the world.
Malnutrition is the underlying cause of almost 50 per cent of child deaths around the world as it weakens the immune system, reducing resilience to disease outbreaks such as cholera and measles. This is equivalent to approximately 2.25 million children dying annually - more than the number of children under five in Spain, Poland, Greece, or Portugal.
In 2022, more than 50 per cent of the world’s 45 million children suffering from wasting - the deadliest form of malnutrition - lived in south Asia.
Beyond the tragic human cost, malnutrition is an enemy to economic growth. Malnutrition reduces school achievement and work productivity, costing us an estimated $2.4 trillion globally every year. The worst-affected nations lose up to 16 per cent of their GDP annually.
Ultimately, it increases dependence on international aid, when global pressures mean we have to ensure every penny of our aid budgets is delivering as effectively as possible.
We’re determined not to look away from this issue. We need a new development model that responds to the evolving global challenges we face. We need a modern approach that will help low- and middle-income countries in the fight against malnutrition, support a healthy population and become self-sufficient, by forming genuine, respectful partnerships.
Baroness Chapman
Afshan Khan
The UK has already supported new thinking, sharing ideas and finding what works, and cofounded the Child Nutrition Fund, which seeks to transform the way we finance action against malnutrition.
For example, unlocking local financing for producers of essential nutrition supplies and services in low- and middle-income countries, and match-funding governments’ contribution to double investments which go towards tackling nutrition.
The Child Nutrition Fund aims to reach 230 million children and 70 million women with life-saving support globally, including the provision of nutrition supplements, breastfeeding support, and treatments for child wasting.
At this week’s Nutrition for Growth Summit in Paris, the UK is continuing that leadership. Along with the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement and partners from around the world, the UK has launched a Global Compact on Nutrition Integration.
It focuses on thinking about nutrition as part of all we do, rather than trying to tackle it as a standalone issue. A new coalition, including the UK, Ireland, Netherlands, and Germany will embed nutrition objectives into wider government policies. This approach will help better leverage existing support for maximum impact and accelerate progress towards a world free from malnutrition.
We know this works. In Bangladesh, thinking about nutrition alongside prenatal and childhood vaccination programmes has helped bring under-five child mortality down 80 per cent. In Sierra Leone, the government has integrated nutrition into agricultural policies, successfully reducing impaired growth due to malnutrition by more than three per cent.
However, to reduce child malnutrition to zero, we need to mobilise and work globally. The Global Compact for Nutrition Integration will unite countries and partner organisations in setting and implementing more ambitious commitments. The first signatories include Cambodia, Nepal, Ireland, Germany, Netherlands, Lesotho and organisations like the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and others.
Doing nothing would be a disaster. But if we tackle this issue together - millions of lives could be saved and trillions of dollars put back into the global economy.
At the Nutrition for Growth summit, we’re rising to the challenge. Not only because it’s the right thing to do, but because it’s pivotal to the health and prosperity of us all.
(Baroness Chapman is the UK minister for international development and Afshan Khan is the coordinator of the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement)
Bringing people together in a changing Britain
Bringing people together is essential to bridge divides, says expert