Share knowledge to improve

  Double Materiality & Stakeholder Engagement: In boardrooms across the world, ESG discussions are becoming more frequent — yet not always more rigorous. Why Boards Must Move from Compliance to Strategic Oversight In boardrooms across the world, ESG discussions are becoming more frequent — yet not always more rigorous. Materiality assessments are conducted. Stakeholder maps are prepared. Sustainability reports are published. But the real governance question is: Are boards treating ESG as a compliance exercise — or as a strategic risk and capital allocation discipline? As Independent Directors, our responsibility is not to accept management presentations at face value. It is to ensure that materiality and stakeholder engagement processes are robust, evidence-based, and strategically embedded. Double Materiality: Expanding the Board’s Risk Horizon The concept of Double Materiality has fundamentally reshaped ESG governance. It requires companies to evaluate su...

  Indian Air Force Fighter Squadron Strength: A Policy Analysis of Gaps, Risks, and Strategic Choices India’s air power calculus sits at the intersection of deterrence credibility, industrial capability, and fiscal prioritisation. Among the most debated issues in recent years has been the fighter squadron strength of the Indian Air Force (IAF) relative to its sanctioned requirement. The discussion is often reduced to a headline number — 42 versus ~30 — but policy evaluation demands a deeper examination: What does the 42-squadron benchmark represent? How severe is the current shortfall? What are the structural causes? And most importantly, what policy choices determine the trajectory over the next decade? 1. The 42-Squadron Benchmark: Strategic Assumptions The IAF’s sanctioned strength of 42 fighter squadrons emerged from long-standing strategic planning premised on a potential two-front contingency involving both western and northern b...