The Profitable Nostalgia, SRCC’s Centenary, the Rise of Alumni Philanthropy, and India’s Unfinished Journey Toward Structured Giving
“Nostalgia is not what it used to be.” The wry observation, variously attributed to actress Simone Signoret and writer Peter De Vries, captures something essential about the human tendency to both romanticise and revise the past. It also, as the accompanying essay by Madhavan Narayanan demonstrates, provides an ironic lens through which to view the centenary celebrations of Shri Ram College of Commerce at the University of Delhi—an institution that is simultaneously not what it used to be and yet, in its red-brick building laden with teenage memories, recognisably the same.
The festive air at SRCC’s centenary echoed with revelry, laughter, and banter. Older folks felt young again. Investment bankers, private equity magnates, and tax planners exchanged career notes as giant screens flashed profiles of successful alumni. The conversations were not merely social; they were strategic. Old boys love to network in alumni meetings. That, as Narayanan notes, is profitable nostalgia.
But beneath the surface of celebration and networking lies a more significant story: the emergence of structured alumni philanthropy in India. The centenary brought into focus the growing willingness of graduates to give back to the institutions that shaped them. Former finance minister Arun Jaitley, probably SRCC’s best-known alumnus, figured frequently in the conversations. His casual suggestion that the classrooms be air-conditioned triggered an alumni fundraising drive that succeeded within months. Today, all rooms are air-conditioned—a far cry from the slowly-whirring fans of earlier decades.
This is not an isolated phenomenon. Across India, alumni are increasingly contributing to their alma maters, driven by gratitude, by the desire to give back, and by the recognition that their education had real value. Narayanan himself notes that he secured a world-class degree at a monthly fee of less than $3 at the then exchange rate. The real value of that education dawned on him when he worked in international agencies as an equal with graduates of Yale and Oxford. That experience is shared by thousands of Indian professionals who have succeeded globally and now seek to support the institutions that launched them.
Yet the alumni philanthropy movement in India has only just begun. It has faced hiccups. The government has been slow to adapt, stirring into action only recently to create what might be called an ‘ease of giving’ equivalent to the ‘ease of doing business’ framework. The contrast with the United States, where university endowments run into tens of billions of dollars, is stark. Harvard’s endowment exceeds $50 billion; Yale’s, named after its first big benefactor Elihu Yale, who made much of his money at Fort St George in Madras, is over $40 billion. Princeton, Stanford, and MIT rank close behind.
India has a long way to go. But the journey has begun.
The Value Proposition: Why Alumni Give
The impulse to give back to one’s alma mater is not new in India. Lala Shri Ram, SRCC’s founder, left philanthropic footprints all over the national capital. But for decades, the culture of alumni giving remained underdeveloped. Graduates went their separate ways; institutions relied on government funding; the idea of structured endowments was foreign.
Several factors have converged to change this. First, global exposure. Indian professionals who have worked and succeeded internationally have seen the model of alumni philanthropy in action. They have witnessed how universities like Harvard, Yale, and Stanford have built endowments that fund scholarships, research, and infrastructure. They have experienced the expectation that those who benefit from an elite education should contribute to its perpetuation.
Second, the realisation of value. Narayanan’s reflection on his own education is widely shared. Graduates of India’s premier institutions—the IITs, IIMs, and colleges like SRCC—have achieved remarkable success. They recognise that their education, subsidised by the state and delivered by dedicated faculty, provided a foundation for that success. Giving back is a way of acknowledging that debt.
Third, the network effect. Alumni gatherings are not merely social; they are strategic. They bring together successful professionals who can benefit from each other’s connections, expertise, and capital. The networking itself creates value, and that value can be channelled back into the institution. The conversations at SRCC’s centenary dinner were not idle; they were the currency of profitable nostalgia.
Fourth, the desire for impact. Alumni want to see their contributions make a difference. They want to fund scholarships that enable talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds to attend. They want to support research that addresses pressing problems. They want to build infrastructure that enhances the learning experience. Structured endowments provide a mechanism for ensuring that donations have lasting impact.
The Regulatory Hurdles: A History of Missed Opportunities
The path of alumni philanthropy in India has not been smooth. The regulatory framework has been slow to adapt, and missed opportunities abound.
The most striking example involves N.R. Narayana Murthy, co-founder of Infosys. In the 1990s, he sought to donate ₹8 crore worth of shares to IIT Kanpur. Regulations at the time did not allow equity-based donations. The offer was refused. Two decades later, Murthy noted that had the donation been accepted, the stake would have been worth ₹2,000 crore. This is not merely a lost opportunity for IIT Kanpur; it is a cautionary tale about the cost of regulatory rigidity.
There is also the story of a scientist who had to backtrack from a donation of 8 acres of land to another IIT because it attracted stamp duty of ₹40 crore that the state government refused to waive. Such obstacles send a clear message to potential donors: giving is complicated, expensive, and fraught with uncertainty.
The government has begun to address these issues. In 2019, the structured endowment model arrived in India when IIT Delhi started a fund with alumni committing ₹250 crore. Administered as a non-profit, the corpus now stands at around ₹480 crore and aims to reach ₹7,000 crore. In 2022, the Union education ministry issued guidelines for central universities to set up endowments to be run by boards headed by vice-chancellors, with rules on how to spend the money while growing the corpus.
These are positive steps, but they are only a beginning. The regulatory framework must continue to evolve. Equity-based donations should be facilitated. Stamp duty on land donations should be waived. Tax incentives for charitable giving should be enhanced. The goal should be to create an environment in which giving is easy, transparent, and effective.
The American Model: Lessons for India
The scale of American university endowments is staggering. Harvard’s $50 billion, Yale’s $40 billion, and the endowments of Princeton, Stanford, and MIT are the products of centuries of accumulated giving, careful investment, and a culture that expects alumni to contribute.
But the real lesson is not the headline-grabbing mega-donations from billionaires like Michael Bloomberg (who gave $1 billion to Johns Hopkins for medical school tuition) or John Paulson (who donated $400 million to Harvard’s engineering school). The real lesson is the way countless lesser-known alumni contribute to build humongous endowments. It is the culture of giving, sustained over generations, that creates these results.
India does not have that culture yet, but it is emerging. The IITs and IIMs have begun to build alumni networks and fundraising operations. SRCC’s centenary demonstrated the potential. The conversations at the dinner were not merely nostalgic; they were forward-looking. There was talk of startup incubators to help entrepreneurs and address opportunities in artificial intelligence. There was recognition that alumni with real-life experience can pitch in with something beyond money—mentorship, expertise, connections.
This is the next frontier. Alumni can contribute not only their wealth but their wisdom. They can serve on advisory boards, mentor students, help shape curriculum, and connect institutions with industry. The structured endowment is a mechanism for financial sustainability; the engaged alumni network is a mechanism for institutional excellence.
The Government’s Role: Enabler, Not Obstacle
The government has woken up late to the potential of alumni philanthropy. For decades, it treated universities as dependent on state funding, with little thought to alternative sources of support. The result was underfunded institutions, overburdened faculty, and missed opportunities for engagement.
The 2022 guidelines are a step in the right direction, but they are not sufficient. The government must go further. It must create a regulatory framework that encourages giving rather than impeding it. It must ensure that donations are tax-efficient. It must streamline the process for setting up endowments. It must empower universities to manage their own funds without excessive bureaucratic oversight.
Most importantly, the government must recognise that alumni philanthropy is not a substitute for state funding but a complement to it. Public universities will always need government support. But that support can be enhanced by private giving, creating a virtuous cycle of investment and return.
Conclusion: The Long Road Ahead
SRCC’s centenary was a joyous occasion, a celebration of an institution that has shaped generations of students. But it was also a moment of reflection on what has been achieved and what remains to be done. The conversations at the dinner, the networking among successful alumni, the talk of startup incubators and AI opportunities—all of this points to a future in which alumni play an increasingly active role in shaping their alma maters.
The road ahead is long. India’s university endowments are a fraction of those in the United States. The culture of giving is still emerging. The regulatory framework is still evolving. But the direction is clear. Alumni are willing to give back. Institutions are ready to receive. The government is slowly learning to enable rather than obstruct.
The profitable nostalgia of alumni gatherings can be transformed into something more: a sustained commitment to institutional excellence, a recognition that the value of an education extends beyond the individual to the institution that provided it, a determination to ensure that future generations have the same opportunities that past generations enjoyed.
That is the promise of alumni philanthropy. SRCC’s centenary showed that the promise is real. The task now is to fulfil it.
Q&A Section
Q1: What factors have contributed to the emergence of structured alumni philanthropy in India, according to the essay?
A1: The essay identifies four key factors. First, global exposure: Indian professionals who have succeeded internationally have witnessed the model of alumni philanthropy in action at universities like Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, and have brought that expectation back to India. Second, realisation of value: Graduates of premier institutions recognise that their education, often heavily subsidised by the state, provided the foundation for their success. Giving back is a way of acknowledging that debt. Third, the network effect: Alumni gatherings are strategic, bringing together successful professionals who can benefit from each other’s connections, expertise, and capital. This networking itself creates value that can be channelled back to institutions. Fourth, desire for impact: Alumni want to see their contributions make a tangible difference—funding scholarships, supporting research, building infrastructure. Structured endowments provide a mechanism for ensuring lasting impact. These factors have converged to create a growing movement of alumni giving, exemplified by the centenary celebrations at SRCC and the fundraising drives at IITs and other institutions.
Q2: What regulatory hurdles have impeded alumni philanthropy in India, and what specific examples does the essay cite?
A2: The essay cites two striking examples of regulatory hurdles. First, N.R. Narayana Murthy’s experience: In the 1990s, he sought to donate ₹8 crore worth of shares to IIT Kanpur. Regulations at the time did not allow equity-based donations, and the offer was refused. Two decades later, Murthy noted that the stake would have been worth ₹2,000 crore. This illustrates the enormous cost of regulatory rigidity. Second, a scientist’s land donation: Another individual had to backtrack from a donation of 8 acres of land to an IIT because it attracted stamp duty of ₹40 crore that the state government refused to waive. Such obstacles send a clear message that giving is complicated, expensive, and uncertain. The essay notes that the government has begun to address these issues, with 2019 seeing the first structured endowment at IIT Delhi and 2022 guidelines for central universities. However, much work remains to create a regulatory environment that encourages rather than impedes giving.
Q3: How does the essay contrast the scale of American university endowments with India’s current position, and what lessons does it draw from the American experience?
A3: The essay notes that Harvard’s endowment exceeds $50 billion, Yale’s is over $40 billion, and Princeton, Stanford, and MIT rank close behind. India’s university endowments are a fraction of these figures. However, the essay argues that the real lesson from the American experience is not the headline-grabbing mega-donations from billionaires like Michael Bloomberg ($1 billion to Johns Hopkins) or John Paulson ($400 million to Harvard). The real lesson is the culture of giving sustained over generations, with countless lesser-known alumni contributing to build humongous endowments. It is this cumulative, generational giving that creates results. India does not yet have that culture, but it is emerging. The essay suggests that India can learn from the American model not by replicating it mechanically but by understanding the underlying principles: sustained engagement, a culture of expectation that alumni will contribute, and institutional capacity to manage and grow endowments.
Q4: What role does the essay suggest for alumni beyond financial contributions, and how might this enhance institutional excellence?
A4: The essay argues that alumni can contribute not only their wealth but their wisdom. They can serve on advisory boards, mentor students, help shape curriculum, and connect institutions with industry. This is particularly important in a rapidly changing environment where AI and other technologies are disrupting every field, including education. Pedagogy needs to reinvent itself, and alumni with real-life experience can pitch in with something beyond money. The essay cites conversations at SRCC’s centenary about startup incubators to help entrepreneurs and address opportunities in artificial intelligence. The engaged alumni network, in this view, is not merely a fundraising mechanism but a resource for institutional excellence. Structured endowments provide financial sustainability; engaged alumni provide intellectual and strategic capital. Together, they can help institutions adapt, innovate, and thrive.
Q5: What does the essay mean by “profitable nostalgia,” and how does it capture the dual nature of alumni gatherings?
A5: “Profitable nostalgia” is a phrase that captures the dual nature of alumni gatherings. On one hand, they are occasions for sentiment, for revisiting memories, for feeling young again. This is nostalgia in its conventional sense—a longing for the past, a bittersweet remembrance of times gone by. On the other hand, these gatherings are also strategic. Investment bankers, private equity magnates, and tax planners exchange career notes. Old boys network. Deals are discussed, connections are made, opportunities are identified. The nostalgia is “profitable” because it generates real economic and professional value. The essay observes this dynamic at SRCC’s centenary dinner, where giant screens flashed profiles of successful alumni and conversations buzzed with the currency of commerce. Profitable nostalgia is not a criticism; it is a recognition that alumni gatherings serve multiple purposes. They celebrate the past while building the future. They honour the institution while advancing individual careers. They are, in short, a microcosm of what alumni philanthropy can achieve when sentiment and strategy align.
