What a closed-door gathering on February 11 for the Karotimam Environmental Stewardship Award on International Day of Women and Girls in Science taught me about building leadership that lasts.
On February 11, International Day of Women and Girls in Science, I attended the Karotimam Environmental Stewardship Award 2026 in Chennai (powered by Karotimam Innovations, DPurpose Foundation and StartupTN).
Karotimam means ‘Black Swan’ in Tamil. Rare. Transformative. Something that shifts systems.
The curation of this gathering reflected that level of seriousness.
The awards were carefully chosen and bestowed upon two individuals who represent two ends of the same arc. Anika, a ninth-grade student from AMM Matriculation School, and Dr Devasena from Anna University.
When Anika’s achievements were read out, the reaction in the room was not polite admiration.
It was disbelief. At ninth grade, she has already filed patents for cutting-edge environmental innovations. Patents. That level of clarity and execution at that age does not happen accidentally. It signals mentorship, exposure, ecosystem access, and personal conviction. She is not just participating in science. She is operating inside formal systems of innovation.
But what struck me even more was watching a ninth grader articulate why we must not only celebrate achievements but also confront the systemic inequities that continue to disadvantage women and girls. Recognition means little if the structures that deny dignity and opportunity remain intact.
That is also why compliments sit uneasily with me. Individual validation feels small when the work is systemic and the inequities are still very real. Progress for one cannot be confused with justice for many.
It was powerful to hear that awareness coming from someone so young. The conversation shifted from applause to accountability.
Then there was Dr. Devasena.
She has guided and produced numerous PhDs from Anna University, many of them women researchers. She has filed multiple patents and contributed significantly to environmental research. Her impact is generational and structural.
When you mentor women researchers who then go on to build their own careers and contributions, you are not just producing academic output. You are building continuity. You are shaping decades.
Placing Anika and Dr Devasena in the same room felt intentional. Early brilliance and institutional scaffolding. The spark and the structure.
The discussions in the room extended beyond the awards. There was a thoughtful distinction made between International Women’s Day and International Day of Women and Girls in Science.
International Women’s Day often celebrates participation in the workforce. Representation. Achievement. International Day of Women and Girls in Science raises a more foundational question. Why must women be in STEM? What happens generationally when they are?
It took a global pandemic for the world to fully recognise how central women are in science, research, healthcare, and innovation systems. Women are nurturing, yes. But they are equally capable of analytical thinking, invention, leadership, and generational shifts. Those traits have never been mutually exclusive.
Historically, patriarchy and cultural conditioning limited women’s access to science and engineering pathways. Even today, the barriers are subtle but persistent.
We have women founders in startups, yet they receive less ecosystem support.
We produce vast numbers of engineers in India, even surpassing China in sheer volume, yet questions about quality and depth remain.
We have women in the workforce, yet many continue to navigate discrimination, unequal pay, and the invisible labour of juggling professional and domestic responsibilities.
So when we speak about introducing STEM formally in schools for girls, and strengthening pathways in colleges for women, we are not speaking about a trend. We are speaking about generational leverage.
Early exposure changes confidence. Confidence changes participation. Participation changes leadership. Leadership changes systems.
At one point, I was asked to speak.
I shared something personal. I come from a psychology and social work background. Yes, there was science within it, but it was still classified as arts. It was not considered traditional STEM.
When I re-entered the sustainability and environmental space in 2018, I had to learn everything from scratch. Technology systems. Engineering concepts. Chemistry fundamentals. Infrastructure thinking. Carbon markets. Industrial processes.
No formal STEM degree handed that to me. I mapped more than 50 sectors across over 20 analytical lenses. I immersed myself in research. I secured scholarships. I spoke to founders. I studied technologies deeply.
Today, I teach green engineering, green chemistry, sustainability technologies, and systems thinking to audiences ranging from school students to PhD scholars to corporate professionals.
I was not formally ‘given’ a STEM pathway. I carved one. That felt important to say in that room.
While we fight to structurally embed STEM access for girls and women in education systems, we must also remind women that they are not permanently excluded if they did not choose science at sixteen.
You can re-enter. You can self-educate. You can build domain depth. You can teach it. Leadership pathways are not always linear.
Coming back to the room itself, its scale mattered.
Dr Chitraleka and Sanal from Karotimam, along with Desika from DPurpose Foundation, brought together activists, founders, researchers, and ecosystem enablers who are not doing superficial work. These are individuals directly shaping environmental systems and institutional frameworks.
Prem Sir from StartupTN spoke about enabling innovation ecosystems. Sivarajah Sir and Shivakumar Sir offered institutional grounding. Rama Ma’am from TiE Chennai brought clarity on enterprise leadership. An IIT professor connected academic rigour with applied impact. Several entrepreneurs and ecosystem enablers spoke about how their lived experiences shaped their decisions to actively accelerate STEM pathways within eco-social impact industries.
There were many inspiring speeches. But what stayed with me was the honesty.
Impact work carries emotional weight. The urgency is constant. Systems move slowly. Recognition is uneven. Fatigue accumulates. Burnout is real in this space.
Small, intentional gatherings function differently from large conferences. They allow lived experience to surface without performance pressure. They create proximity between people who understand the cost of the work.
That proximity stabilises. I was invited to speak, but I left feeling that listening was more valuable.
Watching a ninth grader confidently navigate structural critique. Watching a professor whose decades of work are shaping generations. Watching ecosystem builders intentionally design that bridge.
It reinforced something simple. Leadership that lasts is not accidental. It is architected across time. It is sustained through mentorship, exposure, structural thinking, and proximity.
If there is one suggestion I would offer, it is this:
Protect this format. Repeat it. Build structured pathways between school-level innovators and senior researchers. Let these gatherings become recurring ecosystem circles rather than one-time ceremonies. Applause fades. Continuity does not.
Desika and Dr Chitra Lekha have managed to curate an event most folks in the ecosystem could not and would not even have the agency to do! I am glad to know that such powerful and influential people are using their skills for good!
On February 11, what I witnessed was not just an award ceremony. It was generational impact architecture in motion.
Credits
This article is written by Deepa Sai, the founder of EcoHQ