Appropriate? Technology
Articles / Change the world, Empower, technology
Written by: Barak Bruerd
In nearly every situation in the West, technology plays an important role in dishing up services and solving problems. The more hi-tech and the more efficient the technology, the more we like it. Consequently, when we step into the context of poverty, our natural response is to search for a technological solution. After all, poverty is primarily a physical issue… right? Wrong. But that’s for another post (or two; or five).
That said, technology plays a critical role in addressing the aspects of poverty that are physical. Unfortunately the latest-greatest technology is not always the best. In fact, it’s often the worst. More times than I count I’ve watched universities, companies, and other entities pour millions into research to develop a fancy widget that works fabulously in a laboratory surrounded by techno-geeks, knowing with deep sadness that it’s a terrible solution to the problem they are trying to solve because it has been completely divorced from the context in which it will be used.
Though the term is kicked around in many circles, NGO’s refer to “appropriate technology” as technology that is contextualized for a given situation, offering an optimum balance in service delivery and sustainability. Very often, these two are in tension with one another and selecting the right technology is not always easy. However, there are five basic criterial that can be used to judge the appropriateness of any technology for use in a community development project.
- Suitable: does the technology take into account the context of the need: available resources, environmental conditions, social/political factors, etc or are there considerations that would point to a more suitable solution?
- Adequate: does the technology adequately provide for the needs of the people it’s serving while taking into account that over time needs may change and population may expand?
- Affordable: is the total cost to implement the technology within the financial capacity of those implementing it, which may, (or should) be the combined effort of both the organization and community?
- Maintainable: can those whom the technology serves maintain it independently over time or will outside intervention be required in order to ensure it’s sustainable use? The cost, technical expertise, and availability of parts must all be accessible at a local level.
- Culturally Sensitive: Does the technology take into account cultural preferences, gender and age needs, social norms, etc?
These simple criteria are critical in technology selection. A reverse osmosis system may offer fantastic water quality but the cost and technical requirements are high, making sustainability in a rural community extremely low. A ceramic water filter may be a low-cost, simple solution but if it’s longevity only extends 2-3 years and is not easily replaced locally, it is only a bandaid solution. Chlorine is inexpensive and locally available but many cultures resist chemical treatment or greatly dislike the taste and therefore reject it’s use.
What’s brilliant is that it doesn’t take a PhD to ask these questions or evaluate the answers. What technologies and solutions do you see on the news, on websites, or out in the field that meet or don’t meet these criteria? Play Pumps is a technology recently in the news for it’s reported ongoing failure in the field. It’s a sexy and techie solution to water access but how well does it meet the criteria above as an appropriate technology? Are there situations where it would be more or less appropriate? Though our role is small, we play an integral part in the poverty equations and we have a joint responsibility with implementing organizations to evaluate and ensure that the solutions used are effective. The answers aren’t easy and compromise is a necessary staple of most projects, but best practices in development have strong principles that have to be applied if we are to achieve any measure of long-term success.
A quick note before I sign off: in humanitarian relief, these criteria overlap, but with some very key differences. Humanitarian relief is not about solving poverty, but about responding to life-threatening emergencies. Considerations for sustainability, cultural sensitivity, cost etc, tend to take a back-seat role in the face of saving lives. Effectiveness and rapid deployment in high volumes with consideration for short-term usability tend to be the primary determinants in technology selection. Later, we’ll be talking more about the differences between relief and development but know that technologies that are perfect for relief are often poor choices for development and vice versa.
~ Peace
Marc Krejci
When we were visiting the project in Kitgum, Irene told us about this guy who visited her and pitched her this “revolutionary idea” to give all of her 8,000+ children wireless laptops powered by solar panels hanging up in the trees. This guy was so excited about this idea, and already made up in his mind that he would do this, that he didn’t bother to ask if they would need/want/use this. Irene is so gracious she told him to go for it… who was she to tell him no. But she expressed to us the truth which is that many of these kids are ex-child solders, malnourished, fighting diseases, and dying. They have no need or interest in the internet… they just want to try and live to the next day! She said they would immediately steal the solar panels and use them for some sort of cooking devices, and go to town and sell the laptops for cash.
If only this guy would ask questions and listen, as opposed to being a pitch-man, he might actually help. Or, at the very least, save himself some money!
Fidelia Rozar
Hi would you mind letting me know which webhost you’re using? I’ve loaded your blog in 3 different internet browsers and I must say this blog loads a lot quicker then most. Can you suggest a good hosting provider at a reasonable price? Thanks, I appreciate it!