Question from a reader: Fixing water filtration in India

A simple sand and activated charcoal filter ($10-15) can filter hundreds of gallons of water simply and cheaply. But will this solve India's (bottled) water issues?? Read on... (photosource: bethechangeinc)


I got the following question in my inbox recently. Its becoming a question of increasing frequency, and I want to address it properly. Here's the "question" the reader wrote:

Last year, after a research expedition [on the effect of plastics on the environment]...we were giving talks and meeting with legislators along the way [in North America].

At one of our talks, a woman who had just returned from a long trip in India approached me, and said, "this is all great what you guys are doing to educate people, BUT there are much larger problems with plastic bottles and waste overseas". She told me that due to poor sanitation, in some areas she'd been in, people had no choice but to drink out of plastic bottles, and lacked the infrastructure to deal with them.

Which made me wonder if bringing water filtration systems to India might make a difference, albeit small.... for peanuts here ($500-$1000), an entire school can have clean water.

I've never been to India, but would be interested to hear your thoughts. Perhaps we might try to raise money for a few filters, to start with...

Here was my response:

I agree with the bottled water issue. As much as I detest bottled water, I find that when I'm in the developing world for very short bursts (where I don't have the time to purge my system and adapt) and need reliable, safe water quickly, I rely on bottled water (note: I try to drink tea, boiled water, other boiled beverages or soups for the most part, and only eat fresh, cooked food. Bottled water is a substitute when I can't find these or its simply too hot!). Amongst poor communities, plastic bottles are a huge commodity. Recycling goes on in full, plus the thicker, better bottles are used as water bottles or to store other liquids. They use these for several reasons -- convenience, cost (free to find, recyclable when they are done, easy to replace), how light it is, how sturdy it is, its lack of brittleness, etc. And yes...often they have no other choice.

Water filters are available in abundance in most of the developing world, particularly in non-disaster zones. India has a lot of indigenous water filters that do a very good job...most selling for around $50-$100. Most middle, upper, even poorer class Indians have them installed in their houses, though the best and most effective need access to electricity (they are RO systems). If you really want, you can build one using sand and a large bucket (or see diagram above). This is how most wastewater is treated in the US, though on a much larger scale. Clear water combined with some bleach dosing (aka chlorine disinfection), should render perfectly safe and drinkable water, and all for less than $10.

Probably best of all, there is always the option of boiling...the problem with this is that its very energy intensive and if you use wood/charcoal/kerosene, its simply too expensive. (I tend to boil my water usually in the developing world, except when i've run out of my supply and then use the water i find either at a tea shop or i buy bottled water).

Sometimes its not the filtration that's the problem....its the sourcing of clean water, the collection, the transportation, and the storage of water that are the biggest issues. Outside of the sourcing issues, plastic generally fills these voids.

Of course, for problems like arsenic, fluoride, salinity, etc, where you need more advanced cleaning, or where the water is extremely turbid (cloudy or visibly dirty), it becomes a different issue. These are very regional issues, and generally you can figure out what the biggest water problems in that area are by visiting the NGOs, doctors or govt public health agencies in that area. If its pathogen-related (which is the majority of water quality issues), then generally some proper boiling or filtration/disinfection will quell the problem. But other issues need more specialized solutions.

Finally, I'm not a huge fan of transplanted filters or other mechanisms. Filters from here are not made to withstand water or field conditions there. Expensive systems have a short shelflife, then like every other good transplant, they wither and die. This is partially because there is no one to do regular operation and maintenance, or who has been trained properly to fix even the smallest problems. A COMMON problem is letting untrained hands take over the operation of a technology. Their curiosity gets the better of them, and the technology is quickly rendered useless. Replacement parts are hard to find and buy, and the issue of untrained hands repeats itself. Always look for indigenous units, you are much more likely to have success in terms of adoption, operation/maintenance, and replacement if necessary.

These are my immediate thoughts on the subject. I'm always happy to discuss this further with you...

Thoughts anyone??

Pixar's work culture

Ed Catmull, President of Pixar, receives a Technical Academy Award. Below he speaks about leadership and managing Pixar's work culture (photo source: zimbio.com)

Following up on yesterday's post, here's more from Pixar president, Ed Catmull. In the video shown yesterday, Ed emphasized the importance of having a good team. In this interview, he elaborates further about what he means.

In case you can't watch the video, here is the essence of what he says and what Pixar strives to inculcate:

• Cultivate an air of open and honest communication: The basic work culture at Pixar is that movie production is a team effort. Everyone is needed and important, and everyone has the right to speak and be heard. Ed says that the Pixar team works constantly on keeping communication lines open. There is also a significant emphasis put on trusting each other. This comes from attracting high quality people, and maintaining a high level of open communication.
  

• Keep it egalitarian: Artists and engineers work together; one is in no way above the other. And it is management's job to emphasize this.

• Keep your eye on the ball: At Pixar, the bottomline is making a good movie. Everything else is a means to that end.

• Maintain your quality: Get the best people you know on board, as they will not only deliver a good product, but also bring in better talent.

• Trust the artists: Ed strongly believes that the creative people need to drive the innovation, not the technical people or management. Given this high level of trust, the creative workforce works hard to include everyone else in their decisionmaking, and deliver a high quality product

If you are further interested in Catmull's take on running successful companies, I would also recommend watching this lecture that he gave at the Stanford Graduate School of Business in 2007.

Links I liked

1. If you've ever been unhappy at work and considering quitting, read this post. It also has the best resignation letter ever.

2. Being a geek myself (and sometimes described as "Vulcan", if you are a Trekkie), I'd highly recommend reading this bit on the top ten mistakes people make when managing geeks. In fact, its so popular (and sanctioned) that its been voluntarily translated into 10 different languages, including Persian and Danish

3. An award-winning toilet made from horse-dung. Would you use it?? I would! Truly amazing what good design mixed with decent engineering can do. Here's another example of good design, good idea, and good engineering.

4.  Love reading while taking a dump?? Here's an innovative new dual purpose toilet book...literally!

5. Do our things make us happy?? Happiness Objectified...a must read on a survey done. 

Is the radio dying??

The oft heard, but rarely seen stars of NPR. (photo credit: FastCompany)

I think some technologies won't ever go obsolete. The radio is one of them. Even with iPods, CDs and every other kind of listening technology, people in the developed world seem to cling to the radio just as much as people in the developing world.

As a kid and even as an adult traveling through some remote regions of the world, the radio was and continues to be the center of most people's lives. Music, news, and shows continue to provide the soundtrack to most people's lives. Often "in the field," the radio is my one lifeline out of the space I happen to be in at that point. It connects me to the rest of the world. Listening to the BBC news gives me a level of comfort that I can't quite describe to anyone.

This is why I was pleased to read this piece in FastCompany about NPR's (National Public Radio - by far, the best radio station in the United States and one of the best in the world) ability to redefine itself and charge forward with high quality programming, in the face of stiff competition and the financial difficulties resulting from the economic crisis.

As Americans continue to find themselves stuck in the irritation of a long morning or evening commute between their work and homes, many continue to seek sanity in NPR's excellent programs.

One of my favorite shows continues to be This I Believe that gets input from over 90 countries from around the world. The program focuses on a fundamental lesson that a person has learned in their life. Check out the free podcasts and programs. I am sure you will also be hooked.

Is a computer a good substitute for a teacher??

Nigerian kids get a taste of the OLPC laptop. Can these types of technologies substitute well for real teachers?? (photo courtesy: CNETnews.com)

Nicholas Negroponte has an amazing vision. During his tenure at MIT's famed Media Lab, his team came up with the $100 laptop (granted it has since doubled in production cost, so it should be called the $200 laptop!), and proceeded to start the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) program. His idea was to use computers to engage and help educate the poor kids of the world. He talks about his vision in great detail at a TED conference in 2006. (Regardless of what other people say about the program or him, Negroponte is a visionary and he deserves tremendous credit for trying and testing out an idea that people have long thought about but never gone forth with.)

But the question is...is technology a good substitute for a human teacher??

To answer this, I'd refer to two different write-ups: one a paper (you can also read a summary here) that's come out of the well-respected Jameel Poverty Action Lab (JPAL) at MIT; and a piece on education published in the New York Times (NYT) on August 17, 2008.

The JPAL paper publishes a study on randomized trials in India that compared learning rates between computer-assisted learning and those without. The NYT piece covers computer assisted learning in the United States and UK.

I would highly recommend reading both pieces. In general though, I found that the two highlight two very specific ideas:

• Computer assisted learning works best when learning in class (with a human teacher) is complemented with technology. Technology by itself isn't a substitute for a teacher. Having been through all three combinations (teachers only, computers only, and computer assisted learning) , I couldn't agree more.

• Probably a BIG caveat to any of this is that different students respond differently. This is NOT a one-size-fits-all idea. This is why having a teacher around REALLY matters. Teachers can customize their teaching; computers can't. This is the key. This is why technology is a poor substitute for real human teachers.

A blog far superior to mine

I found a blog that covers the same territory and does a far better job than me (does this mean I'm out of a blog??), so I encourage you lovers of Tworque subject matter to add White African to your reader or email list or whatever. Of course, his blog focuses entirely on technology in Africa, so I won't quit my ramblings anytime soon! :-)

Contests as Sources of Technology Innovation: The X-Prize

I love contests. They serve as brilliant incentive for technology development. Quite often far more money is spent on the technology development, than the prize money that is won in the end.

This is probably most obvious from the X Prize Foundation, where Peter Diamandis decided to take the idea of technical innovation to a whole new level with his prize. His Ansari X-Prize for space travel pushed space technology so far that it suddenly seemed possible for anyone to buy a ticket to space. Example, Virgin Galactica.

Peter Diamandis talks about the origin of the X Prize Foundation.


Peter is pushing the envelope in other fields as well. His recently announced Progressive Automotive X-Prize will reward US$10 million to the first team that produces a car that meets EPA standards and can do about 100 miles per gallon. Of course there are more details than that and you can read about them here. But briefly in their own words:

The Progressive Automotive X PRIZE will place a major focus on affordability, safety, and the environment. It is about developing real, production-capable cars that consumers want to buy, not science projects or concept cars. This progress is needed because today’s oil consumption is unsustainable and because automotive emissions significantly contribute to global warming and climate change.

So you might be wondering why I'm going off on these X-Prizes. Well, I'm highlighting them for two reasons:

A. Efficient technology development is good for the world at large, because of their primary and secondary benefits. For one, it levels the playing field in terms of technology development, i.e. Bangladesh can produce an entry and earn the prize money just as well as the United States. Prizes level the playing field in that it mitigates the risk of investing in technology development...essentially you can possibly make the money back once you win the prize. Some people might argue that prizes give a fake sense of security, but in reality even teams that don't win the prize, spur secondary benefits such as entrepreneurial ventures based on the new technology, economic development, increased environmental quality because of increased efficiency and much more.

B. X-Prizes for poverty alleviation and other social problems. Diamandis is already talking about expanding X-Prizes into the social areas of water purification, poverty alleviation, etc. Imagine the possibilities of innovation and the lives that could be changed as a result.
It would also serve to attract and involve the minds of people who may not have otherwise been engaged. When I think about what could happen if the world would get together to think about social problems, I feel overwhelmed. On one hand the possibilities are extraordinary, on the other, its sad that it should take economic incentives like these to bring people to think about caring about their own fellow human beings.



I'd recommend watching other videos from the X-Prize here.

Smile!

This put a smile on my face (and I'm still in Monsters INC mode), so I thought I'd share it with you. And its technology being used in developing countries.

An ingenious cameraman, mounted cameras on elephants to see how they viewed the world. The pictures he got have been amazing. Check them out here.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=543994&in_page_id=1770

Food Technology: Plumpynut

An extremely malnourished child is fed PlumpyNut (source: CBS 60 mins)

Once in a moment of desperation, I was trying to figure out how to become rich in the developing world - help people and get rich at the same time. So I got together a group of international development folks from different backgrounds and they all agreed that the best way was to start a Plumpy'Nut factory in Africa. The only problem is that Plumpy'Nut is patented and I don't have their formula. And I think my riches would be gone if I stole their recipe and they sued me.

Plumpy'nut has revolutionized malnutrition management in the developing world. Like ORS (Oral Rehydration Salts) it has brought people back almost from the brink of death. Considering the food crisis and the topic of the day, I thought I'd just highlight this technology.


Technology Name: PLUMPY'NUT

Description:
Plumpy'Nut is a high nutrition paste that combines fortified peanut butter, milk, and vegetable oils in a foil packet.

Plumpy'Nut Specs:
Inventor: Michel Lascanne and Andre Briend, Food Scientists and Nutritionists
HQ: Nutriset (founded by Lascanne)
Year of invention: 1997
Franchisees: 4 (Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Niger, Ethiopia, with one set to open soon in the Dominican Republic)
Calories per packet: 500 kCal (usually 1 packet = 1 meal)
Cost per packet: $5

My review:
I heard about Plumpy'Nut from aid worker colleagues when I was taking nutrition classes a year ago. I was so fascinated by the product that I went straight back and did a bunch of research on it. Then CBS 60 Minutes and Anderson Cooper did a whole thing on it and that got the world talking. I recommend watching it.



The good:
Plumpy'Nut does not require dilution and can be eaten as is. This is really critical, because for a long time powdered mixes didn't work because clean water in disaster zones could never be guaranteed. Plumpy'Nut takes that major concern away. It can also be used by babies from 6 months up (most babies cannot have food other than milk before).

Plumpy'Nut is amazing and a lifesaver. I can't say more.

The what:
The main complaint from aid workers is the cost. US$5 per meal may not seem like much to you and me, but in a country where an entire family can eat sumptuously on that money, it seems ridiculous. After all, milk, peanuts and oil are ubiquitous in Africa and should be able to be combined locally to make this product. So why is it so expensive??

Well, Plumpy'Nut is patented and they won't sell their formula to anyone. You can only buy the product from one of their franchisees, and the only people who can afford it are the aid agencies and the military.

Lascanne insists that he is not profiting from the sales of Plumpy'Nut, only fueling the money back into R&D (Research and Development) of other products and for salaries. They won't reveal how high salaries are. I believe him, but I also think there needs to be a way around this cost (atleast its not $90 for a plastic drum, like with Hippo Roller!). Maybe the WHO can subsidize Nutriset's R&D and operating costs, and let the products be priced at cost, so that more people can access and afford it (rather than having to come to a refugee camp or aid clinic).

I must say that it is testament to Lascanne that no one has taken the sample and studied it to come up with their own competitive formula (I'm sure any food scientist could do this).

Variations I would suggest:
None. But the cost is a very frustrating component. Maybe competition would be good in this field.


Other reviews/information:
The official Plumpynut Page
Wikipedia: Plumpynut
Nutriset's page
CBS 60 mins: PlumpyNut
http://lookingglasslandblog.blogspot.com/2005/08/plumpynut.html
http://www.idpas.org/InfantIronDef/PlumpyNutwebpage.html
There were quite a few articles from 2005 that were excellent but that I can't find links online to. If I could upload a pdf here, this would help!
Thurow, R. (2005), In Battling Hunger, A New Advance: Peanut-Butter Paste. 12 April 2005,
The Wall Street Journal.

The Food Crisis Debate: What are the causes??

I think we are all aware of the major food crisis we are finding ourselves in. It may not seem like such a big issue in the United States, where food still abounds (and I see plenty of wastage) and the prices have increased by a relatively small margin. But in other parts of the world, where 20 cents is the daily income of a majority of the workers, this has sparked famine and riots.

On wednesday, April 13, NPR (National Public Radio) did an excellent interview with four influential international policy thinkers who debated the causes of the food crisis: was it a lack of technology? was it climate change? or was it poor policy decisions (like bio-fuels, etc)??

(note: Diane Rehm who conducts the interview, is actually an excellent journalist. Most first timers can get frustrated by her achingly slow interviewing process, but keep in mind that it is because of a neurological condition that she is battling. So just hang in there...the debate is worth it!)Publish Post

Water Technology: The Hippo Roller

Women in South Africa use the Hippo Roller to transport and store water (photo: Hippo Roller.org).

Technology Name: HIPPO ROLLER

Description:
In a nutshell, the Hippo Roller (HR) is a water transporter and storage unit, designed in South Africa.

The HR organizational website has an extensive description about their technology. I'll just paraphrase it for everyone's benefit:

HR is a 20 gallon (90L) polyethylene water drum designed to roll on the ground rather than being carried on the head. The polyethylene is UV stabilized and sturdy enough to withstand every kind of rural condition. To aid input and output of the liquid, as well as cleaning of the drum, there is a large screw-on cap. A clip-on steel handle is used to push the drum around.

HR Specifications:
Year of design: 1996 (I think)
Distribution: 25,000 have been distributed as of May, 2007 (almost all donated)
Size: 20 gallon (90L) drum
Material: UV stabilized, sturdy polyethylene
Features: Steel clip-on handle, Large screw cap (135mm/5.3" diameter)
Cost: US$90 manufacturing + US$10 delivery (the drum is produced in South Africa; delivery costs are in-country as well)

Apparently, the design allows five times the regular amount of water to be carried with a ninth of the force, when compared with the traditional method of carrying water on the head. (If you really want the technical version, the earth balances out a large part of the water+drum weight, leaving only a fraction of the weight and friction for the pusher).

HR also comes with a Hippo Food Security System in place aimed at an average sized family of six. It includes:

• A 210 liter drum for the irrigation system and a 90 liter Hippo Water Roller used for topping up the reservoir.
• 8 x 6 meter drip lines are also included which cover up to 50 square meters of land.
• Tools and instructions and a starter pack of seeds for both the summer and the winter.
• Further training is available if needed.

At the moment, HR is made only in one size.


The Hippo Drum, a closer look (photo source: Project H Design)

My review:
I was browsing through Project H Design's website recently and saw this technology being featured. The H team ended up funding a large project in South Africa in March 2008, which is covered here.

The good:
I've carried my share of water and I can tell you that it is a real pain in the neck (no pun intended). So HR is addressing a real and very important problem.

The concept is simple, replicable, and it works for the processes that it was built for, i.e. storage and transport. The drum has a sturdy construction that can go over all kinds of terrain. It really takes pressure off the women, and she can carry an entire day's water needs in one visit...very efficient!

The what:
I don't think the pushing mechanism works so well if the drum is anything less than full. I've had to roll around half empty barrels on flat earth and uphill (downhill isn't so bad), and the darn thing kept sloshing around. Sometimes going uphill became a battle because the momentum from the sloshing worked against me, and my toes were sore from acting as stoppers!

I'm also not clear on how you fill water from a shallow pool, like if the depth of the pool is less than the diameter of the drum. I guess you have to carry a mug or cup of some sort and scoop the water in. That's the disadvantage of having a big drum as opposed to a 20L jerry can that can be flipped about conveniently.

Another down-side of the mechanism (though not that big a downside) is that sedimentation is slowed down in this case. If you have particularly turbid (muddy) water, then shaking it around just makes the problem worse (carrying water on the head aids sedimentation, making it easy to decant the sample as soon as the bearer gets home).

And what is with the cost?? $90 for a drum?? I understand that things are far more expensive to produce in-country and that there is a social cost to this (hire local unskilled workers, train them, build an industry from scratch, etc). But come on!! You'll be relying on donations for the rest of your life!! (actually is this what is possibly happening with Playpump as well??) I mean...I can clean out one of the ubiquitous steel drums that they have there, have a welder fix me a clip-on (or even permanent) steel handle and sell that for $5 (which is still an unearthly sum, but more consumable and scalable!!). In fact, if I was in South Africa, I'd find a smart, enterprising fellow and invest in him to do this. Trust me, he'd outsell HR and build up a slew of copycats.

Actually this has got me started on a major pet-peeve. Social technology organizations NEED to start thinking about the bottom line. The main goal of ANY organization is to make people's lives easier, so if your technology is really helpful but is not reaching the most number of people it can, you HAVE to ask why and how you can change that. It HAS TO BE SCALABLE. HR is an easily scalable technology, but what is holding it back is the cost. So do what you can to bring down the cost, then use the profits to improve the product (or increase your product line-up) and your marketing model. Don't start with an overpriced technology, you are killing your own success.

And here's another, related pet-peeve...let the poor buy their stuff. STOP giving this away to them for free. It limits scalability and kills the sense of ownership of the owner, which is REALLY important. I have spent considerable time researching the best practices of social entrepreneurs, and I was surprised by how much charity killed the sense of ownership and pride that the consumers had for a particular product. Generally, a technology that required some investment got more respect, was more valued, cared for and gave the owner a great sense of pride. Charity is necessary sometimes, but if you can help it, let the consumer have some pride.

Variations I would suggest:
1. Reduce the cost. $90 is really insane for a plastic drum with a handle. Go for a more affordable, simpler design, and upgrade to the better design as you make profits (which will come with mass production).

2. Each drum has valuable advertising space (even for social messages) that isn't being used. Maybe each woman can sell this space and get her drum entirely subsidized.

3. why not incorporate a simple cloth filter and chlorination mechanism. The water will get basic filtration and be thoroughly disinfected (thanks to the mixing) by the time it reaches home.

4. If you expand the opening and add an extra contraption, the rolling mechanism can make for a spectacular washing machine.

5. HR can also be used as cement/concrete mixer or a leveller (making pathways level). Maybe these women can make extra money by working on a construction site.

6. A kind of line that keeps the lid attached to the drum (rather than it floating away in the river!) would be nice.

7. Another clip on can be using the rotational motion to grind mill flower or just storing the energy as electricity in a battery (but that has its own implications!).

Other reviews/information:
http://www.design21sdn.com/feature/21
http://www.notcot.com/archives/2005/05/design_to_impro.php
http://www.plusonewater.ca/en/FAQ.php#Hippo%20Roller
http://projecthdesign.com/2008/04/13/hippo-rollers-delivered-to-kgautswane/
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/12/the_hippo_water.php
http://poverty.suite101.com/article.cfm/invention_for_more_water_in_africa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippo_water_roller
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/462659/3401481

What makes a good water technology: A summary

We've now talked about the water problem, water decontamination, and transport/storage. I can now start blogging about different water technologies i come across.

Before I start going into technologies, I just want to quickly wrap up what I think defines good water technologies. They must address one or more of the following:

1. Accessibility: The technology must help collect, store, and/or transport water between the source and the end point of use:

2. Safety/quality: It must improve the quality and safety of water, particularly for human use and/or consumption.

3. Applicability (or Appropriable): It should address specific needs of poorer communities (whatever they are) including being easy to use, actually address a water problem in the community, sturdy, address terrain conditions, etc.

4. Affordability: It should be affordable to the people you are making the technology for. If its too expensive, then find financing options to make it consumable (does not mean you have to cut quality). What's the point otherwise??

Water 102: Water Distribution

Men, women, and children rush to get water from a well in Ethiopia (photo credit: Andrew Heavens)

Now that we've covered the processes involved in water treatment, the next stage is water distribution.

As stated in the Water 101: What is the Water Problem post, a huge part of the larger "water problem" is the transportation, storage, and distribution of clean water. In developed countries like the U.S, Canada, and most European countries, and urban parts of some developing countries, water is generally treated and distributed the same way. Its generally treated at a treatment plant, then distributed in pipes. The water usually comes disinfected and ready for drinking. People don't need to store the water, because the distribution system keeps the water clean and disinfected until you need it.* Once water comes in contact with contaminated areas or is exposed to the air, it gets contaminated.


Water flows out of a pipe in the UK countryside (photo credit: Martin Anataman)

*This may NOT be true of developing countries. Quite often there are water shortfalls, or the water distribution is so low that even in urban centers, families have their own boreholes that they pump water out of for use. They then regularly boil the water for drinking or order drinking water from wholesale providers.

In most developing countries, particularly in peri-urban, slum, semi-rural, and rural communities, water needs to collected from a central point (either from a tap, tubewell, borehole, river, lake, pond or other open water source), then carried to their homes. This is generally the work of women and children, who walk six miles (9.6 kms) to and from the water collection area. Water is heavy, weighing approximately 1 kg per litre or 8.34 lbs per gallon of water. Often the water collection and storage units are contaminated; if not, the pots or other collection units are open to the air and easily get contaminated. And finally when drinking the water, they dip their hands into the pots to get the water. Essentially, its very easy for water to get contaminated at any point.

In developing countries, people are responsible for the water collection, storage, and decontamination, which is why this is a major problem for them. The risk for illness and health issues resulting from lack of clean water or neck/head/back problems are very high. Therefore, besides availability of water, transportation and decontamination are major issues that need to be addressed when designing technology for developing countries.



L-R: A water truck carrying water into the periurban areas in Kenya (photo credit: Stig Nygaard); A line of colorful pots mark the queue for women and children in line to collect water in India (photo credit: McKay Savage).


Young women carry water back to their homes in Somalia (Copyright: Heather Arney / WaterPartners International)

Closing out the week on film: Develop.tv

To close this week's posts that focused on media and using media to reach out to the world, I wanted to showcase one last film. Victoria T is a colleague and friend, who would like to spend her time filming what I like blogging about - the impact of technology in developing countries - and using film to spread the word. As seen from some of the previous posts, media is powerful and can reach millions more effectively than anything else.

Victoria started a non-profit production company called {Develop} in 2007, that focuses on exactly this topic. I encourage you to view her first film "Mayan Territory" here, which has already aired on PBS. The projects are partially self-funded and partially with money raised from various organizations...meaning it takes time between projects. She is an amateur filmmaker, and personally I think she's got a great talent for it.

Anyways, check it out. Mayan Territory is

"a documentary that is beautifully filmed in over 15 rural and urban locations in Guatemala, Belize and Southern Mexico, a region that is known for both its conflicting poverty from civil war, as well as the crucible of the Mayan civilization. From their own voices, this film examines how technology and ideas have impacted the individual lives of villagers and volunteers alike, and shares my learning experience by portraying villages as I see them: with dignity, focusing on their culture and showing ideas that have risen from their own people to empower them."

I am going to try to get Victoria to guest blog on here. She already has a blog for {Develop} here. Hopefully I'll get more people to do the same.

photo credit: jubilo haku

The power of voice

We all know about the power of the media. Probably in no country is this more obvious than in the U.S where we are constantly bombarded with some type of media - bulletin boards (in your office, school, on the roadside, in the supermarket), newspaper, radio, internet, and television.

In the context of impoverished communities, media is a powerful connecting tool. It connects the ones with a voice to the ones who want or need to hear, particularly in areas that most need it. Without a voice, you are severely handicapped. Your government rarely cares. After all, what's their incentive?? You are poor and uneducated, and while there are others like you, you are scattered and unable to unite. You don't have any power, and you don't have any voice. Sometimes, your government deliberately keeps you scattered in order to maintain their power. So what are your options?? How do you make yourself heard??

In 2002, I had the good fortune of meeting Jessie M. She was a filmmaker of pedigree, and had come to India to teach others film-making. She had this idea of giving the poor "a voice." I admit, I didn't fully buy into her idea. So you give kids a camera and tell them to film things. But what was the point? There was no electricity, no education, and who was going to see it?? What's the point of a voice if no one can hear it??

I couldn't have been more wrong.

Yesterday, I was fumbling around on the net and stumbled on Ch19.org an online channel that features documentaries made by amateur filmmakers...filmmakers born and living in the slums and villages of impoverished India. I was amazed by the quality of the videos, the material in them. Suddenly I was in the field with the real people - connecting, listening, hearing. There were no barriers. There was trust between them and me. They were telling me about issues that really mattered to them and about how they viewed the world. Normally it would take days, weeks or months of patient waiting and cajoling to connect like this. But I didn't have to anymore. It was refreshing and beautiful.

It turns out to be Jessie's gang (go figure!). Shortly after we met, Jess had started a foundation called Video Volunteers. She brought with her all the materials - cameras, equipment, laptops (with editing software), and her skills; then linked up with local organizations who would provide the volunteers. Since 2002, the organization has grown. Their YouTube channel now features 57 videos.

Here's a preview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TMdRxUwGBQ


So who heard them?? Me...out here in the U.S. And you, wherever you are. And soon the people they were initially talking out to. That's the power of voice, vision, and the right technology.