Re: [GKD] Technology Wars
This is a diversion from the GKD subjects, but I would like to comment on Perry Morrison's note below. He is worried about CFCs as refrigerants in India and China. He may rest assured that under the Montreal Protocol, production of virgin ODS (ozone depleting substances) was capped in these (and other developing countries), and would soon cease altogether. CFC emissions from the stock already in the end-use products - foams, refrigerators and air-conditioners (stationary and mobile) - and in the warehouses of producer companies and users (including car companies, the military, and so on) - will continue. Both these stocks are far higher in the OECD countries - in particular the US - than in countries such as India and China. In fact, as far as I know, most of the refrigerator and airconditioner manufacturers even in India and China have already shifted to CFC substitutes. This is not to deny that some particularly vexatious problems in ODS phaseout in these countries still remain - e.g. halons for fire-fighting. In short, don't worry much about food preservation in India and China. Nikhil Nikhil Desai Consultant, AFTEG, J9-900 The World Bank Perry Morrison wrote: The CFC/environmental consequences of the bulk of India and China wanting fridge/freezers is pretty scary. But who am I to deny such lifestyle shifts - especially when the better preservation of food is associated with much better health outcomes. ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.globalknowledge.org
Re: [GKD] Technology Wars
I was reminded elsewhere that The poor pollute less because they have no choice - it has nothing to do with their 'wisdom.' [There's] no way around formal education and it would be best not to console ourselves for the lack of it. I also recognize the contributions by Tom Abeles, and Perry Morrison. Groups that would recognize creativity, embrace it, and nurture it, would be the ones to increase their intellectual capital and be winners in a competitive field; mediocrity would be concealed for only so long, because the 'market' is made up of people with needs. Adverts could make someone try a product but the choice to stay with one would depend on the product satisfaction, hence major coroprations are spending large sums of money to learn about and avoid churning of customers. The services of the 'e' world are to address needs, and those products/services that addressed the needs best would be propagated. Assuming that the needs are real, then product satisfaction cannot be faked; no amount of product packaging would conceal real performance. If the uneducated would copy some unsafe features of modernity, it would be because the educated failed to inform and educate them, not because they want to pollute. Education is important. The uneducated are aware of this need, hence parents, who may be uneducated, endeavour to send their children to school. It depends on what the educated do with their enhanced knowledge. In the current context, it is expected that the educated are technology intelligence personnel, watching and informing those who depend on their knowledge to make transitions from one technological state to the next. In real situations, several governments in developing nations have had PhD's, MBAs as presidents and legislators; most communities now have PhDs and MBAs as chiefs. So far, much of the 'knowledge economy' activities in many countries have been about adding an 'e' to every word, i.e., e-this, e-that, creating Web pages, bringing tv and radio onto the Web, etc. This is good except the contents have remained the same (which may not be so good). Perry's message about in your face media is real and deals with the clash of cultures, as television programs are beamed from one techno-cultural environment to a different one. We have to exchange experiences but if a local community created a vacuum, others would fill it up - because humans abhor vacuum. We were recently referred to an article by James L. Morrison and Carol Twigg (1): For the most part, .. we are using information technology tools as a marginal enhancement of the status quo. ... We are resistant to change and rarely look for creative, innovative approaches to new opportunities. In the same way that scientists try to 'save the theory' (Thomas Kuhn), we ... stick fast to ... the ... method and look for old solutions to new problems. Reference: 1) The Pew Learning and Technology Program Initiative in Using Technology to Enhance Education: An Interview with Carol Twigg. The Technology Source, May/June 2001. http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/default.asp?show=articleid=859 Regards, John ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.globalknowledge.org
Re: [GKD] Technology Wars
Tom Abeles wrote: John Afele's comments, below, are worth some serious thinking. There was a community biogas project in a developing country. When the gas lines were installed in the homes, they were pressure tested with water. The women were so happy to have water, they didn't want the water turned off so that the gas could flow. There are many stories of the best laid plans of social change agents where the intentions and the ultimate outcomes were different and, may I suggest, unanticipated and unable to be anticipated. I recall a case of a remote village in Pakistan that obtained better road access and all of a sudden through much greater interaction and the arrival of TV, discovered that they were poor. Things seemed to be a lot worse after that. A great deal of misery in this world is real and even more is mental/emotional misery. For me, while appalling levels of physical misery clearly exist and there is a moral obligation to address it, the situation is not helped by in your face media that shows the lives of the rich and famous. Starving is hard. Seeing the occasional broadcast of the feast next door is even harder. The CFC/environmental consequences of the bulk of India and China wanting fridge/freezers is pretty scary. But who am I to deny such lifestyle shifts - especially when the better preservation of food is associated with much better health outcomes. Perry Morrison ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.globalknowledge.org
Re: [GKD] Technology Wars
John Afele's comments, below, are worth some serious thinking. There was a community biogas project in a developing country. When the gas lines were installed in the homes, they were pressure tested with water. The women were so happy to have water, they didn't want the water turned off so that the gas could flow. There are many stories of the best laid plans of social change agents where the intentions and the ultimate outcomes were different and, may I suggest, unanticipated and unable to be anticipated. Ecotourism is another area of recent concern and there are many in the area of agriculture, and biology, not all of which are attributable to the transnationals and GMO's Choice, which John so carefully documents, is often far from free. Coercion is not always with force as Jerry Manders and the Adbusters folks are quick to point out. Remember that someone's information is another's propaganda For example, isn't it interesting that the United States has included tobacco in its food for the poor programs outside the United States? What is good? what do we mean by doing good? Does the end justify the means? Does good intent justify bad consequences? What is ethics in a cross cultural world? Is it really easier to just do it and apologize later? Where does philosophy belong in this discussion? thoughts? tom abeles John Afele wrote: Dear All, I have been following the various thoughts and presentations of projects from all over the world. There are many good things happening. Tom Abele's was most interesting for me. This is my slant: Every group would be defending their own schemes as the best fit model. This is what we might already be aware of: There would be many groups offering something in knowledge networks; they would compete; the weak would fail; the fittest would survive. The fittest would be the programs that met peoples' needs. This is the reality of virtuality; as we have seen in the contraction of the dot.com market in the advanced economies, so would it be in the developing and transition economies. This is because the poor pay for all they have and access - health, education, water, electricity, ... It is the rich that get subsidized most. The poor walk several miles to make a phonecall, which they pay for (no privilege of calling from the office); the poor do not have health insurance from their employers or state; some have to bribe their way to the nurse, and more for specialist clinics; Therefore, they would choose wisely. The small and the big groups offering knowledge products and services would be subjected to the same scrutiny and product assessment - ideas would triumph over size. And the majority, with their pennies, would be evaluating all connectivity programs, not some who think this is their birthright. All that needs to happen is the education of the poor so that they would make their own choices but we could be consoled by the fact that with or without formal education, the poor may still make wise choices; as an example, they take very little from earth and leave very little residue (pollutants). ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: http://www.globalknowledge.org
