Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970221233157.00687844@francomedia.qc.ca> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 18:31:57 -0500 From: Hubert DUVIEUSART <mailto:duvieush@FRANCOMEDIA.QC.CA> Subject: Re: Technology transfer and world change. To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
At 08:03 20-02-97 -0500, Donovan Rykpema wrote:>It seems to me that the 20th century has more than demonstrated that social
>solutions are NEVER solved on a massive scale, they are most effectively
>addressed and solved on a neighborhood or community scale.
I feel David Johnson, in his remarks to that posting, came up with an excellent but partial answer to the idea mentioned earlier by David Harris on the possible role of technology transfer on "social solutions on a massive scale".
I fully agree with David that there are too many people suffering from too many problems to help these people at the community level exclusively: you need global programs that address whole classes of people at once. The water fluoridation example, I think, is a very valid one, although even such actions can involve politics : for years, a mayor of Montreal (a lawyer by education) opposed fluoridation of city water because it went against his personal freedom of choice !
Besides this, I think that some programs, even if they are controversial, cannot be implemented at the community level. The school system, for example, has to be re-designed in many countries where it does not correspond to the needs of emerging economies. The school curriculum of most French-speaking countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, ignores even basic training in small business management, and is tuned almost exclusively to the needs of future public servants, for which no jobs are available. The design of a new curriculum is probably the most urgent action needed to eradicate poverty in many developing countries. It can only be undertaken at the national level.
A similar situation can be found in many fields : you cannot design a farm extension system independently of a national agricultural research policy. It is true that extension systems can be implemented on a regional basis, but the need for coherence forbids to develop a different system for every village. In the same way, you can help people in a village or community to set up some sort of savings and loans cooperative. Such cooperatives, however, will be viable in the long term only if they can regroup in some form of regional, then national federations. If no thought has been given beforehand to the extended system, success will be, at the best, elusive.
Whatever level you are working at, you can never forget you are working for people, and people live in small communities. You cannot, however, solve every problem at the community level : people live in (somewhat) organized societies, and only these can implement economic policies, without which no development is possible.
I feel the two sides on this discussion have touched some of the fundamental aspects of development work. I would appreciate more opinions on the subject. Given the importance of technology transfer in the fields mentioned above, I think this list is a good place to continue the discussion. It can lead to positive results.
Hubert Duvieusart, agr. Montreal, QC, CANADA mailto:duvieush@francomedia.qc.ca agro-economiste - agronome conseil Agro-economist - agricultural consultant Conseiller en developpement rural Rural Development Adviser