On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:33:00 -0500, "phil henshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > David, > Oh, sure, from an investment point of view there are enormous > opportunities for 'leapfrogging'. It is actually evident in the vast > phenomenon of globalization. A lot of the global integration of trade > and markets is just that. I expect there's probably also a good supply > of 'glowing examples' of successful integration with societies whose > indigenous knowledge and social structures are still able to thrive with > it.
The 12volt example was not intended to make any argument for investment. It was intended to show an alternative way of thinking about foreign aid - one that used a bit of imagination to "leapfrog" a technology that was being imposed - at great cost in terms of money, cultural identity, etc. etc. - simply because aid folk were thinking about our own industrialization history - "of course they need hydropower, nuclear generators, and power distribution grids, look what those things did for us." (Aside: of course development is not really about helping "them;" it is all about helping our corporations get rid of obsolete tech.) > > The question is about the indigenous societies for which leapfrogging is > just an alien culture invading and disrupting their way of life, rather > than supporting their development as they would choose. Think about the > vast and growing poverty that has been the result in so many places. > That wide array of broken societies appears to include all the world's > uncontrolled population growth. It's this huge number of societies > largely destroyed by the wealth invasion that are the problem, not our > ability to make money from it. The paper was developed in an anthro class - so respect for indigenous culture was paramount - and in fact provided arguments for why the 12v solution was "better" than the efforts then underway. Cultural change, specifically that induced by the introduction/adoption of technology was my focus as a grad student. Except for some rather general patterns (e.g. a technology that provides a surplus, like agriculture, always leads to the establishment of organized religion followed closely by some form of "statist" government; or, introduction of affordable personal transportation like cars or snowmobiles leads to an increase in sexual promiscuity and breakdown of nuclear families) the unpredictability of results from a change is extremely high. > > What could 'we' do? I think for so many of the disasters erupting from > our unthinking interference in nature, learning and speaking the truth > is the first thing needed. Then the model I heard talked about this > week at the AAAS sustainability science sessions was an all stakeholders > directed research model, involving professionals, organizations, locals, > funding and organizers, maybe using a systematic holistic learning > process like my 4Dsustainability learning process. The trick, whatever > process, seems to be to have the key 'hubs' in place, particularly the > committed and directly involved funding organization and a few 'boundary > spanning' individuals. If you only have one of the latter the whole > project is in jeopardy of failure if they turn up missing one day. > Personally, I think cutlure and culture change is the prototypical complex system and anyone that thinks they can comprehend the system sufficient to "plan" and change is whistling in the dark. davew > > Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 680 Ft. Washington Ave > NY NY 10040 > tel: 212-795-4844 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > explorations: www.synapse9.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Prof David West > > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 8:40 PM > > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] limits of leapfrogging > > > > > > > > Late eighties - lowly grad student taking a development > > course as part of his anthropology course. Term paper > > concerned the feasibility of starting a 12volt appliance > > manufacturing business in Africa with the initial market > > being the RV crowd in the U.S. Within a relatively short > > time the domestic market would pick up as locals earned > > manufacturing wages. Local power to locally purchased > > appliances would come from using the relatively crude solar > > cell technology of that date. The total cost would have been > > about .4% of what was then being invested in establishing > > hydro power generation and high voltage distribution network. > > Fast forward thirty years and the the Green trend that was > > nascent then is in full flower and more and more effort is > > being put into 12v as people seek to leave the grid. And a > > solar cell panel on each rooftop is far less amenable to a > > terrorist threat than the single tower that can bring down > > the entire distribution network. > > > > I suspect that there are a lot more opportunities for > > leapfrogging than the establishment would have us believe. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:55:16 -0700, "Owen Densmore" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > The economist has a thought provoking article on the limits of > > > leapfrogging: > > > http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10650775 > > > .. and attached for convenience. > > > > > > The idea is that, although in a few cases new technologies can be > > > deployed in developing countries .. and sometimes better than the > > > developed countries, new technologies often depend on older > > ones, thus > > > cannot easily be deployed by leapfrogging the older ones. > > > > > > -- Owen > > > > > > MOBILE phones are frequently held up as a good example of > > technology's > > > ability to transform the fortunes of people in the > > developing world. > > > In places with bad roads, few trains and parlous land > > lines, mobile > > > phones substitute for travel, allow price data to be > > distributed more > > > quickly and easily, enable traders to reach wider markets and > > > generally make it easier to do business. The mobile phone > > is also a > > > wonderful example of a leapfrog technology: it has enabled > > > developing countries to skip the fixed-line technology of the 20th > > > century and move straight to the mobile technology of the > > 21st. Surely > > > other technologies can do the same? > > > > > > Alas, the mobile phone turns out to be rather unusual. Its > > very nature > > > makes it an especially good leapfrogger: it works using radio, so > > > there is no need to rely on physical infrastructure such as > > roads and > > > phone wires; base-stations can be powered using their own > > generators > > > in places where there is no electrical grid; and you do not > > have to be > > > literate to use a phone, which is handy if your country's > > education > > > system is in a mess. There are some other examples of leapfrog > > > technologies that can promote developmentmoving straight > > to local, > > > small-scale electricity generation based on solar panels or > > biomass, > > > for example, rather than building a centralised > > power-transmission grid > > > but there may not be very many. > > > > > > Indeed, as a recent report from the World Bank points out (see > > > article), it is the presence of a solid foundation of intermediate > > > technology that determines whether the latest technologies become > > > widely diffused. It is all too easy to forget that in the > > developed > > > world, the 21st century's gizmos are underpinned by infrastructure > > > that often dates back to the 20th or even the 19th. Computers and > > > broadband links are not much use without a reliable > > electrical supply, > > > for example, and the latest medical gear is not terribly > > helpful in a > > > country that lacks basic sanitation and health-care facilities. A > > > project to provide every hospital in Ethiopia with an internet > > > connection was abandoned a couple of years ago when it > > became apparent > > > that the lack of internet access was the least of the hospitals' > > > worries. And despite the clever technical design of the > > $100 laptop, > > > which is intended to bring computing within the reach of > > the world's > > > poorest children, sceptics wonder whether the money might > > be better > > > spent on schoolrooms, teacher training and books. > > > > > > The World Bank's researchers looked at 28 examples of new > > technologies > > > that achieved a market penetration of at least 5% in the developed > > > world, and found that 23 of them went on to manage a > > penetration of > > > over 50%. Once early adopters latch onto something new and > > useful, in > > > other words, the rest of the population can quickly follow. The > > > researchers then considered 67 new technologies that had > > achieved a 5% > > > penetration in the developing world, and found that only > > six of them > > > went on to reach 50%. That suggests that although new > > technologies are > > > often adopted by a small minority of people in poor > > countries, they > > > then fail to achieve widespread diffusion, so their > > benefits do not > > > become more generally available. > > > > > > Lavatories before laptops > > > The World Bank concludes that a country's capacity to absorb and > > > benefit from new technology depends on the availability of > > more basic > > > forms of infrastructure. This has clear implications for > > development > > > policy. Building a fibre-optic backbone or putting plasma > > screens into > > > schools may be much more glamorous than building electrical grids, > > > sewerage systems, water pipelines, roads, railways and schools. It > > > would be great if you could always jump straight to the high-tech > > > solution, as you can with mobile phones. But with > > technology, as with > > > education, health care and economic development, such > > short-cuts are > > > rare. Most of the time, to go high-tech, you need to have > > gone medium- > > > tech first. > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
