Adoption approach
Xanat Flores - Tuesday 23 May 2006Dear all,
I am Xanat Flores, a former student of Susan Murcott at MIT. At the moment I am only indirectly involved in HWST thru collaboration with Amy Smith and Susan Murcott at MIT.
I have been really enjoying all the discussion that has been going on during the past week. I think it has provided a great amount of knowledge and expertise in different areas of interest (technology development, marketing, basic research, social approaches, etc). I have also been very happy to see many familiar names, and to read their share, and I also want to join everyone in thanking Renuka and everyone in the HIP team for making this great e-conference possible.
Now I would like to say a few words in relation to what others have said. I agree and support Matthias Saladin’s old fashion approach and actually think is one that many people miss. For big companies this might not be the best and most “efficient” approach, whereas a good strategic marketing campaign might be considered the best way to get a product out. However, when we look at the greater picture, recipes, stories, traditions, etc., have been passed from generation to generation using the old fashion approach and have remained for hundreds or thousands of years. Many people have showed interest in a marketing approach. Nevertheless, we might need to start thinking about what is it that keeps these recipes, stories, traditions, etc., alive. I think the only way to learn this, will be using the old fashion/grass roots approach that Matthias talks about.
I only have a very limited experience in rural communities, very different from urban settings, but from it, I have learned that people tend to adopt more easily a given technology or hygiene and sanitation practice when they can adopt it as part of their daily rutine, customs, culture, social circle, etc. I have found that several technologies that have been introduced into certain communities, although very effective, end up in someone’s back yard unused. This could be due to different factors: a)they don’t really see the need of the technology; b) they are not able to get replacement parts; c) they are not able to get a technician to come and repair it; d) there are some social/cultural/religious issues involved that prevent them from using them. I believe that a grass roots approach would be able to prevent these factors to a certain extent.
From my point of view, a grass roots (for rural communities) approach should therefore include:
1. A survey of the concerns and needs of the populations (children, women, men, elder). Sometimes, the users might not see the need, for example, of pure drinking water, and therefore education might be needed before the introduction a technology. However, for as long as the population does not raise and expresses the need, adoption will remain limited.
2. Knowledge dissemination thru key members of the community (and not only local governments and local NGOs). The involvement of the local leaders is key, in many aspects: they have a good idea of the population’s needs, and therefore can help address what can be adopted; sharing the knowledge with key members can help brainstorm what features should be present in the technology looking at it with a scientific, but also social behavior eye, and at the same time, will be able to understand the system and therefore repair it (and make it from locally available parts); key members will help disseminate knowledge and educate other members of the community; other members from the community, who tend to look up to community leaders will more easily adopt the technology.
3. Community involvement. Getting the people involved (maybe thru small workshops, small town meetings, small open forums) not only in the technology adoption, but even in an earlier stage, the technology development, allow the community to embrace the technology as its own. This allows the community members to understand it, to take care of it, and to be responsible for it.
This approach is a more time and energy consuming one, and comes from my limited experience in rural communities, but it seems to be more friendly and sustainable. And now that I think about it, is one that also some big companies use. For example, I come from Mexico, and I have seen that Coca-Cola has specific products sold in Mexico that I have never seen here, and it even has regions specific product!
Now, answering some of the questions raised by the HIP team:
1. Share one thing you have learned from this e-conference that will be useful to you in your work.
I happily learned that there is a large group of people with a common interest and a vast amount of knowledge, gained thru research and/or experiences, and that I can learn a lot from it.
2. People talk about sharing knowledge, yet when the opportunity presents itself, much knowledge and information is not shared. Why? What can you suggest to stimulate sharing?
For myself there were two reasons that had kept me from sharing: 1) time; 2) the feeling of not having much to contribute with due to limited experience.
And in my case, the more participation I noticed, the more I wanted to participate. So I guess, thru participation we can all get other people to share.
3. In your mind did this e-conference get to the heart of the HWTS issues posed?
I cannot say whether or not it got there, but we are certainly a step closer.
Thanks a lot for all the sharing!
Sincerely,
Xanat Flores
PhD Candidate
Massachusetts Institute of Technology