(Previously, Urban Syndromes - 1: "We are the world")
No one writes to the colonel is one of my favourite short stories by Marquez. In that story, one of the characters (a doctor I suppose) says something that was very impressive. I don't think I can hazard an exact recollection, but he says something to this effect - "I think people in Europe should be reading our newspapers, and we should be reading theirs. That way we can come to know about each other". And he clinches it by this remark, "To Europe, Latin America is a man with a moustache, a gun, and a guitar". I have definite reasons for quoting the above at the beginning of this post. They should be clear subsequently.
------
Last year I attended a half a day seminar organised by a huge corporate called M, marking the inauguration of its research center in Bangalore. The seminar was held at the Taj west end. There were a lot of delegates that included senior professionals and researchers from the industry and academia. The major focus was of course on the inauguration of M's research centre, and what is the kind of work that will happen over there. But a lot of time was also spent through presentations and panel discussions on one particular topic - "how does our research help to improve the life in rural India?"
Another huge corporate called I made a special kind of PC that they claimed would be very effective in villages. It had a special dust filter. But the killer improvisation that it provided was an AC adapter so that one could run the PC using a car (jeep or tractor) battery.
Since we are into research some of us regularly come across people from the industry who want to collaborate with us to drive some research. A lot of them want our research to help rural India and specially the farmers.
------
Firstly, I have always wondered as to what does it mean when we say we "improve" someone else's life. And what does it mean to improve the life of a segment of society, when they are not even aware of it? Or when we are not aware of them, but only have some predefined notions about them? Is it not like saying - "Hey guys! We discussed at length about your problems, and found some solutions. You know.. if we do this set of things, and if you do this other set of things, it will be good for you". How? I don't understand.
If I am doing research, it is only because I enjoy it. It's not because it is going to help people. People might make use of my research and help themselves. That's a different thing. Similarly, if you have made a cool gadget and want to sell it, go ahead and sell it. But please don't tell me that you made that gadget because it will help me. Specially so, when you don't even know if I really need what you are trying to sell me. Do not assume "we know what you want". You need not know, and you need not care. I have no problems. But if you care, then you better know.
------
Let me make it clear that my rant is not against the assumption "we can make a difference". It is against the assumption "we know how to make a difference". The assumption that you already know what my problem is, or the assumption that the cool solution that worked for you will also work for me, is what I am talking about.
Let me deconstruct the "village PC" example. The claim is that it is a rugged PC that will tolerate "harsh climatic conditions". Firstly, I am not sure if a villager who has bought a thing worth 20 thousand will subject it to harsh conditions. And secondly, I don't understand what is so specially harsh about villages. Next, the AC adapter that can use a car battery. The reason you have that is because one can work on the PC even when there is no electricity. But is a computer so critical for a villager that he needs to use it even when there is no electric supply? I am not too sure. You might argue that it will help in schools where kids can work on it even when there is no power. Right. But then, did you check if the car battery killer improvisation you are talking about is really a new one? No. People in villages have found out such tricks and more long ago. They still continue to. And it should not surprise you. Electricity is so very basic to them that they know how to "loot" your electricity, they know how to "convert" a single phase electric supply to three phase electric supply using a capacitance, they know how to burn motors, and they know how to wind the coils.
What you are doing is "solution probleming". You have a "solution" that has solved some problem of yours. So, you "discover" a problem for the sake of using that solution. It's not at all necessary, but if you care, try and address a problem, not a solution. Try and find what is the problem. Then, if you want you can as well give a solution. Don't be ignorant if you want to make a difference. Go and do a reality check about what you heard or what you read somewhere.
Supposing I am wearing a suit, and the guy next to me is wearing pretty ordinary clothes. Am I right in assuming that his problem is that of clothes? And that his life will be better and he will be happier if he gets good clothes? I don't know. It might work. It might not work.
------
"Social service" is perhaps necessary. But it should involve the society. I am definitely not saying that people left to themselves will miraculously come to know of things that are good to them, and thereby improve the quality of their life. Thinkers are necessary, because a lot of people don't do it. Leaders are necessary, because most people have the habit of following. Visionaries are necessary, but at a macro level. Visionaries are not required to tell people what gadgets they should use. They are required to create awareness in a much more fundamental manner. They should empower people by thought. Today you think a computer is going to improve someone's life, and you give it. As days progress you keep on coming up with newer and cooler things. So, are you going to tell me each and every time that some new thing is good for me? When will I find out on my own and ask you to give me something that I need?
Update(2/2/06):Melquiades puts this series of posts in perspective, and adds his views. Here.
(Crossposted on Desicritics. Some discussion there.)
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
I have a term for this syndrome: solution probleming. We know what the solution is, and you better start suffering from this problem now..
Nice clarity of ideas in this posting..
Oops, I see you have used the term yourself.
My mistake. Just dashed off my reply in a hurry..
On a related note, I don't see anything "urban" about these syndromes. They are more like axioms of the mighty and/or ignorant. I'm sure one can encounter these syndromes in "rural" villages as well.
Nice clarity of ideas in this posting..
So, am I finally off the mark? ;)
I'm sure one can encounter these syndromes in "rural" villages as well.
I am sure too, but what to do, I still am a naive village boy.:D
So, am I finally off the mark? ;)
Definitely. If you notice, I've already started quoting you. ;)
And this is a nice argument to use: Supposing I am wearing a suit, and the guy next to me is wearing pretty ordinary clothes. Am I right in assuming that his problem is that of clothes?
A pretty common fallacy that leads to stereotyped notions of how "poor" people live. And the result of pushing such argument down our throats? We see executives sweating it out in three-piece suits in 45 degree Chennai summers!
On the other hand, the way I'd understood your earlier posting and concluded that these were ESS.. now those are more urban syndromes -- where ideology clashes are more likely than in rural areas, simply because there are more people.
Melquiades, thanks!
Sir, I guss I'll be writing a post on why I chose to call them "urban syndromes". It is too big for a comment.
Well ariculated post. Reminds me of the time when the Govt and some NGOs were trying to "help" the tribals in Andaman. They were trying to bring them out of their life and educate them, and they in turn, turned violent. They were apparently happy as they are. What is right in this situation?!!!
Shruthi, I don't really know what is right. But I have heard that Dr. Sudarshan was/is doing a good job with the soligas of BR Hills.
Sanket, shouldn't you be attributing sir for "solution probleming" ;-)
And talking about 'naive village boys', I saw a poster for a Kannada movie today. The caption was *only* in English - "The Real Guts of Village Guy". Are you one of those?
:D
Ambar, I think I knew the "concept" of "solution probleming" much before, though I got much more clarity and the phrase itself due to sir. I don't think I need to explicitly attribute things I learnt from him. :)
And about the posters of Kannada movies, we can talk in private.
I loved this post. Extremely well-argued and gave me a lot of food for thought. So here is a thought that came to me after ruminating on this one for a while.
Don't you think this makes a case for market based initiatives as against left leaning planning sort of scenarios? I know you aren't posting these as sort of a clash between ideologies but I couldn't help take this away from your wonderfully written post. For me this was a very strong indictment of centralised planning as such; be it carried out by a government or a corporate. Solution Probleming is inevitable in such cases.
Some time back I had read this wonderful book on poverty eradication through markets
The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits by CK Prahlad. He makes an interesting point very similar to what you said about philathropical initiatives 'thrusting' their presumptions down the gullet of the poor and argues that markets provide dignity to the poor by not making those assumptions and if entrepreneurs do make those assumptions then they fail in the market and adapt.
Let's take the same example you provide in your post about computers. A planner or some 'compassionate' person in charge of some corporation/ministry may think of such a benevolent cause of providing computers to the rural areas. He/she will ask some research institute to come up with a cheap computer and call it a Simputer which may have the same flaws you mentioned regarding solution probleming. Plus it will still cost the exchequer Rs.10,000 per computer. The problems in the design will ensure that the villagers hardly use the simputer and the aim of the excercise is nullified.
Now think how a market would have handled this. An enterprising guy knowing that villagers want their kids to be IT literate wont go an open a shop selling cheap or second hand computers at all. He will study the market and simply open a net cafe. Villagers would be able to afford Rs.10 per hour charge and the aim would be solved. The cafe owner would use a generator and solve the problem of electricity supply.
Plus he has an incentive to change in case the customers stop frequenting his cafe. What incentive does a government programme or a philanthropical initiative have for changing the features of simputer which the villagers havent liked? At least when a market entity enters a market with solution probleming, it has an incentive to adapt and modify and eventually converge towards the solution, which is absent in case of governmental and philanthropical initiatives.
Therefore I think the visionaries that you want to see will always fall short of their objectives. I mean definitely there will be a one-off MS Swaminathan and a green revolution but for every such person and initiative there will be hundreds of failures. Whereas a market based approach ensures lower failure rate, more savings and greater efficiency.
I am sorry if you think this comment was a bit off-topic. Its not as if I misunderstood your post. On the contrary this is an off-shoot from the understanding I gained from it.
Another thing I forgot to mention:
It can be argued that a planner may come up with a better solution by identifying a problem better through surveys and polls etc. But here another problem crops up, that of what people say they want and what they actually want. For instance this is a major problem in the media industry. You conduct a survey about what one wants to read in the newspaper and people will say we want more thorough news, or more balanced coverage, that they don't want page 3 etc. But when their reading habits are studied it becomes clear that the same person who asks for those things actually reads only the first paragraph of a news item and finds any news criticising BJP as biased and he may be the first to open page 3 to see the babe of the day. So even through surveys etc. it is difficult to understand real needs and to device a solution based on that.
At least markets still offer a chance at self-correction whereas the other approaches do not.
There is no doubt that centralized planned economies fail. (In fact, I wouldn't call them economies at all).
To give an analogy, think of an economy as a spread of fine cloth spread all over the system. Everyone wants a piece of this cloth and the economy is said to work well then it is the case. Ocassionally though, people tugging at different locations in the cloth make it weak or tear it, creating holes. Sometimes, adjacent holes joint one another and weaken the fabric further and eventually bringing it down.
In a centralized model, the cloth is firmly held at the centre and people are allowed to pull at it as the central node sees fit. Needless to say, the fabric doesn't cover the entire system and it is not an economy at all.
The main problem today is more of the former. Uneven pulls by market forces from different parts of the fabric may create holes, which weaken the fabric and when holes multiply or merge they can weaken the fabric rapidly, bringing down the whole system.
Chetan, first up thanks for the good words and thanks for giving it much thought. You have talked about market driven initiatives to solve problems because there is definite incentive as opposed to philanthropic ones. Sure. It does make sense. However, I don't see much of it happening. At least I am not aware of it. You also say that such initiatives have a fair chance of adapting their approach. Even then, I am not sure if individuals or small organisations find it attractive to take up such initiatives. It takes a lot of time and effort. You have to start with a pilot solution. Experiment it. Get feedback. Adapt. And so on. Can all this be done without the support/intervention of a govt. or a large corporate? I don't know.
Though I mentioned the word visionary, let us not take it too literally. What we need are problem solvers. They should either understand an existing need/problem and address it, or they should discover a latent need/problem. Let me give an example. I had once gone to my friend's place in a coastal district. There I saw a tool that they were using to climb a tree. It gripped the tree. It had sockets to insert your feet. It had a couple of levers which you move up and down with your hands and ascend. Much less effort. More safety. Less skill required. Even solving small problems would do quite a bit.
Post a Comment