I saw an Native American on television the other day. He said that there was a time when his people ".....didn't need anything from anybody..", they had food, shelter, and a beautiful land to roam, and share with God's other creatures. Now that has all been taken away, and laws have been passed which make it illegal to fish the waters which fed their ancestors. Native Americans have been relegated to reservations and pubic assistance programs. They were once communities of great nations living in harmony with nature, until technology helped to destroy these communities, and their way of life.
The great minds of the century have developed amazing technologies in an effort to improve the way we accomplish the tasks in our lives. Much of this effort has been focused on improving the ways in which business is able to generate profits. An alarming amount of this human capital has been directed toward improving the ways that we can kill each other. Very little effort has been directed toward really understanding the impact of technology on the world.
Industry had been discharging hazardous materials into the environment for centuries before we felt a need to regulate, and treat these emissions. Many developing countries do not have the regulatory mechanisms in place to control the industries that are starting up everyday. Businesses without social responsibility take advantage of this lack of regulation, and eliminate necessary emissions control systems.
Technology cannot be transferred to developing countries without evaluating the impact of this technology on the society. The desire to export technology cannot be superseded by the desire to make profits. Large capital intensive projects, such as the steel mills planned for Nigeria, in the latter 1970's, cannot really be feasible in an environment without the infrastructure, and regulatory systems in place to support, and control their operation, even if the market does exist.
There is a growing market for steel within Nigeria, and other ECOWAS countries, to support ambitious national development plans. However, the single large integrated facilities, designed by the foreign partners, were not appropriate technology for a developing country, even one with almost 100 million people and vast oil reserves.
A more appropriate approach would have been to develop the steel industry from a systems perspective. All of the mills planned to utilize iron ore to produce steel without the input of recycled steel. They were located close to the deposits, and far from the markets. There was no effort to put a scrap cycle in place to take advantage of the growing piles of steel scrap which litters the cities and highways.
In conversations with some of the engineers which were responsible for designing steel projects, an opinion was conveyed that suggested that the concept of utilizing scrap steel diminished the value of the project in the eyes of the Steel Development Authority. They proceeded anyway, knowing that every modern steel mill utilizes scrap as part of it's feed. Japan has very little iron ore deposits, yet they are a formidable steel producer (their mills utilize a large percentage of scrap).
A systems approach would have included mechanisms to recycle steel, and small unit operations (foundries, forge shops, machine shops, plating operations) close to the markets, to produce goods to replace imports. This system of businesses could work together to produce the same products as the large integrated facilities.
This same approach can be applied to a large variety of manufacturing processes involving discrete unit operations. The large integrated facility can be transformed into many small and more labor intensive units. These facilities must strive to produce products which are appropriate for the society. It makes no sense to produce a millions cars when only one hundred thousand can fit on the road. Sure you can make money and sell cars, but there is a tremendous negative impact on the quality of life( i.e. "go slow").
The irony of this situation is that smaller is not only better it easier to implement. It creates more jobs, it distributes the wealth, it has less of a negative impact on the environment. This is the approach that has the most positive impact on the community. Operations that have the potential to have a negative impact on the community should be conducted in facilities that are located and designed to have a minimum impact on the environmental. The components of the production process which are compatible with the community can be restructured to be accomplished in flexible units operations employing a labor-intensive strategy to produce goods close to the marketplace. We have the opportunity to move our communities closer to the point of self-sufficiency. We can work together to make sure that we don't "...need anything from anybody".
Copyright © 1996 Appropriate Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher.
