The Global Grid and Mobile Learning

In the McKinsey & Company special report “What happens next?”, the authors identify five pillars of innovation that will shape the coming decade. One of these pillars is the global grid, which refers to the reach and depth of a web of interconnected global networks and channels that enable real-time interactions at scale. As the authors note, the negative effects of this “highly integrated ecosystem” are felt during times of economic downturn – as was the case with capital markets and the decline of trade in 2007-2008 – but the benefits particularly to emerging markets can be significant. With mobile phone connectivity, billions of people in the developing regions of the world now have access to a wealth of information previously not available to them. Furthermore, mobile connectivity is providing many with their first entry into the global economy, reconstructing how people learn, interact, work, and share.

In his working research paper “Mobile Learning in Developing Nations”[1], Athabasca University Professor Scott Motlik outlines how the applications of mobile phone technology and eLearning are not only shaping learning environments that are available to more people in developing regions, but how the adoption of mobile learning – or mLearning – among children is usually the first step in gaining entry to a global society.

Professor Motlik’s working paper is relevant to our discussion of the global grid and the many interconnected networks of global society as mobile learning is not simply a phenomena occurring in emerging markets, but the devices we use to share and learn are radically transforming how those in developed regions access and share knowledge sources. As we have seen with the creation of Salman Khan’s Academy, mobile and cloud-based learning is providing a first opportunity for many in developing regions to have access to basic education and information while the Khan model has encouraged many Western education policy practitioners to reevaluate the current education model.

Professor Motlik’s working paper is important to this discussion in considering how and where innovative approaches to education and mobile learning can take root best on the international stage. A central premise of Motlik’s paper is that there is great promise for the use of mobile phones in education in Africa through SMS delivery because SMS has already proved to be cost-effective, efficient, and has received a high level of adoption.

While Professor Motlik and many other advocates of mobile learning outline the many benefits of the global grid and increased interconnectedness, we should consider some of the obstacles to practical delivery of learning via mobile devices in the developing regions of the world.  Many in developing countries have adopted mobile technology, but with infrastructural deficits and high levels of illiteracy, mobile does not sufficiently broaden access to education. Moreover, access to internet technology and the cost of open curricula make it difficult for larger scale adoption. With infrastructure deficits in many developing countries, what are the available infrastructures to guarantee mobile learning? What should the level of readiness be for open and distance learners with mobile learning?  

---

[1] http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/564/1039ch

Are the Trends already making an Impact?

In CIA article, which is admittedly an older article, the impact of global crises on the United States has already been seen with Syria in the past week. With the British Parliament and United Nations already refusing to take military action the Obama Administration has been forced to go to Congress in order to seek approval to take military action themselves. 

If this sort of instability becomes a new norm in not just the arabian peninsula, but also sub-Saharan Africa, I doubt the United States will be able to continue to make an impact through government/military intervention and remain a global super power. I would argue that there is a vacuum for nation building that could be more in-tune with the needs of the populations and not just US/Western interests.

Public Transporation and Technology

The upward trend of governments, businesses, and nonprofits collaborating together to improve services and products through social innovation is one that benefits a variety of people. Pittsburgh's public transportation woes are not getting any better with drastically reduced bus lines and one of the highest bus fares in the country.  Carnegie Mellon's Traffic21 is a perfect example of social innovation used to implement "a novel solution to a social problem that is more effective, efficient......for which the value created accrues primarily to society as a whole rather than private individuals." (Stanford Social Innovation Rediscovering Social Innovation)


As a student who frequently uses PAT bus to get around town, a frequent annoyance of mine is when a bus zooms right by the stop due to being at capacity. If another bus with the same route were to arrive in 5 - 10 minutes this would not be as irritating. However, sometimes one has to wait another 30 - 40 minutes for the same bus.  A more efficient scheduling system during peak bus times would eliminate this problem. Traffic21 is working on a bus scheduling and stops study which will hopefully aid PORT authority workers to appropriately plan bus routes and time. In the meantime, CMU developers created the application, Tiramisu which uses crowdsourced information to tell riders if the next approaching bus has availability. Specifically the app informs riders if the bus has: "many seats, few seats, bus is full". This application helps people plan their days more effectively.

The hope is that PORT Authority will be able to use new technology to plan a more efficient operation which will be cost-effective to the needs of their organization, subsequently benefiting riders with a transit system that rivals that with more transit friendly cities.


Sources:
Miller, Dale "Rediscovering Social Innovation" Stanford Social Innovation Review Fall 2008

Daley, Lauren "Dude, where's my bus: CMU-developed transit app will help riders find a ride and a seat" August, 4, 2011. http://www.pghcitypaper.com/pittsburgh/dude-wheres-my-bus-cmu-developed-transit-app-will-help-riders-find-a-ride-and-a-seat/Content?oid=1397996

non-profit vs social enterprise vs for-profit

By the time you reach graduate school, it's expected that you know what you want to do with your life, and you know what career path you want to follow. When I was preparing to apply for grad schools, I I thought I wanted to get involved in some sort of non-profit management. While researching the program at Heinz College, I stumbled upon something “new” called a “social enterprise.” While it turns out there's some debate about what exactly constitutes a social enterprise, it was clear that it was some sort of middle ground between a typical non-profit organization and typical for-profit business. I knew immediately that non-profit management was not what I'd be getting into, because in my mind, a social enterprise had all the benefits of a non-profit with even more advantages.

The more reading I did, the more comparisons I found between social enterprises and other for-profit companies. One good example is an article in the Harvard Business Review, “Every Business Is (Or Should Be) a Social Business (http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/01/every_business_is_or_should_be.html). The article claims exactly what you would expect from the name. It states that business models are essentially the same for social and non-social businesses, and even lists some examples of current social businesses running under a typical business model. What struck me most, however, was not the claims this article made.

For some reason, this article in particular made me question why there aren't more non-profits trying to be social enterprises. They surely exist, and maybe there's an answer out there and I just don't know enough about non-profits. But the burning question remains in my mind- Why isn't EVERY non-profit trying to make its own profit and stop relying on money that has to be spent in a very specific way?

Ummeli Provides Job Resource for BOP

The reading that stuck with me the most was "The Next 4 Billion." There is so much that is taken for granted that it seems almost inconsequential to complain about our daily obligations as students (tests, homeworks, job interviews, etc.) when the world is made up of people who barely earn enough to eat or acquire adequate shelter. As I read the course readings, two passages stood out:

"Addressing the unmet needs of the BOP is essential to raising welfare, 

productivity, and income—to enabling BOP households to find their own 

route out of poverty."

And

"Analysis of BOP markets can help businesses and governments think 

more creatively about new products and services that meet BOP needs 

and about opportunities for market-based solutions to achieve them."

Ummeli is an app to help impoverished communities develop a job sharing network. I wanted to write about this company because it is innovative, but it something that we as students take for granted (Heinz Career Navigator). Ummeli operates in impoverished communities via mobile phones. It allows tech savvy members of the community to find jobs and to ultimately help others find jobs. I found it intriguing that its mantra is Ubuntu, which is a proverb that states that translates to: I am what I am because of who we all are.

Ummeli is a social networking site for job posters, job seekers, and people seeking information on volunteering, training, and other career-related experiences. As we continue to learn about the BOP, and as I have talked to some economic professors about world economic markets (for example, Prof. Lee Branstetter) it is fact that emerging markets must become more innovative and allow its citizens to improve on their skills by becoming more employable and financially free.

Ummeli does have its restrictions because it is only accessible by users of cell phones. However, the app is free and has a strategic partnership with phone providers. It also looks at the culture of developing countries, which is often communal as opposed to the individualistic approach to job searches that occur in the Western world.

On its website, it claims: Ummeli disrupts the colonial-inspired, individualistic job-culture which does not work for Africa and fosters the spirit of Ubuntu ("I am what I am because of who we all are") resulting in the creation of a supportive community of young job-seekers and entrepreneurs.

Private sector provides insight: Incorporating customer needs into social innovation

The article about “Human-centered design” basically tells us: certain processes developed in the private sector can facilitate the perfection of social innovation as to reach more people in need. The “Frugal engineering” article emphasized the same theme: understanding the customers.

It is a key concept in the private sector that products, no matter how fancy, are nothing without getting customer recognition. This idea can be borrowed to the social innovation arena that “market research” should be carried out to identify the “target customers”.

I found more blogs and articles that kind of delved more into this topic, providing more examples and illustration.

1.

These three blogs talked about: In what ways can businesses be a source of social innovation?

1) New products, services or markets;

2) Environmental stewardship;

3) Social well-being of their employees and the communities in which they operate.

http://www.strategies-direction.com/business-as-a-source-of-social-innovation-part-1-new-products-services-or-markets/

http://www.strategies-direction.com/business-as-a-source-of-social-innovation-part-2-environmental-stewardship/

http://www.strategies-direction.com/business-as-a-source-of-social-innovation-part-3-social-well-being/

Take-Away here:

Many successful companies adopt inclusive market strategies to target neglected segments in the society. Social innovations can learn from these cases, especially how they developed a way of studying customers and expanding market.

2.

Social innovation: Creating products for those at the bottom of the pyramid

http://knowledge.insead.edu/csr/social-entrepreneurship/creating-products-for-those-at-the-bottom-of-the-pyramid-1957

Quote: When creating innovative, new products for markets at the base of the pyramid, Peter White, Director of Global Sustainability at Procter & Gamble, notes that cost alone is not the issue. “It’s not just about making consumer products cheaper,” he says. “You’ve got to come up with products that actually meet the specific needs at the bottom of the pyramid.  How do you design products that people need? You have to actually go and find out, and so we send researchers to find out how people live – how they do their washing, their cleaning (and) what are their problems.”

Take-away here:

This article mentioned other key features of a successful social innovation other than low costs, including:

1)   Access

2)   Partnership

3)   Distribution channels

4)   Sustainable models

Resulting from years of practice, business models got mature and functional. A lot of the models and factors can actually foster thoughts and improvements in social innovations.

Here’s my question:

Just as the second article said: a growing number of global companies are being drawn to the seductive idea that money can be made by developing and marketing products for those at the bottom of the pyramid. How to make sure the money we make from the poor does not override the good we do for them? Is there a boundary between using them and helping them? Are we gonna face resistance because of this? Or at least how can we make a win-win situation?

Prototyping as you innovate

When striving for social innovation, the process for creating new ideas and products must be approached with care. Otherwise, great ideas may fall to the wayside because of poor design (numerous examples can be seen at http://www.baddesigns.com/index.html). Too often products for business, government and/or social enterprises turn into a waste of resources or perform in a suboptimal manner. Take, for example, the clean water in India that cannot be carried because of the shape of the container (http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/design_thinking_for_social_innovation/). Or how often have you pushed a door when it should be pulled?

Before these products were built and produced on a mass scale, they should have seen multiple user tests. As designers we cannot predict how something will be used, handled, or treated. Paper prototyping is a cheap and easy way to test a product, well before you have spent many resources to build it. Draw out your application, give it ‘pieces’ and ‘buttons’ with separate parts of paper, and show it to a user. Test what task they can accomplish and how.

A clean and cheap water supply in India may alleviate many health dangers. However, if the residents will not use the water then there is no purpose. Use cardboard to design the water container, weigh it down with rocks to the appropriate weight, and hand it to a local Indian woman. The design flaw could have been caught right then and there.

It’s also important to think about the end users of the products and how that affects the testers. With the water example, the gender of the user proves important because usually the men are working all day. Men tend to be stronger than women so it would be necessary to give the women a water-heavy container.

Through this process, you may also discover additional ideas that could be even better. You can think about something for a long time, but seeing a user in action will always provide a new perspective.

How Engineers Without Borders taught me Design Thinking

Before I made the decision to go back to school for my Master’s Degree, I was a volunteering member with the Pittsburgh Chapter of the non-profit organization called “Engineers Without Border” also known by its acronym “EWB.”  For those blog readers who never heard of EWB a few common answers to a few common questions are: Yes, EWB is somewhat similar with the well-known “Doctors Without Borders” in the sense our mission is to provide basic human needs to developing communities around the world.  No, EWB has no association with Doctors Without Borders.  We just kindly borrowed a portion of their name. But I digress….

At EWB, we utilize our engineering skills to partner with developing communities in developing a solution for their specific basic human needs problem; example problems would be gaining access to clean water, clean sanitation, etc.  Such projects seem simple and expect to have a straight forward solution: need access to water then provide a pumping system, need clean water then provide a filtrating system, and many more a sets of standard problem with a standard solution.  Though when factoring the differences of cultures both social and economic between middle-class engineers from the US and let’s say an indigenous village living in 12,000 feet above sea-level in the Andes living on less than $2.00 a day……simple becomes more and more complex.

There is a story we tell at EWB to new joining volunteer members.  The story begins with a EWB chapter who partnered with a small village in South America on a water supply project.  The EWB chapter flew to the small village in South America to survey the lands, meet with the villagers, and gain a better understanding of problems the village was having in obtaining their daily water.  The EWB chapter learned that it took an hour each day to walk to the water well and back and that the village would benefit from an affordable water supply system that would eliminate the hourly daily walk.  The EWB chapter then returned back to the US, reviewed all the data they collected, and designed a gravity fed water supply system that provided water faucet to each hut. 

Several months later, EWB returned to the village to build the gravity fed water supply system.   The gravity fed system was simple, affordable, reliable, easy to maintain, and provided everyone water.  EWB returned home knowing the water system was a complete success!  However, when the EWB chapter returned to the village a year later for post-implementation survey trip they were surprised to see that each and every water faucet was broken.  How could this be? Where in their design did they go wrong? Baffled, EWB continued with their post work surveys though this time meet with the women villagers separately than the male villagers - something EWB had not done in their previous surveys.  It was in this survey that EWB learned that collecting water was how the women socialized with each other.  EWB’s design of bringing a water faucet to each hut unknowingly eliminated this very important social ritual. The women collectively decided to break the faucets.  It was the “Aha! Moment” - when the EWB chapter began to comprehend a perfect design becomes irrelevant when it’s in conflict with the needs of the people it is intended to help - the basis of Design Thinking.

As an Engineer, I have studied how to read a specification on a request or problem, digest it, and then develop a solution built to specification.   But as a volunteer with EWB, I have learned the importance of incorporating “design thinking” or what we commonly refer to as the “human factor” into my designs.  How to watch for human behaviors outside what is written on the specification paper and it has made me become a better engineer.

So what become of the village and the water supply project? The story ends with the EWB chapter changing the water supply design, removing the water faucets and  incorporating a water tank in middle of the village for which the women could still meet.  A final successful design. 

Social Enterprise in Tanzania

The Forbes magazine article titled "The Young African Millionaire Lighting Up Tanzania" (http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2013/08/01/the-young-african-millionaire-lighting-up-tanzania/2/) profiles Patrick Ngowi, a 28 year-old Tanzania who has made a fortune providing solar energy.  The article discusses his early business ventures, starting off  as a cell phone vouchers sales man and moving up to selling high tech phones.  He began both of these ventures with small loans from his family, and after traveling to Asia saw that the real opportunity was in solar energy.  Since getting into the energy sector he has amassed a significant fortune, and has brought power to a part of the world in great need.  

This article fits very well with our discussions from last week, and our readings for this week.  To start, we spent half of a class period discussing whether or not it is appropriate for a social entrepreneur to receive a high pay.  Ngowi, described by Forbes to be a millionaire by the age of 28 has certainly collected a hefty pay check for his work with solar energy, but I believe he can still be seen as a social entrepreneur.  When Ngowi started to develop his business plan for solar energy, only 10% of Tanzania had access to the national power grid, and by providing renewable energy he was able to broaden access to electricity in a sustainable manner.  This would have huge benefits for the society, as access to reliable and renewable energy is essential for development.

Ngowi also provides a great model for his small scale approach that he used to start off.  He was not a Bill Gates, developing new technologies in his garage, but saw an opportunity where others saw nothing.  His initial business was to make cell phone vouchers more accessible to the public.  In Tanzania, as in many parts of the developing world, people use cell phones without data plans.  Instead of plans they rely on vouchers that can be purchased on the street at low costs ($5).  This allows them to use their phones, but keeps the costs low by not locking them into a high cost, automatically renewed plan.  Ngowi noticed that it was inconvenient for many segments of the population to get their vouchers, so by making it easier for them he made profit for himself and provided a solution for a social problem.  The same can be said of his approach to developing his solar energy company.  He did not develop a new technology, he provided a necessary service to the population.

I have already made it clear that I think Ngowi is deserving of the high compensation and accolades he has received for his work.  At the end of the article he states that he wants to see his company become a $100 million company in the next 5 years.  I think that to achieve that would be a a great accomplishment, and would provide an admirable model for others to follow.  The idea of social enterprise that we have discussed in class has primarily been on a smaller scale.  Can we still view Ngowi and his solar energy as a social enterprise if he is turning a profit of $100 million?  Should he start an innovation-based non-profit or other socially-conscious spinoff?

Frugal Engineering and Innovation According to Who?

     I think that there is a problem with trying to tie in or tout frugal engineering as a social innovation venture. Basically, equating the change or management of social development as a market transaction puts the power of social innovation in the hands of entities that based are based on making a profit instead of any sort of social redesign. For example, the article "The Importance of Frugal Engineering" touts Tata Motors' Nano as a great invention that will put so many more Indians behind the wheel. This is great if the end goal is for everyone to be driving. There are some great benefits to having a major increase in mobility, but do they outweigh the costs of putting millions more into an unsustainable, fossil-fuel based system, and is there innovation going on or simply a replication of the development process seen in the most developed nations? What makes the Indian market different than what's been done before? I see developments like this as another pipeline of money that flows toward a concentrated core of enterprises and one that perpetuates an adherence to the same set of ideas that has manufactured dramatic and increasing socioeconomic inequalities elsewhere. There seems to be a very mixed bag of solutions to immediate needs in the developing world, many of which are short-sighted.

     There are no doubt some innovations, such as mobile telephony, that have revolutionized the way developing economies do business and the speed at which cultural ideas and norms spread. What I am wary of is how these technologies are used to push social change. How many new technologies or social platforms come out of the countries that need them the most, and are created by those who need them? It might be a cynical view, but I think so much of social innovation that is heralded as a triumph is a means of casting the producer/consumer relationship in a friendlier light. With so many billion potential customers, why wouldn't every major corporation be clamoring to establish early market share?

     The bigger picture that I would like to see addressed by social  innovation and frugal engineering is "how much is enough?" The American standard of living is far beyond unsustainable, yet that seems to be the stereotype of success. Frugal engineering should focus on a sustainable stable-state rather than breeding a dependence on consumption to fuel itself.

Source:
Sehgal, Vikas; Dehoff, Kevin; and Panneer, Ganesh "The Importance of Frugal Engineering." strategy+business. May 25, 2010.

Altruism and Ineffiency in Design Thinking

1. Altruism in Inspiration Space

As the motive of social innovation is altruism rather than profit-making (Rediscovering Social Innovation by James A. Phills Jr., Kriss Deiglmeier, and Dale T. Miller, 2008), I think the bottom line of design thinking is also genuine heart toward underprivileged people not financial return. If money was the first and foremost drive of design thinking, I don’t think ‘design thinkers’ could go through inspiration space for a long period.
  
During inspiration space, innovators conduct a lot of close examination to discover what people’s actual needs are. However, it is done by “watching what people do (and do not do) and listen to what they say (and do not say)” (Change by Design by Tim Brown with Barry Katz, 2011), rather than by conventional methods like survey or academic research (Design Thinking for Social Innovation by Tim Brown and Jocelyn Wyatt, 2010). Basically, innovators have to stay with them, live with them, and understand them, because “the only way we [innovators] can get to know them is to seek them out where they live, work, and play for an intensive period of observation” (Change by Design by Tim Brown with Barry Katz, 2011).

In this sense, I think inspiration space necessitates innovators’ humble, compassionate, and altruistic mind in finding right systematic solutions, diffusion methods, and distribution channels. Innovators have to take a close look at the clients’ society, to be more specific, culture, history, religion, governance, and tradition, as we talked in class, by living with them and speaking to them as partners, not as seller-and-buyer relationship. If it were only for finding a niche market or Blue Ocean, they would have not finished inspiration space.
 
2. Any Better Efficient Ways for Ideation Space?

The article titled Design Thinking for Social Innovation mentions that “to have a good idea you must first have lots of ideas”, and it is good to “have a diverse group of people involved in the process”, namely, “multidisciplinary people”(Tim Brown and Jocelyn Wyatt, 2010). However, I also think that there are shortcomings in this - this process will require a lot of time, effort, and energy to communicate with people from different backgrounds and even to understand what exact meaning of all these ideas, because multidisciplinary people would have different norms and terms. Would there be any efficient ways to overcome this possible problem so innovators can reach optimal systematic solutions more effectively and efficiently?
 

Social Innovation based on human centered design thinking

Title: David Kelley: Human-centered design

Social innovation is a solution to social problems related to groups of people or communities. This solution should help people or communities handle their issues. Also, since new technologies and solutions are developed and used by humans, social innovations or solutions should be based on human centered thinking.

People like new solutions or technologies that make their life easier. However, getting a great idea for solutions is difficult and takes a lot of time. For example, Apple's first mouse and iPhone's one touch button look simple. If people had thought the design of those product is simple, why did people not develop one button mouses and phones before Apple? If some people had developed one button mouses and phones before Apple, they would have taken the first mover advantages. The bottom line is that simple designs are not simple. In this blog, I want to share some guides on how to apply human centered design thinking.

According to Fred Dust and Michael Maness, the future relies on changes you make now (Hu, 2013). Compared to the past, we use smartphones to check emails and make payments. We do not need to sit in front of computer monitors and type the keyboard. Instead, we touch screen of phones. In rural areas, we can make changes by setting up a wireless router and providing Wi-Fi phones so that people in remote areas can communicate with one another within LAN. 

In addition, Fred and Michael said, “don’t ask them, observer them.” Spending time with users and observe their behaviors continuously will give a chance to get to know more about them. Based on this observation, social innovators can find ideas to be applicable to communities of the users. This way will work. If I ask my friend what he or she wants, they say what they might want not what they really want. Thus, instead of asking them what they want, observing them is more viable ways to find their needs.

Lastly, human centered design is the answer for all product design. When we develop a new product, we conduct market, user, and product analysis to identify needs of customers and the level of competitiveness of market. Marketing, designs and technical solutions are aimed at individuals, groups, and communities. In other words, new innovations or solutions with human centered design thinking are more likely to be successful and appealing to people because they care about how people react and what they want.

*IDEO partner Fred Dust joined Kinght Foundation Vice President/Journalism and Media Innovation Michael Maness

Works Cited

Hu, Elise. "Knight Foundation."Knight Foundation. Kinght Foundation, 11 Feb. 2013. Web.

03 Sept. 2013. <http://www.knightfoundation.org/blogs/knightblog/2013/2/11/how-human-centered-design-thinking-can-transform-community-media/>.

Sustainable Economic Development

Ernesto Sirolli, founder of the Sirolli Institute, recently gave a Tedx Talk refuting many common methods of providing aid to developing countries. While sustainable development, encompassing ideas such as design thinking and frugal engineering, has been gaining popularity in recent years, charitable donations remain the most common type of aid.

Sirolli emphasizes the importance of building personal relationships within the community to better understand cultural norms and expectations. In essence, he argues that the people with the need will have the best understanding both of the problem at hand and the potential solutions. In his talk, Sirolli makes the point that the person who has the idea for a solution does not need to possess the tools to implement said solution. This gap between first-hand experience and sophisticated knowledge is where collaboration can do the most good. Sending skilled workers to areas in need, not to implement solutions thought up by foreigners thousands of miles away, but to work side-by side with locals to develop unique innovations that can work in a given cultural context is where the most potential for truly sustainable development lies.

My experience as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Ukraine confirms Sirolli's argument. It took nearly a year of cultural integration and intensive Russian language lessons to establish an identity within the community. Until this level of mutual understanding and trust was reached, any project I attempted was either immediately rejected or failed soon after implementation. While this was frustrating, I realized that it was absurd to think that I, a recent college graduate with little practical experience, could come in and tell teachers with over 30 years of experience how to "better" do their jobs. Ultimately, our most successful endeavors came as a result of mutual compromise and cooperation. It is easy to find evidence that the most successful projects include capacity-building, not just donations, as a key component.

One example of this type of project is Eastern Rinok, an online Etsty marketplace where Ukrainian artisans can sell their homemade products both domestically and internationally. Before joining the marketplace, participants take part in trainings to learn how to market their products, as well as how to successfully run a small business. These trainings were initially done by Peace Corps Volunteers, but are now increasingly led by other Ukrainians in the community. As more Ukrainians are trained to both sell their products and to become leaders in program, the project can continue to expand and thrive long after the initial founders are gone. The ultimate goal of any aid organization is to no longer be needed in the community it serves, and this is one example where that goal is being met.

The main issue with Sirolli's vision of sustainable development is the difficulty of implementation. Significant time, labor, and fieldwork are needed to establish the types of on-the-ground partnerships Sirolli advocates. A one-time donation, while unlikely to adequately address the need, requires much less planning and labor capital. The question remains: how can we encourage governments and organizations to move toward sustainable development when it remains so much easier to just throw money at the problem?

Social Innovation: How do we ensure Human-Centered Design wins over capitalism?

While reflecting on the articles we read, I see the growing conversation about Social Innovation for emerging markets and a shift to low-cost Human-Centered Design as a tremendous opportunity for economic empowerment-based community development. However, I have several reservations about the long-term evolution of this previously uncharted territory and the subsequent implications of integrating emerging markets into a capitalist model.

I am only too thrilled to think about the tremendous impact that improving serious problems in developing regions of the world, from transportation to health, security, education, etc. The opportunities for social justice through innovation in these regions are seemingly endless, as there are unintended applications which can build on and inspire new innovations. However, my cynicism catches up with me, and I begin to wonder when, how, and if these markets will be taken over by the ideals of capitalism, and how—if and when that time comes—to ensure that the focus is still on sustainable opportunities for these emerging regions to empower their own livelihood.

I worry about the social costs and implications. While the articles clearly outline that the low-cost designs are build with the involvement of locals and through the observation of routine life in the emerging economy, I am still left wondering how often the locals were invited to brainstorm with the innovation and design team. Human centered design can produce remarkable innovations, and when build from the ground-up they will be affordable—but what about inherent biases of the innovators? What about the social-cultural context that the innovations are being built for? Certainly, the contributions of locals in the design discussion will help balance any unintended westernization or cultural erosion—but how do we secure that in the long term? Once a low-cost innovation exists, surely competitors will come to the market. The articles explained that the consumers in emerging markets are highly discerning, and expect high quality for low cost. How do we ensure that this remains a non-negotiable? I worry about product literacy and truly informed decision-making.  I am left wondering when elements of a competing capitalist economy will negatively impact the cultural standards for trade and commerce. Perhaps I’m jaded, but I fear the day we inadvertently destroy culture and replace it with a false idea of globalization.

Take for instance, the social impact of Television on the women of Fiji --(you can find a number of articles, I just selected the study for the sake of this discussion). Granted--this was not a social innovation; this was the transplant of the Western experience of TV straight into Fiji. However, as we build progress through social innovations, I seriously hope that Human-Centered Design can combat the inherent ethnocentric bias and the unintended influence of a pseudo-Imperialism. There is no Institutional Review Board (used in research to approve a research study as ethical) for social innovation and I am terrified of the day that we move beyond what seems to be a socially-conscious way to empower developing regions of the world.

I suppose my fear is based on the idea that this conversation is seen through the lens of economics. As a self-proclaimed idealist and social justice advocate, it makes me wary to hear that the conversation about social innovation is still build on a consumer model. Think about it—the global citizens that social innovation seeks to empower are reduced to “consumers”;  it will effectively limit the ability to create significant dialogue and social progress to a mere material exchange with no real safeguard for ethical practices.


Source Documents:

Big Data from Cheap Phones (Talbot, D., Technology Review, 2013). <http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/513721/big-data-from-cheap-phones/>

Design Thinking for Social Innovation (Brown, and Wyatt, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2010, pgs. 30-35). <www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/design_thinking_for_social_innovation/>

Eating behaviours and attitudes following prolonged exposure to television among ethnic Fijian adolescent girls. Becker, A., Burwell, R., Herzog, D., Hamburg, P., and Gilman, S. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 2002. <http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/6/509.long>

IDEO’s Human Centered Design Toolkit; www.ideo.com/work/item/human- centered-design-toolkit/

Long-Term Global Demographic Trends: Reshaping The Geopolitical Landscape (CIA, July 2001). <www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports- 1/index.html>

The Importance of Frugal Engineering (Sehgal, Dehoff, and Panneer, Strategy+Business, Summer 2010). <www.strategy-business.com/article/10201?gko=24674>

The Next 4 Billion: Market Size and Business Strategy at the Base of the Pyramid (Hammond et al., International Finance Corporation and World Resources Institute, 2007). <www.wri.org/publication/the-next-4-billion>

What Happens Next? Five Crucibles of Innovation That Will Shape The Coming Decade (Bisson et al., McKinsey Special Report, 2010). 

China's aging population are calling for social reforms and innovations

When I read the report of "long-term global demographic trend: reshaping geopolitical landscape",one of the key findings caught my eye,"For China, a large and growing urban population coupled with a looming aging population could mean slower economic growth, increased political instability, and perhaps significant cultural changes."

Aging population is becoming one of the most important problems in China, posing serious challenges to various areas such as economy,health care, social insurance, and even global trade.

Undoubtedly, China's economy is emerging rapidly in recent years, it's becoming the center of the world's attention not only because of its economy share and growth, but also because of its huge population.In fact, China has enjoyed inexpensive labor force for many decades, which enables it to be a competitive outsource supplier in global trade.However, with the looming consequences of one-child policy,the workforce in China is shrinking, and the falling fertility rate and increasing life expectancy have resulted in a rapidly aging population.Just as one of the reporters quoted:"China is getting old before getting rich."

From an internal perspective, aging population in China will give rise to problems in pension provision, health care system,social insurance reform and governmental budget management.Less young adults are shouldering with more economic burdens and responsibilities,and to make the matter worse, large amounts of labor force are flooding into big cities, leaving parents and grandparents alone at home without being taken care of.And the skewed sex ratio is also becoming more and more obvious in society,adding to complexity of the situation of population in China.

From an external perspective,these influences brought by aging population in China will undoubtedly effect international trade and economic development.No one can make indisputable predictions about the future when one of the world's most influential country is becoming old and slow.

However, the road leading to success is always full of setbacks and obstacles. In this moment, brave social reforms should be made and creative innovations based on human need should be carried out.

Personally, I think that health care and social insurance would be very potential areas to develop.Advanced technologies could be creatively applied to old people's special needs,medical and pharmaceutical companies can find a large market in China, government and NPOs and private sectors can join hands together.Of course, things are easier said than done, how to tackle the aging problem in China in a systematical way that can both ensure economic development and social welfare? This really deserves much thought.

Sources:

http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/?fa=52309

http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/China's_Aging_Population

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2012/oct/01/china-elderly-population-pensions-rethink

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/496864/20130805/china-one-child-policy-end-population-ageing.htm

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1250039/unprecedented-study-seeks-assess-challenges-chinas-ageing-population

http://www.helpage.org/blogs/meredith-wyse-19803/shocking-statistics-on-chinas-ageing-population-572/

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/charls0530.pdf

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19630110

Share Our Strength and KaBOOM!- Two Successful Social Foundations

While searching on the internet, I ran into an article by Bill Shore (the founder and CEO of Share Our Strength), Darell Hammond (the founder and CEO of KaBOOM!) and Amy Celep (the president and CEO of Community Wealth Partners) in the Stanford Social Innovation Review Magazine which might give an insight on what motivates social foundations, how they work and how they succeed in tackling social problems. (http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/when_good_is_not_good_enough)

The article is about two successful non-profit US organizations that are trying to deal with: hunger and lack of opportunity to play. How their founders were inspired, what they targeted at and what they did better than other similar non-profit organizations are touched upon.

Share Our Strength is tackling with hunger whereas KaBOOM! is struggling with the lack of opportunities to play. Unlike other non-profit foundations, they focused on the underlying set of problems rather than the symptom. They looked beyond short-term achievements and focused on long-term outcomes that will ultimately solve social problems.

Inspired by the news about thousands of Ethiopians expected to die soon from famine that was on the Washington Post, Bill Shore founded Share Our Strength in 1984. Share Our Strength has raised and invested more than $376 million. Much of the focus was on the entrepreneurial ways to generate funds rather than on how it used the funds to advance its mission.

Similarly, KaBOOM! was founded in 1995, when Darell Hammond came into a story about two children who suffocated while playing in a car because they didn’t have anywhere else to play in The Washington Post. They focused on building, improving, and opening playgrounds by mobilizing communities and engaging the corporate sector to fund and volunteer to support the work.

Despite the novelty and satisfaction of the organizational growth, Share Our Strength and KaBOOM!’s efforts were reaching only a fraction of those in need. Later on, they delved deeper into the problems and succeeded in tackling these problems.

Share Our Strength designed and lead a national campaign called “No Kid Hungry”. The campaign suggested that kids are not hungry because of a lack of food or effective programs, but because they lack access to nutrition programs such as school breakfasts and food stamps. So, their focus became helping kids in need access to these programs. Gaining confidence from their stakeholders, they attracted more investment which helped them add children in need to public nutrition programs.

At KaBOOM! the story was similar. Despite its growth, they weren’t solving the problem completely. KaBOOM! initially only built more places for kids to play; but the important thing is how society values and engages in play. Many playgrounds are empty most of the time, active play is disappearing in America, kids are spending more than eight hours a day in front of a screen. Afterwards, what makes KaBOOM! more successful is addressing the complexity of the issue by creating transformational change. They developed new strategies to inspire the importance of play in kids’ live. For example, they are launching a new initiative that will reward individuals taking action to make their communities more playful.