Appropedia’s Travel Intern Program Initiative: Dock to doc

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all the organizations that are working to reduce poverty and help us live both richly and sustainably had the resources to share their best ideas and practices? Of course! (Okay, maybe that was too easy. )

(Port of Callao, Peru by Jim O'Hagan, via Mediawiki Commons)

But we know that most of these organizations are already overcommitted and that thoroughly documenting a project is a big job. Meanwhile, there are lots of folks that want to help make the world a better place, and are quite willing to travel as part of the effort.  But very often the willing traveler is no more knowledgeable than local workers, and so it is hard to justify traveling in-country to lend a hand.

Aha moment.

Juxtaposing these tensions provides a nice little epiphany. Traveling interns can make excellent documenters.  Documenting great projects at Appropedia helps all parties.  The traveling intern learns a ton.  The host project gets some deserved recognition and awareness.  The broader community gets to see well-written, in-depth information that will, ultimately, get categorized, linked and translated for greatest usefulness.

To this end, Appropedia has begun prototyping our Travel Internship program.  Appropedia’s first travel intern, Isabell (Liz) Kimbrough, is already in-country in Peru. She has already coordinated with some partners, but still has room in her itinerary to visit (and document) other projects in Peru (June), Ecuador (July), Colombia (July)  and Panama (August).  And so, we hereby launch the Travel Intern Initiative to invite everyone to help make Isabell’s trip better.  We also want to prepare for broader participation in (and promotion of) our Travel Intern program later this year, so that you can head for the dock, and get your documentation thing on.

Please take a look at these pages to learn more about the program, and find ways you can help it have the most impact:

  • See Isabell’s itinerary to learn where she’s going, or add a potential project or partner for her or a future Travel Intern.
  • Would you (or a friend)  like to be a Travel Intern? Practice writing articles and show your stuff! And check out the application process.
  • How can we make the Travel Intern program better?  Leave a note on this page, or a leave a comment on this blog post!
  • Visit the Travel Intern Initiative launch page for more details.

Please help us spread the word about this program.  Use Twitter, Facebook or your blog to share it with potential interns or partners.  If you’re as excited as we are about this program, and have an hour a week to help out, consider a stint stewarding this Initiative!

Appropedia takes the Initiative!

Appropedia has grown rapidly in multiple dimensions since our early days, and especially in the past several months.   Both the volume and range of activity at Appropedia.org is up significantly.  We have content translation activity, content porting activity, partnership activity and site technology development activity all expanding in parallel. Twitter and Facebook communities have grown dramatically as well.

In addition to all the active participants, we have a lot of eager supporters that haven’t yet identified the best way to engage. We get notes like “I love what you’re doing!  What can I do to help?”  And for every explicit offer, we know there are many more unspoken.  To make better use of all this pent up energy and goodwill, we are beginning a new program for engaging volunteers, both new and veteran.

And so, without further ado, allow us to introduce <drum roll> Appropedia Initiatives!

The Appropedia Initiatives program is an open-ended series of specific activities that will benefit a lot from community engagement.  Each Initiative will be designed to attract a critical mass of contributions and enthusiasm, in order to build momentum on a particular topic or practice.  We know that our community of supportive people has a great variety of skills, and we envision a broad variety of Initiatives to engage as many people as we can.  Some Initiatives will be focused on the Appropedia.org site (either content or technology), and others will be more community oriented.  Essentially, Initiatives are ordinary Appropedia activities that are likely to have some broad interest. Like most things at Appropedia, users input and ideas will define the path for the Initiatives program.  To get things started we have about three Initiatives lined up, and a bunch of loose concepts semi-identified.

Our first Initiative is very timely.  We quietly began prototyping a “Travel Intern” program a few weeks ago, and there are several ways that the Appropedia community can help.  We will launch that Initiative very shortly and a few weeks later we will launch Number 2.  Each new Initiative will be highlighted on the Appropedia main page, and we will do community outreach in the form of blog posts and tweets to make sure that every gets a chance to see it.  Naturally, we welcome your help in passing the word, and identifying people, partners and resources appropriate for each Initiative.

The goal is for each Initiative to take on a life of its own and to continue for months beyond its initial moment in the spotlight.  To make sure that fledgling Initiatives have a good chance, we’re asking that each Initiative should have some semi-committed support in the form of a “Initiative steward” who will shepherd the activity for at least 3 months.  Through the magic of open collaboration and search-engine-optimization, an Initiative that gets off to a solid start will stand a good chance of gathering other support.  Check out the provisional guidelines for Appropedia Initiatives and see whether your favorite topic or project might be a good candidate for an Initiative.  If so, create a launch page and add your Initiative to the list!

Thank you all in advance for your help and support!

Experiencing Joy and Power

I hope you’ll indulge me for a moment; this post is more personal than my usual content.

This past weekend, I participated in a group retreat (more details here) that I engaged in for two specific reasons.  I wanted to experience more joy in my life (which is already fantastic), and I wanted to eliminate my internal barriers to leadership that I have recognized impede my participation at Appropedia.

Well, I have good news to report!  My connection to Joy has become a vast channel, and my acceptance of my own Power is now deep and strong, where formerly it was very limited.  This blog post captures some of both for me, because I can feel the ecstasy and boldness in the content.

I want to share this joy and power with everyone in the Appropedia community, and express my appreciation to all of you for enabling Appropedia to do what it does.  Appropedia’s ability to manifest positive change in our world is clear to me, and I look forward to engaging much more fully (most visibly through more posts, but in other ways as well).

I invite you all to join me in experiencing the Joy and Power that comes from using collaboration to build rich sustainable lives.

Saving the planet through personal choice

It is now 2010, only 40 years from the middle of this century, when (there seems to be consensus) we may reasonably hope that the human population will have stabilized in the neighborhood of 9 billion. That’s a huge number, to be sure, particularly since we were at 3 billion in 1960.  Take a look at the Wikipedia page on world population. Between 1750 and 1850, the population increased by ~60%.  From 1850 to 1950 we shot up ~100%, and between 1950 and 2050 even the “UN Low” projection shows an increase of roughly 200%.  From 60%, to 100%, to at least 200% and then… 0%? Or negative? Hard to believe, really.  Seems like 300% would be a fair prediction.  And yet this notion of flat-to-down world population are not merely wishful thinking; there is already strong evidence that population growth is decreasing and may be zero or negative in less than 50 years. Wow.

The on-the-ground realities behind these growth rate numbers reflect massive cultural changes. The explosion of humanity shows a certain kind of progress toward things most of us want: improved nutrition, lower infant mortality, longer lives, better disease prevention, etc, for ourselves and our families. What I’m saying is that the population boom was not the result of some effective world wide growth campaign, but a combination of technology improvements in agriculture and health, getting the word out, and  people making their own choices to adopt new methods.

Now we don’t have to be Thomas Malthus to imagine that untempered growth would be a bad thing in the long run, and that slowing the pace is vital to avoid all kinds of resource shortages, etc.  The growth came from people making predictable choices to take advantage of new options.  Is there any chance that we can somehow make use of the personal choice dynamic to bring us to the reduced growth?  Or will population be constrained through starvation and war driven by vast and excruciating shortages and through policies like compulsory sterilization?  Maybe “all of the above”?  It seems plain to me that the more that we can support and encourage the choice-based reduction in growth, the less we will face the tragedy of externally imposed reductions.

The Wikipedia page referenced above tells us that fertility is already falling regionally. Some of that reduction is the result of governance policies “encouraging” small families, but reduced growth is also present in areas without strict population policies.  Large groups of people are having fewer kids for their own reasons, making much different choices than their parents and grandparents did.   Much of that shift has occurred in the developed world.  It is also beginning in the developing world. The cultural changes that motivate lower fertility are multifaceted and include reduced infant mortality, improved education and literacy, the empowerment of women, and a shift from an agricultural model based on child labor.

How is such massive cultural change instigated or mediated?  How do we as individuals “choose our culture”?  We are not simply our parents children, nor did we learn everything in school (particularly not in areas where even primary education is not guaranteed).  Culture is not simply established by government or NGO educational programs, though these may help.   Few of us learned to use the internet in a classroom, and yet somehow that behavior has spread, pretty much through personal choice.  (By contrast, there’s at least some evidence that cellphone usage norms may be learned in school :-))

I’m convinced that rapid cultural change is mediated by a zillion small and large individual decisions based on our experience in a world undergoing rapid macroeconomic change.  Amidst turmoil and uncertainty, many will seek to take their destinies into their own hands to improve their situation by trying something new (nicely exemplified, as I’ve said before, by William Kamkwamba).  The people who are successful will be imitated.  If enough people can make the right kind of choices, we will have a chance to create a stable world through peaceful means.

But time is tight. Humanity must adopt new behaviors quickly to avoid the “hard landing” that it (and other species) will otherwise face in the presence of our current practices. Appropedia’s founders (myself among them) believe that we can have lives that are both rich and sustainable. Today, much of the rich world is not sustainable, and much of the sustainable world is not rich.  What can we learn from each other?

Global progress toward improving the human condition has always depended on technological advances coupled with a millions of individual choices.  Our current reinvention also depends on individuals exercising self determination in the presence of awareness, knowledge and insight.  Could we support the vital rapid reinvention through a massive information campaign?  Alternatively, how much will progress be impeded if practical information is hard to find? Wikipedia has shown that large scale voluntary information sharing campaigns are possible and relatively cheap.  Enlightened self interest shows that such a campaign is essential.

It’s a matter of personal choice…

Wikipedia makes me proud to be human

It’s true.  For all our faults, we humans have done something amazing at Wikipedia.  Sure, the folks on staff there deserve a bit of credit, but it’s the millions contributors like you and me that built that phenomenal resource.  And fast.  And it ain’t exactly done yet.  I just took a look at the English Wikipedia statistics page again.  Eleven million registered users.  Not bad.  Three million articles.  A whopping 350M page edits.  If the average edit takes a minute (gee, that seems short to me) then that’s at least 6M hours of work!  All done free for the rest of us to make use of.  And of course that’s just in English; I figure we oughta multiply by ten for all the other languages (and yeah, that seems low also). Equally amazing to me is that even the organizing structures and policies were all built organically by volunteers.  The approach has been “let’s try to find policies that will work.”  And, one way or another, 11M registered users (plus a bunch of anonymous users and some bots) managed to figure out how to work together, for free, to build something functional and useful.

So, yes, I marvel at the remarkable edifice that is Wikipedia, and I think it says something about what humans are capable of.  And yet, I’ve only made a few small edits there.  Instead, Wikipedia’s success motivated me to create my own wiki around how we humans can work together in practical ways to make lives better.  ( “WinWinWiki” got as big as 14 pages before I joined Chris and Lonny here at Appropedia, which had more pages,  maybe even 100.)   Appropedia’s  hard problem is that much of the information we value often resides nonverbally in people’s heads  and not on some web page.  Find the words to describe how to select the best local dirt for your earthen blocks takes some cleverness.  Consider something as “simple” as rainwater harvesting.  Wikipedia has a nice overview page on the topic, but they don’t provide enough information to build your own system.  Appropedia has a portal focused on rainwater harvesting, with lots of links to practical articles on actually doing some rainwater harvesting.  No doubt there are still unanswered questions, or regional variations that could be added.  Some of that info is hiding on the web somewhere, but some might be in your head.  Or in someone’s head who (gasp!) doesn’t spend much time on the internet, or perhaps doesn”t have regular access (at least for a couple of years).

Appropedia faces a lot of the same challenges that Wikipedia did, and  some different ones as well, but there’s one challenge Appropedia won’t face.  When Wikipedia was first getting started, many said it was impossible.  “Who’s going to spend the time?  How can content quality be maintained?  How will disputes be settled? If you let just any unregistered Schmo edit, it’ll be a spammer”s paradise. Yada yada, it’ll never work.”  But of course it has worked, amazingly well.  (Here’s a nice self referential article about that, and, for balance, a discussion of criticisms. I just love that.)  And since Wikipedia has been-there-done-that, the notion that Appropedia is impossible seems rather naive or even far-fetched.  The question is not “if” like-minded humans can build a large open library of practical and sustainable solutions, but “how” or “when”. I find that profoundly inspiring.

It’s why I’m here.  Oh, and I have a 6-year-0ld son.  He needs to understand what’s possible for humans to do by working together. When he’s my age (“39”), he’ll have another two billion people to share the planet with.  Maybe you can help me show him what we can do together?

Wikipedia makes me proud to be human

It’s true.  For all our faults, we humans have done something amazing at Wikipedia.  Sure, the folks on staff there deserve a bit of credit, but it’s the millions contributors like you and me that built that phenomenal resource.  And fast.  And it ain’t exactly done yet.  I just took a look at the English Wikipedia statistics page again.  Eleven million registered users.  Not bad.  Three million articles.  A whopping 350M page edits.  If the average edit takes a minute (gee, that seems short to me) then that’s at least 6M hours of work!  All done free for the rest of us to make use of.  And of course that’s just in English; I figure we oughta multiply by ten for all the other languages (and yeah, that seems low also). Equally amazing to me is that even the organizing structures and policies were all built organically by volunteers.  The approach has been “let’s try to find policies that will work.”  And, one way or another, 11M registered users (plus a bunch of anonymous users and some bots) managed to figure out how to work together, for free, to build something functional and useful.

So, yes, I marvel at the remarkable edifice that is Wikipedia, and I think it says something about what humans are capable of.  And yet, I’ve only made a few small edits there.  Instead, Wikipedia’s success motivated me to create my own wiki around how we humans can work together in practical ways to make lives better.  ( “WinWinWiki” got as big as 14 pages before I joined Chris and Lonny here at Appropedia, which had more pages,  maybe even 100.)   Appropedia’s  hard problem is that much of the information we value often resides nonverbally in people’s heads  and not on some web page.  Find the words to describe how to select the best local dirt for your earthen blocks takes some cleverness.  Consider something as “simple” as rainwater harvesting.  Wikipedia has a nice overview page on the topic, but they don’t provide enough information to build your own system.  Appropedia has a portal focused on rainwater harvesting, with lots of links to practical articles on actually doing some rainwater harvesting.  No doubt there are still unanswered questions, or regional variations that could be added.  Some of that info is hiding on the web somewhere, but some might be in your head.  Or in someone’s head who (gasp!) doesn’t spend much time on the internet, or perhaps doesn”t have regular access (at least for a couple of years).

Appropedia faces a lot of the same challenges that Wikipedia did, and  some different ones as well, but there’s one challenge Appropedia won’t face.  When Wikipedia was first getting started, many said it was impossible.  “Who’s going to spend the time?  How can content quality be maintained?  How will disputes be settled? If you let just any unregistered Schmo edit, it’ll be a spammer”s paradise. Yada yada, it’ll never work.”  But of course it has worked, amazingly well.  (Here’s a nice self referential article about that, and, for balance, a discussion of criticisms. I just love that.)  And since Wikipedia has been-there-done-that, the notion that Appropedia is impossible seems rather naive or even far-fetched.  The question is not “if” like-minded humans can build a large open library of practical and sustainable solutions, but “how” or “when”. I find that profoundly inspiring.

It’s why I’m here.  Oh, and I have a 6-year-0ld son.  He needs to understand what’s possible for humans to do by working together. When he’s my age (“39”), he’ll have another two billion people to share the planet with.  Maybe you can help me show him what we can do together?

Enabling the Windmill Bills

I had the good fortune to meet William Kamkwamba last Friday night as he and his co-author Bryan Mealer stopped in San Francisco at a private residence as part of their book tour for “The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind”. As the two took a few minutes to share a bit about William’s life, Bryan referred to William as “Windmill Bill.”  Fair enough, except that we soon learned there’s a lot more to William than windmills.  For example, he also built crude but effective power switches and even a circuit breaker to protect his home from risk due to the bare metal wiring he had used.

I’ve only just begun reading the book, and yet I’ve already been struck by several ways in which William’s story highlights the power of Appropedia’s vision.  William used available materials, mostly from a local junkyard, combined with insight from a high school physics text and a book on windmills, to construct his first windmill a few years ago.  William could not then read English, but painstakingly translated some sections of these books with some help from a local library. With his windmills, William has generated power to light his household, and pumped well water to supply his village of Wimbe, Malawi.  In the first chapter, William talks about how learning about science displaced a pattern of magical thinking.

The power of ideas and knowledge is immense.  William’s initiative and perseverance have fittingly won him a rare opportunity at the African Leadership Academy, where 200 other young Africans have the opportunity to get a phenomenal education.  Ideas and knowledge.  William certainly had limited educational resources when he first built his windmill.  100’s of  millions of others in developing nations, both school-aged and older, have even less. Many are working to expand access to libraries, but the task is huge and hard to scale. However, just as the developing world has been able to bypass the huge investment in landline phone technology, they may have alternatives to physical libraries.

In the coming 4 years, half a billion new Internet users will come online, a great many in developing countries. In the past year, shipments of data-enabled phones outnumbered simple SMS phones in Africa.  In ten years, even those in the developing world will begin to gain some access to the internet. That puts a library within reach of every inquisitive mind. Imagine what will happen when all the world’s Windmill Bills can read about useful ideas in their own language.

That is what the Appropedia community is working toward.

Reinvention: Good for us, bad for wheels

We in the Appropedia community frequently talk about the value of sharing sustainable solutions. “Let’s not reinvent the wheel” is the cliché that often pops up. Meanwhile, I’m keenly aware of the need for humans to reinvent they way we do things. We talk about reinventing just about everything (and usually it’s said like it’s a good thing): energy production, health care, government, transportation, and even international aid. We reinvent ourselves as individuals. My wife has written a book on reinventing strategy creation in business.

So why is one reinvention “good” and the other “not good”? I expect someone’s answered that already. If so, do please leave it in a comment.

My off-the-cuff answer is that reinvention to a new better never-before-seen thing is good, in theory. But inventing is risky – success is not certain. Reinventing things that already exist, like wheels or slow sand filters or solar vaccine refrigerators, is a poor use of resources when you can find a proven solution easily.

In the ancient history of, say, 15 years ago, it was a lot harder to uncover someone else’s clever idea, even if the inventor wanted to share it. Nowadays the sharing and finding have been solved (yay!). We can take advantage of that and reinvent our patterns of behavior away from reinvention and toward sharing and leveraging proven solutions.

So what useful invention, adaptation or optimization have you invented? Can you share it and save someone else the time in the weeds?

Small: Good? Bad? Yes! Perhaps…

I just finished reading Bill McKibben‘s “Deep Economy.”  LA Times regards the book at “mind expanding.”  It definitely had some compelling stories about the viability of local agriculture, and some nasty ones about megafarms and the staggering grip that ADM and Monsanto have on US (and to some degree, world) agriculture.  Sadly, his argument is largely anecdotal.  Sad, because in the end, I can’t tell if the argument holds water (even though my romantic side hopes he’s right).  He dismisses some classes of argument (economics, etc) when convenient, and then use that logic when it suits him.  That works fine if you’re not the sort of person who cares about details, but it tends to weaken the argument even further.  So despite his readability, he’s probably not going to change a lot of minds.  Even if he’s talking about some legit ideas.

Meanwhile, at the recent TED conference, I watched Louise Fresco sorta make bread while she talked about the progress in agricultural production.   She use Wonder bread to make a point that it represented the industrialization of agriculture, but that this was not such a bad thing, because it represented such a huge increase in production.  The idea of returning en masse to that artisan’s loaf model would mean a dramatic reduction in agricultural productivity, and doom huge numbers of people to starvation.  Bad. Poor land productivity can also lead to deforestation in the developing world.  Also bad.

So, Bill is basically telling us that small would be a lot better.  Louise tells us that small is a romantic notion that we should let go of, since going there would actually be a disaster.  Who is right, and who is wrong?

Trick question, of course.  It’s possible that both are right.  Or even that both are wrong.  Because they are not talking about the same small.  At least, that’s my conclusion after looking closely.  Bill wants us to be smaller than the massive mechanized and low labor farms common in the US.  He talks about perhaps doubling the labor content of food relative to those massive farms.  His anecdotes talked about relatively small farms with smaller equipment.  It may cost more (he acknowledges that) but can actually produce more food per acre using fewer chemicals.  This seems credible to me.  And although he often uses the term “locally grown”, he will also talk about regional food supplies, and talks about preference, not mandate.

Louise, on the other hand, was telling us that those hand-tilled farms of the good old days will not produce enough food to feed the planet.  And, having seen the village farming in Sierra Leone in January, I think she’s probably right also.  Louise also pooh-poohed the idea of locally grown food, arguing that regional would make much more sense.

I believe there is some midpoint that both could support.  Smaller than megafarm, but not as small as village farms.  Increase the labor content relative to highly mechanized US farms.  Increase the productivity, probably through modest mechanization, of the farmers and the land in developing nations.   Senegal, for example, is more mechanized and more productive than Sierra Leone.  Europe is somewhat less accepting of megafarms than the US (and, in the spirit of anecdotes, here is one) , but they have much higher land productivity than the developing world.  So, Bill is nudging us more toward the European model.  Louise would seem to be hopeful that Sierra Leone, and even Senegal, could move toward European productivity. In short, both want “sustainable”, even “thrivable” as the end goal for humans and, necessarily, the planet.

I don’t know whether Bill and Louise are pals, or if they met, whether they could find a number of points on which to agree.  I hope so, because I believe they’re both intelligent, and they both want as many humans as possible to have high quality lives.  (It’d be great if they could find ways to work together.  His populist appeal combined with her positional and academic credibility would be a formidable combo.)

I would prefer that their messages, like many messages, not be expressed in such ways that they are readily captured in conflicting sound bites.  But that’s life as we know it.  Perhaps the biggest conflict in our world today is the between the complexity of our problems and the enduring human preference for bite-sized concepts.  It’s not so much that our problems are so complex that they’re beyond understanding, but they are beyond understanding in an elevator pitch.

Maybe that’s why my blog posts tend to run long.  But if you read this far, you’ve demonstrated a willingness to invest at least a few minutes on an idea that doesn’t fit neatly into a sound bite.

Village Chickens and Hard-boiled Eggs

First, consider the image below:

The (hopefully) interesting tale below occurred during my recent visit to Sierra Leone.  Unfortunately, my phone, which was doubling as a camera, apparently was not partial to the weather.  After one photo (see my previous post), the software departed for parts unknown and did not return till end of day.  I looked through a boatload of other photos from the same trip.  Chickens seem ever-present in these villages, so I figured I’d find a random chicken to make my point.  But alas, the chickens are apparently camera shy, and so I was out of luck.  With no images of my own to illustrate the story, I took a look at Wikimedia Commons, and voila.  A kind soul I have never heard of before (Foodeel Seddichi) posted a picture to a Flickr account (clicking the picture will take you there), and in turn posted it to the Commons.  The picture is from Niger, not Sierra Leone, but gives a pretty similar sense.  I love that the copyright holder made it available under open license.  We collaborated semi-anonymously (I know a name, but don’t really know the person) in creating this blog post.

The story that prompted this picture began December 29th in Mafirah, a small village near Lunsar, Sierra Leone.  Jon Bart and I were taking a village survey as part of Village Hope.  Our goal was to get a handle on the dietary situation of the members of this village.  Remarkably, although domesticated chickens were scurrying about and seemed to be constantly underfoot, they were not part of the village diet.  Neither the chickens nor the eggs.  The chickens were raised for sale in the market.  I’m guessing they aren’t bought by other villages (which have their own chickens), but by townspeople.  In addition, these chickens were not bred for egg-laying, and roosters and chickens were not kept separate.  In other words, eggs were not produced in high quantities, and they were all fertilized, and therefore represent the chickens of tomorrow.  So, these chickens and eggs represent a small but relatively easy source of extra cash.

A couple of days later, while driving out to another village, I got to talking about this chicken topic with Village Hope’s one paid employee, a Sierra Leonan name Stephen Gibateh.   Stephen told me that fertile eggs are very important to villagers.  Each egg represents valuable future income.  It is a part of the village culture, he said, to tell children stories of bad things that would happen if they ever ate an egg.   The only time a chicken would be eaten in the village was if it became ill and could not be sold.  Similarly, the only eggs that are eaten are those that have clearly been abandoned by a hen.    I marveled at the elaborate customs built up around economic necessity.  Fish is cheaper than chicken.  They raise chickens for sale, and buy fish for protein.  Remarkable.  It made me appreciate the previous day’s meal: a killer fish-AND-chicken stew served over white rice.

Stephen and I continued on our drive out to the villages as part of my investigation of groundnut farming (again, previous post).  At the first village, Kolifah, spent a couple of hours learning a lot of detail about groundnut farming.  I truly am fascinated by this stuff.  At the end of our interviews, the village demonstrated their hospitality with a fish-stew-over-rice meal.  Yum!  We drove on, passing through several villages, including Robanka, where they encouraged us to stop by on our return.  We made no promises, but continued on to Robump, and did another round of interviews.  (In all, I did these interviews in 5 villages, learning something new and relevant in each interview.)  The folks in Robump, upon learning that we had eaten, rewarded Stephen and I with two live chickens, bananas and papayas to take with us in lieu of the meal.  Stunning!  Each chicken alone represents a day’s wages!

As we drove home, twilight was settling in.  We didn’t have much daylight remaining to navigate the rough dirt roads with a series of somewhat makeshift and dodgy bridges over small streams.  Clearly we could not linger in Robanka.  As we passed through Robanka, we paused to explain.  In a heartbeat, someone trotted out, reached through the open window, and handed us four hard-boiled eggs.  They’d been prepared assuming we would pay a longer visit.  Obviously, some villages don’t have such harsh taboos on eating eggs!  Stephen and I had a good laugh over that.  Even Stephen, the local expert-on-the-ground, didn’t have a full picture.  And so there’s yet another lesson.  Along with subtly different ways in which each village farms its groundnuts, they also have different ways of handling chickens and eggs.

And that highlights once again the need for solutions that can be adapted to the local situation.  I propose (surprise!) semi-anonymous collaboration as a useful technique to develop these solutions.  Here at Appropedia, we’re working on getting the infrastructure up and going.  There’s a lot here, but of course always more to do.  Now we just need a more ubiquitous culture of semi-anonymous shared problem solving.  Some may say that’s a bit of a chicken and egg challenge.  All I can say is that bad things may happen if we can’t figure out how to work together.