Today, as per Sinead’s recommendation, we went on a full day tour with Alex and Raul for 200 pesos each (such a steal, I know). It was all very casual — we just showed up in front of a Cathedral at 9:30 AM, found a guy holding the flyer, and got into one of the white passenger vans. In hindsight, this sounds like it could be a recipe for a kidnapping…but we felt super safe the entire time.
Our tour guide, Cesar, was born into one of these communities. As such, we got really interesting insight into the ways that we (as Westerners) have tendency to do things that impose an air of superiority. Just us coming in and trying to tell people how to live their lives (even if we mean the best) comes with the assumption that our way is right. For example, Cesar used the example of Western medicine. After going to Western University, he was extremely doubtful of the local cures. However, he explains how his mom’s use of spiders webs were able to stop bleeding better than band-aids.
What I found most applicable was a side-comment Cesar made in one of the houses we visited. The local woman was making us tortillas over an open fire, and smoke was filling the home. Pushed into a corner was another cooking surface with an attached exhaust pipe (below). However, despite the fact that it is medically proven that such smoke inhalation is bad for health, the woman still prefers the open fire.
Use of Open Fire instead of the Fire with Exhaust Pipe
A main focus of our project has been on community interaction with our devices, and whether they will be implemented even if they work. However, I believe that until now I underestimated the cultural influence on behavior. I (rather naively) assumed that our device would be used as long as the device was easier to use, or the same as, than the current practice. From this example, I think it’s clear that that is not the case. The stove with the exhaust pipe would be just as easy to use and would improve health. It still isn’t used.
How do we move forward with our projects in light of this?
Su Chen has been working on reevaluating the initial assumption that her project was founded on: that the community members don’t drink the rainwater because it does not taste good. Her team spent the semester developing a prototype for the re-mineralization of rainwater to improve taste. We are now considering the possibility the difference in taste might be physiological — that just the idea of drinking rainwater is odd enough that it makes people imagine a difference in taste. If we find out that the dislike of rainwater is more physiological, then we have an entirely different problem on our hands than we thought.
Honestly, I am not sure how to move forward with my project. Learning that the main issue for the communities was a lack of water was a blow because that’s something that my device won’t be able to readily fix. I’m reconsidering the pump prototype because it uses a set amount of water. I will probably have a brainstorming session tomorrow to try to come up with ways that we can develop a device that is easy to use and uses small amounts of water. However, I am not sure how to best test whether the design will actually be implemented. Any ideas would be much appreciated!
-Horatia