World Ark Magazine - March/April 2008 - (Page 14) it to a Lego set), is far more useful than a bigger, nicer design that, however economically designed, is still prohibitively expensive for a one-time purchase by the very poor. Short-term Versus Long-term These principles are not immutable. Certainly, not every design for the poor needs to be income-related. There are many good designs that solve needs unrelated to income; several were featured in the Cooper-Hewitt’s exhibit and the accompanying catalog, like shelters for disaster victims. And, as noted above, not all products should be sold— particularly those that address public health issues, like mosquito nets, which must be distributed as widely as possible for free in order to be effective at curbing malaria. In thinking about design for the poor, it can African farmers use one of KickStart’s foot-operated irrigation pumps to water crops. be useful to distinguish between products that solve short-term, urgent needs, and those that contribute to deeper change. The cover of the exhibit catalog, for example, depicts a device called the Life Straw, a handheld filtration device being used by a woman in a flowered dress who is kneeling in a stream to drink. This is a remarkable device, and would be useful in certain situations, but it is not a permanent solution to the problem of clean drinking water. It is useful, however, to demonstrate the potential of technology, which can provide dramatic solutions to such basic, awful problems as thirst in a land of undrinkable water. As the exhibit’s title points out, design has, by and large, been used on much less urgent problems, for people with much more money. And yet there are a great many problems in the developing world in need of Photo courtesy of KickStart
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.