Stovers,
1. Congratulations to us all for actually keeping the discussion
related to the Subject line for so many messages. :-)
2. The "mind set" of the centralized advocates (not all, but for many,
and increasingly so as the entity gets bigger) tend to have a more
financially-focused objective OF THE ENTITY THAT HAS RESOURCES AND
LONGEVITY, while the decentralized advocates tend toward the
financially-focused objective OF A SMALL OPERATION TRYING TO SURVIVE
WITH A VERY SMALL BASE.
Neither is inherently bad, but when the big and centralized entity
*_comes mainly from outside of an area_* that has primarily small and
decentralized entities, it can hurt the small entities.
It is a judgement call whether the big outsider (or the "acquired local
entities that represent the big outsider") should have that much
influence. That is why in some cases tariffs and other barriers are
erected.
A troublesome analogy is that of the colonial powers of 1700 to 1950
that were are the big entities that "supposedly" brought progress to
their colonies. Some colonial rulers did better than other (for
themselves or for the local people).
Colonial powers were not outlawed, they only became out-dated and they
changed methods from political/military rule to forms of economic
influence.
What does this have to do with Stoves? A lot, but not something that
can be decided at an ETHOS discussion or on-line, but that should be
discussed.
Do we have any concrete examples of small decentalized that made it big
while staying small? I previously mentioned the Kenyan Ceramic Jiko
(KCJ === even earned its own acronym!!!). Any others?
Paul (currently in the decentralized trenches of gasifier stove work
in Uganda.)
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: [email protected]
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: www.drtlud.com
I think the comments below by Richard and Michael are worth reading, if you are
new to this discussion.
On 1/3/2014 12:11 PM, Richard Stanley wrote:
Dear Michael in Marujo, and all others of the decentralisation camp,
In thinking a bit more about it, seems that as I write from my I Mac
or call thru the iphone, centralisation of certain things is a good
thing. What is not good, as many others have said or implied
here, is the incumbent growth of non accountability, transparency,
flexibility of design and involvement and localised responsibility
that keeps the centrailsed operation honest. Whats not good as well in
the centralised model, is the carbon footprint of mass distribution
form production centers Whats
Even more 'not good' about a priori centralised thinking, is the
attendant infestation of the posturing, power plays and positioning
and image maintenance that so often overrides the core purpose of the
centralised production effort in the first place.. (cheaper, better
quality etc etc...).
The wonderful fact of the matter is that the sheer logistics,
communications access, and cultural and political differences will
continue to make it near impossible to ever reach the burgenoning
majority of the globe's population by this model.
We have to learn, in that politically long incorrect saying, to bring
the mountain to Mohammed --to adapt design not only FOR but WITH and
WITHIN the population of potential adapters.
The trick is how to do this get paid for it and assure that those who
are using it will get paid for it as well each according to their own
skills, and interests.
But even that is not enough; We need to have the input of all
concerned for, no one of us is as smart as all of us.
The question becomes how to adapt, integrate, learn with and from the
'engagees' as active and equal participants in the process, all the
while assuring each participant's option for accessing their market
for training and their own product sales. Thats a difficult pill to
swallow for most of the good technical minds we encounter here in the
west. Its not so difficult for the technician academic, trainer or
producer from most nations south to anywhere else south though. For
that I feel sorry for the former group. They are missing a lot.
I am not playing mother Theresa here: Its just common sense You do not
move forward in your line of work in such a way as to cause others to
be left behind as a result. All you wind up with in your with is a
defensive lifestyle lived behind gated communities. For what ? Our
fello citisens of the shared planet need the option for access (and
admittedly many may decide to not take that option) to make it
themselves, otherwise you have what we now have instability, resource
mining, environmental imbalance, political upset, military investment
etc etc... globally under the guide of the free market unregulated
systems.
Really, isn't this just all common sense? where is the rocket science
and why don't we seem to get it?
* So I'd vote, along with many of us, for centralisation for those
products that demand very specialised and very highly skilled
resources but only where subcomponents cannot be made locally but
starting from the platform of of thinking localised and inclusive and
networked and engaged as possible. *
Aluta continua,
Richard / Ashland
On Jan 3, 2014, at 6:39 AM, <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Interesting discussion it is surprising how wide spread around the
world the support for decentralization is even with
its problems warts and whiskers.
Growing up in the middle of the 20th century I remember when there
were A & Ps, IGAs Rexalls
Texacos etc. scattered all across the United States. people were
optimistic and the future bright.
Then came the alphabet soup CFOs CEOs MBA and the Walmarta, Enrons,
the dotcoms and all the rest.
Now we have the 1 % and the greatest misdistribution of wealth known
to mankind.
Some how I just do not feel comfortable about the idea of massive
centralization.
But then again consider what would happen today if Abraham Lincoln was
caught returning some little old lady's cash
by one of todays CFOs or MBAs
Curmugeonly In Majuro,
Michael N Trevor
_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
[email protected]
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/
