Please note - this is a temporary window. id21 is joining forces with Eldis and therefore the id21 website has been suspended. Soon all id21 content will be available on the Eldis website.
Researchers from Demos, Practical Action and the University of Lancaster collaborated on a project designed to engage Zimbabwean community groups and scientists, from both the North and South, in debates about new nanotechnologies. The dialogue was one of four experiments in public engagement with nanotechnologies, known as the nano-dialogues, funded by the Sciencewise programme of the UK Office of Science and Technology.
Providing clean water to rural and peri-urban communities in Zimbabwe is complex. The dialogues enabled a full understanding of this complex problem in relation to both economic and behavioural changes. The discussion and modelling of the problem situation helped to explain areas of concern in relation to water supply, technology, and culture.
The potential for nanotechnologies to help improve the quality of water supply was not raised until there was a clear understanding of the problem in the local context by scientists and the local communities. The meetings focused on how nanotechnology could solve Zimbabwe’s water problems. Among other things, participants discussed a recent trial in South Africa of a nanotechnology-based filter for decontaminating drinking water.
Participants expressed a desire to see the technology working in their communities. At the end of the second day the tentative conclusion that ‘there is no real water quality issue that cannot be solved with existing technologies’ was agreed; but by the end of the dialogues many felt that nanotechnologies might make a contribution to improving water quality. Participants called for poor communities to be involved in debates about whether nanotechnologies can contribute to social and economic development.
The way forward will need to take account of the risks and costs in addition to the opportunities for real benefits to poor people. This dialogue happened at a time before many products using nanotechnologies had entered the market. We hope that such early discussions will enable scientists to take account of the needs of the poor. This might help deliver public value from science.
Funded by: UK Office of Science and Technology
id21 Research Highlight: 1 November 2007
Further Information:
David J Grimshaw
Practical Action
Schumacher Centre for Technology& Development
Bourton on Dunsmore
Rugby, CV23 9QZ
UK
Contact the contributor: David.Grimshaw@PracticalAction.org.uk
Other related links:
‘Towards pro-poor innovation: putting public value into science and
technology’, id21 insights #68, September 2007
‘Biotechnology in Bangalore: the politics of innovation’
‘Supporting local innovation in Nepal’
‘China: the next science superpower?’
‘Enhancing rural livelihoods: the role of ICTs’
‘Social entrepreneurship in Kenya’
Useful web links