10/17/12

Emily Braucher Nathan Johnson

October 17, 2012

SCD 1

An engineer is contacted by an outside organizaCon who has built a relaConship with one or more communiCes. The organizaCon has idenCed the need.

10/17/12

Have good inten,ons, Are good engineers, Have found a community that needs help

But the developing world is liLered with the remains of failed projects.

10/17/12

Solar stoves for Central America

Developer: User:

Great to reduce wood use and deforestaCon. How do we cook breakfast?

French chicken breed for Africa

Developer: User:

Great breed for making large eggs and meaty legs. We cant feed chickens that big.

GeneCcally modied corn for Africa

Developer: User:

Biogas stoves for Asia

Developer: User:

We can donate our superior corn seeds to those with no money. Where is seed ospring? How do I plant next year?

BeLer waste treatment and sustainable energy. Our pigs died; The ame is inconsistent and doesnt cook well.
5

10/17/12

Poor assessment leads to failure

The process of idenCfying needs and turning them into projects. In ParCcipatory AcCon Research, local knowledge is conCnually integrated into the process of idenCfying needs and possible soluCons.

10/17/12

CommunicaCon

and

It is a qualitaCve process

10

10/17/12

The engineering design process is a process of ques,oning

11

Engineering design requires qualita,ve and quan,ta,ve informa,on Par,cipatory research is a methodology to acquire both in contexts that are foreign to the researcher

12

10/17/12

Qualita,ve research emphasizes the study of processes and meanings that are not rigorously examined or measured in terms of quanCty, amount, intensity, or frequency. Quan,ta,ve research emphasizes the measurement and analysis of casual relaConships between variables (not processes).
13

Content searching (secondary data) Surveys

Design task

Experiments

Design space

Participant observation

Focus groups
14

10/17/12

15

Lets say we want to design a toaster. What types of informa,on do we need? and How are we going to obtain the informa,on?

16

10/17/12

You are ignorant the user knows more about their life and

environment than you do, keep an open mind

Focus on need not the absence of a parCcular technology Try considering the user as a consumer Poverty alleviaCon has many paths

17

Human

Natural

Built
18

10/17/12

Human

Natural

Built
19

Human: end-user behavior, policy, economics

Human

Natural: climate, weather, resources

Natural Built

Built: thermal, mechanical, electrical

20

10

10/17/12

Consider implementaCon level and impact to consumer(s) or community

Recall that users interests and capabiliCes are product of their environment
21

Walk the area Interact with various types

of stakeholders

Obtain iniCal perspecCve on

resource availability

IdenCfy people to interview

or for home-stays

22

11

10/17/12

23

Pictures and video Audio Personal notes Physical objects Daily journals

24

12

10/17/12

Include photos IdenCfy disCnguishing characterisCcs

(demographic, occupaCon, )

PrioriCze areas of need into a hierarchy Place the user within livelihood

framework

Note absolute and relaCve amount of

user type in the target populaCon

25

Exper i

Actions

encin g life with in

local en

viron m

Choice Judgment
provides a fram ework for deepe r c

ental cont exts

Viewpoint
onsumer underst anding

Dissatisfaction and Aspiration

General needs and Specific interests

26

13

10/17/12

Level of understanding Action Choice Judgment Viewpoint

Description Consumer performs an activity x or uses resource x Consumer chooses x over y from a set of activities or resources Consumer uses metric z to preference x over y in this application Consumer believes z is important to life and uses it to guide decisions

Data and method Quantitative observations & surveys Qualitative interviews and discussions 27

VW Jetta TDI 2004

28

14

10/17/12

Lets step foot into a village

and look at energy use for domes,c cooking applica,ons

29

30

15

10/17/12

Nana Kenieba: 770 people 8 surrounding villages: 7,000 people No electric grid Market 35 km by bus Subsistence agriculture

31

Ranks 160th out of 169 countries in the Human Development Index Two-thirds live in rural villages Sixth highest rate of death due to poor air and water quality Energy use: 7,500 MJ cap-1 yr-1
32

16

10/17/12

33

34

17

10/17/12

How much energy in the village is used for domes,c cooking? What is the rela,ve cost and impact? What factors explain cooking energy use? What are the cultural preferences and personal interests for cooking and cooking technologies? and In general?

35

May 2009 Planning visit May 2010 Field study (hot and dry)

Aug 2010

Field study (temperate and rainy) Field study (cool and dry)

Dec 2010

36

18

10/17/12

Households straCed by family size 5 families chosen, one from each stratum 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. IniCal understanding, scoping future tests

37

Energy sources: wood, charcoal, petroleum fuels, electricity Data collecCon:

Surveys (domesCc, arCsan, public service, energy sales shops) Measurements and observaCons (supply, storage, use)

38

19

10/17/12

Scale Families (small <5, medium 5-20, large 20+) Communal cooking (50+) Beneciaries Women and young girls: onen responsible for cooking, cleaning, and gathering fuel Children: safe and sanitary living environment

39

Typical Day for a Woman in Rural Mali

Time of day 5:30 AM 5:30 AM 8:00 AM Wake up Prepare and eat breakfast Sweep kitchen and household grounds Gather water Wash dishes Tend to children 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 9:00 AM 11:00 AM 11:00 AM 2:00 PM Garden Gather wood Prepare and eat lunch Gather water Wash dishes Tend to children 2:00 PM 3:00 PM Miscellaneous duties Tend to children Activity

Time of day 3:00 PM 3:30 PM 3:30 PM 4:30 PM 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 5:30 PM 8:00 PM

Activity Make tea for men Prepare grain for dinner and next day Take grain to grinder for processing Prepare and eat dinner Wash dishes Tend to children Make tea for men Tend to children

8:00 PM 9:00 PM

9:00 PM

Go to bed

40

20

10/17/12

acquisition

transport

storage

use

41

acquisition

transport

storage

use

42

21

10/17/12

Steeping tea

Cooking meals

HeaCng water

Processing shea

RoasCng peanuts

Making medicine

43

Village
DOMESTIC
Cooking meals HeaCng water Processing shea RoasCng peanuts Making medicine Steeping tea Space heaCng LighCng Personal electronics 44

ARTISAN
Baker Blacksmith Grain grinder Furniture maker Frying snacks

PUBLIC SERVICE
Clinic lighCng School lighCng Clean water pump

TRANSPORT
Motorcycles

22

10/17/12

45

46

23

10/17/12

Average wood consumpCon is 370 kg cap-1 yr-1 Wood collecCon (up to 8 km round-trip)
250 hr cap-1 yr-1 for women (7.5-24.0 kg) 40 hr cap-1 yr-1 for children (3.0-11.0 kg)

Three-quarters of village energy use on wood cookstoves DomesCc expenditures on energy approx. US$100 fam-1 yr-1
47

Hierarchy of needs

48

24

10/17/12

Ok, so now that we are jus,ed in digging deeper into cooking energy use how do we go about it?

49

Cookstove ownership and use Cooking tasks: six meals, ve non-meals Meal size ranged from 1.3 to 24.7 kg, shea max of 45 kg Cooking vessel: 2 to 50 liters Meal composiCon: dry ingredients 9.7% to 37.5% of total IgniCon method: lighter, straw, plasCc, burning embers Fuel properCes [ASTM E870]
50

25

10/17/12

What factors explain cooking energy use? Why are people not using improved stoves?
this is dierent from the ques,on asked in tests comparing cookstoves Which cookstove uses less fuel?

51

Simple linear workflow

(e.g., gathering water)

Linear workflow with parallel activities

(e.g., cooking)

Cyclical workflow
(e.g., farming)

Activity loop with exit criteria

(e.g., washing clothes)

52

26

10/17/12

Gathering wood (already discussed)

Culinary chain

Food preparaCon

Cook food

Serving

Dining

Washing utensils

Drying utensils

Cooking

Pre-igniCon

IgniCon

Cook food

ExCnguish

Clean-up

53

ObservaConal cooking test

gather data from observing the cook

Session cooking test

present at start and end of each cooking session but does not observe cooking

Daily cooking test

visit once per day to weigh stacks of wood for each cooking ac,vity
54

27

10/17/12

(OCT) Quan(ta(ve Mass wood iniCal data Mass wood nal Mass of igniter Mass ending charcoal Mass of each ingredient Mass of cooked food Mass cooking vessels Number of people eaCng Demographic informaCon Ambient temperature Time-series cooking acCvity log Categorical data Cookstove applicaCon Cooking ingredients Cookstove type Number of cooking res Wood name Season Size of cooking vessels IgniCon method Cooking locaCon Meal Cme of day

Observa(onal Cooking Test

Session Cooking Test

(SCT) Mass wood iniCal Mass wood nal Mass of each ingredient Number of people eaCng Demographic informaCon Ambient temperature

Daily Cooking Test

(DCT) Mass wood iniCal Mass wood nal Number of people eaCng Demographic informaCon

Cookstove applicaCon Cooking ingredients Cookstove type Number of cooking res Wood name Season IgniCon method Cooking locaCon Meal Cme of day

Cookstove applicaCon Cookstove type Number of cooking res Wood name Season Cooking locaCon Meal Cme of day

55

S I T A ST

! S C I T

Johnson NG, Bryden KM. 2012. Factors aecting fuelwood consumption in household cookstoves in an isolated rural West African village. Energy. 46(1):31021. 56

28

10/17/12

Important factors to explain energy use:

Cookstoves had liNle impact on fuel use

Family size Dry mass Total mass dry and wet Number of cooking res (two res 26% increase) Cooking acCvity (meals vs. non-meals; sauce 32% increase) Use of burning embers (10% decrease)

Low thermal capacity, 28% increase, lowest level of signicance Market metal, 24% decrease, not staCsCcally signicant

Factors not important: grain type, grain size, sauce type, season, mass of water, wood species, wood moisture, wood size, cookstove operator, meal type, test type (OCT or SCT)

57

58

29

10/17/12

59

60

30

10/17/12

Start re

Cook sauce

Cook grains

End

Cut leaves

Get water

61

(A) three-stone re, (B) gakourouwana, (C) low thermal capacity, (D) hand-craned metal, (E) manufactured metal, and (F) charcoal tea

62

31

10/17/12

63

Meal Serie Monie Gnegnekini & gnegunac Toh & nac Riz Couscous Graind Sauced

Fraction of all a meals prepared 0.1786 0.1548 0.3711 0.2154 0.0159 0.0529 0.0113

Fraction of meals prepared on cookstoveb TSF 0.0778 0.0897 0.0734 0.0904 0.5000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5 GK 0.9222 0.9103 0.9266 0.9096 0.5000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 5 LTC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 5 HCM 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 MM 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0

No. of cooks that own cookstove

a

Three-stone fire (TSF), gakourouwana (GK), low thermal capacity (LTC), hand-crafted metal (HCM), manufactured metal (MM).

Group 3A from prior slide

64

32

10/17/12

AcCon: use open res to cook Choice: there are six stoves available; cooks in Group 3A used open res ~99% of the Cme, improved stoves ~1% of the Cme Judgment: improved stoves are too small to cook large meals or heat water; some ignite slowly and do not heat fast enough; cannot get proper Clt for roasCng peanuts Viewpoint: I need a stove that can cook large or small meals, or two stoves, one for sauce and one for grains; it would be nice if the stove(s) was portable because meals are cooked inside and water is heated outside

65

50% 40% Program savings (%) 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Adop(on rate (% of families)

C D E 100% 66

33

10/17/12

A. Completely replace all cookstoves for all cooking applications (50.0% savings = 50.0% rated savings). B. Replace all cookstoves for cooking meals (32.3% savings = 50.0% rated savings 64.5% of wood use for each meal). C. Replace all cookstoves for cooking meals less than 18 kg. (16.1% savings = 50.0% rated savings 64.5% of wood use for meals 50.0% of wood consumption for cooking attributed to meals less than 18 kg). D. Replace all cookstoves for cooking breakfast meals less than 18 kg and all cookstoves for cooking the sauce component for lunch and dinner meals less than 18 kg. (7.4% savings = 50.0% rated savings 64.5% of wood use for meals 50.0% of wood consumption for cooking attributed to meals less than 18 kg (27.5% of meal wood use for cooking breakfast + 18.1% of meal wood use for cooking sauce)). E. Use the improved cookstove for 6.5% of breakfast meals less than 18 kg and replace all cookstoves for cooking the sauce for lunch and dinner meals less than 18 kg. (3.2% savings = 50.0% rated savings 64.5% of wood use for meals 50.0% of wood consumption for cooking attributed to meals less than 18 kg (27.5% of meal wood use for cooking breakfast 6.5% improved cookstove utilization + 18.1% of wood use for cooking sauce 100.0% improved cookstove utilization)).

67

The family is the central socio-economic unit in the village. As such, it is onen easier to implement and test projects with families rather than higher socio-economic levels (e.g., the village) which require consensus and coordinated nancial investment of mulCple parCes that onen have liLle disposable income to spend outside of their immediate family needs. Interviews in the village strongly suggest that technology adopCon by the user is moCvated by reduced work rela8ve to exis8ng prac8ces. Women do not like to cook in the sun and prefer to cook meals inside a kitchen for most of the year; women cook outside during extremely warm days (+45 C) in the summer months.

68

34

10/17/12

Wood and charcoal are the only viable fuels in the short term. Many cooks retain mulCple types of cooking devices, suggesCng that a single improved cooking device is insucient to address the wide range of cookstove applicaCons. Many women would like a hand-craned metal cookstove fabricated in Mali, yet the delivered cost of US$10 seems to prevent purchase. As such, this value could be considered as an approximate price ceiling for the one-half of the women in the village who own no improved cooking devices. The temperature of water heated for bathing ranged from 39 to 48C, with an average of 43.7C and standard deviaCon of 2.8C. A solar water heater should be capable of reaching the high temperature range.

69

Kitchens are made from waLle and daub. This construcCon is suscepCble to failure from heavy seasonal rains. Sta8onary cookstoves may be lost when kitchens collapse. Women commonly complete several tasks in parallel with cooking a meal (e.g., tending children, collecCng water, preparing vegetables for the meal) and may be away from the re for up to 15 minutes. A cookstove that can maintain a stable re over this interval without being tended could lead to faster cooking and a reducCon in products of incomplete combusCon by avoiding a smoldering re. Cooking repower ranged from 2.1 kW to 13.8 kW for cooking meals on a three-stone re. Assuming the three-stone re is 15% ecient, a new stove design would need to provide 0.3 kW to 2.1 kW of heat into the pot for cooking meals.
70

35

10/17/12

The maximum mass observed on a cookstove can indicate structural constraints or consumer viewpoints on stove stability. This mass is 45 kg for the three-stone re, 18 kg for the gakourouwana, 6 kg for the low thermal capacity, 18 kg for the hand-craned metal, and 9 kg for the manufactured metal stove. Peanuts are roasted over a re by ClCng the pot at an angle to concentrate peanuts in a smaller region within the pot. An improved cookstove should be capable of holding pots at a 8lt to displace the use of a three-stone re for roasCng peanuts. An alternaCve opCon would be a specialized cooking vessel to roast peanuts on the exisCng improved cookstoves in the village. Communal cooking and using burning embers to ignite the re can reduce wood consump8on and should be considered as opCons to discuss with the community. These opCons do not require nancial capital.
71

Exper i

Actions

encin g life with in

local en

viron m

Choice Judgment
provides a fram ework for deepe r c

ental cont exts

Viewpoint
onsumer underst anding

Dissatisfaction and Aspiration

General needs and Specific interests

72

36

10/17/12

73

Looking at choice and judgment

37

10/17/12

Iceberg Model of Culture

-Edgard Schein (1980)

38

10/17/12

39

10/17/12

Intercultural Communication

CreaCng shared understandings when various perspec,ves are present

Focus Groups

5-6 people who meet 2-3 times 3rd time is most precise Prepare trigger questions and probe questions Who are your participants?

40

10/17/12

safe water

41

10/17/12

safe water

encode

safe water

encode

decode

42

10/17/12

safe water A B

safe water

encode

decode

safe water A A

Interpersonal Gap

safe water B

encode

decode

43

10/17/12

safe water A A

Interpersonal Gap

safe water B

B Lens B

Lens A

44

10/17/12

ImplicaCon

When people from dierent cultures are looking at the same issue, they may be seeing dramaCcally dierent things.

Concept of Self

individualist

collecCvist

US UK F G R, I J ME A SEA, C

-Craig StorC, Figuring Foreigners Out (1999)

45

10/17/12

Role of Context

Low context

High context

US G R F I, S ME SEA, C J UK M A

-Craig StorC, Figuring Foreigners Out (1999)

Degree of Directness

Direct

Indirect

G US R S I ME A, C J F UK M SEA

-Craig StorC, Figuring Foreigners Out (1999)

46

10/17/12

safe water

Interpersonal Gap

safe water

A Indirect

Direct

Individualist

Concept of Self

CollecCvist

US UK F G R, I J ME A SEA, C

Low context

Role of Context

High context

US G R F I, S ME SEA, C J UK M A Direct Degree of Directness Indirect

G US R S I ME A, C J F UK M SEA

47

10/17/12

95

96

48

10/17/12

97

98

49

10/17/12

Emily Braucher emily@interculturalcommunicaCon.us Nathan Johnson nathan@homerenergy.com

99

50