Can anyone identify anyone at any NGO's who employ people with the backgrounds in hard sciences, physics, and invention to be qualified to understand what it is they are procuring? There must be some people who fit that description, but, they seem well hidden. For example, the procurement officer at USAID has a liberal arts decree. What can people like this possibly know about that they are buying? Water technologies tend to be older than the alphabet, and understanding these are not rocket science. There is a tendency to purchase name brand and long standing technologies that do not work for the application at hand, not without heroic methods, and which are poorly supported by R&D. Really this is a governance problem.
We have been experimenting water resource management and conservation primarily with central and state governments at the center of responsibility and carrying out the projects unfortunately with not adequate professionalism.
Fear of failure is bound to be there under such circumstances. Natural resources can not be treated as free commodity specially when there are constraints posed due to climate change regime etc especially it is true in case of water resources.
If these recently launched projects have to really at the end of the day deliver the desired goods, the focus of responsibility and involvement has to shift to private sector intervention with highest degree of professionalism and technology use on one hand and organised community involvement on the other hand to effectively and meaningfully execute the programmes and projects on the river Ganga.
Pradeep Shrivastava, Professor
Limnology department Barkatulah University, Bhopal, INDIA
The fear of admitting failure of projects and initiatives continues to be a key challenge to advance service delivery through non-profits. There are too many projects that get prolonged over and over again, despite a lack of added value (just as there are many good ones). We need to establish incentives to foster an attitude that recognizes failure early on as a basis to then change course or follow-up with adapted or more innovative approaches to enhance service delivery and resource management. On this basis I believe we could leverage required innovation and higher quality contributions through charitable organizations.
The mere mis-management of the water resource itself and the technology available is the reason behind a worldwide crisis despite so many charitable organization focusing on this issue and technologies available.
And in some particular cases, bitter truth is that the water issues are the basis for raising funds from charity organisation, where they do not focus on solving the problem but perpetuate the issues just to continue the donation from charitable organisations!
Atmospheric water generation has been around for many years. This technology only works well under certain circumstances. AWG is what you have when you see the many/numerous drips from the back of air-conditioners. I have extremely strong doubt that there would ever be enough of these AWG machines to ever have even the slightest effects on the overall world atmosphere, in fact they may help atmospheric conditions, if in fact there were ever enough of them, where we have huge greenhouse problems created because of the massive amount of water vapor now in the atmosphere that was not there half a century ago.
We must look for ways to re-cycle water, specially the massive amount of water used in industry that is left to drain into waste water systems and which may eventually pollute our groundwater. We need to look at ways of providing inexpensive ways to clean water from creeks, rivers and dams, as well as from bore holes so that those forced to drink such water are not infected by pathogens carried in such water.
NGO's, water engineering companies, government and concerned citizens need to work together in a spirit of co-operation and harmony and learn to share knowledge and solutions. A problem shared is a problem halved.
As regards the statement "With so many available organization focusing on the issues and technologies available why is there still a worldwide crisis's?" Yes, crisis is there because the need is greater than supply. World's supply of usable fresh water for human and all its living ecosystems is less than 1% of all the fresh water available with only 0.3 % supply from all rivers and lakes of the world. World population is increasing day by day and so to sustain its food needs our water resources are becoming limiting factor even with good water management. Charitable Organization might have some technologies available for freshwater for drinking purpose to some extent but due to its practicality and the cost, poor are always bypassed.
Of course as Mr. Carlo Atum has stated about the atmospheric water generator (AWG) techniques for drinking safe water- what will be its implication in maintaining atmospheric climate (moisture) if it is drawn overly? Will it have some negative effect as we have seen in case of groundwater over drawn cases?
Therefore, we must try to find some sustainable sources and its harnessing technology for solving not only drinking purpose but for the future agricultural production aspects too.
Knowledge sharing is the way we were all educated, someone made available books and stories and anecdotes and information that was shared with their students who learned and passed with some sort of qualification and then it seems promptly forgot that only by sharing can we all learn and grow. The ego needs to be subjugated and the thirst for knowledge through co-operation and sharing brought to the forefront.
It is upon this premise of lack of adequate fresh water that Ecoloblue has developed a cost effective, easy to use, energy saving and atmospheric water generation technology, given the fact that about 13,000Km3 of water is available in the atmosphere (World Water Assessment Program). The technology is eco-friendly and can work off-grid; that is on solar, or wind energy. The products come in many affordable models for office and home services. For instance, the smallest model can generate about 30litres of clean water per day up to about 10000litres of water for the relatively bigger models. The technology typically absorbs humid air from the atmosphere, purifies them and condense it to clean water with proper additions of healthy minerals. It can absorb water from the atmosphere from a relative humidity as low as 30% and above. This offers a real alternative, sustainable and valuable source of water for many cities and rural residents while preserving our natural water sources. for more info follow this link: http://www.ecoloblue.com/.
Por que no hacen atractivos los incentivos para el creador, ejemplo el premio de agua de Rey Hassan:
The King Hassan II Great World Water Prize rewards excellence or innovation in “Cooperation and sound management in the development and use of water resources.” The specific topic of the 2015 edition is “Innovation for access to water, energy and sanitation in the face of global changes”. The winner will be granted an award of US$100,000.
lo malo que los requisitos son muchos, los profesionales deberian escuchar, interpretar y ponerse en marcha en proyecto viable, a veces hay que apostar a un cambio, "si no cambiamos el curso hacia donde vamos, vamos a terminar posiblemente donde empezamos".
Deberìan unirse varias organizaciones, dejar los egoismos de lado por el bien de la gente y hacer un premio tipo Premio novel de la soluciòn del agua. La soluciòn esta a la vista, pero es como la Biblia quien no sepa interpretar, no sabra discernir por mas que lea. saludos
Isn’t Water access a human right ? Why should it depend on charity? What about obligations and responsibilities? Despite their sincere and extremely important role, charitable organisations often lack technical expertise as well as access to information, while they are systematically blamed whenever conflicts arise. So many stakeholders should get the blame too. In addition to public utilities, what about private sector’s role consolidating their own business security through a more sustainable management of their own water usage? Technology is available, but budgets not always allocated towards long term benefits. Yes Carlo, I totally agree that water resources diversification is extremely appropriate, but to undertake an integrated approach to water management systems, a political leadership is required, associated to a proper information management. Water shortages are often blamed on the lack of co-ordination between various government departments and a failure to plan for the foreseen rises in demand. This simple and almost naïve question cannot be answered in few lines but it clearly highlights our struggle and the urgent need for a “revolution” in the way Water challenges should be addressed, in the way budget should be allocated, responsibilities redefined. Business, without any doubt, will handle the technological challenges. But to get the required boost, Water should be promoted and demonstrated as a real platform for financial benefit towards communities, business, governments. COP21 brought many hopes. I share your passion, your worries and sadness. Let’s fight little bit harder to accelerate the path. THE BLAME WILL BE ON US, AS WATER EXPERT, IF WE MISS THE TRAIN. By no means charity organisation’s role should be questioned.
The fresh water crisis will be more pronounced in future. Therefore, we must go to find the technology for cloud forming and teaming from the sea water. Science should be focused on this aspects too to solve the shortage of fresh water need of the world for near future.
The main challenge towards water failures is "water resources diversification". Governments or private sector water providers are relying on virtually few sources that are bound to fail in case of emergencies. For example, underground water that tends to dry up in certain seasons, desalination, chlorination which has proven to be environmentally and somehow unhealthy for humans, distillation, reverse osmosis as well. Yet recently, research findings from World Water Assessment Program have reported 13,000km3 of water in the atmosphere, which can for sure offer alternative solutions to water shortage around the water stress area having relative humidity of as low as 30%. Another challenge is lack of an integrative approach to water management systems whereby committing a large part of water resources management and distribution to a private company with little government investment could seemingly attribute to these breakdowns and yet population of the many towns and cities are growing rapidly putting existing on the existing infrastructures that the private entity cannot expand without committed government investments.
The name of the game is communication. People in so many organizations that are trying to help solve water/sanitation problems have little of no idea about just what is available out there. A developed data base, a central data base with analytical abilities that is able to push information out on a regular but not imposing basis, say once a month is needed. Good, solid, meaningful information about the wants and needs of different areas, peoples and projects together with new technologies and that shows the links between all of this knowledge. Often there are answers and solutions just waiting to be taken up yet those in need are not aware that the answers to their needs is just an email or a telephone call away. To develop such a knowledge base would not really be difficult, I have seen it done before, government s do it all the time with collection and collation by their intelligence agencies. There are computer programs that are used by policing agencies and police forces that are available to the public, these programs use sophisticated algorithms based on fractals to link all sorts of data that is not obviously linked. All one then needs is to precis the gained and developed knowledge and push email it to as many as possible .
One wonders sometimes if there is a lack of curiosity that no database will cure. Also, a database is only as good as the quality of its information. Regarding information quality, there is a citation problem in academic publications. These seem to be citing patents less and less. In an applied field, like water, failure to cite these cite-able references obfuscates where the cutting edge is, makes everything look like a new discovery, and gives the false impression that academics are the sole innovators. Nothing could be further from the truth and academia is in reality a very small piece of the innovation pie.
They do not cooperate well with each other, share knowledge and experiences in a scaleable way, or have a sustainable business model. Many times recreating the wheel. I find in many cases they feel they are competing with each other rather than part of the same team.
Correct Trudi. Co-operation is a big problem, brought about from lack of knowledge and little understanding of the true pathways to successful business because too many scientists/engineers/chemists hold the reins of power and decision rather than bus98ness trained people whose aim is to get it dome one way or another and if co-operation with others is the way to go then fine, as they understand that a piece of the cake is better than none at all.
Dear Trudi Schifter , I am totally agree with your argument and sure that the key is here! As a scientific advisor at Race for Water Foundation, I am frequently confronted with this problem. Just in the issue of plastic pollution, many charitable organisations speeches end like that: "Stop talking, we need to act and work together to solve this issue!", but unfortunately most of organisations are all trying to find financial supports to their respective project or campaing and so instead of working together, we become competitors...
APP Technology’s mission is to provide 100% renewable, cost-effective, easily accessible and affordable clean water as a solution to the growing world water crisis. Currently, we are specifically hoping to bring our innovative technology to places where access to freshwater is exceptionally difficult or scarce, despite being located in close proximity to ocean water.
When you get out to the most remote locations, it is usually the faith based organizations and humanitarian aid orgs doing by far the best work. The transition to sustainable solutions takes a different mindset though, and the last mile delivery, addressing government corruption, and building the sustainable business network needed are usually outside their mission.
Firstly, there is no integrated approach to the provision of safe drinking water together with a clear understanding of what contributes making water unsafe. Sometimes there is limited consultation with the local community and empowerment and understanding of local sensitivities and cultural and social norms. Sadly, it is not necessarily the most vulnerable who are being looked after, but those who the most influential, politically. Provision of safe drinking water is not a social issue though we may think so, but rather a political issue and often driven by political expediency.
Sean Furey makes a good point. Too often NGOs set up something, group hug, walk away and it breaks down. That is in a way the way it is meant to be; because it keeps them going and going for ever.
We need to distinguish between charities that are do gooders and those who do good.
Do charities also hinder because they assume people cannot help themselves.
For another aproach, I'd suggest taking a look at Pump Aid for example. Their pumps are designed to be managed and maintained for at least ten years without any external intervention.
The big question for each NGO is this - will your work bring about a sustainable difference over the longer term without the need for further external intervention?
Charities can often be part of the problem. They can (not always) increase dependency on outside aid - and who are they accountable to? Not the end users, but to their financial donors. Incentives are often misaligned to the emphasis is on building or rehabilitating hardware and doing some token community engagement and training, but without viable supply chains, without viable value chains and cost recovery to cover life cycle costs, and without government providing an effective role as a regulator and conflict mediator, systems are all too frequently fail. There is also a tension between humanitarian interventions that are focused on saving lives in the short term, but in doing so may destroy supply chains and livelihoods by handing stuff out for free. Many NGOs also act in fragmented ways and often independently of government, and this leads to the mutual mistrust and can undermine government legitimacy. Governments will always be there, NGOs are transitory, therefore it is essential to strengthen government and civil society capacities. Yes, there maybe corruption, but ignoring it won't make it go away.