[Stoves] Offtopic: Malawi and responsibility (Andrew, Roger)

[Traveller]

Dear Cecil:

I suggest listening to Gillian Tett: The Anthropology of Economics 16 Jul
2013
<https://soundcloud.com/tim-harford-economics/gillian-tett-the-anthropology>
.

Tett is a major writer for the Financial Times. She talks about how some
people deify computer models without thinking about human beings.

I am afraid that is the case with ISO/IWA, WHO/BAMG exercises.

I wrote of this "box mentality" before -- reducing stoves to fireboxes and
human beings to lungs. Running computer models about oxidation without
bothering about fuel chemistry, human biology, society, culture, food, sex,
production, consumption.

"Scientist" is a job category, like "lawyer", "sweeper", "fixer". Not
everything that scientists do is science.

I disagree with Crispin about "inflated claims for health impact from
cooking fire smoke" bit. It's all a matter of definitions, data, methods. A
matter of opinion.

It is presumptuous to "learn to see the truth". All I can do is verify
particular opinions via examination of definitions, data, methods. It is my
opinion that WHO assertions on IAQ and attribution of BOD are unverifiable.

I choose to call it - and the hyperboles from GACC - hocus pocus. But
others should examine.


Nikhil





On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 6:25 PM, <cec1863 at gmail.com> wrote:

> ‎Dear CPP,
>
> As an anthropologist with too many years of experience in the field
> talking to folks about their stoves and other types of technos I have
> learned that the challenge and the art and even the revelation depends on
> knowing which questions to ask, how to ask them (in what language to ask
> these questions), how to record and aggregate the answers, and how to
> communicate your findings to decision makers who are trapped in a welter of
> competing agendas and paradigms.
>
> My anthropological conversations and feed back from stove users, makers,
> sellers, fuel suppliers,etc to policy makers and funders is like water off
> a ducks back. Maybe I am studying the wrong subjects......maybe I should
> study the policy makers and funders and standard setters in Euro American
> high places. I need to study up from the stove users point of view at the
> BOP.
>
> Cecil
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
> *From: *Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
> *Sent: *Saturday, December 10, 2016 3:38 AM
> *To: *Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> *Reply To: *Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> *Subject: *Re: [Stoves] Offtopic: Malawi and responsibility (Andrew,
> Roger)
>
> Dear Nikhil
>
>
>
> "We did not assess lifetime nutritional conditions of the subject
> populations or their influence on incidence of pneumonia, receptivity to
> foreign researchers and monitors, ignorance of what we are doing to or with
> them and why."
>
>
>
> Well, we should learn to seek the truth then:
>
>
>
> That is from Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert.
>
>
>
> He is right of course – Dilbert is smart.
>
>
>
> The pattern I recognise is inflated claims for health impact from cooking
> fire smoke translated into funding to avert “the health crisis”.
>
>
>
> If one wants to improve the lot of the poor, in the kitchen, ask them what
> bothers them about their stoves and cooking experiences. They will freely
> tell you.
>
>
>
> Then address those concerns. Add your own no-smoke flavour. Presto.
>
>
>
> Regards
> Crispin
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20161211/43912b3d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 10558 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20161211/43912b3d/attachment.jpg>