Proceedings of the UNESCO - University of Tsukuba International Seminar on Traditional Technology for Environmental Conservation and Sustainable Development in the Asian-Pacific Region, held in Tsukuba Science City, Japan, 11-14 December, 1995.
Editors: Kozo Ishizuka, D. Sc. , Shigeru Hisajima, D. Sc. , Darryl R.J. Macer, Ph.D.
Maekawa : Before we move onto discussion of the conference proposal we will have summaries of session I by Prof. Bertram, session II by Dr McAllister, session III by Prof. Yang and session IV by Dr Ryan.
Bertram : Three papers were presented in the opening session. Stephen Hill's paper looked forward to a new era in which the relationship of indigenous culture to emerging new technologies may be characterized by three features: partnership, linkage and alignment. Technologies are developed in a "design space" and the global economy is now inescapably part of this. To participate actively in the process of technological development, people at local level must be able to see the relationship between their own activities and problems and global patterns.
The global trend is now away from "Fordism" and towards small scale and flexible response to local and specific needs. This trend is bringing international technology and knowledge back towards a situation which should be more favourable to partnership, linkage and alignment with traditional production systems. The key to this is to harness the power of leading-edge technology and knowledge to solve problems identified and defined by people at local level. The example which Dr. Hill offered as a prototype for this process was the Lucknow cotton-spinning project. In discussion, a brief comment was offered by Dr. Seki, but substantive discussion of the issues raised by Dr. Hill was left for later sessions.
In the second paper of the session, Dr. Ryan identified four problems of development: potable water, cooking fuel, unemployment, and food scarcity. The proper role of technology, he suggested, is to provide intelligent solutions to these problems by methods which can be implemented by ordinary people. Dr. Ryan described a large number of existing small-scale technologies of which he has personal experience, and argued for policy to give more priority to "a low investment, low technology, people-centred revolution". In the brief discussion time available, Dr. Mazid raised some issues of food-fish production in Bangladesh.
Darryl Macer introduced the concept of "bioethics" and drew the distinction between prescriptive and descriptive bioethics. His paper contained examples of both: From a prescriptive perspective, Dr. Macer put the case for sustainability to be a central goal of policy, and suggested that this may require major lifestyle changes, especially in the North. He raised the possibility of allocating individual tradeable entitlements to environmental goods as a means of making this operational. From a descriptive perspective Dr. Macer presented results from survey research which showed quite widespread "environmentally aware" attitudes among people in advanced countries (UK, Germany and France) but widely-varying attitudes on the balance that should be struck between economic growth and environmental conservation. He argued that the world must move to a condition of "bioethical maturity".
The main question to Dr. Macer came, appropriately, from Dr. Wilk, whose paper in the final session of the seminar returned to the theme that "sustainability" is itself an ethical concept. The question centred on the issue of how the burden of shifting the world economy onto a sustainable basis should equitably be shared between rich and poor countries. Dr. Macer agreed that the onus lay with the rich countries to take the first steps in addressing global environmental problems. These three excellent papers provided a solid foundation for the discussion in subsequent sessions of the seminar.
McAllister : Six papers, with six commentaries were given. Even with this small number of reports the diversity was so great that convenient summary is difficult. Objectives considered included production of food, environmental conservation, financial viability, family and community independence, and human values. The geographic size scale ranged from individual small farms, through communities and regions to nations and the globe as a whole. The biota considered included both wild and planted forest trees and shrubs, rice and other cultivars, natural and cultured fish stocks, and a number of species of wild and cultured tropical fish. The technologies described ranged from harvests and processing of natural biota with traditional technologies; through cultivation of single species to mixed assemblages of plants, plants and fish, use of nitrogen fixing plants or various wastes to reduce inputs of artificial fertilizers; increased efficiency through use of various wastes as fertilizers for plants or as inputs to food chains leading to fish production; to assessment of reforestation as a means of providing a sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide and thus reduction of global warming.
One exception to the focus on traditional technologies was reported. A commentator suggested that in a hungry world, increasing food production remained a vital objective. The commentator thus reasoned that use of artificial fertilizers and other means of intense cultivation was still necessary. Unfortunately, lack of time prevented open discussion of this contrasting perspective.
Infrastructure to distribute the outputs of enhanced production in the local communities discussed in the reports obviously exists. However there is a question as to whether development, maintenance, and protection of such infrastructures in ways which support or enhance local control might deserve attention in future seminars.
The subject of the session was traditional technology in primary industries. The social units most often referred to were small farms or local communities, although national summaries of various data were also presented, and one paper dealt with a global concern. There remain questions as to whom our considerations should apply to. At one extreme we have entire nations or regions which may have moved in lock-step from the traditional era into modern high intensity consumption oriented societies. At the other we may have enclaves, ranging from small to very large, of disadvantaged traditional communities deprived of the scope for traditional enterprise. Seriously disadvantaged groups or areas obviously deserve immediate priority. Beyond this pressing need, should we be asking how we should partition our efforts amongst the various "substrates" to which traditional technology could be applied with significant benefit? Whose benefit should receive priority? We ask whether such questions should be formally considered.
Should we also be asking whom we should be addressing in order to generate the support required for both investigation and application? And how we could most increase effectiveness? We can address the disadvantaged, the scientific community, the presently (temporarily?) happy over-consumers, business, the general public, and governments. Probably we should address all of these, but how, for greatest effect? How should we partition our efforts amongst them? We ask whether these questions also should be formally considered.
The reports presented gave evidence of considerable success on various scales. However, despite these and other notable successes, many serious problems of many types persist. We ask whether the present partition of effort between immediate and pressing problems as compared to long term issues is appropriate. Should we formally address this question too?
Yang : This session covers the various areas of waste management system including the resource recovery. China lays out the management strategy for the solid and hazardous waste for the need of the coming 21st century. Also, it was pointed out that the contradiction between the environment and development. The social/economic development depends on the growth level of the natural system. Current practices of solid waste management system was included in the commentator. Problems of the application of the composting and incineration practice for the solid waste management system were reported. This provides the valuable information/guidance for the development of the strategy for the needs of the 21st century.
Utilization of agricultural wastes (such as cassava solid waste, water hyacinth and cattle manure) through biogas production was presented. Biogas used in the rural area of Indonesia apparently is appropriate. However, the integration of biogas production in the agricultural waste management system in Indonesia requires further investigation.
Both municipal and toxic waste management systems in Taiwan were presented. Landfill, for now, is still number one operation in Taiwan. However, the incineration shows some trends of increase. Composting technology is not acceptable in Taiwan now, because of the people attitude of this technology and questionable market potential. Waste minimization is receiving the public/government support. Some incentives are initiating now for the promotion of waste recycling program. Toxic waste program is including in the program of solid waste management in Taiwan.
Requirement and various treatment processes for the nitrification/denitrification of the wastewater was presented. Both low cost and high effective approaches for the nitrification and denitrification were presented. Requirement of the selection of each process depends on the land requirement and social/economic factors. Denitrification may produce N20 gas was discussed. This is related to the green house effect. Control or reduction of N2O gas is required.
Nitrification/denitrification process for the increase of treated wastewater reuse was presented and discussed. This may provide the effective resource conservation. In general, the topics included in this session reflect the possible ways for converting the waste products into the resource.
These waste/wastewater products include municipal, industrial and agricultural resources. Also, both technology available in the developing and developed countries were presented and discussed. This session indicates that the aspect of traditional technology may need to the modified for the requirement and use for locality and environment.
Ryan : We have just had the fourth session this morning, and in order to allow more time for general discussion I do not have more to add, except to thank the speakers for their papers.
Maekawa : We have had a beautiful conclusion from the session chairpersons. We have distributed a proposal draft, and we can move onto to discussing this. I will ask Dr Macer to read this. There are 11 articles in this proposal, please give us any questions or comments on this.
Flores : Can I make a proposal on the first issue. The second sentence ends "agriculture and aquaculture", which is limiting. Can I suggest "agriculture, forestry and fisheries". Fisheries covers both capture fisheries and aquaculture. Can I also consider item 3, in which you use the word "appropriate" technology, could you clarify what you mean. because some said anything that is low tech is appropriate, which may not apply in a rural community. However, if you consider the so-called "hybrid" technology mentioned by Dr Wilk, which is a mixture between traditional and present-day technology.
Macer : The first suggestion is better, and we will change it. Let me respond to why we use the word "appropriate" in item 3. In the second sentence I tried to clarify the point "there is no inherent advantage in using new over old technology". So we should avoid the adjectives in front of technology, just using appropriate. Technology can apply to anything, old or new, we don't need the word hybrid I think. I should also note that Prof. Muchtar noted in comments given to me that a network should be set up, and that there is a need for a center to collect and improve technology that may be useful for sustainable development. Prof. Mazid also suggested that a regional organization called the Asian Environmental Conservation Organization or Council should be formed to plan, undertake and implement regional programs for conservation and improvement of the environment in the region. He also proposes collaborative research programs, and also stressed the fragility of the common aquatic community.
Yang : The third sentence further explains all the conditions, so the word appropriate is OK I think.
Flores : The reason why I raised this is that during our discussions it has been made clear that in the introduction of new technology, what is existing before you first go into the community needs to be considered. Of course if there is no existing parallel technology in a community you are fine, but we would like to emphasis that whenever modern technology is introduced into the area it should be the concern of the developer to look at whether there are parallel indigenous technologies that will be affected by the introduction of that technology.
Macer : We could add to item 3 the sentence "When introducing an alternative technology into a community we must take due care that it is appropriate for that community", or words to that effect.
Ryan : Would you like to make a reference to the volume that has just been released by the UNEP, 500 pages, called "Cleaning and Greening the Earth". All the ideas of appropriate and sustainable technologies are explained with case studies, and they are printing millions of copies in all the UN languages. They want it to be prescribed as a text book in all the universities and schools of all the member countries. The book has been released, and covers almost all the subjects that have been discussed here. We could make a reference to it, and say that we recommend that book to others, and popularize the cases and references to others. Because it is coming in a big way and everyone can benefit from a push and pulling attention to this manual, which is a first class book.
Macer : Do you have any copy?
Ryan : No, I am one of the six who wrote the manual. I am waiting for my copy.
Macer : Maybe it is better for the network to recommend, and mention, after we have seen it.
Bertram : I agree that the appropriate place to mention it is the network, because this seminar has not seen that book.
Hisajima : In item 8, the funding mechanism is mentioned. However, we have never mentioned a training scheme. Why don't we mention two types of training scheme. In item 3, it says "has ancient roots in all cultures". Why did you use "all" and not "different"?
Macer : The word "all" expresses the idea that all the different countries in the world have their own indigenous culture.
Hisajima : In item 2, you mention "a resource", why not "resources"?
Macer : Resource can be used in a singular, actually those words came from Dr Flores.
Ryan : I need a small clarification regarding training, do we support for-the-job or on-the-job training? It is a very important difference. But for-the-job training leads to unemployment whereas on-the-job training leads to employment. That point should be made very clear.
Flores : I think that details like that should not appear in resolutions like these, we can come out later on with methods to implement the resolutions discussed here. The question on the singular use of the word resource, is that it is sufficient. In item 9 you mention "the essential role that women play in the conservation", I think in the discussion in this conference this was not discussed. I would rather use the word "resource-users" which covers both sexes.
Macer : I think the word "resource-user" is good to include, maybe we could ask other people in general about this last point. We had a little discussion of women's rights issues in Asia at lunch, so should we include any mention or not.
McAllister : We might consider using "resource users of both genders", so we have everyone included.
Ryan : Land reforms and registering land in the joint names of the adult women members of a family is a positive step to increase agricultural production, stop the formation of slums and squatter settlements in towns and cities and to give people work and food in their own village. When women hold ownership of the land they can prevent much of the fragmentation and uneconomical holding of land, which is sold, mortgaged or abandoned. There are also other needs such as adequate water and transportation to market facilities should be provided to rural populations to help them live comfortably.
Alexandrov : I also think the language in item 9 needs more work, with the mix of topics from human rights, to women and to aquatic resources. Of course all these ideas are needed, but we either need to link more closely or separate into different points.
Macer : I wonder if there are any other comments?
Asada : I would just like to make a comment related to women's issue, I think that in order to discuss women's issues it would be good to include more women speakers next time.
Maekawa : Nice comment thank you. Any more comments?
Bertram : Perhaps a compromise form of words might be to say that "the essential role that women, as well as men, play as resource users", then you have all the words you need in one sentence.
Macer : Yes, that may be better to stress the point.
Hisajima : In item 10 we mention the UNESCO-UT office. What can we imagine? I do think it is a good idea but what type of thing?
Maekawa : I am not sure, but I think an office not a building!
Mazid : I think sometimes we may use the word desk rather than office, because when we say UNESCO-UT desk it does not mean a building.
Macer : Maybe an office can be interpreted from a computer, to a desk, to a huge office.
Mazid : It seems that item 10 is very general, we should make it more specific. The UNESCO-UT "environmental conservation" office may be better. I think office is better than desk. Regarding item 11, we could specify the day when the next seminar could be held, and whether it is to be in Japan or another country.
Macer : Thank you, yes in fact even for item 10 we could include a second sentence specifying what the network could be called, and the next sentence would talk about the office for that network. Maybe we should give a name to the network.
Yang : Yes, and maybe change to the "office of this network".
Muchtar : I want to comment on item 7. In the last sentence it overemphasizes the economic aspects, by saying "Education and personal ethics, while essential, are insufficient to meet the needs of people." Maybe we should delete that.
Macer : The reason I put it in is that I thought we should include education and ethics as well as economics, we could change it to "Education and personal ethics are also essential", and delete the rest.
Maekawa : Are there any other comments, especially on item 11.
Flores : On item 11, I would like a clarification. I have noticed in this Seminar how there are very broad areas being considered, sometimes there is a tendency for imbalance in paper presentation. I would like to ask for clarification. Will the next Seminar, which may be held in 1996, whether it could concentrate on agriculture, forestry and fisheries as in item 1? Industrialization and urbanization are two different aspects, and two different problems to be considered.
Maekawa : We had discussed some of the issues on the theme of the future Seminar, and we expect it to focus on secondary industries.
Ryan : Is secondary industry a part of agriculture?
Maekawa : I think we discussed some of these topics over lunch, maybe Dr Macer could clarify?
Macer : Yes, there were plans to have a second conference focusing a little more on secondary industry and technology, to build on the idea of this Seminar. In the network we would be broad and cover the topics as you suggest, and widening a little to include the secondary industries.
Ryan : I suggest that unless you define the target group you cannot decide the subject matter. The target group is very important, whether it is urban, rural, the rich or the poor, who do you want to address. Once that is defined all else will follow. This has been a mistake made in several conferences, some attempt to benefit the Northern societies, some the South, some the rich and some the poor, it is confusing. Who do you want to benefit and then all the papers could focus on that target group.
Alexandrov : In item 9 we have defined it as resource users, women and men. Also it might be a good idea, because if we seek to promote human rights we need to define the target group as resource users.
Ryan : From item 9, I do not know whether your target groups are resource users in the advanced countries or in the developing countries.
Alexandrov : I think people in both groups of countries are resource users.
Ryan : Then it becomes too broad-based and unfocused. You cannot cater to the Northern rich and the Southern poor, the educated and the uneducated, many problems come if you do not define who you are going to address.
Alexandrov : But if you consider sustainability as an ethical concept, we could do this. It is not political, it is an ethical concept as discussed earlier.
Macer : I think one point is that the target group of these Seminars are those who are here, and those who will read the proceedings, which are not the ordinary people of the Asia-Pacific region. With Internet we can get another select group, all the computer users. However, what we hope is that people will go back to their own community and pass on what they can learn. I don't think academic seminars can immediately aim to target the group of the rural poor, however, we can try to target the people who are actively involved with the ordinary people.
Ryan : May I make my point clear. Some of these suggestions we make, are to be implemented by international organizations, some by national governments, some others by NGOs, others by individuals. If we do not specify that we are addressing the individual, or the ordinary people, the NGO or government, than everybody's business becomes nobody's business.
Yang : Of course the target is important, but it could still create some problem. For example, in 1973-1976 I was teaching at the Asian Institute of Technology in Bangkok. Before I joined all the staff limited the type of approach and topic to developed and non-developed approaches, for waste water management system. I promoted some sorts of advanced technology with interaction with existing technology. Some of my students in Taiwan, Singapore or Malaysia, are not going to stick to low technology developments. They need to promote and be an expert in all.
Macer : Yes, I think we could think of the target groups that we intend each item to be addressed to. In item 8 we do include target groups, local, national and international communities. We could include governmental and non-governmental organizations to keep it broad. We need to keep some generality, as many of the issues are relevant to everybody.
Ryan : That means the entire world.
Bertram : I think it is OK as it stands.
Ishizuka : I want to express my pleasure with item 11. We did not have an expectation to have another Seminar before, but your proposal to have one is appreciated. We cannot answer the question of venue or dates, but we will answer at later date.
Maekawa : Thank you. We will discuss item 8 with UNESCO also. If everyone agrees with this proposal we can move to the closing. Thank you very much to all the persons.
Macer : A final announcement is that we will take a conference photograph after the closing address. Now Prof. Nannichi will give us his closing address.