I finally figured it
out in a way I can articulate. The above drawing shows the four elements that
must be considered for any technology to be implemented sustainably in any
society. You can safely ignore these principles if your chosen technology is
entirely disposable, not requiring maintenance, because that is what it will
be.
Local
social infrastructure- The end users of the technology have to be involved and
accepting.
Local
technical infrastructure- There needs to be the technical expertise to operate, maintain
and repair the technology locally. If there is no technical expertise close by,
when the system fails, it will be quickly abandoned.
Local
financial infrastructure- There has to be local availability of whatever finances are
needed for parts, labor, consumables to keep the technology functioning.
Local
consumable/energy infrastructure- If a technology requires consumables or power to operate,
these must be locally and reliably available.
These factors can be used to evaluate whether or not a technology
will function sustainably in a community. For instance, If a water treatment
technology is planned for a remote community of hunter gatherers, if there is
no financial support, no ability to maintain stocks of chemicals and no
technical expertise available, it makes no sense to implement a technology that
requires these things. If an affluent community in the US has the desire for a
highly technical system, has local technicians, the financial reserves for
maintenance and supplies, a constant energy source, then that community has
many more possibilities for technology choice.
This doesn’t mean one technology is better or more effective
than another, only that one technology that works well one place, can utterly
fail somewhere else if the above conditions are not considered and resolved
successfully.
If the choice is to simply supply a technology and walk away, as many
development projects do, the project is assured of failure.
