The Value of the Node

-->

In order to allow lasting impact, our node has to have some level of community buy-in, whether it’s a financial investment in further technology or just the adoption of ownership of the technology that we bring with us this summer.  After our month or so working with the community and node, someone must decide that this is a valuable enterprise.

A huge part of that is confidence in the technology we are bringing. We must make the node extremely modular in the sense that it will comprise of a set of units which are easily assembled and detached. The benefit of this is that is some part of it is to fail (perhaps the charge or lights controller) then the owner of the node can quickly send back the faulty part and new part can be mailed back immediately.

No technical knowledge about the device would be needed to remove, install or even debug any part of the unit. The interface needs to be made such that it is obvious which part is not working and how to exchange it.  We also aim to prevent faults as much as possible. Hopefully we will have time to do strenuous testing on the node for things like rain and dust. Improvement in the casing and electronics can then be made to lower the chances of breakage. It is possible that we go to Nepal with this device and it would be during monsoon season, a real test of climate.

Beyond demonstrating the functionality and reliability of the nodes, we must show their monetary value.  A node owner is able to charge their phones or light their home, but we also envisioned our node being used as a small business with a “pay to charge” component.  Customers could pay a small amount per minute of charging during the day or night, and the owners responsible for its upkeep could collect this payment.

This brings us to the question of microfinancing.  We have to consider who gets this new technology, how do we sell/give it to people once people are interested in using it, and where will the money for repairs and new nodes come from? It was explained to us by Dr. Malkin, who works with Engineering World Health, that giving the node to a community to use as a public device is extremely risky because no single person is directly responsible for it and that such a system would rely on there being established leadership within the community. A far better solution seems to be to give the node to a family, which would then have incentive to protect its source of income.

In theory, the idea of small-scale loans for new technology is great.  It allows for the people most in touch with the needs of the community to benefit from new technology, without making the initial financial investment unrealistic.  However, in practice (and especially in our case since we aren’t a financial institution) things become much more complicated.  Introducing the need to keep up with payment schedules complicates the task from our end, and it’s very difficult to find success stories from microfinance endeavors in developing countries.

Determining the manner in which this technology is distributed initially and the way start-up costs are distributed is one of the main questions that we seek to address with continued research and exposure to a specific community.  This more than anything else in our project is highly situational and sensitive to the norms and culture of the specific community. While the rough figure of $400 (our current estimate for a node) could definitely be improved upon and made smaller this venture is really about documenting the implementation. We hope that people will be able to pick up where we finish to make the nodes better but also more economical with an even better financing model.