Cautions on design for 'the developing world"

In a pithy article called "Why to be Wary of "Design for Developing Countries, "  Krista Donaldson puts forth a whole lot of important advice for the many people now interested in design for less industrialized economies.    She reminds us that many projects actually fall into the category of 'remote design' (design from afar) and 'parachute design' (design from afar with visits)-- and she, along with others, believe that many of these projects will not be sustainable.  Krista, who has worked in Iraq and in Kenya, argues that in many less-industrialized economies there are engineers and designers who are well-trained but lack the capital and political support to address tools that could change everyday lives.  This perspective argues against the 'spring break from college project' approach and for longer-term investments in in-country labs like AppLab. 

Like Paul Polak, Krista also cautions that "the most successful design for development products are those that help people earn or save money--... not necessarily improve health."  Food for thought.  We would see tools that improve outcomes for midwives as a way of increasing midwives' chances of a better livelihood for themselves.  And we know that saving a mother's life has multigenerational downstream effects for her family's well-being.