Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' comments




This idea assumes capacity regarding internet access, the ability of network users to be able to engage as a partner to to CARD and the technology transfer of technologies that may be appropriate in one location but not in another with tailoring to the cultural and ecological context of the 'transferee'. It is unrealistic to assume that governments will agree to make exceptions on import tariffs for technologies promoted under CARD. Furthermore, this initiative professes to become a democratic network of users and suppliers of technologies but without equality in the transaction of ideas there is a risk that this will turn out to impose ideas and technologies on those that are weaker in the chain. It can take years of patiently working with farmers to demonstrate results and to tailor the approaches to the context. Behavioural change cannot be so easily traded across networks. Also, how is quality of advisory services assured in the system? How would the risks of technology transfer be kept to manageable levels?

Furthermore, the author/s are still in the process of developing the institution to do the work (something that takes a lot of time and can be very slow) and the data that they wish to share in their clearinghouse does not really exist. There is little work that has tested adaptation strategies so offering access to "proven" adaptation strategies is a bit of false advertising. If this project included a method of testing these strategies that would be fantastic but that would also add much time to delivery.

1comment
Share conversation: Share via:

Pia Jensen

Oct 26, 2017
11:56

Member


1 |
Share via:
Proposal
creator

Dear Judges: thanks for your comments. They are inspiring. I'll address each point:

"assumes capacity regarding internet access," - this is why the use of alternative communications and media is described - fully recognize not all locations have access to the internet. Will elaborate more on that next year. Also, about cultural and ecological context - this is why CARD proposes that each receiving site be empowered to adapt the program to their needs and resource restrictions - Will elaborate more on that next year.

"unrealistic to assume that governments will agree to make exceptions on import tariffs for technologies" indeed and no assumptions are made. Clearly state that this proposal could be looked upon as disruptive and explain the use of a unique governance model designed to achieve consent and the fact that most governments have already agreed that climate requires immediate and effective changes/solutions/agreements.

"initiative professes to become a democratic network of users and suppliers of technologies but without equality in the transaction of ideas there is a risk that this will turn out to impose ideas and technologies on those that are weaker in the chain" this is why the proposal addresses other organizations which do exactly what you suggest - CARD proposed to be an evolutionary hub driven by contributions from all over the world.

"It can take years of patiently working with farmers to demonstrate results and to tailor the approaches to the context" - this is true and there are solutions in practice today which are exhibiting the intended success as envisioned upon planning and implementation, such as Greening The Deserts, the use of swales and berms in small and large scale sites.

"Behavioural change cannot be so easily traded across networks." - Actually, this point is very debatable. Are you familiar with how bitcoin is changing behaviors, regardless of the long standing opposition by governments and monetary policy officials? Are you familiar with the growing movement of people to grow their own food as evidenced in the Great American Farm Tour by Justin Rhodes and Family this year? And, one reason the governance model Sociocracy was included is because its use on organizations in Europe has resulted in positive outcomes because people experienced the benefits and changed to adopt the model in their organizational activities.

"how is quality of advisory services assured in the system?" Good question - drawing from the successes of solutions considered by CARD for deployment, only the most qualified persons would be invited to work with the project and as evidenced in the proposal, continuous evaluation of the project and outcomes will be fulfilled to ensure that no item, person, group,or issue falls through potential cracks.

"How would the risks of technology transfer be kept to manageable levels"? Please provide an example of what you are concerned about with this question. in the meantime, I'd like to point to the proposal's consideration of blockchain as suggested by team member Peter Rowan on comments and my response embracing the idea.

"Furthermore, the author/s are still in the process of developing the institution to do the work (something that takes a lot of time and can be very slow) and the data that they wish to share in their clearinghouse does not really exist. There is little work that has tested adaptation strategies so offering access to "proven" adaptation strategies is a bit of false advertising. If this project included a method of testing these strategies that would be fantastic but that would also add much time to delivery." 

It is true that CARD as an organization does not exist, which is why it is noted as a start-up at the proposal's website, which you may, or, may not have reviewed. Granted, there are hurdles to overcome in moving concepts forward into fruition, but, where would we be today if Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak hadn't put their noses to the grindstone and developed their first MacIntosh computer?

While most people operate in what appears to be a slow-motion progression, the intended schedule of actions for this proposal is doable, with motivated persons involved. Data entry is a tedious and time-consuming process and negotiating with technology owners and governments could be a labor intensive task. But, most people have come to agreement that we need to move forward now with "boots on the ground" actions to achieve resiliency sooner, rather than miss the mark and suffer later.

Proven adaptation strategies exist, which is why there are other organizations offering to sell their services and products to the public. The difference with CARD is that CARD proposes to make the solutions more readily, and freely, available through a variety of communications portals.

False advertising? Swales work, berms work, Greening of the Deserts is working, rocket stove technology is very effective, apps are effective in educating consumers, circular economy is becoming more well-known and is even promoted by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Billions in Change products are incredibly effective, training the trainers is effective, blockchain is becoming mainstream as we speak... no testing needed in order to move forward.

Please note that a number of proposals in this year's contest moved into the semi-finals without all proposal components completed and some proposals place reliance on other organizations to carry out the plan without stating whether agreements are in place.