Post on 11-Jun-2020
transcript
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump
by Mark V. B. Hughes
Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology University of Toronto
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
National Library l*l of Canada Bibliothèque nationale du Canada
Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques
395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington OttawaON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada
The author has granted 3 non- exclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, distribute or seil copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electronic formats.
The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.
L'auteur a accordé une Licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump i
........................................................... 1 . PROLOGUE: A FRUSTRATED HEALTH CARE WORKER 1
..................................................................................................................................... . 2 rnTRODUCTION 3
3.1 THE RECIPROCA~G HANDPUMP: A DESCRIPTION ............................................................................. 16 4.2 CLASS~CATIONS OF Pmm ................................................................................................................. 25 3.3 A WESTERN TECHNOLOGY. NOT h SOUTHERN ONE ............................................................................. 27
4.3.1.1 Ancient and Renaissance pumpç ............................................................................................................. 28 ........................................................................................ 4.3.1.2 The Industrial Revolution and the bon Pump 31
...................... 5 . MOTIVATION FOR TRANSFElUUNG HANDPUMPS: THIRST A i i aEALTH 35
........................ 6 . PRE-1970%: CAST IRON PUMPS PRCIDUCE A MAINTENANCE PROBLEM: 39
..................... . 7 THE 1970's: DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS CHOOSE THE HANJIPUMP 43
................................................................................. 7.1 A S H F ~ N WESTERN DEVELOPMENT THOUGHT: 44 ............................................ 7.1.1 Post-wur technological avsistance according to the Western model 44
........................................................... 7. I.2 Two Decades of kperience Discredit the Western mode1 JY 7.2 HOW THE WESTERN CHANGE IN FOCUS LED DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS TO THE HANDPUMP ..... 51
................................................................................. 7 . 2 l Pearson Commission Cri t ic th Technologv j l 7'. 2.3 The World Bank Shijs Gears .................... ..... ............................................................................. 52
7.3 LEGACY TO THE 1980's: THE ~NTERNARONAL D W G WATER SUPPLY & SANITA~ON DE CADE...^^
................................................................ . 8 THE 1970's AND 1980's: ADAPTING PUMP DESIGNS -55 . . ..................................................... 8.1 THE INDIA MARK 11: SUCCESS THROUGH [NCREASED DURABILITY 33
8.2 APPROPR~ATE TECHNOLOGY INFLUENCE ............................................................................................. 62 8.3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNIMADE ...................................................................................................... 67
8.3.1 The Waterloo Protoype ................................................................................................................ 67 ..................................................................... 8.3.2 Field Tesring 1 9 78-82: Lessons and Mod@cationr 74
......................................................................................................................... 8.3.2.1 Ethiopia: Back to M d 75 8.3 3.2 Sn Lanka: incorporating Wood ........................................................................................................... 76 8.3.2.3 ïhailand: A Leaky Foot valve ............................................................................................................... 77 8.3.2.4 Malaysia: A Bener Foot valve ............................................................................................................... 78
8.3.3 The ü7VIUclDE ............................... .. ......................................................................................... 80 8.4 THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLrWIWORLD BANK HANDPUMPS PROJECT AND THE ''VLOPVf' CONCEPT ................................................................................................................................................... -82
......................................... ...................... 9 . TEE LATE 1970's: ADAPTING TEE ENMRONMENT ., 85
............................................................... 9.1 E S T A B L I S ~ G CONSTRUCTION FACILITES AND STANDARDS 85 9.2 MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS ...................................................................................................................... 86
... ............................. 9.2.1 The India Mark II Handpump and ifs Three-Tier bfaintenance System ,, 88
..................................................... . 10 THE 1980's: ENCOUNTERING NON-TECEINICAL ISSUES: 93
10.1 NON-TECHMCAL ISSUES DESCRIBED: ................................................................................................. 93 .................................................................................................. ................... 10.1.1 Tunisian Example .. 95
................................................. 10.2 R~connno~ OF NON-TECHNICAL ISSUES AND LACK OF EYPER~SE 96 ............................................................................................................... 10.2.1 Raie of Women -97
........................................................................................................ 10.2.2 Cornrnuniry Participaiion: 99
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump ii
.................................................................................. 10.3 LACK OF FOCUS ON NON-TECHMCAL ISSUES: 100 ................................................ ................................................ 10.3.1 IDRC Marketing Example ... 102
20.3.2 Little Attention to Non-technical Issues ........................................................................... I 1 2
t 1 . COMMENTARY: ............................................................................................................................. -114
1 1.1 THE IMPORTANCEOF SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................ 114 .................................................................. 1 1.2 DEMAND: AN ESSW COMPONENT OF THE SYSTEM 117
.............................................. 1 1.2. I The Indian Busis of Demand: Scarce Warer and Drilled Wells 1 1 7 ................................. 1 1-22 The Bangladeshi Busis of Demand: TubewelZs and Convenience Items -121
........................................................... 11.2.3 The Filipino Basis of Demand: Concern A bout Health 123 .............................................. 1 1.3 ABSENCE OF DEMAND i \ ~ A REASON BEM F N L ~ TO TRANSFER 125
......................................................................................................................... 1 i . 4 POOR ASSIJMFRONS 128
12 . CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 130
... Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 111
Acknowledgements:
I would like to thank rny cornmittee, Al Beny, Bert Hall and particularly my supervisor, Janis Langins for
the guidance they have given me. Tbere are aIso a multitude of perçons who listened patiently, answered
questions, gave feedback and provided encouragement. Foremost among them is my wife, JO-Anne, who,
on top of everything else, turned sketches hastily drawn in pen into the original diagrams found in this
paper.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 1
1. Prologue: A Frustrated Health Care Worker
Consider a healtti worker who wants to reduce childhood diarrhea in a rural third
world village. The link between intestinal diseases and polluted water supplies is well
known. Suppose after making a cursory inspection of the village, the health worker noted
that the villagers drew their water supply fiom the same river where they bathed, washed
their clothes and near which they defecated. The health care worker's resources are
limited, but are sufficient to provide for the installation of handpumps in the village.
Unfortunately, once the handpumps are installed the villagers h d the taste objectionable.
The water fiom the pump is too salty or too metallic. The health worker explains that the
villagers should get used to the taste of the pump water, because it is much better for
them than the river water. He or she explains a little microbiology and describes how E.
coli contributes to bowel diseases, which many of the children suffer from. One puzzled
villager asks why, if what the heaith care worker says is tme, do the people in the city get
diarrhea when they have a brand new modem central water delivery system. The health
worker patiently explains that there is more than one cause of diarrhea, but that dirty
water is almost certainly the p ~ c i p a l cause in this village. Drink the water fiom the
pump and community health will certainly improve.
In spite of the health workers efforts however, a number of villagers continue to
draw their dnnking water fiom the river. A few months later the pump breaks. AAer
fiddling about tryhg to discover the cause of the failure, the viilagers discover that some
stones that children slipped into the pump have made their way down the riser pipe and
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 2
damaged the valve on the piston so that it no longer closes. The piston needs replacing.
No one at the local market has spares, but someone is found who travels to and fiom the
capital. They retum fiom a trip and report that there are no spare valves in stock.
Meanwhile the women of the village have retumed to the river to fetch water, glad
for the r e m of the daily opportunity for chatting with fiends, swapping stories etc.. The
pump stands unused and inoperable. The village leaders eventually send out a request
for a spare part, but no communication is heard back. AAer a while, nobody seems to pay
attention to the nisting pump.
Whose behaviour needs to change here: that of the villagers or that of the health
care worker? How might the health care worker have better achieved his or her goals?
The story of the transfer of the handpump to nual areas of the Developing World is the
story of Western development agencies' growing awareness of the intricacies of
technology transfer. Donors h m the West began with the naïve faith that Western
technology, without adaptation and without preparation, would be accepted in the
Developing World and would be successfùl at solving the problems it was brought in to
face. They leamed that the technologies and environments have to adapt to one another.
'Ihus this is a story of those donoa recognizing the interaction between technology and
the environment and the difficulty of integrating the product of one world into the fabnc
of another.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 3
2. Introduction
One of the most well known books in the history of technology is Thomas P.
Hughes' Nenvorks of ~ o w e r . ' Hughes describes the birth and development of electncal
supply systems in New York, London and Berlin. His description makes it clear that
technologies do not exist in isolation. The electnc light hinctioned only because it was
part of a technological system which included transmission lines and generaton.
Moreover, both the development and the spread of these machines required and were
shaped by inventors and institutions. Politics could be as influential as the design of the
machines in determining the success of the transfer of technology fiom one city to
another. The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines the word "system" as "An organized
set or assemblage of things comected. associated, or interdependent, so as to f o n a
complex unity".' Machines, individuals, institutions and politics interacted with one
another in a complex manner, that is they formed a system to bring electnc illumination
(among other things) to Chicago, London and Berlin around the tum of the century. It is
necessary to understand the entire system if one is to understand the history of the electric
light.
Because of the interaction of technology with its environment, the transfer of a
technology can turn out to be a vev complex process requiring a great deal of effort. The
required effort is enormous because a technology can fail if it is unsuited to any one
factor of the environment, even if well suited to others. The story of the transfer of the
pp - - -
' Thomas P. Hughes, Networh of Power: Elecnifcation in Western Sociefy, 1880-1930 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1 983).
Success and Failure in Technology Transferr The Story of the Handpump 4
handpump nom the Developed to the Developing World reveals the complexities
involved in the transfer of even a simple technology. Since the Second World War,
Western or Westem trained professionals working for developrnent organizations such as
UNICEF, the World Bank and the Oxford Cornmittee for Famine Relief (OXFAM) have
attempted to install the handpump in the Developing World. Through expetience they
discovered the interaction of environment and technology. They learned that new
environments force adaptations in technological hardware. They responded, not just with
one, but with many designs. They also learned that the technology makes demands on the
environment. Therefore, they had to provide training and constmct maintenance systems
to support the pumps. So long as the issues remained sufficiently technical, the
development organizations coped. When moving into the realm of the non-technical
however, the development professionals struggled. The story is instructive to anyone
who wishes to better understand the history of development since World War Two and
anyone who hopes to apply lessons learned fiom that history.
Handpurnps were onginally fashioned chiefly of wood, but corne the nineteenth
century, like so many Western technological artifacts, they mutated to iron. Though
quite popular through the nineteenth centwy, the handpump died out in use in the West in
the early decades of the twentieth century with the advent of electrical power.
Manufacture dried to a trickle by the 1920's,~ but the handpump received new life afier
World War Two as part of the panoply of technologies deployed by Western development
organizations such as the United States Agency for international Development (USAID),
Oyord Universal Dicrionmy, 3ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1 93 3. 3 Bernard M. Eubanks, 2% i s a Stot-y of the Pump and ifs Relatives. (Salem, Or.: [Privately published.], 1971) p. 170.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 5
OXFAM and W C E F to assist in the development of Latin Amencan, Caribbean,
Middle Eastern, Afican, Asian and Pacific countries known collectively as "the
Developing World".
A given technology is designed for operation in a specific environment. We c m
subdivide "the environment" into several pieces. We c m speak of the physical, the
economic or the political environment. We can also speak of the social or cultural
environment. When a technology moves to a different environrnent, either the technology
or the environment, and most probably both, m u t change. If the new environment
features much saltier water, an iron handpurnp will nist more quickly. Answer: use
galvanized iron. However, sometimes it is the environment that m u t change. It is
difficult to see how a pump can be modified to cost nothing or to need no maintenance.
Moreover, what modifications can be made to the shape or materials of a handpurnp
which will compel people to use it despite the fact they prefer the taste of an altemate
source of water and do not perceive a need for "clean" water? The pump also places new
financial and organizational requirements on the recipient community. Perceptions and
values must be changed through education.
Development professionals did not understand this when they began to bring
handpumps to the Developing World. Early attempts to introduce the pump were
failures. The pumps, which had been designed for use on Western famis where they
served a single family, soon broke down in nual areas of the Third World when asked to
undergo near continuous use by a dozen or more families at a tirne. Once broken, there
were few welders to repair cast iron parts and no distribution systems to provide spares.
The pumps, nisting and useless, stood as monuments to donor naiveté. By the mid-
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 6
1960's, development professionals comprehended their error, or at least part of it, and
began to redesign the lowly handpurnp, in order to make it more durable, easier to repair
and to incorporate locally available materials. The new pumps enjoyed better success
than the previous generation.
In the 1970's, development professionals recognized that more than the design
had to change. Maintenance of pumps required organization. in india. a fairly
sophisticated network of caretakers, rnechanics and spare parts was set up. Yet even
when the maintenance problern was solved, still not al1 the pumps were successful, and
even after a decade specifically devoted to bringing clean water to all, millions remained
without it. Even where projects had aiready established pumps, levels of water service
declined once extemal support was withdrawn."
It is dificult to estimate accurately the number of handpurnps in use in the
Developing World and the number of people they serve. No one keeps track of the
worldwide count of handpumps and when figures are reported, they are usually specific to
one mode1 of pump, leaving the reader in the dark about how many pumps of other
models there may be. Furthemore, numbers obtained from governrnents or NGO's rarely
include privately owned pumps and figures indicating the number of inoperable pumps
are often omitted entirely.
We may at least be able to get some idea of the order of magnitude of the nurnber
of handpumps in the Developing World fiom considering WHO data on the number of
people with versus the number without access to a safe water supply, such as govemment
4 J . Hodgkin, Sustainabifity of Donor Assisted Rural Water Supply Projects. (Washington, DC: Water and Sanitation for HeaIth Project, 1994), p. viii.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 7
and NGO installed handpumps are normally assumed to provide.5 According to one
estimate, rural water supply coverage in the Developing World (excluding China) only
increased fiom 10% to 12% in the penod fiom 196 1 - 197 1 .6 This estimate is roughly
consistent with a 1970 survey by WHO, released in 1973: by 1970, the rural population
of the Developing World (excluding China) was 1.249 billion. Of those, only 173 million
7 or 14% had access to safe water. During the next 2 decades. development organizations
made a priority of bringing clean water to the rural Developing 'World. in 1977, the UN
General Assembly approved the goal of providing clean water for al1 people in the world
by 1990.8 Estimates of how many pumps would be needed to meet this goal varied. The
World Health Organization estimated a figure of 5-7 million pumps.9 Other estimates
were as high as 20 rnil~ion.'~ By 1991, approximately 786 million of 1,370 million or
57% of the people in the rural Developing World (excluding China) had access to safe
water. ' ' At that time in China, about 569 million of 84 1 million or 68% of the mal
population had access to safe water.I2 Since much of the improvement was achieved
5 For fùrther eqlanation of why handpurnps represent "safe water supply" see Section 5. WHO, @Community Water Programme-Rogress Report of the Director Generai to the 25" World Health
Assembly. April 1972", in World Bank, Village CVarer Supply. (Washington: The World Bank, 1 976), p. 25. 7 WHO "Community Water Supply and Sewage Disposal in Developing Countries" , Worid Health Srarisrics, Vol. 26, No. 1 1, 1973 as reported in World Bank, Villoge Warer Supply. The survey was carried out in December 1970. s H. V. Krishnaswamy, **The Rural Drinking Water Supply Programme in India and the Development of a Dependable Deep-well Handpump", in Handpumps Testing and Developmenr : Proceedings of a Workshop in China, ed. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar Bryan. (Washington, D.C., U.S.A.: World Bank, 1985), pp. 51-58), p. 51. ' Allen Momson, .'In Third World Villages, A Simple Handpump Saves Lives", Civil Engineering Magazine, October 1983, p. 68. 10 David Spurgeon, "Low-Cost Handpumps for the ThKd World" in Developing World Water 1988, ed, John Pickford, (London: Gromenor Press internationai, 1988), pp. 40-41. " World Bank, Social Indicators of Developmenr 1993. (Baltimore: World Bank, 1993), contains the numbers ftom which these figures are dculated. " World Bank, Social Indicators ofDevelopent 1996. (Baltimore: World Bank, 19961, pp. 72-73.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 8
through the installation of handpumps, we can expect that there were a few, perhaps
several million handpumps in the Developing World by 1 99 1.
The largest concentration is most obviously in Asia where there are approximately
2.6 million hdia Mark Ii and Mark III handpumps serving as many as 500 million people
in rural areas of India alone.13 In the mid-1980's, there were several million suction
handpumps in use in China (and presumably still are today).14 There are perhaps three
million New No. 6 suction pumps in ~an~ladesh . " Several hundred thousand pumps of
various rnakes are to be found in other Asian countries. The Philippines had about
150,000 drilled wells in 1986, '~ the vast majority of which were probably supplied with
handpumps since it is a cheap way to extract water fiom dnlled wells.
Moving to Afiica and Latin America, the nurnbers drop by two or three orders of
magnitude. This is due in part no doubt to the difference in populations: Asia (excluding
Japan and Siberia), 3.5 billion; AWca, 750 million; Latin America and the Cmibbean,
500 million." One will find thousands or tens of thousands of a particular mode1 of
purnp in a given Afiican country. For instance, there were 25,000 Bush pumps in
l 3 A m Kumar Mudgai, Indio Handpump Revolurion: Challenge and Change (Handpump Technology Network Working Paper: WP 0 1/97. Swiss Centre for Development Cooperation in Technology Management (SKAT), 1997)- p. 1 7. 14 Saul Arlosoroff et ai., Cornmuni', Water Supply: The Handpump Option (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1987), p. 9. " Erich Baumann private communication, Sune 29, 1999. Mr. Baumann warns that this number represents an estimate based on memory and shodd not be considered as a precise accoimt. 16 Tan Bock Thiam, "Feasibility of Commercially Producing and Marketing the IDRC-UM Handpump in the Philippines" , in IDRC Hundpump Network Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand, 1 - 3 Oct. 1986, ed. Ernelina S. Almario, (Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, iDRC Manuscipt Report), pp. 96-1 16, p. 104. If United Nations, World Population Prospects: The 1998 Revision (New York, United Nations, forihcoming) as reported in United Nations, Department of Economic and SociaI AfZairs. Population Division, "Population for World Major Areas, 1 750-2050'' United Nations 1998 Revision World Population fitirnates and Projectiom <http9/www.popin4 orglpop 1 998/4.htm> (June 25, 1 999).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 9
Zimbabwe in 1995. The Afiidev, the India Mark II and the Vergnet can each be found
in the thousands in various Afiican count~ies.'~ There are relatively few reports of
handpump projects in Latin America and the Caribbean, though some certainly exist:
12,000 Rope pumps in Nicaragua, 8,000 Maya pumps Ui Guatemala and 3,500 Yaku
pumps in ~olivia." USAID and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
have also engaged in projects in Costa ~ica ," Honduras. Dominican ~ e ~ u b l i c " and
~cuador." In addition to absolute population size, the low nurnbers for handpumps in
Latin America are a reflection of demographics. Not only does Latin America have a
smaller population than either Afnca or Asia, but the population is predominantly urban.
In lWO,73.5% of the population lived in urban areas." Data for individual countries
indicate that even in the penod fiom 1958- 1964, the population of Brazil was 50.4%
urban2' and that of Argentina was 76.1% urban." In urban areas, there are more cost
effective ways to deliver clean water to people than the handpump, such as centralized
pumping systems with piped delivery, therefore the handpurnp is not so important in that
part of the world.
'' ~ o r g m , Peter, **Zimbabwe's User Friendly Bush hunp", in Wurerlines, l4(2), (October 1999, p. 23. 19 Erich Baumann, private communication, June 29, 1999. ' O Erich Baumann, private communication, June 29, 1999. Mr. Baumann wams that this number represents an estimate based on memory and should not be considered as a precise account. " Elias Rosaies, bbRepon on the Euperience of the D R C Handpump Roject in Costa Rica and the Cornmerciahmion Prospects", paper presented at The IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nehvork Meeting, 2 1-25 Ocrober 1992, Beijing, China. N . p., WRC?], [ 1 992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available fiom DRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5.
D. Donaldson, -4 Technica!fihfanagerial Review of MD Hundpump Programs in Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Honduras, and the Domincan Repu Hic. ( Arlington: Water And Sanitation for Hedth, 1 983). 23 B. E. James, UWiD Hundpump Program in Eatador. WASH Field Report no. 123. (Arlington, USA, WASH (Water and Sanitation for Health)), 1984. '' World Bank, Social Indicorors of Developrnent 199 1 - 1992 (Baltimore: World Bank, 1 W2), p. 10. 25 World Bank, Social Indicafors of Deyelopmont 1989. (Baltimore: World Bank, 1989), p. 40. '' World Bank, Social Indicarors of Deyelopnient 1989. (Baltimore: World Bank, 1989), p. 12.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 10
There is no single reason which explains the success of haudpump projects in
some countries, such as India and Bangladesh, while also explaining the failure of any or
al1 cornmunities to adopt handpumps. Price represents a factor, but so also does
perception of need. Not al! the intended recipients of handpumps believed that drinking
handpurnp water was important to their health. The values promoted by the various
Developing World cuitures did not necessarily lead to a demand for handpumps.
Development officiais did see the need for education, which in effect is the reshaping of
values. On the whole, however, the development officiais were not clear on what non-
technical issues of environmental adaptation invdved.
Table 2.1: Chronology: Selected List of Handpumps Deployed in the Developing World Since World War Two Together with Significant Events.
Pump Name Year of DesigdFint Places Deployed Notes De pioyment
I
Asia particularly Slight simplification of the india; Common Handpump design. f i c a Cast Iron purnpstand.
No pump rod guides. ShaIlow well purnp.
Latin America; Designed for durability. Never Caribbean achieved the widespread use that
the lndia Mark II did.
Jalna Forerunner of the india Mark II. "The LittIe Yellow Pump" Designed by indian Mechanic,
Cyrus Gaikwad.
Sholapur c 1973 F o r e m e r of the hdia Mark II, Modification of the Jalna, by Oscar Carlson, an engineer working for a project fünded by the Swedish Covenant Church.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 11
Pump Name Year of Design/First Places Deployed Notes Deploymen t
(1973 Small is Beautrfil published)
New No. 6 cl974 Bangladesh Cheap, cast bon purnp designed for ease of manufacture. Shallow
3,000,000 lifi pump usually mounted on top of tube wells.
( 1975 LTNICEF reports that up ta 75% of handpumps installed in lndia may be out of working order)
tndia Mark U 1975 Asia, particularly IMICEFlGov't of hdia India; undertaking. f i c a Steel pump. Very durable
Based on design of Jalna and of Sholapur pumps. Distinctive chah linkage between lever and piston rod. Seaied bal1 bearing for lever. Most successfiil pump design ever deployed in the developing world. Primarily for use as deepwell P'J"P*
( 1977 üN declares 1 98 1 - 1990 T h e International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade") (IDWSSD)
Waterloo 1978 Prototype
Malaysia; Forermer of the LMIMA.DE, Philippines; developed at the University of Sri Lanka; Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada, Thailand; based on a design by W.K. Ethiopia; Joumey consuitant to the Malawi international Development
Research Centre (DRC), Ottawa. It was designed according to the VLOM smtegy.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 12
Pump Name Year of DesigdFirst Places Deptoyed Notes Deployment
( 1979 Three-Tier Maintenance System first implemented in Tamil Nadu, india.)
( 198 1 UNDPMrorld Bank handpumps project launc hed)
UNIMADE 1984 .4sia; IDRC/University of Malaya Afiica; undertaking. Latin America Uses plastic below-ground
components. Designed to be easy to maintain (VLOM).
(1987 Community Water Supply: The Handpump Option appears: this is the report of the
UNDPM'orld Bank handpurnps project.)
A6ica; Uses some plastic below-ground Philippines; camponents. Designed for ease of
maintenance (VLOM)
india Mark m 1987 india This was a redesign of the india Mark II to make it conform more closely to VLOM principles. The major innovation was to widen the &op pipe so that the cylinder could be brought up separately. The task could thus be performed without the use of heavy rnachinery.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 13
3. Definitions:
3.1 Technology Transfer
If one enters the words "technology transfer" into a library search engine, one is
likely to generate a long list of books and articles. The books and articles do not
constitute one coherent body of literature, however. "Technology" may refer to
something concrete, such as a diesel engine, to something abstract which is closely
associated with physical installations, such as oil refining and refineries or it may even
refer to knowledge of a technique, such as crop rotation. "Transfer" irnplies that the
technology, whatever it is, is moved from one place to another and that the places are
somehow distinct fiom each other. What qualifies as distinct 'places" depends upon the
author. The majority of literature on technology transfer is concemed with the move from
places such as laboratories and universities to places such as factories and industrial sites.
This literature is concemed with the transfer of technology from research and
development to business application. Other authors may consider one Uidustry as a
distinct place fiom another hdustry, or even one tum from as distinct fiom another. in
my essay, technology is transferred fiom the Developed World, i.e. the West, to the
Developing World.
This essay identifies the handpump as a technology. For the most part, the word
haudpump identifies the physical artifact. It is essential to my thesis, however, to make it
clear that I consider the artifact alone to be only one part of the technology, that
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 14
handpump tec hnology, though it centres on the phy sical artifact, includes the knowledge
and attitudes necessary for the handpump to function successfully as a water lifting
device. Technology transfer here refers to the phenomenon in which the handpump and
the knowledge and attitudes necessary to use it effectively spread fiom the developed
nations of the West to the nations of the Developing World.
3.2 The Developing World
Within this essay, 1 repeatedly refer to ''the Developing World". This term refers
to the nations of South and Central Arnerica and the Caribbean, Africo, the Middle East,
south, southeast and east Asia, including the islands of Oceana and the Pacific, but only
sometimes including China. "The Developing World" is a very modem term which has
succeeded "ïhird World". That term was a political designation f?om the Cold War. The
democratic nations of Western Europe and North America (and later Japan) arrogated to
themselves the term "First World". The Communist Bloc countries constituted the
*'Second World". The remaining nations of the world were lurnped together as the "Third
World". Whether or not to classify China as a Second or Third World country was
always in some debate. The nations of the Third World, thus included in one category
regions such as southeast Asia and the Caribbean, people who spoke languages such as
Arabic, Spanish, Malay and Swahili and worshippers of the Hindu, Muslim, Christian and
animistic faiths, among others. About al1 these diverse peoples had in common was their
relative poverty and political impotence in the face of superpower conflict.
One h e m the terni Third World less comrnonly as the hveatieth century nears its
close. It is more fashionable and probably less pejorative to use the term Developing
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 15
World. Nonetheless, the validity of classing the disparate regions together is probably
more in question now than it was in the Cold War. The levels of development (which
means economic development) Vary greatly. While the material conditions of central
Afiica remain near the lowest of the world, Korea and other Newly hdustrialized
Countries have achieved enormous gains in per capita income. Nor have the
aforementioned cultural and regional distinctions disappeared. Nonetheless. the t e m
"Developing World' is still in comrnon usage and the countries to which it applies are
still generally poorer than the nations of "the Developed World" alias "First World" alias
'Uhe West". It is also a convenient term for this essay since more or less the entire region
received Westem aid since the Second World War. That aid included the transfer of the
handpurnp.
The arnbiguity of the status of China exists also in this essay. For political
reasons, China has received relatively little Westem aid, in spite of its enormous
population and low per capita income. As a result, references to China are few within the
documentation upon which this thesis is based (mainly project reports from aid
organizations and journal articles written by people closely involved). 1 ask the reader to
keep in mind that the light treatment of China in this history is more a reflection of the
sources used, rather than an indication that nothing important vis-à-vis handpurnp transfer
ever happened there.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 16
4. The Handpump
4.1 The Reciprocating Handpump:
Fig 1.1: The Reciprocating Handpump.
source: Tschannerl and Bryan The word 'handpump" used in conjunction
Ath wells and drinking water probably
makes most Westerners think of pumps
which look something like this one above.
A Desc@tion.
With the term "reciprocating"
handpurnp, I refer to the generai design of
handpumps cornmon in Europe and North
America in the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries. The image a Western
reader probably has in mind when hearing or
reading the word handpump is based on the
"reciprocating" design. Ancestors to this
design can be found in ancient Greece and
Rome and in Renaissance Europe. Most of
today's handpumps are modifications on the
reciprocating design.
The functioning of the reciprocating
handpumps is govemed by the principle that
water flows fiom areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. if an area of sutficiently
low pressure can be created above a body of water, the water will flow upward. The
handpump is designed to take advantage of this phenornenon to raise water up out of a
well. The reciprocating handpump consiste essentially of a long vertical pipe, called the
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 17
"drop pipe", extending fkom the ground sudace down into rhe well, with a valve
somewhere near the bottom called a "foot valve" and a piston some distance above the
foot valve. In some cases the pump is located in a hand dug well, sometimes in a drilled
borehoie. Both the well and the borehole serve the same purpose: they are deep enough
to extend below the water table so as to allow access to the ground water. Whether hand
dug or machine drilled, these holes are referred to as wells. The reciprocating handpurnp
functions by either pushing or by sucking water up the drop pipe and out of the well. It
accomplislies one or both of these tasks thanks to the up-and-down motion of the piston.
Pump designs which incorporate this motion have the name "reciprocating pumps".
The area in which the piston operates is hown as the "pump cylinder". The
cylinder may be of different diameter than the drop pipe and may be made of a different
material (brass is quite comrnon, for instance). The person operating the pump can make
the piston move up and down using a handle or lever located at the top of the pump. The
lever is attached to the piston by a long rod called the "pump rod". Sometimes this rod
wiI1 be made up of smaller rods comected end to end. in a "lie pump", the pump cylinder
is located relatively far down the drop pipe. As the piston rises, it pushes or lifts the
water above it up the &op pipe. In a "suction pump", the pump cylinder is located near
the top of the drop pipe. As the piston Rses it draws water up the &op pipe by suction.
This distinction accounts for the two different classifications of the reciprocating
handpurnp, lift versus suction, which are still with us today?' From a theoretical point of
view, these two pumps are really the same because the principles by which they function
I7 The t ~ m s "lift" and bdsuction" are not consistently appiied in the literature. See Section 4.2 "Classification of Pumps" for mer detail and an explanation of my choice to adopt these tenns.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 18
b e h w e n t h . - -
piston and the cyiindëc in-whkh P is containeci. This
riese serve to crea
are identical. However, there
are significant operational
distinctions which justi@
treating them as two different
P-PS-
The piston is encircled
by one or two rings of material.
:e a watertight seal between the piston and the cylinder and are known
as "rings", "seals" or sometimes "cups". Because of this seal, the drop pipe is separated
into two distinct sections of pipe so far as the water is concemed. We can name these
sections the upper chamber and the lower chamber. Flow into and out of these sections is
controlled by valves. Valves are devices which allow fluid to flow in one direction, but
Box 43: The Pump.Cyihdet - .J' ,Wi Rhk~~'Cyl inder .I - 1 : ri+,
MM the piston mlLupï& t u ; T .. Us-r. : . 1 ' ' f -, mr,x-#. .,
~ d o w r i i s " M ~ the* pump - ' , :- . ,.,L A.,: 4 .I k -,W. -* -: - W. - . . . I I
@inder. In most pump4 - _ . . h 3 ., . + ,. .. \! -2 $ --.-MW
Piston
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 19
Fig 1.2: The Chambers of the Cyiindet.
PiSon Vslves allmv water to enter - a bove-piston section
Faot vaive alla- rra ter tn enter belowpiston sectmn
0 j t m r ! chamber
The piston effectively divides the pump into
wo sections:
3) the above-piston chamber
2) the below-piston charnber
Nater can only enter these chambers
:hrough the valves. The valves control
Nhich way the water can flow.
not another. The foot valve allows water to
flow fiom the well into the lower chamber,
but prevents any flow fiom the lower
chamber back into the well. The valve in the
piston allows water to flow fiom the lower
charnber to the upper chamber, but prevents
flow in the other direction.
To understand how either pump
works, consider a pump at rest, full of water
but before the operator has started moving the
handle up and down. The water in the drop
pipe and the cylinder, whether it be in the
upper or lower chamber, along with the water
in the well is al1 at atrnospheric pressure.
Since al1 the water is at equal pressure, there
is no reason for the water to flow in any particular direction. The situation changes when
the piston begins to move.
As the operator pushes on the lever, the piston rises. Now that it is rising, the
piston stops pressing d o m on the water in the lower chamber: the pressure in the lower
charnber drops accordingly. Water fiom the well, which is still at atmospheric pressure,
pushes its way through the fmt valve and into the Iower chamber. Water continues
flowing up through the foot vaive and into the lower chamber until the operator can pull
the piston up no m e r .
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 20
At this point, the operator moves the lever in the opposite direction, causing the
piston to descend, pressing down hard on the water in the lower chamber. The pressure
in the lower chamber increases to a little bit above atmospheric pressure. The water
camot flow back down into the well, because the foot valve prevents it fiom doing so.
However, the water can flow through the piston valve into the upper chamber. One can
think in terms of the piston squeezing down on the water until the water squkts up
through the valve in the piston.
The water that flows into the upper charnber c m never flow back to the lower
chamber, because the piston valve prevents it fiom doing so. Each time the piston rises
and falls more water flows from below the piston to above. The upper chamber gets
filled with more and more water. The extra water must go somewhere. Since it can not
go back d o m , the water moves up the drop pipe. Bit by bit, with each cycle of the
piston, the water rnoves up the drop pipe until it spills out the spout at the top where the
operator or an assistant is ready to collect it in a bucket or container of some kind.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the flandpurnp 2 1
- p p p p p
Figure 4.3: Operating Principles of r Single roi Pipe Reciprocrting Handpump
Stage #1. Piston nses drawtng water up into cyliner
Stage #2: Piston decends into water forcing piston valve flaps open.
Slagt3 Ki: Piston rrses W i n lomng water up and through spout. sirnultaneously drawing water up into cyliner as in Stage W .
The above description of the operation of the reciprocating handpurnp is tme for
both lift and suction pumps, which is why, in theory, they are really the same. The
distinction concems the position of the pump cylinder relative to the top level of water in
the water source. In the case of weils, this level corresponds to the water table. From the
preceding discussion we can see that there is a distinction in the means by which water
flows in the lower chamber of the &op pipe and the upper chamber. Water flows into the
lower chamber because the rising piston temporarily lowers the pressure. This process of
lowering pressure to draw fluid into a container (in this case the lower chamber of the
Success and F ailure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 22
drop pipe) is laiown as "suction". By contrast, water flows up the upper chamber of the
drop pipe because it is pushed either by water flowing in fiom the lower chamber or by
the piston itself (i.e. when the piston rises).
In a "lifl" pump, the cylinder lies completely below the water table, so the lower
chamber of the pump is complerely below the water table. The portion of the chop pipe
extending above the water table is al1 part of the upper chamber. Any water in the pump
which is above the water table arrives there because it is pushed or "lified" there. One
c m say the water is lified out of the well. If one could watch such a pump in action,
viewing from the side, one could see water k i n g shoved up and out of the well, step by
step.
Fig 4.5: Cornparison of Lift and Suction Pumps
modified fiom Graham and Sharp
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 23
In a suction pump the cylinder is above the water table, usually near the top of the
pump. Thus part of the portion of the drop pipe extending above the water table,
specifically that portion above the water table and below the piston is part of the lower
chamber of the drop pipe. Water flows up this section by virtue of suction. One could
say that water is sucked up out of the well. ifone could watch the pump in action," it
might appear as though the piston were pulling water up as it rose.
The advantage of the suction pump is that the cylinder can be near the top of the
pump where it is easy to get at for maintenance (e.g. replacement of the piston seals).
However, there are two drawbacks. First, there is a theoretical l h i t to the depth fiom
which a pump can raise water by suction. This limit is about 10 metres (or a little over 30
feet). In practice, suction pumps succeed in lifting water only about 7 metres (or about 20
feet). Second, a suction pump m u t be 'primed" before it can operate. In other words the
drop pipe m u t be filled with water before the pump will operate. Since, in regular
practice, this water has to be poured in by the operator, there is a chance that the well c m
be contaminated with whatever rnicroorganisrns or pollutants that were in the water that
the operator used.
The lifl pump does not have a theoretical limit to the depth from which it can raise
water. Nor is there any need of priming. However, the cylinder m u t be located at the
bottom of the pump. This means that a much longer pump rod is needed. Somethes
long rods are made up of shorter sections joined together and there is a chance that these
" Dwing a handpump project in Thailand fkmced by Canada's International Developmait Research Centre (IDRC) in the t 98O's, one pump was tumed into a dernonstration model. Project workers set the piston inside a short &op pipe made of @as. The portable unit could be taken to trainhg sessions, placed on a table with the bottom of the &op pipe in a bucket of water. In this way, the viiiagers could watch a pump in action.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 24
joints will break during usage. Furthemore, each time the user wants to perform
maintenance on the piston or the cylinder, these components, dong with the long pump
rod must be hauled up the entire depth of the well. This cm be hard work. in short, lift
pumps are more widely applicable and less prone to contamination, but are more difficult
to maintain.
1 have already narned certain parts of the reciprocating handpump. These and
other parts are displayed and labeled in Figure 4.6. The assembly at the top of the pump is
commonly refened to as ''the pumpstand" or "pumpstand assembly" or "above ground
Fig 4.6: Nomenclature of Parts to a Single Drop Pipe Reciprocating Band pump
assembly". It includes a spout and
a "pump handle" which is usually
takes the form of a lever, but is
sometimes similar to a set of
handlebars. One will also
encounter the term %el1 casing".
This refers to a large diameter pipe
within which the drop pipe is
situated. It's purpose is to maintain
the structural integrity of the well
and prevent it fiom caving in,
squeezing or distorting the drop
pipe. The tenns "pivot" and "pin"
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 25
refer to the rotating joints which allow the pump handie to move.
4.2 Classiications of Pumps
There are a variety of narnes to describe different types of handpumps. These
narnes have been invented by different people, perfonning different jobs at different
times. Sometimes the names refer to the application of the pumps, such as "deep-well"
and "shallow-well" pumps. Sometimes they refer to a principle of operation, such as is
the case with "force" or "suction" pumps. The terms "air pump" and "water pump" refer
to theflrrid which is being pumped. The term "handpump" itself is a reference to the
manner in which the pump is driven and distinguishes it from a "diesel pump".
Naturally, al1 these different classifications of pumps can become confusing, especially
since it is possible for the lines of classification to cross. For instance, deep-well
handpumps are almost always lie pumps, but shallow well purnps could be suction or lift
Pl'n.lPS*
Within this paper, 1 use the ternis b'lift" pump and "suction" pump in the same
manner in which ~ubanks,'~ ~ c ~ u n k i n ~ ' and ~ o d ' use them. That is they are exactly as
described in section 4.1 above. in general, deep well pumps, such as the India Mark LT
(see section 8.1) are lifi purnps while shallow well pumps such as the New No. 6 (see
" Eubanks. The Story of the Pump, p. 170. Io F. E. McJrmkin. Hand Pumps for Use in Drinking Water Supplies in Developing Counrries. (The Hague: international Reference Centre for Community Water Supply, 1977), p. 28. '' Goh Sing Yau, "Development of the Unimade Handpmp", paper presented at The IDRC Handpmp Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Hondpurnp Network Meeting, 21-25 Uctober 1992, Beijing, China- (N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedings), p. 6. Available fiom D R C archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 26
section 11 2.2) are suction pumps. Some pumps, such as the UNIMADE (see section
8.3.3) corne in both designs.
The term " re~ i~ roca t in~~ '~ ' is applied fairly consistently in the literature. it refers
to any pump which uses a piston moving back and forth or up and down (hence
reciprocating) in a cylinder. This term applies to almost al1 modem handpumps. Another
term one may find in the literature is "direct action". As it is used by ArlosoroK it refen
to a purnp where "the operator's effort is applied directly to the plunger [a.k.a. piston]
without the mechanical advantage achieved through a lever or flywheel".33 The
advantage of such a pump is that there are fewer moving parts to Wear out and need
replacing.
in this paper 1 also use the terms "common handpump" or "cornmon design".
With these terms, 1 refer to that fàmily of handpump designs which were popular in Noah
America and Europe during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. The
classification is usefùl shce it describes the majority of handpumps which were
transferred to the Developing World in the two and a half decades following World War
Two, before a concerted effort was made to design purnps specifically for the rural
Developing World environment.
In the cornrnon design, the pump stand is made of cast iron, the pump drop pipe is
a steel pipe and the pump rod is made fiom a steel bar. The cylinder is normally of
different diameter than the drop pipe and made of metal, usually brass. The pumps are
heavy. They may or may not feature a "pump rod guide" which is an arm attached to the
top of the pumpstand which helps to keep the pump rod in alignment. The reader may
'' Mdunkïn, Hand Pumps, p. 25.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 27
find it helpful to refer to Table 4.1 at the end of this chapter which shows the
classifications of pumps and gives exarnples fiom pumps referred to in the text.
4.3 A Western Technology, nota Southem One
Since human beings c m only live a few days without water, we should not be
surprised to discover that most communities secured access to water long before
Westerners arrived with handpumps. However, the reciprocating handpurnp was seldom
used outside Europe and North America before World War Two. Lists of traditional
water sources usually include surface sources such as nven, springs, natural depressions
and dug ~ e l l s . ~ ' ' Most of these are rather mundane, though some of these sources, such
as Joseph's well in ~ a i r o , ~ ' are impressive engineering feats. Nonetheless, the handpump
is not a traditional water lifting device. McJunkin reports that a variety of water lifting
devices have been used in the Developing World, including watenvheels and shadoofs,
but only the rope and bucket has been generaliy adopted for drinking water supply.36
Furtherrnore a WHO survey published in 1 97 1 indicated that only 1 5% of the Developing
World had access to a d e water source. 37 It appears that the majority of rural Afnca,
Asia and Latin Arnerica was without the handpump just before the 1 9 7 0 ~ ~ the penod
" klosoroff et al., Curnaunity Water Supply, p. 50. '' Pathirana Dharmadasa, Upali Wickramasinghe, and Douglas Chanhiri, "Sri Lanka" in Villoge Handpump Techno Iogy., ed. Donald Sbarp and Michael Graham. (Ottawa, IDRC, 1 982), p. I 1 ; J. Hodgkin, Operation and maintenance of rural water supplies in the Yemen Arab Republic, WASH field report no. 259, (Ariington, Va, :Water and Sanitation for Heaith (WASH), 1989), p. 3; hgvar Andersson. Wells and Handpumps in the Shinyanga Region, Tanzania (Bureau of Resoutce Assessrnent and Land Use Planning, University of Dar es Salaam. November, 1 982), p. 1 1. " Eubanks, Story of the Pump, pp. 238-39.
McJunkin, Hand Pumps, p. 1 93. " World Bank, Village Wuter Supply,, p. 6.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfec The Story of the Handpurnp 28
when development organizations made a concerted effort to deploy handpumps in the
mal Developing World.
4.3.1.1 Ancient and Renaissance pumps.
Although we have no clear evidence of pumps incorporating al1 the elements of
the single drop pipe reciprocating design until Europe of the fifieenth century. it clearly
has antecedents in the classical world. The Roman engineer, Vitruvius, gives credit to the
Alexandnan Greek Ctesibius (c. 250 BC) for the invention of a reciprocating piston force
pump. Ctesibius' pump incorporated three pipes, two which contained pistons and a third
up which water was forced by the action of the pistons As each piston rose, it drew water
through a valve into the cavity formed below it. As the piston descended, the valve
closed and the water was forced through another valve into and up the discharge pipe.
The pump was designed such that the cylinders were irnmersed in the water they were
supposed to help raise. Long pump rods attached the pistons to the pump handle. The
pump is clearly similar to the modem handpump in that it incorporates a reciprocating
piston, driven by a lever action handle, however the Ctesibius pump never incorporated a
piston fitted with a valve. The placement of the valve in the piston is necessary for
constructing a single &op pipe pump. This innovation is significant for rural water
supply. The single drop pipe is much narrower than the three pipe configuration of the
Ctesibius pump, making the single drop pipe version much more suitable for ddled wells
which are n a r r ~ w . ~ ~ Many of the wells instailed in the Developing World today are of the
drilled (as opposed to dug) variety. It is interesthg to note that a similar argument could
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 29
Fig 1.7: The Ctesibius Force Purnp.
i/itruvius attributed the above pump design to
Stesibius. It uses twin cyîinders with valves such
:hat the cyîinder fills on the piston upstroke. On the
jownstroke, the piston forces water through a valve
and up the centre pipe which leads to the surface.
m e n one cylinder is rnaking an upstroke, the other
s making a downstroke. The design is similar in
nay ways to the common handpump .
be made for the tight quarters aboard
ship. If, as some argue (see below),
the modem handpurnp has its
antecedents in ancient and medieval
navies, then we may fïnd here a
motive for the development of the
single drop pipe design.
However, the origins of the
single drop pipe purnp, particularly the
suction variety, are in debate. Shapiro
reports that there is no evidence of a
valve in a piston until it appears in a
drawing dated circa 1433 made by the
Siemese engineer, Mariano Jacopo
m accola.^^ Da Vinci produced a
drawhg of a single drop pipe suction
pump dated approximately 1480.~' Agricola describes and illustrates single &op pipe
suction pumps in De Re Metailica &en between 1529 and l550! Agricola's design is
very similar to the wooden pumps which were to be common throughout Europe for the
next three centunes, upon which the "common pump" was to be based. Since Agricola
" Credit m m be given to Janis Langh and Wilf Lockett for pointing out to me the comection between pump and drillhg technology. 39 Sheldon Shapiro. "The Origin of the Sution mimp", Technologv and Culture 5,566-576 ( 1 %4), p. 571. ul Ibid., p. 571.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 30
does not mention these pumps as new, we c m conclude that the pump was common in
the mining industry by the tirne he wrote his book.'" Thomas Ewbank recounts how in
the sixteenth century George Baker describes a suction pump as "often used in pits of
water or ~ e l l e s . " ~ Bernard Eubanks quotes a section fiom the translation of Gaiileo's
Discourses Concerning Two New sciences." In the passage, Galileo relates a
conversation with a pump repairman. In the course of their discussion. the men clearly
describe a suction purnp. The repairman refers to the suction pump as a familiar
instrument, indicating, Eubanks argues, that by the beginning of the 1600's, the suction
pump was well enough known for there to exist repairmen familiar with its functi~n.'~
Shapiro claims that though designs of the suction pump appear in Taccola's notebooks in
Siena in 1433, there is no evidence of the pump's actual use in Italy at that time, or
indeed anywhere before it appeared in the German mining ind~stry'~
Ewbank, on the other hand, claims that the single &op pipe suction pump was
handed d o m to us fiom ancient times: "Like many of our ordinary machines, they seem
to have been silently borne down the stream of past ages to the 15' and 16" centuries,
when, by means of the p ~ t i n g press, they first emerge into notice in modem tir ne^.'^'
Ewbank asserts that suction pumps have been used on ships since classical tirneda
However, Oleson, who is familiar with Ewbank's work, nonetheless believes the suction
pump to have been unknown in antiquity. Oleson made a detailed and comprehensive
41 ibid., p. 572 " ibid., p. 573. " Thomas Ewbank. A descr@tive and hiriorical account of hydraulic and other machines for raising water. (London: Tilt and Bogue, 1842. Reprint Edition New York: Arno Press, l972), p. 21 8. U Eubanks, St0t-y of the Pump, p. 1 1. 45 Ibid. " Shapiro, "Ongin of the Suction Pump", p. 574. 17 Ewbank, Machines for ratking water, p. 2 1 7.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 31
study of the literary and physical evidence which sheds light on the designs of European
pumps fiom the classical period and on into the middle ages. Examining archaeological
reports of ancient pumps, he finds that while there are plenty of examples of force pumps,
there is no evidence of suction pumps in a ~ ~ t i ~ u i t ~ . ' ' ~ He then concludes that the suction
pump did not make its appearance until the fifieenth c e n t ~ r y , ~ ~ when Taccola recorded its
design in his notebooks, proposhg that it retumed to Europe during a renewed interest in
Vitruvius or possibly through contact with the Arab ~ o r l d . ' ~ Whether or not one accepts
Oleson's argument over Ewbanks', it is clear that the common handpurnp has a Western
pedigree.
4.3.1.2 The Industrial Revolution and the lron Pump.
Pump makers have made metal pumps since ancient times. Nonetheless, wooden
purnps were much cheaper until well into the industrial revolution. Therefore, wooden
pumps were still rnanufactured well into the nineteenth century." However, metal
became cheaper and more prevalent during the industrial revolution, and pumps were not
waffected by the trend. Amencan f m s began producing cast iron and steel pumps in the
1 gh century. Ewbank, writing in 1842, illustrates a reciprocating piston pump which he
terms a "common metallic pump".S3 Eubanks describes many cast iron pumps
rnanufactured in Arnerica during the 19' and early 20' centuries. The W. B. Douglas
Company began making cast iron purnps in ~ 8 3 2 . ~ ' Eubanks found no evidence of cast
48 Md., pp. 114-21 5. 49 John Peter Oleson, Greek and Roman mechanical water-l#ing devices : the hkrory of the technology. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984), p. 241. 50 Ibid., p. 286. 5 1 Md., p. 303.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 32
ùon pumps being made anywhere else in the world before this.j5 Their early designs
differ little fi-om the pump of ctesibius.j6
McJunkin speculates that pump rnanufacturea became more conscious of material
costs once they switched fiom wood to metal and opted for designs which allowed them
to use as narrow pipes as possible.57 Following this line of reasoning, we can speculate
that the Ctesibius pump was at a disadvantage to the single &op pipe design because the
Ctesibius pump required 3 pipes instead of one. At any rate, whatever their reasons, by
the 1850's, Amencan manufacturers were placing valves in the pistons and producing
single drop pipe reciprocating pumps with cast iron bodies. This became the "common
design" (referred to in section 4.2) used by Arnerican pump manufacturers, such as
~ o u l d s ~ ~ and ~ e r n ~ s t e r . ~ ' McJunkin estimates that there may have been as many as 3000
American manufacturers of pumps.6' The first pumps to be deployed in the Developing
World after the Second World War, pumps such as the Dempster 23F and the wasp,6'
cm be classified with the common design. The various "Developing World pumps",
pumps like the hdia Mark II and the üNIMA.DE, designed by development organizations
such as UNICEF and Developing World institutions such as the University of Malaya
took the common design as their starting point.
'' Eubanks, Stow of the Pump, p. 97. '' Ewbank, Machines for rotking water, p. 222. 54 Eubanks, Stos, of the Pump, p. 47. " ibid., p. 94. 56 ibid,, pp. 46-47 and pp. 50-5 1 . 57 McJunkîn, Hmd Pumps, p. 25. 58 Eubanks, Sfory of the Pump, pp. 32-3. " ibid., p. 59.
Ibid.. p. 122. 6 1 McJunkin, Hund Pumps, p. 26.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 33
Table 4.1: The Classification of Handpumps.
Suction (usually equivalent to "shallow well")
Lift (usually equivafent to "deep well")
Reciprocating Handpumps
Multiple pipe
[no examples known to author]
e.g Ctesibius (c250 BC) 15'
Single Drop Pipe
e.g. as described in Agricola's De Re Metallica ( 1 6 ~ century)"
1 e.g. Dempster PumPs (1 885) e.g. Dempster 23F (c. 1950?)~' e.g. Goulds No. 000 (1 850)~'
e.g. Log Pum s (1 sh century) P
Developing World
eg. New No. 6 e.g. UNIMADE (1 980s)
e.g. lndia Mark I I (1 975). e.g. UNlMAOE (1 980s)
Whatever the precise ongin of the common handpurnp, however the handpurnp
made its way fiom the Ctesibius pump of the classical world to the cast iron and steel
purnps of the American manufacturers, it is clearly a Westem invention and tool.
T'herefore, its introduction to the Developing World represents a true case of technology
transfer, as opposed to support for an indigenous technology. Furthemore, given the
long pedigree of the handpurnp, we can expect that it has had ample time to be shaped
and refined by Westem knowledge and Westem expectations of the technology. As we
consider the transfer of the handpump to the Developing World-and why it took until
p. - - -
'' Arnold Pacey, Hand-pump Maintenance in the Context of Communiry Weil Projects (Intermediate Technology Publications, l985), p. 19. 63 Shapiro, "Origin of the Suction Pump", p. 572. 0.I Eubanks, Story of the Pump, p. 122, 65 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 19. 66 Arlosoroff et al., Comrnuni~ Wufer Supply, p. 174.
Sbapiro, **Origin of the Suction Pump", pp. 567-568. 68 Eubanks, Story of the Pump, p. 43.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 34
the twentieth cenhuy to occur-we should remember the Western nature of the
technology.
69 Ibid-, p. 59. 70 Pacey, Hand Pump hfaintenance, p. 1 9.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 35
5. Motivation for Transferring Handpumps: Thirst and Health
There are two reasons why development organizations tum to handpumps for use
in m a l water supply. One is to secure reliable access to drinking water where none
currently exists. The other reason to employ handpumps was to help improve community
health. In the late 1960's and early 1970's, LMICEF assisted in the deployment of
handpumps in Rajasthan, India to relieve drought. Since the region was quite dry, the
water table was quite low, requiring the wells to be very deep. Suction pumps, whether
or not they be handpumps were not an option. The rock was also quite hard," making
dnlling expensive, necessitating as narrow a diameter of well as practical. In such a
situation. the narrow, single drop pipe, reciprocating pump had an advantage over bulkier
designs like a chah of buckets.
Probably more ofien, however, Western developrnent workers and Developing
World governments have deployed handpurnps as a replacement to the existing means of
collecting drinking water. Those who installed them did so because they believed that the
existing sources of water (frequently rivers and ponds) were contaminated with disease
causing organisms and that the use of handpumps atop sealed wells to tap groundwater
wouid be a low cost means to irnprove the health of the community. An excellent
exarnple is Bangladesh, a country which Maggie Black sympathetically compares with an
open sewer."
" Maggie Black, Frorn Handpumps to Heaith. The evolution of water and sanitation programmes in Bangiadesh, India and Nigeria. (New York: UNICEF, 1 WO), p. 54. %id. p. 18.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 36
The Iink between water and disease is well known in the West, thanks to the
classic snidy whereby John Snow linked cholera in his London parish to the Broad Street
Pump and thanks also to the work of Pasteur which supported Snow's hypotheses.
However, this understanding of microorganisrns, water and disease did not spread quickly
among the rural population of the Developing World. Efforts to educate such populations
have met with great difficulty. For instance. Peruvian villagers could not be convinced of
the utility of boiling their druikllig ~ a t e r . ' ~ For this reason, even after the Second World
War, m a l communities of developing countries still relied on water retrieving strategies
and technologies which were developed without regard to microbes. OAen, this strategy
was no more than to use a bucket or pot to draw water fiom the local river or water hole.
Naturally, these sources contained microorganisrns. The problem was compounded when
the sarne water source was used for bathing and laundry, was fiequented by animals or
when few precautions were taken to separate the water source fiom latrines and points of
defecation.
Soil acts as a natural filter, cleaning the water that moves through it. For this
reason, groundwater is a much safer source of drinking water and even bathing water than
surface water is. Although ground water is not without microbial content, the content is
much Iower than in surface water. Therefore, there is good reason to believe that the
incidence of illness will be much less when groundwater is used in piace of surface water.
Sometirnes the groundwater cornes to the surface naturally as a spring. When it does not,
one requires a weil to reach it.
" Evmn M. Rogers, D$ùsion of Innovations, 3" ed. (New York: Free Press,. 1 983). See Rogers example of water boiiing in a Peruvian village. it is a retelling of Wallin, E. "Water Boiling in a Peruvian Town", in Heath, Culture and Communiiy, ed. B. D, Paul, (New York: Russell Sage Foundation (E) 1955).
Success a n d c f y Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 37
Weils are quite common in the Developing World as they have been the world
over probably since before recorded history. However, the reason behind digging these
wells was normally not a perceived need for micro-organism-fiee water. instead, people
dug them to take advantage of the pervasive nature of groundwater. Where rives and
water holes were not within a convenient distance year round, the use of hand dug wells
was common. The means of raising the water up out of the well was most commonly the
rope and bucket. The bucket was fiequently unclean, handled by many hands, perhaps
mouths and thus provided a source of contamination for the well.
When a pump is used to draw water fiom a well, the well can be completely
covered so that the only access to it is through the pump. Since water only flows in one
direction through the pump, there is little chance for the well to be contaminated." Upon
this knowledge, Westem trained missionaries and development workers based their belief
that reliance on groundwater pumped up from a closed well would significantly benefit
health in the community. installing handpumps on wells is probably the Ieast capital
intensive method of achieving this goal. Alternatives, such as the installation of diesel
pumps connected to a network of pipes which serve as a delivery system, require the use
of a great deal more hardware and/or machines produced in Westem style factories.
Based on this observation one might conclude that the choice of the handpump for rural
water supply represented adherence to the principle of appropriate technology as outlined
by Schumacher which influenced rural water supply projects in the 1970's. (See Section
8.2) However, the literature surrounding handpump projects does not justify the use of
" There is, of course, ni11 the matter of priming discussed above, in which water is poured down a suction pump, which dues pose a contamination k a t unless clean water is used, but the problem can be solved if a supply of clean water can be kept on hand for priming.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer, The Story of the Handpump 38
handpurnps on the principle of appropriate technology in the Schumacher sense per se, to
wit, that low-capital technology is inherently more suitable to developing countries. The
literature rather emphasizes the handpump as a low cost option.75 One can of course
argue that the inherent suitability and the low-cost are one in the same thing, that these
costs themselves reflect the high cost of capital in developing countries, that "low-cost" is
identical to "low-capital", however if development workers made this connection they
never indicated it explicitly in their literature.
75 World Bank, Village Wizter Supply, pp. 3 1 -32.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the flandpump 39
6. Pre-1970's: Cast lron Pumps Produce a Maintenance Problem:
Handpumps do not appear to have arrived in the Developing World in large
numbers until after the Second World War. Those that arrived in the three decades after
the war usually looked very much like the common design. Most of them broke down
and stayed broken soon afier their arrival.
There is some record of handpumps in what is now known as the Developing
World before World War Two. The British developed a pump for the colonies, some
individual examples of which, albeit expensive, were still operating in the 1970's.'~ One
Tommy Murgatroyd designed a heavy wooden and steel pump known as the Bush pump
in Matabeleland in western Zimbabwe in 1933. By 1995, there were about 25,000 of
them in the country.77 Given the long history of contact and interaction between the West
and the territories now known as the Developing World, it seems impossible that there
were not more pre-World War Two instances of somebody, somewhere introducing
handpumps. However, it seems unlikely that anyone did so on a large scale without it
having received any mention in the literature on post-war technological assistance to the
Developing World. Furthemore, one would expect at least some of these pumps, or
copies of them, to still be in use as is the case with the British Colonial pump and the
Bush pump.
Afier the war, handpumps were used in aid prograrns. By the 1950s, development
orga-tions such as CARE (Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere) became
Pacey, Hand Purnp ~Uointenance, p. 18. n Morgan, "Zimbabwe's User-Friendly Bush mimp", p. 23
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 40
active in rural water supply.78 Development organizations and Developing World public
health authonties deployed handpumps in their programs. For instance, UNICEF installed
handpumps in Panama in the 1960's.'~ The Malayan Ministry of Health implemented a
handpump program in that sarne decade.'' UNICEF &lied wells for handpumps in hdia
in the Iate 1960's.~' A World Health Organization publication of 1959, Water SuppZy for
Rural Areas recommended the use of handpurnps (among other types). From the
illustration provided in the book, it is clear that the pumps were of the single chop pipe
reciprocating desigd2 However, problems developed.
During the 1970's reports of non-functional handpumps were rampant. The
recognition may have corne as a result of the fact that in 1975, UNICEF reported that
70% to 80% of handpumps in india were out of order. Confirmation was on its way. In
1977, the US Peace Corps surveyed handpumps in Sierra Leone and found only 40%
were ~ o r k i n ~ . ~ ~ in Thailand, it was reported in 1978 that approxirnately 5000 of the
19000 handpumps installed by various government agencies were out of operation on any
given day.&
The high rate of disrepair was the result of two factors. Fust, there was a lack of
maintenance expertise in the countryside. Donors had assurned that, given the number of
78 CARE "Hedth and Population" CARE Programs. <http://www.care.org/programs/bealWwate~~sanitation.html (June 9, 1999). 79 Robert .i. Saunders and Jeremy J. Warford, Village Water Supply: Economics and Policy in the Developing World, (Baltimore: World Bank, I976), p. 25. 80 Goh Sing Yau and Low Kwai Sim, ''Appropriate plastic handpump for niral water supply in Maiaysia Kuaia Lumpur Dec. 1984", in "international Symposium on Technology, Culture and Development Kuala Lumpur 12-1 4 Dec., 1983", (n. p., 1984), p. 70. Availabie through IDRC archiveses: archiv 62 1.6 1 5 t 983. 8 1 Black, From Handpumps ro Heaith, p. 53.
Wagner, Edmund G. and I. N. LanoUr Water Supply for Rural Areus and Small Communities, (Geneva: World Heaith Organization, 1959), p. 126-1 27. '' Sad Arlosoroff et al. Community Water Supply, p. 50.
Success and Failure in Technology Ttansfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 41
( Fig 6.1 : The Dempster 23F 1
This pump is typical of those
deployed in the Developing Worid
after World War Two up to the
1 1970's. The above ground I assernbly is made from cast iron,
1 prone to darnage and difficult to 1 repair in rural areas.
Source: Dempster Hand Purnp Kits 23F and 4OF 1
handpumps in the countryside, people were familiar
with their repair and maintenance. It was not so?
Second, there was the design of the pumps themselves.
A typical example of the handpumps deployed was the
Dempster 23F. By the 1970's, the Dempster 23F pump
appeared in corntries in ~ f r i c a ~ ~ and ~s ia! Sorne
counhies manufactured pumps according to designs
based on the Dempster, such as the ~averi" in india
and the DMR (Department of Mineral Resources)
pump in hai il and.^^ Made of cast iron, they were close
to copies of old western purnps used on farms about a
century before. 90 The western comrnon pump had been
meant for use by a single household. The design was
not up to the continuous operation demanded of them
as a village water supply.
To repair cast iron parts requires welding. Capable welders were rarely on hand
in rural, third-world settings. A very common breakdown in handpumps is the wearing
- -- -
Pichai Nimityongskul and Pisidhi Karasudhi. Thailand", in Village Handpump Technology, ed. Donald Sharp and Michael Graham, pp. 2 1-32, (Ottawa, IDRC, l982), p. 2 1. 85 Black, From Handpumps to Health pp. 59-60. 86 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 17. '' Goh Sing Yau, bbMalaysia", in VilZage Hondpump Technology, Donald Sharp and Michael Graham, eds. (Ottawa, DRC, 1982), p. 39. 88 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 17 89 Pichai Nityongskul and Pisidhi Karasudhi, "Thailand", p. 21. " Black, From Hundpumps to Heuhh p. 60; George Baldwin, "The hdia Mark iI Handpump and its Three- Tier Maintenance System", in Community Water Development, ed. Charles Kerr, (London, intermediate Technology Publications, I989), p. 174; Krishnaswamy "the Development of a Dependable Deep-well Handpump?',, p. 52; Gob Sing Yau, Developmeni of a Village Level ImtalIed and Mafntuined Handpurnp: a hfaIaysian Erperience, (IL p., n. d.), p. 2, available fiom IDRC archives: archiv (626.83 595) G 5
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 42
out of the piston or foot valve seal. In the common handpump, recovering the cylinder
requires pulling up the drop pipe as well, fiequently when it is still full of water. This is
heavy work. The system of pivots and bars comecting the handle to the piston rods and
to the pump head c m easily Wear. When it does so, the whole apparatus can become
ioose. The handle may move side to side in addition to up and down. This introduces
lateral stress on the handle. the pivots and the pump rods, al1 of which can break. In
addition, a steel pipe or iron cylinder may crack or rust and require replacing.
Replacements were expensive and seldom on hand in a rural village. Many developing
nations did not have the capacity to produce steel cheaply if at all. As a result, the purnps
remained broken until a r e p a h a n and replacement parts could arrive fiom a central
location. The parts may even have needed importing. This could take weeks or months.
in the meantirne the villagers turned elsewhere for water, perhaps to the polluted surface
sources the pump was installed to replace.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 43
7. The 1970's: Development Organizations Choose the Handpump.
It would be wrong to Say that there was no redesign of handpumps in recognition
of Developing World conditions before the 1970's began. Even the Dempster 23F
represented a slight simplification on the design of the common handpump (the Dempster
23F has no guides for the pump rod) which meant fewer parts to repair or replace. USAiD
cornrnissioiied Battelle Memorial Institute in 1966 to design a pump which wouid endure
under severe conditions, could be operated easily by women and children and could be
readily maintained and rnanufact~red.~' The project published at least two reports before
1970.~' Nevertheless, the original USADlBattelle project was unsuccessful at organizing
large scale field evaluation of the pumps.93 It was not until the 1970's, that the handpurnp
maintenance problem received widespread attention. After 1970, Western development
organizations such as the World Bank turned their attention to the plight of the rural poor
and resolved to improve their health by improving their water supply. They seized upon
the handpump as a key technology in their strategy. Perhaps the new interest in the
handpurnp explains why, by 1976, USAID had fmally successfully arranged for field
testing of the AID/Battelle pump with the Georgia institute of ~ e c h n o l o ~ y ~ ~ With the
-
9' Mclunkin, Hund Putnps, p. 132. Frink, D. W. and Fannon, R. D. Ir. , Finai Report on the Development o f o Water Pump for
Underdeveloped Counrries ro Rgency for International Development. (Battelle mernorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA, 1967): Frink, D.W. Fannon, RD. Battelie Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH; US. AiD, Development of a water pump for underdeveloped countries :final report. (Columbus, Ohio : Battelle Memorial institute, Columbus Laboratories, 1967). 93 McJunkin, Hmd Pumps, p. 1 36. 94 Ibid., p. 137.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 44
spotlight on the handpump, the maintenance problem became apparent to everyone. The
decade of the 1970's saw the search for new handpump designs.
7.1 A Shift in Western Development Thought:
A comprehensive history of development thought has yet to be written, however
the story of the handpump may give some clues as to what it will look like. A major
feature of the history of development thought will be the shedding of assumptions. As we
will see, the story of the handpump is full of assumptions which were discarded when
their unsuitability became apparent. Many of these assumptions were quite broad, rooted
in the philosophy of development thoyht itself. It is generally recognized in the
development cornrnunity that the initial approach to development, Le. the remaking of the
Developing World in the image of Western history was discredited by the 1970's. The
philosophical roots of this initial approach and the inspiration for its abandonrnent will
only be speculated upon here. What is more definite is the qualitative and quantitative
impact that the change in development thought had on the attention paid to handpurnps.
7.1.1 Post-war technological assistance according to the Western rnodel.
It would of course be quite incorrect to Say that Europe had had no hand before
World War Two in the development of what we today cal1 the Third World. Europeans
had been conquering, colonizing and goveming large areas of Afiica, Asia, South and
Central America for centuries. While doing so, they introduced al1 manner of changes,
including European technology. It was not until after World War Two however, that
Euopeans (now spread out over enough of the globe to include "the West") embarked
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 45
upon a program explicitly designed to raise the material condition of the inhabitants of
Afica, Asia and Latin Amenca, specifically through the application of Western
technology.
The machinery of hancial assistance had aiready been developing in the decades
surrounding World War Two, most recently in Lend-Lease and in the Marshall Plan.
These programs had been designed to transfer Amencan wealth to Europe. first to assist
B i t a h in the war against Germany and then to finance much of the reconstruction of
Europe after the devastation of that war. The inclusion of technical assistance as a
formally int~grated aspect of foreign aid came in 1949 with President Truman's "Point
Foury' program.95 A year later, the British Commonwealth commenced the Colombo Plan
which included research and training support on the part of the wealthier countries of the
British ~ommonweal th .~~
It is easy to be cynical about the motives behind foreign aid and technical
assistance. One of purposes of the Point Four program and the Colombo Plan was to
provide a defense against the spread of ~ommunisrn.~' An equally good case can be made
that the programs were and are maintained to support the economic self-interest of the
donor nations. They were an investment in çtimulating foreign trade? For instance,
Canada, in the seventies, stipulated that no less than 65% of its non-food bilateral aid
-
'' J. L. Richardson, "Ethical Issues in North South Relations", in The Wesr and the Third World, ed. Roben O'Neill and R 1. Vincent, (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1990), p. 242; Henry Kissinger, Diplornas, (Toronto: Simon & Shuster, 1994), p. 424. 96 John Drexel, ed., Facfs on File Encyclopedia of the Twenrierh Century (New York: Facts on File, 1991 ), p. 213; T. B. Millar, "Australian Foreign Policy and the ïhird World", in The Wesr and the Third World, ed. Robert O'Neill and R J. Vincent, (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1990), pp. 95-96 97 ibid. 9%ichardson, Tthical Issues in North South Relations", p. 245
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 46
budget had to be spent on goods and services produced in Such tied-aid
policies may not be in the best interests of the recipient country, however, which might
find better ways to spend the money or cheaper suppliers outside Canada. Altruism may
not have been a deciding factor in Western govemment decisions to provide aid.
Nonetheless, altniism could explain why the Peace Corps is able to obtain so many
volunteers and the rhetoric of altruism was certainly used alongside containment and
economic self interest to justify the program to the Westem public:
"The United States and other f?ee nations of the world have a common concern for the material progress of these people, both as a humanitarian end in itself and because such progress will further the advance of human freedorn, the secure growth of commerce and the developrnent of international understanding and good will."lOO
Regardless of which combination of containment, economic self-interest and
altnlism is correct, the assumption was, in al1 cases, that foreign fuiancial and technical
aid would work.
Western pride in technology is not difficult to understand. Technological
achievements have given Westem nations the means to control and harness the physical
environment to an extent which has led to unprecedented material prosperity as well as to
the economic and political domination of the globe. It seems only natural that Westerners
would turn to technology to solve the problem of underdevelopment. If we explore
Westem attitudes to technology in even more depth, we may be able to provide even
more sophisticated explanations of the details of development thought.
99 Peter Wyse, Canadian Foreign .4id in the 1970s: an organkational audit. (Montreai: Centre for Developing Area Studies, McGiU University, 1983). 100 United States Department of State, Point Four Program: Cooperative Progront for Aid in the Development of Economicaliy Underdeveloped Areaif, (n. p., 1949), p. 2.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 47
Michael Adas has written about the Western characteristic ofjudging nations by
theu technological achievements. Whereas, before the eighteenth century, religion
formed the basis of European sense of supenority over the inhabitants of other continents:
"By the mid-eighteenth century, scientific and technological gauges were playing a major and at times dominant role in European thinking about such civilizations as those of India and China.. .in the industrial era, scientific and technological measures of human work and potential dominated European thinking.. . ,,101
According to Adas, the use of the technological gauge heled a European sense of
supenority which not only justified a world-civilization mission and colonization, but was
ec hoed in post- World War Two modemization theory ' O 2
Adas' compelling thesis has, 1 think, an important implication which explains
much of the history of development effort and development thought and is consistent
with the story of the handpump in particular: because Westemen have adopted this
single measure of development, i.e. technological achievement, it follows naturally that
there is a single path to development, the technological path or at any rate that the
technological path represents the main path upon which al1 variations depend. This
implication of Adas' thesis manifests itself in the very terminology of "developed vs
"developing" world. The M e r dong this path a nation is, the greater is one's
technological development and the more "developed" a nation is. Moreover, since there
is a single path, we can expect that nations will have similar experiences as they journey
'O' Michael Adas, Mochines as the Memure of Men: Science, Technology und ideologies of Western Dominance, (Ithica, N.Y.: Cornel University Press, 1 SW), p.3. 'O' Adas. Machines as the Meanne of Men, pp. 4,402-403.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 48
dong it, therefore the recent past of the developed nations provides a road map for the
underdeveloped nations.
Early post-war efforts by the West to assist third world development looked to the
history of Westem development for guidance. Perhaps the most widely respected
economic model of development was that of W.W. ~ostow.'" His mode1 included five
stages of growth, using Westem examples to illustrate them. The al1 important middle
stage, take-off, required heavy investment in the modem manufachiTing sector.
Another econornist, Arthur Lewis, provided a dual-economy model in which the
economy of a developing nation could be described in terrns of a traditional (usually
agricultural) and modem (industrial manufacturing) sector. According to Lewis, the
labour in agriculture was underemployed. The practice in the agricultural sector was not
to pay worken the marginal product of labour but the average product, meaning that even
unproductive workers got an equal share of the rewards of labour. Lewis argued that such
practices led to a situation where there was surplus labour in agriculture. The labour
ought to be rnoved to a sector where it could be more productive. The trick to
development then, was to induce labour to move fiorn the agricultural to the modern
sector. Heavy investment in the indusaial sector-and manufacniring would do nicely-
could provide the necessary jobs. The investment would be repaid by rapid growth.
These theoretical developments, embodying a Western "road-map" for
development, almost certainly owe their existence in part to pride in Western
achievernents and therefore Western history. It is not difficult to see the link between
'O3 W. W. Rostow. The Take-oE into Self-S~ained Growth", Economic J o u d 66,2548 (March 1956). '" Anhur Lewis. Thoory of Economic Growth. (London: Allen & Unwin, 1955).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 49
manufacturing and technology, thus these developments are compatible with Adasy theory
and accommodate a bias for Westem technology, including for instance Westem
handpurnp designs. At any rate, the developments bo t - reflected and supported an
emphasis of attention on the urban sector. Development meant industnalization. The
traditional sector, agiculture, was seen as backward and inefficient. To duplicate the
success of the West, the third world had to develop its manufacturing sector. This
required investrnent in capital and technology. In this intellectual atmosphere, urban
industrial centres received far more attention than the rural agricultural areas. World
Bank loans for warer supply systems, for example, went almost exclusively to large urban
pojects. ' O 5
7.1.2 Two Decades of Experience Discredit the Western model.
However, throughout the 1950's and 196O's, the Developing World failed to grow
in the sarne way as the countries of the West upon which the Westem models had been
based. To be sure, some nations did exhibit tremendous growth: South Korea, Hong
Kong, Taiwan and Singapore as well as Latin America. However, these nations were
hardly developing the Westem liberal political structure that Rostow had included in his
model. Growth seemed to require an authoritarian political regime to introduce and
sustain policies of foreign borrowing and primary resource depletion.lo6 ft also becarne
los Charles Weiss and Nicolas Jequier eds.. Technology Finance and Development: An Analysis of the World Bank as a TechnologicaI Institution. (Toronto: Lexington Books, l984), p. 1 10. 'O6 J. S. Hoadley. bThe Rise and FaIl of the Basic Needs Approach", Cooperation and Conjlcr. 16, 149- 164 (198I), p. 151.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 50
apparent, that where there was success, not everyone was sharing equally in it. There
were widening incorne gaps between the rich and the poor, especially in Latin
~merica . '~ ' The deviation from the predictions of Rostow's and Lewis' theories must
have been an affiod to Westem pride. The failure of Western science and technology to
take root in the Developing World and play centre stage in an industrial revolution, must
have seemed perplexing to those whose faith in them was so strong as to use them as a
measure of national worth and development must have been perplexing. Under such
circurnstances, the "appropriateness" of Westem models for third world development
naturally fell into doubt.
By the 1970Ys, the theoretical models of development and the policies informed
by them had undergone major change. Rival theories emerged to challenge Rostow and
Lewis. Some of these theories, such as Dependency, suggested that poverty in the
Developing World was sustained by the international economic system and that any
development which occurred mainly benefited the West and a small group of the very
rich in the Developing World. The great majonty of people remained poor.
Although Dependency and similar theories never dominated government and
NGû policy the way that Rostow's and Lewis' theones did, they were successful in
directing attention toward sustained poverty and the importance of non-manufacturhg
sectors, which often meant the agricultural sector. Prevailing theory in development
economics had to incorporate attention to income distribution, poverty alleviation and the
rural sector.
'O7 John A Booth and Thomas W . Walker, Understanding Centrai Anerica ied, (Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press, 1993). p. 58.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 5 1
An indication of the shifi in emphasis is found in the Basic Needs movement of
the 1970's. The basic needs approach was adopted and championed by the international
Labour Organization which also worked on definhg it. The concept behind basic needs
is that certain minimum conditions must be attained before individuais can contribute to
wealth creation. These include such things as food, shelter and clothing, but also access
to essential services such as transport, health services. the availability of fieely chosen
employment and -o f particular relevance for our study-safe drinking water. 'O8 n i e
basic needs approach also emphasized self-reliance over central control, individuals and
local groups rather than governments and advocated government to individual aid rather
than govemment to govemrnent. Al1 of this would be realized in the handpump programs
of organizations such as UNICEF and Canada's IDRC. Here we can see how it is
necessary to understand the change in Western attitudes if we are to understand the story
of the transfer of the handpump.
7.2 How the Western Change in Focus Led Development Organizations to
the Handpump
7.2.1 Pearson Commission Criticires Technology
With the appropriateness of Western economic models in question, it is not
surprishg to fmd a greater willingness to entertain doubts about the appropriateness of
Western technology. Shce the development community's attention had shifted more
emphasis to rural areas, it followed that rurai technologies would s i d a r l y receive more
1 O8 Hoadley, "Basic Needs Approach", p. 150.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 52
attention. As can be seen fiom the Basic Needs movement, the process of reassessment
of development thought did not stop at econornic theory. Policy was affected, including
policies regarding technology. In 1968, World Bank President, Robert S. McNamara,
appointed former Canadian Prime Minister, Lester B. Pearson, as head of the
Commission on International Development. The commission's very influential report
Purmers in Development, appeared in 1969. The report sweyed twenty years of
development experience, which included both success and disappointment. It outlined a
10 point strategy to revamp the international aid process. One of those ten points was to
redirect the program of technical assistance which had ". . .too ofien failed to adapt its
objectives and methods to actual requirements of developing countries.. .".log So it is not
surprishg that the 1970's saw a growth of attention paid to the handpump, a Western
technology transferred to the rural third world.
7.2.2 The World Bank Shifts Gears
During the early 197OYs, the World Bank responded to a shift in development
thought. As previously mentioned, the World Bank had had an urban emphasis in its
lending for water supply systems. However, as indicated in Robert McNamaraTs 1972
and 1973 addresses to the Bank's Board of Govemors, starting in the 1970's' the Bank
placed a new emphasis on the m a l poor.''O The Bank commissioned a series of research
109 Commission on international Development. Porrners in Development. (New York: Praeger, l969), p. 19. "O nte McNornma Yems at the World Bank: major policy addresses of Robert S. McNummo, 1968-1 99 1. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1 98 1).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 53
projects to provide guidance to a new set of policies designed with rural areas in mind. ' ' ' In one of these projects, between 1972 and 1974, Saunders and Warford exarnined village
water supply and sanitation. ' '' Naturally, the handpurnp came to their attention as a
means of getting clean water in rural comrnunities.
By 1975 the World Bank recognized handpumps as the cheapest forrn of water
supply.''3 The Bank's sector policy paper on village water supply recomrnended the use
of handpumps.''4 A year later, the Bank published Village Wuter Suppiy, which
essentially reargwd the points put forth by Saunders and Warford in their previous report.
in addition it devoted space to Technical Aspects and Costs. "In areas where groundwater
is readily available, shallow wells with handpumps are by far the cheapest means of
providing good water ''
7.3 Legacy to the 1980's: The /ntemationa/ Dnnking Water Supply & Sanitation Decade.
Concentration on rural poverty and basic needs becarne such a fundamental
doctrine among the professional development community that it gave birth to a specific
policy program in the field of rural water supply and sanitation. The UN Conference on
III Julian Bharier, "Water SuppIy and Waste Disposal", in Technology, Finance and Developmenr: An Analysis of the World Bank as a Technological Imtiîution, Charles Weiss and Nicolas Jequier eds., (Toronto: Lexington Books, 1984), pp. 107-1 24., p. 1 1 1. "' World Bank, Village Wuter Supply, p. 21. This book is based on the report of Saunders and Warford, Village Water Suppfy and Sanitation in Less Developed Countries, P . U. Report No. Res. 2. "' F. E. McJunkin, F. E. and E. H. A. Hofkes, "Hand-Pump Techwlogy for the Development of Groundwater Resources", in Water Supply and Sanifation In Developing Countries, Eric J . Schiller and Ronald L. Droste, eds., (Am Arbor Science, 1982), p. 37. "* Charles Weiss and Nicolas Jequier e h . , Technology. Finance and Development: An Anaiysh of lhe World Bank us a Technological Institution, (Toronto: Lexington Books, l984), p. 1 13. "' World Bank, Village Water Suppiy, p. 9.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 54
Human Settlements (HABITAT) met in Vancouver in 1 976. Delegates passed a
resolution calling for clean water for everyone in the World by 1990."~ Delegates to the
Mar del Plata coderence in Argentina in March 1977 followed up on this resolution by
declaring 198 1 - 1990 the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade
(ID WSSD).' '' In addition, *'. . .[w]ith more bravado than realism, they elaborated an
r,118 action plan costing 6 144,000 million in 1977 US dollars.. . to achieve this goal. Later
in the year, the 3 ln UN general assembly endorsed the Mar del Plata resolution regarding
the IDWSSD (though the expensive plan does not seem to have been mentioned again)."9
Since handpumps were the technology of choice by this time for rural water
supply, the DWSSD implied the deployrnent of millions of new handpumps. Some
estimates of the required number were as high as 20 million. This number represented a
calculation based on the assurnption that each pump would serve as few as 100 of the
estimated 2 billion people in need of clean drinking water.'" Given that a single
handpurnp could supply as many as 400 people and given that some comrnunities might
be served by spring fed gravity distribution systems, it seems more likely that the required
nurnber of handpumps was much lower. Saul Arlosoroff estimated that only 5-7 million
handpumps would be needed to reach the goal of water-for-everyone."' in any case, the
nurnber was large and the IDWSSD was the impetus for any nurnber of projects in
handpump design and deployment.
116 Krishnaswamy, nBDevelopment of a Dependable Deep-well Handpump". p. 51. I l 7 ibid. "' Maggie Black, The Handpump Cometh" in The ChiIdren und the Nations, The Story of WICEF. (New York: UNICEF, 1986), p. 304. 119 Handpurnps Testing and Development, ed. Tshannerl and Bryan, p. 5 1. "O John Reynolds, Handpumps, rowmd a sustuinable technology : resemch and deveIopment during the Water Supply and Sanitution Decade. (Washington, D.C. : World Bank, 1 W2), pp. 1-2
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 55
8. The 1970's and 1980's: Adapting Pump Designs
The decade of the 1970's saw a great deal of activity aimed at the design of pumps
for the Developing World. In order to solve the maintenance problern, development
organizations sponsored and commenced projects to design new handpumps which
featured some combination of increased durability (e.g. the hdia Mark 0, increased ease
of maintenance (e.g. the UNIMADE and the india Mark III) and increased ease
manufacture (e.g. the New No. 6). The number of pumps was large enough that by the
end of the decade, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) recognized the
need to set up a comprehensive testing program to compare them. That program becarne
the World B W n i t e d Nations Development Program Handpumps Project of the 1980's
which evaluated 70 models before it was done."'
Figure 8.1: Photo of India Mark II installed.
;ouce: India Mark II handpumps
8.1 The lndia Mark II: Success through lncreased Durability
The hdia Mark II pump (along with its more
easily maintained descendant, the Mark m) was the
most successful design ever deployed in the
Developing World. It was developed in India in the
mid-1970s. At the beginning of the 1970s there
'" Adosoroff, Sad, a'World Bank Handpumps Testing Programme", in Communify Water Development. ed. Charles Km, p. 156. '" ArlosoroEet ai. , p. k
Success and Faiiure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 56
were approximately 575,000 villages in ~ n d i a . ' ~ In 1975, there were an estimated
150,000 village handpumps in 1ndia.12' By 1984, there were 440,000 India Mark II's.125
By 1989, there were 1.3 million, serving 360 million pe0p1e.I~~ By 1996, over 2.5
million hdia Mark II and Mark III purnps were operating there, serving approximately
500 million people. By the late 1 98O's, exports reached throughout the world."' Over
40 countries irnported or manufactured the india Mark II,"' including ~ i ~ e r i a , " ~ Sri
ank ka'^^ and ~ a l a ~ s i a . 13' The UNDPMrB Handpumps Project tested the pump in 1 1
countries which it identified as commonly using the india Mark II: hdia, Sr i Lanka,
Burkina Faso, Ghana, Niger, Sudan, Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania, Philippines, china.'j2 in
the words of Maggie Black, the india Mark II ". . . is today's best-known handpurnp in the
rural water supply business wor~dwide."'~~ Nonetheless, the bulk of the pumps were
installed in india, making this success story not just one of a particular technology, but a
particular region.
There never was an India Mark 1. The narne Mark iI, denotes the fact that the
pump followed closely on purnp designs developed in india in the late 1960's and early
t23 Black. From Handpumps to Health, p. 5 4. '" New Inrernalionalist. Feb. 1975, as quoted in McDonald and Kay, Water Resources and Sirategies.. p. 74.
Gerhard Tshannerl and Kedar Bryan, ed., Hondpumps tesring and developrnent : proceedings of o wotkshop in China. (Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : World Bank, 1985), p. 53. '" khn Reynolds. p. 84. "' Black, From Handpumps to Health, p. 62. "%UNICEF, b*Technologies for the Villagey'. ~http://www.doe.ernet.in~-unicefd/ul8.htm~ (March 17, 1999). Iz9 H. V. fishnaiswamy, Role ofRichardson & Cruddas (1972) Limited. in Developmenr and hfonufacrure of India hfmk II Deepwell Handpumps in Water Suppiy Programmes in India. (Conference of State Ministers of the Statdünion Temtories in Charge of Water SuppIy, February 7, 1986. Organized by The Ministry of Urban Deveiopment, Goverment of India), p. 3.
Knshnswany, Role of Richarmison and Cmddas, p. 3. 131 Goh Sing Yau, "Malaysia", p. 39.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 57
1970's. '~~ During that t h e , the government of India and the United Nations International
Children's Emergency Fund were involved in the installation of handpumps in Indian
villages. UNICEF had originally become involved in response to drought in the
northwest in 1967.'~' Later, the installation of wells became part of a program designed
to bring safe water and sanitation to India's 575,000 ~ i 1 l a ~ e s . l ~ ~ The familiar problem of
break down plagued the indian project: surveys carried out in Tamil Nadu and
Maharashta in 1974 showed that around 75% of handpumps were not in working order."'
In the words of one author ". . .it appeared that a US% million plus investment in drilling
had supplied close to 9,000 villages with little more than a hole in the g r ~ u n d . " ' ~ ~
The solution adopted by UNICEF and its Indian partners was to find a purnp
which did not break down so easily. 13' The UNICEF water supply staff began a search
for a reliable pump, one which could withstand intensive use for long periods of time
without breakhg d o ~ n . ' ' ' ~ in Maharashtra, they discovered thousands of wells equipped
with handpurnps developed locally. These were the laina, the Jal-wad and the
~ h o l a ~ u r . ' ~ ' These three pumps were related. The Sholapur was a descendant of the Jal-
wad, which was in tum a descendant of the lalna. Pnor to the 1970's, the handpumps
13' Adosoroff et al. Communify Worer Supply, p. 11 5. The countries listed are sites of field testhg by the UNDPMrB Handpump Project. %id, p. 1 1 . A condition of field testing was that the pump had to be in common use in the country in which it was field tested.
Black, From Hundpumps to Health, p. 63. 134 Mudgai, India Handpump Revolurion, p. 3. 135 Black, "The Handpump Corneth", p. 285. 136 Black, From Hundpumps to Health, p. 54. "' Ibid.. p. 59. 13' %id. I J 9 Knshnaswamy, "Development of a Dependable Deep-well Hundpump", p. 53 '" Black, From Handpumps to Health, p. 60.
ibid.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 58
installed in India were of or close to the comrnon design. They featured cast i r ~ n . ' ~ ~
Some, such as the Wasp, the Kirti (very much like the Wasp) and the Kaveri (very much
like the Dempster) were manufactued in [odia.lJ3 Naturally, these pumps were
vulnerable to the notonous maintenance problem.
In 1969, at the Church of Scotland mission in Jalna in the state of Maharashtra, a
self-taught Indian
mechanic and driller
by the name of
Cyrus Gaikwad
deveioped a more
durable '"' His innovations were
distinct fiom
previous
modifications on the
design of the
comrnon handpurnp
in that they did not merely consist of rninor simplifications, as was the case with the
Dempster. Nor did he achieve durability by increasing the size (and therefore cost) of the
parts, as the Battelle Mernorial Institute did, when cornmissioned to design a pump for
'" Knshnaswamy, *'Development of u Dependable Deep-well Handpump", p. 52; Black, From Hrmdpumps to Health, p. 60. 143 Pacey, Hmd Pump Maintenance, p. 1 7. lu Arlosoro ff et al., Comrnuniiy Water Suppb, p. 1 1 4. 14s Mudgal, lndia Handpump Revolution, p. 3.
Success and failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 59
Figure 8.2: Multi-pivo t Design
Most handpumps have a complex system of levers and
pivots to tum the rotary motion of the lever into a vertical
reciprocating motion of the rod. The rod is pulled up as
the lever is pushed down and the rod is pushed down as
the lever is puHed up.
USA ID.'^^ hstead, Gaikwad
altered the materials and
principles of design to achieve a
pump less prone to breakdown.
To begin with, he dispensed with
cast iron for the pumphead and
designed the Jalna to be made
Grom steel?' Steel is lighter and
stronger than cast iron. The next
innovation he made , and the
most distinctive, was to the lever,
its connection to the pump head
and to the pump rods. He
designed a single-pivot handle
with a sealed needle b e a ~ i n ~ . ' ' ' ~
Gaikwad also attached the pump
rod to the handle by means of a quadrant and linked hai in.'''^ This flexible connection, in
contrast with the cornparatively ngid and complex multi-pivot system eliminated lateral
movement and strain on the pump rods. By substituthg a single pivot for the more
common multi-pivot design, Gaikwad reduced the number of moving parts on the handle
mechanism and by sealing the bearing prevented Wear fiom dust, mud and tampering.
'* Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 18. f 47 Mudgal, lndia Handpump Revolution,p. 3. '" Ibié, p. 7b.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer, The Story of the Handpurnp 60
Gaikwad also ensured that the pump head was not physically attached to the rising main.
Because of this change, any strain placed on the pump head, nom rough usage for
instance, would not crack the rishg main. By the next year, 1970,9 men in a small
foundry in Jaha made 200 unit^.'^^ They made several hundred " M e yellow purnps"
- 1 *
: - over the next few years. '
Subsequently, the American Marathi
Mission Project at Wadala produced a
more accurately fabricated version of
the Jalna, called the al-wad.I5?
in the early 1970's, the
Sholapur Well Service (fùnded by the
Swedish Covenant Church) modified
Figure 8.3: Single Pivot Design of the lalna Handpump
jource: Mudgal
Figure 8.4: Sholapur WeU Head -
SHûUPUR PUYPHEAO VEAA - 1973
1 The Sholapur pump was the imrnediate
oreninner of the lndia Mark II. This illustration
;how the roller chain which was used to Iink the
iandle with the piston rods. It was one of the
nost significant innovations of the pump.
Source: Mudgal
--
'" lbid., p. 3, p. 7b. '" Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 17. IJ1 Mudgai, India Handpump Revolution, p. 3. IJ' Black, From Handputnps to Health, p. 60; Mudgal, India Xandpump Revolutim, p. 3.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 61
/ Figure 8.5: Schematic of an India Mark O 1
* -TV - - __-
1 This figure shows some of the design features
1 of the lndia Mark II which helped it achieve
1 such a low break down rate. Aside from the
1 single pivot and the roller chain handlelpiston
1 rod connection, note the hooked spout which
1 prevented foreign material from entering the
1 pump and note also that the drop pipe is not
1 attached to the purnp stand assembly.
source: Shree S. K. industries
the design yet again.Is3 An engineer
named Oscaar Carlson replaced the
needle bearing with a bal1 bearing, which
was less prone to damage fiom lateral
motion. He also replaced the Iinked chain
with a roller chain. Finally, the Sholapur
Well Service ensured uniformity of parts
(and therefore spares) by manufacturing
them on jigs and fixtures. ISJ This was the
Sholapur. By 1974, one could see
thousands of Jalna, Jal-wad and Sholapur
pumps throughout Maharashtra, installed
by various NGOs coordinated by Action
for Agricultural Renewal in Maharashtra
(AFARM).'~~
UNICEF and Government of lndia
engineers were impressed enough to base
the design of their new pump on the Sholapur and its re1at i~es . l~~ M C E F developed the
India Mark iI in cooperation with Richardson & Cniddas (a govemment of India
company) and with MERADO (Mechanical Engineering Research and Development
15' Black, Frorn Hondpumps ?O Heolth, p. 60. 154 Mudgal, India Hmdpump Revulution, pp. 34,7c-7d. I s 5 Black, From Hondpumps to Heolth, p. 60. '" ibid.. pp. 60-1.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpurnp 62
Organization, a govemment of India research unit).'" Richardson & Cruddas produced
the prototypes. MERADO provided design support. The UNICEF tearn, led by Ken
McLeod, coordinated the entire project.'58
Like its role models, the hdia Mark II was built for durability. It was made from
steel. It retained the chah and quadrant and the single pivot design. The above ground
assembly was concreted into the base.159 but not physically attached to the well casingi6'
The angled spout prevented foreign material fiom easily being shoved down the pump.
Rugged handle stops stood up to rough use and abuse?'
Also, some significant innovations distinguish the india Mark II fiom the
Sholapur. Designers increased the pedestal diameter frorn 5 to 6 inches in order to fit
easily over 5 inch diameter well casings which were commonly in use in India by 1976.'~~
They also replaced the pipe handle with a solid bar handle. The increased weight of the
handle provided a counter-balance to the pump rods, making the pump easier to
operate!' Approximately 1000 India Mark Il's were tested during 1977-78. The
breakdown fiequency was a mere 10%. The design was a success.
8.2 Appropriate Technology Influence
Development professionals involved with water and sanitation programs saw
redesign as a solution to the maintenance problem. The comection is logical: purnps are
-- - - -
157 Handpumps Testing and Development, ed. Tshcannerl and Bryan, , p. 52 '" Mudgal, India Handpump Revolution, p. 6. 159 Ken Gray and Rupert Talbot, "A Bnef History af the India Mark ï I Handpump", in Handpumps testing and development : proceedings of a worhhop in China. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar B q m eds. (Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : World Bank), 1985, p. 21 9. ''O Baldwin, "The India Mark iI" , p. 173.
Gray and Talbot, BriefHrStwy of the Indio Mark 11, p. 2 19. 16' Ibid., p. 6.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 63
breakhg down; redesign the pumps. They might have adopted a different strategy
however. Development organizations could have responded with an Unmediate effort at
initiating and improving maintenance programs to support the handpumps. By the next
decade, they would do precisely this (see below). Alternatively, they might have
concluded that the handpump experiment was a failure and concentrated on alternative
means to secure clean water, for example piped water systems. It is possible that some of
the inspiration for the handpump redesign that did occur, paxticularly with regard to those
pumps that were designed for simple maintenance came fiom the Appropriate
Technology movement.
The Appropriate Technology philosophy peaked in popularity during the early
1970s. The birth of the Appropriate Technology (originally termed intermediate
technology) philosophy is usually credited to Ernst Friedrich Schumacher. His
enormously popular book Small is Beautiful appeared in 1 9 7 3 . ' ~ In it he argued that the
capital intensive technology of the West was not necessarily suitable to the needs of
developing nations. Schumacher was an econornist, therefore his argument was an
econornic one. Appropriate technology refers to the use of a technology which makes use
of factors of production in a manner consistent with the endowment of the nation.
Therefore, the labour-richkapital-poor nations of the worid should employ technologies
which are more labour-intensive than those of the capital-rich/labour-poor countries of
the West. Such technology need not be srnall, simple nor rurai. Nonetheless, it seems
intuitively appealing to suppose that appropriate technology is more likely to be
164 Ernst F. Schumacher. Small is Beautrfùl: a srudy of economics as ifpeople mattered. (London: Blond & Briggs Ltd., 1973).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 64
associated with hoes hstead of tractors and hand operated pumps rather than motorized
ones.
It is suggestive that the new pump designs examined in this essay, the
USAID/Bettelle pump (late 1 96OYs), the New No. 6 (1 974), the India Mark 11 (1 979 , the
Waterloo-UNIMADE pump (mid- 1970's through l98O's), the Afiidev ( 1 985)-accurred
during the period when the Appropriate Technology movement was strongest, the mid-
1960's to the rnid- 1980's. 165 According to the historian, Carroll Pursell, the Appropriate
Technology movement was bom of dissatisfaction with the results of post-World War
Two technical aid efforts.'66 This is of course one of the majcr explanations I used eariier
to explain the urban-mal shift in development thought which led to a new focus on the
handpump. The coincidence of timing between the redesign of handpumps and the
Appropriate Technology movement might therefore show no more than that the two were
part of a larger phenornena. However, there are more direct links between them.
The literature surrounding handpump development projects paid homage to the
"Appropriate Technology" rnovement by using the t em liberally in connection with its
pump projects. This literature did not concem itself with the economic theory in
Schumacher's phiiosophy, but it did identiQ with the broader concept that the
Developing World needed technology specificaliy tailored to its needs. For example,
between 1976 and 1978, the World Bank adrninistered a project to identi@ appropriate
technology for water supply and waste disposal, even going so far as to give an
165 Carroll PurseIl, "The Rise and Fall of the Appropriate Technology Movement in the United States. 1965- 1 985" , Technology and Culture 34 (1 993): 629-637. '" Ibid. p. 629.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 65
operational dennition of "appropriate t e c h n ~ l o ~ y " : ' ~ ~ ". . .a replicable process or
technique that provides a socially and enviromentally acceptable and a technically
upgradeable level of service or product at the least social ~ o s t " ' ~ ~ David Henry, who as
we shall soon see was an important figure in the early years of the IDRC handpump
program published an article in 1978 entitled "Designhg for Development: What is
Appropriate Technoloey for Rural ~ e v e l o ~ r n e n t ? " ' ~ ~ The trend continued past the
1970s: T h e application of appropriate technology in the field of rural water supplies in
3, 170 indonesia , is just one of rnany instances where the term was used in the 1980s.
Pacey's book. Hand Pump Maintenance in the Conrext of Community Weil Projeers was
published by Intermediate Technology Publications.
A less tangible, but more profound link between the Appropriate Technology
movement and the redesign of handpumps is the qualitative change in handpump design
which occurred in the mid- 1 970's: early attempts at redesigning pumps, such as the india
Mark ii and the USAID~Battelle Mernorial Institute pump employed a strategy of
increasing the durability of pumps. One mi@ cal1 this the "rugged pump" approach.
Later innovations, such as the IDRC's UNIMADE, the india Mark III and the Village
Level Operated and Maintained (VLOM) strategy of the United Nations Development
Prograrn/World Bank Handpumps Project (see below) concentrated on making the pumps
not necessarily so rugged, but easier for niral Developing World villagers to maintain,
- -
167 Charles, G. Gunnerson, "Sanitation Systems for DeveIoping Coutries", in Technology, Finance and Development: ..ln ..inalysrS of the World Bank as a Technoiogical Institution, Charles Weiss and Nicolas Jequier eds., (Toronto: Lexington Books, 1984), p. 125. 16' Gunnenon, *Sanitauon Sysrems for Developing Countties", p. 125, citing L. Squire and H. van der Ta'. Economic Analysk of Projects, (Baithore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975). 169 David Henry "Designing for Development: What is Appmpnate Technology for Rural Development'', Water Suppiy & Management, vol. 2, pp. 365-72. (CM'ord, Pergamon Press Ltd., 197%).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 66
particularly through the use of local materials. The strategy resembles arguments made
by Schurnacher in Small is Beaufifi, before the design of any of these later pumps had
begun:
"The intermediate technology would aiso fit much more smoothly into the relatively unsophisticated environment in which it is to be utilized. The equipment would be fairiy simple and suitable for maintenance and repair on the spot."'
The change in strategy suggests a change in philosophy, a move away fiom viewing the
handpump as a more or less autonomous artifact to a recognition of the handpump as a
machine operating within a technological network, which hcludes not just other
machines (e.g. drilling rigs) but people, such as on-site caretakers and mobile mechanics,
with specific capabilities, resources and availability. Despite the fact that the "rugged
purnp" approach (an approach reaiized with success in die india Mark IF) evolved in an
atmosphere of fmiliarity with the conditions under which a machine must operate in a
Developing World environment, it nonetheless promoted the production of a purnp which
could work in spite of a Developing World environment rather than a pump which couid
work as part of a Developing World environment.
The distinction is similar to an observation Carroll Pursell made about the
Appropriate Technology movemed: Appropriate Technology was perceived as
ferninine.'" Appropriate technology championed ideas of partnership, harmony and
intimate relationships. These ideas stood in contrast to ". . .the rhetoric of conquest and
domination, rationality and control, that are often associated with masculine constructions
''O S. P. Mathur, "The Application of Appropriate Technology in the Field of Rural Water Supplies in Indonesia", Worfd Heaith Statistic. @arterly 39(1), 7 1-80 (1 986). 171 Shurnacher, Small IS Beaufifiri, p. 1 68. '" Pursell. The Rise and Faü of the Appropriate Technology Movement", pp 635636.
Success and Failure in Tectinology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 67
of te~hnolo~y"."~ It is not very difficult to characterize the India Mark II as a "rugged
individual" while describing the UNIMADE as a "CO-operative tearn player".
There is good reason to speculate about a lidc between the Appropriate
Technology movement and the history of the redesign of handpumps. Proponents of the
Appropriate Technology movernent and the development professionals active in
handpurnp projects were aware of one another. Some cross pollination undoubtedly
occurred. Moreover, it is plausible that both groups were indicative of the change in
developrnent thought unfolding in the early 1970s, wherein the applicability of
unrnodified Westem technology in the Developing World was in question. The new
vogue was to h d or develop technology suitable or "appropriate" to the Developing
World setting. This 1in.k between a Westem movement and the policy of development
organizations is a M e r indication of the importance of understanding Westem culture
and history in solving the riddles of technology transfer.
The story of the development of the üNIMADE is indicative of how engineers
changed pump designs to suit the Developing World and how they continued to change
them when they introduced hem to different environments.
8.3 Development of the UNIMADE.
8.3.1 The Waterloo Prototype
The influential report of the Pearson commission, Pariners in Development,
specifically spoke of the need for institutional support for experts engaged in technical
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 68
assi~tance."~ Given that the federal govemment of Canada was at this time in the hands
of the Liberal Pierre Elliot Trudeau , formetly a rninister in Pearson's cabinet, it is
pertiaps not surprishg to find that in Canada the advice of this hi&-profile report was
tangibly realized. The inaugural meeting of the Board of Govemon of the International
Development Research Centre took place in October, 1970. The govemment of Canada
gave the Centre CS 1 million and a mandate *' . . . to initiate. encourage. support and
conduct research . . . into the means for applying and adapting scientific, technical and
othet knowledge to the econornic and social advancement of [developing nati~ns]"."~
The D R C came into being just as the development community was shifting focus to the
problems of rural development and during the period when the appropriateness of
Western technology was in question. in such an atmosphere, it seems reasonable that the
new development organization should become active in the field of handpump research.
At any rate, by the end of the decade, the Centre was committirig hundreds of thousands
of dollars to the development of a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) handpump for use in rural
areas of developing countries, a pump whose most successful incarnation was named
"UNIMADE".
The UNIMADE pump was a plastic, polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pump developed in
Canada and Malaysia as a pump which could be easily repaired and maintained in rural
developing areas. The project began in Canada with IDRC in the mid- 1 970's. By the
mid-1980's it had become a network of projects in rnany countries of Afiica, Asia and
Latin Amenca. In the rnid-1 97OYs, David Henry became Assistant Director of the Health
- - -
1 74 Commission on Development, Parrners in Development, (New York: Praeger, 1969, pp. 20-2 1. 17' Goverment of Canada. Intemationol Development Resemch Centre Act. 1 SVO. Section 4. Subsection 1.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 69
Sciences Division of the IDRC. If we c m identi& the shift to a rural focus among the
development community and the questioning of the appropriateness of Western
technology as providing the conditions conducive to the IDRCYs entry into handpump
research, we can identify David Henry as the specific individual inside IDRC in whom
the potential of those conditions was realized. His expenence as a field officer for
UNICEF in India during the early 1970's (before the arrivai of the India Mark
exposed him to the shortcomings of the common handpump when used in rural areas of
develophg countries. He got a chance to see the maintenance problem of the cornmon
handpump first hand: "hported pumps that were designed for use by individual families
in Europe and North America, when installed in villages of 500 people, wore out in a
week."'" Given his background, it is not surprising that he took notice of the 1974
üMCEF survey in hdia which noted that 75% of purnps were not in working order (the
same survey which stimulated the development of the hdia Mark II, referred to in section
8.1). Henry referred to the survey in an article published in 1976."~ Henry's interest in
solving the problem was the beginning of the IDRC project.
The design that eventually evolved into UNIMADE, came to IDRC with World
Bank consultant W. K. (a. k.a. Tim) Journey. Village Water Supply, the publication of
1976 based on the work of Saunders and Warford over the previous few years (see
section 7.2.2) recornmended that handpumps on shallow wells should be used wherever
possible; that the systems must be designed for simple, trouble fiee operation and be
capable of king maintained and operated by local technicians; that equipment mwt be
-
'" David Henry, BbTechnology Tramfer: Old Myths and New Realities", Journal of Developing Societies 7(l), ( lWl) , p. 97. In Henry. "Technology Transfer" , p. 97.
Success and Failure in Technolociy Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 70
durable and replacement parts readily available and that standard designs, capable of
slight modification for local conditions should be d e v e l ~ ~ e d . " ~ Journey wrote a paper
outlining the design for a plastic pump to m e t most of these criteria for the World Bank
in October 1976.1a0 Given the high profile of rural water supply in general at the tirne, of
World Bank projects in particular and Henry's interest in the handpump, one can ody
assume that he was aware of and interested in Journey's idea. This assurnption. at any
Figure 3: Cornparison of the Journey Design to the Common EIandpump.
Journey Desrgn Traditionai Descgn
rate, explains why Journey came
to work for IDRC. '" He brought
his idea for a plastic pump with
him.
The Journey pump, when
compared to the common pump,
featured a simplified (therefore
cheaper) design and the use of
cheaper matenals such as plastic,
wood and leather. '82 h the
common design, the drop pipe is
placed inside a larger pipe, lcnown
as the well casing. instead of
178 David Henry. "Will it work, will it last, can 1 afTord it?" Reports. 5(J), (1976) 16-1 7. '" World Bank, Village Wuter Supply, p. 3 1 . 180 W. K. Joumey, A Hand Pump for Rural Areas of Deveioping Couniries. (World Bank, 1976). intemationai Bank for Reconstruction and Development document, P.U. Report No, RES 9, 1976. "' Goh, 'Deveiopmmt of a.. .HandumpW, p. 2. '" Joumey. Hand Pump for Rural Areas, p. 2.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 7 1
havhg a separate well casing and &op pipe, in Joumey's design one pipe performed both
functions. '83 This pipe was not steel, but PVC. By the mid- 1 97OYs, PVC was more
readily available than steel or other alternatives such as asbestos cernent in developing
countries and considerably ~ h e a ~ e r . " ~ The use of PVC also had other advantageç over
steel. PVC c m be solvent welded, which requires very little equipment or expertise
compared with the welding of iron and steel. Thus PVC pumps, ceteris paribus, were
easier to construct and to repair in rural areas of developing nations. PVC is also lighter
than steel, making it easier for villagers to install the pump or pull it up to repair it.
The pump rod was to be made from wood or even bamboo. Ioumey also
dispensed with the pump rod guide, which he argued was ~ n n e c e s s a r ~ . ' ~ ~ Joumey's
design called for the piston seals to be made out of leather.'" Naturally these seals are
subject to a great deal of Wction as the piston moves up and down in the cylinder.
Leather seals Wear out relatively quickly, but since both leather and Ieather workers are
generally in plentifid supply in the countryside, replacing the seals did not pose a
prob lem.
The Joumey pump also employed an interchangeable piston and foot valve. The
Joumey piston and foot valve both consisted of perforated PVC disks with nylon
reinforced neoprene flaps placed over the holes to act as valve^.'^' Journey probably
hoped that interchangeable parts would have made stocking spares easier as well as
s impl img manufacture. Because the drop pipe acts as the pump cylinder, both the
-- - -
Ig3 Ibid. I BJ Glennie, Colin. Village warer suppiy in the decade : lessonrfi.ornfield experience. (Chichester [Sussex] ; Toronto: J. Wiley, I983), p. 92. la' Joumey, Hand Pump for Rural Areas, p. 4. 196 Ibid., pp. 5-6.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 72
1 Figure 4: The Journey PistoilFoot Valve
1 source: Journey
piston and the foot valve cm be taken
out or "recovered" sirnply by pulling
thern up the length of the drop pipe.
This cannot be done in common designs
where the cylinder and therefore the
piston is of a larger diarneter than the
riser pipe. in such designs, if the user
wants to recover the piston (to inspect it
for damage for instance) he or she is
obliged to pull up the entire drop pipe
and cylinder which are often full of
water. That is a three person job. In
Journey's design, pulling up the piston
and then the foot valve was only a one
For al1 Journey's attention to detail, he still only had a conceptual design
inasmuch as he liad not proMded engineering drawings in his paper. David Henry went to
the University of Waterloo to visit the Mechanical Engineering Department. He knocked
on the door of Professor Alan Plumtree and asked if the professor could design a
handpump for use in the rural third w0r1d.I~~ Dr. Plumtree must have heard something he
liked, because at the start of 1976, he almg with Dr. A. Rudin were working under an
'" Md., p. 3. la' ibid., p. 3. '" Richard CarnRhers, private conversation, February 1998.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 73
DRC gant to design a handpump for
third world u d g O Their liaison with
IDRC was through David Henry and W.
K. lourney. The pump which they
eventually developed followed the
principles set down in Joumey's
conceptual design. in January of the next
year, the research team was in full
swing.19' By Apcil of 1978, they had a
working prototype of a PVC purnp.
in the spirit of Joumey's design
Figure 5: The Waterloo F&np PistonEoot Valve
jource: Rudin and Plumtree
the Waterloo design substituted PVC plastic for the steel drop pipe. It retained the idea of
an interchangeable PVC piston and foot valve. Instead of leather seals on the piston and
foot valve, the Waterloo pump featured hvo split polyethylene ring seals on the piston and
a polyethylene cup for the foot valve.192 Ln spite of the modifications however, the
Waterloo pump remained m e to the philosophy of the Joumey design, ease of
maintenance. It was simple Ui design and made fiom cheap materials. This made it
easier for villagers to understand how it worked, how to repair it and to get hold of
replacement parts and repair materials.
The Waterloo Pump underwent testing at the Consumer's Association Testing
Facility in England (as part of project sponsored by Bntain's Overseas Development
'* IDRC, &Water Pump Systm", Project 760158. May 1999. IDRC Development Research Information System (IDRIS) < http9/~~~.minweb.idrc.ca/idrisiog.htm > (July 26, 1999). 19' David Henry, "Wanted: A Better Hand Pump", Reports 6(4), p 14 (1 977).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 74
Ministry) later that year. The CA labs suggested a few modifications having identified the
Waterloo Purnp's vulnerability to Wear when handling water containing sand and
abrasives, nonetheless the overall assessrnent was positive.'93 With a university
developed and laboratory tested design, IDRC was ready to take the next step, field
testing. DRC dispersed ~ $ 5 8 2 , 0 8 0 ~ ~ ~ to test the Waterloo pump under field conditions
in Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Ethiopia and Malawi. lg5
8.3.2 Field Testing 1 978-82: Lessons and Modifications
The first phase of testing, the one which DRC initiated to see how the newly
designed Waterloo pump would perfonn under field conditions lasted over three years.
Only the below ground components, Le. the drop pipe, the pump rod, the piston and the
foot valve were taken fiom the Waterloo Purnp. Each country designed its own pump
stand assembly. LDRC did not administer the project directly, but rather provided funding
and technical support to organizations in the host countries. Even though it had been
designed specifically for mal third world use, adaptation of the Waterloo pump to local
conditions was fiequently necessary.
'" Gok b'Development of the Unimade Handpump", p. 2. 193 "Hand Pump Test Lab (England)", Project 770 122, May 1999, IDRIS. (July 76,1999) '%A list of sources is necessary here: "Rural Water Technology Research:, Project 7601 87; "'Pumping Technology Research (Ethiopia)", Project 770022; "Shallow Well Pump Research (Malawi)", Project 770 107; "Water hunping Technolow (Global)", Project 78ûû 16, "Water-Pumping Tecbology (Malaysia) - Phase I", Project 780022, "Handpump Testing (Sri Lanka)" Project 780105, IDRC Developmmt Research Idormation System CI]3RIS) c http~hvww.minweb.idrc.calidrislog.htm > ( M y 26, 1999). (Note: DRIS is a database which contains summaries of each project to which the IDRC has granted fini&. ) The figure given in the text is amived at by adding up the values of the grants for aii projects. 19' Goh, *bDevelopment of a.. .Handpumpw, p. 2.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 75
8.3.2.1 Ethiopia: Back to Metal
In the early 198OYs, the IDRC provided the Ethiopian Water Resources Authority
(EWRA) with C$166,380 to add the Waterloo Pump to its program of testing and
development. EWRA tested six handpumps which included the Waterloo Pump and
pumps designed by the University of Addis Abbaba. Eighty-four Waterloo pumps were
installed in Ethiopian villages and monitored for a penod of about one year. Tested for
volumetric eficiency, foot valve le& rates and pump rod forces at three different depths,
the pump perforined well over the year. Researchers declared the pumps Wear resistant
and inexpensive and believed that the pump could be manufactured l o ~ a l l ~ . ' ~ ~
Ultimately, the Ethiopians did not adopt the Waterloo Pump, but they did
incorporate part of its design in the pump they did d e v e ~ o ~ . ~ ~ ' The EWRA developed a
series of pumps cailed BP pumps. They settled on the BP-50. The BP-50 was a
substantial departure from the Waterloo design. It did not even incorporate Journey's
concept of a predominantly plastic purnp. The Ethiopians did not have a very good supply
of quality PVC pipe.'98 They did have a plentiful supply of artisans involved in a long
established metal indust~y.'~~ So, the PVC drop pipe was abandoned in favour of a return
to metal. However, the Ethiopians did not give up on a more basic concept behind the
pumps such as that of the Waterloo design, the idea of simplicity. in a departure fiom the
conventionai design, instead of a lever, EWRA attached the pump rod, steel now, rather
--
IW *'himpkg Technology Research (Ethiopia)" 19' World Bank, United Nations Development Programme. Laboratory Tesring, Field Trials and Technological Development. (World Bank Rural Water Supply Handpumps Project Report. 1, Washington, D. C., 1982), p. ii clear1y identifies "LDRC Ethiopia Type BP", identifjing the iDRC pump with the BP line developed by Ethiopian Water Research Authority (EWM). 19' Arlosomff et al.. Community Water Supply, p. 1 52. '" C. Bailey et al., Handle On Health, (Ottawa: IDRC, 1990) Video.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer The Story of the Handpump 76
than PVC, to a simple handle, rather like the straight handlebars one might find on a
pogo-stick. This arrangement dispenses with the mechanical advantage afforded by a
lever of course, but it also means fewer moving parts to break down on the pump.
8.3.2.2 Sri Lanka: lncorporating Wood
In 1958, A. T. Ariyaratne, a teacher at Nalanda College, a Buddhist high school in
Colombo organized a group of teachers, students and government workers into a work
camp to assist the residents of the poor, low-caste village of ~anatoluwa. '~~ It was the
beginning of the Sarvodaya movement (full name: Lanka Jathika Sarvodaya Shramadana
Movement (~nc.)'~~) The rnovement was cornmitted to the Buddhist ideal of self
reaiization for the individual and the community. "Sarvodaya" means "awakening of
all". "Sarvodaya" was achieved through "shramadana" which means the sharing of one's
lab~ur.'~' By the 1980's the Sarvodaya rnovement was an established organization in
grassroots community-development work.'03 It involved over 1 million people and
covered over 3000 villages and was beginning to involve itself in small industries.'"
This combination of interests led them to consider the manufacture of handpumps.
Sarvodaya looked for a pump which could be built and repaired in the villages. As the
literature surrounding village water supply fiequently points out, fetching water in
" George D. Bond, The Buddhist Revival in Sri Lanka: Religious Tradition, Reihterpretation and Response, (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1 988), p. 244. "' Sharp and Graham, Village Hondpump Technology, p. 20. 'O' Macy, loanna, Dharma and Development: Religion 4s Resource in the Survodaya Se[/-Hel' ~Movemenr. (West Hartford, Corn.: Kumarian Press, l985), p. 1 16. 'O3 Ssharp and Graham, Village Handpump Technotogy, p. 9. 'w George McRobie, "The Cornmunity's Role in Appropriate Technology" Second Annual E. F. Schumacher Lectures October 1982, Cathedrai St. John the Divine, New York City, ed. Hildegarde Hannum, 1999 <http://www.schumachersociety.org/lec-mc (June 10, 1999). May be purchased in pamphiet form fkom the E. F. Schumacha Society, 140 Jug End Road, Great Barrington, MA 01 230, (4 13) 528-1 73 7, <www.schumacfiersociety.orglpublication.h~~.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 77
traditional societies is usually women's work. Maintenance is therefore easier if the
pumps are designed with women in mhd. PVC pumps are useful, because they are
lightweight, more easily drawn up out of the ground for repair
Once again, this is a story of modification and adaptation. Firstly, the prograrn
participants modXed the existing steel pump stands and levers to accommodate the
below ground cornponents of the Waterloo ~ u m ~ . ~ ~ ~ Secondly, the below ground
components themselves were modified from the Waterloo design. Solid PVC stock was
unavailable in Sri Lanka, so they fashioned the piston and foot valve fiom PVC pipe with
a core of wood. They also replaced the polyethylene seals with a leather cup.'06
Polyethylene was difficult to obtain in Sri Lanka, but leather was plentifid. Leather also
had a further advantage. It made a better seal against the rough inside, typical of PVC
pipe in Sri ank ka."' Some of the parts could be made in the village centres, though the
pistons, seals, valves and above ground components had to be produced at the Sarvodaya
Main centre.''* The project was still operating well five years later when film maken
came to record its progress.209
8.3.2.3 Thailand: A Leaky Foot valve
The Thai experience of the Waterloo handpump in the early LggO's, was to have a
direct influence on the design of the UNIMADE. Once again, D R C introduced its pump
into an existing pump program. The Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) tested the
'Os Mark Rogm "An Appropriated Technology: Handpumps in Sri Lanka". Reports 13 (3) (October 1984) p. IO* '06 Pathirana Dharmadasa, Upali Wickramasinghe, and Douglas Chandrasiri, Sri Lanka" , in Village Hundpump Technology. Donald Sharp and Michel Graham, eds. (Ottawa, DRC, 1982), p. 18. " ibid., p. 18. 'O8 Ibid, p. 12. '" Bailey et al., Handle on Heulth.
Success and Failure in Technotogy Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 78
Waterloo pump alongside two other pumps then currently in widespread use in Thailand,
the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR) pump (a descendant of the Dempster
pump"4 and the Office of Accelerated Rural Development (ARD) pump.''t Based on
Iaboratory tests, a modified pump was d e ~ e l o ~ e d . ~ " It employed a modified piston and
foot valve and a steel casing was placed around the PVC linde der."^ AIT discovered the
foot valve of the Waterloo pump leaked, because the PVC valve flaps did not provide an
effective water seal. The Thais replaced the PVC flaps with a rubber flap with brass
backing plate glued to it. Further, they elevated the valve seat to prevent it becoming
blocked with sand. They attached a spring to press the valve flap ont0 the seat. However,
the backing plate came unglued in practice and the Thais resorted to a single rubber disk
with no backing plate."" They also abandoned the idea of a recoverable foot valve that
could be used as a spare Fi£ty-four pumps were installed in three regions of
Thailand for field testing? With the results both of the laboratory tests and the field
tests. the Thais designed a new purnp, the AIT-PVC which hcorporated some of the
above modifications, particularly to the foot valve." '
8.3.2.4 Malaysia: A Better Foot valve
The AIT-PVC pump did not lead directly to the UNIMADE. However, the
Maiaysians studied the record of the Thai efforts while they made their own
"O Pichai N i tyongsM and Pisidhi Karasudhi, Thailand", p. 21. TI I Ibid., pp. 21-22. '" Ibid.. p. 29. 213 Ibid., p. 26. Il4 Ibid.. pp. 26-7. TI5 Ibid., p. 27. ''' *'Water Purnping Technology (Global)", Project 780016, , IDRC Development Research information System (IDRIS). 37 Goh, "Maiaysia?', p. 29.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 79
modifications. The Malaysian project was
ultimately to be the most f i t f u l of the early
testing projects. This was the project which
brought Dr. Goh Sing Y au of the University
of Malaya to the design of PVC handpumps.
His redesign of the Waterloo purnp, later
known as the UNMADE (UNiversity of
MAlaya DEsigned) "' pump was to be the
most successful to emergc from the iDRC
handpump project and would later be used in
locations throughout the world.
The initial project lasted fiom January jource: Reynolds, "IDRC-üM Handpurnp"
L
1979 to June 1982."9 The Malaysians manufactured 12 lift purnps and 5 suction pumps
according to the Waterloo design. The Malaysians made use of the experience gained by
the Thais, though their solutions were diflerent. Noting the leakage past the foot valve
observed by the Thais, the Malaysians redesigned the foot valve. Unlike the Thais they
did not resort to a non-recoverable foot valve. hstead of a polyethylene cup featured on
the Waterloo pump, Goh and his team used a double-lip rubber seal. Thus they preserved
the recoverable foot valve.u0
-
"' Goh, "Developrnent of the Unimade Handpump", p. 6. '19 Sharp and Graham, Village Hodpump Technology, p. 39. "O Goh. "Development of a.. .Handpumpy', p. 3.
Success and Failure in Technotogy Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 80
1 Figure 6: The UMMADE PistodFoot Valve
Double lip tub ber seal i for foot vafve oniy -' l
8.3.3 The UNIMADE In August of 1982 participants in the
six field test projects met at an end-of-project
seminar at the University of Malaya in Kuala
Lumpur to discuss results."' From there, a
second round of field testing began.
The pumps used in the second round
were a11 rnodified €rom the Waterloo pump.
Apparently, the participants in the
conference were impressed with what they
heard fiom Goh Sing Yau, because the
Thais, the Filipinos and the Malaysians al1
opted for designs based on the modifications
made by Dr. Goh at the University of Malaya.
Meanwhile, although David Henry had left IDRC, the handpump project was now
in the hands of Donald Sharp who pursued it vigorously. The gant he obtained for
setting up the IDRC handpump network and research facility was the largest gant the
IDRC had ever made. It took Sharp a year to convince the board of govemors to approve
it.'" The Malaysian group fomed the centre of a handpump network in Asia, but
Donald Sharp, "The IDRC Handpump Program" , in Hmdpumps testing and developntent : proceedings of a w o h h o p in China. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar Bryan eds. (Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : Worici Bank), 1985, p. 194nl. The resdts presented at this serauiar are presented in Sharp and Graham.
interview with Donald Sharp, April1998.
Success and Failure in Technoloqy Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 81
eventually to include operations in such places as Kenya, the ~ h i l i ~ ~ i n e s , ~ ~ ~ Carneroon
and Costa lXica2". Among the services the Maiaysian group provided was the supply of
pumps if local production facilities did not yet exist, for example in Costa Rica2?
Professor Goh personally provided technical assistance when other organizations
undertook the manufacture of the pumps, for example the Water Conservancy Bureau of
Xinjiang,
By 1 984, the first pump to bear the narne üNlMADE, the UNIMADE Mark 1,
was built at the University of ~ a l a ~ a . ~ ' In the tradition of the Iourney design and the
Waterloo Purnp, the Mark 1 featured a PVC piston and foot valve. These were located
inside a PVC drop pipe which also served as pump cylinder. Unlike the Iourney design.
the UNIMA.DE featured a separate well cashg.?'* It still had the polyethylene piston
rings of the Waterloo Pump, but the foot valve featured the double lip rubber seal which
had been developed at the University of Malaya. Above ground, there was a 6 inch steel
pipe atop which was installed a largely wooden Ieverage ~ ~ s t e r n . ' ~ ~ The
bearings for the pivot and hanger joints on the leverage system were made fiom oil-
" Gendrano, Carme10 M., 'The IDRC Handpump Project in the Philippines: Experiences and Prospects". paper presented at ïhe D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reporfs of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 21-25 October 1992, Beijing, China. (N.p., [DRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedings) Available fiom IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5. i74 - Rosaies. * * ~ a n d ~ u r n ~ koject in Costa Rica". 225 ibid.. P. 2. zb ZhaG ~i De Troject Situation in Popularization of IDRC Handpump and its Prospect on Cornmerciaiization Development in Xinjiang", paper presented at The IDRC Handpump Nenvork Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nehvork Meeting, 21-25 October 1992, Bepng, China. (N.F., [IDRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedings), p. 2, Available fiom iDRC archives: archiv 63 1 -65 G 5. " Goh, "Development of the Unimade.. .", p. 6. "' Graham and Sharp, p. 44. See figure. 229 Goh, "Development of the Unimade.. .", p. 9.
Arlosoroff et al., Communify Water Suppb, p. 154.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfec The Story of the Handpump 82
impregnated ti~nber-'~' All the working components of the pump were either wood or
plastic. The stand was made from steel pipe.
8.4 The United Nations Development PIanAModd Bank Handpumps Project and the "VLOM" Concept
The interest in the development of handpumps suited for use in the Developing
World gained steam in the 1970s and continued into the 1980s. As the nurnber of
"appropriate" pumps grew, the question of cornparison arose. During the late 1970's the
British Overseas Development Ministry contracted with the Consurners Association to
analyze the characteristics of 10 commercially manufactured pumps fiom the
industrialized world. The tests were c&ed out at the Consurners Association Testing
and Research Laboratory in Harpenden, UK. It was to this program that the IDRC turned
when they wanted the Waterloo pump independently e~a lua t ed?~~ ln 1979, with the
DWSSD in rnind, the Consurners Association and the International Reference Centre for
Comrnunity Water Supply (IRC), based in Den Haag, Netherlands ran the international
Conference on Testing and Evaluation of Handpumps. Representatives of the World
Bank attended. Within a year, the World Bank contracted with the Consumers
Association Testing and Research Laboratory to test two more p ~ p s . 2 3 3 One year after
that, the United Nations Development Program chose the World Bank to undertake the
- -
231 Goh Sing Yau. Laborato?y und Field Testing of Hundpumps. (Ottawa: IDRC, 198S), pp. 62-68. 3L Sharp and Graham, Village Hondpump Technology, p. 7 "3 World Bank, United NationsDevelopmmt Programme, Rural lYorer Supply Hundpump Project: Laboratory Tesring, Field Triols and Technologicul Development, p. ii.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 83
Rural Water Supply Handpumps ~roject.'~"e World Bank continued to use the
Consumer Association labs for the lab testing portion of the project, which lasted to
1 982.23s A field testing program began in 198 1 .'36 By mid- 1986 it had tested 2700
handpurnps in 17 co~t r i es . ' ~ ' The project's 1987 report entitled Community Water
Supply: The Ha;.tdpr<mp ~ ~ t i o n , ~ ~ * became a well known and ofl-quoted document in
rural water supply literature. The report contained evaluation of most of the important
new handpurnps fiom the 1970's and early 1980's, including the hdia Mark II, the
Afridev (a popular pump of which many thousands are in use in Afnca, Pakistan and the
~ h i l i ~ ~ i n e s ' ~ ~ ) the üNiMADE. It was this project which coined the terni "VLOM
(Village Level Operated and Maintained) pumps.'JO The term referred to a concept which
had been developing throughout the 1970's and which was probably an outgrowth of the
belief in making pumps "appropriate" for Developing World cornmunities. The concept
entailed creating a pump which could be repaired by villagers using local resources.
Villagers would then not be dependent upon distant mechanics or supplies of spare parts.
Joumey's pump, fiom which the UNIMADE design developed embodied precisely this
reasoning, though it was too early to get the name "VLOM". VLOM was a concept
which the LJNDPMrorld Bank Handpumps Project championed and to which many pump
designs of the l97O's, 1980's and L 990's aspired.
- -- -
234 Arlosoroff, S.. D. Grey and W. Jouney, preface to Rural Water Suppiy Handpumps Project - Hmdpumps Testing and Developrnent: Progress Reporr on Field and Loboratoty Tesring. (Series: World Bank Technicd Paper, 29, UNDP Project Management Report. 1984). 23 5 Arlosorff, "World Bank Handpumps Testing Programme", p. 157.
Ibid.. "' Allosoroff et ai., preface to Cornrnunity Water Suppiy, preface.
bid. 3 9 Erich Baumanu, private communication, June 29, 1999. The numbers represent Mr. Baumann's estimates based on rnemory. IU> Arlosoro ff et al., Community Water Supply? p. 1 3.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 84
Between 1983 and 1988, UNICEF and hdia even redesigned the hdia Mark II to
conform to the VLOM principles.'4' For example, the chief drawback to the India Mark
II, so far as village level maintenance was concemed, was that the piston and footvalve
were of wider diameter than the nser pipe and could not be removed for routine
maintenance (particularly replacement of the piston seals) without pulling up the entire
riser pipe. That operation requires heavy equipment, a few hours and two or three
me~hanics. '~~ The India Mark III used a piston and footvalve of slightly under 2.5 .' in
diameter which allowed them to be pufled up without lifting the nser main.''-' The entire
job could be done without heavy equipment and within an heur? By 1995 there were
2.3 million India Mark II's in I.ndia;14' by 1996 there were 2.6 million India Mark II's and
Mark III's."'6 This rneans that 300,GOO India Mark Di purnps have been installed since
the purnp's development (which ended in 1988). Given that in 1995 there were 36
qualified suppliers of the hdia Mark II with a combined annual production capacity of
150,000 purnps, it would appear that the India Mark iU represents a sizeable portion of
the production, though perhaps still lagging behind its older brother, possibly because of a
higher cost?'
"' hiudgal, lndia Handpump Revolution, p. 23. "' Mudgal, India Handpump Revolution, p. 20; Arlosoroff et al., Comnunity Watet Suppiy, p. 1 17. 3' Mudgal, Indio Hondpunp RevoZution, p. 27. f u Arlosoroff et al., Communify Wuter Supply, p. 1 17. "' Mudgd. India Handpump Revofution, p. 1 1 . '* ibid., p. 17. "' %id, p. 18.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 85
9. The Late 1970's: Adapting the Environment
The results of the handpump redesign efforts of the 1970's were mixed. Al1 were
irnprovements over the nineteenth century common handpump they were meant to
replace, but development organizations also came to recognize that there was more to
successfbily introducing the handpump to the Developing World than good pump
designs. For al1 its v h e s , the UNMADE'S innovative design proved to be only one
factor in &terminhg the success of attempts to introduce it in pilot projects throughout
the Developing World. As we shall see, a great deal of attention focused on maintenance
systems. So long as the issues involved were fairly technical in nature, related for
instance to the construction and maintenance of handpumps, development organizations
like iDRC had little difficulty in meeting the challenge.
9.1 Establishing Construction Faciljties and Standards.
Naturally, an important component of any network to support handpumps is the
manufacturing facility. Some pump designs were adapted to ensure that manufacture was
not beyond the capabilities of local manufachirers. One of the vimies of the extremely
successful New No. 6 pump in Bangladesh (there are approximately 3,000,000 there'"8)
was that it was a very simple pump without fiFe toleran~es.?~~ Ease of manufacture was
'Is Exich Baumann, private communication, June 19,1999. The numbm represent Mr. Baumann's estimates based on memory. "' Black, From Handpumps to Heafth, p. 24; Arlosoroff et al., Comrnunity Water Supply, p. 174.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 86
one of the principal tenets of the design program which developed the ~fkidev."~ Once
Goh had a workable design, he turned attention to the constniction of a small-scale
rnanufacturing plant. Project managers could not simply rely on such facilities k ing
available. The Indonesian organization participating in the iDRC handpump network,
Dian Desa, a village based ("Desa" means village'5') Appropriate Technology g ~ o u ~ , ~ ~ '
was unable to find a private manufacturer for its version of the UNIMADE pump. The
lack of a local manufacturer hurt their program. Local organizations expressed dismay
when they could not purchase the pump locally. Presumably, imports were expensive. In
1992, Dian Desa was çtill trying to secure funding to build its own fa~ility."~ Once
qualified manufacturers were found, organizations such as UNICEF and iDRC might fmd
themselves involved in the establishment of quality control standards .'*'
9.2 Maintenance Systems
in 1976. Oxfarn first published a pamphlet by Arnold Pacey under the title: Hand
Pzrmp Maintenance and the Objectives of Community Well Projects. in the next year it
was republished by Intermediate Technology Publications as Hand Pzmp Maintenance in
the Context of Community Well ~rojects ."~ The essay becarne widely known and Pacey
appeared in the bibliographies of texts on handpurnps prepared by development
Arlosoroff et al., Comrnunity Wuter Supply, p. 62. For wide use, note Erich Baumann, private communication, June 29, 1999. The numbers represent Mr. Baumann's estimates based on memory. "' Avril Gupta, "Rural Water Supplies in hdonesia", (master's thesis, University of Waterloo, 1994) , p. 136. " Christina Anstanti, The D R C Handpump Project in hdonesia and its Commercialization Prospects", paper ptesented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nerwork Meeting, 21-25 October 1992, Beij'ing, China. (Np., @DRC?], f l992?]). (Conference Proceedings), p. 1. AvailabIe fkom IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5. 253 ibid., pp. 6-7. ?Y Donald Sharp. The PVC Pump Branches Out", Reports 14 (3/4), pp. 22-23. (October 1985) 25' Pacey, among tint pages (unnumbered) of Hand Pump Maintenance.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 87
professionals.'56 Pacey made the argument that there was much more to the success of
handpump projects than the design of the pumps. He went so far as to suggest that the
success of handpump projects had more to do with comrnunity o i g ~ t i o n than with
pump design:
"A hand-pump is only appropriate if it fits the pattern of organization, social responsibility and ski11 which exists in the comunity. Suitable purnps cannot be produced if the arrangements for maintenance and water use in the villages ubere they will be used are never examined. Programmes based only on laboratory tests and technical investigations can improve the construction and reliability of the band-purnps, but can never make them more acceptable to the users without community inv~lvement,"'~'
Pacey's book was probably the k t in handpump literature to make a vigorous
argument which explicity acknowledged that machines do not operate in isolation but
function as a component of a larger system.
As Pacey pointed out, some development professionals had, by the mid- 1970's,
already recognized the need to organize regular maintenance as a part of handpump
projects and had developed strategies to address the problem. By 1975, for instance, the
requirement that one villager l e m maintenance on the well and handpump was a
condition for Oxfarn gants for water suppl JS8 From the mid-1970's on, maintenance
received a great deal of attention in the literature surrounding handpurnps. McJunkin
addressed the organization of maintenance in WHO'S draft guideline on handpurnps.'59
By the 19803, the discussion of maintenance appeared in the literature of the handpump
projects themselves. 'Ihe lack of a maintenance prograrn was explicitiy recognized as an
- - -
E.g. Arlosoroff et al. Communiiy Wuter Supply and also McJunkin, H d Pumpc. " Pacey, Hand Purnp Maintenance, p. 6.
~ a ~ g i e Black. A Cuuse for Our Times : Oxfom : thefirst 50 yems. (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 148. 39 Pacey, Hund Pump iclointenance, p. 14.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 88
obstacle in the USAID handpump project in Tunisia in the early 80 's . ' ~~ D. Donaldson, a
professional working on the USAID'S Water and Sanitation for Health (WASH) Program
who wrote the technical reports for the Honduras project, felt that operation and
maintenance deserved its own repod6 ' The World Bank/UNDP Handpumps Project
included discussions of maintenance systems in its publications.'6' The IDRC project
produced an illustrated manual, to train local mechanics how to maintain and repair the
pumps.'63 In Allahabad, India, the Lnstitute of Engineering and Rural Technology reieased
a manual: Do it YourseifMaintenance of the India Mark 11.'~ IDRC projects also
fiequently included training sessions for designated persons in the recipient
c~mmunities. '~~
9.2.1 The lndia Mark II Handpump and its Three-Tier Maintenance System
In the field, attention to maintenance translated into considerable expense and
effort in support of the establishment of maintenance programs and the assignment of
responsibility to specific individuals. The most obvious example is contained in the story
- --
'a P. W . Potts. USAID Handpump Program in Tunisia, WASH Field Report no. 100. (Arlington, VA.: Water and Sanitation for Heaith, 1983). '*' Donaidson, D. A TechnicalUhfanagerial Review of MD Handpump Programs in Sri Lanka, ~ h e Philippines, Honduras, and the Domincan Republic. WASH Working Paper No. 79. (Arlington: Water And Sanitation for Health, 1983); Donaidson, D., Operation and maintenance of rural drinking water and lapine programs in Honduras, Arlington, Va. : WASH field report no. 129. (Water And Sanitation for Heaith, 1984); Donaldson. D., Ttrsting of USAID type handpump (Honduras), WASH Field Report No. 130, (Arfington, Va. : Water And Sanitation for Health, 1984). '6' Adosoroff et al.. Communify Water Supply, pp. 3 1-5.37 and throughout the remahder of the book. 263 Goh Sing Yau W I U D E 3OM handpump: a guide for installation, repair and maintenance. (Kuala Lumpur : University of Maiaya, 1987). '" Mishra, M., Do it YourselfMuintenance of lndia Mark-II Hand Pump. (Allahabad: unitute of Engineering and Rural Technolow, 1994?). "' Samiha El Katsha, "Experience of the IDRC Handpump Project in Egypt" , Papa presented at The lDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, Oaober 1992. Avaiiable in Reports ofthe IDRC Handpump Nehvork Meeting, 21 -2.5 October 1992, Beijing, China. (Np., P R C ? ] , [1992?]). (Conférence Proceedings), p. 3. Available fiom IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5, p. 3; Aristanti. "The IDRC Handpump Project in indonesia", p. 5.
Success and Failure in Technoloqy Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 89
of the India Mark II. A major feature of the India Mark II program was the ofi-described
three-tier maintenance system instituted by water supply authorities in India, beginning in
1 9 7 6 . ' ~ ~ The approach developed fiom NGO projects in Maduari, Coimbatore and
aln na.'^' Each pump received minor maintenance fiom a single, local caretaker. More
difficult maintenance was the responsibility of trained mechanics, each of whom had
responsibility for approximately 100 pumps. What he or she codd not handle was lefi to
a district mobile repair crew responsible for approxirnately 1000 pumps?68
The designers of the three-tier maintenance system took the idea of the village
caretaker fiom an experimental project in Salem District in Tamil Nadu, which had
çought to stress comrnunity inv~lvernent.'~~ The caretaker was responsible for routine
maintenance and monitoring on a single pump. He would demonstrate to other users.
how to operate the pump and perfom such simple and fiequent duties as keeping the
purnp area clean, tightening nuts and greasing the c h a h When breakdowns of
malfunctions occurred, it was his job to report them to the district engineer."' UNICEF
supported a training program for village caretakers in such Indian states as Tamil Nadu,
Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Karnataka. Two day training camps taught batches of 50-
100 caretakers about the pump's basic workings and about hygiene."' The block level
mechanic handled more difficult maintenance work, though not that which required
pulling up the below-ground components of the pumps. The block level mechanic had
tools and a bicycle. He would visit each of his 50- : 00 pumps once a month, to carry out
'W Black, From Handpumps ro Heulth pp. 63-70. "' Mudgal, India Hmdpunp Revolution, p. 1 8 "' Black, From Handpurnps ro Healrh, p. 65. 269 Mudgal, India Handpump Revolution, pp. 17-1 8. "O Krishanswamy, "'Rurai Dnnkuig Water Supply hogamme in india", p. 57.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfec The Story of the Handpump 90
minor repairs on the pump head assembly, but not the dom-the-hole components. He
also advised the district engineer whenever he suspected that a major repair was
m e n t . 2 7 2
The most difficult maintenance tasks, including those such as replacing the
cylinder seals were lefi to the district mobile team. On the highest tier, looking after 500-
1000 pumps. the district levet mobile team consisted of a junior engineer. a senior
mechanic, a dnvedmechanic and a fitter. They were equipped with a diesel pickup truck
and a small workshop. They took care of major preventative and corrective maintenance,
particularly any having to do with the below ground ~orn~onen t s . ' ~~ The state
govemment paid for the program.'74
Part of the strategy of the three-tier program was to improve communication of
pump malfunctions to those who were capable of effecting repairs. The village caretaker
had a supply of preprinted postcards on which was a list of fiequently encountered
malfunctions. When the caretaker encountered a problem he could not take care of
himself, he merely had to place a tick beside the appropriate entry on the list and send it
to the auth~rities."~
The +hree-tier program looked well designed. By 1979, UNICEF and the Tamil
Nadu Water Supply & Drainage Board had fïnalized the design of the program and it
received goverment of India approval in 1979y6 However, in practice, there twned out
to be many flaws. In spite of the efforts to improve communications and shorten
'" Mudgai. India Handpurnp Revolution, p. 1 8. " Krishanswamy, -'Rd ïhinking Water Supply Programme in india", .57. " ibid., p. 57. 17' Krishanswamy, -'Rurai ûrinking Water Supply Programme in M a " , -57. " Mudgal, India Handpurnp Revolution, p. 1 8.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 91
response tirne, an average of about 45 days elapsed between break-dom and repair.'"
The problem lay not so much in what the program design contained, but in what it
overloo ked.
I.n the words of Arun Mudgal, a UNICEF project ~ff icer ' '~ who worked on the
Lndia Mark II project,279 ". . .technical solutions becarne dependent on not-so-neat
arrangements such as methods of communication between the pump users and a block-
level mechanic. Solutions also depended on the availability of these mechanics, their
ability to travel, availability of spare parts, and the interest on the part of relatively
sluggish administrative r n a ~ h i n e r ~ . " ~ ~ ~
Despite UNICEF support and the active involvement of Indian authorities such a
the Public Health Engineering Department (PHED),'~' by 1984 no state in hdia had
succesçfully implemented the complete three-tier pr~gram.?~' in practice, the two top
tiers (block level and district level) received institutional support and attention, but
authorities neglected the lowest level. that of the caretaker. As a result, many of the
caretakers, whoTd been working on a volunteer basis, dropped out of the p r ~ ~ r a r n . ' ~ ~
Experience also showed that the response time of the district level repair teams was too
281 long.
" ibid, p. 18. ibid.. p. 18.
'" Proceedings of the National Worhhop on Potenrial Improvements in Mark III Deepwell Design: hfay 25 & 25, I W O , India International Centre, M m Mueller Marg, New Delhi. (N. p., t 990?). '" ANn Mudgal, personal communication, May 14. 1999. ''O Mudgal, India Hmidpump Revolution, p. 1 9. '" ibid, p. 18. "' Gray and Talbot, " A Brief History of the hdia Mark II", p. 221. '" Mudgal, India Handpump Revolution, p. 1 8. 2w Ibid., p. 19.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 92
The Social Work Research Centre in Tilonia, Rajasthan tried a one-tier system
aimed at simplification and decentralization of the maintenance program. Under the
system, the governent gave school leavers and dropouts training, pay, tools and made
them answerable to local authorities, the village "panchayats". However, the new
mechanics got caught between obligations to panchayats and the Public Health
Engineering Department. The system did not function well. and had to be supplemented
with 6-month repair c a ~ n ~ a i g n s . ~ ~ ~
The example illustrates the complexity of the problem of setting up a maintenance
system and thc effort that can be expended in m o d i w g the environment surrounding the
handpump in a bid to ensure the program's success. While, on the face of it, handpump
maintenance was a purely technical problem, the success of a maintenance program was
dependent upon non-technical environmental factors such as communication systems, the
presence of skilled workers and institutional support. Certain indian authorities and
UNICEF spent a great deal of effort addressing these. They taught new skills to the
recipient communities and set up new organizations to support the pumps. When they
were not successful in doing so, the maintenance programs failed.
" Ibid., pp. 1 8-1 9.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 93
10. The 1980's: Encountering Non-technical Issues:
IO. 1 Non-technical Issues Described:
As the importance of maintenance systems demonstrates, pump design was not
the only factor in rural water supply projects. Sometimes the environment included
amusing surprises. In the Malawi portion of the iDRC handpump program, the white
colour of the PVC plastic pipe tumed out to be a problem. Hyenas thought they looked
very much like bone and chewed on the above ground portions of the pumps, damaging
hem badly? Frequently however, problems were more human in nature. One can
imagine the type of hurdles the f ~ s t attempt at an IDRC project in Kenya faced when one
reads the line in the post-project sumrnary which says the project never got under way
because of "penonal, administrative and political factor^".'^' Non-technical issues could
mean min for a handpump project.
Politics can play a decisive role: in the Sudan water merchants brought political
pressure to maintain a certain scarcity in water, and areas of poor purchashg power were
not s e r ~ e d ? ~ When pumps meant for the Harijan people (Le. untouchables) of India were
placed on Hindu upper caste land a serious problem a r~se . "~ Handpump projects could
not succeed under such conditions. Another non-technical issue, user preferences, could
'" @'A Quick Fix" Reports, 13 (3), (October, 1984) p. 6. '" .'Water Pumping Technology (Global)" "' A. W. Shepherd and Asha Mustapha el Neima, Popular Participation in Decentralhed Wafer Suppiy Planning: A Case Stuùy in the Western DeisîriCt of Northern Kardofm Province Sudan, (n. p. Development Administration Group, Occasional Paper no. 1 7. fanuary 1 983), pp. 66-7. 189 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 1 1 .
Success and Failure in Technoiogy Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 94
also undermine efforts at establishing handpurnps in communities. Users sometimes
preferred traditional sources of water to handpump because they disliked the iron taste of
the handpump ~ater.'~' Kenyan workers on the IDRC pump project noticed that pumps
which discharged slightly salty or hard water got less use than pumps that did n ~ t . ' ~ '
Then too. religion can be a complicating factor in skills transfer. in most societies,
drawing water is women's work, therefore they need the training on the operation and
daily maintenance of the pumps. In strict Muslim societies, male educators may not be
allowed to interact with or even see the women. Women educators stand a better chance
of gaining access to the women of the comrnunity, but may experience more difficulty
establishing their credibility as educators than men do.
Whether one wishes to include non-technical issues as components in a
technological system is a matter of definition. It is defensible to hold that the components
of a technological system ought, in some way, to be technical in nature such as is the
case, one might argue, that machines, rnanufacturing facilities and maintenance systerns
are technical in nature. However, by applying the defmition of "system" presented in the
introduction-an organized set of things connected so as to fom a complex unity-1 will
defme the technological system to include non-technical issues as components. Politics,
religion and perception al1 have a role to play in detennining how well a machine
fùnctions or even if it fùnctions at dl. To be effective at solving the problem of water
supply, the technological system focused on the handpump must accommodate and adapt
" Saunders, Robert I. and Ieremy J. Warford Village Wu~er Suppiy and Saniration in Less Developed Countries. (World Bank, 1974), p. 22.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 95
to non-technicai issues as well as to techaical ones, so that it justifiable to include both as
components.
10.1.1 Tunisian Example
The lack of attention to non-technical issues is significant because issues such as
user perception of the value of drinking groundwater could be critical to the success of a
handpump project. in March of 1980, the USAID mission in Tunisia cabled Water and
Sanitation for Health (WASH), a project set up under USAID auspices, requesting
assistance with a handpump project. WASH dispatched a team of project workers to
supply selected rural Tunisian communities with handpumps. The fiutration the workers
experienced came through in the project report. The report states that handpumps were
not appropriate for rural Tunisia because rural Tunisians did not have an awareness of
water-related disea~es. '~~ "Water is considered 'good' if it is fiee of visible matter and
tastes 'sweet'. . .Many do not believe water can cause i l ~ n e s s . " ~ ~ ~ Furthemore the pumps
annoyed the locals because their presence forced users to queue up for water, something
rural Tunisians were unaccustomed to d ~ i n g ' ~ ~ Previously they had k e n able to crowd
around the open wells and several people at a time could draw water. The purnps could
only be operated by one person at a time. Those waiting in line were impatient and those
"' Karama et. al.. The Experience on Unimade Handpump in Kenya and the Commercialization Prospects", paper presented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 2 1-25 Ocrober 1992, Beijing, China. N.p., [IDRC? 1, [1992?]. (Coderence Proceedings), p. 6. Available fkom IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5. 191 Potts, U W D Handpump Program in Tunisia, p. 33. " Potts, USAI. Handpump Program in Tunisia, p. 28 taken hom a 1980 USAID evduation repon 'W mici, 31.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 96
at the pump felt pressured to finish quickly.?g5 Sometime d e r the pumps had been
installed, project workers retumed to make inspections. They discovered several had
been vandalized. Photos of inoperable broken purnps or pumps rnissing pieces made it
into the report.'96 Schoolboys were responsible. Addts did not prevent the damage
because they themselves did not want the purnps.'97 The fnistrated development workee
concluded that they needed the expertise of a sociologist to solve the problem of getting
the Tunisians to accept the purnps. Five of the eight recommendations made in the
project report called for better understanding of social and cultural factors.'98
10.2 Recognition of Non-technical Issues and Lack of Expertise
The existence of relevant non-technical issues was not unrecognized by
handpump professionals, as the Tunisian exarnple shows. As another exarnple, one
individual connected with the LJNIMADE program in Costa Rica wrote: "Experience has
demonstrated that the water supply program can not be treated or attacked as a cornmon
technical problem, but a wider analysis that includes important aspects such as:
community participation, health, sanitation and cultural attitude, is required."299 Another
commentator, discussing the status of development thought during the middle of the
international Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade noted that technology
transfer must be approached with a sensitivity to the culture of the u~ers.~''
295 ibid., p. 29. 2% lbid., pp. 25-7. 197 Ibid., p. 29. " Ibid.. pp. 32-33. 299 Rodes, "Handpump Project in Costa Rica", p. 2. jûû P. G. Williams and L.R I. Van Vuren, "Appropriate Technology for Rural Watw Supplies", in World Wuter '86: Water technoloayfor rhe Developing World. (London: Thomas Telford Ltd., 1986, pp. 99- IOO), p. 200.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 97
10.2.1 Role of Women
Among the relevant non-technical factors which came to be recognized in the
rural development projects was the role of women. Fetching water in traditional societies
is usually women's work. A handpump program, particularly one which is designed to
rely on the local users to perform routine maintenance, will stand a much better chance of
success if it takes wornen into account. Donald Sharp advised that when conducting
surveys in villages to determine where to put handpurnps, (vis-à-vis the existing
geogaphy of water sources and latrines) one should interview women and men
9, 301 separairly: "you might get different answers .
One might assume that water carriers, male or female, would be grateful if a
handpump were placed inside or close to the village so as to eliminate a long walk to the
river or watering hole. These distances could be between 1 and 15 miles.jo2 Consultation
with the women may reveal a very different story, however. Field workers discovered
that the old watering holes and rivers sometimes fulfilled a social function for women.
They were a place to meet with fi-iends, spend some time away fiom the house, exchange
news. Some women actually preferred to walk some distance to water as this was their
oniy opportunity for socializing during the daye303
It was not until the 1980's that women received much in the way of specific
attention in the handpump literature. A report by Fannon in 1975 notes the need to
'O' interview with Don Sharp, April 1998. 'O' Allen Momsson, "in Third World Villages, A Simple Handpump Saves Lives" , Civil Engineering Maguzine, (October 1983), p. 7 1. 'O3 Rogers, Barbara *'Water Women's Work" iri Community Water Developnent, p. 199.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer The Story of the Handpump 98
weight the handle so that even women and children cm operate pump,3W but the topic of
women as users is not covered in the World Bank's monograph Village Water ~ u ~ ~ l y . ' ~ '
Pacey does not devote any specific attention to the role of women in Hand Pztmp
Maintenance, despite his emphasis on the importance of organization and social
responsibility within the community. It is interesting to note that, although Pacey does
not mention the prevalence of women as users, in the only drawing he includes which
depicts the operator of a pump, that operator is a ~ o r n a n . ~ ~ ~ McJunkin also has a sirnilar
d r a ~ i n ~ , ~ ~ ' though he also does not address the issue in the text.
Attention to the role of women grew during the 1980's. Titles along the lines of
Participation of Women in Commtrnity Water Suppiy and Sunitdion: Roles and
~eal i t ies , 308 Village Women. Water and ~ e v e l o ~ m e n ~ ~ ~ and Women and water3'*
appeared. This interest in women and water continued into the 19903, perhaps even
broadening with titles such as: Women and ivater pumps in Bangladesh: the impact of
participation in irrigation groups on wornen S stat2is.
Probably one of the first handpump projects to be designed with women
specifically in mind was the D R C supported project in S n Lanka, run by the Sarvodaya
Movement. In an IDRC supported handpump project during the 1980's, Sarvodaya
'0.1 R D. Fannon, absaact to Field Research and Testing of a Water Hand Pumpfor Use in Developing Countires. Final Research Report to Agency for international Development. (Ohio: Battelle Columbus Laboratones, January 3 1, 1975). 'O' World Bank, Village Water Supply. 3W Pacey. Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 23. 'O7 Mclunklli. Hond Purnps, p. 1 53. 'O8 CC. A. Wijk-Sibesma. Participaiion of Women in Communiîy Water Supply and Sonitation: roles and realities. Technicd Paper no. 22. (The Hague, The Netherlands, IRC, 1985). '" R M. Harkness, Village Wonten Water and Development: an evahative study of the water suppiy projeci in Bolgatanga DIStricf, Upper Region, Ghana.. (Ottawa, Canada, Carleton University. 2 983).
'O Roark, P. . Women and Water. In Water und Sonitation: economic and sociologicai perspectivest ed. Peter Bounie, (Orlando, USA. Academic Press, 1984), pp. 49-68.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 99
specifically focused on ~ o r n e n . ~ ' ~ Women were trained in metalwork, carpentry,
masonry, well-drilling techniques, management and accounting. These women went on
to train other women who then worked in local workshops in t o m s and villages where
components of the purnps and tools were
10.2.2 Community Participation:
By the l98O's, handpump literature, including project reports, normaily contained
at least a sentence afimiing the importance of cornmunity participation as an ingredient
in a successful handpump prograrn.31J Most of the projects associated with the IDRC
handpump network in the 1980's reported some degree of community participation. in
the Philippines, the involvement of cornmunity level organizations was a priority.315
Villagers were consulted on their willuigness to engage in a community water project.'16
Villager recommendations were incorporated into the development of a field manual for
maintenance and repak3" in Mali, an Association Malienne de Recherche Action pow
le Developpement (AMRAD) project which participated in the handpump network, held
'" Barbara van Koppen, ed.. Women and Water Pumps in Bangladesh the Impact of Participation in irrigation Groups on Women 's Starus, (London: Intermediate Techriology Publications, 1996).
Sharp, T h e D R C Handpump Program", p. 192. "' 9 r i Lankan Women's Handpump Enterprise" , in DeveIoprnent Journal, ( 3 ) 1991. 314 For example, Ariosoroff, p. 47, Brown, p. 1 1 . 315 Meâiatrtv P . Valera, Terminal Report on the Village Handpump (Philippines) Projecr. ( 1 986). Avaüable through EDRC archives: archiv 621.65(914) V 3., p. 14. j16 ibià, p. 3. 317 Emeiina S Almario, "Feasibility of Commerciaily Producing and Marketing the DRC-ml Handpump in the Philippines", in IDRC Handpump Network Proceedings ofthe Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailund, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Aimario, (Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report), p. 9 1.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer The Story of the Handpump 100
public debates to decide the placement of pumps.318 Most of the other projects report
some form of survey of preferences or consultation with the villagers.
10.3 Lack of Focus on Non-Technical Issues:
Nevertheless, the literature produced by organizations running handpurnp projects
does not give the impression that non-technical issues were handled with anything like
the consistency and expertise that technical issues such as design and maintenance were.
Donald Sharp wrote:
"lt has been repeatedly stated in the Iiterature that a key elaiient to the successfui introduction of a technology is the involvement of the end-users, the villagers. However, in reality they are rarely consulted, nor are they involved in the accual re~earch.'"~
Even in the IDRC program, over which Sharp had considerable influence and which
featured villager participation as described above, community involvement varied a great
deal in level and kind between projects. The rhetoric of the Costa Rican project echoed
the cornmitment to community involvernent of the Philippine project by advocating a
"participatory strategy" which included placing commmity members ". ..in charge of
development, monitoring and evaluation of the spread of water supply and sanitation
projects"3'0 Howevet, Goh Sing Yau's description of the Malaysian project indicates
only that a questionaire was prepared to survey attitudes and preferences and sociological
factors affecting the maintenance cost and economic life of handpumps. There is no
Mamadou Diallo, The Roblem of Drinking Water Supply in Mali and the Action of AMRAD" . in IDRC Handpump Network Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Almario, (Onawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report), p. 136. 319 Donald Sharp, "Low Cost Handpumps for Developing Corntries: The IDRC Approach to Techology introduction" , in intemational Water Resources Association, Waterfor world development : proceedings of the Uth IWRII World Congress on Water Resources. Urbana, Ill. : international Water Resomces Association, 1988, p. 222.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 101
indication that those surveyed took any part in the decision making process."' The
pattern of decision making was quite possibly like that of Indonesia where handpump
recipients were chosen by project workers on the basis of a sirnilar sociological s ~ r v e ~ . ~ "
Sometimes, even this level of consultation did not occur, for exarnple, Ethiopia:
"Looking back, the weak point of the handpump training program, was that the community was not consuited in the pianning phase before the hand umps were instailed. The people therefore did not always regard the pump as their own. .&3
To obtain insight into why community involvement, or for that matter any "non-
technical issue" could receive a great deal of acknowledgment in the literature, but only
inconsistent attention in the field it is usehl to examine the IDRC experience with one
non-technical issue in particular-marketing. Here, it is evident that the D R C personnel
were aware of the need for marketing, but in practice did not focus their attention on it.
1 0.3.1 l DRC Marketing Example
Most of the later projects hanced by the IDRC as part of its Handpump Network,
employed Goh's UNIMADE pump. Goh and Donald Sharp made plans to set up a pilot
production facility and research centre at the University of Malaysia and establish the
pump commercially throughout the Developing ~orld. '" As might be expected, the
commercialization prospects varied among projects and situations. Among the rosiest
"O Rosales, .'Handpurnp Roject in Costa Rica", p. 3. "' Goh Suig Yau -*From Research and Development to Mass Production of Handpumps" , in IDRC Handpump Network Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand 1-3 Ocr. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Aimario, (Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, DRC Manuscipt Report), pp. 33-34. 322 Christine Soedjwaro, "Introducing the PVC Handpump in hdoaesia" , in IDRC h n d p u m p Nenvork Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok Thailand, 1-3 Oc?. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Aimario, (Ottawa, Ont.: DRC, 1987, iDRC Manuscipt Report), p. 63. "-' Jima Jemah, "Technical Report on the Ethiopian Handpump" , in IDRC Handpump Nelwork Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand. 1-3 Oc?. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Aimario, (Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report), p. 9.
Success and F ailure in Tedinology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 102
prospects were those of Kenya (despite the failure of an initial IDRC project in the late
1970s'~~): demonstration models shown at agricultural fairs generated so much interest
that project organizers were inundated with inquiries about the pump and felt it necessary
to withdraw the pump from display at the fairs until such tirne as production could
actually be ~tar ted.~ '~ Later, in 1988, the Kenya Medical Research institute (KEMRI)
contracted with lDRC and the University of Malaya to allow the KEMRI Engineering
Department to produce 200 purnps for commercial sale. This was one of the first such
orders received for the LJNIMADE.~'' On the other hand, in [ndia, UNIMA.DE faced the
challenge of carving a niche in a market dominated by the India Mark ll. in 1992, project
organizen, who up to then had only worked with 16 pumps supplied by the University of
Malaya, called for multiple demonstration projects on the order of 500 pumps e a ~ h . ~ ' ~
Even though they were working on a much larger scale, the Indians, unlike the Kenyans,
did not expect to sel1 these purnps for profit.
Contracts for production of the UMMADE existed with the Philippines, (March
1990) Kenya (July 1 W2), Costa Rica (September 1992) and China, (September 1 992).329
Nevertheless, the UMMADE never enjoyed the success of its rival, the india Mark iI. By
- --
324 Donald Sharp, 'Zow Cost Handpumps for Developing Countries", pp. 227-228. j3 "Water Pumping Technology (Global)". 326 Karma, M. et. al.. **The E.xpeRence On Unimade Handpump in Kenya and the Cornrnercialization Prospects", paper presented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 21-25 October 1992. Beijing, China. (N.p.. [IDRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedings), p. 7. Available &om IDRC archives: archiv 622.65 G 5 , 3 27 Ibid., pp. 1,7. "' Ranjit Singh, "Teshg and Development of IDRC Handpump (PVC Handpump) in India and its Commercialization Prospects", Papa presented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1 992. AvaiIable in Reports of the lDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 21-25 October 1992, Beijing, China. (N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedings) , pp. 3,8. Available from IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 1 03
the mid- 1 990's over one million India Mark II pumps existed. Each year, 1 00,000 were
installed throughout the Developing ~ o r l d . ' ~ ~ By 1992 the participants in the IDRC
handpump network had installed less than 9000 purnps world~ide. '~' At least part of the
explanation for the UNIMADE'S poor sales figures lies in price. Relative pnce was an
obstacle to the adoption of the UNIMADE pump, as in the case of the Philippines where
cornpetition &om cheaper pumps created a problem for suppliers of the UNIMADE. 332
Cornpetition came both fiom imported and locally manufachired pumps.333 The local
purnps appear to have been of foreign design. One was the Clayton Mark pump with a
brass cylinder, used in Tunisia in the 1970's3'" and the other was the Maldev, a
f o r e m e r of the ~ f r i d e v . - ' ~ ~ The Maldev was the product of a development project in
Malawi in 198 1 .'j6 Price was also a concern in ~ndonesia'~' and Costa this time
in absolute terms, that is, the intended user's ability to pay for a pump at all.
It is difficult to compare the costs of the pumps directly, since complete cost
includes the pump, the drop pipe, drilling, installation etc.. Figures quoted in the
literature do not al ways inc lude equivalent components. Even Community Water Supply
- - -
3 29 Sieh Lee Mei Ling. "Commercialization of the Unimade handpump : an evaluation", paper presented at The D R C Handpump Nework Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the lDRC Handpump Nenvork Meeting. 2 1-22 October 1992, Beijing. China. (N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]). (Conference Proceedigs), p. 1 1. Available fiom [DRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5.
UNICEF *'Village Water Supplies". ~Http://www.rmicef.org/sow96/hpump.hmi~ (November I 1, 1998.) '" Goh, "Development of the Unimade Handpump", p. 1. "' Carmelo M. Gendrano. T h e IDRC Handpump Roject in the Philippines: Experiences and Prospects", paper presented at The DRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992). Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 21-25 October 1992, Beving, China. N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings), p. 2. Available fiom lDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5. '" ibid. p. 3. "' Potis, U U I D Handpump Program in Tunbia, p. 6.
Gendrano, "The IDRC Handpump Pmject in the Philippines", p. 5. 336 Ariosoroff et al., Communiîy Water Supply, p. 62. '" Aristanti, *The DRC Handpump Project in indonesia", p. 6. 338 Rosales, "Handpump Project in Costa Rica", p. 6.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 1 04
which Arlosoroff et al. at the World Bank/UNDP handpump project prepared as a
catalogue to compare handpumps, though it includes pricing information for each pump,
does not always do so in a manner which makes cornparison easy."' This fact probably
reflects the difficulty in fïnding the appropriate pricing idormation. Furthemore, prices
Vary with region, depending on the cost of certain supplies (e.g. steel, PVC) and whether
or not parts or al1 of the pump must be imported.
For deepwell pumps, the India Mark II has enjoyed the most success. Reported
prices for the india Mark II Vary somewhat. Baldwin reports the cheapest cost. He
claims that in 1979, an India Mark II, complete with pumphead. cyiinder, nsing main and
comecting rods cost a mere US$ 182. He does not include figures on the depth of nsing
main and length of pumprod. Pacey's estimate for 1977 is similar. He pnces the pump at
US$200 including 50 metres of &op pipe.3J0 However, Alrosoroff, in the mid-1980's,
when the India Mark II was being produced in the tens of thousands per year, quotes a
pnce of USS295 for a 35 metre depth.3J1
Arlosoroff also reports that the üMMADE handpump cost US$290 + US$
2.00/metre of pumprod + USS5.00Imetre of rising main (which works out to
approximately US$535 for a 35 metre ~ e l l ) . ~ ' ' ~ Gendrano writing in the Philippines in
the early 19903, wrote that the handpump (ie. pump stand and cylinder assembly) cost
ody USS158 to US$168 and the pump rods cost US$1.57/metre and the rising main cost
US$3.44/metre to US$4.95/inetre (which works out to approximately $333 to USS396
339 Arlosoroff et al., Community Wczter Suppiy. 340 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 6. 341 Arlosoroff, Community Water Supply, p. 1 14 '" Ibid., p. 154
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 1 05
for a 35 metre ~ e l l ) . ~ " Goh and Low report that the UNIMADE cost only US$ 130 for
pump and maintenance in Malaysia in the early 1 980's.~"
Table 10.1 : Price Estimates for UNIMADE and Corn petitor Oeepwell Pumps.
The table provides a summary of the p r i e cornparisons made in the text. The cornparison is approximate since data are not available to compare pumps of the exact same depth, location and year. References are indicated: full details and precise page references can be found by consulting the text.
Pump
Afridev
UNIMADE
lndia Mark II
usso-200 Range
US$130 or more (in Malaysia) [Goh and Law]
US$$200 (35 m well) [Paceyl
US$l82 (pumphead, cyîinder, rising main) JBaldwinl
US$200400 Range
US$333-396 (for 35 m well; in Philippines) [Gendrano]
US$450 (for 30 m well) [Arlosoroffl
US$400-600 Range
US$535 (for 35 m well) [Ariosoroffl
US$6OO+ Range
US$450-900 (in Africa)
It appears that the India Mark II enjoyed a price advantage, however it is not clear
that the difference is enough to explain the orders of magnitude difference in sales
figures, especially given the wide variation in prices reported. Nor can one coddently
Say that the LMIMADE was an idenor purnp. In fact, in sorne important categories, such
as corrosion resistance and ease of maintenance-which ought to have k e n of
'" Gendrano, *The LDRC Handpump Project in the Philippines", p. 5. Note: Gendrano's prices were for a later mode1 of the UNMA.DE, the D-series, than that which Arlosoroff referred to (the Unimade Mark 1). 3-84 Goh Sing Yau and Low Kwai Sim, 'Waysian Villagers Comment on Simple Plastic Handpumps" in Communiîy Water Developrnent, ed. Charles Kerr, (London: intermediate Technology Publications Ltd., 1 !NB), p. 168.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 1 06
significance both to those who selected the pumps and those who had to depend on
them-the UNIMADE received a better rating fiom the World BankNNDP handpump
project than the India Mark II did (though the project concluded that the IDRC pump was
good only for wells of no more than 12 metres depth).345 Though it is significant that the
project recommended the UNIMADE only for wells of 12 metres depth or less. The
project also gave the pump a good reliability rating (i.e. likelihood of being in good
working order) only when pumping less than 1.5 cubic metres of water per day.3J6
Morover, the UNIMA.DE has also not performed as well as the Afndev, another
deepwell handpump which uses PVC parts. The Afndev is frequently mentioned in the
literature, otten alongside the hdia Mark Ii. Arlosoroff reported that an Afndev for a 30
metre well cost US$450. Michael Wood reported that Afiidev's cost between $450 and
$900 in ~frica.'" In spite of the high cost, the Anidev is very popular in Afnca. It is
manufactured for instance in ~ e n ~ a , " ~ ~ t h i o ~ i a ~ ' ~ and ~ a l a w i . ~ ~ ' There are also
manufacturers in ~ndia.~'' However, it appears to be at least as expensive as the
üMMADE. Something beside up-fiont price must be responsible for the relative lack of
success of the LMIMADE as a deepwell pump.
Efforts to market the UNIMADE were hampered by the fact that although the
pump was designed for use by nirai third world villagers, the largest buyers for
345 Adosoroff et al., Community Wuter Suppfy, p. 8 1 . '" Arlosoroff et al., Community Wuter Supply, p. 1 55. '" Michael Wood. *-Are Handpumps Really Atfordable?" 20' WEDC Conference ~http:/linfo. lboro.ac.uk~deparmients/cv/wedc/papwood. h 1 994 (Jue 8 , 1 999) """Industriai Components Limited", <http://~~~..Uidumial-Itd.com/home~html> (.lune 8,1999). 3.19 GIobai Applied Research Network, Evduation of Water Supply, Sanitufion and Health Education Projects, Aàwa and North Gondor Ethiopia, 1997. <http:/lwww. Iboro.ac.uk/gamet/dlcasewateraidl3 .html> (June 8, 1 999). "O "Section 2.4 Conmintes et Problemes du Secteur de L'Eau et de L'Assainissement" <http://~.telesenrices.sn/bad/partic.h June 8, 1999
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 1 07
handpumps were the various governrnental and non-govemmental agencies involved in
rural water supply projects. Many of these received fwiding fiom the World Bank, but
such projects used World Bank guidelines for the selection of purnps. UNIMADE was
not favoured in such guidelines. The Drap Sample Bidding Documents for the
Proctcrement of Handpumps prepared by the World Bank for use by organizations
receiving World Bank funding and shopping arnong manufacturers/suppliers for purnps,
specifically identified the need to establish specifications for the depth of lift and the
volumetric flow rate expected of the pumps.35' The World B a n k i W P handpumps
project had specifically identified limitations for the [MIMADE in these two criteria (i.e.
they recommended the pump only for lies of 12 metres or less and for flow rates of less
than 1.5 cubic metres per day), which in effect limited the scope of application of the
üNlMADE to low lift wells and low flow rates. The Tulangan sa Tubingan Foundation's
plans for commercialization in the Philippines were dashed when they failed to secure a
government contract because of the specifications of the World ~ank."~ In this case, the
author of the report referred to the limited scope of application for the CMIMADE as
reported by the World B a n k W P handpumps project.
However much of the UNIMADE'S low sales figures can be explained by pnce
cornpetition and lack of World Bank endorsement, an examination of the literature
suggests that marketing was not pursued with great vigour in any case. Don Sharp, who
managed the IDRC handpump project in the 1980's, defmed comrnercialization of the
"' Micahael Wood. 'Are Handpumps Reaiiy Affordable?" World Bank, Dqfî SampZe Bidding Docttnents for the Procwement of Handpumps. (Washington:
World Bank, 1986), p. 36. 353 Gendrano, "The IDRC Handpinnp Roject in the Philippines", p. 10.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 108
Y, 354 LNIMA.DE as "selling pumps for profit . The statement suggests a practical attitude
and perhaps a determination to see the comrnercialization succeed. However, it appears
that profits were to be obtained without assigning as much pnority to marketing as to
development and production. The majority of the literature surrounding the
IDRCNMMADE project fkom the 1970's and 1980's is technical in nature. It does not
indicate that much attention was paid to questions of market research and demand.
Village Handpump Technology, which appeared in the 1980's as a comprehensive
description of the IDRC handpurnp project, includes a chapter by Tan Bock Thiam
entitled "Economic Analysis and Potential ~arkets".'~' Tan makes a reasonable attempt,
given the information he had at that tirne, to forecast the pnce of a mass-produced
LJM~IADE,~'~ to detemine the number of people without access to alternative water
supply (such as piped water ~ ~ s t e r n s ) ~ ~ ~ and to estirnate the number of pumps required by
govenunent sponsored projects.'58 However, this chapter covers only 10 pages of the 72
page book. Descriptions of the research and deveiopment receive four times as much
space. Moreover, while Tan makes reference to concepts or details addressed in the other
chapters, such as VLOM and the niai problem with the footvalve, the other chapters do
not make references to the issues of market dernand that Tan brings up. This suggests
that the main focus of the other authors was narrower than Tan's and did not include
marketing concems. If the technical focus was dominant among the project leaders and
managers, it is unlikely that issues of marketing and demand received hi& pnority.
3 55 Donald Sharp, personal communication, April22, 1 998.
"' Tan Bock Thiam, *'Economic Analysis and Potentiai Markets", in ViZhge Handpump Technology, Donald Sharp and Michel Graham eds. Ottawa, IDRC, 1982, pp. 57-66. 3 56 Md., p. 64. 357 Ibid.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 1 09
The two most Muential of the project's managers in the 1980's were obviously
Goh Sing Yau and Donald Sharp, who can be given miich of the credit for the survival
and advance of the U W E . However, their focus seems to have been on issues of
supply which were largely technical, (e.g. the design of the purnp, the cost of production,
the development of production facilities) rather than on issues of demand and marketing.
The conclusion of Village Handpump Technology, which Sharp CO-edited outlines
Goh's plan "to bridge the gap between developmental research and
3,359 cornmercialization . Note that the points listed concem supply issues, not demand
issues:
"-thoroughiy understand the manufacturing processes and the actual costs involved in producing each component; develop the necessary expertise required to consult with manuf'acturing units on production procedures; -condut cost assessrnents of various rnanufacturing options; for example, subcontracting versus manufacture at point of assembly; -establish quality conuol guidelines and standards; -field test (utilizing Ministry of Health personnel) mass-produced models of the pump to evaluate their technical performance; -develop appropriate manuals for tramferring the technologies to other interested groups; and -support cornplementiuy projects by providing prototypes, training, and research on solving any problems chat may occur. .S60
To be sure, m e r down the page one reads that certain research priorties had
been identified which included "development of methodologies designed to promote
cornrnunity acceptance" and "development and testing of community financing and self-
help ~chernes".~~' However these issues are not attached to Goh's plan for
commercialization and are not given as much prestige and emphasis in the article. Most,
''' ibid., pp. 61-2. ' 5 9 Graham and Sbarp, Village Handpump Technology, p. 69. j6û ibid., p. 69. 36 1 Ibid., p. 69.
Success and Failure in Technology Ttansfer: The Story of the Handpump 110
if not all, the components of Goh's plan were cealized. Sharp acquired the funds fiom
IDRC to set up a regional research and training centre and communications network to
share technical information. There were more field tests. D R C donated C$96,835 to
develop an installation manual in the ~ h i l i ~ ~ i n e s . ~ ~ ~ The University of Malaya, Goh's
employer, also published a manual for the installation and repair of the UNI MADE.'^^
Goh secured nearly CS 600.000 in 1982 to fund a project which established a mass
production facility, investigated means to reduce production costs, established quality
control and featured Malaysian Ministry of Health empioyees testing 550 pumps in the
field.3a Goh's team supplied prototypes, training and technical assistance to IDRC
funded handpump projects, such as in T h a i ~ a n d , ~ ~ ~ the ~ h i l i ~ ~ i n e s . ' ~ ~ There was no
comparable support for promoting cornmwiity acceptance or developing community
hancing.
Sharp and Goh continued to show a supply side focus in later publications. In the
last section of an article describing the DRC's handpump program, Sharp identified the
cornmercialization strategy as "demand-dnven", but what he talked about was supply, the
ability to produce the p ~ p s . 3 6 7 When Goh Sing Yau referred to commercialization, he
X' -*Handpump Manual (Asia)" Project 830066. in IDRC Development Research Information Service (IDRIS). lb3 Goh Sing Yau, LBVlMDE 3OM huna'pump: a guidefor instullation, r e p i r and nioinrenmce Kuala Lumpur : University oCMalaya, 1987. '" .'Water Pumping Technology (Malaysia) - Phase III", Project 820162 in IDRIS. j6' Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to *'hoducing PVC Handpump (Thaüand) Project From 23" to 28' Aprii, l98S", p. 1-2, in Goh Sing Yay Report on Vhii to C2AMWPDMPBSPfiom 16* ~ p i l - 3 & M i , 1985. Available chrough IDRC archives: archiv 621.65(593) G 6. 366 Report on Visit to "Village Handpump (Philippines) Roject From 29' Aprii to 3" May, 1985, p. 1 in Goh Sing Yau, Reporr on Visit to C M P D A / P B S P @ m 1 6 ~ ~prii-3d Moy. 1985. Available through IDRC archives: archiv 621.65(593) G 6. 567 Donald Sharp, "Low Cost Handpumps for Developing Countries", pp. 227-8.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 111
described it in terms of the ability to achieve large scale rnanufact~re.~" He did not
discuss demand issues.
Apparently the technical and supply bias was not restricted to Goh and Sharp.
Representatives of projects from the various countries participating in the IDRC
handpump program delivered reports at a meeting held in Beijing. Tme enough, alrnost
al1 these papers addressed commercialization. However, the one paper specifically
concemed with evaluating the comrnercialization of the CTNIMADE, was very critical in
tone. According to the s w e y conducted by the author, Sieh, while technical
development goals were attained in al1 projects, commercialization goals were the least
a ~ h i e v e d . ~ ~ ~ Sieh explained that project personnel were biased toward technical goals,
probably because of training and personal intere~t."~ Project workers were very good at
building pumps, but not at selling thcm.
1 0.3.2 Little Attention to Non-technical Issues.
In general, less technical issues, such as strategies for involving the recipient
community closely in handpump projects or ensuring that they understood the health
benefits associated with drinking ground water, received far less attention than handpump
design or the organization of maintenance. The notion that the comrnunity should be
involved in the choice of technology and the project which introduces it is present in the
literature, but it does not get much elaboration. The final report of the World
BanklLMDP Handpumps project, Community Water Suppfy, contains 202 pages. The
j6' Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to C W S , Beijing (16 -23 April, 1985), p. 6 in Goh Sing Yau, Report on Virit to C W P D A / P B S P f i o m 166 ~ ~ r i l - 3 & May, I988. Avdable through IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65(593) G 6.. 369 Sieh, Tommercialization of the Unimade handpump", p. 7.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 112
notion of comrnunity involvement is mentioned in more than one place in the book, but
ody as a line or two each time and there is little elaboration on what it will entai1 and
how it c m be secured. j7' In cornparison the maintenance strategies are outlined in five
pages, and reprised paragraphs at a t h e throughout the book. 37' Well over 100 pages
concem technical details and assessments of handpumps and the various designs
available. Similady the pages of F. E. McJunkin's ~anci~icrn~s.'~~ vimially the firçt
major work on handpumps produced by anyone connected with the development effort,
are filled with illustrations of different pump designs and while the book is thick with
technical detail, the need to educate potential users about the health benefits of clean
water merely gets a mention with no elaboration. Almost 70 pages go to a technical
description of handpumps. Another 70 describe the different designs of handpumps
developed and the manner of their construction. Comrnunity motivation and health
education are listed at the beginning of the section on project administration, but the
section is given over mostly to a discussion of maintenance ~ ~ s t e r n s . ~ ~ ' This pattern of
affirmation without elaboration suggests that "non-technical" or "software" issues were
not well understood, which explains why they were inconsistently handled.
Time constraints have, unfortunately, prevented a more comprehensive
investigation in this thesis of the background of the decision makers involved in
handpump projects. Goh Sing Yau was probably the single most influential individual in
the UNIMADE project. He was a professor of mechanical engineering with a clearly
370 ibid., p. 6. "' Adosoroff et ai., Community Water Supply, p. 37, p. 47. '" ibid., pp. 3 1-35,37. '73 McJunkin, Hond Pumps. j7' Mdunkin, Hmd Pumps, p. 107.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 113
technical focus, which had a decided impact on the allocation of money and resources in
the project, such that issues of supply and production were efficiently and effectively
handled, apparently at sorne expense to issues of demand. It would be instructive to learn
whether the observation that Sieh made for the UMMADE project-that project
personnel were biased toward technical goals, because of training and interest-holds
true for other handpump projects. Handpump projects naturally involve a large
proportion of engineers. Of the 43 persons listed as attending the national Conference on
Deepwell Handpurnps in Madurai, India, Iuly 10- 13, 1979, approximately half (2 1) had
the word "engineer" in their title.jÏ5 If the project officers responsible for overseekg the
design and implementation of m a l water supply programs are drawn fiom the ranks of
engineers and similarly technical personnel, then Sieh ' s observation probably holds
generally. However, development organizations and government departments hire from a
nurnber of different disciplines, so that someone with the title "project officet" cannot
simply be assurned to be an engineer.
Whether or not Sieh's observation about training and interest holds generally, the
literature definitely shows a technical focus. While non-technical issues are clearly
recognized, they are not analyzed in detail, nor are the strategies for dealing with them
developed to the same sophistication as with the technical issues.
'" Report of the National Confèmce on Deepwell Hmdpumps, Madurai, July 10-1 3,1979, pp. 70-3.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 114
11. Commentary:
f .I. 7 The Importance of Systems
Technology is environment dependent. Designed for a particular environment a
given machine will fail to fùnction satisfactorily if moved to a radically new environment
without attention to the adaptation of the machine or the environment or both. Engines
desiped for North America may overheat in the tropics. Pumps designed for use on fiesh
water lakes corrode quickly when asked to handle salt water. Snowmobiles are
inappropriate for navigating the Everglades. Holes can develop in a PVC riser pipe
hstalled in rocky soil.
A machine cm also fail to perform satisfactorily if the society and culture it was
designed for differs significantly fiom that into which it is deployed. Machines cannot
work at optimal efficiency if the organizational structure assumed to exist by the
designers, is absent, if for instance there are no trained mechanics or no distribution
system fiom which to obtain spare parts. User preferences also impact the effectiveness
of a given technology in achieving a given goal. Water taken fiom a handpump often has
an objectionable taste in the opinion of the users, many of whom have been used to river
or hand dug well water.
Machines may have to undergo adaptation before they can move to a new
environment. At this task, the Western development organizations and their counterparts
in the Developing World excelled-once they recognized the need, at least. The durable
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 115
india Mark II and its VLOM descendant the India Mark III, the Afiidev and even the less
successfÙi UNIMADE are al1 vastly better suited to the rural Developing World than the
cornmon cast iron models they were designed to replace. Yet if the machine sometimes
needs adaptation, so does the environment into which it is placed. Even the India Mark II
program struggled to establish a workable maintenance system amongst the communities
which the pump served. Wherever there were pump programs, the organizers had to
concem themselves with questions of supply, of identifjmg or even creating
rnanufacturing facilities and ensuring the existence of quality controls.
To Say that a technology is environment dependant is to recognize that machines
do not operate in a vaccuurn, but are components in a technological system. It is possible
to approach the study of hurnans fiom an individual or collective fiame of reference. We
c m examine Mr. Smith and identiQ various intemal and extemal factors which influence
the way Mr. Smith behaves. Altematively we c m snidy a society as a whole, which has a
behaviour which affects and is affected by the various components, including Mt. Smith,
within it. Similarly an economist may study an individual firm or a collection of fums
and economic actors making up an industry. Altematively, he or she may choose to
examine an economy as a whoie, recognizing, for arguments sake at least, a single,
collective entity with component parts. One may consider the heart on its own or as part
of the respiratory system. In the sarne way, one may choose to study a technology in
terms of individual artifacts or one may conceive of a single structure made up not only of
machines, but of various components of the environment which affects them and which
they affect, such as inventors, manufacturers, weather conditions, users, consumers,
competing machines (diesel engines vs. gasoline engines), supporthg machines or
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 116
physical artifacts (what is the bow without the arrow?), operators, inputs, power supplies,
rnechanics. One c a . cal1 this structure a technological system.
Because machines such as the handpump represent only one component in a
system, technology transfer requires not only the installation of machines in new
communities, but the developrnent of entire systems which serve and are served by the
machine. There must be someone who lmows how to fix the pump and some way of
getting spare parts. There need to be manufacturers, inspectors and educators.
Constraints on the type of system which can be developed may require changes in the
design of the machine. For economic reasons, the maintenance and supply systems of the
rurai Developing World is less able to ensure quick response by mechanics or the prompt
delivery of difficult-to-manufacture spare parts at an affordable pnce than is the rural
Westem maintenance system. As a result, the handpumps of the Developing World need
to be of slightly different design than those of the rural Westem world. Both the
environment and the machine must adapt.
Some components of the technological system are easy to recognize: the
machines; the factories; the mechanics. Other components are less obvious, but no less
necessary. A technological system camot even begin to form if no one can supply the
labour and capital. If the community has no means to pay for handpumps or their upkeep
(or no one else foots the bill), then there will be no handpumps in that community.
Perhaps the most often overlooked component of the handpump system in the context of
development projects was user demand. Where there was a desire for handpumps, the
transfer of handpumps succeeded. Where there was little desire for handpumps, the
transfer struggled.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 117
11.2 Demand: An Essential Component of the System
The real world being the complex phenornenon that it is, we should not be
surpnsed that there is more than one source of demand for handpump technology. By the
mid- 1 9 7 0 ' ~ ~ NGOs and the World Bank had corne to favour handpumps as a means for
combating water-bom disease, however, that was not the only reason that people turned
to handpumps. The choice of well technology may dictate or at least heavily favour the
adoption of handpumps. In some cases, as with the tubewell in Bangladesh, the choice of
well technology may be influenced by suspicions about the health impact of surface
water. In other cases, the choice of well technology, and therefore purnp technology, may
be primariiy related to questions of access to water, quite apart fiom questions of water-
bom disease. Whatever its characteristics, there must be demand befoce a community
will adopt a technology.
1 1.2.1 The lndian Basis of Demand: Scarce Water and Drilled Wells
India has achieved a great deal of success in bringing access to safe water to the
majonty of its population. In 1970, only 18% of India's m a l population, that is less than
87 million of a population of approximately 480 million, had access to safe drinking
~ a t e r . ~ ~ ~ By 199 1, the situation had improved tremendously. Of the rural population
World Bank, Social Indicarors of Development, 1 989, p. 142; World Bank, Social Indicators of Development 2991-1992, p. 142.
Success and Faiiure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 118
which by then had risen to approximately 675 million people, 69% or 466 million had
acce~s.~" Much of the change came as a result of the India Mark II handpurnp program.
Despite the success of water supply programs to get Indian villagen to use clean
water sources, the Indian Rural Water Supply and Sanitation programme
". ..ha failed, since its inception, to galvanize the same interest and support for sanitation and health education as it has for water. While no one can dispute that e.upanded water supplies have immeasurably upgraded the quality of life for women and childeren in India's 'hard-rock-villages'. as yet, the service.. . h a no more than scratched the surface of poor hygiene. related infection and environmental c~eanliness."~~'
Even today the percentage of people in india with access to sanitation facilities is
less than 30%~~'~
One factor which may help account for the discrepancy in levels of success of the
two wings of the program is the motivation of the users to adopt handpumps; if rural
Indians turned to the handpump as a source of micro-orgaiiism fiee water then they
should have been just as interested in the sanitation aspects of the Indian Rural Water
Supply and Sanitation programme; if, on the other hand, we discover that rural Indians
adopted the handpurnp for reasons having nothing to do with micro-organisms, the lower
rate of success among sanitation programs is easier to understand.
Ln the late 1960s and early 19709, at the govemment of India's request, LTNICEF
assisted with the drilling of wells in India to relieve d r o ~ g h t . ' ~ ~ The project that UNICEF
had been invited to join was not srnail: in 1974, 150,000 drinkuig water wells were
3n World Bank, Social Indicators of Development, 1993, p. 153. 578 Black, From Handpumps tu Health, p. 54. 379 UMCEF. "Access to Sanitation", ir#omrrtion: Statktics, source: LTNICEF, World Health ûrganization (WHO) and Multiple uidicator CIuster Surveys (MICS). ~http://www.unice£org/statislSanitationhtm~ (July 6, 1 999). "O Black, From Handpumps to Heulth, pp. 53-56.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 119
completed in India within programmes involving UNICEF.~~' Pacey laments that during
these early projects in India, issues of social education. such as health education were
neglected. He concedes that this is understandable since the main objective of installing
the boreholes and pumps was ". . .to provide water to people in desperate need of it."
Pacey goes on to explain how UNICEF and the Indian authorities later broadened their
approach to include educational and training programs and the three-tier maintenance
~ ~ s t e r n . ~ ~ ~ Pacey does not descnbe the attitude of the rural Indians to the new approach,
however. One could hypothesize that they remained interested in the handpumps only as
a source of water, never mind UNICEF's or the health authorities' concems over water-
bom disease. To maintain this position, one needs to provide some reason for the Indians
adopting the handpurnp as a means of securing water supply. It is not enough to Say that
the pumps were affordable or that the program enjoyed govemrnent support, because the
same was true in Malaysia, where purnp programs failed to achieve anything like the
success seen in india. in hdia, the environment favoured drilled wells as a water source
and the use of àrilled wells favoured the use of handpumps.
Black explains how the drilled well becarne essential in india. Approximately
70% of India consists of hard rock shield. Much of this area was drought prone, with
surface water sources disappearing in the dry season. Disaster stmck if the monsoon
season failed to recharge them. The traditional means of getting at the ground water was
to dig d o m to the bedrock and to break through it using fire and ice. At the tirne that
UNICEF became involved in Indian rural water supply, the late 1960's, the population of
381 Pacey, Hand Pump Maintenance, p. 9. Ibid., pp. 27-28.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 120
india was rising sharply. The Indian population in about 196 1 had been 487 million,383
By about 197 1 it was 6 13 million.384 By 1983 it was approximately 765 million.38s
increasing environmental pressure was forcing the water table deeper and deeper into the
hard rock. The ody way to dig a well through this rock with any speed was to use an air
driven, down-the-hole harnrner
Naturally. these drilled boreholes are kept as narrow as practical. The Halco
Tiger rigs, used by UNICEF in 1967 in the Bihar and Uttar Pradesh drought, bored a 4-
1 0 inch hole, 150 feet.38' Because the water table was low, the water level in the well
would be near the bottom of the borehole. There was no way a rope and bucket could be
used to get water out of such wells. The bucket would be so skinny and the time to raise
and lower it so long, that water just could not be retrieved at an acceptable rate.
Handpurnps, on the other hand, were ideally suited to extracting water from drilled wells.
Furthemore, handpumps were cheaper than motorized purnps.
The population was rising, the water table was dropping and the traditional means
of blasting a well through the rock was no longer feasible. Rural Indians had to turn to
the drilled well for a source of water in the dry season. The dnlled wells necessitated
handpumps and that was why there was comparatively little difficulty in getting rural
indians to adopt the handpump. In the 1970's however, the efforts of UNICEF and other
donor agencies at funiishing safe water supplies to the rural third world were focused on
technical aspects such as pump design. Analysis of demand was not a general feature of
383 World Bank, Social lndicarors of Development, 1988, p. 1 42. Ibid.
j" World Bank, Social hdicators of Development, 1996, p. 157. '" Black, From Handpumps to Health, pp. 54-55. '" ibib, p. 57.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 121
handpump projects. Only towards the end of the decade would activities expand to
address the recipient's reasons for adopting a given technology and the rest of the
network of factors important to the tramfer of the handpump.
11.2.2 The Bangladeshi Basis of Demand: Tubewells and Convenience Items
In contrast with india, because of the wet conditions prevalent in Bangladesh,
there is no difficulty in obtaining water per se; however, it is difficult to obtain safe
drùiking water. When the water table is so high as to be very near or even above the
surface, it is nearly impossible to keep the "surface" water fiom mixing directly with the
"ground" water. A traditional dug wetl, which draws on ground water near the surface,
will easily become contaminated. The solution to the problem is the tubewell. This is a
long tube or pipe. It cm be made of metal, but may also be made of natural materials
such as b a r n b o ~ . ~ ~ ~ The tube runs vertically fiom a metre or so above the surface down
many metres into the ground. The tube is open at either end, but otherwise impervious to
water. For this reason, the only place for water to enter the tube is fiom the top, where it
will be covered to prevent this fiom happening, or frorn the bottom. The water entering
the tube, therefore is groundwater fiom deep below the surface. Contamination fiom the
surface is very uniikely to have spread to this water. Since the water level inside the tube
'" AAdrian McDodd and David Kay, Water Resources and Stmtegies. (New York Longman Scientific & Technical copublished with John Wiley and Sons, l988), pp. 7 1-72,
Success and Faiiure in Technology Transfer The Story of the Handpump 1 22
must correspond to the water table outside the
tube,389 this clean water makes its way up the
tube.
The watet must still be drawn out of the
tube, however. Since the tube is narrow, a rope
and bucket cannot be used. A simple suction
handpump, such as the New No. 6, works quite
well. Perhaps as many as 3 million of these
simple pumps nave been Uistalled in
~ a n ~ l a d e s h . ' ~ ~ It may seem incongnious that
such a successfbl pump features a pump head
made fiom cast iron, generally considered one
of the weakness of the common handpump for
Fig 11.1: The Tubewell
The tubewell is a device for gaining
mess to dean groundwater in
ocations where the upper levels of that
groundwater are contaminated. The
mly water entenng the tubewell cornes
'rom the very bottom of the well, where
:he groundwater is comparatively clean.
Developing World use. However, the New No. 6 was designed to have no close
to~erances.~~' The absence of close tolerances means that quality control can be relaxed
and puts the manufacture of the pumps well within the capability of Bangladeshi
foundries. By the end of 1975, six Bangaladeshi foundries had produced 7000 pumps a
month, with an installation rate of 50,00O/year, and a supply of spare parts?92
389 The principle is the same as that which govem the entry of water into the nser pipe of a pump. One can explain it in terms of the necessity to obtain equal pressure at equal levels as explained in Section 4. '90 Erich Baurnann, Private Communication, $une 29, 1999. The nurnbers represent Mr. Baumann's estimates based on memory. 39' Adosoroff et al. Comrnunify Water SuppZy, p. 1 74. 'z Black, From Handpurnps to Heolth, p. 24
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 123
It is of course possible to use a very wide tube so that a rope and bucket can fit
down it, however not only does the cost of tubes hcrease with their diameter, but the cost
of drilling holes to put them d o m increases even
fast er.
So there is some similarity between the
indian and the Bangladeshi examples in that in
both cases, the choice of well technology favoured
the adoption of the handpump. It is important to
understand the reason behind the popularity of the
tubewell and handpump in Bangladesh, however.
The Department of Public Health with assistance
fiom the World Health Organization (WHO) and
üNICEF installed 500,000 by the mid- 1980's.
-
Fig 11.2: The N ~ W No. 6
Source: ShalIowell Handpump
4pproximately 3 million New No. 6 iandpumps are in use atop tubewells in 3angladesh. Although the pump head s fashioned from cast iron, the parts do lot have close tolerances, which keeps ts manufacture within the capability of ocal foundries.
Their motivation was to improve public health. This is not the reason that the population
at large has chosen to use the pumps however. The purnps and the tubewells are seen as a
convenience, much like a refiigerator or washing machine in the West, but they are not
coveted for their health benef i t~ . '~~
1 1.2.3 The Filipino Basis of Demand: Concem About Health
Another country which has witnessed some success in the transfer of handpump
technology is the Philippines. There are, for instance, perhaps 20,000 handpumps
conforming to some derivative of the Afndev design. By 1992, there was a demand for
'" Ibid., pp. 18-20.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 1 24
15,000 to 20,000 deepwell pumps per year.394 The demand was supplied by three local
mmufacturers and a pair of ~ n p o r t e r s . ~ ~ ~ Perhaps the transfer had begun even before
development organizations became active in the field. At any rate, one of the problems
encountered by the IDRC project in the mid- 1980's was that they had cornpetition fiom
local suppliers of "traditional" pumps (Clayton Mark purnps with brass ~ ~ l i n d e r s ) . ' ~ ~
Why was the handpump successful in the Philippines. even before iDRC got
there? The m a l villagers of the Philippines appear to have had an appreciation for the
connection between drinking water and disease. When interviewed by workers involved
with the D R C project in the Philippines in the mid- 1980's, Filipino villagers c o ~ e c t e d
dirty water with abdominal pain, vomiting and d i a ~ ~ h e a . ' ~ ~ Clean water was clear, came
fiom a naturally flowing source and could support ~hr i rn~s . '~* One interviewee
responded that the only tnie test of water's potability was laboratory t e ~ t i n ~ . ' ~ ~ This type
of awareness was found both among those who had handpumps and those who did net?"
A 1985 study found that almost al1 households were willing to spend money to irnprove
the quality of their water."'' Another indication that Filipinos understand rnicrobiology
and water is the relative success of sanitation prograrns. The percentage of the rural
population with access to sanitation in the Philippines is 63%:" By the sarne argument
Black uses to show how a low percentage access to sanitation in hdia reflects low
jW Gendrano. The D R C Handpump Project in the Philippines". p. 3. 395 bid. j96 Ibid., p. 2,s. 397 Almario. **Commercially Producing and Marketing the IDRC-UM Handpmp". p. 84. j9' ibid. 399 Ibid.
aiid., p. 84. 'O' Philippine Business for Social Progress, A Bateline Study of a Village Handpumps Project (Philippines), N. p., I98S. p. 38. AvaiIabIe through D R C archives: archiv 621.65(9 14) PS.
Success and Faifure in Technology Transfec The Story of the Handpump 125
appreciation for the microbiologicai aspects of drinking water, a high percentage indicates
a high appreciation for those same aspects in the Philippines. The health workers
message will be well received in the Philippines, but it was not the health worker's
message that created grassroots demand for handpumps in India and Bangladesh. Those
people had other reasons to demand the handpump. When people have no other reason to
demand the handpump. the health care worker's argument is not enough.
41 1.3 Absence of Demand as a Reason Behind Failure to Transfer
in spite of obstacles, the transfer of handpumps succeeded to the extent that
perhaps five to ten million handpumps are in use in the rural Developing World today.
They serve hundreds of millions of people. One might ask, though, why it took until
recent decades for handpumps to appear in large numbers in the Developing World. The
handpump must have been brought to the Developing World long before Point Four and
the Colombo Plan ever existed. It seems hardly credible that the long involvement of
Spain in Latin Amenca and of Britain in India could have occurred without someone,
sometirne, bringing over a handpump. it is reasonable to assume that this happened a
number of times. It was not the obscurity of the handpump wliich prevented Latin
Americans, Aficans and Asians of the three centuries preceding the Second World War
fiom adopting the handpump. Rather, there was no apparent need for them to do so.
Without a knowledge of microbiology, these people had no reason to believe that water
taken fiom a river or a well might be contaminateci with tiny, invisible disease causing
--
a' W C E F , Tdormation: Statistics: Philippines" @np~/~~~..unicef.org!statidco~ay_l Page l4O.htrni.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 126
organisms. Nor, were their weiis of a type that required a long, thin device for extracting
water fiom them. Had these peoples relied on drilled wells, then they might have found
the geometry of the classical handpump very appealing. It appears, however, that dug
wells are the traditional form of well in the Developing World. Presurnably they have
been used there for a very long tirne. A rope and bucket is quite sufficient to haul water
out of a dug well. if one is to adopt a handpurnp, then one must be able to find a
manufacturer fiom whom to purchase it and one must also be willing and able to maintain
it. Ropes and buckets would not place much of a burden on traditional infrastnictures.
Handpumps would. Any technology is part of a network which includes complernentary
technology, supporting infiastructure and supporting values which generate demand.
Since none of these existed, no transfer to Latin America, Afiica or Asia took place.
The weakness of this portrayal of the non-transfer of the handpump is that it does
not explain why the handpump was adopted in Europe as far back as the classical era,
long before Europeans had any knowledge of microbiology and while they were still
drawing ârinking water fiom nvers and dug wells. Perhaps the handpurnp first appeared
for use in ships or in mines. With an established demand, the appropriate infrastructure
would have had a reason to grow and develop. Unlike the Developing World case,
manufacturers and mechanics would then be on hand if someone should see advantage in
applying the technology to drinking water supply. However, the present literature does
not yet provide enough guidance to the development and adoption of the handpump in
Europe and it is beyond the scope of this paper to do so.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 127
Notwithstanding the question marks around the European story, the modem
experience of West to South transfer of handpurnps is consistent with the previous
explmation for the lack of transfer in prior centuries. The Western aid organization and
development professionals saw the handpump as an instrument for improving the health
of the rural population of the third world. It was a means to secure relatively
microorganism-free drinking water. However, the concept of microorganisms causing
disease belongs to Western science. While it is safe enough to assume a belief in science
arnong almost any group of people in the West, the same cannot be said for the
inhabitants of the rural Developing World. These intended recipients did not necessarily
share the development professional's opinion of the supenority of the handpump over
traditional water sources. Consequently, even many of those who had been persuaded to
try the pumps, abandoned them when maintainhg the pump took substantial time and
effort, as was the case when spare parts were difficult to obtain or whenever they
perceived the pumps to be an inconvenience or a nuisance of some sort, as the USAID
team discovered in Tunisia, or when it interfered with some other aspect of life, as with
the women who missed out on the social opportunity that a trip to the water hole
provided. When the pumps broke down fiequently and when there were no mechanics on
hand to repair them when they did, the opportunity to abandon the pump must have
presented itself fiequently. Purnps were vandalized, removed and set aside to rust. When
handpumps were rejected by the very villages which donor agencies selected as places to
introduce the pumps to a region or country, it is unlikely that the use of the pump would
spread.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 128
No doubt, education programs can create an appreciation of the health benefits of
handpumps and lessen the likelihood of the purnp k ing rejected. Andersson reported
that in the Shinyanga region of Tanzania, the incidence of vandalism of pumps (stealing
the wooden pieces for use as firewood) had àropped and ventures that the change in
behaviour is due to an increased appreciation of the pump.Jo3 Moreover, the rural
Filipinos, particularly the one who refened to laboratory testing as the only true means of
testing water's potability, have clearly absorbed some concepts nom Western science.
Nonetheless, health education does not appear to be responsible for the large numbers of
handpuinps in use in India and Bangladesh. It is dificult to assess the impact that health
education h3s made. What is clear is that the handpump succeeded when it was valued,
but beyond the development professionals, it was often not valued as a means to health.
Il. Poor Assumptions
The history of the transfer of the handpump is Full of failures arising fiom poor
assumptions and the improved success due to subsequent efforts to correct for bad
assumptions. The pattern of assurnption and corrective action reveals an initial failure to
identiQ technological hardware as part of a system. As development projects became
more sophisticated, they encompassed first technical and then non-technical aspects of
the system. hitially, development workers made the assumption that neither the
handpumps nor the communities they served needed modification for successfid
technology transfer. The result was a lot of broken, nisting, unused handpumps. By the
1970's, the most popular solution to this problem, in the West at least, was deemed to be
Anderssoa Welk and Handpumps in the Shinymgu Region. T m n i a , pp. 35-36.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 129
the design of new purnps incorporating the principle of easy maintenance and the
possibility of local manufacture. The faulty assumption here was that the rural
Developing World communities would necessarily have the know how and existing
organizations to take advantage of these design features. Before the decade was out. the
development community discovered that they needed to expend money and effort in
training mechanics and setting up maintenance organizations and providing technical
assistance to local manufacturen. Thus far, development workers (most of them
Western) proved themselves equal to overcoming problems once they had recognized
them. However, they discovered that the technological systems wirh which they dealt
extended beyond the technical. n i e success of the transfer depended upon certain values
and tastes, such as what good water tasted like and the perception of what clean water
was. Development workers could not assume that villagers had these values. Workers
could not even assume that the wornen of the village would welcome being relieved of a
long jouniey to fetch water. By the mid 19803, the orthodox wisdom as reflected in the
handpump literature was that community involvement and education was necessary to
identiQ and handle these non-technical issues. However, judging by the lack of
elaboration on these non-technical issues in the professional literahue compared with
technical matters, it seems likely that the non-technical issues did not get the attention
they required. This was not a traditional field of expertise for NGO's and nual extension
services. Consequently, they handled it less adroitly.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 130
12. Conclusion
The story of the transfer of handpump technology fiom the West to the
Developing World has meaning both for those interested in the history of development
and those who would like to draw lessons fiom that history. Both groups of people must
comprehend how technology interacts with its environment, that it operates as part of a
system. They need to understand the needs and demands of the recipient culture as well
as the philosophy and assumptions of the donor culture.
In bringing the handpump to new cultures, Western development workers learned
first hand about the implications of the cultural and social interaction of technology. The
consequences of the interaction with the cultural and social environment were of as much
practical importance as the consequences of the interactions with the physical
environment. in either case, failure to make adjustments to the technology or to the
environment, in other words failure to create a viable technological system, meant failure
of the entire project. Naïve Western concepts of technology made it difficult to perceive
even the technical components of the technological system. The technical bias of the
workers made it very difficult for them to deal effectively with its non-technical
components. Experience led to criticism of Western technology, even in the West, and
removed the fust difficulty. Developrnent workers still stmggle with the second
di fficulty.
By the 1980's development professionals working on handpump projects
recognized the need to treat the handpump as a component in a system. This system
included manufacturing facilities, networks of suppliers and, as Arnold Pacey recognized,
maintenance systems, the clearest example of which was the three-tier maintenance
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 131
system designed to support the india Mark II program. It had taken three decades fiom
the launch of Truman's Point Four program and the Colombo Plan of the British
Commonwealth for this conception of technology to appear and establish itself in
development thought and fiom there to make its way hto policy. Westem faith in its own
brand of technology had to be shaken by events, like the atrocious performance of the
early cast-iron handpumps, or like the poor record of development projects, before
Westerners would examine the nature of technology close enough to apprehend that
Westem technology was not invincible, that it required modification when brought to a
new environment. The India Mark II was the product of enlightenrnent bom of
disappointment. The VLOM strategy, which produced the UN[MADE, the Afridev and
the india Mark III was a M e r recognition of the handpump's role as a cornponent in a
system, because it was an attempt to adapt the handpump more closely to the systems of
manufacture and maintenance which could be put in place in the Developing World. The
influence of the Appropriate Technology movement was probably a large factor in
promoting this view of the handpump-as-component.
Where the questions remained technical, development workers were by and large
successful at seeing past their previous assumptions about the independent nature of
machines and perceiving the technological system surroundhg the handpump. They did
not find it difficult to grasp the need for maintenance systems once Pacey and other s
pointed it out. They had little trouble redesigning the pumps. It is the non-technical
components that the development professionals dealt with least successfully, probably
because these people were technically oriented by training and practice. Perhaps also
because the Westem philosophy of technology was a poor framework in which to
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 132
recognize the importance of non-technical components, or even their existence. Where
the handpump professionals did recognize non-technical components, such as community
motivation and perception of health benefits, they had few detailed plans for coping with
hem, certainly nothing to compare with the plans worked out for technical issues.
Probably the most important non-technical issue in the handpump projects was that of
demand. The success of handpump projects in the Developing World depended upon the
degree to which the intended users perceived a need for them. Where need was felt
whether it was a need sirnply for water (e.g. India), a need for clean water (e.g. the
Philippines) or a "nee8' for a convenience item (e.g. Bangladesh), demand for the pumps
existed and handpump programs were successful; arnong comrnunities which did not feel
a need for handpumps, for instance the villages of rural Tunisia targeted by USAD in the
early 19803, the handpump programs failed. It is certain that the perception of need was
not a suEcient condition for success; for instance, handpumps needed redesign before
they could operate reliably in a Developing World environment. However, the perception
of need appears to have been a necessary condition.
Does it seem likely that the story of the handpump is unique in the history of the
transfer of technology between countries of widely dif5erent history and culture? 1s it not
more likely that other technologies, ofien more complex than the simple handpump, also
required the existence or creation of a complex neh~ork of organizational support,
knowledge and values to thrive in the new environment? It seems more likely that the
handpump is indicative of patterns present in the larger history of development: naïve
assumptions about technology, about its requirements and the recipient cornmunities
desire and capability to absorb it; disappointment bringing enlightenment; awareness of
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 133
techological networks growing as old assumptions are shed and new models and
explmations gain acceptance; finaily, the awkwardness experienced by technical workers
trying to cope with non-technical issues.
The transfer of technology will almost always require adaptation to the artifacts
they centred on and the environment into which they were htroduced. It will be
necessary to understand the physical, social and cultural aspects of the new environment.
However, to identie what adaptations are needed it is necessary to examine the
assumptions the donors have about the technology in question and why people should
want to adopt it. Understanding the culture of the donors will be as important as
understanding the culture of the recipients.
It is clear that Western development organizations succeeded to some degree in
transferring handpump technology across different cultural environrnents. As they did so.
they discovered that the interaction between a technology and its environment is complex,
involving technical and non-technical aspects. Given the complexity of the task the
donors chose, instead of asking why handpunp programs have failed to provide access to
safe water for all, one might rather wonder how they accomplished as much as they did.
What originally seemed like a simple problem, revealed itself to be multifaceted,
involving questions of engineering, economics, sociology and culture. A half century of
experience revealed faulty assumptions and the handpump projects of the 1990s were
much more sophisticated than those of the 1950s and 1960s. With time the Western
development professionals recognized the importance of understanding the needs and
desires of the recipients, the demands the technology made of the community in which it
was deployed and the changes the technology was likely to bring.
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 134
List of Acronyms:
AFARM
AIT
ARD
AMRAD
DMR
EWRA
D R C
DWSSD
IRC
KEMRI
M E W O
PHED
PVC
UNDP
UNICEF
LJMMA.DE
USAID
WASH
WHO
VLOM
Action For AgicuihuaI Renewai in Maharashm
Asian Institute of Technology (Thailand)
Office of Accelerated Rural Developrnent (Thailand)
Association Malienne de Recherche Action pour te Developpement
Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere (formerly, Cooperative for American Rernittances to Europe)
Department of Mineral Resources (Thailand)
Ethiopian Water Research Authority
International Development Research Centre (Canada)
international Dtinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade
international Reference Centre for Cornmunity Water Supply
Kenya Medical Research Institute
Mechanical Engineering Research and Development Organization india
Oxford Commîttee for Famine Relief UK
Public Health Engineering Department (india)
United Nations Development Program
United Nations International Children's Emsrgency Fund
üniversiry of Malaya Designed handpurnp
Uni1.d States Agency for international Development
Water and Sanitation for Hedth (a USAiD project)
World Health Organization
Village-Level Operated and Maintained
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 135
Bibliogra p hy :
Pubiished Sources
"A Quick Fk" . Reports, 13 (3): 6 (October, 1984.
Adas, Michael, Machines as the hfeasure of hfen: Science, Technology and Ideologies of Western Dominance. Ithica, N.Y.: Corneil University Press, 1989.
Andersson, ingvar, Wells and Handpumps in the Shinyanga Region, Tanzania. Bureau of Resource Assessment and Land Use Planning, University of Dar es Salaam. November, 1982.
Arlosoro£F, S., O. Grey and W. Jomey, Rural Wuter Supply Handpumps Project: Handpumps Testing and Devefopnient: Progress Report on Field and Laboratory Testing. Series: WorId Bank Technical Paper 29, UNDP Project Management Report, Washington, D. C.: World Bank, 1984.
Arlosoroff, Sad, "World Bank Handpumps Testing Programme". in Community Water Developmenr, ed. Charles Kerr, London, intermediate Technology Publications, 1989, pp. 156-1 59. First published in Waterfines 1, no. 3, (January 1983).
Arlosoroff, Sad, Gerhardt Tschannerl, David Grey, William Journey, Andrew K q , Otto Langeneffer and Robert Roche., Comrnuniiy Water Supp[v: The Handpump Option. Washington, D.C. : World Bank, 1987.
Baldwin, George, '*The india Mark II Handpump and its Three-Tier Maintenance System". In Cornmunip m e r Developrnent, ed. Charles Kerr, London, lntemediate Technology Publications, 1989, pp. 1 70- 178. First published in Waterlines 1 (4), (April 1983).
Bharier, M a n , ..Water Supply and Waste Disposal". In Technoloa, Finance and Development: .-in Analysis oj'the World Bank ar a Technological Institution. Charles Weiss and Nicolas Jequier eds., Toronto: Lexington Books, 1984, pp. 107-1 24.
Black. Maggie, *The Handpump Corneth". in The Children and the Nariotu, The S top of WICEF. New York: üNICEF, 1986.
Black. Maggie, -4 Cmse for Our Times : &-am : the First F U I Years. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Black, Maggie, Frorn Handpzrmps to Health: The Evolution of Water and Sanitation Programmes in Bangladesh, India and Nigeria. New York: UMCEF, 1990.
Bond, George D., The Buddhist Raival in Sri Lanka: Religious Tradition, Reinterpreration and Response, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1988.
Booth, John A. and Thomas W. Walker, Understanding Central America 2ed,, Boulder: Westview Press. 1993.
Brown, G. A., "Keynote Adâress. The intemational Drinking Water SuppIy and Sanitation Decade (1 98 1- 90): the situatiori at mid-decade". In Institution of Civil Engineers (Great Britain), World Water '86, London: Telford, 1987, pp. 9-15.
Commission on international Development, Partners in Development. New York: Praeger, 1969.
Success and Faiiure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 1 36
Drexel, John, ed., Facts on File Encyclopedia of the Twentieth Cenhrry, New York: Facts on File, 1991.
Eubanks, Bernard M.. This is a Story ofthe Pump and ifs Relatives. Privately published. Salem, Or., 1971.
Ewbank, Thomas. -4 descriptive and historical account of hydraulic and ofher machines for raising water. London: Tilt and Bogue, 1 842. Reprint Edition New York: Arno Press, 1972.
Glennie, Colin. Village water supply in the decade : lessomjiomfield experience. Chichester [Sussex] ; Toronto : J. Wiley, c 1983.
Goh Sing Yau, Laburutory and Field Tesring offiandpumps. Ottawa: iDRC, 1985.
Goh Sing Yau, "bhlaysia". In Filluge Handpump Technoiogy, Donald Sharp and Michaei Gnham. eds. Ottawa, IDRC, 1982, pp. 39-52.
Goh Sing Yau, CINIhLADE 3 O M handpump: a guide for installation, repair and maintenance Kuala Lumpur : University of Malaya, 1987.
Goh Sing Yau and Low Kwai Sim, "Malaysian Villagers Comment on Simple Plastic Handpumps". In Communiv Water Development, ed. Charles Kerr. London, Intermediate TechnoIogy Publications, 1989, pp. 163- 168. First published in Waterlines 3(2) (October, 198 4).
Gray, Ken and Rupert Talbot, '*A Brief History of the india Mark II Handpump". In Handpumps resring und development : proceedings of a workshop in China. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar Bryan eds. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : WorId Bank, 1985, pp. 21 6-223.
Gunnerson, Charles, G.. "Sanitation Systems for DeveIoping countries". in Technology, Finance and Development: ..ln Anaiysis of the World Bank as a Technological Institution, Charles Weiss and Nicolas lequier eds., Toronto: Lexington Books, 1984, pp. 125- 1 39.
Henry, David, "Designing for Development: What is Appropriate Technology for Rural Development". Wufer Stipp!v & Management, vol. 2 , pp. 365-72. Oxford, Pergarnon Press Ltd., 1978.
Henry, David, "Technology Transfer: Old Myths and New Realities". Journal of Developing Socieries 7(1), 97-109, (1991).
Henry, David. "Wanted: A Better Hand Pump". Reports 6(4), 14, (1977).
Henry, David, "Will It Work, Wi11 It Last, Can 1 M o r d It?" Reports 5(4),16-17, (1976).
Hoadley. J. S.. *The Rise and Fall of the Basic Needs Approach". Cooperation and Conflict, 16, 149-1 64, (1981)
Hodgkin, J., Susfainabiiity ofdonor arskted rural water suppiy projects. Washington, DC : Water and Sanitation for Health Project, 1994.
Hughes, Thomas P., Nefivorks of P ower. Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1 983.
International Water Resources Association, Wuter for world developmenr : proceedings of the Vlrh IWRrl World Congress on Wuter Rarources. Urbana, W. : international Water Resources Association, 1988.
Kalbermatten, J.M., Julius, D.S., G~tlflerson, C.G. Appropriate Technology for Water Supply and
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 137
Saniration-a Surnrnary of Technical and Economic Options. Washington, World Bank, 1980.
Kerr, Charles, ed., Cornmuniq Water Development, London, intermediate Technology Publications, 1989.
Kissinger, Henry, D@lamacy, Toronto: Simon & Shuster, 1994.
Krishnaswamy, H. V.. 'The Rural hinking Water Supply Programme in uidia and the Development of a Dependable Deep-well Handpump". in Handpumps tes ting and developrnent : proceedings of a workshop in China. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar Bryan eds. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : World Bank, 1985, pp. 5 1-58.
Lewis, Arthur, Theory ofEconomic Growth. London: Allen & Unwin, 1955.
Macy, Joanna, Dharma and Development: Religion as Resource in the Sanrodaya Self-Help Movement. West Hartford, Conn.: Kumarian Press, 1985.
Mathur, S. P., "nie application of appropriate technology in the field of rural water supplies in Indonesin", World Heaith Statistics Quarrerly 39(1), 71-80. (1986)
McDonald, Adrian and David Kay, Water Resources and Straregies. New York: Longman Scientific & Technical copublished with John Wiley and Sons, 1988.
McJunkin, F. E. and E. H. A. Hofkes, "Hand-Pump Technolog for the Development of Groundwater Resources". In Water Supply and Sanitaiion In Developing Countries. Eric J . Schiller and Ronaid L. Droste, eds. Ann Arbor Science, 1982, pp. 37-52.
McJwikin, F. E.. Hand Pumps for Use in Drinking FVater Supplies in Developing Countries. The Hague : International Reference Centre for Comrnunity Water Supply, 1977.
McNamara, Roben S.. The McNamara Years at the World Bank: major policy addresses of Robert S. McNamara, 1 968- 1 99 1. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1 98 1.
Milfat, T. B., 'Auseralian Foreign Policy and the Third World)'. In The West and rhe Third World, ed. Robert O'Neill and R J. Vincent, New York, St. Martin's Press, 1990, pp. 91-107.
Morgan, Peter, "Zimbabwe's User-ûiendly Bush Pump", Waterlines, 14(2), 23-26 (October 1995).
Momsson, Allen, "In Third World Villages, A Simple Handpump Saves Lives" . Civil Engineering Maguzine, pp. 68-72 (October 1983).
O'Neill, Robert and R. J. Vincent eds., The West and the 7'hird World. New York, St. Martin's Press, 1990.
Oleson, John Peter, Greek and Roman mechanical water-l@ing devices : rhe history of the technology, Toronto : University of Toronto Press, 1984
Pacey, Amoid, Hand-pump Maintenance in the Context of Cornmunis, WeII Projects. N. p.: intermedate Technology Publications, 1985.
Pichai Nimityongskd and Pisidhi Karasudhi, "Thailand", in Village Handpump Technology, ed. Donald S Sharp and Michael Graham, (ûttawa, IDRC, l982), pp. 2 1-32.
PurseIl, Carroll, The Rise and Fa11 of the Appropriate Technology Movement in the United States, 1965- 1985". Technology and Culture 34: 629-637 (1993).
Reynolds, John, Handpumps, toward a sustainable technology : resemch and development during the
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 138
Water Supply and Sanitation Decade. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1 992.
Richardson, J. L. ..Ethical Issues in North South Relations". In The West and the Third Worid, ed. Robert O'NeiI1 and R. J. Vincent, New York, St. Martin's Press, 1990, pp. 242-259.
Roark, P., "Wornen and Wa ter", in Water and Sanitation: Economic and Sociological Perspectives, ed. Peter Borne, ûrlando, USA, Academic Press, 1984, pp. 49-68.
Rogers, Barbara '*Water: Women's Work". in Comrnunity Water Developmenr, ed. Charles Kerr, London, intermediate Technology Publications, 1989, pp. 1 99-20 1 . First published in Wurerlines I(1), (July 1982).
Rogers, Everett M.. Diffusion of lnnovafions..3* ed. New York: Free Press,. 1983
Rogers, Mark "An Appropnated Technology: handpumps in Sri Lanka". Reports 13(3), 9- 10 (October 1984).
Rostow, W. W., "The Take-off into Self Sustained Growth". Economic Journal 6 6 , 3 5 4 (March 1965).
Saunders, Robert J. and Jeremy J. Warford, Village Water Suppfv: Ecanomics and Policy in the Developing World, Baltimore: World Bank, 1976.
Schumacher, Ernst F. Small is Beautiful: a srudy of econornics m fpeopk mattered. London: BIond & Briggs Ltd., 1973.
Shapiro, Shefdon. "The Ongin of the Suction Pump". te ch no log^ and Culrure 5,566-576 ( 1 964).
Sharp, Donald and Michael Graham. Eds. Village Handpump Technology. Ottawa, IDRC, 1 982.
Sharp, Donald, "Low Cost Handpurnps for Developing Countries: The D R C Approach to Technology tntroduction". in international Water Resources Association, Water for world deveiopment : proceedings of the VIth WRtl World Congress an Water Resources. Urbana, III. : international Water Resources Association, 1988, pp. 221 -229.
Sharp, Donald, "The IDRC Handpump Prognm". in Handpurnps testing and development : proceedings of a workshop in China. Gerhard Tschannerl and Kedar Bryan eds. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : World Bank, 1985, pp. 189-194.
Sharp, Donald. "The PVC Pump Branches Out". Reporfs 14 (3/4), 22-23 (October 1985).
Spurgeon, David, "Low-Cost Handpumps for the W d World". In Developing World Water, ed, John Pickford. London: Grosvenor Press International, 1988.
Squire, L. and H. van der Tak, Economic Analysis of Projects, Baitimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975.
"Sri Lankan Women's Handpump Enterprise" in Developmenr Journal 3 ( 199 1 ).
Tschamerl, Gerhard and Kedar Bryan., eds Handpumps testing and development : proceedings of a workshop in China. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. : World Bank, 1985.
United States Department of State, Point Four Progrom: Couperative Program for Aid in the Developmenr of Economicaliy Underdeveloped Areas. N. p., 1949.
Valera, Mediaükx P., Terminal Report on the Village Hmdpump (Philippines) Project. 1 986. Available
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 139
through iDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65(9 t 4) V 3.
van Koppen, Barbara, ed., Women and Warer Pumps in Bangladesh the Impact of Participation in Irrigation Groicps on Wornen S Starus, London: intemediate Technology hbIications, 1996.
Wagner, Edmund G. and J. N. Lanoix, Water Suppiy for Rural ,-ireas and Small Communities, Geneva: World Weaith Organization, 1959.
Weiss, Charles and Nicolas Jequier eds., Technology, Finance and Developrnent: .An Analysis of the World Bank as a Technological Institution. Toronto: Le-xington Books, 1984.
Wellin, E., "Water Boiling in a Peruvian Town" In Health, Culture and Commzcnis), ed. B. D. Paul, New York: Russell Sage Foundation (E) 1955.
WHO "Cornmunity Water Supply and Sewage Disposal in DeveIoping Countries". World Health Staiistics, 26( 1 1 ), (1 973).
Williams, P. G. and L.R. J. Van Vuren, "Appropriate Technology for Rural Water Supplies". in World Water '86: Water technology for the Developing World, pp. 99- 100, London: Thomas Telford Ltd.. 1986.
World Bank, Social Indicators oj'Drvelopmenr 1989. Baltimore: World Bank, 1989
World Bank, Social Indicarors ofûevelopment 1991-1992 Baltimore: World Bank, 1992.
World Bank. Social Indicarors ofDeveloprnenr 1993. Baltimore: World Bank, 1993.
World Bank, Social Indicators of Development 1996. Baltimore: World Bank, 1996.
World Bank, Viliuge Water Supply. Washington: The World Bank, 1976.
World Bank, Drafi Sarnple Bidding Documents for the Procurement of Handpumps. Washington: World Bank, 1986. p. 36.
Wyse, Peter, Canadian Foreign Aid in the 1970 's: un organizarional audit. Montreal: Centre for Developing Area Studies, McGill University, 1983.
Arcbival Material
This includes material which may be publically availabte, but is not as readily accessible as formally published work.
IDRC Manuscript Reports include meeting documents, interna1 reports and preliminary technical documents given a small distributions to a higfily specialized audience.
Almario, Emelina S. "FeasibiUty of Commercially Producing and Marketing the IDRC-UM Handpump in the Philippines". in IDRC Handpump Network Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok. Thailand, 1-3 Oct. 2986. ed. Emelina S. Aimario. Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report, pp. 93-95.
Almario, Emelina S. ed., IDRC Handpurnp Network Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thaihd, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ûttawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, DRC Manuscipt Report.
Success and Failure in Technofogy Transfer: The Story of the Handpurnp 140
Anstanti, Christina. ''The IDRC Handpump Project in Indonesia and its Cornmerciaikation Prospects". Paper presented at The IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the iDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 2 1-25 October 1992, Beijing, China. N. p., [IDRC?], [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available Erom IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Dharmadasa, Pathirana, Upali Wickramasinghe, and Douglas Chandrasin, "Sri Lanka" , in Village Handpump Technology. Donald Sharp and Michael Graham, eds. Ottawa, IDRC, 1982.
Diallo, Mamadou, "The Problem of DiUiking Water Supply in Mali and the Action of AMRAD. in IDRC Handpump Nenvork Proceedings oj'the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thaiiand, 1-3 Oct. 1986. ed. Emelina S. h a r i o . Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, DRC Manuscipt Report, pp. 13 1-1 38.
Donaldson, D. -4 TechnicalUManagerial Review of -4ID Handpump Prugrams in Sri Lanka, the Philippines. Hondurm, and the Dornincan Republic. WASH Workuig Paper No. 29.. Arlington: Water And Sanitation for Health, 1 983.
Donaldson. D., Operation and maintenance of rural drinking water and latrine programs in Honduras, WASH Field Report No. 129, Arlington, Va.: Water And Sanitation for Health, 1984.
Donaldson. D., Trsting of USAID type hundpump (Honduras) WASH Field Report No. 130, Arlington, Va.: Writer And Sanitation for Health, t 984.
Fannon, R D., abstract to Field Research and Testing of a m e r Hand Pumpfor Use in Developing Countires. Final Research Report to Agency for international Development. Ohio: Bartelle Columbus Laboratories, January 3 1, 1975.
Frink, D. W. and Fannon, R D. Jr. , Final Report on the Development of a Water Pumpfor Underdevrloped Countries to rlgencyfor International Deveiopmenr. Battelle mernorial institute, Columbus, Ohio, USA, 1967.
Frink, D.W. Fmon, RD. Banelle Memorial institue, Columbus, OH; US. AiD, Development of a water pump for underdeveloped countries ifinal report. Columbus, Ohio : Battelle Memorial Institute. CoIurnbus Laboratories 1967.
Gendrano, Carme10 M., "The IDRC Handpump Project in the Philippines: Experiences and Prospects". Paper presented at The IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nenvork Meeting, 71-25 October I N , ' , Beging, China. N. p., [IDRC?], [l992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available tkom iDRC archives: archiv 631.65 G 5.
Goh Sing Yau "From Research and Development to Mass Production of Handpumps" . in IDRC Handpümp Network Proceedings ofthe hfeeting Held in Bangkok, Thaihnd, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ed. Emelina S. Almario, Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report, pp. 30-40.
Goh Sing Yau and Low Kwai S i m , "Appropriate plastic handpump for rural water supply in Malaysia Kuala Lumpur Dec. 1984". in ''International Symposium on Technology, Culture and Development Kuala Lumpur 12- 14 Dec., 1983". N. p., 1984, pp. 69-74. AvaiIabIe through iDRC archives: archiv 631.6 1 5 1983,
Goh Sing Yau, "Development of the Unimade Handpump". Paper presented at The iDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Hondpump Network Meeting, 21-25 Ocfober 1991, Beijing, China. N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]. (Conkence Proceedings) Available kom DRC archives: archiv 621 -65 G 5.
Goh Sing Yau, Developrnent of a Village Level Inrtalled and Maintuined Handpump-A Malaysian Experience. N.p,, ad, available h m IDRC archives: archiv (626.83 595) G 5
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer. The Story of the Handpump 141
Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to *'introducing PVC Handpump (Thailand) Project". From ~3~ to 28" Apnl, 1985. ui Goh SUig Yau, Report on Visit to CahLFPDrVPBSPfrom 1 tjh .+wil-3"' ~Cfay, 1985. Available through iDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65(593) G 6.
Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to "Village Handpump (Philippines) Project From 29" April to 3d May. 1 985. in Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visii t0 CrLA MSPDdPBSP fiom I & +ri/-3& May, 19235 Available through IDRC archives: archiv 621.65(593) G 6.
Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to CAAMS, Beijing (16-23 April, 1985). Ln Goh Sing Yau, Report on Visit to C;UMS/PDA/PBSPfrorn 1 fh April-3"' Moy. 1 985. Available through IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65(593) G 6.
Goh Sing Yau, Report on k i t to CMi\fS/PD..YPBSP from 16lh ;lpril-3" ibfay, 1985. Available through IDRC archives: archiv 621.65(593) G 6.
Gupta, Avril, "Rural Water Supplies in indonesia". Master's Thesis, University of Waterloo, 1994.
Wandpurnp Manual (Asia)" Project 830066. in IDRIS.
Harkness, R M., Village FVomen, CYarer and Developmsnt: an Evaluative Stirdy of the Vater Supplv Project in Bolgaranga District, Upper Region, Ghana. Master's Thesis. Carleton University, O a a m Canada, 1 983.
Hodgkin, J., Operation and maintenance of rural warer supplies in the Yemen Arab Republic, WASH field report no. 359, Arlington, Va.: Water and Sanitation for Health (WASH), 1989.
James, B. E. , USAID Handpump Program in Earador. WASH Field Repon no. 123. Arlington, USA, WASH (Water and Sanitation for Health), 1984.
Jemati, Jima *Technical Repon on the Ethiopian Handpump" . In IDRC Harrdpump Neiwork Proceedings ofthe hfeeting Htdd in Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ed. Emeiina S. Almario, Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1 987, D R C Manuscipt Report, pp. 5- 10,
Journey, W. K. "A Hand E%mp for Rural Areas of Developing Coutnries". World Bank, 1976. Lnternational Bank for Reconstruction and Developrnent document. P.U. Report No. RES 9, 1976.
Karama, M. et. al.. 'The Expenence On Unimade Handpurnp in Kenya and the Commercialization Prospects''. Paper presented at The DRC Handpurnp Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 21-23 October 1992, Beijing, China. N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings) AvailabIe Fom IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Katsha, Samiha El "E.xperience of the IDRC Handpump in Egypt". Paper presented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nerwork Meeting, 21-15 October 1992, Berj'ng, China. N.p., PRC?] , [ 1 992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available from IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Krishnaswamy, H. V., Rote of Richardson & Cruddas (1 972) Limited, in Development and Manufacture of India Mark II Deepwell Handpumps in Water Supply Programmes in India. Conference o f State Ministers of the State/Union Territones in Charge of Water Supply, February 7, 1986. Organized by The Ministry of Urban Developrnent, Government of India.
Mishra, M., Do it yourself: maintenance ofIndia Mir&-II handpump. Allahabad: Wtute o f Engineering and Rural Tec hno logy, 1 994?
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 142
Mudgal, Arun Kumar, India Handpump Revolution: Challenge and Change. Handpump Technology Network Working Paper: WP 01/97. Swiss Centre for Development Cooperation in Technology Management (SKAT), 1997.
Philippine Business for Social Progress, A Baseline Stuc& ofa Village Handpumps Projeci (Philippines), N. p., 1985. Available through IDRC archives: archiv 62 t .65(914) P5.
Potts, P. W., U U l D Handpump Program in Tunisia, WASH Field Report no. 100. Arlington, VA.: Water and Sanitation for Health, 1983.
Proceedings of the National Workshop on Potenrial Irnprovernents in Mark II/ Deepwell Design: hfuy 25 & 25, 1990, India International Centre, Max Mueller hfarg, New Delhi. N. p., 1 W O ? The cover page identifies UNICEF, New Delhi; National Drinking Water Mission, Department of Rural DeveI opment, Government of India; and the UNDPtWorld Bank Water and Sanitation Program, Regional Water and Sanitation Group-South Asia. 1 obtained my copy of this document through the UNICEF, New Deihi Office.
Reports ofthe IDRC Handpump Nenvork Meeting, 21 -25 October 2 996, Beging, China. N. p., [IDRC?] , [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available fiom IDRC archives: archiv 621.65 G 5.
Rrporr of fhe Narional Conference on Deepwell Handpumps, Madurai, July 10-13, 1979. Sponsored by the Minisûy of Public Works and Housing [India], Central Public Health & Environmental Engineering Organization (CPHEEO) and W C E F . 1 obtained my copy of this document through the UNICEF, New Delhi Office.
Reynolds, John and Ian Collins, "IDRC-UM Handpump". [Harpenden?]: Consumers' Association (UK) 1986. Unpublished report by the Consumers' Association (üK). Available through IDRC archives: archiv 63 1.65 MFICHE-Lib- 104390.
Rosales, Elias, "Report on the E.uperience of the D R C Handpump Project in Costa Rica and the Commercialization Prospects". Paper presented at The iDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nenvork Meeting, 72-23 October 1992, BeQing, China. N.p., [IDRC?], [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available Eom D R C archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Rudin, A. and Alan Plumtree, Designfor Plastic Hand Pump and Well. University of Waterloo, March, 1978.
Saunders, Robert J. and Jeremy J. Warford. Village Water Supply and Sanifation in L m Developed Couniries. Wortd Bank, P. U. Report No. Res. 2, 1974.
Shepherd, A, W. and Asha Mustapha el Neima, Popular Participation in Decentralised Water Suppiy Pfanning: A Case Sttrdy in the Western Deisirict of Northern Kordofan Province Sudan. N . p.: Development Administration Group, Occasional Paper no. 17. January 1983.
Sieh, Lee Mei Ling, "Commercialization of the Unimade handpurnp: an evaluation". Pape presented at The D R C Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpurnp Network Meeting, 21 -25 October 1992, Beijing, China. N. p., [IDRC?], [ 1992?]. (Conférence Proceedings) AvailabIe iiom D R C archives: archiv 621.65 G 5.
Sin& Ranjit. "Testing and Development of iDRC Handpump (PVC Handpump) in M a and its Commerciaiization Prospects". Paper presented at The IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1992. Avdable in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Network Meeting, 2 1-25 October 1992, Beijing, China. N.p., WRC?], [1992?]. (Conference Proceedings) AvaiIabIe 6om
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 143
IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
Soedjwaro, Christine, "introducing the PVC Handpurnp in Indonesia" . in IDRC Handpump Nerwork Proceedings of the Meeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 Oct. 1986, ed. Emelina S . Almario. Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, IDRC Manuscipt Report, pp. 60-66.
Tan Bock Thim, "Economic Analysis and Potential Markets" . in Village Handpump Technologv, Donald Sharp and Michael Graham eds. Ottawa, IDRC, 1982, pp. 57-66.
Tan Bock Thiam, "Feasibility of Commercially Producing and Marketing the IDRC-UM Handpurnp in the Philippines" . In IDRC Handpump N e ~ o r k Proceedings ofthe bfeeting Held in Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 Ocr. 1986, ed., Emelina S . Ahnario, Ottawa, Ont.: IDRC, 1987, [DRC Manuscipt Report, pp. 96-1 16.
Wijk-Sibesma, C.A., Purriciparion of Nomen in Communiiy Warer Suppiy and Saniturion: Roles and Realitirs. Technical Paper no. 22, The Hague, The Netherlands, iRC, 1985.
World Bank, United Nations.Development Programme, Laboratory Testing, Field Trials and Technological Development. R l d Water Supply Handpumps Project - Senes: World Bank Rural Water Supply Handpumps Project Report. 1, Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1982.
Zhang Li De "Project Situation in Popularization of IDRC Handpump and its Prospect on Cornrnercialization Development in Xinjiang" . Paper presented at The IDRC Handpurnp Network Meeting, Beijing, October 1993. Available in Reports of the IDRC Handpump Nrhvork Meeting, 21-25 Ocrober 1992. BeiJ'ing, China. N p . . [IDRC?], [ l992?]. (Conference Proceedings) Available fiom IDRC archives: archiv 62 1.65 G 5.
On-line Databases and Internet Sources.
The IDRC Developrnent Research Information System (IDNS), contains swnmaries of each project to which the iDRC has granted funds. The summary identifies such information as the amount of money awarded, the recipient of the fùncis, the date of the project, the statu (open, closed) and it also contains a brief description of the project. The author of the summary is never indicated, but we can assume that it is a sta f f member of IDRC, probably the project manager. The database is available via the world wide web at < http://www.minweb.idrc.cdidnslog.hn>.
A note on intemet sources: The worId wide web has ody been with us for a few years as a mass access tool. For that reason, standards regarding its use in academic writing are still forming. The vas amount of information available through this medium makes it difficult to ignore in a comprehensive sntdy. However, there is no editorial filter to vouch for the competence of the author. Its use demands prudence and discretion on the part of the academic. For my part, I have avoided using internet materiai to back up potentially controversial material or as a basis for details of fact unless the facts put forward are plausible given supporting rnaterial published in the traditional fashion. 1 have also used internet copies of documents which would normally be accepted as sources in a historical study if they had been obtained through conventional channels.
Afkican Development Bank, "Section 2.4.7 Participation du Secteur Prive", Politique Sectorielle de L'Eau et de Lilssoinissement., <hctp://www.teleservices.sn/bad~partic.htm> (June 8, 1999).
CARE "Health and Population" C . Program. <http://www.care.org~programs/fiealttilwater-s~~tio~ htmi (June 9, 1 999).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 144
"Dempster Hand Pump Kits for 23F and 40F". Hand and Gravity Purnps, <http://jademoun~.cotn/handpumps.htm (JuIy 15, 1999).
Global Applied Research Network, Evaluation of Wafer Supply, Sanitution and HeaIth Edzication Projecis. tldwa and North Gondar Ethiopia, 1997. <http://www.lboro.ac.~ganiet/dlcasewateraidI 3.html> (June 8, 1999).
Global Applied Research Network. Evaiuation of Water Supply, Sanitation and Health Education Projects, Adwa and North Gondar Ethiopia, <htrp://www.lboro.ac.uk/gmetlallcasewate~dI 3 . h t m l (June 8, 1999).
"Handpump Testing (Sri Lanka)" Project 780105, IDRIS. (July 26, 1999).
Hoang, Dustin X., "A Buddhist Economic System: Lessons fiom the Samodaya Shramadana Movement in Sn Lanka". Http://www. buddhanetz.net/texte/sarvodaya.htm, June 10, 1999.
"industrial Components Limited", <hnp://www.hdusuial-Ltd.com/home.html> (June 8, 1999)
Lifewater, "The India Mark 11" <http:llLifewater.cdmmk2.htm> (July 22, 1999).
McRobie, George, T h e Cornmunity's Role in Appropriate Technology" Second Annual E. F. Schumacher Lectures October 1982, Cathedra1 St- John the Divine, New York City, ed. Hildegarde Hannum, 1999 ~http://www.schumachersociety.or~ec-rn- (June 10, 1999). May be purchased in pamphlet form from the E. F. Schumacher Society, 1 JO Jug End Road, Great Barrington, MA 0 1230, (41 3) 528- 1737, ~www.schumachersociety.org/publication.html~.
"E'mping Techno Iogy Research (Ethiopia)", Project 770022, IDRIS. (July 36, 1 999).
"Rural Water Technology Research:, Project 7601 87, IDRIS. (July 26, 1999).
"Shallow Weil Pump Research (Malawi)", Project 770107, iDRiS. (July 26, 1999).
Shree S. K. industries, India hfmk II Detaiis, ~http:llskind.hypennart.netlmak2~details.h (July 22, 1999)
Shree S. K. industries, Shalloweii Handpump, ~http://skind.hypemart.net~shallowell.hm~ (My 22, 1 999).
UNICEF, "Village Water Supplies". <Http://www.unicef.org/sowc96/hpump.htm> (November 1 1, 1998.)
UMCEF, "'TechnoIogies for the Village". <http://www.doe.met.in/-unicefd/u18.htm> (March 1 7, 1999).
UNICEF, Information: Statistics: Philippines, <http:llwww.unicef.org/statidco~ntry~l Page 14O.html> (July 22, 1999).
W C E F , "Access to Sanitation", Information: Staristics, <http://www.unicef.or~statis/sanitation,htm> (fdy 6, 1999). The information contained at this site is compiled fiom UNICEF, World Health Organization (WHO) and Multiple hdicator Cluster Surveys (MICS).
"Water Pumping Technology (Global)", Project 7800 16, IDRIS. ( M y 26, 1999).
"Water-Pumping Technology (Malaysia) - Phase i", Project 780022, IDRIS. ( M y 36, 1999).
Success and Failure in Technology Transfer: The Story of the Handpump 145
Private Communication
Baumann, Erich, Personal communication, lune 29, 1999.
Carnithers, Richard, Private interview, February 1998.
Mudgal, Anrn, Personai Communication, May 1 4, 1 999.
Sharp. Donald, Private interview, April22, 1998.
Other Material
Bailey, C. Whitehead, W. del Grandé, L. McKee, N., Handle On Healrh. Ottawa: IDRC, 1 990. Video.