Grassroot diplomacy: A set of delicate and deliberate techniques for working harmoniously and effectively with diverse entities to catalyze social change

 

Prompt: Grassroots Diplomacy Case 9/8/2020

Part 1: Ethical Decision-Making

 

Step 1: Determine the facts

•  ~35% of the children is stunted due to poor nutrition
• Traditionally, maize and bananas are the items most commonly made into gruel and fed to infants at 2 months of age
• Gruel is used to complement breastfeeding until approx. 24 months
• Mothers in East Africa believe gruel is beneficial to children, but studies show it has little nutrition
• HIV/AIDS are prevalent in the region
• World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding until infant is 6 months of age
• The longer a HIV+ mother is breastfeeding, the higher the risk of transmission
• Received grant to establish a women’s cooperative in region to improve children’s nutrition and livelihood of households
• Funds from women’s cooperative can produce a nutritiousness, shelf-stable porridge made from local produce that is intended to wean children off of breastmilk around 6 months 
• 500 women from three sublocations have indicated interest in joining cooperative, but they are skeptical about the porridge 
• Cash crops in region will be used to make the porridge, but they are grown with pesticides which can cause adverse growth for infants

1. B) Clearly state the ethical issue/issues (seesaw problem)

• Prolonged breastfeeding in the area could potentially lead to the child being transmitted of HIV virus
• Pesticides are used on many crops, and there is a possibility of pesticides being in the foods produced for infants/young children
• Not a lot of women are being tested, diagnosed or treated for viruses such as HIV/AIDS
• Early introduction of supplemental foods for infants’ diets introduces the chance of endangering the child’s health
• (Compare the harm) Traces of Pesticide VS HIV

1. C) Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

• Mothers in the area
  • Personal: they want healthy babies, they do not want to spread HIV/AIDS to their babies 
  • Professional: n/a
• Members of the womens’ cooperative
  • Personal: want to provide nutritious, locally grown baby supplement to wean children off of breastfeeding at 6 months, want better livelihoods for themselves and other women, may just want to feel good about themselves, want to keep their jobs
  • Professional: may want to enter a career in this field, want this venture to be successful so that it can continue to get its funding and they can stayed employed 
• The donor (secondary bc they are not directly involved to solve this case)
  • Personal: may just want better health/livelihoods for these women, improve nutritional status of children, status of donating 
  • Professional: may be doing this to get in the public’s good graces for their career
• You (leader of cooperative) 
  • Personal: may just want better health/livelihoods for these women, improve nutritional status of children, status of building it 
  • Professional: increase skills/resume build for career, wants to push for a career in nutrition/public health
• Children (secondary)
  • Basic needs of being fed (personal motivation)

 

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

*Who’s going to pay? Would it be organizations such as WHO, health administry or etc that we can partner with? 

Community health workers or volunteers are highly needed, so it is hard to work with them in this issue, unless there is a way to incentivize them.

1. Solution: hold information sessions to show the benefits of this new supplement and the cons of the traditional method alongside trusted community members (teach them first and maybe have them be the main hosts/info givers)

• • Pros:
    • People will no longer be relying on hearsay but rather, will make an informed decision based on facts 
    • Trusted community members hosting the information session will minimize reluctance to trust new supplement
    • Babies get the nutrition needed and do not have to increase risk of hiv from prolonged breastfeeding
  • Cons: 
    • People may still be skeptical due to pesticides 
      • Show them that the risk of possible presence of pesticides does not compare to the risk of possible exposure to HIV/AIDS 
    • Pesticides still pose a real risk to the health of the baby
      • Remove crops on there that are known to commonly sprayed with pesticides and replace with other sources that specific nutrient
      • Or go to farmer that does not use pesticides and get verification to show mothers
    • How does it save face of those involved?
      • Everyone is trusted and informed
  • Implications on relationships: bond between womens cooperative and the general community will strengthen both long and short term because there is an atmosphere of communication, trust, and education
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: venture might struggle to lift off to due either misunderstand, miscommunication, or the extra time it takes to teach the community hosts as well as the mothers
    • Long Term: stronger bond centered around communication, trust, and education will allow the venture to proceed smoothly and more effectively. Community will be better informed on the science behind nutrition rather than maintaining that misinformation and us simply working around it

2. Solution: Partner up with a food distributor that does not involve or provide weaning food that has been recently sprayed with pesticides

• • How does it solve the problem?: 
    • They must have a record of when the crops were last sprayed
  • Pros: You are able to track the right timing of when the crops can be harvested, where the pesticide will not affect who consumes the product. If there is a waiting period for the pesticide to dissipate, this can help lessen the risks for children.
  • Cons: If crops now took longer to wait and harvest, this takes up time for the farmers, who just want to earn money from their crops in the market. Not all crops are completely free of pesticides, so even after a waiting period, there still may be some left
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Farmers can experience increased profits. Those consuming the crops can have a smaller intake of the pesticides. 
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: The 500 women will likely cooperate more often if they knew about the pesticide cycles.
    • Long Term: More women will begin to participate in the cooperative, once they see
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: 
    • Long Term:  

3. Solution: Sanitary efforts on the food being used to produce the porridge

• • Pros: 
    • This can help get rid of any extra traces of pesticides on the surface of the food that remains. (Ex: washing food carefully and peeling the skin of some fruit)
    • women in the coop can do it for a small incentive or we could put simple instructions on the packaging
  • Cons: 
    • more physical labor
    • more wages to pay
    • more time to spend
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Women are reassured their food is clean and the distributors do not have to be associated with pesticide
  • Implications on relationships: physical labor and cooperation can strengthen professional atmosphere of coop
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: Mothers will learn how to wash their produce carefully when they learn how to produce their own shelf-stable porridge
    • Long Term: Partnerships with local supermarkets to have commercial vegetable and fruit washes

Step 5: From the past cases, I have learned that many times honesty is the best policy to ensure a long term stable relationship. Give the consumer the benefit of the doubt (just as in the syringes) and trust that they will be responsible with the information so long as you took every precaution to ensure as such.

Step 6/7: Best solution–education. Focus on the primary stakeholder: the mothers. This can be done by providing clear instructions on either washing the vegetables to get rid of any residual pesticides and hold “information sessions” which could also function as marketing campaigns (if the donor plans to profit off of this gruel) so it would not be as cost-raking as you would think, as more people would hear about the gruel through hearsay and thus attending these sessions. These sessions would demonstrate the minimal risk of pesticides versus the long time risk of a child born with HIV/AIDS.

1. Design packaging with simple instructions to wash thoroughly (pictures when able).
2. Plan information sessions with community members, health workers, etc. Pay them a small wage.
3. Spread the word! Drive to different towns handing out flyers for the sessions, tell health clinics to divert breastfeeding mothers to an info session, etc.
4. Hold the sessions!

Part 2: Grassroots Diplomacy

Step 1: Determine the facts

• Women work for about nine hours every day and earn KES 300
• They have the opportunity to sell the produce grown on their small farms to the cooperative 
• Transaction is conducted at a prevailing market rate which helps the woman make some money on the side
• The arrangement of being able to earn money from selling their produce to cooperatives saves them (time+ money) to the village market in order to sell them

1. B) Clearly state the ethical issue/issues

• The woman does not get a say in keeping their own money, as the men in her family have power over that
• The twin social outcomes of improving the nutritional status of children and the livelihoods of rural households is not being achieved

1. C) Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

• The Entrepreneur
  • Enjoy the publicity and connections with the community, but wants to help solve this issue, however this issue has been ingrained in the community for a while
• The women in the communities
  • Just want to feed their children and save some of the money to support their families
  • Grow and sell the best produce to the cooperatives
• Children 
  • Just want to be fed
• The men in the women’s families
  • Personal motivation to enjoy life, drink alcohol and do frivolous things

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

1. Solution: give women a portion of their earnings ($1.50) in cash so that they their husbands could have something while the rest can be given out in gift cards OR credit at the cooperative, which would reduce their incentive to cash it out themselves (swipe in and the amount of money increases per day in the gift card)

• • Pros:
    • Most of the money is stored for the family to use later for their children
  • Cons: 
    • They’re going to ask where the rest of the money is, might still get mad
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Saves face for both wife and husband
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife will fight less about the money since the husband’s needs are curbed by the small cash incentive
    • Long Term: Babies are healthy! father is drunk! Mother is hopefully satisfied with where her hard earned money is going. 
  • Implications on the venture: Money will flow back into the co-op via gift card for gruel, partnered supermarkets, etc. Co-op will grow, livelihoods of mothers and babies are improved. 

2. Solution: Credits in cooperative, instead of money they can get credit hours, she can use it in the store of the cooperative worth $6 per credit, but if they want the cash they would be getting $3

• • Pros:
    • incentivizes health of baby over cash for other things
  • Cons: 
    • no one is stopping the husband from making the wife take out the cash regardless
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Husband can still indulge in his hedonism without being shamed for it
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife have a stabler relationship
    • Long Term: atmosphere of putting alcoholism over health of family is prolonged and even ingrained
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: would succeed.
    • Long Term:  because of constant prioritization of  material things over health of baby, the venture’s long term goal of improving health and livelihood cannot be achieved to its greatest potential
• Solution: The women would get a side incentive along with the money they are earning from the cooperative, which would be alcohol, or gruel. 
  • Pros:
    • Both parties have something
    • money can be set aside for the children
  • Cons: 
    • husband might still buy other things with the money other than alcohol
    • Husband will sell on black market
    • expensive to purchase alcohol just to incentivize men not to steal their wives money and degrade baby’s health
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Husband can still indulge in his hedonism without being shamed for it
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife have a stabler relationship
    • Long Term: atmosphere of putting alcoholism over health of family is prolonged and even ingrained
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: would succeed.
    • Long Term:  because of constant prioritization of  material things over health of baby, the venture’s long term goal of improving health and livelihood cannot be achieved to its greatest potential

Step 5:  

My chosen solution is biased against the husbands and for the mothers + babies. In my opinion, it does nothing for our venture goal to simply add a band-aid fix to a deeply ingrained cultural issue that will continually be a roadblock in achieving the goal of better livelihoods.

Step 6/7: Best solution–give 1/3 of daily or weekly earnings in cash (to curb alcoholic husband) and 2/3 in a gift card for gruel or for a partnered supermarket.

1. Grassroots diplomacy. Speak to community members about issue and best way to go about it. In this diplomacy, also search for supermarkets who are willing to partner up with the venture to provide these gift cards.
2. Implement.