Jacques Pelman Cinq387 9/3/20

Step1: Facts

Lesotho is a small developing country

You are a group of 10 researchers

You have 2 weeks to conduct research

You are looking for pathogens in the water sources

Your team requires community assistance to locate water sources

Your goal is to produce publications

Chemical additives may be produced as a result of your publications

Ethical issue: Is your current research plan ethical?

It is ethical but there are solutions to make it fairer to the Lesotho communities

 

Step2&3: Stakeholders and Motivations

Researchers: want the best possible outcome of their study, efficiently find participants, make study ethical, identify and study all pathogens

Participants in the study: offer assistance to a project that could positively impact their community, potential for safe drinking water

Funders: results, return on investment, maintain reputation, stay within the timeline

People of Lesotho:

want their water to be safe to drink, protect water as one of their main natural resources, and want something out of participating in the study

University: Care about reputation and return on investment. Would like the study to stay within budget

(Lesotho)Government: keep the people safe and benefit long and short term for the people, improvement in the society/community long and short term, protect natural resources (water)

 

Step4: Solutions

 

1. Pay the people with money

Pros: communities will be eager to help, gives them purchasing power for items they need, your team gets the help they need, many people will be likely to volunteer

Cons: unknown how much the community will want, does the community want the money(similar to taxes for public goods) or the individual people, cannot guarantee they will spend the money to help themselves, they are still susceptible to the pathogen, may cause issues within the community is some members receive monetary incentives while others are left out, increase amount needed from University/Funding Agents

2. Don’t pay the people

Pros: save money which will please the funders and university, what “most” researchers do

Cons: communities may lack enthusiasm and may be uneasy about the research; some areas might not help you at all (waste of resources), no delays to publication

3. Provide incentives (other than money) and education

Pros: almost Guarantees to help the people with the water issue specifically, maybe be cheaper than giving a large number of people cash, education may allow the researchers to bridge social/cultural differences

Cons: Will cost some amount of money more than just the bare minimum, may cause the researcher to take longer thereby delaying the publication, increase amount needed from University/Funding Agents and increase time needed due to added educational aspect

 

Step5: Additional Assistance

 

 

The main source of water for parts of eastern South Africa

Very vulnerable to political disputes in South Africa

Droughts are common

Water is distributed through the Lesotho Highlands Water Project

Waterborne diseases are common and the infant mortality rate is high because of them.

 

 

Step6: Best Course of Action

Option 3: Provide incentives (other than money) and education

 

Incentives will promote communities to help us locate water sources but the information we provide to them will also increase their knowledge about water safety. We will get the data we need but the communities will benefit in a way greater than monetarily. Education costs us nothing but time to provide and will help the Lesotho people in their development. I would focus on a small number of incentives and only give incentives to the people who help us. This will keep the cost down and only allow a small amount of inequality between the community. I would want to focus on education since it can be spread and helps to equalize the population.

 

Monetary incentives might be more enticing and ensure we get the support we need in the research, but it does not have a sustainable long term result. The Lesotho people will still be susceptible to the pathogens in the water.

 

No incentives at all only benefit us as we will get our research completed although we might miss out on some communities not willing to engage with us.

 

 

 

Step7: Implications

 

By educating the locals about their water issues but also solutions to protect themselves from these pathogens almost guarantees to help the people with the water issue specifically, Lesotho can continue progressing their water safety and spread their knowledge to the other regions that they supply water to. This as a whole aids in the development of their country into a safer and more stable region. Education may allow current and future researchers to bridge social/cultural differences to more easily complete research with less interference. Although this option will help most people with the least economic cost it will delay the publication.