Team: COPRA

Members: Ami Yoshimura, Michelle Hu, Sammantha Powers, Jake Donoghue, Brianna Wanbaugh, Tri Nguyen, Brianna Cimaglia, Rozhin Zahrouni

 

Top 20 FAQs and Answers

 

 

• What happens to the middlemen if you eliminate them in the supply chain? (Ami)

 

A: At this stage, we don’t have a concrete answer yet, because we are still in the development phase of our products. 

 

 

• What is the scale of the coconut farms in the Philippines? (Tri)

 

A: The majority of coconut farms are small to medium sized (around 5 hectares / 40 – 100 trees per farm).

 

 

• How will you implement your product in the Philippines? (Sammy)

 

A: We are not yet sure at this stage, as we do not currently have a definite business model since we are still developing our product. 

 

 

• How do you know that there aren’t better antioxidants out there that are just as effective or more than the antioxidants that you are using now? (Rozhin)

 

A: We have done our research on many different potential antioxidants and have read many scientific articles and journals on them before coming into our conclusion of the top antioxidants for us to use on our experiments. Unfortunately, there is no way for us to know about all of the potential antioxidants that exist, however, we believe that from our research we have found the best ones that are available and cost-effective.

 

 

• What are some of the current solutions to the aging tree problem in the Philippines? (Bri C)

 

A: There are replanting, intercropping, and education programs designed by the Philippines Coconut Authority to address these challenges.

 

 

• How do you make sure the coconut farmers will benefit from your solution? (Tri)

 

A: We will provide coconut farmers the cost-effective technology to produce high-quality copra and higher-value added products that they can sell directly at a higher price, which will earn the farmers additional income.  

 

 

• To what extent do coconut farmers have access to energy? (Tri)

 

A: It is noted that 6.1 million households (half of the rural population) have no electricity in the Philippines. Our investigation suggests that more than 30% of coconut farmers do not have access to the power grid.

 

 

• How will this solution be sustainable? (Brianna W)

 

A:  We hope to partner with a company based in the Philippines that can continue to aid and distribute our solution after we leave the Philippines

 

 

• How successful are efforts to address the aging tree problem? (Bri C)

 

A: The PCA has established a few programs to address this issue, but many of them are purely informational with little execution and direct aid to farmers. These programs have certainly helped inform farmers about the issues, but there has not been significant change.

 

 

• How long will this copra & antioxidant experiment take? (Rozhin)

 

A: This is a two part experiment that has been started from July, however, since it was decided that better results were needed with improved procedure plans, the experiment will be restarting during the fall semester and will most likely before the end of the semester depending on the results found.

 

 

• What do you expect to see in your experiments and what is the goal of the experiments? (Jake)

 

A: On the engineering side, the experiments are set up with the goal of optimizing air flow inside the drying chamber. We expect to gather data that will allow us to decide whether we should utilize horizontal or vertical airflow moving forward.

 

 

•  What are your next steps for the venture? (Ami)

 

A: The next steps entail testing antioxidant solutions, prototyping the dryer, and submitting research proposals to a few conferences. 

 

 

• What are you doing in your experiments currently and what is next? (Jake)

 

A: We are constructing benchmark prototypes of our drying chambers and comparing the effectiveness of horizontal vs. vertical airflow on drying time. The goal is still to uniformly dry all the coconut meat in the drying chamber as fast as we can, so whichever method works better is what we will include in our drying design moving forward. Once we have identified the optimal air flow method, we will move to experimenting and designing our heating source and heat exchange mechanisms. 

 

 

• Why are you doing this experiment and how do these antioxidants work on the copra? (Rozhin)

 

A: The current problem is the copra browning which reduces their financial value because of their unappealing visual quality, even if they are safe to consume and use even for other means. The browning of the copra occurs from a chemical reaction from its exposure to oxygen, known as enzymatic browning. The enzyme that plays the major role in this chemical reaction is called Polyphenol Oxidase (PPO) and another major enzyme that contributes to the enzymatic browning and is involved with the internal browning is called Peroxidase. Therefore, this reaction can be prevented from occurring through the application of higher acidity (pH<4), which lowers the chances of oxidation of the food and causing the enzymatic reaction to occur. Moreover, the copra also needs to have antimicrobial protection, so that they can last longer and prevent spoiling. Since the best antioxidants that we have chosen from our research are both acidic and have antimicrobial properties (which we also plan on combining the best ones together to create an even stronger antioxidant preservative), they are one of the best natural and cost-effective preservation methods for us to use on the copra.

 

 

• Why are natural antioxidants being used instead of cheaper alternatives? (Rozhin)

 

A: Natural antioxidants are the best materials to use as preservatives of copra as this will make it safe and have no/less harmful side effects than other chemical or other cheaper alternatives. Natural antioxidants are the next best option, from their effective protection against oxidation and microbes, in comparison to more expensive preservation treatments (e.g. freeze drying), so they are the best option considering their ease of access, effectiveness, and reduced cost.

 

 

• How do you imagine implementing these antioxidants into the supply chain and how will the farmers gain access to them? (Rozhin)

 

A: We are still in the process of determining which antioxidants will be used for preservation, so we have yet to know the full logistics of when and how they will be incorporated into the supply chain. We imagine that the antioxidants will be either sold to the farmers in packages or the farmers will be taught how to make those antioxidants treatment themselves (depending on the antioxidants chosen as preservatives).

 

 

• How will the optimal antioxidants be integrated into the engineering team’s product? (Sammy) 

 

A: The antioxidants will be included in the drying and preserving process, though we are not sure exactly how until we discover more through our experiments. We are still determining if the antioxidants will be put on the copra before or after drying, and if they will be included as a part of our product, or if they will be sold separately.

 

 

• How will you be able to scale this effectively? (Ami)

 

A: By improving one niche/aspect of the drying process and building a better drying solution with affordable materials, accessibility will be easier. We also have connections in the Philippines who could help with distribution. 

 

 

• How likely is it that farmers will take to this kind of solution? (Jake)

 

A: This is something that we still need to figure out. Given that our project is in early stages, and that we have not been able to conduct field work, it has been rather difficult to gauge interest in our ideas. 

 

 

• Why are we choosing the specific antioxidants we are using?  (Michelle)

 

A: All the specific antioxidants  we are using are all cost effective so it will not be another hardship on the farmers. Also all of these antioxidants do not affect the taste of the copra or the texture and they are accessible. 

 

Class 4: 9/15/2020

 

Part 1: Ethical Decision-Making

 

In a certain region of East Africa, the growth of ~35% of the children is stunted due to poor nutrition. Traditionally, maize and bananas are the items most commonly made into a gruel and fed to infants beginning at ~2 months of age. The gruel is integrated into a child’s diet to complement breastfeeding until they are ~24 months of age. Mothers in the area firmly believe that the gruel is highly beneficial for their children, but scientific research has shown that it does not provide some key nutrients. HIV/AIDS is very prevalent in this region. The World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding until an infant is six months of age, but the longer a child nurses when the mother is HIV+, the greater the chance that the virus will be transmitted to the child. You have received a grant to establish a women’s cooperative in this region. The donor’s intent is to simultaneously improve the nutritional status of children and improve the livelihoods of rural households. The grant for the women’s cooperative has sufficient funds for the women’s group to process and market a nutritious, shelf-stable porridge made from a large mix of locally grown produce. The nutritious porridge is intended to wean children off of breast milk at about 6 months of age. 

 

Approximately 500 women from three contiguous sub-locations have indicated their interest in joining the cooperative, in hopes of improving their livelihoods. However, they are skeptical of the porridge and its use as an early weaning food. Cash crops as well as subsistence crops are grown in the area, including maize, sorghum, cassava, several varieties of legumes (dried beans), French beans, coffee, pineapple, bananas, pumpkins, tomatoes, carrots, kale, white (Irish) potatoes, and sweet potatoes. Pesticides are typically used in growing some of these crops and can result in adverse health implications for infants. How would you address the ethical health issues associated with prolonged breastfeeding in an area where there is a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS and few women are tested for the virus, very early introduction of supplemental foods to the diets of infants, and the possibility of pesticide residues in foods developed for infants and young children. 

 

What are your next specific steps to develop this cooperative? 

 

Case Study: 

Ethical: GIve children formula that might contain pesticides or have them drink breast milk that contains HIV.  

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue.

•  The growth of ~35% if the children is stunted due to poor nutrition
•  Maize and bananas are most commonly made into a gruel 
• These are fed to infants at the beginning of 2 months of age
• HIV/AIDS are prevalent in this area 
• The longer a child nurses with a mother with AIDS/HIV the greater the chance that it will be transmitted to the child 
• The mothers are skeptical of giving the children the gruel
• A donor provided money to build a cooperative.

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome 

•  Mothers (Primary)
•  Children (Primary)
•  Research team (Primary) 
•  Donors (Secondary)

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders 

•  Mothers: Decrease the chances of their child getting aids and receiving the proper amounts of nutrition. They can make money by  selling the crops they grow. 
•  Children: Want to live a healthier life. They need their basic needs to be met.  
•  Donors: They want to simultaneously improve the nutritional status of children and improve the livelihoods of rural households.
• Research Team: The research team aims to help the local community. Primarily by providing an alternative to gruel which will be more nutritious for children whose growth may be stunted. They want to build up their own credibility. 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using basic ethical core values as guide 

Approaches 

• Potential solution 1: Continue on with the Cooperative (Create our own porridge, which we will grow using local crops and then distribute)
  • Ethical Principle or code
    • Justice: We want to be able to create a product that is fair and safe for the children.
    • Beneficence: We want to help the children be as healthy as possible
  • Pros 
    • Children will not be exposed to HIV/AIDS  
    • Children will be able to receive the proper amount of nutrition 
    • Wider variety of food 
  • Cons 
    •  Children may be exposed to pesticides 
    •  Could lead to a decline a child’s health  
    •  Children may not like it because it might not taste well 
• Potential solution 2: Continue to feeding the children gruel
  • Ethical Principle or code
    •  Nonmaleficence: we will be minimizing harm to the children by not possibly feeding them pesticides
  • Pros 
    • No risk of pesticides 
    •  Children are already accustomed to the gruel
    •   The mothers would already be accepting of it because they have been feeding it already 
  • Cons 
    • Children would not be receiving the proper amount of nutrition   
    •  Only a few varieties (maize and bananas) 
    •  Further research will be needed, which can be costly
• Potential solution 3: Provide education to the community members about HIV/AIDS
  • Safe Sex Education
  • Condom handouts
  • How this disease affects their children
  • Targeting males within the community
  • Partner with Ministry of Health to accomplish this
    • Potentially help subsidize condom sales

 

• • Ethical Principle or code
    •  Justice: We are providing these educational resources to everyone in the community, in order to treat everyone equally and possibly provide for a reduction in the transmission of HIV/AIDS
    • Beneficence: We will be maximizing health benefits to the community by targeting the HIV/AIDS epidemic in order to address the root of the problem 
  • Pros 
    • It will decrease the amount of people with HIV/AIDS.  
    • The babies will be able to ingest the mother’s breast milk safely
    •  It will decrease the amount of deaths and number of illnesses within the communities.
    • Eliminating the need to find a supplement because the mother’s can provide their breast milk
  • Cons 
    • We would need to find more funding   
    • The community may not be accepting of it 
    • Time: It will take a lot of time to go around the community and to teach people about how they can decrease it but will it take so long that it may end up hurting the community more in the shorter term

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection. 

1. https://academic.oup.com/her/article/30/3/388/559779
2. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/10/world/africa/10aidscondom.html
3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6380312/

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class. 

The best course of action would be potential solution 1. The 3rd solution does not seem feasible at this time because it would require too much time to find funding. It will take too much time it may cause more problems for the children than positive outcomes. The second solution would also do more harm than good because children would not be receiving the proper nutrition amount. Although with the first solution there are cons such as possible ingestion of pesticides we can lower the chances of it by washing the fruit properly and the children will be obtaining the proper amount of nutrition.  

Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the impact of your proposed solution on the venture’s technology, economic, social and environmental aspects.

Environmental aspects is the ground or soil they will be using will become more rich because it is receiving proper nutrition. Economic there may be more money coming in because the women are able to sell the extra fruits/vegetables they are growing. Socially the women will be able to interact with one another and hopefully grow a community.

 

Part 2: 

Grassroots Diplomacy Six months after launch, the efforts of the women working in the cooperative you established are paying off, and business is thriving. The women work for about nine hours every day and earn KES 300 (about $3). Besides the wages earned, they have the opportunity to sell the produce grown on their small farms to the cooperative. This transaction is done at the prevailing market rate and helps the women make a little money on the side. The women like this arrangement because it saves them a trip (time + money) to the village market to sell their produce. The women enjoy working with each other and are happy with the cooperative; they have a strong sense of community and identity. However, there is one big problem. When a woman brings her hard earned money home, she has no choice but to turn it over to her husband, father, or brothers. Rather than using the money to support their families, the men waste it on alcohol and frivolous things. Though the cooperative is thriving, it is not achieving the twin social outcomes of improving the nutritional status of children and the livelihoods of rural households. 

 

As the entrepreneur who helped establish the cooperative, you are pained about the situation. Though you are loved and respected by the entire community, you do not have a direct say in the cooperative’s functioning. You are one of the seven members of the leadership committee that oversees all operations. The committee is elected on an annual basis and you have six months left on the committee, after which you will practically leave the cooperative completely. The other six members of this committee are local women who understand the problems and want things to change. They are not necessarily opposed to the men taking away their money but are upset that their hard-earned money is not used to feed their children. They are convinced that nothing can be done about it because that’s just the way it works in their community. What is your strategy to get the cooperative back on track to meet the twin social outcomes for the cooperative on a sustainable basis? 

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible 

• Women work for 9 hours a day and make KES 300 ($3).
• The women have the opportunity to sell the product to make an additional income on the side.
• When the women come home from work they give the money to the man of the household (husband, father, brother)
• The men of the household spend the money on alcohol or frivolous items and not to support their families. 
• The women are upset that the men are not using the money for the families. 

 

Step 2: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome 

 

Problem:  When a woman brings her hard earned money home, she has no choice but to turn it over to her husband, father, or brothers. The men in the household use the money on alcohol or frivolous items instead of using it to support their families. 

 

• Mothers (Primary)
• Fathers (Primary)
• Entrepreneur of the cooperative 

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the stakeholders. 

•  Mothers
  • Personal: They want their children to be safe and nutritious and also collect their wages. 
  • Professional: They can make money for selling the produce they grow. 
• Men of the household
  •  Personal:
  • Professional: 
•  Entrepreneur of the cooperative 
  • Personal: The research team aims to help the local community. Primarily by providing an alternative to gruel which will be more nutritious for children whose growth may be stunted. 
  • Professional: They want to build up their own credibility.

 

Step 4: Formulate (atleast three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture. 

• Potential Solution : Cooperative creates saving accounts for the women 
  • How does it solve the problem? 
    • Pros 
      • The women will have money available to spend
      • The men won’t be able to take all of the money because some of it is with the cooperative 
      • The men will still be able to buy their alcohol 
    • Cons 
      • The men will still be able to take the money or even get mad at the women 
      • The women will have to travel to retrieve their own money
      • The cooperative will need to find funding somehow
  • How does it save face of those involved? 
    • it save face for the women because they won’t have to give their money to the male figures. So they won’t have to feel guilty or lie to them. It saves face for the men because it doesn’t question their masculinity because the women don’t have money to give them.
  • Implications on relationships 
    • Short-term  
      • Women will trust the cooperative more
      • Women will gain a little bit more power within the relationship
      • The family will have more funds to spend on groceries
    • Long-term 
      • Men might be against the cooperative because they feel like their manhood is being threatened
      • The cooperative will have a stronger relationship with the women in the community
      • Men’s health might be healthier because they will not be consuming alcohol
  • Implications on the venture 
    • Short-term 
      • They will gain more connections within the community
      • The women will be more trusting of the volunteers
    • Long-term 
      • The cooperative will begin to expand
      • More and more residents will be using the resources of the cooperative

 

Step 7: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution.

• First the cooperative may need to form connection with the banks in the community
• Next, the cooperative will ask each women if they want to set up a savings account
• For the women who do want a savings account the cooperative will help them set it up
• The cooperative will teach the women how to deposit and withdraw money

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible

• Jack is an American student who is working on a social venture at a youth center in Kenya. 
• On a Saturday evening, kids are receiving gifts from an international donor organization 
• Jack was picked to help with the passing out of the gifts
• There were four children who did not receive gifts and instead they received black hats 

Step 2: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

1. Kids
2. Staff at the center / the youth center
3. Jack

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the stakeholders.

1. There are no professional motivations/ personal motivation → wanting to receive a gift
2. They are more motivated to earn some sort of income/ personal motivation → give back to the kids and community 
3. Wants to save face and establish future relationships with kids and staff, wants to take care of kids
   1. Has to save face with both groups: he can’t just flat out tell the kids that the staff didn’t get them enough gifts and he can’t just get them a gift without hurting his relationship with the staff members

 

Step 4: Formulate (atleast three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture.

1. Potential Solution: Make a game out the hats
   1.  Pros
      • The kids are happier because their gift means something after all
      • The staff is happy because they do not have to get involved and they can take credit for the hats
   2. Cons
      • It is still unfair because the hats are not as good as the gifts
      • Takes up time for Jack and the staff members to think up of a game 
      • Making the hats specific can make the other kids feel worse about their gifts
   3. How does it save face of those involved?
      • It makes Jack and the staff look better because the four kids may be satisfied with their gifts
      • The kids who receive the black hat won’t feel as bad or left out 
      • Jack and the staff also no longer look like they forgot gifts
   4. Implications on relationships
      •  Short-term
        • Kids won’t be upset at Jack/staff
        • Jack can now build trust in his relationships with both the kids and the staff
      • Long-term
        • Kids will feel more comfortable talking to Jack and the staff because they see the effort they are putting into them

 

1. Potential Solution: Buy other gifts for the kids
   1. Pros
      • Kids feel special because they got gifts
   2. Cons
      • Jack have to spend their own money on gifts 
      • Doesn’t solve the problem because the kids are still being left out because Jack are buying the gifts after they realized their mistake
      • Staff won’t agree because Jack is going over their heads to buy gifts
   3. How does it save face of those involved?
      • Jack/staff will not feel as guilty because the gifts receive the gift 
   4. Implications on relationships
      •  Short-term
        • Kids are happy to receive gifts and like Jack more
        • Staff are upset
      • Long-term
        • The kids may not be comfortable with Jack because he forgot about their gifts last minute 
        • Staff will not trust Jack for future events 
2. Potential Solution: Buy himself and the entire staff the same black hats
   1. Pros
      • Makes the kids who received the hats feel better about their gift
      • Builds a sense of comradery (stronger relationship) between the kids, the staff and Jack
      • The staff members probably wouldn’t mind getting a free hat
   2. Cons
      • Jack has to spend money 
      • Kids who don’t have hats may feel left out 
      • The kids who actually receive the black will be more upset because other kids will look down at them because their being coddled (being a teacher’s pet) 
   3. How does it save face of those involved?
      • Saves face for Jack, it makes the kids feel less bad
      • Saves face for the staff since they are also participating
      • The kids may (or may not) feel less embarrassed about receiving their hat
   4. Implications on relationships
      • Short-term
        • Kids will be less upset about not receive gifts 
        • Staff would be happy and more accepting of him
      • Long-term
        • Jack would have a better connection with those kids who do receive the black hats (common ground)

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection

• Peers- asking help from other volunteers at the center on how to approach the situation 
• Inner reflection – Previous experiences with children or siblings
• One-on-one conversations with staff members to ask what they would do
• Talk to the children, inquire about how they feel/how they can feel better

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that solves the problem, saves face and has the best short- term and long-term implications for your relationship and venture. Explain reasoning and discuss your solution vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in class.

The best course of action would be solution 1 which is making the hats of games. This allows Jack to save face because the kids will still be able to receive their gifts that day as opposed to Jack having to go out and buy gifts. It also saves money for because he wouldn’t have to buy more hats for himself and the staff. However a problem that may arise is that the other kids may feel neglected because the black hats are common bond that Jack and the staff share with certain children. This may make the other children feel bad.

The short term implications

• allows the kid who received the black hats not feel left out
• They would also feel special because Jack and the kids have share a secret bond that the other kids don’t have
• Other kids might get jealous

The long term implications

• The kids that had the hat may feel more comfortable with Jack and will have a closer relationship
• The kids that received a black hat will have a closer bond with one another

Step 7: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution.

• Jack would first think up of a game for the black hats
• Jack would Inform the staff members of the game
• The staff would then approve of the game
• Jack would then round up the kids with black hats and inform them of the game
• Jack and the kids would then play the game

 

Ethical Issue:

 

Don’t know if the citizens Lesotho are being fairly compensated/benefiting from the research

 

1: The facts

 

Researchers are going into Lesotho for two weeks (a team of 10) to research the life cycle and characteristics of a pathogen found in this region’s water. In order to do this, they need the community’s assistance to show them water sources as well as methods of storing water. The end goal is publication, profiling of the pathogen, and development of additives to counteract the pathogen.

 

2: The Stakeholders

1. Academic University
2. You (research team)
3. People of Lesotho
4. Academic partnerships/ Funders

 

3: Motivations of the Stakeholders

1. Academic University: They want recognition for their research (promote their personal brand). They might also want to attract prospective students. 
2. You (research team): To gain recognition from your field of work and a publication. Begin a development of chemical additives to make the water safe to drink. It could also be more professional because you might be bound to do the research because of the company you work with.
3. People of Lesotho: They would want to help the researchers with the expectation that the researchers would help educate them about safe drinking water. Maybe they would want to build partnerships with people from a different country/organization.However, there might be a problem with this because they might give you information to satisfy you.
4. Academic partnerships/Funders: To be apart of a publication and as a result of that gain more money which they can use to fund more projects, our findings will add to a wider body of knowledge on the pathogen and their reputation

 

4: Potential Approaches (numbered for corresponding solutions)

1. Duty-Based Thinking
   1. It only seems right to compensate the participants because we are using their knowledge for research purposes 
2. Virtue Based 
   1. Because the citizens of Lesotho are being generous enough to help researchers 

 

1. Potential Solution 1: Provide sufficient financial compensation to community members who provide critical assistance and knowledge to the project 
   1. Pros
      1. Receiving financial assistance if they missed normal work to help the project 
      2. Incentive enthusiastic participation (easier to convince someone to participate)
      3. If we pay people, they are more likely to share more water sources 
   2. Cons
      1. Takes away from the funding of the project that could be used for something else 
      2. Providing too much or too little financial compensation might seem rude or undermining 
      3. May have too many volunteers which could create saturation of information 
2. Potential Solution  2: Provide educational compensation (education around the current status of their drinking water and its impact on their health, along with sharing our future findings) to community members who provide critical assistance and knowledge to the project 
   1. Pros
      1. Will help educate the community members about the safety of drinking water in their community 
      2. Those members can educate others about the safety of drinking water to spread awareness 
      3. Creates more empowerment and inclusion in the project 
   2. Cons
      1. Community may already know the water is unsafe and will feel that the researchers believe they are uneducated 
      2. Information on safe drinking water may not be perceived as correct based on cultural beliefs and level of science knowledge 
      3. May create panic as community members feel that they have no sources of safe drinking water and cause unrest 
3. Potential Solution  3: We don’t compensate them but distribute the additive that is developed to the community 
   1. Pros
      1. There is no unfairness in financial compensation to the participants 
      2. We are still giving back to the community but not to the participants directly  
      3. Save money
   2. Cons
      1. The willing participants do not directly benefit from our use of their time or labor
      2. If we do not succeed, then there is no benefit to anybody
      3. People are unwilling to participate because they are not being compensated

Possible solutions:

1. Publishing the research results in an open source journal 
2. Talking to the leaders of communities and establishing some sort of small incentives for the community members 

5. Seek Additional assistance

1. IRB approving 
   1. This may be helpful in selecting which participants you will use in the study
2. Peers
   1. Maybe there have been other researchers who have done a study at Lesotho that may provide insight into the culture
3. Inner Reflection
   1. As a researcher, do you ethically feel okay with what you are doing ‘

6. Select the best course of action

1. Solution 2 is the best course of action because it gives the citizens of Lesotho with something more substantial. If we were to give them money they would eventually use it all so it is only short term. If we were able to educate them they would be able to keep the information for longer and even pass it on which is more long term than money. Also if we didn’t compensate them we would be able to use the funding elsewhere.

7. Implications 

1. Economic –> because we are paying participants they will have money that they may be able to spend in their community that they may not have. This then means there is more money circulating than there was previously.
   1. this research if produces results would bring more attention the area of Lesotho. This could potentially increase tourist attractions.
2. Social –> allows for the citizens to engage with other members outside of their community