29/05/2009

This is an idea I've sorta stolen from Warren Ellis. You see, once upon a time he wrote about an organization called Global Frequency that solved urgent problems that threatened the very existence of life as we know it.That sort of problem solving capability isn't what I'm interested in, although it might be needed in the future. You never know, after all.

But what I was thinking was more of a a think-tank that works around the clock, different experts exchanging places as people sign on and off. But I'm not talking about experts in the normal sense either. Depending on the situations, problems, resources at hand at the various locations, the political climate, and so on, it'd take a lot of manpower to get it operational, and from there getting it efficient might not even be possible. The administration alone would probably be a nightmare.But if it was possible to get it going, starting out with, for example: working out a sustainable method to reduce starvation in a certain region in Africa.First you need to look at the general state of the country, what does the infrastructure look like? How stable is the country? It'd be a bad idea to start a project in a country that at any moment could erupt into civil war, or other types of conflicts for that matter.The food production might be seized by militant groups in the name of their cause, so that means there would also be a need for some form of security.But all of this is after the organization has been formed.Considering that my thought is to keep it mainly a humanitarian organization, the main problem as I see it is funding. Who do you work for that wants to pay you for creating such things as running water, simple and environmentally friendly techniques for producing electricity in places where there are none?Then UN comes to mind. That's pretty much it actually. I can see the EU being interested in hiring this type of organization, but mainly for developing nations wanting to become a part of it.We'd also have to develop alternative methods for existing techniques that'd be of use, thanks to the patents.

But what about the administration of it then? Would it be better to have supervisors out controlling the various projects with local personnel? Teams doing the projects in part and gradually phasing in local talent? Coordinators supervising various projects in a region, or even inside a country?Which would be best? To finish the project yourself and then hand it over to the locals, or let them do it themselves? What would be most efficient, most economic, and would it more or less of a difference depending on which you chose?Maybe it'd be better to work out scenarios of different types in advance and then try to think of a solution? Which leads to another question: should the problems we as a group work on be the problems of today only? Or should we include the ones of tomorrow?Need to think more about this. Ideas, suggestions, etc. would be most welcome. Even if it might not be possible to create such a group, we could at least develop a concept. Hopefully it might inspire and aid others with similar goals.Leading by theoretical example, you might say.I'll think it over some more, and I hope you do too. If you think of something write it down, I definitely will.