Innovation in developing countries: Why Global Problems Need local Problem framing.

Innovation has become a buzzword that can mean so many things; it has lost its meaning. However, innovation as its core means "to solve a problem." A concept that is lost in favor of Chindōgu products, or worse, items with no innovation who are advertised as "new and improved." "New and Improved Nintendo Switch G2", "New and Improved elevator design," and, of course, cars that have had innovation as part of their tagline since the 1960s, just to name a few.

In the sea of buzzwords, we need to go back to the original definition and solve real users' problems. Human emotion and experience are similar all across the world. However, individual needs are just that individual. How we react to these varies drastically depending on gender, race, ethnicity, social class, and country of origin, just to name a few. The video above shows one of the most common reasons innovation goes wrong: the technology needed to power the car is not available. The above example is the most obvious as we can see the problem, but there are many unseen barriers to problem-solving.

Take climate change, plastic use in particular. Recycling comes naturally to the poorest sections of all populations. There is no reason to buy Tupperware when you can reuse an "I can't believe it's not Butter" container. Similarly, there are recycling centers in many developing nations where users paid to bring in PET, cardboard, glass, and plastic. Providing a source of income that forces families to recycle not only their items but also search for more in their neighborhoods and High Streets. Contrastingly, the upper class who is traditionally more educated, and has the privilege of buying eco-friendly goods. Thus they take care of the environment because they understand the consequences, want to be part of a global movement, and want to have a better quality of life. Hence, though the act may be the same, the motivation is different. One is driven by income while the other by consequence and belonging. Thus, when we think about global problems, we must think about how the problem and solution affect individual users. As well as, and arguably more importantly, how other areas of their lives are affected by the solution proposed.

Similarly, CO2 emissions affect the Ozone worldwide; however, in Mexico City, our air quality ranges from moderate to toxic. As a solution, there are city-imposed rules that prohibit some cars from driving particular days of the week. The city is also known for its terrible traffic, but car ownership has long been a symbol of status and upward mobility. Hence, we have a problem with a culture that loves car ownership and a city that can't physically take any more cars. The solution is pretty apparent: fewer cars equal less traffic and better air quality. Nevertheless, convincing the rising middle class that bike-ownership and ride sharing are better and more efficient, is going to take a drastic change in discourse, (that we long inherited from our neighbors to the north.) Thus, innovation should focus on how to challenge traditional status symbols, and question how to nurture belonging within transportation and mobility.

Everything is interconnected; one problem is probably causing ten others. Therefore, when we think about global problems, we must center them around our users and focus the problem on the social, economic, and cultural structures that it affects. Only when the problem is framed locally will the solution be efficient.