Blog

Pushing the 'go' button (to borrow Francisco's brilliant phrasing), is much harder than it sounds.  Some days, I'm convinced that I misplaced mine, lent it to someone who forgot to return it, or never had it at all.  Regardless, I think about what makes people go, hoping to divine the ingredients of the secret sauce.  What I've realized recently (and what Francisco pointed out in his post), is that 'going' is part conscious choice, part inspired possession.  It's about being completely consumed by an idea to the point where your doubts about how, what, when, and who (Me?  No, but maybe you.) completely melt away, if only for a blissful moment.  Then comes the inspired decision-will you or won't you?

I've also noted that it helps to watch the creative process unfold in others.  To that end, I'd like to share the story of Big Red MicroCapital.  BRM MicroCapital is a "student-run organization that spurs microenterprise development by assisting self-employed individuals to reach their business goals."  Several Johnson School students, (now newly-minted alums) spent more than a year bringing this concept to life.  The team is comprised of Andrea Findley (Director of Client Support Services), Taryn Goodman (Director of Community Partnerships), Ryan Kelley (Director of Finance), Kandea Mosley (Director of Marketing), and Mike Pezone (Director of Operations).

Thanks to their efforts, the Johnson School community, and hopefully, the citizens of Tompkins County, will be better for it.  I had the opportunity to sit down with Taryn, who graciously offered to speak on behalf of the group.  Introducing BRM MicroCapital...

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:  
What does BRM MicroCapital do exactly?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital: 
We have a business coaching program and offer financial support to low income entrepreneurs in Tompkins County.  (Low income describes people who earn less than 80% of median income in a county according to HUD data.)  The coach's job during a typical four-month engagement is to understand what the entrepreneur wants to do and help him/her create a process for achieving their goals.

In terms of financial support, we take on what a traditional bank would call "risky loans".  Loans are typically small ($300-$1500) and short-term.  We also require borrowers to enroll in the coaching program so we can help them reach repayment status.  Although our interest rates are slightly higher than bank rates, we can adjust them when it makes sense to do so,  for example, if a community recommendation is made.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:  
How was BRM MicroCapital founded?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
BRM MicroCapital was conceived 3-5 years ago by students who wanted to launch an   international microfinance fund.  Given the difficulty of creating an international program, someone had the idea to do something local.  Last year Jeff Fuchs 
(JGSM '08) revitalized the idea, started creating a strategy around it, and began meeting with local community members.  He discovered that there was a need to help people who couldn't be served by the normal banking system.  As a result, he recruited a few other students to join the team.  They did months of research to understand what other programs existed, what worked, and what didn't.  Eventually, they were referred to theAlternatives Federal Credit Union (AFCU), now a BRM partner.  It's great because we benefit from the AFCU's expertise with lending and the community; it's one of the premier credit unions in the nation.  Additionally, AFCU assists us by processing our clients' loans and matches our funds.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:  
Don't these types of services already exist in Tompkins County?  How does BRM fill an unmet need in the community?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
We didn't actually know what the need was when we started.  It was hard to tap into, but we partnered with the Greater Ithaca Activities Center, the Women's Opportunity Center, Tompkins County Work Force, and several community leaders to learn the landscape.  We met great people with great ideas.  Ithaca actually has a very entrepreneurial feel to it.  People have the desire to create but may not have the financial ability or the background to do so.  They also have families, jobs, and other daily requirements that don't allow them to put the time and energy into really figuring things out.  We wanted to help those people.

Also, it's assumed that people who don't get loans don't deserve them.  Clearly, this is a miscalculation and a misrepresentation.  Sometimes people just need another pathway, an opportunity to  flourish.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:
How did you find your clients?  What types of businesses do your clients have?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
People came through the AFCU website but we found others through the research that we did. We cultivated relationships with people who could help us understand what was going on in the community.  Our plan is to continue to reach out through community organizations. 

In terms of the businesses, we have a woman who does transcription, someone who does composting and landscaping for private homes, a clothing store owner, a housekeeper/personal assistant, and a small scale farmer.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:
What have been your major accomplishments?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
Our biggest accomplishment has been getting the program running, because we had no idea what it would look like when we started.  Now we have 12 coaches who are rising 2^nd year MBA students and 5 entrepreneurs in the program.  We have also elected the new board, so we know the organization will be around next year.  It's a great feeling and it's kind of unbelievable to see.  We actually got an email from an Executive Director at United Way who's excited about the program, and wants to connect us to someone who's trying to create a micro-loan program in Wisconsin.  We told them that we were still in the pilot phase, but it's great to know that there's interest in what we're doing, and that our efforts could extend beyond Ithaca.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net: 
Your biggest challenges?

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
We had really difficult internal conversations about program requirements.  What should the income cut-off be? Should we require six months of revenue because we're not equipped to handle start-ups?  It was challenging because we couldn't foresee how these decisions would impact our program.  We were also concerned about lack of interest in it, so we wanted to target the right people.  But initially we didn't know who the right people were.

Tayo Akinyemi, Nextbillion.net:
What is the strategic outlook for BRM?  What do you hope to see in the future? 

Taryn Goodman, BRM MicroCapital:
Our strategic vision is to become the premier, student-run microenterprise fund.  We want to share our vision with other business schools and create a model that others can replicate.  Many schools belong to communities like ours and have students with similar passions.  It would be great to share our vision with them. 

There you have it.  To read more about BRM, please visit the profile at the Center for Sustainable Global Enterprise.

SKS Microfinance, GreenMango, PharmaSecure, Mobile Metrix and One Acre Fund may sound like familiar names to NextBillion readers and those that follow the "goings on" in this base of the pyramid space. What they all have in common (besides having been profiled in NextBillion at some point), is strong and commited leaders that listened to their moment of obligation and at one point just decided to take a step forward and push the "Go Button".   

Echoing Green has supported the leaders of the organizations mentioned above and has also done worked with many more that been bold enough to find and push their own Go Buttons to drive positive social change. Each year, after a process of open applications a very competitive process, a group of Fellows is selected, who receive support in the form of grants, networking, advice, mentoring and so forth, aimed at giving these entrepreneurs a platform to accelerate their growth and increase the viability of their ventures. Echoing Green Fellows are entrepreneurs, the leaders behind innovative ideas; the fellowship is a recognition to their drive and commitment, as well as to the relevance and innovativeness of their ventures.  

2009 Fellows were announced just a few hours ago and I was happy to find a familiar face from the BoP space in the list: David del Ser Bartolomé. I met David a few months back. We've become good friends and I have been able to work with him in Colombia while he launches his venture Frogtek. I'm happy for his accomplishment and look forward to seeing where this takes him and his venture.

Of the 2009 cohort, David's was probably the project most in line with the development-through-enterprise concept, but all of the new fellows have fascinating and inspiring ideas. I encourage you to take a look at the full list, learn more about the program, watch the video below and ultimately apply if you have what it takes.    

NextBillion announces a unique opportunity for our community to participate in a global online conference called “The Role of the Private Sector in Poverty Alleviation at the Base of the Pyramid”.  The event is sponsored and organized by The Speaker’s Corner – a series of online conferences discussing issues around microenterprise and microfinance – and will be hosted by NextBillion ally Monica Touesnard, of Cornell University's Center for Sustainable Global Enterprise.  As the Managing Director of the Base of the Pyramid Learning Lab, Monica will undoubtedly bring a unique perspective to bear over the three-day online event.

The Speaker's Corner kicks off on Tuesday, June 23 and runs through Thursday, June 25.  Topics for the 3 day event will include: Roles for Private Sector Entities; Technologies for Enterprise Development; and Cultural, Political, and Geographic Limitations.

According to microLINKS, which hosts Speaker's Corners:

As the world’s population continues to increase, so do the environmental and social strains on our global system.  Despite technological advances, the number of people living in the base of the economic pyramid are increasing.  Multilateral and non-profit organizations have traditionally been viewed as the entities best suited to respond to and address these problems.  Recently, however, companies are beginning to realize that there is an opportunity to create new business enterprises while simultaneously trying to solve these environmental and humanitarian problems.  As a result, companies are experimenting with new business models in low-income communities using both old and new technologies.  Locally-embedded entrepreneurs are also trying to respond to local needs through new business ventures.  However, it is yet to be determined which models will prove to be successful.

The accessibility of this event makes it a truly unique opportunity.  We encourage our readers to participate and join the discussion.

For more information and to sign up for the event, please click here.

More about Speaker’s Corner: guided by leading experts on a topic, Speaker's Corners bring together professionals from across the world to share and discuss resources, ideas, and opinions, and to suggest and discuss new approaches to improve program and activity impacts.

It's nice to be back home in Washington, catching up with friends and enjoying the spring weather after quite some time away. After a field trip to Brazil I took off again, this time thanks to an opportunity to visit Spain and Peru. This modest allowed me to take the pulse at the base of the pyramid movement in the Spanish speaking world. Following are some notes and afterthoughts of the trip.

First stop was Madrid, where I participated in a Future Trends Forum organized by the Bankinter Foundation for Innovation. Bankinter is one of Spain's largest financial institutions, having won several international awards over the years thanks to their innovations in products, services and the use of novel technologies. The Foundation is part of their CSR agenda; through it, the bank creates spaces for conversation among experts in emerging global trends, which are intended to inform the innovation agenda within the Spanish government and the private sector as a whole.

Two FTF take place every year, and topics are chosen from relevant and current trends that are suggested by members of the forum themselves. Previous venues themes include topics such as biotechnology, mobile technologies and the role of emerging economies in the 21st century; this year's summer Forum was titled "Reinventing Support for Sustainable Development" and revolved around the challeng and opportunities in supporting entrepreneurial approaches to tackle poverty and environmental degradation.

Many NextBillion friends and allies paticipated, including Maria Blair from Rockefeller Foundation, Jocelyn Wyatt from IDEO, Chris West from Shell Foundation, Ted London from the University of Michigan and James Koch from Santa Clara Univeristy and the Global Social Benefit Incubator. It was also interesting to meet new people with very interesting insights and contributions to the BoP conversation, like Nishant Lalwani from Monitor Inclusive Markets, Andrew Wolk from Root Cause, Maria Wells from Ashoka and Mari Nuraishi from Gobal Giving.

Rather than a discussion about approaches and nuances in the support of social entrepreneurs, the conversation shifted, for the most part, towards tools and innovations that encourage greater collaboration and coordination among the organizations in this space. A lot was said about innovations that could be applied to sector so that knowledge sharing and management becomes more efficient, so that approaches known to work to address various challenges get to spread more rapidly. At one point, Ms. Blair suggested this space "needs more scalers and less solvers", meaning that instead of more water purification technologies (for example), there is a need for more entrepreneurs and distribution systems that help existing ones to scale out. Her characterization -that of "scalers" and "solvers"- was a sticky one and kept being brought up throughout the whole event.

The specifics of the discussion and its conclusion will be turned into a paper that will become available here in NextBillion, as will the video recordings of the talks during the conference. My general feeling after visiting Spain is one of hope and enthusiasm, not only because of the growing interest I saw in this idea amongst the Spanish business community (mainly during the FTF) but also in the business schools of Madrid, whic are growingly international but largely inhabited by Latin American students. That was my feeling after having the chance to meet some of the students at IESE in Barcelona, who are very interested in this space and pushing for specific social enterprise courses to be offered in their curricula. Their Net Impact chapter is trmendously active and their second Doing Good and Doing Well conference is already scheduled to take place next February with close to 500 atendees.

I met with Max Oliva, who leads the area of corporate responsibility at Madrid's Instituto de Empresa and with whom my colleague Rob Katz has done several workshops on base of the pyramid for new MBA students in the past. I would argue that these schools, together with TU Delft in the Netherlands and perhaps the Said School of Business at Oxford, are leading the way in making social enterprise and "the next billion" a mainstream theme in business education. I wonder if there's an equivalent to the Beyond Gray Pinstripes report for Europe... I'll look into it.

So after a few days with "base de la pirámide" enthusiasts in Spain I flew to Lima and took part in an interesting discussion on the challenges and opportunities for this work in Latin America. I left the meeting with mixed feelings. On the one hand, the language and idea behind development through enterprise seems to be gaining ground, especially among the business community in the region. The work done by groups like the SNV-WBCSD Inclusive Business Alliance and new initiatives like IDB's Opportunitites for the Majority can take credit for what seems to be a change of paradigm among the business community, just like the efforts of organizations like Ashoka aimed at convening different actors and stakeholders to advance the concept and practice of social business in the region.

The flipside to this positive trend is just a feeling I have, an intuition without much empirical backup but important nonetheless. In short, I feel Latin American needs a much stronger sense of urgency around this work, specifically in changing the business paradigm among those living at the base of the pyramid. There are a couple of reasons why I think this is the case. First, I would argue that Latin America is a region with a particularly strong tendency to fall into the hands of populist governments that do a great job creating distorsion around the idea of markets and sweeping off whatever remains of the so called enabling environment for business. That discourse has the perfect background image in Latin America: The most unequal continent on earth; huge mansions back and beautiful buildings back to back with massive slums in cities like Rio de Janeiro and even Bogota. What happens when that kind of rethoric takes hold is now most in countries like Venezuela, where development efforts are more than urgent but development through enterprise (or, pretty much anything through enterprise) is no longer viable.

Again, these portraits send signals that businesses are vehicles only useful at making the wealthy even wealthier. The business community has taken note of the reivindication that is needed in such circumstances and seems to be taking an important step in exploring inclusive business as a viable strategy, thus moving away from transition concepts like CSR. However, this movement needs a lot more strength and urgency not only from the business community but from society as a whole to make inclusion a real and sincere premise of development in the region. We need a much more creative and bold vision for the region, clearly articulating the role of enterprise and markets in creating an environment where choice is not an exclusive and unaffordable commodity but an assetwidely available.

A long term vision of change requires that we incubate a new generation of inclusive business leaders, not only at the region's business schools but also in the rural areas and slums of Peru, Colombia, Brazil, etc. This moment in time is key to build a smarter and more complex vision of what business is and what it is not, and the role different segments of society can take in it to fulfill their most basic needs. We need to do so creating spaces where collaboration between businesses and the BoP takes place and new business models are conceived, and new BoP entrepreneurs come to surface.

From my visits to both Spain and Peru I gather that the "political will" from the business community is there, and resources ready to be allocated to give inclusive business a serious try. Now we need the buy in from those we seek to include or, put another way, to come up with ways in which this concept also gains ground in those communities.

But outreach and advertising as usual will not suffice to shift the enterprise vs. poverty and inclusion paradigm among the poor. Collaboration and co-creation need to start taking place and this is where smart investments and innovative resource allocations will be paramount.

I'll go into more detail about what these "spaces" could look like in a future post, perhaps. This is already a long one and I thank you for your time if you've read this far.

The French dairy company Danone and the Grameen Group signed a joint venture in 2006 whereby a social business was created with an initial capital of $1 million. The business would manufacture and distribute fortified dairy products in Bangladesh without incurring losses and maximizing the benefits of the clients served. What are these benefits? According to Danone's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Franck Riboud the benefit is "To bring health through food to the largest number of people in Bangladesh" (Financial Express, 2006).

The initial factory was set up in Bogra, 230 kilometers north of Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. The business plan targets the construction of 50 plants over the course of a 10 year period. Riboud confirmed on 29 April 2008 that Danone and Grameen would seek to build a second factory in 2009. The new facility would generate 3,000 tons of dairy products every year (France-Press, 2008).

I decided to travel to Bogra during my one week visit to Bangladesh. The Grameen Danone social business is a pioneer of what could become a default approach to doing business with the extreme poor in a new capitalist paradigm. At 3pm on Wednesday 4 March 2008 I was picked up from the Grameen Tower in Dhaka and headed off towards Bogra, a five hour car ride on Bangladesh's crowded roads. I spent the night in room 305 at the Naz Garden Hotel and met with the Grameen Danone managers the next morning.

Khandoker Mohammad Abu Sohel is the Sales & Distribution Manager at Grameen Danone Foods Ltd. I met Sohel at 9:30am on Thursday 5 March 2009. Sohel and his team - including Brice Lewillie and Remi Carpentier - showed how the way the social business is structured helps the extreme poor: from the ladies that deliver the 50 or 100 cups of yogurt in four hour shifts every day to the local farmer and his seven cows that provide the milk to keep the factory operating. I remain convinced the pilot I saw will become mainstream and help the bottom billion get on the ladder of prosperity, once and for all. What is the next step if the first pilot is successful?

In 2007 Danone proposed a mutual fund that would raise $135 million and pay an interest rate of 3% to 4% annually. The investment fund, named danone.communities, allows to finance the expansion of Danone's social business in Bangladesh as well as to start new social businesses that fight malnutrition and poverty mainly in emerging countries.

Asad Kamran Ghalib and Farhad Hossain of the University of Manchester review the case of Grameen-Danone Foods Limited. The authors review the benefits a social enterprise brings.

For the Manchester scholars the Danone-Grameen joint venture brought about a merger of the values of Grameen Bank and Danone Foods. The authors point out that "Social entrepreneurs do not call for the abolition of capitalism altogether; they do not suggest an entirely different business model to run markets; they do not advocate that philanthropy alone can run the world's social markets" (Ghalib et al, 2008). Capitalism is however understood as a tool to serve the poor, a tool to serve the bottom billion. The authors conclude that "This paper has seen how communities within the proximity of the Bogra facility, a fraction of the bottom billion, have benefited in a number of ways: health, nutrition, employment and greener environment, all with the possibilties of expanding the operations further afield" (Ghalib et al, 2008).

Incentives.  Results.  How to align incentives to achieve real results is one of my many takeaways from the past 2 days, which I spent at the incentive2innovate conference, a non-traditional gathering of big business types, entrepreneurs, policymakers and non-profits.  Interestingly, the event wasn’t focused on a particular set of outcomes (end poverty; clean up the environment, etc.); rather, it offered a set of non traditional tools that practitioners can deploy in order to get where they’re going more quickly and effectively.

I have to admit, it was a bit strange to have an “innovation conference” held at the United Nations.  This was reinforced by the first speaker, Amir Dossal (Executive Director of the UN Office of Partnerships), who admitted as much, saying “very seldom do we discuss innovation.”  Despite the UN’s standard operating procedures, Dossal quickly and easily connected with the audience, suggesting that the UN sees its mission as poverty alleviation, whereas the assembled group sees the same mission as wealth creation.  Semantics, yes, but important nonetheless – you need to have the right tone if anything’s going to change. 

I was surprised by the venue (which, coincidentally, is perhaps the only place in New York where you can smoke inside).  I was also surprised by the organizers and sponsors – what does the XPRIZE Foundation have in common with British Telecom, the John Templeton Foundation and the United Nations, anyway?  Turns out, they share a commitment to open collaboration, incentivized competition and as Matt Bross from BT said, to “accelerat[ing] the participation of the next billion people into the global economy.”  So far, so good.

Despite that statement, incentive2innovate was not a conference focused on market-based approaches to poverty alleviation; there were sessions on innovating with the commons, building innovative workplace cultures and more.  Still, a few key sessions stood out to me from a base of the pyramid perspective.

First, I was glad to hear from McKinsey and Co., whose Social Sector Office recently published a study entitled “And the Winner Is…” (PDF) examining the ways social sector organizations are using prizes and competitions to incentivize change.  I was intrigued when panelists Paul Jansen and Jonathan Bays suggested that “prizes pay for results, not attempts.”  According to their study – which I strongly recommend downloading for free – prizes are effective ways to focus a community, mobilize new talent, build skills and mobilize capital.  I thought of how TechnoServe’s business plan competitions work to stir up great ideas, and how Changemakers uses collaborative competitions to drive innovation in the social sector, and this all made sense.

Of course, paying only for results can be problematic.  We need to fail to learn, and I would hate to see the social sector move too far towards prize-based awards, since it acts as a strong disincentive to re-try after failing.  There’s a middle ground, which McKinsey understands, and I think this report is an important step in pushing the social sector to think creatively about how to incentivize innovative thinking.

I made a note to share the McKinsey report around the Acumen Fund office.  I’m also sharing links to various Innocentive competitions.  If you don’t know, Innocentive is a huge (160,000+ people) community of problem solvers that come together to crowd-source solutions to tough issues.  From a NextBillion.net perspective, Innocentive is actively exploring a number of developing country problems.  These include ideas around branchless banking, dry latrines, solar-powered routers and much more.  They’ve received funding from the Rockefeller Foundation to use this out-of-the-box thinking, and a quick look at their web site shows that they’re getting (and only paying for) results.

While the entire event was worthwhile, I had eagerly anticipated the event’s final panel, uninterestingly titled “Global Development & Partnerships.”  Despite the dry title, the content was fantastic.  First, kudos to moderator Michael Green, a DFID refugee who teamed up with Economist editor Matthew Bishop to co-author Philanthrocapitalism: How the Rich Can Save the World.  (Side note: Bishop moderated the panel on which the McKinsey prize report was presented, and pointedly asked about the role of prizes to spur market-based approaches to poverty alleviation – go Matthew.)

Green corralled a good group – Amir Dossal from the UN Office of Partnerships was back, along with Carol Armistead Grigsby from USAID’s Office of Development Partnerships.  Grigsby has been instrumental in pushing USAID to think outside the box – not only when it comes to partnering with business, but in using new tools and approaches to develop ideas.  Their recent Development 2.0 challenge – out of the Global Development Commons initiative – asked the USAID community to find innovative mobile technology applications for development problems.  The winners and runners up are all out of the typical USAID box – which is an important first step for the agency as it tries to capitalize on the momentum around innovative approaches to persistent problems.

Joining Dossal and Grigsby were two NextBillion allies and uber-innovators in their own right: Andreas Widmer and Charlie Brown.  Andreas is the co-founder of S.E.VEN Fund (Social Equity Venture Fund), a relatively new organization that has burst on the scene with a number of cool prizes and programs to spur market-based approaches to poverty alleviation.

In his brief remarks, Andreas identified three key areas of S.E.VEN’s work:

1. Define poverty differently: “Being poor is to be excluded from networks of productivity and exchange.”
2. Look for leapfrog ideas
3. Focus on appropriate technology – the mobile phone and ICT are not the ubiquitous answer to all development problems (by this point in the conference, it seemed as if the mobile phone could cure cancer and mint money…the hype was suffocating.)

Charlie Brown, meanwhile, is part of the old guard, having worked at Ashoka for a number of years.  But that doesn’t make him staid, or complacent.  Rather, Charlie is taking his Changemakers division of Ashoka and continuing to shake things up, asking his community to:

1. Frame the right problem
2. Participate in the marketplace of ideas
3. Take ideas through to real impact – which means more than the $5000 prize a typical Changemaker winner receives

It was great to see this panel on stage; it was a shame that, as the last panel of the day, they spoke to a half-full room.  (No offense, but I bet the crowd would have benefitted more from these guys than they did from some of the earlier keynote speakers.) 

All together, the incentive2innovate conference was an important framing: how can we use incentives (prizes, awards, etc.) to drive solutions to some of humanity’s most pressing problems?  And how can we create innovative environments – inside our organizations and outside, with our customers and communities – to make those solutions big and meaningful.  I was glad to step outside my typical market-based approaches to poverty alleviation bubble and meet people from other worlds, many of whom are thinking aggressively about how to do things differently.  If that’s the change that comes from i2i, then we’re all in good shape.

For more coverage on the conference, be sure to check out Matthew Bishop and Michael Green’s blog post.

Braden Kelley over at Business | Strategy | Innovation captured two great interviews with the Innocentive founder and CEO as well as with Changemakers’ Charlie Brown. 

Finally, check out the Twitterverse’s coverage of incentive2innovate – search #i2i.

I must say, being an MBA has its privileges.  It's difficult to imagine how I would have attended the Cornell Global Forum (CGF) otherwise.  However, as a recent graduate of the Johnson School, I had an "all-access pass" to an invitation-only event in exchange for support services.  Even so, I approached the CGF with a healthy bit of skepticism.  Although its purpose is explicitly action-oriented-the mission of the Forum is to accelerate the degree to which clean technology firms and BoP-focused companies incubate clean technology at the BoP (also known as convergence)-I couldn't wrap my head around how another big, centrally-planned talk shop ensconced in a tony New York locale could possibly do anything meaningful. 

Let's look at the variables.  You have:  a). nearly one hundred delegates with very distinct BoP or cleantech foci divided into eleven task teams; b) three working sessions over the course of two and a half days; and c) eleven facilitators charged with the daunting task of combining a, b and c to yield d) eleven actionable initiatives that facilitate convergence.  Just to be clear, I have a vested interest in an action-oriented CGF.  First, I had recently worked with another student to develop a methodology to measure the convergence rate.  No action, no convergence.  Additionally, as an MBA graduate hoping to work in this space, I have to understand what work needs doing.  So, was I disappointed?  The answer is a resounding, "No!"

First of all, I was surprised by the lack of resistance to the convergence concept.  Granted, the Forum delegates comprised a relatively captive audience and my task team participation was limited, leaving me less privy to "hallway murmurings".  (As event staff, I was able to sit in on three of the eleven teams.)  It was also quite impressive that every task team produced an initiative; some generated two or three.  Given the time constraints and the diversity of perspectives represented, this is a significant accomplishment. 

However, lest the buzz of the Cornell kool-aid obscure my critical thinking, let me state that the impact of the Forum remains to be seen.  Whether it actually accelerates the rate of convergence will depend on the quality of the initiatives developed, how committed the task teams are to launching them, and how much support the Forum provides to these efforts.  Clearly, the challenge is great and the journey strictly uphill.

As I learned through my independent study, social impact measurement is a frustratingly complex phenomenon.  It is difficult to define social benefit accurately, particularly when costs, trade-offs and externalities are considered.  Even if one succeeds there, the greatest challenge is to translate this (hopefully) well-defined benefit into something measureable. 

The Forum's convergence concept is no exception.   At this stage who's to say what the practical nature of convergence will be?  Will consensus form around what constitutes convergence activity or will there be several interpretations?  Will momentum grow around the concept?  If so, will it be strong enough to bring convergence 'doers' to life?  Finally, will 'converged' companies succeed in fostering world-wide sustainability?  How will we know?  Only time will tell.

What I can say is that the Forum organizers have a strong impact orientation and have a monitoring and evaluation system in place.  They also, quite strategically, created an enabling environment for action.  As Virginia Barreiro described in her recent post, cards were exchanged, names taken, and deals done.  Needless to say, the end of the story is just the beginning.  Stay tuned for the next episode...

Last week, coming out of a 2 ½ day conference on "The Great Convergence" - the intersection of clean technology and business development at the Base of the Pyramid- I thought I would be fairly exhausted. After all, the agenda was merciless, with 8am starts and 9:30pm finishes, sprinkled with "speed dating" and intensive task forces to come up implementation strategies. But I was not. Rather, I felt energized and enthusiastic about what appears to be a certain maturation or "coming of age" of the space.

First, the overall emphasis of the event - the idea that we absolutely cannot achieve inclusion of the BoP if we don't consider how to do so with environmental sustainability, and vice-versa, was incredibly refreshing. Although several groups have already been active in this space for some years, like E+Co and WRI's New Ventures, this idea does remain a fairly minority view with the majority of efforts around social inclusion and the BoP broadly emphasizing economic development that does not focus specifically on sustainable resource use and many of the clean technology initiatives focusing on top of the pyramid markets in developed countries.

Second, I welcomed the explicit outcome-oriented agenda. The two days focused on break out task teams that focused on specific topics such as water, distributed energy, and biomaterials. The 100 or so participants were all pre-divided into 11 such task teams and asked to work together to develop a plan for driving convergence in those areas.

I was assigned to the biomaterials task team. When my team first met I was relieved to see that no one really knew what was meant by "biomaterials" but also relieved to see that it didn't matter. Rather than spend time on a long philosophical discussion of what is and what is not a biomaterial, we quickly agreed to focus on pragmatic conversations to identify how biomaterials were relevant to our own individual or organization's pursuits and how biomaterials could drive "the great convergence". Broadly, we considered biomaterials inputs to a production process that could emphasize a cradle-to-cradle approach.

The task team consisted of MNCs, NGOs, entrepreneurs, scientists, financiers and academia and, surprisingly, after two long days of conversations, we came up with a plan. Very generally speaking, the plan focuses on market creation for biomaterials that includes the engagement of the BoP as producers, entrepreneurs and distributors and emphasizes recycled products, closed loop production, and technology innovation.

I am truly amazed by the commitment of all parties involved to really give this an honest try. We have identified a product sector (poly-materials) and a country of initial focus - Brazil. This initial step of putting together a workplan will kick off in two weeks in Brazil and we hope to leverage existing activities there, such as those of the IADB's Opportunities for the Majority initiative and the work of AVINA and FUNDES. We will also be documenting our trials and errors from day one to facilitate replication in other areas or sectors, if we are successful.

Like our task team, 10 other groups will hopefully also be following up with implementation strategies that drive social inclusion, improve the quality of life of the 4 billion at the base of the economic pyramid and promote disruptive technologies to change the development trajectory we are currently on. Surely not all of us will be successful, but the emphasis on partnership and pragmatic solutions to move the needle on the global poverty and environmental degradation is a huge step forward for the sector.

In Development and Base of the Pyramid circles, we often discuss remittance economies and innovative ways to send remittances home; what we don't always think or talk about is what forces people to leave their home countries in the first place and what they experience when they go abroad. In the case of Nepal, as I've written about before, migrant laborers most often travel to the Middle East and Southeast Asia, often having their passports taken away from them upon arrival and not getting paid for months at a time. So would systems that facilitate sending remittances home actually encourage and facilitate such an unjust ecosystem? In the case of Nepal, I think we are better off creating jobs at home. 

I took the opportunity to interview one such laborer, Aslam, who spent 18 months in Doha, Qatar. In Kathmandu, he is a widely respected mason, but in Doha he simply broke stone and his skills were not put to full use. Aslam wanted to see the world; while abroad he went to the ocean for the first time and flew on an airplane for the first time. But in the end, the money he earned in Doha only paid off the loans he had to borrow in order to go to Doha in the first place, essentially breaking even and not profiting.

So when we in BoP circles think about remittances, let's also think about what forces people to leave their homes in the first place and what they endure and sacrifice in order to send those remittances home. We need to create jobs at home- that is certain. But when those are not available, is it a better option for people at the base of the pyramid to travel abroad where they make the same or even less money, are separated from their families, and are treated like second class citizens? Below is a video and transcription of my interview with Aslam, which offers a glimpse into the lives of the laborers that churn remittance economies.

The video is available here, on YouTube.

Jenara Nerenberg, NextBillion.net: Why did you go to Qatar?

Aslam, Nepali mason: I went to Qatar to find work.  I wanted to make extra money from work so I could eat happily.

JN: What did you experience there?

Aslam: Work is a lot harder there than here. It's a lot hotter over there. It's twice as hot there. They don't care how bad the weather is there; they just want you to work. If you don't go to work, they cut your pay.

JN: How did they treat you?

Aslam: Some of the managers are nice, but others are very untrustworthy.  Some people don't have a lot of kindness. They tell you, "You came from Nepal to work. Whether you live or die, it's all the same. You came here to work. If you work, we give you money. If you don't work, we don't give you any money." They don't let you take any time off from work either.

JN: Why did you come back to Nepal?

Aslam: The thing is, I got placed with a really bad company. I was very unhappy, and they also turned out to be very untrustworthy. At one time they didn't pay me for four months. Even though we had a signed contract, they didn't give me any money. It's a lot harder than Nepal there. But it's harder for all the laborers, not just Nepalis.

JN: Are you happy you went?

Aslam: I went to Qatar and it was a very unhappy experience. I was happy when I went there; I was hoping to earn extra money so I can have an easier life. But I found a lot of unhappiness there. I even filed a case against the company. I even went to the Nepali embassy. After two or three days, I got into an argument with the Embassy. I asked them, "Why do you even have an Embassy here? Go back to Nepal. You're just here to spend the government's money. You're not doing anything while so many Nepalis are in trouble. While there are so many Nepalis suffering, you're just sitting in a comfortable chair and eating good food."

I got into a labor dispute and I even took them to court. But they don't care what Nepalis have to say. They call Nepali people "jungly." That's how much unhappiness there is for Nepali people abroad.

JN: Are you happy to be home in Nepal?

Aslam: Yes, I am happy to be back in my own country.  Once you come back to your country, you're happier whether you have money or not.

JN: What do you want to tell other Nepalis who are thinking about going abroad to work?

Aslam: If someone wants to go, it's obviously their choice. Once people don't find work in Nepal, they will go. They think that going abroad will earn them more money. I will tell them, "Don't go." Try to work in Nepal and if you can't find work, then take care of your home.

JN: Would you tell others to go abroad or stay in Nepal?

Aslam: I got some phone calls asking me if I wanted to go to Dubai. But I told them, I'm going to stay in Nepal and work. For people who want to go, they will spend at least 140,000 rupees. You might as well spend that much money here.

JN: Are you happy with the amount of money you earned while there?

Aslam: How can you be happy bringing back money that made you so unhappy?  I earned about 150,000 rupees.  I used that to pay back my loans.

JN: Tell me about some of your experiences.

Aslam: On Saturday they have a big get-together where people gather around and have fun and talk. The whole country gets a holiday. They eat and drink and be merry. All the Nepalis there are experiencing hardship.

I liked the gardens over there. I liked traveling around. I found the country beautiful. But what good is being in a beautiful country when you can't feed yourself?