The next fifty years; Context of the Future...Youth, Tech

Thank. You. Thank you. Science they ice technology the urban environment well see rapid change during the next 50 years. National Educational radio presents a series of programs expressing a variety of opinion on the future of the democratic environment. Theys it was were given at the 50th

year conference of the American Institute of planners held in Washington in October of last year and attendance was any our public affairs director Bill Greenwood. This is number 11 in our series of 13 programs dealing with the future environment of this democracy. Over the weeks this series has brought you the voices and policy recommendations of men concerned with the future. Experts in their fields through long years of experience but policy recommendations for the next half century will only be implemented by the youthful members of the planning community. This program is devoted to the ideas of a few of the younger experts in the field of planning. They'll be giving particular attention to the underdeveloped areas of the world and in contrast this week's closing statement comes from an elder statesman in planning Buckminster Fuller. First this week representing youth and planning is a young woman whose chief

concerns are with the people of underdeveloped areas and harnessing the latent energies of those people. Seems to be a specialty of banned Schran teacher and writer. Mr. Franz participation in the Peace Corps has taken her to South America. She's been associated with the enter American student projects in Mexico and here at home ish Rand has been involved in similar work as a teacher in the Harlem ghetto. It's this background and a talent for the sensitive communication that qualifies this young teacher to discuss the hope there is in people. Here's Miss Ann Schran. To discuss the theme the hope there is and people is really quite complex. And yet in a sense to me very simple so simply it embodies recognition or awareness in people themselves of their responsibilities and their dignity. And in a word I think this sums it up. But I'll

continue to explain what I mean in the process of development really whether it's in this country or from what I've seen overseas. I think all of us hold an image of ourselves. We have an image which helps us to relate to the world around us and to understand it to name ourselves. I think that when we work in development it's important that we understand this and the people that we work with obviously were aware of the image we hold because we feel free to export or to impose many times the ideas that we hold. If there is hope if hope in people is to be realized. We must keep this idea in mind because it implies and demands that we accept diversity. We must I think come to the point that we understand and have the

maturity to deal with diversity and appreciate it and to foster it. We must allow people the people we deal with. And again I reiterate whether there are people in this country or whether there are people in the developing countries to speak for themselves and of themselves too often when we go into programs of aid or development we're all too eager to impose our own mistakes. And then we react with shock and horror at the monsters we create. I think that technology is a marvelous tool but too frequently we've forgotten that we've created it ourselves that it's not some Thurber dog that's been plopped on our doorstep staring at us. But really our own creation and something that should serve us not something that we should be subservient to. In the process of using technology and using developmental tools. I

go back to this idea of imagery and diversity of the tool. I think that we must use in employing these ideas is dialogue. Dialogue implies listening. Far too frequently we're still prone to go in with monologue in point of fact we're talking to ourselves in point of fact we don't hear or see the other party. The great numbers of people in developing countries and in developing areas in this country have quite a bit to say to us. It's one fact that I've learned in the teaching profession actually no one ever teaches anyone anything. We teach ourselves. People that we deal with know and understand their surroundings. They experience the conflict and the strains of being there. Likewise they experience the conflict and strains of conversion when change

takes place. We have to understand this in terms of a country. I am afraid that many times we don't particularly when we're seeing as we do today bombs waltz and impose democracy. I think that again it's because we view the process of development as unilateral. And when the programs that we enunciate and one the programs that we impose on others don't succeed to far too frequently. We tend to fall back on cliches or crude statements about the people that we're dealing with that they're lazy or they're stupid. I don't think it's this way. Perhaps it's saying something about ourselves that we're still holding monologue and we're talking of ourselves. We're the ones who don't see it and the people for their part are reinforced in their frustrations and their negative impressions that

they've held for many many years. There are many countries in the world today where my people of my generation are growing up and defining themselves in terms of opposition to us for no other reason than the fact that we've refused to listen if we're to achieve a productive in a complementary relationship. We've got to evaporate some of the persistent and damaging mists which exist. We have to place in Phasis on the energy and the tenacity in survival that the people we're dealing with possess. I'm not advocating that we romanticize. But on the other hand I'm definitely not advocating that we impose the image we hold of ourselves upon people that we deal with this kind of a refusal to confront the situations we find ourselves in and only pollutes the possibility of any communication and deflects the advance of all of us

towards integration and complementary existence. I think that when we're speaking of the development in this country and the development we hope to take we hope to see take place in other countries. We should be cognizant of the sharp conflicts and difficulties which arise in an area or many areas which truly are just coming in to us. Well I guess I would go back on what's been said before the idea of a bronze age existing next to the electronic age. Because truly the more we advance in many ways the more we have widened the distance that exists between us. If we've conquered geographical distances We've widened Extremely the differences in mentality differences and ways of organization and differences and ways of life. These conflicts can only be remediated when we take time to turn

inwards to ourself and listen. Because in many ways the conflicts that we see illustrated on a geographic or in a material sense are conflicts which perhaps exist in ourselves throughout the week we've listened to problems or people discuss problems that we're facing in this country. The most advanced or one of the most advanced in the world and perhaps the difficulty is that as we ourselves are struggling to become new men with the creations that we have about us we haven't yet learned how to integrate the forces we have with the human qualities which we've come to recognize without destroying one of the other. So not to go on at too great length. I'd like to again emphasize that if there is hope it rests in ourselves and in our awareness and willingness to assume the responsibility that

we have ahead of us. I'd like to just give a few statements of people I've worked with in the past few years the bare this out. One of my colleagues in Africa said in Africa I had glimpses into a culture which was so strange and alien that I was incredibly frightened. This cracked open my sights before anything I didn't understand was on Real and I found I could do nothing with the people unless I accepted their code. So I learned to develop a much broader line of action based on pragmatic terms in addition to former moral principles. The scope of action was broadened and certain old moral codes changed. Another said you learn to appreciate and realize the benefit of process. In other words it's not perhaps the goal that you set out for. That is your measure. But what is happening in the

process. Another stated and I think very well I do and will say were the diversity of events that take place. I have to keep things loose. This is an encounter with an imperfect reality. The approach I had to learn was not one of rejecting but of accepting an imperfect reality and not working on it but with it. Failures are due to lack of knowledge and I had to learn to empathize and I learned the ability to understand and so I think I could repeat on statements that many others have made. Again I think this is a factor that we have to keep in mind. We're going to be called on more and more in the coming years. People need the help that we can offer. But it will it will be really of no avail at all if we don't have the capacity to turn inwards and first of all understand ourselves and what we're saying. And secondly listen to what others are saying to us. If we're able to do this I think that we can come to a very fruitful

relationship one that will benefit both. Obviously there's not going to be much benefit at all if we're living in a so-called global village. While one sector is far behind the other. Alternately there is hope and people there's a great deal of hope and the expectations that we hold for greater understanding meaningful development and fuller human life. This is the hope that being human the quality of being human implies flowing from this is the hope that we can hold in ourselves to achieve these goals. This is the hope that we hold as a result of the possibilities open to us and our awareness of them. If we were to go away from this conference with any real possibilities I think we really have to question deeply whether we understand what we're saying and if we do. I think you will see a realisation of hope that we hold

today. Thank you. Thank you. I'm. A teacher and writer and Schran stressing the importance of understanding the self-image of underdeveloped people. It's Miss Schrans view that this understanding is the key to helping these people help themselves. National Educational radio is bringing you another in a special series on the future needs of society in the democratic world. Our speakers are men and women whose task it is to plan for the future environment in the next 50 years. Environmental changes are of course of particular importance in underdeveloped areas. If improvements are to take place and technology has its role but as we'll learn there is dissenting opinion on how large the role of technology can be in underdeveloped

parts of the world. The discussion begins with the young Italian architect designer Mr. Salvatore knows impressive educational accomplishments include a doctor's degree in architecture from the University of Florence and a Fulbright scholarship to Georgia Tech. Most of Mr Severino his research has been in prefabrication and the simplified design of building components. Mr Severino solutions for the problems of the underdeveloped world involve a major application of technology and following his remarks. The opposite view to solving the same problem will come from John Turner but now with his ideas on technology and the underdeveloped world. Here is architect designer Renato Severino a few months ago a group of journalists in Africa to some African leaders see how long it would take to solve the problems of developing countries. Somebody from the African side said 20 years somebody

else 50 years you know and I think that it would be on its side and the African side then agreed about that to at least a 50 yes it would be necessary to to get to certain. Developing point. But at such a moment an African step out and ask. But do you think European and up to 50 years would be enough for you to think of us as human beings like you are. This is the main problem. The problems of today comes from the antithesis of technology. Developing countries. Millions and millions of people of New emergency society hospital all over the world and they are fighting for better living. They are fighting a few blocks from here seeking for this in

space and space in this world. You know we haven't we have until now failed program of the UN. If if unfortunately fail we are to speak we will respect a much more prone to aid. Plans often often sort of new colonialism was the result of his day his way over helping people in a romantic way. It is not efficient anymore. We must operate on a much without just gave you not actually the kind of experience of I mean way is all of that because the game is over. The Greens the green hills of Africa one being green animal problem would be solved. Anyway it was a great writer searching for the truth in a personal way. But we cannot afford to finish it with a gunshot from breakfast. We must face

the problem of everybody not only our personal problems. If we fail again in these few years that war would be in a you know big trouble to approach and solve the problem. There is only one way to establish an understanding of the Russian A-level We did people over all the world. The human brain works everywhere the same way. We must find you know Africa Latin America and India bring all the brains that are needed for this operation. Sentiments won't be any good. They bring feelings and final score would be misunderstood. Russian metals and therefore technology is the only way for the sort of technology is the only way to approach a problem on a large scale. They can ology is the lingua franca of the international language understood by all men. But conflict between sentiments and rationality. PR you know minds we have to be careful you know voiding a separation of all our selves from our

sentiments with technology it is possible to build atomic bombs and to commit genocides. Technology can be a gun a table that can be used against an assault on him out against a peaceful man. Our aim must direct and overachieve goal was to benefit all humanity. Here is the dilemma again. The use of all means has to be planted only to stimulate the attitudes of developing countries. I mean already present attitudes and capacity or to induce new forces. But technology evidently can also be a steamroller acting as fuck to all the young men in the new countries won't allow this technology if they have not a brilliant boss that they like at least to have a brilliant contemporary technology. An Indian or an African doctor will feel frustrated knowing that the new of us seeing the cost a few cents in America

won't be available for him. But the main problem in bringing aid is an interfering directly into starvation feels a few of the developing developing countries. Apart from done we give to give it is the most difficult thing in the world that people start to receive would immediately feel inferior because they are in need. Not only does not own it out but if you give them a small gift that they will feel that the QIF is proportional to their personality. The United States are facing the problem says the Marshall Plan. In fact I wish now to refer to it under development and the concept is in the new countries. They mean the same thing. We must be against for chlorate against all that kind of tradition that the respect thinks like a segment of cults fault war and religion are most of the time against development. Then what about the respect to pay through allegiance. Can we say that we are not a septum endure a Legion because allows routes to eat to the

food of Indians hungry people are then we going to draw a line for another discrimination. But would you accept to pay more taxes to feed Indian rights. This is the way in your country. The Active the active educate the young people are against the establishment that is traditional. Most of the tradition are religious traditions. The establishment want to retain these privileges. Then young people in your country start protocol everywhere 530 shown on the large scale. It's a vicious circle. Only of rationality and technology can break it. The same problem is evident also in Europe where most of the old fogeys saw freed of the future. They say that human factors and sentiments would be left out. What I want to say is that we are seeking for a new moral attitude towards a

larger society much larger than before we still work for the war of the benefit and not for a small elite. Consequently in future all of the architecture under you've been planning we're dead afraid to form a new attitude of the planners and designers. Then you see it is it would be one space for all men not a group of us to enter clubs if you will not succeed in the same in just that little space would be left to for a real democracy would be to go back to medieval situation. We would start building castles. People would be afraid of leaving the iris the greenbelt would still be the thing that divides the white belt from the black belt the way it said the charts obs for what concerns planning and building is developing countries we have to face two distinct phenomena. House today you know the fellow being you know developing country costs much more than a house built in Europe or in the United States.

Do it too low to even with the lumber cost is much lower than what is it in the states or even Europe this is because that most of the goods to build a house are imported directly from industrial areas. In industrialized countries otherwise we are going towards a totally industrialized prefabrication in metal and plastic. Only no more of force or conflict in the future. Building will wait one tenth of the actual bill thanks to phenomena building like primates below one side and completely industry lies on the other side the opposite. Today a lot of a prefabricated building event tall and large. I was sent to Africa and Latin America because they are cheaper but the new countries won't have soon enough foreign currency to pay prefabricated buildings. This solution then is a plan including all the continents to

determine the industrial areas with drone material and skilled labor to produce goods of a controlled standard to present all the key of new countries is ruining them. These industrialized areas can be allocated also in Africa Latin America. All the efforts to must be concentrated in a few areas to produce for other areas we have to find the best area and the right people for every specific production. Evidently nationalism that would be against the welfare policy. But we know that Nationalists may have produced the worst phenomena in our century. We do need a new kind of Pisco technology cockle not only a moral attitude is needed it's also need that the attitude of doing good is good business on both sides. A new revolution has opted to active.

If we do if we do not succeed in this aim in a few years and not even a hope we'll be able to sustain us. Thank you. To you. There you have an articulate confident expression of faith in the possibilities of technological solutions to the problems of developing areas. Remarks from one of Italy's young architects Renato Severino. Now to an architect and planner whose ideas on solving the problems of developing areas are in opposition to Mr Severino shows John Turner's experience with the under developed world includes eight years with the Peruvian government housing agency. His work with the agency was connected with rural schools housing and squatters. He has conducted research on squatter problems for the United Nations and at present is a consultant to the UN on

urban settlement in developing countries taking exception to Renata Severino thesis that technology is the only solution to the problems of underdeveloped areas. Here is architect and planner John Turner. I've been forbidden to read the paper that I had for Pat so I'm going to try and give you a short summary. To begin with. I want to thank you not a Severino for the irritation he caused his band which made it possible for me to write my record. I'm fat. Substituting for a colleague of mine who I'm sure would have made a much better contribution and I'm going to be able to make it. However I will do my best. I take us out and treat text as it were a quotation of my

colleagues. He says they're referring to traditional construction brick and mortar type construction he said in his paper that there is no future for this method of construction if the hopes of improving living standards in the new countries are to be transformed into reality. Well I don't want to create the impression that I am an unbeliever in technology. It has to offer. But I do want to raise some questions raise a few doubts which have been raised in my own mind as a result of the Beslan experience and observations I have had in Mr. Nash America. To exaggerate perhaps a little bit. I would say that

the opposite of that statement is nearer the truth there. On the contrary the introduction of modern organizer should have the modern technology which is necessary to operate in. Economies that they're. Not prepared to accept them. How. Does more harm than good. Well the evidence. I which I base this claim. I'm going to jump a little bit. Is that why in the first place the majority of the projects which governments national governments and international agencies with the best intentions in the world. Support the big highs low cost housing projects which are being carried out.

Does it I know myself and those that I have read about federal authority active ministry official documents Borglum failures.