Appropriate technology has swept through the world of development policy making and planning and gained momentum in the wake of the failure of the green revolution and other strategies depending on the use of high technology. It is being advocated in both developing and industrialized countries. In the materials of organizations from the United Nations to grassroots environmentalist groups, women are often ignored and bypassed.

As the negative impact of introducing technology without considering the lives and needs of women becomes apparent, appropriate technology is being advocated for women, especially as a means of lightening their daily tasks in food production and supplying the family's fuel and water needs. Appropriate technology, however, is no magic formula, for women, men or communities. Appropriate technology should be precisely that: the technology most appropriate for a given place at a given time. Technology is not neutral, although many development planners and technocrats seem to think it is. To introduce it without a knowledge, understanding and analysis of the political, economic, social and patriarchal structures of a given situation and of the impact and implications of this technology for these structures, is to run a good risk of having a highly inappropriate technology, with all sorts of negative consequences for the community.

what is appropriate technology?

There is no single definition for the concept of appropriate technology (commonly abbreviated AT), sometimes also referred to as alternative, adapted, intermediate, soft-core, self-reliant or people's technology. These terms are most often used to describe technologies which are small scale, simple, low cost and which use local materials and labor.

Using the term "intermediate technology, "E.F. Schumacher, author of Small is Beautiful, calls it "technology with a human face." His book is an introduction to the theory and need for appropriate technology, emphasizing that it is production by the masses, not mass production. He writes:

The technology of production by the masses, making use of the best modern knowledge and experience is conducive to decentralization, compatible with the laws of ecology, gentle in its use of scarce resources, and designed to serve the human person instead of making him the servant of machines. I have named it intermediate technology to signify that it is vastly superior to the primitive technology of bygone ages but at the same time much simpler, cheaper, and freer than the super technology of the rich. One can also call it self-help technology, or democratic or people's technology - a technology to which everybody can gain admittance and which is not reserved to those already rich and powerful.¹

In  her  study  Appropriate Technology for African  Women, Marilyn Carr sums up the concept thus:

The solution to many of the problems being faced in Africa will rest largely on the development and dissemination of new types of technologies which are appropriate to existing conditions. Such technologies will not be as complex as those which have so far been transferred from the West. Nor will they be as unsophisticated as the traditional techniques which are currently employed by millions of people in Africa. The latter, although having a high labour requirement, are usually characterized by low capital and labour productivities and do not generate the surplus needed for rapid growth in capital stock ... In essence, the technologies we are talking about are small, simple and cheap enough to harmonize with local human and material resources and lend themselves to widespread reproduction with the minimum of outside help.²

Others  in the appropriate technology  field stress its aspects of  self-reliance,  people's  participation  and  innovation   from the bottom up:

Part of the appropriate technology strategy has been to start with and build on locally available skills and materials, based on the initiative and full participation of local people. This should mean that local needs will be met more effectively, that mistakes will be on a scale that is understandable and correctable, and that technological and social changes that follow are more likely to harmonize with evolving local traditions and culture.³

appropriate technology is not new

Appropriate technology is not new. It has been used in developing implements and methods needed for survival and daily life. People in many parts of the third world, for instance, build their houses with local labor and with local materials eminently suited to their climate and needs. Some of these technologies, however, have been made obsolete by the introduction of a money economy.

While there have long been advocates of appropriate technology such as Mahatma Gandhi, who envisioned self-reliant and decentralized village technologies, AT as a movement has become widespread only in the last two decades. It has grown up simultaneously from many different sources in both the developing and industrialized world, partly from the growing realization that the model of development which includes transfer of advanced technologies from the North to the third world is not increasing the economic well-being of third world countries. The introduction of advanced technologies has often had negative effects on the populations, increasing unemployment and impoverishment so that most of the people have been denied the benefits of modernization.

At the same time, groups and individuals, particularly in industrialized or "over-developed" countries, have become concerned about the waste and pollution caused by advanced technologies, the depletion of natural resources, the environmental and ecological imbalances and the health hazards resulting from their use. There is a growing concern for the quality of work and life in societies where mass production, dehumanization of the workplace, high levels of consumption of luxury goods, and the use of more and more artificial foods and goods alienate people from work, nature, each other and themselves. There is a worldwide concern that a small percentage of the world's population is consuming a large percentage of the world's goods and natural resources.

From these diverse beginnings, links were forged:

By the mid-1970s there was a convergence of the various strains of alternative technology ideology, and a call for environmentally responsible techniques to produce smaller, less capital-intensive workplaces. Energy and agriculture became the primary areas in which the alternative technologies were identified and developed, reflecting the belief that the high technological forms of agriculture and energy were not viable in the long run for developed countries and were already wreaking havoc in many of the developing nations.⁴

While there are differences in emphasis in the appropriate technology movement in the developing and industrialized countries, there is a growing awareness that these are linked together with basic underlying concerns and needs. Environmentalist groups in developed countries, in particular those concerned with nuclear hazards, industrial pollution and wastes, and the depletion of nonrenewable energy resources, are beginning to see the need for global perspectives and strategies for these problems which are global in dimension. They must take into account the power of multinational corporations that control so much of technology and determine how and where these are used.

appropriate vs inappropriate technology

The AT movement questions the appropriateness of sophisticated technology especially in rural areas of developing countries where the basic needs of people for adequate food, water, clothing, housing and health services have yet to be met. Introduction of modem technologies often benefits cities over rural areas and a small elite over the majority of the population. Modem, well-equipped hospitals and cardiological centers can be found in the capitals of third world countries where the majority of the population, living in rural areas, lack basic health services and personnel and where malnutrition is still one of the leading causes of death. Tractors and mechanized irrigation systems are available for cash crops in the same area that women have to try to grow enough food for their families using hoes and hauling water great distances. Farmers who can afford the pesticides and high yielding seed varieties called for in the green revolution have a great advantage over most of the farmers who cannot.

Classic examples of the inappropriateness of some uses of advanced technology can be found in the literature. In the introduction to Schumacher's Small is Beautiful, Theodore Roszak writes:

Today in poor nations everywhere we find far too many Western and Soviet financed projects like the African textile factory Schumacher describes: industries demanding such advanced expertise and such refined materials to finish their luxurious products that they cannot employ local labor or use local resources, but must import skills and goods from Europe and America. In Ghana the vast Volta River power project, built with American money at high interest, provides Kaiser Aluminum with stupendously cheap electricity contracted at a long-term low price. But no Ghanaian bauxite has been used by Kaiser, and no aluminum plants have been built in the country. Instead, Kaiser imports its aluminum for processing and sends it to Germany for finishing. Elsewhere we find prestigious mega projects like Egypt's Aswan high dam, built by Russian money and brains to produce a level of power far beyond the needs of the nation's economy, that meanwhile blights the environment and the local agriculture in a dozen unforeseen and possibly insoluble ways.⁵

Another instance is described by Marilyn Carr in Appropriate Technology for African Women:

Undeniably a major cause of the most pressing problems of the Third World has been the transfer and use of technologies which are totally inappropriate to prevailing conditions. A famous case study from one African country illustrated this point perfectly. Two plastic-injection moulding machines costing US$ 100,000 each were imported to produce plastic shoes and sandals. Working three shifts and with a total labour force of only 40 workers, the machines produced 1.5 million pairs of shoes and sandals a year. At US$2 per pair, they were better value and had a longer life than cheap leather footwear at the same price. Thus, 5,000 artisan shoemakers lost their livelihood which, in turn, reduced the markets for the suppliers and makers of leather, hand tools, cotton thread, tacks, glues, wax and polish, fabric linings, laces, wooden lasts and carton boxes, none of which was required for plastic footwear. As all the machinery and the material (PVC) for the plastic footwear had to be imported, while the leather footwear was based largely on indigenous materials and industries, the net result was a decline in both employment and real income within the country.⁶

When small technologies are planned and introduced from outside, they can also turn out to be absurdly inappropriate. An example is this:

In Africa where sunshine is abundant but oil, coal and wood are scarce and expensive, a solar stove should really mean utmost happiness to women - or so some eager development theoreticians thought. Field tests then showed what every experienced expert (or local woman, ed. note) could have predicted: In the African bush, meals are prepared in the morning or in the evening when the sun has not yet risen or has already set. Furthermore: which cook wants to stand in the scorching sun Finally: the nightly fire also has a group and therefore social function.⁷

One of the third world leaders advocating a Basic Human Needs Approach to appropriate technology is Dr. Julius Nyerere, President of Tanzania. A characteristic statement of his is:

I've been telling my own people, "We've got to change, we must mechanise, we must have better tools. But what are better tools Not the combine harvester. If I were given enough combine harvesters for every family in Tanzania, what would I do with them? No mechanics, no spare parts ..." But we still have to give the people better tools, tools which they can handle, and can pay for. We are using hoes. If two million farmers in Tanzania could jump from the hoe to the oxen plough, it would be a revolution. It would double our living standard, triple our product!⁸

Some third world countries, however, oppose AT because they see it as a move on the part of rich nations to keep the benefits of high technology to themselves, and to keep the third world in a state of underdevelopment by offering it less advanced technologies. This opposition is intensified by the fact that developing countries have, for years, been pressing for the transfer of technology from the industrialized countries, with few results.⁹

capitalising on AT

While there are many appropriate technology advocates and organizations in the third world, the majority are located in the industrialized countries. From the United Nations to governments of developing, developed market and centrally planned economies; multinationals ·and small business enterprises; non-governmental organizations; alternative and environmentalist groups; and development agencies - all are busy capitalizing on AT. Although the movement is young, it has generated thousands of resources - books, pamphlets, bibliographies, equipment catalogues and information centers.

What are the motivations for promoting appropriate technology? These range from a concern for the environment to stimulating growth and profit. As AT has become more popular and acceptable, it has tended to become more western-dominated and controlled. For many groups the elements of self-reliance and people's participation have been forgotten. Groups and organizations and businesses carry out research and development mainly in the developed world, experiments in the developing world. Local materials, local talent and skills have been displaced by centralization and control by big business. For example, the initiatives taken by small groups around solar energy have been increasingly monopolized by large oil companies that have bought out the smaller enterprises and which now control the research and development of solar energy technology .10 Businesses continue to see AT as a good opportunity for profit making through manufacture of "AT equipment" for sale and export to developing countries.

One AT organization speaks of this as the "erosion of the integrity of the term 'appropriate technology' " and gives this example:

A representative from a major international organization visited us recently and had this to say: His organization intends to get technically sophisticated engineers and. social scientists to visit the rural areas of developing countries and design technology to fit these circumstances. Stainless steel small-scale machines would then be produced in American factories and exported to these countries. It is rather unnerving to hear this described as "appropriate technology." It is just a formula for continued dependency.¹¹

A major problem is that:

AT is a difficult approach to incorporate into large agency planning efforts. The concept of "local self-reliance," for example, is difficult to define or quantify and will vary from place to place. Furthermore, it is a quality that can either be nurtured or destroyed from outside, but never created. "Self-reliance" also sounds vaguely utopian or ideologically-tainted. To many planners it looks unnecessary, and out it goes. Equally difficult is the concept of "people's participation." "Participation" is probably the most invoked and least often attempted aspect of rural development programs. "Participation" is often interpreted to mean carrying out instructions. This kind of interpretation makes "participation" simply a measure of the degree of local acceptance of a project, not a strategy for success and human development.¹²

AT has also become part of development aid programs of the North and this has perhaps created more problems than it has solved. As Nicolas Jequier writes in Appropriate Technology: Problems and Premises:

This interest of aid-giving countries and organisations, important as it may be for the future of the movement, is in fact at the root of a very wide-spread misconception, namely that appropriate technology is primarily an aspect of development aid. It certainly has a part to play in development aid, but the philosophy which underlies it is precisely the opposite: appropriate technology should first and foremost be an indigenous creation of the developing countries themselves and the central problem they have to face is that of building up an indigenous innovative capability and not that of importing more foreign technology.¹³

and microelectronics?

At the same time, newer high technologies like microelectronics are creating their own revolution. With research pouring into this, microelectronics will soon come to dominate manufacturing and assembly in a major way. This has and will continue to change radically the discussion about technologies. As with other forms of high technology, it brings with it problems such as increasing joblessness, alienation and health hazards. However, there is little if any dialogue between the proponents of AT and those of microelectronics technology. Would it not be in the interest of AT supporters to pay serious attention to this question, instead of proceeding in the expectation that AT will be a major technology of the future while there is serious and growing competition in the field by the richer, more resourceful and more powerful businesses promoting microelectronics?

a male-dominated movement

In addition to being a predominantly western-dominated movement, AT is also very much male-dominated and male oriented. The male researchers and policy makers from industrialized countries bring with them all the prejudices about women and technology found in their societies. Most of the material on appropriate technology hardly deals with women at all, still less considers the impact of this on women's lives. Just as the social, economic and political reality is ignored on the pretext that technology is "neutral," so are the patriarchal structures and sexist attitudes.

Most technological advances and improvements, whether considered to be· "advanced" or "appropriate," are introduced almost exclusively to men. In the field of agriculture, men are the recipients of training and access to machines, tractors, harvesters, improved ploughs and irrigation systems in spite of the fact that women are the major food producers. In water supply, men are trained to construct and use pumps, wells, filtering systems, pipes and faucets, in spite of the fact that women have traditionally been in charge of supplying water needs. Planners then express surprise when men are reluctant to maintain and repair systems. Women lose power when charge over the water supply is transferred to men. Does lightening women's load in fetching water necessarily entail stripping them of control and status?

While some development planners now recognize the importance of women's role in water supply, they still seem to have difficulty in breaking down prejudices about women and technology. In the materials prepared by the United Nations Development Programme for the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade 1981-1990, nearly all the illustrations of traditional means of water supply show women carrying water. The material clearly points out that "women and children bear the biggest burden" in fetching water for the household needs. It includes a good article about how village women's groups in Kenya have taken steps to improve their own water supply. Yet the great majority of illustrations of improved water systems show men building and running them. In an article entitled "Maintaining the System: Barefoot Engineers," the engineers shown are men and are referred to throughout as "he"; e.g., "he is given two days training" or "his job is to ensure."14 To avoid sex-role stereotyping, non-sexist language and stick figures could have been used. For role reversal and consciousness raising, images of women in traditionally male roles could have been portrayed.

In areas in which men have no stake or desire to take over (routine household tasks of cleaning, cooking and child care), the experts have introduced singularly inappropriate technologies, demonstrating their complete lack of understanding and experience of women's lives and work. In addition to designing solar stoves for women who cook before dawn and after dusk, they have invented maize shellers which take longer to do the job than the women themselves and have introduced pedal-driven grinding mills in areas where women are forbidden to sit astride.¹⁵

Small technologies, if they were really appropriate, could do much to relieve overworked women. In her study on Appropriate Technology for African Women, Marilyn Carr points out several areas where appropriate technology could help women. Male planners tend to overlook these because they do not even consider them ''work," or because they undervalue the enormous contributions women make to the household, community and nation. These tasks include: fetching fuel and water; food production for local consumption, including planting, weeding, harvesting, hauling, storing and processing of foods; cooking and housework. In many places, women have to do this work under extremely arduous conditions, in addition to bearing and raising children and often working in cash cropping or industry as well. They may have to walk as much as 10 to 20 kilometers a day to haul fuel and water on their heads and backs. Women's work is so time-consuming and there is so much of it, that it leaves women without sufficient time to rest and sleep. "Free time" for relaxation, socialization or other activities is unknown. This takes its toll on women's health and that of their children.¹⁶

Questions about the division of labor between men and women and about sexist attitudes toward this division which automatically assign lower value and status to the jobs women do are seldom raised or addressed.

reinforcing stereotypes or liberating women?

In the developed market and centrally planned economies, women have had an increasing number of labor-saving devices to help them in their household tasks of cleaning, preparing food and cooking. They are also wage earners outside the home, yet all these women continue to bear the double shift of all child rearing and household activities. Men occasionally help out but women bear the responsibility. From their experiences, it is clear that the introduction of labor-saving devices and employment in wage labor by themselves do not address the basic questions of women's oppression.

While women's lives are very different in different parts of the world, and while political, economic and social systems vary, sexism is universal, and is a factor that links women and gives them a common battle to fight.

In industrialized countries, the appropriate technology movement demonstrates its prejudices about women's capabilities and roles, neglects women's needs and desires, and excludes women from power, decision making and control. In the booklet Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Due: Women and Appropriate Technology, Judy Smith writes:

Few women are involved in appropriate technology for the same reasons that so few women are involved in traditional science and technology. (Women make up 6 percent of all U.S. scientists with college degrees in natural sciences and engineering.) Science and technology are considered men's work in this culture. Women are not supposed to understand or even be interested in these areas ...
The AT movement appears to be a sex-role stereotyped movement relying on male expertise. Men do men's work and women do women's work. Men do the construction and invention. Women do clerical tasks and make the coffee.
Most of the attention on appropriate technology focuses on the traditionally male technologies of energy and transportation, rather than on traditional female technologies of food preservation and clothing production. Although women have a long history of involvement with survival technologies, their contributions are overlooked in a society which values external success linked technologies of engineering and science ...

Who's in the movement anyway? Who are the experts? The founding fathers? Who's deciding what is appropriate? Who talks at meetings, gets the grants and does the inventing? Who's on the tech staff and who's on clerical? ...

Visit an AT project. Who works on the solar collector? Who cans food in the kitchen? Which technology is pointed out with pride? How much time is spent encouraging and training women to do men's work and vice versa?¹⁷

The focus of AT in industrialized countries is on simpler, less energy-intensive technologies. What does this mean for women? It usually means fewer labor-saving devices for household tasks, less use of prepared and processed foods and synthetic fibers. Women are asked to give up their gas, electric and microwave ovens for wood stoves, to bake their own bread and preserve their own food instead of buying it from the shops. They are urged to buy or, even better, make clothes of natural fibers rather than synthetic ones, even though natural fibers require considerably more care, especially ironing. They are asked to save energy by giving up the use of cars, which have meant freedom of movement and from confinement to the home.

It is not surprising that few women in industrialized countries are willing to give up labor-saving devices and products, given that the main burden of household work and child care falls on them, and that, for most of them, wage employment is a necessity not an option.

As one of the reasons for introducing appropriate technology to third world women, development planners argue that it will "alleviate women's burdens" in the household and enable them to participate in wage labor or "income generating" activities. There is an important lesson to be learned, however, from the lives and experiences of women in developed countries. Labor saving devices alone cannot lighten women's work load. They only rearrange it somewhat, enabling women to take on waged work in addition to their unpaid work in the household.

Moreover, women's access to wage labor means more and more things must be bought. More money must be earned to pay for the things which women can no longer provide for themselves or which can no longer be produced locally, leading to less self-sufficiency. As Elise Boulding says:

Packaged appropriate technologies containing all the recommended small incremental improvements of food storage facilities, wheel-barrows, food dryers, flour mills and high-protein multivitamin food supplements will be sold to women, usually by multinational corporations. Whatever cash surpluses their wage increases might have generated will thus be quickly absorbed in the national or even the world economy.¹⁸

what would appropriate technology be like if...?

What would appropriate technology for women be like if women were setting the priorities and making the decisions?
A woman in a highly industrialized country writes:

We don't even know what technology could possibly do for women, because women have no control over it ... We don't know how different that would be, but we do know what happens to women when they don't control technology. A perfect example is what has happened with birth control technology ...
When birth control technology first appeared, it had very negative effects for women. The kind of technology that was made available was effective, but it did a lot of damage to women's bodies, and we have evidence that there was no adequate risk assessment of that damage. This technology was not controlled by women, women did not do the research, women did not do the marketing. What kind of birth control would be available to us now if women were the ones making the decisions ...¹⁹

What would appropriate technology for women be like if it were not simply a matter of providing labor-saving devices; if it were placed in the context of the question of the division of labor between men and women, in the context of the social and patriarchal structures; if it included access to knowledge of technology?

what women are doing

For women to begin to define what they need for coping with present times and what skills and knowledge they already have that need to be transferred to other women and future generations, they need to come together to reflect and plan. Some of this has begun.

During the Workshop on Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries (TCDC) and Women, held by the Asian and Pacific Centre for Women and Development in April 1978, participants analyzed the impact and implications of new technologies and of TCDC on women. According to Devaki Jain of the Institute of Social Studies, New Delhi, they concluded that "women's needs were different from men's even if they were both poor, and even if they belonged to the same ideology; that this had not been taken notice of in the design of institutions or in development strategies." The participants affirmed the importance of TCDC, but also the importance of changes that would make this beneficial, not detrimental, to women. Among the needs they identified are: to document, analyze and disseminate experiences in addition to providing directories of experts, institutions and training facilities; to create and support existing pressure groups for women's concerns and interests.²⁰

Asian and Pacific women also met together in November 1980 at the second Appropriate Technology Workshop for YWCAs of the region. Ruth Lechte reports that the participants had the opportunity not only to learn about practical matters and equipment such as solar dryers and water pumps, but to discuss the whole idea of appropriate technology and to try to see it in a political context. The participants gave importance to consciousness raising and awareness building on many levels and to overcoming stereotypes of what is women's work and what is men's.²¹

Women from both third world and industrialized countries met together in June 1981 to share experiences and information about their work in the area of health and medical technologies. Organized by ISIS and the Women's Health Clinic in Geneva, this third International Women and Health Meeting brought together women working in the self-help movement, local women's clinics, community health projects and research. What is unique about these meetings is that the participants do not come to hear panels of experts but to exchange information and experiences about their own work and findings, in areas such as contraception, abortion, childbirth, and infections ,and to discuss the politics of established medicine and how it affects women. The meetings are opportunities to analyze, reflect, share knowledge of new and traditional health technologies, and to begin to devise health care systems and technologies more responsive to the needs of all people.²²

Perhaps we should speak not only about TCDC {Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries) but TCW (Technical Cooperation Among Women): a new kind of information sharing and cooperation among women from different parts of the world who are developing and using technologies which help them gain more control over their lives and their communities. This is a very different thing from the "traditional technical cooperation for women" described by the African Training and Research Centre for Women which "meant assistance in patron-client fashion from women of industrialized countries and elite African women's organizations that had internalized their ideals giving instruction in embroidering pillows, baking scones, urging the acquisition of more electrical appliances."23 A new kind of technical cooperation among women is not a one-way flow of information from North to South: it is South to South and South to North as well. It builds on the great store of knowledge and expertise women already have and which, in many cases, is in danger of being lost, and it opens the way for new knowledge and new technologies to develop, based on women's real needs.

___________________________________

1 E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), p.154.

2 Marilyn Carr, Appropriate Technology for African Women (Addis Ababa: United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 1978), pp.7-8.

3 Ken Darrow, Kent Keller and Rick Pam, Appropriate Technology Sourcebook, vol. 2 (Stanford, California: Volunteers in Asia, Inc., 1981), p. 328.

4 David E. Wright and Robert E. Snow, "Which Technology Will Shape the Future'!" World Education Reports, no. 19 (May 1979), p. 11.

5 Schumacher, Small is Beautiful, p. 7.

6 Carr, Appropriate Technology, p. 6.

7 Helmut Mylenbusch, "Appropriate Technology - Fashionable Term, Practical Necessity, or New Social Philosophy?" Development and Cooperation, no. 3 (1979), p. 18.

8 Cited in Carr,Appropriate Technology, p. iv.

9 At the United Nations Conference on Science and Technology (UNCSTD), held in Vienna in 1979, guidelines were set for increasing the third world share of technical research and development. The United Nations Commission on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has been negotiating terms for the transfer of technology from multinational corporations for a number of years. The industrialized world, however, has been reluctant to make the necessary commitments or give adequate financial aid for this. In recent years, developing countries have been examining more ways to increase the transfer of technology among themselves. One such initiative was the conference on Technical Cooperation among Developing Countries (TCDC), held in Buenos Aires in 1978, under the sponsorship of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

10 "The Solar Game Stakes," Development Forum, vol. 7, no. 6 (August-September 1979), pp. 8-9. This compilation is based on an article by Earthscan (Press Briefing Document, no. 19).

11 Darrow.Appropriate Technology Sourcebook, vol. l , p. 15.

12 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 330.

13 Nicolas Jequier, Appropriate Technology: Problems and Premises (Stanford, California: Volunteers in Asia and OECD, 1976), pp.13-14.

14 International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade (New York: United Nations Development Programme, 1981).

15 Carr, Appropriate Technology, p. 28.

16 Ibid., pp. 26-31.

17 Judy Smith, Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Due: Women and Appropriate Technology Missoula, Montana: Women and Technology Project, 1980), p. 7 and pp. 18-19.

18 Elise Boulding, Women: The Fifth World, Foreign Policy Association, Headline Series (New York, 1980), p. 52.

19 Smith, "Feminism/Environmentalism: Point-Counterpoint," Con ference Proceedings, Women and Technology: Deciding What's Appro priate (Missoula, Montana: Women's Resource Center, 1979), p, 7.

20 Report: TCDC and Women (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: United Nations Asian and Pacific Centre for Women and Development, 1978), and "Women and Technical CO-Operation Among Developing Countries," Development Issue Paper for the 1980s, no.13, United Nations Development Programme (New York, 1980), p. 3.

21 Ruth Lechte, "Appropriate Technology Workshop," Common Concern, no. 29 (March 1981), pp. 7-8.

22 See the report of the International Women and Health Meeting in ISIS International Bulletin, no. 20 (October 1981 ). For the report in Spanish, see ISIS Boletin Internacional, no. 8 (December 1981).

23 Cited in "Women and Technical Co-operation," Development Issue Paper, no. 13, p. 4.