Humanitarian Engineering
Creating Technologies That Help People
Kevin M. Passino
Humanitarian Engineering
Creating Technologies That Help People
Kevin M. Passino
College of Engineering
The Ohio State University
Edition 1.0, Jan. 5, 2014
Bede Publishing, Columbus, Ohio, USA
Copyright, Kevin M. Passino
Cover photo: Taken by Kevin Passino, March 2005, Yuscaran, Honduras, C.A.
Dedication
In memory of my father, Stan Passino (1933-2013), my role model for taking action
to promote social justice.
To my mother, Mary Dolores Passino, the reason I am an engineer.
Stan Passino, bricklayer by trade, circa 1956, doing volunteer work (laying block).
Preface
Basic Definitions and Focus
The following definitions explain the focus and scope of this book:

“Engineering” can be defined as “the use of science and mathematics to invent,
create, design, develop, or improve technologies” (of course it also focuses on the
creation of “processes,” but often it is a focus on technology for processes, such
as computer automation for manufacturing). This is my own definition as
dictionaries I consulted gave very old and inaccurate definitions (e.g., only talking
about bridges and mechanisms); if dictionaries cannot get it right, it is no wonder
that people outside the field do not understand what engineering is.

“Technology” is often thought of simply as “a tool that extends human capability”
(e.g. from hammers to the internet). The New Oxford American Dictionary
defines technology as “the application of scientific knowledge for practical
purposes.” Encyclopedia Britannica defines technology as “the application of
scientific knowledge to the practical aims of human life.”

“Humanitarian” has been defined as “concerned with or seeking to promote
human welfare” (New Oxford American Dictionary), which is quite a bit broader
than typical interpretations of this word in that it applies to long-term problems
(not just natural disasters) everywhere, from local individuals and community to
international sites. Here, we define the meaning of “human welfare” via social
justice.

“Social justice” can be defined as “standards for, and a view on how to
promote via human interactions, human dignity and human fulfillment for all
of humanity.” Central to social justice are: (i) dignity, rights, and fulfillment of
the human person; and (ii) the structure and systems that influence, support,
or help humans achieve fulfillment (well-being, welfare, etc.) such as family,
work, economics, politics, environment, and peace. In other words, human
rights, fairness, and helping people are the key issues in social justice.

“Humanitarian engineering” is “creating technologies that help people” (the
book title/subtitle and notice that the title and subtitle help define each other
so that there is an emphasis on helping people in significant need). Another
good definition of “humanitarian engineering” is “creating technology to
promote social justice;” however, many people do not understand what
“social justice” is. The shortest and most precise title would have been
“Engineering for Social Justice;” however as mentioned above, “engineering”
is not widely understood. Yet another title for this book could have been
“The creation of technologies for humanitarianism.”
Humanitarian engineering has a broader knowledge foundation than
engineering in general. Like engineering, it includes all the physical sciences (e.g.,
physics and chemistry), life sciences (e.g., biology) and mathematics/statistics, but it
also includes many areas of social science (social work, psychology, economics,
political science, sociology, anthropology, and international studies); compared to
the traditional engineer, a good humanitarian engineer needs to know more about
people, and in particular social human groups of all sizes.
The goal here is to provide a framework for creating, modifying, and using
existing technologies for development and promotion of justice, with specific
technologies discussed only meant to be representative. I have great confidence in
the creativity of engineers. I am sure that given goals, methodology, and constraints,
they can create amazing technologies that fulfill needs today and in the future. This
is why so much time is spent in this book on goals, constraints, and the creation and
modification (design) process for technology for development that enter
humanitarian engineering, and relatively little time on specific technologies or their
design (that is the purview of the various disciplines of engineering—at OSU these
are civil, environmental, electrical, computer engineering, computer science,
biomedical, mechanical and aerospace, chemical-biomolecular, agricultural,
industrial, materials science and engineering, and architecture).
16 Myths of Humanitarian Engineering
Over the years I have heard many person’s opinions on, preconceived notions of, the
meaning of “humanitarian engineering” (or similarly-named areas) including the
following from students, staff, and faculty:
1. There is no role for engineers in humanitarianism.
2. My engineering discipline is not useful for humanitarianism.
3. That must mean that I have to travel to dangerous countries to try to solve
hopelessly difficult problems.
4. I am too busy to do humanitarianism (service) as it will not fit into my curriculum
or count for academic credit.
5. It would not have any technical content so at best it must be a general education
class in the social sciences (e.g., economics or political science) or perhaps in
philosophy, so I will not like it sine general education classes are generally a
waste of time.
6. Humanitarian engineering is only about service and “do-gooders” giving things
away (i.e., charity) around the world.
7. There is no need for technological innovation for humanitarianism (we can simply
use off-the-shelf technology).
8. I could never get a good job in humanitarian engineering, let alone make a career
out of it.
9. It must be only for undergraduates so as a graduate student I have no role in that.
10. It is at the margin, not central to a university’s educational mission
11. There are no educational needs (course work) for supporting humanitarian
engineering, at least none that are of value; I can just go out and help people
without learning anything about that first.
12. The standard engineering “research-teaching-service” metrics for faculty
promotion and tenure at a top research university do not apply to faculty working
in humanitarian engineering (hence, before promotion and tenure, and before
becoming full professor, no faculty should work on humanitarian engineering as it
will distract them from their central objectives).
13. Scholarship, rigor, physical sciences, mathematics, and traditional engineering
have no meaning or use in humanitarian engineering (i.e., traditional facultygraduate student engineering education-research is not possible).
14. There is no need for development of a fundamental theory for humanitarian
engineering. I do mathematics and basic “hard” sciences so humanitarian
engineering is outside my interests.
15. External funding to support faculty, staff, and graduate students is, at best, only
possible via infrequent small-dollar philanthropy.
16. Engineers do not have an important role in humanitarianism, and clearly no role at
the upper levels in economics, politics, and aid policy.
This book will dispel each and every one of these myths.
Engineers’ Important Role in Development
First, systems of thought on social justice call out the importance of technology,
stress its moral use (e.g., in issues connected to biotechnology, the environment, or
weapons technology), and would then acknowledge the importance of what
engineers do, and that they do it with a deep sense of fairness both in how they
create technology and in the design of technology that promotes justice. Amartya
Sen, a Nobel-Laureate economist, whose perspectives on social justice and
development will be discussed in this book, said:
“The gap between understanding how something would work and making it
actually work can be quite a substantial one, and some of the major problems
of technological advance in developing countries seem to arise from
difficulties in the translation of science into technology” (Sen, 1975).
This is a strong and authoritative endorsement of the value of engineering in
development. Or, consider that Jeffrey Sachs, past Director of the U.N. Millennium
Development Program, says (Sachs, 2006): “We glimpse the pivotal roles that
science and technology play in the development process” and in studying the history
of economic development he says “Technology has been the main force behind the
long-term increases in income in the rich world” and goes on to say that all
countries, including developing ones today, can have “a reasonable hope of reaping
the benefits of technological advance” and quotes John Maynard Keynes as
concurring with this point (considered to be the most influential economist of the
20th century, as he made fundamental contributions to the theory and practice of
macroeconomics).
There are thousands of engineers graduating every year from universities
around the world, and many more practicing in the “engineering enterprise”
(entrepreneurs, industry, government, etc.). The field of humanitarian engineering
hopes it can harness the talent of the engineering community and focus it on
poverty, development, and the promotion of social justice. Clearly, if individuals in
the profession of engineering work together, we can do much more than if we work
separately. Indeed, currently and in the past, there have been many engineers
involved in successful humanitarian work (even if while working they do not
identify themselves as such like a medical doctor often does by wearing their white
coat or stethoscope). This book seeks to synthesize the past and current work in
humanitarian engineering, at least to some extent (a full history is not an aim of this
book), make some advancements in how to think about humanitarian engineering,
and also provide a vision for the future of humanitarian engineering.
The Importance of People and Relationships
Personal Stories: A selection of my own personal stories of doing volunteerism and
humanitarian engineering are spread throughout the book. I had a range of
concerns about doing that, including: (i) that it is very unconventional for an
engineering book; (ii) stories told by older people, especially to younger people, are
often viewed as boring, and I am getting older relative to typical university students;
and (iii) of course personal stories always open the door to criticism. In the end
though, I balanced that against the following positive reasons for including personal
stories:

I felt it was a useful way to show the joy of relationships with all people no
matter what conditions they live in, and the value of such relationships in
doing good engineering.

To give one example of the motivation and rationale for doing humanitarian
engineering.

To provide “on the ground” stories (i.e., what I saw standing on the ground,
“up close,” or within no more than 100 feet of people or a thousand feet from
homes and scenery) about how to understand poverty, culture, social justice,
development, and real experiences of humanitarian engineering.

Every time I have talked to people about humanitarian engineering I learn
the most from on-the-ground personal stories about people, situations, and
best practices.

I do not mean to say that theory, concepts, principles, and “the view from a
distance ” are not valuable; indeed much of this book is on those
perspectives. Both views are useful, and one without the other is generally
not good.
Sociality and Social Intelligence: There is clear value of mathematical and
scientific intelligence in engineering. Many engineers can see the value of artistic
skills in engineering (e.g., the “art of producing a mathematical or computational
model,” creativity in design, and design for aesthetics). Clearly, other skills are
valuable (e.g., business or economics). While all areas of engineering require “social
intelligence” (e.g., ability to develop and maintain relationships and the ability to
work to understand client needs and the effect of technological solutions on clients),
humanitarian engineering has special needs on this topic and these will be covered
in this book.
There is no doubt that humanitarian engineering has a number of differences
from other disciplines of engineering. These include:

The need for what I call here “collaborative design” which includes groups of
engineers working with groups of people who are poor and others (“clients”)
to identify needs or challenges, to understand the system (e.g. family,
community, environment) within which they live, construct solutions, pick
the best solutions, implement solutions, evaluate their performance, and
disseminate the results to others. Clients are fully engaged at every step.
From a broad perspective this is identical to what happens in some
engineering technology creation processes, just not every engineering
company. To make the point, note that the isolated (loner) introverted
engineer may have some valuable role in humanitarian engineering, but
unlike the corporate engineering “cloister” (where there are cubicles, rooms,
or buildings separating departments or groups that perform the technology
creation process) where a loner can succeed, such success seems to be more
rare, at least in some areas of humanitarian engineering. If you do not like
people, can you effectively help people?

Solutions to the enormous problems discussed in this book (e.g., poverty,
development, human trafficking, etc.), especially systemic and structural
problems discussed in the chapter on social justice, require groups of people,
systems, and structural solutions. Sometimes, one human can solve another
human’s problems (e.g., a counseling psychologist via talk therapy or an
engineer who designs a special wheelchair for person that has highly unique
disabilities). Sometimes, one person can solve a whole group of people’s
problems (e.g., an engineer designing a low-cost engineering laboratory
experiment that will then be used by many students to grow their technical
capacity to solve the problems of their own country). But, there are many
cases, some of them the most challenging, where groups of people
(engineering teams) are needed to solve the problems of large groups of
people (e.g., a team of engineers developing software to fight corruption and
promote governmental transparency). Of course, when I say “team” or
“group” above, I do not mean groups of helpers who are only engineers; most
often, a group of helpers can be more effective for their clients if it is
composed of persons from other disciplines (e.g., social work, business, or
economics). Also, in every case, my view is that there are not two teams, but
one team working together to confront challenges together (engineer helpers
together with clients). Clearly, our social skills (or “social intelligence”) will
play a very important role in humanitarian engineering on such diverse
teams as they will be diverse in many ways (e.g., culturally and socioeconomic class). Can the introvert succeed or be of value in a group? Of
course, but they may want to admit their limitations and choose a role that
best fits their skills (e.g., like running off and doing a statistical analysis or
computer simulation to validate ideas or assess success).
Strategy for Evolving Local and Global Perspectives
It is impossible for one guy from the U.S., even if he gets inputs from a range of
colleagues and students in the U.S. and abroad, to develop a truly global perspective
on the field of humanitarian engineering. I simply need very broad inputs from all
over the world, from people who are poor to top experts in development, to achieve
that goal. I believe strongly in the power of “open public discussion” and critique of
this work to produce and mature a valuable perspective on humanitarian
engineering. It is for this reason, that in order to “evolve” a more global and
inclusive perspective, I have for a number of years gathered inputs, and am adopting
more strategies as they arise:
1. Teaching in-person to a diverse audience:
a. For students at OSU, which include many from other countries; and
b. Talks or short courses on the subject (or other technical subjects) in
the U.S. and other countries, especially in the developing world
(where I hope to promote local development of country-specific
versions of courses based on this book).
2. On-line education, text/audio/video discussions:
a. On-line course (e.g., via i-Tunes U). The plan is to make this available
in Summer 2014. Next, a massively open on-line course (MOOC) to
reach out to the world (e.g., via Coursera) is planned for the next
offering of this course.
b. On-line discussions involving both faculty and students, and between
faculty and between students, across the world (via email, social
media, discussion sites, blogs, webinars, electronic meeting systems,
virtual communities, Skype, Google Hangouts with streaming to
YouTube, etc.) that, along with an on-line course, may also help faculty
to offer courses on this subject in their own country.
I am well-aware that nations, communities, sets of problems (and their
priorities), viewpoints (e.g., religious, philosophical, or moral), and solutions are all
different; however, I am hopeful that we can learn from each other and work
together to distill a set of essential principles to learn (i.e., the fundamentals of
humanitarian engineering), and at least some “best practices” on how to approach
development (i.e., for “practice” where the principles are applied in the real world).
I understand the wisdom in the statement: “in theory there is no difference between
theory and practice, but in practice there is.” The approach here is to attempt to
develop a “theory informed by practice” much like what has been achieved for many
other topics in engineering education. A professional humanitarian engineer would
never only study this book, or only take a course based on it. Humanitarian
engineering is a deeply social field and one that requires “on-the-ground” up close
work; hence you need to talk to people (colleagues or locals) about the issues and
work with them to solve problems to understand and make concrete the real issues
(e.g., not just at an intellectual level, but at an emotional and personal level).
Differences Between This Book, Lectures Based on It, and Self-Learning
By design, there are some distinct differences between the content of this book and
lectures based on it. A clear separation was sought between the two as they
represent different modes of learning, and I did not want to repeat all the
information in both approaches to learning. The learning modes are designed to
complement each other, increasingly feasible considering the presence of on-line
education. They key differences are:
1. I will tend to teach the main ideas and principles in lectures, and leave full
definitions, data, and technical details to the book (in the main text, or via
self-study via the web or homework problems) to complement learning from
lectures.
2. I tend to treat broad issues in lecture, and leave the book and hands-on
solutions to homework problems to specific versions of the broad issues (e.g.,
I may discuss broad issues in poverty and development in lectures, but
discuss specific countries in the book, and require the student to learn about
specific countries or people in homework problems).
3. In several cases I treat key ideas from homework problems in lectures that
are not treated in detail in the main text of the book. In other cases, the
important points made by homework problems are not covered in lectures,
or the main text of the book, but left to self-study.
4. I leave discussions and debates entirely to class lectures (face-to-face or online), or discussions in group meetings outside class, and I do not even
identify in this book the topics for these (see the on-line lectures). This
leaves the flexibility to also discuss changing current world events.
5. I often show how to use a software tool in class, discuss more details about it
in the book, then assign a homework problem for a detailed hands-on
experience (e.g.., in the case of using on-line data bases on poverty,
development, values, and culture; or in computer simulations of poverty,
social justice, development, etc.). You really cannot understand the tools
without using them, so I broadly describe what the tools are and what they
provide in this book, and I show broadly in class how to use software tools
(e.g., for one case), I leave homework problems for really learning the tools.
Book and Course Web Sites
At the web site for this book there are some supplementary materials:

Information about how to obtain the book

Electronic reports and papers

Other resources
At the web site for a class based on this book there are a number of supplementary
materials:

Electronic lecture slides

On-line videos of lectures

Course logistics, role in curriculum, and syllabus
Feedback on Book and Course
I welcome your inputs, suggestions, and feedback on this book and the course. To
provide such input, email me at
passino.1@osu.edu
Please provide carefully thought-out feedback, and when appropriate provide
justification for your opinions (e.g., scholarly and authoritative publications).
The “Publisher:” The name of the “publisher” for this book that is used on the title
page is a complete fabrication on my part; there is no such publishing company. I
invented “Bede Publishing” simply to fill the necessary slot for bibliographic
referencing of this book. This book has never been sold, and there are no plans to
ever sell it. The only costs incurred in publishing this book are computer hardware
and software costs supported by my employer, The Ohio State University. I
gratefully acknowledge this support.
Acknowledgements
I have obtained many people’s kind inputs over the years that have, in the spirit of
humanitarianism, helped me develop and improve this book and the corresponding
course (listed in no particular order):
Individuals: Maggie McHugh, an OSU student, helped in many of ways with initial
course development, and this impacted the book also. Zachary Palmer, an OSU
student, helped in several ways. Molly Moran has taught me by working with her,
and you will learn about a project she leads later in the book. Roger Dzwonczyk,
John Merrill, and Howard Greene of OSU have run many courses and international
project trips in Honduras for humanitarian engineering (one since 2005) and have
provided me with a number of inputs over the years. Bob Gustafson of OSU has
given very helpful encouragement, help, and input, especially on the course
associated with this book, and he led the development of the OSU Humanitarian
Engineering Minor. My brother-in-law, Kelly Wurtz, a professor at Lehigh University
and expert on international political economy, provided a variety of inputs on
poverty, development, and illicit markets. Katey Borland, a professor of
comparative studies at OSU helped me with development issues and service ideas.
Manuel Betancur, of Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana in Medellín, Colombia helped
me learn about issues in Colombia, and hosted me there several times. Nicanor
Quijano, of Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia provided input on global
poverty issues and has been an on-going partner, indeed leader, of the university
development project that will be described later in this book. Jorge Finke, of
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Cali, Colombia provided inputs on several issues
with the book (e.g., ideas for survey questions to ask students) and good
information on corruption. Also, Jorge and Nicanor (both past students of mine)
taught me a lot about Colombia, hosted me there several times, worked with me on
two humanitarian engineering projects there, and also suggested and worked on the
low-cost engineering laboratory development project that is discussed later in this
book. Raúl Ordoñez (past student of mine), from Ecuador and partly educated in
México, and now with the University of Dayton, has taught me about Latin America
and a bit about Ecuador in particular. Alvaro Gil and Jose Velasquez (past students
of mine), both from Venezuela, have taught me some about Latin American politics
(e.g., Chavez). Alejandro J. Piña Ortega, an OSU graduate student, taught me about
issues of volunteerism in Venezuela. Margie Pfeil, Univ. Notre Dame, Dept.
Theology, Greer Pagano, Rabbi Laura Baum of Congregation Beth Adam, Omar
Tarazi Esq., Ovamir Anjum of Univ. Toledo, Dept.. Philosophy, Islamic Studies, and
Prof. Ingrid Mattson, Univ. Western Ontario, gave inputs or advice on social justice.
Carlos Juárez of Universidad Centroamericana in San Salvador, El Salvador, and
Mayra Méndez and Mauricio Quiñonez of the IEEE Section of El Salvador all helped
me understand issues in El Salvador. Juan Diaz (my brother-in-law) has helped me
understand issues in México. Vickie Rush helped me understand issues in
Honduras, and the running of an orphanage for HIV/AIDS children in Honduras.
Greg Bixler of OSU and Design Outreach provided some sources. Don Hempson of
OSU provided input on cultural issues in engineering. Ola Ahlqvist, leader of the
OSU service-learning initiative helped me find experts at OSU who could help.
Khanjan Mehta and Thomas Colledge at Pennsylvania State University gave me
several inputs (e.g., on social entrepreneurship, philosophical issues, and
collaboration on the Scholarship in Engineering for Social Justice: A Practitioner’s
Forum). John Clapp, OSU College of Social Work, helped me with several issues
associated with the US case including recommendations of the books covered here.
Leslie Moore, College of Education and Human Ecology and Mark Mortiz, Dept.
Anthropology, both helped with cultural issues. John Passino (my cousin), a top
official at the U.S. Dept. Agriculture, has helped me understand some higher-level US
government issues.
Groups: Students in my class ‘Humanitarian Engineering” at OSU (first offered
Spring 2014) I am sure will provide a wide variety of inputs via discussions and
questions in and outside of class, along with their solutions to homework problems
and projects. These students often come from the OSU Humanitarian Engineering
Scholars Program (e.g., they live in a dormitory together), take the course as part of
the OSU College of Engineering “Humanitarian Engineering Minor” (being developed
now), or are a part of our active OSU extra-curricular student engineering service
organizations. Students in my ethics in engineering class that I have taught at OSU
since 1991 have provided me a variety of U.S. and international perspectives on
ethics in engineering (which has a number of close connections to social justice,
discussed later in this book). Students from the OSU student organization
“Engineers for Community Service” (ECOS), of which I am the faculty advisor, have
provided me many inputs (and pleasant demands) since their formation in Spring
2004. I have obtained many useful inputs from the OSU “Humanitarian Engineering
Advisory Committee” led by Howard Greene. I have visited, given technical talks, or
delivered short courses in a number of countries where various people (e.g., over
lunch or dinner) have given me insights into their countries, including in: Colombia,
Guatemala, México, El Salvador, and Turkey. The OSU Muslim Student Association
Executive Board helped me with social justice issues. I have given talks on
humanitarian engineering and engineering ethics in a variety of universities and
thank the students, faculty, and practicing engineers who gave me a number of
insights: Several U.S. universities and Universidad El Salvador in San Salvador, El
Salvador. Also, I have been involved in some domestic and international
humanitarian engineering projects where I received feedback from locals and
learned some valuable lessons of practice: U.S., Honduras, Colombia, and El
Salvador. All these, and other countries I have visited (Turkey, Greece, Italy, Spain,
England, Wales, Sweden, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand), have taught me
about other cultures and a wide range of perspectives of others on the U.S.
Finally, I owe many thanks to my wife Anne for taking care of our children (Carina,
Juliana, Jacob, and Zacarias) while I was out gallivanting around the world; this book
would not exist if I did not have her kind, loving, and continuing help (i.e., these
days, one of her humanitarian activities).
Many thanks to each and every one of you. It has been fun!
Kevin
Columbus, Ohio, USA