3 ms·

I agree, but this is a human system so efficiency is never the only concern. Would people feel comfortable handing their possessions over to a central service?

I agree, but this is a human system so efficiency is never the only concern. Would people feel comfortable handing their possessions over to a central service? Would they trust the people running it? Should they? Would people appreciate the overall time savings of a centralized service, or would they prefer the flexibility of being able to wash whenever they need? Which solution is more efficient for people who live in very remote places and can't easily travel? Is it really feasible to ask overburdened and underfunded administrators to set up another centralized system on top of food, water, medicine, shelter, education, etc.? If they have no capacity to take on more work, a distributed system might be better.

dredmorbius 5y ago
There are different models of centralisation, and yes, trust is a factor in several ways. "Centralised" needn't be "a single centre serving an entire camp", though that's clearly one model. It could also be nodes distributed amongst every-so-many refugees, based on a full-utilisation estimate. Say: every family does laundry 1x weekly, for 2 hours, within a 12-hour day, 6 days a week, giving one washing machine per 36 families. Hypothetical though plausible numbers, modify assumptions to arrive at different values. If a family has 4 members, this would be about 7 machines per 1,000 camp inhabitants. Are we comparing 250 x $30 hand laundry systems (1 per family) vs. 7 x $100 laundry systems (plus power and water)? The electrically-powered machines would be 1/10th the total cost, though requiring greater coordination and infrastructure. The service might be fully staffed, or a family member would operate the washer. The risks for a full-service laundry are of loss of clothes to the refugees. The risks of a self-service laundry is abuse or damage to the equipment to the providing and/or managing agency or operators. One problem facing refugee camps is that they're organised on the explicit assumption that they are temporary, and that there isn't an economy --- people not only don't work and produce goods and services, they often cannot by camp and government regulations. A resident-operated laundry might be sensible, but prohibited.

dredmorbius 5y ago

There are different models of centralisation, and yes, trust is a factor in several ways. "Centralised" needn't be "a single centre serving an entire camp", though that's clearly one model. It could also be nodes distributed amongst every-so-many refugees, based on a full-utilisation estimate. Say: every family does laundry 1x weekly, for 2 hours, within a 12-hour day, 6 days a week, giving one washing machine per 36 families. Hypothetical though plausible numbers, modify assumptions to arrive at different values. If a family has 4 members, this would be about 7 machines per 1,000 camp inhabitants. Are we comparing 250 x $30 hand laundry systems (1 per family) vs. 7 x $100 laundry systems (plus power and water)? The electrically-powered machines would be 1/10th the total cost, though requiring greater coordination and infrastructure. The service might be fully staffed, or a family member would operate the washer. The risks for a full-service laundry are of loss of clothes to the refugees. The risks of a self-service laundry is abuse or damage to the equipment to the providing and/or managing agency or operators. One problem facing refugee camps is that they're organised on the explicit assumption that they are temporary, and that there isn't an economy --- people not only don't work and produce goods and services, they often cannot by camp and government regulations. A resident-operated laundry might be sensible, but prohibited.