Saving the world. Is there an app for that?

Apple’s iPhone, along with its infinite array of applications ("apps" as they are affectionately known) has been hugely successful, but is its most notable contribution to society yet to be realised? Nan King thinks she has a smart idea.

I HATE iPhone apps. Admittedly some are useful, but the world did exist without them. Before we knew which tube carriage to board to be nearest to our exit, we used to just walk a little further. I’m not convinced that was such a bad thing. And seriously, an app that turns your phone into bubble wrap so you can pop the bubbles? It’s like the jogging program for Wii Fit. Do people forget we have this amazing real world full of amazing real things? When the man who invented the bubble wrap app reaches 90 (I don’t know why I am assuming it was a man?) and he’s sitting in his nursing home, I have no doubt he will be thinking “thank gooodness I invented that app...!”

But the technological genius that many applications demonstrate is annoyingly impressive. Could this cleverness not be put to better use I wonder?

I work for a charity. At present the not-for-profit world is in a state of extreme anxiety. “Even though we are hearing reports of the end of the recession, for fundraising organisations the effects of the economic downturn are likely to be felt for some time,” says Lindsay Boswell, Chief Executive of the Institute of Fundraising, “...charities need to keep up their focus on fundraising.”[1]

Charities are trying hard and doing well to embrace web 2.0, and there are countless “digital media in the third sector” conferences urging them to dive headfirst into the world of Twitter, blogs and Facebook groups. But I have yet to witness the effective use of an iPhone app by a charity, or even an attempt to do so. So I have some proposals for the non-profit sector.

Firstly, I am curious about societal crazes like the Tamagotchi-mania that hit several years ago and more recently, applications like Farmville on Facebook. They all involve nurturing computational beings or “relational artefacts” as they are described by sociology professor Sherry Turkle of Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Turkle explains that: “When the cared-for object thrives... people are moved to experience that object as intelligent. Beyond this, they feel a connection to it.”[2] This behaviour is not a childhood phenomenon, the craze transcends adult society and I have many friends addicted to Farmville. If “relational artefacts” can evoke such motivations in individuals, could charities not harness this to aid their campaigns?

More specifically, I am suggesting that a charitable organisation like the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) could create an application whereby when a donor sponsors a dolphin or adopts a polar bear, their personal animal is represented as a computational being by their iPhone app. As the person donates more to their adopted animal, the iPhone animal thrives, which positively reinforces the donors' giving behaviour.

Here’s another suggestion. Charities often rely on direct debits from regular donors and the last survey by NCVO (the National Council for Voluntary Organisations) showed an increase in the cancellation of such arrangements, presumably attributable to the recession.[3] Perhaps here too charities could embrace our bizarre love of computational objects. Oxfam for example could create an app where a £30 a month donor could choose how their £30 donation was spent. Five mosquito nets and a chicken? Each item bought would be represented by an icon added to their homepage as a constant reminder of their good work. Or perhaps they put that month’s donation into a savings account to buy a water pump or a hospital for a village. Each month their app shows them how close they are to purchasing the desired item. Still further, the app could send requests. For example, if there was a particular need for antimalarial drugs in Malawi this spring, a personal request could be sent to each donor.

At first this sounds like an administrative nightmare, but with the right data analysis built into the application software, the charity could be supplied with a monthly report on how donors wanted their money to be divided. It’s no different to their current gift system where people specifically purchase a goat or a cataract operation.

Another objection might be that the use of apps in this way would trivialise the plight of those in need. Then again, does it matter if it raises more funds and engages more people in giving?

The recurring theme here is involvement. Connection. Empowerment. The more involved and empowered a donor feels, the more positive they are about their giving, and the more likely they are to continue their direct debit, or even increase it.

I am no market research expert. I cannot predict this would work, particularly as I have failed to understand these crazes myself in the past. I never owned a Tamagotchi and I can think of a million things I’d rather do with my time than care for farmyard animals on Facebook, but who knows. If it worked, it would surely be a better use of the amazing iPhone app technology than popping bubble wrap. Making the world a better place? Surely there should be an app for that.

Footnotes

[1] http://www.institute-of-fundraising.org.uk/pressnews/topstories/Charitiesremainanxiousasrecessionhitsthethirdsector

[2]http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/story/101.html

[3]http://www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/advice-support/funding-finance/income-sources/individual-giving