Chicken:Egg :: Problem:Solution

What came first?

Chicken? or egg?

Well, the debate has been going on for ages and the verdict it still not yet out, unless one considers assertions made by some British Scientists last year, who believe that it was chicken which came out first.

Now whether it was chicken or egg, there is a very remote possibility that it is going to  affect anybody's life now.

But the same cannot be said in the case of problem and solution.

What comes first?

Or more importantly, what should come first?

Problem?

or Solution?

And should we be bothered which comes first?

Should we have a problem and then we find a solution for it, or should we come up with a solution and then try to tag problems to it?

If it isn't making sense to you, let us try to illustrate with an example which I have attempted to keep simple.

Let's assume someone comes up with the idea of installing a tap for clean air. Every house in a  locality/city be equipped with a tap through which clean air could be fed directly into the house. Let us now think of its potential benefits: it could help people get access to clean air directly in their homes; it could also help everyone get access to clean air without discriminating between them; it could save efforts for people; and it could also have other related medical benefits.

In the above case, we came up with an idea first, which we call the solution, and then we tried to attach or tag problems to it. Problems did not seem to exist initially, and if they existed, they did not seem to warrant a solution.

Consider another case: People in a locality are having problems with a nearby industry discharging effluents in the local pond. They then approach the authorities which make the industry install effluents treatment plant inside the premises. This then results in no harmful effluents being discharged.

In this case, we had a problem and then a solution to it was arrived at.

So, what's the difference between the two cases?

In the first case someone thought of installing pipes and taps in every household, and once it was decided to do it, reasons were found to justify it or make it more appealing to all. While one does not dispute benefits which could arise due to such efforts, one need to ask could the problems (now being identified) have been not been dealt in a different manner? In other words, was installing taps the only option to provide clean air? Could maintaining green cover in the city or reducing pollution in the locality not have been solved the problem?

We see numerous cases around us where someone (in power, in most of the cases) comes up with an idea (called solution afterwards) and then tries to attach problems to it, or in some cases even manufacture problems to justify the solution.

And who bears the cost of such innovative solutions?

It is those with the least voice, and in most cases they are the urban/rural poor.

It is not only the poor in all cases, but in many cases, cost is borne by a large section of society, while the benefits accrue to the select few who conceptualized the solution and consequently the problem.  

Names of cities and states are changed in the name of instilling honour among the citizens. No one dare ask the cost of such solutions (forget asking whether changing names is the only solution or not) !

Locations for airports and institutions are chosen in such a manner so as to benefit the select few making the decisions. Later on numerous attempts (which are often self contradictory and hilarious) are made to justify the selection of the location !

Projects are launched in cities and districts and are projected as the panacea for all problems. And because many problems have been tagged to the solution, no one thinks of questioning the solution as doing so will appear as being irrational. Whether or not these solutions actually solve the problems they claim to solve is a different topic. The fault is then passed on to the implementation and administration, rather than those who made hay while conceptualizing such projects. 

There are multiple instances like these which we come across our daily lives once we try to delve into such instances. My aim here has not been to point out particular instances or to pass a judgement, but rather to make an attempt to illustrate issues related with identifying solutions ahead of problems.

So what is it?

Solution?

or Problem?

And what should it be?

Solution?

or Problem?

PS: I do rule out the possibility of a solution-first scenario actually solving certain problems. But I am doubtful if a solution-first scenario actually solves every problem it claims to solve.