Thank you. Im kathleen hicks. I direct the National Security program here. Our ceo wanted to be here this morning to welcome the commandant, but hes been under the weather, so i get to both moderate the conversation and also do that. Before i begin, i just want to remind everyone that this is the fourth of our Maritime Security dialogue series of 2019. Our Maritime Security dialogue is cohosted between csis and our partners at the u. S. Naval institute. And our goal is to highlight Current Issues and future challenges facing the navy, marine corps and coast guard. I want to thank our sponsor, Huntington Ingalls industries who has made this possible. Today were talking with admiral karl schultz, a commandant of the marine corps. And i want to get right into it. We were lucky enough to have you join us in august of 2018. Pete daily was the moderator for that session and here we are a yearplus beyond that, a few months beyond that when you began which was roughly may 2018. I would love to
Ladies and gentlemen, please help me welcome the National Direct their of the freedom are youill stop encouraged . Are you feeling it . You understand now why we pulled and invited people to participate, at least for me, incredibly encouraging to hear and see and feel and reach out and touched the actual people who carry the very burdens that we ourselves carry and our own hearts and minds. So thank you for those remarks. Making it happen. As the senator just told us. It is a different animal. It is a different skill set. We want quick results. We want fast, urgent, immediate results. He know what . Sometimes the longterm results take a longer game. A longer perspective they had just one congressional cycle. One is election cycle. Next presentation is going to come from a gentleman that understands that intrinsically. The United States senate is a complicated body. The personalities involved are sometimes elaborate personalities. The rules themselves are nuanced and intricate. The poli
These villages. So if you have a small hall tank in your home, you can truck water to the home and fill the tank, and you can have faucets and you can have a shower and you can have some water in the home in that respect. But as it turns out, that model doesnt deliver a lot of water into the home. And so what weve learned is that homes that have honey buckets that have basically no system other than a central Watering Point where you go fill up buckets, they deliver about 1. 5 gallons of water per person per day. If you have a small hall system, they deliver about 2. 5 gallons of water per person per day. Now, the w. H. O. Recommends a minimum of 13 to 15 gallons per person per day of water. If you look at what the use is in the United States in general, we generally use about 50 gallons per person per day. So our villages in alaska are doing extreme, extreme water rationing, and we know that this isnt just true for alaska. There are other areas in the arctic, some of our other neighbo
And may never get it. So what do we do . Well, one of the interim steps that we had taken was to develop small hall Water Systems into these villages. So if you have a small hall tank in your home, you can truck water to the home and fill the tank, and you can have faucets and you can have a shower and you can have some water in the home in that respect. But as it turns out, that model doesnt deliver a lot of water into the home. And so what weve learned is that homes that have honey buckets that have basically no system other than a central Watering Point where you go fill up buckets, they deliver about 1. 5 gallons of water per person per day. If you have a small hall system, they deliver about 2. 5 gallons of water per person per day. Now, the w. H. O. Recommends a minimum of 13 to 15 gallons per person per day of water. If you look at what the use is in the United States in general, we generally use about 50 gallons per person per day. So our villages in alaska are doing extreme, e
Communities and clin igss and governments and others needs to know what works in order to know what to implement more widely. A number of questions arose, how do we do that . How do we know how communities define what works . Thats not always the same as the way researchers define what works. How do decisionmakers define what works and how do the different perspectives intersect . Finally as i mentioned, they noted there were two studies of interventions with the rigorous evaluation. Opportunities that we see from the u. S. Perspective for building on communities, first of all acknowledging that these kinds of problems need shared knowledge and tailored efforts. But when were tailoring intervention interventions, how can we be sure that others are learning from those interventions . If they are successful, whats required for implementation. And once an intervention is implemented, how can one ensure that the intervention can be sustained . So how can the results of successful intervent