Respecting Africa - the Socio- Technical Problems of Global ICT and Localisation

This has also been posted at http://incommunicado.info

In the recently held Copenhagen Conference on Africa 06 on the future cooperation between Denmark and the African continent, organised and conducted by the Danish government, the chair man of the African Union, Malian Alpha Oumar Konaré stated the following: ‘Africa need partners with a new attitude. Partners from all over the world, but partners who will follow the new rules: Respect the African development and adopt our priorities’. The reporter adds:’ Other than just developing the traditional sectors such as health and educational institutions Konaré is also looking for more respect from foreign donors countries – or partners as he consequently calls them [my italics]
This statement is important to adopt, when looking at development issues from a European country, where the logical assumption is that sending money to the so-called under developed countries is regarded as a means of solving the problems. In this economic cycle of donation, the roles of sender and receiver are maintained by the money flow of international donations, under the anticipated need for alleviating socio-economic conditions, giving the giver a privileged role, in terms of deciding what to support and how to obtain development goals.
Equally, the visions of information and communication technologies for development are articulating ICTs as machines that are to strengthen the position of development countries to improve their position in world economy for the equal prospect of socio-economic improvement. Where it can be agreed that development work should be increasingly more locally based, I will argue that the current articulations of ICT for development purposes are making this problematic.
An aspect I would like to emphasise is the methodological issues entailed in these logical constructions of giver and receiver when outlined as partnerships; in this context understood as a symmetrical relationship, between two partners, establishing an equal cooperation. This equality in cooperation could also be regarded as an emphasis of a change from an agenda defined by external entities towards a local level, particularly in terms of methodology employed for achieving development goals.
This requirement for the relocation of methodology is important to understand and take seriously in its practical consequences, particularly when it comes to the integration of ICTs. Information and communication technologies that are articulated as an imperative for Africa, with an argumentation finding its vocabulary in economic globalisation and high tech discourse can be argued to have risk for overlooking and overriding local perspectives and locally based issues; the seductive discourses on Cyber technologies (eReadyness, eDevelopment etc.) combined with global technical standards, rhetorically amplified by the imperative for becoming global members are inducing specific methods for use and integration, i.e. very diverse contexts and culturally different practices have to conform with a specific practice and standards established externally of the context of use. The implication of this is that asymmetrical partnerships are inevitably established advising top down practices.
Having conducted research in South Africa, I came across various instances where official governmental discourse outlined the imperative of information and communication technologies in particular rural settings indented to develop through the import of technology, however when interviewing those intended for ‘becoming developed’ there were indications that there was a limited understanding of why money were being spent on ICT as this one particular thing, rather than addressing more relevant local needs. I think that these are good examples of conflicts between local and externally defined practices and this stresses that there is the need for the shift in attitude towards developing countries and the subsequent need for relocating integration method, going from a unitary method externally defined by ICT discourse towards being pragmatically and locally based and implemented.
Furthermore I think that when it comes to the use of information and communication technologies for development it requires an ability to look beyond the very strong anticipations of the necessities of ICT, outlined by dominating traditional discourses of socio-economy and globalisation.
Thus, more concretely this shift in particular entails that the methodology of implementation needs to be designed in consultation with and respect of the local context, subsequently shaping the technology, and not the other way around. In this process it is highly important that European based practitioners and researchers connect, join, listen and learn from the particular settings at the African continent, rather than in a normative manner pre-establishing a standardised role and use of information and communication technologies; or to use the words of Konaré, ‘development’ has to take it start and end in African local issues, based on respect and understanding.

Source: Poulsen, U.: “Den dag Afrika rejser sig op” Kristeligt Dagblad, 11th of May 2006 (my translation)

Cheap Stuff from the West – On inexpensive ICT for the third world.

This has also been posted at http://incommunicado.info

Blogging about the 100 dollar laptop, Simputer and other low cost computer products aiming at solving problems in the third world may seem a bit late, as the hype of WSIS is slowly finding an everyday. However, I would like to take another approach to understanding this trend of cheap devices for alleviation of third world problems.
The logic behind these devices is that the cheaper a device is the more devices can be afforded by third world governments and placed in schools for educating poor children. The anticipated wonders and prospects of e-learning are sought to be proliferated to every little village. This could only be a project of goodness, where the possibilities of modern technology are being harnessed. However it also demonstrates a trend, which is problematic in various ways.
These devices are drawing together various discourses: it is financial: The price of the devices is the key argument for introducing these in the so-called third world, perceived as being the main barrier, when it comes to using ICTs. The countries that through the discourse of development have been dubbed as being poor logically need these devices to overcome this barrier. Secondly this is about enlightenment; information and communication technologies are providing information, which in this context equally means learning, education, knowledge and even anticipated as contributing to the development and implementation of equity (gender, economy etc.). Thirdly, the discourse on the very modern technology is being dragged in as well. These new devices are providers of connections they are windows to the world enabling every child to acquire the values and thinking from the modern western societies. So this cheap device trend is very straight forward and as a part of the modernising project of the third world it would seem like a great idea: Build a cheap, computer, sell it to poor countries and let technology educate these people for a better future. In this way, the cheap modern devices are representing a modern dream of using technology to solve problems, or as stated at the official website for the Simputer: The Simputer is a low cost portable alternative to PCs, by which the benefits of IT can reach the common man (my emphasis http://www.simputer.org/).
There are several problems in these rather simplified understandings of the problems faced by these areas and the easy solutions may even be distorting their own aims and targets.
Firstly, an interesting thing about this trend is the way in which the discourses of science and advanced technologies are increasingly being tied together with the discourses of economy i.e. in the development discourse issues around poverty. With the promise of a decrease in cost of these modern devices, technology now gets a role, where it’s benefits can be immediately harnessed and in this way fits very well into the sole focus on Socio-economic improvements by development rhetoric. Consequently, people working within science and technologies are able to fulfilling their visions of the mass proliferation of their technologies. The humanitarian ideals of socio-economic improvements are suddenly entailed in a physical artefact. With the modern institutions of Science, Enlightenment, Development Agencies and Economy working together there is an amplification of a unitary and homogenous definition of the third world countries now supported with physical devices, bringing the rhetoric of the western originating information society even closer together with development discourse. Rhetorically, the anticipated emphasis on the purely economic issue of poverty reduction as anticipated being a universal problem for virtually all countries outside North America and Europe still persist and the universal a priori anticipation of ICTs as beneficial in all cases (good here – good everywhere) adds to the homogenous picture of the third world poor country. I think that the biggest problem in this is that there is an increasing risk of easiness of ignoring perspective i.e. the trajectory and intentionality of who, who have an interest in this. Consequently, the practices from one perspective are being put forward as being universal and the only valid, ignoring the obstruction of local practices. In an interview with Wired News about the 100 dollar lap top, Nicholas Negroponte is asked the following question:


W[ired] N[ews]: Is the goal literally to make computers available to every child that wants one in the world?
And replies:
Negroponte: It's every child in the world whether they want one or not. They may not know they want one.
(http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,69615-1.html?tw=wn_story_page_next1)


In his mind there is no doubt that those who do not want this lap top should be almost enforced to get the thing and use it. This statement puts the technology in the driving seat as the remedy for saving those, who only appear as a rather undefined group of poor people. Apparently Nicholas sees no problems in intentionally enforcing other practices to other people; and he is backed up by this new (ish) close alliance between modern technology (and the promoted need for everybody to get technology), economic globalisation (and in development context the issue of poverty alleviation) and development discourse (homogenous dubbing of third world countries as poor). But the consequence may easily be that the targeted areas are getting fewer opportunities for actually taking a stand, evaluating and debating the integration of technology. Moreover, technology maintains and is strengthen in a stand, where it remains unquestioned and just anticipated as the necessary tool, consequently the space for debating technology becomes even smaller and the dominating western right version of technology implementation in a non western context becomes even stronger.
Only focusing on technology, as an issue of price anticipating that that could be a sort of solution for third world problems thus is only a solution in the isolated logic of modern development rhetoric. This easier solution of constructing ‘cheap devices’ may appear as a great idea, but outcome may in fact be a strengthening of a western position, where one solution easily silences local context and leaves out the voices of those, who are actually sought to be helped.

Membership of the Global West: Reflections about Globalisation and Third World ICT

This has also been posted at: http://www.incommunicado.info

Information and communication technologies are in the discourse around the development of third world countries an intergrated component. Development in the information society context means developing third world countries after model that entails making these to become like the western information societies. Through ICTs these countries obtain membership of the information society However this entails a number of problems and basis for further analysis:
Based on the notion from the development discourse, technology is equally constructed as ressource in the West that needs to be transferred to the Third World. As such entails same problems as described in development discourse and entails an even more radicalised version, since can now be excluded. Technology is suddenly a lot more than just improvement of production but also prescribed other values and as such strengthening/promoting the homogeneity of human rights etc. also critisied for enforcing the adoption of a western ethics, eradicating the multiplicity of local communities. However, when it come to analysing technology it should not be overlooked , that technology isn't just western, but that all technologies can be argued to be a part of practice in all civilisations. However the cultural aspect of these pratices should be emphasised in order to analyse this as a cultural exchange (human-culture, social-cultural). The focus on technicalities takes away this focus and technology shouldn't be seen as neutral, but also shouldn't be seen as the opposite since this would be an error. Banerjee at al. argue that technology is only a means for western countries to expand their control through capitalism, often with a military purpose; but we need to expand our notion and understand impacts on localities through this understanding as membership of the global imagined community. We need a different idea about technology in globalisation, as more than just something circulating in a capitalist circuit, but also as media technology with impact on imagined globalisation (appadurai). Following Anna Tsing it is important to examine the political-cultural and politico-economical aspects around projects claiming a locality and still yet claiming global membership of the information society. I think this is a pretty good way of approaching telecentres and multipurpose community centres, that are established as part of South African government initiative to 'transform' rural districts into information societies. Interestingly, transformation in a South African context is also linked to the post-apartheid process South Africa is currently undergoing, which aim is to empower previously disadvantaged groups. This only adds further complexity to the matter, as South Africa is a very heterogeneous society with a great awareness of indigenous cultures (an awareness endorsed by government) yet striving strongly to become Euro-style information society, accepting the cultural homogeneity of ICT. What impact does this have on localities? How is this dream of connecting far country side locations? How are 'rural areas' constructed in this tension (same question about these, at times very undefined, communities)? Very complex, but very interesting as well.