Dear GKD Members, Many countries have already conducted e-readiness studies, while several more appear to be considering e-readiness studies with the support and encouragement of international donors. These efforts raise some major concerns:
1. E-readiness needs to build on not to duplicate... The idea of assessing national/institutional capacities is not new. It has been around for a long time except for adding the prefix "e"- to confuse governments, institutions and the rest of us. Telecommunications experts and consultants have been producing t- readiness and t- strategies since the Maitland report. Librarians and documentalists have been busy producing i-readiness, i-strategies, following the New World Information Order movement. I-strategies on developing National Scientific and Technical Information Systems (NATIS) were hot but now shelved forever. The National Information Infrastructure movement that began in the early 1990s spurred a number of countries to produce "thick" documents entitled "NII" plans. Driven by the African Information Society Initiative and other economic and globalization stimulus a number of African countries have been developing their national information and communications infrastructure (NICI) plans as of the same time. Advice on the need for national/institutional ICT strategies is thus as old as ICTs. (African countries were being advised to install mainframe computers to manage utilities as early as 1965.) Although these thick documents vary in quality, and in levels of stakeholder participation, they all discuss the same thing. At the end the problem remains: Africa is the ground for studies on studies, strategies on strategies and readiness on readiness, with little or no action. Many institutions and indviduals warn, but the cycle continues as fresh ideas emerge to run away with... 2. E-readiness for what? The whole thing sounds as if countries are getting ready to attack something to bring change overnight. Data and observation show the opposite. Absolute poverty is deepening in Africa. Even "key" economists that were enthusiastic about the impressive African GDP growth in the 1990s are conceding that structural constraints, institutional weakness, external shock, debt, war, draught, are haunting its macro-economic performance. E-readiness cannot happen in a vacuum. If macroeconomic performance is not going anywhere, what else can e-readiness do? How can one makes sure that relative strength in e-readiness is really what it means? Is what it means accepted universally or by a given country? Is there a universal yardstick/criteria to compare countries in space and time? 3. E-readiness methodologies need some revision. First, more work is required in developing the right indicators for the right countries and sectors. Beyond the problem of transposing issue of developed countries to developing nations, diversity among African countries presents a challenge. No two countries are/will be the same, thus one cannot develop a e-readiness/e-strategy toolkit that works for Mali and Malawi at the sametime and space (a friend of mine was suggesting to develop a "comprehensive!" toolkit for national strategies in Africa recently :-;). Second, a snapshot of the state of readiness is one thing, but understanding the underlying social, cultural, political setting and the incentives that led to the current situation in a particular country is another. Experience on the ground urges the need to move away from simplistic "two-week" snapshot figures to a fundamental assessment of the actual ICT situation on a long-term basis. This requires more than commissioning studies to consultants. E-readiness may work better through support to poor professors and graduate students in Africa - enabling them to build their national e-readiness knowledge base, to understand their problems better and chart local solutions. 4. We need to reduce confusing jargon... E-strategies in Africa have as many names and versions as the consultants that produce them. Confusion is abundant, what is the difference between e-strategies, national ICT strategies and information policies or informatics policies? What does a NICI plan mean? What is an ICT-led socio-economic development? What should countries do - feed their people or produce e-strategies? These were some of the questions that raised in a recent meeting in Johannesburg... 5. We need to streamline somehow what they are all about...Contents of e-strategies vary - some are as thick as 500 pages, others short and cooked. Most emphasize dominant scenarios in developed nations - liberalization, universal access, competition, and infrastructure development than the social capability needed to define and implement these strategies in the first place. E-strategies need some order. Effective e-strategies that are working in Africa seems to emerge from creative combination of local knowledge base, external information, participation of stakeholders and action by all with a goal to make differences to development and people. My expereince over the last five years shows that this is not as easy as producing the strategies. 6. E-actions as an ultimate goal, not e-strategies/e-readiness. At some point countries need to graduate from e-readiness to e-strategies and finally to e-actions by human beings. As in the case athletics or soccer, it is not only the readiness, or the strategies that count but also the final actions. Africa has been short of actions, e-strategies seems to add to the pile... In a group of experts conversation in a recent meeting in Harare, it occurred that there would be two options for action 1) small steps that make a difference and demonstrate that ICTs are indeed useful 2) bold steps and large scale projects in one or two areas that produce snawball effect at national level. As per small steps, there are plenty of "best practices" within Africa and elsewhere. Experience shows the latter requires some thought and analysis on the ground... 7. On a final positive note, one indicator that is missing from e-readiness assessment is a measure of "enthusiasm" of people on the ground. From a small businesswoman to a local teacher, there are people on the ground that make it easy to turn e-strategies to e-actions. I was in Mozambique recently to attend a national e-strategy implementation symposium. I was amazed by the quality of work by local people (experts) from all walks of life and by the leadership of the President and the Prime Minister. What makes a difference to e-strategies is this forward-looking leadership and action of people on the ground. Africa has an abundant supply of these people... Perhaps E-strategies should have strategies to search for these people and to empower them. These will do better jobs than the pile of plans... Thanks. Lishan ------------ ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: <http://www.globalknowledge.org>
