Africa Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 15:41:23 -0500 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear GKD Members: Having read, and re-read Lishan Adam's comments on the ongoing cycle of ICT Assessments, E-Readiness, E-Strategies, etc., I would have to agree with much of what is being put forward. I say this being one of those bottom-feeding, blood-sucking U.S. consultants who has participated in several of these "two week" ICT snapshots in a number of developing countries. I can't say that any of my efforts have resulted in 500 pages, but I do suspect a few of them passed a threashold in bulk where few except the most interested actually read the entire report. Without sounding too defensive, I would like to put forward some additonal thoughts: 1) If there is so much that is known already, why is so little being done? The phone has been around for over 100 years, yet in some parts of Sub-Saharan Afica there is only one per 1,000 population or even less. We don't need to analyze this much to know this is a less than optimal situation and that those living in these locations suffer as the result of this unconnectedness. I agree that when it comes to actions, there are no cookie cutter approaches that fits everywhere. However, there are frequently common recurring themes from place to place. And I suspect it is most frequently the fundamentals that are missing, not the marginal esoteric stuff. I'm not so sure I'd focus on those doing the assessments, nor even the large number of assessments themselves. But rather on those that pay for doing the assessments. To my knowledge those of us that have participated in these efforts are invited by someone or some organization to do them--we typically don't volunteer just for the fun of it. And those paying for these typically have a purpose in mind that at least makes sense to them and the context in which these are undertaken. 2) With rare exception, everyone of these Assessments that I have been engaged in has in fact resulted in action. In fact this is the driving purpose for undertaking the assessment to begin with. My efforts have used the two week process to build off of earlier work when possible, and to sift through tons of materials to identify those few key activities that if undertaken, hold the most promise for bringing about positive change. And yes, this incorporates the notion of identifying who on the ground are the local champions and can support local ownership for these actions. My view is rather simple, if the assessment effort hasn't gotten some trackion in "doing" something within 2 months, then in fact the time and funds spent may well have been wasted. I will also indicate that it is very rare where there haven't been action items initiated from those I've been engaged in. 3) In many of the efforts I've been engaged in, we have included local talent in carrying out the Assessment. This isn't done in every case, but in many of them. And it does make a difference for the positive when it can be done. Just lately I was engaged to carry out such an Assessment, found that one was already being done by local talent, and simply backed away from the project--deferring to the locally-grown effort. I don't know of anyone that wants to duplicate what has already been done. Those that I come in contact with want to add something of value by our efforts. 4) I suspect that many of these Assessments have in fact resulted in more action than may be apparent. The reports may well be but the shell or cull of an effort--the discards of a larger project or activity that went through an initial scoping or assessment phase on the way to actually doing something. The same may be said for national strategies. They are simply what we use to call, "end of phase" documentation, but do not represent the actual end of the larger activity. I can look back at some Assessments that I participated in that have been instrumental in triggering substantial amounts of followup action. But, if one were to pick up the report itself and ask, "what good was this effort?" and the answer given was, "just another report on the pile," it would be an absolutely incorrect answer! 5) I find amusing at times the argument posed as either or with regards to feeding the poor or investing in information technology. Even Bill Gates doesn't get it! First, this simply isn't a mutually exclusive/either-or argument. And second, it just may be that ICTs can feed the poor and feed them better. If ICTs can be leveraged to acquire information and knowledge that would allow a remote farmer in Mali to improve the yield on their maze by better techniques, or to suffer less croploss due to insects or spoilage, or be able to obtain a higher price from the buyer, then isn't technology in fact the same as feeding the poor? The same can be said for providing improved health care, expanding markets, or improving productivity. Again, E-Readiness and E-Strategies aren't the goal, they're simply a way station along the path of getting action. And in fact, I would say that it's really not even the "E-Actions" themselves that we are all after. Rather, it is the results of these actions that are the prize we're after. Actions are but a step towards these results. Darrell Owen ------------ ***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>
