Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[Vickram Crishna]

On 11/12/2003, Cliff Missen wrote:

> You can still go into markets in much of the developing world and find
> someone whose business it is to write letters for others. (I like to
> harken back to old American Western movies where the farmer strides into
> the Western Union Telegraph station, hooks his thumbs under his overall
> straps, throws back his shoulders, and drawls, "I want to send me a
> message to Warshington...")
> 
> Today, villager's messages are being delivered on paper to a Internet
> Cafe and then transcribed into email for delivery worldwide by someone
> who holds an email account. There may someday be a SERVICE that enhances
> this informal relationship to the point where a single "griot" can
> manage email accounts for hundreds of clients through a simple handheld
> device. It'll take a little tweaking of the current email and client
> software, but it's very possible.

Exactly. In fact, I am currently looking for a source of funding to
develop (with an expert technology source right here in India) precisely
such an application - voice mail to anyone anywhere, delivered over a
modern handheld based telecom system, using the Net's proven store and
forward paradigm. CDMA technology, recently deployed with an aggressive
and innovative approach, has begun to push the limits of deployment
already, with far many more connections in select rural areas in the
past few months than traditional telephony could achieve in fifty years.

My thesis for voice mail is something I emphasise again and again, the
situation on the ground is that peoples of old nations have hundreds of
living languages, only some of which are supported meaningfully by
written scripts. New technology or expanding the use of known technology
makes sense when such realities are incorporated or allowed for. I think
this applies to much of Africa and Asia. The idea of someone writing a
message for someone else is seductive (we have Rudyard Kipling's 'Kim'
as a classic literary example: as a young schoolboy, Kim uses an
itinerant roadside letter writer to send his postcards, and, BTW, you
will find such letter-writers sitting outside post offices everywhere in
India even today). We need to look beyond this system.

Thank you for the word 'griot', a fascinating concept, and very much
alive here in India, yet amazingly easy to diminish or destroy
unthinkingly.


On 11/13/2003, Don Richardson wrote:

> The telephone is the most basic unit of telecommunications service. The
> policies and programs implemented in support of rural telephony services
> are a critical part of the supporting environment for other rural ICT
> initiatives. In most cases rural connectivity can best piggyback on or
> leverage infrastructure that is primarily intended to support rural
> telephony. Among rural populations, voice communications will usually be
> the most immediately useful and easily accessible service (application).
> 
> In addition, a great deal of evidence shows that telephone services are
> the primary source of revenue for rural telecommunication services.
> Without that revenue, operators would have no justification to extend
> their networks to rural areas, and these networks are critical for
> supporting other applications like the Internet. For example, many
> research studies on telecentres and phone shops that provide both
> Internet and telephone services conclude that voice communications (i.e.
> phone calls) provide the overwhelming majority of telecentre revenues.
> For these reasons, it is important to examine in detail the rural
> telephony policy and programmatic issues that form part of the operating
> environment for broader rural ICT/connectivity initiatives. Basic
> telephone services enable agricultural extension stakeholders to
> creatively integrate a wide variety of other ICT applications that would
> not otherwise be possible.

In India, the 'partyline' system, where one telephone operator handles
outward dialing for many users, thus saving on installation costs and
allowing many users to share a single telephone line has always been
'legal', yet the rules were framed in such a way as to prevent its
implementation.

The reason is political: most likely to do with the inability of power
groups (even, and perhaps mainly, minor bureaucrats) to do anything that
brings about sweeping change. Formal submissions to regulatory bodies
over the past five or six years pulled out fiscal data to show how
impossible it is to deploy telecom in the rural areas of the country,
yet we have proven evidence today to show that the data was muddily
compiled. Towards the end of last year, a private audience with the
minister in charge gave him enough gumption to order the private
deployment of partyline telephone networks (but only for the rural poor,
not the urban poor). Although the largest telco here is still the
government owned provider, it will not lift a finger to extend its
networks with such services. The audience was not mine, I am 

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[Venkatesh (Venky) Hariharan]

In India, we have the public call offices (PCOs) -- essentially manned
telephone booths where the revenues are shared between the telco and the
PCO operator. There are more than 600,000 of these PCOs across the
country. There are many Community Information Centres where one can
access the Internet and according to some of my friends who love
travelling across India, these cybercafes are now appearing in remote
locations too.

A couple of examples of Community Information Centres are:

www.drishtee.com
www.e-choupal.com

Venky


Herman Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Cliff, this is a very interesting line of argument -- if this way of
> using the internet through an intermediary is a general practice in
> Africa because of the lack of connectivity, it might mean amending some
> of the theories of Internet communication from the idea of the Internet
> as a many-to-one or individualised, customised form of communication to
> one that is similar to the two-step flow of communication, where
> information is mediated by leaders or representatives in society.
>
> Can you perhaps point me to some case studies of this type of mediation,
> or to specific examples? Thanks
>
> Cliff Missen wrote:
>
>> Today, villager's messages are being delivered on paper to a Internet
>> Cafe and then transcribed into email for delivery worldwide by someone
>> who holds an email account. There may someday be a SERVICE that enhances
>> this informal relationship to the point where a single "griot" can
>> manage email accounts for hundreds of clients through a simple handheld
>> device. It'll take a little tweaking of the current email and client
>> software, but it's very possible.






This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

[GKD-DOTCOM] What's on the Horizon?

[Global Knowledge Dev. Moderator]

Dear GKD Members,

During the past three weeks, GKD members have discussed a number of
intriguing technical solutions to bringing access to underserved
communities, several of which have demonstrated promise in the field.
Especially noteworthy are various forms of wireless connectivity, in
combination with low-cost devices, e.g., the Solo. In addition GKD
members have noted that some pilots have already proven robust --
scaling them up requires policy change, training, tailoring to local
demand, and community involvement.

This week we ask GKD members to consider the distant future in ICT terms
-- the next 3 years. "Connectivity for All." It has a nice ring, but
success thus far has been limited. Funding is a central issue. Although
there are some impressive donor programs, some high profile,
multi-lateral donor commitments have fizzled. Perhaps, going forward, we
should follow the 80-20 rule: Focus our limited resources on pursuing
the few technologies and project approaches likely to have the widest
impact. Forgo experimentation and defer efforts to meet the needs of
those who will be most difficult to serve.

KEY QUESTIONS:

1. What new "high impact" technologies are on the 3-year horizon? Who
(exactly) needs to do what (concretely) to make those technologies
widely available?

2. What's the most valuable area for technology development? Voice
recognition? Cheap broadband delivery? Cheap hand-helds (under $50)?

3. Where should we focus our efforts during the coming 3 years? On ICT
policy? Creating ICT projects with revenue-generation models that are
quickly self-supporting? Demonstrating the value of ICT to developing
country communities?

4. What levels of access should we be able to achieve by 2007 in each of
the major under-served regions? Who (exactly) must do what (concretely)
to attain them?

5. What funding models should we develop over the next 3 years? Projects
with business plans that provide self-sustainability? Support from
multilateral corporations? Venture capital funds for ICT and
development?


We look forward to your valuable input and insights!





This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[Richard Koman]

Sorry for piping up without an intro, but I just returned from Uganda.
There community radio stations offer an email service to rural
listeners. Friends can email you care of the radio station and, at a
designated time, the radio will alert everyone who has received an
email. The charge for receiving an email in this way is approximately 5
cents.

I was in Uganda creating a digital bookmobile, which would download
public domain materials from the net, print and bind them into books and
distribute them to rural schools and families. So a form of mediation,
also?

But you mention mediation by societal leaders - I'm not advocating that,
just the use of humans as technical conduits to information for the
benefit of massively nontechnical populations.

- Richard Koman
Program Director
Anwhere Books
www.anywherebooks.org



Herman Wasserman wrote:
 
> Cliff, this is a very interesting line of argument -- if this 
> way of using the internet through an intermediary is a 
> general practice in Africa because of the lack of 
> connectivity, it might mean amending some of the theories of 
> Internet communication from the idea of the Internet as a 
> many-to-one or individualised, customised form of 
> communication to one that is similar to the two-step flow of 
> communication, where information is mediated by leaders or 
> representatives in society.
> 
> Can you perhaps point me to some case studies of this type of 
> mediation, or to specific examples? Thanks
> 
>
> Cliff Missen wrote:
> 
>> Today, villager's messages are being delivered on paper to a Internet
>> Cafe and then transcribed into email for delivery worldwide by someone
>> who holds an email account. There may someday be a SERVICE that enhances
>> this informal relationship to the point where a single "griot" can
>> manage email accounts for hundreds of clients through a simple handheld
>> device. It'll take a little tweaking of the current email and client
>> software, but it's very possible.






This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] How Much Bandwidth is Necessary?

[Don Richardson]

John,

Voice connections are still absent in far too many parts of rural Africa
- and other LDCs. Fola Odufuwa's email hits the nail on the head -
market liberalization, open investment climate, good regulation (that
supports universal access).

On a related note, while GSM may not currently be as Internet compatible
as we might wish, the very existence of TOWERS and backhaul from towers
provides the opportunity to use GSM towers for Wi-Fi and other non-voice
applications, provided the local market has a willingness and ability to
pay for such services. Incentives or mandates for tower sharing may
also be a vehicle to increase competitive telecom service in underserved
markets.

Besides wireless providers, other tower sharing opportunities exist with
public utilities, police and emergency services, radio and TV stations,
etc. In the US and Canada, thousands of untapped AM, FM, TV and public
utility towers are available for wireless coverage - often in rural
areas where wireless capacity and coverage are most needed for Wi-Fi and
cellular.

Even in North America, recognition of the need for progressive
regulation on tower sharing, and sharing of other tall structures, and
other geographic elevation points, is only just emerging. Much of the
interest in tower sharing is coming from desires for improve RURAL
telecommunication service.

In the US, some states and municipalities, are creating incentives for
tower sharing among competing operators. Incentives include expedited
consideration and approvals (zoning, construction and public safety
standards) by local governments for towers that will accommodate
multiple users, relaxation of environmental regulations when towers are
shared (reduced impacts on migratory birds, reduced visual impacts,
etc.). In Connecticut, the state can require tower sharing, and deny an
application for a tower if the proponent does not cooperate - potential
users of someone else's tower have the right to request reasonable use
of an existing tower, and the state can enforce tower sharing.

See
 for the example of Canada's
national antenna tower policy review which focuses attention on tower
sharing. In the US, the FCC is now maintaining a national database on
tower locations to assist with tower sharing.


Don Richardson, PhD.
Director
TeleCommons Development Group
Stantec Consulting
361 Southgate Drive
Guelph, Ontario
N1G 3M5
Canada
Tel: 519-836-6050; Fax: 519-836-2493
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.telecommons.com or www.stantec.com


John Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Since much of the Internet technology (laptops, telecentres etc) seems
> to be landline based, yet it is cellular telephony that is flourishing
> in many of the less developed countries, is there a 'disconnect' here
> that may be inhibiting the spread of the Internet to rural areas?...I
> just came back from Yemen where cellphones predominate, and coverage has
> been obtained over most of the country... so voice connections are now
> relatively normal even to remote rural districts...but Internet of
> course (notwithstanding the Arabic language issue) is largely confined
> just to cities...





This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] Improving Access Via Mobile Telephony

[William Lester]

Congratulations! Fola Odufuwa has got it exactly right, IMHO. As we look
for what was referred to in some previous posts as 'narrowband'
solutions, the evolution of the mobile phone from a simple audio
communication device to an internet gateway may prove to be the answer.
While we won't get the speed of high-end WiFi, we will get a
cost-effective solution to support low bandwidth applications, like
email, along with access to all the virtual knowledge centers on the
internet super-highway.

This is happening, not just in Africa, but all over the world - in
places where traditional wired infrastructure is too expensive or not in
place. We've seen this happen in Eastern Europe, where George Soros has
invested millions to help civil society by investing in wireless
technology, and we are seeing it happen today in the nation-building
efforts in Afghanistan and East Timor. Go to Cambodia and see how clever
people are bundling multiple inexpensive mobile phones into virtual GSM
internet gateways that can support email servers and web sites.

While there is no one solution for such a complicated issue, often one
workable solution will help us to move swiftly in the right direction.

Bill Lester

William A. Lester
CTO/Director of Technology
NinthBridge
a program of EngenderHealth
440 Ninth Avenue
New York, NY 10001
(Office) 212.561.8002   (eFax) 212.202.5167
(e-Mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
(URL) www.ninthbridge.org 
"The Means to The Mission"


Fola Odufuwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The only constraint to this happening now is two-fold. First is the
> limitation of GSM technology. GSM support for broadband Internet
> technologies, a key requirement to productive Internet access, is
> evolving at the moment. There is no clear-cut, globally acceptable
> single means of assessing the Internet via a mobile device on a GSM
> network. Whether it is WAP, GPRS, EDGE, or ETC (!), GSM support for the
> Internet is extremely weak. This is why bypass technologies such as
> Wi-Fi, and Wi-Max are in strong demand.

> The second reason is the poor usability of mobile phones as Internet
> access devices. But this problem would be solved and the Internet will
> soon merge with, and converge into, mobile devices. When that happens,
> the digital revolution in Africa would be even more explosive. Think of
> it again. The day you can conveniently use your regular mobile phone
> (and I'm not talking of expensive esoteric models as the Communicator)
> to send emails to your loved ones in the village and browse for current
> prices of cement (for instance), that day your need for the services of
> a place to browse would diminish! The place to browse would be right in
> your hands! And that day is not too far-fetched.





This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative
Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides
more information.
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
For the GKD database, with past messages:
http://www.GKDknowledge.org

Re: [GKD-DOTCOM] What Can and Should be Brought to Scale?

[Stella Hughes]

Scale up is clearly a challenging question and one that seems to have
left us all pondering since it was put to the list. UNESCO is going to
launch a scale-up initiative at the ICT4D Platform in Geneva (conference
event No. 1.3) on 10 December, together with the Swiss Agency for
Development and Cooperation as a key donor and the Heads of State of
three African countries as champions of scale up in their countries. Our
Community Multimedia Centre programme (CMC - combining community radio &
telecentre facilities) already has some successful pilots in Africa,
Asia and the Caribbean . The
proposal for going to scale was discussed at a Symposium in Dakar in
June  by some 20 international
development partners (IGOs, NGOs, bilateral agencies, Foundations...).
In UNESCO's view, scale-up could not be done without the active
involvement of all relevant partners working in the country.

Now to answer the questions:

> 1. Is scalability important -- or even valuable? Or are local
> communities better served by having a wide range of diverse activities
> tailored to specific contexts, shaped by local needs and priorities?

Is scale up important? We believe so - it is the only way to achieve a
critical mass sufficient to impact on development of whole societies and
regions and not remain restricted only to individual communities. It
obviously brings economies of scale. It also forces a re-examination of
the resource investment in pilots: is the investment in pilots realistic
or excessive when it comes to increasing the number of local projects?
It may scarcely be noticed that a project is not very cost effective at
the level of one village; it becomes glaringly obvious when planning how
to bring that project to scale. Can scale up allow for diversity, shaped
by local needs? Yes, if there is local ownership. A CMC offers a basic
communication and information platform for the development needs of a
community. The community can adapt and prioritise according to local
needs.


> 2. Are there examples of ICT projects that have successfully scaled up
> significantly? Please provide concrete information about cases.

We have begun searching for such examples at the same time as we are
planning this initiative and would welcome examples.


> 3. What specific critical factors lead to successful scalability? Are
> there common factors across pilots -- e.g., commitment of local
> leadership, technology that can be supported by an identified revenue
> stream, supportive public policies? Is it possible to devise a common
> set of "critical success factors" that can be used to assess which
> pilots should be scaled up? Would such a common assessment tool be
> desirable or would it stifle innovation?

We have no model to go on here, but we believe that as well as the
essential local leadership, there has to be genuine top level political
committment to facilitate the supportive public policy and regulatory
environment that is required - hence the mobilisation of Heads of State.
The also has to be real conviction on the part of donors and a
multistakeholder approach. At present, we are preparing the launch of
the initiative. The next stage will be the formation of consortia of
partners in the 3 countries to plan the project strategy in detail.


> 4. What pilot projects have attempted to scale up and failed? What can
> we learn from their experience? What critical issues led to the failure
> of scalability?

We are also currently searching for examples of failure for lessons
learned. Without anticipating on the findings, sustainability has to be
a key factor. The CMC generates its own income by functioning as a kind
of community cooperative - offering for-profit services alongside free
or subsidised services for priority groups based on development
priorities. That is one step towards financial sustainability.
Organisational & social sustainability have also to be addressed.


> 5. Are there "technology models" that seem particularly effective in
> addressing the needs of under-served communities and should be scaled?
> If so, what is needed to bring them to scale?

Our model is based on the active combination of radio together with
Internet and other digital resources. Community broadcasting that draws
on the information resources of a mini-telecentre reaches the whole
community, overcoming the barriers of language, literacy levels,
distance, lack of awareness etc that often limit individual
participation. The result is an exponential impact that just 3 or 4
computers with connectivity can have on a community of, say, 100,000
people.


> 6. Should local communities be more involved in determining what pilots
> go to scale? Do we need a global "help desk" that communities can query
> to determine the project approaches that best fit their needs? Or
> perhaps an "ICT and Development Consumer Report" that provides unbiased
> assessment of ICT project approaches?