Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Chris Bragg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I think there is a real value to the observation that many development projects stray on the wrong side of the 80/20 rule in an effort to ensure maximum value from the project, I cannot agree that the factors effecting decision making are in any way different from one community to the next, when viewed at the point where the decision is finally made. Whether a committee, election processes or referenda, or a single autocratic individual makes the choice the important fact is that the decision is made on the basis of existing knowledge and a necessity to reach a decision, for one or other reason. It may be that multiple people make the decision and then cast a vote, or it may be one person makes the decision, but the principle is the same in each case. In an ideal world, all decisions would be rational and evidence based. In the real world, amost none are. The experience, perception and understanding (i.e. knowledge) of those who perceive a need to make a decision and the quality and quantity of existing knowledge of those who make the decision, will impact on the decision whoever makes it. Whatever form and shape that knowledge takes, whether induced by a formal university degree, or a specific research study, or traditional folklore, or social awareness and political understanding of what is desirable or not, surely we can safely accept that in the general sense 'better knowledge' will lead to 'better decisions'. Better knowledge has the potential to lead to better decisions if you mean rational and evidence based decisions. But for many (most?) people rationality and evidence can be tossed aside at the drop of a hat. I have a health economist friend who does very good work for a number of agencies including WHO. Her work is very rational, accessible and based on good data. It shows what optimal level of investment in primary prevention could yield in long term chronic care savings and quality of life. Pretty basic stuff that some detailed costing data and a spreadsheet can generate. It also amounts to many millions saved that could be invested in education, welfare etc. Not to mention thousands of lives in which chronic care is prevented. Selling this message to the health fraternity is very difficult because innoculation, health screening, regular checkups etc. aren't empires. Running a hospital is an empire. Millions spent in imaging and other equipment is an empire. Nurses with a clip board do not make an empire. Apart from that, being rational doesn't leave much flexibility for political ploys. Cutting out breast imaging for women under a certain age may be rational because it yields no real benefits, but try selling that rational decision to a voting public in a marginal electorate. I think it is a common mistake for the rationally trained to believe that others appreciate rationality, logic and evidence. It is a mistake I made after 15 years as an academic. When I asked people to write up their arguments, evidence, methodologies and logic as a consultant I was simply regarded as an argumentative jerk. I was willng to accept the best argument from any source, but most of the people I worked with knew what I didn't- that rationality had very little to do with anything. Indeed, the vast majority of people have very little understanding of anything logical. I think I mentioned in an earlier post that one of the barriers to aircraft over 1000 passengers is not technology- it is simply the fallout that a crash of a single plane would have on passenger risk perception. Again, the risks would not have shifted but people will not be amenable to a logical contradiction. If you really look, there are many structures, processes and policies in any society that are plainly irrational and which persist because it suits the status quo or because change is simply unacceptable to the populace as a whole or to influential groups. Self interest is an amazingly rational thing for the individual and a disaster for the whole. (shades of tragedy of the commons). If people don't have time to gather better knowledge we have to find ways to enable them to have time - and this means a better standard of living usually, basic needs like fresh water and food closer to hand and electricity/light to extend daylight hours, and as so rightly pointed out, the opportunity to apply better knowledge for immediate and long term benefit. Yes, when people (usually individuals) have the power to implement their decisions, then better information does indeed yield better decisions. But as pointed out above, once an implementation decision needs to be filtered through some approval process, then the politics of the group and the divergent interests of the individuals that comprise it come to the fore. Perry Morrison http://www.alteich.com/links/morrison.htm http://www.geocities.com/perrymorrison/oz_aboriginal_comms.html ***GKD is
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
In a message dated 4/8/02 7:53:32 PM, Don Cameron [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I do not see quantity of time spent on a computer as necessarily having any particular significance to a students future prospects, (unless it is truly miniscule, or the student fully intends to complete tertiary studies and enter the IT industry), rather I view the quality of tuition and tasks performed by the student as elements offering the highest degree of pay-back. I have gone to schools in other countries where the professor and his notes are the resident knowledge, which did or did not reflect the knowledge in the field. You also are talking about a student generically. Students in a class are usually very diverse. There are students who may already know the subject well, who have read and learned a lot and who would be further interested in the subject based on their ability to aquire resources, contacts, materials, and other types of learning. We could use space science, medicine, earthscience, and or literature as a test case. Though there are a lot of titled individuals who are quite skilled in teaching and learning , there is no one teacher who is the respository of all knowledge. The Internet does not contain all knowledge either, but to an interested student at any level with requisite skills, there is a treasure chest of experts, websites, references, magazines and ideational scaffolding for learning. Bonnie Bracey ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Dear GKD Members, I'm glad to see that Yacine's intervention has opened up the debate somewhat to include a consideration of the role of ICTs in society. However, I think it's still important to point out the need to not be technologically deterministic when considering the role of ICTs in society. I agree with Luis Eliecer's contribution, we need to see technologies as means to ends. I've been prompted to make this contribution after looking at some evaluation Panos has done of some of its work in Southern Africa using the (albeit non ICT) technology of radio. It is quite clear that Panos' particular use of radio involving a system of listening clubs to facilitate discussion and intervene in the broadcaster/listener relationship has achieved at least one of its objectives in empowering women to take part in broader discussion on issues of concern to them. This empowerment has also enabled them to take part in other fora and to take on leadership roles beyond the scope of the project facilitated by the particular media technology concerned. For the purposes of this discussion I'd like to see more evidence of understanding of just how ICTs are being and can be used to empower the poor and marginalised in the majority world. Alec Leggat Project Development Panos London 9 White Lion Street London N1 9PD tel +44 (0) 20 7239 7608 fax +44 (0) 20 7278 0345 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.panos.org.uk ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
At 10:50 AM -0500 04/03/02, Lolita A.Wood-Hill wrote: One set is being taught how to make the computer work for them (able to program it for their own purposes), the other set is being prepared to use that same computer as a glorified typewriter for the purpose of being a white collar worker. So the exposure to computers is not a magic formula for bringing the masses out of poverty but another means whereby we train folks for the higher end and lower end jobs of society--as we've always done. It is sad but not surprising. I have a slightly different take than Lolita Wood. My sense is there is not nearly enough connecting the dots between the (computer) training and a real world job - particularly in the tele-work arena. How many know that Amazon.com contracts a major portion of its electronic help desk from India? Whether it's programing or helping with an airline reservation, isn't the *main* point that more people (on the wrong side of the digital divide) need to get better jobs? US$5.00 an hour may not seem like much in Los Angeles. But how about in Lagos? John Hibbs www.bfranklin.edu ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
To Yacine: It is hard to disagree with your pithily expressed frustration, or sharp definition of the social schisms underlying the 'digital divide' (DD) however I would suggest there is some political utility in keeping these two words as a sort of quick shorthand.. if it can focus the attention of policymakers ... DD resonates at several levels, after all, one of the first references was in the US (then) Vice President Gore's introduction of a US Internet policy, and what could be called the 'Carthage' principle... where he said that if the information highway bypassed his birthplace, Carthage, Te (pop 2251), he was not interested in promoting it... and the big question was how to build on-ramps accessible from small rural areas admittedly this ignores critical development issues like literacy, language of access, utility of information, and modalities in zero-electricity regions. but I would not disregard the value of the DD label as a good shorthand for mobilizing political will and thus (hopefully) resources ... while surely we must not ignore underlying social factors which are truly important, the speed is so precipitous at which community Internet access technologies are moving, we can scarcely afford to wait...here follows a quick personal (admittedly 'northern') anecdote to illustrate.for years like many, I have used all kinds of devices/strategies to get at my email while travelling... and found it sometimes easier in Africa or India than in rural US or UK...but when an Internet cafe popped up in London Heathrow, with branches in some motorway rest areas out in the countryside..I joined happily, and received a little card (named E-Internet Exchange with a logo suspiciously close to UNESCO's!)..that was stamped each time, promising bonuses to frequent users... now, it seemed, my access problem was solved for pennies a visit EXCEPT I had not allowed for the vagaries of the 'free' market system (nor the awesomely steep technology curve)... two weeks ago I smugly steered my car into the Oxford (M40) motorway service center to have a coffee and pickup my email.. but lo and behold.. the shiny computer consoles were nowhere to be seen, no eager service person ushering me to my keyboard, just tables, trays and people eating I found the 'manager' who apologised and said there was just not enough business to justify continuing the cyber-investment.so I began to twitter through early stages of e-withdrawal ...on the way back through London, I found part of the reason for the demise of roadside E-Internet Exchange..near Victoria Station is a cavernous cybercasino-type facility (which did not honour my little card)... where there were at least four times as many consoles, and no expensive 7/24 service-person, just cash machines like a swiss busstop, where you put in your coins or banknote, and out comes a unique password... good for 60 minutes... you then wait your turn for one of the scores of folks to get up ... you leap in, sit down, enter your password at the prompt, and the Internet is yours interestingly, this is only a block from the new DFID HQ one wonders if that is pure chance? this is the first time I have encountered this kind of automated Internet cafe... but maybe others have seen it elsewhere? certainly it must be confined (like big hospitals, well-financed public schools) to wealthy, probably urban areas? again endorsing the metaphor of the 'digital divide'. Yacine Khelladi wrote: Just as we seek to close the Digital Divide between the North and South, We are sick and tired of the digital divide problem. The REAL problem is how are we going to use the Strategic opportunities offered by the ICTs to close the SOCIAL divide. And avoid digital divide initiatives that deepen the social divide. This is not a semantic problem, but a vision that encompasses all of our objectives, methods and actions, to use ICTs for sustainable human development. ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Thanks to contributors who have raised this topic. The issues do need to be clarified. How can we have clarity of thoughts and communication without clarity of language? May I illustrate the problem by describing a project in rural Nigeria. Its long term vision is for community development. Communication across the digital divide is an important feature - but I am at a loss for effective words to describe it if we are to avoid being misunderstood. The project combines community development and digital bridges. It was initiated by someone who belonged equally in the rural community and the ICT community (the late Peter Adetunji Oyawale) and his vision for development combined what he knew of the two cultures. The project foundations are both in rural Nigeria and also on the connected side of the digital divide (more information on www.cawd.info). In Nigeria, the project has the commitment of local chiefs, local government officials, teachers and farmers, and the benefits of all their formal and informal communication networks. That means the project can communicate with considerable effectiveness across a large rural area that has no telephone network, a postal service of dubious reliability, and a large number of adults who need help with the written word. With regard to descriptive words this is definitely a community development project, and it aims to introduce sustainable initiatives. On the connected side of the digital divide the project is supported by people like me who knew Peter when he was a skilled ICT professional working in the UK. I can easily take advantage of the Internet on behalf of the project. This is what makes it, even at this early stage, a project that reaches across the digital divide. Communication between Nigeria and the UK is by whatever means we can manage, and includes physically delivering web-page printouts to Nigeria to overcome lack of Internet access for the community development committee members. On both sides of the digital divide we share Peter's vision for community development, which, to oversimplify, is based on opportunities for self help through access to information. Ultimately what we want to do is provide an integrated dynamic effective multi-directional community information system. Our long-term vision includes existing community communication structures, Community Digital Information Centres (CDICs - staffed to provide a human interface and maximise inclusiveness) offline web-page libraries, email, public telephones, online web access, and a community radio service. We already have some small pieces of this information system beginning to take shape. These include a local broadcaster ready to help us do some slots on existing radio channels, the likelihood of a small solar powered email bureau and web-page library in the heart of our rural area later this year, and a probable VSO worker - to help act as a catalyst to increase the two way flow of information among people at the edges of the project. So we have long term vision and something that we describe as a digital bridge community development project. At one time those words seemed right - but now they seem too empty and, in some people minds, almost reduce down to 'putting some online computers in somewhere', or 'doing some IT training'. What other words are there? How can we best describe clearly and succinctly what we are trying to do? Pam McLean [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Yacine raises a very important, but I fear often overlooked point: any technologies, ICTs included, should only be seen as a means to an end. Acquisition of technologies should never, or at best very very rarely, be seen as the end in itself. And, partly adopting a role of Devil's Advocate, I can also see an equally important question implied in Yacine's comments: the diffusion of ICTs benefits both the consumer and also the provider. And it troubles me somewhat that the latter, in many (most?) cases can often be traced back to the large, frequently multinational and essentially western-based, corporations (naming no names, but I think we all know who I mean!). We should never forget that these vendors (not unnaturally!) have strong vested interests in developing new markets; and those of the developing world - in particular in South and South-east Asia - are probably the most significant of all of these in terms of the numbers of people involved and the revenue they could generate for the suppliers. In such circumstances, adopting technologies without also having full access to their underpinning conceptual and operational foundations could be very risky, and creates a culture of dependency, as well as having potential security implications. When I read Yacine's comments, I started wondering whether the marketing strategies of at least some of these large multinational corporations doesn't foster and, perhaps even depend on, the entrenchment of both the digital and the social divide? After all, the acquisitive instinct is one of the most powerful allies of the entire advertising / marketing industry worldwide! We all want to be the kids with the newest and fanciest toys in the neighbourhood, and the news and advertising media hardly discourage such motives! I accept I am quite new to this forum, but even within this GKD group, I have seen very little discussion of these questions? Comments anyone? Darius * Darius Bartlett Department of GeographyRoinn na Tireolaiochta University College CorkColaste na hOllscoile Corcaigh Cork, Ireland Corcaigh, Eire Phone: (+353) 21 4902835 Fax: (+353) 21 4271980 Phone(GSM): (+353) 86 8238043 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.ucc.ie/staff/djb ** Yacine Khelladi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are sick and tired of the digital divide problem. The REAL problem is how are we going to use the Strategic opportunities offered by the ICTs to close the SOCIAL divide. And avoid digital divide initiatives that deepen the social divide. This is not a semantic problem, but a vision that encompasses all of our objectives, methods and actions, to use ICTs for sustainable human development. ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Yacine raises a good point, and it relates to both semantics and actions. Terms and expressions such as bridging the digital divide and sustainability stand for concepts and approaches to development that mean (meant) something, but their formulaic repetition tends to blur them into meaninglessness. With regard to the bridging the digital divide discussions, I've long thought that what is really being proposed and ultimately accomplished is replicating the global divide on smaller (national and ever more local) levels. Indeed, this will at least in the short term coincide largely with the lines of social and economic divides of long standing. To a certain extent this may be unavoidable, and one certainly should not minimize the challenges facing or efforts made by people and projects working in this area. But it is important as Yacine suggests and we probably all would agree, to try to be aware of the impacts of ICT for development projects on existing inequalities, and above all to have a longer term vision. Don Osborn [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Bisharat! A language, technology development initiative *Bisharat! Initiative langues - technologie - developpement http://www.bisharat.net ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
Re: [GKD] Digital Divide vs. Social Divide.
Dear GKD Members, I'm in basic agreement with Yacine Khelladi. For the last several years I have referred to the Education Divides, the Opportunity Divides and Economic Divides (all similar to what you call the Social Divide) that pre-date and help to shape the Digital Divide (and I know others who share a similar view). And I think she is right that how we conceptualize these various divides influences the plans we make and the actions we take in fundamental ways. I think a key challenge that I have perceived is how to conceptualize the prior divides and the vision for sustainable human development in light of the opportunities, threats and as-yet-undetermined possibilities of digital technologies vis a vis any of a number of other development strategies and imperatives. I, for instance, think we under-theorize the actual and potential damage and/or benefit for sustainable human development that can be realized by THOSE WHO ALREADY HAVE GREAT ACCESS TO DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES. How are those with privileged access wielding that privilege? This to me is a key, virtually unasked question. By focusing only on getting access for those who don't have it (and I'll just mark as an aside that I mean access to refer to as rich, meaningful, multifaceted and social uses and designs of technologies as we can conceive), we, imho, let certain folks who already have tremendous access off the hook (i.e., we don't hold them responsible for turning their access to the most beneficial ends for achieving sustainable human development). I don't mean to downplay the potential importance of access for those who don't have it, only to point out that getting access has only limited positive effects if those with greater access are using that access in ways detrimental to sustainable human development. That to me is a major flaw of the digital divide currently conceived. Thanks for your point Yacine. In Peace, K. ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, an NGO that is a GKP member*** 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.edc.org/GLG/gkd/
