Summary

In this article, Ramirez argues that the potential for ICTs as tools to enhance development remains undetermined, primarily because the technologies involved have their roots in a developed, Western, and industrialized setting. In order to apply these technologies to rural community settings, new paradigms for analysis and an entire new epistemology are required. This new framework for analysis is decidedly post-modern and Ramirez proposes that elements gleaned from the emerging field of natural resource management (NRM) are appropriate for the ICT for development (ICT4D) field as well. This approach is based on four central pillars: acknowledging diversity in paradigms; embracing pluralism; embracing a systems approach; and emphasizing learning and participation. The paper describes ongoing action research towards this end and the attention paid to stakeholder engagement, assessment, and capacity development.

Key Points

Assessment in the field of ICT4D is possibly one of the areas most neglected in the creation of projects and policies, in large part because the tools for assessment are wholly inappropriate. This is because the source of the ICTs is an entirely different environment than the one in which ICT4D is working. Nevertheless, policy makers seem to be inclined to take the leap of faith that involves the massive investments that are taking place, but are the potential users of this technology prepared to take this leap as well? As the technology becomes more complex, it becomes less predictable and the idea of a single best practice becomes more elusive. Because this venture represents a new and unexplored arena, the author suggests that a new language is needed to understand it. In assembling a new epistemology, the author argues that a multidisciplinary approach is critical (as NRM is) and should incorporate several important pillars.

The first is the acknowledgement of a diversity of paradigms, a single approach to research, planning, and implementation is not shared by all and will not contribute to constructive development. The problem is that ICTs are embedded with modernist technologies and policy – and that their advocates cherish this perspective. Ramirez, however, argues that when placed in the development context, ICTs are best evaluated using a post-modern paradigm. ‘Mediators' are needed to bridge the two perspectives and it must be recognized that the successful appropriation of the technologies is dependant on the amount of local control.

The second pillar is embracing pluralism, and the recognition that accommodating multiple interests is necessary. NRM has been particularly successful in producing methodologies that include various forms of collaborative management, learning and appraisal. ICT4D needs to move along this same route and recognize a diversity of truths, goals, and systems. This also involves being open to a broad range of scientific disciplines and methods.

The third pillar involves embracing a systems approach because of the sheer complexities of the interactions involved in ICT4D (and ecosystems). ICTs have many layers, hierarchies and feedback and communication features that require holistic evaluation in order to facilitate understanding. This is in contrast to engineering approaches that dominate ICT assessment and focus on the reduction of issues to individual parts. A key contribution to this thinking is soft systems methodology (SSM) and its notion that stakeholders involved in a system are ‘owners' of a problem and thereby must be involved in the solutions process. ‘Soft' refers to the human and organisational realm of relationships.

The fourth pillar emphasizes learning and participation and the recognition that multiple stakeholders are involved when utilizing ICTs for community development goals. For ICTs to have an impact, users must define what they want from the technology. They need to participate in design, and the definition of evaluative measures. Participation, however, is not without room for critical evaluation, and attention must be paid to political/cultural context, reasons for participant interest, and the willingness and ability to participate of those invited. Research has shown that a number of features can help to make technology relevant: (1) access through public spaces, (2) allowing community members to experiment with ICTs, (3) allowing community members to ‘dream', (4) planning around their aspirations, and (5) organizing to make those aspirations a reality via infrastructure, applications, and skills.

These four pillars lay the groundwork for an action-research approach to ICT4D that will provide both knowledge and initiative for projects. This action-research can then lead into larger community engagement opportunities through workshops that assist in the planning for the use of ICTs, information and data sharing, explorations into how progress should be measured and provision of management tools for needs assessments. It is also important to track ICT4D systems performance on multiple levels: by measuring community level access; by monitoring the growths in capacity of sectors and organizations; and by paying attention to individual skills and knowledge.

This paper attempts to build a bridge between the established theoretical and methodological perspectives of NRM and the nascent ideas behind ICT4D. The two fields of study share many commonalities and the author believes that by adopting many of the lessons learned in NRM, a new, and more appropriate epistemology for ICT4D can be developed using the metaphor of a kaleidoscope – the multi-prism tool that allows for differing perceptions of reality that are a feature of the world of development.

Source: Ricardo Ramirez, "Bridges Across Disciplines: Lessons from adaptive management of natural resources that inform the analysis and planning of information and communication technologies in rural and remote communities." Draft 1. Contact rramirez@uoguelph.ca

Click here to go back to the table of contents, or navigate above by clicking on "next page".