|
|
|
|
ConclusionsThe objective of the action is important. ICTs can support developmental activities and can do more than directly enhance income options for livelihoods. In many cases the new opportunities offered by the ICT have affected the whole system of developmental activities – for instance setting up CARDIN gave opportunity for institutional support to, and strengthening of, the disaster preparedness network; kiosks in India have offered new ways of tackling corruption and encouraging good governance. While the objective is very important, we also note the role of the project processes. In all cases the process of the project was an opportunity for more involvement by staff and clients. This is not to say that full participatory processes involving the final clients were always necessary. The case studies show many projects that were conceived by “Champions” or in an office. However a key theme running through all the projects is that there is then a conscious effort to involve the client community in the detailed planning and execution of the project in order to tailor the information to the targets groups needs. The institutional form of arrangement does not seem to be critical to the success of the project. The case studies show a variety of institutional frameworks, from networks to single organisations. Neither too does it seem that there is a need for a special policy environment. The case studies mostly build upon the existing policy environment but do not have to institute new policies in order to undertake their project. Capacity building is (almost) always required. Where there is strong technical competence, there is generally a need to build capacity on project processes. Where project processes are the focus there is a need for technical capacity. In some cases linkages can overcome this, using the links to either gain capacity or build it in other institutions. One mechanism for obtaining capacity is to use the commercial sector (eg FOOD uses cyber cafés effectively “renting” equipment). The cases support the idea (proposed by many writers on digital opportunities) that ICTs can disintermediate – to a certain extent. There are examples of how the ICT has removed some of the gatekeepers of information making the information more available to the poor and their supporting NGOs. However, the cases also suggest that full disintermediation is not possible as many users require assistance in the technical operation of the ICT (from kiosk owners or support staff). Abetter term might be re-intermediation, where technical people must intermediate ICT use (access) but are not gatekeepers as such of the information. The technological tools have nothing special that ensures project success. And there are few if any opportunities for standardisation. Technology is constantly changing and the central prescription of a standard technical package would probably negatively affect the project. None of the studies show any indication that standardisation is necessary. However, the use of second hand technology was a noted hindrance on many of the projects. There was an increased need for maintenance and repair, and often the technology was out of date leading to other difficulties (e.g. inability to run current software) The cases suggest that the cost of the technology can be minimal and the cost of the technology as a part of the whole was not raised as an issue in the case studies (although this was part of the selection criteria). The overall project costs can be quite significant even where the project includes only a single PC (e.g. Revistazo), becoming an annual budget of tens of thousands of dollars. Most cases show that ICTs are part of a bigger developmental programme or system, and the costs of the technology therefore are small compared to the whole. When we consider the project processes in the cases, we find strong support for the premise that direct provision of ICT services to the poor should be a part of some greater community mobilisation. Some of the factors that helped success are social mobilisation issues e.g. support from local authorities, close connection to communities, entry processes to target group, communication and networking. Finally, the developmental benefits of the projects support the case that ICTs can be a useful part of an overall developmental action. The benefits range from good governance to good mental health to income generation, i.e. influencing all parts of the livelihood system, and as such are worthwhile. In conclusion, the case studies show that ICTs can enhance development projects. The research has not conclusively proven that an ICT activity directed at increasing income for the poor can, on its own, generate cost recovery inclusive of set-up and replacement costs, i.e. achieve economic sustainability. However, the studies do indicate that this is beginning to happen in some cases, and the prospects for the future are encouraging. More importantly the case studies clearly show elements of institutional and social sustainability. They also show significant developmental impact, and there are indications that ICT activities can be regarded as cost effective. |
|
Send mail to research@gamos.org with questions or
comments about this web site.
|
