|
|
|
|
IntermediariesHypothesis : - ICT are said to “disintermediate”, ie to provide the poor with more direct access to information. Potentially this removal of the “middle man” in transactions (both information and economic transactions) would credit the ICT activity with enough value to ensure its sustainability.
Associated with the target group is the role of intermediary. A much discussed aspect of ICT is the potential they have for “disintermediation” i.e. removing intermediaries from the process of enhancing livelihoods by allowing the poor a direct voice to the authorities and in their own planning, and direct access to the information they need.
In any discussion of intermediaries in ICT, one notes a distinction between those who intermediate with some vested interest in the information (e.g. the corrupt official who might offer advice that leads to a bribe), and those that are “technical intermediaries” or intermediaries for access for example in Gyandoot and MANAGE. Many rural people need assistance to access information on the ICT. They may not have keyboard skills, their literacy may be low and they may require items to be read aloud to them, key information may not be in a local language, they may require assistance to search for the information, or to fill in forms on screen..
However although intermediaries are needed to help in access, there is a removal of intermediaries, in the form of government officials, in terms of “gatekeeping” Gyandoot has evidence that villagers who previously had to spend time travelling to an office, and then wait for a particular official to issue the required piece of paper can now gain the papers via the ICT. This is quoted as an example of increased transparency, and is said to have lowered corruption. The ICT has removed the gatekeeping role of the official..
In most of the cases the introduction of ICT has “disintermediated” in making information that was previously only accessible through a particular office more available, through alternative access points. However, the access requires some knowledge of ICT and those who are illiterate have not necessarily direct “disintermediated” access. Even if the information is not being mediated in the sense of being translated or adapted for a different group, there are still intermediaries in terms of access. In many cases the final users need assistance to access the information – young people who help the computer illiterate or semi literate. The assistants mediate the information although the information could in theory be accessed directly by the poor. As such ICT are potentially a long term mechanism for removing intermediaries.
The case studies seem to illustrate re-intermediation rather than dis-intermediation. There are examples of removing the “middle man”, and this has proved beneficial particularly where the intermediary had a vested interest in the transaction. The studies show that there often remains a need for technical facilitation, though - what we might call an ICT intermediary. The difference between the original intermediary and the ICT intermediary is significant. In the former case, there was probably only a few people who could access information (or services), and therefore they had near monopolistic power which could be abused. In the latter case, although the ICT intermediary has the vested interest of earning a salary or commission, there are potentially thousands of ICT intermediaries for each activity, and the abuse of that position is unlikely.
The case studies partly support the hypothesis and show that ICT activities therefore re-intermediate rather than dis-intermediate, and that although this may present a degree of vulnerability to users, the risks are generally much less than in traditional transactions.
|
|
Send mail to research@gamos.org with questions or
comments about this web site.
|
