Digital Ecologies

["Irfan Khan" <khania2@super.net.pk>]

November 05, 2002

Digital Ecologies  

By Steven Rudolph
Director, Jiva Institute

The past few years have seen an explosion of digital initiatives 
aiming to improve the socio-economic conditions of rural communities 
in developing countries. However, despite billions of dollars being 
spent in these programs, there are surprisingly few examples of 
information and communication technology (ICT) projects that have 
resulted in true sustainable development; and of those that have 
succeeded, there are few examples of projects that have scaled.

Till recently, the mantra of development agencies and government 
bodies has been: "Bring in the technology and the digital divide will 
automatically close". However, when the global economy came crashing 
down in 2001, it forced not only companies but also development 
funding agencies, to look at their bottom lines; they were obliged to 
ask if this technology was really making a difference. Although some 
organizations have made a brave attempt to prove that ICTs have 
indeed been successful (often to ensure that funding keeps coming), 
ground-level reality checks frequently prove otherwise. The question 
is thus raised: If ICTs hold so much promise, then why are they not 
giving the intended result? The answer to this pressing question lies 
less in the tools themselves, but rather in the limited approach in 
which they are being applied.

Perhaps the best way to begin unraveling the problem of failed ICT 
for development (ICT4D) initiatives is to consider the concept of 
"living systems". Living systems typically consist of complex 
interdependent systems and subsystems that interact in sustainable 
manners. Such systems can be witnessed in a variety of 
contexts—organic cells, schools, governments, the Internet, and even 
terrorist networks. How such systems operate is often a mystery, as 
much as is how they adapt and evolve. Nevertheless, there are 
regularities in how these systems function, which can provide us with 
enough insight on how to sustain or even, if necessary, to destroy 
them.

Applying the metaphor of a living system to a village community, we 
can consider the complex relationship that exists related to the 
village economy—the environment, social systems, political systems, 
and so on. These systems together form larger ecologies within which 
human beings exist.

As changes are made to a rural ecology, it will respond as any 
living, breathing system would. For example, an extensive draught in 
a farming village will cause a "dehydrating" effect on the community, 
with less crops being produced, laborers forced to find work 
elsewhere, a reduction in consumer spending, a reduction in students 
going to school, a decrease in healthcare spending, and an increase 
in overall health. In the case of a new road connecting a village to 
a nearby town, we would witness an effect akin to a by-pass heart 
surgery—increased flow of traffic, new transportation services, an 
increase in sales and trade, the creation of new jobs, an increase in 
wealth, spending, schooling, health, and so on.

When it comes to a technology being introduced into a village, its 
success will depend entirely on how well suited it is for the 
ecology. In other words, using the living system or biological system 
as a metaphor, we can consider how certain elements that are 
introduced may be "metabolized", while others would be treated as 
"antigens" and discarded. In this sense, technology introduced into a 
village community may be adopted or rejected (or ignored) depending 
upon its suitability to the ecological climate.

For instance, consider a village in the deserts of Rajasthan, with no 
electricity or running water, and a ramshackle building that serves 
as a school. One may romanticize how giving them handheld computers 
for their children would be an excellent way to help them "progress". 
The devices could also be used to teach literacy to adults. However, 
in reality, here’s what would likely happen: The devices would be 
introduced, and there would be a tremendous amount of curiosity about 
them. The adults would examine them briefly and, unable to make much 
sense out of them, turn them over to their children. The children 
would use them for some time, and would eventually become bored with 
them—just like all kids do with toys. Not long after, the PDAs would 
find themselves locked inside someone’s cupboard, not due to fear of 
them being stolen, but because they are alien devices that just don’t 
fit in anywhere. However, even if there were some lasting appeal of 
the devices, interest would wane when problems arose due to their 
having to be recharged again and again, or needing frequent 
replacements of batteries. Or if they broke (as they would in the 
hands of any curious and careless youngsters!).

The key to creating sustainable ICT solutions lies in understanding 
existing rural ecologies, and then creating digital solutions that 
harmonize with them. It is at this stage, when an existing ecology 
absorbs and sustains a technology, that we could say a digital 
ecology has been formed. At the same time, it is important to 
recognize that a technology that does not find favor with ecological 
systems produces "waste". This may be readily realized as unused 
equipment, however, it may also manifest itself in the form of 
capital waste, industrial pollution, and even human alienation.

Here’s a real-world example:

In one of Jiva’s ICT for development projects, we set out to create a 
community learning and information center with a computer serving as 
an information kiosk, and also to find ways of using video that 
connected villagers and villages. Our early attempts to introduce 
technology were met with the same type of resistance as most ICT 
projects generally face, admittedly owing to a degree of 
insensitivity on our part to the existing village ecology. Villagers 
were intrigued by the technology at first, but when the novelty wore 
off there was little that could be done to maintain their 
interest—despite our best intentions. In short, they went back to 
their lives—to the systems that they had been living within happily 
(or unhappily) for years without us or our technology.

In order to attain a better understanding of why certain things were 
working and why others weren’t, we focused more on the basic village 
ecology—the living systems and the environment that supported them, 
speculating and romanticizing less, and observing and dialoguing more 
with the villagers. This step provided us with better insights as to 
how technology could be successfully employed. At once it became 
clear that the community software system we had been building could 
only be absorbed once the human systems of the village supported it. 
The existing systems did not readily lend themselves to a 
computerized community information system, and thus, forcing it upon 
the village, despite any incentive you could offer, would not result 
in a natural adoption and use. We realized that if a community 
software system were to have any value, there would need to be 
certain activities in place in the offline world that had a genuine 
need for such a system.

We therefore started working with the villagers to enhance the 
various systems—economic, information, communication, etc. For 
example, a village committee was established for creating a bazaar to 
cater to the needs of villages in the area; an employment notice 
board was set up; regular Ayurvedic health camps are being offered; a 
post office is being set up; vocational courses are now being offered 
in the center; information for government programs are being made 
available, etc. It is our expectation that as these systems 
strengthen, there will be a greater role for technology—to support 
these human systems.

However, unlike the community software system, the technology 
activities we carried out with respect to videography succeeded 
beyond our expectations. After a short training program, a team of 
village boys were shooting local TV news and short films, which found 
their way onto the village cable TV. On top of that, local businesses 
began asking to advertise during this time slot. The youth then 
seized the opportunity, and created advertisements for them, and 
started charging as well. The reason for this was because the living 
systems of the village more readily supported these video 
activities—video was a technology that villagers have a clear schema 
about; 50% of the village households have television; there were 
immediate results after the video team created its video content and 
aired it on local cable TV.

Unfortunately, most attempts at ICT for development in India have 
been, and frequently still tend to be quixotic at best, with very few 
achieving impact or sustainability. Researchers, social leaders, 
corporations, and others have been turning up empty handed, as they 
desperately attempt to "crack the genetic code" for creating "the 
sustainable ICT program". But these failures should come as no 
surprise when we look at, say, business in developed countries. In 
business, apart from a few very opportune individuals, there is 
generally no short cut to go from rags to riches—except of course if 
you want to break the rules. For the vast majority of businesses, 
there is an economic ecology within which people must operate if they 
want to be accepted by the community, to sustain, and grow.

The same holds true for ICT4D projects. In any living system, there 
are no quick routes to growth. And more, if you want a truly healthy 
system, the best means to do so is by taking the organic path. In 
this sense, we might consider technology as a dietary supplement or a 
type of medicine, and further that living beings can be positively or 
negatively affected by the type of substance imbibed. Interestingly, 
there has been a growing trend towards the use of natural remedies as 
compared to more chemical-based substances, which, although provide 
some kind of solution, are often fraught with side effects, which can 
be debilitating or even deadly.

The paradigm of digital ecologies offers those of us from the ICT4D 
field a lesson from our own living world. By viewing a village as a 
living system, we can understand that the introduction of technology 
may produce a number of outcomes. In the same way that if we desired 
to improve the condition or state of health of our bodies, we would 
not experiment by ingesting any random substance; we should also be 
prudent in understanding the nature, history, and ecology of a 
village, and determine appropriate measures for how to ensure that 
technology best suits that community. This approach might not suit 
all people’s interests—especially those that are involved strictly 
for reasons of financial gain or popular support. However, it would 
certainly create healthier digital rural environments, and 
undoubtedly bring us at least a little closer to achieving the 
expectations that the world has invested in ICTs for development.

About the Author Steven Rudolph(steve@jiva.org) is co-founder of Jiva 
Institute, and serves as Director of Education and Outreach. Based 
near New Delhi since 1994, he has been engaged in the advancement of 
information technology and constructivist education in India. He is 
currently project consultant to Media Lab Asia (www.medialabasia.org 
) for the Baatchit Program (www.jiva.org/baatchit), which aims to 
enhance rural communication and development through ICTs. He has also 
served as a consultant to Intel, Apple Computer, Microsoft, UNESCO, 
the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), the ICSE Board, 
and the Central Board of Secondary Education.

About Jiva Institute Jiva Institute (www.jiva.org) is a non-profit 
research and development institute that creates solutions for socio-
economic development that make use of indigenous knowledge systems 
and technology. Founded in 1992, the institute operates in four 
areas: Education, Health, Culture, and Outreach. Jiva has offices in 
India and the United States.

source: http://www.jiva.org/report_details.asp?report_id=49