ICTs and Development

A Study of Telecentres in Rural India

M. Mukerji

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781137005540
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business Strategy
• Index: Business

Juxtaposes the global discourse on ICT-D with in-depth case studies on the pattern of access and use of telecentres to draw implications for the possible development trajectories induced by the provision of ICTs in rural hinterlands of India.

1

Introduction

During the 1990s, advances in digital technology enabled simultaneous creation, processing and transmission of all forms of data – textual, sound and image. Along with the evolution of the Internet and World Wide Web, such advances led to the convergence of media, access equipment, gadgets and devices, applications and services. In common parlance, convergence also refers to the technical, functional and corporate integration¹ of key sectors like telecommunication, broadcasting, microelectronics and information technology (Soriano, 2003, pp. 15–16; UNESCO, 1997, p. 33). The origin and popular use of the term Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) is attributed to such convergences and to the fusion of computing and communications – especially through the Internet (Labelle, 2003, p. 1). Broadly they include devices, applications and services associated with radio, television, mobile phones, computers, network and satellite systems (Kleine & Unwin, 2009, pp. 1045–6). ICTs enable communication and exchange of information between individuals and organizations across geographic locations (UNDP, 2001b). They are central to the process of globalization and in the creation of economies and societies, often described as ‘global’, ‘digital’, ‘networked’, ‘information’ or ‘knowledge’.

ICTs for Development (ICT4D) refers to the trend in development thinking and practice that considers information, knowledge and communication important for bringing about development and thus propound active deployment of new ICTs like computers and Internet in developing countries for (a) spurring economic growth, as in production of ICT goods and services and by using ICTs to increase the productivity and efficiency of other sectors; (b) facilitating governance reforms through computerization of key administrative functions and e-Governance initiatives; and (c) human development by using technologies to bridge the digital-divide and enhance delivery of services like education, health, etc. (Accenture, Markle Foundation & UNDP, 2001; Cecchini & Scott, 2003, pp. 74–5; Kramer & Derick, 2002 c.f. Joseph, 2002, p. 3). This dominant view espoused by practitioners assumes a techno-deterministic and unidirectional (the emphasis on ‘for’) relationship between provisions of new technologies and development. It does not take into consideration the historical or political economy aspects of the production, deployment and use of ICTs (Sreekumar & Rivera-Sanchez, 2008, p. 160). The term ICT in Developing Countries is also used in literature since the focus had been specifically on information systems and use of ICTs in developing countries (Avgerou, 2008; Walsham & Sahay, 2006). In contrast, ICTs and Development (ICT-D) as an alternate term is often used for describing the emerging interdisciplinary area of research on implementation, diffusion, adoption and impact of ICTs in developing countries (Sreekumar & Rivera-Sanchez, 2008).

In the extant literature, the difference between the dominant ICT4D approach and the critical ICT-D perspective manifests in the basic notions held about the role of technologies in development and consequently in framing of the research objectives and questions.² To illustrate, the dominant perspective believes that ICTs have inherent characteristics to overcome infrastructural and institutional obstacles and hence by bridging the digital divide using telecentres, existing socio-economic divides can also be bridged. The research questions then revolves around issues of developing appropriate technology, connectivity, favorable policy, business models, sustainability, entrepreneurship, etc. Despite recognizing that access to technology is shaped by contextual characteristics, the perspective essentially puts an emphasis on the instrumental and/or techno-centric if not techno-deterministic options.

In comparison, by substituting ‘and’ in place of ‘for’ allows the researcher to question the basic assumptions in conceptualizing the digital divide itself. The ICT-D approach acknowledges and foregrounds the historical, socio-cultural, market and political-institutional factors that often play a role in the implementation, diffusion and adoption of technologies (Sreekumar & Rivera-Sanchez, 2008). Adopting a critical perspective enables a holistic understanding of the larger discourse on ICT and development, which in turn is necessary for making sense of the actual outcomes. Both the terms ICT4D and ICT-D are used in the book. The former is used while referring to the dominant perspective or describing ICT-enabled projects and interventions. The latter denotes the stance adopted by the study for investigating telecentres and development against the backdrop of the larger discourse on ICTs and Development.

Telecentres and development

Within the wide variety of ICT-D applications and approaches, one popular form of intervention has been the telecentre. They are also known as telecottages, multipurpose community telecentres, community multimedia centres, public Internet access centres etc. In the case of developing countries, use of terms like rural knowledge centres, information kiosks, village knowledge centres, common service centres etc. are also common. Within India, telecentres are popularly referred by their brand names like Gyandoot, Drishtee, Akshaya e-Kendra, e-Choupal etc. In this study, telecentre is defined as a generic term for all kinds of arrangements that provided shared and mediated access to information and services using new technologies like computers and the Internet. The concept of shared access emerged in response to the perceived constraint that households in rural areas cannot afford expensive technologies (Proenza, Bastidas-Buch & Montero, 2001, p. 2). Access is said to be mediated because a telecentre operator, also referred to as entrepreneur or infomediary (Ballantyne, 2002, p. 185), mediates between information, technology and the people. Mediated access was considered as a way to overcome the barriers of low levels of literacy, awareness about technology and availability of required computing skills.

The earliest telecentres were established in developed countries during the mid-1980s (Fuchs, 2007).³ At that time the cost of computers and associated software was very high. The primary purpose of the telecentres was to provide shared access to expensive computing resources. They were deployed in remote and rural locations to enable communities to overcome social and economic isolation (Oestmann & Dymond, 2001, p. 2). The acceptance of telecentres as development intervention is often attributed to the telecentre movement⁴ in Hungry in the mid-1990s. After the collapse of centralized political and economic structure, around 150 telecottages were established in Hungry as part of a USAID-supported, public-funded programme for building the local government (Colle and Roman, 2001, p. 4; Mátyás, 2001; Murray, 2001). Around the same time, there was a global call to bridge the digital divide through provision of universal and affordable access via publicly available facilities. Numerous pilot projects were initiated in developing countries by various international agencies like UNESCO, ITU, IDRC and FAO etc. These pilot projects facilitated understanding about the role of ICTs in enabling development in different contexts. While the experience of telecentres in developed and developing countries differed in terms of technology deployed, resources mobilized, organization and impact, the discourse was similar in terms of hopes and expectations (Sreekumar, 2011). The current phase of the telecentre movement is often referred to as Telecentre 2.0 where the telecentre is considered as ‘a mature development mechanism’ for ‘implementing a judicious development strategy in resource-poor situation of developing countries and marginal areas’ (APDIP, 2007a, p. 1).

Roman and Colle (2002, p. 3) identified three basic assumptions guiding the telecentre movement across the globe: (a) information can contribute significantly towards individual and community development, (b) ICTs can accelerate the flow, exchange and effectiveness of information, and (c) people can use telecentres to access ICTs. These basic assumptions can be traced to the emergence of certain supply-side and demand-side factors at global and national levels. On the supply side, technology push was provided by successive reduction in the price of the basic personal computer, increasing computing power and robustness, and innovations in satellite and wireless technologies, evolution of the Internet and World Wide Web, and convergence of digital media (Oestmann & Dymond, 2001, p. 2). These in turn spurred the computer and Internet industries to expand their market in newer areas (Dagron, 2001; Ya’u, 2002).

On the other hand, demand was created by both government and business organizations. The revolutionary changes brought about by information technology in restructuring manufacturing and re-engineering business processes generated much hope with regard to the nature of interaction within the public sphere and about the possibilities of online democracy, participation, digital empowerment, inclusion and equity (Gomez & Ospina, 2001). The need and urgency to adopt ICT-enabled management practices under the e-Governance rubric for a responsive, accountable, accessible and transparent administration was another key driver of telecentre deployment (Madon, 2005, p. 402). Business organizations and private enterprises perceived an opportunity to establish and expand their business by using new technologies to serve ‘the bottom of the pyramid’ (Prahalad, 2004; Schwittay, 2008). Further, the efforts directed towards bridging the digital divide and ‘enabling everyone everywhere to participate in the global economy’ mainstreamed telecentres as a development strategy of various aid organizations (IIIT-B, 2005; Thomas, 2006; UNDP, 2001b, p. 2).

Specifically, telecentres as ICT-enabled development strategy were envisioned to contribute to socio-economic development in one or more of the following interrelated ways (Oestmann & Dymond, 2001):

1. Development of physical infrastructure: Telecentres, as means of bridging the digital divide, provide connectivity and thereby enable rural areas to overcome lack of traditional infrastructure like road and transport.

2. Economic development: Telecentres effect economic development by generating direct or indirect employment; accelerating exchange of private goods and services, reducing transaction cost of the agencies and enhancing livelihoods by providing access to market information, better farming practices, employment opportunities, etc.

3. Administrative reforms and institutional changes: Telecentres as delivery points for e-Governance services lead to better local administration and improved government-citizen/business/government interface (G2C, G2B, G2G), thereby increasing reach, transparency, responsiveness, accountability, efficiency, effectiveness, citizen’s empowerment and participation. Institutional change is also expected as telecentres enable people to bypass the traditional knowledge brokers like middlemen and moneylenders by providing direct access to information.

4. Social and cultural development: Telecentres improve access to basic services like health and education, thereby increasing capacity and employability of people. They also enable communication and exchange of ideas, expertise, goods and services via national and international networks and online forums.

Telecentres in rural India

The growing popularity of telecentres can be seen from their emergence and evolution in rural India. A compilation of ICT4D projects in 2004 showed that India had the largest number of ICT-enabled projects, more than the combined figure for all other Asian countries (Paul, Katz & Gallagher, 2004, p. 6). The projects were both sector specific as in applications of ICTs for education, microfinance, etc. and cross-cutting the three broad thematic application areas – economic development, governance reforms and human development. Apart from the supply-side and demand-side factors mentioned above, deployment of telecentres in India emerged primarily from the policy concern that the benefits of the new technologies in terms of employment and income had accrued only to the educated and urban population.

At the start of this study, a web-based compilation indicated around 50 different types of telecentre-based projects which together had around 50,000 kiosks dotting the rural hinterland (See Annexure 1). However, it is difficult to estimate the actual number of telecentres in rural India. Many of the earlier pilot projects like Gyandoot, Mahiti Shakti or n-Logue Chiraag have closed down. And few like Drishtee have changed their initial orientation. Others like Akshaya in Kerala and e-Gram in Gujarat have aligned with the national level Common Service Centre (CSC) programme. The number of telecentres in rural India may have actually increased with 100,000 Common Service Centres planned for deployment under India’s National e-Governance Programme (NeGP) (www.mit.gov.in). Whatever be the number, the telecentre movement in India is characterized by considerable diversity in terms of agencies involved, purpose, organizational structure, etc.

However parallel to hope and optimism regarding the potential of ICTs and telecentres to bring about development in rural areas, there was scepticism also. The scepticism was partly due to the fact that many celebrated projects never took off after the pilot phase was over, and failed to create the desired impact (Keniston, 2002a, pp. 3–6; Kothari, 2002). Only a handful of telecentre projects could demonstrate some incremental change in the villages (Dagron, 2001, Sreekumar & Sanchez, 2008). The anecdotal evidences of social and economic impact of telecentres were not adequately substantiated by field-based investigations (Gomez, Hunt & Lamoureux, 1999; IIIT-B, 2005; Keniston, n.d.). Further, perceptions on success and failure of telecentres were mixed, depending upon the criteria selected for judging them. For example, the progress of large-scale programmes like CSCs are still given in terms of the number of CSCs rolled out, instead of measurable and quantifiable socio-economic outcomes and impact. The quest for a sustainable, successful and replicable model remains. The sense of ‘not knowing for sure’ as to whether telecentres and ICTs for development was ‘more hype than hope’ was the primary motivation for undertaking this empirical study. It was an attempt to investigate the changes brought about by telecentres in the villages and also to comprehend their long-term social and developmental impacts.

Research questions and objectives

The research started with two broad questions: (a) What are the changes brought about by telecentres in rural areas, and (b) how are the changes mediated or shaped by the macro, meso and micro contexts? However, preliminary fieldwork revealed certain theoretical and methodological challenges of the endeavour.

Telecentres were deployed by many different types of agencies as part of their ICT4D strategies. At the time of the study, evidence about their impact was primarily anecdotal. The general belief or rather ‘group-think’ was that provision of technology and services would automatically solve the issues of development (Wade, 2002). No deliberations were deemed necessary for debating the often contested notions of development. For example, what kind of development was propounded by ICT4D? Who benefited from such developmental strategies? How development at one level – macro, meso or micro – was shaped and/or influenced by development at another level. Efforts have been made to draw upon areas like development studies and management for theorizing about the linkages between ICTs and Development (Avgerou, 2008; Heeks, 2007; Kleine & Unwin, 2009; Schech, 2002). However as pointed by De (2011), while investigating various aspects of any ICT4D project, prior theory is often found to be inadequate to factor in the complicated contextual issues shaping design, implementation, diffusion and adoption. Moreover, as observed by Sreekumar (2006), traditional meta-theories of development policy and practice like modernization and dependency provided only partial explanations of the contemporary phenomenon. The empirical evidence of impact was mixed and highly dependent on the context. The overall ICT4D experience was diverse, fragmented and at times contradictory.

Methodologically, the main challenge was due to the elusiveness of observing, measuring and establishing the causal linkages between provision of technology/information and development. As interventions, telecentres were often deployed as part of broader development/business goals, making it difficult to explicitly map a particular development outcome like enhancement of the quality of life, increase in income or increase in efficiency of service delivery to the provision of information and new technologies. At the field level, because there are simultaneous interventions in other areas and by multiple agencies, it was also difficult to isolate and attribute a particular impact to the provision of telecentres. Many also consider that since the process of diffusion and adoption of such interventions is still underway, it is too early to observe their impact (Abraham, 2007; Heeks, 2007). Moreover as pointed by a recent review of literature (Sey and Fellows, 2009), even after around 15 years, the evidence of downstream impact is almost nil. Diversity in models and contexts makes it difficult to apply a particular theoretical framework and draw generalizable conclusions (Kuriyan and Toyama, 2007).

To overcome such theoretical and methodological challenges, the study first made an attempt to delineate ICT-D as a development paradigm. And then the emergence and evolution of telecentres as development interventions was mapped against this broader context of ICT-D. As a paradigm, development was considered not only in terms of development outcomes or processes but also in terms of the ideologies, assumptions and strategies of various actors and agencies. This approach identified the key trends and agencies shaping the ICT4D discourse, in particular those driving the deployment of telecentres in rural India. It also allowed juxtaposing the findings from the field against the larger discourse for drawing implications for policy and practice.

Second, the conceptual framework for the study was derived from the existing literature on telecentres and development. Generic by nature, the conceptual framework was informed by many related areas and fields of study like development communication, diffusion of media and innovation, rural sociology and anthropology. Since impact was not directly observable or measurable, the conceptual framework put forth that the socio-economic change brought about by telecentres within a village can be studied by investigating the pattern of access and use of the telecentre and its services by households belonging to different socio-economic groups. It was based on the premise that technology access and appropriation is differentiated across different socio-economic groups within the village; an examination of access/non-access and use/non-use of its services would give an indication of the possible impact on different groups and consequently to the village as a whole.

Existing studies lent support to this assumption. In a study of the Sustainable Access to Rural Internet SARI initiative in Tamil Nadu (Kumar & Best, 2006b), a key finding was that telecentres sustain existing socio-economic...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures and Tables
• List of Abbreviations
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Perspectives on ICTs and Development
• 3 Telecentres in Rural India
• 4 Conceptual Framework and Methodology
• 5 Akshaya, Kerala
• 6 e-Choupal, Maharashtra
• 7 Drishtee, Uttar Pradesh
• 8 Pattern of Access and Use
• 9 Developmental Implications
• Annexure I: Telecentres in Rural India
• Annexure II: Studies on Telecentres in Rural India
• Annexure III: Data Collection Instruments
• Annexure IV: Distribution of Households by Socioeconomic Status
• Notes
• References
• Index