T.R. Gopalakrishnan, Lecturer, Department of Mass Media & Communication Studies, University of Madras, Chennai, India. E-mail: trg_gopi@yahoo.com.

Paper to be considered for the IFIP WG 9.2 Conference on Landscapes of ICT and Social Accountability to be held on June 27-29, 2005 at University of Turku, Turku, Finland-- Extended Abstract (Kai Kimppa, kai.kimppa@it.utu.fi.)

Introduction

Developing countries are struggling with varying degree of success to attain its developmental goals. As ICTs diffuse rapidly, the question about its contribution to the development process has become an issue of much concern. ICTs are seen as a critical resource in the promotion of socio-economic development, with a potency to alleviate poverty. The popular wisdom is that there are various spheres in developing societies where the pace of development can be accelerated significantly by the use of new ICTs. However, the faith in the transformative potential of ICT is also accompanied by concerns about the growing disparity between information haves and have-nots and the emergence of ‘zones of silence’— communities who are excluded from the digital revolution and exist on the margins of information societies. ICTs are making no difference to the lives of many people in developing countries, who are still struggling to address their basic human needs, the endemic problem of poverty, illiteracy etc. As in other services (World Bank Report, 2004), ICTs are also failing poor people in many ways. Thus, in exploring the landscapes of ICTs and social accountability, it is imperative that we address the following questions: How and in what ways can ICTs help poor people and those who are socially excluded? How can ICT-based development strategies and policies be made more accountable to the special needs of the dis-empowered? What are the areas that are likely to create opportunities for the use of ICTs where they have the maximum potentials to benefit the poor? These questions serve as an impetus for the present paper and have guided the choice of background theory, focus theory, research context & design.

Background Theory

Many observers hope that if technological diffusion can be achieved in poor communities, ICTs provides multiple opportunities for socio-economic and democratic development. ICTs have the potential to broaden and enhance access to information and communication resources for remote rural areas and poor communities, to strengthen the process of democratization and to ameliorate the endemic problem of poverty (Norris, 2000). Governments and many developmental institutions, are now trying to establish national level as well as local state level strategy to promote ICTs to enable people to participate in 'knowledge-based development'. These policies emphasis the special/unique opportunities opened by ICTs for socio-economic development (e-governance/government/learning/health etc.). However, if these strategies do not take into account the issue of poverty and social exclusion, especially gender based ones, then ICT-driven development might create new inequalities of power and wealth, reinforcing deeper divisions between the haves and have-nots. Thus the real question is not whether there will be absolute social inequalities in ICT diffusion—such inequalities will exist as in other dimensions of life (Norris, 2000). Missing in this debate is the critical question of whether there are any special barriers to ICT diffusion and adoption and what needs to be done to address them.

In attempting to examine the question of linkages between ICTs and poverty reduction, few scholars have paid close attention to the constraints that exist for poor to harness the potential benefits of ICTs. Based on the works of the Richard Heeks and others, Melkote and Steeves (2002) identify following constraints:

F Constraints in Accessing Technology

F Constraints in Assessing Technology

F Constraints in Evaluating Information

F Constraints in Applying/Using Information

Available evidence strongly suggests that such constraints are driven by socio-economic development, so that access to ICT diffusion reflects and reinforces traditional inequalities between the rich and the poor communities (Norris, 2000).The poor and socially excluded are unlikely to “reap the benefits” of ICTs due to deep divisions of social stratification such as patterns of household income, education, occupational status dis-empowerment etc.

Following Heeks (2000) suggestion, this paper is premised on a understanding that ICTs have far more enabling power within the institutional intermediaries that serve the poor than poor themselves. The poor often focus more on pressing needs of everyday life and to the extent any interventions addresses these need, they are likely to be involved. Building the capacities of the intermediary institutions to ‘access, assess and apply’ ICTs for their development goals might enable them to be more responsive, efficient and effective in their role as development support workers. ICTs have the capacity to strengthen the institutions of civil society mediating between poor, the state and the market.

Focus Theory

The present study focuses on how one particular development intermediary, micro-finance institutions (MFIs) seek to apply ICTs for their organizational development. Mobilizing tacit knowledge and organizational capabilities to effectively connect experience with skills in the construction of knowledge-based societies is a major challenge for development. The skills and capacities of the intermediary institutions are keys to the success of the ICT initiatives for development since ICTs are skill intensive.
It seems important to work through and encourage ICT usage within such intermediary institutions.

Section I would provide a systematic framework to relate ICT, poverty and development. The framework, referred here as Development Support-ICT (DS-ICT) Model, is based on the following key assumptions

Ü ICTs are tools that open new opportunities and new threats (often by virtue of each other).

Ü ICTs have a far more enabling role in building the capacity of the intermediary institutions that work for poverty, rather than directly affecting poor themselves. ICTs have the greatest potential to act as a facilitator for specific development initiatives that are currently operational at grass-roots.

Ü A particular focus in addressing the capacity building concern would be to exercise control over the ICTs rather than exercising control through them.

Ü To make ICTs work for the poor the critical issue is an alignment between Development Goals, Institutional Tasks and ICT Strategy.

The institutional intermediary approach to ICT and poverty seeks integrate Development- Institutional Strategy and Institutional-ICT Task-Fit within a matrix defined by two axes based on the extent of alignment-fit as shown below:

	Do ICT Strategy and Institutional Task Fit?
Are Institutional Goals and Development Goals in Alignment?		*YES*	NO
	*YES*	Cell 1: Digital Opportunity due to positive reinforcement	Cell 2: Technological Barrier due to socio-technical mismatch
	NO	Cell 3: Institutional Barrier due to negative reinforcement	Cell 3: Total Failure

Thus the critical task is to identify appropriate institutional intermediaries which specifically address development and poverty alleviation needs of the disempowered. One such effort that has become the focus of much development activities today is micro-finance programs.

Section II provides an overview of micro-finance initiatives which has emerged innovative approach to address the issue of poverty and social exclusion, especially those of women. Micro-Finance Institutions (MFIs) are non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who have as their main objective poverty reduction through a combination of financial and social intervention. MFIs are, in a varying degree, engaged in the formation of grass-root level collectives of the poor as a means for social and economic empowerment (often called self-help groups, SHGs). It is claimed that the micro-finance approach is an effective and sustainable strategy for fighting conditions of deprivation and poverty (Harper, 1998; Fisher and Sriram, 2002). Micro-finance as a means or tools are now employed not only for integrating a range of financial services for poverty alleviation, but also for livelihood promotion, developing the local economy, women’s empowerment, building democratic people’s organizations (e.g. SHGs) and to challenge wider institutions within society. Thus, micro-finance seeks to integrate the range of NGO intervention strategies with ‘credit and saving’ acting as an ‘attractor’ or a catalyst.

Micro-finance administration is an information-intensive activity to which application of ICTs has long been recognized as having enormous potential. The Development Support ICT model (DSICT) suggests that attention needs to be given to modifying and reconfiguring the technologies and applications to support such initiatives. Building the capacities of micro-finance initiatives and institutions to harness the potential of ICTs provides a promising terrain to study how ICTs can make a difference to the poor.

The final section provides a detailed examination of application of ICTs for micro-finance initiatives—the opportunities and risks involved in such efforts. The present paper is based on an extensive study of twenty MFIs in the state of Tamil Nadu, India. It relied on in-depth interviews with key informants, study of internal documents, current systems in use and a survey of development workers specializing in micro-finance.

References

A detailed reference list will be presented with the final paper