More questions to discuss web2.0 and development

July 24th, 2007 by Christian Kreutz

Thanks to Michael, Peter and Lawrence for giving interesting answers to my questions some while ago. Let’s face it, web2.0 is just a concept, but there is a lot more behind it and even more perspectives on it. I am still curious, so here are some more questions:

  1. Can web2.0 really work on grassroot level or does it need intermediate organizations such as NGOs?
  2. Is “user generated content” of high value for development?
  3. If so, what kind of user generated content could or already does have impact on social change?
  4. What are the challenges to motivate people to engage in networking and creating social media?
  5. Is web2.0, in the context of development, so far only a thing for and between organizations?
  6. Will web2.0 promote transparency and feedback (evaluation) to development projects?
  7. Will the collaborative web be trully multilangual, or will English be again the lingua franca?
  8. Is this networking and aggregation of information giving us more knowledge when needed?
  9. What are and will be the tools of the web2.0 buzz which could really help the people get involved in development?

Please contribute also some questions. Everybody’s questions are welcome.

4 Responses to “More questions to discuss web2.0 and development”

  1. on 24 Jul 2007 at 1:44 pm   Peter

    10. Can web2.0 offer users tools to easily communicate with machine brain and themselves?

  2. on 29 Jul 2007 at 11:17 am   pauline

    in regard to chrstine’s Q1, i believe that initially intermediary organizations will have to play a great role in uwing web 2.0. this is espcially so in the context of Africa; in rural areas, illiteracy levels are high; there are no computers or knowledge how to use them among other practical challenges. even in the urban areas, web 2.0 tools, for exampe in my country Kenya are limited with the young/ youthful population. unfortunately this is the group that is ‘usually’ engaged in development matters. they are interested in what web 2.0 can do to improve their social life, and maybe individual learning. the older population no matter how educated, still finds this new technologies cumbersome, time wasting and probably not worth to explore

    in my view, from the developmental context,.. the issue can somehow be summarised by asking ourselves that comes first… ‘is it the chicken or the egg than came first’. practitioners as well as local communities identify issues or problems they would like to tackle. technology comes only second in helping them addresss these problems. they will rarely careif its web 1.0 or 2.0. A push strategy (for web 2.0) is rarely likely succeed, especially at the beginning.

    So yes, intermediaries are important if these technologies are to gain a wider use and meaning from all stakeholders in the development context. However there is need to promote these tools/technologies … for the whole adoption process to start.

  3. on 21 Aug 2007 at 1:26 pm   Flo

    Can web2.0 help improving citizen-controlled governing and will/can it lead to a more democratic approach to governance?

    What are unique capabilities of web2.0 that make it stand out against other ways to communicate - what do these capabilities enable on the other side? Is there something that is only possible on web2.0?

    I agree, the prospects of “more democracy” have been raised before, in fact as soon as the first networked computers appeared, but it seems like things have changed.

    So far
    flo

  4. on 21 Aug 2007 at 1:29 pm   Diplom 2.0

    Frage: Wie sieht eine NGO 2.0 aus?…

    Einfach mal so: Ich bin auf der Suche nach einer NGO, der wir guten Gewissen, dass “Tag” ngo2.0 geben können - vorzugsweise einer Umwelt-NGO.
    Kennt Ihr die Umfrage von Squidoo? Hier haben sie nach der “Smartest Org Online” gesu…

Trackback URI |