The limiting factors of web2.0 for development
August 30th, 2007 by Christian Kreutz
Charles Dhewla made a comment which raised a great discussion on dgroups. It expands how web2.0 might even widen the gap of ICT for development. It also highlights how challenges such as connectivity, electricity or education limit very much the use of web2.0. Here are some interesting quotes from the discussion. The full contributions can be accessed here: web2fordev dgroup.
Charles Dhewla:
Web2.0 is a welcome development particularly for African countries where website developers are charging a fortune if one wants a simple website. This new technology has opened up new channels for sharing information. I have discovered that in most cases, a blog is more useful and user-friendly than most websites which are not even interactive.
However, before we are lost in the hype of Web2.0, let us not forget that in some parts of Africa, there are millions of people who are still to know what an e-mail is or visit a website. Let’s not promote new technology as if the earlier one is no longer useful. There are people still learning their ropes on conventional websites who need to be given time to absorb this knowledge. The pace at which ICTs are being developed and promoted does not take into account the rate at which people are able to absorb and use acquired knowledge and skills. If it takes years for educated people to learn and absorb internet use, how long do you think it will take illiterate communities, who are supposed to benefit? The workshop should make an effort to address this issue. Information and knowledge overload is a grim reality in most developing countries especially in Africa.
Ken Kubuga:
In parts of the world like Africa, Web2 is not exactly the problem. The problem is Internet availability and accessibility. I am sure a good number of us will feel charged about exploiting the opportunities associated with web2 tools during and after the conference and perhaps get back home to having to deal with Internet accessibility.
Steve Ciscler:
I’d like to remind people of the solution in the mid-90’s to low bandwidth and the desire to use the web: accessing it via email. There were whole manuals to do this, and I met a researcher from Guyana who did literally everything via email at 9600 bps. You can see some of the instructional texts at the bottom of this page: http://www.expita.com/ While most of us would not do this, there may be a resurgence in using these techniques from mobile phones: access the web using SMS.
Makelesi Kora-Gonelevu:
Lets not forget the Pacific where the islands are spread over vast amounts of water. The problem here too would be internet connectivity.
John Tim Denny:
On the one had we need the dreamers to come up with what it will be in the future, yet at the same time we also need some sort of bridge between what we must do now to directly assist in the most basic steps to set the stage… the step from not having electricity to Web 2.0 is like sending a man to the moon.. what is in between?
Rachael Kadama:
I would like to include another dimension to this discussion, if tomorrow we all got reasonable internet access and availability, what kind of impact to development are these tools likely to bring to us?
The availability of relevant content is what worries me and where I think the web2 tools have the opportunity to lend us a hand in developing it. whether we have no access , little access or abundance of bandwidth, people in both rural and urban areas only need this access to get some kind of content / information. We need to look into how these tools can deliver some of the lacking content or strengthen content development, communication, collaboration etc.
Tobias Eigen:
For me the most important part is that Web 2.0 helps to make the case for justifying the Internet for busy and cash strapped organizations. With a little knowhow and an hour or so of Internet connectivity, it is possible to get a professional looking blog up and running. With minimal care and feeding, that blog can be filled with compelling stories and photographs, as exemplified by some of the blogsdescribed in the comments to my blog already. Blogs are really just one example - a wide range of new “Web 2.0 hype enabled” software and services really have made it easier for African organizations to make use of the Internet once you get online.
Koin Etuati:
I think the Web 2 is ideal for us that work on gathering and sharing information on new technologies/concept - either with energy, agriculture, health etc. Because we want to use this technology to share and gather new ideas/concept with our counterparts, in the respective islands in the case of the pacific region. We put the information together, get innovative financing schemes to put this information on the ground.
Edward Addo-Dankwa:
If we are going to wait for all people to learn and be familiar with conventional things before new technologies are introduced, then we will never develop. New technologies are mostly built on the conventional ones. In fact Web 2.0 according to many people, is not new. They are the old conventional things that have been improved. They are supposed to have made it easier for people to appreciate and use those technologies better. Technology does not take into consideration individual people’s rate of learning. In fact our people don’t need to start learning from the begining.
Anke Weisheit:
Connectivity is a major challenge for economically poorer countries to access, participate in the electronic media, especially internet, and e-mail communication.
Some internet connectivity information in Uganda
1-hour internet in a cafe in
Kampala 1500UGX = 0.85USD
Mbarara 3000UGX = 1,72USD
Village 6000UGX = 3,42USD
Jonathan C Onyekwelu:
Bandwidth cost is probably the same for Africans and Europeans or Americans but the earning power is about 500 times higher in both continents than in Africa. Providing the right bandwidth that will guarantee the right internet speed will cost Africans a fortune!
It might be interesting for us to know that a lot of Universities and research institutes in Africa cannot afford the luxury of fast internet connection. In fact most have epilectic services, which is often times frustrating. You will have to wait for hours to connect and when you are finally connected, downloading data is another nightmare. If this is the case with the elites, then what will the story for rural communities for whom we are trying to evaluate the efficacy of web2fordev?

I expect many readers are already familiar with the e-Choupal system described in C.K. Prahalad’s book “The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid”, but it’s worth remembering that if Internet and Web2.0 use drives economic activity then the money to sustain it will be found.
See http://www.itcportal.com/ruraldevp_philosophy/echoupal.htm
And also bear in mind that “to keep up with the growth in human population, more food will have to be produced worldwide over the next 50 years than has been during the past 10,000 years combined” http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/31/climatechange.food
I agree with the idea that electricity,cost of connectivity are the greatest challenges / obstacle in bring web2fordev in urban and rural areas in Africa.
But i must hasten to say we in Africa must not relent but rather strive for our development, web 2.0 tools can be of immense benefit for us Africans. We must start somewhere and then allow the trend to pick up with Persistent grassroot education and awareness.
I agree - how could I not? - that connectiviy costs are a very very important barrier. But, on the other hand, Web 2.0 applications do require less hardware and, over all, less software - just a browser! - than desktop applications. So savings in hard and soft could go to better connectivity. For instance, one can use Google Docs, Spreadsheets and Gmail and save o Microsoft Word, Excel and Outlook. Same goes for Phixr vs. Photoshop, etc.
Concerning literacy, again, this is quite a barrier and no doubt the most difficult to overcome. But again, Web 2.0 can help those more (digitally) illiterate to find help on online forums, wikis, blogs and plenty other places. A perfect example are some wikis built around free software applications. See, as an example, wordpress.org - the famous blog application -, the support forums (http://wordpress.org/support/) and the “handbook” for the software (codex.wordpress.org), mostly everything developed by end users.
So, true web 2.0 apps do challenge connectivity and literacy, but the (positive) trade-off is that they directly or indirectly provide resources to help go over them. The final balance, time will tell.