(cross posting from internet.artizans blog)

Shaking the hype out of Web 2.0

A big shout out to the organisers of the Web2forDev conference in Rome. They’re shaking the hype out of web 2.0 and wrestling it in to relevance for the world’s poorest and most marginalised.

Connectivity, Innovation, Censorship

If I’d had a chance to contribute to the conference, I’d have stepped back from the real issue of rural connectivity and looked at the less examined issues of innovation and censorship - the good and bad futures for the social web in the developing world.

The dark side of web 2.0

The bad news first - as soon as social media starts to make a real social difference it will be subject to some form of repression by those who favour the status quo. The downside for web 2.0 is that, under the wrong circumstances, its social networking side could become an engine for privacy invasion and surveillance. We must learn from places where social media survives and thrives in the face of corruption, military might, and the intimidation of opponents. Embedding human rights in social media requires eCampaigning for Internet Freedom.

Innovation - the disruptive fruit of participation

The real powerhouse of web 2.0 for dev will be innovation, the disruptive fruit of all architectures of participation. Charlie Leadbeater’s book We-think starts with the example of the Barefoot College before going on to show how examples like Wikipedia are the herald of a new era of mass collaborative innovation. His wide global analysis of the new era mashes silicon valley with social innovation - as he says about a peer-to-peer AIDS support network “Low-cost, self-organising networks might be the height of organisational fashion on the US west cost but they are a matter of life-and-death in places like Mbuya Parish, Kampala“.

Web2forDev HowTo

So where do we find guiding values for the development potential of web2.0? If I’d been at the web2fordev conference I’d have plagiarised the Res Publica Report ‘Prospects for e-Advocacy in the Global South’ and proposed this set:

• Work within Movements: Working within a movement means that all the talent of the various members can be brought to bear in creating solutions and the lines of communications within the network can be used to quickly disseminate new methods.
• Worship the Power of the Network: Through networks we aggregate our knowledge, amassing insight that is greater than the sum of its parts.
• Bring Technologists and Advocates Together: Innovative solutions emerge when technologists collaborate with advocates, working on a specific campaign problem or network goal.
• Build Innovation Systems: Rather than think of innovations as pieces of hardware or even creative ideas, it is better to think in terms of “innovation systems,” combinations of hardware, social structures, and economic models that solve social problems.
• Promote Independence not Dependence: Seek to empower, and explicitly address sustainability.
• Engage with Youth: In almost all societies, young people are most likely to adopt new ICT methods. They are more familiar with ICT because it has been present for most of their lives.
• Cultivate the Fringe: The boldest new ideas often come from far outside the
  mainstream.

I applaud the organisers and participants at the web2fordev conference for their global fusion of social media and social impact. The scale of that impact will depend on how well mass creativity can challenge the status quo. As the APC’s Anriette Esterhuysen says “The key is NOT to think of social networking tools (or Web 2.0) as a completely new set of tools/applications. … but as representing significant changes to power structures that characterise the creation and use of content on the internet“.

« Le taster Day » de la conférence Web2fordev s’est déroulé dans une ambiance très décontractée mais riche d’instructions du fait de l’approche interactive adoptée pour la conduite des panels.

Dans sa présentation, au cours du premier panel de la pré-conférence, Christian Kreutz, de la GTZ, l’air enthousiaste, plein d’énergie et de passion, a emballé la « Lebanon Room » de la Fao en fondant son propos sur le concept d’échanges participatifs. Questions-réponses, mimiques, invites régulières de l’assistance à apprécier des gestes des mains son développement, sa manière de présenter est sans commune mesure avec les méthodes classiques d’exposés grand public.

 « Le Web2 est un processus participatif par excellence et l’idée est d’amener tous les participants à la pré-conférence à manifester leur intérêt pour ce qui se dit et à donner leur point de vue sans tabou » explique-t-il. L’approche participative mise en place dans la conduite des panels a certainement porté ses fruits au regard de l’ambiance bon enfant qui a caractérisé les séances plénières. De nombreux participants prenaient des photos sans complaisance. Réactions et contributions venaient de tous les sens, de sorte qu’un visiteur non averti aurait du mal à distinguer les participants de l’expert, ce dernier n’assurant presque la police des débats.
« Nous venons d’horizons divers, des Etats-Unis, des pays européens, de l’Afrique tout comme de l’Asie et nous avons la même passion pour les outils du Web2 et des divers thématiques liées au développement, même si on est venu apprendre, il s’agit fondamentalement d’un rendez-vous du donner et du recevoir qui s’est concrétisé à travers cette approche participative », apprécie Karel Novotny, de APC.
La philosophie qui a conduit l’animation des panels est puisée du concept de Barcamp, un principe de conférence informelle né de l’application des divers outils de l’Internet. Sa devise, ‘’ Pas de spectateur, tous participants’’. « Parfois, dans certains cas, ce sont les participants eux-mêmes qui fournissent le contenu du débat. Tout le monde est invité aux échanges quelles que soient ses compétences techniques », explique Christian Kreutz.
Selon les explications qu’on en donne à travers le dictionnaire électronique wikipedia, « le Barcamp commence par une présentation des participants sous la forme d’un tour de table ou chacun donne son nom, son appartenance (entreprise, association), et trois tags qui permettent de cerner ses centres d’intérêt. Ensuite les participants sont invités à inscrire le thème qui les intéresse sur une grande feuille de papier qui sera ensuite affichée au mur. Cela prend la forme d’un tableau matriciel avec d’un côté les salles ou tables disponibles, de l’autre les créneaux horaires. Tous les participants sont encouragés à présenter un projet ou à aider lors d’une intervention.  Pour préparer les Barcamp et permettre d’en assurer le suivi, il est conseillé d’inscrire à l’avance les sujets que l’on voudrait discuter sur la page wiki du Barcamp et il est demandé à chacun de partager les informations et les expériences reçues lors de l’événement, tant pendant celui-ci qu’après, grâce notamment aux canaux internet publics, aux blogs, au partage de photos, aux wikis, aux blogrolls et aux logiciels de messagerie instantanée ».
 Dans le cadre de l’avant-première conférence Web2fordev, l’essentiel des champs de cette méthodologie participative a été exploré. Pour renforcer l’intérêt des participants, il a été ainsi créé à l’interne le wiki de la conférence à l’adresse wiki.web2fordev.net. « Ce wiki permettra aux participants d’avoir toutes la documentation sur la conférence, les communications. Ils peuvent également poster leurs notes afin de les partager avec tout le monde », précise Karel Novotny.  « De la même manière, une plate-forme virtuelle d’échanges de partage de photos a été installée au profit des participants », informe Rambaldi Giacomo, du CTA, membre du comité d’organisation qui a animé son panel à travers le skype.
Quant à l’exercice permettant de cerner les centres d’intérêts des participants, Christian Kreutz l’a expérimenté durant le panel intitulé « Tags and tagging ». L’exercice a permis de se rendre compte que les participants ont des centres d’intérêts qui se recoupent et s’inscrivent parfaitement dans les objectifs de la conférence qui vise entre autres, à voir comment les divers outils du web2 pourraient impacter les besoins d’informations et de formation du monde rural.
Comme on pouvait s’y attendre, la pré-conférence a annoncé les couleurs d’une conférence enrichissante qui reste à confirmer dans les prochains jours.
Gnona AFANGBEDJI

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?

Nous avons récemment eu une discussion sur ce thème. Internet - et ce n’est pas une nouveauté dans un monde globalisé - est avant tout un outil unilingue. L’anglais s’impose partout sans partage. Peut-on croire que les outils Web2 vont promouvoir de nouvelles voix?
J’aimerais beaucoup entendre sur la question des outils web2 et de leur impact potentiel les voix de nos amis hispanophones, francophones, lusophones, hindi… Pourquoi ne pas imaginer un blog Babel où chacun pourrait rapporter ou commenter dans sa langue ce que les autres ont écrit dans un autre idiome?
Une autre de mes questions en suspens est la dimension humaine et sociale des outils web2. J’aimerais vraiment trouver des illustrations qui nous expliquent comment ces outils révolutionnent notre manière de considérer le “développement” et comment concrètement ils sont porteurs de changements sociaux sur le terrain.