[WSIS CS-Plenary] ICT and Rural Development: Contribution by Bakary Faye (Senegal)

[Nnenna]

ICT and rural development

Attempts at poverty reduction did not begin in the era of Modern Information and Communication Technologies. Just like the Fudicial Fund, set up in 1976 “to provide temporary support to those countries needing help to enable them remedy their balance of payments”, Structural Adjustment Policies (SAP), designed mainly for African countries, were established in the mid-eighties by the Bretton Woods institutions, to reduce, and not eradicate poverty, which should in fact be the main threat to any development project undertaken in Africa.

Twenty years of implementing SAPs suffice to conclude that they not only failed to produce economic growth, but also worsened the poverty situation in these so-called “developing” countries. This bitter fact is manifested in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Document (PRSD) established in 1999 by the World Bank and the IMF, and adopted by these developing countries. Unlike its predecessors, this programme aims at prioritizing cooperation between populations in the area in which it is implemented. Advocates of this document proclaim that “promoting the PRSD has helped involve all development actors” and “in view of its legitimate participative process, it shall be the reference document for all activities carried out by all actors”. This document guaranteed the active participation of the most marginalized strata of the African population, the rural populations.

The Senegalese PRSD is very explicit. It admits that “poverty is largely centralized in rural areas”, and varies between 72 and 88 percent. The poverty reduction strategy carried out in Senegal is centred on four (4) fundamental objectives: increase wealth, capacity building and development of local social services, improve living standards of vulnerable groups and a participative approach to implementation and follow-up evaluation based on the decentralization of management and control. 

We have noticed that any anti-poverty programme based on these principles should resolve the numerous problems that threaten the survival of the rural world. We believe that resolving these issues will be a big step towards developing the rural world, and eventually leading to the establishment of information and communication technologies.

In a bid to find solutions to local community ICT access problems, leaders and financial donors should always collaborate mainly with the populations, and the civil society to take stock of the reality of the situation and avoid proposing not only inappropriate, but unacceptable socio-cultural solutions. Poverty reduction should essentially be reflected in actions undertaken at local level. 

Everyone, especially the rural populations acknowledges that modern information and communication technologies are wonderful tools for development and efficient management. However, the only tools and instruments used for communication in rural areas include trucks, cars, flutes, or talking drums, smoke, etc. 

Just like traditional tools, ICTs should meet certain criteria for efficiency. If the needs of the rural area are really that many, then the soil is not fertile enough for good seeds to grow. In fact, the rural area needs at least basic economic and social infrastructures, water, food, electricity, literacy, etc. in order to embrace ICTs, which are key elements towards improving productivity and modern communication mechanisms.

These basic needs are lacking in the rural area. Instead, test points have been sprinkled here and there to blindfold financial donors that support is being given to these “marginalized and vulnerable” populations. This is evident in the great number of NGOs established in rural or/and peri-urban areas to “help” these populations. Some of these organizations, which are in fact profit-minded private companies, act unofficially on behalf of the populations. This unlawful practice reached its peak when these populations were represented by unknown individuals at meetings such as the World Summit for Information Society.

Rural communities such as districts and counties have applied for membership to WSIS in vain, while demands of the rural council were simply rejected without any further actions. At the time when we declare and advocate an inclusive information society, rural areas are excluded from the preparation process and even from summits. Haven’t they the right to voice their opinions on issues that concern them directly? Should we continue to think for them?

At the time when we advocate the promotion of an information society for all (and by all, should have been added), the representation of African local populations at world summits is negligible or even absent. This adds to their marginalization (overused concept). Meanwhile, we are quick to use them for our defense, or to have a clear conscience. Their absence in decision making, or to say the least, the fact that their concerns are given little consideration surely explains their marginalized nature. Why are they termed marginalized populations? Who is marginalizing them? On what are they being marginalized? When does this marginalization end?

The digital gap is the least of concerns of the rural world as it is plagued by internal social problems which are common to several African countries. At national level, there is great need to curb the extreme disparities between towns and countrysides at different areas such as health, education and training, drinking water, transportation, etc.

The important issue here is how ICTs can solve these numerous social, economic, agricultural and digital problems currently afflicting our global village, continents and Governments as well. The international community acknowledges the important role ICTs play in development, as their contribution to globalization is limitless, and they ensure a legal political, economic and cultural environment worldwide. 

Presently, the concept of NICT is being used to pursue new trends into socio-economic development issues. This is evident in the establishment of the African Information Society Initiative (AISI) and NEPAD’s NICT which sets out to bridge the digital gap in African countries. The implementation of the digital solidarity concept requires the setting up of a special fund to finance Africa’s infrastructural deficiency. 

While this effort is laudable, it is worth observing that it should involve other essential measures such as reducing the agricultural gap. The Dakar meeting of February 2005 addressed this issue head-on. Any developing country which has not yet curbed their food self-sufficiency problem should embrace NICT policies as accompanying measures in order to facilitate the participation of the rural populations at national and world meetings. Countries plagued by agricultural problems should benefit from NICT support to boost their technical know-how. NICTs actually rationalize world meetings and organize exchange modalities from the performance of services they provide. Some thinkers speak of NICTs as the most apparent sign of post-modernism. Now is the time to use them judiciously in developing countries with necessary accompanying measures such as electricity, which is presently a luxury in cities of Sub-Saharan Africa countries. 

Could the self-induced electricity revolution campaign become one of ICT’s gateways? This urges us to set up, amongst others, rural electrification projects as incorporated accompanying measures without which information technology would be lacking in technical support. 

Bakary FAYE

____________________

Translation by  ACSIS Online Translator from UNV  (South China)

Lilian  bornlilian at yahoo.co.uk


		
---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! 
 Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050306/8cf5f92c/attachment.html