ChapterPDF Available

Enacting and Interpreting Technology- From Usage to Well-Being

January 2006

In book: Empowering Marginal Communities with Information Networking

Authors:

Georgetown University

Under which conditions can information and communications technologies (ICTs) enhance the well-being of indigenous communities? This chapter investigates this question, focusing on the role of information and communications technology in promoting indigenous peoples’ development. First, the chapter analyzes key factors under which information and knowledge can be instrumental and substantive for the empowerment of marginalized groups. Hereby, it will be argued that improved informational capabilities, similar to the enhancement of a person’s writing and reading skills, can enhance poor people’s capabilities to make strategic life choices and to achieve the lifestyle they value. The chapter develops an alternative evaluation framework for ICT interventions based on Sen’s capability approach. This framework places, in contrast to the current discourse around the digital divide, the human development of the poor and not technology at the center of the analysis. The chapter concludes that a direct and causal relationship between ICTs and enhanced well-being does not exist, but that in fact this relationship is being shaped by a dynamic, multi-dimensional interrelationship between technology and the social context.

Training workshop with indigenous youth in a Kari'ña community of Venezuela (photo by Haydée Seijas, Executive Secretary, UNUMA)

…

Ashaninka leaders of Mari Kiri Bajo using the Internet

…

Figures - uploaded by Bjorn-Soren Gigler

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Bjorn-Soren Gigler

Content may be subject to copyright.

124 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Chapter VI

Enacting and Interpreting

Technology — From

Usage to Well-Being:

Experiences of Indigenous

Peoples with ICTS

Björn-Sören Gigler

London School of Economics and Political Science, UK

Abstract

Under which conditions can information and communications technologies

(ICTs) enhance the well-being of indigenous communities? This chapter

investigates this question, focusing on the role of information and

communications technology in promoting indigenous peoples’ development.

First, the chapter analyzes key factors under which information and

knowledge can be instrumental and substantive for the empowerment of

marginalized groups. Hereby, it will be argued that improved informational

capabilities, similar to the enhancement of a person’s writing and reading

skills, can enhance poor people’s capabilities to make strategic life choices

and to achieve the lifestyle they value. The chapter develops an alternative

evaluation framework for ICT interventions based on Sen’s capability

approach. This framework places, in contrast to the current discourse

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 125

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

around the digital divide, the human development of the poor and not

technology at the center of the analysis. The chapter concludes that a direct

and causal relationship between ICTs and enhanced well-being does not

exist, but that in fact this relationship is being shaped by a dynamic, multi-

dimensional interrelationship between technology and the social context.

Introduction

What is the impact of information and communication technologies (ICTs) on

indigenous peoples1? Can the introduction of ICTs enhance their human and

social capabilities and thus improve their well-being2? The starting point of the

following chapter is to investigate the impact of ICTs on development from the

vantage point of marginalized communities themselves. This approach centers

on people and their well-being rather than on technologies. It underscores the

notion that communities are not mere beneficiaries of development, but have the

capacity and creativity to define their own development priorities, goals, and

vision for the future (Chambers, 1983; Cernea, 1991; Eade, 2003; Max-Neef,

1991; Korten & Klauss, 1984). Using this concept, an alternative evaluation

framework of ICT programs has been developed that places their human

development rather than technology at the core of its analysis (Madon, 2003) and

which operationalizes Amartya Sen’s capability approach.

The chapter addresses the two key questions, whether and under which

conditions the improved access to information and knowledge facilitated by ICTs

can enhance the capabilities of marginalized groups to better achieve the

lifestyles they value. At the outset, it will be argued that information and

knowledge can play an important role to improve the well-being of marginalized

groups, as long as they are fully integrated into the broader socio-political

realities of the communities (Castells, 1997, 1998; Madon, 2000; ITDG, 2001;

O’Farrell, Norrish, & Scott, 1999). This approach places communities’ assets

and capabilities in the center, and examines the catalytic role of information and

knowledge flows in expanding the capabilities of marginalized groups. Within this

framework the chapter investigates key factors that enable marginalized groups

to gain real and meaningful access to ICTs and allow them to appropriate these

technologies as an instrument for their own development.

On the basis of two case studies, the chapter will provide a set of conclusions,

which point out that it is in fact not possible to identify a direct and causal

relationship between ICTs and the improved well-being of marginalized groups,

stressing the complex and dynamic interdependency between people, social

institutions, and technology.

126 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Background: Indigenous Peoples

and ICTs for Development

Indigenous peoples have historically been the poorest and most excluded in Latin

America. They have not only faced serious discrimination in terms of their basic

rights to ancestral property, languages, cultures, and forms of governance, but

also in terms of access to basic social services (education, health and nutrition,

water and sanitation, housing, etc.) and the essential material conditions for a

satisfying life. These conditions of extreme poverty and material deprivation —

what might be best described as a denial of the fundamental social citizenship

rights of indigenous peoples — are widespread in many parts of the world (Davis,

2002; Partridge & Uquillas with Johns, 1998).

In recent years, the potential of information and communications technologies3

for development has gained a lot of attention in the development discourse

(Braga, 1998; Heeks & Kenny, 2002; Panos, 1998; UNDP 2001; Wade, 2002;

World Bank, 1995, 2000). Within this debate, critics highlight that the emphasis

is frequently being placed on providing access to ICTs to the poor before

analyzing the value information and knowledge exchanges play for development

at the local level (Black, 1999; Mansell, 1998; Menou, 1993, 1999; Norris, 2001.

But an unanswered question remains — what is in fact the impact of ICTs on the

lives of indigenous peoples?

The analysis will draw on the contextual approach to ICTs, emphasizing the

importance of the socio-economic and cultural milieu, considered crucial for a

better understanding of the potential effects of ICTs on development (Avgerou,

2001; Kling, 2000; Walsham, 1993, 1995). This approach stresses that technol-

ogy only receives meaning once it is enacted by users, and thus people can exert

control over its use by interpreting and appropriating it to their specific realities

(Orlikowski, 2000). In essence, it places human action rather than technology at

the center, and emphasizes the interdependencies between technology and the

social context (Orlikowski, 2000; Avgerrou, 2001). The chapter focuses on this

very interrelationship between technological and social change, in effect,

seeking to broaden the focus from simply studying the immediate and measurable

effects of ICT diffusion and usage to a wider scope encompassing the analysis

of social, economic, and cultural aspects of the local context in which ICTs are

placed. This approach follows earlier empirical works (e.g., Harris, Bala,

Songan, & Khoo, 2001; Madon, 2001; Miller & Slater, 2000; Nelson, 1996) which

have demonstrated that the researcher has been able to discern the specific

factors (i.e., local culture and social structures) influencing whether or not

technologies have a positive impact on the daily lives of poor communities

(Avgerou & Madon, 2003).

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 127

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Key Factors for ICTs and Indigenous

Peoples’ Development

The chapter highlights the following main factors that influence whether and to

what extent the access to and use of ICTs can enhance the capability of

indigenous peoples, ultimately resulting in their improved well-being. These

include the following:

1. The role of existing indigenous information systems,

2. The role of intermediary organizations,

3. The appropriation process of technology, and

4. The broader socio-political context.

The Role of Existing Indigenous Information Systems

In contrast to more conventional approaches to ICTs, this chapter highlights the

key role indigenous information systems — which are based on indigenous

knowledge and communication practices — play for securing the well-being of

indigenous peoples (Agrawal, 1995; Chambers, Pacey, & Thrupp, 1989;

Brokensha, Warren, & Wern, 1980; Harris et al., 2001; Wang et al., 1994). This

approach emphasizes that the existing information and knowledge gaps are

rather mutual in nature, whereby not only poor communities lack access to

information and knowledge, but at the same time policy makers in capital cities

lack knowledge about the local and cultural context of the poor and marginalized

groups (Scoones & Thompson, 1994; Long & Villareal, 1994). It is thus crucial

to first analyze the existing information ecology and traditional information

systems and communications channels before exploring the impact of the

introduction of ICTs (Madon, 2003; ITDG, 2001; O’Farrell et al., 1999; Slater,

2002).

These traditional information systems are embedded into the existing social

and organizational structures at the community level. A common reason for the

failure of ICT programs is that key community members (e.g., elders and other

information brokers) perceive the new technologies as a mechanism to

undermine the existing information systems embedded in the social and

organizational structures of the community (Robinson, 1998; Long & Villareal,

1994).

128 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

The Role of Intermediary Organizations

The literature points to the critical role intermediary organizations are playing in

the process of introducing ICTs to local communities (Madon, 2000; Heeks,

2002; McConnell, 2000). For instance, Heeks argues that intermediaries play a

critical role in supporting rural communities to overcome some of the previously-

mentioned barriers while providing ICT services (Heeks, 2002). However, the

literature has neglected to specify the exact role that intermediaries play in the

process. Instead it takes a more institutional perspective and analyzes the effects

of ICTs within organizations (Avgerou, 2001; Powell, 1999; Meyer, 1997).

Based on this gap in the literature, the chapter suggests investigation in greater

detail of the different types and levels of intermediation in ICT programs, hereby

distinguishing between the following two types: (1) ICT or technical and (2)

social intermediaries. The main role of ICT intermediaries is defined as an

organization providing effective support to local communities in the use and

adaptation of technology. Most commonly an ICT intermediary will be a

specialized organization from outside the community, such as a non-governmen-

tal organization, local government, or international donor. On the other hand, a

social intermediary is defined as a local institution from within the community,

such as a community-based organization. This classification will be used to

analyze the two main aspects of the intermediary process: (1) the manner in

which ICTs are being introduced and which technical support services (i.e.,

training, content development) are being provided to the community, and (2) the

extent to which the ICT program is embedded into existing social and organiza-

tional structures (i.e., the relationship between existing informal information

systems and the ICT intervention).

The Process of Technology Appropriation

Based on this contextualized approach to ICTs (Avgerou, 2001; Madon, 2001;

Walsham, 1998, 1993), the chapter emphasizes that the local appropriation of

technologies by local communities and the contextualization of information

provided through ICTs is a key factor that determines whether indigenous

communities are able to derive real benefits out of the use of ICTs. Pure access

to ICTs by the poor does not translate into improved well-being (O’Farrell, 2001).

In fact, a tool such as the Internet is a very ‘western’ medium and needs to be

appropriated by poor communities before real benefits can be derived. For

instance, the content on the Internet often does not reflect the realities of local

communities (Ballantyn, 2002). Also, language many times represents a prohibi-

tive barrier for communities in their use of information, as most of the Internet’s

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 129

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

content is written in a rather academic or business style, and thus is not directly

applicable at the grassroots level. Another factor which acts as a barrier to

access, stems from the fact that the majority of the content available on the

Internet is in English — limiting access in poor communities across most

developing countries (Gurstein, 2000).

The Broader Socio-Political Context

Several authors have argued that existing barriers to the use of ICTs are not

simply about the lack of access to technology or inadequate access to relevant

and timely information, but that these are in fact much more deeply rooted in

underlying social and institutional structures which continue to perpetuate

existing socio-economic inequalities between the elites and marginalized groups

of society, ultimately reproducing themselves also in the uneven benefits accrued

from ICTs (Castells, 1997, 1998; Hamelink, 1994; Hewitt de Alcántara, 2001;

Mansell, 2004; Skuse, 2000). Thus, rather than the lack of knowledge of

marginalized groups, the existing political, socio-economic, and cultural barriers

between the urban elites and the poor inhibit them from making their information

and knowledge known and disseminated, blocking their participation in the

dominant society’s political and economic system.

The Capability Approach

Amartya Sen argues that human development should be viewed first and

foremost as a process of expanding people’s capabilities. What matters,

according to Sen, is what people are capable of being, or doing, with the goods

to which they have access. A person’s capability therefore refers “to the

alternative combinations of functionings that are feasible to achieve. Capability

is thus a kind of freedom: the substantive freedom to achieve alternative

functioning combinations (or, less formally put, the freedom to achieve various

lifestyles)” (Sen, 1999, p. 75). Capabilities include things that a person actually

has done, as well as things people can possibly do. In other words capabilities

refer to the extent of one’s positive freedoms (Gasper, 2002, p. 5).

The concept of functioning “reflects the various things a person may value

doing or being” (Sen, 1999, p. 75). They represent “various components or

aspects of how a person lives” (Gasper, 2002, p. 4). A person’s ability to realize

her or his desired and valued functionings very much depends on her or his

capabilities as well as entitlements or assets.

130 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Operationalizing Sen’s Capability Approach

In the last couple of years, there has been significant debate in the literature on

ways to operationalize Sen’s capability approach and to apply it in a more

practical way to empirical research (Alkire, 2002; Comin, 2001; Corbridge 2001;

Gasper, 1997, 2002; Stewart & Deneulin, 2002), On the one hand, as Comim has

suggested, the capability framework is well suited for “evaluating and assessing

social arrangements, standard of living, inequality, poverty, justice, quality of life

or well-being” (Comim, 2001, p. 4).

On the other hand, however, several scholars have highlighted the difficulties to

operationalizing the approach. Comin points out that these difficulties derive from

the capabilities approach’s “theoretical underspecification and inclusive view of

operationalization which contest not only the evaluative but also the practical

foundations of utilitarianism” (Comim, 2001, p. 2). Furthermore, a key challenge

has been to define a-priori a set of basic capabilities, in order to have a baseline

from which to start specific evaluations (Nussbaum, 2000; Alkire, 2002).

Another difficulty related to operationalizing the capability approach is that some

capabilities are harder to measure than others. For instance, it is much more

difficult to assess a person’s ability to have self-esteem than their ability to write

and read. This represents particular challenges for gathering data on the non-

material aspects of people’s well-being.

Comim highlights that the capability approach is particularly suited for micro-

level studies, since to a large extent it focuses on non-income variables (Comim,

2001). Such an approach, he argues will reveal more interesting findings at the

micro-level than at the macro-level, as research at this level can better analyze

people’s ability to choose what to do or be.

Toward an Alternative Evaluation

Framework of ICT Programs

Based on the theoretical background discussed earlier, the chapter develops an

alternative evaluation framework (AEF) of ICT interventions based on Sen’s

capability approach (Garnham, 2000). The center of the analysis focuses on

whether or not and under which conditions the improved access to information

and knowledge facilitated by ICTs can enhance the individual and collective

capabilities of marginalized groups to better achieve the lifestyles they value.

This approach stands in contrast to the majority of existing ICT evaluations that

have focused primarily on the issue of access and usage, and assume that the

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 131

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

improved access to ICTs will have a direct positive impact on the lives of the poor

(Daly, 1999; Hudson, 1995; McConnell, 1995, 2000; Wilson, Daly, & Griffiths,

1998; White, 2000). These evaluations focus on measuring more immediate and

quantifiable output indicators, such as the increase in total numbers of Internet

hosts and computers per capita.

In an earlier analysis Richard Heeks (1999) has argued that information instead of

technologies needs to be in the center of the analysis. The proposed approach,

however, goes even one step further and places individual and collective capabili-

ties in the center, with information and ICTs being placed at the outermost circle

of the model. The aim is to underscore that ICTs are not a means to an end by

themselves and that in fact only under certain conditions can they act to expand the

capabilities of the poor and realize improved economic, social, political, and cultural

opportunities. Although it is argued that the right to information and knowledge is

an important entitlement and its absence can be a contributing factor to poverty,

this notion needs to be balanced against the broader context of existing social and

economic inequalities, which may reinforce themselves through the technology

(Hewitt de Alcántara, 2001; Castells, 1997). Consequently, the sustainable

livelihoods framework4 will be integrated to attempt a more holistic socio-

economic analysis of the possible effects of ICTs through its breadth and scope.

As a starting point, it is being argued that it is important to introduce information

as an additional asset or capital into the sustainable livelihoods framework. The

analysis of the role that information and knowledge can play for development and

the view that the right to information represents an important entitlement of the

poor serve as the rationale for including the concept of informational capital

into the livelihoods approach. This concept is defined through the following four

components:

1. The extent to which the poor have access to information from the formal

institutions of the market, state, and civil society;

2. The ability of the poor to process and evaluate information;

3. The extent to which the poor do not only consume, but produce and share

information within their community and networks; and

4. The extent to which indigenous knowledge is used.

As Table 1 shows, the informational capital has been added as an additional

dimension to the set of livelihood resources of the poor. Thus the framework aims

to underscore that the inter-linkages between informational capital and all the other

capitals are crucial for evaluating the role information and ICTs play in the

livelihoods of the poor. At the same time, it is being argued that information in its

own right is an important asset for the poor to improve or secure their livelihoods.

132 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Table 1. Empowerment through ICTs framework

CONTEXT LIVELIHOOD INSTITUTIONAL CAPABILITIES LIVELIHOOD

RESOURCES PROCESSES OUTCOMES

Socio-economic Economic/financial Existing social structures Individual

conditions capital Existing information system - Material Informational

<=> - Human => Capabilities

Demographics <=> Natural capital <=> - Social strengthened

- Informational

Cultural context Human capital Level and degree of Human

ICT intermediation <=> => Capabilities

Political context Social capital Collective strengthened

- Voice

ICT diffusion Informational capital - Organization => Social

- Networks capabilities

ICT policy - Informational strengthened

framework

Stages of ICT Project

Existing information

Systems and environments Assess

Information needs

Informational capital

1) Community ICT access

2) Local and relevant content

3) Capacity-building

Local appropriation

and use of ICTs Ownership

Sustainability

INFORMATION ICTs IMPACT

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 133

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

This approach contends that the capability of individuals and social groups to

transform valued functionings into realized functionings depends to a large

extent on their livelihood resources or capitals (Bebbington, 1999). The

expansion of capabilities is hereby understood as the strengthening of people’s

capitals. However, questions remain such as: what is the role that information

plays in this context, and what justifies broadening the livelihood approach by

the additional dimension of the informational capital? The main argument for

including this dimension into the framework is that information and ICTs can

play an important role not only in their own right, but can act as a catalytic

agent for the strengthening of the poor’s capital in multiple areas. As the

literature has demonstrated, only the combination of strengthened resources

and agency can lead to enhancing individual and collective capabilities (Kabeer,

1999; Bebbington, 1999). Based on these findings, the AEF analyzes under

which conditions the expansion of the informational capability can have a

positive multiplier effect on the other capabilities. In other words, does the

expansion of the poor’s capability to make meaningful use of ICTs strengthen

their capabilities to achieve valued functionings in multiple areas? This notion

stems from Sen’s concept on the role that human capital plays not only in

enhancing a person’s ability to generate income, but also in expanding her or

his capabilities to lead a freer and more fulfilled life, and to reach her or his

valued functionings (Sen, 1997, p. 1960). In this sense the focus is on the

agency role of human capabilities for bringing about social change. The AEF

applies this concept to the field of ICTs, arguing that better access to

information and improved ICT skills similar to the enhancement of a person’s

writing and reading skills can increase people’s capabilities to make choices in

their lives in various areas, including the economic, social, and political spheres.

Thus, as a result of expanded informational capabilities, individuals will be able

to increase their control over important life choices — in this sense information

and ICTs can contribute towards the empowerment of the poor.

It is, however, important to emphasize that in this scenario the improved access

to ICTs has indirect rather than direct effects on the well-being of the poor. In

fact the relationship between these variables is multi-dimensional and needs to

be seen within the broader socio-political context of a country.

Moreover, the framework requires that at the outset of ICT programs, an

assessment of existing indigenous information and knowledge systems be

carried out (Brown, 1991). A common reason for the failure of ICT programs is

that key community members perceive the new technologies as a mechanism to

undermine existing information systems and as a challenge to the role of

traditional knowledge brokers (Robinson, 1998; Long & Villareal, 1994). Thus,

it is decisive to carry out an information needs assessment prior to introducing

ICTs, and to use this tool in identifying the key stakeholders and their interests

in the information system. Such an assessment will make explicit the role that

134 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

information plays for the community, and which information and communications

channels (i.e., oral tradition, community-radios) have been used traditionally.

Furthermore, the evaluation framework underscores the importance of under-

standing the institutional structures and processes that mediate the transforma-

tion process from livelihood resources into the expansion of capabilities, thus

contributing to the attainment of positive livelihood outcomes. Hereby, it is

important to analyze the interrelationship between existing social structures and

ICT inter-mediation. The framework contends that a successful mediation

process by an effective and local intermediary is required before ICTs can

have a positive contribution towards expanding the livelihoods of the poor. In

addition, intermediaries play a decisive role in: (1) identifying and providing

access to ICT products and services that suit the local communities’ information

needs; (2) supporting the generation of local and relevant content; and (3)

providing ongoing support in the areas of training and capacity-building (Delgadillo,

Gomez, & Stoll, 2003; Gurstein, 2003). Based on this contextualized approach to

ICTs (Avgerou, 2001; Madon, 2001; Walsham, 1993, 1995), the AEF emphasizes

that the local appropriation of technologies by local communities and the

contextualization of information provided through ICTs is a key factor that

determines whether indigenous communities are able to derive real benefits out

of the use of ICTs.

An Overview of Experiences

in Using ICTs for Indigenous

Peoples’ Development

In spite of tremendous challenges associated with the use of ICTs, indigenous

peoples have been proactive in embracing the opportunities provided by the use

of new ICTs. In particular, the indigenous leadership has used these new

technologies to establish or strengthen existing national, regional, and interna-

tional networks. Hereby indigenous peoples frequently stress the need to foster

horizontal exchange of information, knowledge, and experiences among each

other. Furthermore, many indigenous peoples have used the Internet as an

instrument to strengthen their alliances with international NGOs, academic

institutions, and international donor agencies, as well as to raise the awareness

of the international community about their needs and concerns.

In order to analyze the specific effects of new ICTs on indigenous peoples, it is

necessary to clearly distinguish the different levels at which indigenous peoples

are making use of ICTs. In the analysis, the chapter will distinguish between the

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 135

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

following five levels: (1) international indigenous leaders, (2) regional leaders

(i.e., in Latin America), (3) national leaders, (4) community leaders, and (5)

indigenous communities5.

At the international level, indigenous peoples are increasingly gaining spaces

at the international fora, such as through the United Nations Permanent Forum

of Indigenous Issues established by the U.N. Economic and Social Council, the

U.N. Working Group on Indigenous Issues of the High Commissioner of Human

Rights, or various global summits, such as the World Summit on Sustainable

Development. As a consequence of this renewed international interest in

indigenous peoples’ concern, a new international indigenous leadership has been

formed. This new indigenous leadership makes intensive use of the Internet

mainly as a communication tool in order to coordinate their actions, to lobby for

indigenous rights, and to maintain close contact to international organizations,

governments, and international NGOs. A good example of this proactive use of

ICTs by international indigenous leaders is the Indigenous Media Network (http:/

/www.indigenousmedia.org). This network was established in May 2002 with

the support of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Advocacy

Project to bring together indigenous journalists from all parts of the world to

“promote indigenous identity, language, culture, and human rights.” The initiative

was conceived as a reaction to concerns by indigenous peoples that the

traditional mass media is solely based on the values of mainstream society, and

thus can lead to the erosion of indigenous peoples’ culture or be misused as an

instrument to stereotype against them. The indigenous leaders see their own

initiative as a key vehicle for reporting more accurate and culturally appropriate

news coverage from indigenous perspectives to a broad international audience,

including indigenous communities, international NGOs, governments, and inter-

national agencies.

An experience that demonstrates the new opportunities ICTs can provide

indigenous peoples to influence international policy dialogues is the program of

Indigenous Dialogues jointly organized by the Rigoberta Menchú Tum Foun-

dation (http://www.frmt.org), the University of the Autonomous Regions of the

Nicaraguan Coast - URACCAN (http://www.uraccan.edu.ni), and the Devel-

opment Gateway6 (http://www.developmentgateway.org). In a series of seven

videoconferences, the program connected indigenous leaders from up to 17

countries — primarily from Latin America and to some extent from Africa, Asia,

Europe, and North America — to exchange their views and make their voices

heard on such global issues as sustainable development, human rights and

discrimination, cultural diversity, women and development, and free trade. The

program enhanced the participation of indigenous peoples in international policy

dialogues. For instance in October 2001, more than 300 indigenous leaders

participated in a dialogue to evaluate the results of the World Conference against

racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia. Through the use of

136 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

videoconferencing, hundreds of indigenous leaders, who were not been able to

travel to this international conference, were enabled to participate in the debate

and in the development of a joint indigenous peoples’ position. This experience

highlights that the new international indigenous leadership has proactively

engaged with new ICTs and appreciates the value it can bring towards furthering

their causes. Dr. Myrna Cunningham, the director of URACCAN, expressed

this view by stressing:

We, the indigenous leaders have to take full advantage of this wonderful

technology to continue discussing key issues of our concern and to prepare

ourselves for international summits, as for instance the World Summit on

Sustainable Development. (Gigler with Simmons, 2002)

At the regional level, increasingly indigenous peoples are using new ICTs to

better coordinate their activities and to develop joint regional programs. A good

example of the use of ICTs at this level is the experience by the Fondo Indígena

para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas en America Latina y el Caribe (http:/

/http://www.fondoindigena.org). This regional international organization, repre-

senting indigenous peoples of 16 countries in Latin America, has developed since

mid-2000 a strategy to use new ICTs as an instrument to: (1) enhance the

organization’s transparency, (2) improve the information flow between its indig-

enous and government representatives, (3) promote indigenous peoples’ issues at

a regional and global level, and (4) enhance the capacity of indigenous leaders to

make use of the new ICTs. In order to implement its strategy, the Fondo Indígena

established a small communications team, which developed an institutional Web

site as one of its first activities, containing information about the institution, specific

programs, news, a calendar of events, and contact information. In addition, the

organization started a quarterly newsletter, which provides its members and the

general public with regular updates about its main activities.

A second main challenge of the institutions represented the need to improve the

information flow between its member governments and indigenous representa-

tives. As an important step the organization organized jointly with the Development

Gateway in September 2001 the first of a series of capacity-building workshops in

the use of ICTs for indigenous leaders. The core objectives of these workshops

were: (1) to train national and regional indigenous leaders in the practical use of the

Internet (i.e., use of e-mail, Web-searches); (2) to provide indigenous leaders with

specific online tools and resources (i.e., through the hosting of Web sites and the

provision of free e-mail accounts); and (3) to promote a culture of information

sharing and enhanced information flows between indigenous peoples.

Third, the Fondo Indígena became the main partner of the Development

Gateway in developing an international Indigenous Peoples Community Portal

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 137

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

(http://www.developmentgatway.org/indigenous). The main objectives of this

portal is to develop an interactive Web-based platform, where indigenous

organizations, international NGOs, governments, and international donors can

freely share information about development projects, best practices and lessons

learned, research reports, contact information, current events, and related

information on such issues as indigenous rights, cultural diversity, sustainable

development, and indigenous health. The portal offers a broad range of informa-

tion on indigenous issues; provides indigenous peoples with the opportunity to

access information about the activities of international donors, NGOs, and

governments; and disseminates its own information and content to a broad

international audience. Moreover, the portal serves as a major source of

information about the current situation of indigenous people for the international

community.

Finally, one of the key objectives of this ICT program, aiming to strengthen

indigenous peoples’ capacity to design and develop their own community sites,

has however encountered a series of important difficulties. Due to the lack of

access to computers, Internet connectivity, and technical skills, many indigenous

peoples remain de facto excluded from the services provided by the program.

Even national indigenous leaders and organizations frequently lack the resources

and capacity to make meaningful use of the portal and other online services.

Furthermore, a key lesson of the project is that there exists an abundance of

content on indigenous issues, which is more academic or theoretical in nature.

However, it is very challenging to develop content that meets the local needs of

indigenous leaders or local communities. Finally, due to the previously-described

important differences within the indigenous leadership, the portal is confronted

with the challenge of serving the information needs of a very diverse audience.

For instance, the information needs of international leaders are entirely different

from the needs of a community leader.

At the national level, there exists an abundance of experience of the use of ICTs

by indigenous organizations which provide useful information about existing

national policies, laws, and government policies; the current situation of indig-

enous peoples; and other issues relevant to indigenous peoples. In Ecuador, for

instance, the national confederation of indigenous peoples, CONAIE — with the

support of an international NGO and volunteers — is providing a broad range of

information of the situation of indigenous peoples in Ecuador through its Web site

(http://www.conaie.nativeweb.org). Furthermore, the organization has been

quite effective in using its Web site and e-mail listservs in coordinating its joint

actions between the different indigenous groups, as well as to influence the

national and international policy dialogue on such issues as land rights or the

structural adjustment programs.

In Canada, the main indigenous organizations have formed an alliance with the

government in the development of a national Aboriginal portal (http://

138 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

www.aboriginalcanada.gc.ca). The main objective of the portal is to provide a

single, national Aboriginal window on federal, provincial, and local Aboriginal

information and services. Many indigenous peoples however continue to

perceive this program as a government-led initiative, since the content and the

design of the portal has been coordinated by a technical group within the

Ministry of Indian and Northern Affairs. In order to minimize this type of

criticism and to allow the full participation of the main national aboriginal

organizations, the government has created a Working Group for the project,

where all the main aboriginal groups of Canada are represented. The main

function of this Working Group is to define the strategic priorities of the portal’s

future development.

Another example of how the Internet can facilitate indigenous peoples’ access

to the political arena and can raise awareness about indigenous peoples’ issues

at the national level is the Mirror Art Group from Thailand. Since 1991, this small

NGO composed of young professionals committed to social change has sup-

ported the Akbar hill tribe in the highlands of Thailand. The Group’s Web site

(http://www.bannok.com) has obtained on average 300,000 hits a month, making

it one of the country’s most popular Web sites. Through its Web site the

organization has successfully promoted indigenous peoples’ rights, and carried

out many campaigns to support the Akbar people through the recruitment of

volunteers and solicitation of financial resources and in-kind donations. Further-

more, the Akbar people have had some success in trading their arts and crafts

through the site (Gigler, 2001).

These examples, however, illustrate in themselves a key challenge — that the

large majority of information found on the Internet is produced by outsiders (i.e.,

international NGOs or academic institutions), rather than developed by indig-

enous organizations themselves. An evaluation of 200 Web sites from Latin

America carried out by the author in 2002 demonstrates that approximately 75%

of these sites are being produced and maintained by international volunteers,

NGOs, and academic institutions, rather than by indigenous peoples themselves.

An interesting case highlighting this issue represents the AymaraNet (http://

www.aymaranet.org), which provides some of the most comprehensive cover-

age about the Andean Aymara culture on the Web. Although the site provides

information in English, Spanish, and Aymara, it is significant that the site has been

developed and maintained by an Aymara activist living and working in Washing-

ton, DC, instead of being locally developed and owned by indigenous leaders of

the region.

At the community level, there seems to exist a discrepancy between the use of

ICTs by community leaders and community members. Frequently, community

leaders have started to use new ICTs by using cell phones and Internet services

(mainly in the form of e-mail), particularly when they are traveling to the nearby

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 139

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

urban centers. For instance in Peru currently exist approximately 1400 public

telecenters exclusively in urban centers, which enable community leaders and

certain more privileged indigenous subgroups (i.e., indigenous professionals) to

access ICT services. At the same time, the large majority of indigenous peoples

living in their communities remain completely excluded from the access to new

ICTs.

Furthermore, local indigenous leaders play a key role in deciding whether or not

communities should engage with the new forms of ICTs. In the Ecuadorian

community of Sumbagua in the Cotopaxi province, for instance, a proactive local

community leadership cooperated with Chasquinet (http://www.chasquinet.org)

— a local NGO dedicated to promoting the use of new ICTs for social change

and sustainable development by developing a telecenter in the community. The

center directly supported the livelihoods of the local community, when commu-

nity members where able to find a solution to an insect plague that was

threatening the local potato harvest via the Internet. This came about after

connecting themselves with indigenous communities that had faced similar

problems in Bolivia, Brazil, and Peru. The community leaders were able to use

the provided information in order to launch an awareness campaign on how to

combat the plague, and through a consolidated effort the community was able to

control the plague (Gigler with Daly, 2003). On the other hand, in Mexico one of

the main reasons for the failure of several community-based telecenter pilot

projects located at the edge of Mexico City and in the State of Michoacán has

been the opposition to the project encountered by local indigenous leaders, who

felt that the introduction of new ICTs would undermine their position of power

as the main holders of information (Robinson, 2000).

Based on this brief overview, it seems key to analyze the impact of ICTs on

indigenous peoples in more detail through specific case studies. In the following

section, the chapter will provide a more in-depth analysis of two cases studies,

whereby ICTs have been introduced to indigenous peoples at the community

level. The main reason for limiting the analysis to the community level is that it

seems that ICTs have the potential to most directly impact the well-being of

indigenous peoples at the community level. As the previous analysis has shown,

many of the ICT programs at the international, regional, and national levels seem

to reach only a relatively small number of indigenous leaders, as well as having

rather indirect effects on the well-being of indigenous peoples. It is thus the aim

of the following section to apply the previously-developed Alternative Evaluation

Framework (AEF) to the analysis of the impact of ICTs on the well-being of

indigenous peoples at the community level.

140 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

UNUMA: Bilingual and Intercultural

Education Project from Venezuela

Since 2000, UNUMA — Sociedad Civil de Apoyo al Indígena (http://

www.unuma.org) — a local NGO working for the promotion of indigenous

peoples’ development and rights in Venezuela, has focused on the innovative use

of ICTs to support a bilingual and intercultural education project of indigenous

peoples.

The key objectives of the program are to strengthen the capacity of indigenous

teachers from the Wayuu (Guajira peninsula), Kari’ña (El Tigre, Anzoategui),

Uwotjuja, Hiwi (Amazonas), and Pemón communities (Estado Boliviar) by

providing training in linguistics; production of books in indigenous languages,

mathematics, and psychology; and the use of ICTs (see Appendix 1). The role

of the ICT capacity program was catalytic in nature and sought to reinforce the

other training modules, rather than focusing exclusively on the field of ICTs

themselves. Early findings demonstrate the high value of integrating an ICT

intervention into a bilingual and intercultural education program. Most indigenous

teachers had never used a computer before the training and were enthusiastic

about the ICT program. During a field visit in December 2000, an indigenous

leader showed the author his computer artworks — all of which were based on

traditional Kari’ña cultural and spiritual motifs. He explained to me that this

activity was also an important source of income, as he took his digital artworks

(see Figure 1) and reproduced them on t-shirts and other prints, selling them in

the local marketplace.

Based on the success of this pilot experience and the strong demand from

indigenous peoples to continue the program, UNUMA was able to finance a

second phase of the program in 2002 through a $50,000 grant from the

Figure 1. Artwork: Graphic designed by an indigenous leader of the Pemón

community

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 141

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Development Marketplace of the World Bank. As a first step, a series of

consultation workshops with indigenous communities was organized, where it

was decided that several computers needed to be purchased in order to expand

the ICT program and provide the training to more indigenous teachers, in addition

to organizing a series of capacity-building workshops at the community level.

Due to the strong interest from many communities, the indigenous communities

in all three regions developed a system of sharing the computers, whereby

indigenous youth themselves were trained to maintain the equipment and

organize the distribution of computers among the different communities. This

model is based on collective identity and the strong organizational tradition of

indigenous communities, drawing on their cultural value of reciprocity, which

provided the basis for the sharing of computers among different communities.

Impact of the Project on the

Well-Being of Indigenous Peoples

These first findings from the field clearly illustrate that ICTs can play an

important role in strengthening the human and social capabilities of marginalized

groups. It is, however, important to take a closer look at the program and to

analyze the following questions:

1. What is the overall socio-political context in which the project is taking

place?

2. What were some of the ingredients of this successful application of ICTs?

3. What role did the local NGO play in enhancing the individual and collective

capabilities of indigenous peoples?

4. In what manner did the project build on and strengthen existing community

structures?

5. What are the effects of the project on the cultural identity of indigenous

communities?

6. What are some of the key challenges the project is facing?

Firstly, the overall socio-political context of the program is characterized through

a permanent struggle of the cultural survival of indigenous peoples in Venezuela.

With a population numbering between 2 to 3% of the overall population,

indigenous peoples represent a very small minority within the Venezuelan

society. For instance, the Kari’ña live in the surroundings of El Tigre, a city that

has been for the past 70 years a major area of oil exploration in Venezuela. As

a consequence of the oil boom in this region, the cultural identity and social

142 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

institutions of the Kari’ña communities have come under significant pressure.

Many Kari’ña communities are today facing a situation of severe poverty,

struggling to make their ends to meet and attempting to preserve their cultural

identity.

In spite of this challenging socio-economic and political context, the project is

demonstrating that the meaningful use of ICTs by indigenous peoples can

significantly enhance their human and social capabilities. One of the key success

factors of the project is the fact that the ICT project was fully integrated into the

bilingual and intercultural education program. The main role of the ICT program

is to enhance the other program components such as increasing literacy capacity,

rather than to support the capacity-building of indigenous peoples in the use of

computers and the Internet on a stand-alone basis. It is important to highlight that

the overall program responds to a key priority of indigenous communities — the

strengthening of their cultural identity by recuperating their own languages and

improving the quality of the existing bilingual education programs.

This case study illustrates how ICTs can form part of a holistic approach towards

promoting indigenous peoples’ development, and they can act in a catalytic

manner enhancing the human capabilities of indigenous peoples, thus ultimately

contributing to improving their well-being. In the project, the instrumental value

of ICTs are being well integrated into the more substantive aspects of the

education program, thus contributing in a significant manner to its overall

objectives. In this sense, the objectives of the ICT capacity-building activities are

to enhance indigenous peoples’ informational capabilities not for their own

sake, but in order to enhance their skills and further their human capabilities in

the cultural, social, and economic spheres of their lives.

A very positive aspect of the ICT program is the enthusiasm the project has

created for the overall program, particularly among indigenous youth (see

Figure 2). For instance, several youth were able to find employment as a result

of their newly acquired computer skills. Furthermore, for the first time, six

students from the Kari’ña community have been accepted to pursue a career

in computer science in several universities in Caracas. A more intangible

effect of the program was that the increase in self-esteem of most of the

indigenous youth who participated in the training workshops. An important

ingredient of the program’s success has been the key role that the local NGO

has played in acting as a facilitator in promoting the process of individual and

collective empowerment of indigenous peoples. It is important that UNUMA

has continuously been working with the same indigenous communities since

1992 and thus has gradually gained the respect and trust of many indigenous

peoples. Furthermore, the executive director of the NGO has been a longtime

ally of indigenous peoples in their struggle to maintain their cultural identity and

affirmation of their rights.

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 143

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Finally, an important aspect of the program has been the emphasis on building all

project activities on the existing traditional social structures. Hereby, indigenous

leaders have played a key role in facilitating an open participatory approach that

includes all community members, including the most marginalized groups (e.g.,

women and youth). A key aspect of this process encompassed a detailed needs

assessment carried out in 2000 with indigenous teachers in order to better

understand their attitudes, needs, and perceptions towards the role of information

and ICT for development.

In spite of the overall positive outcomes of the program, several important

challenges remain. Firstly, due to the overall difficult political situation in

Venezuela, the execution of the program was seriously delayed. Furthermore,

the indigenous organizations, particularly among the Uwotjuja, Hiwi, and Kari’ña

communities, remain relatively weak, and thus the entire financing as well as a

large portion of the program management responsibilities remain with UNUMA.

Finally, the program very much relies on the personal commitment of the

executive director of UNUMA, and it was not yet possible to transfer its

management to the indigenous communities themselves.

Internet Access in the Peruvian Amazon

The following case study illustrates the significant challenges involved in

promoting the use of ICT for indigenous peoples’ development. In the year 2000,

the Ashaninka community Marakiri Bajo (see Figure 3), with the support of

IDRC Canada and the Red Cientifica Peruana, initiated the first telecenter

project located in a remote indigenous community in the Peruvian Amazon.

Figure 2. Training workshop with indigenous youth in a Kari’ña community

of Venezuela (photo by Haydée Seijas, Executive Secretary, UNUMA)

144 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

The Ashaninka represent the largest indigenous group of the central Peruvian

Amazon region. They live in severe poverty, while their cultural identity and

subsistence economy are under severe pressure due the exploitation of natural

resources and invasion of indigenous lands since the early 1900s (Garcia Hierro,

Hvalkof, & Gray, 1998). Moreover, their access to such basic social services

remains very limited. Within this overall political and socio-economic context,

many indigenous peoples had very high expectations about the potential benefits

of the project, while others remained skeptical about the usefulness of ICTs from

the beginning. This early enthusiasm about ICTs is best reflected in the words

of Mino Eusebio Castro, the Asháninka leader, who spearheaded the project

from inception. In an interview with the author in early 2001, he emphasized that

“through the help of the Internet[,] indigenous peoples have the opportunity to

overcome their exclusion and to have improved access to education, markets,

and political participation. The Internet also enables us for the first time to

directly contact international donors, to present our opinions in policy debates,

and to directly negotiate funding proposals without any intermediaries.”

In the first phase, the project focused on finding a technical solution to provide

telephone and Internet connectivity to the remote village of Marakiri Bajo, a

community without access to electricity and running water. Furthermore, since

it was one of the key objectives of the program to provide distance education to

indigenous youth, the program installed in the community a state-of-the-art

videoconference facility (via a generator-operated satellite system).

What was the impact of such a high-level investment in technology at the

community-level? How did the community react to the newly introduced

telecenter? What were the reactions of the Ashaninka in the surrounding

communities? Was it possible to maintain the interest of the community into the

project? Were people really empowered and did they derive real value out of its

use?

Figure 3. Ashaninka leaders of Mari Kiri Bajo using the Internet

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 145

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

At first, it seemed that the project was quite successful. Many indigenous

peoples — in particular, indigenous youth and women — started to explore the

new technologies. Based on this demand, the project initiated a capacity-building

program for indigenous peoples in the use of ICTs. As a result of the training, in

particular indigenous youth quickly learned how to use the technology and started

to make contact with the Ashaninka living in Brazil and other indigenous groups

throughout Latin America. Based on the new skills, several community members

developed a Web site for the community and began using the videoconferencing

facility. At this stage of the project in late 2000, the international audience started

to become interested in the project, and Mino Eusebio Castro, one of the

community’s indigenous leaders and champion of the project, was invited to

several international conferences to present the case as a best practice on how

the Internet can ‘empower’ indigenous peoples by providing them with an

instrument for the reaffirmation of their cultural identity and to contribute to their

economic and social self-development.

At the same time, however, the project ran relatively quickly into serious

difficulties. Firstly, right from its inception only a relatively few number of people

actually used the telecenter and the entire project was controlled by a small group

of indigenous leaders. As a consequence many indigenous peoples from within

and in the surrounding communities felt excluded and began to envy the ones who

were able to use and manage the center. Thus the project aggravated existing

social tensions between the different groups within the community. Due to the

long assimilation process within the project area, about half of the population

in Marakiri Bajo identifies themselves as Ashaninka, with the other half as

mesticos who have settled in the community relatively recently. The telecenter

was controlled by the Ashaninka and was not open for the general public,

excluding the non-indigenous population from its potential benefits.

In addition, the telecenter did not meet the high expectations of many indigenous

peoples about its potential benefits, in particular in economic and social terms.

At first, many people hoped that the new technologies would enable them to

better sell their products of fruits and artisans to the market in Lima. Unfortu-

nately, this objective went unrealized due to the lack of an online market for such

products within Peru, as well as the communities’ limited knowledge and

experience with e-commerce.

Moreover, many people encountered problems in terms of being able to relate to

the new media due to the lack of local content in their own language. In particular,

many women became relatively quickly disinterested in the technology, as they

felt that the center did not provide them with any concrete information or services

they could use in their daily lives. The only group that continued to use the center

was indigenous youth. Finally, the videoconference equipment was entirely

underused due to a lack of both the supply of educational programs and a very

low demand for this service from the community.

146 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

On the night of August 29, 2001, these difficulties culminated, when the

telecenter burned down and was almost entirely destroyed. It remains unclear

to this date who was responsible for this incident or what the motives might have

been for the destruction of the center. After this incidence, several community

members decided to rehabilitate parts of the center and restarted the program the

following year, giving it clearer objectives and grounding it in a much more

realistic approach. After a 6-month period of reflection and internal discussion,

the community relaunched the ICT program through the opening of a local radio

station. The Ashanika radio station is now producing and broadcasting local

programs about agriculture, education, health, and cultural topics in the Ashaninka

language to about 10,000 people in the project area. The Internet continues to be

used, but through existing telecenters in Satipo, the closest intermediary city.

This case study raises a series of research questions: What are some of the key

lessons learned from this example? What are some of the key factors that led to

the difficulties of the program? How could some of the problems have been

avoided?

The first important factor that contributed to the difficulties of the project is the

overall complex political and socio-economic context of the project area. As a

result of almost 100 years of continuous colonization of the Ashaninka territory,

many communities such as Marikiry Bajo have been divided and have suffered

under tremendous pressure to maintain their cultural identity. In addition to

invasion of their lands, many indigenous peoples became the victims of violence

during the confrontations between the Shining Path and government troops in

the 1980s. This violence had severe consequences for them, and in spite of the

end to the widespread violence, several guerrilla groups remain sporadically

active in close proximity to the project area (see Appendix 2).

Secondly, the project entirely bypassed the existing organizational structures of

the indigenous peoples of the Amazon region in Peru. In order to represent the

interests and to fight for indigenous rights within the political system of Peru, the

indigenous peoples have formed AIDESEP, a national indigenous organization

representing the large majority of the indigenous peoples of the Peruvian

Amazon. AIDESEP as a membership organization has six regional offices, one

of which is located in Satipo and represents the interests of the Ashaninka people

of the central Amazon. By executing the project directly at the community level,

without any coordination with the traditional organizational structure of the

indigenous in Peru, the project created tensions between the different indigenous

communities and alienated many Ashaninka leaders within AIDESEP.

Thirdly, the project’s design overemphasized the role of technology and did not

carry out the necessary groundwork for the ICT investment. It seems that the

consultative process at the planning phase was much too scattered and did not

provide sufficient space for discussion and dissent within the community. The

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 147

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

process did not include from the outset the non-indigenous population, which

contributed to the raising of tensions within the community. Furthermore, the

technological solutions, in particular the videoconferencing facility, were not

based on real needs from the communities and thus remained underused.

Finally, the local community was not supported by any local intermediary

organization; instead the project was being monitored by the Colombian founda-

tion, Fundación Multicolor. In this way, the investment on the infrastructure was

not adequately complemented by key preparatory steps identified earlier such as

the carrying out of an information needs assessment, building of local content, or

extensive capacity-building workshops in the use and maintenance of the

technology.

Key Challenges in the Use of ICTs for

Indigenous Peoples’ Development

While the case studies mentioned have demonstrated that new ICTs have the

potential to improve the well-being of indigenous peoples, there continue to exist

tremendous challenges for indigenous peoples to make meaningful use of ICTs.

The following section will highlight several key challenges.

Ownership and Trust

One of the most important issues for indigenous peoples is how they can control

the process of the introduction and use of ICTs in their communities. Many

indigenous peoples have expressed their concerns that this process is being

driven by outsiders and emphasize that there exists a threat that these new

technologies can lead to new dependencies for indigenous peoples. In order to

avoid such new dependencies, it is particularly important that indigenous peoples

are appropriating these technologies in order to be able to adapt ICTs to their own

cultural and social context. It seems that the potential benefits of ICTs for

indigenous communities can only be fully recognized, if indigenous peoples

themselves acquire the necessary technical skills and know-how in managing

and “owning” the technology (Gigler, 2001, p. 36). As shown earlier in the case

studies, intermediary organizations that enjoy the trust of local communities play

an essential role within this process by providing long-term technical assistance

to indigenous communities.

148 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Generation of Local and Relevant Content

Indigenous communities are rich in traditional and indigenous knowledge. At the

same time, however, the traditional indigenous information systems are based on

an oral tradition, and there are not many experiences through which indigenous

communities were able to produce their own local content and to disseminate it

through the Internet. As the previous analysis has shown, the large majority of

information found on the Internet is being produced by outsiders to the commu-

nities, instead of being developed by indigenous peoples themselves. The

experiences described in the case studies have demonstrated that the capacity

building of indigenous peoples not only in the use of the Internet, but also in the

development of their own content, is crucial to allow indigenous peoples to derive

more meaningful benefits out of the use of new ICTs. The production and sharing

of content is particularly important to enable indigenous communities to share

information and lessons learned with each other, and learn from each other’s

experiences.

Intellectual Property Rights and Indigenous Knowledge

Another important challenge for indigenous peoples is the issue of how they can

control and manage their intellectual property rights and protect their indigenous

knowledge. Many indigenous leaders have expressed their suspicion about the

use of information about their communities by outsiders. They emphasize that the

introduction of ICTs has to be based on the recognition of indigenous peoples’

basis rights (i.e., self-determination, land rights, etc.), as ICTs cannot be seen in

isolation from the overall context in which indigenous peoples live. Consequently,

a key demand of indigenous peoples is to establish clear international and national

frameworks for the protection of their intellectual property rights, in order to

avoid that the introduction of ICTs threatens their cultural heritage and indig-

enous knowledge (WSIS Global Forum of Indigenous Peoples and the Informa-

tion Society, 2003). As the example of the telecenter project from Mexico has

demonstrated, frequently ICT projects underestimate the importance of taking

the cultural and political context of indigenous communities (i.e., the need to

adequately protect indigenous knowledge) into account and subsequently face

serious problems in their implementation (Robinson, 2000).

Literacy and Capacity Building

A large number of indigenous peoples speak and write their own indigenous

language. In particular, indigenous women have frequently very limited access

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 149

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

to formal education and thus are monolingual. Consequently, they have great

difficulties interacting with the world outside their own communities. Low

literacy levels represent a major challenge in increasing the use of ICTs in

indigenous communities around the world. The high correlation between being

indigenous and poor is based to a large extent on the lack of equal access to

education (Pscharapoulos & Patrinos, 1994). As the case studies have demon-

strated, it is crucial that indigenous peoples gradually build up capacities to use

and manage modern technologies, so that they can determine by themselves how

to make use of ICTs for their own development. The objectives of ICT capacity-

building activities hereby should not only be limited to train indigenous peoples in

the practical use of ICT applications (i.e., use of e-mail), but also to enhance their

‘informational capabilities’ (i.e., capacity to analyze and evaluate information).

In spite of the efforts to strengthen the capacity of indigenous peoples to use new

ICTs, language barriers remain a major challenge when making use of the new

technologies. It is estimated that approximately 75% of the content on the

Internet is in English, and there exists almost no content in indigenous languages.

Consequently the benefits of using the Internet are relatively limited to many

indigenous peoples (Kenny, 2003). A very innovative solution addressing this

issue represents the multilingual translation system, Atamiri (http://

www.atamiri.cc), developed by Iván Guzmán de Rojas, a Bolivian scientist. This

computer translation system is made up of a set of natural language processing

programs based on a set of mathematical algorithms and is capable of automati-

cally translating text from six languages into the Andean language of Aymara and

vice versa.

Existing Economic and Social Inequalities

It needs to be stressed that the impact of ICTs has to be seen within a much

broader context of existing economic, social, and political inequalities that are

key barriers to indigenous peoples’ development. It needs to be fully acknowl-

edged that these structural constraints frequently limit the impact ICTs can have

on the well-being of marginalized groups. For instance, the extent to which

subsistence farmers can benefit from information provided by the Internet will

vary according to other factors such as land rights, proximity to market, available

means of transportation, and the overall existing degree to which large-scale

producers are dominating agricultural markets. Improved access to market

prices represents an important but not sufficient condition to address existing

market failures (Curtain, 2004). Thus important challenges remain to make use

of ICTs for social change. It seems that the introduction of ICTs can only

incrementally improve the well-being of marginalized communities, and needs to

be accompanied with complementary programs addressing existing structural

150 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

inequalities. For instance, in the case of subsistence farmers, they could form a

cooperative in order to join forces and to enhance their overall negotiating power

position within the marketplace.

Information Flows Between Different Levels of

Indigenous Leadership

A key challenge for the effectiveness of ICTs is the lack of information flows

between the different levels of indigenous leadership. This issue addresses the

underlying power relationships within the indigenous movements. It seems that

a very small number of international indigenous leaders have privileged access

to information and do not share this information with national leaders or with the

grassroots. While ICTs have contributed to the enhanced access of indigenous

peoples to the political arena at the international level and have supported the

establishment of strong international networks, it seems that these new technolo-

gies have not contributed to the same extent to the democratization and enhanced

transparency of the indigenous movement. For instance, the participants of the

U.N. Working Group on Indigenous Populations and the U.N. Permanent Forum

on Indigenous Issues seemed to be very well connected with each other, while

the large majority of national and local indigenous leaders are not aware of the

advancements achieved at these global fora. Within countries, there frequently

exists a conflict of interest and a certain degree of factionalism between

different leaders which impede the free exchange and sharing of information. At

the same time, the example of the Fondo Indígena has demonstrated that ICTs

have the potential to improve the transparency of indigenous organizations and

significantly enhance the information flows between the different levels of

indigenous leadership7. It needs however to be stressed that ICTs solely remain

an instrument, and the main challenge remains to find the political will of

indigenous leaders and organizations to promote the open and free exchange of

information.

Conclusion

The previous analysis has shown that ICTs under certain conditions can

significantly enhance the human and social capabilities of marginalized groups.

At the core of the process of introducing ICTs into marginalized communities

stands the notion that ICTs can enhance people’s control over their own lives.

Similarly to literacy, newly acquired informational capabilities can act as an

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 151

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

agent for change for individuals and communities — enhancing their abilities to

engage with the formal institutions in the economic, political, social, and cultural

spheres of their life.

In this context, the issue of whether ICTs are channeling resources away from

the real priorities and needs of poor communities seems to be misguided. Instead

this question should be rephrased and address the issue of how ICTs could be

used to meet the basic needs of the poor.

Furthermore, the chapter has illustrated that there is no direct and causal

relationship between ICT and poverty reduction. This relationship is much more

complex and indirect in nature, whereby the issue of its impact on the livelihoods

of the poor depends to a large extent on the dynamic and iterative process

between people and technology within a specific local, cultural, and socio-

political context. Frequently, the most immediate and direct effect of ICT

programs seems to be the psychological empowerment of poor people, whereby

newly acquired ICT skills provide the marginalized with a sense of achievement

and pride, thus increasing their self-esteem.

A key recommendation of the chapter is that the human development of people,

rather than technology itself, should be the center of the design and evaluation

of ICT programs. As has been shown, the important advantage of using the

capability approach as the basis for the evaluation of ICT programs is its

emphasis on the ability of ICTs to improve the daily livelihoods of poor

communities, in contrast to more conventional approaches that overemphasize

the significance of technology itself for social change. Furthermore, evaluations

of the impact of ICT programs should focus on an analysis from the vantage point

of the poor, rather than from the perspective of outside donors.

In addition the analysis provides the following concrete recommendations on the

manner in which ICT programs should be designed in order to be most effective

to enhance the well-being of marginalized groups:

•First, the potential benefits of ICTs are largest when they are being fully

integrated into other sectoral development programs (i.e., in education or

health). As the case study from Venezuela on the use of ICTs in bilingual

education has demonstrated, ICTs can make a significant contribution

towards reaching the core objectives of this development project — in this

case improving the access to bilingual education to indigenous peoples.

•Second, it is essential that ICT programs prior to initiating any project

activities carry out a detailed assessment of existing information flows and

information needs. Hereby, the analysis should focus on how the new

technologies can strengthen existing communication and information ex-

changes within and in between communities. The assessment should

152 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

furthermore identify key information intermediaries in the community

and analyze existing power relationships as they relate to the transfer of

knowledge within the communities. Thus it is essential that poor communi-

ties first identify and define their own needs and development priorities

before, in a second step, a project can define whether and how ICTs can

support the community’s development goals. As has been shown in the

Ashaninka case, in cases where such a process was not undertaken and the

exact objectives of the ICT project were not defined, ICT programs

frequently fail.

•Third, it is crucial for the evaluation of the impact of ICTs on the well-being

of marginalized communities to analyze the process of how ICTs are being

introduced. Hereby, outside agents or intermediaries are playing a key role

in supporting communities in appropriating the technologies to meet their

own local and cultural needs. Within this process, it is essential that

community members gradually gain the skills to make meaningful use of

ICTs as well as gradually take ownership of the management of the

program. As the case studies have demonstrated, capacity-building activi-

ties and the provision of local content through intermediaries are the two

important factors that influence whether or not an ICT program will indeed

strengthen the capabilities of the poor and thus contribute towards improv-

ing their livelihoods.

•Fourth, ICT programs are most effective when combining traditional media

with new forms of ICTs. As the case study of the Ashanika community has

demonstrated, the convergence between two different technologies — the

Internet and community radio stations — is combining the advantages of

both media. While the Internet is a powerful tool to connect networks and

to exchange large amounts of information across long distance, community

radios have a very broad reach, and represent the most accessible and

inclusive technology for the poor. Due to the oral tradition of indigenous

communities, this is of particular importance, considering that its use does

not require literacy.

Finally, the chapter has demonstrated that the most important factors influencing

whether an ICT program has positive or negative outcomes are social, political,

and cultural in nature, and in fact technical issues involved in the provision of

ICTs frequently do not play a key role. The analysis highlights that frequently,

ICT programs are not responding to a concrete need expressed within the

communities, but are designed in a top-down supply-driven approach. In order

to avoid the potential negative social effects, it is crucial to frame any ICT

intervention around the existing social community structures. Thereby, the

programs should strengthen traditional information systems, building on existing

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 153

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

indigenous knowledge and enhancing existing information channels without

undermining the existing structures.

References

Agrawal, A. (1995). Dismantling and divide between indigenous and scientific

knowledge. Development and Change, 26.

Alkire, S. (2002). Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and

Poverty Reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Arunachalam, S. (2002). Reaching the unreached: An Indian experience in

empowering people through information access. Vidura: MS

Swaminathan Research Foundation, Press Institute of India

Avgerou, C. (2001). The significance of context in information systems and

organizational change. Information Systems Journal, 11, 43-63.

Avgerou. (2002). Information systems and global diversity. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Avgerou, C., & Madon, S. (2003). Framing IS studies (Working Paper Series).

Department of Information Systems, LSE.

Ballantyn, P. (2002, June). Collecting and propagating local development con-

tent. INASP Newsletter, (20).

Bebbington, A. J. (1999). Capitals and capabilities: A framework for analyzing

peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty in the Andes. World Devel-

opment, 27(12), 2021-2044.

Braga, C. P. (1998). Inclusion or exclusion. Information for Development

(InfoDev), the World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/cou-

rier/1998_12/uk/dossier/txt21.htm

Black, J. (1999). Information rich - information poor, bridging the digital

divide. International Institute for Communication and Development.

Brokensha, D., Warren, D., & Werner, O. (Eds.). (1980). Indigenous knowl-

edge systems and development. Lanham, MD: University Press of

America.

Brown, D. (1991). Methodological considerations in the evaluation of social

development programs: An alternative approach. Community Develop-

ment Journal, 26, 4.

Castells, M. (1997). The Information Age: Economy, society and culture.

Volume 2: The power of identity. Oxford: Blackwell.

154 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Castells, M. (1998, June). Information technology, globalisation and social

development. In Proceedings of the UNRISD Conference on Informa-

tion Technologies and Social Development. Geneva.

Castells, M. (2001). The Internet galaxy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cernea, M. (Ed.). (1991). Putting people first: Sociological variables in

rural development (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chambers, R. (1983). Rural development: Putting the last first. Harlow, UK:

Pearson Education Limited.

Chambers, R. (1997a). Whose reality counts: Putting the last first. London:

Intermediate Technology Publications.

Chambers, R. (1997b). Editorial: Responsible well-being: A personal agenda for

development. World Development, 25(11), 1743-1754.

Chambers, R., Pacey, R., & Thrupp, L. (Eds.). (1989). Farmer first: Farmer

innovation and agricultural research. London. Intermediate Technol-

ogy Publication.

Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1991). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical

concepts for the 21st century (IDS Discussion Paper 296). Brighton: IDS.

Comim, F. (2001, June 5-7). Operationalizing Sen’s capabilities approach. In

Conference Proceedings — Justice and Poverty: Examining Sen’s

Capability Approach. Von Hugel Institute, St. Edmund’s College, UK.

Corbridge, S. (2001). Development as freedom: The spaces of Amartya Sen.

Progress in Development Studies, 2, 183-217.

Curtain, R. (2004). Information and communications technologies and

development: Help or hindrance?

Daly, J. (1999, May 21). Measuring impacts of the Internet in the developing

world. iMP Magazine.

Davis, S. (2002). Indigenous peoples, poverty and participatory development:

The experience of the World Bank in Latin America. In R. Sieder (Ed.),

Multiculturalism in Latin America. Palgrave Macmillan.

Delgadillo, K., Gomez, R., & Stoll, K. (2002). Community telecentres for

development: Lessons from community telecentres in Latin America

and the Caribbean. IDRC Canada.

Eade, D. (2003). Capacity-building: An approach to people-centred devel-

opment. Oxford: Oxfam.

Garcia Hierro. P, Hvalkof, S., & Gray, A. (1998). Liberation through land

rights in the Peruvian Amazon (IWGIA Document No. 90).

Garnham, N. (2000). Amartya Sen’s “capabilities” approach to the evaluation

of welfare: Its application to communications. In B. Cammaerts & J.-C.

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 155

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Burgelman (Eds.), Beyond competition: Broadening the scope of tele-

communication policy (pp. 25-36). Brussels: VUB Press.

Gasper, D. (1997). Sen’s capability approach and Nussbaum’s capability ethics.

Journal of International Development, 9, 281-302.

Gasper, D. (2002). Is Sen’s capability approach an adequate basis for

considering human development? (Working Paper Series No. 360). The

Hague: Institute of Social Studies.

Gigler, B. S. (2001, July/August). Empowerment through the Internet: Opportu-

nities and challenges for indigenous peoples. Technology for social

action. TechKnowLogia.

Gigler, B. S. with Daly, J. (2003, July 21). ICT for indigenous development.

Development Gateway Special. Retrieved from http://

www.developmentgateway.org/node/133831/sdm/docview?docid=627584

Gigler, B. S. with Simmons, L. (2002, February 28). Giving voices to indigenous

peoples. Global Development Learning Network Newsletter. Retrieved

from http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/External/lac/lac.nsf/GDLN/

51800128B15E0B2985256B6E007D2433?OpenDocument

Gomez, R., Hunt, P., & Lamoureux, E. (1999). Enchanted by telecenters: A

critical look at universal access to information technologies for international

development. In Proceedings of the New IT and Inequality. University

of Maryland, USA.

Gurstein, M. (2000). Community informatics: Enabling communities with

information and communications technologies. Hershey, PA: Idea

Group Publishing.

Gurstein, M. (2003). Effective use: A community informatics strategy beyond

the digital divide. First Monday, 8(12).

Hamelink, C. J. (1994). Trends in world communication, on disempowerment

and self-empowerment. Penang, Malaysia: Southbound, Third World

Network.

Hamelink, C. J. (2002). Social development, information and knowledge: What-

ever happened to communication? Development, 45(4).

Harris, R. W., Bala, P., Songan, P., & Khoo E. (2001). Challenges and

opportunities in introducing information and communication technologies to

the Kelabit community of North Central Borneo. New Media and Society,

3(3).

Healy, K. (2001). Llamas, weavings, and organic chocolate: Multicultural

grassroots development in the Andes and Amazon of Bolivia. Notre

Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press.

156 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Heeks, R. (1999). Information and communication technologies, poverty

and development (Development Informatics Working Paper Series No.

5). IDPM: University of Manchester, UK.

Heeks, R. (2002). I-development not e-development: Special issue on ICTs and

development. Journal of International Development, 14(1), 1-11.

Heeks, R., & Kenny, C. (2002). ICTs and development: Convergence or

divergence for developing countries? In Proceedings of the 7th Interna-

tional Working Conference of IFIP WG9.4. Bangalore, India.

Hewitt de Alcántara, C. (2001). The development divide in a digital age

(Technology, Business and Society Programme Issue Paper No. 4).

Geneva: UNRISD.

Hudson, H. (1995). Economic and social benefits of rural telecommunications:

A report to the World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.usfca.edu/

facstaff/hudson/papers/Benefits%20of%20Rural%20Communication.pdf

IDS Bulletin. (1994). Knowledge is power? The use and abuse of information in

development. University of Sussex. Institute of Development Studies

Bulletin, 25(2).

ITDG. (2001). Enable people to make technologies work for them. ITDG’s

response to the Human Development Report 2001. Retrieved from http://

www.itdg.org/html/advocacy/docs/itdg_response_to_hdr_june2.pdf

IWGIA. (2003). Indigenous peoples and information technology in indig-

enous affairs (No. 2/2003). IWGIA.

Kabeer, N. (1999). Resources, agency, achievement: Reflections on the mea-

surement of women’s empowerment. Development and Change, 30(3),

261-302.

Kenny, C. (2003, January-February). Development’s false divide: Giving Internet

access to the world’s poorest will cost a lot and accomplish little. Foreign

Policy 76-77.

Kling, R. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change:

The contribution of social informatics. The Information Society, 16(3).

Korten, D. C., & Klauss, R. (Eds.). (1984). People-centered development;

contributions toward theory and planning framework. Kumarian Press.

Long, N., & Villareal, M. (1994). The interweaving of knowledge and power in

development interfaces. In I. Scoones & J. Thompson (Eds.), Beyond

farmer first: Rural people’s knowledge, agricultural research and

extension practice. London.

Madon, S. (1992). The impact of computer-based information systems on rural

development: A case study in India. Journal of Information Technology,

7, 20-29.

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 157

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Madon, S. (2000). The Internet and socio-economic development: Exploring the

interaction. Information Technology and People, 13.

Madon, S. (2003). Evaluating the developmental impact of e-governance

initiatives: An exploratory framework (Department of Information

Systems Working Paper Series No. 124). LSE.

Mansell, R., & When, U. (1998). Knowledge societies: Information technol-

ogy for sustainable development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mansell, R. (1999). Information and communication technologies for develop-

ment: Assessing the potential and the risks. Telecommunications Policy,

23, 35-50.

Mansell, R. (2004). Political economy, power and new media. New Media &

Society, 6(1), 74-83.

Martínez-Cobo, J. (1986). Study of the problem of discrimination against

indigenous populations (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7). U.N. Subcommission

on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Geneva.

Max-Neff, M. (1991). Human scale development conception, application

and further reflections. New York/London: Apex Press.

McConnell, P. (Ed.). (1995, July 10-12). Making a difference: Measuring the

impact of information on development. In Proceedings of Workshop.

Ottawa, Canada.

McConnell, P. (2000). Connecting with the unconnected: Proposing an evalua-

tion of the impacts of the Internet. In D. Richardson & L. Paisley (Eds.),

The first mile of connectivity: Advancing telecommunications for rural

development through a participatory communication approach. FAO.

Menou, M. (1993). Measuring the impact of information on development.

Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

Menou, M. (1999, July). Impact of the Internet: Some conceptual and meth-

odological issues, or how to hit a moving target behind the smoke screen.

In D. Nicholas & I. Rowlands (Eds.), The Internet: Its Impact and

Evaluation: Proceedings of the International Forum. London.

Menou, M. (2002). Information literacy in national information and commu-

nications technology (ICT) policies: The missed dimension, informa-

tion culture (White Paper prepared for UNESCO, Information Literacy

Meeting of Experts). Prague, The Czech Republic.

Miller, D., & Slater, D. (2000). The Internet, an ethnographic approach.

Oxford: Berg.

Meyer, C. (1997). The political economy of NGOs and information sharing,

World Development, 25, 7.

158 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Nelson, D. (1996). Maya hackers and the cyberspatialized nation state: Moder-

nity, ethnostalgia, and a lizard queen in Guatemala. Cultural Anthropol-

ogy, 11(3), 287-308.

Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty

and the Internet worldwide. Boston: Harvard University John F. Kennedy

School of Government.

Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capabilities

approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

O’Farrell, C. (2001). Information flows in rural and urban communities:

Access, processes and people. The University of Reading.

O’Farrell, C., Norrish, P., & Scott, A. (1999). Information and communication

technologies (ICTs) for sustainable livelihoods: Preliminary study. ITDG,

AERDD.

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of

technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398-429.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A

practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organizational

Science, 11(4), 404-428.

Panos. (1998). The Internet and poverty (Panos Media Briefing No. 28).

London: Panos Institute.

Partridge, W., & Uquillas, J. with Johns, K. (1998). Including the excluded:

Ethnodevelopment in Latin America description. In Poverty and Inequal-

ity: Proceedings of the Annual World Bank Conference on Develop-

ment in Latin America and the Caribbean (pp. 229-250). Washington,

DC: World Bank.

Powell, M. (1999). Information management for development organiza-

tions. Oxford: Oxfam.

Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. (1994). Indigenous peoples and poverty

in Latin America: An empirical analysis. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Robinson , S. (2000, October 26-27). Telecenters in Mexico: Learning the hard

way. In Proceedings of the Partnerships and Participation in Telecom-

munications for Rural Development: Exploring What Works and Why

Conference. University of Guelph, Canada.

Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis

(IDS Working Paper 72). Brighton, UK: IDS.

Scoones, I., & Thompson, J. (Eds.). (1994). Beyond farmer first: Rural

people’s knowledge, agricultural research and extension practice.

London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 159

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom. The Dewey Lectures 1984.

Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169-221.

Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.

Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.),

The quality of life (pp. 30-53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A. (1997). Editorial: Human capital and human capability. World Develop-

ment, 25, 1959-1961.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Knopf Press.

Skuse, A. (2000). Information communications technology, poverty and empow-

erment. Retrieved November 20, 2004, from http://www.imfundo.org/

knowledge/skuse.htm

Slater, D. (2002). Social relationships and identity on/off-line. In L. Lievrouw &

S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of new media: Social shaping and

consequences of ICTs. London: Sage Publications.

Stewart, F., & Deneulin, S. (2002). Amartya Sen’s contribution to development

thinking. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 61-70.

UNDP. (2001). Human Development Report 2001: Making new technolo-

gies work for human development. Oxford: UNDP.

Wade, R. (2002). Bridging the digital divide: New route to development or new

form of dependency? Global Governance, 8(4).

Walsham, G. (1993). The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Informa-

tion Systems Research, 6(4), 376-394.

Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretative case studies in IS research: Nature and

method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 74-81.

Walsham, G. (2001). Making a world of difference. Chichester: John Wiley

& Sons.

Wang, G., & Dissanayake, W. (Eds.). (1994). Continuity and change in

communication systems: A cross-cultural perspective. East-West Com-

munication Institute.

White, A. (2000). Assessing community telecenters. Canada: Acacia Initiative,

IDRC.

Wilson, G., & Heeks, R. (2001). Technology, poverty and development. In T.

Allen & A. Thomas (Eds.), Poverty and development: Into the 21st

century. Open University & Oxford University Press.

Wilson, E., Daly, J., & Griffiths, J. -M. (1998). Internet counts, measuring the

impact of the Internet. Washington, DC: Office of International Affairs,

National Research Council.

160 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

World Bank. (1990). World Development Report, 1990. New York: Oxford

University Press.

World Bank. (1995). Harnessing information for development. World Bank

Group, Vision and Strategy.

World Bank. (1999). Knowledge for development (World Development Re-

port). New York: Oxford University Press.

World Bank. (2000). Global Information and Communication Technologies

Department. The Networking Revolution, Opportunities and Chal-

lenges for Developing Countries.

WSIS Global Forum of Indigenous Peoples and the Information Society. (2003).

Summary narrative report of the discussions during the meeting.

WSIS.

Endnotes

1No universal definition of indigenous peoples exists, and due to the history

of political repression, and discrimination and assimilation policies by states,

indigenous peoples usually reject being defined by external agencies. In

order to be able to identify rather than define indigenous identities, I am

suggesting to make use of the working definitions provided by the Interna-

tional Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 169 and by U.N. Special

Rapporteur José Martinez Cobo, both of which emphasize that the self-

identification as indigenous should be used as the main criteria for the

identification of indigenous peoples.

2The research will use Sen’s multi-dimensional approach of well-being

developed in the capability approach (CA) (Sen, 1984, 1992, 1993). The

approach moves away from an income-based perspective of well-being

(utilitarianism) to account for the constitutive plurality of human life. It thus

emphasizes the non-material aspects of human well-being (i.e., spiritual,

cultural, political aspects). The CA characterizes well-being in terms of

what a person is actually able to do or to be (achieved functionings) and the

combinations of beings and doings that a person can achieve (capabilities).

3For the purpose of this research, I will use Hamelink’s definition of ICTs:

“Information and communication technologies (ICTs) encompass all those

technologies that enable the handling of information and facilitate different

forms of communication among human actors, between human beings and

electronic systems, and among electronic systems” (Hamelink, 1997, p. 3).

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 161

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

This functional definition of ICTs includes both the new (i.e., Internet, e-

mail) and traditional (i.e., community-radio) forms of ICT into its definition.

4The definition used for sustainable livelihood framework is one provided by

Chambers and Conway (1992): “A livelihood comprises the capabilities,

assets (including both material and social resources), and activities required

for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and

recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and

assets, while not undermining the natural resources base.”

5This classification was defined in an interview with Mateo Martinez,

Technical Director, Fondo Indígena, on January 14, 2005.

6The Development Gateway is a program of the Development Gateway

Foundation (http://www.dgfoundation.org) that aims to bring together

people, resources, and information on development and poverty. reduction.

This interactive portal further provides a space for communities to share

experiences on development efforts.

7In the case of the Fondo Indígena, the introduction of ICTs supported an

institutional change within the organization towards increased transparency.

The impetus for the use of ICTs came during the organization’s General

Assembly held in 2000 in Mexico, in which the need to restructure the

organization and to enhance its transparency was discussed by its interna-

tional donors, as well as government and indigenous representatives.

Terms and Definitions

Capability: The chapter uses Sen’s definition of capability as developed in the

“capability approach” (Sen, 1999). A person’s capability therefore refers “to

the alternative combinations of functionings that are feasible for her to achieve.

Capability is thus a kind of freedom: the substantive freedom to achieve

alternative functioning combinations (or, less formally put, the freedom to

achieve various lifestyles)” (Sen, 1999, p. 75). Capabilities include things that a

person actually has done, as well as things people can possibly do. In other words

capabilities refer to the extent of one’s positive freedoms.

Indigenous peoples: No universal definition of indigenous peoples exists and

due to the history of political repression, discrimination, and assimilation policies

by states, indigenous peoples usually reject to be defined by external agencies.

In order to be able to identify rather than define indigenous identities, I am

162 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

suggesting to make use of the working definitions provided by the International

Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 169 and by U.N. Special Rapporteur José

Martinez Cobo, both of which emphasize that the self-identification as indig-

enous should be used as the main criteria for the identification of indigenous

peoples.

Indigenous knowledge: There does not exist a single definition of indigenous

knowledge; the literature however emphasizes the concept’s main character-

istics as being: (1) rooted in a particular local community and situated within

broader cultural traditions; (2) experimental, meaning that it is being tied to action

and based on experiences from trial and error; (3) implicit or tacit, meaning that

it is often difficult for people to express this knowledge unambiguously and to find

words to express what one knows (Gidden 1984); (4) transmitted orally, or

through imitation and demonstration; and (5) being a dynamic mix of past

traditions and present innovations.

Information and communication technologies: In the chapter I use

Hamelink’s definition of ICTs: “Information and communication technologies

(ICTs) encompass all those technologies that enable the handling of information

and facilitate different forms of communication among human actors, between

human beings and electronic systems, and among electronic systems” (Hamelink,

1997, p. 3). This functional definition of ICTs includes both the new (i.e., Internet,

e-mail) and traditional (i.e., community-radio) forms of ICT into its definition.

Informational capital: This concept is being defined through the following four

components: (1) the extent to which the poor have access to information from

the formal institutions of the market, state, and civil society; (2) the ability of the

poor to process and evaluate information; (3) the extent to which the poor do not

only consume, but produce and share information within their community and

networks; and (4) the extent to which indigenous knowledge is used.

Sustainable livelihoods: The definition used for sustainable livelihood frame-

work is one provided by Chambers and Conway (1992): “A livelihood comprises

the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and

activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can

cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabili-

ties and assets, while not undermining the natural resources base.”

Well-being: The chapter use Sen’s multi-dimensional approach of well-being

developed in the capability approach (CA) (Sen, 1984, 1992, 1993). The

Experiences of Indigenous Peoples with ICTs 163

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

approach moves away from an income-based perspective of well-being (utilitari-

anism) to account for the constitutive plurality of human life. It thus emphasizes

the non-material aspects of human well-being (i.e., spiritual, cultural, political

aspects). The CA characterizes well-being in terms of what a person is actually

able to do or to be (achieved functionings), and the combinations of beings and

doings that a person can achieve (capabilities).

Appendix 1

Map: Indigenous Peoples in Venezuela

Source: http://a-venezuela.com

164 Gigler

permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.

Appendix 2

Map: Indigenous Peoples in Peru

Source: World Bank, 1999

Policy arena: Do information and communication technologies (icts) contribute to development

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2010

Richard Heeks

Understanding benefits realisation of iREACH from a capability approach perspective

Article

Jun 2011

The research presented in this paper is the first wave of a longitudinal study of a Cambodian information and communication for development (ICT4D) project, iREACH, aimed at testing a framework for evaluating whether and how such initiatives can contribute to capabilities, empowerment and sustainability. The framework is informed by Amartya Sen’s capability approach (CA), uses a participatory methodology, considers the micro-, meso-, and macro- levels in understanding the role ICT can play in the development process, and adopts a forward-looking longitudinal perspective. Key findings of this research are that the project had contributed to livelihoods and other aspects of well-being in diverse ways, primarily in education, health, and farming. Participants also valued the project because of its contribution to empowerment, particularly gender empowerment. Another way in which participants valued iREACH was of a more intrinsic nature, manifested in a general appreciation of just being part of the world and knowing about events in other parts of Cambodia and beyond. These findings are consistent with the CA’s emphasis on development being about more than economic growth and support the importance of considering external factors, conceptualised here as the meso- and macro- levels, in the conversion of commodities in the form of services provided at iREACH, to capabilities. KeywordsCambodia–Capability approach–Empowerment–ICT4D–iREACH–Longitudinal study–Micro- meso- and macro-levels–Participatory evaluation–Sustainability

Do Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) contribute to development? Journal of International Development, 22, 625-640

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2010
J Int Dev

Richard Heeks

This editorial introduces the three papers in this Policy Arena on the contribution of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to development. Contribution in terms of technology diffusion and use - especially of mobile phones - is easy to detect. But focus has only recently shifted along the 'ICT-for-development value chain' from these indicators of ICT readiness and availability, to the question of development impact. In part, the absence or poor quality of ICT impact assessment to date derives from its lack of conceptual foundations. This editorial maps out the intellectual roots of the emerging sub-discipline of 'development informatics' to show where such foundations may come from. It also summarises the conceptualised contributions made by each of the Policy Arena papers. The papers draw on models of enterprise value chains, empowerment and Sen's capability theory to demonstrate ICTs' contribution to conceptions of development as economic growth, as sustainable livelihoods, and as freedom. Of course, not all ICT initiatives succeed, and the editorial provides a good practice summary drawn from experiences of success and failure. It moves beyond the perennial call for practitioners and policy makers to incorporate impact assessment as part of this good practice. First, by identifying the need to address motivational and structural issues around impact assessment. Second, by calling on policy makers to be more aware of the transformational potential of ICTs in development; so-called 'Development 2.0'. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Beyond Farmer First: rural people's knowledge, agricultural research and extension practice.

Article

Full-text available

Jan 1994

Part 1 Theoretical reflections on knowledge, power and practice: introduction knowledge, power and agriculture - towards a theoretical understanding, I. Scoones and J. Thompson knowledge, consciousness and prejudice - adaptive agricultural research in Zambia, M. Drinkwater the interweaving of knowledge and power in development interfaces, N. Long and M. Villareal indigenous management and the management of indigenous knowledge, D. Marsden "the technicians only believe in science and cannot read the sky" - the cultural dimension of the knowledge conflict in the Andes, M.A. Salas trees, people and communities in Zimbabwe's communal lands, F. Matose and B. Mukamuri declarations of difference, J. Fairhead and M. Leach indigenous soil characterization in Northern Zambia, P. Sikana agricultural discourses - farmer experimentation and agricultural extension in Rwanda, J. Pottier composing rural livelihoods - from farming systems to food systems, A.J. Bebbington. Part 2 Methodological innovations, applications and challenges: introduction acknowledging process - challenges for agricultural research and extension methodology, A. Cornwall et al participatory watershed management in India - the experience of the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme, P. Shah challenges in the collection and use of information on livelihood strategies and natural resource management, K. Schoonmaker Freudenberger developing interaction and understanding - RRA and farmer research groups in Zambia, M. Drinkwater quality control, method transfer and training, J. Jiggins the ethics of documenting rural people's knowledge - investigating milk marketing among Fulani women in Nigeria, A. Waters-Bayer stimulating farmer experiments in non-chemical pest control in Central America, J. Bentley encouraging knowledge exchange - integrated pest management in Indonesia, Y. Winarto learning by improvization - farmers' experimentation in Mali, A. Stolzenbach experimenting farmers in Northern Ghana, D. Millar local knowledge formation and validation - the case of rice production in Central Sierra Leone, P. Richards participatory methods and political processes - linking grassroots actions and policy-making for sustainable development in Latin America, L.A. Thrupp et al. Part 3 Transforming institutions and changing policies: introduction tiwards a learning paradigm - new professionalism and institutions for agriculture, J.N. Pretty and R. Chambers from research to innovation - getting the most from interaction with NGOs, J. Farrington and A.J. Bebbington. (Part contents).

Sustainable Rural Livelihoods. A Framework for Analysis. IDS Working Paper 72

Article

Full-text available

Jan 1998

Ian Scoones

The concept of 'sustainable livelihoods' is increasingly important in the development debate. This paper outlines a framework for analysing sustainable livelihoods, defined here in relation to five key indicators. The framework shows how, in different contexts, sustainable livelihoods are achieved through access to a range of livelihood resources (natural, economic, human and social capitals) which are combined in the pursuit of different livelihood strategies (agricultural intensification or extensification, livelihood diversification and migration). Central to the framework is the analysis of the range of formal and informal organisational and institutional factors that influence sustainable livelihood outcomes. In conclusion, the paper briefly considers some of the practical, methodological and operational implications of a sustainable livelihoods approach.

Information and Communication Technologies, Poverty and Development

Article

Jan 1999

Richard Heeks

Capability and Well-Being

Article

Jan 1993

A. Sen

Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach

Book

Jan 2001

Martha Craven Nussbaum

Indigenous Peoples, Poverty and Participatory Development: The Experience of the World Bank in Latin America

Chapter

Jan 2002

Shelton H. Davis

Indigenous peoples have historically been the poorest and most excluded social sectors in Latin America. They have not only faced acute discrimination in terms of their basic rights to their ancestral property, languages, cultures and forms of governance, but also in terms of access to basic social services (education, health and nutrition, water and sanitation, housing, and so on) and the essential material conditions for a satisfying life. These conditions of extreme poverty and material deprivation — what might be best described as a denial of the fundamental social citizenship rights of indigenous peoples — are widespread throughout Latin America and have recently come to the attention of international development agencies, such as the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank and the various bilateral development agencies. The denial of the basic social citizenship rights of indigenous peoples have also been a growing concern of scholars, journalists and others concerned with social conditions in Latin America.2

Llamas, Weavings, and Organic Chocolate: Multicultural Grassroots Development in the Andes and Amazon of Bolivia

Article

Nov 2002

This is the story of Bolivian rural development and cultural change in three parts. The first provides an overview of the history of rural development; the second consists of narratives of nine projects; and the third analyzes successful outcomes of the projects and their effects.

Well-Being, Agency and Freedom: The Dewey Lectures 1984

Article