James Murphy (Clark University) and Pádraig Carmody (Trinity College Dublin)
How can ICT research better inform and communicate theories of development and globalization? New challenges and promising directions
- How can we conceptualize the impact of ICT on the relationsihps between palces in the world system?
- How can studies of ICT use an d impact better inform theoretical explanations for uneven development and between places?
- What theoretical frameworks can help us in better understanding what’s going on in the ICT4D discipline?
The session splits in groups to discuss these topics. Here are the main aspects that raised in the groups.
ICT, indigenous rights, and new global inerconnectivities
Moderates: Jenna Burrell
- What is the place of indigenous knowledge in the context of discussionas around the global “knowledge society”?
- Cross-cultural encounters via ICT: as connectivity extends, how are these efforts to bridge between North ad South turning out?
Indigenous knowledge is usually understood in time and space, but specifically as something about the past, and that latter understanding of “indigenous” is one that should be eradicated.
Indigenous knowledge has been also localized, closed within small communities that have no contact and no impact with larger ones, with universal knowledge. That is something that should be better understood too.
ICT, the global-local nexus, and the political economy of development in the Global South
Moderates: Janaki Srinivasan
- Studies of ICT-based development initiatives are often based on what Hart calls “impact model” (Hart 2002). Can we move away of this conception of development?
Development should be depoliticized, in the sense of being separated from political power bargains. That would ease the sustainability / sustainable development factor to step in the agenda.
ICT governance is crucial to understand the dynamics of ICTs and development.
We should also focus at the real impact of huge information flows, and see whether they are really empowering people or, instead, concentrating power in a few people’s hands.
Moderates: Anita Gurumurthy
Can we understand development differently from turning everything into a commodity?
Indeed, with the excuse of “stakeholderism”, many institutions participate in development without the required transparency and accountability.
The technological change is not governed, and there is a need for it to be, so that the impact of that change is precisely in the intended direction.
Collaboration vs. competition.
Importance of capability and competences when talking about an ICT-mediated society or an ICT-fostered change/development.
Inclusion is mostly about local-level decision making, and this is where ICTs should have an important field to act in.
ICT, uneven development, and spatial integration
Moderates: Pádraig Carmody and Jim Murphy
- How do ICTs reshape geographies of uneven development? How might ICTs contribute to spatial integration and marginalization, both directly and indirectly? Who are the principals actors and drivers and through what channels?
- How might we better conceptualize the ways in which ICT are, or are not, being absorbed into production, marketing, and innovation systemsw in order to better assess whether they are enabling upgrading and more progressive forms of economic globalization?
How can ICTs change power structures? ICTs can be empowering and disempowering.
Is there an overuse of ICTs?
Who trains an educates in the use of ICTs and capabilities that they require?
Information and Communication Technologies and Development (2010)
If you need to cite this article in a formal way (i.e. for bibliographical purposes) I dare suggest:
Peña-López, I. (2010) “ICTD2010 (II). How can ICT research better inform and communicate theories of development and globalization? New challenges and promising directions” In ICTlogy,
#87, December 2010. Barcelona: ICTlogy.
Retrieved month dd, yyyy from https://ictlogy.net/review/?p=3638
Previous post: ICTD2010 (I). Round table: the future of ICT4D research