Commentary: In the Aftermath of "India Shining"

by Dr. Allen L. Hammond

The recent defeat of India's ruling government in the last elections prompted a series of news stories and editorials re-examining the role of information and communications technology (ICT) as a development strategy. Millions of impoverished rural villagers were unaffected by India's recent ICT-related economic boom and they reacted by voting the economic reformers out of office. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote, "... the key to spreading the benefits of globalization across a big society is not about more Internet." The Internet, it seems Friedman and others are concluding, is not the promised land of development after all.

But does the defeat of Indian ICT proponents, like Andhra Pradesh's Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, really signal the end of ICT-for-development (ICT4D)? Despite certain media reports clinging to the Indian elections as a proof-of-no-concept, success stories elsewhere continue to point to the fact that information and communications technologies can and will play a critical role in the economic and social development of less developed countries. India's elections, however, teach us a valuable lesson about the nature of ICT4D: it is not about the "what" of technology, it's about the "how" of the application. In order to achieve sustainable -- and, it seems, politically secure -- development, it must take place "from the bottom up."

The case of Andhra Pradesh's Naidu serves to illustrate this lesson. During his nine years as chief minister, Naidu transformed the state capital, Hyderabad, into a center for technology services firms, the majority of which are based in the United States and Europe. The local economy flourished as a result, and thousands of educated, skilled Indians are now employed by Indian firms engaged in outsourced work from Western countries.

All of Andhra Pradesh does not look like Hyderabad, however. Mirroring the situation in the rest of India, 70 percent of the state's citizens are farmers who live in villages scattered throughout the vast countryside. The ICT revolution in Hyderabad is a far cry from the conditions in villages, where the difference between a good and bad year can hinge on a week's worth of rainfall or a few rupees' difference in the price of a primary crop.

When Naidu proclaimed India to be "shining," the farmers in his state simply didn't buy it. In voting him out of office, they demanded change. Some observers have interpreted that to mean less technology, and more governance. The real solution, however, lies in innovative combinations of both.

Technology can unlock the potential of poor farmers by making agricultural production more efficient. The World Resources Institute's (WRI) Digital Dividends Project Clearinghouse includes several hundred examples of successful ICT-enabled development projects. One example currently attracting international attention is ITC, an Indian agricultural processor.

ITC has initiated the e-Choupal ("choupal" means "gathering place" in Hindi) effort that places computers with Internet access in rural farming villages, creating an e-commerce hub that enables farmers to receive a fair price for their produce.

In Uganda and Kenya, farmers use short message system (SMS) technology to receive updates on commodity prices, which allows them to negotiate fair prices for their produce with traders and middlemen who have exploited them for generations. Bangladesh's Shidhulai Swanirvar Sangstha, a non-profit organization, uses boats that are outfitted with computers, printers, and an Internet connection to deliver agricultural education modules to isolated farmers that are unreachable by roads.

Perhaps Andhra Pradesh's new government could take a page from the book of its neighboring state, Maharashtra. There, the government-funded Kisaan Call Center fields inquiries from rural farmers, who get advice from operators speaking their own language and whose directive is to treat every farmer as a customer, emphasizing respect.

In all of these cases, information technology is driving innovative solutions to the problems of poor farmers. "More Internet" is not what plagues these farmers; in fact, Internet technology is helping them climb out of poverty by connecting them with information, educational opportunities, and financial resources. "Connectivity for the sake of connectivity accomplishes very little," says Jonathan Lash, WRI president. "Connectivity that links marginalized citizens with needed services, however, can play a major role in economic development."

The bottom line is that technology has a major role to play in development at the bottom of the economic pyramid. Political commentators correctly note that Naidu and his colleagues were voted out of office primarily by dissatisfied rural voters, the majority of whom are farmers. If Indian policymakers had spent as much time investing in information technology in rural areas as they did in urban ones, in ways that addressed basic problems such as agriculture, education, healthcare, and job training, the election results may have been significantly different.

The problem is not, as Friedman contends, that there is too much Internet being used in Indian economic development efforts. Rather, the problem is that the Internet is not being used to help the majority of the population, and those who can benefit the most from technology: the rural poor. (WRI Features, 836 words)