This document compares two rural empowerment projects that aimed to provide access to knowledge through information and communication technologies (ICT). The first project in Honduras was initiated by an international non-governmental organization and had a top-down approach, while the second project in India establishing Village Knowledge Centers was locally initiated. The Honduras project produced reports but did not have lasting local impact after funding ended, while the India project continues to be utilized by local villagers. The document concludes that locally initiated projects can have more sustainable impacts than top-down international projects, and that future development efforts should support both local NGOs and international knowledge transfer initiatives.

1. Rural empowerment
through access to
knowledge:
a comparison of two projects on two
continents
With some reflections in 2011
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Julian Swindell
Principal lecturer
Royal Agricultural College
julian.swindell@rac.ac.uk
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

2. Knowledge access for the
rural poor
• The first UNMG is “… to eradicate
extreme poverty and hunger…”
• Knowledge access is fundamental to
poverty alleviation
• Paradigm shift possible through
knowledge acquisition:
– Why are they poor?
>>
– Why am I poor?
• The barrier of ignorance is immense
• ICT may help overcome that barrier
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

3. The impact of ignorance
• What is my crop really worth?
• What big are the waves?
• How can I learn?
• What jobs are there?
• What’s wrong with my crop?
• What’s wrong with my child?
• What’s wrong with me?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

4. Honduras-India (Pondicherry)
1
2
3
4
5
6
• 7.5 million
– 53% BPL
•
•
•
•
•
GDP $25 billion
$3,100 PPP
80% literacy
25/1000 IM
69.3 years LE
• 1,130 million
– 25% BPL
•
•
•
•
•
GDP $4.2 trillion
$3,800 PPP
61% literacy
34/1000 IM
68.6 years LE
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College
Source: CIA World Fact Book, 2007

5. The “Honduran Project”
• “Methodologies for integrating
data across geographical scales
in a data-rich environment:
examples from Honduras”
– Instigated and driven by an
international NGO, CIAT
– Stakeholder participation invited
after the instigation
– Stakeholders at lower level were
not really interested
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

6. Honduran stakeholders
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

7. Project outcomes
• Research papers
• Final project report for funding
agency
• Final project workshop in 2000
• Funding ceased, the consultant
team dispersed
• Honduran farmers carried on
much as before.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

8. Village Knowledge Centres
of Pondicherry
• A local project instigated
within India by an Indian
research foundation,
MSSRF
– Acquisition and sharing of
knowledge by rural villages
– Use of ICT to empower the disadvantaged.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

9. Local knowledge, local people
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

10. Comparison of the projects
Honduras
• International
instigation CIAT
• Significant project
funding
• Top-down, institution/
government led
• Participatory during
the running of the
project
• Outputs claimed by
the consultants
• Finite timescale
– 1997-2000
Pondicherry
• Local instigation
MSSRF
• Start up funding, plus
user contribution
• Bottom up from what
the villager needs
• Participatory from the
outset. No participation,
no VKC
• Outputs claimed by the
villagers
• Open ended
– 1997-continues
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

11. Which approach is best?
• International, top down, closed
projects are unlikely to have
clear, perceptible local impact
outside of the project team
• Locally instigated projects
aimed at establishing a local
service can become embedded
if adopted by the stakeholders
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

12. Recommendations
• Development funding should be
channelled in two directions:
– Developing localised NGOs which
instigate and support
development in their own
environment
– Developing international projects
for knowledge transfer and
coordination
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

13. Knowledge transfer
• International knowledge transfer
may be the better realm for major
international development funding
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Royal
Agricultural
College

14. But things change…
• In the first decade of the 21st
century.
– Desk top computing was seen as
the target
– Access to knowledge was seen as
access to managed data in a
managed way
• In the second decade…
Royal
Agricultural
College

15. Mobility is the key word
• Mobile phones changed
everything
– Almost everyone who wants one
can get one
– Mobile telephony has lead to
mobile computing
– A modern smart phone can
access everything offered by the
Village Knowledge Centres, and it
sits in your pocket
Royal
Agricultural
College

16. Assam 2009- NE India
• No power or water
• Mobile phones
common
• Charged vi solar
panel
Royal
Agricultural
College

17. Nagaland 2010-NE India
• Some power
• Mobile phones
universal
• Charged via solar
panels and in shops
• Facebook and email
very common
Royal
Agricultural
College

18. Summary
• Technology
changes
• What is
cutting edge
will be
ordinary
• Access to
electricity is
the major
blockage
• Social
networking
and mobile
ICT can bring
more benefits
to emerging
economies
than to
developed
economies
Royal
Agricultural
College

19. Organisation summary
• CIAT, Cali, Colombia
– Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical
www.ciat.cgiar.org
• MSSRF, Chennai, India
– M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation
www.mssrf.org
• RAC, Cirencester, United Kingdom
– Royal Agricultural College
www.rac.ac.uk
• Contact
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
julian.swindell@rac.ac.uk
12
Royal
Agricultural
College