Do information and communication technologies (ICTs) contribute to development

TLDR: The contribution of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to development is easy to detect as discussed by the authors, but the 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.

Abstract: 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 20’ Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Full text

1
Thisistheprepeerreviewedversionofthefollowingarticle:Heeks,R.“Do
informationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICTs)contributetodevelopment?”,
JournalofInternationalDevelopment,22(5),625640,2010,whichhasbeen
publishedinfinal format:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jid.1716/abstract
DoInfor mationandCommunicationT echnologies
(ICTs)Contributet oDevelopment?
RichardHeeks
Introduction
Everyyear,developingandtransitionaleconomiesspendinexcessofUS$800bnon
informationandcommunicationtechnologies(Heeks2009a).EvenAfrica,the
world'spoorestcontinentwaslikely tospendoverUS$60bnin2010(WITSA2008):
theequivalentofaroundUS$60perhead. Such percapitafiguresareeasily
superseded:thoseoutsidetherichestquartilewhoownmobilephonesinAfricaspend
1127percentofmonthlyincomeonthem(Gillwald&Stork2008).Forexample,in
ruralTanzania,averagespendisUS$22permonth;some20%oftotalincomeand
suchthataroundhalfreport"theysometimessubstituteimportantneeds(e.g.
education,buyingfood,andclothes)formobilephoneownership/usage"(Mpogoleet
al2008:7).
Muchofthisexpenditurewillfinditswayfromdevelopingtodevelopedcountries;
thelatterbeinghometomostoftheworld'sICTmultinationals.Conversely,ICT
relateddevelopmentandinvestmentfundsflowfromNorthtoSouth.TheWorld
BankGroup investsaroundUS$800mperyearinspecificloansandguaranteeson
ICTsanddevelopment,andUS$11.5bnperyearonprojectswith significantICT
components(WorldBank2009a).PrivatesectorinvestmentinAfricaonmobile
telephonyalonerunsataboutUS$10bnperyear(Heeks2009a).
Fromtheindividualthroughtheorganisationtothenationandbeyond,then,huge
sumsofmoneyarebeingspentonICTs.Butwhatisthecontributionofallthis
expendituretodevelopment?
Thatcanbeansweredincertaintermsfairlyeasily,ifweseeinfrastructural
developmentasafundamentalpartofbroaderdevelopment,andICTasa
fundamentalpartofinfrastructure. In1998, oneofevery100inhabitantsina
developingcountrywasanInternetuser(ITU2010).By2008,thatfigurewasnearer
toasixthofthepopulation –15per100– witha21percentannualgrowthrate. The
riseformobilephoneshasbeenevengreater: thenumberofsubscriptionswas
equivalentto2percentofthedevelopingworld'spopulationin1998(ibid).Tenyears
laterin2008,thatfigurehadrisento55percent,witha26percentannualgrowthrate.
Estimatessuggestthatactualownershipofmobilesmightbearoundthreequartersof
thesubscriptionrates(duetolapsedandmultiplesubscriptions),butthatactualusage
mightinturnbetwicethatfigure(duetosharedusageofmobiles)(Heeks2009b).
Theseestimatessuggestusageratesofmobilesin excessof80percentofthe

2
populationofdevelopingcountries;afiguresupportedbyfielddatafrom thelowest
incomegroupinasampleofAsiancountriessuggesting95percentofadultshad
madeatleastonephonecallinthepreviousthreemonths(deSilvaetal2008).
SothedevelopmentcontributionofICTinvestmentintermsoftechnological
infrastructure,diffusionandevenusagehasbeendramatic. Thereareofcourse
enormousinequalitiesthatremain. Accessinequalitiesoflocation,age,gender,
educationand–oftenunderpinningallfourothers –income;havenotgoneaway.
Thekidsgrowingupas"digitalnatives"insuburbanBangalorearefarremovedfrom
theircounterpartsinthe"bitlessdeserts"ofremoteruralAfrica.Yeteventhese
blanksonthemaparefastbeingcolouredin:itisestimatedthat,by2013,over90%
ofAfrica'spopulationwillbecoveredbythemobilenetwork(Denton2008).
BeyondInfrastructure:TheICT4DValueChain
Digitaltechnologieshavethereforespreadveryrapidlyintodevelopingcountries,
leadingtoasituationthatlooksverydifferentfromjustonedecadeago. Itseems
reasonabletopaintanoverallpictureinwhichtheInternetisincreasinglywidespread
indevelopingcountries;andmobilephonesareclosetoubiquitous.
ButinfrastructureandaccessareonlythestartingpointinunderstandingICTs'
contributiontodevelopment;theyareinputswhereasourrealattentionshouldbe
focusedonoutputs.
Tomaketheconnectionbetweenthetwo,anobviousdevicewouldbeavaluechain,
suchastheoneshowninFigure1(Heeks&Molla2009). Thisbuildsonastandard
input—process—outputmodeltocreateasequenceoflinkedICT4Dresourcesand
processes.Itcanbedividedintofourdomains:
· Readiness:thesystemicprerequisitesforanyICT4Dinitiative;boththe
foundationalprecursorsthatwemightconceptualisemainlyatthenationallevel
suchasICTinfrastructure,skillsandpolicy;andthemorespecificinputs(both
"hard"and"soft")thatfeedintoanyindividualinitiative.
· Availability:implementationof an ICT4Dinitiativeturnstheinputsintoasetof
tangibleICTdeliverables; typicalamongwhichmightbeatelecentre(with
publiclyaccessibleInternetconnectedPCs)ormobilephones.
· Uptake: theprocessesbywhichaccesstothetechnologyisturnedintoactual
usage;alsonotingthatkeyconcernsaroundthisprocessanditsabilityto
contributetodevelopmenthaverelatedto thesustainabilityofthisuseovertime,
and–forvariousinnovationsthatareprototyped– thepotentialoractualityof
scalingup(Walsham&Sahay2006).
· Impact:whichcanbedividedintothreesubelements:
o Outputs:themicrolevelbehaviouralchangesassociatedwith technologyuse.
o Outcomes:thewidercostsandbenefitsassociatedwith ICT.
o DevelopmentImpacts:thecontributionoftheICTtobroaderdevelopment
goals.

3
Figure1:TheICT4DValueChain
Precursors
Datasystems
Legal
Institutional
Human
Technological
Leadership
Drivers/Demand
Inputs
Money
Labour
Technology
Valuesand
Motivations
Politicalsupport
Targets
Intermediates/
Deliverables
Locations(e.g.
telecentres)
ICTs(e.g.PC,
mobile)
Software
applications
Outputs
New
Communication
Patterns
New
Information&
Decisions
NewActions&
Transactions
Outcomes
Financial&
otherquantitative
benefits
Qualitative
benefits
Disbenefits
Development
Impacts
Publicgoals
(e.g.MDGs)
Strategy Implementation Adoption Use
Exogenous
Factors
READINESS
UPTAKE
IMPACT
AVAILABILITY
Sustainability
Scalability

4
InterestinthesedomainsamongtheICTfordevelopmentcommunityhaschanged
overtime.Onewaytotracethisisthrough fourstagingposts:
· TheDigitalOpportunityTaskforce(DOTForce)arosefromthe2000G8summit
inOkinawa.In2001,itproducedits"DigitalOpportunitiesforAll"reportwhich
encompassedfourfocalareas(DOTForce2001).Three–readiness,connectivity
andhumancapacity –wererelatedonlytotheReadinessdomain;andone–
participationinenetworks–lookedmainlyatReadinessandAvailabilityissues.
· In2003,thefirstWorldSummitontheInformationSocietywasheldinGeneva.
Itsmainreportwas,tellingly,entitled"BuildingtheInformationSociety"(WSIS
2003)andnotsurprisinglythemainfocuswason buildingICTconnectionand
access;againlookingmostlyattheReadinessandAvailabilitydomains.
· ThesecondWorldSummitontheInformationSocietywasheldinTunisin2005.
Unlikeitspredecessor,itsagendadidstarttotalkaboutimpact(WSIS2005).It
stillhadastrongfocusonprecursorslikefinancingandgovernance,butit
includedadditionaldiscussionabouttheactualapplicationofICTs,thusstarting
toencompasstheUptakeandImpactdomains.
· ThelargestsubsequentmeetingwastheGK3eventinKualaLumpurattheendof
2007. Itwasshapedbytwelvemainsubthemes(Gerster&Weigel2007).
Analysingtheseshowsafairlyevenspreadacrossthefourdomains,thoughwith
Impactbynowthelargestsinglefocus,followedbyAvailability.
Therehasbeennosubsequentcomparablesingleeventintheareadrawingtogether
thousandsofparticipants;rather,agrowingnumberofsmallereventsdrawingseveral
hundreds.However,ausefulbellwetheristheInformationandCommunicationsfor
DevelopmentReportproducedbytheWorldBank.Inits2009edition,theratioof
mentionsof"readiness"to"impact"was1:35(WorldBank2009b).
Suchevidenceisbestseenasstrawsinthewindratherthandefinitive,butitdoes
suggestasimilarpatterntothatseeninotherareasofICTapplication(Heeks&Molla
2009),andsummarisedinFigure2.
Figure2:ChangingFocusofICT4DPrioritiesOverTime
Time
Readiness
 Policy
 Infrastructure
 DigitalDivide
Uptake
 Demand
 Usage
 UseDivide
Impact
 MicroOutputs
 Outcomes
 DevelopmentContribution
Availability
 Supply
 Implementationand
Design
LevelofICT4D
Activity

5
Whatevertheexactshapeofthegraph,itreflectstherelativelackofattentionthathas
beenpaidtoICTs'contributiontodevelopmentuntil quiterecently.Thishasledto
numerouscallsformoresuchattentiontobepaid(e.g.McNamara2003,Kenny2006,
Souter2007).Therelativelack,butrecentemergence,ofworkonthistopicisthe
mainimpetusforthisspecialPolicyArena.
AssessingICTs'ContributiontoDevelopment
TheobjectiverationaleforimpactassessmentofICTfordevelopmentinvestmentsis
thesameasonemightfindforanyinvestment(Heeks&Molla2009).Itwillbesome
combination of:a)retrospectiveachievement–posthocassessmentofwhathasbeen
achievedfrominvestmentstodate;b)prospectivepriorities–prehocassessmentof
futuredevelopmentprojectinvestments;c)accountability –enablingagenciestobe
heldtoaccountfortheirICT4Dspending.
TheparticularrationaleforICT4Dspecificallytobeevaluatedderivesinpartfrom
thelargeandgrowinglevelsofinvestmentnotedabove. Butitalsohasamore
politicalandsubjectiveimpetus:thehistoryofICT4D(seebox1)whichhascasta
longshadow,andthefeltneedforthosewithinthe"ICT4Dcommunity"toprovethe
valueoftheirwork tothe"developmentmainstream"
1
.
Box1.A ShortHistoryofICT4D
Informationandcommunicationtechnology hasexperiencedaparticulardiffusion
cyclewithindevelopment;acyclethatcanbecharacterisedasheavyoverpromising
followedbynoticeableunderdelivery. Thisischaracteristicof theearlycourseof
eachdevelopment"silverbullet"thatemergeseveryfewyears(Healey2002,Waage
2010).ButICThasperhapsbeenanespeciallymarkedcase,launchedviaaseriesof
reportsandeventsthatwerestrongonpromiseandhype;reekingof"technology
boosterismandcyberutopianism"andseen asthetoolofNorthernprivatesector
firmsseekingnewmarketsfortheirgoods(Pieterse2009,seealsoWade2002).
Thiswasthenfollowedinquiterapidandrelativelywellpublicisedsuccessionby
reports oflittleusedorabandonedICTprojects;andbyoverallanalysesthat
somethinglikeonethirdofsuchprojectsweretotalfailures,somethinglikehalf were
partialfailures,andonlyasmallminoritysucceeded(Heeks2002).Suchratesof
failurearenotunusualforanytypeofchangeinitiative;especiallythosebasedonnew
technologies.AndtheyaroseinpartbecausethemainICT4Dmodel –therural
telecentre– wasonedrawnfromtheglobalNorthwhichincorporateddesign
assumptionsandrequirementsthatsignificantlymismatchedlocalrealitiesinthe
averagedevelopingcountryvillage(ibid.)
Whateverthereason,political damagewasdonebythelarge,readilyobservedand
relativelybrief gapbetweenhypeandreality.DonorsbeganmovingawayfromICT;
forexamplewiththeUK'sDepartmentforInternationalDevelopmentclosingits
1
Talking privatelywithseniorICT4Dfiguresindevelopmentagencies,onefindstheirmainconcernis
thatthecaseforICTindevelopmenthasyettobemadetotheircolleagues,andneedstobemade.

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What are the contributions in this paper?

For example, this paper found that those outside the richest quartile who own mobile phones in Africa spend 11 −27 percent of monthly income on them.