[kictanet] Article on Digital Villages in the Daily Nation

[warigia bowman]

Hi Charles

That is a good idea. I agree that comparing the performance of those who
trained and those who did not would be interesting for pashas.

Yours, Rigia

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:03 PM, charles nduati <
charlesnduati2002 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi Listers,
>
> Congratulations Dr Bowman and your team for the study tour. Having been the
> one with my collegaues in JKUAT who developed the digital training
> curriculum I am quite excite to get your feedback.
>
> The thing is, we developed the cuuriculum following a rigourous process
> which entailed a public presentation of dry run at KICC and then later via a
> pilot which we did for a sample of 200 people in all districts including
> lokichogio. We later conducted at TOT and ICT board then contracted those
> acredited trainers to train 7,500 potential Digital Village operators who we
> even certified. At the time we did the training, the understanding was that
> only those who had undergone the training will qualify for the funding. So
> it later turned out that even those who we didn't  train got the funding, so
> I am not surprised of your findings. Next time, please compare the
> performance of those who we trained and those who are not trained then
> perhaps we can know whether the training had any impact. You can get the
> curriculum from ICT board web site and comment on it also
>
> Regards,
>
> Charles
>
> CHARLES N. NDUATI
> GENERAL MANAGER
> JKUAT ENTERPRISES LTD
> JOMO KENYATTA UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY
> JUJA MAIN CAMPUS, THIKA
> P. O. BOX 79324-00200
> NAIROBI, KENYA
> TEL: 254-067-52420 OR 254-067-52711 FAX: 254-067-52438
> MOBILE:254-722728815
> EMIAL:charlesnduati2002 at yahoo.co.uk,cnduati at gmail.com,
> bm at jkuates.jkuat.ac.ke
> www.jkuat.ac.ke
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Muchiri Nyaggah <muchiri at semacraft.com>
> *To:* charlesnduati2002 at yahoo.co.uk
> *Cc:* Patrick Mule Mbithuka <PMbithuka at safaricom.co.ke>; Wachira Kang’aru
> <wkangaru at ke.nationmedia.com>; KK <kavorek at gmail.com>; KICTAnet ICT Policy
> Discussions <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> *Sent:* Thu, 1 September, 2011 14:11:29
>
> *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Article on Digital Villages in the Daily Nation
>
> Hi Listers,
>
> Apart from e-health and e-learning, e-government was a critical part of the
> whole digital village idea. Bringing government services closer to the
> people by using technology to remove the barriers of geography and hopefully
> reducing the barriers of bureaucracy. One thing we did notice though is that
> government services such as KRA PIN applications cost upwards of KSh150 with
> similar costs for filing returns and KNEC applications.
>
> One of the challenges that needs to be tackled is how to innovatively
> reduce the financial barrier to access whilst still making it worth the
> business owner's while to keep this services available. I'm certain those
> insights lie with us.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> *Muchiri* Nyaggah
>
> Principal Partner
>
> @muchiri
>
> +254 722 506400
>
> Semacraft.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 1:47 PM, warigia bowman <warigia at aucegypt.edu>wrote:
>
>> You can get the PDF here
>>
>> http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1621502&show=abstract
>>
>> You do not need university access
>>
>> Yours, Rigia
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 1:34 PM, warigia bowman <warigia at aucegypt.edu>wrote:
>>
>>> Dear colleagues
>>>
>>> Here is an article I had written many years ago. I did not think it was
>>> worth much, but it seems very relevant to the discussion we are having on
>>> digital villages. The PDF is available free online here.
>>>
>>> This is what digital villages COULD BE.
>>>
>>> http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1621502&show=html
>>>
>>> The promise of public access: Lessons from the American experience
>>> ------------------------------
>>> The Authors Warigia Bowman, *Harvard University, USA*
>>> Arifa Khandwalla, *University of Massachusetts, USA* Abstract
>>>
>>> This essay surveys and synthesizes the academic literature, archival
>>> sources and interviews with key policy makers regarding the emergence of
>>> community technology centers in the US. Community Technology Centers (CTCs)
>>> came to the fore in the late 1990s through an activist nonprofit sector
>>> combined with federal government and private sector funding. Federal data
>>> indicates that CTCs now represent the most important access points to
>>> information communications technology for the poor in the US. This essay
>>> reviews the latest arguments for and against continued investment in CTCs
>>> and public access in general. In addition to providing access, which is
>>> often used beneficially for employment and education related purposes, CTCs
>>> appear to contribute to social capital as they become social gathering
>>> points. This paper concludes, that both government and nonprofits play a
>>> vital role in ensuring public access for the poor and that continued
>>> investment in CTCs is warranted.
>>> Article Type:
>>>
>>> Literature review
>>> Keyword(s):
>>>
>>> Access; ICT; Community; Technology centres; Government.
>>> Journal:
>>>
>>> Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society
>>> Volume:
>>>
>>> 1
>>> Number:
>>>
>>> 2
>>> Year:
>>>
>>> 2003
>>>  pp:
>>>
>>> 87-98
>>> Copyright ©
>>>
>>> MCB UP Ltd
>>>  ISSN: 1477-996X
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 5:00 PM, warigia bowman <warigia at aucegypt.edu>wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Dear colleagues
>>>>
>>>> Here is an article I wrote which appeared in Smart Company in the Daily
>>>> Nation on Tuesday. Victor Gathara and I will be writing a more comprehensive
>>>> report in the coming months. I had put in some compliments to the ICT Board
>>>> staff and the Safaricom staff, but those were edited out by the nation.
>>>>
>>>> Yours, Rigia
>>>>
>>>> BY WARIGIA BOWMAN
>>>>
>>>> warigia at aucegypt.edu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Plans are afoot to improve access to computing and Internet
>>>> infrastructure in rural Kenya, thanks to an initiative between the
>>>> government and the private sector.   In April 2010, the ICT Board,
>>>> which is part of the Ministry of Information and Communication, promised to
>>>> connect each constituency by setting up a digital centre, complete with five
>>>> computers and Internet connectivity, under the Pasha Centres programme.
>>>>
>>>> Kupasha is Kiswahili for “to inform”. The Pasha Centre project is being
>>>> supported by $4 million (about Sh36 million) in revolving World Bank funds
>>>> administered by Family Bank.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, the Kenya Communication Amendment Act 2009 stipulates that the
>>>> Communication Commission of Kenya (CCK) should levy telecoms operators a
>>>> universal access fund of one per cent of their total revenue to be used for
>>>> rural connectivity.
>>>>
>>>> Access to portals
>>>>
>>>> According to the regulator, 90 per cent of Kenya’s 6.4 million Internet
>>>> users (2010) are in Nairobi and Mombasa. Both the digital villages and the
>>>> pasha centres are to offer services such as access to government portals
>>>> like NSSF, identity and driver licensing services, Teacher Service
>>>> Commission information, HELB loans and information on farming, as well as
>>>> access to e-health and e-learning.
>>>>
>>>> This all sounds fantastic and exciting... on paper. Unfortunately, the
>>>> reality on the ground is different. A multi-sectoral group of academics,
>>>> private sector consultants and civil society activists have visited 20 per
>>>> cent of all pasha centres in Kenya, as well as 15 digital villages, over the
>>>> past two months.
>>>>
>>>> What the group found is a matter of concern to anyone interested in
>>>> rural connectivity in Africa.
>>>>
>>>> The number of digital villages and pasha centres that are actually open
>>>> for business is only a fraction of the reported total. The ICT Board
>>>> provided the research team with the list of all approved centres.
>>>>
>>>> Only 37 have actually been approved, although each of Kenya’s 210
>>>> constituencies is entitled to one. Of these, only two in the sample of 10
>>>> had actually received all of the money awarded to them and had opened for
>>>> business.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, Safaricom provided the research team with a list of 147
>>>> digital villages, not 500. On the list of 147, the identifying information
>>>> was incomplete and vague.
>>>>
>>>> The team visited pashas and digital villages in Malindi, Embu, Meru,
>>>> Muranga, Maragwa, Nyeri, Isiolo, Samburu, Oloitoktok, Machakos, Wote and
>>>> Mbumbuni. It was, however, yet to visit and evaluate pashas in Western,
>>>> Kisii and Nyanza regions.
>>>>
>>>> Overall, the conditions in the ICT Board run pashas were better than
>>>> those in the Safaricom-run digital villages, although the pashas also needed
>>>> improvements.
>>>>
>>>> Owners were, on the whole, fairly well educated IT experts, good
>>>> businesspeople and visionaries. The two pashas (Mbumbuni and Maragwa) that
>>>> had actually opened offered a range of services, including photocopying,
>>>> printing, typesetting, printing photos, browsing and IT training.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the centres had heard of  e-health and e-learning, but did not
>>>> really know what these terms meant and had received no training from the ICT
>>>> Board in these areas, although the topics were mentioned at one training the
>>>> pasha owners received in late May.
>>>>
>>>> Further, owners had little knowledge of what government services they
>>>> could offer other than the registration of KRA pin details and downloading
>>>> of police abstracts.  Most had received little or no support regarding
>>>> branding and marketing, and one of the open facilities was making a serious
>>>> financial loss.
>>>>
>>>> However, it is easy to criticise and hard to build. In that spirit, here
>>>> are some constructive suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> First, the MOIC, CCK and ICT Board should work together to implement the
>>>> tax of one per cent on all telecommunications operators this year.
>>>>
>>>> Based on a quick back of the envelope calculation, this will amount to
>>>> approximately Sh4 billion per year. Part of this money should support extra
>>>> staff on the pasha centre project.Right now, there are only two people
>>>> working on the pasha project at the ICT Board.
>>>>
>>>> Second, tariffs must come down. Every pasha owner and digital village
>>>> operator we spoke to said tariffs were too high. Indeed, the ICT Board had
>>>> promised pasha operators free connectivity for a year.
>>>>
>>>> Regardless, operators and digital village operators must be given highly
>>>> preferential rates by telecommunications operators.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, pasha owners and digital village operators need support and
>>>> training in  marketing, branding, and proper use of government portals.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Owners need to be sensitised on the wealth of information with regard to
>>>> farming and husbandry, including Kenya Seeds, www.infonet-biovision.org,
>>>> icow, and www.nafis.go.ke.
>>>>
>>>> Finally, Safaricom should expand the resources it invests in each
>>>> digital village.
>>>>
>>>> There are many other reforms needed, but if the government and
>>>> telecommunications operators can pay attention to these few suggestions,
>>>> Kenya can attain true rural connectivity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dr Bowman is an ICT expert in the American University, Cairo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/warigia%40gmail.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for
> people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20110902/51b113bd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3248 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20110902/51b113bd/attachment.jpg>