Despite the substantial investments in ICT4D projects in developing countries, the benefits are yet to be realised by the majority of remote communities. Inaccessibility to ICT has widened educational, healthcare, information, and communication gaps between urban and remote communities. This paper focuses on an interpretive case study in Nepal to widen our understanding of how locally-initiated ICT4D projects may help to narrow these gaps. The study utilises the Assets Pentagon Model to identify the strengths and challenges of the Nepal Wireless Networking Project in the mountain areas, and to identify implications for research and practice based on insights from the case.
12/4/10
ICT, SOCIAL CAPITAL AND DEVELOPMENT
While the role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in fostering socioeconomic development is generally accepted, the process through which this may happen remain unclear. In this paper, we take a social capital perspective and propose that ICT helps to create or strengthen social capital of communities which in turn leads to development. To illustrate our proposition, we conducted a qualitative case study in the Myagdi district in the mountain region of Nepal. We studied the Nepal Wireless Networking Project (NWNP) and examined its role in building social capital, and the consequences of extended social capital on socio-economic development process. Our findings indicate that the project is enabling the villagers to create, maintain, and extend their bonding, bridging, and linking social capital. Subsequently, this social capital assists them in developing and improving their education, healthcare, communication, and generating economic activities. We also identified several challenges such as, over dependency on single actor, high illiteracy rate, poor physical infrastructure, language, and lack of participation that may impede the social capital building process.
11/8/10
ICT and Society
Current news on growing rate of internet usage and installation of mobile towers in Nepal shows that more and more people can have access to pools of information and bridges of communication. The growing web of information and communication technology (ICT) can be a boon to people living in urban areas in general and remote areas in particular. Plenty of literatures, anecdotes, and empirical studies show that proper design, implementation, and execution of the technology can leads to extended social ties, better education and healthcare opportunities, and advance commerce activities, at the same time, more inclusive participation in political decision making.
In the context of Nepal, assessment of information and converting it into valuable knowledge, however, remains an issue. Likewise, the threat of social exclusion is another important issue that needs to be considered before realizing the joy. We cannot ignore the fact that majority of the population is still out of technology reach. And, the extension of towers is just one of the necessary conditions of development, but not the sufficient condition. Nobel laureate Amartya Sen argues that the primary end objective and the principal means of development should be focused on individual substantive freedom, such as education, healthcare, environment, gender equality, and political participation; so that they can lead a life they have reasons to value.
Even philosophically, technology means more than just a technical intervention. The word technology derives from the Greek techne and logos. Logos means word, thought, reason, which in turn could be interpreted as a form of knowledge. Techne means art and craft and is one of three ways of knowing as described by Aristotle, the others being episteme and phronesis. Techne describes the practical knowledge used when producing art and craft, episteme describes the abstract theoretical knowledge in science and phronesis describes the social knowledge used in our everyday relations with other people. The impact of the ICT therefore, should be directed towards phronesis or social welfare.
To warrant and back up this unequivocal claim provided below some statements made by prominent people working in the area of ICT and society in Nepal.
Mr. Karmacharya, executive director, OLE Nepal, stated:
Getting more teachers training, building schools, building classrooms, in spite of this, we are not saying that we should stop it, but in parallel let’s start looking into quality. One of the best ways is to introduce computers like OLPC in the classrooms… other thing technology can do is from the communication aspects, it improves the access, so now they[students in rural and remote areas] can go to school and access lot of quality education materials. Many places every year in remote areas don’t even get the textbooks, sometimes the books arrived when the academic year is over, so we are facing lot of these challenges. By introducing technology we can update and send the materials immediately, and easily access the materials. These are the things we can do with technology.
Dr. Dhital, Doctor, Kathmandu Model Hospital, Stated:
Currently we are in a very initial stage [talking about telemedicine project]…daily video conference can provide continue training to the health workers in the remote area. And secondly, at the time of emergency, they can bring patients before camera. Our effort is that health workers here in the village become efficient. The people in this village should trust them more, and ultimately it will benefit village people.
Mr. Joshi, Director, www.thamel.com expressed:
In the rural areas, there is always a misconception that there is no market. What works in urban obviously not work in rural areas, but the thing is all the rural areas have there own socioeconomic dynamics. Where we can plug in the technology and create some kind of socioeconomic opportunities… people in every village in the mountains like Nangi and Tikot are working somewhere else…So there are people making money and there are people sending money to villages…right now the remittance service in the middle of four or five villages can stop villagers to come down to Beni (district headquarter). If we bring that remittance service in the village then they don’t have to come down.
In the similar strand,
Dr. Pun, Team Leader, Nepal Wireless Networking Project expressed his optimism:
One of the reasons I involved in this project is because I have seen that this has good potential to provide some very basic services to the rural community. Like health and education services…Because there is no way Nepali government is going to build hospital and bring doctors in the rural areas … as it cost so much money to do that… also you can see a lot of good schools and colleges are in the urban areas… students are getting opportunity to get quality education there but students in rural areas are not. So there is a huge education gap…therefore, I think ICT can help to bring this education gap closer. Similarly, to make this project sustainable we have to generate income, that’s why we are working in ecommerce project and internet telephony.
Finally, this article acknowledges the role of information and communication technology in fostering socioeconomic development, however, at the same time, put emphasis on understanding the process through which this may happen.
10/1/10
Crafting research proposal
One of the interesting, challenging, exasperating and demanding moments of PhD is writing research proposal. I had a similar experience while writing my proposal. I experienced the tantalizing moments of finding research topic, structuring research questions, finding theoretical framework, research methodology and philosophical underpinnings. Through this article I would like to share the experience of intellectual labor pain, which may be helpful to other PhD candidates. Beware, this is one of the many ways to explore and inscribe research proposals. I coined it as crafting because it is both a science as well as an art.
My exploration started with finding a suitable research topic. In my opinion, finding a research topic doesn’t imply finding a title for the research. The topic implies the comprehensive knowledge of the phenomenon that you want to examine. I followed two basic principles to identify my research topic. The first principle was my personal motivation for the topic, for instance, I was interested in understanding the link between information and communication technology (ICT) and socioeconomic development of developing countries. Therefore, I started to read related literature, case studies, and UNDP reports, furthermore, discussed with researchers and practitioners in this research domain. After reading loads of literature, I was still not be able to find a link between ICT and development. Aha! And that was the clicking point in my exploration moment; consequently, I formed my initial research topic. The topic was ‘finding a link between ICT and socioeconomic development in developing countries’. Now, the second principle was relevance of the topic to the contemporary society (academic and non-academic), for example, I asked myself what are the implications of my study on policy makers and practitioners of the third world countries, likewise, I asked, whether academic world were interested in this research topic. By going through the reports and research articles, I identified the relevance of subject; I found that the topic of information and communication technology for development (ICT4D) was a hot subject of discourse in academia and non-academia. Therefore, I decided to continue with this research topic.
The second task after finalizing the topic was to identify the philosophical, theoretical, and methodological underpinnings. Initially, to me, the term ICT4D sounded easy; however, after going through the process of inquiring its anatomical features, my views were completely different. I identified four complex topics and philosophies concealed inside this easy looking term ICT4D. The ICT4D was composed of multidisciplinary subjects, ‘I’ information, ‘C’ communication, ‘T’ technology and ‘D’ development. It was a pretty tough time to find relevant theories that integrate all these four fragmented alphabets. To understand this gigantic subject, I decided to read multidisciplinary literature, such as computer science, information systems, and development studies. As Richard Heeks stated, from computer science we learn what is possible with digital technology; from information systems we learn what is feasible with digital technology; and from development studies we learn what is desirable with the digital technology. At the same time, I attended many ICT4D related seminars, summer schools, workshops and conferences. During that time I always tried to relate gained knowledge, experiences, and insights with my research topic. It truly helped me to blend my scattered knowledge. Three courses that directly contributed to understand the subject were philosophy of science, theory of information systems, and research methodology. The philosophy of science course taught me to understand the meaning of concept through micro-analysis of the concept; the theory of information systems helped me to understand the ICT and its implications on society; the research methodology course helped me to find the suitable method, tools, and techniques for data collection and data analysis. Finalizing research methodology is an equally difficult part of the proposal crafting process. The philosophical understanding, such as paradigm, ontology and epistemology helped me to recognize the particular theory and methodology for the research topic. These philosophical, theoretical and methodological connections are important to define our work as a science.
Crafting a research proposal is a hermeneutic circle as Gadamer expressed,” The hermeneutic circle is an iterative process through which a new understanding of a whole reality is developed by means of exploring the detail of existence. Understanding is linguistically-mediated, through conversations with others in which reality is explored and an agreement is reached that represents a new understanding,” similarly, crafting requires to read in breadth and depth, to relate concepts with theories, philosophies and methodologies, to write and rewrite, to present, discuss, listen, and sometimes defend. Writing research proposal is not a mere process of copying and pasting ideas, but it’s a rigorous process of Structuration through learning and reflecting. The outcome (research proposal) of this intellectual labor pain will leads to rigorous and relevant empirical study vis-à-vis theory and practice.
9/27/10
The reflection of philosophy of science on my ICT4D research: is my research a science?
1. Introduction
The purpose of writing this essay is to find the corresponding philosophy of science for my information and communication technology for development (ICT4D) research, so that I can entitle my research outcome as a valid scientific knowledge. The ICT4D research, which is more dealing with the national development and changing the quality of life through deploying ICT service, falls in the domain of information systems (IS) research. Whereas, the IS field is more broadly related to the study of the effective use of information and the potential impact of software systems and enabling information technologies on the human, organizational, and social world. The nature of IS field as a science is a mixture of natural science positivism and social science interpretivism (Khazanchi & Bjørn, 2000).
Particularly, the objective of my ICT4D research is to analyze the complex interaction process among various social and technical actors that influence the impact of ICT availability on remote communities. Therefore, the nature of my research as a science is more pertinent to interpretative or social science rather than positivist. My work is influenced by the authors like Heidegger, Gadamer, Latour, and Amrtya Sen who are writing from phenomenological hermeneutics, sociotechnological, and post-modernist perspectives. However, as Chalmers proposed that if the human sciences are to emulate the success of physics then that is to be achieved by first understanding and formulating this method and then applying it to the social and human sciences. Therefore, in the subsequent sections, as highlighted in Table 1, I will summarize the different perspective of philosophy of science such as empiricist tradition (observation and Experiments), logical positivism (theory confirmation through induction), popper’s theory of falsification, Kuhn’s paradigmatic views, furthermore, brief description about Lakato research methods and Feyerabend anarchistic theory of science. Alongside, I will briefly explain the reflection of these philosophies on my research; in addition, I will locate the nature of my research as a science by referring to the philosophical ideas of sociology of science. Finally, I will briefly discuss the ontological beliefs such as realist and anti-realist of my research work.
2. Reflections of philosophy of science on ICT4D research
Table 1. Nature of science and its reflections on ICT4D research
Nature of Science | Reflections on ICT4D Research |
Empiricism (Aristotle, Locke, Berkeley, Hume) Observation & experience Rejects, priori reasoning | Case study (observation) But, uses priori theory |
Logical Positivism (Vienna Circle) Confirmation of scientific theory by induction/deduction | Generalization of theory through induction or deduction, however, lacking law of uniformity |
Karl Popper’s falsification All theories should have the nature of falsification | Better than induction, however, difficult to falsify social theories due to contextual problem |
Kuhn’s Paradigm Galileo paradigm, Newton’s paradigm etc. | ICT4D research uses paradigm such as positivism and constructivism in ontology and epistemology |
Lakatos ‘research programs’ An alternative theory of paradigm | Using standard research methodology such as interpretive case study |
Fayerabend’s theory of Anarchistic history Based on humanitarian ground, doesn’t believe in paradigm or standard methods | Misunderstood, but it is relevant to my research because ICT4D is more concerned to humanitarian issues |
The Bayesian approach Confirmation of new scientific knowledge influenced by previous success probabilities | Difficult to estimate the previous success probabilities of social science research |
Social science (post-modernist approach)- science is the outcome of interplay among different human and non-human actors (Latour) | My research fits here, but is it a real science? |
2.1 Empiricism
The initial thought in the philosophy of science was mostly dominated by the concept of empiricism. The empiricism emphasizes those aspects of scientific knowledge that are closely related to evidence, especially as discovered in experiments (Chalmers, 1999). The idea of empiricism is that the science is to be based on what we can see, hear and touch rather than on personal opinions or speculative imaginations. Based on Aristotelian theory of tabula rosa, which state that the human mind is like a blank table and that their knowledge comes from experience and perception. Empiricism is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world, rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation. Therefore, empiricist claims that the science is methodologically empirical in nature. Some of the classical empiricists were John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume (Godfrey-Smith, 2003). The ICT4D research is also bound to empirical study. For this purpose we conduct interviews, surveys, and data collection in the natural setup. However, the concept of not using any priori or existing theory in empiricism is differing to my research. It employs existing theories such as actor-network theory and social capital theory for analytical purpose.
2.2 Logical Positivism
It is a school of philosophy that combines empiricism with rationalism incorporating mathematical logics known as deductions in epistemology. The epistemology of IS realm was dominated by the logical positivism. However, the IS research community gradually realizing the importance of interpretive studies along with positivism. Notwithstanding, the construct validation and process evaluation of the case study is some of the reflections which has implications to my ICT4D research. Logical positivism has advocated the observation based theory should be tested through experiments. However, the ICT4D research has a contextual problem in conducting theory laden experiments. The differences in the local context can produce different results even though both use the same theory. Another, drawback of logical positivism is the logical induction. Logical positivism has put forward the concept of generalization through induction. This suggests that the appropriate facts can be established in science by large number of observations under a wide variety of conditions, and there should not be any conflict with the derived law (Chalmers, 1999). It means replication of experiments many times to make it a standard theory. This kind of replication is not possible in social science research generally and ICT4D research particularly. Although social science theory also needs to be generalized through inductive and deductive reasoning, there is a lack of law of uniformity.
2.3 Karl Popper’s falsification
Karl popper was sharply against the idea of logical positivism or induction for generalization of the theory. Therefore, Pooper formulated his demarcation criterion for distinguishing science from non-science, where the criterion pertains to falsifiability. The falsificationist sees science as a set of hypothesis that is tentatively proposed with the aim of accurately describing or accounting for the behavior of some aspect of the world or universe. There is one fundamental condition that any hypothesis or system of hypothesis must satisfy if it is to be granted the status of scientific law or theory, a hypothesis must be falsifiable. Even though falsification seems better than induction for the generalization of ICT4D research outcome, sometimes multiple subjective interpretations may erroneously falsify the true hypothesis.
2.4 Kuhn’s Paradigm
Inductivist and falsificationist accounts of science were challenged in a major way by Thoman Kuhn. He came to believe that traditional accounts of science, whether inductivist or falsificaniost, do not bear comparison with historical evidence. Kuhn’s account of science was subsequently developed as an attempt to give a theory more in keeping with the historical situation as he saw it. A key feature of his theory is the emphasis placed on the revolutionary character of scientific progress, where revolution involves the abandonment of one theoretical structure and its replacement by another, incompatible one (Godfrey-Smith, 2003). The concept of paradigm is frequently used in the realm of ICT4D research. However, the paradigm in ICT4D research is mostly confined to positivist and interpretive camps (Khazanchi & Bjørn, 2000). And, my research falls into the interpretive paradigm.
2.5 Lakatos ‘research programs’
Lakatos like Kuhn, saw the merit in portraying scientific activity as taking place in a framework, and coined the phrase “research program”. According to Lakatos some laws or principles are more basic than others and that can be the defining feature of a science. A science can then be seen as the programmatic development of the implications of the fundamental principles. I take it as a use of standard methodology in my research such as use of most frequent interpretive case study.
2.6 Fayerabend’s theory of Anarchistic history
Fayerabend from his humanitarian point of view supports his anarchistic theory of science on grounds that it increases the freedom of scientists by removing them from methodological constraints and, more generally, leaves individuals the freedom to choose between science and other forms of knowledge. A central problem with Feyerabend’s notion of freedom stems from the degree to which it is entirely negative, in the sense that freedom is understood as freedom from constraints. The only relevance to this paradigm and my research is that both are based on humanitarian ground. Social science research probably cannot be confined to any establish way of theorizing the phenomenon.
2.7 The Bayesian approach
Bayes’ theorem is about conditional probabilities, probabilities for propositions that depend on the evidence bearing on those propositions. Those probabilities will be subject to change by the punter in the light of new evidence. Bayes’ theorem is a theorem prescribing how probabilities are to be changed in the light of new evidence. It is quite difficult to estimate the previous success probabilities of social science research.
2.8 Social science (post-modernist approach)
Scientific theory can be objective, however, an objective theory not as one that exists independently of human beings and their influences. It can be a social object that forms over a period of time from a process of social construction in which many generations of cohorts of researchers participate and whose properties and behaviors can be observed and explained through such empirical disciplines as the history and sociology of science (Godfrey-Smith, 2003). The emergence of modern science in itself is a sociological process, which takes different forms during the transition from feudalism to early capitalism (Zilsel, 1942). The philosophy of science has been mainly drawn by the natural scientist with a very positivist approach; therefore, so called modern science definition rejects my research as a science. However, it is the post-modernist scientist who defined the science in a broad view which includes the social perspective as well. According to Schultz a social science theory and a natural science theory are no different in their logical form. Of course, there remain major differences between them, one of which pertains to some empirical work that a social scientist, but not a natural scientist, needs to perform prior to formulating a theory. As such, they require data collection or observation by the social scientist no less than does any other aspects of objective reality that he or she encounters. Schultz conceptualizes these subjective meanings as first-level constructs – meanings constructed by human subjects in the social setting that the social scientist seeks to explain. It is only on the basis of these first-level constructs that the observing social scientist may properly found the constructs (hence second-level constructs) comprising his or her scientific theory. Because subjective meanings or first-level constructs exist in the empirical subject matter of social science but not natural science, it is appropriate to describe the subsequent second-level constructs or theory as being social theory. An interesting consequence that follows from Schultz’s view of social theory is that natural science methodology can be seen as a limiting case or subset of social science methodology. Therefore, my ICT4D research qualifies as a valid scientific knowledge.
3. Conclusion
Most of the theories put forward by scientific community are positivists by nature, whereas, social phenomenon cannot be observed by positivists approach only as advocated by the theory of empiricism, logical positivism, and falsification. As an anti-realist ontology my research seems to be more near to empiricism however consider the importance of existing theories as well. Confirmation of social theories through induction seems to be impossible in my case because the context changes with every new case study. Likewise, the theory of falsification cannot be found in my research as my research does not test any theory; instead, it just uses the theory for the sake of defining its conceptual framework. These theories are mainly criticized for favoring objectivism and rejecting the subjective aspects of social perception. That may lead us to rigor testing of the process and ignoring the relevant facts.
In IS domain, I found the Kuhn’s paradigm theory is consistently dominating. For instance, the ontology of IS realm is defined as positivists and interpretive. Likewise, the epistemology of IS field is characterized as positivist, interpretive, and critical realism. Following this tradition of paradigm, I would say the ontological and epistemological nature of my research falls into anti-positivists and interpretive category. Interestingly, I found the nature of science itself is the outcome of social construction. And, there is not a single agreed philosophy which describes the nature of science. Thus I am not in a state to fit my work in any particular theory such as empiricism, logical positivism, falsification or Kuhn’s theory of paradigm. Whereas, the IS field is more broadly related to the study of the effective use of information and the potential impact of software systems and enabling information technologies on the human, organizational, and social world. The nature of IS field as a science is a mixture of natural science positivism and social science interpretivism. To me, this controversy seems to be a never ending process, however, that is the only way to keep the growth of science alive.
References:
(1) Chalmers, A. (1999). What is this thing called science? : Open University Press, UK.
(2) Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and Reality: an introduction to the philosophy of science: The University of Chicago Press/Chicago and London.
(3) Khazanchi, & Bjørn (2000). Is information systems a science An inquiry into the nature of the information systems discipline. Database for Advances in Information Systems ( Formerly : Data Base ), 31(2), 24.
(4) Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social, an introduction to actor-network theory: Oxford University Press.
(5) Lee, Allen (2004). Thinking about social theory and philosophy for information systems, in Willcocks, L. and Mingers, J. (eds) Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems, Wiley, Chichester, 2004, pp. 1-26.
(6) Merton, R. K. (1938). Science and the Social Order; Philosophy of Science, 5(3), pp. 321-337.
(7) Zilsel, E. (1942). The Sociological Roots of Science, The American Journal of Sociology, 47 (4), pp. 544-562.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)