|
Notes in unedited form, reflecting the flow of discussion in one of the breakaway groups.
Pro-Poor Policy Group discussion Chair: Charles Lewis Observer: Denise Biggs Scribe: Heloise Emdon
Q1. Tell us about the high points in your project or research programme. Q2. Tell us about the low points in your project or research programme. Q3. Tell us about the people in these projects or research programmes. Q4. If you were to do this programme or research again, would you do it differently? Explain.
Conclusions: Distillation of what is relevant for sustainable development. Reference the outcomes for future research. What would be best practices to follow: guidance with future interventions into ICT policy.
Denise Biggs Unctad meeting in Geneva July 2002. Policy and projects. Macro-level issues need to be implemented at the micro-level. Cape Sonke Community tourism route project Linking community tourism projects using ICTs Awareness of the use of technologies: linked with OpenAfrica www.openafrica.org 2nd phase: ICT needs of the individual members SA had 9 tourism authorities. No coordination. Global forums, not terribly interested in community tourism University itself is interested in learning and academic issues Cape Town city conference on responsible tourism, yet use a big business bus. There is a lack of understanding from the tourism policy makers and in ICT sector, lack of understanding of this sector. 2nd phase: strength in peer to peer networking, eg Soweto, West Coast Need to deliver ito development, now many offers for the funding.
The people: Dynamic community tourism entrepreneurs. Gourmet festival in CT. We had good coordination. Information flow was very good. The festival organizers information flow to the disadvantaged entrepreneurs was very poor (assumptions about the acces to means of communications) Youth forum started: skateboarding for 20km through township, tobogganing down the dunes in CT. innovative ideas Airports company, Cape Technikon are stakeholders.
Do it differently? Stakeholder reference group, we invited, but they did not come. We would rather invite peers, not people who do not appreciate the same development issues. Far more tangible interventions. We were building awareness and did not know where we were going in ph 1.
ARISE Sean Kane: See the page
USAID: Leland Initiative Enrique Portillo Mozambique, the main issue is affordability. We’re operating in one of the poorest countries iin the world with a minimum wage of around $30 a week. We need to find solutions for making services more affordable.
We have to allow competition of services. A regulator who fights everything. 2nd national cellular operator will bring new experiences. Keep the regulator away from the value-added services.
Outside of Maputo, we need to make ICTs meaningful for people. Even my colleagues have difficulties, we find cultural or historical arrears. The issue is we need to address the reluctance to use a computer. Ple need to realize they have the skills to use ICTs, but it remains a serious challenge. Many things suggest that we’re moving in the right direction.
We need to create an environment where new technologies, new ideas are affordable. Importing into Mozambique is a nightmare, the tariffs make things very expensive, especially with technology imports. Eg Regulator not willing to allow low-power radio imports because they do not understand or have the capacity to get to know the use of the technology.
Reform of the telecom sector is one of the high peaks in this process. The emergency of a dynamic entrepreneurial sector. In the city you find computer dealers, but not able to provide support to users. One of the USAID projects is to strengthen this.
There are similarities in Leland and Acacia projects:
We see the dialogue with government, the private sector, is important, but we would have achieved more if we had had pilot projects that are demonstrations of products to introduce changes. The dialogue vs demonstrating through piloting demonstration projects.
Venancio, comment: ICTs as a new development area has got a wide range of challenges, more than one can address at once. We may have a perception that there are not some demonstrations, but in the Acacia programme, while the policy was being developed we had a schoolnet. It was so interesting, because as you discuss at different levels, people could see what you were talking about. When we launched the telecentres, we launched 2 aiming to demonstrate, touch and feel. In the Acacia project, we were always validating, not approving, but validating what we mean by x or y. The number of these is very small, putting ICTs in rural areas to control wildlife management, tracking animals, not always in the context of tourism, but also for the community. It’s a few thousand dollars, a small amount, but has applications at a far larger level. This enables people to say, ‘this is what I want, and not what I want’. If we only talk, people will not know what to point to.
Research project aiming to generate projects Using scientific models, techniques, tools to develop ideas that can be a) translated into projects or b) create opportunities to regenerate projects
The high points: We have managed so far to get a nation to talk the same language. From the President to the grassroots, people now realize the importance of technologies, the benefits. We have results: Maybe people are not aware of them, but the results are there. There are massive projects going on. TDM announced the networking of schools for free. We’re working on a systematic concept, and still digging up other components. The opportunities for Mozambicans to enjoy ICT services. Yesterday Vodacom was launched in Moz, and indirectly there is contribution in the policy. Networking schools will allow for another type of education. Infrastructure is still a problem. The outcome will be good
Low points Where are we going to place this? It is a problem, to decide under whom do we place this? Five years ago we said it has to be under the Prime Minister. But it may create some difficulties of locating the policy function. Financing, implementation of the ICT policy and strategy, and really depend on who is financing, dependent on the donor’s willingness to fund. It’s a problem at middle and higher level, as well as grassroots. Donor’s can influence by what they think is correct for the country.
3. The People Endemic to Africa, number of engineers, doctors, professors, ICT sector very low level of the skills. Consequently they have limited the capacity to manage, in this sector, the managers are utilized 2 to 3 times more than other professionals. This reduces effectiveness.
Do it differently? We would do what we did so far. But what would do differently: Human resources development for ICTs. What will happen is that there is a bottleneck because we lack capacity to implement. ICT Institute, Research and Learning, Technology incubators, Technology Park or Science Park in Mozambique. Very high potential for this to have an impact on our discussions. |
|
Send mail to
mediaman@worldonline.co.za with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
