The VGKs were to be in areas where traffic patterns allowed for sustainability. Just because people live in villages, it does not mean that they never come to market or that their children do not go to school or tuition classes in rural nodal points. Careful studies were commissioned to identify places where there would be enough foot traffic to make telecenters sustainable. All this was thrown to the wind and telecenters were given to temples primarily at the behest of the President. Obviously, they are unsustainable. No amount of assistance from the computer technician at the local Vidatha center is going to bring foot traffic to fundamentally unsustainable locations. That answer given by the Minister in the interview linked here is a non sequitur. A technician can keep the computers operational, he/she can’t bring customers. And the Minister seems to thinks that charging fees increases the digital divide and that not charging fees and having the center close down narrows it. He makes no mention of the vouchers that were designed and implemented under e Sri Lanka to address the issue without making the centers unsustainable.

Sadly, Professor Vitarana repeats falsehoods and lies by omission. Now we are compelled to blame the former man of science. He is, we now understand, a common or garden politician who cares nothing for evidence.

If he wants evidence, there is plenty. You see, we do not give up hope. All he has to do is get a list of VGKs and Nenasalas from ICTA and check their locations to see who is serving urban areas and who is serving rural. The vouchers were operational, the last time we asked. All he has to do is ask.

Google paid for the final design of the stations and is covering the monthly fees for satellite bandwidth. The company has also invested in O3b, a start-up that hopes to deploy a constellation of satellites over Africa by the end of next year.

“Building infrastructure is not necessarily Google’s objective, but if you look at all the areas that Google has gone into, in many cases it has been to fill a gap,” said Joseph Mucheru, who heads Google’s East Africa office. “The market should see the opportunity.”

Just how much opportunity there is remains unclear. Google is uncertain whether such satellite stations can pay for themselves in rural areas, given the cost of equipment and bandwidth. Communities may well benefit from the connection, but they do not all have the means to afford it.

Bandwidth fees for stations like the one in Entasopia could cost as much as $700 a month, though slower ones cost less, said Wayan Vota, a senior director at Inveneo, a nonprofit that works to disseminate Internet technology throughout Africa and the developing world. As these connections are introduced more widely, which is O3b’s goal, the price could fall, Mr. Vota said.

The presentation that Helani Galpaya and I did (Sujata and Chanuka ran a parallel session) included components on innovation in service industries, the external environment that made innovation so important for telecenter operators, and systematic learning from failures. Because we had to work with multiple languages, it was not possible to cover all the slides, which are here.

One of the things we noticed was that there appeared to be two different kinds of problems: the first kind could be fixed through process innovation; the second kind was structural and required remedies that were outside the scope of an event like this. An example of the latter is location. When the telecenters under e Sri Lanka were first planned, the principle was that they could not unfairly compete with existing unsubsidized communication bureaus and that there had to be no other telecenters near their locations. Yet we found that this principle is being violated in the rush to put as many telecenters in place as possible. In some cases location decisions had been made on the basis of promises of connectivity, which had not been fully met.

So with the next offering, we will say upfront that structural problems are outside the scope and focus the participants on the solveable issues.

The repairs will, we understand, address the most serious risks raised by the LIRNEasia participatory research. However, due to ill-informed protests of the opponents of water-use reforms and the weak-kneed response of the government agencies and the World Bank, the component that would have addressed the sustainability issues was stripped out after one exchange. So we have postponed the day of reckoning, but not created a long-term sustainable system for safe water use.

http://www.priu.gov.lk/news_update/Current_Affairs/ca200808/20080815dam_safety_water_resources_planning.htm