5 Comments

1. Pingback: Tweets that mention Can telecenters and OLPC end poverty? » LIRNEasia - a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific -- Topsy.com
2. 

   Parvez Iftikhar

   November 29, 2010, 2:29 pm

   I read Kentaro’s article and posted my comment there, which I reproduce here:
   I agree that technology cannot change people magically but I do not agree that technology cannot be used to make positive changes in the lives of have-nots.
   To say that since a poor farmer, using ICT, from a remote village can never raise as much money as an urban/educated dweller in 24 hours, thus its useless to invest in ICT for him, is weird. I say, provide him the technology so that at least he has equal opportunity of doing so. There are countless examples where the poor found good uses of technology in cities (I personally know plumbers, cooks, gardeners, carpenters … who have increased their productivity – and consequently incomes – by a factor of at least 4 by use of mobile phones). If the rich in cities can play games on PCs and still manage to improve their lives through ICTs, so would the poor. If the city dwellers keep discovering ways of using ICTs for their benefits every day, so would the rural folk – provided ICTs reach them.
   My message is: don’t deny technology to poor even if they would fumble (and in many cases fail) with it in the beginning.

3. 

   Cool Knight

   November 29, 2010, 4:17 pm

   Rural poor should not be denied technology, food, education or health facilities. I fully agree.

   But these are conflicting interests. When you offer one you deny something else to rural poor or someone else.

   The question what cost justifies the technology to rural poor? Should we build a telecenter at a cost of USD 1,000 diverting that money from the health system? Should we keep on pumping money to a failed experiment?

   Those are the difficult questions to answer.

4. 

   Cool Knight

   November 29, 2010, 4:29 pm

   The above response is for Mr. Parvez Iftikhar, not to the post.

5. 

   Jacob Varghese

   November 29, 2010, 5:36 pm

   An extremely well balanced article. A good guide to all who are well meaning about using technology for poverty alleviation. The author is not ruling out technology from the scene. He is only discouraging the urge of people to ‘scale’ faster using technology without real human-touch in the background to support the scale.