Tapping ICT to ReducePoverty in Rural India

Simone Cecchini

Satellite dish in front of a house in Banaskantha, rural Gujarat, India.

he World DevelopmentReport 2000/01: Attack-ing Poverty identifiesthree priority areas forpoverty reduction:increasing opportunity,enhancing empower-ment, and improving

security. Opportunity makes mar-kets work for the poor and expands

poor people’s assets. Empower-ment makes state institutions workbetter for poor people and removessocial barriers. Security helps poorpeople manage risk [30]. In light ofcurrent experiences in rural Indiaand elsewhere in the developingworld, it is apparent that informa-tion and communications technolo-gy (ICT) — defined as the set of

activities that facilitates the captur-ing, storage, processing, transmis-sion, and display of information byelectronic means [31]— can be uti-lized to support poverty reduction

Simone Cecchini is withECLAC, United Nations, Casilla179-D, Santiago, Chile; email:scecchini@eclac.cl.

T20 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 20030278-0079/03/$17.00©2003IEEE

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003 21

strategies. The use of ICT applica-tions can enhance poor people’sopportunities by improving theiraccess to markets, health, and edu-cation. Furthermore, ICT canempower the poor by expandingthe use of government services,and reduce risks by wideningaccess to microfinance.

ICT PROJECTS FORPOVERTY REDUCTION INRURAL INDIA

Although most of the rural poorin India are isolated from the infor-mation revolution, there are severalexamples in rural India where ICT isused to contribute to poverty reduc-tion in the areas of opportunity,empowerment, and security. The fol-lowing case descriptions highlightICT applications that are attemptingto realize the potential of ICT.

OPPORTUNITY

Supporting Pro-Poor MarketDevelopment: Computerized MilkCollection Centers

Small farmers and artisans liv-ing in rural areas typically lackaccess to information about prices,data on crops, weather conditions,credit facilities, and market oppor-tunities. ICT can remedy suchinformation asymmetries and stim-ulate poor people’s entrepreneur-ship by better connecting them tomarkets [29].

In Gujarat, computerized milkcollection centers with integratedelectronic weights, electronic fattesting machines, and plastic cardreaders are ensuring fair prices forfarmers who sell milk to dairycooperatives. Traditionally, the fatcontent in milk was calculatedthrough a cumbersome measure-ment process hours after the milkwas received. Although farmersdelivered milk on a daily basis,they were only paid every ten daysand had to trust the cooperativesociety staff’s manual calculationsof the quality and quantity of milk.Malfeasance and under-payment to

farmers, although difficult to sub-stantiate, were commonly alleged.Computerized milk collection cen-ters have increased transparency,and led to faster processing, short-er queues, and immediate paymentto farmers. Furthermore, the DairyInformation System Kiosk (DISK)software provides relevant informa-tion to farmers through a data-base that contains completehistories of all milch cattleowned by members of thecooperative and a dairy portalconnected to the Internet. The50 000 dairy farmers whoobtain services through thecomputerized system benefitfrom a more transparent andefficient cooperative system[7], [9], [10].

Improving Access to BasicServices: India HealthcareDelivery Project

ICT can improve healthcare delivery to the poor.Telemedicine can diminish thecost and hardship of long dis-tance travel for medical atten-tion and diagnosis, and email andmedical list-serves can deliver atminimal cost recent medical find-ings to health workers lackingresearch and technological facili-ties. Furthermore, ICT can simpli-fy medical data collection, recordmanagement, and paper filing [13].

Handheld computers, or Person-al Digital Assistants (PDAs), areallowing auxiliary nurse midwives(ANMs) participating in the IndiaHealthcare Delivery project toreduce redundant paperwork anddata entry, freeing up time forhealthcare delivery to the poor.ANMs shoulder most of theresponsibility for healthcare deliv-ery in vast and densely populatedrural areas. Their duty is to admin-ister immunization, offer advice onfamily planning, educate people onmother-child health programs, andcollect data on the rural popula-tion’s growth, birth, and immuniza-tion rates. Each ANM serves 5000

people, typically residing in differ-ent villages and hamlets, oftenlocated several kilometers apart.ANMs usually spend between 15and 20 days per month on data col-lection and registration. PDAs areused to facilitate data collection andtransmission, potentially saving upto 40 percent of ANMs’ work time.

Redundant data entry prevalent inpaper registers is eliminated andreports are generated automatically.These gains in efficiency can multi-ply the impact and reach of limitedresources, thus expanding access tobasic services [9], [10], [18].

EMPOWERMENT

Improving Access to GovernmentServices: Gyandoot

ICT can be used by governmentagencies to transform relationswith citizens and businesses. InIndia, as in much of the developingworld, it is not uncommon for rur-al villagers to travel long distancesto government district headquartersin order to submit applications,meet officials, obtain copies ofpublic records, or seek informationregarding prevailing prices in com-modity markets. This involves theloss of a day’s income as well asthe cost of transportation. Once at

Woman operating a computer in a milk collection centerin a dairy cooperative of the Self Employed Women Asso-ciation (SEWA) in Banaskantha, rural Gujarat, India.

22 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003

the government office, the relevantofficial, record, or informationcould be unavailable, forcingrepeated visits and additionalexpenses. In effect, governmentofficials working with paperrecords enjoy a monopoly overinformation and records. Villagersmay also face discomfort, harass-ment, and corruption on the part ofpublic officials, or are often givenincorrect information about gov-ernment programs or market prices[25]. In fact, compared to middleor upper classes, the poor end uppaying a disproportionate share oftheir income on bribes.

With ICT, it is possible to locateservice centers that provide docu-ments, land records, and other publicservices closer to citizens. Such cen-ters may consist of an unattendedkiosk in a government agency, or aservice kiosk located close to theclient. Potential benefits includeincreased transparency, less corrup-tion, better delivery of governmentservices, and greater governmentresponsiveness [32]. Information dis-

closure and the possibility of interact-ing with public officials also buildspressure for government accountabil-ity. The poor become empoweredbecause they feel they are getting aservice rather than a favor.

Since January 2000, Gyandoot— a government-owned computernetwork — has been trying to makegovernment more accessible to vil-lagers in the poor and drought-proneDhar district of Madhya Pradesh.Gyandoot attempts to reduce thetime and money people spend tryingto communicate with public officialsand to provide immediate, transpar-ent access to local government dataand documentation. For minimalfees, Intranet kiosks provide caste,income, and domicile certificates,avoiding for villagers the commonpractice of paying bribes. The kiosksalso allow farmers to track cropprices in the region’s wholesale mar-kets, enabling them to negotiate bet-ter terms. Other services includeinformation on school results and onthe names of people included in thebelow-poverty-line list, and a publiccomplaint line for reporting brokenirrigation pumps, unfair prices,absentee teachers, and other prob-lems. Kiosks are run by local opera-tors along commercial lines and areplaced in villages located on majorroads or holding weekly markets, sothat each of them can serve another25 to 30 villages [8], [11].

SECURITY

Improving Access to Microfi-nance: Smart Cards

Microfinance — the provision offinancial services to low-incomeclients — is an important tool forpoor people to reduce, mitigate, andcope with risk. Computerization,smart cards, and software systemsproviding loan tracking, financialprojections, and branch manage-ment information can reduce costsand help microfinance institutionsreach clients more efficiently.

Smart cards with an embeddedmicrochip containing information on

clients’ credit histories are helpingSKS, a microfinance institutionoperating in the Medak district ofAndhra Pradesh, to reduce transac-tion costs. One of the main problemsfaced by SKS, which follows thepeer-lending model developed by theGrameen Bank, is the high cost ofservice delivery to the poor. All cashtransactions take place at villagegroup meetings and each transactiontakes about 90 seconds per person.Much time is spent not only onpaperwork but also discussing termsand conditions and counting coins.Office computerization alone wouldnot bring much time savings becausestaff would have more free time dur-ing the day, but not in the morningsand evenings when people in villagesare available for meetings. Smartcards have been identified as a solu-tion to the high cost of delivery,because they can lead to gains in effi-ciency, elimination of paperwork,and reductions in errors, fraud, andmeeting time. Potential savings toSKS’s operations are estimated to bearound 18 percent. Once all of SKSoperations are conducted with hand-held computers, a read-only devicewill be left in each village for clientsto check the information stored onthe Smart Cards. Microfinance pro-jects like SKS enable poor peopleand their microbusinesses to gainbroader access to financial services[3], [4], [10].

REALIZING ICT POTENTIALNOT AN AUTOMATICPROCESS

Realizing the poverty-reducingpotential of ICT is not guaranteed.It requires attentive public policyformulation and careful projectdesign. Insufficient informationand communication infrastructure,high access costs, and illiteracyhave bestowed the benefits of ICTon the better off, urban segmentsof the population to the detrimentof the poor and rural areas. Gener-al theory and observation of theIndian experience illustrate thesedynamics.

Operator at an information kiosk of the IndiaAgriline project in Nellikuppam, rural Tamil-nadu, India.

DIFFUSION OF ICTAn economic model developed

by C. Scott [24], building on earli-er work by K. Griffin [15], showswhy the poor and the rich use dif-ferent communications techniquesand how the nature of technicalchange has until now been biasedtowards the rich, widening the dig-ital divide. Since the value of timeis low for the poor — due to under-employment — and the cost of ICTcapital is high, when ICT consistsof oral and written communicationon the one hand and fixed line tele-phony on the other, the poor tend tocommunicate orally. The rich, whoface opposite constraints, choose tocommunicate via fixed line tele-phony, which is relatively capital-intensive. When mobile telephonyand the Internet become available,both of which require more capitalper unit of information communi-cated than any of the existing tech-niques, the rich switch from com-municating by fixed telephony tousing the Internet, while the poorcontinue to communicate orally.Therefore, the model has twoimplications for a pro-poor ICTpolicy. First, the relative price ofcapital for communications pur-poses needs to be reduced for thepoor. Extending the electricity gridto low-income areas, selectivelyand temporarily subsidizing poorusers, and improving access totraining are essential. Second, thefocus of research and developmentin ICT has to favor poor-user-friendly hardware and software.

ACCESS TO ICT IN RURAL INDIA

In India, even where telephonelines have reached rural areasthrough the introduction of PublicCall Offices (PCOs), the poor havevery limited access to ICT. Asrevealed by a recent survey con-ducted in five villages in UttarPradesh, West Bengal, and AndhraPradesh [24], only radios are ownedby a majority of poor households.Televisions, telephones, and news-

papers are available to the majorityof households on a shared basis.Very few families have sharedaccess to a computer or Internetconnection, and some householdshave never viewed television, read anewspaper, or used a telephone (seeTable I). Surveys also suggest thatthe poor rely on information frominformal networks of trusted fami-ly, friends, and local leaders, butthese networks do not adequatelysatisfy their information needs [24].This indicates that ICT could play apivotal role in improving access toinformation by the poor. However,it remains very difficult for peoplewith low levels of education to reapthe full benefits of new technolo-gies, including wide access toknowledge and information.

ACHIEVING LOW-COSTCONNECTIVITY: ANECESSARY CONDITIONFOR PRO-POOR ICT

While many factors contributeto the success of ICT projects inrural areas of developing countries,low-cost access to informationinfrastructure is the basic neces-sary, but insufficient, condition toreach the poor. Inadequate orabsent connectivity and unstablepower supply clearly reduce theeconomic viability of ICT projects[22]. Gyandoot, for instance, facesproblems with dial-up connectionsbecause most of the local rural tele-phone exchanges do not operatewith optical fiber cable [8].

Given that it is not realistic to

provide telephone lines or comput-ers to all households in developingcountries, government and regula-tors should be concerned with policyinstruments for achieving “universalaccess.” The latter is generallydefined as the presence of a publictelecom booth in every village, orwithin reasonable distance [19],[21]. India is striving to achieve uni-versal access through its nationaltelecom policies focused on the pro-vision of telecom facilities to everyvillage at “affordable and reasonableprices” but almost 40 percent of rur-al communities still lack sharedaccess to a telephone [27].

FOSTERING COMPETITIONFostering competition in the tele-

com sector can significantly reducecommunication costs, and thusimprove physical access to ICT bythe poor. In countries that reformedtheir telecom sector through privati-zation, liberalization, or by a combi-nation of both, teledensity — thenumber of telephone mainlines per1000 people — grew at a muchhigher rate between 1996 and 2000than in countries where reform hadnot taken place [5]. Privatizationalone, however, does not necessari-ly foster competition; in manydeveloping countries privatemonopolies have replaced statemonopolies [28]. In fact, state con-trol of the telecom sector could stillbe a viable option if a governmenthad resources to divert towardsinfrastructure build-out. Countriesfollowing this path would be repro-

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003 23

TABLE IACCESS TO SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS

FOR THE RURAL POOR IN INDIA

Source Personal Shared/ Not ownership (%) communal (%) available (%)

Radio 77.3 22.7 —

Newspapers 11.3 80.0 8.7

Television 9.3 84.0 6.7

Telephone — 63.3 36.7

Fax — 0.7 99.3

Computer/ — 12.0 88.0 Internet

SOURCE: [24]

24 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003

ducing the route taken by developedcountries, which historically haddirect public control of the telecomsector. There, the state-ownedprovider had to meet teledensity oraffordability targets set by its gov-ernment, leading to significant pen-etration and network quality [5].

In India, teledensity has signifi-cantly improved between 1997 and2000 (see Table II). This mainlyhas been the result of market-ori-ented reforms in the telecom sec-tor. Prior to 1992, the Departmentof Telecommunications was thesole provider of telecom services,and the rigid regulatory frameworkwas a big obstacle to the develop-ment of telecom infrastructure. In1992, the mobile market was priva-tized. In 1994, the fixed servicesmarket followed and finally, in1999, national long distance opera-tions were opened to private com-petition [14]. However, only largecorporations were effectivelyallowed to take part in the privati-zation process. Privatization per-mitted prospective telecom opera-tors to bid for the right to operate ina whole state. Given the size ofstates in India, bids of over US$1billion were common [20].

ROLE FOR SMALLENTREPRENEURS

Large telecom operators tend tolimit their operations to higher-income urban areas because of thelower revenue potential of poor rur-al areas and the higher cost of ser-vicing them. Small entrepreneurs,on the other hand, see the opportuni-ty to make a profit even in a lowerrevenue environment, and thus havethe proper incentive to enter ruralmarkets. A good example of this iscable TV in India. Typically, microentrepreneurs install dish antennasfor cable TV and provide service tosubscribers within a 700-meterradius. Operators sell the connectionand visit homes to collect charges —between US$1.50 and US$4 permonth. Customers know the opera-tor personally, and the service oper-

ator is available to rectify problemsanytime of the week. For these rea-sons, cable services in India are con-sidered superior to telephone ser-vices, although cable technology issignificantly more complicated thantelephone technology. Consequent-ly, it can be argued that privatizationshould be opened up to allow smallentrepreneurs — or Local ServiceProviders — to supply telecom ser-vices in rural areas [20].

REGULATORY MECHANISMSHowever, the market by itself

might not be able to provide a suf-ficient level of connectivity to thepoorest and most isolated ruralareas. The key to achieving connec-tivity for these areas is to determinehow far market forces will carry therollout of voice and data networks.The gaps left by the private sectorcan then be remedied by publicintervention. Regulatory mecha-nisms that can help extend access toinformation infrastructure includegeographic coverage requirementsand universal access funds.

One alternative is to invite privateoperators to bid for services in areasthat are not commercially viable inreturn for a subsidy financed from auniversal access fund. A concessioncontract is then awarded to the com-pany requesting the smallest sub-

sidy. In Chile, for example, thismechanism has been used to lever-age US$40 million in private invest-ment on the basis of just over US$2million of public subsidy. As a result1000 public telephones have beeninstalled in rural towns, at around 10percent of the costs of direct publicprovision. Subsidies of this kindcould also be used to support thedevelopment of Internet-enabledcommunity centers, content relevantto low-income groups and to peoplethat speak languages not well repre-sented on the web, and communitypostal and radio facilities [31].

PROJECT DESIGN LESSONSEven if information infrastruc-

ture reaches rural areas, there is noguarantee that the poor will accessICT applications. Many of the pro-jects that attempt to provide accessto the Internet in rural India, forinstance, end up favoring middleand upper-class men [11], [12].Rural women tend to be excludedbecause of their restricted mobility,lack of education, and, in somecases, male control over informa-tion and media [3]. How can weensure that ICT projects reach poorwomen and men?

Grassroots IntermediariesIn rural India direct ownership

TABLE IITRENDS IN TELEDENSITY ACROSS STATES IN INDIA, 1997-2000

Telephone Mainlines per 1000 people

State 1997 2000 Change 1997-2000

Punjab 33.4 61.8 +85% Maharashtra 33.8 52.8 +56% Kerala 26.7 46.8 +75% Tamil Nadu 21.4 37.2 +74% Gujarat 24.4 36.4 +49% Haryana 20.0 33.1 +66% Karnataka 19.8 32.6 +65% Rajasthan 13.2 25.7 +95% Andhra Pradesh 13.5 22.0 +63% Madhya Pradesh 10.6 18.2 +72% West Bengal 9.6 13.9 +45% Uttar Pradesh 6.8 12.5 +84% Orissa 5.9 9.6 +63% Bihar 3.6 5.9 +64%

SO

UR

CE

: [2

3]

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003 25

and use of ICT — for instancethrough a PC with Internet access— applies only to a very minimalfraction of the population. Althoughthe availability of content in locallanguages and the use of graphicand voice interfaces can make ICTapplications more accessible to poorpeople, illiteracy, low levels of edu-cation, gender, class, and casteinequalities are all powerful obsta-cles to the use of PCs and other ICTtools. In most cases, poor peoplehave to rely on a human intermedi-ary between them and ICT, in whatis termed a “reintermediation mod-el” [17]. The profile of the interme-diaries who add human skills andknowledge to the presence of ICT isthus critical for projects that want toreach the poor [16].

Successful examples of ICT pro-jects for poverty reduction are con-ducted by intermediaries that havethe appropriate incentives andproven track record working withpoor people. In Andhra Pradesh,ANMs have been working with poorvillagers on a daily basis for years.SKS, the microfinance institution,adheres to a philosophy of reachingout to the poorest women in ruralareas. In Gujarat, dairy cooperativeshave been the best agent to targetsmall farmers. If these intermedi-aries are grassroots-based, under-stand the potential of ICT for socialchange, and can be held accountableto the communities they serve, theycan be tremendously effective inpromoting local ownership of ICTprojects. In rural India, many infor-mation kiosk operators are young,educated, computer-savvy, andvery attached to their communities.They are also extremely entrepre-neurial. In the case of Gyandoot,successful kiosk operators –besides offering e-government ser-vices – often create and managedatabases and work on data entryfor private clients, offer PC train-ing, and provide voice, fax, copy,Internet, and many other services.

Given the right incentives andopportunities, these intermediaries

are keen to make access to infor-mation easily available for every-body and are willing to train othersin the villages [10]-[12].

Community InvolvementApplications developed by or

with the collaboration of local staffare more likely to be appropriatefor local conditions when there iscontinuous involvement and feed-back from the community. Localownership fosters the success andresilience of ICT projects. Outsidecontrol and top-down approaches,on the other hand, often wasteresources in the initial periods ofprojects endangering their futuresustainability.

In the case of e-governance pro-jects, the local administrative andpolitical machinery needs to beinvolved in the implementation ofthe project, or otherwise the chanceof failure is almost certain. Informa-tion technology officers working onthe Computer Aided RegistrationDepartment (CARD) e-governanceproject in Andhra Pradesh have alsolearned that it is important to devel-op constituencies outside the politi-cal and administrative system, i.e.,with citizens themselves. By involv-ing citizens, the administration can,among other things, ensure that themove to introduce computerizationdoes not get wed to the political for-tunes of the party in power [2].

In Rajasthan, the state-sponsoredRajNidhi e-governance programhas failed to deliver, despite the factthat the software is easy to use andin Hindi, because of extremely cen-tralized planning that did not takelocal conditions into consideration.Content, in fact, lacks regular updat-ing because of communicationsproblems between the state and thelocal government [26].

Information Needs, Locally-Con-textualized Information, and Pro-Poor Services

Local, governmental, non-gov-ernmental, and international organi-zations planning ICT projects in the

field should thoroughly assess theinformation needs of a communitybefore launching these initiatives.Rapid, participatory rural appraisalsand other survey instruments havebeen used for several years toensure community ownership ofdevelopment programs. These toolsshould be used to ensure that ICTapplications respond to the priori-ties of the community.

Content provided through ICTshould not be limited to the knowl-edge that can be accessed from out-side sources, but rather extended toensure that the poor have the meansto speak for themselves. The poorknow a great deal: they know theirneeds, circumstances, worries, andaspirations better than anybody. Insum, the poor may demand access tolocally-contextualized information,more than access to existing infor-mation from an alien context [16].The Honey Bee Network, with itsdatabase of solutions to local devel-opment problems, is a good exampleof the creation of relevant contentfor the lives of poor people. Innova-tive solutions presented in the data-base include a tilting bullock cart, asimple device to fill nursery bags, animproved pulley for drawing water,and a gum scrapper to enablewomen to collect gum from thornybushes or trees. The database alsofeatures a large number of smallmachineries, herbal pesticides, vet-erinary medicines, new plant vari-eties, and agronomic practicesdeveloped by small farmers. Manyof these innovations are extremelysimple but can significantly improvethe efficiency of farm workers, smallfarmers, and artisans [13].

It is also advisable that ICT pro-jects focus on a limited number ofwell-run pro-poor services, andexpand them incrementally, ratherthan offer a great number of ser-vices that end up lying unutilizedbecause of lack of demand. Gyan-doot, for instance, offers abouttwenty services. However, only ahandful of them are heavily request-ed, and of those in demand only a

few – like grievances, applicationsfor income, domicile and caste cer-tificates, or information on the belowpoverty line list– can directly benefitthe poor [11]. Among the core ser-vices that telekiosks can offer toattract clients and generate revenue,voice and text communication ser-vices are definitely among the bestcandidates. Information systems thatconnect people to each other despitebarriers of time, distance, literacy,and ownership of a telephone or PCare in fact in high demand amongpoor rural communities [6].

Awareness Raising and Training Raising awareness among the

poor about the potential of ICT isanother important aspect of suc-cessful ICT projects. In the Dhardistrict of Madhya Pradesh, poorpeople are generally not aware ofthe services offered by Gyandoot.Although some efforts have beenundertaken to raise awareness – bydesigning posters with pictorialdepictions of the services offered atthe kiosks and by displaying promi-nent Gyandoot signs outside thekiosks – more could be done [11].Word of mouth is often a very pow-erful tool for publicity. The leadersof poor communities, as well asschool children, could be brought tothe kiosks for a demonstrationshowing what ICT can do for them.Furthermore, the provision of con-

tent that is not directly related todevelopment goals, such as news,matrimonials, and entertainmentinformation could also be a win-ning strategy to raise awarenessabout kiosks. A recent survey fromrural India found that entertainmentprograms, together with news, arethe types of information most fre-quently accessed by the rural poor(see Table III) [24].

Training poor women and menin information technology skills isalso important. Failure to get thepoor involved in the use of technol-

ogy can lead to further mar-ginalization. Participatorycommunications approachesrequire innovative and inter-active training processes,since learning is more effec-tive through practice [3]. TheSelf Employed Women Asso-ciation (SEWA), for instance,has successfully trained poorwomen in the use of videocameras and audiovisualequipment. A team of 8 full-time and 20 part-time mem-bers is now producing video-tapes as a tool for learning,education, development, andpolicy action.

Financial Sustainability,Monitoring, and Evaluation

Finally, a major challenge forICT projects is reaching financialsustainability. Connectivity can beparticularly expensive, be itthrough wireless or fixed lines. Inurban areas of India, each fixed-line telephone connection costsmore than US$650. A phone boothoperator needs to earn at leastUS$190 per year to break even.Telephones in rural areas are evendearer — a line can cost US$1500-1700. To break even, the annualrevenue per line would have to bearound US$425 [26]. Since mostICT projects are recent and notexpected to reach self-sustainabili-ty for three or four years, experi-ence on sustainability is limited.Gyandoot, which started operating

in 2000, has seen few kiosks reachcommercial viability.

How will we know whether thebenefits derived from existing ICTprojects outweigh the costs? Inorder to answer this and other ques-tions, rigorous monitoring andevaluation (M&E) of the social andeconomic benefits of ICT projectsin rural areas are needed. M&Emeasure performance, identify andcorrect potential problems early on,and improve the understanding ofthe relationship between differentpoverty outcomes and ICT policies[21]. M&E are especially needed tomeasure the success of many pilotscurrently under way. In fact, in thecase of pilots, successful outcomesmight be implicitly biased due tothe choice of favorable places andconditions. Projects might not yieldthe same results in more challeng-ing and realistic situations.

REALIZING ICT POTENTIALFOR POVERTY REDUCTION

Reaching the poor and realizingthe potential of ICT for povertyreduction in the areas of opportuni-ty, empowerment, and security is adifficult endeavor. Nevertheless,ICT projects implemented bygrassroots-based organizations andindividuals who have the appropri-ate incentives to work with margin-alized groups can achieve encour-aging results. Successful ICTprojects are characterized by localownership and the participation ofthe community.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTI am grateful to Deepa Narayan

and Giovanna Prennushi for theopportunity to conduct research onICT for poverty reduction in India,and to the World Bank’s ExternalDevelopment Assignment Program(EDAP) for funding. I also want tothank all of those who spent timemeeting with me and showing meprojects in the field, includingAlbert M. Lobo, ADP Madhavan,Ujval Parghi, Dhara Patel, NaveenPrakash, Roy Sastry, and Rajesh

26 IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003

Information and communicationstechnologies can enhance poorpeople’s opportunities byimproving their access tomarkets, health, and education.

Sivanesan. A special thanks goes toDhawal Bathia, Ciny Mathew,Kalpesh Mehta, Monica Raina, andShilpa Ramadesikan. Preciouscomments were received by Sub-hash Bhatnagar, Shirin Madon,Giovanna Prennushi, Chris Scott,Robert Schware, and an anony-mous reviewer. The viewsexpressed in this document arethose of the author and do not nec-essarily reflect the views of theUnited Nations.

REFERENCES[1] V. B. Akula, Putting Technology to Workfor Poverty Alleviation: A Draft Proposal for$151,030 to Develop Smart Cards for Micro-finance. Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh:Swayam Krishi Sangam, 2000.[2] S. Balakrishnan and R. Ramnathan, Stateof the Art as Art of the State: Evaluating E-Governance Initiatives through Citizen Feed-back, Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore, 2000.[3] S. Balit, Voices for Change: Rural Womenand Communication. Rome, Italy: FAO, 1999;www.fao.org/docrep/X2550E/X2550E00.htm[4] Baramati Initiatives, SKS-Smart Cards:Case Study. 2001; www.baramatiinitiatives.com/cases/case10.htm[5] S. Beardsley, I. Beyer von Morgenstern, L.Enriquez and C. Kipping, “Telecommunica-tions sector reform – A prerequisite for net-worked readiness,” in The Global InformationTechnology Report 2001-2002: Readiness forthe Networked World. Oxford, U.K.: OxfordUniv. Press, 2002; www.cid.harvard.edu/cr/pdf/gitrr2002_ch11.pdf[6] M. L. Best and C. M. Maclay, “Ccmmuni-ty internet access in rural areas: Solving theeconomic sustainability puzzle,” in The Glob-al Information Technology Report 2001-2002:Readiness for the Networked World. Oxford,U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002; www.cid.harvard.edu/cr/pdf/gitrr2002_ch08.pdf[7] S. Bhatnagar, Empowering Dairy Farmersthrough a Dairy Information & Services Kiosk.Washington D.C.: World Bank, 2000; www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov/diskcs.htm[8] S. Bhatnagar and N. Vyas, Gyandoot:Community-Owned Rural Internet Kiosks.

Washington D.C.: World Bank, 2001;www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov/gyandootcs.htm[9] S. Bhatnagar Subhash and R. Schware,Eds., Information and CommunicationTechnology in Rural Development. CaseStudies from India. Washington D.C.: WorldBank Institute Working Papers, 2000; www.worldbank.org/wbi/pubs_case37160.html[10] S. Cecchini, Back to Office Report: Infor-mation and Communications Technology forPoverty Reduction in Rural India. WashingtonD.C: World Bank, Mimeo, 2001.[11] S. Cecchini, Back to Office Report: Eval-uation of Gyandoot and Bhoomi and Interna-tional Conferences on ICT for Development.Washington D.C.: World Bank, Mimeo, 2002.[12] S. Cecchini and M. Raina, “Warana: Thecase of an Indian rural community adoptinginformation and communications technology,”Information Technology in Developing Coun-tries, vol. 12, no. 1, Apr. 2002; www.iimahd.ernet.in/egov/ifip/apr2002/apr2002.htm [13] S. Cecchini and T. Shah, “Informationand communications technology as a tool forempowerment,” in Empowerment and Pover-ty Reduction: A Sourcebook. WashingtonD.C.: World Bank, 2002; www.worldbank.org/poverty/empowerment/sourcebook/[14] Digital Opportunity Initiative, Creating aDevelopment Dynamic: Final Report of theDigital Opportunity Initiative. 2001; www.opt-init.org/framework.html[15] K. Griffin, The Political Economy ofAgrarian Change, 2nd ed. London, U.K.:Macmillan, 1979.[16] R. Heeks, Information and Communica-tion Technologies, Poverty and Development.Development Informatics Working PaperSeries, pap. no. 5, 1999; idpm.man.ac.uk/idpm/di_wp5.htm[17] R. Heeks, Understanding e-Governancefor Development. i-Government WorkingPaper Series, pap. no. 11, 2001; idpm.man.ac.uk/idpm/igov11abs.htm[18] InfoDev, InfoDev Quart. Rep. The WorldBank: Washington D.C, various years; www.infodev.org/projects/quarterly.htm[19] J. James, “Pro-poor modes of technicalintegration into the global economy,” Develop-ment and Change, vol. 31, pp. 765-783, 2000.[20] A. Jhunjhunwala, “Unleashing telecomand internet in India,” presented at India Tele-com Conf, Stanford Univ., Stanford, CA, Nov.2000; www.tenet.res.in/Papers/unleash.html[21] C. Kenny, J. Navas-Sabater, and C.

Quiang, “Information and communicationtechnologies and poverty,” in Poverty Reduc-tion Strategies Sourcebook. Washington D.C.:World Bank, 2001; www.worldbank.org/poverty/strategies/ict/ict.htm[22] G. Kirkman, “It’s more than just beingconnected: A discussion of some issues ofinformation technology and internationaldevelopment,” presented at Development E-Commerce Workshop, M.I.T., Cambridge,MA, Aug. 16-17, 1999, working pap.; www.cid.harvard.edu/ciditg/resources/beingconnected.pdf[23] S. Nanthikesan, Trends in Digital Divide.Harvard Center for Population and Develop-ment Studies, Nov. 2000; www.undp.org/hdro/backgroundpapers/nanthikesan.doc[24] M. Pigato, Information and Communica-tion Technology, Poverty and Development insub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Washing-ton D.C.: World Bank, 2001; www.worldbank.org/afr/wps/[25] A. Sharma and W. Yurcik, “The emer-gence of rural digital libraries in India: TheGyandoot Digital Library Intranet,” in Proc.ASIS Annual Conf. (ASIS 2000). Chicago: IL,2000; www.sosresearch.org/publications/asis2000.PDF[26] K.P. Syngh Yadav, “Virtually there,”Down to Earth Mag., vol. 9, no. 18, Feb. 2001;www.cseindia.org/html/dte/dte20010215/dte_analy.htm[27] Telecom Regulatory Authority of India,Recommendations of the TRAI on “UniversalService Obligation,” 2001; www.trai.gov.in/USOREC.htm[28] UNDP, Human Development Report2001: Making New Technologies Work forHuman Development. New York, NY: OxfordUniv. Press, 2001; www.undp.org/hdr2001 [29] World Bank, World Development Report1998/99. Knowledge for Development.Washington D.C.: World Bank, 1999; www.worldbank.org/wdr/wdr98/index.htm[30] World Bank, World Development Report2000/01: Attacking Poverty. WashingtonD.C.: World Bank, 2001; www.worldbank.org/poverty/wdrpoverty/[31] World Bank, Information and Communi-cation Technologies: A World Bank GroupStrategy. Washington D.C.: World Bank,2002; info.worldbank.org/ict/ICT_ssp.html[32] World Bank, “A definition of e-govern-ment,” in E-Government Website. WashingtonD.C.: World Bank, 2002; www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov/definition.htm

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Summer 2003 27

TABLE IIIFREQUENCY OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION BY THE RURAL POOR IN INDIA

Information accessed Very often (%) Quite often (%) Seldom (%) Never (%)

News/ Politics 57.3 28.7 10.7 3.3

Entertainment 51.4 32.7 12.7 3.3

Health/ Education 41.3 46.7 10.7 1.3

Training Programs 17.3 42.0 28.7 12.0

Agriculture/ Markets 13.3 46.0 26.0 14.7

Welfare Programs 11.3 31.3 41.3 16.0

Employment Opportunities 10.7 25.3 38.0 26.0

SO

UR

CE

: [24

]