Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (14)
Similar to Theorizing ict4d
Similar to Theorizing ict4d (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Theorizing ict4d
- 1. 1 Richard Heeks richard.heeks@manchester.ac. uk Development Informatics Group Institute for Development Policy and Management School of Environment and Development University of Manchester Manchester, United Kingdom Theorizing ICT4D Research HEEKS Theorizing ICT4D Research The aim of this special issue is to show how theoretical ideas from the so- cial sciences can be applied to researching ICTs and socioeconomic devel- opment. Why should this be needed? Because the explosion of work on ICTs for development (ICT4D) has (unconsciously) followed Marx’s dictum: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world differently; the point is, to change it.” There has been a bias to action, not a bias to knowledge. We are changing the world without interpreting or understanding it. Most of the ICT4D research being produced is therefore descriptive not analytical. It might make some interesting points but it lacks sufªcient rigor to make its ªndings credible and it can often be repetitive of earlier work. It has a close-to-zero shelf life. The pictorial analogy of such work is that of stones being thrown into a pond, each one making a ripple but then sinking without trace. Instead, it would be better if each “stone” was placed on a cairn, building on what has come before and acting as a foundation for future work. Such a contribution is generally possible only where the research draws on some preexisting conceptual framework. Of course, there are existing and ongoing research foundations for ICT4D work, which we can ªnd particularly in various factions of “informatics”: • The I of ICT4D—work drawing from library and information sciences. • The C of ICT4D—work drawing from communication studies. • The T of ICT4D—work drawing from information systems. Very little work to date has drawn from the D of ICT4D—linking concepts in development studies to this research domain. However, the base created from these foundations has some limita- tions. First, much of the research undertaken has based itself on models or on schema of categorization but has not generally provided the solidity of a true theoretical foundation. Second, where work has been based on theory, it mainly emerges in academic journal articles. In such articles, the explanation of the theory used tends to be relatively brief, because the main focus of the article is the case application of the theory rather than the theory itself. Similarly, any reºections within such articles tend to be on the object of study not on the theory. The result is that ICT4D researchers looking for guidance on how to apply theory in their work have only a partial basis for assistance. This problem became the basis for an ongoing project of the University of Manchester’s Development Informatics Group: to develop a set of publications that would draw on a range of theoretical ideas and explain to ICT4D re- searchers what those ideas were and how they could be applied to devel- © 2007 The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Information Technologies and International Development Volume 3, Number 3, Spring 2006, 1–4
- 2. opment informatics research. (We prefer the term “development in- formatics” to “ICT4D” because the former is less technocentric and allows an equal focus on in- formation, knowledge, and infor- mation systems as well as on ICTs. Recognizing the widespread us- age of the latter, though, we will use both terms interchangeably.) All papers developed within the “Theorizing Development In- formatics” project follow a consistent four-part for- mat that we believe will be of particular assistance to those undertaking ICT4D research, ranging from academic and graduate/postgraduate researchers through to consultants, donor staff, and other “reºective practitioners” seeking to add greater rigor, validity, and longevity to their work: • following a brief overview introduction, the paper describes an issue of current interest in development informatics and identiªes a particular focal topic that will be addressed. • a description is provided of a theory that could be helpful in addressing the focal ICT4D issue. This description aims to be as full as possible and to avoid any assumptions of preknowledge or prereading: a “theory 101,” of sorts. • an illustration of how to apply the theory to the issue, usually through analysis of a speciªc ªeld project or country. Brief ªndings are presented. • reºection on what the case application and other literature tells us about using the theory. Alongside highlighting positive values of the theory, this might also identify shortcomings or modiªcations to the theory required to make it more appropriately applicable. Finally, in this section, we aim to provide some broader guidance on other ICT4D issues to which the theory might be applied and summarize its likely research app- licability according to two models, shown in Figure 1. This ªrst identiªes which parts of the informatics lifecycle the theory might best be applied to: research on the initial development/ invention of ICT innovations and/or research on the diffusion and adoption of those innova- tions in developing countries (which would in- clude issues of ICT policy) and/or research on issues related to the use of ICTs and/or research on the impact of ICTs, including their relation to development goals. Second, the ªgure identiªes what level of analysis the theory best applies to: from research at the meta level of a global perspective down to the level of re- search on individuals. This is intended to help researchers with a particular issue in mind iden- tify whether a given theory might be appropri- ate to their needs. Overall, then, we try to provide a “one-stop shop” guide for development informatics researchers con- sidering use of a particular theory: not just an appli- cation of that theory, but also an explanation of it and pointers to the issues that arise in its use for re- search into ICT4D topics. What theories can be used in ICT4D research? We categorized in two ways: ªrst in terms of depth; sec- ond in terms of discipline. Relating to depth, what counts as “theory”? To avoid many hours of unproductive, introspective navel-gazing on that question, we adopted a fairly rough-and-ready continuum of the frameworks of knowledge used in development informatics research: • Theory-based work: this makes clear use of an identiªed theory, either applying or testing that theory and referring to “theory.” An example might be structuration theory. • Framework-based work: this makes use of a framework that explicitly derives itself from a body of theoretical work. For example, a 2 Information Technologies and International Development THEORIZING ICT4D RESEARCH Figure 1. Applying theory in development informatics research.
- 3. framework of different perspectives on ICT reg- ulation, based on ideas from theories in politi- cal science. • Model-based work: this makes use of a model that is presented without reference to any deeper framework of knowledge. An example would be some variant on the four-part “Web stage” model (e.g., information–interaction– transaction–transformation). • Schema-based work: this uses a schema of techniques or a technical architecture for ICT4D, such as a data architecture. • Concept-based work: this uses a particular con- cept, such as “sustainable development.” • Category-based work: this presents a set of categories, or a list of factors, such as success factors in telecenter projects. • Nonframework-based work: this makes no use of any discernible framework of knowledge; it merely provides a set of data and ideas. We decided that only the ªrst two would be admis- sible, recognizing that the distinction between a theory and a framework is probably quite murky but that we were looking for foundations around which a body of conceptual work already existed. What, then, about discipline? We set the whole of social sciences as our boundary and then created a rough map from which our the- ories were likely to be drawn (see Figure 2). This shows not just the range of disciplines that can be drawn on, but also the typical dif- fusion paths that conceptual ideas have taken to date. It in- cludes, in the dashed lines, paths that have generally not yet been taken such as the lack of use of development studies theories within development informatics research. In drawing from the whole pool of indicated disci- plines, we were therefore making a deliberate attempt to move be- yond the information science, communication studies, and in- formation systems concentrations that have dominated ICT4D re- search to date. For this particular special issue, we have selected four papers: • My own paper looks at competitive advantage theory, based on Porter’s work and the well- known “diamond of determinants,” applied to study of the IT sector in developing coun- tries. • Carolyne Stanforth makes use of actor-network theory, drawing particularly from material by Callon and Law, applying it to the trajectories of e-government-for-development projects. • Savita Bailur presents stakeholder theory and the technique of stakeholder analysis, review- ing their application to telecenters. • Richard Duncombe discusses the livelihoods framework, which is widely used in develop- ment circles, and investigates its use for the analysis of microenterprise and poverty reduc- tion. Our selection was based on two main criteria. In terms of depth, we drew concepts that are arguably around the interface of theory and framework: not so deep (as, say, structuration theory) that practical lessons may be hard to ªnd; not so shallow that they are really just models without a deeper under- Volume 3, Number 3, Spring 2006 3 HEEKS Figure 2. Disciplinary foundations for development informatics research theories.
- 4. pinning. Although three are called “theory,” as will be seen in the papers, this label can be questioned. In terms of discipline, we decided to select from four different disciplines to illustrate the range of theoretical ideas than can be applied to develop- ment informatics research. Competitive advantage theory comes from economics (though may be seen as having strayed into business studies); actor- network theory was developed from science/tech- nology studies (though has arguably backtracked to become a sociological theory); stakeholder theory is rooted in organization/management studies; and the livelihoods framework is a tool of development studies. In addition, our selections ensured that at least two theories were applicable to research at each stage of the informatics lifecycle and at each re- search level (see Figure 1). What is presented here should be seen as just a ªrst tranche of outputs. The Theorizing Develop- ment Informatics project is ongoing, and we wel- come general feedback on the aims of the project and speciªc contributions of new papers. ■ 4 Information Technologies and International Development THEORIZING ICT4D RESEARCH