Mobile Phones in Developing Countries- Is Building Social Capital Enough?
Several of the readings in the Emerging Markets for Digital Media course this term question the value of mobile phone use among the poor in developing countries. Richard Heeks blogged last year about research suggesting mobiles are doing more harm than good. Kurt DeMaagd did a study (link unavailable) sought to demonstrate the rapid adoption of mobile devices has not resulted in a corresponding increase in productivity around the globe. And Kathleen Diga’s study “reveals” some Ugandans are choosing to pay for airtime instead of food items.
Why must the use of mobile phones among many of the most poor and isolated demonstrate some sort of measurable advancement in order to be justified? I doubt people here in the U.S. would question why a welfare mom owns a cell phone. And I’ve never hear anyone wonder why a senior citizen on a fixed income would choose to pay for phone service. So why the attitude towards those in developing countries?
I believe there are two reasons for this misguided criticism. First, mobile phones’ roots are in the Information Communications Technologies (ICT) sector and therefore promise and/or set expectations of greater productivity. Second, we take communications for granted. With well developed postal and landline infrastructures few westerners find it difficult to communicate from afar. Getting a message to a family member in a timely manner is a given.
With almost three-quarters of the bottom billion living and working in rural locations, the ability to communicate across even relatively short distances can be difficult. Many African countries are characterized by poor postal infrastructure. And the lack of landlines is well known. With this in mind, it’s surprising that we cannot just appreciate the value of human connection that mobile phones make possible.
The report written by Katrin Verclas and Sheila Kinkade co-sponsored by the United Nations Foundation and Vodafone Group Foundation highlights several case studies that speak to the benefit of mobile phones on a pure human level. The World Food Program (WFP) initiated a mobile-phone based system to notify Iraqi refugees in Syria about the availability of food aid. The WFP alerts are sent to eligible families about food rations and directs them to a pick-up location. Haitham El Noush, program officer at the WFP Damascus: “We are finding the program to be very effective. You give good news to people on their mobiles. People reported that they felt happy when they received the text messages from us, and told us they felt that someone cares about them.”
In another scenario mobile phones proved instrumental in helping manage the crisis after the December 2007 presidential election in Kenya. A text messaging “nerve center” was particularly useful after the government ban on live broadcasting of incidences of violence. Reading text messages such as “Over 400 people with no food or water holed in Huruma PCEA church in Eldoret for three days. Help needed immediately” and “I humbly ask for security in the church we are in now, Elgon view, Eldoret as we have heard of the killing in Kiambas church” makes me question why there is any suggestion that mobile phone use in developing countries must somehow be justified by proving higher productivity or financial wherewithal.
Of course it’s important to recognize the significant role mobile phones play in fostering economic growth and opportunity among the world’s poorest. Not surprising, in many countries they have come to symbolize economic status. But it would be wrong to think of their value only in terms of economics.
(3 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5)
Loading ...
Subscribe to Comments
Follow us on Twitter
Get email updates
5 Comments, Comment or Ping
Richard Heeks
There is neither “attitude” nor “misguided criticism” in the research you report at the start. It’s just research reporting findings.
Instead, there is both attitude and misguided criticism in your own blog entry, revealed in the language bias you use. The research you don’t wish to agree with, you report as “sought to demonstrate” as if it had a pre-determined purpose, while you state Kathleen’s work ” ‘reveals’ ” – in inverted commas – indicating a scepticism or lack of belief.
Meanwhile, the research that supports your viewpoint is reported neutrally or as having “proved”.
You also seem incapable of even reading someone else’s blog entry through to the end.
Research informs open minds, and helps them form a view; a view that can change dynamically as new research emerges. Those with a pre-determined view and a closed mind should save their time: if you already know the answer, don’t bother reading any research since you will be unable to process it without bias.
Dec 13th, 2009
pam
Hi Richard- I appreciate your response, but I believe your comments are unduly harsh. Please know that my intent was neither to criticize you nor the research/researchers you mention in your blog. I have followed your blog since I was first made aware of it during my coursework and I have great admiration for Kathleen Diga’s works. AND I completely agree with your concluding points. My humble view is that westerners can be quick to judge what is right/wrong for citizens of resource poor countries. Research indicating families are skimping on food costs in order to pay for airtime can lead to westerners to question the value of mobiles in those circumstances and judge those involved. Yet, we think nothing of welfare mothers or senior citizens on fixed incomes in our own countries spending money on communications. This was the key point of my blog- not whether or not you/other researchers were right/wrong.
Dec 18th, 2009
JamesDX
Anyone know how to do things like this?
Feb 14th, 2010
Kathleen Diga
I definitely agree that people (Western or others) are quick to judge on the circumstances of developing countries which is why at the end of my thesis, I ask whether it was time to approach the development / human rights paradigm (ie. international institutions deciding which rights are most important and thus provide interventions accordingly without a participatory approach) in another light.
Nevertheless, one should also be aware of the difference in expenditure of communication costs of the most poor in Africa who are likely to spend nearly 10-30% of their expenses on mobile costs / repair. While not to downplay the difficulties of those on welfare, elderly, the disabled, etc., in the States, the situation is most dire for the poor in areas like rural Uganda. It is due to African infrastructure policy and cost (see researchICTAfrica.net). I hardly see an elderly person with an expenditure budget of say 1000$ a month spending 100$-300$ of it on their mobile phone. The average spending internationally is only 2-3%. While social capital has its own difficulties in measurement indicators in development, such micro-economics does display some concrete, measurable results of dramatic changes in the livelihoods of the poor.
Feb 16th, 2010
convert to 3gp
Most mobile phone devices or cellphones already have cams to capture video at the same time take photos. But wait , how can you watch a video or mini-movie that was recorded by way of a phone if you need to view it onto your Windows computer? Two issues regularly come up: Playing 3gp files and 90 degree rotation. It is possible to obtain a media player or video player which lets you view 3gp videos on your computer. Free Windows-compatible players for 3gp files.
Feb 18th, 2011
Reply to “Mobile Phones in Developing Countries- Is Building Social Capital Enough?”