I am studying an
online course called Engaging
Citizens: A Game Changer for Development? and trying to blog as
I go. Although the course is focussed on international development, I want to
try to apply the ideas to UK politics (both national and local) and also to
student engagement in higher education.
Here are my thoughts on week 4:
Video 1: ICT-Enabled Citizen Engagement
What is meant by ICT? Community radio, internet,
mobile phones, social media, SMS, mobile apps, crowdsourcing technology, community
mapping, and social computing.
1) How can the potential of ICTs be translated into
real enhancements? Programs must go beyond access to technology and instead
strengthen the capabilities of people to use ICTs in a meaningful way.How can
we develop an impact chain on the link between ICTs and peoples' human
development? a) Information needs assessment and existing communication
ecologies. b) Who has access? c) Does this now translate into enhancements
in political, economic and social rights?
2) Can ICT enhance accountability and close the
feedback loop? ICT can build accountability by: Supporting the two-way flow of
information, Reducing information asymmetries, Facilitating recurring
interaction.
3) What is the specific value that ICT brings to
citizen engagement? Radical openness, Effectiveness, Timeliness, Directness,
Inclusiveness, Collaboration.
4) What are the early lessons on how to implement
ICT-enabled citizen engagement? Technology is not a panacea for development.
ICT-mediated mechanisms should be designed in response to a clearly defined
goal. The selection of appropriate technological solutions is critical and has
to be context specific. To ensure the scalability and sustainability of
ICT-enabled initiatives, the deployment of ICT tools should follow and
iterative and incremental approach.
Reflection:
In the UK there is access to ICT (internet and
mobile phones) therefore ICT initiatives will be software-based e.g. Lobby
a Lord (re: same-sex marriage) at UK level and Contact your Northampton Borough Councillors at
a local level. These certainly show directness and timeliness.
Are central governments or local
governments more responsive to citizen needs? Optimists claim that
decentralisation increases citizen participation &
governmental accountability, and improves allocative efficiency &
generates greater equity in service distribution. Pessimists claim that
decentralisation is too susceptible to elite capture (powerful
individuals diverting state resources to their own ends), and lacks the
resources needed to provide efficient and responsive public services. How can
governments overcome the challenges of elite capture and limited capacity to
create more inclusive (rather than extractive) institutions? How can the
mismatch between government spending and citizens' needs be resolved? The
simple adoption of participatory budgeting does not translate into automatic
welfare improvements.
Reflection:
The UK is very centralised, with limited autonomy
in local government (to avoid a "postcode lottery"). The voting
system of First Past the Post has resulted in virtual one-party states in local
government - elite capture in a sense. There is a definite distance between
citizens and government, only slightly breached at election time.
E-Governance refers to the usage of ICT to:
1) Increase administrative efficiency, and
2) Improve the interface between government and
citizens by increasing the transparency and accountability of government
processes.
By losing sight of the human development approach,
many ICT-heavy citizen engagement initiatives have fallen short.
Case study 1: Karnataka - National Rural Health
Mission - combination of ICT-heavy and ICT-light approaches. Although
technological capabilities made data more transparent, in this case it did not
lead to improvements in data quality and, importantly, timeliness.
Resulted in reinforcement of hierarchical decision making structures. In
contrast, the (non-ICT) Village Health and Sanitation Committees have become a
key forum to mediate between primary health centres and the communities they
serve.
Case study 2: Tanzania - Giving smart phones to
health workers in villages to gather data. Despite poor ICT infrastructure (low
upload/download speeds), data collected was useful for planning and decision
making. Two-way information flows, as well as integrating new information and
data into existing bureaucratic systems, tailored to the specific context, are
both critical in bridging the relationship between citizens and
governments.
Reflection:
More computers/software is not the answer to every
problem. In the UK, large ICT-initiatives tend to fail or go way over
budget (e.g. Universal credit). We should aim for evolution, not revolution.
Video 4: Does ICT Work in the Real World?
Technology is the medium, it's not the end in
itself. It's just a way to coordinate efforts. Map your own community and pick
the right tools for you. Liking on Facebook does not equal social change. Don't
force technology on your community. There is a divide between "digital
natives" and "digital immigrants" when approaching new
technology/ICT. Digital immigrants' tend to show a lot of resistance to
technology. Just make it simple. Need to be inclusive. Community of geeks and
community of social activists - need people who are members of both
communities. If you have financial problems, technology is key. Technology
allows no room for improvisation (e.g. elections). Failure happens when you are
not ready - test, improve, test again!
Reflection:
There are lots of ICT initiatives in the UK at the
moment, linked to the general election (e.g. vote match). These tend to be simple and
clear. I know some geeks and I know some social activists and they are
definitely two different populations but there are some great people who are
both.
Video 5: Course Summary
A good summary of all the previous talks.
Video 6: Course Takeaways
1. Citizen engagement, when done well, is a very
powerful vehicle to create meaningful change and improve development outcomes.
2. Beyond its instrumental value, citizen
engagement also holds intrinsic value and is a cornerstone of political rights
and human dignity.
3. Despite the benefits that citizen engagement
programs can bring, there is no template or one-size-fits-all approach that can
be applied everywhere.
4. Strategic citizen engagement programs, which are
long-term and multifaceted, tend to work better than tactical and short-term
programs.
5. It is important not to do things just for the
sake of doing them. Instead, we must start with a clear objective.
6. Technology can greatly increase the scalability
and reach of citizen engagement programs, as well as increase efficiency and
reduce participation costs. However, it cannot fundamentally alter the
relationship between governments and citizens on its own.
7. We should not expect overnight solutions or
silver bullets. Nevertheless, we should continue to experiment, share, and
learn, and strive to build a more open, citizen-centric approach to government.
Reflection:
Lots for me to think about!
Quiz
1st attempt 8/10
2nd attempt 10/10 :-)
Previous MOOC blog posts:
No comments:
Post a Comment