http://funredes.org/mistica

MISTICA: Re: Development Gateway ICT4D Topic Community

From: [email protected]
Date: Mon Apr 15 2002 - 13:28:16 AST

I am one of the ICT & Development crowd that was opposed to the design of the -
then named - Development Portal - and now more politically acceptable
Development Gateway. As many of you know, I wrote the original concept
paper for
Bellanet, which is housed at IDRC in Ottawa.

I worked with Bellanet for several years and part of my distancing myself from
Bellanet and its efforts was that I didn't want to put Bellanet at risk
with the
World Bank by being "on the Bellanet team" and being a critic of the
Development
Gateway, based on the fact that is is ill-conceived. The World Bank has a habit
of being "unforgiving" since it seems unable to understand the substance of
such
criticism. I call it "the willful failure to learn".

This is my first comment on the Gateway after a two year self-imposed ban. I
won't list, one more time, the problems with the Development Gateway, except to
say that the prospects that it will back into "getting itself right side
up" are
very slim.

I do want to note that I just spend a month (February) in Sri Lanka as part of
an eReadiness assessment team. It was an excellent trip and took place just as
the Norwegians were brokering the cease fire and peace agreement between the
government of Sri Lanka and the Tamil rebel forces on the north west.

We had access to ICT activities, policies and issues across a wide band of
stakholders in Sri Lanka. There was both agreement and disagreement about
strategic options, national priorities, strtengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats (challenges) - to use an old planning framework.

On reflection I cannot think of a real substantial role for the Development
Gateway for the ICT and Development Process in Sri Lanka. (Oh! I know it is
about more than ICT and development.) It was never mentioned once in the dozens
of interviews and consultations we conducted. A cynic might say that
support for
the Gateway might be necessary for World Bank project support. Based on how
little many of the existing international efforts were integrated into, or
consistant with, overall planning objectives, less funding but more domestic
control might be a good thing.

The Gateway exists because the World Bank though it was a good idea and had the
resources to get it funded. Whether is was/is a good idea and whether it will
have a positive impact that justifies the effort are two questions that will
never really get asked, nor will the get answered.

All the well meaning effort of its supporters aside, the Gateway simply
"is" and
will continue to be, not based on assessment, but based on funding support.
Some
individuals, groups, and maybe even countries will figure out how to take
advantage of that fact. Whether this will have anything to do with development
is a seperate question.

Now back to the marginalized edges of the real ICT and Development struggle.

Sam Lanfranco
<[email protected]>
AshPiedmont Consulting
Prince Edward County
Ontario, CANADA

Este archivo fue generado por hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Mar 08 2004 - 12:18:15 AST