In his recent blog Emeka Okafor has raised the issue of appropriate technology and illustrates the concept with case studies.
Article Rolfe Leary, appropriate technology is defined as "a simple technology created for, but not by the people."
From the practice of international technology transfer that it trumped, appropriate technology was a progressive form of the technology for development. Rather than transfer of capital-intensive technologies from industrialized countries, practitioners of consciously set out appropriate technology to develop appropriate technologies, as they have seen, to the needs of non-industrialized countries.
Although progressive over the transfer of technology, appropriate technology was fundamentally wrong at least two respects. First, the appropriate technology movement was based on the conviction that the solution technology, and they were thus operated with a "technological imperative" to improve all that already exists through the application of new technologies. Second technology solution was almost invariably conceived, designed and delivered by foreign experts, especially in the first decades.
Today, we find two defects in certain ICT practices. The two errors - starting with the rather than community technology and localization of power in the hands of foreign experts - disables the local populations. We must improve our practice in two respects.
If the appropriate technology movement (or ICT4D) relies for its solutions on the engineers in London or Washington, which have been socialized in technocratic cultures and who live in industrialized countries, then we should not be surprised if they continue to prescribe technical solutions for development; nor should we be surprised if these solutions often underestimate local priorities, fail to reflect the practices and local customs, or be unaffordable or otherwise not viable.
To create truly appropriate technologies, we must take a totally different approach to ICT - one which from the outset is directed and belonging to the community, and where the decision-making power, resources and capacities are located as close as possible to the intent that the development site. Instead of technology transfer to international featured agencies might think constructively on the transfer of the location of their HQ, decision and budget-holdings for developing countries?
A star restructured should aim to avoid dependence on foreign experts, donors or institutions and instead set out to develop participatory people-processes that enable communities to define their own development objectives, priorities and activities. To reduce dependencies, there is also a need for capacity-operational in the field that is able to innovate new solutions to development problems - or appropriate and modify existing solutions (hack) according to identified needs.
A way to build the capacity of delivery is to use the type of hackspaces and iHubs who earn such popularity dans the world. Hackspaces are places equipped with tools for engineering and working spaces where people can meet, share skills and work on collaborative projects. iHubs are similar, except that they focus on software development projects. Hackspaces provide a vibrant community of makers, engineers and tinkers able to learn and teach each other manufacturing and production skills.
ICT4D agencies could iHubs and rural hackspaces and employ graduates engineering and development of African universities to hack of the solutions to the problems of the community-defined. Regular opportunities to share experience and expertise with co-creator of other communities will have to be a feature to enable dissemination and cross pollination. This could be facilitated by open-days, volunteer programs hacker in residence and plans. The Hackspace R & D rural teams could work on the challenges identified in the community such as alternative energy for rural areas, the adaptive technologies open source for people with disabilities or for dryland irrigation pumps...
Instead of the execution of apps4dev competition agencies of the United Nations with the sponsorship of multinational, ICT4D organizations could run for Maker of business and Hackathons in rural Africa, catalyze creative solutions to the problems rural and strengthening of the capacity to meet the challenges of sustainable development. An example of work in this vein is the creation of a Campus of Ubuntu to rural Macha in the South Province of Zambia in collaboration with the University of Zambia (UNZA).
I think that a Rural Hackspace would indigenous solutions that are based on an appreciation of the local operating environment: environment, culture and markets. I think that allowing people to appropriate technology development would be a powerful way to build their autonomy and local capacity.
Instead of the execution of applications competitions in New York, judged by CEOs leave communities around the Rural Hackspace their own prices for the solutions that they have more reason to value.
Be the first to this position, as.