Power and Interests in Information and Communication and Development: Exogenous and Endogenous Discourses in Contention

Abstract

This paper illustrates the persistence of an exogenous model of development that underpins many interventions aimed at employing information and communication technologies (ICTs) to meet development goals. The analysis is based on a sample of texts from reports produced by United Nations agencies and the World Bank. The aim is to show how the discourse on ICT interventions invariably is reminiscent of a dominant exogenous model even when alternative models with respect to development are seen to influence policy and practice. It is argued that practice‐based, emergence approaches offer an attractive, although insufficient, way forward. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Embedding knowledge transfer in digital citizen engagement in South Africa: Developing digital literacy

“…The pragmatist philosophy has not been used significantly in research; however, it is instrumental in developing change and action, and how knowledge can relate to that action (Feilzer 2010;Morgan 2014). This is quite fundamental to developing theories within the African context (indigenous theory), as information systems theory is quite dominated by world views developed in different contextswestern and business contexts (Mansell 2011). The premise of pragmatism is abductive reasoning, where the researcher engages in a process of developing a logical connection between theory and empirical data in an iterative fashion.…”

“…As a result, how can an individual or group become digitally literate if the means to do so are inaccessible and unusable (Leahy & Dolan 2009) (Mansell 2011). These practices need to be applied iteratively and incrementally to address barriers and build digital literacy.…”

“…This is also quite typical of many ICT for development (ICT4D) projects in developing countries. Nevertheless, this does not imply that such projects do not have successful outcomes -these outcomes can only be fully realised when an effort is made to apply endogenous practices to understand institutional forces that support or hinder implementation and sustainability (Mansell 2011). The failures and challenges should be seen by researchers and practitioners as opportunities to learn from them, unlearn wrong practices and apply incremental changes or develop possible mechanisms and theories to address these specific failures (Dodson, Sterling & Bennett 2012;Pade-Khene & Lannon 2017).…”

“…These aspects are often embedded in local practice and context (endogenous practice); therefore, practitioners and researchers need to learn in the local context to obtain insight into the factors that influence DCE. Furthermore, they need to engage in participatory approaches with key beneficiaries, allowing multiple perspectives to emerge in an open dialogue of knowledge transfer and incremental learning through a consultative process of decision-making (Ika & Hodgson 2014;Mansell 2011;Toyama 2015). Key to building capacities and learning is developing the abilities of both local government and citizens to become digitally literate, in order to realise and action the true benefits of DCE.…”

Working across Cultural Spheres: The Knowledge Sharing Practices of Boundary spanners in a Global Insurance Firm

“…While these power dynamics were prominent in the case organisation, they are not confined to the private sector. In spite of the participatory philosophy that commonly underpins crosscultural partnerships in the third sector, in practice, these are often undermined by perceptions of power and status differences that hinder two-way knowledge sharing and learning (Girgis 2007;Mansell 2010;Powell 2006). For instance, capacity development projects in developing countries require Western actors and their local counterparts to bridge existing power differentials (Heizmann, Fee, and Gray 2014).…”