[p2p-research] ICT4D internet vs. mobile debate

[Michel Bauwens]

Dear Parminder,

May I reproduce your contribution in the p2p blog?

what name should I use as 'author'?

Many thanks,

Michel Bauwens, http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

From: Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
To: donc at internode.on.net
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:22:31 +0530
Subject: Re: [ciresearchers]
Hi everyone

PC/Internet versus mobiles is one of the most important policy issues in
ICTD today.  It is not that I want to present it as a 'versus' issue, I
would prefer not to.   However that is how those with unadulterated  belief
in  markets-as-panacea  present it as, ironically, even when the dominance
of their  ideology has largely been responsible for what as been described
as the failure of first generation telecentres initiatives. And this
'versus' thinking also dominate policy makers today, and thus we need to
address it.

At one level, there are substantive issues in this discussion and at another
clarificatory ones about issues/ concepts etc that one may be speaking for
or against.

First the latter, the clarificatory stuff:

If anyone is arguing that the less developed regions be left with p2p voice/
telephony application alone because this is what they have so eagerly lapped
up while  the rest of world is transforming the very nature of social
interactions and social institutions - in sum, the nature of society - over
new techno-social possibilities offered by the Internet, I think this
argument does not even require refutation. Such kind of arguments have been
used regarding modern education and communities living in 'traditional
ways', and I thought were completely out of fashion now a days. There is
however a curious new over-valorisation of 'choice' in neoliberal thought
whereby it seems to be offered as overruling all ethical and normative
considerations. However going into that discussion may not be possible here.

Then comes the issue, if Internet is indeed required (1) how should it be
best provided in the conditions that obtain in developing countries, and (2)
a related question of, what 'kind' of Internet it should be.

In the light of the above, we may be not be arguing about whether Internet
or not (unless someone here is so radical to be arguing that, whereby I may
be corrected), but whether

(1) mobile or landline Internet/ broadband, and (2) PC or mobile/ handset as
user device

A connected and, at the base, a very important question is whether
connectivity is easily and freely available for a range of social purposes
for which, as per the typical economic definition of a 'public good', a
model of a large number of people accessing the Internet on user-fee basis
does not work. Example; a community trying to build a community generated
database of local information.

Also, whether a PC is the end device of a mobile/ handset is an issue
completely different from the question of the underlying infrastructure -
Internet or mobile telephony infrastructure. The two questions should be
teated separately and not conflated as is often done Beyond that, there are
certain limitations in relying 'only' on mobile/ handset as the user device,
which choice affects the kinds of activities and applications that can be
accessed/ done. This factor too can determine the nature of uses of the
Internet, in terms of empowering uses versus passive uses - a factor I
consider very central to the consideration of 'development potential' of new
ICTs.

In the light of above clarificatory analysis we may examine the available
policy and market options. This brings us to the real ad substantive issues
of the present discussion.

Mobile connectivity has the obvious, and immense, advantage of 'mobility',
as well as better economics for less densely populated areas. However, the
question remains if it should be a wired backhaul and a wireless last-mile
connectivity, or wireless all the way. The former to me looks the preferred
model which means we still have to lay the fibre backbone almost everywhere.


The problem with mobile connectivity is that the bandwidth scarcity is often
used as an excuse for bandwidth manipulation to change the net neutral
nature of the Internet, which for me is very essential to its 'development
potential'. Unfortunately, many market-model enthusiasts do not think so. A
connected issue  is that mobile connectivity has come to be associated with
pure market play model while in broadband infrastructure - due to natural
monopoly factors - there often is a strong possibility of a public sector
player. This particular factor

(1) on one side, reduces the possibility/ incentive to manipulate the net
neutral character of the Internet for endless 'innovations of business
models' to squeeze in more and more profits

(2) and on the other, makes possible availability of connectivity on special
subsidized terms, or free, for a range of social purposes, as is required in
the case of all essential infrastructure and services. It was (wrongly)
assumed by the first generation ICTD initiatives that a pay-per-use model of
providing a general purpose transformational technology like the Internet
can enable its appropriation to its best potential. There is so much
literature on 'productivity paradox' and its subsequent clarification
regarding use of ICTs for the business sector in the world's most developed
economy. In the light of it, I continue to be amazed how we cannot simply
see that the usage/ appropriation/ 'productivity' curve will be even much
more difficult for social uses of the Internet in under-developed regions.
Such difficult - as in, 'apparently' unpromising - curves cannot be cited as
the reason for jettisoning efforts to appropriate a technology, a mastery of
which is the very condition of even expecting to live on fair and equitable
terms in the emergent social arrangements. (Never forget what literacy and
education has meant for the same purpose.)

The above to me are the two main issues/ factors in any discussion on what
kind of connectivity or infrastructure is needed for less developed regions,
and for marginalized sections of the society.

The point two above of providing connectivity (plus) as a public good
relates to a larger - and very ideological - debate on whether it is enough
to expose marginalised communities to markets for ensuring their development
or whether 'interventionist'  (enabling/ empowering) initiatives continue to
be needed to ensure development. One cannot easily expect to convince those
on the other side of this great ideological divide. The only thing that can
be attempted in this regard is to offer clarifications on some issues, and
also some deliberate obfuscations that get created by the strength of
various resources that market-fundamentalist ideology obviously commands.

To expound on and expose the other point, regarding what does an exclusive
reliance on mobile infrastructure (and to a lesser extent, exclusive
reliance on a very small user device) do to the very nature of the much
celebrated phenomenon of the Internet, is something which should appeal to a
much greater swathe of interests and opinions. I propose that we undertake a
systematic study of how Internet on mobile is increasingly provided in a
stunted, non net neutral manner, and the prognosis for the near future in
this regard is even much worse, and how this threatens the very egalitarian
potential of the Internet. This egalitarian and empowering nature of the
Internet, as against possibilities of providing some goodies while
increasing dependencies, is the  real development question that should frame
the 'Internet versus mobiles' debate.

So while we discuss much whether mobiles can provide more Internet to more
people, we need to at the same time ask the question, what kind of Internet
is this? It exactly parallels  the key development question around us today
- the issue is not only 'more development' but also 'what kind of
development'.

Parminder

-- 
Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Think thank:
http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI

P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100223/2384283e/attachment.html>