When People Die of Hunger
Labels: east africa, off the grid
Labels: east africa, off the grid
Tonight, I'm participating in a podcast organized by the Peace Corps Africa Rural Connect project, on how the Obama administration can leverage digital technology to deliver social and economic gains to rural Africans. I'm going to make two points:
Let Aid Recipients Tell Donors What They Want
Technology can change the foreign assistance industry by allowing recipients, via mobile phones, to tell donors what their need on their own terms. Philanthropic groups such as Global Giving are already experimenting with linking donors and projects via an online marketplace for aid. Further, Global Giving is experimenting with mechanisms to ask recipients exactly what they need from donors. One such experiments allows people to dictate donor funds in their community via mobile phone. The new USAID coordinator should put in mechanisms that allow recipients to tell us what they need.
Labels: east africa, technology policy
"Welcome to K'la City, where the food is delicious but the roads are shitty."
Labels: east africa, off the grid
A president's first trip to Africa:
So I believe that this moment is just as promising for Ghana - and for Africa - as the moment when my father came of age and new nations were being born. This is a new moment of promise. Only this time, we have learned that it will not be giants like Nkrumah and Kenyatta who will determine Africa's future. Instead, it will be you - the men and women in Ghana's Parliament, and the people you represent. Above all, it will be the young people - brimming with talent and energy and hope - who can claim the future that so many in my father's generation never found.
Labels: East Coast, West and Central Africa
Engineering News reports on the SEACOM submarine fibre cable:
The increase in pirate activity during April and May 2009, in terms of intensity and geographical coverage, has necessitated a change in undersea cable system Seacom’s cable installation plans, which has resulted in a delay in the ready-for-service date from June 27, 2009 to July 23, 2009.
Labels: east africa, technology policy
Last week I asked what arguments would convince network providers in East Africa to stop fixing SMS prices artificially high. Steve Song answered with the 'economics of abundance' argument, where carriers earn more by having more users at lower costs. This is a familiarand powerful argument in the telecom policy world. Steve explains how the argument worked in Phillipines, resulting in 1 cent SMSs (the global average is 10 cents):
Regarding what sort of pressure it would take to get operators to voluntarily drop their SMS rates, I think they need to be convinced of the economics of abundance. They need to believe that if they halved their SMS rates, that their SMS traffic would more than double. I have given the example of the Philippines where they send roughly a billion SMSes a day as compared to roughly 25 thousand per day sent in South Africa. The cost of an SMS in the Philippines is less than 1 US cent as compared to 7.5 US cents in South Africa. If you double South Africa's population (and resulting SMS revenue) to roughly match the Philippines, they are still generating more than 3 times the revenue at less than 1/7th of the price.Amassing evidence that lower pricing leads to more revenue is the first step. The second step is finding someone in the Kenyan or Ugandan telecom sector with the gravitas and positioning to make the argument to the network providers
Labels: east africa, technology policy

Labels: east africa, technology policy
Earlier this week, Google, Grameen Foundation and MTN Uganda launched a premium SMS service aimed at delivering health tips and critical agriculture tips to the poor. A debate erupted when it was mistakenly thought that MTN was charging users 220UGX to use this service.
nota bene: In Uganda, sending a person-to-person SMS costs 110UGX. Sending a premium SMS (primarily when businesses target potential customers) costs at least 220UGX.
When it was clarified that the service costs only 110Ugx, the debate turned to whether network providers are fixing prices artificially high, and if so, whether the government should set a price ceiling in order to both stimulate innovation and lower the prices for the poor.
Two thoughts:
(i) This is the lowest price ever for a premium SMS service in Uganda.
I was talking about this debate to a director of one of most prominent software companies in Uganda. He reminded me that this is the first time in the industry's history that a premium service has gone for less than 220UGX. This is a good first step, but most likely not a deal that anyone besides Google could get immediately. Many of the premium SMS services [usually targeting the rich] are adding their own fee (usually around 60UGX) onto the 220UGX base and making a killing
(ii) What kind of pressure would it take to get network providers to lower SMS rates voluntarily?
In Uganda, the best things are done without government intervention. Think about how amazing it is that an NGO, an Internet company and mobile company got together to launch this program without government intervention (contra programs run by, say, USAID or UNDP). Often when the public pressures an industry to reform, the industry comes together to create voluntary restrictions. This recently happened when the Internet industry came under fire for violating human rights in China. Is this concievable with the mobile industry in Uganda? If so, it would have to start with pressure from companies that are innovating in the SMS information space.
Labels: east africa, technology policy
A few weeks ago, I made my way from Nairobi to Kampala, stopping to see a family of lions sleeping soundly after ravaging a water buffalo on the banks of Lake Nakuru. When I arrived in K'la, I wasn't sure how long I'd stay or what I would do. Some interesting work has come about. More details soon, but here are the themes: (i) the Africa internet infrastructure; (ii) mobile software; and (iii) internet & democracy. And, of course, the latest news from these three fronts.
Labels: east africa, Internet and Democracy, internet policy
It's not every day that you put on a conference [in Africa or anywhere else] and see immediate results. Last month, I help organize in Nairobi, along with my colleagues from The Fletcher School and the Central Bank of Kenya, the M-Banking 2009: Balancing Innovation and Regulation. The idea behind the event was to get banking regulators, network providers and bankers in the same room to talk about how mobile phones can be leveraged to bring more access to banking services to more people.
Last week, Finance Minister and Deputy PM Uhuru Kenyatta, who opened our conference, published a bill to allow branchless banking and open the door to more appropriate mobile banking regulation. Today's Sunday Nation (Kenya) reports:
Mr Kenyatta noted that despite of the progress the country had made in the banking, many Kenyans remain unbanked due to deposit-taking institutions’ limited reach. “ In this regard, I propose to amend the Banking Act to allow banks to extend their footprint through agencies with wide distribution networks,” he said. Recent innovations like mobile telephony firms Safaricom and Zain’s M-Pesa and Zap have deepened the banking services while expanding the outreach to the previously unbanked population.
However, the expansion of the services have been held back by the lack of a legal and regulatory framework to monitor and arrest crimes like money laundering and terrorism. Players in the banking sector last month held an international conference in a bid to draw experiences and expertise from the various parts of the world in order to craft relevant laws.
Labels: mobile money
Labels: off the grid
Labels: east africa, IT for development
I'm leading the last session of Patrick and my Digital Democracy course tonight. To prepare, I was sifting through the fantastic set of student blog posts from throughout the semester. The diversity of topics, opinion and writing style reminded me of Andrew Sullivan's piece from November 2008 in The Atlantic. Andrew writes:
...as blogging evolves as a literary form, it is generating a new and quintessentially postmodern idiom that's enabling writers to express themselves in ways that have never been seen or understood before. Its truths are provisional, and its ethos collective and messy. Yet the interaction it enables between writer and reader is unprecedented, visceral and sometimes brutal.I think assigning blogging in college (or high school) classes helps students develop their voice, not just within the bounds of formal writing, but by encouraging the exploration of the relationship between themselves and the content they are exploring.
The fact that a huge part of Africa relies on satellite to connect to the internet completely blew my mind, and when I found that even our connection to the internet here in Boston tenuously relies on the well-being of a few bottleneck points I decided to do some more research into the history of the backbone of the World Wide Web.Sam reflects on the role of the Internet in the larger activism narrative:
“Johnny’s in the basement mixing up the medicine; I’m on the pavement thinking about the government.” Bob Dylan said that in 1965. The midpoint of an era that shook, like a withdrawn junkie, with political unrest. And to put it lightly, ain’t shit changed — just the names, faces and places….oh yeah, and now we have this thing called the internet. Once upon a time, the markings of a true activist were physical action and the robust will to stand in harm’s way; bottles broken in streets, sit-ins, Molotov cocktails and marches. Today the political landscape has changed. Concurrently, the weapons we use to fight injustice on this terrain have evolved. After all, who wants to sit in a Humvee with paper thin siding when the freedom fighters* come?Aaron critiques the DigiActive Introduction to Facebook Activism:
A DigiActive Introduction to Facebook Activism” gives a concise overview of how to best use Facebook to achieve a successful campaign. While I believe the advice given in the guide is fairly helpful, I believe it grossly overestimates the power of digital tools for grassroots movements looking to achieve substantial reform. There are three criticisms of the guide that I have which concern accountability, sustainability, and results.Hui discusses jailed bloggers:
jailed bloggers = violation of human rights = repressive government = INJUSTICE
The above is a primitive expression of the thought process most individuals seem to take on when the subject of jailed bloggers is broached. Yet, for me, the subject of jailed bloggers immediately brought to mind the two Singaporean bloggers who were jailed for their offensive racist remarks. Here, another formula is proposed:
jailed bloggers = due punishment for action harmful to other persons/society = enforcement of law + maintenance of civil society = JUSTICE
Why this difference? Are they mutually exclusive?
Labels: digital democracy
Imagine two teams of engineering students, the first in Silicon Valley and the second in Nairobi. Each of the these teams develops an equally sophisticated and useful SMS-based mobile phone software application that will allow health clinics to create automated responses to reproductive health questions submitted to them via SMS. For example, women in the developing world who send SMSs about HIV/AIDS, pregnancy or condoms would automatically receive detailed information about these requests. They often have no other source of reliable information. Each group believe this product can be profitably marketed to health clinics and aid agencies around the developing world.
It is well understood that entrepreneurs in the developing world (the Kenyans in our example) face significant legal and institutional barriers from reaping the benefits of their good ideas. Measurements such as the World Bank Doing Business Index, as well as the management, political science and economics literatures have addressed these barriers in detail. They include, but are not limited to, the ability to secure seed capital, incorporate and legally protect a business, transfer money both domestically and across borders and efficiently and flexibly find employees well-positioned to perform. In short, much of the developing world suffers from a poor institutional ecosystem for doing business.
This post marks the start of a series of blog posts that ask the question: to what extent can new digital institutions help entrepreneurs circumvent poor institutional ecosystems and privately re-design their incentives landscape? As more of the machinations of global commerce go digital, new tools are emerging that would help the Kenyans in our example lower some of these barriers. The Digitally Doing Business series will explore new opportunities ranging from digitally registering as a US company regardless of physical location to securing previously unavailable venture funds and low-cost payments from abroad to distributing work to employees via mobile phones.
Labels: east africa, technology policy
A few months ago I drafted a technology for international development proposal for the Obama Administration. This was one piece in a broader effort to get the official foreign assistance community to embrace the values of the Africa tech community: experimentation, low cost innovation, local solutions and flexibility.
This largely tracks with Matthew Bishop's notion of Philanthrocapitalism:
While hopefully some of the world's problems will be solved using for-profit business models, many will not. But that does not mean they can not be addressed in a businesslike way, in the sense of serious focus on results; understanding where to use scarce resources to have the greatest impact through leverage; a determination to quickly scale up solutions that work and a toughness in shutting down those that do not; backing entrepreneurial, innovative approaches to problems; forming partnerships with whoever will get the job done soonest and best and taking big risks in the hope of achieving outsize impact.In the latest issue of Dissent, Alix Rule offers one critique of philanthrocapitalism from the Left that can not be ignored:
The 'sensibility of giving a damn' isn't really much to commit to; conveniently, most everyone's already committed. But mere possession of a moral pulse doesn't provide much of a basis for decision-making. Yet, when good is like money, individuals do not need coherent approaches to it any more than institutions do; there are no trade-offs or hierarchies or conflicting loyalties here, either. In place of a critical moral framework, we're furnished with a sort of cabinet of curiosities, the decontextualized contexts of which are presumably to be enjoyed as peculiarly shaped artifacts of good...Absent the semblance of context- we're ill equipped to judge.Any marketplace for good risks being overtaken by possible oligarchs (Gates, Soros), falling prey to glossy marketing at the expense of accuracy and context (Save Darfur) or simply continuing to exclude the recipients of aid. Overcoming these dilemmas is the challenge of foreign assistance community in our time.
Labels: east africa, IT for development, technology policy, west africa
In the case of Ukraine it is evident that pro-democracy forces used the Internet and cell phones more effectively than the pro-government forces, such that in this specific time and place these technologies weighed in on the side of democracy.The successful revolution in the Ukraine was the product of really good organizers who leveraged technology to be more effective than they would have otherwise been. A few hours after his original post, Evgeny provided a great bit of follow-up analysis by pointing out the different role that technology played this week in Moldova and those five years ago in Ukraine.
Labels: Internet and Democracy
Mobile banking in Africa has everyone's attention. Mobile companies are realizing a new revenue stream, banks furrow their brows over possible new competitors and NGOs hail a new venue for the poor to access capital. The Fletcher School's Center for Emerging Market Enterprises, along with the Central Bank of Kenya, are hosting a conference on May 25-26 in Nairobi to address how central banks and regulators should respond to the explosion of mobile banking:
“M-Banking 2009: Balancing Innovation and Regulation” conference is:
a student-led initiative that seeks to bring together more than 100 key stakeholders in the mobile banking sector—regulators, financial institutions, telecoms, customers, and mobile service entrepreneurs—in an effort to shift the dialogue around mobile banking from the risks it presents to the social benefits and business opportunities it provides. The conference will focus on the identification of tangible m-banking policies that strike a balance between increasing access for the underserved and controlling misuse of these new systems. The current nature of the m-banking sector and potential future developments will be explored.The announcement of this conference also marks a new focus on mobile finance on this blog. In the coming week or so, I'll be writing about the best ideas in both the industry and regulatory space of mobile banking. My writings have addressed the industry and civic implications of more and cheaper Internet on the continent. In parallel to this discussion of a freer exchange of ideas, I'll also be discussing about a freer exchange of capital.
Labels: mobile money
This is a stylized version of the question facing a handful of corporations, including Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft and Cisco, who have to figure out how to do business in Internet-censoring markets like China.
How corporations and policy makers in the United States navigate this thorny landscape was the subject of our Digital Democracy class last night (session description here). The first half of the class provided an overview of the state of censorship globally: how states marshal moral, political and security reasons to censor content through IP blocking, DNS blocking and proxy servers tactics.
Labels: Internet and Democracy, internet policy
Labels: east africa, off the grid
The Tufts homepage (article here) is featuring an article about the course I'm teaching at Tufts with my collaborator Patrick Meier. I've been thinking about the intersection of the Internet and politics for several years, and its been a joy to learn from students who live with these tools, care deeply about communities and are not afraid to think critically about the status quo. You can see the thoughtfulness of the students clearly in their weekly blog posts here.
Labels: Internet and Democracy
The study of the effect of the Internet on democracy is really in its infant stages. One reason the Berkman Center's Internet & Democracy project initially focused on creating a set of narrative case studies is because we felt there simply was not enough data for a larger quantitative study.
This is why when I gave a paper at the International Studies Association Conference (ISA2009) yesterday in New York I was happy that my colleagues were presenting what is really the first shot across the bow in studying quantitatively the effect of the Internet and mobile phones on outcomes such as protests and human rights. It was also fun having the always snappy Daniel Drezner as the discussant for this panel.
My friend, and the panel chair, Patrick Meier has a great set of summaries of these papers, including my piece of the the effect of Internet on democracy in Kenya's 2007-08 presidential election crisis.
Labels: east africa, Internet and Democracy
Labels: east africa, Internet and Democracy, technology policy, west africa
Labels: east africa, technology policy, west africa
Tonight I start my teaching career. Alongside my frequent collaborator, Patrick Meier, I am creating a teaching a course to Tufts University undergraduate course entitled Digital Democracy:
In the last five years, text message campaigns, online social networks, and citizen media have played a major role in world events including a democratic revolution in Ukraine, a humanitarian emergency in Kenya and the election of the first African American President of the United States. This course explores how digital technology changes both the mode and the meaning of democratic participation. We will conduct this inquiry through the exploration of case studies and by putting an experimental social networking application to the test, exploring its use in civic projects throughout Boston.Patrick posted the syllabus here (pdf). I'm incredibly excited, not least because no one has really figured out the effect of the Internet on politics yet. Andrew McLaughlin, my boss at Google, once said: "We are only in the most vague sense conscious of what the Internet's disruption means in the real world." There really is no better way to attack these unanswered questions than by getting a bunch of smart, open minded people together in a room to talk about it. This will be fun.
Labels: Internet and Democracy