Not to belittle their potential to democratise knowledge, free computers are no dice with a 12 per cent electricity deficit and a 20 per cent peak power shortage, the brunt of which is conveniently passed on to rural India. Internet programmes are futile with a 3 per cent teledensity as against the world average of 15. Notwithstanding the phone boom the direct dialling system brought in its wake, of the 44.6 million direct exchange lines in the country, villages account for a meagre 9.6 million, while public telephones exist in 5 lakh villages. Web content makes sense to a mere 5 per cent English-conversant population. A country of over a billion has only 11 million PCs, mostly in offices and institutions, and only 35 lakh Internet subscriptions, which translate into 10.5 million users at an average of three users per connection. Many need to dial long-distance calls to the cities to get connected. With poor telephony and modem speeds, getting connected is like watching paint dry. For a modest 7 per cent broadband reach, India ranks 18th among 20 major nations of the world. Quite distinct from lofty political balderdash, rural India continues to be anaemic in infrastructure.
Yet, come to think of it, even the advent of the now-ubiquitous television in the country had invited scepticism. But two decades thence, the rural market is already accounting for 70 per cent of total colour television sales. So now, as several rural ICT initiatives, mostly local pilots, are bearing the first fruits, those in the know are quashing the normative European trajectory of industrial development, swearing by multi-sectoral and non-linear progress, and pledging themselves to weed out unequal access to information, dubbing that as the root cause of inequality within countries.
In all measure, ICTs haven’t yet arrived for the hinterland, much less for the 40 per cent below the poverty line, and the empowerment gabfests are far from outwitting socialist rhetoric. The digital divide is as much a social dilemma today as a technological reality. Let the hype not beguile us into over-expecting. Notwithstanding our long craving for quick-fix solutions to problems all and sundry, technology is no magic wand. Warns Ken Keniston, professor of human development at MIT: "ICTs are neither a panacea, nor necessarily the first line of attack in combating poverty, injustice and misery." Explains Walter North, director, usaid-India: "Unless we make investments in basics like education, ICT will remain an icing."
Yet, rural demands must grow to force improved provisions. Technology must re-scale itself to the local needs of end-users. Development agencies must stop assuming too much on behalf of the people at the grassroots. Information services must cease being supply-driven and unidirectional. Organisations must embark upon technology audits to transcend policy directives and mission statements and assess the maturity, timeliness, quality, cost-efficiency and user-friendliness of their technologies. Says Akhtar Badshah, executive director, Digital Partners, a Seattle-based non-profit institute: "The rural masses need a different computing power than what we are providing them." Not mere ardour, but empirical data is required to govern this headway. Keniston avers: "The most creative uses of ICTs in development may not entail computers, e-mail, websites or Internet access, but the use of computer-based technologies, including embedded chips and satellite-based information, to better meet local needs." Rakesh Kumar, CEO, TARAhaat, grimaces: "ICTs have the power to give a lot, but ICT technicians don’t have the imagination to make that happen."
Mercifully, the first steps have been taken—towards technologies that interact with the masses in their tongue. The local language software market in India has surged from $0.5 million in 2000-01 to $11 million and is expected to rise to $64 million by 2005. More importantly, e-governance initiatives could be amounting to 55 per cent of this market by the end of 2003, what with as many as 140 ICT packages being implemented currently by the central and various state governments. Tech research group Gartner says the government spent $1.008 billion in 2002 on e-governance initiatives, accounting for 9 per cent of the total IT spend, a share that can go up to 12-15 per cent by 2005. Figures read encouraging. But is anyone crunching figures to substantiate the efficacy of these investments?
Money is less of a deterrent for social entrepreneurs as well. Micro-finance models may still be evolving in India, but, states Naina Lal Kidwai, MD and vice-chairperson, hsbc Securities and Capital Markets, "A quasi-Grameen Bank model is beginning to work and people are trying to replicate its success. Financial institutions are realising that the right model to lend is through the community, in some cases women’s self-help groups, rather than the individual. This has dramatically improved loan paybacks."
It’s crucial to strike commercially viable combinations of communication technologies. Says R.R.N. Prasad of TRAI: "Bridging the digital divide in India essentially means bridging the teledensity divide between rural and urban areas." That mandates a synergy of the telecom and the IT sectors. While the telecom market crossed a turnover of $9 billion in 2002, the IT industry is expected to grow to $20 billion by 2008. The country’s exalted ascent as an IT superpower and the monetary gains thereof haven’t trickled down, barring niche initiatives by the likes of Infosys, Wipro, tcs and Satyam. India still needs to cover ground in terms of regulatory environments conducive to technology development, private participation in infrastructure augmentation and basic literacy to keep billions from falling through the net.
Yet, says Arun Shourie, Union minister for disinvestment, communications and IT, "We must realise that everything cannot be left to the government, although it is true that the state apparatus in India needs to change to keep pace with technological creativity. There’s still resistance to technology, but our heckling is not going to stop time. We must learn to spot business opportunities, like Amul finding one in a woman milking a cow or Sulabh International finding another in a person defecating along railway tracks."
If an underserved rural market contributes 50 per cent of the national income, it’s not hard to explain why the private sector is animatedly drawn towards a potential market of 750 million people, many netting savings as high as 25 per cent of the family income. Ved Prakash Sharma of the National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad, says: "The growth of the Indian rural economy will provide a large number of customers for technology companies." So while Hewlett Packard is developing special products for rural markets to make IT accessible to vernacular users, improve connectivity options and provide affordable devices, Microsoft is also developing training packages for regional audiences.
That apart, India has not been able to harness the rich experiments well, maintains Keniston, although "there is more creativity in India than anywhere else". Agrees Motoo Kusakabe, former VP, World Bank: "The fragmented approach to ICT development in India needs to make way for comprehensive programmes." What we need is a managerial rather than an administrative approach to ensure that technology does not become dominant, believes NASSCOM chairman Kiran Karnik. "It is the application of technology that must drive the process. The technology itself must be need-based, not merely imitative or commercially driven."
The accent of most ICT projects is on incubating business models for social entrepreneurs. However, with subsidies and grants having killed the need for long-term sustainability, the ngos are now being put through their paces in driving home the idea of viability. Satish Jha, chairman of the Digital Partners South Asia initiative, reasons: "There’s more passion than capacity in the ngo space. Capacity-building takes one through various generations of learning about technology and, given that this debate is only a few years old, they haven’t had enough time to do that." Profit ambitions cannot be an anathema if the ICT initiatives are to be spared the plight of state-run welfare schemes. Deepak Amin, investor and senior VP, Streamserve Inc, chides the sceptics: "Profitability isn’t a capitalist way of looking at a cause. Those not talking about it are missing the point. By giving people things, you are making them dependent. That’s not the goal."
So if the government is strapped for resources and ngos are far from the necessary capacities, can the corporates help? Notably, India’s private sector is more aggressively involved with installing ICT kiosks than anywhere else. But the contribution of most corporates remains limited to funding.
We are tempted to conjecture: wouldn’t the most compelling model be where the government builds the infrastructure, social entrepreneurs cognise rural needs before buckling down on ICT ventures, corporates mentor them to inculcate the rigours and processes that help businesses succeed, financial institutions develop effective micro-financing frameworks, and the community sheds its indifference to technology to contribute to the bottomlines of these ventures? Through all this, ngos would be required to play a primary role—of demystifying technology, of auditing progress, of helping investments reach a critical mass, and, most importantly, of sharing success stories in milieus most characterised by lack of precedents, although India has the world’s highest number of local ICT promoters. A business-like approach to social change, based on revenues rather than grants, is becoming indispensable.
Technology may have helped us confront certain issues, but it has also thrown up many of its own. However, to lose sight of its promises would only set us back in time. Wasted, poorly utilised, or unspent resources in IT applications are only reinforcing popular scepticism. Gartner also warns that India’s enthusiasm for e-governance in 2003 may not be matched by its ability to provide online services. It’s important to look beyond investing in technology for technology’s sake. Development conclaves resembling grand picnics may deliver little.
As scientist Michael Dertouzos said: "ICTs can be of use in reducing the digital divide if only we commit to that goal the same intelligence and imagination that has gone into creating the technologies themselves."
