[Telecentres] CIPESA: E-readiness assessment: Is duplication building a knowledge base or wasting resources?

[Joy Olivier]

CIPESA INTERNATIONAL ICT POLICY COMMENTARY SERIES
Volume 1, Commentary 2.  14 March 2005

E-READINESS ASSESSMENT: IS DUPLICATION BUILDING A KNOWLEDGE BASE OR
WASTING RESOURCES?

[NOTE: This commentary is part of the Collaboration on International ICT
Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA), a programme of
bridges.org. This is one of a series intended to spark thinking and
dialogue on important issues in the field. These short informative
pieces give an overview of an international ICT policy issue relevant to
African stakeholders, and stir discussion by presenting strong views and
provocative questions. Readers are encouraged to respond to the points
raised, via email or in the "comments" box under each commentary on the
CIPESA website at www.cipesa.org/AfricansCareAboutICTPolicy.]

Many developing country leaders have embraced information and
communications technology (ICT) as an engine for growth and development.
However, translating a grand vision into practical steps that fit the
local context, and then executing it effectively, is easier said than
done. Decision-makers need to know where the country stands in terms of
ICT availability and use, so they can plan toward their goals.
Governments and development professionals often frame this discussion in
terms of "e-readiness", or how ready a country is to gain the benefits
offered by ICT in terms of policy, infrastructure and ground-level
initiatives.

A range of assessment tools have been developed to measure a country or
economy’s e-readiness. They use widely varying definitions for
e-readiness and different methods of measurement; assessment reports
vary considerably in the topics covered, level of detail, and results.
Generally, e-readiness assessments look at different social, political
and economic aspects of physical infrastructure, ICT use, human
capacity, policy environment and ICT economy. Bridges.org has updated
its Comparison of E-Readiness Assessment Tools, to highlight the
different options available.

E-readiness assessments are intended to guide development efforts by
providing benchmarks for comparison and gauging progress. They can also
be a useful tool for judging the impact of ICT, to replace exaggerated
claims and anecdotal evidence with concrete data. A plethora of
e-readiness assessment projects have been completed, and more are
underway or planned. Bridges.org's recent update on Who is Doing What
and Where in the Field of E-Readiness reports that:

* A total of 1506 e-readiness assessments have now been conducted.
* A total of 188 countries have been assessed by at least one tool.
* 68 countries have been assessed between 5-10 times by different
organizations, while a further 69 countries have been assessed over 10
times.
* Only four countries have never been assessed: North Korea, Tuvalu,
Monaco and Nauru.

While e-readiness assessment can inform ICT-based development, these
figures represent an unacceptable level of duplication and wasted
resources. And these numbers do not even tell the full story, because
many assessment results are not publicly available or easily accessible.

However, many ICT-development professionals disagree, saying that
e-readiness assessments must necessarily be replicated in order to build
a valuable knowledge base for benchmarking. They point out that surveys
need to be repeated to show progress over time. But in practice, this
only happens when the same methodologies, using precisely-defined
indicators, are implemented each time. And that is rarely the case.

The costs to support an e-readiness assessment vary. Competitiveness or
"ranking" reports (such as the Economist Intelligence Unit's E-Readiness
Rankings and the World Economic Forum's Networked Readiness Index)
provide quick, rough guides to e-readiness that track changes over time
and enable comparisons between countries. These high-level overviews are
often conducted by companies for free as business development. But
usually their coverage does not include many developing countries, and
their use is limited because they do not give much detail.

However, most e-readiness assessments are carried out by consultants or
government bodies, and are frequently funded by national governments or
international donors for USD $50,000 or more. Most assessment tools are
designed to be flexible so they can be interpreted and applied in
particular ways relevant to the country and timeframe. But the specific
methodologies employed by assessment teams are rarely captured in
sufficient detail to allow replication. This means that each assessment
is only useful in and of itself.

And even if assessors wanted to build on the prior work of others, they
may not be able to. In some cases, assessments are proprietary to the
company or organization that conducts them, and the results are
published for sale at high prices. Sometimes only the government agency
or organization that commissions the assessment gets the results and
they are either not published, or not well-publicized. There is no
central listing for such assessments.

Another common complaint about resources wasted on e-readiness
assessment is that the target audience is ICT professionals, but the
reports usually only confirm what they already know. Where reports are
intended to inform ICT project and policy implementation, a lack of
political will and funding often condemns them to gathering dust on a shelf.

WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU THINK!
Broader debate and coordination are needed for an improved approach to
the digital divide in East and Southern Africa. CIPESA has launched a
discussion forum that aims to achieve just this.

=> Do you know whether your country has ever had an e-readiness assessment?
=> Is it available? Do you know how to obtain a copy?
=> Would an e-readiness assessment be useful to you? How?
=> Have you ever used your country's e-readiness assessment in your work?
=> Are there other areas in the ICT policy field where you see
duplication of effort?
=> What impact does duplication have on ICT projects and policies?
=> What can be done to coordinate instead of duplicate?

Please share your views with us via email to cipesa at bridges.org or post
them in the "comments" box under this commentary on the CIPESA website
at www.cipesa.org/AfricansCareAboutICTPolicy.  (Email responses will be
posted to the website too.)

------------------------
REPORTS WORTH READING:

* Bridges.org (2005 update), E-Readiness Assessment Tools Comparison,
http://www.bridges.org/e-readiness/comparison.html

* Bridges.org (2005 update), E-Readiness Assessment: Who is Doing What
and Where, http://www.bridges.org/e-readiness/where.html

------------------------
For more information on CIPESA, contact:

UGANDA
Anthony Mugeere
+256 77 506015
cipesa at bridges.org

or

SOUTH AFRICA
Joy Olivier
+27 21 465 9313
cipesa at bridges.org

CIPESA is a programme of bridges.org. It is dedicated to increasing the
capacity of East and Southern African stakeholders to participate in
international ICT policy-making. It is one of two programmes with this
specific objective, established under the Catalysing Access to
Information and Communications Technologies in Africa (CATIA) initiative
and funded by the UK Department for International Development. Its
sister programme, CIPACO (serving West and Central Africa) has been
launched by Panos West Africa. Working together, the programmes will
stimulate discussion, undertake research and policy analysis, and
disseminate findings concerning international ICT issues. The aim is to
enable African interests to be more effectively represented in
international policy fora, and international policy decisions to be more
effectively translated into positive outcomes in Africa. For more
information see www.cipesa.org and www.cipaco.org.

Bridges.org is an international non-profit organisation based in South
Africa with a mission to promote the effective use of ICT in developing
countries to improve people's lives. One area of focus is informing
policy decisions that affect people's access to and use of ICT.
Bridges.org also conducts technology research and provides social
consulting services to ground level projects using ICT, helping with
project planning and evaluation and relaying lessons learned. It brings
an entrepreneurial attitude to its social mission, and is committed to
working with, instead of against, government agencies and the business
community. For more information please see www.bridges.org.

CIPESA and bridges.org:
PO Box 715, Cape Town 8000 South Africa
Makerere University, Department of Sociology, PO Box 7062, Kampala, Uganda