Jump to content

User:Lutin jovial/Sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Work in progress: article Community Informatics

Definition

[edit]

Community informatics is a name given to the approach aiming to apply information and communication technologies for generating positive social change at a local level [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].

Examples

[edit]

We can group the different possibilities offered by ICT for positive socio-economic outcomes in two types of strategies:

  • providing opportunities for economic development.

Information and communication technologies can facilitate market access for small businesses [9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and “can assist the creation of new relationships and economic linkages”[16].

  • reinforcing cooperation and enabling individuals to have better control over their destiny.

Information and communication technologies can be used as a tool to gather “a range of ‘linked’ resources of value to improving quality of life” [17]. Bringing together “dispersed linguistic communities”, or other communities of interest, making easier the access to “skilled practitioners” are possible outcomes of ICT [18]. New forms of public participation in the tourism development process [19][20]. Indeed, information technologies offer new possibilities for collecting and presenting data: GIS [21], web survey, reports available online, forums, blogs…

ICT can be a tool for an advocacy purpose: “giving amplification and global voice to unheard minorities (or majorities)” [22]. Political and cultural activism using ICT to build “a counter-hegemonic discourse” can be found, among others, with Zapatistas (in Chiapas, Mexico), the Confederation of Indigenous Nations of Ecuador, the Mapuche in Chile[23].

Wireless technologies (such as mobile phones, GPS devices, PDA, satellite internet radios…- can help to overcome the lack of infrastructure -electricity, landline telephone, computer ownership, internet access-, support itinerant work (for instance, animal trackers in African national parks), nomadic lifestyles -information about agriculture and environment, weather forecast…- or emergency situations -famine early warning system…-[24].

Criticisms

[edit]

Too much focus on technology

[edit]

In ‘community informatics’, by focusing on the “computer as a central tool”, there is a risk to perceive “all problems as technological”[25]. “[I]f the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all problems look like nails”[26].

Too much faith in technology

[edit]

However, problems resulting from the introduction of information technologies are likely to occur, for example issues related to: literacy and language, skills, financial cost, environmental conditions (temperature, noise, glare, rain, dust, heat, humidity), support and maintenance, technical constraints, variety and compatibility of hardware and softwares, cultural values, technophobia, communication effectiveness, dependency [27][28][29][30][31].

ICT can reproduce traditional social patterns (inequalities, exclusion, surveillance, control, exploitation, commodification, ideological homogeneisation…), increasing actual divisions and creating new ones[32][33][34][35][36].

Among the potential negative outcomes of ICTs, we can quote exposing people to “socially undesirable influences such as pornography and gambling”[37].

Technology, far from being neutral, embodies particular values and forms of authority and power[38][39].

For instance, there are some concerns about the use of geographical information system (GIS) and the way such technology represents “the other” : “there is generally some type of filtering process before providing information in maps or on website”[40]. With the emphasis on spatial data and spatial constraints[41][42][43], there is a risk to give not enough attention to aspects which are hard to represent in GIS. Geographical information system is accused of “replacing old traditional views of geographic knowledge with new, progressive, scientific and technological ways”[44]. Palmer [45] compares the effects GIS with the “civilizing mission in which Christian missionaries and government agents infiltrated the homeland of indigenous peoples and effectively suppressed cultural traits such as language, religion and symbiology”.

“Cyberspace and information technology are limitless in their potential as the modes of transmission for the dominant society to continue colonization practice. Information accessed through the internet has no context in which to position it and is distanced from the indigenous peoples that it purports to represent” [46]. ‘Distance’ is a feature of a colonization process[47].

In short, GIS can be a tool used for “cultural assimilation”[48] which contribute to “deskilling” the marginalized populations (Palmer, 2007: 228)[49]. “[T]hrough colonization, the individual can be distanced, or separated, from the physical environment, the community […] the individual is separated from his/her self, family, community, nation, land and universe. They are further separated from their history, culture, language and traditions. This complete separation of the self -physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually- is the true nature of the colonial process”[50].

“[T]echnologies and ICTs are social products”[51] which serves the interests of the groups “that have made such technologies possible”[52]; for instance, those who “invested in their development and deployment”[53].

“[T]he opportunity (and the benefits which follow) of being a producer as well as a consumer are reserved not for those who have simple ‘access’ but for those in the privileged position of designing and developing the uses and applications to which this access is being put”[54].


For Gurstein[55], “ICTs are […] as much an opportunity as a problem”. Indeed, technology can contribute, either to the instrumentalisation of humans, either leading to their liberation[56][57][58][59][60].

Idealistic view of the "community"

[edit]

By giving importance to "communities", community informatics projects risk to be built on the assumption that “communities are ‘densely-knit and tightly bound’ “[61].

“Societies are, and will always be, shaped among by social actors, mobilised around interests, ideas, and values, in an open conflictive process”[62].

“[T]echnology cannot be regarded as a ready-made tool that can be used to create community”[63].

Components not necessarily compatible with each other

[edit]

The three components of community informatics -community, technology and information- do not have objectives which are always compatible with each other. “What happens if community is the most important concept, or if information is, or if technology is?”[64] Without purpose(s) or priority(ies) clearly defined, there is a risk of missing the point or discovering lately some negative outcomes. It is often not obvious what aspect is priviledged in a ‘community informatics’ project[65].

We can find different reasons explaining the failure of some ‘community informatics’ projects: social tensions within the community, lack of strategic and operational project management (poor communication, unrealistic expectations…), conflicting agendas (“commercial aspects” versus “community aspects”)…[66].

Autres

[edit]

However, governments can “enable or constrain participation” according to technologies they use, the kind of knowledge they choose to include (or exclude), the efforts they make to “initiate change” (Puri & Sahay, 2007: 140).

Puri S.K., Sahay S., 2007. Role of ICTs in participatory development: an Indian experience. Information Technology for Development 13 (2), p. 133-160.


Possible ICT applications aiming to generate positive socio-economic outcomes can fit into several strategies (Dyson et al., 2007; Gurstein, 2000; Gurstein, 2003; Keeble & Loader, 2001; Marshall et al., 2004; Milne et al., 2004; O’Neil, 2002; Pitkin, 2001):


Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S., 2007. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, 346 p.

Gurstein M., 2000. (Ed.) Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; 596 p.

Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide. Retrieved on October 12, 2007 from: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issu8_12/gurstein/index.html

Keeble L., Loader B.D., (Ed.) 2001. Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. United States of America & Canada: Routledge; 388 p.

Marshall S., Taylor W., Yu X., (Ed.) 2004. Using community informatics to transform regions. United States of America & United Kingdom: Idea group Publishing; 346 p.

Milne S., Mason D., Hasse J., 2004. Tourism, Information, Technology and development: revolution or reinforcement? In. Hall A., Lew A., Wiliams A., (Ed.) A companion to tourism geography. England: Routledge; p.184-195.

O’Neil D., 2002. Assessing community informatics: a review of methodological approaches for evaluating community networks and community technology centers. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 12 (1), p. 76-102.

Pitkin B., 2001. Community Informatics: hope or hype? Proceeding of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Retrieved on October 12, 2007 from: http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/hics/2001/0981/08/09818005.pdf


- - - - GIS (Geographical Information System; also known as ‘geographical information system’ or ‘geospatial information system’) is a computer-based system for collecting, storing, analyzing and displaying geographical data (Dyson et al., 2007: 318).

Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S., 2007. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, 346 p.

Notes and References

[edit]
  1. ^ Bishop A.P., Bruce B., 2005. Community Informatics: integrating action, research and learning. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (August-September); p.6-7.
  2. ^ Day P., Cupidi R., 2004. Building and sustaining healthy communities: the symbiosis between community technology and community research. Community Informatics Research Network (Prato Colloquium, Italy: Sustainability and Community Technology: What does this mean for community informatics?)
  3. ^ Erwin G.J., Taylor W.J., 2004. Assimilation by communities of Internet Technologies. Community Informatics Research Network (Prato Colloquium, Italy: Sustainability and Community Technology: What does this mean for community informatics?)
  4. ^ Kwon N., 2005. Community networks: Community capital or merely an affordable internet access tool? Journal of the American Society for Information science and technology 56 (8), p. 813.
  5. ^ Milne S., Ewing G., 2004. Community participation in Caribbean tourism: problems and prospects. In (Ed.) Duval D.T. Tourism in the Caribbean: trends, development, prospects. Routledge, United States of America & Canada; p.212.
  6. ^ Milne S., Mason D., Hasse J., 2004. Tourism, Information, Technology and development: revolution or reinforcement? In. Hall A., Lew A., Wiliams A., (Ed.) A companion to tourism geography. England: Routledge; p.184-195.
  7. ^ O’Neil D., 2002. Assessing community informatics: a review of methodological approaches for evaluating community networks and community technology centers. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 12 (1), p. 76.
  8. ^ Pitkin B., 2001. Community Informatics: hope or hype? Proceeding of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p.1.
  9. ^ Braun P., 2002. Networking tourism SMEs: e-commerce and e-marketing issues in regional Australia. Information Technology & Tourism 5 (1), p.13-23.
  10. ^ Braun P., 2004. Regional tourism networks : the nexus between ICT diffusion and change in Australia. Information Technology & Tourism 6 (4), p.232.
  11. ^ Buhalis D., 1996. Enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6 (1).
  12. ^ Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide, p.9.
  13. ^ Milne S., Ewing G., 2004. Community participation in Caribbean tourism: problems and prospects. In (Ed.) Duval D.T. Tourism in the Caribbean: trends, development, prospects. Routledge, United States of America & Canada; p.205-217.
  14. ^ Milne S., Mason D., Hasse J., 2004. Tourism, Information, Technology and development: revolution or reinforcement? In. Hall A., Lew A., Wiliams A., (Ed.) A companion to tourism geography. England: Routledge; p.184-195.
  15. ^ Sharma P., Carson D., 2002. Online opportunties and challenges for indigenous cultural tourism in Australia. Information Technology & Tourism 4 (2), p.80.
  16. ^ Milne S., Ewing G., 2004. Community participation in Caribbean tourism: problems and prospects. In (Ed.) Duval D.T. Tourism in the Caribbean: trends, development, prospects. Routledge, United States of America & Canada; p.212.
  17. ^ Milne S., Ewing G., 2004. Community participation in Caribbean tourism: problems and prospects. In (Ed.) Duval D.T. Tourism in the Caribbean: trends, development, prospects. Routledge, United States of America & Canada; p.212.
  18. ^ Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide, p.9.
  19. ^ Milne S., Mason D., Hasse J., 2004. Tourism, Information, Technology and development: revolution or reinforcement? In. Hall A., Lew A., Wiliams A., (Ed.) A companion to tourism geography. England: Routledge; p.184-195.
  20. ^ Sharma P., Carson D., 2002. Online opportunties and challenges for indigenous cultural tourism in Australia. Information Technology & Tourism 4 (2), p.80;82-83.
  21. ^ Doorne S., 2004. Community integrated tourism development in the South Pacific. Research report for the ICT capacity building project at the University of the South Pacific GIS as a planning support tool for community integrated tourism development: a pilot study for Fiji Islands and the South Pacific. Retrieved on April 28, 2010 from: http://www.usp.ac.fj/jica/ict_research/documents/pdf_files/report_gis.pdf
  22. ^ Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide, p.9.
  23. ^ Leclair C., Warren S., 2007. Portals and Potlach'. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.22-23.
  24. ^ Dyson L.E., 2007. Wireless applications in Africa. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S., 2007. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.286-287;290-292
  25. ^ Stoecker R., 2005. Is community informatics good for communities? Questions confronting an emerging field. The journal of Community Informatics 1 (3), p. 13
  26. ^ Stoecker R., 2005. Is community informatics good for communities? Questions confronting an emerging field. The journal of Community Informatics 1 (3), p. 13
  27. ^ Colle R.D., 2000. Communication shops and telecenters in developing nations. In. (Ed.) Gurstein M. Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; p.418.
  28. ^ Dyson L.E., 2007. Wireless applications in Africa. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S., 2007. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.287-289;291-292.
  29. ^ Hearn G., Kimber M., Lennie J., Simpson L., 2005. A way forward: sustainable ICTs and regional sustainability. The Journal of Community Informatics 1 (2), p.22-23.
  30. ^ Stillman L., 2004. Structuration, ICTs, and Community Work, p.17;24;30;34
  31. ^ Suoranta J. & Vadén T., 2008. Wikiworld: Political economy of digital literacy, and the promise of participatory media. Paulo Freire Research Center & Open Source Research Group, University of Tampere: Finland; p.185. Retrieved on April 28, 2010 from: http://wikiworld.wordpress.com/2007/03/21/6/.
  32. ^ Dordoy A., Mellor M., 2001. Grassroots environmental movements: Mobilisation in an Information Age. In. (Ed.) Webster F. Culture and politics in the information age: a new politics? Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.181.
  33. ^ Fortier F., 2000. Virtual communities, real struggles: seeking alternatives for democratic networking. In. (Ed.) Gurstein M. Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; p.446-447;450.
  34. ^ Green E., Keeble L., 2001. The technological story of a women’s centre: a feminist model of user-centred design. In. (Ed.) Keeble L., Loader B.D., Community Informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.53;61-62.
  35. ^ Rheingold H., 2001. Foreword. In. (Ed.) Keeble L., Loader B.D. Community Informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.xxi.
  36. ^ Stillman L., 2004. Structuration, ICTs, and Community Work, p.25-26. Retrieved on April 28, 2010 from: http://www.webstylus.net/?q=node/21
  37. ^ Daly A., 2007. The diffusion of new technologies: community online access centres in Indigenous Communities in Australia. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S., 2007. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.277.
  38. ^ Leaning M., (Ed.) 2005. The modal nature of ICT: challenging historical interpretation of the social understanding and appropriation of ICT. The Journal of Community Informatics 2 (1), p. 35.
  39. ^ Pitkin B., 2001. Community Informatics: hope or hype? Proceeding of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p.4.
  40. ^ Pitkin B., 2001. Community Informatics: hope or hype? Proceeding of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p.5. Retrieved on April 28th, 2010 from http://www.hicss.hawaii.edu/HICSS_34/PDFs/OSINF04.pdf
  41. ^ Magablih K., Al-Shorman A., 2004. Management and development of tourist sites in Jordan using geographic information system. Information Technology & Tourism 6 (4), p. 287-295.
  42. ^ Palmer M.H., 2007. Cut from the same cloth: the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geographic Information Systems, and cultural assimilation. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S.. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.227.
  43. ^ Turk A., 2007. Representations of tribal boundaries of Australian Indigenous peoples and the implications for geographic information systems. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.235-237.
  44. ^ Palmer M.H., 2007. Cut from the same cloth: the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geographic Information Systems, and cultural assimilation. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S.. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.221.
  45. ^ Palmer M.H., 2007. Cut from the same cloth: the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geographic Information Systems, and cultural assimilation. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S.. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.221.
  46. ^ Iseke-Barnes J., Danard D., 2007. Indigenous knowledges and worldview: representations and the Internet. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.32.
  47. ^ Smith quoted by Iseke-Barnes J., Danard D., 2007. Indigenous knowledges and worldview: representations and the Internet. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.32.
  48. ^ Palmer M.H., 2007. Cut from the same cloth: the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geographic Information Systems, and cultural assimilation. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S.. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.224.
  49. ^ Palmer M.H., 2007. Cut from the same cloth: the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Geographic Information Systems, and cultural assimilation. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S.. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.228.
  50. ^ Smith quoted by Iseke-Barnes J., Danard D., 2007. Indigenous knowledges and worldview: representations and the Internet. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.32.
  51. ^ Fortier F., 2000. Virtual communities, real struggles: seeking alternatives for democratic networking. In. (Ed.) Gurstein M. Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; p.450.
  52. ^ Fortier F., 2000. Virtual communities, real struggles: seeking alternatives for democratic networking. In. (Ed.) Gurstein M. Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; p.464.
  53. ^ Fortier F., 2000. Virtual communities, real struggles: seeking alternatives for democratic networking. In. (Ed.) Gurstein M. Community Informatics: enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Idea Group Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom; p.450.
  54. ^ Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide, p.8.
  55. ^ Gurstein M., 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide, p.2.
  56. ^ Benkler Y., 2006. The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press: United States of America; 515 p.
  57. ^ Dordoy A., Mellor M., 2001. Grassroots environmental movements: Mobilisation in an Information Age. In. (Ed.) Webster F. Culture and politics in the information age: a new politics? Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.181.
  58. ^ Ebersbach A., Glaser M., Heigl R., (Ed.) 2006. Wiki: web collaboration. Germany: Springer; p352.
  59. ^ Leclair C., Warren S., 2007. Portals and Potlach. In (Ed.) Dyson L.E., Hendriks M., Grant S. Information technology and Indigenous people. Information Science Publishing: United States of America & United Kingdom, p.2.
  60. ^ Rheingold H., 2001. Foreword. In. (Ed.) Keeble L., Loader B.D. Community Informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.xxi.
  61. ^ Wellman et al., 1999 quoted by Keeble L., Loader B.D., (Ed.) 2001. Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. United States of America & Canada: Routledge; p.4.
  62. ^ Manuel Castells, 1998 quoted by Schuler D., 2001. Cultivating society’s civic intelligence: patterns for a new ‘world brain’. In. (Ed.) Keeble L., Loader B.D. Community Informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. Routledge: United States of America & Canada; p.284.
  63. ^ Keeble L., Loader B.D., (Ed.) 2001. Community informatics: shaping computer-mediated social relations. United States of America & Canada: Routledge; p.6
  64. ^ Stoecker R., 2005. Is community informatics good for communities? Questions confronting an emerging field. The journal of Community Informatics 1 (3), p. 18.
  65. ^ Stoecker R., 2005. Is community informatics good for communities? Questions confronting an emerging field. The journal of Community Informatics 1 (3), p. 16-18.
  66. ^ Simpson L., 2004. Community Informatics & sustainability: why social capital matters. Community Informatics Research Network (Prato Colloquium, Italy: Sustainability and Community Technology : What does this mean for community informatics?).
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User:Lutin_jovial/Sandbox&oldid=358870686"