| I originally tried to tackle  Government ICT policy issues directly (eg, contributing to the SA position  paper ("The Information Society and the Developing World:  A South African Perspective", 1996) for the ISAD 1996 conference called by then vice-president Mbeki). It did enable us to develop a new perspective regarding the "Information Community":  
              The information age has not so far contributed to a reduction of inequalities between people, regions and  countries. Where it has entered the social arena, IT ha s not operated on a communal basis but rather on  an individual one: personal computers rather than community access. To date it has served to  concentrate wealth and power. (p 3) Information infrastructure is not an end in itself, but simply a means to an end. Appropriate, timely,  culturally relevant content must be made available. Indeed, the creation of content is the raison d'être for the development of infrastructure. Ultimately, however, I   found that experience  frustrating and without practical consequeces. Instead I have decided to focus on developing  small telling examples of ICT applications that expose ICT possibilities for  development and at the same time highlight policy issues. A good example of  this is Chetty, Blake, McPhie “VoIP deregulation in South Africa: Implications for underserviced  areas”, 2006. This connects with the work I have done on use of ICT for development,  empowerment of deprived people and indigenous knowledge. The most spectacular  example of this is no doubt the CyberTracker system which has attracted a great  deal of media coverage and has a worldwide impact in terms of downloads and use  of the software (see CyberTracker website to get an idea: www.cybertracker.org). I published the  account of that development as Blake “A field computer for animal trackers”  2001.  In reflecting on this and subsequent  projects I have been struck by the need to rethink the way we do SE in a  country like South Africa.  SE needs to step outside the traditional methodologies and involve much more of  the social context in which the software is placed. If we do not, we run the  huge risk of having no useful impact - as has happened so often. The methodology  I favour has grown out of the realization that there is a parallel between the cycles  of newer SE methods and the cycles of (Critical) Action Research. The  development has lead over the years to Socially Aware SE, eg, Blake and Tucker  “User interfaces for communication bridges across the digital divide”, 2006. |