Information Society Watch

It may be easier to judge the success of a project – like Akshaya – than to judge the factors behind its success. And when I see the enormously success of Akshaya project, my mind of course goes toward seeking to explore the crucial factors that made Akshaya possible, and more, made it successful. Two factors are often mentioned in this regard. One is the level of literacy, and the value placed on literacy in Kerala. Computers appeared to many as just the next level of literacy, and truly so in today’s age.

So it was easier to establish the value of learning computers in Kerala. Then, we of course know that we had the right people at the right place in the administrative machinery, at the secretariat, at IT mission and leading the district administration. Entrepreneurial leadership within governments is crucial, and very often lacking, when such transformational changes which are novel and therefore risky are to be tried out.

But beyond these well recognized factors of the unique success of an ICT services project aimed at universal reach and inclusiveness in Kerala as compared to many efforts made all over India, I think there is something in the very political culture of the state that may be a significant factor for success. This culture that I refer to is not easy to put in words, and I will tentatively call it something that puts a lot of value on community-based activities and on politics. It is the same culture which often has been blamed for relatively lower levels of industrialization in Kerala. However, when it comes to developing a new ‘information society’ infrastructure (preferring to call it that rather than ICT infrastructure because the issues of services infrastructure and social infrastructure that goes with ICTs use are most crucial for ‘success’), this same community culture may become the winning factor.

I will profess two reasons why a ‘problem’ factor in the industrialization era could be a ‘winning’ factor for an inclusive and development-oriented informationalisation of the society. One, the industrialization phase of India has been characterized as being too public sector dependent, and not sufficiently response to private enterprise. Added to it, that extra bit of Kerala ‘community/political’ factor was lethal. However, the present environment of ICTs in India is so much private sector driven that the public and the community sector is also derided in this space. The global as well as the national information society is congenitally neo-liberal. This has upset the required balance between the public, private and the community sectors. Kerala inherent community/political culture it appears can help get the balance right for the state, and it is here that I see some evidence and more promise for the greatest success of ICT for development in Kerala.

Secondly, apart from the need of balancing the too exclusive a private sector orientation of the dominant paradigm of the information society, it is also important to note that times of transformation, as we are in midst of, require greater intervention of the public sector to build infrastructure and capacities. Today as more and more social systems are transforming on the digital opportunity such a role of the public sector is even more important. All the developed countries built their present industrial strength through massive public investment, especially in the post-war period. Information society, especially in developing countries, is in similar formative stages.

Public investments in basic ICT and information society infrastructure are sure to produce a great multiplier effect on all socio-economic activities. But why hasn’t most other states in India been able to do an Akshaya? It is because of the above mentioned dominant paradigm of the information society, that these state have not been able to take the bold decisions that Akshaya took. It provided a state built connectivity infrastructure and then put public finds to develop universal e-literacy. And now it is in what is of course the most difficult phase of developing the services infrastructure over this connectivity and capability infrastructure. Private entrepreneurship is always important, and Akshaya itself employs it very purposefully. However the power relationship between the public, private and the community sector is the most important issues in any partnership, and it is only Akshaya among all such partnerships for ICT services delivery in India that has been able to get this relationship right. I consider this to be the basic reason for its success and future hope.

Globally, there is a lot of debate on the issues of ‘commons’ and of balance between values of collaboration and competition in the information society. Kerala, as also seen its recent decision to use open source in its schooling system, seems to be getting the equation better than other parts of the country.

One of the most important factors of success for a public initiative of this kind, which requires a lot of public entrepreneurship, is the nature of the body within the government that is driving the change. In this regards, the role of IT Mission in Kerala has been very critical. One, the state got its institutional structure right, by positioning IT mission as a organization outside the core governmental structure, and taking people both form the government and outside. The employees of IT mission have been able to show the entrepreneurship of the private sector while retaining a keen community and public-mindedness. However, the real challenge for IT mission comes beyond the provision of connectivity infrastructure and basic e-literacy to people. It is in the form of developing the Akshaya network as the main machinery of delivery of development services, as well as other services, to people. This is a very complicate endeavor, and I trust the IT mission to be able to achieve it more than any other similar effort elsewhere.