By: Mamello Thinyane, Alfredo Terzoli and Peter Clayton
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University
P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa

Abstract:

Explorations of ICT as an enabler for community development are being undertaken by governments, non-governmental organizations and research institutions all across third-world nations. The pivotal role of ICT in development is acknowledged by all within the ICT4D domain and the effectiveness of well-situated interventions has been validated by the different ICT4D projects success stories. In our involvement with an ICT4D intervention (which spans the last three years) in Dwesa, South Africa, we developed and implemented eServices platforms with a focus on eCommerce, eGovernance and eHealth services. The undergirding layer in these platform has been the IK layer which allows for the integration of the local knowledge in manner that makes the deployed services relevant, allows the local communities to participate in the knowledge economy and activates, empowers, and positions the local communities within the global information and knowledge society.

In this paper we discuss our experiences from undertaking the project in Dwesa, and in particular we discuss the need for ethno-centricity and context sensitivity in the deployed IK based ICT solutions. This need for contextualization of ICT interventions is a result of the fact that the ICT solutions and technologies are developed within a specific worldview and context (in the case of knowledge based systems this in terms of the epistemological and ontological underpinnings of the knowledge, and the IKS dynamics that are specific to different communities) and therefore it is important that the technology is adapted to the specific community context. We discuss the OSCA knowledge matrix which highlights the nature of knowledge, that is typical in many of the third world communities, along the dimensions of ownership, social advantage, accessibility and confidentiality. For the different types of knowledge along the OSCA matrix, we discuss the different ICT mechanisms that ensure the integrity of the knowledge encapsulated in the developed IK service platform.

Introduction

ICT4D in general explores the ways in which ICT can be used in the context of community development. ICT is indeed providing the opportunities for dealing with rural poverty, inequality and exclusion and in many ways it is challenging the traditional paradigms of doing business, delivering services to citizens and running societal institutions [1]. But the key question at the center of all policy markers and governments is whether to invest in developing ICT capacities in the rural communities or rather to focus on the provision of other basic services (e.g. schools, hospitals, and government services). At the core of this question is really the need to understand the role that ICT can play in the development of a society and what the benefits and limitations can be expected from undertaking an ICT based approach to development.

Technology, in and of itself is not a panacea for the underdevelopment woes of communities, it is however a prerequisite for social development in this day and age [2]. Technology is neither a target towards community development and social well-being, but rather a tool for facilitating the achievement of desirable future for a society: well being, health, peace, and communality [3]. To a large extend, human activity depends on information and therefore a synergistic interaction of technology and information leads to a competitive advantage for societies [2]. ICT also increases information share-ability within communities and therefore can positively impact the provision of that information for commercial benefit, based on the differing valuation of the information to different people [4].

Knowledge Society Interventions

The current state of the art and the trends as far as knowledge networking technologies are concerned, presents numerous possibilities and benefits for human societies. The general context in which this research is undertaken is that of ICT4D. The specific research site for the project is a deep rural and marginalized community of Dwesa in South Africa. This community is characteristic of many third world rural realities in which ICT4D projects are undertaken. Situating the research in a specific area allows for an extensive and close study of the community and a situated determination of the direct needs and requirements of the community. The objective is still that the solutions developed and implemented in this specific context will be implementable in other similarly marginalized and rural communities.

The formal establishment of Dwesa as a research site for the ICT4D intervention came as a result of a link with previous research activities in the region by researchers from the Department of Anthropology at Rhodes University. The project undertaken in Dwesa, upon which this research is built, was initiated in 2005 with the preliminary discussions with the stakeholders in situ to assess its feasibility.

The initial objectives were to develop a prototype of an e-commerce platform for the arts and crafts entrepreneurs in the community, and also for the possible exploration of micro-tourism potential in the area. The introduction of the eCommerce aspect to the economic activities in Dwesa was aimed at activating the community towards greater involvement in economic activities in the region, but also at opening up the market base to incorporate wider international customers. The eCommerce portal was developed in direct interaction with the local arts and crafts entrepreneurs to integrate their specific needs and requirements into the platform.

The initial deployment of the services in Dwesa was centralized and predominantly web-based. Some of the above mentioned service portals are accessed primarily through a web interface to a server deployed in one of the schools. The successful deployment of the initial phase of the project paved the way to an alternative conceptualization and revision of the intervention in Dwesa. The initial phase of the project was centered around the eCommerce platform and the establishment of the associated infrastructure to support the effective utilization of the portal. The subsequent realization of the platform is to develop it as a multi-functional, multi-service, distributed communication platform for the local community. This integrates into the platform the flexibility to deploy a plethora of community based services in a manner that is distributed across the different points of access in the community. One of the key features of this new architecture and platform is that it is an inherently multi-service platform. The provision of eCommerce, eGovernment, eHealth and eJudiciary services would be built in an integrated manner on the platform as opposed to as independent service portals.

Ethno-centricity and context-sensitivity

One of the primary tenets of the discipline of ethnocomputing is the realization of the culture specific influences on computing and subsequently on the Internet [5]. Tedre et al also identify three levels of uniqueness in the human enterprise, depicted in Figure 1 [6].

At the lowest of the levels is the general human nature that is common to all human beings, the influences that emanate from this level are universal and are appreciated globally. The next level is the cultural level of uniqueness, which is encapsulates values, ideas, preferences that have been learned over time and that are part of an identity of a specific group or category of people. The topmost level, and the smallest, is the personality level. At this level, the variation is as large as there are people of earth, and it is the level at which the individuality of human being is expressed in terms of values, beliefs, and preferences.

In the consideration of ICT in development, the focus is at the level of a culture, the middle level in Figure 1. The aspects of computing that are universal and that are aligned with the general human nature, are easily transplanted from one community to another. Aspects that are cultural however, need to be considered, adapted and validated for adequacy within the environment where they are being implemented [7]. ICT4D should therefore take into consideration the ethnographic considerations and expressions of a community to avoid the technology determinism flaw that has plagued many ICT4D projects [8].

The realization of an ethnographic ICT for development intervention necessarily has to address the issues at the interface between technology and the culture of a community. More appropriately, it has to address the encoded cultural expressions in the technology and their interaction with the culture of the community in which the intervention is being undertaken. This intervention strategy is positioned within the premise that for rural communities to be active participants and peers in the global eSociety, the technology has to be relevant and contextualized to their environment.

OSCA Knowledge Matrix

Knowledge systems dynamics differ from one community to another based on numerous factors. Some of the factors that characterize different communities and that directly influence the usage and exchange of knowledge include: the levels of social stratification and the relationship between the different strata, the general power relation dynamics, and the extend of communal orientation within the community. These factors have a direct bearing on the realization of knowledge systems in communities and form part of the critical points of departure in the implementations of knowledge systems for different communities. For example, a knowledge system developed for a fairly egalitarian community where there is a cultural sense of openness and sharing would implement far less features around confidentiality and privacy than for a society with opposite cultural orientation.

This section therefore highlights the different factors and the associated dynamics that are specific to the Dwesa community, that have direct bearing of the realization of a knowledge platform for that community. These factors are characteristic of other similarly rural, marginalized, African communities.

In Nonaka's SECI framework of knowledge, he makes a distinction between two types of knowledge: tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Within the SECI framework, a process of externalization provides access to the internal tacit knowledge through explicit expression by the individual. In understanding the specific knowledge dynamics in Dwesa, the focus is on explicit knowledge as this is the knowledge that is accessible and codifiable.

The categorization of knowledge in this sections is based on a superficial aggregation of similar types of knowledge that exhibit similar characteristics, and not on any ontological or epistemological considerations. The differences in the categories of knowledge highlight specific requirements for the knowledge platform. The different categories of knowledge have been elucidated through discussions with the Dwesa community members, individuals from the Xhosa culture and other South African cultures. We present these different types of knowledge in a graph we have developed, called the OSCA knowledge matrix, which is based on the mapping of different knowledge types along the dimensions of Ownership, Social advantage, Confidentiality and Accessibility (Fig. 2):

• Common knowledge - This is the knowledge that is common to every human being and not particular to any locality or a group of people. This knowledge once codified, is accessible in the public domain and every individual is entitled to access, use and benefit from it.

• Shared-cultural knowledge - This is the knowledge that is specific to a cultural group. This knowledge is identifiable with the culture and can be assumed to be owned by that cultural group. Examples of this knowledge include folktales, stories, proverbs and riddles. This knowledge also includes arts and crafts patterns and artifacts. The issue of ownership of this kind of knowledge is a contentious one and at the core of it is the concern for the commercial exploitation that sometimes occurs. While this knowledge can be assumed to be owned by a specific ethnic and cultural group, it is however accessible to the public.
• Specific group knowledge - Within the Xhosa culture (i.e. the culture of the people in Dwesa), and in fact within other South African cultures, there is knowledge that is associated with different groups. These groups form around age, gender, social status, or ethnicity. The kind of knowledge in this category is not only owned by the specific group, but it is also private and confidential (at varying levels) to that group. Examples of this kind of knowledge include, the secret knowledge of the amadoda (the men, vs the boys) in the Xhosa culture, or banna in the Sesotho culture. Access to this kind of knowledge is normally associated with an initiation process into the group, which in this particular case is through the initiation schools. This kind of knowledge is exchanged and communicated within the confines of the group. This knowledge is associated with key social and power dynamics and in a sense access to this knowledge (or membership to the group through the initiation process) gives an individual certain social advantages. An example from the Xhosa culture is that the males who have not been to the bush (the initiation school) have lesser roles to play in family ceremonies, are held at a lesser regard as amankwenkwe (the boys) within the community.
• Specialist knowledge - An example of this type of knowledge is the medical knowledge of the amagqirha (the traditional healers) in the Xhosa culture. This knowledge is very confidential and secretive at best. It is owned by a specific individual or a close knit group of individuals. This knowledge gives the owners an advantage within their community or society. This social advantage can be in a form of the prestige that the person gets in the community, or the direct competitive advantage from the point of view of the commercial benefits of being the healer in the community. Access to this kind of knowledge is very strict and only a few people (e.g. a protege, an heir) have access to this knowledge.

Knowledge platform and related projects.

The OSCA knowledge matrix has informed the development of a knowledge platform, called KnowNet, for the Dwesa community. The KnowNet platform underlies the eServices portals that are developed for the community. For example, the eHealth portal is developed to interface and to integrate with the local medical IK. The encapsulation of knowledge is preformed at two levels. At one level, the coding of the logic and the implementation of procedural functions represents the internal knowledge about the functioning of the platform. At the core of the platform, is another level at which knowledge is explicitly encapsulated in ontologies and folksonomies. This happens at the knowledge base layer. Ontologies provide the formal and explicit specification of conceptualization of knowledge. Ontologies are domain-specific and narrowly defined for the particular area of knowledge. On the other hand, folksonomies allow for a freely structured, widely distributed, bottom-up, categorization of knowledge entities. Folksonomies represent and reveal the wide spread conceptualization and the emergent structure of knowledge.

A number of ontologies have been developed, specifically contextualized to Dwesa. These ontologies represent the following key areas of targeted eServices deployment as part of the larger project undertaken with this community:

• Health/Medicine – the knowledge encapsulated in this ontology is the traditional medical knowledge that is part of the every day life in Dwesa. This knowledge becomes crucial in the implementation of eHealth portals.

• Agriculture – the community in Dwesa is predominantly subsistence farmers, and this is a central area of community life. The IK around agriculture is contained in this ontology, which allows for the development of services that support farming in the region.
• Commerce – the potential for commercial activities in Dwesa is very high. This could be in terms of micro-tourism, arts and crafts entrepreneurship, and eco-tourism as a result of the availability of a nature reserve in the area. This ontology encapsulates the knowledge around these specific areas to enable to eCommerce customer to have an improved experience in the utilization of the portals.
• Cultural knowledge - the cultural knowledge is an important aspect of any community, and the usage of this type of knowledge permeates a variety of community services. This ontology therefore encapsulates the history, the folklore and the practices of the specific community.

Related ICT machanisms

Folksonomies and ontologies represent two positions on the spectrum of KR. On one end is the structuring of knowledge in organic, bottom up folksonomies in which the structure of the underlying knowledge emerges as the users associate content with different semantic tags. On the other end is the formalized, top-down, structured ontologies in which the knowledge gets populated into the ontologies that have been design by the experts. These two approaches to knowledge management both have their advantages and disadvantages, which are applicable in the context of the knowledge platform.

The implementation of support for folksonomies within the platform is implemented in a manner that allows the users of the platform to define tags that are associated with the different IK that is added and available on the platform. The weighting of these tags results in an emergent classification of the knowledge in a manner that represents the users' understanding of the structure of the knowledge. This emergent structure as a result of tagging the knowledge items, can be utilized to inform the revision of the associated platform ontologies . The tags associated with content can also add a weighting on the index searches that are performed on the platform. The utilization of folksonomies within the platform therefore allows for KR that is contextualized, due to being informed by the users' ontological views.

Confidentiality

One of the culture sensitive aspects that have been taken into account in the development of KnowNet is the confidentiality considerations associated with the different types of knowledge in Dwesa (and generally in rural marginalized communities). We discussed the OSCA knowledge matrix, which highlights the different types of knowledge and the associated levels of confidentiality in the community. The knowledge platform provides permissions control mechanisms to enable the specifying of the different confidentiality requirements. These requirements are handled as follows:

For the specialist knowledge (type D in Fig. 2), there is highest requirement for confidentiality and this kind of knowledge is only shared between a few specific individuals. This is achieved in KnowNet through an option to allow the owner of the knowledge to share it with a specific person already on their list of friends (i.e. related by a dwesa:knows or sub-class thereof) and to limit access from the rest of the users of the platform (Fig. 3 (a) and (b)).

The specific group knowledge (type C in Fig. 1 is shared between a small group of individuals and the group membership is typically based on a relational association between the members. Within the platform, this is enabled through permissions that are associated with a relationship type (Fig. 3 (c)). For example, one can set the read flag only for the people within the same family (i.e. associated by the dwesa:isFamily predicate) or people within the same clan group.

A key consideration for the shared cultural knowledge is the establishment of the ownership of the knowledge. On the KnowNet platform this is achieved through the association of every unit of knowledge authored with a specific user, or a specific cultural group. The actual mechanisms of enforcing the protection of the knowledge (from exploitation and abuse) are within the legislative domain in terms of copyright laws and policies.

The common knowledge is accessible and available to every user of the platform and therefore such knowledge can be authored with the read and write permissions set On for the group everyone (Fig. 3).

KnowNet implements access and permission control mechanisms that offer flexibility to cater for the different relational groupings within the community of users. The implementation of these mechanisms is possible due to the functional separation of content (i.e. knowledge base tier) from the domain logic (i.e. interaction tier) and the integration of the relational dynamics (through the social networking tier) as articulated through the PIASK architecture [9]. The platform is therefore validated as adequate for the purpose of encapsulating different types of knowledge, from the point of view of implementing the necessary confidentiality and ownership requirements as per the OSCA knowledge matrix.

IK lifecycle

The realization of the platform has been with a direct focus on being situated within the context of rural, marginalized areas as typified by Dwesa. Some of the key differences with such contexts are associated with the social dynamics, the socio-technological constraints, and the infrastructural limitations. The notion of IK is predominantly (within literature) applied to these kind of rural contexts, although in reality every community and society has knowledge that is indigenous within that community. The processes associated with IK are therefore universal and apply equally in different contexts. The life cycle discussed by Woytek in [10], encapsulates the key processes that are associated with IK. Although the life cycle is discussed from the understanding of IK being a special, different type of knowledge (i.e. not universally available) and from an external perspective (i.e. from the perspective of someone studying the IK of a specific community), it still highlights the crucial factors in the utilization of IK.

These processes are handled within the knowledge platform as follows:

• Recognition and identification - the first stage in the knowledge life cycle is the recognition and the identification of the knowledge sources that are available in a community. This process in a sense occurs within the externalization process in Nonaka's SECI framework (Section [par:Knowledge-in-society]). Externalization results in the knowledge being available in a codified form. This process is therefore facilitated in KnowNet by the ability to add new content on the platform in an explicit format (e.g. a recording of a folktale, or authoring a story).

• Validation - Once the knowledge is available in an explicit form, the next process involves validating that knowledge along the dimensions of significance, relevance, and reliability. This process is intrinsically a community process, in that the significance, relevance and reliability can only be ascertained in the context of people accessing the knowledge and commenting on it. KnowNet provides a feature for the users of the platform to validate the different content that is available on the platform. The users are able to give a vote on the content, in terms of its reliability, relevance and accuracy. The accumulated voting for the content is then calculated and made available to inform the usage of the content. The validation weights from the users are also useful in ranking the search results on the platform. The net effect from this validation mechanism is that the content that is most reliable, relevant and accurate will hopefully get the highest weighting on the platform and increased availability, and the content that the users do not find reliable, relevant and accurate gets the low weightings.
• Documentation - The process of documenting the IK primarily contributes to the externalization of the knowledge and therefore this is handled through the mechanism to add new knowledge on the platform.
• Storage - The knowledge base layer is primarily responsible for the storage of the knowledge that is available on the platform.
• Transfer and Dissemination - Intrinsic in the platform is the facilitation of the exchange of knowledge between different people and making the knowledge available. KnowNet provides features for the knowledge to be accessed via any of the channels (implemented via the Access layer agents) that are available on the platform, thus increasing the accessibility of the knowledge. For example, a user can call into the platform, browse the specific content and request that the associated file be emailed to them.

The support for the different processes in the IK lifecycle aligns the platform for effective integration into the communities as far as representing and encapsulating the local knowledge (i.e. IK) within that community.

Conclusion

The proliferation of ICT4D interventions is necessitating the exploration of mechanisms to position the undertaken projects within the context and environment of deployment. We have discussed an ICT4D project that we are undertaking in Dwesa, South Africa. Within that, we have highlighted the importance of integrating IK within the developed eServices platform. In order to formalize the dynamics associated with different types of IK, we have developed the OSCA knowledge matrix. We then highlighted the available ICT solutions towards meeting the requirements for the 4 different types of knowledge that have been identified in marginalized rural communities.

References

[1] - Bhatnagar, S., Information Technology and Development Foundation and Key Issues, Information and Communication Technology in Rural development: Case Studies from India. World Bank Institute, pp. 1--12, 2000

[2] - Castells, M., Information technology, globalization and social development, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, 1999

[3] - Hietanen, O., The Global Challenges of eDevelopment - From Digital Divides Towards Empowerment and Sustainable Global Information Society, in Seminar of global perspectives of development communication, University of Tampere, 2004

[4] - Singh, B., Information Technology for Rural Development in India, State University of New York at Buffalo, 2002

[5] - Tedre, M. and Sutinen, E. and Kahkonen, E. and Kommers, P., Ethnocomputing: ICT in cultural and social context, Communications of the ACM, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 126--130, 2006

[6] - Tedre, M. and Sutinen, E. and Kahkonen, E. and Kommers, P., Appreciating the knowledge of students in computer science education in developing countries, Proceedings of International Conference on Information Technology Research and Education (ITRE2003), pp. 174--178, 2003

[7] - Thinyane, M. and Dalvit, L. and Terzoli, A. and Clayton, P., The Internet in rural communities: unrestricted and contextualized, in Proceedings of ICT Africa conference, 2008

[8] - Thinyane, M. and Terzoli, A. and Clayton, P., Transitions Towards a Knowledge Society: Aspectual pre-evaluation of a Culture-Sensitive Implementation Framework, in Learning to live in the knowledge society, Springer IFIP - Learning of live in the knowledge society, vol. 281, pp. 271-278, 2008

[9] - Thinyane, M. and Dalvit, L. and Terzoli, A. and Clayton, P., Towards a Model of an Ontology Based, Multi-Modal and Multimedia Knowledge Portal for Marginalized Rural Communities., in Proceedings of IEEE Information Communication Technologies International Symposium, Fez - Morocco, 3rd - 5th April, 2007

[10] - Woytek, R. and Gorjestani, N. and Africa Regional Office, Indigenous Knowledge for Development: A Framework for Action, World Bank, 1998