ABSTRACT
Given the orders of magnitude that seem to separate the benefits and costs of Internet based telecentres in poor, rural areas of developing countries, it seems to us highly doubtful that policy adjustments undertaken within the prevailing paradigm will be sufficient if such projects are to function without ongoing donor funding. For, it is the very nature of this paradigm that sets limits to what can be achieved with respect to both costs and benefits (at least in the short to medium run). On the one hand, that is to say, the paradigm embraces the idea that the target population should have direct Internet access at a location set aside specifically for this purpose where a host of supporting constituents need to be imported from the West (as part of what in the previous chapter was referred to as a modern technological system), if the telecentre is to function at all. On the other hand, the existing paradigm presupposes a relatively advanced set of user capabilities, whereas in reality the level of user capabilities and other socio-cultural barriers to the demand for Internet access, make the entire over-elaborate technological package irrelevant to all but a few of the designated beneficiaries. The essential point is that precisely because of its package nature, the prevailing approach allows very little in the way of major reform. Thus, as we shall argue in this chapter, an entirely different paradigm is needed if the ratio of benefits to costs from Internet use in poor rural communities is to change as drastically as appears to be necessary for a viable approach to this crucial policy issue. We begin the chapter by contrasting in a simple diagram the organizational differences between the existing and the proposed paradigms. Thereafter, we identify the mechanisms through which the latter alters the benefit-cost calculus of Internet use and, finally, show that many such mechanisms can be traced back to, and draw on, a number of earlier debates in the literature on technology and development.
