Michael Gurstein on Wed, 19 Sep 2001 15:49:23 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Global Development Gateway.Com |
(This was written but not circulated before the recent events, but there may still be an interest... MG For anyone who hasn't yet wandered through the World Bank's controversial Global Development Gateway <http://developmentgateway.org> it might be worthwhile to take the time... The criticisms that have been raised of the GDG have mainly been of "crowding out" (of existing sites), skewed funding priorities (toward WB associated sites rather than indigenous or grass-roots developed sites), and supposed self-dealing (of WB officials). I won't go into those--they have been well presented by others and particularly on the GKD listserve. What interests me is how the strengths and weaknesses of the site(s) are so revealing of larger issues concerning Development and the very harsh realities that are being discovered about information and E-Commerce on the Net. The GDG sites that I looked at were, I think, quite useful as compilations of materials--lots of useful (but selected) links and some access to information not readily accessible elsewhere (particularly WB and related information). So far, not very different from any of the zillions of sites which rose so quickly in everything from flower growing to auto-mechanics. Clearly, the model employed was that of the late '90s E-commerce "portal" phenomenon. And the approach appears equally to suffer from the limitations of most of those portals--naive (and failed) attempts at creating communities of interest, self-interested (and failed) attempts to generate volunteer enthusiasm and thus voluntary labour and (information) contributions, and overall a rather partial window on the very complex reality(s) into which they were meant to provide a "doorway". In the case of some portals, particularly those that didn't arise from or manage to create a linked self-organizing community of interest, the output has tended to be skewed to the interests/biases/limitations of its creators and raises the hackles and competitive juices of all those who don't share those assumptions. In the Development sphere particularly, there are a range of competing interests and "communities" and what seems evident from the WB portal is that the primary community with which it is associated is the "official" ODA/government/agency/consulting world. Thus the documents/links/presentations--"reality" which is provided through the portal are the "official" documents/links/"reality" etc. Nothing particularly wrong with that--it gives useful access to something that certainly occupies a lot of the available financial/psychological/political space; but there is, as many have observed, the very real danger (likelihood) of this having the result of crowding out/unfairly competing/defunding all the other "realities"--many of which may be closer to the interests and activities of folks on the ground or in the trenches--the NGO's, the implementers, the communities, the development activists. And over all of course, is the central dilemma of the E-Commerce phenomon which, though unstated, is visible on every page--how is all this "sustainable"--financially (and socially). For many of the E-Commerce folks, the answer was "advertising" and "community building" and those sites have been disappearing at an incredible rate as funders/advertisers asked uncomfortable questions of who was looking, for how long and for what purpose and the toughest question of all--is this site (and the money I'm putting in), cost-effectively having the desired outcome for my "bottom-line" i.e. impacting the behaviour of those I'm trying to reach. What most of them found was that maintaining an up-to-date useful, interesting, relevant portal was fantastically labour intensive (and thus expensive). And ultimately it is unsustainable unless there is a direct link to a supportive volunteer community where the updating/populating of the site is done as a matter of course by a community communicating within itself and as it goes about its normal community building and community maintenance activities, cf. <slashdot.org>. The dilemma for the WB is that the only folks who, over the longer term are likely to provide on-going content development and in-put into the portal, are those who do it because they have a stake (financial) or are paid--take a look at the (lack of) participation in any of the "forums" associated with the various GDG topics or themes and compare this with any of the multitude of "community of interest" voluntary lists in those same topic areas. The very very much larger number of others who are involved in Development and who ultimately the portal is designed to reach, will find other and more accommodating and responsive/effective ways of participating in a "Development community" and making use of the Net and certainly ones that are inclusive of both "official" and unofficial channels and information. And they are very unlikely to offer their labour or their information for free where others are being (well) paid for the same efforts. So, the very hard truths of E-Commerce and Development are likely to come home to the WB GDG as they have to many others--content on the Net is an expensive business and communities (whether virtual or geo-local) are difficult to create and even more difficult to harness for any goals other than their own. Of course, the WB has the resources to ignore this, but I would guess, not for very long. Mike Gurstein (Visiting) Professor: School of Management New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark NJ USA Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. Michael Gurstein & Associates Vancouver BC CANADA _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold