Do we sometimes overrate new technology at the expense of the old? Is there a possibility that we idealise the impact of the new to a degree that we completely overlook things that still work perfectly well?
Does Africa always need to go high-tech?
This is the continent that has in some ways led the world in terms of innovative uses for mobile phones and financial services (in some countries airtime has become a form of currency). The way in which Africa has leapfrogged older forms of telephony is an object lesson in how poor, supposedly unsophisticated people will embrace an innovative new technology with alacrity if it is affordable and adds value to their lives.
Cellphones work so well in Africa because they’re easy to use, the technology is relevant and there’s enough investment in infrastructure to ensure that they function. The fact that cellphones and airtime vouchers require hugely expensive masts, transmitters and technicians — all paid for by corporations looking to make a profit — in order to be able to make and receive calls is a reminder that while Africa must embrace new technology in order not to be left behind, that technology must also work under what are all too often, ahem, challenging conditions.
This simple paradox struck me as I walked into the DTI complex in Sunnyside, Pretoria, where my colleagues and I had travelled to present to a potential new client. All along the perimeter of the building, men and women had positioned themselves on plastic chairs. Some of them were surrounded by customers; others sheltered under umbrellas. The one thing that all of them had in common was that, on their laps, each of them held … a typewriter. It was a sight so extraordinary that I stopped to stare.
I hadn’t seen a typewriter for years; it had never occurred to me that anyone still used them. And yet here were several people running little businesses typing up letterheads for people who were then walking inside to queue at the Cipro help desk.
“Old technology,” our IT director smiled, pointing out that nobody needed IT support. And I realised that all of this made perfect sense. Think about it: no electricity required. No printers, no cables. No expensive toner, just a ribbon. No high overheads, so you can keep your prices low for your customers. Press any key, and it works.
What does this mean? I was reminded of last week’s FinScope presentation, which revealed that fewer poor South Africans have bank accounts according to this latest set of research figures than they did last year — a shocking indictment of the country’s ability to lift its people out of endemic poverty. Wizzit founder Brian Richardson argued that the reason for this was firstly a regulatory environment that makes it difficult for poor people to sign up for bank accounts, and secondly that a formal, bureaucratic institution would never be able to properly service the chaos and informality of a township.
Old technology survives in Africa because it fulfils a need. It survives because it works when you need it to.
Sometimes, the solution is to be found, not in new frameworks or innovations, the latest technology or global best practice, but in something that Woody Allen explores in his latest film. Sometimes, you shouldn’t overthink things. You take what you can get.
Maybe what Africa needs is whatever works.
I’m a telecoms veteran (as much as I hate to have to admit to it) having been in the industry since 1983 and I could not agree more.
Far too often we make technology the end as opposed to the means. Techies love new technology, but “new technology” fast becomes yesterday’s technology and causes the entire ecosystem to become more complex to maintain.
Too seldom do we concentrate on making old technology far more effective. Far too clever for our own good is what we are.
Viva the renaissance of the typewriter!
Sarah, are you sure you do not have some black blood running through your veins. I would bet your great grand father was some Taxi boss from the Faraday Taxi association – after all these taxi owners have proved over and over their unwillingness to move over to more modern and secure taxi fleets and would rather make bundles of cash with the very very old Jalopies.
On a more serious note, i think you have just hit the nail on the head. It pains me though that with all the so called African professionals and Politicians, who are quick to point a fingure at the West when it suits them, they have not yet realised this reality – not only for the convenience and cost cutting as you pointed out, but perhaps more importantly, reduce the dependance on the very West that they all love to despise.
That way, we could see some real economic growth, and not the superficial type that we see when our comrades spend millions (that could be used for develoment)on the latest German machines
When I was at school, a physics teacher pointed out how cheap it was to use ethanol for many fuel uses. When we asked why poorer countries didn’t then use it, he gravely said that ethanol was less “cool” than petrol, so many poorer govts, to look wealthier and more “withit” opted for petrol. It’s a case of looking good to everyone else. It’s like aircons in India. they’re a status symbol. People on the ground it seems, are smarter.
Good points. I need to stew on it a bit.
I saw hundreds of people in Ugandan markets diligently sewing clothes with foot-powered machines. What makes or breaks new technology is the entourage of marketing media as it is introduced. People are presented with a view that their futures would be incomplete without the new additions, and if they have the means, they buy into it. In Africa, those are by far the minority. (Even if they sometimes make decisions for many.) For the rest, and that’s a big market, circumstances enforce pragmatism!
Sarah – both old and new technology can be beneficial to Africa. One of the biggest problems is technology is foisted upon us because it makes money for the producer, not because it is the best technology for the user/consumer.
If governments would objectively choose technology that was most beneficial and least harmful while taking into account socio-economic issues without lobbying and bribes from industry we would be in a much better position.