..also I recommend this speech on equitable governance and people empowerment, delivered by Merlie B. Mendoza, CARITAS Manila, Philippines, at SESSION 3: SUSTAINING DEVELOPMENT AND WITHSTANDING CRISES, at Informal Interactive Hearings of the UN General Assembly with Non-governmental organizations, Civil society organizations and the Private sector

[quote="hannahb"] (McQuillan) By applying a feminist lens to community informatics we can start to develop positive action programmes, which support women's roles as innovators and active change agents and challenge existing knowledge paradigms and power hierarchies." [/quote] Knowledge paradigms and power structures must be challenged, and gender is certainly a factor to consider in capacity diagnosis (and therapeutics - building capacity). However, gender is unlikely to be the only factor at play when diagnosing why knowledge does not work for the poor. "Additional" entrenched power structures surrounding knowledge conversions are addressed at http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/knowledge-markets, and in references that can be found there. At the same website, under the tab development, attention is given to collaborative diagnostics and therapeutics, generalizing (somewhat) related work on growth diagnostics (Hausmann, Klinger, Wagner, Rodrik, Velasco at CID, Harvard University). Key in intervention design is to avoid a presumptive mindset. A feminist lens will usually be necessary, and lead to actionable ideas, as demonstrated by many contributions in this forum; but often, it may not be sufficient to warrant the desired capacity building and empowerment of rural stakeholders.

I would consider a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) "standard module regarding gender issues" very useful. Such a gender M&E module should be multi-level (macro - local to global scale , meso - sector, micro - org, pico - person) as gender issues are cross-cutting (see several of the posts). I have done some work exploring the option of a Multi-level M&E standard in health systems. A report with a "multi-level health system scorecard" (but without specific attention to gender issues) is available at: A multi level monitoring and evaluation standard in health care systems exploring the option A number of gender indicators could/should be consolidated globally, and initiatives (ICT for rural livelihoods, as well as others, health, education,...) should rather select existing indicators than (loose time and money in) develop(ing) "green-field" M&E instruments. For the maintenance of the "indicator pool," a maintenance procedure should be enacted by the development community, for an option here (in a very different sector), see the footnotes at http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/global-agreement Key points are: -- achieving synergies in M&E without draining project resources and constraining operational options on the ground, and -- ensure comparability of outcomes among peers, benchmarking can then support exchange of (proven) best practices (south-south)

As in other ICT projects, one should determine the project's scope and map (list) the stakeholders and factors that make up the project environment, in particular the so-called work system (e.g. the farm processes) in which the ICT solution is going to play a role. In the current situation (AS-IS work system) there will be an allocation of roles (doing the work, accessing the information) which may be gender-based (let's call this the gender status quo). Required changes to the gender status quo must be identified early, these are "social order changes", necessary to make the ICT solution effective (in the anticipated "socio-technical" TO-BE work system). With the stakeholders a gender-feasible socio-technical blueprint must be agreed, and related activities and evaluations (see for instance: GEM Step 1) must be planned. Typically the activities would include communications/training that is also gender-aware.

Via the APC link posted by Anapuma, answering to Question 1, I came across the Gender Evaluation Methodology for Internet and ICTs (GEM). The GEM has also been used for Rural ICT development. A. I wonder to what extent this methodology is effective in addressing the kinds of problems that exist in the field? B. Considering that also community radios and mobile phones are important communication channels, should the GEM perhaps be broadened to include these technologies? C. To what extent can community groups based learning play a role http://content.commons.net.in/ ?

Hello, My name is Jan Goossenaerts. I run a small business advocating and publishing on a more systematic use of wikis and other technologies to achieve synergy in development initiatives. How this might transform development practice is what I try to explain in a Content Commons Tutorial at www.atria.us. At the Global Alliance for ICT and Development, I have created a group Towards a Global MDG Breakthrough Plan to address the role that ICT can play in the forthcoming (renewed) action agenda for the poor. I look forward to a productive and engaging experience sharing ideas, Jan