Earlier this month, the Corporate Council on Africa (CCA) held its 8^th Biennial US-Africa Business Summit in Washington DC. One of the key focus areas at the summit was the agribusiness sector in Africa with sessions and workshops covering topics such as “Winning for Farmer Entrepreneurs and Investors”; “Partnering to Build an Integrated Agribusiness Sector”; “Financing a Dynamic African Agribusiness Sector”; “Removing Barriers to Create Opportunities in Regional and Global Trade”; and “Leveraging Development Assistance to Support Private Enterprise”. Stories and experiences from a number of participants who are already in the market in certain parts of Africa clearly show the increasing interest in changing Africa’s agricultural sector from an “AID Recipient” to a “BUSINESS Partner”. This of course, calls for a number of changes including the perception of agriculture by the smallholder farmers that need to be undertaken in Africa’s bid to revamp its agricultural sector.

As an agricultural information specialist, I followed with keen interest the proceedings at the said US-Africa Business Summit with special concern for agricultural development in the continent. What I saw and heard at the summit during the discussions on issues such as farmer entrepreneurship, partnership, financing, removing barriers for regional trade, and leveraging development assistance within the agricultural sector, seemed to be missing a major component – information and communication technologies (ICTs). In fact, one would have expected most of these discussions to have some element of  ICTs as enabler or catalyst for the entire agricultural value chain. Especially given the Information Economy Report 2011: ICTs as an Enabler for Private Sector Development (PSD), published by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) that pointed out clearly that the potential of leveraging ICTs to develop the private sector is far from fully exploited.

Access to information by smallholder farmers is key for producing high quality products to meet market specifications both locally and international. ICTs are key in gathering and delivering timely and accurate agricultural information for farmers to be able to do just that. Smallholder farmers are currently using ICTs in pre-production and production activities across the world that the business sector needs to exploit and leverage upon in Africa.  This is being achieved through the reformed and modernized Agricultural Advisory Service (AAS), which connects local farmers to research, market, and policy. Popular applications that should interest companies and institutions interested in Africa’s agribusiness include Grameen AppLab Community Knowledge Workers; Farmer Voice Radio Project; M-Powering Farmers, and other radio services across the developing world.

Farmers also lack access to credit for their production and there are a host of financial services using the new ICTs to facilitate the flow of financial services to smallholder farmers in the developing world. Mobile payments, mobile money, or mobile banking applications are being used to make financial transactions more accessible, faster, and safer for rural farmers. These services also link farmers to financial services and make it easier for them to save money obtained from their farm activities for other social services. These are great opportunities for entrepreneurs and the business community interested in investing in Africa’s agribusiness to explore. Examples include the M-PESA currently operating in countries like Kenya and Tanzania; Mobile Money in Ghana, Uganda, Zambia and others.

Also worth exploring is ICTs for market. When one talks about business, the first thing that comes to mind is “market” and markets affect smallholder agriculture production from inputs supply such as seed, agrochemicals, farm machinery to the outputs or products delivery to the final consumer either in the local, regional or international market. Access to market information helps farmers find out about market prices, make decisions regarding when to harvest, how to negotiate with intermediaries, etc. ICTs models such as esoko in a number of Sub-Saharan Africa countries, e-Choupal and Reuters Market Light in India, Manobi in Senegal, Infotrade in Uganda, and Zambian National Farmers Union MIS are just the tip of the iceberg.

The traditional agricultural extension service, which has been a public platform over the decades, is undergoing a lot of reforms to create an enabling environment for the private sector to heavily invest in the ICTs sector. With the new models of agricultural extension reforms such as decentralization, privatization, commercialization, pluralism, and partnerships, there should not be any barrier for the private sector in using ICTs to enhance their agribusiness in Africa. American and European businessmen and companies interested in Africa’s agriculture should not make mistake by ignoring the importance of “information” in their business – ICTs can help when recognized and incorporated into the agribusiness plan!

While moderating a session at the just ended US-Africa Business Summit, the immediate past CEO of Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization (CTO), Dr. Ekwow Spio-Garbrah responded to a question from me about the experience of the panelists on the presence and administration of Universal Service and Access Fund (USAF) in the continent of Africa. In his response, Dr. Spio-Garbrah stated that “money is not the issue when it comes to extending broadband Internet to remote communities across the world for rural people to be able to participate in the information society”. In other words, there might be enough funds to support the deployment of broadband Internet to most rural communities that are currently not connected. So what does this mean to the ‘unconnected communities’?  To know that there could be enough funds somewhere but due to the poor administration of the funds, poor management of the funds, or non-utilization of the funds, they are still being left out in the global Internet revolution.

I find the statement made by the moderator very interesting. I wonder if some of the key stakeholders on the panel such as the World Bank, Microsoft, and SEACOM really understood the implications of the statement. In other words, where do we put the blame? On the national governments; on the regulatory and policy environments; or on the telecommunication operating companies? I am wondering if these organizations or corporations are aware of the existence of USAF in some of the countries they are operating in Africa but have not exploited these funds in anyway to support their Puplic-Private-Partnership (PPP) activities. While almost all the panelists have argued that there is so much investment going into infrastructure, policies, applications/services, funding, and regulatory mechanisms to support African countries (in this context), why is it that the administration and management of USAF is still a challenge in most of these countries – at least the countries that have established the fund? What of other countries that have not even initiated USAF due to the poor telecommunication regulatory environment that exist in those countries?

In responding to my question (which was virtually avoided by the panelists), Dr. Spio-Garbrah gave a background to USAF by stating that most countries, through their regulatory bodies have applied a levy of between 1-5% of the total gross income of the operating telecommunication and mobile phone companies to establish USAF. This has resulted in the generation of a large volume of such funds all over the world, which has to be used to ensure access to broadband by all. He cited the World Bank’s estimate some years back about 10 billion dollars that was generated as a result of USAF. But unfortunately, this fund has not been adequately utilized, and in some countries lying down dormant. He stated that this fund is available and can be blended with World Bank funding, USAID funding, and private sector funding to be able to get the broadband to the rural people – the last mile. To get broadband to those who needed the Internet more to be able to perform their basic e-businesses and reduce traveling hundreds of miles to the nearby city once they have access to a simple $30 tablet.

So if it is true that ‘money is not the issue’, then why this picture – I mean the global picture. The under 40% global penetration of Internet – 30.2% to be specific based on the Internet World Statistics for March 2011? But of more interest to me, are the figures from the developing world – Africa, Asia, etc. Looking at the statistics from the figure below, there is no doubt that policy makers, regulators, governments, and donors need to work together to leverage their investments in the ICTs sector in order to benefit the ordinary citizen.

This also reminds me of a European Union document that argues that despite the numerous success stories about the administration and use of USAF, there are equally a number of horrible stories. The document cited reasons such as funds that have been established in law but have not been operational as many as 5 years later. Others have determined levies, over-collected and under-spent. Still other funds are over spent by providing subsidies for unsuccessful projects, or for inefficient use in projects. Some have initiated projects but have not been able to coordinate them amongst different levels of government and different affected government departments. Some of the funds also have not made their collections and disbursements public on a periodic basis and have not held regular Board or Trustee meetings in order to facilitate project design, development and implementation. All these reasons boil down to the management and administration of the funds.

National governments in the developing nations have the opportunity to better utilize this fund through the GBI’s Universal Service & Access Funds Project which expands awareness/best practices, and provides technical assistance for both new and existing Funds. The GBI Program builds off of earlier successes in supporting USAFs in Asia and Africa through the Last Mile Initiative (LMI).

This blog is my reflection on a session titled “Talking to the Future: Bringing Global Broadband to the Doorsteps”, during the 8th Biennial U.S.-Africa Business Summit that was held between October 5-7, 2011 in Washington, DC, organized by the Corporate Council on Africa’s (CCA). Participants came from across the world – Africa, Europe, Asia and US.

A recent study undertaken in Haiti found that mobile phones can deliver critical information on population movement rapidly and accurately following disasters.

Richard Garfield presented the findings from the research he conducted with several other public health specialists and social scientists at a recent mHealth working group meeting using data from mobile phone networks before and after the 2010 earthquake that rocked Haiti. The publication explains how the research team used position data of SIM cards from Haiti’s largest mobile phone company, Digicel, to estimate population movement trends following the earthquake and the subsequent cholera outbreak.

The researchers originally set out to find this data in order to respond to the disaster in Haiti. Knowing that 1 in every 3.8 people in Haiti owned a cell phone, they collaborated with Digicel to track the number of calls and the location of those calls over the course of a year, before and after the earthquake. Most mobile users were based in Port-au-Prince where the earthquake was centered. While cell reception was down for a few days immediately following the quake, the network capacity was rapidly re-established, making the phones easy to trace.

A 22 % decline in phone usage in Port-au-Prince after the quake correlated with the massive outflow of population from the capital, which was widely known. In the aftermath of the disaster, the UN and Haitian government had created maps based on eyewitness observation to track population movements. But because these were reliant on eyewitnesses, there was no way to tell how accurate the data was.

In fact, the mobile phone usage analysis showed different results from these official maps, showing movement that was more spontaneous and seemingly more accurate. Many of those who evacuated Port-au-Prince originally returned back within 7 days, and this was something the official numbers did not catch right away. Months after the earthquake when the UNFPA carried out a survey in Haiti to retrieve more accurate numbers of where people were and when, the mobile phone data was much more closely associated with these results. The mobile phone data also helped to estimate where the cholera outbreaks were happening and to get people out of the danger zones.

 

Garfield emphasized that while these results do not indicate that mobile data should be used as final, official counts on death tolls, it can provide initial estimates while waiting for more accurate counts. The key point is to mine the data rapidly and assist in a quick response.

Will this research lead to improved quick responses for future disasters? It certainly could be combined with current disaster relief efforts following the recent earthquake in Turkey, such as Google’s Person Finder app or social media response.

Last week’s mHealth working group meeting laid out the opportunities, challenges, and potential of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) within the mHealth sector.

 

Several experts in the field presented their experiences of monitoring and evaluating mHealth projects, emphasizing the considerable potential that mobile projects offer in generating robust and accurate data. Kelly L’Engle, a behavior scientist at FHI 360, discussed the need for M&E in order to gauge the impact of mHealth. She claimed that mHealth technology is not being fully leveraged and that the current mHealth research “doesn’t provide evidence on actual impacts…or answers to critical research questions…”

James BonTempo from Jhpiego presented on evaluating behavior change evidence from a text message project that promotes male circumcision (MC) for HIV prevention in Tanzania. He referred to this evidence extraction as “mining the data exhaust” – that is, the data generated as a byproduct of ICTs, the “trail of clicks” that ICT users leave behind.

The MC program offered a toll-free text-messaging/SMS service. With the service, individuals could request to receive information on the benefits of MC (using key word: TOHARA), where to find MC services (WAPI), as well as receive follow-up care information after undergoing the circumcision (BAADA). While the SMS platform was intended to capture requests to the three keywords and generate access logs for system performance monitoring, Jhpiego has analyzed this data in order to see if there was a relationship between requests for the MC data and actual utilization of MC services.

The data set included 12,056 keyword requests sent by 4,954 users. After performing a Chi Square analysis on the data, the project team found that requests for information on the benefits of MC (TOHARA) was not strongly associated with going to receive the circumcision. However, it was found that those who requested where to find the data (WAPI) did have a statistically significant association with undergoing the circumcision. These results are consistent with pathway models of behavior change, indicating that those who simply wanted to know more about MC were not quite prepared to undergo the procedure, but those looking for service availability were ready to use the services.

The associations found in this particular project imply that providing text or voice messages that tell people where to get a particular service could be more effective in encouraging clients to utilize that service. M&E that finds results such as these could help project leaders design SMS services that generate more useful data.

Like most forms of M&E, there are limitations on findings that use mobile data. There is a lot of information that mobile devices do not provide, such as which phones belong to whom and who actually sends the text messages; this makes it difficult to link messages to specific individuals. In the MC case, data analysts found an association, but did not necessarily know the nature of the association. It can also be challenging to find the time or manpower to rake through the massive amount of data that is produced by mobile devices.

While M&E in mHealth has its limitations, it is difficult to find data that can be collected and analyzed as quickly, cheaply, or easily using other means. Paper, radio, and television simply do not offer the same kind of easily-mined data exhaust that mobile does.