Aakash iTutor Tablet

I came across this today

http://www.aakashitutor.com/

The Aakash iTutor (TM) Program is a tablet based complete educational product that combines the best of classroom learning and self-study. It is based on next generation learning solutions and claims helps one to learn more in less time.

Positive: IT combines class-room learning and self study. 

Today laptops are the way to go. We watch movies, videos and matches on laptops, listen songs on laptops, work on laptops, surf on laptops, chat, skype, facebook all on laptop.

In years to come tablets may take its place due to extra portability and user-friendly touch input screen. So incorporating tablets for educating people, may be an idea with lot of demand in future. If people would be doing everything else on tablets why not study as well

Negatives:


Courses are offered only for:
Class VIII and above, Medical, and Engineering Entrance exams (It then may seem, just another way to tap into huge coaching revenues)

Anyway coming from Aakash the big name in entrance exam coaching it was something we should expect. However it would be interesting to see if it even helps the older kids.

We could make such a tablet available and then let students download each year's books as he progresses. It will let us focus on content once we might have invested one-time in the infrastructure.

India's efforts at giving a chance to marginalized people to share in creating information

An interesting read: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/06/tech/bangalore-india-internet-access/index.html?hpt=hp_bn1

ISOC through an Internet Society Community Grant of US $9,000, and other initiatives in India are brought to light, as well as the poor standing of India in the digital community.

There is also a very accurate conclusion: people in India never got a chance to participate in creating information.

Today cities like Bangalore, and other entrepreneurial efforts are aiming at changing that.

Kissan Kerala

Kissan Kerala is an integrated, multi-modal Agriculture Information System for Kerala. It is one of the leading citizen centric e-governance projects of the Department of Agriculture, Government of Kerala. It is conceptualized, implemented and managed by Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management-Kerala(IIITM-K).

Kissan Kerala also has a channel on Youtube. The channel provides telecast quality informative videos on agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries and allied topics.

Visit http://www.kissankerala.net for more information.

The youtube channel is http://www.youtube.com/user/kissankerala

Such ideas may not be able to reach the rural poor at one go. But I believe it is the first step in the right direction of building infrastructure for the rural farmers.

Digital Empowerment

The digital medium is becoming a powerful medium for the poor to get their views across. The video below shows how digital activism is growing among the poor. How the digital medium is empowering the youth of the poor. Have a look and realize that the possibilities are endless.

Water ATMs: Yes, you heard it right!

Ever heard of a Water ATM? The term took me by surprise the first time I heard it. I just couldn't believe it. Believe it or not Water ATM is a reality. It is an innovative & profitable solution to provide clean water in rural India. The Company behind this project, ‘Sarvajal’ currently has 154 rural franchises and currently 84854 people are drinking clean water because of them. They have made innovative use of a lot of simple technologies available today to deliver this innovative service.

How does something like this become possible? Not only possible but also profitable! Watch the video below to know the answers.

Awesome! Isn't it?

Using programmatic CDM to trigger transformative change...

Before we proceed to the innovation and technology, it is important to go through a few definitions necessary to understand the project.

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets. (United Nations Framework for Climate change)

The official definition by UN for programmatic CDM is, “A Program of Activities (PoA) is a voluntary coordinated action by a private or public entity which coordinates and implements any policy/measure or stated goal (i.e. incentive schemes and voluntary programs), which leads to GHG emission reductions or increase net greenhouse gas removals by sinks that are additional to any that would occur in the absence of the PoA”. (United Nations Framework for Climate change)

Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) are a type of emissions unit (or carbon credits) issued by the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board for emission reductions achieved by CDM projects and verified by a Department Of Energy (DOE) under the rules of the Kyoto Protocol. These carbon credits can then be sold in European energy markets to buyers who seek to meet the emission norms set by the Kyoto protocol.

About 3 billion people cook and heat their homes using open fires and biomass stoves. Nearly 2 million people die every year from indoor air pollution. 44% of these are due to pneumonia, 54% from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and 2% from lung cancer. Cooking indoors over and open fires is equivalent to smoking two packs of cigarettes per day. According to a study by the UN, ‘Women exposed to heavy indoor smoke are three times as likely to suffer from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (e.g. chronic bronchitis), than women who use cleaner fuels. Among men (who already have a heightened risk of chronic respiratory disease due to their higher rates of smoking), exposure to indoor smoke nearly doubles that risk.’

Fig 1: A women using traditional stove to cook the meals

Therefore, conversion of these biomass (mainly wood) based stoves to a cleaner technologies would not only be a great help to the poor people using these but would also be a boon to the degrading environment due to these activities.

Fig 2: An improved cook stove

Following are a list of possible advantages by replacing the traditional stove with the improved cook stove shown in the figure above.

Around $70-150 of income would be saved per year per family as the usage of the wood would drastically reduce by using the improved cook stove. Moreover, more than 250 hours of useful time in collecting and buying the wood would be saved per family per year. Further, over 30 trees wuld be saved resulting in saving of 3-5 tons of CO₂. This would also mean 50% less exposure to particulates from the smoke which will have huge health benefits for the poor people.

This project is currently being implemented by Earth Matters, Don Feil and SOSAI (DARE) in association with UN.

Following are the financials (and funding pattern) of the project:

•          Such stoves are sold in the open market at $35-40 each. This is really beyond reach for the poor families using stoves to cook.

•          These companies sell these stoves at a subsidized price of $10-15 to the consumers.

•          They then use funding from impact investors, debt and grant providers to fund the difference.

•          As this project is classified under programmatic CDM, CERs are issued by the DOE under the guidance of UN for reduction in CO₂.

•          The CERs are then sold in regulated markets like Europe over 5 years to pay cost of the subsidy and other operational costs.

•          For the consumers, the stove pays consumer in approximately 2 months and produces long term health and environmental benefits.

Therefore, it is a win-win for all. This is one of best examples of how a small technological innovation can be used to improve the lives of millions of poor families in underdeveloped and developing nations. Currently, this project is being carried out in poorest countries like Nigeria in Africa.

Reinventing "The wheel"..

Now that so many debates have happened over different ICT4D intervention, I could see a trend in success, failure or sustainability of all these interventions. Here is my $0.02 over this topic in here,

Government as a Stakeholder

Time and Time again, it has been a key differentiator for ICT4D in including government as a buyer, seller, benefactor, enabler or a stakeholder in the value chain that ICT intervention creates. The government would have already laid a foundation or has intentions on it and a general rule, a little help from government is always better for a BOP reach.

Timing of the project

We are talking about technology, the one that halves in cost every 18 months. A late entrant becomes redundant while a too early bird becomes just a visionary who is far from reality. 

There is also a difference between technology cycle in urban and rural. I could not figure out the relative span between the two. In some cases, rural technology span has been eternal (Radio has been a key information medium for a span so long  that the initial wave of urban radio came out, spent the time, became obsolete, hibernated and then resurrected through FM frequencies). The irony is that in some other cases, the rural technology cycle is so short considering the late technology adoption making the rural technology span narrow and only as a subset its counterpart.

Incentive to majority of stakeholders

We have known the so called “Spill-over effects” but when there is a negative effect its better interpreted as the “The Intruder Effect”.  Consider this, there is an existing system in place (how obsolete it may be) and there is always inertia to move away from it and it creates ripples right across the value chain. It could be elimination of middle man, unwillingness to delegate responsibility, lack of trust or for worse might be classified as capitalistic.  The delicate way of sharing the pie is really critical.

Not another piece in the puzzle

In urban model leave a better technology on the table and it`s for grabbing. In rural model, An investment should be pushed against the pulling behavior of the urban market. A replication model from urban to rural is like letting it walk in the dark unguided. There are also other mentoring agendas including last mile delivery, adoption process and year round support.

Although with above factors addressed, ICT4D looks better on papers but still it`s a delicate balance. One side there is lower margins and high volume possibilities and on the flip side there is at least an extra mile to travel from the way business has been done traditionally. Yes, there is double side uncertainty but there is one more perspective worth a mention here. Urban markets are stagnating. An average PC buyer is a replacement buyer not a new buyer. It will not be any more a choice to focus on rural BOP but a bandwagon to catch on. But the rules of the game are still the same.

P.S - An interesting and inclusive corporate perspectives on ICT4D have been addressed in the below video (Impatient surfers should skip forward to the 8^th minute and have a glimpse on the myths part). My favorite quote - “Technology magnifies human intent and capacity” and just that.