Coming soon: the $100 (or so) laptop

So the poor kids' gadget to bridge the digital divide will be available in developing countries this month! Newsweek has a cool interview with Negroponte about it recently, calling it "the people's laptop". OK, so the price is still $150 - but the MIT guru said he'll work it down to $100.

But what's maybe cooler is the (less than) "$100 Un-PC" produced by Chennai-based company Novatium. It looks a lot more familiar to the people - just like a PC, but stripped down to the very basic parts (it only uses cell-phone processors).

The main difference between the two products is the drive behind them: Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child machine "is dependent on the kindness of wealthy partners." Whereas Novatium's Nova NetPC was about making profit, and "making the computer affordable was only part of the equation."

This reminds me of the clash of ideas between William Easterly in "The White Man's Burden" and Jeffrey Sach's "The End of Poverty".

Who will prevail?

Image from: tech.blorge.com

technorati tags: ICT-for-development

Jakarta flood and urbanization failure

One big reason for the Jakarta flooding is our failure to urbanize properly. As Lefebvre said, everything is now essentially "urban": from the Thamrin-Sudirman corridor, to the mountains of Puncak in West Java, even to the forests of Papua - meaning they are under the power of urban capital interests.

So why shouldn't the old natural flood plains of Jakarta (now places called Pantai Indah Kapuk and Kelapa Gading) fall into urban interests, as every place has? Why - specifically in Jakarta - do such interests manifest in extreme forms: building settlements where there should be none, thus risking their lives and the lives of others? Quite simple: no choice.

People need to live in the city, and they couldn't. I mean, if apartments cost Rp 10 million per square meter (and renting is far from cheap, too), then how many people can afford to live in the city? Naturally, sprawl happens. Destruction of nature is not only due to rich people wanting to have grand villas in Puncak, but also our failure to urbanize Jakarta properly.

But this may about to change. Remember Jusuf Kalla's wild idea (i.e. here and here) to build 20-storey public low income flats (rumah susun) all over big cities in Indonesia? Well, that may soon materialize (although hopefully the Government will not take his words literally!). Last week, the President just approved the exemption of value added tax (PPN) of rumah susun development by developers. The BTN bank apparently is quite excited. They've allocated Rp 1 trillion for financing this. The Director said,

If the Government can provide interest rate subsidy of 3%, then that will bring the interest rate down from currently 14% to 11%.

Hey, 11% is quite close to the 10% that Ciputra wanted. Last year, the big real estate mogul said that if he gets 10% rate, he is "willing to invest whatever it takes to build low-income flats in Jakarta."

Are we about to see a better urbanization of Jakarta?

technorati tags: settlements, cities, urban, Jakarta

On Network

Interesting that I should read Dewi's post that mentions informal community networks in Jakarta and Bangkok, and not long afterwards I stumble on Kazys Varnelis' "The Rise of Network Culture," through his blog post.

Being a fan of Manuel Castells, I read the latter quite excitedly, and found it to be a good further exploration on the importance of networks. It's quite a heavy and philosophical read (not sure I understood all of it), stating how "network culture" is the next big thing after modernism and postmodernism. I quote my favorite part:

Today, network culture succeeds postmodernism. It does so in a more subtle way. It does not figure itself as an “ism” that would lay claim to the familiar territory of manifestos, symposia, definitive museum exhibits and so on, but rather servers as a more emergent phenomenon.

A question remains in my head: how does this entirely "new cultural condition" link to the lives of the poor? Surely, they have networks too; in fact, many aspects of their livelihoods depend on networks. Would networks mean more to them now, as more people in rural areas have access to cell-phones, than before?

technorati tags: network

Nerdtivist, or is it Actinerd?

I'm just back from a two-week mission, learning about a new approach to development. While my head is screaming to let some of its content out, I think I'll let it sit for a while as I try to sort out the good parts from the details.

In the meantime, let me share some interesting articles I've recently found. They're all related to ICT for development.

Apparently, there's a gap between traditional activists and the FOSS (free and open source software) community. While the two may "frequently share ethical positions and social interests ranging from freedom of expression and cooperative organization to consumer rights, privacy, and anti-trust legislation, mostly the two groups remain unaware of each other." Why? Byfield in Linux.com shares what he thinks. It's somehow related to language (jargon) gap, domain of work gap, and even age gap.

Still related, I also found through the CivicActions blog that Creative Commons has just released a "Developing Nations" license.

This new license allows creators to make their works available for attributed free distribution (copies can be freely shared, providing the original creator is credited) in the Global South, while still retaining all copyright control in the Global North.

Here's another good quote:

We're trying to hack the copyright system, in the programmers sense of hack. Not to break it but make it function in ways it wasn't intended to work. That's not because we're opposed to copyright, but because we're opposed to copyright functioning in ways that don't benefit either the author or the end user. Copyright is meant to be a tool to promote invention

So why oh why does a gap still lie between the nerds and the activists?

technorati tags: ICT-for-development

Slow Cities

Tired of racing all the time, trying to catch the economy while losing on "good life"? Well, consider this: an international (mostly European) network of cities are joining the "Slow Cities" movement. Here's a piece from Planetizen:

[E]ven though the dynamics of globalization are affecting cities and regions, urban planners, mayors, and citizens of small towns are taking action to resist processes of standardization and homogenization. Slow Cities are dedicated to community economic development efforts that focus on the unique attributes of a place such as small businesses, locally owned restaurants, farmers markets, and socially responsible enterprises.
...
Slow Cities want to be at the forefront of cutting-edge urban planning ideas, technology and innovation. They are not against locating a McDonald's, but rather hope that through their efforts the citizens will become educated consumers who are aware of the local choices and option for getting fresh, healthly and tasty meals. Slow Cities want to be eventful places where local traditions are celebrated and mixed with cosmopolitan influences.

I see this in-line with the rationale behind "smart growth":

Smart growth tries to take into consideration the total long-term economic costs of development decisions, rather than merely an aggregation of the short term profits that can be made by improving each individual parcel of land.

As in: sure, (economic) development is important, but what about preserving some "good life" while we're pursuing it, for us and for our children?

technorati tags: cities, development, growth, slow-cities

Buy Nothing Day: Nov 24 & 25

Consumption is important. Some would say that it's so important, it's "the most fundamental decision unit." Others would say that it's so important, once in a while we need to stop and think about it, be critical about it, and not just take it for granted.

Adbusters is part of the latter. Here's what they say:

"Every November, for 24 hours, we remember that no one was born to shop. If you’ve never taken part in Buy Nothing Day, or if you’ve taken part in the past but haven’t really committed to doing it again, consider this: 2006 will go down as the year in which mainstream dialogue about global warming finally reached its critical mass. What better way to bring the Year of Global Warming to a close than to point in the direction of real alternatives to the unbridled consumption that has created this quagmire?"

technorati tags: political-economy, consumerism, buy-nothing-day

Who's afraid of Vietnam?

Newsweek has a really positive report on the Vietnam economy. Some quotes:

Economic reforms pushed by Southern entrepreneurs have fueled an economy that's grown nearly as fast as China's over the last decade. Manufacturing jobs are plentiful, and the national poverty rate has plummeted from 57 percent in 1993 to about 18 percent today.
...
[Vietnam] could become Southeast Asia's most important industrial economy in the coming decades, with the potential to surpass Thailand. This year alone, Vietnam is on track for $7 billion in foreign direct investment, roughly the same as giant India."
...
Often compared to China, Vietnam is actually more similar to Taiwan circa 1970, an economy then burgeoning with small and medium enterprises ready to burst onto the global scene.

A few weeks back Enda led me to this post from a Malaysian concerned about Indonesia's progress. It's was sad to realize that our advancement is seen with worry by others. I thought, "why couldn't we grow together?"

And now I'm in his shoes. As a fellow south-east Asian, I thought I should be proud of Vietnam's achievement, but I'm getting shivers instead. For example, I'm afraid that investments would keep going to Vietnam instead of Indonesia.

Apparently, developing countries' economic progress is also seen with shivers by free-trade protagonists of the developed world. Guardian's senior economics commentator, William Keegan, told the dilemma of "someone who had been a senior international official promoting free trade and open markets for many years." This person "had met an old friend whose previously successful US furniture business had collapsed in the face of the kind of international competition that he (the former official) had been busily promoting."

My dad once told me of a "negative" character common to the old people from our village that should be avoided: "happy to see others miserable, miserable to see others happy." But now it seems that such character is the dominant mindset.

I don't know whether I should be sad, happy, or just embrace this with a straight face.

Pic source: Newsweek.

technorati tags: political-economy, Vietnam, free-trade

Wasting rice

Tempo Interactive reported that

1. Indonesia needs up to 195 thousand tons of rice by the end of this year. There is a gap between rice production and consumption rate.
2. Not only rice production can't keep up with population growth, but in following years it is expected to decline due to decrease of the harvest field measurement and land fertility.

A few days ago a friend forwarded me an email that seem to be written by someone called Tarunajaya. It talks about how everyday rice is wasted by people who don't finish their meals:

Ceritanya ada seorang anak SD yang memenangkan suatu perlombaan pembuatan makalah dikampungnya. Masalah yang diangkat oleh anak ini sederhana sekali, yaitu pemborosan beras orang indonesia. Makalah ini dia susun melalui pengamatan saat bekerja membantu di warung dekat rumahnya.

Dalam pengamatannya dia menghitung bahwa rata-rata orang yg makan disana menyisakan 2 atau lebih sendok nasi atau 200 butir nasi setiap piringnya.

Kemudian dia menghitung, berarti setiap hari setiap org membuang 200 x 3 kali makan = 600 butir nasi. 100 butir beras kira-kira 5 gram. Sehingga kalau dikonversikan berarti setiap hari setiap org membuang 30 gr beras. Kalau org Indonesia ada 200 jt berarti terbuang 30 gr x 200jt = 6.000 jt gr = *6.000 ton beras SETIAP HARI*. Iya, satu hari saja sedemikian banyak beras yg terbuang.

The point is that rice is available. It's just that people who has it are wasting it. A classic problem of wealth distribution, rather than production. Amartya Sen has covered this since he wrote Poverty and Famines over two decades ago.

technorati tags: economics, rice, food-distribution

The economics of increasingly disasterous global warming

From BBC, a couple of weeks ago (link via John Orford):

A report by economist Sir Nicholas Stern suggests that global warming could shrink the global economy by 20%. But taking action now would cost just 1% of global gross domestic product.

Studies about global warming are nothing new. What's interesting about the Stern Report is that it's "the first major contribution to the global warming debate by an economist, rather than an environmental scientist."

[The report] warns that if no action is taken:

• Floods from rising sea levels could displace up to 100 million people
• Melting glaciers could cause water shortages for 1 in 6 of the world's population
• Wildlife will be harmed; at worst up to 40% of species could become extinct
• Droughts may create tens or even hundreds of millions of "climate refugees"

...
The review coincides with the release of new data by the United Nations showing an upward trend in emission of greenhouse gases - a development for which Sir Nicholas said that rich countries must shoulder most of the responsibility.

John Orford suggested to use Pigouvian Taxes as disincentives to pollution:

Pigou noticed that production often causes costs to the environment which the company themselves don't have to pay. Obviously the users of the environment generally have to pay the cost sooner or later in some form.

Pigou's idea was to tax the sale of products depending on how polluting they were, in effect the government would recoup the cost to the environment of the product. Consumer's would directly see the high cost of highly polluting products, which would give them an incentive to seek out less polluting products and firms to pollute less.

technorati tags: economics, global-warming

In defense of rural-urban migration

Kompas this weekend featured a special report on rural-urban migration. Two main arguments were presented in favor of this: the "no-alternative" argument, and the "rights-based" argument.

The "no-alternative" argument basically says that life in the villages sucks. Due to failure of rural livelihoods, some of the younger females had to become commercial sex workers, older males day laborers.

Marco Kusumawijaya, as proponent of the "rights-based" argument, said,

Wartiyah, like all migrants, including the Governor, came to Jakarta to look for a better life...
[...]
The job of cities is to respect this right, help them go through the process of becoming good urban dwellers, and as far as possible serve them as citizens who give governments a reason for being.

However, two city governments (in Bandung and Makassar) complain about rural-urban migration. They say,

For those who come and work, it's no problem. But for those who can't find work and become homeless, they becomes a heavy burden for the government.

What? You mean if they're unemployed in the village, it's not your burden? You're lucky Indonesia doesn't have to pay a stiped for the unemployed (like in some welfare states), and you're complaining that the people are taking care of their own lives, whereas the government has failed to do so?

To give more weight to the migration proponents, let me propose a third argument: that "urbanization is good" and should be prepared for with optimism. More labor in cities enable cheaper cost of everything, i.e. construction, food, domestic help, factory-based production. Low-income rural migrants keep cities competitive.

Imagine if you have to pay double for your food and triple for your babysitter (because it's so hard to find cheap labor). Then you'd probably demand more wage from your employer. If so, then the employer might think that your city is not competitive anymore, and they'll move their business to another city. What do you say now?

Why do we keep blaming the negative effects rural-urban migration to the low capacity of our migrants? Why don't we blame the entrepreneurs who are not ready to absorb such opportunity? Why don't we blame our education system that failed to prepare its citizens to become able workers? Why don't we thank the positive effects of having rural migrants in the city, such as the cheap food and services that we consume, and maybe our job too?

technorati tags: cities, urbanization, migration