From m-euphoria to m-governance, thinking about the potential of mobile technology

The hype about mobile technology for development work is going on the rise.  It's not for granted.  More than four billion worldwide mobile subscriptions -with the fastest growth trend in developing countries-, sounds like a great opportunity to reach and interact with broader groups of people, including the poor.  Actually, mobile penetration in Africa has expanded from about 2 to 28 subscribers (per 100 inhabitants) since 2000 (see graph at the bottom). 

This looks like a great scenario, but putting aside the m-euphoria let's explore the role for mobile technology in the field of governance.

We've blogged here about m-governance before, but this time I'll mention a non-comprehensive list of governance related activities in which mobile phones have started to be used, and then I'll go over a few caveats to consider when getting on the train of m-governance.

My list includes bottom-up and top-down activities.  I'll mention a few examples, but feel free to add more of them in the comments section.

• Voice and awareness campaigns.  Mass SMS communication has empowered people in places where censorship and violence are present.  The 2007 elections in Kenya or the case of Zimbabwe are just a few examples of how mobile technology can empower people by giving them voice and information.
• Social participation and advocacy.  Grassroots organizations have taken the lead in using technology for advocacy and mobilization purposes.  Philippines and the protest against former president Estrada, women in Kuwait advocating for the right to vote -which they ultimately won- and pro-democracy demonstrations in Ukraine and Burma are examples that have been replicated in the rest of the world. 
• Voting and participatory decision making.  While civil society organizations have used mobile phones to monitor electoral processes in several countries, it seems that cells will enable m-voting in the following years, as per the case of Estonia, where the Parliament approved the use of mobile technology for the 2011 elections.  Also, as part of a pilot in the field of participatory budgets, citizens of La Plata in Argentina will have the chance of voting this year for their preferred public investment project via SMS (here in Spanish).
• Public service delivery.  M-government is making its case as a complementary way to reach people that remained unconnected until mobile technology knocked their door, and to provide public services in a more efficient way.  Information consultations and requests, denunciation mechanisms and payment of services are just some of the examples in Malaysia, the Philippines, among other countries. (Visit the World Bank's e-Development site to learn more on m-government).
• Data collection and monitoring. Data collection and monitoring activities are relevant to inform governance reform and to improve management practices and operations in the public sector.  Recent developments allow collecting data in remote areas with the use of cells and PDAs, in some cases without having a cellular or internet connection (as it is the case of EpiSurveyor and other).  More automatic data collection and monitoring activities are just starting, as per the following point.
• Crime denunciation.  Mobile technology has made easier the denunciation and reporting of crime in Ireland, Turkey, and Peru by providing real-time exchange of information between citizens and law enforcement units.  In Ireland, MMS (multimedia SMS) has been used to send photos of criminal suspects to law enforcement agencies; while in Turkey, law enforcement units have used mobile devices to pull out information of the vehicles they stop and then cross checked it other government units, such as tax payment, criminal records, motor registration (read about both cases here); finally, in Peru,  crime reporting systems have helped in the reduction of crime at the locality of Miraflores.]

The list and number of visible examples will certainly grow over the following years. However, while the m-wave gets bigger, there are some caveats to consider, based on the experience of success and failures in e-government projects.  Richard Heeks from the University of Manchester argues that, among other things, e-government projects fail because there is a misconception and gap between "where we are, where we want to be, and how technology will help us to get there." 

Technology is a great enabler, but it's just a tool.  A vibrant civil society and governments willing to listen and interact with citizens are just some of the basic ingredients to translate the m-euphoria into successful m-governance stories. However, as penetration rates expand and cells become an individual's fingerprint, the potential for advances in the governance field through the use of mobile technology and its combination with other ICTs becomes more real.