Responding effectively and appropriately to large scale natural disaster requires information-driven coordinated action between many different stakeholders. Evidence from one NGO engaged in reconstruction work after the 2015 Nepal earthquake sets out some of the knowledge management practice issues faced by an organization performing this work in a challenging geographical environment with low-connectivity. Key issues are identified and a data gathering tool that encourages data-driven bottom-up development practices is presented

De Boer, Victor

Ferguson, Julie E.

Robenhagen, Aske

Visscher, Marije

English

NARCIS 

Knowledge management practices for development - Lessons from post-earthquake Nepal. A case-study on using technology to facilitate inclusive data gathering

Responding effectively and appropriately to large scale natural disaster requires information-driven coordinated action between many different stakeholders. Evidence from one NGO engaged in reconstruction work after the 2015 Nepal earthquake sets out some of the knowledge management practice issues faced by an organization performing this work in a challenging geographical environment with low-connectivity. Key issues are identified and a data gathering tool that encourages data-driven bottom-up development practices is presented.</p

VU Research Portal

VU Research PortalKnowledge management practices for development - Lessons from post-earthquakeNepal. A case-study on using technology to facilitate inclusive data gatheringRobenhagen, Aske; Visscher, Marije; De Boer, Victor; Ferguson, Julie E.published inPerspectives on ICT4D2018document versionVersion created as part of publication process; publisher's layout; not normally made publicly availabledocument licenseArticle 25fa Dutch Copyright ActLink to publication in VU Research Portalcitation for published version (APA)Robenhagen, A., Visscher, M., De Boer, V., & Ferguson, J. E. (2018). Knowledge management practices fordevelopment - Lessons from post-earthquake Nepal. A case-study on using technology to facilitate inclusivedata gathering. In Perspectives on ICT4D: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium "Perspectives onICT4D" co-located with 10th ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci'18). Amsterdam, the Netherlands, May 27,2018. (Vol. 2120). (CEUR Workshop Proceedings). CEUR Workshop Proceedings. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2120/paper7.pdfGeneral rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.            • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.            • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain            • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.E-mail address:vuresearchportal.ub@vu.nlDownload date: 22. May. 2021Knowledge Management Practices for Development -Lessons from Post-Earthquake Nepal.A case-study on using technology to facilitate inclusive data gatheringAske RobenhagenVrije Universiteit AmsterdamDepartment of ArtificialIntelligenceFaculty of SciencesMarije VisscherVrije Universiteit AmsterdamDepartment of OrganizationSciencesFaculty of Social SciencesDr Victor de BoerVrije Universiteit AmsterdamDepartment of ComputerScienceFaculty of SciencesDr Julie E. FergusonVrije Universiteit AmsterdamDepartment of OrganizationSciencesFaculty of Social SciencesABSTRACTResponding effectively and appropriately to large scale nat-ural disaster requires information-driven coordinated actionbetween many different stakeholders. Evidence from oneNGO engaged in reconstruction work after the 2015 Nepalearthquake sets out some of the knowledge managementpractice issues faced by an organization performing this workin a challenging geographical environment with low-connectivity.Key issues are identified and a data gathering tool thatencourages data-driven bottom-up development practices ispresented.KeywordsICT4D, Knowledge Representation, Emergency Response,Inclusive Development1. INTRODUCTIONResponding to widespread destruction wrought by naturaldisasters requires the coordinated long-term efforts betweenmany different actors spanning from the local communitylevel to large international NGOs and state actors [10]. Re-sponding effectively requires precise and continuous input ofinformation which can be turned into appropriate action. Inrecent years technology has increasingly been used to facil-itate development data gathering processes[1]. Given thechanging complex environments and resource limitations,different development efforts have to prioritized based onthe collected data. Within the domain of inclusive devel-opment and empowerment of peoples, affected citizens havea legitimate part in choosing these priorities[3]. Based ona field-study within a Nepalse NGO, the particular knowl-edge management issues facing an organization engaged inreconstruction and development work after the 2015 Nepalearthquake were identified. One of the key findings was thatthe information gathering processes and technological toolsused, can lead to affected citizens having a reduced say inthe relative prioritization and choice of development goals.Instead objectives set by donors and higher management arefavoured, even if organizational goals include inclusive devel-opment. Development is a complex, multi-aspect endeavorand having an organizational focus is important, however itcan lead to priority-biases. In this paper, the CitizenHelperdata gathering tool is presented as a solution to highlightthese organizational priorities as part of the data gather-ing process, whilst simultaneously aiding their informationgathering processes.2. CASE STUDY - ACCOUNTABILITY LABAt 11:56 Nepal Standard time 2015, a 7.8Mw earthquakestruck Nepal with its epicenter in the Gorkha district ap-proximately 80km from Kathmandu. The earthquake leftnearly 9000 people dead, injuring 22000, and caused wide-spread destruction of buildings and infrastructure[2]. Nepalis poor landlocked mountainous country ranking 144th onthe UN Human Development Index1 and responding effec-tively to a disaster of this magnitude is a challenge for anycountry. In the aftermath of the shock and subsequent after-shocks, many local organizations and self-organizing groupsstarted to organize to deliver aid and coordinate responseefforts affected areas outside of Kathmandu not yet reachedby government and NGO workers. One of these organiza-tions is the Citizen Helpdesk project2, at the time known asthe Quake Helpdesk. This organization established a net-work of volunteers to visit remote rural villages either notconnected in the first place or disconnected from the mo-bile phone networks due to quake damage, in order to assesthe damage and needs of affected citizens. This informationcould then be brought to NGOs to help ensure a more accu-rate picture of the needs across Nepal and help to organizethe response effort accordingly. As the emergency responseefforts progressed from immediate needs for medical treat-ment, shelter, and food towards the long-term developmentgoal of reconstruction - the nature of the work changed. The1http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/NPL# Ac-cessed 03/03/20182http://citizenhelpdesk.org Accessed 02/04/2018needs of affected citizen, some of them among the most vul-nerable in the world, remains significant. More than twoyears after the earthquake more than 600000 families werestill living in temporary shelters and less than 10% of homeshad been rebuilt with many more suffering from damagedproperty, farmland, and irrigation systems. Money has beenearmarked for reconstruction effort, but many of the mostvulnerable people are still suffering the consequences of thequake. Helping these people requires an understanding oftheir needs and data gathering to find out where the is-sues of accessing and utilizing the earmarked resources fail.Citizen Helpdesk does this through a team of CommunityFrontline Associates (CFAs) who each cover a geographicarea and their communities, conducting surveys, interviews,and organizing community meetings in response to the spe-cific needs of their communities. The organization does notprovide aid itself, but seeks to use data to break down bar-riers and bring the information to relevant stakeholders whocan take action and be held accountable. In many the casesaccess to local government is geographically hard to reach,otherwise inaccessible3 or unknown to citizens in the com-munities.2.1 Knowledge Management PracticesFor this case study, a living labs[11] field study was con-ducted during 6 weeks in April and May 2017. The studywas conducted through a mixture of participant observa-tion, semi-structured interviews, and subsequently an agiledevelopment process whereby technology was used to ame-liorate some of the identified knowledge management issuesidentified. The identified issues were:1. Communication issues between main office staff andCFAs.2. Existing data collection tools not suited to the CitizenHelp Desk work practices.3. Limited knowledge sharing between CFAs.4. Differing information requirements at the different lev-els of the organization not being met by existing tools.5. Evidence of organizational focus biases not visible tostakeholders.Communication issues between the staff in the head-quarter in Kathmandu and the community front line work-ers caused by many different modalities of communication(some used CFAs primarily used Facebook messenger, oth-ers email, text, or phone calls). This paired with the dif-ferences in access to internet and phone connectivity meanthat organizing and disseminating information in both direc-tions suffered. The organization had gone through a num-ber of different data gathering practices, but reported thatthe existing tools all were too rigid and schematic for theopen forum format used by the CFAs for their communitymeetings where the citizens often were the driver behindthe choice of topics. Knowledge sharing between CFAswas limited due to the different ways of communicating andinfrequent in-person meetings due to long travel costs and3Nepal suffered through a long and protracted civil war[12]which mean that local elections where not held for more thana decade. During the field study the first local elections sincethe new 2015 constitution where held.distances caused by the topography of Nepal. The infor-mation Requirements at the different levels of the orga-nization varied and were sometimes in conflict. Three mainlevels of information requirements were identified, one forthe CFAs who favoured personal stories and localized infor-mation to bring local organizations and stakeholders to helpwith issues in their communities and administrative wards.The staff in the main office on the other hand primarily dealtwith larger organizations at the governmental and UN level,where the need for stricter data formats and standardizedpractices were demanded. Finally the donor organizationswere interested in statistics and impact assessments in theform of reports. Organizational focus was found to beprimarily driven by the donor organizations. During thecourse of the 6 weeks field study, a new donor organizationbegan to fund the project and with that the project changedfocus from reconstruction to issues surrounding labour mi-gration. The issues of reconstruction, development, and mi-gration are deeply interlinked and all are important aspectsof the overall development efforts. Labour migration is thelargest export of Nepal and it has large consequences, goodand bad, for those leaving and for those staying behind (See[13], [8], [7], and [6] for an overview of some of the effects oflarge-scale migration). However, one issue that appeared inmany communities and community meetings was water is-sues including drought and water uncertainty. Little of thisextra information made it to the higher levels of the orga-nization because the data gathering tools rigidly imposed aparticular format for reports. This is important as Nepal,despite its large water resources in some parts, lacks sig-nificant planning in water management with many of thosemost adversely affected living in remote mountain areas.3. THE CITIZENHELPER TOOLFigure 1: CitizenHelper App OverviewThe CitizenHelper tool was developed in Nepal with theoffice staff of the Citizen Helpdesk and their communityfront line workers during focus groups and testing in Kath-mandu and in the field. The CitizenHelper tool combinesan app built around four modules, which together aims tosolve the problems identified in the previous section of thispaper. Together the intention is to create a synergy thatamplifies the reach and effectiveness of the Citizen Helpdeskproject’s work. The app combines a simple low-data usechat module which stores messages locally and sends andreceive them when the phone is connected for easy field com-munication between CFAs and office staff. The apps re-porting module is built around a Kobo Toolbox[5] back-end, but uses Enketo webforms to display freeform reportswhich allows flexibility in the reporting instead of the strictprogression enforced by other data collection tools. Kobowas selected in accordance with the criteria set out in [1] formobile data gathering tools, but with the extra criteria ofeasy maintenance, higher emphasis on low-cost, and the ex-tra criteria of external acceptance and data integration (Theopen-source Kobo Toolbox is supported by the United Na-tions with free hosting and allows sharing and queries acrossdifferent data sources). An Announcement Module al-lows dissemination of guides and training to CFAs from themain office, whilst a Wiki Module allows CFAs to sharetheir knowledge and experiences. Finally the applicationauto-generates additional meta-questions about the struc-ture of each report with the aim of providing a mechanismwhere extra information in meetings can be gathered andpriority mismatch can be identified. This final feature meansthat, in conjunction with organizational practices that en-courages it, the opportunity for inspection and adaptationof the work increases.Figure 2: Smartphone Use during CommunityMeeting[14]4. EVALUATIONThe CitizenHelper system, like all technological interven-tions, is a tool intended to facilitate the process of develop-ment and not an end in and of itself[4]. A tool has to be eval-uated to answer the question of what, if any, change it haseffected in the community where the tool was deployed. Ex-tensive evaluation over time should be considered an integralpart of the development process and for ICT4D interventionsshould draw on multiple fields of research [9]. The presentresearch employs the evaluation framework of Mthoko etal.[9] where evaluation is carried out in line with the guidingthemes of Strategic Value, Most Significant Change, Em-powerment, Livelihoods, and Sustainability. Each of thethemes are related and interdependent. Mthoko et al. makethe distinction between outcome assessment and impact as-sessment, where the former is the direct effects observedand the latter is the contribution those impacts (long-termeffects) make towards development goals (which can be neg-ative)[9]. Strategic value asks for the immediate effects andreactions to the intervention with the other themes requir-ing progressively larger spheres of consideration to evaluate(community level, long-term sustainability of the livelihoodsusing the technology, amongst others). Providing mobilephones with free calls might have the outcome that peoplemake more phone calls, which could have an impact on em-powerment if that leads to citizens using phones to organizeand putting pressure on elected officials. The evaluation ofthe current project is an ongoing process that evolves withthe project and in the present focuses on the observed effect,with the long-term impacts being evaluated in upcomingwork. During focus groups with the Community Frontlineworkers the immediate outcomes were a great desire to usethe technology in their day to day work, the unexpected out-come that they expected to save money on paper by relyingon the phone for their documentation, and appreciation thatthey felt that having a tool made for them was a sign of theorganization investing in them.5. FUTURE WORKThe informational needs and knowledge practice issuesidentified in the particular organizational setting discussedin this paper have a universality that could make the Citi-zen Helper applicable to situations where organizations aregeographically dispersed in a low-connectivity context andengaged in information-driven development work. However,to ascertain its usefulness in other context more researchis needed. Technology does not exist alone and consistentpractices and long-term uptake determine their success, solong term evaluation of the impact is needed as well.6. CONCLUSIONSThis paper has argued that effective disaster responserequires long-term coordination between diverse stakehold-ers and that providing an effective response requires high-quality data gathering over time to monitor interventions.This data gathering can be facilitated by technology. It hasbeen argued that organizational biases in choosing develop-ment priorities can be exacerbated by the use of data gath-ering technology without the flexibility and possibility foraffected citizens to have an input into the prioritization pro-cess. To help alleviate this issue, the CitizenHelper datagathering tool was presented which auto-generates meta-surveys on deployed report formats to help show if there isa discontinuity in prioritization between the providers andrecipients of development interventions.7. ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe author would like to thank Dr. Victor de Boer forsetting out the path for this research project and the VUNetwork institute4 for supporting and funding the presentresearch.8. REFERENCES[1] M. B. Fisher, B. H. Mann, R. D. Cronk, K. F. Shields,T. L. Klug, and R. Ramaswamy. Evaluating mobilesurvey tools (msts) for field-level monitoring and datacollection: development of a novel evaluationframework, and application to msts for rural waterand sanitation monitoring. International journal of4http://www.networkinstitute.org Accessed 02/02/2018environmental research and public health, 13(9):840,2016.[2] K. Goda, T. Kiyota, R. M. Pokhrel, G. Chiaro,T. Katagiri, K. Sharma, and S. Wilkinson. The 2015gorkha nepal earthquake: insights from earthquakedamage survey. Frontiers in Built Environment, 1:8,2015.[3] J. Gupta, N. R. Pouw, and M. A. Ros-Tonen. Towardsan elaborated theory of inclusive development. TheEuropean Journal of Development Research,27(4):541–559, 2015.[4] R. Heeks and A. Molla. Impact assessment ofICT-for-development projects: A compendium ofapproaches. University of Manchester. Institute fordevelopment policy and management (IDPM), 2009.[5] H. H. Initiative et al. Kobo toolbox 2.0, 2018.[6] M. Lokshin, M. Bontch-Osmolovski, and E. Glinskaya.Work-related migration and poverty reduction innepal. Review of Development Economics,14(2):323–332, 2010.[7] M. Lokshin and E. Glinskaya. The effect of malemigration on employment patterns of women in nepal.The World Bank Economic Review, 23(3):481–507,2009.[8] D. S. Massey, W. G. Axinn, and D. J. Ghimire.Environmental change and out-migration: Evidencefrom nepal. Population and environment,32(2-3):109–136, 2010.[9] H. Mthoko and C. Khene. Building theory in ict4devaluation: a comprehensive approach to assessingoutcome and impact. Information Technology forDevelopment, 24(1):138–164, 2018.[10] D. Sanderson and B. Ramalingam. Nepal earthquakeresponse: Lessons for operational agencies. The activelearning network for accountability and performance inHumanitarian action ALNAP, 2015.[11] H. Schaffers, M. G. Cordoba, P. Hongisto, T. Kallai,C. Merz, and J. Van Rensburg. Exploring businessmodels for open innovation in rural living labs. InTechnology Management Conference (ICE), 2007IEEE International, pages 1–8. IEEE, 2007.[12] K. Sharma. The political economy of civil war innepal. World Development, 34(7):1237–1253, 2006.[13] S. Thieme and S. Wyss. Migration patterns andremittance transfer in nepal: A case study of sainikbasti in western nepal. International Migration,43(5):59–98, 2005.[14] M. Visscher. Photo taken during community meeting,nepal, 2017.

Knowledge management practices for development - Lessons from post-earthquake Nepal. A case-study on using technology to facilitate inclusive data gathering

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NARCIS

VU Research Portal