MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403638975 · doi:10.15353/joci.v20i1.5497

The Contribution of Community Informatics in Rural Communities to Development

2024· article· en· W4403638975 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenneth Erickson Kirya, Clement Nabutto Lutaaya

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformaticsRural communityCommunity developmentGeographyEnvironmental planningSociologyPolitical scienceSocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community informatics (CI) is a generic term used to refer to Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) deployed in communities to meet community needs, simplify day-to-day tasks, close digital divides, among other benefits. In practice, it is about the use of information and ICTs in community development efforts to enable and empower community processes so as to achieve community social, economic, cultural and political goals. On the other hand, community development is the promotion of participative democracy, sustainable development, human rights, economic opportunity, equality and social justice, through the organization, education and empowerment of people within their communities. This paper established the contribution of community informatics to the development of rural communities with reference to Kaliro district as a case study area. Using participative case study design and mixed methods research approach, responses from 173 CI users and 33 district workers engaged through questionnaire survey and interviews respectively were analyzed and results were presented quantitatively in tables and qualitatively under themes for interpretation. The study found out that CI contributed significantly to the district's social, economic, cultural, and political development. Towards social development, the CI promoted social connection and networking, ensured quick information flow, and fostered knowledge sharing. Towards economic development, they promoted trade and business, business and economic awareness, efficiency and effectiveness in service delivery, reduction in operational costs, job creation, income generation, and fostered new CI developments for businesses. Towards cultural development, they exported culture, promoted cultural awareness, tourism, and reinforced cultural freedom among the people of Kaliro district. In terms of political development, they had promoted government programs, human rights, provided government information, enabled civic education, eased follow-up on political developments, and fostered political stability in the district. Study findings showed that communities leverage CI and its infrastructure to keep up with information about government programs, health, environment, education, personal development, economic living, empowerment, and democracy, among others in a sense that triggers development. However, there is a general literature gap owing to the novelty of CI concept and the dearth in review evidence pointing out the contribution of CI to development of communities. Keywords: Community informatics; Community development; ICT4D; Kaliro district.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0080.003
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207