IDENTIFICACIÓN Y EVALUACIÓN DE IMPACTOS AMBIENTALES

4.5.1 Partnership Concept and Governance

The concept and nature of not-for-profit PPP in education (See Box no 6.6) is not crystallised yet. Though the two parties are in partnership but the idea, as to what this partnership entails, is not the same for HiWel and the government partner. In the absence of

51

I did not collect data on the number of PLCs vandalised but from passing reference made by the HiWel-Jaipur team came to know that PLCs in at least 4 locations in Jaipur city

a common conceptualisation one will not be surprised if the impact of the partnership is not visible or if the benefits of the partnerships fade away as the projects end.

The project had suffered delays in payments agreed upon in the MoU. The construction of kiosks for establishing PLCs was the responsibility of the JMC. At the time of data collection in July 2009 out of 200 PLCs as planned in the MoU in 2007 only 45 had been established because of delay on part of JMC in constructing the kiosks. Rest of the computers were stored in a building constructed by JMC for the purpose of an old age home.

The HiWel-JMC-MoU however does not go into the details as to how PLCs will function once the project is over. There is no exit plan. The sustainability and partnership transformation of such MSP model is suspect because a clear phase out plan is neither mentioned in the MoU nor discussed amongst partners during the process of the project implementation. After the end of the project timeline one could see the schools with PLCs struggling with the running cost and maintenance issues (See Box 6.7).

Prior to my visit to Jaipur to study PLCs, I had asked the HiWel team in Delhi how it was possible for children who never had access to formal schooling or good schooling to learn without any sort of handholding? One team member had told me that they are aware

Box 6.6 Concept of PPP Remains to be Understood

“When it comes to PPP, the government still has idea of contracting out the construction of roads and bridges as the only kind of partnership. Even in case of JMC, education is not on their agenda yet. They do not understand the concept of partnership in education.” (Interview, HiWel team-Delhi, 2010)

Box 6.7 Sustainability Issues

“Now since HiWel has handed over the PLC to the government, the PLC will remain shut down. I do not know where and how to pay the electricity bill. Last summer, I received a bill of 5000 INR (111 USD approx)and the electricity board then snapped the connection. We have been without electricity since the beginning of the new term. Now if the computers run, there will be electricity bill too, but there is no provision to pay for those bills. How could I keep the PLC working?”(Interview, Government teacher of a school with PLCs kiosk in school building, 2010)

of the challenge and therefore their work with SSA (in Delhi) has a special focus on working with and through government schools and teachers. In case of REI, HiWel had clearly not delivered benefits due to lack of integration with SSA.

4.6 Conclusion

There is a conflict between how the HiWel project is promoted as an example of self organising learning environments and ground level realities in under-developed locations in Jaipur city. Though the approach towards learning as adopted by HiWel is self exploratory, in actual practice it was found that various modes of support guidance and inputs were being provided to the children through collaborating partners, volunteers and supervisors. Some of the approaches were almost akin to what goes on in a classroom where teachers simply write on the blackboard and children copy the content in their notebooks.

There was conflict of interest between the government-led programmes in providing access to education for girls in schools vis-à-vis programmes focussed on education for out of school youth or children or communities through HiWel kind of experiment, due to their location when the PLCs were in walls of the government school. If out of school boys accessed computers then this affected attendance of adolescent girls in those schools. Thus the introduction of innovations, providing access to information for communities, improvement in learning achievement in curricular subjects and bridging the digital divide was not without situational, community or location specific peculiarities. This intervention which was planned to fill the digital divide had a very limited impact and had faded away once the project came to an end and was handed over to the government.

Arora (2010) has critiqued the premises, features and sustainability of such experiments on the basis of her study of Central Himalayan communities. One thing which Arora points out (and which had intrigued me right from my introduction with HiWel project in 2007) is that the experiments cited by Mitra and HiWel team are part of insider

experiment long term outcomes of these experiments. So in one sense we have only a one- sided, insider story claiming success of initiatives.

Secondly, the discussions only focus on the success of experiments. The impediments faced by the team that could have led to formulating the experiments differently have not yet been discussed and published as learning from these experiments. Thirdly, SOLEs which Mitra has been discussing is still developing as an idea. Whilst experiments are welcome, the one under discussion fell short in proving its credentials as a candidate for delivering the REI vision of providing quality education. So its replication in future education related initiatives, where quality provision of education in less-developed localities is needed, should not be automatic.

Besides this, the government has also not shown the evidence of commitment towards its partner. There were delays in building of kiosks, the electricity bills were not verified by JMC accounts department and payments were not made to HiWel in time. The partnership was functional in a limited manner. This is worth noting considering the fact that this was the only partnership signed under REI where JMC (the government) had to pay some charges to the private provider-HiWel. The issue of wastage of time, money and efforts due to delays on part of the government partners raises questions about the design and governance of partnership programmes. In such an environment the possibility of learning from the experiment and using it according to the systemic need remains neglected. The impact of such PPPs cannot be seen and the benefits cannot be harnessed for either the short term or long term.

Case Study 2