http://www.sajim.co.za/peer156.11nr1.asp?print=1


   
  Peer Reviewed Article Vol.11(1) March 2009

 

Selective exclusion: the digital divide in the 
context of indigenous knowledge systems in 
South Africa  
H. Lotriet *  
Department of Informatics  
University of Pretoria  
Pretoria, South Africa  
hugo.lotriet@up.ac.za 

M. Matthee  
Department of Informatics  
University of Pretoria  
Pretoria, South Africa  
machdel.matthee@up.ac.za 

F. Mazanderani  
Oxford Internet Institute  
University of Oxford  
Oxford, United Kingdom  
fadhila.haerimazanderani@oii.ox.ac.uk 

This article provides an alternative view to questions of technological inclusion and 
exclusion in sub-Saharan Africa via an analysis of the South African governmental discourse 
on indigenous knowledge systems (IKS). The concept of 'selective exclusion' (SE) is 
developed in relation to the digital divide, highlighting that technology is not always 
perceived as neutral or universally beneficial, but rather is negotiated in relation to specific 
socio-political contexts and alternative systems of knowledge. The concept of SE highlights 
the following: (a) 'Western' rationality and technology can be perceived as threats to 
indigenous identity and knowledge and as a result treated circumspectly; (b) nevertheless the 
'Western' domain is seen as promising economic benefits, which need to be accessed; (c) 
therefore, the 'Western' domain and its associated technologies are selectively excluded; (d) 
the existence of a digital divide is not necessarily seen as negative as it offers protection 
against globalisation; and (e) the agency of indigenous individuals and communities is 
considered central and the ability to appropriate technology in relation to this is stressed.  

Key words: Digital divide, indigenous knowledge systems, selective exclusion, Africa, 
South Africa, ICT  

Received 20 March 2009; accepted March 2009 

Contents 

Page 1 of 18



1. Introduction  
2. Digital divide and indigenous knowledge systems  

2.1 Digital divide and the rhetoric of marginalisation  
2.2 Role of government discourse  
2.3 South African context  
2.4 IKS and the digital divide  

3. Design and method  
4. From digital divide to 'selective exclusion 4.1 Overview of the IKS discourse  

4.2 Themes from speeches and the policy document (2001 – 2005)  
4.3 Towards the institutionalisation of IKS (2006 – 2008)  
4.4 Correspondence of findings to discourses on IKS in literature  
4.5 Selective exclusion' view of technology  
4.6 ICT applications in the context of IKS elsewhere in the world  

5. Discussion  
6. Conclusion  
7. References  

1 Introduction 

At its simplest the 'digital divide' is defined as 'the gap separating those individuals who have 
access to new forms of information technology from those who do not' (Gunkel 2003:499). 
Although pleasingly alliterative, its application, both in the popular imagination and 
academic research, has been much criticised for its techno-centricity and rhetorical 
simplification (Couldry 2003; Gunkel 2003; Mansell 2001; Murdock and Golding 2004; 
Roode, Speight, Pollock and Webber 2004; Van Dijk and Hacker 2003; Warschauer 2002). 
As a result it is now widely accepted that the concept of the digital divide is as variable and 
multifaceted as the technology whose distribution it aims to equalise. Despite, or perhaps 
because of this, it continues to be a popular designation for studies focusing on different 
dimensions of the unequal distribution of information and communication technologies 
(ICT). Consequently there is a large and growing body of work within the digital divide 
paradigm that is based on a nuanced appreciation for the relevance of context on a micro 
individual as well as macro societal level. This research contributes to this discourse by 
situating a grounded analysis of the South African governmental discourse on indigenous 
knowledge systems (IKS) in relation to the digital divide.  

Issues pertaining to ICT and development are closely entwined. With the belief in the 
existence of a digital divide it is unsurprising, therefore, that a number of the criticisms 
levelled against the digital divide concept are also prevalent in the literature regarding ICT 
for development. One such criticism, which this research focused on, is that the discourse 
marginalises the very people it aims to empower by privileging the value of technical 
'western' knowledge at the expense of local capability (Burkett 2000; Schech 2002; Wilson 
2002). Lack of access to ICT is conflated with lack of information and, by association, 
knowledge, resulting in the creation of the category of 'information poverty'. It is partly in 
response to this that indigenous or local knowledge has received considerable attention as a 
possible escape route from the perceived impasse that has been reached in many 
developmental initiatives (Briggs 2005:99). Proponents hope that via an appreciation for the 
salience of IKS the agency and inherent worth of the people who are the 'object' of 
development will be brought to the fore. In relation to the digital divide debate, this emphasis 
on IKS offers an opportunity for a deeper investigation into the 'have-nots', accentuating 
what they 'have' versus what they lack. Via a qualitative analysis of the South African 
governmental discourse on IKS, this research developed the concept of 'selective exclusion', 
offering an alternative view on the appropriation of ICT in an African context. In doing so 
the importance of taking a historically situated approach to ICT and development is stressed. 

Page 2 of 18



Although the scope of the analysis is limited to a high-level discourse in South African 
governmental circles, it is illustrative of how discussions on the digital divide need to be 
cognisant of a local socio-political context which does not necessarily treat 'western' 
technology and rationality as something desirable in and of itself.  

Firstly a brief overview of research on the digital divide as it relates to this research is 
presented, followed by an outline of the methodological approach. The core of the article, 
however, is a discussion on the empirical findings of an analysis of the governmental 
discourse and associated policy document on IKS. This is based on a thematic analysis of 
speeches made by South African government officials over a period of seven years and the 
official policy document of the South African government on IKS (South Africa. Department 
of Science and Technology 2004). A section follows that highlights aspects of IKS 
discourses in literature that relate to the findings of the analysis. The development of the 
concept of 'selective exclusion' is then discussed, followed by an analysis of what some of 
the potential implications of a 'selectively exclusionary' approach might be for ICT and 
development in South Africa. 

2 Digital divide and indigenous knowledge systems 

2.1 Digital divide and the rhetoric of marginalisation 

Since its inception the concept of the digital divide has been both popular and contested. It 
has been applied to and recognised as having relevance across a diverse area of concerns 
ranging from education, economic and political participation, heath care and social 
participation (DiMaggio and Hargittai 2001; Gurstein 2003; Van Dijk 2005). The concept of 
the digital divide, however, implies a binary differential; you are either a 'have' or a 'have-
not', when in reality the situation is more nuanced. The concept also implies an inherent 
value judgement, with the technological 'haves' occupying a privileged position that all 
should aspire to. Its rhetorical form conceals the existence of numerous 'divides', not all of 
which are externally enforced. Some of these 'divides' can be voluntary or selective rather 
than simply being a negative consequence of lack of access to resources.  

Numerous alternatives to the digital divide construct have been posited. Examples include 
Roode et al.'s (2004) 'socio-techno divide', Warschauer's (2002) 'technology for social 
inclusion', Gurstein's (2003) community informatics strategies and Cushman and Klecun ' s 
(2005:2) 'digital exclusion' to mention but a few. While these approaches differ, they share a 
number of common features upon which this research was premised. Firstly it was assumed 
that the adoption and use of technology is potentially benevolent in terms of socio-economic 
development, but that there needs to be a strong focus on the recipients of technology as 
active social role-players. People of all socio-economic tiers can never simply be treated as 
passive recipients of technical largesse, and equating improved access to technology with 
improved lives is a grossly over-simplified view. Based on this, a grass roots approach to 
structuring the use of technology is frequently advocated with a stress on people's self-
assessed needs and behaviour rather than superimposed expectations. It is essential in such a 
discussion to remember that people do not exist in a vacuum; that their cultural and historic 
differences need not only to be taken into account in abstract but integrated into the 
development process. To facilitate this it is important to develop a deeper understanding of 
how different role players involved in development initiatives view ICT, with minimal 
imposition from pre-existing researcher bias. While research has shown how access or lack 
of access is stratified by factors such as age, education, location, income, employment and 
gender, less work has been done on the active decision-making process carried out by 
various stakeholders as they negotiate with technology. One group of pertinent stakeholders 

  top

Page 3 of 18



(although by no means the only or most important one) are government representatives and it 
is the public discourse of this group that the empirical portion of this research analysed. 

2.2 Role of government discourse 

A discourse is a 'particular system of making sense of the social world out of which 
commonly accepted actions emerge' (Wilson 2002). By analysing the South African 
governmental discourse on IKS, it was hoped that some of the assumptions and perceptions 
surrounding the relationship between ICT and IKS could be unpacked, contributing towards 
a deeper understanding of what constitutes a non-binary digital divide. While governmental 
discourse does not contain a complete or even partially complete reflection of the 
environmental factors that influence issues of technology diffusion (Wejnert 2002), the 
government has an important role to play in the initiation of ICT projects as well as 
contributing to a suitable regulatory environment for ICT to flourish. In addition, a 
significant portion of ICT research in Africa has a developmental focus and is closely linked 
to the governmental sector, which often drives development efforts. Although the role of 
governments and high level players can be viewed as both potentially negative (Gurstein 
2003; Warschauer 2003) and potentially positive (Roode et al. 2004) that they play a role of 
some kind is not in doubt.  

The implications of policy on the digital divide have been discussed in some detail in relation 
to the European Union and the United States (Stewart, Gil-Egui, Tian and Innes Pileggi 
2006) as well as to developing countries (Dasgupta, Lall and Wheeler 2005), highlighting the 
role that policy can and does play. When a discourse becomes prominent in government 
circles it is often translated into policy and regulation (as has been the case with IKS) and 
can be influential in a number of ways, not least of which is in the allocation of funding and 
initiation of projects. Green (2008:49) emphasises the need for research that focuses 
specifically on South African IKS policy makers (i.e. government) and their underlying 
assumptions. This relates partly to the fact that very few governments play the role of 
advocate for 'knowledge diversity' and the IKS policy document produced by the South 
African government is considered the most advanced of its kind in the world, thus making 
the role and position of the South African government fairly unique (Green 2007:134).  

This research focused exclusively on a specific South African governmental discourse which 
cannot be assumed to be transposable to other African countries. South Africa is in itself 
made up of a diverse cultural, ethnic and linguistic population and the discourse analysed is 
not meant to reflect a unified perspective. The scarcity of research of this nature on sub-
Saharan Africa is considered validation enough to have focused on South Africa but, in 
addition to this, there was added significance on selecting South Africa, which is discussed 
briefly in the following section.   

2.3 South African context 

South Africa is a middle income developing country with one of the most unequal 
distributions of wealth in the world. Many indicators, however, suggest that it is in a good 
position to benefit from technological development (Bridges 2001; UNDP 2000; UNDP 
2004), the potential for which is increased when countries have acquired a critical income or 
absorptive capacity level (Soete 1985:411). At the same time, the digital divide is a 'term that 
could have been coined for South Africa' (Makhaya and Roberts 2003:47). Hence while 
many elements are in place for South Africa to leverage ICT for development purposes, the 
situation is more complicated than often assumed in the technological 'leapfrogging' model.  

The country emerged from a political heritage that had regarded information and education 
as both a gateway to empowerment and an instrument of oppression (Postma 2001). There is 

Page 4 of 18



a strong desire to increase African identity which has historically been lacking in regional 
information services and which created a pervasive sense of dissatisfaction and a suspicious 
attitude towards these services (Nassimbeni 1990:167). It is felt that 'western' models of 
Internet use and broader ICT adoption are not always aligned with local cultural values as 
can be seen in the educational environment where individual-focused learning is accepted 
with difficulty and 'individual excellence is still regarded as a Western preference' (Postma 
2001:234).This is not to suggest that South Africa is a fictitious archetype of pan-African 
post-colonial suspicion, but rather that the desire frequently expressed in South Africa for the 
development and appreciation of a sense of Africaness is not unique. In addition, South 
Africa is an economically and politically prominent country in Africa, an example of which 
is its leadership role in NEPAD (NEPAD 2001). In relation to indigenous knowledge, South 
Africa has taken significant steps towards institutionalising IKS, through policy and research 
(South Africa. Department of Science and Technology 2004), making it one of the priority 
focus areas of the South African National Research Foundation (National Research 
Foundation 2006). 

2.4 IKS and the digital divide  

In analysing the IKS discourse, the intention was not to uncover an utopian development 
ideal in opposition to the view that access to ICT is a beneficial development imperative. It 
has to be recognised from the outset that the IKS discourse is embedded within its own 
rhetorical paradigm, but it is a discourse that can provide an enlightening contrast to the 
more traditional 'ICT for development' one. As such its selection is not only based on its 
relevance to the broader ICT for development discourse but also as illustrative of an 
alternative to the pervasive information rich versus poor dichotomy (Burkett 2000; Schech 
2002; Wilson 2002). IKS is one example of a more user-centred approach to development, 
stressing that 'communication is not just about delivering information to the poor and 
oppressed; it can also be about transmitting information and knowledge from these groups to 
a wider audience' (Heeks 2002:3). The adoption of 'the language of IK' (Briggs and Sharp 
2004:667) by influential institutions such as the World Bank (1998) is an indicator of the 
way in which international bodies involved in development are engaging with IKS. The 
discourse on IKS, therefore, has relevance in Africa, not only because of its numerous 
developmental challenges but also because it seems to offer an alternative to Africans being 
treated as passive recipients of externally provided technological innovation.  

For the purpose of this research the definition of IK used in the South African government 
policy document on IKS was adopted:  

'Indigenous knowledge (IK) is generally used synonymously with traditional and local 
knowledge to differentiate the knowledge developed by and within distinctive indigenous 
communities from the international knowledge system generated through universities, 
government research centres and private industry, sometimes incorrectly called the Western 
knowledge system' (South Africa. Department of Science and Technology 2004:10).  

Based on this definition, it is difficult to delineate what is encapsulated under the IKS rubric, 
which by definition is intended to be heterogeneous and local. Within the policy document 
there is, however, a strong emphasis on cultural goods as well as traditional medicine and 
agricultural practices. The purpose of the analysis is not to explicate or critique IKS per se 
but rather to generate a better understanding of explicit and implicit views on technology 
expressed in the IKS discourse that relate to the digital divide and ICT for development 
debate. 

  top

Page 5 of 18



3 Design and method

The principles and guiding philosophy of grounded theory has been used as the basis for a 
significant number of studies in Information Systems (Hughes and Jones 2003) and this 
research used the version advocated by Strauss and Corbin (1998). This approach was 
deemed suitable due to a number of reasons, not least of which was the exploratory nature of 
the research. In addition, it was well aligned with the intention to minimise the imposition of 
preconceived notions and expectations on the empirical portion of the study. [It should be 
noted that, even though a significant body of research on the wider concept of IKS exists, 
multiple possibilities of theorising exist (Green 2008:49) – this would be a further argument 
against imposing preconceived notions on the data.] The founding assumptions of grounded 
theory such as the close interaction between researcher and data, the emphasis on temporally 
and spatially bounded findings and its collaborative and discursive nature were also felt to be 
appropriate.  

As the aim of the research was to analyse government discourse pertaining to IKS in the 
context of the digital divide, a search was carried out on the official repository of South 
African government speeches by senior figures in the Department of Science and 
Technology (South African Government 2007). All speeches that referenced IKS 
substantively (i.e. made more than a fleeting reference to the concept or another document) 
were analysed. These speeches were presented by South African government officials over 
the period 2001 to 2008. In addition, the official IKS policy document released by 
government (South Africa. Department of Science and Technology 2004) and some press 
releases from the Department of Science and Technology were analysed. Although South 
Africa has 11 official languages, the speeches in the repository were all in English and no 
need for translation was necessary. The speeches were delivered to diverse audiences, 
ranging from South African government representatives and African peers to international 
bodies and diverse IKS holders and practitioners. The complete list of speeches that were 
analysed can be found in Appendix A.  

The open coding portion of the research was conducted independently in order to identify as 
many potential dimensions and meanings in the data as possible. This was followed by the 
axial coding which was performed collaboratively during which categories and sub-
categories were linked through the consideration of their highlighted properties and 
dimensions. Finally, during selective coding, the emerging theory was refined and integrated 
through the discovery of the 'main theme' or 'core category' that related to all categories and 
could be used as an integrating concept. This final stage also allowed for the refinement of 
the analysis in terms of consistency, logic and completeness. Although a detailed grounded 
analysis was made of the speeches and the IKS policy document, only the main findings that 
relate to the discussion of the location of ICT within this discourse are presented below.  

4 From digital divide to 'selective exclusion  

4.1 Overview of the IKS discourse 

The speeches and policy document analysed were selected due to their specific focus on IKS, 
but their discourse was embedded within a much wider socio-political narrative. While it is 
not the aim of this article to provide a detailed description of this narrative, it is also not 
possible to isolate the categories that relate specifically to ICT from their broader context, 
without stripping them of meaning. To provide the appropriate background, a brief summary 
of the IKS discourse is presented prior to a description of the development of the concept of 
'selective exclusion'. The speeches from 2006 onwards differ from the earlier documents in 

  top

Page 6 of 18



that they show a definitive move towards practical measures and implementation of policies 
developed in earlier work. The overview of the themes and sub-themes that were identified 
during the analysis are discussed according to these groupings.  

4.2 Themes from speeches and the policy document (2001–2005) 

The overarching theme that emerged from the analysis was the desire and intention to affirm 
an African identity via IKS. The multiplicity of what constitutes an African identity is 
recognised in the discourse and yet the idea of an African identity is often referenced as a 
unitary constant. While the opportunity and potential of IKS is highlighted repeatedly the 
discourse is also laced with and defined in relation to a threat. The threat is perceived as 
coming both from the 'international' (as it is referred to in the documents analysed) economic 
rationality as well as the local, South African, history of oppression. While the opportunities 
offered by 'international' resources and knowledge are recognised they are not privileged 
above the desire to promote African emancipation, unity and heritage, a drive which is often 
grouped under the direction of the African renaissance. It is within this context that the value 
of IKS is stressed, not as an alternative for 'international' technology but rather as the 
foundation for initiatives that may or may not include the leveraging of external resources 
such as biotechnology or ICT. IKS is seen as being representative of African thinking and 
processes, as being human-centred and arising from communities rather than individuals, 
where its roots are located in the lives, beliefs and folklore of the indigenous people. 
Through the agency of IKS (although where this agency originates from is often not clear), 
benefits will be derived such as creativity, self-discovery and emancipation. The discourse is 
imbibed with a sense of hope that the institutionalisation of IKS will result in locally relevant 
action, create a sense of community, redress imbalanced legacies, and improve lives, dignity 
and equality. Three main points that emerged from the analysis as key to the process of 
insitutionalisation are:  

The commodification of IKS, which will result in economic benefits to IKS holders 
(presented in the discourse as predominantly being the unemployed, women and/or black 
people and communities).  

The recognition of IKS as a scientifically valid discipline in terms of its epistemology 
and ontology. This will allow IKS to take its rightful place in science and technology 
education, thus granting the knowledge grounded in the African tradition scientific 
validity and status.  
Partnerships and co-operation founded on IKS will add value to world debates where 
IKS will be perceived as being synergistic to 'international knowledge systems' and 
where IKS holders and communities will benefit from relationships with the private 
sector, industry and government.    

4.3 Towards the institutionalisation of IKS (2006–2008)  

Although no new themes emerged from the analysis of the speeches delivered during this 
period, what sets this period apart are the deliberate attempts of government to 
institutionalise IKS. During this period the National Office on IKS (NIKSO) and the 
ministerial IKS Advisory Committee were established. The minister of the Department of 
Science and Technology announced a 'Ten Year Plan on Innovation' during his address at the 
induction of the IKS Advisory Committee (Mangena 2008) and, as part of this ten-year plan, 
several strategies and actions were proposed, some of which are discussed below.  

Raising public awareness of IKS was seen as an imperative and various strategies such as the 
hosting of competitions and expos were seen as a mechanism for achieving this (of which the 
first one took place in August 2008). The hope is that through these initiatives, civil society 

Page 7 of 18



will develop an appreciation of the commercial value of IKS products and how they can 
leverage the opportunities offered by IKS. Another important aspect relating to the 
commodification of IKS, is the work being done by government on the Intellectual Property 
Amendment Bill in order to protect IKS and its owners (South African Government 2008), 
with amendments to the Patent Act being approved affirming the ownership of IKS 
(Mangena 2006).  

The drive towards the recognition of IKS as scientifically valid discipline as well as the 
integration of IKS with other knowledge systems is expressed as being high on the agenda 
and it is hoped that this could be achieved through the introduction of a degree in IKS in 
higher education institutions (HEI). Such a degree is currently being reviewed by the SA 
Qualifications Authority (SAQA) (South African Government 2008). In addition, research 
chairs on IKS will be established at HEI (of which the first one on traditional medicine is 
based at the Nelson Mandela School of Medicine).  

Analysis of the documents from both time periods shows that in order to realise these 
initiatives promoting IKS and consequently the benefits from it, some external (non-
indigenous) support functions need to be in place in order to ensure that IKS is recorded, 
documented and disseminated. It is in this category that ICT is placed. Already, a national 
audit on IKS databases hosted by different institutions was completed, laying the ground 
work for a national IKS database (Mangena 2007b). The establishment of a pilot IKS centre 
at the University of KwaZulu Natal has as its main purpose the recording, codification and 
dissemination of IKS (Mangena 2007a). It is also foreseen that computers will be made 
available to the public in disadvantaged communities to enhance knowledge sharing (South 
African Government 2008). It is clear from the abovementioned initiatives that ICT is seen 
as a very valuable resource and support function to IKS. It is not, however, viewed as 
politically neutral but rather as something that needs to be negotiated with and managed. 
Rather than the digital divide being seen as a question of 'bridging a gap' between people 
who 'have' versus those who 'have not', the IKS discourse shifts the impetus from universal 
inclusion to selective exclusion.  

4.4 Correspondence of findings to discourses on IKS in literature  

An examination of literature on IKS revealed a number of discourses. These focus on IKS as 
culturally embedded behaviour (Fischer 2005:745); IKS in the context of 'local' vs. 
'global' (Green 2008:50; Higgs 2005) and IKS in Africa and South Africa (Green 2008).  

Much of what is published situates the concept of IKS within the post-colonialist domain 
where 'western' knowledge and knowledge production processes are seen as 'hegemonous' 
and the 'universality' of knowledge is seen as an entrenchment of unequal power 
relationships in society (Higgs 2005:1). In this context, commitment to indigenous 
knowledge is seen as the way to 'restore dignity to African Knowledge' (Green 2008:49) and 
even to address the weaknesses of 'western' knowledge (Du Toit 2005:68). This particular 
position on IKS is usually linked to arguments for a developmental focus as part of the IKS 
agenda (Green 2007:131; Ngulube and Lwoga 2007:121; Sen 2005:376), which in the South 
African context relates to the socio-political benefits of intellectual property rights for the 
disadvantaged sections of society and empowerment projects (Loubser 2005). Recognition of 
the validity of these systems in order to realise the developmental aims requires managing of 
the knowledge through documentation and other processes (Sen 2005). 'Validation' may have 
interesting implications in terms of ICT usage – Tjiek (2006:124) reports on an instance in 
Indonesia where (due to the cultural factors) digitised versions of IK has more status and 
'appeal' among locals than the same knowledge in a more 'traditional' format would have.  

The question of how to manage indigenous knowledge has received some attention in the 

Page 8 of 18



literature, with authors advocating both the use of established knowledge management 
models such as those developed by Nonaka, Toyama and Konno (Ngulube and Lwoga 
2007:121), arguing that knowledge management practices are essentially 'universal', as well 
as more nuanced approaches to the creation of IK 'assemblages' (Watson and Huntington 
2008:259). 

From a non-socio-political perspective researchers deconstructing concepts related to 
'knowledge' tend to point out the problematic nature of separating 'western' and 'indigenous' 
knowledge (Fischer 2005:737; Green 2007:135). In this regard it is interesting that 
researchers tend to highlight the similarities rather than differences between scientific 
('western') and indigenous ('African') knowledge. Some of these similarities include: (a) the 
persistent presence of a cultural influence (Wallner 2005: 47); (b) that all knowledge is 
essentially local, with only the networks of actors aligned to certain local 'knowledges' being 
more wide-spread and thus creating an 'illusion of universality' (Higgs 2005:7); (c) the 
limited differences in instantiations of applied 'scientific' and 'indigenous' knowledge in 
terms of its richness and complexity and in both instances the underlying knowledge system 
serves mainly as a 'legitimating device' (Fischer 2005:743) (d) that portrayal of either 
knowledge system as bounded is problematic (there are long histories of mutual interactions 
between knowledge systems) (Kargbo 2005:200; Watson and Huntington 2008:275); (e) that 
neither system is homogenous (within any geographical or temporally selected boundary) 
(Green 2007:135); and (f) the fluid nature of these systems (Green 2007:136; Kargbo 
2005:200).  

4.5 'Selective exclusion' view of technology 

Selective exclusion is indicative of the rejection of people in 'developing' or 'less developed' 
countries of the mantle of information poverty. It represents a disentangling of knowledge 
from information and information from information technology. It echoes the criticisms that 
have been levelled against the 'modernisation' slant of a great deal of ICT for development 
literature and the binary differential implied in the digital divide debate. Instead of being 
portrayed as a universal good, 'international' rationality and technology, in the selective 
exclusion view that emerged from the IKS discourse, are seen as both an opportunity and a 
threat. There is a strong feeling that not all 'international' systems are aligned with 'local' 
prerogatives as expressed by Ben Ngubane, the then South African Minister of Arts, Culture, 
Science and Technology, in a speech on IKS in 2001, in relation to intellectual property: ' 
there is a concern that Intellectual Property Rights System encourages the appropriation of 
traditional knowledge for commercial use without a fair sharing of benefits with the holders 
of this knowledge' (Ngubane 2001). This emphasis on the need to protect local knowledge 
and knowledge holders is common across the speeches and is re-iterated numerous times in 
the policy document. Sometimes the threat is seen as coming from external systems and 
processes or from the historic 'hostile socio-political environment characteristic of 
colonialism and apartheid' (South Africa. Department of Science and Technology 2004:10). 
'Western' rationality and systems are not, however, treated as universally negative and there 
is a strong recognition of the promise of economic benefits, which need to be accessed for 
the advantage of previously marginalised groups. Therefore, it is suggested that systems of 
technology can be selectively excluded from a partnership between local and international 
knowledge systems. The emphasis being on the appropriation of technology in order to 
harness the potential of local knowledge as expressed in this extract: 'The challenge before us 
is to bring about synergy in our actions in terms of indigenous and western knowledge, and 
other knowledge systems, so that knowledge generation and utilisation benefits all segments 
of our society, without causing disparities or lopsided development' (Mangena 2004).   

In this context, the existence of a divide offers a measure of protection against globalisation 
and there is not necessarily a need for the divide to be fully bridged. Rather than the 

Page 9 of 18



appropriation of ICT being paramount, the need to protect and promote local systems is the 
overriding theme: 'For indigenous knowledge to survive on its own terms, the social and 
economic context in which it develops and continues to develop has to be nurtured, 
maintained and protected' (Mangena 2004). Selective exclusion as espoused in the discourse 
allows for both the protection and promotion of IKS to assist South Africa in producing 'its 
own knowledge agenda for its own development' (Mangena 2008). Its essence is perhaps 
best summed up by the phrase 'we need to dream and realise new visions in the old 
ways' (Sonjica 2003), articulated by Buyelwa Patience Sonjica who was Deputy Minister of 
Arts, Culture, Science and Technology at the time.  

In terms of ICT contributing to the realisation of these developmental benefits while being 
'selectively exclusive', there are some challenges that need to be considered. These include: 
(a) balancing effectiveness of resource use against local capacity building; (b) risk of 
disempowerment of local custodians through global knowledge dissemination; and (c) the 
contextual 'dislocation' of knowledge leading to reduced significance of such knowledge 
(Augusto 2008:214).   

4.6 ICT applications in the context of IKS elsewhere in the world  

Various practical initiatives elsewhere in the world have been reported on. Although it is 
outside of the scope of this article, interested readers are referred to reports on work done in 
India such as the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (Chikonzo 2006:136; Green 
2008:50; Sen 2005:379), biodiversity knowledge among tribes in the Terai region (Sen 
2005:379) and the National Institute of Rural Development in Hyderabad (Tella 2007). In 
Australia, initiatives in preserving Aboriginal knowledge include Aboriginal Voice – a forum 
involving Aborigines in discussions on the use of ICT to preserve their IKS − and Metisradio 
that contributes to the preservation of the Aboriginal cultural heritage (Chikonzo 2006:135). 
In Africa, a pilot project at a university library in Sudan has been reported on (Sen and 
Khashmelmous 2006).   

Although a detailed discussion of practical ICT challenges is outside the scope of this article, 
the following challenges are reported in literature (Chikonzo 2006:137−138; Kargbo 
2005:204; Mehta and Kalra 2006; Sen 2005; Sen and Khashmelmous 2006;): (a) Availability 
of suitable technologies; (b) scalability; (c) data structures and data complexity; (d) metadata 
standards and application of metadata to large data sets; (e) security; (f) customisability and 
flexibility; (g), complexity; (h) establishment of organisations, structures (typically libraries) 
and networks to deal with the collation and preservation of IKS; (i) financing the 
establishment and maintenance of technologies; and (j) cultural acceptance and diffusion of 
technology.   

5 Discussion  

The analysis of the IKS discourse presented above reveals what has been dubbed a 'selective 
exclusion' view of ICT that emerged in relationship to IKS, but what are the implications of 
this perspective and what does it contribute to the digital divide debate? In one sense it 
suggests a sophisticated socially sensitive understanding of ICT in relation to local 
knowledge, one in which IKS and ICT need to be aligned in order to maximise benefits for 
local and international stakeholders. What is more problematic, however, is trying to 
understand how, once one steps away from the rhetorical appeal of IKS, this would work in 
practice. Roode et al. (2004) quote Kvasny and Truex (2001:399) who in their analysis of the 
statements made by US government officials found a recurrent technological determinist 
view in which technology was 'treated as this magical force that will erase centuries of 

  top

Page 10 of 18



discrimination and inequality'. On the other hand, a 'selective exclusionist view' in the 
context of IKS would primarily view ICT as enabler of the extension of local African 
practices beyond its own boundaries (Higgs 2005:7). Such ICT use would enable local 
communities not only as users but as contributors (Sen 2005:375). The authors would expect 
ICT projects and initiatives supportive of these aims to be embraced and supported by 
government.  

The emphasis on IKS as the foundation for an Afro-centric development model is in many 
ways an evolution of and improvement on more techno-centric approaches. While this 
represents a positive shift away from the rhetoric of the 'haves' and 'have-nots', it needs to be 
wary of instituting a false duality that separates African indigenous knowledge from 
'international' systems and expertise. Although understandable, when viewed in relation to 
the socio-political history of South Africa, it contains within it a danger that is both subtle 
and insidious. As much as the discourse demonstrates an appreciation of the advances that 
have been made in the ICT for development literature, and challenges the construct of 
information poverty, certain important issues have been omitted or are brushed over. The 
first of these, as has already been alluded to, is the artificial creation of a North−South 
divide, where in reality the international and intra-national distinction between those who 
have access to ICTs is much more blurred (Burkett 2000). The second and related point is 
that neither IKS nor the international domain could be considered as monolithic entities. The 
parameters of 'have' and 'have not' may have been redrawn but there still is the risk of a 
binary opposition, of an 'us' versus 'them' polemic.  

The belief in the agency of indigenous knowledge holders to choose their level of 
involvement with ICT is creditworthy, but it is also an oversimplification of a complex 
phenomenon. The ability to separate technology that will promote IKS from that which 
threatens is not only practically infeasible, but also belies the process of technological 
innovation, which is rarely a linear centrally controlled event. An example of this complexity 
can be seen in the adoption of mobile telephony in South Africa. It would appear on the 
surface that mobile telephony belongs to the 'international' paradigm of globalisation and yet 
it has not only been enthusiastically received into the South African market but has also been 
used in novel 'South African' ways (Reck and Wood 2003; Vodafone 2005). This is 
illustrative not only of how globalisation has a much more fragmentary influence on culture 
than is often assumed (Appadurai 1990), but also of how different uses and adaptations of 
technology emerge over time (Orlikowski 2000). The only way that ICT processes, products 
and artefacts that embrace and represent African ideas or values can be developed is via 
exposure and access to technology, the consequences of which will not always be visible 
beforehand. If ICT is to become part of the indigenous research agenda, being researched by 
Africans in terms of African ontologies and epistemologies, there needs to be symmetry in 
the way IKS and ICT are treated, even if that symmetry does not equate to equality.  

6 Conclusion 

The analysis conducted on the South African governmental discourse on IKS revealed a 
much more complex relationship with ICT in the context of development than is often 
assumed. Most importantly, it highlights the way that technology is perceived as neither 
neutral nor a development imperative in and of itself, but rather as something to be 
selectively utilised, an attitude that has been called 'selective exclusion'. While the approach 
being advocated by the government representatives in relation to IKS is socio-centric with a 
heavy emphasis on local knowledge and capabilities, a number of queries regarding its 
viability and validity remain. The extent to which a 'selective exclusionary' approach is 
sustainable in an increasingly globalised world and whether it really has practical 

  top

Page 11 of 18



implications in terms of the diffusion of technology also remains an open question.  

In relation to the digital divide debate, however, the concept of 'selective exclusion' offers a 
number of insights. It challenges the simplistic designation of 'have-nots', questioning its 
position as the negative counterpart to the 'haves', replacing this with an added appreciation 
for the agency of people who are often treated as passive in the face of externally managed 
development initiatives. In a similar vein, the rise of IKS, regardless of its practical 
application or longevity as a fashionable concept, is significant even if its only contribution 
to the ICT for development discourse is to challenge the notion of information poverty, 
decoupling information from knowledge. In much the same way that ICT is perceived in the 
South African governmental discourse on IKS, as both a threat and an opportunity, the 
recognition that technology is not disseminated in an apolitical historically impartial vacuum 
is both a challenge and an opportunity for those involved in ICT for development.  

The study was limited in scope and a number of questions need to be asked about how 
representative the governmental discourse is in relation to different groups of people in South 
Africa. The political implications and context of IKS was only discussed in brief and would 
benefit greatly both from further detailed empirical research on actual IKS implementations 
as well as extending the analysis to other African countries.  

7 References 

Adam, R. 2005. Address by the director-general of the Department of Science and 
Technology of the Republic of South Africa, Dr. Rob Adam at “The international dimension 
of the Europe of knowledge: A common interest to Europe and to the world” conference, 
Brussels, Belgium, Thursday 6 October 2005. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.esastap.org.za/esastap/pdfs/eraconf_adam_oct2005.pdf (Accessed 11 May 2009). 

Appadurai, A. 1990. Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. In: 
Featherstone, M. Global Culture. London: Sage.  

Augusto, G. 2008. Digitizing IKS: epistemic complexity, datadiversity and cognitive justice. 
The International Information and Library Review 40:211–218.  

Bridges, 2001. Spanning the digital divide: understanding the tackling the issues. Cape 
Town: Bridges.  

Briggs, J. 2005. The use of indigenous knowledge in development: problems and challenges. 
Progress in Development Studies 5(2):99−114.  

Briggs, J. and Sharp, J. 2004. Indigenous knowledges and development: a postcolonial 
caution. Third World Quarterly 25(4):661−676.  

Burkett, I. 2000. Beyond the 'information rich and poor': futures understandings of inequality 
in globalising informational economies. Futures 32:679−694.  

Chikonzo, A. 2006. The potential of information and communication technologies in 
collecting, preserving and disseminating indigenous knowledge in Africa. The International 
Information and Library Review 38:132−138.  

Couldry, N. 2003. Digital divide or discursive design? On the emerging ethics of information 
space. Ethics and Information Technology 5:89−97.  

  top

Page 12 of 18



Cushman, M. and Klecun, E. 2005. How (can) non-users perceive usefulness: bringing in the 
digitally excluded. Penceil Paper 7. LSE: The Department of Information Systems.  

Dasgupta, S., Lall, S. and Wheeler, D. 2005. Policy reform, economic growth and the digital 
divide. Oxford Development Studies 3(2):229−243.  

DiMaggio, P. and Hargittai, E. 2001. From the 'digital divide' to 'digital inequality': Studying 
Internet use as penetration increases. Princeton University Center for Arts and Cultural 
Policy Studies, Working Paper Series number 15.  

Du Toit, C. 2005. The environmental integrity of African indigenous knowledge systems: 
probing the roots of african rationality. Indilinga – African Journal of Indigenous Knowledge 
Systems 4(1):55–73.  

Fischer, M.D. 2005. Culture and indigenous knowledge systems: emergent order and the 
internal regulation of shared symbolic systems. Cybernetics and systems: an International 
Journal 36:735–752.  

Green, L. 2007. The Indigenous Knowledge Systems Policy of 2004: challenges for South 
African universities. Social Dynamics 33(1):130–154.  

Green, L. 2008. Anthropologies of knowledge and South Africa's Indigenous Knowledge 
Systems Policy. Anthropology Southern Africa 31(1&2):48–57.  

Gunkel, D.J. 2003. Second thoughts: toward a critique of the digital divide. New media & 
society 5(4):499−522.  

Gurstein, M. 2003. Effective use: a community informatics strategy beyond the digital divide.
First Monday 8(12).  

Hangana, N. 2007. Speech by Deputy Minister for Provincial and Local Government at the 
Human Rights and Indigenous Knowledge System Conference at the Sammy Marks 
Convention Centre, Pretoria, 23 March 2007. [Online] Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2007/07101916151005.htm. (Accessed 29 January 2009).  

Heeks, R. 2002. i-Development and e-development: special issue on ICTs and development. 
Journal of International Development 14:1−11.  

Higgs, P. 2005. In defence of local knowledge: a theoretical reflection. Indilinga – African 
Journal of Indigenous Knowledge Systems 5(1):1–11.  

Hughes J. and Jones, S. 2003 Reflections on the use of grounded theory in interpretive 
information systems research. In: Ciborra, C.U., Mercurio, R., de Marco, M., Martinez, M. 
and Carignani, A. (eds.). Proceedings of the Eleventh European Conference on Information 
Systems , 833-845, Naples, Italy.  

Kargbo, J.A. 2005. Managing indigenous knowledge: what role for public librarians in Sierra 
Leone? The International Information and Library Review 37:199–207.  

Kvasny, L. and Truex, D. 2001. Defining away the digital divide: a content analysis on 
institutional influences on popular representations of technology. In: Russo, N.L., Fitzgerald, 
B. and DeGross, J.L. (eds.). Proceedings of the IFIP TC8/WG8.2 Conference on Realigning 
Research and Practice in Information Systems development: The social and Organizational 
Perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.  

Page 13 of 18



Makhaya, G. and Roberts, S. 2003. Telecommunications in developing countries: reflections 
from the South African experience. Telecommunications Policy 27:41−59.  

Mangena, M. 2004. Speech presented at the dinner of the Southern African development 
conference (SADC) workshop on indigenous knowledge. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2004/04062109451001.htm (Accessed 22 November 2006). 

Mangena, M. 2006. Opening speech for the 2006 TCI conference on indigenous knowledge 
systems. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2006/06080212451001.htm (Accessed 22 November 2006). 

Mangena, M. 2007a. Budget vote speech by the Minister of Science and Technology, 
honourable Mopsibudi Mangena, Parliament, Cape Town. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2007/07052516451001.htm (Accessed 29 January 2009).  

Mangena, M. 2007b. Keynote address to the second Southern African Development 
Community (SADC) workshop on indigenous knowledge systems Livingstone, Zambia. 
[Online]. Available WWW: http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2007/07032811151001.htm 
(Accessed 29 January 2009).  

Mangena, M. 2008. Address by Minister Mosibudi Mangena at the induction of the IKS 
Advisory Committee. [Online]. Available WWW: http://www.dst.gov.za/media-
room/speeches/ (Accessed 5 February 2009).  

Mansell, R. 2001. Digital opportunities and the missing link for developing countries. Oxford 
Review of Economic Policy 17(2):282−294.  

Mehta, S. and Kalra, M. 2006. Information and communication technologies: a bridge for 
social equity and sustainable development in India. The International Information & Library 
Review 38:147–160.  

Murdock, G. and Golding, P. 2004. Dismantling the digital divide: rethinking the dynamics 
of participation and exclusion. In: Calabrese, A. and Sparks, C. (eds.). Toward a political 
economy of culture: capitalism and communication in the twenty-first century. Lanham, M.D:
Rowman and Littlefield.  

Nassimbeni, M. 1990. Poverty and development in South Africa and the role of libraries. 
Journal of Librarianship 22(3):161−170.  

National Research Foundation. 2006. Indigenous knowledge systems. [Online]. Available 
WWW: http://www.nrf.ac.za/focusareas/iks/ (Accessed 6 November 2006).  

NEPAD 2001. The new partnership for Africa's development. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.nepad.org/2005/files/home.php (Accessed 22 November 2006).  

Ngubane, B. 2001. Speech presented at the annual general meeting of the international 
federation of reproduction rights organisations. [Online]. Available 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2001/011018346p1003.htm (Accessed 22 November 2006). 

Ngubane, B. 2003. Speech presented at the signing of a benefit sharing agreement between 
the CSIR and the San people. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2003/03032410461009.htm (Accessed 9 September 2007). 

Ngulube, P. and Lwoga, E. 2007. Knowledge management models and their utility to the 

Page 14 of 18



effective management and integration of indigenous knowledge with other knowledge 
systems. Indilinga – African Journal of Indigenous Knowledge Systems 6(2):117–131.  

Orlikowski, W.J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for 
studying technology in organizations. Organization Science Quarterly 11(4):404−428.  

Reck, J. and Wood, B. 2003. What works: Vodacom's community services phone shops; 
providing telecommunications to poor communities in South Africa. What Works Digital 
Dividend, Michigan Business School.  

Roode, D., Speight, H., Pollock, M. and Webber, R. 2004. It's not the digital divide − it's the 
socio-techno divide! In: Leino, T., Saarinen, T. and Klein, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 
Twelfth European Conference on Information Systems, Turku School of Economics and 
Business Administration, Turku, Finland.  

Postma, L. 2001. A theoretical argumentation and evaluation of South African learners; 
orientation towards and perceptions of the empowering use of information. New media & 
society 3(3):313−326.  

Schech, S. 2002. Wired for change: the links between ICTs and development discourses. 
Journal of International Development 14:13−23.  

Sen, B. 2005. Indigenous knowledge for development: bringing research and practice 
together. The International Information and Library Review 37:375–382.  

Sen, B. and Khashmelmous, N.A. 2006. Incorporating indigenous knowledge materials. 
Efforts at Elhafeed Library, Ahfad University, Sudan: a preliminary study. The International 
Information & Library Review 38:117–122.  

Soete, L. 1985. International diffusion of technology, industrial development and 
technological leapfrogging. World Development 13(3):409−422.  

Sonjica, B.P. 2003. Speech presented at the science and education training week gala dinner, 
Mafikeng, South Africa. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2003/03052214461001.htm . (Accessed 22 November 
2006).  

South Africa. Department of Science and Technology. 2004. Indigenous knowledge systems. 
Pretoria: Department of Science and Technology.  

South African Government. 2007. South Africa Government online. [Online]. Available 
WWW: http://www.gov.za/ (Accessed 20 March 2007).  

South African Government. 2008. Department of Science and Technology (DST) announces 
plans to bolster indigenous knowledge systems (IKS). [online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.info.gov.za/ (Accessed 29 January 2009)  

Stewart, C.M., Gil-Egui, G., Tian, Y. and Innes Pileggi, M. 2006. Framing the digital divide: 
a comparison of US and EU policy approaches. New media & society 8(5):731−751.  

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research. London: Sage.  

Tella, R.D. 2007. Towards promotion and dissemination of indigenous knowledge: a case of 
NIRD. The International Information and Library Review 39:185–193.  

 

Page 15 of 18



Tjiek, L.T. 2006. Desa informasi: the role of digital libraries in the preservation and 
dissemination of indigenous knowledge. The International Information and Library Review 
38:123–131.  

UNDP. 2000. South Africa: transformation for human development 2000. Pretoria, South 
Africa, United Nations Development Programme.  

UNDP. 2004. Human development index. United Nations Development Programme.  

Van Dijk, J. 2005. From digital divide to social opportunities. Proceedings of 2 nd 
International Conference for Bridging the Digital Divide, December 2005, Seoul, Korea. 

Van Dijk, J. and Hacker, K. 2003. The digital divide as a complex and dynamic 
phenomenon. Information Society 19(4):315–326.  

Vodafone. 2005. Africa: the impact of mobile phones. The Vodafone Policy Papers Series, 
Vodafone.  

Wallner, F. 2005. Indigenous knowledge and western science: contradiction or cooperation. 
Indilinga – African Journal of Indigenous Knowledge Systems 4(1):46–54.  

Warschauer, M. 2002. Reconceptualising the digital divide. First Monday 7(7).  

Warschauer, M. 2003. Dissecting the 'digital divide': a case study in Egypt. The Information 
Society 19:297−304.  

Watson, A. and Huntington, O.B. 2008. They're here – I can feel them: the epistemic spaces 
of indigenous and western knowledges. Social and Cultural Geography 9(3):257–281.  

Wejnert, B. 2002. Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a conceptual framework. 
Annual Review of Sociology 28:297−326.  

Wilson, M. 2002. Understanding the international ICT and development discourse: 
assumptions and implications. The Southern African Journal of Information and 
Communication 3(3).  

World Bank. 1998. Indigenous knowledge for development: a framework for development, 
knowledge and learning centre. Africa Region, World Bank. [Online]. Available WWW: 
http://www.worldbank.org/afr/ik/ikrept.pdf (Accessed 20 March 2007).   

Appendix A: List of speeches analysed 

Speaker  Occasion  Audience  
B. Ngubane, 
Minister of Arts, 
Culture, Science 
and Technology 
(Ngubane 2001)  

2001 Annual General 
Meeting of the 
International 
Federation of 
Reproduction Rights 
Organisations  

Representatives 
International 
Federation of 
Reproduction Rights 
Organisations  

B.P. Sonjica, 
Deputy Minister of 
Arts, Culture, 
Science and 

2003 Science and 
Education Training 
Week Gala Dinner; 
Mafikeng, South 

Mainly dignitaries 
from the North-
West Province, 
South Africa  

Page 16 of 18



Technology 
(Sonjica 2003)  

Africa  

B. Ngubane, 
Minister of Arts, 
Culture, Science 
and Technology 
(Ngubane 2003)  

2003 Signing of a 
benefit sharing 
agreement between 
the CSIR and the San 
people.  

San representatives  
CSIR 
representatives  
Media  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 
(Mangena 2004)  

2004 Dinner of the 
Southern African 
Developmental 
Conference (SADC) 
Workshop on 
Indigenous 
Knowledge  

Representatives of 
SADC countries 
attending the SADC 
workshop.  

Dr Rob Adam, 
Director-General 
of Science and 
Technology (Adam 
2005)  

2005 International 
Dimension of the 
Europe of 
Knowledge 
Conference in 
Brussels  

Conference 
delegates.  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 
(Mangena 2006)  

Opening speech for 
the 2006 TCI 
Conference on 
Indigenous 
Knowledge Systems  

Experts, scientists, 
holders and 
practitioners of IKS 
discipline.  

N. Hangana, 
Deputy Minister 
for Provincial and 
Local Government 
(Hangana 2007)  

Speech at the Human 
Rights and 
Indigenous 
Knowledge System 
Conference  

Experts, scientists, 
holders and 
practitioners of IKS 
discipline.  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 
(Mangena 2007a)  

Budget vote speech, 
Parliament, Cape 
Town  

Members of 
parliament  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 
(Mangena 2007b)  

Keynote address to 
the second Southern 
African Development 
Community (SADC) 
workshop on 
indigenous 
knowledge systems 
Livingstone, Zambia  

Representatives of 
SADC countries 
attending the SADC 
workshop.  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 
(Mangena 2008)  

Remarks at the 
launch of the 
Knowledge for 
Africa’s 
Development Book, 
Pretoria  

Finnish ambassador, 
 
experts, scientists, 
holders and 
practitioners of IKS 
discipline.  

M. Mangena, 
Minister of Science 
and Technology 

Address at the 
Induction of the IKS 
Advisory Committee 

Director General, 
Members of the 
Advisory 

Page 17 of 18



(Mangena 2008)  committee, elders, 
practitioners.  

 

ISSN 1560-683X

Published by InterWord Communications for Department of Information and Knowledge Management, 
University of Johannesburg

Page 18 of 18