Journal of Mountain Science

, 6:320 | Cite as

Telecentres in mountain regions — A Peruvian case study of the impact of information and communication technologies on remoteness and exclusion

  • Richard HeeksEmail author
  • Laura León Kanashiro


Communities in developing country mountain areas, in part due to their remoteness, find themselves excluded from social, political and economic systems; and excluded from access to resources. This paper aims to study the impact of information and communication technologies (ICTs) on remoteness and exclusion. It utilises two models — the resource movement framework, and the “information chain” — to analyse a telecentre in one district of mountainous Huancavelica, Peru’s poorest region, set in the high Andes. It finds ICTs enabling new and positive resource flows for the two key user groups: teenaged school students and young farmers. These help to maintain social networks. They also support information searches that have improved agricultural practice where other information chain resources have been available. But non-use and ineffective use of the telecentre are found where information chain resources are lacking. ICTs have some impacts on intangible elements of remoteness. In this particular example, they also offer access to some previously-excluded resources. But they have not really addressed the systematic exclusions faced by mountain communities. And they so far appear to be a technology of inequality; favouring those residents who begin with better resource endowments. The paper concludes by offering some recommendations for mountain ICT project practice.


Exclusion Telecentre Information and communication technologies (ICTs) New technology Andes Peru 


  1. Aitken, H. 2002. Bridging the Mountainous Divide: a Case for ICTs for Mountain Women. Mountain Research and Development 22(3): 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altamirano, T., Copestake, J., Figueroa, A. and Wright-Revolledo, K. 2004. Universal and Local Understanding of Poverty in Peru. Global Social Policy 4(3): 313–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Byers, A., Gilligan, N., Golston, S., and Linville, R. 1999. Mountains: a Global Resource. Social Education Sept: 281–296.Google Scholar
  4. Carver, R. 1999. The Accursed Mountains: Journeys in Albania. London, UK: Flamingo.Google Scholar
  5. DFID. 1999. Sustainable Livelihood Guidance Sheet Section 2. London, UK: Department for International Development.Google Scholar
  6. ERTIC. 2007. Bienvenidos al Distrito de Pazos. Lima, Peru: Establecimientos Rurales de Tecnologías de la Información y Comunicación. (In Spanish)
  7. Escobal, J. and Torero, M. 2003. Adverse Geography and Differences in Welfare in Peru, WIDER Discussion Paper no. 73. Helsinki, Finland: World Institute for Development Economics Research.Google Scholar
  8. Heeks, R.B. 2005. Foundation of ICTs in Development: The Information Chain, eDevelopment Briefing no.3. Manchester, UK: Centre for Development Informatics, University of Manchester. Google Scholar
  9. Heeks, R.B. 2006. Implementing and Managing eGovernment. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Heeks, R.B. 2009. Participatory design problems in ICT4D, ict4dblog, 23 Jan
  11. Helmersen, P. 2002. Re: ICTs in Mountains, Contribution to APMN e-conference on The Intervention on Technologies in Mountain Areas, 14 MarchGoogle Scholar
  12. INEI. 2006. Las Tecnologías de Información y Comunicación en los Hogares: Agosto-Octubre 2006. Lima, Peru: Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. (In Spanish)Google Scholar
  13. INEI. 2008. La Pobreza en el Perú en el Año 2007. Lima, Peru: Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática. (In Spanish)Google Scholar
  14. INICTEL. 2006. Reglamento de Funcionamiento del Establecimiento Rural de Tecnologías de Información y Comunicación (ERTIC), internal document. Lima, Peru: Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Capacitación de Telecomunicaciones. (In Spanish)Google Scholar
  15. Karumuna, B.L. 2004. The Challenge of Providing Access to the Uluguru Mountains, Morogoro Region, Tanzania. Mountain Research and Development 24(4): 284–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kohler, T., Hurni, H., Wiesmann, U., and Kläy, A. 2002. Mountain Infrastructure: Access, Communication, and Energy, Background paper for Bishkek Global Mountain Summit. Kathmandu, Nepal: Mountain Forum.Google Scholar
  17. Lightfoot, C., Gillman, H., Schueurmeier, U., and Nyimbo, V. 2008. The First Mile Project in Tanzania. Mountain Research and Development 28(1): 13–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. MEF. 2005. Formato SNIP-03. Lima, Peru: Banco de Proyectos, Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas. (In Spanish)
  19. Montgomery, L. 2002. Re: ICTs in Mountains, Contribution to APMN e-conference on The Intervention on Technologies in Mountain Areas, 10 March.Google Scholar
  20. Panos. 2002. High Stakes. London, UK: Panos Institute.Google Scholar
  21. 2007. Information by Regions. Lima, Peru: Google Scholar
  22. Ureta, S. 2008. Mobilising poverty?: Mobile Phone Use and Everyday Spatial Mobility among Low-income Families in Santiago, Chile. The Information Society 24(2): 83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ward, J. and Peppard, J. 2002. Strategic Planning for Information Systems, 3rd edn. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Warschauer, M. 2002. Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide, First Monday 7(7).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment, CAS and Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Development Informatics, Arthur Lewis BuildingUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations