In order to attain these above-mentioned objectives, it is essential to clearly define a methodological approach to undertake this research. The success of such an endeavour greatly relies on the clarity and applicability of an organized and coherent methodology. Various ideological approaches conceptualize human development in different ways with varied emphasis on critical factors. A coherent methodology is also required to ensure continuity and consistency in the respective country analyses.

To begin with, as the central objective of this project is to reinstate human development at the heart of ICT initiatives, planning and deployment, it is necessary to have a clear definition of human development followed by an overarching conceptual and methodological framework, which will be used as a benchmark to characterize human development.

At this point it would be useful to return to the concept of development itself, which is said to constitute the raison d’etre of these ICT initiatives. Since the Second World War and after two of the most devastating and destructive periods of human existence, the concept of development essentially referred to a process of economic growth and consolidation. For the developing countries, most of which had recently attained independence and nationhood, development came to be synonymous with increases in per capita income, Gross National Product or GNP growth, and attaining a standard of living equivalent to the industrialized world.

The concept of development also came to signify industrialization, technological progress and modernization. Integral to this process of development were goals such as national unity, cultural sovereignty and identity as well as the development of social infrastructure covering key areas including education, health, transportation and communication. It is, however, important to note that many developing countries have gradually taken up a very institutional view of development which focuses essentially on infrastructure and economic development and which is measured essentially in terms of per capita income, GNP, GDP, investments, exports and other such indicators.

From the perspective of laissez-faire theory -- from Adam Smith to Kenichi Ohmae (1996) -- to remain relevant and compete effectively in the borderless world, countries must learn the rudiments of the open marketplace and free trade. But the hard reality is different regions and countries being differently structured politically, physically, economically and culturally are either better or worse prepared to respond to the transnational challenges which all confront.

ICTs cannot possibly be viewed only on the economic globalized marketing level as its impact weaves through the cultural, psychological, political, sociological dimensions -- the intangible and nonmaterial dimensions of human/social existence -- to our spiritual and cultural values. The critical influence on a nation's responsiveness to change probably is its social attitudes, religious beliefs, and culture. The question is: are some generational and cultural values naturally hindrant to change and new developments - for instance, a distaste for industry and manufacturing, a suspicion of trade and enterprise as reflected in the spate of protests against the G8 world economic forum; an ideological/religious opposition to Western, capitalist mores, power structures?

In recent times, the capitalist concept of development has been repudiated for eschewing the non-material aspirations of the people. There are calls for an alternative perception of development as a process which leads to an “..evolution of shared perceptions of what humanity is and should be, and of devising the means of advancing, both individually and collectively, towards putting those values in practice” (Bezanson and Sagasti, 1995: 9).

A refreshing alternative framework for conceptualizing development comes from the Nobel laureate in economics, Amartya Sen (1999) whose analysis of contemporary economic development from the perspective of human freedom posits that real development consists of the removal of various types of unfreedoms (poverty as well as tyranny, poor economic opportunities as well as systematic social deprivation, neglect of public facilities as well as intolerance or overactivity of repressive states) that leave people with little choice and little opportunity of exercising their reasoned agency.

Sen (1999) views development essentially as a process of expanding human freedoms. His main argument is that if the overarching objective of development is human freedom, then public policy should above all concentrate on achieving this central objective rather than on some particular means or some chosen list of instruments. He also goes on to identify the rights and opportunities that characterize human freedom and elaborates his perspective by classifying these interconnected instrumental freedoms in five categories (1999: 38-40): political freedoms, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, and protective security.

Sen’s perspective locates human beings at the centre of the development process. Human development resumes its centrality and freedom becomes the principal means and ends of development. If one were to apply Sen's paradigm to the development process, it would become essential to "develop and support a plurality of institutions, including democratic systems, legal mechanisms, market structures, educational and health provisions, media and other communication facilities…’ (Sen, 1999: 53). Sen’s perspective offers us a new insight and framework to reinstate ‘freedom’ at the core of human development initiatives. However, Sen’s model tends to highlight general areas and sectors of concern rather than specific goals and targets for human development efforts and therefore it is difficult to operationalize in terms of research.

If we were to successfully operationalize a conceptual framework and methodology in order to assess the role and impact of ICTs on human development, it would be of critical significance to establish clear targets and goals of human development as measuring success and failure would be relatively easier. In this context, there are perhaps no better criteria or indicators of human development than the United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The Millennium Development Goals or MDGs consist of global targets that the world’s leaders set at the Millennium summit in September 2000.

The central focus and objective of the MDGs is to reduce poverty as well as its causes and manifestations. The Millennium Development Goals offer us a comprehensive framework to identify the objectives of human development as set by the UN and its member states. The Millennium Development Goals are highlighted as follows:

- eradication of poverty;
- universal primary education;
- gender equality and empowerment of women
- reduction of child mortality
- improvement of maternal health
- the fight against major diseases such as AIDS and malaria
- the promotion of sustainable environment
- the development of a global partnership for development

Progress towards the goals has been mixed. Some countries are on track for some goals but none of the goals are likely to be reached at the current rate of global progress. The reasons are many, but they often include insufficient and inefficient public spending, crippling debt burdens, inadequate market access in developed countries, and declining official development assistance.

These critical human development goals will form the overarching criteria for assessing the success of ICT initiatives in various nations. However, the MDG framework highlights long-term human development goals, few of which are practically achievable in the immediate future. Therefore, numerous other instruments and indicators of human development will also be relied upon to ensure the applicability of the MDGs in a study of this kind. Moreover, this application also requires some retooling for it to be effective as an operational research methodology. Herein lies the main challenge of this research project. We propose to operationalize the MDGs as a conceptual framework and a methodological tool in the following manner. Each of the goals set out by the MDG model can be specified to cover certain key areas and core concerns of human development. The research project will therefore attempt to assess the exact use and impact of ICTs on these eight key spheres and goals of human development.

This operationalization will result in a methodological approach, which will be applied by all the researchers in question covering the different countries. Three levels of research will have to be undertaken:

(Note: Detailed methodological instruments and indicators for analysis will be developed by the entire research team at the outset, once it is constituted. Meanwhile, a proposed chapter outline is attached.)

This methodological approach would ensure a comprehensive analysis while at the same time looking at specific policies, strategies and deployment within each country with a clear focus on human development and the eight goals set by the MDGs. The comparative regional study will examine existing National ICT Strategies and Action Plans, and their governance mechanisms. The studies will document and demonstrate ICT’s contribution to development outcomes and impacts in core ICT strategic areas of focus at the national level. The studies will also identify the combination of external factors, capacities and management decisions that led to a significant impact and draw lessons.