Critical agency and development: applying Freire and Sen to ICT4D in Zambia and Brazil

References

• ADB. (2006). Zambia country gender profile. African Development Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and philosophy and other essays. London: Monthly Review Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson, A., Grönlund, Å, & Wicander, G. (2012). Development as freedom – how the capability approach can be used in ICT4D research and practice. Information Technology for Development, 18(1), 1–4. doi: 10.1080/02681102.2011.632076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appelbaum, S. H., Asham, N., & Argheyd, K. (2011). Is the glass ceiling cracked in information technology? A qualitative analysis: Part 1. Industrial and Commercial Training, 43(6), 354–361. doi: 10.1108/00197851111160487
   Google Scholar
• Avgerou, C. (2010). Discourses on ICT and development. Information Technologies and International Development, 6(3), 1–18. doi: 10.4018/jiit.2010070101
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barbosa, A. F. (Ed.). (2013). Pesquisa sobre o uso das tecnologias de informação e comunicação no brasil: TIC domicílios e empresas 2012. São Paulo: Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil.
   Google Scholar
• Beardon, H. (2004). ICTs for development: Empowerment or exploitation? London: Action Aid.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, R., & Mattis, M. (2007). Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Cheltenman: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Buskens, I. (2014). Developing the capacity for gender awareness in development research: Some thoughts and suggestions for the IDRC’s I&N team. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers, R. (1983). Rural development. Essex: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers, R. (1994). The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World Development, 22(7), 953–969. doi: 10.1016/0305-750X(94)90141-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, B. (2010). Conscientization and development as freedom. Saeculum Undergraduate Academic Journal, 5(1), 25–51.
   Google Scholar
• CIA. (2016). The world factbook. Retrieved October 25, 2016, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2153rank.html
   Google Scholar
• Corbridge, S. (2002). Development as freedom: The spaces of Amartya Sen. Progress in Development Studies, 2(3), 183–217. doi: 10.1191/1464993402ps037ra
   Google Scholar
• Cotter, D., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001). The glass ceiling effect. Social Forces, 80(2), 655–681. doi: 10.1353/sof.2001.0091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, A. (1982). Women, race & class. London: Women’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deneulin, S., & Shahani, L. (2009). An introduction to the human development and capability approach: Freedom and agency. London: Earthscan; International Development Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Devereux, S. (2001). Sen’s entitlement approach: Critiques and counter-critiques. Oxford Development Studies, 29(3), 245–263. doi: 10.1080/13600810120088859
   Google Scholar
• Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (2002). India: Development & participation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (2013). An uncertain glory: India and its contradictions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, M., Fransman, J., & Pearce, E. (2008). Review of 16 reflect evaluations. London: Action Aid.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, P. (2002). Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’s development as freedom. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 54–60. doi: 10.1007/BF02686261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fals-Borda, O. (1979). Investigating reality in order to transform it: The Colombian experience. Dialectical Anthropology, 4, 33–35. doi: 10.1007/BF00417683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Frediani, A. A. (2010). Sen’s capability approach as a framework to the practice of development. Development in Practice, 20(2), 173–187. doi: 10.1080/09614520903564181
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Geuss, R. (1981). The idea of a critical theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gigler, B. (2011). Informational capabilities: The missing link for the impact of ICT on development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, N. (2008). Researching social life (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Giri, A. K. (2000). Rethinking human well-being: A dialogue with Amartya Sen. Journal of International Development, 12(7), 1003–1018. doi: 10.1002/1099-1328(200010)12:7<1003::AID-JID698>3.0.CO;2-U
   Google Scholar
• Giroux, H. (1983). Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
   Google Scholar
• Hoggett, P. (2001). Agency, rationality and social policy. Journal of Social Policy, 3(1), 37–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooks, B. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston: South End.
   Google Scholar
• Hooks, B. (2000). Feminist theory: From margin to center. London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• ILO. (2012). Decent work country profile: Zambia. Geneva: United Nations, International Labour Office.
   Google Scholar
• Johnstone, J. (2007). Technology as empowerment: A capability approach to computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 9(1), 73–87. doi: 10.1007/s10676-006-9127-x
   Google Scholar
• Kleine, D. (2013). Technologies of choice?: ICTs, development, and the capabilities approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ledwith, M. (1997). Participating in transformation. Birmingham: Venture Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ledwith, M. (2005). Personal narratives/political lives: Personal reflection as a tool for collective change. Reflective Practice, 6(2), 255–262. doi: 10.1080/14623940500106237
   Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. (1946). Action research amd minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longwe, S. (1991). Gender awareness: The missing element in the third world development project. In T. Wallace & M. Candida (Eds.), Changing perceptions: Writings on gender and development (pp. 149–157). Oxford: Oxfam Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lunch, N., & Lunch, C. (2006). Insights into participatory video: A handbook for the field. Oxford: Insightshare.
   Google Scholar
• Martín-Baró, I. (1996). Writing for a liberation psychology. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mattos, F., Santos, B., & Silva, L. (2009). Evolução de alguns indicadores de inclusão digital no brasil nos primeiros anos do século XXI. Revista De Economía Política De Las Tecnologías De La Información Y Comunicación, 11(2), 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• McLaren, P. (1995). Critical pedagogy and predatory culture. London: Routeledge.
   Google Scholar
• Molyneux, M. (1985). Mobilization without emancipation? Women’s interests, the state, and revolution in Nicaragua. Feminist Studies, 11(2), 227–254. doi: 10.2307/3177922
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neri, M. (2003). Mapa da exclusão digital. Rio de Janeiro: FGV/IBRE, CPS.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and human development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nyerere, J. (1973). Freedom and development: Uhuru na maendeleo. A selection from writings and speeches 1968–1973. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Portal Brasil. (2013). Histórico do governo eletrônico. Retrieved November 5, 2013, from http://www.governoeletronico.gov.br/o-gov.br/historico
   Google Scholar
• Poveda, S. (2016a). How can digital inclusion promote social change? Exploring two Brazilian case studies. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development.
   Google Scholar
• Poveda, S. (2016b). Conscientisation and human development: The case of digital inclusion programmes in Brazil (Unpublished PhD). University of London, London.
   Google Scholar
• Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2006). Handbook of action research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Riddell, A. (2001). A review of 13 evaluations of reflect. London: CIRAC.
   Google Scholar
• Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., & Grodsky, E. (2012). The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM college majors. American Educational Research Journal, 49(6), 1048–1073. doi: 10.3102/0002831211435229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, T. (2016a). Critical-agency in ICT4D: A case study of Zambian women’s use of participatory video technology to challenge gender inequality (Unpublished PhD). Royal Holloway University of London, London.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, T. (2016b). Women’s use of participatory video technology to tackle gender inequality in zambia’s ICT sector. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, T., & Lunch, C. (2015). Participatory video. In R. Mansell & P. Hwa Ang (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communications and society (pp. 1–6). London: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Robeyns, I. (2000). An unworkable idea or a promising alternative? Sen’s capability approach re-examined (Discussion paper 00.30 ed.). Leuven: Center for Economic Studies, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
   Google Scholar
• Sarachild, K. (1978). Feminist revolution. New York: Random House
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1992). Missing women. British Medical Journal, 304(6827), 587–588. doi: 10.1136/bmj.304.6827.587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, F., & Deneulin, S. (2002). Amartya Sen’s contribution to development thinking. Studies in Comparative International Development, 37(2), 61–70. doi: 10.1007/BF02686262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stromquist, N. (1995). The theoretical and practical basis for empowerment. In C. Medel-Añonuevo, Women, education and empowerment: Pathways. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education.
   Google Scholar
• Tandon, R. (2008). Participation, citizenship and democracy: Reflections on 25 years of PRIA. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 284–296. doi: 10.1093/cdj/bsn019
   Google Scholar
• Tandon, R., & Brown, L. D. (1981). Organization-building for rural development: An experiment in India. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 17(2), 172–189. doi: 10.1177/002188638101700204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNESCO. (2012). World Atlas of gender equality in education. Paris: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walsham, G., Robey, D., & Sahay, S. (2007). Foreword: Special issue on information systems in developing countries. MIS Quarterly, 31(2), 317–326. doi: 10.2307/25148793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsham, G., & Sahay, S. (2006). Research on information systems in developing countries. Information Technology for Development, 12(1), 7–24. doi: 10.1002/itdj.20020
   Google Scholar
• White, S. (2003). Participatory video: Images that transform and empower. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, P. F., Dell, L. D., & Anderson, G. F. (1993). Root cause analysis: A tool for total quality management. Milwaukee, WI: Quality Press.
   Google Scholar
• Young, K. (1993). Planning development with women. London: MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• ZCSO. (2015). Zambia demographic and health survey 2013-2014. Lusaka: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Zheng, Y., & Stahl, B. C. (2011). Technology, capabilities and critical perspectives: What can critical theory contribute to Sen’s capability approach? Ethics and Information Technology, 13(2), 69–80. doi: 10.1007/s10676-011-9264-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng, Y., & Walsham, G. (2008). Inequality of what? Social exclusion in the e-society as capability deprivation. Information Technology and People, 21(3), 222–243. doi: 10.1108/09593840810896000
   Google Scholar