KEY FINDINGS - Humanitarian Technologies Project

One of our main findings is that the assumptions about technology present in humanitarian policies do not translate to actual uses of technology by affected populations. This disconnect was apparent when examining the participation of affected people in disaster recovery.

Communication technologies do not give people a ‘voice’. Technologies can facilitate voice but only as long as other factors, such as social capital and a strong civil society, are present. Further, we identify a divide among the better-off participants who are most likely to have a ‘voice’ in post- disaster contexts and the poorer participants for whom finding a voice is more challenging, if not impossible.

Middle class participants can exploit some of the potentials of digital technologies to make their voices heard and bring attention to their problems thus often improving their social positions. Conversely, those who are most in need are less likely to find such opportunities because they lack access to these technologies and the skills needed to use them.

Several agencies interpreted accountability as feedback and set up various mechanisms for affected people to offer their views and express their concerns. Interactive digital technologies were often prioritised as feedback collection tools. The narrow interpretation of accountability as feedback has a number of consequences. Given the relationships of obligation and patronage that govern Philippine social life, affected people were reluctant to offer their views or air their grievances.

For accountability to meaningfully work, we need to shift from a culture of audit to a culture of listening and working together with affected communities. We need intelligent and culturally sensitive accountability.

Mobile phones and social networking sites such as Facebook were widely used for sociality and entertainment. For example, Facebook was often used in mourning and memorialization rituals. Users quickly returned to the long-established uses of social media such as dating and computer games. We view media’s everyday uses in the face of extraordinary events as meaningful coping mechanisms and ways of reintroducing normality in everyday life in the aftermath of disaster. 

We observe how platforms that were introduced by aid agencies to facilitate information dissemination and feedback were often appropriated for different purposes by affected people. Such is the case of humanitarian radio which used Frontline SMS for feedback but was largely used for song requests and dedications to friends and family members