Abstract
Action research is thought to be a useful methodology for knowledge creation in ICT4D research. Researchers applying this methodology may use post hoc theorization, that is, applying theoretical lenses to make sense of the out-comes of the action research interventions after the research is done. In this paper we compare two alternative approaches to the process of post hoc theorizing using a case study of an action research project based in Africa that focuses on developing robust research infrastructures for open science. We employ both actor-network theory concepts used in ICT4D research on large scale infrastructure projects and Activity Theory concepts for the analysis. Separately and complementarily, they are found to offer the potential to theorize the case study’s “theory of change” and approach to action research.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bon, A., Akkermans, H.: Digital development: elements of a critical ICT4D theory and praxis. In: Nielsen, P., Kimaro, H.C. (eds.) ICT4D 2019. IAICT, vol. 552, pp. 26–38. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19115-3_3
de Vries, E.: Rigorously relevant action research in information systems. All Sprouts Content 7(4) (2007)
Davison, R., Martinsons, M.G., Kock, N.: Principles of canonical action research. Inf. Syst. J. 14(1), 65–86 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00162.x
Phelps, R., Hase, S.: Complexity and action research: exploring the theoretical and methodological connections. Educ. Action Res. 10(3), 507–524 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790200200198
Aanestad, M., Jolliffe, B., Mukherjee, A., Sahay, S.: Infrastructuring work: building a state-wide hospital information infrastructure in India. Inf. Syst. Res. 25(4), 834–845 (2014)
Braa, J., Hanseth, O., Heywood, A., Mohammed, W., Shaw, V.: Developing health information systems in developing countries: the flexible standards strategy. MIS Q. 31(2), 381–402 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2307/25148796
Braa, J., Monteiro, E., Sahay, S.: Networks of action: sustainable health information systems across developing countries. MIS Q. 28(3), 337 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2307/25148643
Latifov, M.A., Sahay, S.: Challenges in moving to “health information for action”: an infrastructural perspective from a case study in Tajikistan. Inf. Technol. Dev. 19(3), 215–229 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2012.751575
Sahay, S., Sæbø, J., Braa, J.: Scaling of HIS in a global context: same, same, but different. Inf. Organ. 23(4), 294–323 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2013.08.002
Zheng, Y., Hatakka, M., Sahay, S., Andersson, A.: Conceptualizing development in information and communication technology for development (ICT4D). Inf. Technol. Dev. 24(1), 1–14 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2017.1396020
Walsham, G.: Health information systems in developing countries: some reflections on information for action. Inf. Technol. Dev. 26(1), 194–200 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2019.1586632
Shidende, N.H.: Challenges in implementing patient-centred information systems in Tanzania: an activity theory perspective. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 64(1), 1–20 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2014.tb00455.x
LIBSENSE: LIBSENSE; The Power of Open Access and Science. https://libsense.ren.africa/en/. Accessed 26 June 2023
AfricaConect: Africaconnect. https://archive.geant.org/projects/africaconnect/ac1/Pages/Home.html. Accessed 26 June 2023
Harle, J.: Data, dialogue and development – why the last kilometre matters. https://blog.inasp.info/data-dialogue-development-kilometre-matters/. Accessed 30 June 2022
Foley, M.: What is an NREN-2. https://casefornrens.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/What-is-an-NREN.pdf. Accessed 11 Oct 2023
WACREN: Home - WACREN. https://wacren.net/en/. Accessed 26 June 2023
EIFL: EIFL. https://www.eifl.net/. Accessed 26 June 2023
COAR: Home. https://www.coar-repositories.org/. Accessed 26 June 2023
LIBSENSE Working Group on Open Science policies, governance and leadership: LIBSENSE Statement on Open Science in Africa (2020). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4017999
LIBSENSE: LIBSENSE Regional Open Science Policy Development Workshop (2022). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6467216
LIBSENSE-RUFORUM – LIBSENSE. https://libsense.ren.africa/en/ruforum/. Accessed 30 June 2023
WACREN: LIBSENSE initiates conversation on research assessment reforms in Africa. https://wacren.net/en/libsense-initiates-conversation-on-research-assessment-reforms-in-africa/. Accessed 30 June 2023
IFLA: Guest Article: Connectivity and Cooperation: How RENs, Libraries and Universities Are Combining to Accelerate Open Science « Library Policy and Advocacy Blog. http://blogs.ifla.org/lpa/2021/04/07/guest-article-connectivity-and-cooperation-how-rens-libraries-and-universities-are-combining-to-accelerate-open-science/. Accessed 29 June 2022
Abbott, P., Cox, A.: Perceptions of Rwanda’s research environment in the context of digitalization: reflections on deficit discourses. In: Bandi, R.K., Ranjini, C.R., Klein, S., Madon, S., Monteiro, E. (eds.) IFIPJWC 2020. IAICT, vol. 601, pp. 50–64. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64697-4_6
Reilly, K.: Designing research for the emerging field of open development. Inf. Technol. 7(1), 47 (2011)
Abbott, P., Appiah, K., Oaiya, O.: Barriers and Enablers to Open Access Repository (OAR) Development and Management in African HLIs: Research from the LIBSENSE OAR Workshops in the UA, WACREN and ASREN Regions. Zenodo (2020). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3884974
Monteiro, E.: Actor-network theory and information infrastructure. In: Ciborra, C. (ed.) From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, pp. 71–83. Oxford University Press (2000)
Hanseth, O., Monteiro, E.: Understanding Information Infrastructure (1998)
Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M., Berg, M.: Guest editors’ introduction: actor‐network theory and information systems. What’s so special? Inf. Technol. People. 17(2), 116–123 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840410542466
Walsham, G.: Actor-network theory and IS research: current status and future prospects. In: Lee, A.S., Liebenau, J., DeGross, J.I. (eds.) Information Systems and Qualitative Research. ITIFIP, pp. 466–480. Springer, Boston, MA (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35309-8_23
Callon, M.: Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In: Law, J. (ed.) Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Routledge, London (1991)
Latour, B.: Reassembling the Social [electronic resource]: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)
Hanseth, O., Monteiro, E., Hatling, M.: Developing information infrastructure: the tension between standardization and flexibility. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values. 21(4), 407–426 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399602100402
Karanasios, S., Allen, D.: ICT for development in the context of the closure of Chernobyl nuclear power plant: an activity theory perspective. Inf. Syst. J. 23(4), 287–306 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12011
Karanasios, S., Nardi, B., Spinuzzi, C., Malaurent, J.: Moving forward with activity theory in a digital world. Mind Cult. Act. 28(3), 234–253 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2021.1914662
Karanasios, S., Allen, D.: Activity theory in information systems research. Inf. Syst. J. 28(3), 439–441 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12184
Engeström, Y.: Innovative learning in work teams: analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In: Punamäki, R.-L., Miettinen, R., and Engeström, Y. (eds.) Perspectives on Activity Theory, pp. 377–404. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812774.025
Karanasios, S., Allen, D.: Mobile technology in mobile work: contradictions and congruencies in activity systems. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 23(5), 529–542 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.20
Wagg, S.: An investigation of digital inclusion in UK rural communities (2021). https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articles/thesis/An_investigation_of_digital_inclusion_in_UK_rural_communities/17026574/1
Vassilakopoulou, P., Hustad, E.: Bridging digital divides: a literature review and research agenda for information systems research. Inf. Syst. Front. 25(3), 955–969 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10096-3
Mervyn, K., Simon, A., Allen, D.K.: Digital inclusion and social inclusion: a tale of two cities. Inf. Commun. Soc. 17(9), 1086–1104 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.877952
Wagg, S., Simeonova, B.: A policy-level perspective to tackle rural digital inclusion. Inf. Technol. People 35(7), 1884–1911 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-2020-0047
Allen, D.K., Irnazarow, A., McLauglin, F.: Practice, information and the development of a digital platform. Proc. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 56(1), 597–598 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.101
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Abbott, P., Wagg, S. (2023). Reflections on Post Hoc Theorization of ICT4D Action Research Projects. In: Jones, M.R., Mukherjee, A.S., Thapa, D., Zheng, Y. (eds) After Latour: Globalisation, Inequity and Climate Change. IFIPJWC 2023. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 696. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50154-8_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50154-8_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-50153-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-50154-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)