Mobile Phones in rural life: Insights from fieldwork in western Kenya

Presentation to CDCs and MOH 24 September 2008Laura Murphy, PhDTulane University

Study site & topic

“Hybrid Technologies”

Mobile Phones, Kitchen Gardens & HIV/AIDS

Case study of social and technological change in a village

-national GDP-impacts on fish trade -commercial farming-Small business-Financial transactions-Mpesa for remittances-entrepreneurship

Sidenote: Other “Mobile Phone Research”

Image source: The Economist

A study of changing livelihoods, responses to HIV/AIDS, the social construction of technology

Amaranth and other local plants: still grown?

Pre WWII hoes

Marakaru,Bungoma District

Village case study

Household survey (census), in-depth interviews with owners, group discussions

Population of 5100 in 848 households (29 non-response) in 15 square kilometer catchment area

Who owns phones?

Findings: phone ownership

Households owning >1 phone: 15% (125 HH)

Primary owner is male head: 78% Owners education levels > secondary: 59%Year first phone acquired: 1999

MP HH with HH-head working away: 21% Non MP HH with head working away: 5% Respondents who “ever used” MP: 38%

Range spending/month/airtime only: Ksh 50-6500Airtime use/month, all owners: Ksh 95,000

6% of owners account for 20% of airtime spending

Phone use

Voice > text: “Ear to Ear”Personal/household/communal uses

vs. strictly business

Strengthen family & local networks Sharing phones, but reluctantly

Mobile phone users in 2007 group discussion

Significance to rural lives

Phones mean freedom, convenience and connections

Replace costly transport: foot, matatu, bus KSH, time and uncertainty

Communication vs. information

Rural User #1. Farmer/Community Health Worker/”Long-Distance Housewife”

“R” got a phone in 2003 (used Nokia 3310). In her mid-40s now, she uses a phone to help manage a small

farm, raise 6 children (& grandchildren). Her husband lives in Mombasa most of the year and sends airtime and brings home cash.

HIV+ (on ART in 2006), she is active in her HIV support group and volunteers as CHW and HBC.

Death & disease figure in her conversations about how her phone is useful.

It is important for “knowing about people” but and sometimes for finding about prices.

Text messaging is something she just learned: amazing, you just “write a message!”

Cost and inconvenience of charging a phone are large problems. She lacks cash so “I never buy any airtime”.

While expensive, with the phone, you “Can’t starve to communicate!”

Rural User #2: Grower/Trader

“E” (24) is the eldest son in a large family, still single and living in his father’s household.

He has a new Moto c113 (2007) –the only phone in the household, replacing older handsets

Farming is a business: the phone helps with “tenders to K-- and B– schools”

He likes voice more than texting: you talk “Ear to Ear”The phone must be shared as it is not “mine alone”, but

changing SIM cards is frustrating!He feels privileged “…walking with MP” and my “heart

is ..happy”Without phone, I was in total darkness”

(In July 2008: We could not reach him on his old line which is “out of service”)

Problems

Cost a lot of money!“Lack of cash” #1 constraint to owning handset among non-owners, and operating (owners)

Charging batteriespoor quality batteries, poor access to electricity is #1 problem for owners

Hard to maintain! (handsets & Lines)

“There was a time I wanted to call a friend… it just made a funny sound …there was etaa ye lichumuni (a lantern lamp) and writings saying “slow (low) battery”. I was told that it meant that kumulilo kwa welemo (the charge was finished)...”

(Wilfred, age 60+)

Charging those batteries (1)

Charging those batteries (2)

Spent on commercial charging kiosks: Ksh 100-200/mo

Plus travel time & uncertainty

Batteries ruined through generic chargers

Local owners with access to electrical outlet: 18% (teachers, etc.)

Solar not yet the answer

Rose testing Ksh 5000 portable charger: Repair costs Ksh 650

Lack of continuity: phone update 2008

44% (35/84) households reached by original phone number

24% “line out of service”

31% temporarily out (call diverted, out of signal, switched off)

Phone survey over 5 consecutive days (Fri-Tues) in July 08

Implications for health communications & applications

Mobile phones not widespread in all rural communities (social differences)

Poorest don’t own/use MP effectivelyText messaging not yet popular‘keeping track’ for privacy & targeting a

problem with mobility and turnover Health professionals lack electricity, cash

too