| ....... Russian communities online |
North American ModelNorth American community networks are varied, but have some common features which provide a framework for similar systems in the UK. Technically they help computer users in a locality connect with each other, mainly using modems and phone lines. They may do this through one computer, the server, dedicated to acting as a hub in a closed system, or by building their network on the server of a commercial Internet Service Provider. Some provide that access free, covering costs through grants, donations and earnings from elsewhere, others charge subscriptions. Users connect from home, work or public terminal - perhaps in a classroom or library. The connections available on different networks range from a couple of phone lines to fibre optic links. These links, perhaps between key sites like schools and training centres, could offer two-way video conferencing, audio and data networking. Others are experimenting with wireless radio networks. These connections users can exchange messages privately, conduct public discussions, exchange computer files and access centrally held information. Their exchanges may be limited to the local system, or they may have gateways to the wider Internet and other systems. The information the networks offer to network users may range from timetables to job opportunities, electronic library catalogues, restaurant listings, tourist attractions and news reports to material from community groups. The electronic networks depends on local organisations and real world networks for their support in funding, information provision and volunteer help - local government, libraries, university, voluntary bodies, sponsors. In turn the networks will train local groups in using the technology and help them develop new projects. The general form of organisation of a community network is a non profit distributing company, which may consequently gain tax advantages. Funding and support comes from a mix of grants, donations, sponsorship, subscriptions and volunteer help. The Morino Institute, one of the champions of community networks in the US, has published a directory of Public Access Networks, which it splits into two sections: first Free-Nets, Community networks and Civic Networks aiming to serve communities as a whole; and secondly Special Focus Networks. The latter split into further categories including economic development, government information, education, community service, health and education. Morino draw a distinction between relatively passive broadcasting and interactive communication where information users are also providers. They argue that: 'This new medium offers immense potential for helping people address many of the challenges to their individual success and the vitality of their communities. Those who have experienced the richness of interactive communications understand its ability to empower individuals, inspire collaboration, facilitate learning and enhance our patterns of access to people and information. 'On the grand scale, interactive communications is already connecting millions of individuals around the world in unrestrained dialogue and helping them to reach vast resources of knowledge and information. Closer to home, it is helping local communities energize citizen participation, reinvent institutions, provide outreach services and spur economic development. Perhaps the greatest opportunity is that it may provide a vehicle for bringing together groups of people in collaborative efforts to solve the interconnected social problems afflicting those communities.' http://www.morino.org/ Community networks in North America started on simple Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) as early as 1980, when David Hughes set up Old Colorado City Communications in Colorado Springs to help people become more active and involved in local government. These early systems required their users to deal with text menus to work their way through to discussion and file areas, and would limit email addresses to others on the same system. Later BBSs would connect together, so that users could send messages across the country - and the world - by Fidonet. Today a community network using a BBSs might use First Class software which can run on equipment costing under L2000, and a software licence costing a few hundred pounds. Subscribers are greeted with the equivalent of a new Mac or Windows desktop (unless they are running DOS), and a range of email, conferencing and file transfer options. Costs will, of course, increase substantially with the numbers of users, storage and connection requirements, but the look and feel is much the same whatever the scale. It has some similarities with commercial systems like Compuserve, that have for some years offered subscribers a friendly graphical interface, with email, conference areas, specialist databases and a host of information services from timetable and weather reports, news services and film reviews. The BBS-based system could expand its services to include email out to and in from the Internet. It might offer both direct dial in and access via the Internet for long distance users. Many community networks have seized the opportunities offered by World Wide Web, and created community networks on systems run by Universities or Internet Service Providers. These systems are excellent for publishing information attractively, but demand that all core material is designed and coded using HTML. There may be associated discussion groups, but in my view these are not as flexible as those running on First Class systems. At one level it has never been easier for the UK home or business user to enjoy the benefits of interactive communication. While there are no developed community networks on the North American model, he or she can open an account with Compuserve which will provide a wealth of information plus Internet access at about L6 a month plus use charges, or simply gain access to the Internet for L10-L15 a month plus only local call charges. Once on either system he or she will have international email, an ability to transfer files, and access to the World Wide Web. A look at the North American community networks may prompt a socially-conscious user to think about developing something similar locally. Here I would offer the enthusiast a few cautions, which lead to where I think the main issues for community networks lie - in the real, not the virtual, world. Here, first, are the cautions: The level of computer use and connectivity in the UK is much lower here than in North America, and getting online is a big jump for most people. The potential user base in most localities is still very low. Little will be achieved by creating a World Wide Web site called Anytown Community Network, with some basic information, and hoping enthusiastic volunteers will email you with pages of fascinating material. Ask the editor of a community or parish newspaper how easy it is to get good copy. Even creating mailing lists or conferences around local topics and hoping people will send basic messages may not work. People simply 'lurk' on the lists, uninterested or under-confident about joining in. Managing even a modest bulletin board system can be time-consuming, maintaining a Web site even more so. Key public sector partners for a community network - local council, libraries, colleges, training agencies - may not even have email. They probably won't understand what you are talking about. Community and voluntary sector interests are unlikely to see online working as a priority, unless there are very obvious benefits. Potential private sector supporters will be more likely to offer help in kind than funding. Behind these observations lie some lessons and possible guidelines for community networking. Community networks are significantly different from public or private ventures. They rely on a wide range of different interests to commit technical support, information, and 'animation' voluntarily. The collaboration and commitment needed to build them does not come easily, particularly when the different interests probably haven't worked together before and are new to the technology. This means a lot of early effort to build up teams, assess technical needs, develop information structures, plan training and support. Later this work may be done by paid staff, but in the early days there may be no funding to cover the work. Start up costs cannot easily be repaid from later funding or earnings. The more 'commercial' a system tries to make itself, the less voluntary effort it may attract. However, there is a positive side to these difficulties. In reality there is no one 'community'. There are communities of locality and of interest. Every place has a myriad of links of family and friendship, of clubs for sport and recreation, support for health and learning, campaigning for the environment and citizens rights. These communities need to communicate better within their interest groups, and between themselves. They need to share experience with others nationally and internationally, and increasingly they need to form partnerships to bid for funds from Government and Europe and demonstrate continuing collaboration. They are the human infrastructure which already uses the technology of phone and fax, as well as print and face to face meetings, to maintain the web of relationships which makes up what we call community. So for the new community networker a good starting place is the existing networks which want to enhance their activity. They have information and they have members who could become network users. They will do your marketing and provide content. They understand voluntary effort, fundraising and non profit distributing companies. Once a critical mass of users develops, there will be scope for lively informal networking between individual users, finding others with similar interests, trading information and maybe holding the electronic equivalent of parties or car boot sales. This is in addition to the more conventional information providers in local government, libraries, schools and colleges and other public agencies who will soon begin to feel some political pressure to join in. UK Model has better Internet connectivity, but higher local call charges. Its traditions of volunteering and civic responsibility are different. IT has better public service broadcasting and, perhaps, a better Press. There may be less perceived need for local electronic networks. On the other hand there is growing interest in getting online, and a realisation that while the Internet may provide good connections, it doesn't necessarily provide useful information. There is too much, which is too diverse and too difficult to find. Organisations and networks need customised solutions which go beyond a simple Internet connection. UK community networks may well be networks of networks and projects, as much as information providers. They may be teams of technical experts, information brokers, trainers and facilitators who ensure there is an appropriate platform, and help people use the new medium. Their work will reinforce our sense of real world place, as well as create new virtual communities online, because they will be making face to face connections which might not otherwise happen. I have found email has increased the people I know across professional and other boundaries, and I have now met quite a few. Community networking could help get us away from the computer screen into new real worlds, as well as create virtual ones. However, community networks - broadly defined - could provide the telecommunications industry with an unparalleled opportunity to test different approaches and contact a wide range of individual and organisational users not readily accessible through normal public and private sector channels. The only way to find out what may or may not work is to try it. We need a number of local pilot projects which share their experience nationally and internationally, and which draw on expertise in telecommunications, computing, information management and community development. |