- KICTANet - KICTANet

FW: Search for ERNWACA Regional Coordinator / Le ROCARE recherche un Coordonnateur régional
by Edith Adera 01 Jul '08

01 Jul '08

_____ From: ROCARE/ERNWACA [mailto:info@rocare.org] Sent: 01 July 2008 10:16 To: Undisclosed-recipients: Subject: Search for ERNWACA Regional Coordinator / Le ROCARE recherche un Coordonnateur régional ANGLAIS Please circulate Search for ERNWACA Regional Coordinator, based in Bamako (Republic of Mali) The Educational Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA) is pleased to call for applications for the position of Regional Coordinator, based in Bamako, in the Republic of Mali. The deadline for receipt of applications is 14 August 2008. More information is available at the following internet addresses: Job Description: www.ernwaca.org/web/IMG/pdf_RC_Job_Desccription.pdf Call for Applications (in French): www.ernwaca.org/web/spip.php?article138 Call for Applications (in English): www.ernwaca.org/web/spip.php?article139 Please circulate this announcement to all those who may be interested and to appropriate electronic lists and webmasters. Do not hesitate to include it in institutional and other publications. _____ Veuillez faire circuler FRANCAIS Le ROCARE recherche un Coordonnateur régional, basé à Bamako (République du Mali) Le Réseau Ouest et Centre Africain de Recherche en Education (ROCARE) a le plaisir de lancer un appel à candidatures pour le poste de Coordonnateur régional, basé à Bamako, en République du Mali. La date limite de réception des candidatures est fixée pour le 14 août 2008. Plus d'informations sont disponibles aux adresses Internet suivantes: Description du poste: www.ernwaca.org/web/IMG/pdf_RC_Job_Desccription.pdf Appel à candidatures (en Français): www.ernwaca.org/web/spip.php?article138 Appel à candidatures (en Anglais): www.ernwaca.org/web/spip.php?article139 Veuillez faire parvenir cette annonce à tous ceux qui sont susceptibles dêtres intéressés par le poste , aux listes électroniques de diffusion et aux webmasters. N'hésitez pas à l'inclure dans les bulletins dinformation et autres publications de vos institutions respectives. Job description Vision of ERNWACA: Give an African face to African education. Mission: Promote African expertise and a culture of research to improve educational policy and practice. Regional Coordinator position, based in Bamako, Mali; start date is November 2008 Application deadline: 14 August 2008 Responsibilities * Develop and promote the vision and leadership of the network, * Develop, in a participatory way, the 2010-2016 strategic action plan in two budgetary cycles, in collaboration with network leaders and partners in member countries; * Coordinate implementation of the plan in ways that promote development of the national branches of ERNWACA and institutional development of the organization; * Assure the consolidation, expansion and deepening of the network and mechanisms for the decentralization of responsibilities for planning, action plan implementation, and monitoring; * Ensure an effective and coordinated communications strategy for the promotion of the network and use of its expertise and products in policymaking and in improving the quality of education in member countries; * Oversee transnational research projects and processes * Facilitate planning and organization of training workshops on research methodologies and writing, as well as seminars and conferences to share research findings and stimulate public and policy dialogue; * Consolidate existing partnerships and develop and maintain appropriate synergistic and mutually beneficial partnerships at the regional level, so as to broaden the networks influence in matters pertaining to the development of education; * Network with regional organizations, inter-governmental institutions, universities, research institutes, teacher training colleges and unions, foundations, development agencies, and other partners to implement and/or co-finance joint training, research, advocacy, and publication programs; * Raise funds and diversify sources of funding for the network to ensure greater autonomy of financial management as well as institutional sustainability, including through the Friends of ERNWACA giving program and the Endowment Fund campaign; * Support the national branches of the network to design, implement, monitor and evaluate their annual action plans, in collaboration with the national coordinating committees, and ensure respect of statutory obligations and responsibilities; * Support national network branches in strategic partnership development and resource mobilization in order to ensure greater autonomy of national branches; * Promote linkages among the networks different branches in member countries and facilitate communication and sharing of lessons learned and good practices among them; * Work with the networks scientific committees to ensure the quality of research and publication processes; * Work with the Board of Directors in ensuring healthy institutional development, including financial transparency and good governance at national and regional levels; * Regularly assess, evaluate and report on organizational capacity and performance; * Present annual technical and financial reports to the Board of Directors for approval; * Represent the network at regional and international meetings, with other network leaders and network members. Profile * Possess at least a maters degree or its equivalent, preferably a PhD and several scholarly publications; * Have a background in social science research, preferably with university linkages; * Have a least 5 years of documented and proven experience in the following areas: * management, networking, and institutional development; * communications, negotiation, and public relations; * partnership building and fundraising; * Able to mobilize and manage human and financial resources; * Innovative team player with excellent human relations skills; * Excellent use of French and English in written and oral communication; * Regular use of information and communication technologies for learning/teaching/training, research, and administration; * Resident/citizen of African country and familiar with educational development challenges and aspirations on the continent; * Able to travel at least 25% time. This is a full time position for three years, based in Bamako, Mali. Contract renewal is based on performance and the search for and renewal of complimentary funding. The coordinator will be employed by ERNWACA. ERNWACA looks forward to negotiating detachment from responsibilities at a national institution. To apply Please send by 14 August 2008 the following in a SINGLE message with ERNWACA plus your FULL NAME in the subject line to Raynal et Fadhika RH, Abidjan, at recrutement(a)rfrh.net and also to recrutement.rocare(a)ymail.com. 1/ Motivation letter 2/ CV 3/ three (3) letters of recommendation (obligatory), addressed to the President of the ERNWACA Board of Directors 4/ current earnings as well as salary expectations (obligatory) 5/ indication of institution in your country with video-conference facilities where pre-selection interview could take place All five (5) items are required and incomplete applications will not be considered. Qualified women candidates are encouraged to apply. Se désinscrire

1 0

An extract of the adopted resolutions by the ICANN Board in Paris on Thursday 26 June 2008.
by alice wanjira 30 Jun '08

30 Jun '08

An extract of the adopted resolutions by the ICANN Board in Paris on Thursday 26 June 2008. http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-26jun08.htm Approval of Minutes GNSO Recommendations on New gTLDs IDNC / IDN Fast-track GNSO Recommendation on Domain Tasting Approval of Operating Plan and Budget for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Update on Draft Amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement Approval of PIR Request to Implement DNSSEC in .ORG ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct Ratification of Selection of Consultant to Conduct Independent Review of the Board Appointment of Independent Review Working Groups Update on Independent Reviews of ICANN Structures Board Committee Assignment Revisions Approval of BGC Recommendations on GNSO Improvements Receipt of Report of President's Strategy Committee Consultation Review of Paris Meeting Structure Board Response to Discussions Arising from Paris Meeting ICANN At-Large Summit Proposal Other Business Thanks to Steve Conte Thanks to Sponsors Thanks to Local Hosts, Staff, Scribes, Interpreters, Event Teams, and Others Approval of Minutes Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the minutes of the Board Meeting of 29 May 2008 are approved. <http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-29may08.htm> GNSO Recommendations on New gTLDs Whereas, the GNSO initiated a policy development process on the introduction of New gTLDs in December 2005. <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/> Whereas, the GNSO Committee on the Introduction of New gTLDs addressed a range of difficult technical, operational, legal, economic, and policy questions, and facilitated widespread participation and public comment throughout the process. Whereas, the GNSO successfully completed its policy development process on the Introduction of New gTLDs and on 7 September 2007, and achieved a Supermajority vote on its 19 policy recommendations. <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-06sep07.shtml> Whereas, the Board instructed staff to review the GNSO recommendations and determine whether they were capable of implementation. Whereas, staff has engaged international technical, operational and legal expertise to provide counsel on details to support the implementation of the Policy recommendations and as a result, ICANN cross-functional teams have developed implementation details in support of the GNSO's policy recommendations, and have concluded that the recommendations are capable of implementation. Whereas, staff has provided regular updates to the community and the Board on the implementation plan. <http://icann.org/topics/new-gtld-program.htm> Whereas, consultation with the DNS technical community has led to the conclusion that there is not currently any evidence to support establishing a limit to how many TLDs can be inserted in the root based on technical stability concerns. <http://www.icann.org/topics/dns-stability-draft-paper-06feb08.pdf> Whereas, the Board recognizes that the process will need to be resilient to unforeseen circumstances. Whereas, the Board has listened to the concerns about the recommendations that have been raised by the community, and will continue to take into account the advice of ICANN's supporting organizations and advisory committees in the implementation plan. Resolved ( 2008.06.26.__ ), based on both the support of the community for New gTLDs and the advice of staff that the introduction of new gTLDs is capable of implementation, the Board adopts the GNSO policy recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm>. Resolved ( 2008.06.26.__ ), the Board directs staff to continue to further develop and complete its detailed implementation plan, continue communication with the community on such work, and provide the Board with a final version of the implementation proposals for the board and community to approve before the new gTLD introduction process is launched. IDNC / IDN Fast-track Whereas, the ICANN Board recognizes that the "IDNC Working Group" developed, after extensive community comment, a final report on feasible methods for timely (fast-track) introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs associated with ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes while an overall, long-term IDN ccTLD policy is under development by the ccNSO. Whereas, the IDNC Working Group has concluded its work and has submitted recommendations for the selection and delegation of "fast-track" IDN ccTLDs and, pursuant to its charter, has taken into account and was guided by consideration of the requirements to: Preserve the security and stability of the DNS; Comply with the IDNA protocols; Take input and advice from the technical community with respect to the implementation of IDNs; and Build on and maintain the current practices for the delegation of ccTLDs, which include the current IANA practices. Whereas, the IDNC Working Group's high-level recommendations require implementation planning. Whereas, ICANN is looking closely at interaction with the final IDN ccTLD PDP process and potential risks, and intends to implement IDN ccTLDs using a procedure that will be resilient to unforeseen circumstances. Whereas, staff will consider the full range of implementation issues related to the introduction of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 list, including means of promoting adherence to technical standards and mechanisms to cover the costs associated with IDN ccTLDs. Whereas, the Board intends that the timing of the process for the introduction of IDN ccTLDs should be aligned with the process for the introduction of New gTLDs. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board thanks the members of the IDNC WG for completing their chartered tasks in a timely manner. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board directs staff to: (1) post the IDNC WG final report for public comments; (2) commence work on implementation issues in consultation with relevant stakeholders; and (3) submit a detailed implementation report including a list of any outstanding issues to the Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November2008 GNSO Recommendation on Domain Tasting Whereas, ICANN community stakeholders are increasingly concerned about domain tasting, which is the practice of using the add grace period (AGP) to register domain names in bulk in order to test their profitability. Whereas, on 17 April 2008, the GNSO Council approved, by a Supermajority vote, a motion to prohibit any gTLD operator that has implemented an AGP from offering a refund for any domain name deleted during the AGP that exceeds 10% of its net new registrations in that month, or fifty domain names, whichever is greater. <http://gnso.icann.org/meetings/minutes-gnso-17apr08.shtml> Whereas, on 25 April 2008, the GNSO Council forwarded its formal "Report to the ICANN Board - Recommendation for Domain Tasting" <http://gnso.icann.org/issues/domain-tasting/domain-tasting-board-report-gns…>, which outlines the full text of the motion and the full context and procedural history of this proceeding. Whereas, the Board is also considering the Proposed FY 09 Operating Plan and Budget <http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm>, which includes (at the encouragement of the GNSO Council) a proposal similar to the GNSO policy recommendation to expand the applicability of the ICANN transaction fee in order to limit domain tasting. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board adopts the GNSO policy recommendation on domain tasting, and directs staff to implement the policy following appropriate comment and notice periods on the implementation documents. Approval of Operating Plan and Budget for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Whereas, ICANN approved an update to the Strategic Plan in December 2007. <http://www.icann.org/strategic-plan/> Whereas, the Initial Operating Plan and Budget Framework for fiscal year 2009 was presented at the New Delhi ICANN meeting and was posted in February 2008 for community consultation. <http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-04feb08.htm> Whereas, community consultations were held to discuss and obtain feedback on the Initial Framework. Whereas, the draft FY09 Operating Plan and Budget was posted for public comment in accordance with the Bylaws on 17 May 2008 based upon the Initial Framework, community consultation, and consultations with the Board Finance Committee. A slightly revised version was posted on 23 May 2008. <http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm> Whereas, ICANN has actively solicited community feedback and consultation with ICANN's constituencies. <http://forum.icann.org/lists/op-budget-fy2009/> Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee has discussed, and guided staff on, the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget at each of its regularly scheduled monthly meetings. Whereas, the final FY09 Operating Plan and Budget was posted on 26 June 2008. <http://www.icann.org/en/financials/proposed-opplan-budget-v3-fy09-25jun08-e…> Whereas, the ICANN Board Finance Committee met in Paris on 22 June 2008 to discuss the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget, and recommended that the Board adopt the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget. Whereas, the President has advised that the FY09 Operating Plan and Budget reflects the work of staff and community to identify the plan of activities, the expected revenue, and resources necessary to be spent in fiscal year ending 30 June 2009. Whereas, continuing consultation on the budget has been conducted at ICANN's meeting in Paris, at constituency meetings, and during the public forum. Resolved (2008.06.26.___), the Board adopts the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Operating Plan and Budget. <http://www.icann.org/en/financials/proposed-opplan-budget-v3-fy09-25jun08-e…> Update on Draft Amendments to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (For discussion only.) Approval of PIR Request to Implement DNSSEC in .ORG Whereas, Public Interest Registry has submitted a proposal to implement DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC) in .ORG. <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/pir-request-03apr08.pdf> Whereas, staff has evaluated the .ORG DNSSEC proposal as a new registry service via the Registry Services Evaluation Policy <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/>, and the proposal included a requested amendment to Section 3.1(c)(i) of the .ORG Registry Agreement <http://icann.org/tlds/agreements/org/proposed-org-amendment-23apr08.pdf> which was posted for public comment along with the PIR proposal. Whereas, the evaluation under the threshold test of the Registry Services Evaluation Policy <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/rsep.html> found a likelihood of security and stability issues associated with the proposed implementation. The RSTEP Review Team considered the proposal and found that there was a risk of a meaningful adverse effect on security and stability, which could be effectively mitigated by policies, decisions and actions to which PIR has expressly committed in its proposal or could be reasonably required to commit. <http://icann.org/registries/rsep/rstep-report-pir-dnssec-04jun08.pdf> Whereas, the Chair of the SSAC has advised that RSTEP's thorough investigation of every issue that has been raised concerning the security and stability effects of DNSSEC deployment concludes that effective measures to deal with all of them can be taken by PIR, and that this conclusion after exhaustive review greatly increases the confidence with which DNSSEC deployment in .ORG can be undertaken. Whereas, PIR intends to implement DNSSEC only after extended testing and consultation. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), that PIR's proposal to implement DNSSEC in .ORG is approved, with the understanding that PIR will continue to cooperate and consult with ICANN on details of the implementation. The President and the General Counsel are authorized to enter the associated amendment to the .ORG Registry Agreement, and to take other actions as appropriate to enable the deployment of DNSSEC in .ORG. ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct Whereas, the members of ICANN's Board of Directors are committed to maintaining a high standard of ethical conduct. Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has developed a Code of Conduct to provide the Board with guiding principles for conducting themselves in an ethical manner. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board directs staff to post the newly proposed ICANN Board of Directors' Code of Conduct for public comment, for consideration by the Board as soon as feasible. [Reference to PDF will be inserted when posted.] Ratification of Selection of Consultant to Conduct Independent Review of the Board Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that Boston Consulting Group be selected as the consultant to perform the independent review of the ICANN Board. Whereas, the BGC's recommendation to retain BCG was approved by the Executive Committee during its meeting on 12 June 2008. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board ratifies the Executive Committee's approval of the Board Governance Committee's recommendation to select Boston Consulting Group as the consultant to perform the independent review of the ICANN Board. Appointment of Independent Review Working Groups Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that several working groups should be formed to coordinate pending independent reviews of ICANN structures. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board establishes the following independent review working groups: ICANN Board Independent Review Working Group: Amadeu Abril i Abril, Roberto Gaetano (Chair), Steve Goldstein, Thomas Narten, Rajasekhar Ramaraj, Rita Rodin, and Jean Jacques Subrenat. DNS Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC) Independent Review Working Group: Harald Alvestrand (Chair), Steve Crocker and Bruce Tonkin. Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) Independent Review Working Group: Robert Blokzijl, Dennis Jennings (Chair), Reinhard Scholl and Suzanne Woolf. Update on Independent Reviews of ICANN Structures (For discussion only.) Board Committee Assignment Revisions Whereas, the Board Governance Committee has recommended that the membership of several Board should be revised, and that all other committees should remain unchanged until the 2008 Annual Meeting. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the membership of the Audit, Finance, and Reconsideration committees are revised as follows: Audit Committee: Raimundo Beca, Demi Getschko, Dennis Jennings, Njeri Rionge and Rita Rodin (Chair). Finance Committee: Raimundo Beca, Peter Dengate Thrush, Steve Goldstein, Dennis Jennings, Rajasekhar Ramaraj (Chair), and Bruce Tonkin (as observer). Reconsideration Committee: Susan Crawford (Chair), Demi Getschko, Dennis Jennings, Rita Rodin, and Jean-Jacques Subrenat. Approval of BGC Recommendations on GNSO Improvements Whereas, Article IV, Section 4 of ICANN's Bylaws calls for periodic reviews of the performance and operation of ICANN's structures by an entity or entities independent of the organization under review. Whereas, the Board created the "Board Governance Committee GNSO Review Working Group" (Working Group) to consider the independent review of the GNSO and other relevant input, and recommend to the Board Governance Committee a comprehensive proposal to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO, including its policy activities, structure, operations and communications. Whereas, the Working Group engaged in extensive public consultation and discussions, considered all input, and developed a final report < http://www.icann.org/topics/gnso-improvements/gnso-improvements-report-03fe… > containing a comprehensive and exhaustive list of proposed recommendations on GNSO improvements. Whereas, the Board Governance Committee determined that the GNSO Improvements working group had fulfilled its charter and forwarded the final report to the Board for consideration. Whereas, a public comment forum was held open for 60 days to receive, consider and summarize < http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvements-report-2008/msg00033.html > public comments on the final report. Whereas, the GNSO Council and Staff have worked diligently over the past few months to develop a top-level plan for approaching the implementation of the improvement recommendations, as requested by the Board at its New Delhi meeting. Whereas, ICANN has a continuing need for a strong structure for developing policies that reflect to the extent possible a consensus of all stakeholders in the community including ICANN's contracted parties. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board endorses the recommendations of the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working Group, other than on GNSO Council restructuring, and requests that the GNSO convene a small working group on Council restructuring including one representative from the current NomCom appointees, one member from each constituency and one member from each liaison-appointing advisory committee (if that advisory committee so desires), and that this group should reach consensus and submit a consensus recommendation on Council restructuring by no later than 25 July 2008 for consideration by Receipt of Report of President's Strategy Committee Consultation Whereas, the Chairman of the Board requested that the President's Strategy Committee undertake a process on how to strengthen and complete the ICANN multi-stakeholder model. Whereas, the PSC has developed three papers that outline key areas and possible responses to address them: "Transition Action Plan," "Improving Institutional Confidence in ICANN," and "FAQ." < http://icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-16jun08-en.htm > Whereas, these documents and the proposals contained in them have been discussed at ICANN's meeting in Paris. Whereas, a dedicated webpage has been launched to provide the community with information, including regular updates < http://icann.org/jpa/iic/ >. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board thanks the President's Strategy Committee for its work to date, and instructs ICANN staff to undertake the public consultation recommended in the action plan, and strongly encourages the entire ICANN community to participate in the continuing consultations on the future of ICANN by reviewing and submitting comments to the PSC by 31 July 2008. Selection of Mexico City for March 2009 ICANN Meeting Whereas, ICANN intends to hold its first meeting for calendar year 2009 in the Latin America region; Whereas, the Mexican Internet Association (AMIPCI) has agreed to host the meeting; Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board accepts the AMIPCI proposal to host ICANN's 34th global meeting in Mexico City, in March 2009. Review of Paris Meeting Structure (For discussion only.) Board Response to Discussions Arising from Paris Meeting (For discussion only.) ICANN At-Large Summit Proposal Whereas, at the ICANN meeting in New Delhi in February 2008, the Board resolved to direct staff to work with the ALAC to finalise a proposal to fund an ICANN At-Large Summit, for consideration as part of the 2008-2009 operating plan and budget process. < http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-15feb08.htm > Whereas, potential funding for such a summit has been identified in the FY09 budget. < http://www.icann.org/financials/fiscal-30jun09.htm > Whereas, a proposal for the Summit was completed and submitted shortly before the ICANN Meeting in Paris. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), the Board approves the proposal to hold an ICANN At-Large Summit as a one-time special event, and requests that the ALAC work with ICANN Staff to implement the Summit in a manner that achieves efficiency, including considering the Mexico meeting as the venue. Resolved (2008.06.26.__), with the maturation of At-Large and the proposal for the At-Large Summit's objectives set out, the Board expects the ALAC to look to more self-funding for At-Large travel in the fiscal year 2010 plan, consistent with the travel policies of other constituencies. _______________________________________________ AfrICANN mailing list AfrICANN(a)afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/africann

1 0

FW: Advert for the position of Website Editing Specialist
by Edith Adera 30 Jun '08

30 Jun '08

-----Original Message----- From: kmuthembwa(a)worldbank.org [mailto:kmuthembwa@worldbank.org] Sent: 30 June 2008 10:19 Subject: Advert for the position of Website Editing Specialist Please forward to your contacts (See attached file: Advert - Website Editing Specialist - 24th June 2008.doc) Keziah Muthembwa Public Information Officer World Bank, Kenya Office Box 30577 00100 Nairobi Tel: 254 20 3226484 "The past cannot be changed, the future is still in your power." - Hugh White

1 0

World Youth Congress 2008
by Wainaina Mungai 29 Jun '08

29 Jun '08

Dear all, There is an opportunity for a KICTANet member to support youth and promote their work at the World Youth Congress to be held in Quebec, Canada in August. The organisation or individual will support one young person to attend the Congress by funding return airfare to Quebec. Your organisation may then utilise the young person to wear your merchandise (T-shirts, bag etc) as well as organise media coverage of your support. A win-win arragement that helps young Kenyans present their work at the Congress. One of the projects (ToughCookie Project) is featured on the congress website and http://www.madeinkenya.org If you are intersted, contact Made in Kenya Network on wainaina(a)madeinkenya.org by July 4th 2008. Regards, Wainaina -- Made in Kenya Network P. O. Box 72031 - 00200 Nairobi. Kenya Tel: +254-20-3590451 Cel: +254-722-811171 Cel: +254-735-370840 www.madeinkenya.org www.bungesms.com www.pamonet.org

1 0

Kenya embarks on exercise to protect Intellectual Property - will this help our jeune entrepreneurs?
by Brian Longwe 28 Jun '08

28 Jun '08

The penny has finally dropped. After the country's huge loss of revenue due to Japanese patenting of Kenya's traditional 'kiondo' and the near loss of the traditional 'kikoy' patent to a shrewd Kenyan living in the UK, the Kenya Intellectual Property Institute (KIPI) has now embarked on a process to take stock of traditional knowledge and artifacts and determine those that need protection through patent. [Full article at] http://mashilingi.blogspot.com/2008/06/kenya-embarks-on-exercise-to-protect… -- Brian Munyao Longwe e-mail: blongwe(a)gmail.com cell: + 254 722 518 744 blog : http://zinjlog.blogspot.com meta-blog: http://mashilingi.blogspot.com

6 10

linked lists??
by Alex Gakuru 28 Jun '08

28 Jun '08

Recent unusually high traffic apparently originates from elsewhere. I request information whether kictanet was silently married? regards, Alex

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Expensive software systems?
by tyrus＠icsit.jkuat.ac.ke 27 Jun '08

27 Jun '08

I think pkariuki has a point. The fact that even here in a University of Technology, students are encouraged to come up with creative solutions to problems affecting our current markets. However, the discouraging bit is that we tend to see recurring projects and very marginalized creativity. Certain societies and technology clubs do try to get innovative by going out there and identifying where they can offer solutions. Another weakness I find in our institutes of higher learning is the fact that research in IT is seriously lacking. If you are keen to observe, research is usually based on agriculture thus shutting out IT which we all know will propel this nation to achieving the vision 2030. My humble opinion is to venture into research and to ask stake-holders to come and tap into the brains here in campus. Having research carried out in campuses in as far as technology is concerned will even ensure the use of under-utilized resources and am referring to computers during after hours, idle bandwidth which will ultimately be paid for as if it were used, etc etc. Some bit of encouragement from the private sector that is coming up is the holding of competitions and exhibitions like the IEEE competitions which actually bring out the hidden potential in the students. This however, is also abit tricky because we have had cases of such stakeholders taking advantage of this thus benefiting themselves and short changing the students. I firmly believe in as far as developing add-on software to work with enterprise softwares like SAP or Oracle, this can be done locally and if the fear expressed here is the confidence in not having these developers going under with out a trace, then why not do it in university level where you have the full backing of its administration. Tyrus Muya Kamau. Systems Administrator, eLearning Jomo Kenyatta University of Agri & Techology Kenya, Cell Phone: +254-721292936. Mail:tyrus@icsit.jkuat.ac.ke [DISCLAIMER] This message may contain confidential information and must not be copied, disclosed or used by anybody other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please notify us by e-mail (noreply(a)jkuat.ac.ke) and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it. E-mail may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment, and no liability is accepted for any such corruption, interception or amendment, or the consequences thereof. No liability or responsibility is accepted for viruses - it is your responsibility to scan

2 1

Fw: RE: Expensive software systems?
by Shem Ochuodho 27 Jun '08

27 Jun '08

FYI --- On Thu, 6/26/08, HW <hwachira(a)itakenya.com> wrote: From: HW <hwachira(a)itakenya.com> Subject: RE: [kictanet] Expensive software systems? To: "HW" <hwachira(a)itakenya.com> Date: Thursday, June 26, 2008, 5:43 PM Shem & co Thanks for your kind mention. I saw today someone announcing as “new” features we implemented through our Virtual-M ERP through which we deployed solutions for PricewaterhouseCoopers ERP in 1998! Perhaps our problem is PR – we do not promote our own, even when we do world class quality work. To bring you up to date we (Information Technology Associates Ltd) are currently involved in the design of two hopefully revolutionary products which we will be announcing shortly. Our client, in both cases the system is a PPP between government and stakeholders who need a national system with multi-platform interfaces (SMS, Internet, desktop, email, voice calls) and in which dB replication (to remote loc) will depend on very little bandwidth (GPRS). In both cases, hardware/chip design is involved, and the users of the system will be many (up to 1.5 million) and distributed countrywide. Yes, I am aware (and working on) the software/hardware integration aspects as you have described in ref to Nigeria . The challenge in the past has been that the Chinese or Malaysian manufactures do require numbers (min 10,000 units) for example to mass produce eg a microchip with your software integrated. It is only now for the first time that I have secured a large enough project requiring mass production in advance…. So I trust that we will in due course demonstrate that Africa can also offer software/hardware solutions competitively. Regards Haron Wachira Information Technology Associates Ltd 7th Floor, Eden Square (AIG House), Chiromo Road , Westlands P. O. Box 10510 Nairobi 00100 Landline: 254-20-3673691 Cell: +254-723-691835 Fax: 254-20-3673231 size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1> From: Shem Ochuodho [mailto:shemochuodho@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:55 PM To: kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com; KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Cc: New Vision List; Haron Wachira; Antoine BIGIRIMANA-Yahoo Subject: Re: [kictanet] Expensive software systems? Wesley, Actually given the right parameters, even ERP-like software can be locally developed. The two closest examples of ERP-like systems I have come across that were 'locally' developed were: a system by Haron Wachira (he formerly of Diamond Systems - the 1st Kenyan firm to assemble computers) which I remember being used by a major Tea company through its network, among others, and Rwanda 's SmartGov. There is a very thin line between these systems and conventional ERPs. Btw, before I even thought that 'hardware' manufacture/assembly is a pipe-dream for us - until I came across the 'fabless trend' that Nigeria is already pushing. It is truly cutting-edge technology - and 'knowledge work'. For those who might not know, in such a scenario, a country/firm that does not have the technology to 'manufacture' chips/VLSI can still design systems, and then send designs to places like Malaysia for production/manufacture of the chips. The 'intelligence' or brain-work (and hence the money) is not in the manufacture, but in the design, particularly for products whose value is in the uniqueness/complexity, not numbers. In effect, if the environment is right, it is doable. Shem --- On Wed, 6/25/08, wesley kiriinya <kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote: From: wesley kiriinya <kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Expensive software systems? To: "Shem Ochuodho" <shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 12:55 PM The kind of software I'm refering to is not on the rank of SAP and Oracle. These are software built to use SAP, Oracle or other larger scale software. So let me break it down: 1. Level 1 Software: Operating systems, SAP, Oracle, MS SQL, ...: I don't propose that these can be done locally. 2. Level 2 Software: Software that integrates with the above. Usually shipped as libraries. It's sort of middle level software: This requires good skill and can be done locally on some scale. Infact it should be encouraged that it be done locally. 3. Level 3 Software: What the client actually interacts with. They can also be software utilities. They interact with the Level 2 Software: Can be done locally. This is probably the work outsourced to countries with cheapest labour that can do the work. --- On Wed, 6/25/08, Leonard Mware <mleonardo(a)yahoo.com> wrote: From: Leonard Mware <mleonardo(a)yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Expensive software systems? To: kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com Cc: "New Vision List" <newvisionkenya(a)yahoogroups.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 4:40 PM I have two questions: 1. Do we have locally done large scale ERPs in the market that compares with SAP, Navision, BAAN, Oracle Financials? 2. How well tested are they? For such a large and mission critical system testing skills and the cost of testing is critical on final cost. Leonard Shem Ochuodho <shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Wesley & Washington, Very legitimate points raised. Allow me to share a real life experience. While at KPC, we came across two very interesting scenarios. When developing the Corporate ICT Strategy, we shopped around and gathered that possibly only 2 other 'Class A' parastatals and a handful of large private corporations had developed their ICT strategies. In a number of cases for multi-nationals, their strategies had largely been developed from parent organizations overseas. For the 2 local firms (and 1 large MNC), they had spent about KShs 300m to develop their strategies. In the case of KPC, it was done by locals (Kenyans), and it cost in total just under KShs 15m (10m to 'experts' + overheads + taxes). Yet for those who may be in the know, at the time (2004/05), the KPC ICT Strategy was like an ad-hoc standard (the way the Rwandan ICT Masterplan is to some!). Not only did a number of other strategic parastatals go the same route/or borrow an idea or two from it; at the time, some sections of COMESA and NEPAD were considering it for a 'regional template'. Am not belabouring on this to show how excellent it was, but to give comfort that it was as good - if not better - than those which were developed at 20x its cost - and by locals. At inception, we had a dilemma because we would not have found any local experts with experience in this sector - since KPC was/is perhaps the only refined petroleum pipeline company in the region - so to find 'local experts' who had developed similar strategies was almost out of question. However, Management & Board recognized that there were discrete skills which could be put together to get something close to the desired whole/ideal: there were people who had developed strategies for large corporations (public and/or private), oil companies (the distributors), energy companies (e.g. SCADA is a backbone to all large-scale energy 'transporters', including KPC and KP&LC), etc. So, we went out looking for what at the time were considered to be some of the best within Govt, industry (private sector), academia, and civil society (in this case not the NGO Council, but professional associations), etc. In all, we ended up with a team of 15, some of them subscribers on this list. And they did a fantastic job. Scenario 2: just as the team was winding down, the SCADA system broke down. This wasn't the first time for the system to go done; it had done so a few times before. From info available, whenever this had happened before, we had to turn to a major international firm in this sector domiciled in Canada . Firstly, they would take at least two weeks to arrive to work on the problem. Secondly, every time they came the Corporation would pay KShs 10m minimum, minus overheads (air-fare, hotel accommodation, etc). In this instance, when the ICT-Strategy team was asked if they could work on it, 3 among them came forward to do so. Within 4 days, yes 4 days, the system was up and running, and it cost the Corporation only KShs 700k (inclusive of overheads)! Apart from the money and time saving, we had enabled ¡technology transfer/acquisition¢, and if need be, in future, there was local expertise that would be called upon. In a nutshell, I wouldn't be surprised if we spent 20x more on ICT products and services than is really necessary - especially for the ultra-large projects. ICT development and promotion is not only attractive in the wealth, jobs, efficiency and productivity it creates, but also in the expenses/costs it saves. Would be interesting to know how much as a country we spend to 'import technology' versus what we would need to spend on developing skills that would help us avoid importing some (of course not all) those technologies. Best rgrds, Shem --- On Wed, 6/25/08, Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo(a)gmail.com> wrote: From: Odhiambo Washington <odhiambo(a)gmail.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Expensive software systems? To: "Shem Ochuodho" <shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 4:20 AMOn Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 9:56 AM, wesley kiriinya <kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Ladies and Gentlemen, > > How come most of the software systems Kenya gvnmt and related bodies > purchase always cost 100s of millions if not a few billions? > Like this one for KPA: > http://www.bdafrica.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8383&Item… > > This is not meant to hit anyone hard. I'm trying to see whether there is a > better solution. > > So far this year I've heard of 3 systems: > 1. KRA > 2. Immigration > 3. KPA. > > This KPA system costs a total of 450M, but the software bit is 200M. From > the software features described I feel they could have got better value for > their money. > > May be these systems really cost that much. May be there is someone in the > list who can shed more light on these systems. > > BTW: To make this even more interesting various developers in the list can > suggest a software solution component for each problem these systems solve, > estimated development time and estimated cost. That way it's not just > talking the talk but walking the walk. > > I'll take a shot: > Case 1: > From the newspaper article, one of the port guys is quoted as saying: > "One unique thing about the system is its capacity to capture data in real > time. The moment a vehicle rolls out of a vessel, its data is captured. This > makes it easier for us to track such cargo and containers as well," said > Osero. > > My take: > Analysis: The machines which are costing 250M (It's 250M machines + 200M > software = 450M entire system) have sensors that measure different > qualities/properties of the item in the machine e.g. weight. These machines > have an API to link them to a computer system. Using the API get the > measured quantity and display/store in database etc. This isn't really the > hardest thing to do as the manufactures of the 250M machines should provide > documentation and support to the software developers. > > Estimated work force and time: 3 developers, 3-4 months. > > Cost: 200K * 3 developers * 4 months = 2.4M. + 20% (any other expenses) = > 2.88M. > > Case 2: > Another feature is keeping track/audit trails/ historical data. > > My take: > Analysis: This is basically from: > 1. Collection of good requirements from the port. > 2. Designing the right architecture that fits the requirements. > 3. Creating the right designs from the architecture. > 4. Pass the designs to the programmers for implementation. > > 1-3 are Key and this is where the bulk of the money will go. > > Estimated work force and time: 3 system requirements/analysis collectors, 4 > months. The actual time depends on how well KPA know the problems they are > facing, and how well they can describe them. > 3 system/software architects, > 3 months. > 4 system/software designers, 5 > months. > > Cost: (Requirements) 100K * 3 * 4 = 1.2M+20% = 1.44M > (Architecture) 350K * 3 * 3 = 3.15M+20% = 3.78M > (Design) 250K * 4 * 5 = 5M+20% = 6M. > > So far the total is 14.1 M. And these are some of the most important roles. > Even with 15 programmers @ 100K for 12 months (+20%) = 21.6M for a current > toral of 35.7M. > > OK I'll stop there. I'm not writting a report. Feel free to correct me. I > could be very wrong. Hello Kiriinya, This is a very interesting analysis and I'm compelled to agree with you as regards the cost factors. However, the implementation process doesn't seem to be that straight, and might not be for some time. Hey, I am not being the govt spokesman on these matters but nothing is so secret about it. I do believe that tenders were invited for such implementations but I don't know the details. I am only assuming it's the norm. If any studies were carried out regarding the system requirements, then only the IT Directors within those organizations can tell. Perhaps it's time such information is made public via some govt publication (those organizations are parastatals). I am not familiar with govt procurement procedures but the last time I read anything about it, it was a whole lot of a mess so you don't expect to see any level of transparency in that. Those are some of the things the coalition govt is supposed to be addressing, IIRC. But even if you expressed interest in undertake such a project, I wonder how much the organizations would be willing to let you in on their operations. So the first question is: Did they give the organization that won the tender the access into their operations in order to understand their needs? I don't think so. Perhaps they just "borrowed" from an organization that had done it for someone else and customized! In such a case, no one cares to do the calculations as you have done. They simply get a quote, "negotiate" and buy. I believe this explains why the costs are as high as they are. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi ,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "Oh My God! They killed init! You Bastards!" --from a /. post _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/shemochuodho%40yahoo.c… _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: mleonardo(a)yahoo.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mleonardo%40yahoo.com _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: kiriinya2000(a)yahoo.com Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kiriinya2000%40yahoo.c… _______________________________________________kictanet mailing listkictanet@lists.kictanet.or.kehttp://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: shemochuodho(a)yahoo.comUnsubscribe or change your options athttp://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/shemochuodho%40yahoo…

1 0

Re: [kictanet] Voiceless 'Knowledge Workers'
by Shem Ochuodho 27 Jun '08

27 Jun '08

Victor,   I wouldn't have responded to this, save for the record. I am not sure which Rwandan 5-star hotel you are talking about (as they are not many), but whatever the case, you and I seem to be talking about 2 different Rwanda's. And btw, 300km of fiber for Rwanda is not the same thing as 300km for Kenya, not that Kenya's laid and functional national fiber is significantly much higher!   Even with the fact that it would be unfair to compare Rwanda's ICT status with Kenya's (given the countries' histories, sizes, populations, and economies), one cannot deny the fact that Rwanda is a miracle story, largely due to leadership and vision. And it is not only limited to ICT: look at governance, gender, security (Kigali is one of the safest of the 40+ African cities am familiar with), cleanliness/environment, good roads, etc. This is not to say Rwanda does not have its flip side; of course it does, e.g. democracy and private sector are still nascent, limited human resource base, etc.   Back to ICT: neither you nor I would be the best judge on whether Rwanda or Kenya is doing better in ICT. But last year's UNCTAD's Global ICT Diffusion Index put Rwanda at per with (if not ahead of) Kenya. If we are talking implementation, sample this:-   1. Rwanda was the 1st Sub-Saharan Africa's country to link its two largest cities by fiber 2. Rwanda's Cabinet sessions are e-ready (a good number of ministers prepare their own power point presentations) 3. Rwanda is the only country I know of where within 24 hrs of a Cabinet meeting, decisions are available on the web (Official Govt website - talk of transparency!) 4. Rwanda's e-Parliament is being used by NEPAD as a model for Africa - Internet-ready/WiFi/WiBro at every point of 'Parliament's' precinct (both Senate and Chamber of Deputies) 5. Rwanda was the first African country where e-Schools was simultaneously launched in all the 6 urban-rural schools with live webcast 6. Nearly 80% Govt offices in Kigali have fiber-to-office 7. About 10 local/district headquarter sites already have functional video-conferencing facilities connected to Kigali 8. Rwanda was first Sub-Saharan Africa to establish an ICT/TechnoPark (already with over a dozen active clients/innovators/companies) 9. Rwanda is the only African country I know of whose IFMIS (Treasury/Ministry of Finance System) is anchored on a locally developed software, by a Rwandan company (talk of supporting local private sector) 10. Telemedicine Network: several major hospitals are already connected 11. With Rwanda's Karisimbi 'Earth Satellite Station' linked to a Transponder in Stockholm, in October 2006 Rwanda was able to negotiate with Intelsat bandwidth rates down from US$ 4,500 per Mbps a month (which is what everybody pays - some countries pay as high as $6,000) to $1,300. COMESA/ADB have now adopted the facility for use for regional air-traffic control and surveillance. 12. On the e-legislation front, Rwanda was one of the first Africa's countries to evolve an IPR Law, and its e-Transactions Law (like ours) is under consideration.    .... I could go on and on with the list. If these don't constitute 'achievements', then I don't know what does. Btw, several African countries I know of are borrowing one leaf or the other from the Rwandan 'humble' experience (including its plans).   But then again, is it fair for Kenya to compare with Rwanda? Shouldn't we have done much better than we have? I recall a saying that 'one thing's their mother is the best cook in the world until you taste another woman's dish'. Of course am not saying we have done nothing/little; my contention is that there are strategic things we could and should do to make an even greater leap.   Best rgrds, Shem --- On Thu, 6/12/08, Victor Maloi <victormaloi3(a)gmail.com> wrote: From: Victor Maloi <victormaloi3(a)gmail.com> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Voiceless 'Knowledge Workers' To: shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet(a)lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Thursday, June 12, 2008, 1:26 PM Dear Shem, I am in utter shock that you want to involve stakeholders from day 0ne.  Havent you ever heard the African saying - "too many cooks spoilt the broath".  Do you want Kenya to go the Rwanda way.  For those who do not know, Rwanda ICT programme cannot be compared to any in East Africa.  It is simply way back.  What they have succeeded with the help of Shem, is to talk about ICTs.  The NICIs.  There is nothing on the ground.  The speeds of internet in any five star hotel are far below what you get in our three star hotels here.  They have laid only 300 Kms of fibre but they have plans all over.   Although I have often criticised our policy mskers here, they have mostly been action oriented with a mix of stakeholder participation.  For example, we all know or have the summary Master Plan that I hear is being expanded.  Had we waited to finish the plan before we start the infrastructure projects, ICTs would still be discussed among the techies.  If you listened to the Budget proposals today, you will know that the ICT programme in Kenya means sereous.  Please Dr. Ndemo do not listen to Shem because he may contaminate you with the Rwandese rhetoric.     Victor.   On 12/06/2008, Shem Ochuodho <shemochuodho(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Joseph,   Apologies for a late acknowledgement of your mail.   Well put. I guess the greatest desire for people like Nyong'o, Juma, etc, is to see those dear things they espouse done - not necessarily by them, but done nonetheless. Let's hope that some of the actions being floated in these spaces will some day (sooner or later) see the light of day.   Best rgrds, Shem

4 8

Re: [kictanet] Marketing Kenya as a BPO Destination (within and without the country)
by Marilyn Kamuru 26 Jun '08

26 Jun '08

Could we please stop equating the BPO sector with Call Centers. Every time a discussion on the BPO sector starts it is inevitably reduced to a discussion on call centers. This is one of the biggest problems domestic outsourcing companies face since the BPO discussion seems to be only about call centers (for those of you at the CEO Breakfast earlier this year you will recall it was one of the main issues CEOs identified . They said the message they received was essentially BPO=Call Centers). There are numerous BPOs in the country that offer back office processing services from imaging and data storage to mail sorting and delivery (perhaps the stock brokers would have been advised to use them to prevent the Safaricom refund fiasco), and when we fail to highlight the diversity of the industry we lose valuable opportunities for marketing and visibility for these companies and the industry as a whole. Business Process Outsourcing is much larger that call centers and if we on this list cannot seem to make that distinction that is a major problem. May I also suggest that the ICT Board has more work to do on promoting domestic as well as international BPO work. Without a viable domestic market, we will not be able to nuture and grow local companies. Before the international business comes it would be helpful if local companies had local business to help sustain them, provide refernces as well as cushion them against the longer sales cycle for international contracts. Government can help by leading the way as it looks at implementing the eGovernment initiative as well as in providing incentives for local business to outsource. Marilyn Many thanks and best regards, Marilyn M. Kamuru eManage Africa Ltd. P.O. Box 18136 00500 Nairobi, Kenya Tel: (254) 20828 383; 20 34550 Cell : (254) 725 525 972, 736 225 384 www.emanageafrica.com

10 11