A vital technology: Review of the literature on mobile phone use among pastoralists

Abstract

Mobile phones fit well into the lives of pastoralists in lowincome countries. The technology is firmly integrated into most pastoralist communities, affecting and transforming several core activities. Most studies concerned with this relationship, however, have narrow regional and thematic foci. The complementarity or discrepancy between relevant research is unknown, and a critical assessment of the current state of research is lacking. This study identifies, summarizes, and analyzes relevant studies, showing that the literature attests generally positive influences of mobile phones although some negative effects also occur. Effects on pastoralists' income, environmental externalities, and gender roles are not yet sufficiently understood.

Pastoral livestock market integration amidst improvements in physical and communication infrastructure: Evidence from northern Kenya

“…Examples of such projects include a programme to the value of US$20 million sponsored by USAID (the United States Agency for International Development) to improve resilience and growth launched in 2013; the Isiolo-Moyale road, sponsored by African Development Bank (ADB) and China Exim Bank to the value of US$420 million and completed in 2017; a continuous effort by county governments to open up rural roads since 2013; telecommunication masts erected in many parts of the region since 2015; and other, similar efforts by various development agencies. Recent studies have shown an increasing trend in pastoral connectivity and the use of mobile phones (Parlasca 2021). Mobile phone access reduces transaction costs in trade by improving coordination and supervision (Aker 2010).…”

“…This study provides insights into the state of livestock market integration in the pastoral livestock markets of Kenya. Its aim was to discover the effects of the recent public and private investments that resulted in improvements to roads, market infrastructure, telecommunication networks, access to mobile phones, and digital financial infrastructure (Roba et al 2017;Parlasca 2021). The interaction between such technologies in an environment with improved physical infrastructure improves market integration (Barrett 2008;Bizimana et al 2015).…”

Pastoralisme et frugalité numérique : évaluation des usages chez les ménages pastoraux au Sénégal

“…Le développement des outils numériques dans les systèmes d'élevage au Sud se concrétise souvent par une utilisation accrue du téléphone mobile dans la conduite du troupeau (Parlasca, 2021). Les éleveurs pastoraux transhumants ont notamment adopté la téléphonie mobile comme nouvel outil de travail leur permettant de nouveaux usages dans l'alimentation (Asaka et Smucker, 2016), la santé animale (Abakar, 2016), la mobilité (Butt, 2015) et la commercialisation des animaux (Debsu et al, 2016).…”

“…Malgré l'intérêt croissant pour ces technologies, la révolution des smartphones et de l'internet mobile au sein des communautés pastorales demeure limitée (Parlasca, 2021). Les coûts de connexion et les prix des équipements restent relativement élevés.…”

Unraveling heterogeneity in farmer's adoption of mobile phone technologies: A systematic review

“…First, except for a few of these targeted reviews (e.g., Mendes et al, 2020;Misaki, Apiola, Gaiani, & Tedre, 2018;Pongnumkul, Chaovalit, & Surasvadi, 2015), most studies on this topic are non-systematic. Second, their focus is narrow and often restricted to one specific sub-sector of agriculture or mobile phone application, e.g., precision agriculture (Mendes et al, 2020); smartphone applications for the sustainability of agricultural landscapes (Inwood & Dale, 2019); specific mobile phone-enabled services among smallholder farmers (Baumüller, 2017) and pastoralists (Parlasca, 2021), smartphone-based sensors (Pongnumkul et al, 2015); or consider the general state of ICTs (Aker, 2011;Nakasone et al, 2014). Third, previous literature reviews on farmers' adoption of mobile phone technology services and applications have primarily targeted developing countries (e.g., Baumüller, 2017;Duncombe, 2015;Keerthi & Gautam, 2021;Misaki et al, 2018).…”