CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentICT in Developing CommunitiesInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Infusing Futuring into Community-based Co-design: A Pathway to Innovative Technology Design with Indigenous Communities in Africa

Open access
Muashekele, Chris, Winschiers-Theophilus, Heike, Rodil, Kasper, Mbinge, Uariaike·2023·Proceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference
DOI 10.1145/3628096.3629049
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper argues for a fusion between community-based co-design and futuring as an approach for alternative and innovative technology development in rural indigenous settings in Africa. We base our argument on theoretical propositions and two prior empirical project cases in Namibia that applied Community-based co-design and futuring. The cases focus on the co-design of a digital wildlife data collection tool and futuring of rural green energy use, highlighting the fundamental attributes and application of each approach in rural indigenous settings. In a critical stance, we accentuate the shortcomings of each approach and propose an alignment that transcends each approach from individual application to a collective alliance that enables rural indigenous technology innovation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3628096.3629049

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both communities have been involved in co-designing emerging technologies over the past decade.

    “Both communities have been involved in co-designing emerging technologies, such as digital repositories for indigenous knowledge [33] and augmented and virtual realities for preservation of their distinct heritage over the past decade [35, 52, 56].”

    From Designing Responsible AI with Indigenous Communities: Towards Participatory AI with ovaHimba and San People in Namibia (2026) · cites this paper as [35]

    Section 3.2.2 describes community participation in exploring VR, and Section 3.2.3 reports suggestions for cultural demonstrations in VR and a desire for technology that preserves culture. The paper does not establish that both communities co-designed augmented and virtual reality technologies for heritage preservation over the past decade; it describes recent exploratory activities instead. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 88

  1. 10.1145/3571811 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/2901790.2901852 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.009 · DOI
  4. Kehinde Aruleba and Nobert Jere. 2022. Exploring digital transforming challenges in rural areas of South Africa through a systematic review of empirical studies. Scientific African (2022), e01190.
  5. 10.1080/14626268.2013.767276 · DOI
  6. 10.1145/2998581.2998585 · DOI
  7. 10.1177/1946756718807014 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.sheji.2021.06.001 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/s41559-020-01343-6 · DOI
  10. Emma Blomkamp. 2018. The promise of co-design for public policy. Australian journal of public administration 77, 4 (2018), 729–743.
  11. 10.1145/3491102.3501945 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.erss.2022.102604 · DOI
  13. Sheena Carlisle, Martin Kunc, Eleri Jones, and Scott Tiffin. 2013. Supporting innovation for tourism development through multi-stakeholder approaches: Experiences from Africa. Tourism management 35 (2013), 59–69.
  14. 10.1109/HICSS.2011.82 · DOI
  15. 10.1111/csp2.205 · DOI
  16. 10.3390/en14133916 · DOI
  17. 10.1145/3491102.3501929 · DOI
  18. 10.3384/svid.2000-964X.13248 · DOI
  19. 10.1109/GHTC.2016.7857350 · DOI
  20. Pedro de Araujo Lima Constantino, Henrique Santiago Alberto Carlos, Emiliano Esterci Ramalho, Luke Rostant, Carlos Eduardo Marinelli, Davi Teles, Sinomar Fonseca Fonseca-Junior, Rômulo Batista Fernandes, and João Valsecchi. 2012. Empowering local people through community-based resource monitoring: a comparison of Brazil and Namibia. Ecology and Society 17, 4 (2012).
  21. 10.1145/2858036.2858081 · DOI
  22. 10.1145/1120212.1120434 · DOI
  23. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. 2013. Speculative everything: design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT press.
  24. Anuoluwapo Abosede Durokifa and Edwin Chikata Ijeoma. 2018. Neo-colonialism and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in Africa: A blend of an old wine in a new bottle. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 10, 3 (2018), 355–366.
  25. Gloria Emeagwali. 2020. African indigenous knowledge systems and the legacy of Africa. Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Development in Africa (2020), 37–55.
  26. 10.1145/3544549.3577050 · DOI
  27. 10.1145/3537797.3537826 · DOI
  28. 10.1177/0261018317747444 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112476 · DOI
  30. 10.1145/3210604.3210640 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/095183900413304 · DOI
  32. 10.1145/3491102.3502118 · DOI
  33. Steve Harrison Deborah Tatar and Phoebe Sengers. 2007. The three paradigms of HCI. In Alt. Chi. Session at the SIGCHI Conference on human factors in computing systems San Jose California USA. 1–18.
  34. 10.1145/3328320.3328399 · DOI
  35. 10.1080/03098265.2020.1869923 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Katherine M Homewood, Pippa Chenevix Trench, and Daniel Brockington. 2012. Pastoralist livelihoods and wildlife revenues in East Africa: a case for coexistence?Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 2 (2012), 1–23.
  37. 10.1145/3411763.3450364 · DOI
  38. 10.1145/3491102.3517584 · DOI
  39. 10.1145/2661435.2661441 · DOI
  40. 10.1145/3152771.3152787 · DOI
  41. 10.4103/cs.cs_15_30 · DOI
  42. 10.1145/2971485.2993921 · DOI
  43. 10.1145/3313831.3376526 · DOI
  44. 10.1080/17547075.2022.2103949 · DOI
  45. 10.1145/2783446.2783592 · DOI
  46. Joseph Lindley and David Philip Green. 2022. The ultimate measure of success for speculative design is to Disappear completely. Interaction Design and Architecture (s)51 (2022), 32–51.
  47. 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.02.020 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.05.004 · DOI
  49. 10.2752/175470813X13705953612200 · DOI
  50. 10.1186/s12898-020-00319-1 · DOI
  51. Nkwazi N Mhango. 2017. Africa’s Dependency Syndrome: Can Africa Still Turn Things around for the Better?Langaa RPCIG. · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.10.007 · DOI
  53. 10.1145/3544549.3585761 · DOI
  54. 10.1145/3328320.3328383 · DOI
  55. 10.1145/3448696.3448708 · DOI
  56. 10.1145/3593743.3593761 · DOI
  57. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102961 · DOI
  58. 10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00620 · DOI
  59. Akinlolu G Omisore. 2018. Attaining Sustainable Development Goals in sub-Saharan Africa; The need to address environmental challenges. Environmental development 25 (2018), 138–145.
  60. 10.1145/3292147.3292204 · DOI
  61. 10.1145/3411764.3445406 · DOI
  62. 10.1145/3385010.3385030 · DOI
  63. 10.3389/fict.2019.00004 · DOI
  64. 10.1145/2347635.2347647 · DOI
  65. 10.1145/3448696.3448704 · DOI
  66. 10.1145/3377143 · DOI
  67. 10.1145/3449195 · DOI
  68. 10.1016/j.erss.2017.11.022 · DOI
  69. 10.1145/3411764.3445095 · DOI
  70. 10.1145/3460112.3471956 · DOI
  71. 10.1109/ISTAFRICA.2015.7190565 · DOI
  72. Marc Steen, Menno Manschot, and Nicole De Koning. 2011. Benefits of co-design in service design projects. International Journal of Design 5, 2 (2011).
  73. Claudia Stöcker, Serene Ho, Placide Nkerabigwi, Cornelia Schmidt, Mila Koeva, Rohan Bennett, and Jaap Zevenbergen. 2019. Unmanned Aerial System imagery, land data and user needs: A socio-technical assessment in Rwanda. Remote sensing 11, 9 (2019), 1035.
  74. 10.1145/3536169.3537780 · DOI
  75. 10.1145/3536169.3537786 · DOI · Paper page
  76. 10.2752/144871314X14159818597676 · DOI
  77. 10.1016/j.destud.2022.101118 · DOI
  78. 10.1145/3394332.3402830 · DOI
  79. Magalhães João Viera and Nick Couldry. 2021. Giving by taking away: big tech, data colonialism and the reconfiguration of social good. International Journal of Communication 15 (2021), 343–362.
  80. 10.3389/fevo.2018.00242 · DOI
  81. 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2014.PARKS-21-1DW.en · DOI
  82. 10.1080/10447318.2013.765763 · DOI
  83. 10.1162/DESI_a_00164 · DOI
  84. 10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100439 · DOI
  85. 10.35199/ICDC.2020.33 · DOI
  86. 10.1007/s00146-017-0739-y · DOI
  87. Richmond Y Wong and Vera Khovanskaya. 2018. Speculative design in HCI: from corporate imaginations to critical orientations. Springer.
  88. 10.1145/3461778.3462140 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Muashekele, C., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., Rodil, K., & Mbinge, U.
Affiliations
  • Aalborg University (DK)
  • Namibia University of Science and Technology, Namibia
  • Omukuendata matriclan and Okoto patriclan, Namibia
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference
Publisher
ACM
Published
2023-11-27
Pages
151-161
DOI
10.1145/3628096.3629049
OpenAlex
W4391345786
Cited by
20
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 3
FWCI
19.68
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
  • African Human Computer Interaction Conference (AfriCHI) (publishedVersion)
  • VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
futuring, indigenous peoples, Namibia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review