Rural women’s empowerment in a communication technology project:

some contradictory effects

June Lennie

Paper published in Rural Society, Vol 12, No 3, 2002, pp.224-245

Abstract

This paper presents selected findings from the evaluation of a feminist action research
project that aimed to enhance Queensland rural women’s access to interactive
communication technologies (ICTs). Project activities aimed to be empowering and
inclusive. They included online conversation groups, workshops and audioconferences. A
model of women’s empowerment is used that comprises social, technological, political
and psychological forms of empowerment. The evaluation results suggest that many
participants experienced each of these forms of empowerment. The online group welink
(women’s electronic link) was considered particularly important in facilitating women’s
empowerment. However, the analysis also indicated various disempowering effects of
participating in the project. Case studies of two participants illustrate these
contradictory effects. These results suggest that enhancing rural women’s technological
empowerment is urgently required, given that use of ICTs is becoming increasingly
important to their leadership and participation in community development. Strategies for
enhancing rural women’s empowerment are suggested.

1
Introduction

With the shift towards a ‘knowledge society’, the role of interactive communication
technologies (ICTs) such as email and the Internet1 in sustainable community and
economic development is becoming increasingly important (Mansell and Wehn, 1998).
The effective use of ICTs in community development projects has been argued to have
many potentially empowering benefits and effects, such as greater inclusion,
cooperation, participation and wellbeing (Scott, Diamond and Smith, 1997; Simpson et
al, 2001; Milio, 1996).

Many women in rural Australia are taking leadership in community and economic
development activities and are often extremely reliant on a range of communication
technologies for personal, family, business and networking purposes. Despite often
lacking access to good quality infrastructure, technical support and training, rural
women have been found to be enthusiastic adopters of new ICTs (Grace, Lundin and
Daws, 1996; RWICTs Research Team, 1999).

The empowering effects of the use of ICTs for women and other community members
have been indicated in several publications (see Daws, 1997; Harcourt, 1999; Milio,
1996; Schuler, 1996). However, some researchers argue that there is a danger in placing
too much faith in the emancipatory power of the Internet for women (van Zoonen,
1992). An important factor is that, as Foucault (1980) argues, power relations are
present in all interactions. Feminist research into gender differences in online
communication (Herring, 1994; Truong et al, 1993) suggests that this is likely to be the
case whether such interactions are mediated by technology or are face-to-face. The
potentially disempowering or unintentionally negative effects of using ICTs in rural
community development projects therefore need to be considered.

Numerous critiques of the problematic concept of empowerment have been published

(Gillman, 1996; Gore, 1992; Humphries, 1994; Peters and Marshall, 1991). This
literature suggests that rural researchers need to adopt a more critical approach to the
concept and to be more explicit about the processes they claim have facilitated
empowerment. This requires the development of useful models of empowerment and
effective methods for evaluating and critically assessing claims for empowerment
(Anderson, 1996). An inclusive approach to such evaluations also requires a focus on
gender and other differences and use of participatory evaluation methodologies
(Shapiro, 1988).

This paper presents selected findings from the evaluation of a feminist action research
project that aimed to enhance Queensland rural women’s access to ICTs, which was
undertaken as part of my doctoral research (see Lennie, 2001). Following a summary of
the findings from the needs analysis and assessment, a model that identifies social,
technological, political and psychological forms of empowerment is used to analyse
participants’ experiences of these forms of empowerment and the use of ICTs in this
process. Corresponding forms of disempowerment are also identified and analysed.
Case studies of two participants further illustrate the contradictory effects of ICTs and
participation in the project. Based on the findings, strategies are suggested for enhancing
rural women’s empowerment in relation to ICT projects.

1
While email is one of the key uses of the Internet, in this paper the term ‘the Internet’ is used to refer
mainly to the World Wide Web, as distinct from email and email discussion lists.

2
The Rural Women and ICTs research project

From early 1996 to December 1997 I was part of a team of researchers, based at
Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, who undertook a major action
research project Enhancing Rural Women’s Access to Interactive Communication
Technologies. The aim of this project was to explore the current and potential impacts
of ICTs for women in rural, regional and remote Queensland, in terms of personal,
business and community development.

The project’s feminist participatory action research methodology aimed ‘to develop and
implement a participatory process which was inclusive and empowering for
participants, takes the differences between rural women into account, and encourages
women to take action leading to desirable change’ (RWICTs Research Team, 1999:12).
Regular critical reflection and an ongoing process of evaluation (both formal and
informal) were important features of this methodology. In addition to various online
conversation groups, project activities included workshops held in ten Queensland
communities and regular audioconferences with participants.

We conducted this project in collaboration with women in rural communities and eight
government and industry partners. The partners involved were Telstra Corporation,
Pegasus Networks (an Internet service provider), the Offices of Women’s Affairs and
Rural Communities, Queensland Health, and the Departments of Public Works and
Housing, Primary Industries, and Social Security. The project partners actively
participated in some project activities and provided ongoing input into the evaluation.

Around 350 community members, mainly women, had some involvement in the project.
Participants included women living in rural towns and on remote farming and grazing
properties, women who were retired, and women of various occupations and age
groups. While most participants had a white Anglo-Celtic background, a small number
of indigenous and migrant women, including a few women from non-English speaking
backgrounds, took part in some project activities.

Evaluation methodology and methods

Drawing on Shapiro (1988), Wadsworth (1997) and others, a participatory feminist

evaluation methodology was developed to critically evaluate the project’s methods and
activities. This was based on a praxis feminist framework that aimed to give voice to,
and validate the needs, values and experiences of the participants. The evaluation
included a rigorous analysis of how well the project’s methods and activities met the
diverse needs of the participants, and met the aims of empowering women and
including a diversity of women. Multiple research methods were used, including:

• Participant observations of project activities such as workshops and online

conversation groups.

• In depth, semi-structured, individual interviews with twenty-six participants and

project stakeholders comprising thirteen participants (all women), six research team
members (four women and two men), and seven industry partner representatives
(five women and two men). Of these interviewees, nine participants, five research
team members and three industry partners took part in the project’s online groups.
Of the community interviewees who participated in the online groups, eleven had

3
 also taken part in workshops, or workshops plus other project activities, while six
participated in the project via the online groups only.

• Two focus group interviews conducted via audioconference with five participants in
each (nine rural and one urban). Eight of the participants were online group
members.

• Analysis of diaries kept by six participants in the project’s small online group
‘wechat’.

• Analysis of selected email messages sent to the online groups.

• Workshop feedback questionnaires that provided qualitative and quantitative data.

• Statistical analysis of demographic and personal background information provided

by workshop and online group participants.

The qualitative data analysis program NUD*IST was used to code and analyse all of the
focus group and interview data, while statistical analysis of questionnaire data was
undertaken using the SPSS program. The validation process included triangulation of
the various data collected and the use of multiple analytical strategies and methods.
Feedback on some of the analysis was also obtained from selected participants.

During individual and focus group interviews, the participants, research team members
and industry partners provided definitions of the concept ‘empowerment’. Together
with relevant literature on empowerment and the results of the analysis, this data was
used to develop a model of rural women’s empowerment.

Friedmann’s framework of empowerment

Friedmann’s (1992) alternative development and empowerment model provided a

useful framework for the analysis. This model of empowerment involves local self-
reliance, direct participatory democracy and experiential social learning. Friedmann’s
view that empowerment cannot be conferred by external agents is similar to that of
Claridge (1996) and Lather (1991), whose work was also drawn on. However, he
suggests that such agents can play a role in providing ‘support in ways that encourage
the disempowered to free themselves of traditional dependency’ (Friedmann, 1992: 77).

Taking the perspective of people in households, Friedmann argues that they potentially
have access to three kinds of power: social, political and psychological. ‘Social power’
requires ‘access to certain “bases” of household production such as information,
knowledge and skills, participation in social organisations, and financial resources’
(Friedmann, 1992: 33). This form of empowerment therefore includes key features of
social capital, which has been identified as an essential element of sustainable rural
community development (Harrison, 1998; Simpson et al, 2001).

The concept of ‘political power’ includes access to the process by which decisions are
made, particularly those that affect people’s own future. It also includes the power to
vote, as well as the power of voice and collective action (Friedmann, 1992: 33).
Friedmann suggests that this requires a prior process of social empowerment to enable
effective participation.

4
Psychological power is defined by Friedmann as an individual sense of potency which
is demonstrated in self-confident behaviour that often results from successful action in
the social or political domains, although ‘it may also result from intersubjective work’
(Friedmann, 1992: 33). Several researchers have identified self-confidence and self-
esteem as essential ‘first steps’ to empowerment (Anderson, 1996; Claridge, 1996).
Feelings of greater individual control are another important aspect of psychological
empowerment (Anderson, 1996).

All three kinds of empowerment are seen by Friedmann as relevant to women’s

struggles and form an interconnecting triad. Friedmann (1992: 116) suggests that ‘when
this triad, centred on an individual woman and household, is linked up with others, the
result is a social network of empowering relations that, because it is mutually
reinforcing, has extraordinary potential for social change’.

Although somewhat idealistic, Friedmann’s framework of empowerment is useful

because it suggests that empowerment and social change is a multidimensional process
which requires analysis at the micro and macro levels of the individual and the
community, organisation or group, and the interrelationships between them shown. It
also highlights the power and value of Australian rural women’s networking activities
that have been successful in generating action and change (Grace and Lennie, 1998).
Networking was an important component of the online conversation groups established
as part of the Rural Women and ICTs project. These online groups connected the rural
participants with the QUT research team and women working in relatively powerful
positions in government and industry, thus potentially facilitating political
empowerment.

Technological empowerment

The various meanings that the interviewees in the study gave to empowerment, and
other indicators of the empowering effects of the project could be readily coded in
Friedmann’s categories of social, political and psychological empowerment. However,
my analysis identified an important fourth form of empowerment that was labelled
‘technological empowerment’. Like social empowerment, this form of empowerment
also requires access to information, knowledge, skills and resources.

Feminists such as Arnold and Faulkner (1985) and Wajcman (1991) argue that an
important factor in women’s empowerment is the development of knowledge and skills
that enhance their technical competence and expertise. As Wajcman (1991: 165) points
out: ‘technical competence is certainly not the only source of male power, but it is an
important one, especially in relation to women’. Given the technological focus of the
Rural Women and ICTs project, several of the meanings of empowerment provided by
the interviewees referred to confidence and competence in using technologies, and the
benefits to women from using new ICTs. It can be argued that, with the increasing use
of the Internet to access government information and to lobby and organise campaigns
on important social, economic and environmental issues, technological empowerment is
an important new prerequisite to political empowerment.

A new model of rural women’s empowerment

Drawing on Friedmann’s framework and the meanings and indicators of empowerment

identified in the analysis, Figure 1 presents the model of rural women’s empowerment

5
that was developed. This illustrates the interrelationships between the four forms of
empowerment that were identified, and summarises the key features of each form of
empowerment. Although these four forms of empowerment are discussed separately in
this paper, there are clearly many interrelationships and overlaps between them.

Figure 1: The key forms and features of rural women's empowerment

New knowledge and information Having a voice and being listened to

Awareness and understanding of issues
Skills, abilities and competence
Support, friendship and inspiration
Participating in group activities with women
Networking
Participating in policy making
Taking action to change your life or your
community
Networking and lobbying
Changing stereotypes about rural women

Social Political
empowerment empowerment

Technological Psychological
empowerment empowerment

Knowledge about ICTs Self confidence and self esteem

Awareness and understanding about ICTs
Skills and competence in using new ICTs
Ongoing support and advice in using ICTs
Access to high quality technologies
Confidence to use and speak about ICTs
Understanding ‘disempowerment’
Feeling more valued and respected
Motivation, interest and enthusiasm
Freedom to do things or express yourself
Feelings of belonging
Wellbeing and happiness

The term ‘disempowerment’ was used to indicate a state or a sense of powerlessness,

oppression, marginalisation, exclusion or disadvantage. While the interviewees in my
study rarely used the terms ‘disempowerment’ or ‘disempowered’, a few used terms
such as ‘excluded’, ‘oppression’, ‘disadvantaged’, and ‘powerless’, or phrases such as
‘don’t have the power’.

6
Young’s analysis of oppression was considered valuable in defining the concept of
disempowerment. Young (1988: 271) labels the ‘five faces of oppression’:
‘exploitation, marginality, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence’. She
argues that various groups who are said to be oppressed, such as ‘women, blacks …
Native Americans ... and poor people’ are not oppressed ‘to the same degree or in the
same ways’ (Young, 1988: 270–271). However, she believes that ‘in the most general
sense, all oppressed people share some inhibition of their ability to develop and exercise
their capacities and express their needs, thoughts, and feelings’ (p.271).

Young considers that most people [in North America] lack significant power due to
their lack of participation in making decisions affecting their lives. ‘Powerlessness’
describes the lives of people

who have little or no work autonomy, exercise little creative judgement in

their work, have no technical expertise or authority, express themselves
awkwardly, especially in public or bureaucratic settings, and do not
command respect. (Young, 1988: 283)

This analysis is useful because it suggests that, like empowerment, oppression (as a
form of disempowerment) has several different facets that affect groups of people in
different ways. In addition, because ‘different factors or combinations of factors,
constitute the oppression of different groups’, it is not possible to have one ‘essential’
definition of this concept (Young, 1988: 276).

Drawing on Young’s analysis, the various forms of disempowerment related to

participation in the Rural Women and ICTs project were identified. Disempowerment
was seen as having various forms that are the binary opposite of the four forms of
empowerment, summarised above. They were labelled social, technological, political
and psychological disempowerment. However, using a feminist poststructuralist
framework of analysis, my study also showed the intersections between empowerment
and disempowerment and challenged various feminist assumptions; such as giving
voice to women will lead to empowerment (see Lennie, 2001).

Key activities of the Rural Women and ICTs project

The major activities of the Rural Women and ICTs project were workshops, online
conversation groups and audioconferences. The aims of these activities included giving
voice to participants about their key needs and issues related to communication
technologies, building confidence and skills in using new ICTs, maintaining ongoing
communication, organising activities, and learning about the various uses that rural
women make of ICTs. These activities therefore sought to facilitate many of the forms
of empowerment identified above.

The research team conducted full and half-day workshops in various communities in
rural, regional and remote Queensland2 in both years of the project. The researchers
aimed to use processes that women would feel comfortable with and easily understood
and appropriate language. The various workshop sessions included participants giving
2
These communities were Lockyer Valley and Gympie in the South East, Emerald and Longreach in
Central and Western Queensland, and Charters Towers, Mount Isa and Atherton in North and North West
Queensland. In 1996 only, workshops were held at Goomeri in the South East and Cloncurry in the North
West. In 1997, a workshop for Aboriginal women was conducted at Blackwater in Central Queensland.

7
voice to their ‘burning issues’ related to ICTs. Only 27% of workshop participants had
some previous experience with using the Internet so some hands-on experience with
using email and the Internet was provided where possible.

The online conversation groups were an important means of maintaining regular

communication between those involved in the project. Three different online groups
were established:

1. wechat (women’s electronic chat) a small informal list that operated via multiple
addressing of email messages. This list operated between August 1996 and May
1997. Wechat was an important forerunner to the much larger welink group. It aimed
to provide a non-threatening environment for building workshop participants’
confidence in using email, often for the first time. Participants were encouraged to
talk about anything they wanted to, and a wide variety of topics were discussed.

2. wechat-l, a larger, short-lived list that was established for a virtual conference in
conjunction with a Queensland Rural Women’s Network (QRWN) conference in
October 1996. It could be accessed by either email or as an online conference. The
software used to access the list failed shortly after the conference ended and the list
was terminated.

3. welink (women’s electronic link), a larger conversation group which operated as a

majordomo email discussion list. It began in March 1997 and is still ongoing as a
very active list. It was open to a wider range of people, including people from
interstate and overseas. By November 1997, it had 112 members. However, just
over half the members were active. A very wide diversity of topics was discussed
and a friendly, informal and supportive atmosphere quickly developed.

A web site on the project included information on the project and how to join the welink
group, stories and photographs of participants, profiles and photographs of the research
team, and links to industry partner web sites.

The audioconferences conducted at regular intervals during the project aimed to

maintain good relationships and facilitate ongoing contact with key participants, obtain
regular feedback, share updates on activities, and develop partnerships between the
groups involved. Most participants were already experienced in taking part in
audioconferences so were comfortable with the process involved.

Findings from the needs analysis and assessment

The needs identification and assessment process

A rigorous assessment of how well the various project activities met participants’ needs
was undertaken. This provided important data for analysing the various forms of
empowerment and disempowerment that were experienced. However, identifying the
participants’ needs and assessing how well they were met was a complex process. This
process included identifying various categories of needs, drawing tables showing the
significance of these needs, creating matrices of needs for three major groups of
participants, and analysing how well each of the general needs and the needs associated
with the various project activities were met. Differences between the three major groups

8
of participants - ‘high profile’ farmers, ‘low profile’ farmers3 and professionals living in
rural towns - were also analysed.

Summary of the findings

A large number of needs were identified and divided into three broad categories:

1. ‘General’ needs that were not so specifically related to the project activities,
such as the need to share or access information or to feel less isolated. These needs
were divided into four sub categories:

• Social/psychological needs

• Group communication and interaction needs

• Participation and decision-making needs

• Information and awareness needs.

2. Needs specific to the workshops (such as the need for hands-on experience with
email or for small group discussions).

3. Needs specific to the online groups (such as the need to interact daily with other
women, for the groups to have a safe, comfortable atmosphere, for the
communication to be personalised, and to feel able to communicate online easily
and openly).

The analysis indicated that the majority of the needs identified were very well met and,
for a few women, some of their needs were extremely well met. However, there were
also some needs that were only moderately or fairly well met and needs that were not
met. The online groups, particularly welink, appeared to be the most successful project
activity in terms of meeting a large number of significant needs. The workshops also
successfully met quite a large proportion of the significant needs, while the
audioconferences met a smaller number of the significant needs.

Many feminists argue that women-only activities such as workshops and online
discussion groups are often more empowering for women than mixed gender activities
(Butler and Wintram, 1991; Spender, 1995; Welbourn, 1991). The evaluation findings
suggest that the project’s methodology and methods, and many of the women-centred
activities, were very successful in meeting the diverse needs of most participants. A
high proportion of the workshop and online group participants valued these groups
being mainly women and the safe, comfortable and friendly atmosphere of these
activities. The online group members valued the personalised style and content of the
communication, the supportive nature of the groups and the sense of community that
developed. Many also valued the diversity of the women who participated, particularly
those involved in the online groups. However, the analysis also indicated that some

3
The terms ‘high profile’ and ‘low profile’ were used to indicate the level of community or industry
activism of the farming women and the extent to which they had a public profile. This type of distinction
could not be so readily made with the non-farming women.

9
participants experienced various forms and degrees of disempowerment as a result of
their participation in various project activities.

Empowering effects of the project

Each interviewee was asked: ‘How well did the project meet the aim of empowering
women?’ The analysis showed that 16% of the interviewees indicated that the aim of
empowerment was extremely well met, 58% indicated that the aim was very well met,
23% indicated that the aim had been quite well met, and one thought the aim was not
met.

Table 1: How well interviewees thought the aim of empowerment was met in
relation to the project, welink and the workshops

Extremely Only met

Very well Fairly well Not met
well for some
Project as a whole 4 8 5 6
The welink group 3 12 - 1 -
The workshops - 3 2 1

Table 1 shows that significantly more the comments indicating that the aim of
empowering women was extremely well or very well met were made about the welink
group, compared with the workshops.

The forms of empowerment experienced

The needs analysis and assessment indicated that a significant proportion of the
interviewees and others who provided feedback experienced various forms and degrees
of empowerment as a result of their participation in the project and the use of ICTs in
the project. The major types of empowerment that participants reported experiencing, or
were indicated by the data analysis, are now summarised.

Social empowerment

Many of the participants experienced the following forms of social empowerment:

• Gaining access to new and useful knowledge, information and awareness about a
range of issues, topics and activities of interest to women. This new information and
knowledge often provided mental stimulation and broadened participants’ thinking.

• Developing new skills, abilities, confidence and competence, including those

required to participate in the various group communication and interaction processes
used in the project.

• Obtaining the friendship and support of other women in rural and urban areas who
have commonalities with each other and differences from each other.

• Participating in various activities with other women and people in positions of

influence where you can openly discuss issues, share concerns and experiences, and
reflect on issues affecting you.

10
• Networking with or making contact with others involved in the participants’ areas of
interest such as rural community development, teleworking, and writing.

Some interviewees also gained benefits in relation to their paid work or their businesses.
Examples that were given included:

• Two graziers developed valuable contacts and ideas for their farm tourism ventures.

• One industry partner considered that a ‘fantastic example’ of the opportunities

provided by the project was the woman who moved from a property into a nearby
rural town to successfully establish a small business providing computer support and
training to new users.

Technological empowerment

Taking part in the project also provided many participants with varying degrees of the
following forms of technological empowerment:

• New knowledge, awareness and understanding about new ICTs and their potential
benefits and impacts.

• The development of new skills, experience and greater confidence and competence
in using new communication technologies.

• Advice and support in using email and the Internet, provided in ways that often met
the participants’ needs very well.

Some participants also became more confident in talking about ICTs, asking for
explanations about computers, asking for help with computer problems, or helping
others use or access ICTs. Ten rural interviewees reported an increase in their
confidence in using computers, email and the Internet as a result of taking part in
the project.

An outcome of the social and technological empowerment some participants

experienced was enhanced work or business opportunities. Several interviewees
mentioned the example of a very enthusiastic and active project participant on a
relatively remote property who was offered the first teleworking position with the
Queensland government on a trial basis.

Other outcomes of this technological empowerment included:

• Discussing with a friend the possibility of developing a joint teleworking venture

through combining their computer and writing skills.

• Encouraging other rural women to get online or assisting them with getting online.

• Organising computer and Internet workshops for others in their local community.

• Talking to local organisations and rural women’s groups about teleworking and the
Internet.

11
Political empowerment

As well as social and technological empowerment, several participants also experienced

the following forms of political empowerment:

• Having a voice and being listened to by the researchers and people in decision-
making positions in government and industry.

• Participating in formulating ideas and recommendations for better

telecommunications and Internet services and support, and influencing other
government policies and decisions that affect rural women and rural communities.

• Changing urban and town-based people’s beliefs and stereotypes about farming
women.

• Networking or meeting with people in government and industry and other women to
lobby or discuss issues affecting rural women and rural communities, and to
organise various actions.

Some participants also gained new understandings about feminism and gender
equity issues. One ‘high profile’ farming women reported that she identified as a
feminist for the first time following a welink discussion on feminism.

An important form of political and social empowerment which several interviewees

experienced was taking individual and collective action to improve telecommunication
services and Internet access or to promote the benefits of the Internet for rural
communities. These actions included:

• Conducting regular meetings of women involved in the project in Mt Isa to discuss

community-based initiatives.

• Applying for major government funding to implement various rural community

development projects that involved the use of new ICTs. The most successful example
of this was the QRWN’s application to the Regional Telecommunications
Infrastructure Fund for the ‘BridgIT’ project. This Queensland-wide Internet training
project received $2,000,000 in initial funding and subsequently became an extremely
successful project.

• Making speeches and presentations at conferences and seminars about rural access to
ICTs, and the benefits of ICTs for rural community development.

Psychological empowerment

Many project participants also reported experiencing the following forms of

psychological empowerment:

• An increase in self-confidence and self-esteem. Seven rural interviewees mentioned

that they or others had developed more confidence to express their opinions or
views.

12
• Feeling more valued, respected or that you have more standing or credibility.
Participating in welink appeared to be particularly effective in developing this
feeling.

• Greater motivation, inspiration, enthusiasm and interest to develop new skills and
knowledge, to keep pushing for better services for rural people, and to learn more
about or gain access to computers and the Internet. Some participants also gained
more enthusiasm about the use of ICTs for rural community development.

• Feeling much less isolated from others (particularly other supportive women) and,
as a result, experiencing greater wellbeing, happiness and enjoyment of life.

• Feelings of belonging related to participation in the online groups in particular.

Forms of disempowerment experienced

As well as experiencing empowerment, some participants also indicated that they

experienced various forms and degrees of disempowerment at certain times during the
project. This was sometimes the result of factors not directly related to the project
activities, such as poor quality telecommunications infrastructure. As with
empowerment, there are clearly various degrees of disempowerment. For example,
feelings of discomfort during a workshop may be quite momentary, while anger and
frustration about your poor telecommunications services might be experienced on a
regular basis. The following provides a summary of these experiences.

Some participants indicated that they experienced the following forms of social
disempowerment at times:

• Feeling excluded from the workshop or the online groups.

• Not obtaining the knowledge and information they wanted.

• Feeling uncomfortable participating in certain group activities or unable to talk

about certain social or personal topics.

• Being unable to fully participate in project activities they would have liked to take
part in due to work, business or family responsibilities, community-based
commitments, or the high financial cost of taking part.

Some of the participants also indicated that they experienced various forms of
technological disempowerment, including:

• Not gaining new skills or experience in using ICTs due to a range of factors,
including the lack of hands-on experience at the workshops, or being unable to
afford computer equipment and Internet services.

• Being unable to understand the technical information provided at workshops or by

computer or Internet service providers.

• A lack of confidence and competence in using computers, email and the Internet or
in speaking about these technologies.

13
• An increase in concern or fear about the potentially negative social impacts of new
ICTs.

• Feeling anger and frustration because of the poor quality telecommunications

infrastructure in their area or the lack of appropriate and effective customer service.
This was a key experience of many participants and prevented some women from
taking part in the online groups.

• Having little or no access to appropriate technical support or advice from others.

Certain participants also experienced the following forms of political disempowerment

at times:

• Not having your voice heard or not being given an opportunity to express your
‘burning issues’ due to various factors.

• Feeling that your issues were not well understood or listened to by others.

• Little or no immediate action being taken by government or industry on the issues

raised due to the slowness of the policy-making process, which increased cynicism
and scepticism.

• Being silenced or feeling restricted in talking about socially or politically

controversial issues on the online groups (see Lennie, 2000).

Various types of psychological disempowerment were reported as being experienced by

some participants at times, including:

• Feeling very nervous or lacking confidence to speak out, ask questions, or to take
part in certain project activities.

• Feeling more fearful or concerned about the future of rural communities following
participation in project activities such as workshops.

• Lack of a sense of belonging to workshop or online groups.

• Feeling that you are not valued or respected by the people or organisations involved
in the project.

• Feeling intimidated by others taking part in the workshops or online groups.

• Feeling concerned about the extent to which other welink members maintained the
confidentiality of personal issues raised on the list.

14
Case studies of empowerment and disempowerment

To further illustrate the participants’ complex experiences of empowerment and

disempowerment resulting from their participation in the project and the use of
ICTs, four case studies of individual participants were prepared. These case studies
were sent to each of the women involved. All of them agreed that their experiences
had been accurately represented, and gave permission for personal details that may
identify them to be included. Two of these case studies are now presented. Names
have been changed.

Ingrid’s experience: ‘more excited about the use of this technology’

Ingrid had a moderate level of participation in the project. She took part in the first
workshop held in Community 6 (the communities where workshops were held were
randomly numbered), a follow-up audioconference held after this workshop, and the
wechat and welink groups. Due to various factors, Ingrid had quite a low level of
participation in these online groups.

Ingrid was 40 years old and had a demanding professional position that involved
providing information and support to rural families affected by the drought. She and her
husband also owned a business in the rural town where they lived. They had two
primary school aged children. Her voluntary work included being a community
representative on the Queensland Landcare Council and sitting on two health councils.

Ingrid was very interested in gender equity issues and was a QRWN member. She used
feminist principles and ideas and commented that the project’s focus on women was
‘invaluable’. She thought that the welink group allowed women ‘to be able to
communicate in that particularly supportive way that women communicate’.

Prior to the project, Ingrid said she had a ‘fear’ of using email and the Internet.
However, as a result of her participation, she became ‘much, much more confident
about and excited about the use of this technology as a tool in rural community
development’ and ‘convinced’ that ‘this is the area that I should go into’. Participating
in the online groups provided useful ‘practical’ experience with using email. Following
the workshop she took part in, she spoke enthusiastically to other people in her
community about the benefits of the Internet and one woman ‘got really excited about it
and she’s now on the Internet, and saw it as a tool for her business’.

Ingrid experienced a ‘great deal of frustration’ because of major problems with the
computer software and hardware at her workplace. Technical support and training,
promised by another participant, did not eventuate and she was unable to participate in
the 1997 workshop where some Internet training was provided. A further frustration
was that the local trainers ‘don’t communicate, they don’t teach very well’.

Soon after she joined the wechat group, Ingrid sent a message saying that she felt
‘guilty of not having very much to say’ and that she felt ‘a bit like an interloper’. Ingrid
identified a number of reasons why she ‘felt quite excluded at times’ as a wechat
member. These included the predominantly farm-based issues being discussed not being
‘issues that I feel I can contribute to’, and the sense that she was not part of ‘the club’
that she thought had developed among the active members. Other factors were that her
email access was only at work and she was often away from the office and ‘my level of

15
stress with my work’. However, in a follow-up message she said ‘I do believe that I can
learn from being part of this group about the issues that do interest women that are
isolated not just “rural” and how you cope with the stressors in your life’.

Ingrid considered that welink more effectively met her need for ‘more stimulating issue-
based communication’ than the much smaller wechat group. She thought the diversity
of issues discussed on welink was ‘fantastic’ and ‘really enjoy[ed] reading … how other
people think, and how my thinking differs from other people’. Ingrid also thought that
welink ‘challenges your preconceived ideas about “oh she lives 50,000 miles from
nowhere, she might be a bit dumb”’. However, she expressed disappointment that she
was not always able to take part in welink ‘as fully as I would have liked to have’.

Having access to information on welink that ‘we wouldn’t necessarily be privy to

through the normal networks’ was considered one of ‘the most valuable, the most
enjoyable (aspects) for me … because it allows me to have a bit of an edge’. Another
empowering outcome of participating in welink was the valuable new contacts and
networks that she developed. This included her contacts with some ‘high profile’
farming women, and an American community development specialist who was working
on ‘really exciting stuff’.

Ingrid had planned to conduct informal Internet sessions with small groups of rural
women in her community. Following her demonstration of the value of email for their
work, Ingrid’s employer agreed to link up her office with workers in two other rural
communities via email. She was later involved in preparing a major funding submission
for a community-based initiative that involved the use of ICTs.

Leila’s experience: ‘a sense of empowerment in my community’

Leila’s level of participation in the project was very high. She helped to organise, then
actively participated in both workshops in Community 8, took part in four
audioconferences, and was often a very active member of the wechat and welink groups.
Leila had previously been involved in the project by Grace, Lundin and Daws which
included participating in a small email group. By the end of 1997, Leila had therefore
been closely involved in research focussed on rural women and ICTs for nearly four
years. During this time, she formed strong friendships with several QUT researchers
and other project participants.

Leila was 43 years old and worked with her husband as a grazier on a cattle station
located 130 kilometres from her nearest town. However, she considered herself ‘quite
suburban in many ways’ because a bitumen highway ran through the middle of their
property. She had a daughter who lived away from home, a young son at boarding
school and an older son who worked on the property.

Leila was the vice president of her local School of Distance Education’s P&C, a board
member of a local girls college and was actively involved in other organisations.
Through her voluntary work, and her participation in the research projects, she had been
invited to speak about distance education and telecommunications access issues at
various Queensland and interstate conferences. Although Leila expressed significant
ambivalence about feminism, she was an advocate for the advancement and recognition
of rural women’s leadership and for gender equity in education.

16
Taking part in the project resulted in Leila experiencing a significant increase in her
social and psychological empowerment. This included becoming ‘a lot more confident’
and gaining a sense of ‘empowerment in my community’ because of her growing
reputation as a woman with some knowledge about new ICTs and an advocate for better
telecommunication services in the bush. Leila thought this ‘was really good’ for her as
‘it was something that I felt was of my own’, compared with her work as a grazier.
Taking part in welink had been ‘empowering’ because ‘people were actually seeing that
we (ie farming women) were running businesses, we were educating children, we were …
doing a lot of things’.

Another important outcome of her participation in the online groups was ‘a marvellous
feeling’ of ‘support from a group of women’, some of whom were in ‘similar
circumstances’ and others that were not. As well as in times of natural disasters, she
also appreciated this support when she sometimes felt depressed about business or
family problems or frustrated about the ‘second class citizen’ status of rural people in
terms of their access to ICTs. Lelia found that she could often ‘pour her heart out’ on
wechat and expressed concern about being able to do this when the larger welink group
was established. Once welink began, she often preferred to post more personal messages
to wechat.

Lelia also gained ‘a pretty good feeling’ from ‘being a part of a group of women who
are achieving, and not all the time, but in their own way, they’re achieving a big
breakthrough’. This comment referred to the strong friendships that she had developed
with some of the other ‘new pioneers’ who participated in the project. Like Leila, these
women were mostly farmers and graziers who were using email and other ICTs to
enhance their personal, professional and community development work, despite the
many access barriers they faced. Participating in the project had ‘encouraged’ and
‘inspired’ Leila to ‘keep pushing for better communications for rural people’. In a
welink message, Leila summarised the effects it had on her by saying ‘welink keeps me
going’.

Although Leila derived a lot of benefit and enjoyment from participating in welink, she
also had some disempowering experiences. These included often feeling ‘a little bit
intimidated’ by the academics on welink. She felt this way, in part, because she had not
obtained any tertiary education. Leila also spoke of sometimes feeling like ‘a bit of a
goldfish in a bowl’ because of the high numbers of university and government people
who had joined welink and ‘want to find out about how we live’. While she could
understand this interest because ‘our lifestyles are so different’, she thought that
‘basically we’re all people that have the same interests and problems and things like
that, so this is why I think the whole thing works so well’.

Leila also spoke of feeling ‘very intimidated for a while’ by a (male) welink participant.
This experience had made her reluctant to participate. Another reason for ‘hanging
back’ from participation was that, at one stage, many new people were joining welink
and ‘we weren’t getting to know the people’.

As well as the valuable friendships and support that involvement in the project
provided, Leila gained access to useful information and networks and enhanced her
public profile. Through information about a new government funding scheme posted on
welink, she became involved in a successful proposal to extend her local community’s
access to the Internet. Newspaper articles were also published about her pioneering use

17
of email for her business and in her personal life. In 1997, members of the research
team nominated Lelia for the ABC Radio Rural Women of the Year Award and she was
delighted to become a State finalist.

Analysis of the case studies

Ingrid’s case study

While Ingrid appeared to have fairly high existing levels of social, political and
psychological empowerment, taking part in the project clearly enhanced these forms of
empowerment in beneficial ways. The most significant change she experienced was in
her level of technological empowerment. This led her to become involved in various
initiatives related to the use of ICTs in her work and her community. However, Ingrid
also experienced significant disempowerment of various kinds in the process of setting
up and learning to use email and the Internet, and seeking technical training and
support. Once connected, she felt excluded from the wechat group and was unable to
participate in welink as much as she wanted to due to her work commitments and other
factors, including the need to access the list daily for effective participation.

Ingrid’s participation in the project therefore had a number of contradictory effects.

Some of these were an outcome of the inclusive and participatory nature of the project,
while others were associated with her work and community commitments, the poor
quality of the technology, and a lack of effective local training and technical support. In
a personal email sent in December 2000, Ingrid indicated that she experienced
significant ambivalence about using email rather than spoken communication in her
work.

Leila’s case study

Like the other ‘high profile’ farmers who were interviewed, Leila already had a fairly
significant degree of empowerment prior to her participation in the project. This
included technological empowerment, given that she already had a high level of
experience with using computers and email. However, her ongoing frustration with the
poor quality telecommunications infrastructure on her property meant that she also
experienced some degree of technological disempowerment which made her feel ‘a bit
of envy’ of others with faster line speeds who were able to learn and do more using the
Internet.

Although Lelia was already empowered in many ways, she appeared to have increased
her level of social and psychological empowerment in fairly significant ways.
Participating in welink enabled Leila and others to alter some of the stereotypes about
farming women and this resulted in her feeling much more valued and respected. Through
the inspiration and ongoing support of others involved in the project, Leila also
experienced enhanced political empowerment and her leadership and activism was later
publicly recognised and rewarded. However, taking part in welink also resulted in various
forms of disempowerment, including sometimes feeling ‘intimidated’ by others or
restricted in her participation, and that some non-rural members of welink were placing
her daily life under unwanted observation.

18
Strategies for enhancing rural women’s empowerment

The findings from my evaluation of the project (Lennie, 2001) and from the project
itself (RWICTs Research Team, 1999) suggested a number of strategies that may be
successful in enhancing rural women’s empowerment in rural community development
projects that use ICTs. Factors that could hinder the effectiveness of these strategies are
also noted.

• Incorporating participatory forms of evaluation into activities to enable an ongoing

assessment of whether they are meeting the diverse needs of participants, and to
make changes that improve activities and processes.

• Encouraging participants to assume joint ownership of projects and activities such

as online groups. However, a sense of ownership can result in certain groups of
participants dominating activities such as online groups, thus excluding other groups
of women.

• Using a range of participation processes, such as those found successful in the Rural
Women and ICTs project, that can be effective in facilitating social, technological,
political and psychological empowerment. Such processes included establishing
supportive online groups that enable participants to network and share information
on a regular basis, and conducting some women-only workshops in which they feel
comfortable to openly voice their issues and concerns. Participants’ existing levels
of the various forms of empowerment need to be considered, as well as the extent to
which they want to obtain or increase all four forms of empowerment.

• Encouraging the active participation of women from diverse backgrounds and

interests. This can facilitate enhanced understandings of ‘other’ women and can
result in broadening participants’ knowledge and perspectives and the development
of more creative ideas and strategies for personal and community development.
However, awareness is needed of the power issues that can arise when women of
diverse backgrounds and levels of skills and knowledge are brought together.

• Using various communication technologies in ways that meet a diversity of

women’s needs. This could include audio and videoconferences and the
establishment of online groups. However, the limitations and potentially
disempowering effects of ICTs need to be taken into account.

• Using communication and interaction strategies such as workshops, seminars, online

groups, audio and videoconferences that enables the active participation of
collaborating researchers and government and industry partners. This can enable
women to have a direct voice with people in strategic or policy-making positions,
and thus facilitate political empowerment. Such strategies can also provide decision-
makers with a better understanding of rural women’s lives and issues. However, to
be most effective, prior face-to-face contact between project participants and
stakeholders is required and communication and information sharing needs to be
personalised. This helps to build mutual trust.

• Conducting a range of all-women activities that are facilitated in a relaxed, friendly,

inclusive, less hierarchical and non-patronising manner that is sensitive to

19
 differences among participants. These processes should aim to build mutual trust
and understanding and enable two-way sharing of information and experiences.
Workshop presentations about new technologies and other issues also need to use
language that is easily understood and appropriate. In projects that aim to enhance
Internet access, some hands-on use of email and the Internet is essential where
participants lack experience with these technologies.

• Allowing adequate time to prepare, undertake and reflect on activities in a relaxed

and unhurried fashion. Participatory processes, particularly those that involve the
use of ICTs, often take much longer to plan, prepare, conduct and evaluate
effectively than is anticipated.

• Obtaining good quality equipment and technical support to undertake workshops

that include live Internet demonstrations and training sessions, and being prepared
for technical problems with Internet connections that can occur in some rural areas.

Conclusion

In both Australia and overseas, there is a growing emphasis on research methodologies

and rural community development projects that aim to be participatory, empowering
and inclusive. ICTs such as email and the Internet are often used extensively in these
projects. However, as Humphries (1996) argues, the complex and contradictory nature
of empowerment processes needs to be more widely acknowledged and understood.

The findings outlined in this paper suggest that, designed and implemented in ways that
meet rural women’s diverse needs, community participation processes that use ICTs can
be important to facilitating social, technological, political and psychological
empowerment. The project’s online group welink was particularly effective in
producing these effects. However, the evaluation also identified various disempowering
effects of participating in the project and using ICTs. Many of these effects were
associated with various barriers to participation that were experienced, including a lack
of effective access to ICTs, while others were associated with the power relations
among the participants and stakeholders.

The feminist participatory evaluation methodology and the analytical frameworks used
in this research were considered to have enabled an effective and rigorous assessment
and analysis of the contradictory effects of the project. The results of this evaluation
suggested a range of strategies that could enhance rural women’s empowerment,
including the use of ICTs in this process.

Technological empowerment was identified as a significant new under-theorised form

of empowerment that requires more research. The results of this study suggest that
enhancing rural women’s technological empowerment is urgently required. As well as
for personal and social purposes, effective access to and use of ICTs is becoming
increasingly important to rural women’s leadership and participation in community and
economic development activities.

References

20
Anderson, J. 1996. ‘Yes, but is it empowerment? Initiation, implementation and
outcomes of community action’. In B. Humphries (ed). Critical perspectives on
empowerment. Birmingham: Venture Press, pp. 69–83.

Arnold, E. and W. Faulkner. 1985. ‘Smothered by invention. The masculinity of

technology’. In W. Faulkner and E. Arnold (eds). Smothered by invention. Technology
in women’s lives. London, Pluto Press, pp.18–50.

Butler, S. and Wintram, C. 1991. Feminist groupwork. London: Sage.

Claridge, C. 1996. Women, development and the environment: A method to facilitate

women’s empowerment. Unpublished PhD thesis, Brisbane: Department of Agriculture,
The University of Queensland.

Daws, L.1997. An analysis of the role of the Internet in supporting rural women’s
leadership initiatives. Paper presented to the Sixth Women and Labour Conference,
Deakin University, Geelong, 28–30 November.

Foucault, M. 1980. Power/knowledge. Selected interviews and other writings 1972–

1977. (C. Gordon ed) New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Friedmann, J. 1992. Empowerment. The politics of alternative development. Cambridge:

Blackwell.

Gillman, M. 1996. ‘Empowering professionals in higher education?’. In B. Humphries

(ed). Critical perspectives on empowerment. Birmingham: Venture Press, pp.99-116.

Gore, J. 1992. ‘What we can do for you! What can “we” do for “you”?: Struggling over
empowerment in critical and feminist pedagogy’. In C. Luke and J. Gore (eds).
Feminisms and critical pedagogy. New York: Routledge, pp.54–73.

Grace, M. and Lennie, J. 1998. Constructing and reconstructing rural women in

Australia: the politics of change, diversity and identity. Sociologia Ruralis, 38 (3), 351–
370.

Grace, M., Lundin, R. and Daws, L. 1996. Women and networking: Women’s voices
from elsewhere. A report on the project: Queensland rural women’s use of
communication technologies: Implications for information and referral services and for
networking organisations. Brisbane: Centre for Policy and Leadership Studies in
Education, Queensland University of Technology.

Harcourt, W. 1999. Cyborg melody. An introduction to women on the net (WoN). In W.

Harcourt (ed). Women@Internet. Creating new cultures in cyberspace. London and
New York: Zed Books, pp.1–20.

Harrison, L., 1998. ‘Using community learning to identify stores of social capital: Have
we found the ‘right’ community?’. In Learning communities, regional sustainability
and the learning society, an international symposium. Conference proceedings, Vol 2,
Launceston: Centre for Research and Learning, pp.186-196.

21
Herring, S. 1994. Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: Bringing
familiar baggage to the new frontier, Keynote talk, American Library Association
Annual Convention, Miami, June 27.

Humphries, B. 1994. Empowerment and social research: Elements for an analytic

framework. In B. Humphries and C. Truman (eds). Re-thinking social research. Anti-
discriminatory approaches in research methodology. Aldershot: Avebury, pp.185–204.

Humphries, B. 1996. Contradictions in the culture of empowerment. In B. Humphries

(ed). Critical perspectives on empowerment. Birmingham: Venture Press, pp.1–16.

Lather, P. 1991. Getting smart. Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the
postmodern. New York: Routledge.

Spender, D. 1995. Nattering on the net. Women, power and cyberspace. North
Melbourne: Spinifex.

Lennie, J. 2000. Voice and silence in an email conversation group involving rural and
urban women in Australia. In the electronic conference ‘Women’s organisations and the
building of civil society in the twenty-first century: an international perspective’,
conducted by the Global Network on Women’s Advocacy and Civil Society, 4-15
December, 2000. http://www.philanthropy.org/GN/KEN/gntext/ (Accessed 4 December
2000)

Lennie, J. 2001. Troubling empowerment: an evaluation and critique of a feminist

action research project involving rural women and interactive communication
technologies. Unpublished PhD thesis, Brisbane: Faculty of Business, Queensland
University of Technology.

Mansell R. and Wehn, U. (eds). 1998. Knowledge societies: Information technology for
sustainable development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Milio, N. 1996. Engines of empowerment: Using information technology to create

healthy communities and challenge public policy. Chicago: Health Administration
Press.

Peters, M. and Marshall, J. 1991. Education and empowerment: Postmodernism and the
critique of humanism. Education and Society. 9 (2), 123–134.

Schuler, D. 1996. New community networks. Wired for change. New York: Addison-
Wesley.

Scott, M., Diamond, A., and Smith, B. 1997. Opportunities for communities: Public
access to networked information technology. Canberra: Department of Social Security.

Shapiro, J. 1988. Participatory evaluation: Towards a transformation of assessment for

women’s studies programs and projects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis.
10 (3), 191–199.

Simpson, L., Wood, L., Daws, L and Seinen, A. 2001. Creating rural connections:
Book 1: Project overview. Brisbane: The Communication Centre, Queensland University
of Technology.

22
The Rural Women and ICTs Research Team. 1999. The new pioneers: Women in rural
Queensland collaboratively exploring the potential of communication and information
technologies for personal, business and community development. Brisbane: The
Communication Centre, Queensland University of Technology.

Truong, H. with Williams, G., Clark, J. and Couey, A. 1993. Gender issues in online
communications. http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/gender/bawit.cfp93 (Accessed 31 July 1997)

van Zoonen, L. 2001. Feminist Internet studies. Feminist Media Studies 1 (1), 67-72.

Wadsworth, Y. 1997. Everyday evaluation on the run. (2nd ed), Allen and Unwin: St
Leonards, NSW.

Wajcman, J. 1991. Feminism confronts technology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Welbourn, A. 1991. RRA and the analysis of difference. RRA Notes. 14, 14–23.

June Lennie holds a postdoctoral fellowship with the Service Leadership and Innovation
Research Program, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Her significant
research and consulting experience encompasses various fields, including rural
women’s use of communication technologies, gender and community participation
processes, and the social impacts of technologies. During 1996-1997 she was a
researcher with an award-winning feminist action research project involving
Queensland rural women and new communication technologies. Her doctoral research
critically evaluated the methods used in this project. June’s current research aims to
build the capacities of rural people (particularly women) in participatory planning and
evaluation related to communication technology initiatives.

Address for correspondence:

Dr June Lennie
Service Leadership and Innovation Research Program
School of Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations
Faculty of Business
Queensland University of Technology
GPO Box 2434
Brisbane, Q. 4001

Phone: 07 3864 4158

Fax: 07 3864 2252
Email: j.lennie@qut.edu.au

23