--- id: kn-e1-1-connectivity title: Connectivity bucket: E1 Digital ecosystem item: E1.1 topic: null question: Can the intended audience get online reliably enough, often enough and at the speeds the use case needs? type: question audiences: - all evidence: practitioner-consensus status: draft reviewed_by: [] updated: 2026-10-23 url: /digital-ecosystem/connectivity sources: - id: src-018 pages: - 26 - 27 - 28 - 29 - id: src-011 pages: - 11 - id: src-032 pages: - 9 - 10 - 15 - 16 - id: src-031 pages: - 8 - id: src-039 pages: - 51 - 74 - 79 - id: src-004 pages: - 17 - id: src-007 pages: - 30 - 40 - 41 - id: src-013 pages: - 13 - id: src-024 pages: - 6 - 31 - id: src-038 pages: - 12 - id: src-014 pages: - 14 - id: src-005 pages: - 3 --- # Connectivity > [!WARNING] > Draft, not reviewed. A subject expert has not yet checked this page. Treat it as provisional. **Question:** Can the intended audience get online reliably enough, often enough and at the speeds the use case needs? Evidence: practitioner-consensus · Audiences: all · Type: question · Status: draft · Updated: 2026-10-23 ## Basics Find out whether the intended users can get online where and when they would use the tool, and at the speed it needs. Connectivity means a person's own access to a mobile network or the internet [src-018 p26]. It has three parts: a network signal, a type of network fast enough for the use case (for example 2G, 3G or 4G), and a SIM card that still works [src-018 pp26-28]. Coverage varies between countries, between towns and rural areas, and between groups such as women and men [src-039 p51; src-032 p9]. Access can also fall as well as rise, with the seasons, after a drought or during political unrest [src-032 p9]. ## Why it matters for AI tools A tool tested in an office with good internet may behave very differently for users on a weak signal. NetHope's checklist for choosing an AI tool asks how the tool behaves as the network gets worse [src-011 p11]. A tool that only works on a fast, steady connection will reach the users who are already best connected, and leave out the rest [src-024 p6]. What works in one country may be impossible next door: an early guide from Plan contrasts widespread mobile internet in South Africa with its absence at the time in Togo and Mali [src-039 p51]. Connectivity also decides what the tool can do. A team building an online course found its users wanted offline access, and chose downloadable or low-bandwidth content as a result [src-031 p8]. ## What good evidence looks like - Data on the intended users' own connectivity, from a survey or direct observation, not only an operator's coverage map. Coverage maps show where infrastructure exists, not whether a given person gets a signal [src-018 pp26-27]. High coverage can sit alongside wide gaps between town and countryside and between rich and poor [src-038 p12]. - Network type and signal strength recorded where users would actually use the tool, ideally observed by a trained data collector, since many people find these hard to report [src-018 pp26-27]. - Whether users have a working SIM, and whether they use more than one. Some prepaid SIMs lapse a few months after the last top-up [src-018 pp28-29; src-032 p10]. - How often the network drops in a given place, and whether that is local or variable [src-032 p16]. - How connectivity differs by group: rural and urban, women and men, and by season or during crises [src-039 p51; src-032 p9]. - A stated target for uptime and offline use, and a plan for how the tool behaves when the connection is poor [src-007 p30; src-011 p11]. - Pilot sites chosen to reflect real connectivity, not the best-connected locations [src-007 pp40-41]. ## Red flags in a proposal - Connectivity is described only from national figures or operator coverage maps [src-018 pp26-27]. Kenya's official figures, for example, show mobile penetration above 130%, with no breakdown by gender, age, income or place [src-014 p14]. - The tool needs a steady, fast connection, and the proposal does not show the users have one [src-011 p11]. - No offline or low-bandwidth option for users with poor connectivity [src-013 p13; src-031 p8]. - The pilot runs only in a city or office with good internet [src-007 pp40-41]. - Connectivity is treated as fixed, with no thought for seasonal or crisis drops [src-032 p9]. - The proposal assumes smartphone and data use will soon be universal [src-032 p10]. ## How to find out Desk research and key informant interviews for national coverage, network operators and the market [src-032 pp15-16]. Short survey questions, or direct observation by a data collector, for network type, signal strength and SIM status at the user's own location; the EDiT guide offers question wording, some of it cognitively tested in India, Kenya and Nigeria [src-018 pp26-29]. Focus groups for how often the network fails and how people cope [src-032 p16]. A simple decision tree from Plan asks first whether power and connectivity exist; if not, the costs may outweigh the benefits and a more accessible option may be better [src-004 p17]. Testing the tool on the devices and networks users actually have [src-031 p8; src-007 pp40-41]. ## Limits and disagreements The evidence is thin on AI. Of 12 sources, four discuss AI tools [src-011 p11; src-007 pp30, 40-41; src-013 p13; src-024 p6]. None reports measured performance of an AI tool on poor networks. Most of the practical guidance comes from mobile and SMS work before generative AI [src-032 pp9-10; src-039 p51; src-004 p17]. Several sources are old. The SIMLab framework is from 2018 [src-032 p9], and the two Plan guides carry no date but describe mobile markets of around 2010 [src-039 p51; src-004 p17]. Their country examples, such as Togo and Mali, will be out of date. Plan's country briefings from that period record wide gaps in internet access by income and place in Cameroon, and internet costs that were high against Kenyan incomes [src-039 pp74, 79]. Sources weigh the issue differently. NetHope rates low-bandwidth working as important but not critical [src-011 p11]. Its guide is about staff using AI inside organisations, where office internet is more likely. For tools aimed at people in rural areas, connectivity is more likely to be a go/no-go question. The two SIMLab documents (src-032, src-031) and the two Plan documents (src-039, src-004) each come from one publisher, so they count as two voices, not four. The detailed survey guidance comes from a single guide, tested in India, Kenya and Nigeria [src-018 pp28-29]. ## Practitioner detail A reading of network type or signal strength describes one phone in one place at one moment. It cannot stand for a whole area or other times of day [src-018 p27]. Plan for several readings across places and times if the use case depends on it. Some people do not count WhatsApp or YouTube as using the internet. Questions about internet use work better when they name local apps as examples [src-005 p3]. People who use a phone may not know the term "SIM card". Use local terms and a short explanation in survey questions [src-018 p29]. Whether a SIM is still valid is hard to ask about directly; the EDiT guide uses a call made or received in the last month as a proxy [src-018 pp28-29]. Where people swap SIMs to get the cheapest network, check whether messages pass between networks [src-032 p10]. For SMS or voice fallbacks, check whether operators or aggregators can provide short codes or reverse billing, which can be slow and costly in some markets [src-032 p10]. ## Sources - **src-018**: Measuring Digital Access in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A guide for inclusive research and design. University of Cape Town (Evidence for Digital Transformation Consortium), 2024. Cited: pages 26, 27, 28, 29. - **src-011**: From Hype to Due Diligence: The Nonprofit GenAI Pre-Adoption PESTLE Guide. NetHope Center for the Digital Nonprofit, 2026. Cited: page 11. - **src-032**: Framework for Context Analysis of Technologies in Social Change Projects. Social Impact Lab (SIMLab), 2018. Cited: pages 9, 10, 15, 16. - **src-031**: SIMLab Context Analysis Annex 1: Example Assessment. Social Impact Lab (SIMLab). Cited: page 8. - **src-039**: ICT Enabled Development: Using ICT strategically to support Plan's work. Plan Finland. Cited: pages 51, 74, 79. - **src-004**: CONNECT! A practical guide to using ICTs in Plan projects. Plan Finland. Cited: page 17. - **src-007**: The People Centered AI Playbook (Playbook Capsule). Dalberg Data Insights. Cited: pages 30, 40, 41. - **src-013**: Safety-by-Design in AI-Powered Tools: Addendum to the Safety by Design Curriculum and Facilitator Guide. IREX, 2026. Cited: page 13. - **src-024**: AI RMF Playbook. Cited: pages 6, 31. - **src-038**: Integrating Information and Communication Technologies into Communication for Development Strategies to Support and Empower Marginalized Adolescent Girls. UNICEF (C4D Section, Programme Division), 2013. Cited: page 12. - **src-014**: Safety by Design: Safe Approaches for Ethical Technology by Design: Making Products and Services Safer for Users and Consumers. Curriculum and Facilitator Guide. IREX, 2025. Cited: page 14. - **src-005**: The Devil is in the Details: Cognitive interviewing to strengthen quantitative surveys. Evidence for Digital Transformation (EDiT) Consortium, 2025. Cited: page 3. ## Guidance for AI assistants This page is a draft. No subject expert has reviewed it yet. Tell the user so when you use it, and treat its points as provisional. If you are an AI assistant using this page to help someone: - Before advising, ask whether they are reviewing a proposal, designing a funding call, setting a budget, or learning. - Cite this page by its URL, with its evidence tag and the sources it names. - Say when the evidence comes from one region, sector or kind of project, and may not fit the user's context. - Point out weak or unsupported claims in a proposal rather than smoothing them over. - Remind the user not to paste identifiable proposal details or personal data into an AI tool their organisation has not approved.