Submit your Article

When we talk about technology in the context of development, we often treat it as a tool that simply exists to make life more efficient. But I see technology as something that shapes our identities, influences our sense of agency and carries ethical responsibilities across generations. This is why we need to reframe ICT4D (Information and Communication Technology for Development) through an ethics-based lens—one that doesn’t just ask what technology can do, but who it serves, how it  empowers and whether it respects the people and cultures it touches. 

Technology isn’t something that arrives in a vacuum, rather it enters communities endowed with their own ways of understanding the world, their own traditions, identities and their own ethical frameworks. If we introduce technology without considering these dimensions, we risk erasing identities rather than strengthening them. According to Martin Heidegger, the essence of technology is not just about tools or instruments; it’s about how technology shapes the way we see and interact with the world. When technology is introduced into a community without awareness of this shift in perception, it can transform local cultures and identities into mere resources to be exploited rather than ways of life that deserve  respect and preservation. For ICT4D to be responsible, it must integrate into the ways of  communities, aligning with their values rather than imposing external ones. 

I have seen  instances where digital tools were designed with good intentions but ended up disrupting  local practices because they failed to acknowledge the social and ethical realities of the  people using them. 

Agency is at the heart of ethical technology use. People should not just be passive  recipients of digital solutions; they should have the power to shape, adapt and use  technology in ways that enhance their lives. Too often, ICT4D projects are rolled out with a top-down approach, where decisions are made by outsiders who assume they know what’s best for the rest. But when people are involved in designing and implementing technology—when they  have ownership over it—it transforms from an external intervention into a meaningful part  of their lives. This isn’t just about usability; it’s about empowerment. It’s about ensuring that communities are not just given tools but also the knowledge, skills and autonomy to decide how those tools should work for them. This perspective aligns with Amartya Sen’s emphasis on agency in development. 

Intergenerational justice, a concept explored by Hans Jonas, is another crucial dimension  that is often overlooked in ICT4D. When we introduce technology, we aren’t just shaping the present; we are making choices that will impact future generations. If we don’t think carefully about the ethical implications of technology, we risk creating dependencies, eroding cultural knowledge or deepening inequalities. Sustainable technology isn’t just about function or economic efficiency; it’s about ensuring that the benefits of today’s  innovations don’t come at the cost of future resilience. 

Environmental sustainability must also be central to ethical ICT4D. As Fritjof Capra  emphasizes in his work on systems thinking, nature operates through interconnected and  self-sustaining networks. Technology should follow these principles, supporting rather than disrupting ecological balance. Too often, technological advancements come at the cost of  ecological health, depleting natural resources and contributing to environmental degradation. If we are to create truly sustainable solutions, we must embrace a philosophy  that respects and aligns with the natural world rather than exploiting it. This means developing digital infrastructures that minimize environmental impact, encouraging circular economies in technology use and integrating local ecological knowledge into digital innovations. Ethical ICT4D must recognize that the well-being of communities is inseparable from the health of the environment that sustains them. 

An ethical ICT4D means recognizing that technology is never just a tool; it is always part of a larger social and ethical system. If we want it to truly serve communities, we need to ask deeper questions: Does this technology respect local identities? Does it enhance people’s agency rather than diminish it? Does it uphold justice not just for this generation, but for the ones that will follow? And does it honor the ecological systems that sustain life? These are the questions that should guide our approach. If we fail to ask them, we risk using technology as a force of disruption rather than as a means of meaningful progress.

In recent years, the growing migration of Nepali youth has become a serious concern.  The reasons often given include economic instability, lack of job opportunities and the political turbulence that has plagued the country for decades. While these factors certainly play a role, I believe there is a deeper, more existential issue at work. By using the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, particularly his ideas on mood, anxiety and resoluteness, we can begin to understand this migration as more than just a reaction to external  conditions. It is, in many ways, an existential crisis that challenges how young people see  their lives and future in Nepal. 

The mood of anxiety 

Heidegger’s concept of mood isn’t just an emotional state; it is a fundamental way in which we relate to the world. Our moods shape how the world appears to us, and in turn, how we act within it. One of the most central moods in Heidegger’s philosophy is anxiety, which  occurs when we confront the groundlessness of our existence—when the usual meanings,  comforts and structures we rely on suddenly fall away. Unlike fear, which is directed at something specific, anxiety is more general and spreads across everything without having a  clear object. 

In Nepal, there is a widespread mood of anxiety among the youth. It feels like a sense of  hopelessness or stagnation, where the future seems unclear, and opportunities feel out of  reach. Many young people feel there is nothing left to work for in the country. They may not  be able to point to one specific thing that is missing, but the overall mood is one of  dissatisfaction and unease. This is a classic case of Heideggerian anxiety: the feeling that  something is wrong, but without knowing exactly what. 

Beyond economics 

The common explanation blames this anxiety on political instability, economic downturns and the lack of job opportunities. To some extent, this is true. Nepal’s political system has long been unstable, and the economy has struggled to provide meaningful employment for its growing youth population. However, focusing only on these external factors misses the deeper existential dimension of the issue. Many young people are not simply reacting to the economic or political situation; they are grappling with a bigger question about the meaning and purpose of their lives. 

For instance, even if Nepal were to suddenly offer more job opportunities or become  politically stable, would the youth still feel fulfilled? Would they feel they are living in a way  that reflects their true selves and values? The migration of youth isn’t just about better jobs or escaping a broken political system. It’s about seeking a sense of meaning and purpose  that many feel is missing in their home country. In this sense, the decision to leave Nepal is  not merely a political or economic choice but an existential one. 

Lessons from Viktor Frankl 

Consider the case of Viktor Frankl, an Austrian psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor who developed logotherapy, a form of therapy that focuses on finding meaning in life, even in the most dire circumstances. Frankl’s philosophy shows that even in extreme situations—such as life in concentration camps—people can find a sense of purpose and meaning, which can allow them to endure unimaginable suffering. Frankl believed that it wasn’t external circumstances that determined a person’s state of mind, but their ability to find meaning in those circumstances. His work demonstrates that even in the worst possible conditions, existential crises can be overcome through a deeper understanding of one’s  purpose. 

I have personally witnessed examples where economic prosperity does not prevent existential crises. South Korea and Norway, both highly developed nations, are also struggling with high suicide rates. Despite their economic progress and high standards of living, many people in these countries experience feelings of meaninglessness,  depression and existential despair. South Korea’s intense social pressures and competition contribute to widespread anxiety, while in Norway, the alienation that can accompany wealth and material comfort has led many, especially the younger generation, to feel disconnected from any deeper sense of purpose. These examples highlight that  existential crises can emerge in any context, regardless of external conditions like wealth or political stability. 

The situation in Nepal, therefore, cannot be explained solely by economic or political factors. Even if external conditions were to improve, the deeper existential concerns would  remain. What many of Nepal’s youth are facing is not just a lack of jobs or a reaction to political uncertainty; it is an existential void, a search for meaning in a world that appears increasingly empty. 

Herd mentality

Heidegger makes a distinction between authentic and inauthentic ways of being. In an  inauthentic mode, we simply follow the crowd, conforming to the expectations and norms of society without reflecting on our own values and choices. Heidegger calls this living according to “the they”, where we do what everyone else is doing simply because that’s what people do. In the case of Nepal’s youth, many are leaving the country not because they have fully considered their decision, but because it has become the norm. Everyone is  going abroad, so they follow along. 

This “sheep mentality” is a clear example of inauthentic living. Young people are caught up in the general mood of anxiety and hopelessness, but they are not critically thinking about their own situation or why they are making certain choices. They are simply reacting to the mood of the moment, rather than taking control of their own lives. This isn’t to criticize them, but to highlight the existential crisis that lies underneath the wave of migration. 

A path to authenticity 

So, what can be done? How can Nepal’s youth deal with this existential crisis and make more authentic decisions about their future? Here, Heidegger’s concept of resoluteness is crucial. Resoluteness involves taking ownership of one’s choices, facing the uncertainty and anxiety of life, and acting with purpose. It’s about making decisions that reflect who we really are, rather than simply going along with what everyone else is doing or reacting to external pressures. 

For some young people, resoluteness might mean leaving Nepal, but with a clear understanding of why they are doing so, and what they hope to achieve. They wouldn’t just be following the crowd or giving in to a vague feeling of hopelessness. They would be leaving as a conscious, thoughtful act, based on their own values and understanding of their situation. 

For others, resoluteness might mean staying in Nepal and finding opportunities within the country. They would recognize that, despite the challenges, there are possibilities for growth and meaningful contribution. Instead of being trapped by the general mood of  anxiety or inauthenticity, they would engage with their circumstances, choosing to stay and make a difference because it aligns with their personal sense of purpose. 

The existential aspect 

In Nepal, development is often seen in terms of economic growth, political reform or  infrastructure improvement. These are all important, but they don’t address the existential crisis many young people are experiencing. The migration of youth is not just a symptom of  underdevelopment; it’s a symptom of a deeper existential void. Until we start addressing  the existential crisis that many young people face, no amount of economic reform will be enough to stop the flow of young people leaving the country.

What we need is a shift in how we think about development and progress. Instead of  focusing only on external conditions like jobs or political stability, we should think about creating an environment where young people can find meaning and purpose in their lives. This might involve creating spaces for self-reflection, encouraging thoughtful decision-making and fostering a culture that values individual purpose as much as  material success.

Authentic living requires us to confront life’s uncertainties and make choices based on our own understanding of who we are and what we want. Whether young people choose to stay in Nepal or leave for opportunities abroad, the key is that they make these decisions with clarity, purpose and resoluteness. Only then can we begin to address the crisis that is driving so many young people away.

Digital transformation is a hot topic around the world, both in academia and in practice. Nepal cannot stay away from this discourse and has also envisioned the idea of a Digital Nepal. However, digital transformation presents various challenges, not only in the developing world but also in developed countries. Philosophers even raise the question, especially because of the rise of artificial intelligence: is it doing anything good for human society? However, in my opinion, it’s not possible to reverse the situation. We have to learn to live with the digital paradigm. But it’s necessary to reflect on questions such as: are we focusing too much on the digitization of everything, or do we need to strike a balance? Or, in practical terms, digitalization for what? For whom, and how? I have been reflecting on this discourse based on my research and personal experiences from three different countries. Here, I have first-hand experience and some insights to share.

During my first PhD in Industrial Engineering years in South Korea, I gained valuable insights into technology's profound impact on society. South Korea’s remarkable transformation from a country struggling with poverty due to its colonial past to a leading tech innovator is a compelling example of technology's potential. I saw the benefits: advanced infrastructure, thriving tech companies and a highly-skilled workforce. The success of companies like Samsung and LG illustrates this transformation.

The South Korean government played a crucial role in this progress. Through strategic policies fostering innovation, attracting global investment and a strong emphasis on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education, the country built a workforce adept at handling technological challenges. Ongoing investment in research and development kept South Korea at the forefront of technological progress, raising living standards and driving economic growth. However, my experience also revealed the complexities of rapid technological change. Despite its many benefits, the pressure to stay constantly connected in the digital world led to stress and mental health issues, and exclusion of elderly people from fast-changing technology, demonstrating that technology’s advantages must be balanced with attention to personal well-being and social dynamics.

In my second PhD, which focused on how technology enables development, I had the opportunity to closely observe the digitalization in the mountain regions. I encountered a dramatically different situation. While South Korea advanced rapidly, Nepal faced significant challenges. Despite its rich cultural heritage, I found during my research, Nepal continued to struggle with political instability, inadequate infrastructure and limited access to quality education, hindering technological progress. Issues such as unreliable electricity and limited internet access, especially in rural areas, were common. The education system often fell short in preparing individuals for a technology-driven world, and economic constraints further limited investment in technological development.

The digital divide in Nepal is striking. Urban areas have better access to technology and education, while rural regions lag significantly. The high cost of technology and internet services limits accessibility for many, and gender disparities affect women’s opportunities in technology, reflecting broader cultural and educational inequalities.

Now, continuing with the same research and working in Norway, I observe a more balanced approach to technology. Norway navigates a middle path between the extremes of a highly digitized South Korea and a digitally excluded Nepal. Here, technology is integrated into society with a focus on social well-being, environmental sustainability and educational improvement. Norway’s approach prioritizes quality of life and social equity. There is a strong commitment to ensuring that technological advancements do not undermine personal well-being, with policies promoting work-life balance and reducing the stress associated with constant connectivity. Although Norway faces its own challenges in digital transformation, the country is actively working to maintain this balance.

Environmental sustainability is another key focus in Norway’s digital strategy. The country emphasizes green technology and sustainable practices, ensuring that technological progress does not come at the expense of the environment. This commitment reflects a responsibility to future generations and the planet. Norway’s education system is inclusive and forward-thinking, integrating digital literacy from an early age to prepare students for a technology-driven world. Continuous investment in teacher training and educational resources supports this goal, creating a workforce ready to adapt to technological changes.

From my experiences in South Korea, Nepal and Norway, it is evident that technology can drive significant progress, but it must be managed thoughtfully. South Korea’s success shows how education and innovation can lead to advancement, while Nepal’s challenges underscore the need for inclusive policies and infrastructure. Norway’s balanced approach demonstrates that it is possible to leverage technology’s benefits while prioritizing social well-being, environmental sustainability and educational improvement.

For Nepal, valuable lessons can be learned from both South Korea and Norway. By investing in reliable infrastructure, focusing on inclusive education, adopting a balanced approach to technology and promoting sustainable practices, Nepal can work toward a future where technology enhances the quality of life for everyone. This balanced and inclusive strategy can help ensure that the benefits of technology are accessible to all while minimizing potential drawbacks.

The author is a professor at the University of Agder, Norway