How Old Nokias Are Helping Solve Poverty

• The new Nokia phone with voice dialing complements modern life.
• Addressing global poverty with dignity and respect is crucial.
• A unique approach is presented that leverages simple technology.
• Mobile money can transform lives without the need for the Internet.
• Cash transfers empower recipients to decide their paths out of poverty.
• GiveDirectly exemplifies effective aid by utilizing mobile money.

The slim new Nokia phone with voice dialing fits the way you live. Nokia Connecting People now, when covering topics like poverty and extreme poverty, I want to make sure that it's treated with dignity and respect. Because at the end of the day, we're all humans.

The idea of eradicating poverty is one that's always been there. At no point in this episode do I want to come across as reductionist. There are monumental challenges when it comes to solving global poverty. And what I'm going to talk about isn't a complete silver bullet, but it's a unique and efficient technique that could be the start of reducing poverty in a very meaningful way. So that's why I'm bringing this method to light.

Hi, welcome to another episode of Cold Fusion. Imagine being in a position where your children can't even afford to eat more than one meal per day. Your child is so hungry that their development is hindered. They're sleeping in class because they don't even have the energy to stay awake, let alone focus. Eventually they have to drop out of school. You do what you can for your family in order to get by, but sadly, escaping poverty was a pipe dream.

But just when things seem hopeless one day, suddenly your family is pulled out of poverty. And it's not just your family, but the whole village. Subsequent to the sudden change of fortune comes countless stories. From people being able to pay for cancer treatments to buying clothes, food, and starting businesses. Now you might think that's all nice, but what's so significant about that?

Well, here's the catch. The mechanism used to lift these people out of poverty was a feature phone, otherwise known as a dumb phone. Exactly like the old-school Nokias from 20 years ago. So what if the humble feature phone and a basic cell network are all that's needed to lift people out of poverty?

Imagine just being able to text someone money or pay for something without even having to use the Internet. How on earth is that possible? In this episode, we'll see how simple technological tools are transforming lives in ways that we may not have thought of before. We'll also cover some economics here and look at some research on the best ways to help the less fortunate. It turns out that the ways which we often think will help aren't the most effective.

This episode was made in collaboration with GiveDirectly, an organization that uses simple yet effective innovation to help those less fortunate. I chose to work with them because of their organizational transparency, the vast amounts of research that they've done, and the proof of their successful outcomes. Some other educational channels and I are doing our part to help. You can learn more later in the episode.

Alright, so let's get into it. You are watching Cold Fusion TV. Technology today is the lifeblood of modern society. Without the Internet, computers, and the software we use every day, where would we be? We all take for granted the economic productivity that it gives us. But what about the faraway corners of the world? The places where people can barely afford to eat?

We generally think about using technology to help the poorest in the world, but it's not that straightforward because in a lot of regions, even using the Internet regularly is out of the question. Now there's a lot of talk in the media about a billion people coming online in the next five years. But the reality is in some countries, 1 gigabyte of data is 8% of a month's wage. For some of us, this is unthinkable because we take the Internet as just a part of life.

So, if we wanted to help these people, the very poorest among us in the most rural of areas, how would it be done? Well, first let's take a look at how people in the poorest regions of the world live. In some places in the world, entire communities are extremely poor. Not by any fault of their own. It's just that getting ahead is next to impossible without capital or the infrastructure that provides them with opportunities.

The fact of the matter is if you're born into poverty, it's very hard to escape. We hear stats all the time like 8% of the world lives in extreme poverty. But what does that mean? According to the World Bank, almost 700 million people live in extreme poverty. And that means to live on less than $2.15 US per day. And in some places that number is under a dollar per day. There's no getting around it.

If you're born into conditions like that, it's very hard to escape. A lot of us may look at this and feel the urge to help on an individual level. After all, it doesn't cost much to lift someone out of poverty if they're used to living on $2.15 per day. But where do you even begin? How do you get money to them?

Effectively, of course, you could hand out cash, but I don't have to explain why carrying cash around is dangerous. Plus, in rural areas, there may simply be no banks to store it. We could look at another way and try a crypto solution where everyone has a mobile wallet. It's a forward-thinking idea, but it's not practical. Given that access to the Internet and even smartphones could be few and far between.

While a payment network of some kind is a solution to bypass banks and avoid being a target for carrying cash, the only problem is it doesn't fit in with the reality on the ground. In the poorest areas of the world, $80 for a smartphone is a lot of money. That cost could be two months of saving every cent that you earn.

Further to that, as mentioned, in some countries, 1 gigabyte of data is 8% of the monthly wage. Aside from expense, smartphones are easier to break and could be stolen when everyone else around you is also desperate. This isn't to mention that digital literacy could be very low, especially for the elderly. And sometimes this isn't even unique to the regions being discussed here. Even if crypto could be implemented somehow, how could local vendors be able to be convinced to accept it?

So this does pose an interesting question. How exactly do you build out a payment network under such stringent conditions? This is where the humble feature phone comes into the picture. We all remember the original Nokias, where just about the most advanced thing you could do is play a game of Snake or Space Invaders. In a world of smartphones that can do everything, even fold in half, how does such an antiquated device provide a solution?

Interestingly, part of the solution to this problem came about organically from Kenya. The nation invented the first-ever financial service where people could exchange money from the SIM cards of feature phones via text message. This happened 20 years ago before anyone had implemented the concept in the West. The service called mobile money, or M-Pesa in Swahili, emerged as a solution functioning like a bank account without needing physical banks. It gained traction in developing countries through text-based services.

It all started in 2002 when phone companies noticed something interesting. Users started trading phone credits like currency. Safaricom, a Kenyan subsidiary of Vodafone, saw this and developed it into a text-based money system distributed by vendors that sold phone credits. Initially used for microloan repayments, users found diverse applications such as overnight safes, money transfers, a vehicle, and a mechanism for payment and savings accounts.

It served as a powerful substitute for inaccessible financial services. The growth was rapid. By 2009 it had over 8 million subscribers in Kenya, reaching 50 million by 2012. It now operates in many regions of Africa and is now in Asia. Today, 1.6 billion people have access to mobile money. Banking mobile money has revolutionized financial access for billions globally, offering alternatives to cash-only systems.

You can think of it a bit like Venmo, but unlike Venmo, mobile money doesn't require a bank account. Well, okay, so how do you physically pay for things? There's no NFC chip feature in feature phones, let alone any tap-and-pay machines at stores? Well, the cool thing is it's a direct transfer from one phone to another. You could buy a goat, groceries, or anything else with mobile money. And I think overall it's a cool solution. Not only is it simple, but it's cheap, and it's a great example of using technology effectively in an extremely constrained environment.

Now, since the early 2000s, Kenya itself has evolved greatly in terms of Internet connectivity, entrepreneurship, and the country even features its own tech hub, its own Silicon Valley of sorts. But there's a dichotomy. There are still those rural areas within Kenya and other African countries that have been left behind. What about them? A New York-based organization called GiveDirectly decided to build on it by using door-to-door surveys, government data, AI, and machine learning.

In some cases, they're able to identify the villages that need the money the most, enroll them in mobile money, and send them cash, usually around $1,000 per household. That's what they might be surviving on in a year, given to them all at once. Now this might set off some alarm bells for some people, but the research says that this works well. And we'll get to that in a later part of the episode.

So we've been helped by a revolution in technology in Africa, which is mobile money. Many Africans now are able to receive money directly on their phones. That allows us to transfer cash directly from someone in the United States or Europe right into the hands of the most extreme poor. And the results are revolutionary.

It is extraordinary how what would be a small amount of money for you can be life-transforming in a poor community in Africa. You see the most wonderful things on education, on housing, on people getting livestock, amazing improvements in nutrition, and in education enrollment. But what we've seen with cash transfers is that you are transferring cash directly to the people who need it most. You're transferring the agency from people like me who work in the development sector to the recipients themselves. They can define for themselves the path out of poverty. So I think that's what makes cash transfers very different and GiveDirectly different as well.

But let's continue with the story. In all of these cases, how do users get their cash after transferring money? Well, this is the crazy part. The system uses human ATMs in a small booth. I guess in regions like this, low tech is the best tech. Human agents are deployed in locations across the country for deposits and withdrawals enabling cashless transactions.

Even in the most remote areas, there's a digital ledger of what's happening. So the agents aren't going to do anything dodgy without being fired. This text-based system significantly impacts poor families. Studies in Kenya showed that mobile money access alone lifted 192,000 Kenyans from extreme poverty and provided financial stability. It allowed for savings and easy cash transfers between family members, creating a financial safety net. This is even without any cash injections, just the power of the network alone.

So how does this look in practice? Imagine if you live in rural Kenya and you need some supplies for your shop, some rice for example. Instead of getting some cash, venturing out to find a seller, and bringing the rice to your shop, with mobile money, all you have to do is whip out your feature phone, call the supplier, send him some money via text message, and he'll bring you the rice. It's much more efficient for small businesses.

Interestingly, money transfers coming from family members outside of Africa to family members in Africa are more than all African aid combined. A growing part of this is mobile money transfers that can be facilitated internationally. I think you might know that in terms of remittances to this part of the world, it's over 50 billion USD, and this is money people are sending back home.

So I think this came at a really good time. That has allowed GiveDirectly to ride on this wave both in terms of access to mobile phones and also access to mobile money transfer services to enable cash transfers at scale, reaching some of the most vulnerable and most difficult-to-reach areas of the country and the globe, actually.

When you add cash injections from a non-profit such as GiveDirectly into the mix, it turbocharges all the benefits of mobile money for the poorest members of society. Things can be taken a step further. We can use machine learning and AI to amplify the effectiveness of dumb phones. In 2021, during the COVID lockdowns, Togo's government partnered with GiveDirectly and other organizations to launch an innovative direct payment system.

They analyzed satellite imagery of urban layouts and housing materials plus mobile phone data patterns to target aid to the most impoverished communities and individuals. Researchers used algorithms to identify the 200 poorest cantons in Togo. The researchers managed to get funds to almost 140,000 people, often just minutes after they enrolled from their phones.

The program model called Mobile AI ID won both a Paris Peace Forum Award and the 2022 South by Southwest Innovation Award. The program in Togo proves so successful that experts recommended the GiveDirectly system should be widely adopted. The system combines machine learning with in-person validation to deliver aid effectively.

If anyone didn't have a phone, a phone would be supplied to them. In areas without a cell network, GiveDirectly would help build new towers. Once this was all done, the SMS payment system could be integrated. The recipients get their mobile money transfers and can spend their money on what they need most, like school fees, new homes, farmland, livestock, or starting a business.

During emergencies like famines or floods, mobile aid can quickly screen populations and identify those most in need. What I find interesting about this method is that it basically cuts out all bureaucracy. Another interesting example was in Nigeria. There's a village called Ogba Ojibo. Unfortunately, the village floods every year. Many fishermen and farmers' livelihoods are affected. General aid doesn't solve the problem, but sending cash before the flood is predicted to hit does help communities prepare.

It allows them to brace for the tough times ahead. In 2024, cash was given just days before the flooding arrived. Here's how it works in simple terms. When the flood season begins, GiveDirectly uses data from an AI prediction model from Google to identify flood-prone areas. When the water rises above a critical threshold, a trigger is activated, and from there, payments can be sent out. Those affected take the opportunity to stock up on food and other essentials while they can.

So what about fraud? Well, there's an audit team to track transfers and a PIN number and complimentary phone call to check that who’s receiving the money is the correct person. It's not perfect, as fraud still happens. According to GiveDirectly, losses from fraud are estimated to be just under 1% annually, and the fraud happens through bribes, SIM swapping, and imposter recipients.

One percent is about $150,000 of the $150 million given out. That is lower than other forms of aid which lose about 5% per year. But unlike other forms of aid, mobile money can be monitored and tracked similar to credit card companies. But despite that, the benefits of the system are there for all to see.

The cool thing is that you can help in the next effort through GiveDirectly by donating at this link giveirectly.org/coldfusion, but I'll tell you more about it later in the episode. Now let's get onto the economics. Surely just giving people cash and letting them do whatever they want is going to end in disaster, is it not?

So you’d think that giving people stuff or skills to help themselves would be the best way to help them. But this isn’t actually the case. It turns out that giving people money directly is much more effective. It sounds crazy, as we've all heard the saying, “give a man a fish and he can eat for a day, but teach a man to fish and he can eat for life.”

But the data tells us something different. If the fish in this case is money, he can indeed eat for life. But it depends on how this is done. Research from the World Bank shows that traditional charities or NGOs don't actually help people get out of poverty that often. It's a rate of about 0.3%. Actually, the most common way that people get out of poverty is via doing it themselves.

That is by finding a job, starting a business, getting additional income, or migration. The rate of these factors helping someone leave poverty is over 75%. Giving cash directly helps to this end. This isn't something that I would expect or even something that I've ever heard of, but it makes sense when you think about it.

We are not having the confidence of giving cash to people. Most African communities know much better than a foreign government does what their real needs are. If you imagine yourself in a very poor community, every house has a different need. One person might need to get their kids back into school. Their neighbor might need to fix their roof. Somebody else might need to put some food on the table.

And giving cash to people is the most efficient and effective way of delivering support. And it gives them dignity, gives them choice, and lets them be in charge of the decisions in their own lives. In Kenya, a lump sum injection of $500 resulted in a 65% revenue increase in village businesses, 20% more businesses, a 141% increase in annual income from self-employment, a decrease in depression, 14% better primary school outcomes, and a 4% decrease in alcohol consumption.

And these were measured a full two years after the original cash injection. In a village in Rwanda, similar positive outcomes were seen with a $1,000 cash injection. An interesting side effect was that those within the community keep tabs on each other and keep each other accountable for how they spent the money. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity; you know, don’t waste it.

And that's how most of the communities think about the investments that GiveDirectly places in their hands. And I think to some extent there's also like community peer pressure to be like, you got your investment, what did you do with it? All your neighbors are also getting the same investment.

So you can see them buying livestock, you can see them putting up a new roof, you can see them taking your children to school. You're unlikely to waste your transfer as well because you will be left behind. So what we've seen is that by guaranteeing people a basic income, they can take on investments or business ideas that they wouldn't have tried before.

We've seen school attendance going up, we've seen generally food security going up, and I think what was also interesting is seeing child mortality also going down. I think that was unexpected but very encouraging to see that a basic income also has really positive effects on child mortality. Generally, the communities are healthier and happier.

You know, I think that's something that has also been interesting to see. This all makes perfect sense, even if it's somehow a little unintuitive. But how do we know that these numbers are statistically and scientifically sound?

Well, in 2019, three economists, Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo, and Michael Kremer, won a Nobel Prize for finding out a method to carry out randomized controlled trials and field experiments on poverty relief. It turned around the notion that giving physical things or teaching skills was the best way to help people. What the results show is that this isn't necessarily the best way to help people in poorer regions.

It turns out that we could be thinking about poverty and aid the wrong way this whole time. I set off to visit the project and as you can imagine, I received an amazing 100-page document full of descriptions of all the smart stuff that we thought we were doing.

And I arrive at the project and the result was literally two holes in the ground with brick walls around them and five red plastic buckets. $2,000 maximum impact for a $40,000 project. And I said to people, why did you not just give $2,000 to the head teacher and let the head teacher buy those buckets? And the answer was, we were worried that if we didn't do all our paperwork and studies and needs assessments and consultations, the project would go wrong and he would steal the money.

And my response was, we stole the money. We could have done 20 times the number of schools; we stole the money. And I realized that because I went out to see a completely different project. I went to Rwanda, to the Rwanda-Burundi borders three years later, and I saw a project where an NGO had turned up on the ground and instead of doing capacity building, instead of teaching people how to fish, they were turning up in village houses and saying here is $900 in cash. This is your money; you can do with it what you like.

But the results were absolutely staggering. This community had completely transformed the amount of electricity in the community. Almost everybody was ending up with roofs, almost everybody had health insurance, and there was a fantastic increase in the number of children in school. The whole place just felt better, happier. Honestly, in my entire life in international development, I'd never seen anything like this village.

Abhijit Banerjee, one of the researchers, comments, “It's striking how little evidence there is that when you give people an unexpected bunch of cash, they go out and buy booze or something else bad for them.” This fear that cash will somehow be misused is really extraordinarily overemphasized. They seem to spend it in perfectly sensible ways.

In lower-income countries, a relatively small amount of money can go a long way. There are some concerns about inflation, though. But so far the studies conducted show that free money doesn't cause inflation in lower-income countries. In 2014, the non-profit GiveDirectly and research partners carried out a large study. The aim was to see how a large lump sum of payments of $1,000 could help rural communities in Kenya.

653 randomized villages were chosen. 10,500 poor households were selected. This amounted to 15% of the local GDP, a relatively huge amount. But wait a second. Doesn’t giving money to people just push up the demand for goods and services, contributing to price inflation? Well, not so fast, because after 2.5 years, researchers found that the average price inflation was just 0.1%.

So MMT and UBI advocates would be rejoicing, but the fact of the matter is that a blanket UBI may not always work. Contrast GiveDirectly's work with pandemic relief efforts. The Federal Reserve themselves admit that COVID stimulus contributed to inflation in multiple countries. The reasons for why this happened are complex. But at the end of the day, inflation as a consequence depends on where the cash is given out, how exactly the cash is given out, and how much slack there is in the local economy.

Even though it's better than blowing money on traditional charity, GiveDirectly still looks for inflationary risks where they're re-scaling. But according to the study, the cash transfers had a multiplier effect. This meant that for every dollar of cash input, $0.50 was generated in the form of spending or income for the larger economy. Interestingly, both who received the funds and those who didn't benefited.

In the last decade, there's been a growing body of evidence to suggest that cash improves the lives of the poorest among us more than if that same amount was given in the form of traditional aid programs or goods. If their small local businesses could receive money in a frictionless way, it could do wonders.

So in conclusion, for many, multiple decades, there have been various efforts of charity, novel technologies, and aid from the west to the poorer nations of the world. Ideas that come to mind are one laptop per child, the socket ball, or the play pump. These all failed to make a lasting change.

And it's ironic because what turned out to be one of the most effective solutions was an innovation from Africa itself: mobile money. We often forget how others live, lives without secure food, shelter, and education. A life without comfort, the Internet, or leisure. A life just about surviving some novel technology or a cryptocurrency isn't going to work.

But with just a basic phone and some well-designed financial targeting, this way of living could be a thing of the past for so many. To wrap things off, a group of educational creators and I are getting together to raise some funds. If you want to donate to a village in need and ensure your money goes to them in the best and most efficient way possible, you can visit the URL giveirectly.org/coldfusion. Your donations will be distributed via mobile money in a village in central Kenya. Each family will receive $250.

It's an opportunity to change the lives of 164 families. So I hope you enjoyed that look at a very unconventional but effective way that dumb phones are helping those in need escape poverty. Let me know your thoughts in the comments section below.

And that's about it from me. My name is Degogo, and you've been watching Cold Fusion, and I'll catch you again soon for the next episode. Cheers, guys. Have a good one.