IGF 2008: Event Report on Workshop No.15
Delivering universal access and public value of the Internet:
a goal of national information policy
Wednesday 3 December, 11:30 to 13:00, Room 7, Hyderabad, India
The workshop discussed the following questions:
1. What is the public value of the Internet?
What are the key public value elements of the Internet
which improve the quality of our lives?
2. Which services express or create them?
3. How can the users and citizens have access to and make
most effective use of these services?
4. What are good – and maybe also bad – concrete examples
of such elements of a public value of the internet?
Key speakers and presentations at the workshop:
· Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General, Council of Europe (Video Message)
· Haiyan Qian, Acting Director, Division for Public Administration and Development Management, UNDESA
· Haja Sheriff, Business Development Director, Partnership of Technology Access, Microsoft, India
· Frédéric Riehl, Vice-Director, Federal Office of Communications (OFCOM), Switzerland
· Jonathan Charles, Foreign Consultant, World Affairs Unit, BBC, United Kingdom
· Jagdish Laddha, Tata Consultancy Services, India
Moderator: Thomas Schneider, Information Society Coordinator, OFCOM, Switzerland
Following 5 key speaker presentations there was a very intense interactive discussion about the publilc value of the internet and access as a prerequisite to it.
Ad question 1:
There was a strong view that the internet has a public value. The internet has a great potential for improving the people’s life in all aspects: economical, social and also political. It can enhance peoples knowledge, improve people’s health, social cohesion, create new business opportunities, improve the quality and transparency of government services as well as private services and it can improve democratic participation and participation of people with disabilities in society in general. A key public value of the internet to society is also its interactivity. The internet allows for an extent of interaction between all stakeholders that has never been here before.
In the discussion, the internet has been regarded as an integral part of human activity. Many participants claimed that access to the internet should be regarded as equally fundamental as access to Television and Radio. Any denial of access to the internet was regarded as impediment to the fundamental right to freedom of information and expression.
Several references were made to the Council of Europe’s respectable work in the field of the public value of the internet and in particular to its contributions to the IGF process.
Ad question 2:
Examples of services that create or express a public value have been named and discussed, such as: better and more people-oriented government services, access to (quality) information through libraries, archives but also through public service media, the provision of community access point that provide people with information and new ways to create jobs.
Many of these services are provided by public authorities or at least funded by public authorities. Private sector services can also provide a public value. Sometimes civil society and community based services can have an even higher public value than the respective public service, because they tend to be more people-oriented and bottom-up driven.
Ad question 3:
Access remains a fundamental prerequisite for people to benefit from these services: Access to internet is still a great challenge, especially to developing country. A lot of aspects of access were discussed such as access to infrastructure in developing countries, access for disabled people and other disadvantaged groups, the importance of access to services in the people’s native language, etc. The relevance of these aspects vary from country to country.
Affordability of access, hardware and services is also a prerequisite for people to benefit from the public value. The falling of mobile phone and mobile service prices e.g. has had a big influence in the success of mobile services in developing countries.
The services (be it from governments or private sector) have to be driven by the needs of the users. E-Strategies and E-services of governments are only effective if they take into account the users’ needs and take the users’ feedback seriously.
Governments have to pay attention to the digital divide in a country
Governments – in cooperation with other stakeholders need to create a positive environment and help people to develop trust and confidence in the use of the internet services. Otherwise users will hesitate to make best use of the services. Governments have to take the lead in providing services that are transparent and accountable to their citizens.
Empowerment and training of the users is also a necessary prerequisite.
There was also a rich discussion on the risks and opportunities of private public partnerships. There is a great potential in PPPs in order to mobilize business resources to create public value through business services creating a value for the general public, e.g. in the field of education and empowerment. But there are also challenges with regard to PPPs. Some people expressed concerns that PPPs can foster private monopolies and enhance the dependence of countries on big ICT companies. PPPs should take into account the relevance, affordability, accessibility and sustainability of the services they provide.
Some participants claimed that governments should take care that the rights of PPP services remain in public hands. Some also had the view that public services and information should not be offered only via proprietary but also via open source.
Many participants also expressed that there should be a regulation of standards that are relevant for having access to the internet: “you can have access without standards and you can not have standards without regulation”.
Participants requested that developed countries would apply the same quality and regulatory standards to their international aid projects that they apply to projects in their own countries.
Ad 4. Some examples that were discussed:
- Universal Telecommunication Service including broadband in Switzerland
- PPP with Microsoft and the Government of Guatemala in empowering teachers and providing hardware for them
- BBC online communities to promote e-inclusion of older people and other disadvantaged groups
- Tata portals and telecenter initiatives that help to improve access to the internet and create new jobs and business models
- Accessibility Standards for websites accessible to disabled people based on W3C standards are compulsory for all public federal websites in Switzerland. Application of these standards is also promoted for local public authorities and private services
- BBC i-Player allows online access to all broadcasted TV content
Background Information about the workshop:
Internet governance: ex post or ex ante? Just assigned names and numbers or something more? Should we wait and see how Internet will develop, and then act to eliminate deficiencies and maximize the individual and public benefits it can deliver, or can we be wise before the event? Moreover, should we allow events that seriously hamper or block access to the Internet for a large number of users over a significant period of time.
These are some of the issues to be discussed during this workshop. We rely on the Internet as an essential tool for their everyday activities (communication, information, knowledge, commercial transactions). The Internet and other ICTs can deliver even more public value when they contribute to development and poverty reduction (as a contribution to the Milennium Development Goals). Ultimately, they can enhance the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The question therefore becomes: how can Internet governance ensure and/or facilitate the delivery of the tools and services for our everyday activities which improve our basic quality of life? What role for governments, the private sector and civil society, and what public-private partnerships can be struck? Are current arrangements for Internet governance adequate to this task? Another question is: can this, as well as the educational and cultural role of the Internet (including its multilingualism and multiculturalism) be guaranteed by exclusively commercial use of the Internet?
National information policies including a comprehensive national and local strategy designed both to ensure universal access to the Internet (inter alia by promoting information literacy) needs to be developed and implemented, in particular in areas with a low communication and information infrastructure, and to make sure that it delivers full public value. Information policy should also provide for redressing market failure, where market forces are unable to satisfy all legitimate needs, both in terms of infrastructure and of the range and quality of available content.
The workshop will also cover, among other things, the integration of ICTs into education and promoting media and information literacy and training in formal and non-formal education sectors for children and adults.