[bestbits] Global Policy Initiatives on Access and Digital Inclusion

[parminder]

Responses are already complied question wise at 
http://unctad.org/en/pages/MeetingDetails.aspx?meetingid=396

But it seems there are many responses missing and they are now putting 
them in...



On Saturday 12 October 2013 01:40 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
> Dear all,
> I'm forwarding an e-mail thread between Michael Gurstein and me (with 
> Michael's permission) on the topic of policy actions at the global 
> level on access and digital inclusion.  I'd like to see what ideas 
> folks on this list have.
>
> I'm pleased that the WGEC questionnaire included question # 15:
>
> *15. What are the international internet-related public policy issues 
> that are of special relevance to developing countries?
> *
> as also
> *16. What are the key issues to be addressed to promote the 
> affordability of the Internet, in particular in developing countries 
> and least developed countries?*
> **12. What actions are needed to promote effective participation of 
> all marginalised people in the global information society?*
> *
> Where are the public's responses to these available?  I think it would 
> be very useful to compile all the answers under each question, as that 
> will make it easy to grep.
>
> Cheers,
> Pranesh
>
> ======
>
>
> *Pranesh Prakash <mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>**
> **16/12/12**
> *
> Dear Michael,
> You have written that we should start focussing on "digital
> inclusion/Internet access and use, distribution of the economic benefits
> of the Internet, local languages and cultures and so on".
>
> I didn't get a chance to ask you this when we met: Would you have ideas
> on what concrete measures can be pursued?
>
> Regards,
> Pranesh
>
> *
> **Michael Gurstein <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>**
> **16/12/12*
>
> Hi Pranesh,
>
> I'ld be delighted but I need a bit more background/context for your
> question... Are you asking in the context of CS consultation/advocacy,
> government policy, professional programming?
>
> M
>
> *Pranesh Prakash <mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>**
> **1 January**
> *
>
> In terms of governmental policy and in terms of what concrete measures
> you believe civil society should be advocating for.
>
> As in, would it take the form of a digital solidarity fund? And/or
> governmental policy mandate on local language support on devices? 
> And/or...
>
> *Michael Gurstein <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>*
> 1 January
>
>
> Okay...
>
> In terms of governmental policy it really depends on the national 
> context...
> and that to a considerable degree is evolving as new technologies 
> emerge and
> as the type and cost of connectivity is also evolving...
>
> In India I think the policy has to be towards some sort of right of
> universal access and use... Not necessarily individual access but some 
> sort
> of access at least at the village level--which could be through mobiles or
> fixed line connections. The issue with mobiles may be cost either of the
> device or of the connection particularly in very poor areas--but by making
> it a "right" it means that say some form of access is made available 
> at the
> Panchyat level.  But I also think you need to include "use" which 
> means that
> the access is available in local languages and the various apps that might
> be of most value are available in a form that is usable at the village 
> level
> (including through training someone at the village level to facilitate the
> use of those applications as  for example e-gov applications.
>
> At the CS level globally I think (now) that the direction should be 
> towards
> a global Internet in the public interest... Some sort of global framework
> (say like the Law of the Sea) which recognizes that the Internet is not
> simply a collection of wires ("pipes") but is rather a global framework of
> communications that should be developed in the interests of all. Precisely
> what that looks like or how it could be developed I have no idea but 
> having
> an Internet at the basic infrastructure of global communications which is
> essentially owne/controlled by certain national or corporate interests
> should be of concern to us all.
>
> I'm not sure that that is as "concrete" as you are asking for, but I think
> the more concrete measures flow rather directly from these higher order
> principles/policies.
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> M
>
>
> *Pranesh Prakash <mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>**
> **1 January*
>
>
> In India's NTP'11, para IV.1.2 states:
> >
> > "To recognise telecom, including broadband connectivity as a basic 
> necessity like education and health and work towards 'Right to 
> Broadband'".
>
>
> Further, there's a universal service obligation fund too.  The document
> continues:
>
> >
> > 1.3. To lay special emphasis on providing reliable and affordable 
> broadband access to rural and remote areas by appropriate combination 
> of optical fibre, wireless, VSAT and other technologies. Optical fibre 
> network will be initially laid up to the village panchayat level by 
> funding from the Universal Service Obligation Fund (USOF). Extension 
> of optical fibre connectivity from village panchayats to be taken up 
> progressively to all villages and habitations. Access to this Optical 
> Fibre Network will be open, non-discriminatory and technology neutral.
> >
> > 1.4. Provide appropriate incentives for rural rollout.
>
>
> I'm actually looking for less at the level of principles and objectives
> (e.g., universal service) and more at the level of policy-based action
> items (e.g., a universal service obligation fund that aims to create an
> incentive-based mechanism to achieve universal service instead of just
> leaving it to market forces).
>
> Essentially, I'm not looking for the *what should we be aiming for* /
> *where should we be heading*, but *how do we get that which we are
> aiming for* + *what concrete steps can we take to get where we are
> heading*.  So I'm looking less for "local languages should be promoted",
> and more for "these are the concrete steps the government can take to
> promote local languages".
>
> I don't see many, if any at all, useful policy-based action items coming
> out from civil society.
>
> ~ Pranesh
>
>
> *Michael Gurstein <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>**
> **2 January*
>
>
> Hi Pranesh,
>
> I'm not sure that you are asking the right question...  The specific
> activities re: connectivity etc. will be quite specific to individual
> locations/regions etc. and will depend on local resources, 
> capabilities and
> so on.  This local knowledge/program identification is almost 
> certainly best
> left to local NGO's to develop, what can be done at a policy level is to
> enable the local NGO's to do their work -- with appropriate funding, 
> back up
> , support, policy enablement and so on.  (BTW, that isn't "civil 
> societies"
> usual role--they are generally acting as advocates while NGO's do the
> implementation...
>
> If you are looking to ideas on how to proceed locally there are lists of
> case studies/best practices in various places (I think a big one is being
> compiled by UN ECOSOC for WSIS, but unless those are filtered through 
> local
> experience my feeling is that they are rather useless.
>
>  Best,
>
> M
>
>
> *Pranesh Prakash <mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>**
> **2 January*
>
>
> Then you wouldn't say there is anything we can advocate for at the 
> global level to tackle access issues other than at the level of 
> normative but unenforceable rights or principles?
>
>
> *Michael Gurstein <mailto:gurstein at gmail.com>**
> **2 January*
>
>
> Hi Pranesh,
>
> I work a lot with indigenous peoples in various parts of the world and 
> have tried to get them involved in global level initiatives... They 
> have basically no interest as there is nothing at the global level 
> that will have an immediate impact on their local circumstances.
>
> What does have an impact, but is rather more indirect are what you 
> call "unenforceable rights or principles"... things like global norms 
> around broadband deployment, recognition of indigenous rights, 
> inclusion of indigenous peoples into broad initiatives like the 
> Broadband Task Force that sort of thing... Recognition of them in 
> those forums means that they then have more leverage in their national 
> contexts and can make direct programme/policy recommendations/advocacy 
> initiatives with some sort of global backing--they can call their 
> national governments to account for commitments made, even " 
> unenforceable rights or principles" (the only kind of commitments that 
> national governments are likely to make at the global level...
>
> The programs/policies that are linked to these are dramatically 
> different from country to country--from Indigenous people in Canada 
> linking their national treaties to global agreements, to tribal 
> peoples in India or Bangladesh looking to the UNDHR as their leverage 
> point for gaining access to services, to countries in Latin America 
> taking leadership in global environmental initiatives on behalf of 
> Pachen Mama...
>
> But maybe I'm misunderstanding your point, give me some examples of 
> the kind of initiatives you think might be worthwhile presenting at 
> the global level?
>
> M
>
>
> *Pranesh Prakash <mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>**
> **Tuesday*
>
> A mail that was stuck in my 'Drafts' folder since January 3!  I think it
> might be useful to throw open this question to the Best Bits list.
> Would you mind if I forward this thread there?
>
> ====
> Dear Michael,
> If *I* knew what we should be doing, I wouldn't be quizzing you like
> this. :)
>
> It's not like there haven't been global policy efforts to improve
> access.  There's the Digital Solidarity Fund created as part of WSIS.
> From what I've been given to understand, it was mired in corruption, and
> that ultimately led to its failure.  Universal Service Obligation Funds
> are one of those best practices things that various countries have
> adopted, but which — according to people who know much more about this
> than I do — are having precious little effect in most countries. (There
> might of course be counter-examples.)
>
> I think pushing for shared spectrum through the ITU is one part of the
> solution.  If in the future we manage to get Internet to people,
> wireless (whether over phone or WiFi or WiMax or anything else) has got
> to be the way to go, since wired connections can't possibly provide
> sufficient coverage.  This means that spectrum allocation rules, etc.,
> are among the more important policy changes we could be targetting.
>
> But apart from that, my current thinking is that most access-enabling
> policies have to be passed at the national level.  There doesn't seem to
> be too much (apart from the examples I've cited above) that can be done
> at the global level save for what-might-be-perceived-as platitudinous
> statements of our desire for universal access.
>
> Regards,
> Pranesh
>
>
> -- 
> Pranesh Prakash
> Policy Director
> Centre for Internet and Society
> T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
> PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash
> -------------------+
> Postgraduate Associate & Access to Knowledge Fellow
> Information Society Project, Yale Law School
> T: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131012/bd78216c/attachment.htm>