[governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme

[Milton L Mueller]

Parminder:
I wrote my dissertation on universal service policy as it evolved in the
US, and have been engaged in U.S. policy debates around that topic since
1990. So I am fully aware of the implications of various phrasings,
which is why I don't want to go down the road of calling for "ensuring
universal access to the Internet." Such a call could be construed, and
almost certainly would be construed by some, as a call for the kind of
classical subsidy schemes that rationalized telephone monopolies and in
many instances actually hindered the expansion of new networks and
services by creating a social compact to restrict service delivery to a
privileged monopoly subject to universal service obligations. I am
unwilling to support anything that would even hint at perpetuating or
reproducing that old model. 

Of course, who is against having universal access to the Internet? the
issue is how you get there. Fact is, access is growing very fast, almost
everywhere where there is peace and a relatively open market. If you
want to accelerate that process, you'd better have some solid ideas how,
and also make sure that your proposals don't disrupt or retard the
growth already taking place. Incidentally, the MOST important variable
affecting telecom access is GDP, so the best way to promote
(more-)universal access is to foster economic growth and greater wealth.
So why not just call for "ensuring universal access to wealth"?

Another problem is, it's not clear what institutional mechanisms are
available to finance the "ensuring" of universal access at the global
level, nor is it clear what levels of access we are talking about, nor
is it clear what other budget items get lost to finance that. Absent
those institutional specifics, I feel that it is irresponsible to call
for a goal of that sort. We've had this discussion before: you call
things "rights" that I call "policies," and by calling them "rights"
imho you seem to (verbally) exempt yourself from the discipline of
putting them into the context of competing social priorities, and
basically assume away the budget constraint that inherently and
inescapably limits what govt policies can do.  

So now we are in the ideological argument...and the statement to the
Secretariat...?

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 11:25 AM
> To: Milton L Mueller; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme
> 
> 
> 
> Milton
> 
> > We can indeed have a rich discussion of what we mean by "rights" and
> > what we mean by "universalization" but in the immediate 
> time frame, such
> > a debate is unlikely to be conclusive.
> 
> If you read my proposal you will see that I am not asking that we
> communicate that the suggested topic be universalisation (and 
> there is no
> mention of rights anywhere either). 
> 
> I am agreeing that there is some difference of views on 
> 'universalization of
> the internet' term. So I proposed 'ensuring universal access to the
> Internet' instead of 'reaching the next billion' about which a lot of
> discussion did take place. I saw no one specifically insisting that
> 'reaching the next billion' should be retained (I may be 
> corrected on this).
> We agree that 'internet for all' is a good overall theme 
> (hopefully). And
> under it the relevant theme from a policy point of view, and 
> not a business
> strategy point of view, is 'ensuring universal access to the Internet'
> since, as I argued, nearly all countries, including the US I 
> think, have
> some form of universal access policies...
> 
> Parminder 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
> > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 8:38 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
> > Subject: RE: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] 
> programme
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> > >
> > > However, I am not sure how the universal access part is being
> > > dismissed so easily, and offhand, even though there was much
> > > discussion on this issue on
> > > the list, a little earlier..
> > 
> > Sorry if my comment seemed so short, it was due to time 
> limitations. I
> > was not even able to participate in the dicsussion on 
> "universalization"
> > for the same reason.
> > 
> > We can indeed have a rich discussion of what we mean by "rights" and
> > what we mean by "universalization" but in the immediate 
> time frame, such
> > a debate is unlikely to be conclusive. My understanding was 
> that that
> > you were asking for quick advice on a statement to the 
> Secretariat. For
> > that purpose, it seemed sufficient to simply express support or
> > opposition to the two parts of the statement.
> > 
> > Milton Mueller
> > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> > XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
> > ------------------------------
> > Internet Governance Project:
> > http://internetgovernance.org
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance