[governance] Some Help Needed in Developing CS Statement for OECD Ministerial

[Michael Gurstein]

Hello colleagues:

I've agreed to pull together a section on "Discrimination in the Information
Economy" for the CS statement to the OECD Ministerial in Seoul in June.

I've done up several very general statements as placeholders but I know that
there are individuals on this list with specific expertise in these areas
and I would very much appreciate if they could redo what I've done and as
well add appropriate referencing to previous CS documents, standards,
appropriate websites etc.

If people could send their comments to me individually indicating which
numbered section they are referring to, I'll compile them and recirculate
them.  I've agreed to do a final by Monday at the latest so speed is of the
essence. (This is a bit of a last minute job so I'm not sure how much debate
on wording will actually be possible so please if comments could be made as
"generic" from a CS perspective as possible that would be great.


Among the barriers to equitable participation are: 

1.physical disability which interferes with the opportunity to make use of
the input/output devices through which the digital platform is access. Such
disabilities might include visual disabilities (the inability to read or
interpret messages on a screen) as for example arising from blindness,
colour blindness or other forms of visual impairment. There are a variety of
well recognized standards for the design of web interfaces which enable
utilization of these sites by those with visual disabilities but these
standards are for the most part voluntary and frequently are ignored or
overlooked. The enforcement of these standards particularly in government
sites or site which are supportive of public participation, provide public
services, or are overall in the realm of "public activities" should become
mandatory and means for their enforcement should be developed. 


2.levels of literacy may be required by certain digitally enabled activities
which act as discriminants for those with lower levels of education,
cognitive abilities or limited facility with the language being used on the
site. Similarly as with visual disabilities standards exist for determining
the level of literacy required for utilization of specific sites and these
should be formally adopted and means developed for their enforcement
particularly in those sites necessary for social, political and economic
functioning in the Information Society 



3.differential access to the use of the Internet because of barriers of cost
of access (Internet access costs or costs of the input/output devices
themselves (personal computers for example). Many of those currently not
using the Internet (as understood by means of the concept of the "Digital
Divide") are not doing so because of the cost of this service. Ensuring that
publicly accessible services at no or nominal cost is a minimum basis for
ensuring equitable participation in the Information Society.

 

4.related to the financial barrier of access may be the barriers of physical
disability in limiting access to places where no or minimal cost Internet
access may be available. Many of those with physical disabilities also have
very low incomes so the opportunity to use the Internet (or other ICTs) may
only come through public Internet access points (PIAPs). If these PIAPs are
themselves not accessible because of physical barriers (as for example not
being wheel chair accessible), then the opportunity to participate is doubly
restricted. 



5.further, many of those also who do not make use of the Internet may not be
doing so because of a lack of knowledge or personal confidence with respect
to the means for making such use. This would be particularly the case for
the elderly and those with lower levels of education. The barrier of
confidence or skill with respect to Internet use may be overcome through the
availability of training or support services in the context of the PIAPs and
thus publicly supported means for providing this training (it is frequently
done through support of volunteers or student interns) is a further means
for ensuring that discriminatory barriers do not exist for Internet
participation. 



6. Equitable gender access to ICT has been linked to an increase in overall
social equality for women; however, within numerous global
contexts-including those of Developed Countries-gender disparities in access
to ICT persist, and women predominate the lower-wage sectors of the
information economy. Women also are under-represented in ICT decision-making
capacities. Gender is one of many factors that determine the impact of ICT
on women's lives. Ethnicity, religion, age, physical ability, and
socio-economic status also figure into the degrees of inclusion and
exclusion that differentiate regions and communities. Key to overcoming the
barriers, shortcomings and misconceptions that exacerbate gender
inequalities in ICT are the comprehensive education of all persons
regardless of gender, the promotion of equal access for women to scientific
and technological arenas, the provision of opportunities for lifelong
learning in ICT, and the augmentation of women's roles in ICT
decision-making. Governments should enable equal access and opportunity for
all via policies and programs as well as collaborate more broadly with the
private sector and civil society to change social attitudes, cultural
ideologies, and stereotypes that limit women's participation in the digital
economy. 



7. in many circumstances there are additional difficulties (and costs) in
obtaining access to the means for participation in the digital economy by
those living in remote, rural, or low-income areas. The cost of the
provision of enhanced (broadband for example) infrastructures in such areas
may lead to gaps in access in these areas if the service provision is only
left to market considerations. In order to ensure that there is no
discrimination or additional barriers to participation on the part of rural
and remote residents it may be necessary for public authorities to intervene
to find means to balance costs as between locales. 


8. Individuals' relationship with access providers or their business
partners may also be a source for discrimination against particular users.
Vertical integration of access provision with other products, content, and
services may lead access providers to engage in tying behaviors, such as
blocking or degrading competitors' services. Competition and communications
authorities should act to prevent such behavior.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080305/e79de8aa/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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