[governance] WSIS, ICT4D, the IGF and other...

[Garth Graham]

While I too eagerly await the withering away of the state, the  
problem is how to discuss a phase change without being on the other  
side of it.  In fact, governments do still believe that governance is  
the province of governments.  "They" haven't yet quite "got it" that,  
in self-organizing systems, the rules governing relationship are  
internal to each element of the system.  They are not externally  
imposed, except in the sense that the system overall learns its way  
forward according to its circumstances.

The first sentence of my original draft of an e-governance definition  
was actually borrowed from a Canadian International Development  
Agency (CIDA) web site that defines "governance" in the context of  
development policy as follows:

“CIDA considers democratic governance essential for poverty reduction  
and long-term sustainable development.  The Agency’s work in this  
area aims to make states more effective in tackling poverty by  
enhancing the degree to which all people, particularly the poor and  
the marginalized, can influence policy and improve their livelihoods."

CIDA apparently does not have a working definition of e-governance,  
in spite of support for e-governance capacity building projects.  In  
a way, and as you will no doubt recall, this mirrors the total  
absence of a definition of the "Information Society" in the World  
Summit on the "Information Society."

I think I'd like to leave that "perception of governments" in the  
definition, at least for a little while longer.  Pandering to that  
misperception just might create a political climate in which the  
significance of the phase change and its impact on our perceptions of  
how society is structured can actually be discussed.

GG

On 9-Mar-08, at 10:48 AM, Michael Gurstein wrote:

> I'm not sure why the "perception of governments" should be a  
> crucial element
> of the definition which I would rephrase as:
>
> "E-governance is the uses of ICTs TO MODIFY the exercise of power  
> so that
> all people,  particularly the poor and marginalized, can  
> PARTICIPATE IN policy,
> improve their livelihoods and gain a SHARED voice in the public
> decision making process.  E-governance changes behavior in relation
> to power in the direction of open and collaborative communities of
> interaction."
>
> I was just at a meeting where the Government of Ontario (Canada) is  
> in the
> process of kicking off a major process to develop a "Provincial  
> Broadband
> Strategy"... The issue of whether the process would be  
> "consultative" or
> "participatory" took up a fair amount of the discussion time.  It  
> was clear
> that the position of all of those not being governmental  
> representatives was
> towards "participatory" while the government folks didn't seem to  
> have ever
> considered anything other than a (top-down) "consultative" process...
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Garth Graham [mailto:garth.graham at telus.net]
> Sent: March 9, 2008 9:14 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Michael Gurstein
> Subject: Re: [governance] WSIS, ICT4D, the IGF and other...
>
>
> My thanks for your disagreement, Michael, because, of course, I agree
> with it.  We're both headed toward the same definition of e-
> governance as, I think, the second sentence of the definition
> reveals.  I suspect my close association with national strategies for
> the uses of ICTs for development in several counties made me overly
> sensitive to a government view in that first attempt at a working
> definition.  After all, the notion that we all now face distributed
> collaborative governance is quite shocking to some.  But you are
> right.  We can't get into the conversation unless the risk of making
> the offensive point about shared power is taken.  With your
> observation in hand, I can see edits to improve the first sentence so
> that point begins to clarify, as follows:
>
> "E-governance is the uses of ICTs TO MODIFY the exercise of power AS
> IT IS PERCEIVED by various levels of government so that all people,
> particularly the poor and marginalized, can PARTICIPATE IN policy,
> improve their livelihoods and gain a SHARED voice in the public
> decision making process.  E-governance changes behavior in relation
> to power in the direction of open and collaborative communities of
> interaction."
>
> GG
>
> On 8-Mar-08, at 8:54 AM, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>> Let me make a few other comments interspersed within an edited
>> version of your note...
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Garth Graham [mailto:garth.graham at telus.net]
>> Sent: March 3, 2008 9:41 AM
>> To: governance
>> Cc: Michael Gurstein; Ronda Hauben
>> Subject: Re: [governance] WSIS, ICT4D, the IGF and other...
>>
>> ...... "E-governance is the uses of ICTs in the exercise of power
>> by various levels of government so that all people, particularly  
>> the poor and
>> marginalized, can influence policy, improve their livelihoods and
>> gain a greater voice in the public decision making process.  E-
>> governance changes behavior in relation to power in the direction of
>> open and collaborative communities of interaction."
>>
>> I DON'T AGREE WITH THIS GARTH AS E-GOVERNANCE FOR ME IS NOT ABOUT  
>> GOVERNMENTS SHARING WITH CITIZENS THE OPPORTUNITY TO  
>> "INFLUENCE" (I.E. TOP DOWN) BUT RATHER CITIZENS DIRECTLY SHARING  
>> (VIA ICTS) IN THE  PROCESS OF GOVERNANCE WITH EXISTING  
>> GOVERNMENTAL BODIES HOWEVER THAT MIGHT BE  ORGANIZED AND WHATEVER  
>> THE RELATIONSHIP MIGHT BE OF THIS WITH EXISTING
>> REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURES.
>>
>

____________________________________________________________
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