  What
is ICT policy?
Citizen
involvement in ICT policy
Information and communication are integral to human society.
In many cultures today, information retrieval and presentation
– the recording of wisdom and history – is still
done with the use of speech, drama, painting, song or dance.
The use of writing changed this enormously, and the invention
of the printing press allowed communication on a massive scale,
through newspapers and magazines. More recent technological
innovations increased further the reach and speed of communication,
culminating, for now, with digital technology. These new ICTs
can be grouped into three categories:
Information technology uses computers,
which have become indispensable in modern societies to process
data and save time and effort
Telecommunications technologies include
telephones (with fax) and the broadcasting of radio and television,
often through satellites
Networking technologies, of which the
best known is the internet, but which has extended to mobile
phone technology, Voice Over IP telephony (VOIP), satellite
communications, and other forms of communication that are still
in their infancy.
These new technologies have become central
to contemporary societies. Whether you are talking on the phone,
sending an email, going to the bank, using a library, listening
to sports coverage on the radio, watching the news on TV, working
in an office or in the field, going to the doctor, driving a
car or catching a plane, you are using ICTs.
Convergence
The new ICTs do not operate in isolation from one another. The
advantages and reach of the internet make it a focal point for
the use of new technologies. Its decentralised, widely-distributed,
packet-based mode of transporting information makes it an efficient,
cheap and flexible means of communication, which facilitates
interrelationship with other technologies. So, for example,
international telephone calls are increasingly made through
the internet’s network of networks, and television and
radio are broadcast via the internet. Today’s Local Area
Networks must be connected to the internet and secure copies
of data (backups) are now made through the internet rather than
onto a local drive. Software, music and video can be rented
through the internet, sometimes without even requiring a copy
on the local computer. The internet is accessible through mobile
phone networks, which use it to present content to the user,
and digital movies will be soon distributed through the internet
to cinemas. The list is long and getting longer by the day.
Not only are new technologies converging
in this way, the areas where they are applied are also becoming
interrelated. Telecommunications are firmly based on computer
technology, and are fundamentally dependent on the internet.
For example, the software that makes computers so useful is
now often created by a team of programmers who may live and
work in different countries, but can collaborate and communicate
via the internet. Telephone companies are increasingly using
VOIP to reduce their international communications costs. Consumer
commodities too are becoming dependent on the internet. This
is especially true of electronic devices and appliances, such
as audio and DVD recorders and players, or refrigerators.
This convergence happens not only at a technological
level, where everything is in bits (binary digital form) and
the internet is the main way of moving this information from
place to place, but also at the level of industry. These days,
a large internet service provider will probably also be linked
to a telecommunications infrastructure company, and have subsidiaries
that produce software or own an internet search engine. The
important media multinationals are buying heavily into internet
technology as they see it as the physical and conceptual infrastructure
for media in the future. This has led to a situation where telecommunication
giants are also multimedia giants with huge investments in internet
technologies. The same company that broadcasts your favourite
TV programme may also be the one that allows you to access the
internet, or pro-vides your ISP with its connection to the rest
of the internet. The movie you watch at your local cinema may
well be produced by a media multinational that owns your local
newspaper and also a telephone company that runs a main internet
portal.
If technology and industry are coming together
around the internet, governments that decide policy and regulate
industry must recognise this fact and adapt their policy-making
accordingly. For example, there is no point in regulating traditional
broadcasting in the usual way if it is being replaced by internet
broadcasting which follows a different set of rules. The traditional
regulation of broadcasting, involving restricted bandwidths,
and huge investment costs, cannot be applied to new forms of
broadcasting which require relatively little capital outlay,
are instantly global and available to everyone, have open standards
that facilitate access in multiple ways, and are decentralised
so that coordinated control is very difficult. The notion of
intellectual property and copyright changes when all information
is digital and can be freely copied and transported. For example,
legislation about recorded music must take this into account.
Other questions arise: How should workers’ rights to privacy
in the workplace be regarded in the context of email and the
World Wide Web? What will it mean to regulate telephone call
costs when the ability to call via the internet at a much reduced
rate becomes generalised?
What
is ICT policy?
The Oxford English Dictionary defines policy as “A course
of action, adopted and pursued by a government, party, ruler,
statesman, etc.; any course of action adopted as advantageous
or expedient.” While this definition suggests that policy
is the realm of those in power – governments or official
institutions – a wider sense could include the vision,
goals, principles and plans that guide the activities of many
different actors.
ICT policy generally covers three main areas: telecommunications
(especially telephone communications), broadcasting (radio and
TV) and the internet. It may be national, regional or international.
Each level may have its own decision-making bodies, sometimes
making different and even contradictory policies.
Although policies are formally put in place by governments, different
stakeholders and in particular the private sector make inputs
into the policy process and affect its out-comes. Thus, for example,
in the International Telecommunications Union, an intergovernmental
body for governments to coordinate rules and regulations in the
field of telecommunications, the influence of multinationals has
grown enormously. Privatisation of state-owned companies has meant
that governments can rarely control telecommunications directly.
The privatised telecom companies, often partly controlled by foreign
shareholders, look after their own interests. In the context of
globalised markets, large and rich corporations are often more
powerful than developing countries’ governments, allowing
them to shape the policy-making process.
 |
|
Two sets of issues in ICT policy are critical to civil society
at the moment: access and civil liberties. Access has to do
with making it possible for everyone to use the internet and
other media. In countries where only a minority have telephones,
ensuring affordable access to the internet is a huge challenge.
Much of the response would lie in social solutions such as community
or public access centres. In richer countries, basic access
to internet is available almost to all, and faster broadband
connections are fairly widespread. Access to traditional media
is now a key concern, as new technologies make community video,
radio and television more feasible than before.
The other set of issues, civil liberties, includes human rights
such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy, the right
to communicate, intellectual property rights, etc. These rights
as applied to broadcast media have been threatened in many countries,
and now the internet, which began as a space of freedom, is
also threatened by government legislation and emerging restrictions.
Some of the most blatant attacks on freedom of expression come
from developing countries such as China and Vietnam, but even
in countries which have a long tradition of freedom of expression,
such as the USA, there are new attempts to restrict internet
users’ privacy and to limit their right to choose. At
the same time, restrictions that are intended to limit media
monopolies are being weakened and pushed aside.
Involvement
in ICT policy
Why should we, as citizens, become involved in ICT policymaking?
The obvious answer is that, as shown above, ICTs are so central
to contemporary society that they affect us continually in many
ways. So, for example, if a government decides to promote free
software, we are more likely to enjoy the benefits of free software
(better security, lower cost, easy adaptation to local conditions
and needs, etc). This is because it will be more extended throughout
society, the monopoly of Microsoft software and its file formats
will be broken, and our lives will improve. If a government
decides to introduce a new form of censorship on the internet,
or fails to protect citizens’ rights to privacy, then
we will suffer too. If the telephone companies keep prices artificially
high for broadband, or refuse to introduce a cheap flat rate
for modem access, then we may have to pay too much to access
the internet, the same as everyone else. If telecommunications
companies are not encouraged or obliged by regulation to roll
out services in rural areas, people there will have to rely
on more expensive mobile phone services. If governments do not
make it legal for wireless internet services to operate, development
and community workers in ‘unconnected’ parts of
the world will not be able to benefit from the power of online
communication and information access. The internet makes it
possible for local voices to be heard throughout the world but,
if policy and regulation limit their access, they will also
limit their reach.
These self-interested reasons are not the main ones. Other reasons
have to do with the nature of global society. If we want to promote
social justice, then ICT policy will be a key factor in this battle,
and we cannot afford to remain outside the ICT policy-making process.
A globalised world and networking
Globalisation is a historical reality, not just a catch phrase.
The world we live in has changed enormously in the last 15 to
20 years. While a global economy has existed for centuries, in
the form of colonialism and world trade, a new form of unregulated
expansion has taken shape in the last decade. The basis of the
new economy has been free trade, unrestricted investment, deregulation,
balanced budgets, low inflation and privatisation of state-owned
enterprises and infrastructures. At the same time, restrictions
on financial markets were lifted. A large number of mergers and
company takeovers mean that many industries have become dominated
by a few multinationals, while smaller, local companies have gone
under or been forced to depend on the larger ones.
ICTs have been a fundamental part of this process. Without instantaneous,
global, electronic telecommunications, the world financial market
could not exist, nor could companies coordinate their production
strategies on a global level. Today’s competition between
companies depends on such global communications, as does the
production of new ideas and research, whether at universities,
private institutes or company laboratories. Although it is not
true to say that ICTs have caused these radical changes, they
have been a prerequisite and are now fundamental to the functioning
of the global economy.
The conclusion is clear: we have to use the networks in a new
way, for the benefit of human beings and not for the efficient
functioning of the international money market and multinational
companies. If global, networked systems are the new basis of
power, and if ICTs are the technical foundation of globalisation,
they became a terrain of struggle. The main challenge is to
adapt them to become the technical foundation of the struggle
against the negative impacts of globalisation and for social
justice. Those who remain inside the networked society, with
access to the systems that make it function so effectively,
will be able to fight to change it. Those who are excluded will
find it so much more difficult.
So what should we do
with the new technologies?
What does this mean in practice? It means using ICTs to do several
things. First, to spread alternative information in a new way,
to millions of people instantly and without the confines of
traditional limitations such as distance. Second, to create
new forms of organisation and coordination, new structures and
new modes of operation. Third, to foster new forms of solidarity
among the powerless, new ways of sharing experience and of learning
from one another. And finally, to incorporate more and more
people into these alternative global networks.
People are already doing it. The Web allows anybody to publish
news and information, and the effects of this can be seen everywhere,
not just on the millions of websites that anyone can access.
No longer can the powerful tell lies and get away with it so
easily. For example, when a politician justifies a war with
lies, alternative versions immediately appear on thousands of
electronic mailing lists, websites, blogs, and internet radio
and TV. Websites like the Indymedias provide alternative sources
of information, which are instantaneous, open to the participation
of anyone who has interesting news, and where information, opinion
and debate coexist. Information can now be made available instantly
all over the Web. This forces the traditional media, such as
the mainstream press and TV, to respond, changing the style
of information gathering but showing, as they compete for momentary
exclusives and news-breaking stories, that their news and information
are still controlled by the editors, the directors, and frequently
the owners. Counter information on the internet is usually unpaid,
and allows other viewpoints to be heard.
|
|
|
A unionist
comments on the use of email
“Before, when information arrived by fax
to the local union office, I never knew what
was going on. If I made the effort to go into
the office, the fax might be on the notice board,
but half the time it had fallen off and been
put into the bin, or someone had taken it home,
etc. Then we started using email in the office
and the first thing I used to do when I arrived
was look in the computer to see the new emails.
Now that we are all on the Net, I have a copy
of everything that reaches the local office.
I can comment on it through the list and we
can discuss things before the meetings, which
makes them quicker and less boring. Now I get
too much information, quite the opposite from
before."
Source: Personal communication |
|
|
|
But it is not only the information flows that
are changing. The way we work together is also changing. New
tools allow new ways of organising, often without the vertical
hierarchies, rigidly formal structures and entrenched office
bearers that previously allowed those who controlled the information
flows to control the structures. A mailing list makes it just
as easy to send a message to hundreds or even thousands of people
as to one person. When activities are organised through a list,
everyone can have all the information, not just chosen bits.
Thus a coalition of activists can be not just a few representatives
who go to a meeting once a week, but hundreds of people who
can voice their ideas. A campaign for mass demonstrations, or
to protest a political trial, can quickly involve thousands
of people in a matter of weeks, when previously it would have
taken months or years. This makes grassroots-organising easier,
allows more people to be involved, but also may mean that the
political structures that are developed in this manner are not
so stable as they used to be. A network may develop for a particular
campaign, involve a dozen, hundreds or thousands of people,
and then dissolve or change into another form when the campaign
finishes.
One challenge faced by those working for social
justice in the era of globalisation is how to operate on a global
scale, to link people and communities in different countries
around causes that affect us all. Apart from email and mailing
lists, web forums, news groups, intranets, online group work
spaces, webs, blogs, videoconferences, instant messenger services,
and a host of new tools mean that the possibilities for international,
national or local collaboration are infinitely greater with
the new technologies. In the same way that injustice has become
globally organised, the struggle against it must be global,
not only local. This means that people from rich countries can
learn from those from poorer countries, and vice versa. Of course,
ICTs are no substitute for real, face-to-face interaction, but
when this is not possible they can pro-vide alternatives. And
they often make closer human communication easier by bringing
people together.
But to use the new ICTs in these ways, you need to be able to
access them, and most of humanity cannot do so at the moment.
Access to ICTs for all is thus a key demand for concerned citizens,
an essential aspect of ICT policy, and an issue for us all.
The new technologies offer enormous possibilities for increasing
human freedom and social justice. The origin of the internet,
designed as a way of collaborating without any central control,
makes it an excellent tool for this, and because the internet
has developed in an unregulated way on the basis of collaboration,
it is not controlled. Not yet. But this situation is unlikely
to last. In fact, it is under threat from governments and multinational
companies, through legislation, regulation, monopoly control,
legal pressures, and intellectual property restrictions. The
new ICTs will not be new for very long, and they might not continue
to be as free as they are now. The possibilities they offer
can be taken away from us, unless we actively participate in
the inevitable regulatory process that any new technology experiences.
Act now, before it is
too late
Now is the time to act, when all is not yet decided. If we wait
until the restrictions on ICTs are consolidated, it will be
much more difficult to reverse policies than to create better
ones in the first place. Policy varies from country to country,
especially from rich to poor, and the priorities are different.
In poorer countries, where ICTs are less developed, the key
issues are access to ICTs for the majority of the population
and outright restrictions such as internet filters and lack
of freedom of expression. In the developed countries, many of
these issues have already been decided, such as telephone access,
or have a long tradition, such as the lack of censorship. But
new issues are arising as restrictions are imposed: privacy,
censorship, intellectual property restrictions, broadband, 3G
cell phones, wireless connectivity, infrastructure monopolies,
media concentration, etc. The result of these new struggles
to impose the power of governments and multinationals will inevitably
be extended to the rest of the world, so people in less developed
countries should actively engage with these issues, because
their future will be decided for them.
So why should we be interested in ICT policy? Because the way
ICTs develop will have an enormous impact on the possibilities
of working for social justice and sustainable development. If
we do not take an active part in ICT policy-making, we will
have no say in how our societies develop and how the future
unfolds.
Source:
ICT Policy: A Beginner's Handbook APC 2003 freely available
for download from this site. See our resources section.
|
The Africa ICT Policy Monitor is an initiative of the 
and
