The first phase of the World Summit on
the Information Society [WSIS] took place in Geneva, Switzerland from
10-12 December, 2003. The second phase will take place in Tunis, Tunisia,
from 16 to18 November 2005. In Geneva, over 54 Heads of State, Prime Ministers,
Presidents, Vice-Presidents and 83 ministers and vice-ministers from 176
countries, Executive Heads of United Nations agencies, industry leaders
[private sector], NGOs, media representatives and civil society came together
for the first multi-stakeholder global effort to share and shape the use
of ICTs for a better world.
The Summit adopted a Declaration of Principles which puts forward the
shared elements among members of the international community about a common
vision of an information society's[1]values.
It also adopted a Plan of Action which sets forth a road map to build
on that vision and to bring the benefits of Information and communication
technologies [ ICTs][2] to underserved economies.
One among the few things for which there was consensus among the participants[3]
in the Summit was with respect to the framework and strategy the international
community should develop to ensure that the possible benefits of ICTs
for development are maximized while the possible obstacles and barriers
are minimized. With respect to the other two major themes discussed at
the summit, namely, access and applications, very little of concrete and
immediate relevance was achieved at the end of the first phase of the
WSIS. All the intensity of debate and hard talk on internet management
and governance during the pre-summit phase was diluted with the decision
at the Summit to set up an UN working group on internet governance which
will report to the second stage of the summit in Tunis, the decision only
facilitating the stalling of the issue temporarily. Regarding the question
of bridging the so called 'digital divide' by increasing access and applying
ICTs for redressing the problems of the poor countries, it was agreed
upon that for achieving the above, building up the infrastructure base
in these countries from the primary level is essential . However, the
consensus ended here. How this process is going to be funded and what
role the developed countries should play in this respect remained a topic
of controversy and discordance.
Few people have ever died because they did not have access to the Internet
or could not make a telephone call. Among the necessities of life, ICTs
come well down the scale. But it is much easier to deliver the real necessities
of life-such as clean water, nourishing food, shelter, education, healthcare,
and employment-with good access to information and communications. The
UN Millennium Declaration[4] contains commitments
to halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of the world's population living
on less than one US dollar per day, suffering from hunger or having no
access to drinking water. It also contains commitments on achieving universal
primary education for both boys and girls, reducing maternal and child
mortality, improving healthcare and achieving significant improvements
in the life of slum dwellers. ICTs can help in achieving these goals.
At the closing ceremony of the Summit, Yoshio Utsumi, Secretary-General
of the International Telecommunication Union [ITU][5]
and Summit cautioned that the Summit was only the start of a long and
complex process. "Telephones will not feed the poor, and computers
will not replace textbooks. But ICTs can be used effectively as part of
the toolbox for addressing global problems...." he said[6]
. The true test of an engaged, empowered and egalitarian information society,
he added, would be seeing the fruits of today's powerful knowledge based
tools in the most impoverished economies. . The participants in the closing
ceremony also stressed why it is pertinent to have a new commitment in
areas like internet governance, access, investment, security, the development
of applications, intellectual property rights and privacy to work together
if we are to realize the benefits of the information society. A genuine
and objective assessment of the Summit can be done by examining to what
extent the above issues were addressed to in the summit and a consensus
evolved with respect to tackling them.
The issue of internet governance was one of the most important and extensively
discussed topics in the pre-summit phase, largely because of its multi-dimensional
impacts in the global context. However, with agreement to set up an UN
working group on internet governance – technical management of the
internet and public policy concerns such as unsolicited advertising [spam],
privacy, cyber crime and network security- the dispute has been defused,
at least, temporarily[7] . Developing countries
have proposed that the International Telecommunications Union should be
given control of Internet governance issues, including anti-spam measures
and distribution of Website domains. Many developing world countries believe
that a new approach is needed as the Internet reaches maturity and as
many poorer countries log on to the Internet. The move could represent
a major setback in future for the International Corp for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN), a non-profit company which is currently seen as the
most-recognisable Internet governance organisation. Because of its far-reaching
implications in the international political, economic and cultural milieu,
the issue has to be analysed systematically and independently, in detail.
Access to information, and thereby to the creation of knowledge, is considered
a critical factor in the development process. On the one hand, this requires
an adequate range of ICT networks and services. On the other hand, it
implies the ability to use those tools to develop applications that benefit
society (learning by doing). But both the tools and the ability to use
them are unevenly distributed. Despite considerable progress in recent
years, access to ICTs, notably the telephone, mobile phone, Internet and
broadcast networks, remains unequally distributed[8].
There are, for example, more televisions in Brazil; more fixed line telephones
in Italy; more mobile phones in Korea; and greater Internet connectivity
in Luxembourg; than in the whole continent of Africa. Yet the population
of Africa, and the needs of its people, greatly exceeds those of these
other countries. In recent years, these disparities have come to be known
as the "digital divide". The Digital Solidarity Agenda put forward
by the Draft Plan of Action attempts to bridge this divide by putting
in place the conditions for mobilizing human, financial and technological
resources for inclusion of all men and women in the emerging Information
Society. The plan of action suggests that Developed countries should make
concrete efforts to fulfil their international commitments to financing
development including the Monterrey Consensus, in which developed countries
that have not done so are urged to make concrete efforts towards the target
of 0.7 per cent of GNP as ODA to developing countries and 0.15 to 0.20
per cent of GNP of developed countries to least developed countries. However
many participants, especially from Africa were quite sceptical about the
financing aspect of this process. African countries led by Senegal wanted
a Digital Solidarity Fund to help governments, companies and nonprofit
organizations narrow the so called digital divide. The U.S. and other
western countries rejected this funding proposal insisting that the existing
mechanisms are adequate, requiring at most unspecified adjustments. This
seems quite ironical in the light of the fact that the WSIS was able to
pledge only a trickle of financial support compared with the $6.3 billion
(U.S.) one organizer estimated it would take to truly bring phones and
internet to all corners of the world. However, it was finally resolved
to undertake a review of existing ICT funding mechanisms and also study
the feasibility of an international voluntary Digital Solidarity Fund,
which would be reviewed in the Tunis Summit.
Another concern which was voiced by civil society groups[9]
and some participants from African countries [before and after the Summit]
was that the Summit was steamrollered by western and MNC interests', as
clearly evidenced by the dominance of MNCs like Micro Soft, Hewlett- Packard,
Cisco, World Space etc. in technological collaborations formed at the
Summit. especially with respect to developing the internet. Ralf Bendrath
of Germany's Heinrich-Böll Foundation warned that "To an extent,
industry is naturally important, to build infrastructure and operate it.
But we are against an information society that's organized as a purely
profit-oriented information society"[10]
.
Civil society groups also came out with an alternative declaration claiming
that their voices and the general interests collectively expressed by
them are not adequately reflected in the Summit documents. Their Declaration
titled "Shaping Information Societies for Human Needs" is centered
around four core principles : Social Justice and People-Centred Sustainable
Development; Centrality of Human Rights; Culture, Knowledge and Public
Domain; and Enabling Environment.
Inspite of all the focus and big talk on the role national governments[11]
have to play in the ICT diffusion process, the Summit was attended by
a relatively much smaller number of government representatives than was
initially expected. Of the 176 governments represented at the Summit 80
heads of government were initially expected to attend, some 60 confirmed
their participation and finally was attended by 40 As Claire Flus, who
works on providing access and local content to Brazil's urban slums summed
it up, " The people we have seen are mainly from NGOs. The governments,
I can't really see them. I don't find it obvious at all they are supporting
this"[12].
Press freedom has been another controversial issue at the summit, with
developing nations and European states clashing over the wording of a
general declaration on the role of the media. The growing reach of the
Internet as a news medium has once again thrown the spotlight on press
freedom. But there was anger that many governments such as those of Zimbabwe,
who are accused of clamping down on the media and restricting access to
the Internet, are participating in the summit. As Timothy Balding, director
general of the Paris-based World Association of Newspapers, said, "Many
of the principal barriers and obstacles to development of the Internet
as a platform for free expression have been erected by the very governments
who are in attendance". It is quite ironical to note that closely
on heels with the Summit , a new U.S. federal law is coming into vogue
from January, 1, 2004, making it legal to send bulk e-mail (60% of which
is today spam). Anti-spam activists suggest that this would open the floodgates
of spam[13] !!
A clear concern of alarm and caution also was voiced at the Summit, especially
by Latin American and African nations regarding the need not just to preserve
existing cultures, but also protect new cultures and forms of expression
being created by the internet. One of the positive outcomes of the Summit
was the consensus to preserve and support cultural diversity, though the
question of how this could be achieved in today's world still characterized
by a sharp digital divide was largely skipped ,foster local content development
an knowledge-sharing , and enable the use of all world languages on the
internet.
Inspite of the differences of opinion in many areas the Summit ended on
a general note of optimism that it was largely successful in placing the
importance of ICTs in fostering development and bridging the digital divide
on the world agenda. With long term commitment on the part of governments,
private sector and civil society to mobilize resources and investment
most of the envisaged targets can be achieved.