Document(s) 6 of 15

Key Trends

It is important to recognize that ICTs can often produce contradictory results simultaneously: homogeneity and fragmentation, for example, or greater equality and greater inequality. ICTs can both destroy and create jobs. Some believe globalization is a major factor; some do not. Some believe that differences between people and between countries are increasing; others, that they will diminish. Prediction becomes hazardous as individuals and organizations, embedded in social, cultural, and financial structures, use ICTs to select their own services, create content, and manipulate information.

Terms like globalization and a wide-eyed approach to technology (assuming that technology is socially neutral) obscure the many different realities. In Africa, for example, countries that emerged from colonial rule took, whether by will or by happenstance, entirely different routes. In some countries, the nationalist struggle has achieved a social transformation. In others, the government has been swayed by sectarian interests, and large numbers of people are marginalized. In these societies, volatile and divided, the mood can swing rapidly from hope to fear. One speaker at Kelburn said we have moved through four eras: "colonialism," motivated by a desire to control others; "liberation," motivated by a desire for self-control; "development," motivated by a desire to catch up; and "technology," motivated by a fear of losing out.

Another speaker said that all countries are moving away from protectionist, exclusive, economic regimes to more liberal, inclusive regimes with low tariffs, a greater role for the private sector, and more open trade. The speaker indicated that companies use ICTs to eliminate geographic barriers and time zones, and small offices can supply all the services of large offices. The key drivers of change are globalization, economic liberalization, and technological change. These forces tear the social fabric. Tension will increase, as will, specifically, income inequalities, job insecurity, job mobility, and disempowerment. Each country will respond differently according to its history, culture, values, and institutions. According to this view, only two responses will be successful: either a hypercompetitive, individualistic, and libertarian attitude, as found amongst many Internet users and software companies, or a new social contract between government and industry, creating a long-term vision and social cohesiveness. Societies that do not adapt will be left behind, some falling into chaos. Countries that are reluctant to change and try to put up barricades will not succeed. Global markets will punish unsustainable economic behaviour.

Workshop participants also indicated that major areas of uncertainty include

• The role of ICTs in governance and the political process;
• The role of ICTs in work, employment, and wealth creation;
• The impact of ICTs on the social sector (such as in education and health);
• The impact of ICTs on localism; and
• Vulnerability and crime.

Government Responsibilities

ICTs will not bring greater equity, participation, or employment unless governments implement appropriate policies. Some participants believed governments are capable of this. Others emphasized the intense particularities of existing political, ethnic, and cultural systems; the lack of agreement on the nature of ICTs and their impacts; and, therefore, the difficulty of making robust policy decisions.

There are two loci of public policy. The first is centred on the communications and information industries and based on sectoral concerns about infrastructure and content. The second is driven by wider public concern about health, education, employment, public expenditure, foreign ownership, culture, etc., which are themselves affected by changes in communications.

The two policy circles overlap. For example, communicating requires networks. Very few countries can afford to use tax revenues to build their networks. So they must either wait until private funds are sufficient (which may take many years) or licence one of the half dozen or so global consortia that are willing and able to build infrastructure. This raises a number of fundamental questions. What is the balance between ownership, control, access, and impact? Is having a telephone network owned by a foreign company worse than not having one at all? How does a country without much domestic expertise in software ensure that it acquires the network it needs?

Tariffs are another important issue. In OECD countries, the average rate for telephone access and for Internet access is about 1% of average income (and using both services costs 2% of income). Rates in developing countries are usually higher. Indeed, there is an inverse correlation between per-capita income and the cost of access: the higher the income, the lower the cost. As a result, although many have access in principle, few can afford it. Governments face a challenge: whether to put the priority on higher charges, to increase revenues in the short-term, or to reduce charges to increase traffic.

Many of these problems are amenable to, and call for, public policy. Governments can control public expenditure on infrastructure (subject to available resources). They can control national competition policy. They can set limits on foreign investment. They can use the principle of "planning gain," whereby they allow private development on condition the company makes some social investment in roads, education, etc. They can influence the creation of new skill sets through the school curriculum and by training teachers in the new skills.

Each government needs to formulate a full response to this challenge. A complete policy regime has these characteristics:

• Covers all of the development indicators listed in Chapter 1;
• Reflects the reality of the information society both globally and nationally, and in terms of the public and private sectors; and
• Is sensitive and flexible.

Document(s) 6 of 15