Information Society Development - Essay Example

Information Society Development What are the strengths and weaknesses of the policies for information society development being pursued by international organisations (e.g. UN, EC, IBRD, OECD, etc.)? Introduction Broadly speaking, an information society is a social setup where the development, delivery and control of information have become a significant cultural and economic activity for the members of the society. It is supported by ideas like the knowledge based economy where information can be bought and sold for a price and information technology is an important part of the daily lives of the people. The development of this sort of society is important since it has many benefits for the countries which have not been very successful on their path to industrialisation. The greatest forces behind the creation of an information society are the western civilised nations and various organisations like the UN, EC, IBRD and the OECD. The lessons learnt from the process of industrialisation have shown these groups that the development of information infrastructures and development frameworks is important for the Information Society (Audenhove et. al., 1999). The policies suggested by these groups broadly recommend the creation of opportunities where competition is encouraged, investments from the private and public sectors are to be supported and the free flow of every kind of information is strongly urged (Europa. 2006). While these policies have been lauded for their foresight, they have also been objected upon due to problems with their application especially in the third world and the developing regions. The development of an information society is supposed to include the entire world but the policies are often seen as weak when it comes to their usefulness in places where the basic necessities of life can not be found. Areas like sub-Saharan Africa and some regions of Asia lack basic facilities like water and electricity and there are some analysts who believe that without these basics no information society can ever be created (Audenhove et. al., 1999). It is therefore important to study the strengths and weaknesses of the policies for information society development in the third world since these could very well point to our collective future as a humane society. Background on Policies Since the last decade or so, the creation of an Information Society and the creation of a common Global Information Infrastructure have been on the ‘to do’ list of the G7 nations and their allied organizations. Sociologists and thinkers have been hard at work trying to create the policies which would encourage the development of both the above mentioned systems. As a foundation for this society, the creation and interconnection of high speed data networks, reliable voice communication networks and wireless information access tools have been encouraged in the developing world (Wikipedia, 2006). This process traces its roots to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Development Conference at Buenos Aires which took place in 1994. The American Vice-President at the time, Al Gore, was the first to present the idea of a Global Information Infrastructure (GII). This was because information transfer between the developed nations like America and the countries forming the EU had reached such a level that a mutual agreement on certain protocols had to be made for easier and faster sharing of information (Audenhove et. al., 1999). The very next year, during the 1995 G7 Ministerial Conference on the Information Society, it was recognized that attention must be given to including the developing and less developed nations into the Information Society. The representatives at the conference realised that there is a great potential for change in social terms and development in economic terms if an Information Society can be created (Audenhove et. al., 1999). However, the overall recommendations of the conference to developing nations remained on the economic lines of liberalising their markets, allowing open competition and broadening the avenues of information access. In fact, this has been one of the central weaknesses of the policies recommended for the creation of an Information Society that they are more concerned with liberal economics than technological or social advancement for the developing nations of the world (Conhaim, 2001). Policy points which agree with the liberal economic agenda of international trade organisations may not be in the best interest of the underdeveloped countries who seek to use the Information Society for other purposes. It can be seen that the developing countries want to have policies with significantly advantageous impacts on society to motivate economic growth and increase their overall productivity (Development Gateway, 2006). Their use of an Information Society would be to create new economic activities and employment for the masses (Conhaim, 2001). Eventually the final target of an information society in the third world would be to improve the quality and standard of life for the general population. Strength in Africa Of course this does not mean that the policies are all bad and incompatible with the aims of the developing nations of the world. In the case of Africa there have been significant benefits of the policy guidelines since the Information Society initiative in Africa has been localised and regionalised by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. The African Information Society Initiative (AISI) is a modified framework which seeks encourage local economic development and social support programmes that are expected to move towards an eventual creation of the Information Society (Audenhove et. al., 1999). Since the (AISI) programme concerns itself with overall economic and social growth, it has been pegged as a long term initiative. It has been successful enough to allow other information and communication based programs to be modelled on the same footing. The localised viewpoint means that policies are made to encourage the creation of information networks and the establishment of a physical infrastructure as the foundations of the Information Society (eSEEurope Conference, 2002). This is significant because the non-localised recommendations coming from other agencies often make assumptions as to the level of development in a certain region which may or may not be true. Weaknesses in Asia The application of the policies has been weaker in less developed regions of Asia since many of them are considered to be well on the path to attaining the status of developed nations. China and India serve as prime examples since they both have booming economies and a significant amount of infrastructure already in place which is required for an Information Society. Organisations such as the World Bank, WTO, EC, IBRD, OECD and others have suggested that these countries should open their information markets and further liberalise the telecom and broadcasting industries (eSEEurope Conference, 2002). This recommendation is based on the idea that since liberalisation and the privatisation process have been useful in other regions like Eastern Europe, they should be useful here. Additionally, it is assumed that money poured into the telecom sector would enable greater use of the information markets to enhance current economic activities. Moreover, the efficiency of private ownership over government monopoly is given as the most important reason why privatisation should take place quickly to help the creation of an Information Society (Audenhove et. al., 1999). This is certainly a weakness in the policy recommendations because the development comparisons given for nations which benefited from privatisation are those who had the infrastructure already in place. It must be noted that liberalisation, technological development, economic development, deregulation processes and the social distribution of services are very strongly interconnected (Audenhove et. al., 1999). Many Asian countries could face problems with social changes coming very quickly if the recommended policies are implemented in a somewhat haphazard manner. To avoid these problems, the implementation of the policies has to come with recommendations on how a dialogue can be setup between various actors and interested parties within a given region. If they are able to effectively communicate, the regional players would be able to balance the different goals which they seek from the implementation of policies leading to an Information society (eSEEurope Conference, 2002). Not only is there a need to seek input from technical experts, policy makers must also listen to economists, sociologists and development experts to know how the policies will effect the masses. In fact, these experts are some of the staunchest critics of the Information Society policies because they doubt if increased local competition or the establishment of free trade will have the desired effects. In most situations, fair competition is never seen and economically realistic markets like oligopolies, cartels or industry groups may be formed by various companies working in the same field (Audenhove et. al., 1999). Additionally, the recent years have seen a plethora of mergers on national and international levels which have created super companies with balance sheets larger than the budgets of most countries. This scenario appears to be contrary to the accepted relationship between increased competition and free trade generating greater choice and cheaper prices (Development Gateway, 2006). As a case in point, the privatisation and liberalisation of the telecom sector in Europe did not lessen the regulatory requirements but rather increased them. The same is true for the insurance and finance sector in America (Audenhove et. al., 1999). This goes to show that government control and intervention often becomes important where corporations behave irresponsibly and it can only be imagined how a corporation could behave if it controls the information society. Instead of becoming a secondary player in society, the state becomes a primary player and seeks to mediate between the differing goals of people working for corporations, economic markets, social organisations and political parties. Perhaps the most significant weakness in the policies for the creation of an Information Society is an underlying assumption that simply by giving people tools to access digital information, society will experience an economic boom. This idea equates easy access to information with economic development and social progress (Audenhove et. al., 1999). It appears to be based on the lessons learnt in America where the advent of the internet did lead to a significant increase in economic activity and billions of dollars were generated in the stock market. However, it is not justified to assume that the same will happen in places like Bangladesh or Pakistan where access to clean water is still a matter of life and death (Development Gateway, 2006). Clearly this is a somewhat optimistic approach to the development of an advanced Information Society where mobile phones or computers will bring about the betterment of society. However, it must be realised that the most significant way to improve the human condition is through human capacity building, education, healthcare development and social action (Development Gateway, 2006). Unless human and institutional capabilities in the developing nations reach an acceptable level, no amount of technology or equipment will bring any noticeable change. The Overall Analysis The development of the information society must be seen in the context of the global digital divide. The United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, reported that said that the Internet is used only by 5 percent of the worlds population and 85% of all users are in the developed world. Further research by Professor Ernest J. Wilson at the University of Maryland shows that at the turn of the century, 98 percent of Latin Americans, 99.5 percent of Africans, and about 98 percent of Asians were not connected to the information superhighway. This situation is getting worse since access to the internet is growing by more than 20 percent per annum in the developed world (Conhaim, 2001). Even in the most benign sense, it appears that the developed nations of the world and the allied organisations are fixated upon breaking the digital divide which separates them from the developing countries. While this is certainly a noble cause since information access is important for education and learning as well as social development, it should not be the primary motivation for an information based society. It would be very difficult to use the internet or computer technology to bring about social and economic change while the global powers have access to easier tools for stimulating job growth and economic activities in the less developed countries. Despite all the problems associated with the policies, it seems as if the future for an information society is quite bright. The information age offers us a chance to rebuild what might have been lost in the decades after the Second World War and it gives us the method of righting several wrongs done in the past. Developing countries now have the opportunity to use beneficial social engineering methods along with information technology to put themselves on equal footing with the developed nations of the world (Duff, 2005). Those nations which already have the semblance of an Information Society in place are looking forward towards the creation of a Creative Society where political and ideological power is obtained from the glory attached to innovative concepts, superior output and the useful application of Information Society principles. The U.K. itself is an example of such a society and this is represented by the shift in terminology within the country’s culture policies from cultural to creative industries (Garnham, 2005). Conclusion The development of an Information Society is not something that will happen overnight and it is certainly more dependant on social institutions and the skills of the people rather than the availability of information access tools. I believe that if the policy makers are willing to involve the local people for whom the policies are being formulated, they will have a better chance of creating successful polices which can be used by the people to bring about a fundamental improvement in their standard of living. On the other hand, if the policies are made while keeping the interests of the industrialised nations at heart, the policies will not have any significant benefits for the people of developing nations and may even lead to more problems than solutions. Word Count: 2,542. Works Cited Audenhove, L. et. al. 1999, ‘Information society policy in the developing world’, Third World Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 387-404. Conhaim, W. 2001, ‘The Global Digital Divide’, Information Today, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 1-3. Development Gateway. 2006, ‘Information Society: The Next Steps’, DevelopmentGateway.org, [Online] Available at: http://topics.developmentgateway.org/special/informationsociety Duff, A. 2005, ‘Social Engineering in the Information Age’, Information Society, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 67-71. eSEEurope Conference. 2002, ‘eSEEurope Agenda for the Development of the Information Society’, eSEEuropeConference.org, [Online] Available at: http://www.eseeuropeconference.org/draft.html Europa. 2006, ‘Information Society Policies at a Glance’, Europa.eu, [Online] Available at: http://europa.eu.int/information_society/policy/index_en.htm Garnham, N. 2005, ‘From cultural to creative industries’, International Journal of Cultural Policy, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 15-29. Wikipedia. 2006. ‘World Summit on the Information Society’, Wikipedia.org, [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Summit_on_the_Information_Society Read More