E-GOVERNMENT
The Future of E-democracy: Lessons from Canada
WSIS
A Steep Climb to the Information Society Summit
EVENTS
Media, Diversity and Localism: Meaning, Metrics and the Public
Interest
E-GOVERMENT FOR ALL CONFERENCE, DAY 10
Partnerships for Success: How Government, the Private Sector and
Civil Society Can Work Together
E-Democracy and Civic Participation
Public Use of E-Government: Citizen Perspectives
Closing Plenary: Bringing It All Together
"Open Space" Discussion Forums
Note: During the 10 days of the E-Government for All conference (November
3-14), the Headlines team will include highlights from the ongoing
conference sessions, along with our usual headlines. We hope you find the
additional summaries useful. For more information on the conference, please
visit http://www.egov4all.org.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
E-GOVERNMENT
THE FUTURE OF E-DEMOCRACY: LESSONS FROM CANADA
E-democracy could help create a revamped public space and a more accountable
democracy. A project in the New Brunswick province of Canada highlights the
benefits of continuing to research and experiment with e-democracy
initiatives. "E-democracy has a place in the effort to bridge the
"innovation gap" between New Brunswick and wealthier provinces like Ontario
or Alberta, but its precise role remains unclear," says Gustavo Capdevila.
The experiment involved an effort to include citizens in the decision-making
process, by conducting a public consultation on the city's budget choices
online. The article says, "E-democracy may be the 21st century's most
seductive idea. Imagine technology and democracy uniting to overcome
distance and time, bringing participation, deliberation, and choice to
citizens at the time and place of their choosing." It also provides
critiques of and challenges to implementing e-democracy. Some of the
challenges discussed included: cost, jurisdictional barriers, the absence of
political will, and the element of uncertainty and challenge to take a risk.
"It is hard to justify supporting e-democracy while its goals and conditions
of success remain elusive," says Capdevila. New Brunswick's experiences
could provide the opportunity to visualize the use of e-democracy as
integral to a healthier civic landscape.
SOURCE: Open Democracy; AUTHOR: Keith Culver
http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-8-85-1586.jsp#
WSIS
A STEEP CLIMB TO THE INFORMATION SOCIETY SUMMIT
How to tackle the information and telecommunications divide still remains
elusive. In a final effort to prepare a strategy for the World Summit on the
Information Society (WSIS), governments, private sector, and civil society
gathered this week in Geneva for a session of the Summit's preparatory
committee. WSIS, which will be held on Dec. 10-12, will attempt to tackle
the challenges of rapid development and expansion of information and
communication technologies (ICTs). The documents that are supposed to be
discussed and signed at the summit have yet to be finalized. Dissent
afflicts issues that are included throughout the texts of the declaration of
principles and the plan of action that the WSIS is to adopt, says Mark
Furrer, Switzerland's communications minister. Activists say frustration is
mounting because of the difficulty that governments in WSIS preparatory
process are having in reaching agreements. A special session of high-level
officials from the participating countries will be held Dec 7-8 in order to
resolve the pending issues, said Pierre Gagne, executive director of the
WSIS secretariat. The Swiss government, host of the international event,
will promote bilateral meetings between opposing parties in order for
agreements to be reached.
SOURCE: IPS News; AUTHOR: Gustavo Capdevila
http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=21121
EVENTS
MEDIA DIVERSITY AND LOCALISM: MEANING, METRICS, AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST
The Donald McGannon Communication Research Center at Fordham University is
hosting a conference on December 15th and 16th, titled Media Diversity and
Localism: Meaning, Metrics, and the Public Interest, at Fordham's Lincoln
Center campus in New York. The conference brings together academics, policy
professionals, industry representatives, and public interest and advocacy
group members to address the issue of the meaning of the diversity and
localism principles and how they should be used in media policymaking and
policy analysis.
SOURCE: Donald McGannon Communication Research Center at Fordham University;
CONTACT: Donald McGannon
http://www.bnet.fordham.edu/public/comm/pnapoli/mediadiversityagendaonli...
oc
-------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Government for All:
November 3-14, 2003
Over 1200 participants from 80 countries
Information and registration: http://www.egov4all.org/
CONFERENCE SUMMARY, DAY 10
Public/Private Partnerships for Success
Kenan Jarboe wrapped up this conference session by thanking everyone for
participating and sharing all their great ideas.
E-Democracy and Civic Participation
The final day of the"E-Democracy and Civic Participation" panel began with a
discussion focused toward digital divide issues. "I think the digital divide
is a vital issue but just talking about how many people are online stifles
our thinking ... You can be technically online but not a proficient user,"
said Jason Kitcat of the free democracy project. He began asking questions
of personal awareness and technological uses, like whether the individual
could open attachments, search sites or can merely follow hyperlinks.
"Perhaps compelling e-government and e-democracy applications will encourage
some to get online and improve their IT literacy, but this cannot be counted
on," said Kitcat. He said this is a long-term multi-faceted challenge. "We
can't put everything online only, we can't push everyone to improve their IT
use but also we don't want to be held back -- it's a tough balance." The
challenge will involve fundamental political, cultural, and democratic
institutional reforms.
Alan J. Rosenblatt, director of Training Programs at e-advocates, offered
information on reports that have highlighted members of Congress who are
effectively using their websites to help stem the tide of incoming email.
The reports are available at the website:
http://congressonlineproject.org/publications.html.
Rosenblatt then addressed Andy Carvin's earlier post about the rosy picture
of the digital divide that he presented. "I realize that key underserved
populations are under-represented online, and while I believe this is a
problem that will diminish in time, it is because these groups are offline
that we have whole-heartedly embraced integrated online/offline campaigns
that empower all citizens," he responded. Just because key groups tend to
be offline, does not mean we can diminish the role of online politics, said
Rosenblatt.
There are certain skills necessary to decrease the digital divide; some
skills are more important than others, commented Taran Rampersad. "To make
matters worse, governmental projects don't always try to get to the lowest
common denominator [LCD], and in doing so are attempting to falsely create a
demographic, which may not exist," he said. He said the LCD is what really
matters.
Rosenblatt changed the direction of the conversation to respond to a
previous point on voting records. "Yes it is true that voter files can be
purchased indicating name, address, party affiliation and which elections
people voted in. They DO NOT contain whom you voted for," he responded. He
said that one could guess because the records do indicate what party you
identified in the general election, but this is a guess with a relatively
high margin of error. He also mentioned that voting records could cost an
average of $500,000.
Rosenblatt then commented on Kenan Jarboe's quote, "technology is neither
good nor bad ... nor is it neutral." I would argue more specifically that
technology is not ideologically neutral," he said. He said this notion
inevitably related to McLuhan's discussion of the 'medium is the message.'
"Communications technology imposes ideology on us by the inherent dynamics
of the technology," he said. For example, it could be argued that the
interactive nature of Internet-based communication has an inherent populist
ideology, therefore it increasingly proves difficult to maintain a top-down
political process, he added.
"Do you believe many people involved in government feel it is necessary to
maintain this 'top-down political process' when we may have the means to
better follow the spirit of democracy?" asked Rampersad. He continued, "I
for one do not think that such a process is capable of representing the
people in a manner that follows the spirit of democracy. It's a mediocrity,
in my humble opinion. And in that regard, it's mediocrity when compared to
the ideals of democracy."
Belinda Spinosi responded to the information Rosenblatt offered about the
cost of voting records. "I am not surprised by the price on the national
voter files and positive that some organizations probably find that a
worthwhile investment," she said. Spinosi said she thinks further discussion
should take place on how it can be determined who an individual voted for.
"In the primary you designate your party affiliation by voting for a
candidate (this is essentially a quasi party caucus), in most states. Many
independents despise this because they do not want to be affiliated with the
two major parties but still want to be able to vote for a candidate, so they
don't vote candidates in primaries," she explained.
"Big money is made on the selling of comprehensive voter lists in
elections," said Peter Ladd of Group Jazz. He continued, "While they do not
reveal who a person voted for -- they do reveal what type of voter you are
with such information as party affiliation and voting history." These lists
can be very important in forming a targeted group for phone calls or
door-to-door publicity of a candidate, he added.
Rosenblatt responded to Rampersad's comment about democracy from the bottom
up. "I [d]o believe that democracy comes from the bottom up. But I was
reminded yesterday by Carl Cannon that democracy has been born from top down
and side to side as well," said Rosenblatt. "Sadly, [I] do believe that
there are too many that favor top down at the expense of true democratic
ideals," he commented. "We have two types of people in America (among the
many ways to slice us in two). Those who have democratic hearts, and those
who do not," said Rosenblatt. He says it is certain that the Internet
provides the tools needed to build bottom-up democracy. Time will tell, he
added.
"I favor the term 'percolate up' instead of 'bottom up' ... gives a sense
that ideas and action are bubbling," said Ladd.
"I like Alan's [Rosenblatt] suggestion about the hierarchy starting with
information dissemination at the bottom and leading up to interaction,"
commented Paul Leighton of StopViolence.com. Leighton also said that he
appreciated Rosenblatt's 'calming point' on the digital divide. He says the
book "The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison" offers a point of
departure. "There's a saying that you can tell a great deal about a country
and a democracy by how it treats its prisoners and less fortunate (By the
way, people convicted of a felony lose the right to vote and in some cases
permanently, unlike Europe, which sees it as an important to show criminals
they are part of society with civic obligations.) In the US, several million
people -- mostly poor and minority -- are disenfranchised," he said.
Public Use of E-Government: Citizen Perspectives
Garry Mendez agreed with Shireen Mitchell that education is the key to
moving forward. "As it stands now, low-income Americans are getting
mis-educated by marketing (like cigarette or predatory loan company
marketing)," Garry commented. "Where e-government is concerned, we need to
learn from marketers and use the tools of the trade to educate low-income
folks about all of the services that are available to them," he suggested.
"Brick and mortar companies in the private sector have learned how to use
the web as both a service delivery tool and a marketing tool. I think
e-government has to do the same and has to take that next step of adding
educating their constituents to their charge," he concluded.
Conn Crawford agreed with earlier discussion that so-called "glocalization"
is a key factor. "So are there necessary consequences of
de-territorialization and horizontalization for government and governances
-- besides placing a strain on our language?" he asked. Conn posed several
other questions as well. "How should our institutions adapt (or be replaced)
to meet ICT challenges of virtuality or acceleration? Can hierarchical
structures which derive from post-agricultural revolution respond to these
trends? Are we not complacent in our assumptions and too comfortable in our
new-found solidarity to contemplate real innovation?"
Addressing education, Conn suggested that our concept of "education" also
needs revision. "... [M]any think that supported 'learning,' not pedagogy,
is more critical while others focus on 'marketing' the benefits of
e-government. Probably all three approaches are valid." He wondered if there
is a strategy for embracing all three.
Taran Rampersad expressed the need to be careful with the adaptation of
marketing. "Traditional methods of broadcast information that have been used
in the pre-Internet era are lacking in one major way: a feedback mechanism,"
he said. A feedback mechanism is a powerful tool in allowing people a way to
affect the process. "Traditional media/marketing is good to let people know
what they can do and how. The rest, I think, will be feedback related. The
down side to this is that no matter how fast it happens, it will never be
fast enough ...," he continued.
Taran gave the example of Xeebra.com, which has a Career
Development/Employment board that has morphed into a way to network IT jobs
as well as sharing the experience of interviewing. As one of the
Administrators for this free site, Taran has seen this board take on a life
of it's own. "Nobody is making a dollar to help anyone. They may hear about
a job where they are and post it out of simply being a part of the Xeebra
community," he explained. It's a step in the right direction, but "What is
the next step?" he wondered.
Regarding de-territorialization and horizontilization for government, Taran
said he believes there are consequences." For the most part, many local
offices such as [unemployment offices] could become more consolidated across
a larger territory (geographic, legal, etc). It could also be more reactive.
Some may even go away. New ones may spring up to replace them." He
continued, "I suppose the key will be vision, and vision is elusive and
sometimes completely wrong. It's perilous. Of course, I think we're all
coming to terms with our own perils in the given context -- be it round the
clock surveillance to privacy of data to having to manage these things."
"Perhaps we should focus more on the 'Why' instead of the 'How' before
proceeding along certain paths -- and open it up to public discussion. The
public may have ideas -- and people from other offices may have ideas," he
suggested.
Responding to the question, "Can hierarchical structures which derive from
post-agricultural revolution respond to these trends?" Taran said, "I think
that most of these structures will simply *have* to adapt, and I think the
amount which they will adapt to any given thing will be based on the economy
of the country. Some that remain contextual will persist, some that are
orphan branches of evolution will have to die."
Regarding the question, "Are we not complacent in our assumptions and too
comfortable in our new found solidarity to contemplate real innovation?"
Taran spoke about innovation. "Innovation -- free thought based on what is
supposed to be achieved versus how it can be achieved by adapting present
systems -- that is key. Because something can be adapted to work temporarily
does not necessarily mean that it's the best solution. I think the best
solution is the one with the most options for future growth while retaining
the spirit of what is to be achieved."
Taran ended by saying that he is amazed by the UK's adaptability, given it's
long standing structures, for example, "the adaptation of new technologies
from government (test studies presently underway to assess open source
technologies, which is derived from the legislation of last year enforcing
the assessment of open source as a solution) to the BBC itself, where use of
P2P (peer-to-peer) technologies is being seen as a method for the BBC to
decrease circulation costs."
Amy Ladd closed by thanking Garry Mendez, Jessica Alvarez, Latonya Brown,
and Shireen Mitchell, and participants for their time and contribution to
the conference with the Citizens Perspectives session.
Closing Plenary: Bringing It All Together
Sharon R. Swain started the session with the hope that dialogue such as this
can continue. "There are still so many topics to cover," she said. "Thanks
to all who worked so hard to put this together and to those who were willing
to share their views so candidly with us all."
Carola Solomonoff, publisher and web editor, spoke of how the Internet is
radically changing the way citizens relate to government. "Many realize they
can indeed fight assorted city halls -- by routing around them on the
information highway. The Internet also gives individual citizens, in
far-flung locations, a broader context in which to view their issues,"
commented Carola. "Connecting with others who are experiencing similar
conditions not only provides emotional support, but affords access to wider
political strategy. Political corruption thrives in closed situations. The
Internet is a window which helps throw light into dark corners: it can be
transparency's greatest friend."
Todd M. La Porte then responded to questions about his research. He defined
transparency as "the availability of information for navigating a
large-scale social system. It constitutes a layman's basic map of the
organization as depicted in the information on the site." Interactivity is a
measure of the level of convenience or degree of immediate feedback.
"Transparency and interactivity are both components of openness, which is
the extent to which an organization provides comprehensive information about
its attributes and maintains timely communications with its various
publics," he continued.
The study of transparency and interactivity puts citizen concerns at the
center: "what would a citizen want to know about a government agency's
activities or services, and what would a citizen want to do with an agency
to respond or initiate actions desired or required under the law," Todd
explained. These are measured by doing a content analysis of websites using
a list of about 40 attributes that are either present or not present.
Rosemary Gunn said her definition is somewhat different -- she is more
interested in the extent to which the public can see where government
decisions came from. Having thought about studying decision-making
processes, she thought that Todd's definition would be far more easily
measurable. Rosemary cited a GAO report that suggests how complex the
question of decision-making transparency can be. "OIRA, a part of the Office
of Management and Budget, increased the amount of rulemaking information
that is public. However, the report demonstrates that while one part of the
process is more open, much of the important discussion occurs in earlier
stages that are still quite closed," she said.
Andy Carvin reminded the group of the purpose for this panel - to highlight
the major themes from the conference and pinpoint specific principles and
actions that can be embraced for achieving e-government for all. This will
provide input for a final report of the conference.
Gopalakrishnan (Krishnan) Devanathan commented that it was unfortunate that
so few actually participated in the debates and discussions. He proposed
that we are missing a very fundamental problem, which has not been addressed
thus far. "Why are we still fighting with the idea of e-Governance, when it
can no longer be made relevant?" he asked. "E-Governance will have a natural
death if e-service is introduced through private-citizen partnership. Even
in the 21st century, let us not ... continue with the idea of Governors and
Governed," he continued. "The Government should be renamed as 'Servants of
the people, by the people, for the people' ... [t]hen the topic of this
virtual conference can be 'e-service to society.'" Corruption is a state of
mind when there is no self-discipline on either side. "The 'please the boss'
culture also brings in bureaucracy and makes individuals just puppets in the
hands of the boss. It is the role of every individual to get away from this.
Individuality and freedom of thinking and working is a must," he concluded.
Commending the conference, Alan J. Rosenblatt said, "The idea of an ongoing,
moderated discussion using message boards is exactly the kind of dynamic
that makes the Internet a revolutionary force in the political arena." He
continued, "The 'communications revolution' brought on by the Internet stems
from its ability to facilitate all modes of communication, including the
full range of participant dynamics (one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-one,
and many-to-many), a full range of media delivery (text, image, audio, and
video), and the ability to communicate on both real-time and on-demand.
Advocacy communities that take full advantage of Internet technology are
able to grow quickly and exert a growing influence over the policy formation
process."
Lisa Kimball of Group Jazz shared a quote to capture some of the sentiments
expressed in the discussion: "These communities did not become civic simply
because they were rich. The historical record strongly suggests precisely
the opposite: They have become rich because they were civic. The social
capital embodied in norms and networks of civic engagement seems to be a
precondition for economic development, as well as for effective government.
Development economists take note: Civics matters. How does social capital
undergird good government and economic progress? First, networks of civic
engagement foster sturdy norms of generalized reciprocity..."
--Robert D. Putnam
To illustrate, Lisa Kimball, shared some slides about the evolution of the
Internet and communications. In addition to major shifts in modes of doing
business and engaging in learning, Internet growth has also brought with it
shifts in how organizations and associations connect to make a difference.
It has become a significant venue for advocacy, political action, and
stakeholder engagement.
She suggested that the problem is NOT that not enough people have access to
information. Rather, too few people are producing information - the stories,
the ideas, the language that makes their experience real to others. "If the
Internet is going to fulfill its promise to support and enhance the quality
of Civil Society and support our efforts to collaborate to make a better
world, then we need to focus more on the social computing capacities of the
Internet and less on its information processing capacity," she said.
"The first implication of this perspective is that we need to understand the
Internet as a place for groups of people to interact in social spaces - not
just a place for individuals to access canned information." She offered an
example of such an environment used by Asian Americans for Equality - a
project supported by the Fannie Mae Foundation's Knowledgeplex site. It
includes not only documents and calendars but also member profiles and a
caf