Publication date:
07/2002

I am not accustomed to attending major United Nations meetings. I work in the field, as a researcher and an active member of organized civil society in the South, where I rather get involved in workshops and in learning and cooperative virtual communities. My presence here today is a sign that the World Summit on the Information Society could be different from traditional summits and could open up new areas and forms of participation.

Why should it do so? To put it simply, if the aim is to visualize, define and decide on a new form of society, the paradigm shift required to construct that society will, for obvious reasons of coherence, need to be holistic. The pioneering - and hence the longest-standing - organizations in this field have, like my own, been in existence for fewer than 15 years. Most organized groups dealing with this topic have existed for less than five years, and new ones are appearing every day. The criteria by which we recognize one another have more to do with the quality and transparency of our websites, which report on our activities and associated resources, than with traditional legal or accounting documents.

In fact, "traditional" meetings are on the whole viewed with a critical eye from the field. At best, they appear to take place in a space that is far removed from the realities of the field while at worst, the fear is that civil society is being used and that its presence will serve as an alibi for decisions in which it played no proactive role.

You will understand, therefore, that I do not in any way claim to "represent" civil society here. Civil society is multifaceted and made up of many and diverse components, although this does not impair ability to pull together at decisive moments.

What are the essential messages I wish to convey, as one of the voices of civil society, in terms of the collective construction of the information, communication or knowledge societies, or whatever we want to call the social context in which the use of electronic networks is radically changing the way in which human beings interact with each other and with the information they generate? That context is giving rise to new challenges and opportunities and thus requires new rights (as could be the right to communicate) and adaptation of the law (for example, for intellectual property). You will note that I speak of societies, since it should be clear that each entity must decide democratically on its own model, in the light of its cultural currents, the interests of its citizens and its history.

Speaking of history, the official history of the Internet, which tends to place greater emphasis on the technological aspect of the network phenomena, is inclined to overlook the fact that the network pioneers were first and foremost researchers from all regions, followed by civil society sectors in the South (networks for development) and in the North (citizen and community networks), who realized early on the promise that computer mediated communication held and who created the first social applications of information and communication technologies (ICTs), thereby linking local and global concerns.

DIGITAL DIVIDE OR SOCIAL DIVIDE?

There exist between the North and the South, and within all countries, deep social, economic and political divides. The digital divide is merely a reflection of that situation, and putting the thermometer in the icebox will not bring the fever down. I have dedicated the past 15 years of my life to the use of ICTs for development and, of course, believe that the social divide can be narrowed by making appropriate use of ICTs. However, the prevailing rhetoric is superficial and simplistic in that it distracts from the true social promises (social ownership of technologies leading to empowerment of people and communities) and focuses the debate on access, in the narrow sense of the word. Of course, network access infrastructures and services at affordable prices are essential, but that is not enough. In order for ICT applications truly to change the reality of social injustice and for the term universal access to spell change, other factors are vital:

- The existence of contents (and interfaces) that adequately reflect the languages and cultures of each group. While globalized society should be founded on shared values and consolidate global ethical principles, it must also foster cultural diversity, which constitutes humankind's essential wealth and is the essence of our societies' complexity, the key of our capacity to evolve.

- The basic education required by users in order to be able to transform information into knowledge, and knowledge into wisdom. If there is one major challenge, there can be no disputing the fact that it is education for all, an objective that calls for the innovative use of ICTs to democratize education however without simplistic solutions.

- Specific training in the mature use of these technologies and understanding of the social stakes, thereby drawing the line between consumers and producers and enabling citizens to be socially-involved and become development players.

The task is enormous, and top priority should be given to those who are excluded, meaning all socially discriminated groups. Especially close attention should likewise be paid to women and young people, and the isolation of rural sectors should be duly addressed.

GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND CO-REGULATION

Decisions that are to all appearances technical but that can have a major impact on how our societies function are taken by global governance bodies that sometimes act like members-only clubs. Transparency is not enough: governments, both national and global, must shoulder their responsibilities as regulators between social requirements and the private sector and actively associate civil society in co-regulatory frameworks. A relationship of mutual respect must be built between the private sector and civil society, a relationship that acknowledges the existence (and the necessary growth) of a public domain of information and knowledge from sources to which access is open.

All facets of civil society (trade unions, researchers, professional associations, grass-roots communities, etc.) have something to offer: they can act as facilitators in relations with citizens, as social experimenters, as capacity builders, or as links to local governments. They are vital capillaries in the social body whose arteries and veins do not reach the extremities.

A great deal of creativity is required to invent new democratic models or methods for dealing with affairs of global governance. Allow me to point out that when it comes to creativity there is no divide: the South's capacity is at least as great as that of the North, as evidenced by the meetings organized in Africa and by several field experiences in Latin America. Attention should be paid (and resources made available!) to local and community initiatives that have met with success and are building a new world from the bottom up; international cooperation should also undertake a paradigm shift and strengthen local initiatives, showing respect for and enhancing its processes rather than imposing solutions from above!

In conclusion, what do we expect from this Summit? Our hopes are focused not so much on products, on which we would of course also like to bring our point of view, the outcome of our social experience to bear, but rather on the process, a process able to generate real actions for whose implementation we will feel a genuine commitment through having participated at each stage.

We believe that this Summit represents the first truly global opportunity to bring together in an effective manner, the three main sectors of society to engage in joint action-oriented reflection. We believe, moreover, that only if the participative process is characterized by a balanced distribution between (and within) governments, the private sector and civil society will it be possible for solutions to emerge that can provide answers to the complex challenges facing our societies.

Thus, the quality of the participative process represents the key to the Summit's credibility in the eyes of the wide range of sectors and civil society protagonists, bearing in mind that, in a networked society, the capacity to exert an influence has many means of expressing itself.

I should like to end on an optimistic note by applauding the African regional meeting, which provided concrete evidence of the benefits of opening up to society; by expressing satisfaction at the fact that Europe has announced its adherence to the principle of openness; and, lastly, by welcoming the Latin American meeting that will be held in the Dominican Republic - a meeting which I confidently expect to be based on the same spirit of openness and to represent a moment of shared creativity for Latin American and the Caribbean.