Ensuring Open, Universal, and Affordable Access to the Internet: Global Public Policy Advocacy for Information and Communications for Social Justice and Sustainable Development
Report for the period 1 June 2007 to 31 May 2008
Grant # 1065-0731
Presented by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) Communications and Information Policy Programme to the Ford Foundation, July 2008
Contacts:
Willie Currie Communications and Information Policy Programme Manager Cell: +1 646 249 0600 [email protected]
Anriette Esterhuysen Executive Director PO Box 29755, Melville 2109, South Africa Tel/Fax: +27 11 726 1692 [email protected] http://www.apc.org Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... 3 1. Summary...... 5 2. O verview of progress ...... 7 2.1 G lobal Advocacy on O pen, U niversal, and Affordable Access ...... 7 2.1.1 Participation in post-W SIS public policy processes ...... 8 2.1.2 U nited N ations G lobal Alliance for ICT4D (G AID) ...... 14 2.1.3 U N Commission on the Status of W omen (U N CSW ) ...... 15 2.1.4 O rganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (O ECD)...... 15 2.1.5 APC led or hosted public events and w orkshops ...... 16 2.2 Linking G lobal Advocacy to Regional and N ational Advocacy ...... 18 2.2.1 Africa ...... 18 2.2.2 Latin America...... 19 2.2.3 Asia...... 20 2.2.4 N ational policy spaces...... 21 2.2.5 Connecting the global: manifesto on affordable universal broadband ...... 22 2.3. N urturing and G row ing the Existing N etw ork of APC M embers and Partners Engaged w ith ICT Policies...... 22 2.3.1 APC members ...... 22 2.3.2 Partnerships...... 23 2.4. G lobal Information Society W atch (G ISW atch) ...... 25
Appendix 1: H ow APC Implements ICT Policy Advocacy ...... 28 Appendix 2: N ew M embers since 1 June 2007 ...... 32 Appendix 3: APC W ebsites ...... 34 Appendix 4: APC.org W ebsite Statistics for 2007 ...... 35 Appendix 5: ICT Policy Related Publications since 1 June 2007 ...... 40 Appendix 6: Event Participation since 1 June 2007...... 43 Appendix 7: APC’s G eographic and Strategic Partnerships, M ay 2008...... 46 Appendix 8: W SIS follow -up mechanisms...... 51 Appendix 9: G ISW atch 2008 Table of Contents...... 55 Acronyms and Abbreviations
ALER Asociación Latinoamericana de Educación Radiofónica (Latin American Association for Radio Education) AM ARC Asociación M undial de Radios Comunitarias (W orld Association of Community Broadcasters) APC Association for Progressive Communications AW ID Association of W omen’s Rights in Development BASIS Business Action in the Information Society BCO Building Communication O pportunities BFES Bangladesh Friendship Education Society APC W N SP APC W omen’s N etw orking Support Programme CATIA Catalysing ICT Access in Africa CIPESA Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa CIPP Communications and Information Policy Programme CRASA Communications Regulators’ Association of Southern Africa CRIS Communication Rights in the Information Society CSO Civil society organisation CSTD (U nited N ations) Commission on Science and Technology for Development DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo ECLAC (U nited N ations) Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean ECO SO C (U nited N ations) Economic and Social Council EDRI European Digital Rights Initiative EED Evangelischer Entw icklungsdienst EPIC Electronic Privacy Information EASSy East African Submarine Cable System EFO SSN et Ethiopian Free and O pen Source Softw are N etw ork FO SS Free and open-source softw are G AID (U nited N ations) G lobal Alliance for ICT and Development G EM G ender Evaluation M ethodology GISW Global Inform ation Society Watch G KP G lobal Know ledge Partnership ICAN N Internet Corporation for Assigned N ames and N umbers ICT Information and communication technology ICT4D Information and communication technology for development IG F Internet G overnance Forum IG P Internet G overnance Project IICD International Institute for Communication and Development
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 3 of 56 IPRs Intellectual property rights ISO C Internet Society ITeM Third W orld Institute
ITU International Telecommunications U nion KICTAN et Kenya ICT Action N etw ork LAC Latin America and the Caribbean M DG s M ilennium Development G oals N EPAD N ew Partnership for Africa’s Development N G O N on-governmental organisation N RO N etw ork Resource O rganisation O ECD O rganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development O N I O penN et Initiative REDISTIC Red sobre el Impacto Social de las Tecnologîas de la Información y Comunicación (N etw ork for the Social Impact of ICTs) SAFE South Africa Far East SAT-3 South Atlantic 3 U N DP U nited N ations Development Programme U N ECE U nited N ations Economic Commission for Europe U N ESCO U nited N ations Educational, Scientific and Cultural O rganisation VoIP Voice over internet protocol W ALC W orkshop for Latin America and the Caribbean W ASC W est Africa Submarine Cable W IPO W orld Intellectual Property O rganisation W SIS W orld Summit on the Information Society
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 4 of 56 1. Summary
This report describes the progress made by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) during the second of two years of support from the Ford Foundation for public policy advocacy work with respect to information and communication technology (ICT).
The Ford Foundation is providing support to the APC toward activity in four specific outcome areas:
i) G lobal advocacy on open, universal and affordable access to the internet through engaging tw o policy spaces: the IG F1 and W SIS implementation action lines C2 and C6.2 ii) Linking this global advocacy to regional and national advocacy processes on “open access”3 to the internet in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. iii) N urturing and grow ing the existing netw ork of APC members and partners engaged w ith ICT policies. iv) U sing this netw ork to produce an annual 'information society' w atch (published under the title G lobal Information Society W atch) report that monitors the implementation of goals agreed by governments during W SIS.
A detailed section on each of these areas follows below.
Global public policy that impacts on how the internet develops, how it is regulated, and ultimately on how global civil society and citizens are able to access and use the internet is complex and dispersed. Decision-making is becoming more trans-scalar4 in character i.e. it is affected by relations within a region, in the interaction of governments, private sector and civil society in global policy spaces and is no longer purely carried out at national level. A greater variety of institutions are involved in regulating the internet at all three levels simultaneously leading to regulatory powers that are distributed across global, regional and national spaces simultaneously in the form of polycentric networks.
Citizens and communities are no longer solely subject to national legislation but affected by trans-scalar and polycentric dimensions of policy. APC grapples with this in its policy practices. This was exemplified by our participation in the Internet Governance Forum and the successful launch of the Global Information Society Watch report in 20075. The text of the report combines a review of the impact of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and of post-WSIS policy spaces like the IGF with an analysis of some of the polycentric institutions engaged in global governance with regard to ICTs and the internet like ICANN and the ITU and also presents a number of country reports that give a national perspective on global ICT policy.
It is not easy to work for policy influence across such diverse policy spaces and to manage to make coherent connections between global, regional and national levels. Much depends on what policy windows are open. In Africa, in the closing phase of WSIS, a policy window
1 The IGF was convened by the UN Secretary General as a space for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue on internet governance following WSIS. 2 APC identified action lines C2 on communications and information infrastructure and C6 on creating an enabling policy environment as global spaces in which to advocate for open access to the internet. 3 The argument in favour of open access models is that they permit access and competition at all layers of the internet – physical, logical and content layers in such a way as to maximise participation by everyone and to challenge monopolies of the physical infrastructure, proprietary software, illegitimate governance of critical internet resources, censorship and surveillance and maximal approaches to intellectual property. 4 Used by Jan Aart Scholte in ‘Reconstructing Contemporary Democracy’ p 2 - http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1077587#PaperDownload 5 http://www.globaliswatch.org/
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 5 of 56 opened around open access to broadband infrastructure on the east coast of Africa that enabled multi-stakeholder engagement in policy and regulation related to the building of submarine cables that would bring down the cost of the bandwidth needed to access the internet in Africa.
In Latin America, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) initiated an inter-governmental process to develop an action plan on ICTs for the region which began as eLAC2007 and moved into a new phase as eLAC2010. In the first phase, civil society participation was resisted by the governments, but APC led a sustained campaign to secure civil society participation in the second phase of eLAC2010. In the African case, the policy window involved direct engagement on matters of policy while in Latin America, the battle for multi-stakeholder participation in ICT policy processes, that had been won at the global level in WSIS, had to be fought all over again at the regional level.
APC has integrated its experiences of undertaking national ICT policy advocacy in countries within Latin America, Africa and South Asia into a new form that seeks to undertake policy advocacy at regional and national levels within a framework that is also being pursued at the global levels within the IGF. The issue of affordable universal broadband access to the internet now forms a single policy advocacy issue in campaigns supported by APC:
• National level: Within at least four countries in East Africa, six countries in West and Central Africa and four countries in the Andes region of Latin America • Regional level: within the regional economic communities and ICT regulators associations of East Africa, West and Central Africa and the Andes region, and • Global level: within the Internet Governance Forum and the UN Commission for Science and Technology for Development.
A key moment in 2007 came at the access plenary session at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Rio de Janeiro, when Mike Jensen, speaking at the invitation of the APC, succinctly advocated that achieving the goal of affordable universal broadband in Africa required:
• More competition and innovation in the Internet and telecom sector, with effective regulation • Much more backbone fibre, national and international, with effective regulation of non-discriminatory access to the bandwidth by operators and service providers • More effort to build demand, especially by national governments to build useful local applications • Improved availability of electric power • Better indicators for measuring progress.
This is the approach to access that is being followed by the government of Kenya and it will take off across the East African region once the TEAMS submarine cable is landed in Mombassa sometime in 2009. It is also the approach adopted by the Connect Africa Summit in Kigali in October 2007.
It is unusual to see a convergence of thinking about access taking place simultaneously at national, regional and global levels of policy, as well as among different stakeholders œ governments, private sector and civil society. The views on access coming out of three multi-stakeholder workshops on access œ one led by ISOC, one by the private sector, and one by , converged in their views on what should be done to increase access to the internet across the world.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 6 of 56
This has been the main purpose of APC‘s policy work œ to build consensus on ICT policy matters across national, regional and global spaces simultaneously.
2. O verview of progress 2.1 G lobal Advocacy on O pen, U niversal, and Affordable Access
In the post WSIS phase APC's efforts to ensure that open, universal and affordable access to the internet is prioritised in strategic global internet public policy spaces were successful.
APC found the Internet Governance Forum, an experimental, but influential policy forum, to be the primary arena of influence for global advocacy on open access. But we have also engaged in other processes that are strategic, and that provide opportunities for APC to promote its policy agenda. These include the OECD ministerial meeting on the 'Future of the Internet Economy', the UN Global Alliance for ICTD (which is doing significant work with the ITU led 'Connect Africa' 6 initiative), the 52nd session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women7 which had as one of it's two main themes 'Financing for gender equality and the empowerment of women' and the WSIS action line follow-up and CSTD (Commission on Science and Technology for Development) process - charged with responsibility for monitoring UN system-wide implementation of the WSIS Geneva Action plans, and which focussed on 'development oriented policies' in it's 11th session.
APC also participated in various CSO organised meetings on intellectual property and copy right enforcement (particularly in relation to trade agreements outside of intergovernmental processes) and in networks that approach public policy from a rights based perspective.
During the second year of this Ford supported initiative, APC refined its global advocacy strategy, expanded its network of collaborative partners, hosted several public events and developed influential publications that have shaped future directions in global policy advocacy work on access. Activities are clustered in four areas and relate closely to APC‘s approach to ICT policy advocacy, which is described in more detail in Appendix 1.
Participation in public policy processes (networking and advocacy):
• IGF preparatory consultations (September 07, February 08 and May 08) • United Nations Global Alliance for ICT4D (Kuala Lumpur, October 07) • IGF II (Rio De Janeiro, November 07) • UN Commission on the Status of Women (New York, March 2008) • WSIS Action line follow-up meetings (May 08) • UN Commission on Science Technology and Development - 11th session - UN System wide reporting on WSIS to ECOSOC • OECD Ministerial meeting on the Future of the Internet Economy (October 07, March 08 and May 08)
APC led or hosted public events and workshops:
• Equitable access: one day event prior to the 2nd IGF (Rio, November 2007)
6 http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/connect/africa/2007/ 7 http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/52sess.htm
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 7 of 56 • Workshops on access, content regulation, participation and multi-stakeholder national advocacy in the second IGF (Rio de Janeiro, November 2007) • Capacity building for regulators: with LiRNE, at the Global Knowledge III conference (Kuala Lumpur, December 2007). • "Communication Rights for Women - Why the Purse feels empty?: Financing for women's equitable access to information and communication technologies (ICTs) UN Commission on the Status of Women (New York, February 08) • Participation in public policy processes: with Council of Europe and the UN Economic Commission For Europe during WSIS action line meeting (Geneva, May 2008)
Research and information resources8:
• Equitable access: commissioned a series of papers (with peer review and commentary) that document the experience and recommended strategies of practitioners working for equitable access in relation to new business models, policy and regulation, tools and technologies and networks and capacities9 • Multi-stakeholder coalitions influencing policy: documenting lessons from APC's experience of multi-stakeholder coalition building and advocacy promoting equitable and affordable access in national level campaigns10 • Building Consensus on Access at the IGF: analytical assessment of the work of all stakeholders involved in access in the second IGF and outlining areas of consensus on how to promote open, affordable and universal access amongst multiple stakeholders involved in access in the IGF (and other policy spaces). 11 • Pro-Poor ICT Access Resource Kit: initial work developing advocacy kits for policy- makers, regulators and CSO practitioners working for 'pro-poor' access solutions (work in progress)
Assessment and monitoring:
• Global Information Society Watch: The 2007 issued monitored WSIS follow up and civil society participation in policy processes. The 2008 issue will focus on access and is reported on in detail elsewhere in this report.
Concurrently, APC has been building it's capacity to build awareness, deepen knowledge, build partnerships and develop advocacy strategies in related policy areas including access to knowledge, building the commons, freedom of expression (particularly in relation to privacy rights and content regulation), internet and communication rights, public participation and transparency and accountability in governance processes.
2.1.1 Participation in post-W SIS public policy processes
WSIS implementation involves implementation and monitoring of targets and action lines agreed by governments in the Geneva Plan of Action.12 Governments set targets for 2015, whereas action lines are understood to be ongoing. The monitoring process is complex and participation difficult and expensive, particularly for CSOs.
8 A more complete list of relevant APC publications and reports is attached in Appendix 5. 9 http://www.apc.org/en/news/openaccess/world/new-apc-series-equitable-access 10 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/manuals/policy/all/frequently-asked-questions-about-multi-stakeholder 11 Please see APC's paper: Building Consensus on Access in the IGF: http://www.apc.org/node/5878 12 http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/poa.html
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 8 of 56 Four follow-up processes emerged from the WSIS:
• WSIS action line implementation (including action lines dealing specifically with open, affordable and universal access) - a total of 11 action lines. • Internet Governance Forum • Enhanced cooperation on managing critical internet resources • Financing ICTD/Digital Solidarity Fund
Of these four processes, only the Internet Governance Forum has been consistently active. It was hoped that the action line implementation process would animate stakeholders to collaborate on ongoing activities, but there are neither sufficient resources to support the process, nor is it structured in such a way as to allow for interested stakeholders to easily participate. The 'Enhanced Cooperation' activity has yet to begin in any formal sense and little progress has been made in relation to the ”Financing ICTD‘ line since the inaugural meeting of the Digital Solidarity Fund in 2005. This section of the report focuses therefore on the WSIS Action Line/CSTD process, and the Internet Governance Forum.
W SIS Action Line/CSTD process
The WSIS follow-up processes are facilitated by no less than 10 UN agencies, 5 regional economic commissions, the IGF secretariat and other related bodies. All of these processes feed, by way of reports from facilitating UN agencies and regional commissions, each report with a different format, into a formal review/assessment process overseen by the UN CSTD. The CSTD is responsible for UN system-wide WSIS follow-up and monitoring. The Commission holds its annual session every May in Geneva, immediately following the WSIS week of events. The CSTD compiles the various agency reports into one document and submits this on behalf of the UN Secretary General to the UN ECOSOC13 annually in July14.
For the past three years APC participated in the follow-up processes related to access to infrastructure, openness, access to knowledge, participation, diversity and capacity building. Our goal was to assess which spaces are most strategic in terms of potential partnerships and which most conducive to influencing policy outcomes.
Based on agreements made in 2005/6 APC tried to co-facilitate three action lines with the responsible UN agencies during 2006 and 2007:
C2: Access to Infrastructure (with the International Telecommunications Union -ITU) C4: Capacity Building (with the UN Development Programme - UNDP) C6: Enabling environment (with the UN Development Programme - UNDP)
We also decided to monitor action line C3: Access to Knowledge, which is facilitated by UNESCO.
In 2008, APC withdrew from co-facilitating action line C2 with the ITU and working together with UNDP on action lines C4 and 6 as, faced with funding constraints, it was no longer possible to justify the resources required to maintain participation in a space with so little output and opportunity for policy influence. Participation in the action lines had turned into a matter of organising an annual meeting in May in Geneva attended by a small number of mainly Europe-based people. Some of the UN organisations involved were engrossed with
13 Economic and Social Council of the United Nations 14 Information about the WSIS implementation and monitoring system, including some of the challenges for CSOs in monitoring outcomes, and a diagrammatical representation of the follow-up process, is attached as Appendix 8.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 9 of 56 their own internal restructuring processes resulting from recent changes in their leadership, and were not really able to effectively engage in a multi-stakeholder environment. In short, engagement in the action line spaces had become a waste of time and resources.
During the May 2008 WSIS Action Line follow-up session most stakeholders (including facilitating UN agencies and regional commissions) concluded that the process was in need of significant reform if it was to become a constructive platform for shared learning, collaboration, networking and monitoring of the Geneva Action Plan.
The 11th CSTD session which followed the WSIS follow-up week provided a platform both for interventions on ways to improve/reform the follow-up process, and for interventions related to the session theme: 'Development Oriented policies for an inclusive information society'.
APC made interventions on both issues which were well received. On process reform15:
• that facilitating agencies and commissions produce integrated national reports with the involvement of all stakeholders, but particularly CSOs, enabling more bottom-up monitoring by citizens and non-governmental entities thereby strengthening accountability and good governance • that future reports focus specifically on barriers and challenges, and suggest ways in which they can be overcome • that reports are produced in a timely fashion and work to a standard template
On the theme of 'Development oriented policies for a more inclusive information society', APC shared lessons learned from it's access work in the IGF (contained in the 'Building consensus on Access at the IGF paper), elaborating that, in relation to development of broadband infrastructure, the impact of sustainable energy use had to be considered, and that policy and regulation needed to be formulated from a rights based approach, ensure protection of privacy , be network neutral, promote community driven initiatives and protect the rights of online and teleworkers16.
Several of these recommendations17 are reflected in the CSTD 11th session declaration which was presented to ECOSOC in July 2008.18. APC remains committed to participating in the WSIS Action Line/CSTD process with a view to improving the process, building CSO participation in and monitoring implementation of the action lines of most interest to APC.
Internet Governance Forum
APC was instrumental in ”access' being identified as one of the five main IGF themes (the other being security, diversity, openness and critical internet resources). At the first Internet Governance Forum (IGF)19, access emerged as an issue of common concern and priority to all stakeholders. At the second IGF20 stakeholders from business, civil society and the technical community worked together to prepare a more coherent approach to access; the outcome of which was a convergence in views as to what should be done to increase
15 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/briefs/policy/world/wsis-follow-apc-contribution-secretary-generals-re 16 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/briefs/policy/world/wsis-follow-apc-contribution-session-development-o 17 A very influential resolution that made the same points was tabled by an influential group of governments including some that rarely join forces, e.g. its supporters who also collaborated to draft the resolution included several EU countries, Iran, Cuba, the United States, India, Brazil, Argentina, and Switzerland. 18 http://www.unctad.org/sections/wcmu/docs//ecn162008_r004_en.pdf 19 Athens, Greece, November 2006 20 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, November 2007
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 10 of 56 access to the internet across the world. ”Connecting the next billion‘ is one of two priority themes for the upcoming third IGF21 - with stakeholders working together to move from debate and discussion to a manifesto for action.
The first IGF was seen by most (certainly those who attended) to be a successful event in relation to providing a safe space to discuss, debate and deepen understanding on common problems in relation to access, diversity, security and openness.
Expectations were high in the run-up to the second IGF. Two controversial issues - 'critical internet resources' - and membership of the IGF advisory group loomed as potentially divisive in the IGF community. Both were seen to symbolically represent a perceived bias of control and ownership - between developed and developing countries on the one hand - and between government, commercial and non-commercial interests on the other. Seventy five workshop proposals were received, and considered to be of a much higher quality than those submitted for the first IGF.
The second IGF probably exceeded expectations in some respects, and little came of the potentially divisive issues that had preoccupied so many in the preparatory phase.
Second Internet Governance Forum (Rio de Janeiro, Nov 12-15, 2007) APC was highly visible throughout the IGF, from the strong statement made by Anriette Esterhuysen during the opening session,22 to the well-received reflections and recommendations that she shared at its conclusion.23 Representatives from thirteen APC member organisations participated in the forum and worked closely with APC staff in monitoring and reporting on workshops, dynamic coalitions and plenaries.
APC led four workshops on access,24 content regulation,25 public participation26 and multi- stakeholder participation. In each case, follow-up work is ongoing:
(i) Access: In 2007, APC built on its strategy of 2006, which was to get the theme of —internet access“ firmly onto the agenda of the IGF. For the second IGF meeting in Rio, we had to do more than discuss access as a policy issue. APC undertook to analyse the content of the three workshops and the plenary session on access to see to what extent there was a convergence of views.
Whilst recognising that the IGF is currently viewed and operates primarily as a space for discussion, it is also a space in which consensus can lead to ”recommendations‘ that can then be repeatedly asserted independently in workshops, and strategically reinforced at different levels of the IGF œ influencing governments, technical bodies and think-tanks.
Views converged in the following areas:
a. Competition and incentives are needed if all citizens are to have affordable, available access
21 Hyderabad, India, December 3-6 2008 22 For a transcript of Anriette’s statement, please visit: http://intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF_opening_Session.txt 23 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/briefs/policy/world/apc-statement-2007-internet-governance-forum 24 “Regulatory frameworks for improving access,” http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=36 25 “Content Regulation and the duty of States to protect fundamental rights,” http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=34 26 “Access to information and public participation for democratic governance: the Aarhus Convention as a prototype mechanism for ensuring adherence to WSIS principles and deepening democracy in internet governance,” http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=38
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 11 of 56 b. Rural and local communities need suitable ICT and telecoms policies. Current policies that service urban areas need to be adapted. c. ICT regulation and policy need to complement local development strategies.
APC took this virtual consensus on access to the IGF‘s May 2008 open consultations for the third IGF meeting to be held in Hyderabad in 2008 and proposed that stakeholders work together to concretise these recommendations from the access workshops in Rio into a manifesto on access to be supported by all stakeholders at the IGF in Hyderabad.
(ii) Content regulation: The APC women's networking support programme continued to develop its analysis, research and advocacy on bringing a feminist perspective to content regulation. The Ford Foundation recently approved a major research initiative which will deepen understanding of the connection between sexual identities and content regulation, build partnerships with researchers and strengthen collaboration between the rights and women's movements active in this area.
The APC WNSP co-convened the Dynamic Coalition on Gender and Internet Governance to build a constituency of gender advocates and strengthen gender advocacy during internet governance processes. The Dynamic Coalition prepared a statement that called for greater consideration of gender considerations in the debates during the forum as well as increasing women's participation at the next IGF.
(iii) Public Participation: At the conclusion of the IGF, APC issued a press release with the Council of Europe and the UN Economic Commission for Europe, proposing a code of practice/guidelines for public participation in internet governance processes.27 This work is ongoing with initial research being funded by the COE and presented at a public event held during the WSIS Action Line followup meetings in Geneva in May 2008 (reported on below).
(iv) Multi-stakeholder coalitions for influencing policy: APC produced a guide for national ICT policy animators on how to use multi-stakeholder partnerships in ICT policy. It was based on APC‘s CATIA experience in running ICT policy advocacy networks in Africa. We learnt that national campaigns, and national ICT policy information portals:
• Provide increased visibility and recognition to a policy issue and are seen to be authoritative reference points for ICT policy issues, particularly when they are the only voice in a country • Provide a strong informational base for activism and in bringing civil society perspectives to bear on national policy debates and policy makers • Need to be supplemented by face-to-face strategies to engage all stakeholders in national ICT policy debates and processes.
The focus on national policy processes in 2007 fed into the IGF workshop on multi- stakeholder processes and the workshop which APC organised on ”Equitable Access‘ in Rio de Janeiro just before the IGF opened.
APC also partnered with various organisations in workshops focussing on issues ranging from cyber-security (led by the Chinese government), to the IGF mandate (led by the Internet Governance Caucus), to governance frameworks for critical internet resources (with
27 http://www.apc.org/en/press/governance/world/inspired-aarhus-convention-council-europe-and-apc-
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 12 of 56 ITforChange),28 to multi-stakeholder policy development (led by the French government), to —towards a development agenda“ (led by Bill Drake).29
The APC communications team did an excellent job throughout the forum by publicising issues of concern to us, and by contributing to daily blogs in English, Spanish and French.30 Meanwhile, APC WNSP‘s GenderIT.org team blogged on Feminist Talk from the IGF and contributed to APC blogging and media work.31
Preparations for Third Internet Governance Forum The third IGF will take place in Hyderabad, India Dec. 3-6 2008. APC will focus on consolidation of its access work, strengthen human rights and privacy interventions, launch the second phase of the public participation work being implemented with the Council of Europe and the UN Economic Commission for Africa, and, launch the 2008 edition of Global Information Society Watch.
As the (approximate) midpoint of the IGF 5 year mandate, the Hyderabad IGF will also be a critical point to begin and assessment and evaluation process and will be the first IGF for a reformed and more equally balanced multi-stakeholder advisory group. (MAG)
IGF‘s Multi-stakeholder advisory group APC was very active in responding to the need to rebalance and rotate membership of the Multi-stakeholder advisory group. The process began by calling for recommendations regarding structure, working methods, rotation policy and so in September 2007, culminating in a nomination process.
The IGF agenda mandates that the Advisory group should have 50% government representation, with the other 50% being shared equally amongst business, the 'technical' community and civil society. At the moment, this balance is very much skewed towards business and the technical community. APC's main advocacy has been to promote candidates through a nomination process for civil society representation. APC submitted a slate of APC staff, members and partners to the UN Secretary General in April 2008. APC was also active through the Latin American CSO Caucus which proposed five CSO candidates from the region.
The UN Secretary General will approve a new advisory board, based on existing members, and the additional nominees, in time for the September 2008 open consultation.
Key Issues and workshop plans In addition to the main theme of access, which APC has successful advocated for in the IGF process, issues of public participation (transparency and accountability), sustainable development and internet governance, privacy and content regulation (openness) and development and internet governance will be prioritised.
Of particular concern is the erosion and diminishing visibility of a rights based approach to internet governance in the IGF process. This is due on the one hand to a predominant emphasis on security (without the counter balance of privacy and openness) and the emergence of a very strong child protection lobby within the IGF.
28 http://info.intgovforum.org/yoppy.php?poj=37 29 For more information on the workshops held at this IGF, please visit: http://intgovforum.org/Rio_Schedule_final.html 30 http://blog.apc.org/en/events-list.shtml?conds%5B%5D%5Bshort_id...... %5D=5301802 31 http://www.genderit.org/en/index.shtml?apc=f--e--1&nocache=1
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 13 of 56 APC joined others during the February and May consultations in 2008 to ensure that openness and privacy are once again linked with the main theme of security, and this is now reflected in a main session for the third IGF bringing these three themes together. APC has proposed two workshops for the third IGF - building on our work on equitable access and public participation and we will work with other stakeholders in shaping two of the main thematic sessions.
Thematic sessions have high visibility, are translated into 6 UN languages, and are webcast. APC has been asked by the IGF secretariat to work on the access main session ('Connecting the next billion'), and on the privacy, openness and security session.
2.1.2 U nited N ations G lobal Alliance for ICT4D (G AID )
Unlike the IGF, the GAID has not managed to effectively attract bottom-up multi- stakeholder participation in its activities. One of the problems is that it harnessed itself to a private sector sponsor, Intel, by appointing Intel's Chairman, Craig Barrett as the GAID chairman. The IGF by contrast ensured that the role of chairing the forum remained a UN responsibility, which ensured the legitimacy of the IGF in the eyes of its stakeholders. One can imagine the problems that would have arisen if the UN had allowed Serge Brin of Google, or Bill Gates of Microsoft, to chair the IGF.
GAID's activities tend to mirror the activities of the Intel Foundation. The GAID also created an excessively cumbersome structure consisting of a Steering Committee, Strategy Council, Champions Network and a group of High-level Advisers, in which roles and responsibilities were unclear and power rested only in the Steering Committee.
Consequently, GAID is, in the eyes of many people from civil society and government, a difficult space to engage effectively and there is a perception that GAID represents an opportunity cost for ICTD by occupying space that could be better utilised by a different formation.
APC tried to coordinate a community of expertise on social, public and community entrepreneurship within GAID but was not able to sustain the initiative and has let it lapse. APC has thus tended to focus its global advocacy on access on the IGF which is a more viable space for policy influence and multi-stakeholder engagement and which can justify the expenditure of time and resources.
APC WNSP sits on the steering committees of two communities of expertise on gender that focus on 1) development and information society policies and 2) education, workforce and entrepreneurship as part of its follow-up of gender advocacy post WSIS. Much of the activities of these two networks are driven by the members of the networks and goes beyond GAID's programs. WNSP's focus in participating in these COE's has been more about contributing to the reshaping of the gender advocacy networks that was built during WSIS. In view of this, WNSP co-organised the Strategy Planning Workshop of the Feminist Network on Gender, Development and Information Society Policies in Bangalore, India, 5-7 October 2007. The aim of the meeting was to bring together organisations engaged in gender, development and ICT policies, to conduct a gender analysis of existing ICT policies and approaches and to facilitate and strengthen the partnership of gender and ICT advocates. Participants agreed to follow-up on a number of research and advocacy collaborations, including building a feminist framework for engaging with information society policies in such areas as content regulation, national ICT policies and civic participation, and gender
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 14 of 56 violence in digital spaces. While the network engaged the UNGAID through a community of expertise focused on gender policy participants also agreed to evolve an advocacy network that is not identified with any multilateral institutions or intergovernmental process, which will have feminism at its core but include a broader gender and development framework.
2.1.3 U N Commission on the Status of W omen (U N CSW )
Chat Garcia Ramilo, Programme Manager, Jennifer Radloff, Regional Coordinator for Africa, and Katerina Fialova, GenderIT.org Policy Monitor Coordinator attended the 52nd session of UN CSW in New York, USA from 25 to 29 February. On 29 February, APC WNSP co-hosted with the UN Division for the Advancement of Women a side-event on women's communication rights "Why the purse feels empty: Financing for women's equitable access to information and communication technologies".32
The panel brought together donor, development agency and civil society perspectives and is part of the APC WNSP's strategy to build stronger connections between communications and women's movements. We aim to advance women's participation in public policy and ICT policy-making at the national, regional and global levels by deepening understanding of the links between women's rights and ICT issues The 52nd session of UN CSW focused on —Financing for gender equality and the empowerment of women“, APC WNSP brought together a mix of ICT policy and gender advocates to discuss effective financing mechanisms to advance gender equality policies in the information society.
2.1.4 O rganisation for Economic Co-operation and D evelopment (O ECD )
The OECD held its 2nd Ministerial Meeting on the 'Future of the Internet Economy33' in June 2008. In late 2007, the OECD Secretariat approached APC to encourage us to join other Civil Society Organisations in forming a Reference Group who would work together to build CSO participation in the preparatory process and the Ministerial meeting itself.
APC had two priority objectives in its work with the OECD process: a) to influence government policy documents b) to influence the process of institutionalising Civil Society participation in the OECD
In relation to (a) APC is new to the OECD. The OECD is the most important intergovernmental body developing public policies that impact on economic and social development. Although it tends to work from a 'soft governance' approach (that is, most of the policies guidelines and recommendations are taken up by the member states on a voluntary/opt in basis) OECD policy guidelines are incredibly influential.
As this was APC's first formal interaction with the OECD, it was difficult to contribute significantly in the policy development process, but it was an important step in the process in terms of long term engagement. APC has developed good contacts, demonstrated our ability to bring in perspectives from more diverse network than the traditional CSOs who work with the OECD, and has familiarising ourselves with the OECD‘s modus operandi.
32 For audio and article on the event: http://www.genderit.org/en/index.shtml?w=e&x=95572 33 http://www.oecd.org/site/0,3407,en_21571361_38415463_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 15 of 56 In relation to (b) œ APC and the many CSOs who participated in the Ministerial were successful in lobbying for the recognition of CSOs as a formal advisory structure of the OECD œ something that CSOs had been working towards for the last 10 years.
Concurrently, colleagues from the internet and technical community followed parallel path to concretise an advisory committee to facilitate their participation in the OECD.
APC will remain involved in the process of establishing a civil society advisory committee (CSAC) which, together with the new internet/technical advisory committee, will complement the long standing business and industry advisory committee (BIAC) and trade union advisory committee (TUAC).
APC's Executive Director was invited to speak at the closing panel of the Ministerial meeting joining the Secretary General of the OECD, Vint Cerf (for the internet/technical community), Peter Robinson (for the Business and Industry Community) focused on the need for increased cooperation among OECD member states and developing countries, particularly in achieving universal and affordable access to the internet, and in ensuring a rights-oriented approach to internet policy and regulation.34
The OECD will host a workshop at the IGF in Hyderabad on this new approach to inclusion of multiple stakeholders in the OECD process which is consistent with the WSIS principles of participation.
2.1.5 APC led or hosted public events and w orkshops
In addition to the public workshops led by APC during the IGF, APC organised events and workshops in all of the global policy spaces identified as strategic for our advocacy for open, affordable and universal access during the 2007-8 period.
Equitable Access Event, Rio de Janeiro, 10 November 2007
APC took advantage of the large number of people gathered in Rio de Janeiro for the second IGF to host the 10th APC council meeting and a one-day public event on equitable access. The goals of the event were to:
• Start a process of consolidating emerging lessons and knowledge on innovative access solutions • Broaden —access for all“ debates at the IGF and strategically integrate access debates across international, national and community levels • Outline key issues and strategies that are being undertaken to address each of the four themes on which the event focused:
i) business models; ii) tools and technologies; iii) policy and regulation; iv) people, networks and capacities
Around 100 people attended the event, making it a valuable opportunity for sharing experiences and identifying issues, strategies, and recommendations. A discussion paper
34 http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/OECD_Closing_18062008.pdf
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 16 of 56 was commissioned on each theme and made available prior to the event on a wiki page.35 In May 2008, APC commissioned experts to provide additional commentaries on the papers which are, along with an event report, available on the APC website.36 The commentaries are particularly interesting, providing different and sometimes critical perspectives on the original papers.
Hello Regulator? Regulatory Authorities' Communication Practices, GKP III, Kuala Lumpur, December 2007
APC hosted a workshop with LiRNE (Learning Initiatives on Reforms for Network Economies37) at the third Global Knowledge conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The workshop —Hello Regulator? Regulatory Authorities' Communication Practices“ brought together the regulatory sector, consumer advocacy, civil society and private sector representatives in a roundtable format to discuss regulatory transparency and effectiveness, using regulator's websites as a discussion tool. The workshop allowed space for debate about regulatory authorities' information practices and new and emerging information needs for civil society and advocacy groups. The session offered new insights for encouraging more transparent regulatory practices and uses of information that is more ended-user. Organizers also expected to achieve new insight as to what kinds of information civil society needs access to, in order to continue lobbying regulatory authorities for better information practices.
Public Participation and Transparency in Internet Governance, Geneva, May 2007
APC, with the Council of Europe (CoE) and the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) hosted a one day stakeholder consultation entitled: —Public Participation in Internet Governance: Towards a code of good practice building on the principles of WSIS and the Aarhus Convention", on 23 May 2008 in Geneva. 38
The consultation discussed the results of the exploratory research study into a —Code of good practice on public participation, access to information and transparency in Internet governance“ done by David Souter through a trilateral initiative of the CoE, UNECE and APC.39 The study emerged from a workshop at the second Internet Governance Forum in Rio in November 2007. The aim of the proposed code of good practice is to encourage all the institutions which play a role in some aspect of governing the internet to commit to ensuring transparency, public participation (of all stakeholders) and access to information.
The objective of the consultation was to explore the purpose and scope, as well as limitations and risks of the proposed instrument with panellists and participants. Related initiatives in the field of internet governance, such as the UN Working Group on Internet Governance and the International Telecommunication Union consultation on public participation in ITU processes, were discussed and analysed in respect of their compatibility or complementarities with the proposed instrument.
35 http://access.apc.org/index.php/Main_Page 36 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/briefs/openaccess/all/equitable-access-papers-and-commentaries 37 http://www.lirne.net 38 http://www.unece.org/env/pp/related.htm 39 Research report is available on request.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 17 of 56 The consultation also aimed to identify other interested stakeholders groups with a view to associating them with the initiative. A representative from the UN Economic Commission for Africa announced that the initiative would be considered at the African Regional Meeting on follow up to WSIS in November 2008. The consultation laid the groundwork for a proposed workshop to be held at the third Internet Governance Forum, in Hyderabad, India, from 3-6 December 2008.
2.2 Linking G lobal Advocacy to Regional and N ational Advocacy
During the WSIS process there were many connections between national and regional spaces and the global space provided by the Summit. Regional WSIS conferences were held in most parts of the world and fed into the WSIS preparatory process. In the post-WSIS period, connections between national and regional spaces and the global policy spaces are much more tenuous. Nevertheless, there is a sense in which the WSIS and its outcome documents created a multi-stakeholder and trans-scalar dynamic which has legitimised and supported links between global, national and regional efforts.
This has two main dimensions and is stated in the Tunis Agenda:
• Building an inclusive development-oriented information society will be done on a multi-stakeholder basis involving governments, private sector, civil society and the UN and other international organisations.
• Sustainable implementation and follow-up of the WSIS outcomes must take place nationally, regionally and internationally.40
Horizontally, WSIS developed a norm for multi-stakeholder participation beyond the inter- governmental activities of states on the basis that building an information society involved all key sectors of society and could not be solely driven by states and inter-governmental organisations. Vertically, WSIS recognised that building a global information society required multi-stakeholder activity at national, regional and global levels. Moreover, the relationship between there levels is dynamic. There is no hierarchy of levels but rather a relational intersection between them.
APC has been able to engage in a number of these trans-scalar and multi-stakeholder policy arenas in the aftermath of WSIS and the experience gained is feeding back into our advocacy practices. The primary arenas at regional levels have been in Africa and Latin America, with more limited activity in Asia and Europe.
2.2.1 Africa
The key regional dynamic in Africa over the past year has been the question of how best to increase access to broadband infrastructure on the east coast of Africa. Initially in 2005-6, there was a complex multi-stakeholder interplay between governments, private sector, civil society and international development finance institutions over the structure and financing of the East African Submarine Cable System (EASSy). The private sector telecommunications companies on the east coast of Africa formed a consortium to lay a submarine cable up the east coast but were unable to fully finance it. After approaching the
40 Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, paragraph 83
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 18 of 56 World Bank and other development finance institutions (DFIs) for additional finance, the DFIs indicated that they would not put finance into a monopoly structure that would not bring the cost of international bandwidth down significantly. The WASC/SAT3/SAFE cable on the west coast had been run since 2003 by a ”club consortium‘ of private sector telecommunications companies which had used their monopoly over the provision of international bandwidth to charge prohibitively high prices. APC had organised a meeting in Mombassa in March 2006 to raise concerns from the perspective of civil society, universities and internet service providers, while governments on the east coast discussed the issue of open access to EASSy within the regional framework of NEPAD and engaged in discussions with the EASSy consortium and the DFI‘s. This initiative led to the drafting of the Kigali protocol in which governments laid down a set of policy and regulatory principles to ensure that the EASSy cable would operate on open access principles and could not operate as an unchecked monopoly and charge high prices for international bandwidth.
At this point, in the first few months of 2007, political consensus on the Kigali Protocol broke down. Tensions erupted between the governments of Kenya and South Africa and Kenya declared it would not sign the protocol but would proceed with its own cable, the East Africa Marine System (TEAMS). Only half the 24 governments signed the protocol and the EASSy consortium went ahead with hiring an equipment supplier to lay the cable. At this point a US-led consortium also entered the terrain with its cable project, Seacom. And the governments who were signatories to the Kigali Protocol declared that they would proceed with a NEPAD broadband network called UhuruNet, which would not only cover the east coast but also the west coast. The situation thus changed dramatically throughout the rest of 2007 and in early 2008 with the prospect of four cables competing to supply international access to the internet and the question moved on to who would be the first to get their cable landed and under what conditions.
Within this dynamic trans-scalar space, APC organised a civil society workshop in Kigali in October 2007 to coincide with the ITU‘s Connect Africa! Summit41. APC also engaged in a research project to analyse the implementation of the SAT3 cable on the west coast to better understand the dynamics of its monopoly implementation and to find a basis to engage in advocacy to reduce the cost of international bandwidth on the west coast42. In response to the changing regional dynamics regarding the submarine cables and the emerging issue of regional economic integration, APC began developing a plan to build two regional ICTD networks in East Africa and West and Central Africa to engage in advocacy activities both regionally and nationally on the issue of access to affordable universal broadband43. The East African ICTD network was launched in Nairobi in May 2008 and the West and Central African ICTD network, called GOREeTIC, was launched on Goree Island, Senegal in June 2008. These activities involve engaging in trans-scalar spaces at national, regional and global level simultaneously and in multiple stakeholder relations.
2.2.2 Latin America
Political commitments and goals for a next phase of the regional action plan (eLAC 2008- 2010) on the information society were drafted by ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin
41 http://www.apc.org/en/press/civil-society-calls-new-governance-make-internet-a-0 42 See http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/research/openaccess/africa/case-open-access-communications-infrastructure-afr and http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/research/openaccess/africa/case-open-access-africa-mauritius-case-study 43 IDRC-supported project ‘Communication for influence - Linking advocacy, dissemination and research by building ICTD networks in Central, East and West Africa (CICEWA)’ http://www.apc.org/en/projects/policy/africa/communication-influence-central-east-and- west-afri
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 19 of 56 America and the Caribbean) and governments in Latin America during 200744. Since its inception in 2005, multi-stakeholder participation in eLAC has been resisted to some degree by ECLAC and some governments. APC has been at the center of advocacy and lobbying to ensure multi-stakeholder participation.
APC started monitoring the planning and implementation of the eLAC in 2005. Our involvement focused mainly on two aspects: a) participation, and, b) content. APC facilitated the participation of civil society organisations in the region in eLAC through the creation and dissemination of content on its LAC policy monitor site45.
For the 2008-2010 eLAC period, APC advocated for the inclusion of a gender perspective, free and open source software and the use of alternative technologies. APC, in collaboration with ALER, presented formal proposals to the eLAC2010 plan and advocated for the inclusion of civil society delegates in the eLAC coordination mechanism, at that time made up of government representatives from four countries in LAC.
Results were good. By the end of 2007 governments agreed to have civil society participation in the eLAC2010 inter-ministerial meeting in El Salvador in February 2008 and to have civil society delegates in the eLAC coordination mechanism. This represents a crucial gain for participatory governance at regional level. Inclusion of civil society participation in the eLAC coordination mechanism will increase the quality and impact of eLAC implementation. It also represents a challenge for civil society organisations in the region. Within their heterogeneity, civil society organisations have to build a common intervention agenda.
As part of our engagement in the trans-scalar policy arenas, APC is implementing CILAC46, an initiative oriented to link research, research communications, networking and advocacy at the sub-regional level in Andean countries. The initiative will look at the implementation of telecom reform in the Andean region from a political perspective, focusing on sector performance, access to broadband infrastructure, practises of governance, and policy environments. CILAC will look at the interplay between ICT and telecom policy at national levels to enhance cross-border connectivity at the sub-regional level. It will explore what regulatory frameworks are needed at the sub-regional level to harmonise the delivery of universal affordable access to ICT infrastructure in the Andean region.
2.2.3 Asia
APC does not have dedicated staff working in ICT policy in Asia. We are however, through members in the region, working with international NGOs on privacy and censorship issues.
Mobile telephony use has exploded all over the planet; in developed and developing countries. The Asia Pacific region has had one of the highest growth rates in mobile telephony uptake. Relatively inexpensive and portable, mobile phones and applications from low-end short message service (SMS) to higher-end emerging third generation (3G) and location-based services, have led to mobile being called —the internet of the masses“. APC engaged in a research process with the Open Net Initiative to explore the extent to which the mobile telephony space is also becoming an arena for censorship, content filtering and
44 http://www.cepal.org/socinfo/elac/ 45 http://lac.derechos.apc.org/ 46 Communication for influence – Linking advocacy, dissemination and research by building an ICTD network in the Andean Region. (CILAC) http://www.apc.org/en/projects/policy/lac/communication-influence-andean-region-latin-americ
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 20 of 56 surveillance. The technologies to do so are definitely available, and the contexts countries as the Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Cambodia and South Korea are to be conducive to states engaging in such practices.
This exploratory research will provide a basis to help the ONI develop a framework, as well as technical and analytical tools to audit a country‘s mobile telephony space, and extend ONI‘s initial research to this arena. The research is led by APC members in the above- mentioned five countries and has a trans-scalar dimension within civil society as a joint activity between a global NGO, ONI, and national civil society actors.
2.2.4 N ational policy spaces
APC has come to the end of a first phase of national ICT policy advocacy processes developed within the framework of three initiatives: the Catalysing Access to ICTs in Africa (CATIA)47 programme, the Building Communication Opportunities Alliance (BCO)48 and an EED-supported initiative to build national ICT policy portals with APC members. The CATIA and BCO processes involved capacity building within civil society to engage in policy debate in national policy arenas with other stakeholders; governments, the private sector and the media. The policy issues were to be identified by each national advocacy group and a plan of action then developed as to how the group would engage in advocacy on the issue. A broad range of ICT issues were chosen which ranged from community radio in Nigeria, a new ICT policy in Kenya, a backbone network in DRC, community radio in Pakistan, ICTD policy in Ecuador and Bolivia and broadband policy in Bangladesh.
A practice of undertaking advocacy in partnership with other stakeholders developed - pioneered by the Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) - and involved a conscious engagement in meetings and online spaces between stakeholders and extensive deliberative discussions to build consensus between them. APC has captured this multi-stakeholder advocacy practice in a primer49 which partially informs the next wave of national policy advocacy which the APC-facilitated regional networks in East and West Africa and in the Andes will undertake. The key difference is that each national network member will focus on a single issue determined jointly by the regional network. The West and Central African ICT4D network, GOREeTIC, for example, will focus on universal access funds in six countries over the next six months. This singular focus will make it easier to coordinate activities and share information at the national level but also enable the network to take up advocacy on a common issue at regional level with regional governance structures such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the West African Telecommunications Regulators Association (WATRA).
A proposal for national policy advocacy on lowering the cost of bandwidth in South Africa, Ghana and Nigeria is currently under discussion with the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa50. APC is currently involved in a multi-country research study coordinated by the US SSRC (Social Science Research Council) into media piracy practices in Brazil, India, Russia and South Africa51. APC is responsible for the South African study and for developing an
47 See the Gamos & Big World independent assessment: http://www.gamos.org/icts/catia-catalysing-access-to-ict-in-africa.html 48 http://www.bcoalliance.org/ 49 ‘Frequently asked questions about multi-stakeholder partnerships in ICTD: a guide for national ICT policy animators’, September 2007 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/manuals/policy/all/frequently-asked-questions-about-multi-stakeholder 50 http://www.foundation-partnership.org/ 51 IDRC-supported project ‘Research on Media Piracy and Access to Knowledge in South Africa’ http://www.apc.org/en/projects/media/africa/media-piracy-study The Ford Foundation supports the SSRC component of the project.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 21 of 56 advocacy campaign using the findings of the research to strengthen access to knowledge and intellectual property policy within the framework of the India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) co-operation framework. Here the aim would be to develop advocacy on a trans-scalar basis within each national policy context; inter-regionally between India, Brazil and South Africa œ IBSA; and globally in the context of WIPO and the US government‘s practices in enforcing intellectual property rights internationally through the global anti-piracy industry.
APC is also in the early stages of exploring possibilities of advancing access to knowledge by countering maximalist intellectual property rights enforcement. We want to understand how bilateral trade agreements with countries in the global south are used to extend northern rights holders' interests to the detriment of the global development agenda.
The national ICT policy portals initiative is in a fundraising phase and will seek to take the work forward by integrating lessons from the first phase of the project‘s development.
2.2.5 Connecting the global: manifesto on affordable universal broadband
The initiatives in Africa and Latin America connect with the activity to build consensus on internet access within the Internet Governance Forum. Many of the inputs into the access workshops at the IGF in Rio de Janeiro came from national and regional experiences which forged a rough consensus on what it would take to connect the next billion people to the internet52. For the IGF in Hyderabad, APC‘s advocacy goal with respect to access is to work with a number of key stakeholders œ the International Chamber of Commerce, the Internet Society, the Governments of Kenya and India, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus in a multi-stakeholder coalition to formalise this rough consensus into a manifesto on affordable universal broadband access to the internet. Such a manifesto would be an exercise of soft power, that, while not being formally endorsed by the IGF (as it is a purely deliberative body), would exert policy influence back into the regional and national policy arenas on a trans-scalar arc carried into the polycentric institutions of governance and regulation at regional and national levels.
2.3. N urturing and G row ing the Existing N etw ork of APC M embers and Partners Engaged w ith ICT Policies
2.3.1 APC members
APC gained five new members from 2007-8: KICTANet, Kenya (May-08), Open Institute, Cambodia (May-08), Oneworld - Platform for Southeast Europe Foundation (OWPSEE) , Bosnia-Herzegovina (August-08), AZUR Développement, Republic of Congo (July-08), Sulá Batsú, Cost Rica (April-08). For more information about these APC members see Appendix 2. APC now has a total of 52 members53 in around 40 countries.
APC‘s approach to member engagement in ICT was to maximise their involvement in the global and regional processes described above, and in linking in national policy advocacy.
52 http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/openaccess/all/building-consensus-internet-access-igf 53 See http://www.apc.org/en/members for full list and map of APC members.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 22 of 56 The regional ICTD networks referred to earlier (active in Africa and LAC) are driven by primarily by APC member organisations.
Below is an updated table of APC members and partners and the type of policy issue they prioritise: Member or partner* Country Primary policy advocacy / policy space Alternatives-DRC DRC ICT infrastructure ArabDev Egypt Access to technology AZUR Developpement Congo Brazzaville Access BlueLink Bulgaria Environment and ICTs BFES Bangladesh Access to health and information Bytes4All Bangladesh ICT infrastructure and community radio Bytes4All Pakistan VoIP c2o Australia Regional ICT policy Colnodo Colombia National ICT policy and legislation EFOSSNet* Ethiopia FOSS and ICT policy FMA Philippines Government transparency and accountability Fantsuam Foundation Nigeria FOSS and access to infrastructure IT4Change* India IPRs and open access to content ITeM Uruguay IPRs and national ICT policy KICTANet Kenya Multi-stakeholder partnerships and increasing access to infrastructure LaNeta Mexico Communication rights and spectrum allocation Nodo Tau Argentina National ICT policy and legislation Open Institute Cambodia Rural connectivity OWPSEE Bosnia-Herzegovina IPRs, ICTs, and access to education PROTEGE QV Cameroon National and Regional ICT policy and legislation Pangea Spain Gender and ICT policy RITS Brazil Telecentres and computer refurbishing Sangonet South Africa Mobile Activism, National ICT policy Wougnet Uganda Gender and ICT policy Panos Institute West Senegal Media activism and ICT policy Africa (CIPACO)* StrawberryNet Romania FOSS Womensnet South Africa Gender and ICT policy ZaMirNet Croatia FOSS and IPRs
The most comprehensive APC-wide initiative that involves members is the Ford supported Global Information Society Watch initiative which is reported on in detail below.
2.3.2 Strategic partnerships
APC‘s diverse network of partners, along with our members, have rich experience at international, regional and national levels, and strengthens APC‘s policy advocacy. Below are some of the partners we work with and the different policy and social movement spaces on which we focus. A more complete list of partners is attached as Appendix 7.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 23 of 56
International partners Policy space Issue/advocacy 80/20 Thinking Privacy standards and Privacy training AWID54 Women's movement ICTs and violence against women spaces BASIS/ICC (International IGF Equitable access, open access Chamber of Commerce) BCO55 UN (MDGs), IGF, WSIS Giving voice, media and ICTs, and Follow-up, CSTD poverty alleviation CONGO (Conference of IGF, WSIS follow-up, Public Participation, WSIS monitoring NGOs) CSTD and implementation Council Of Europe (COE) IGF, WSIS follow-up Public participation, content regulation CRIS Campaign WSIS/UNESCO56/WIPO57 Communication rights Freedom of Expression IGF Rights based approach to public Project policy advocacy GKP58 GAID Multi-stakeholder partnerships, social innovation IGF Access to Knowledge IGF Access to Knowledge Coalition IGF Bill of Rights Coalition IGF Communication/internet rights IGF Open Standards Dynamic IGF Open Standards Coalition IGF Privacy Dynamic Coalition IGF Privacy Internet Governance Project IGF, OECD Global Governance, participation, (IGP) IISD IGF Sustainable development and ICTs/Climate Change ISOC IGF Equitable access, open access Panos London IGF, FAO, GK Fora Communication/internet rights, media reform, multi-stakeholder participation Privacy International National level policy Privacy advocacy Public Voice - EPIC59 IGF, OECD60 CSO involvement in OECD processes, intellectual property rights (IPRs), trade and censorship UNDP61 National advocacy and Pro-poor access policy advocacy IGF United Nations Economic IGF, WSIS follow-up Public Participation, Content Commission For Europe regulation (UNECE)
54 Association of Women’s Rights in Development, www.awid.org/ 55 Building Communication Opportunities Alliance, http://www.bcoalliance.org/ (of which APC is a member) 56 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, www.unesco.org 57 World Intellectual Property Organisation, www.wipo.int/ 58 Global Knowledge Partnership, www.globalknowledge.org/ 59 APC, the Internet Governance Project (IGP) (www.internetgovernance.org/), and the Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC) (www.epic.org/) are collaborating in this initiative. 60 www.oecd.org/ 61 United Nations Development Programme, www.undp.org/
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 24 of 56
Regional partners and spaces Communications Regulatory Regulatory reform processes Regulation, convergence Authority for Southern Africa (Africa) (CRASA) DECAL – LAC Communication Regional policy processes and Communication rights Rights Campaign civil society platforms/movements (World Social Forum/Americas Social Forum, eLAC 2007) REDISTIC62 ICT4D community and regional Multi-stakeholder policy processes (LAC) partnerships for ICT4D EDRI63 EU/Commission policy, OECD Internet Rights (Europe) ONI64 OpenNet Initiative (Asia) Surveillance and censorship of mobile telephony in Asia West African Telecommuni- Regulatory reform processes Regulation, convergence cations Regulatory Authority (Africa) (WATRA)
During WSIS, APC served as a bridge between different networks. Building on this role is a strategy that we are exploring more closely in order to sharpen the focus of our global public policy work. We have begun to explore the potential for creating a forum for existing ”issue‘ networks65, many of whom APC is already collaborating with, in which they can share their analyses and expertise towards developing a joint strategy that can amplify the influence of global civil society in internet public policy.
2.4. G lobal Information Society W atch (G ISW atch)
GISWatch is an annual publication that monitors the implementation of key international and regional agreements on the information society from a civil society perspective. While a particular focus is on the implementation of WSIS commitments, agreements reached at other forums, such as the IGF, or regional plans such as the African Action Plan (Accra, Ghana) are also relevant.
As mentioned in our last report, APC partnered with ITeM, its member in Uruguay, to start produce the first GISWatch report, which was launched in May 2007 and enthusiastically received.66 Subsequently, HIVOS67 joined APC and ITeM as a core partner in the project. In preparation for the expansion of the partnership HIVOS contracted Alan Finlay (who edited the country reports in GISWatch 2007) to compile a review of the status of GISWatch and a proposal for a way forward, taking into account, amongst other things:
62 Le Red sobre el Impacto Social de las Tecnologîas de la Información y Comunicación, www.redistic.org/ (Network for the Social Impact of ICTs) 63 European Digital Rights Initiative, www.edri.org/ 64 OpenNet Initiative, http://opennet.net/ 65 The civil society issue networks implicated in Internet governance can be enumerated as follows (see Table 1): ICANN civil society ; Free software, open access to knowledge movement; Digital Rights (civil liberties – human rights networks); Media policy and alternative media production groups; ICT4D groups (Information and Communication Technology for Development) Milton L. Mueller: Information and Communication Technologies, paper presented at the International Seminar on Civil Society Intervention in the Reform of Global Public Policy, convened by the Ford Foundation and the Institute for a New Reflection on Governance, 2007 66 See http://www.globaliswatch.org/comments for some comments on the 2007 report. 67 http://www.hivos.nl
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 25 of 56
• Potential ownership/partnership models, and possible roles and responsibilities; • Editorial mechanisms and production processes; • Different possibilities for the GISW product, including ideas regarding its essential features, distribution, partners, and sustainability; and • The expectations of contributors and their capacity development needs.
One of the main findings included in the report is that —GISWatch presents a unique opportunity for collaboration between three established and influential non-profit organisations. Each partner brings potentially strong networks to the table, with only some overlap. Each partner has core competencies or areas of experience that can be effectively leveraged for the project. The partners also have strong experience in the national and global ICT arenas. At the same time, there is evidence that the product is needed, and that it can easily niche itself in the current environment.“
The three partners met in London, from 10 to 11 October 2007, to discuss arrangements for the hosting and management of initiatives, roles and responsibilities, the thematic focus for 2008, fundraising needs and content related issues. The meeting established two committees in which all three partners are represented, a steering committee responsible for providing overall direction to the project as well as a coordinating committee responsible for working closely with the project manager in the implementation of the project.
The partner representatives at the London meeting were effectively constituted as the steering committee. The London meeting confirmed Pablo Accuosto of ITeM as the project manager for GISWatch 2008, and approved the appointment - again - of Alan Finlay as country report editor. Subsequently, Natasha Primo (APC), Ines Campanella (ITeM) and Monique Doppert (HIVOS) was nominated onto the coordinating committee.
In terms of role differentiation, the partners agreed that for 2008, APC would host the project while ITeM would hold responsibility for the development of the web site. HIVOS would take responsibility for raising funds for future GISWatch issues, starting with 2009. Through their representatives on the coordinating committee, all three partners would assist with identifying potential authors for the project.
The London meeting participants - the steering committee - further agreed that the GISWatch theme for 2008 would be —access.“ Subsequently, the initial proposal for a focus on —access“ theme was revised and the scope narrowed to —access to infrastructure.“ Further, APC proposed that for 2009 the theme should be —access to knowledge,“ and managed to secure and expression of interest as well as an offer of funding support from the IDRC for GISWatch 2009.
Challenges Project implementation has not been without its challenges. In March 2007, the project manager, Pablo Accuosto based at ITeM, resigned. As there was not enough time to advertise for and hire replacement, the project management responsibilities has had to be divided among those already with in the project. In response, APC has had to take on the lead coordination role - through Natasha Primo - while the contract with the country report editor, Alan Finlay - has had to be extended to include compilation and editing of the entire issue. The 2008 edition will follow the same structure as GISWatch 2007, including regional and country reports, an overview of the institutions active around —access to infrastructure“ issues, a chapter on access indicators, as well as coverage of the following themes: net neutrality; open standards; spectrum management; trends in technology; and, content.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 26 of 56 The current issue of GISWatch is supported by Ford Foundation (APC‘s allocation), HIVOS, Bread for All, as well as a kind contribution from ITeM. In the last two months, APC has also had discussions with SIDA to increase African country participation in GISWatch, with the possibility of three-year funding support.
However, fundraising for GISWatch 2008 has provided the partners with another challenge and has meant that we had to downscale some plans for GISWatch 2008. Specifically, the need for workshops with country report authors to strengthen ICT policy analysis and writing skills has had to be forfeited. Similarly, the review of the GISWatch 2007 also indicated the need for a more interactive online platform. An extensive web site upgrade has had to be postponed to 2009, when we hope to have raised sufficient funds.
Achievements Following the publication of GISWatch 2007 APC received several expressions of interest to participate in the subsequent editions, ensuring an even broader network of contributors for the following issues. Some of these contributions have already been agreed. For instance, the Swiss NGO Platform on the Information Society, comunica-ch, has agreed to write a report on ICT policies in Switzerland for the 2008 report. Furthermore, with HIVOS joining the initiative the core team is able to extend the participation œ through the country reports to more countries in regions that were previously underrepresented, such as for example countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and countries like Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
As at 25 June APC had secured commitment for 38 country reports. From 22 country reports in the 2007 edition, GISWatch 2008 will have close to 40. Eighteen APC member organisations are writing country reports for the report.
A table of contents for the 2008 GISWatch is attached as Appendix 9.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 27 of 56 Appendix 1: H ow APC Implements ICT Policy Advocacy
The APC network has been involved in global, regional, and national ICT policy processes since 2000, focusing on human rights and social inclusion in the information society and on addressing the —digital divide.“ Two APC programmes in particular, CIPP and WNSP, place substantial focus on ICT policy. Their activities, with the support of APC‘s network development manager and executive director, constitute the hub of APC policy advocacy in global, regional, and national spaces. This report focuses primarily on the CIPP work that is supported by the Ford Foundation.68 APC‘s work with its strong community of members and partners to promote ICT policy advocacy on these levels is also reviewed in this report.
1. Communications and Information Policy Programme (CIPP)
1.1 Programme Overview CIPP‘s overall goal is to ensure that the interests of civil society are addressed in ICT policy and supported in ICT practice. It seeks to build more inclusive ICT decision-making processes by facilitating civil society engagement through building their capacity in a range of ways, and supporting advocacy at national, regional and international levels. Out of this broad mandate, CIPP developed a modular framework for ICT policy work, in which the activities of each module reinforce each other, as depicted in the figure below:69
COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY
INFORMATION ADVOCACY & RESEARCH RESOURCES NETWORKING
CAPACITY BUILDING
Figure 1: Diagrammatic representation of CIPP activities CIPP maintains a gender equality perspective, which involves incorporating gender considerations in all ICT policy processes, and a commitment to sustainable development. CIPP also endeavours to incorporate members in its policy work wherever feasible.
1.2 Priorities for 2006-2008 Global ICT policy advocacy in the post-WSIS environment: • Advocating for openness in relation to access (infrastructure), content, technology and policy and decision-making processes
68 A separate report on APC WNSP’s policy advocacy is available on request. 69 Research generates information resources that inform the content of APC’s communications strategy in specific contexts. The research module also incorporates a dissemination strategy for keeping partners and relevant stakeholders informed on outputs. Such information resources not only aid advocacy and networking capabilities but also form an important component of capacity building activities, which in turn, strengthens advocacy.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 28 of 56 • Specifically, continuing to open and sustain a space for the issue of universal and affordable access to the internet on the agenda of the IGF70 • Advocating open access models as an appropriate global public policy for addressing universal and affordable access • Seeking to place access as a development priority in the context of the UN's Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) initiative and the UN Global Alliance for ICTs for Development (GAID). • Seeing to what extent access can be advanced within regional spaces such as the eLAC200771 Action Plan, the —Fibre for Africa“ campaign,72 and within the regional policy space in southern Asia • Extending the reach of these regional spaces into the global space of the IGF and other global spaces as appropriate • Engaging with the WSIS implementation agenda which has divided the policy issues of the WSIS Geneva Programme of Action into eleven action lines.
Regional policy work Africa73 • Growing the user base and content partnerships of the French and English online policy resources • Researching and supporting the development of municipal networks74 in Africa • Campaigning for open access regulation and new business models to manage and govern bandwidth initiatives such as the EASSy and SAT-3 western Africa undersea cables • Facilitating debate, discussion and collaboration between civil society, regulators and policymakers, the media, and the private sector on ICT issues in Africa • Collaborating with governments in the regional implementation of WSIS and regional ICT strategies.
Asia75 • Supporting a national campaign led by the Bangladesh Friendship Education Society (BFES), a new APC member,76 to persuade its government to allow open access to the submarine cable that was landed on the coast of Bangladesh in 2006 • Supporting a campaign in India which is pushing for all digital content related to development to be openly accessible and affordable for all • Supporting a national campaign to persuade the Pakistani government to reform its laws in order to permit community radio in Pakistan • Supporting research on surveillance, censorship, and monitoring of mobile telephony in southeast Asia and in the Philippines, Cambodia, South Korea, and Bangladesh
LAC77 • Supporting national policy advocacy and capacity building in Bolivia and Ecuador
70 Access is one of the four themes of the annual Internet Governance Forum, the others being openness, security and diversity. APC’s efforts definitely contributed to the inclusion of “access.” 71 eLAC2007 is the Regional Plan of Action for the Information Society in Latin America and the Caribbean, www.eclac.org/socinfo/elac/default.asp?idioma=IN 72 www.fibreforafrica.net/ 73 http://africa.rights.apc.org, http://rights.apc.org/training/contents/ictpol_en?set_language=en, and http://rights.apc.org/training/contents/ictpol_fr?set_language=fr 74 A municipal network is a wireless broadband network built and operated on behalf of a municipality which offers low cost internet access to residents of the municipality. 75 http://asia.rights.apc.org/ 76 For a list of all new members who joined APC during the reporting period, please see Appendix 1. 77 http://lac.derechos.apc.org/
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 29 of 56 • Participating, and ensuring the inclusion of civil society, in the implementation of the regional strategy, eLAC Action Plan 2007, and WSIS regional implementation in collaboration with APC partners and members • Collaborating with the community media sector on ensuring access and enabling policy for civil voices to be heard • Researching universal access funds, open access models, and new technologies as a means of developing advocacy around new approaches to ICT4D • Working in collaboration with partners to develop an approach to monitoring and engaging with regulators on implementation of ICT policy in development zones.
National ICT Policy Capacity Building and Advocacy • Expanding the network of national ICT policy portals maintained by members and partners78 • Supporting national initiatives in Senegal, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Uganda, Bangladesh and India.
1.3 The CIPP Team During the period covered by the report, the CIPP team consisted of:
Willie Currie, manager US and South Africa Valeria Betancourt, CIPP Latin America coordinator Ecuador Natasha Primo, national ICT policy advocacy coordinator South Africa Coura Fall, Africa ICT policy advocacy coordinator Senegal Natalie Brown, intern assisting CIPP national policy activities South Africa/Canada Analia Lavin, specialist editor Uruguay Florencia Flores, LAC ICT policy editor (freelance) Uruguay Alan Finlay, Africa ICT Policy Monitor and Chakula79 editor South Africa Abiodun Jagun, Africa research coordinator (up to Dec 2007) Nigeria/UK
With the exception of the manager, the team works part time. They work very closely with Karen Banks, APC‘s network development manager, Anriette Esterhuysen, APC‘s executive director, as well as APC members active in ICT policy advocacy.
2 The W omen‘s Networking Support Programme (APC W NSP)
2.1 Programme Overview APC WNSP was established in 1993 to support women's networking and women's advocacies. It has since played a leading role in gender and ICT advocacy in national, regional and international arenas. Its overall goal is to promote gender equality and women‘s empowerment through advocacy at all levels, and to promote the strategic use of applications and tools by women to strengthen their networking. The programme works to:
• Promote incorporation of gender perspectives in ICT policymaking • Initiate and implement research activities in the field of gender and ICT • Advance the body of knowledge, understanding, and skills in the field of gender and ICT by implementing training activities • Facilitate access to information resources in the field of gender and ICT • Create gender awareness in evaluation and impact assessment in the ICT area.
78 http://ictpolworkshop.gn.apc.org/w/Portals_Project_Gallery 79 Chakula is a newsletter of APC’s ICT Policy Monitor, http://africa.rights.apc.org/en-chakula.shtml
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 30 of 56 APC WNSP activities are centred on six main areas of work:
i) Policy and advocacy ii) Research iii) Evaluation iv) Information facilitation v) Development of training methodologies and materials vi) Support for emerging national and regional internet-based networks.
APC WNSP ICT policy work began in 1995 during the UN Conference on Women in Beijing, China, and carried on through the five-year and ten-year reviews of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action.80 During WSIS, APC WNSP was a founding member of the NGO Gender Strategies Working Group,81 the Multi-Stakeholder Gender Caucus and, along with APC and several APC members, an active member of the Civil Society Plenary82 and the Communication Rights in the Information Society (CRIS) Campaign.83 APC WNSP fought for recognition of women and civil society throughout the WSIS process. Gender analysis is included in APC publications.84
2.2 Priorities for 2007-2008 During 2007 and 2008, APC WNSP‘s activities focussed on the following priorities: • Advocating for gender equality to be given consideration in national and global ICT policy processes • Conducting an evaluation of four national policy processes using APC's gender evaluation methodology (GEM) • Strengthening the impact and profile of the gender and ICT portal85 as a resource for policy-makers and gender advocates • Bringing a women's rights and gender analytical perspective in content regulation and openness issues at the IGF 2007.
2.3 The APC WNSP Team During the period covered by the report, APC WNSP team members involved in policy advocacy were:
Chat Garcia Ramilo, manager Philippines Jennifer Radloff, APC-Africa-Women coordinator South Africa Sylvie Niombo, APC-Africa-Women co-coordinator Congo Dafne Plou, LAC regional coordinator Argentina Katerina Fialova, Gender and ICT Policy Monitor coordinator Czech Republic Jac sm Kee, Violence against Women and ICT project coordinator Malaysia
80 http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/ 81 http://www.apcwomen.org/wsis/ 82 www.wsis-cs.org/ 83 www.crisinfo.org 84 www.apc.org/books 85 www.genderit.org
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 31 of 56 Appendix 2: N ew M embers since 1 June 2007
APC‘s network is extensive and growing. We currently have 51 member organisations in 42 countries, as well as a vast community of partnerships with individuals, organisations and networks all over the world, working in a range of areas from human rights to sustainable development, grass-roots literacy work to appropriate and low-cost connectivity, internet governance to gender equality and women‘s empowerment.
Members get involved by sharing information, discussing activities, developing policy positions and participating in general planning, and working in a range of online community spaces. We offer small grants to members to develop collaborative projects together and opportunities to participate in events that are relevant to our collective strategic priorities. We hold regular face-to-face and online meetings for members at the regional and global levels. And there‘s constant interaction between staff and members.
AZUR Développement, Congo www.azurdev.org An APC member since July 2007, AZUR is a registered non-profit organization working in the area of socio-cultural development in the Congo and Africa generally. It is quite a young organisation, founded in May 2002, but only became active in early 2003. AZUR's objectives include promoting women‘s empowerment, sustainable development, and arts and culture; bringing multi-fold assistance to sick and vulnerable people; and working to protect environment. Although ICTs are not the major focus of AZUR's work, many activities incorporate ICTs significantly through training and capacity building, particularly with young and rural women, generation of local content (including a CSO information sharing portal, www.lissanga.org, and a newsletter which aims to gather together stakeholder information for policy processes), and research on the use of ICTs, to name a few.
OneWorld Platform for Southeast Europe Foundation (OWPSEE), Bosnia- Herzegovina http://see.oneworld.net An APC member since August 2007, OWPSEE was born in 2003, as an initiative of One World Italy (Unimondo) (a member of APC since November 2003). The OWPSEE initiative was at that time a portal of online text and audio news, linking the countries of the region. During 2006, OWPSEE developed into a fully autonomous and independent, not-for-profit foundation formally registered in Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina. OWPSEE has grown into a recognized information service organization and partner for social change, collaborating with around 200 partner organizations across the region and the world. OWPSEE's mission is to hasten democratic developments and positive social change within civil societies of the region, and to build cooperation through interactive platforms at local, national, regional and international levels.
Sulá Batsú , Costa Rica http://www.sulabatsu.com An APC member since April 2008, Sulá Batsú is a non-profit cooperative formed by ICT professionals who had conducted work together for over 5 years. They work in social research of ICTs appropriation and impact, knowledge sharing and innovative use of ICTs focussing on gender, youth, solidarity and social economy, the digital commons and evaluation of programs and projects. They also have an area dedicated to media and web production that specializes in producing materials for knowledge sharing processes. Although Sulá Batsú is a relatively new organisation founded 2-3 years ago, APC has had a long standing relationship through member (Funredes, LaNeta, Nicarao) and staff (WNSP
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 32 of 56 gender evaluation) collaboration, both with the current organisation, and with current staff when they worked with Fundación Acceso, prior to the formation of Sulá Batsú.
KICTANet, Kenya http://www.kictanet.or.ke/ An APC member since May 2008, KICTAnet was established in August 2004 through the APC CATIA project (Catalysing Access to ICTs in Africa) in Kenya. Its mission is to catalyse reform and development in the ICT sector by enhancing collaboration amongst different stakeholders. KICTANet aims to become the focal point for building multi-stakeholder consensus on ICT Policy, regulation, strategy and initiatives in Kenya. In March 2007 KICTAnet established itself as a trust fund registered in Kenya. Kictanet provides an alternative platform of multiple actors who bring the concerns and voice of consumers to ICT policy makers, who conversely have a sounding board for outreach in relation to critical ICT policy issues. In 2007, Kictanet was appointed to both the Board of the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) and on the Kenya Network Information Center (KENIC) board. Kictanet worked closely with APC on IGF related activities in 2007, and is now a key partner in a major East African ICT policy network initiative funded by IDRC.
Open Institute, Cambodia http://www.open.org.kh An APC member since May 2008, the Open Institute is a registered NGO founded in September 2006. The mission of Open Institute is to facilitate communication and knowledge sharing, leading to more effective participation in social and political development, by providing opportunities and means for Cambodian citizens with different backgrounds and responsibilities to keep themselves informed on the social and political situation in Cambodia, have access to information and knowledge in Khmer through all means of communication, including Information and Communication Technology tools, also in the Khmer language and share perspectives and information with others and cooperatively develop analyses of and solutions for various social, political and cultural issues. Open Institute understands that the strategic use of ICTs forms a strong foundation which contributes in reaching the social goals of equal access to affordable and creative technology, information, capacity building, and knowledge sharing. They are very active in localization of the Khmer language, the use of FOSS and open learning. OI is also sensitive to women‘s issues and clearly uses ICTs to improve people‘s lives.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 33 of 56 Appendix 3: APC W ebsites
DESCRIPTION URL Language APC Website www.apc.org/english/ English/Spanish œ French and Portuguese in 2006 www.apc.org/espanol/ APC Women's Programme www.apcwomen.org English (APC WNSP) Gender and ICT Evaluation www.apcwomen.org/gem English/Spanish (Portuguese under development) Website Gender Awards www.genderawards.net English Gender and ICT Portal www.genderit.org English/Spanish (and Portuguese launch 2006) APC Africa Women (AAW) www.apcafricawomen.org English (some French content) APC ICT POLICY/RIGHTS Global APC ICT Policy and Internet http://rights.apc.org English/Spanish Rights (revised) http://derechos.apc.org Gender Gender and ICT portal www.genderit.org English/Spanish (Portuguese 2006 Regional APC Africa ICT Policy Monitor http://africa.rights.apc.org English/French APC LAC ICT Policy Monitor http://lac.derechos.apc.org Spanish National Argentina, TAU http://www.haciendocumbre.org.ar/ Spanish Australia, apc.au http://rights.apc.org.au/ English Bangladesh, Bytes4All http://bangladeshictpolicy.bytesforall.net/ English Bosnia-Herzegovina, OWPSEE www.ict-policy.ba/ Serbian/English Bulgaria, Bluelink www.bluelink.net/wsis/ Bulgarian/English Brazil, RITS www.infoinclusao.org.br Portuguese Cambodia, Open Institute http://open.org.kh/ictpolicy/ Khmer/English Colombia, Colnodo http://cmsi.colnodo.apc.org Spanish Croatia ZamirNet www.zamirnet.hr/drupal/ Croatian/English DRC, Alternatives www.rdc-tic.cd/ French Ethiopia, EFOSSNet www.efossnet.org/ English Egypt, ArabDev www.arabdev.org/ict_portal - not active Arabic/English Mexico, Laneta www.laneta.apc.org/cmsi/ Spanish Pakistan, Bytes4All http://pakistanictpolicy.bytesforall.net/ English Philippines, FMA http://wsisfma.gn.apc.org/ English/Tagalog Romania, StrawberryNet http://politic.ngo.ro Romanian/English Spain, Pangea www.pangea.org/dona/frameset_tics.htm Spanish/Catalan Uruguay, Chasque http://politicas.infoycom.org.uy Spanish South Africa, Womensnet http://womensnet.org.za/ict English
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 34 of 56 Appendix 4: APC.org W ebsite Statistics for 2007 86
In 2007, APC.org received more than 300,000 unique visitors accessing more than 2.3 million pages. They viewed 7.5 pages per visit. APC.org is a site that attracts people from all over the world. The most visitors come from the USA, with developing countries Brazil and Colombia in second and sixth place respectively.
In the top 25 visiting nations registered by continent were: i) North America: USA, Canada (in this order continentally) ii) Europe: EU, Germany, UK, Switzerland, Czech Republic, France, Italy, Spain, Holland iii) LAC: Brazil, Colombia, Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Chile, Venezuela iv) Asia-Pacific: Australia, South Korea, China, Japan, Hong Kong, India v) Africa: South Africa
86 Unfortunately, APC is not able to produce website statistics for the period covered by the report as statistics are gathered annually. The software we use does not allow for a period that crosses years.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 35 of 56 The APC site remains very popular in Latin America, probably because it is available in English and Spanish. African-based visitors (with the exception of South Africa) are still very underrepresented amongst our readers, which mirror the limited access to the internet. The APC site from 2008 is available in French. We will be tracking how this affects French-based readership.
Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) policy monitor lac.derechos.apc.org
The LAC monitor site received over 80,000 unique visitors accessing almost 490,000 pages (up from 305,000 pages in 2006). Visitors viewed an average of six pages per visit (up from 2.8 pages in 2006). This counted for over one in four of all APC.org website visits (up from one in five in 2006). This is an extraordinarily high number given the fact that the LAC site is in Spanish only and focuses specifically on ICT policy (the APC.org site is bilingual and covers multiple ICT themes). The most visited sections continue to be WSIS (2940 views, even two years after the last summit, and 2787 views of the page —What is WSIS?“) and legislation.
The LAC monitor site readers are overwhelmingly Latin American. Of the top thirty visiting countries, seventeen are Latin American and a large percentage of —unknown“ visitors
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 36 of 56 probably come from LAC. Visitors from top LAC country Mexico accessed almost 8,000 pages in 2007 down to Guatemala (20th visitor) with almost 900 pages.
Africa ICT policy monitor: africa.rights.apc.org
The Africa monitor site received over 43,000 visitors accessing more than 600,000 pages. The number of visitors to the Africa site is just over half those to the LAC site however on average they stay for much longer on the site, viewing an impressive 14 pages per visit (up from 6.5 pages in 2006). Visitors to the Africa monitor account for 14% of all visitors to the APC site (up from 10% in 2006) but 26% of all pages read on the website. Most accessed pages are thematic and for the first time theme/country cross-referenced e.g. national ICT strategies (1802 views, theme), telecommunications (1199 views, theme), ICT policy in Kenya (1154 views, theme/country) and ICT policy in South Africa (1009 views, theme/country).
Site visitors are overwhelmingly from outside of Africa and from North America with œthe same as in 2006- three African countries (South Africa, Kenya and Ethiopia) featuring in the top twenty visiting countries.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 37 of 56 To address the poor connectivity situation in Africa, APC continues to adopt —push“ strategies e.g. full-content newsletters so that readers do not have to visit the website. However, visitors from Africa are creeping upwards.
Six countries (Nigeria, Namibia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Uganda and Egypt) each registered 230-400 pages viewed in the year. Seven countries (Togo, Ghana, Cameroon, Gambia, Mauritius, Senegal and Tunisia) registered 100-200 pages viewed.
Monthly statistics
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 38 of 56
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 39 of 56 Appendix 5: ICT Policy Related Publications since 1 June 2007
Issue Papers • —Building consensus on internet access at the IGF“ (CIPP). Print copies will be available in English for all IGF-related meetings. A digital version in Spanish will also be produced. • —Digital television and radio œ Democratisation or greater concentration?“ by Gustavo Gómez of AMARC • —Convergencia para el desarrollo: Radiodifusión comunitaria œ Como estrategia para la inclusion digital“ by Rivadeneyra Olcese.
Reports • Access event report - http://access.apc.org/index.php/Main_Page
Guides and manuals • Internet rights charters in nineteen languages: A highlight of the council meeting was seeing the charters in multiple languages and formats (e.g. Urdu and Bengali in bilingual booklets, and Hausa, which we did not know was being produced) and hearing the stories of the translation consultations. Members were very excited and inspired by the other charters (e.g. John Dada told us that, motivated by the bilingual charters, he would try to produce a four-language version of English, Yoruba, Jju and Hausa œ all languages spoken in Nigeria). We hope that plans to make the charters a focal point of CIPP advocacy come to fruition in the future. • A 32-page CATIA-based manual, —Frequently asked questions about multi-stakeholder partnerships in ICTs for development œ A guide for national ICT policy animators,“ was produced in English and French. The Communications team suggested that we follow the FAQ format used in 2003 for the how-to on running WSIS consultations. We are exploring using the same format for an APC-IISD guide. / —Frequently Asked Questions about Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships in ICTs for Development: A Toolkit for National ICT Policy Animators“ by Lishan Adam, Tina James, and Alice Wanjira, September 2007. • ICT policy handbook: Progress is being made on the second edition of the handbook.
News • CIPP completed and disseminated a regional policy newsletter covering the LAC country reports in GISW 2007 • An edition of the ICT policies and internet rights regional newsletter addressing the issue of ICT policies in rural contexts was produced and disseminated in November.87 • Mobile phones for development in LAC (Natalia Uval):88 During production we realised that there is a major gap regarding what‘s being done in the region in terms of mobile- for-development. As a result, CIPP-LAC is commissioning an issue paper on the subject.
August: APCNews 77 (August): Members featured: BlueLink, BytesForAll, Protégé QV, Women‘sNet, Funredes, Colnodo, Nodo TAU. Specials: DRC backbone study coverage, new African policy coordinator, Microsoft agreement with Chilean government. Event reports: GEM II: global training exchange (KL, July 2007) Book review: Media in central African conflicts
87 http://lac.derechos.apc.org/es-newsletter.shtml?z=5164012 88 http://apc.org/en/news/wireless/lac/mobile-phones-and-poverty-reduction-can-shortcut-w
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 40 of 56 September - APCNews 78 (September) - Members featured: Community Education Computer Society (CECS) - Specials: special coverage - Highway Africa
October - APCNews 79 (October) - Members featured: Web Networks, Bytes for all, Computer Aid International, Protégé QV*, RITS*, Ungana-Afrika, AZUR Développement, Alternatives - Specials: Chris Nicol FOSS prize announcement - Event reports: WENT (African women on digital storytelling)
November - APCNews 80 (November) - Members featured: BlueLink*, Foundation for Media Alternatives*, Bangladesh Friendship Education Society (BFES)*, APC.au* - Specials: special coverage œ IGF II
May: —Stakeholder consultation on public participation in internet governance“ - http://www.apc.org/en/news/governance/world/stakeholder-consultation-public-participation-inte —Remarks from APC addressing agenda items 2 and 3 of the Commission for Science and Technology for Development“ - http://www.apc.org/en/news/hr/world/remarks-apc-addressing-agenda-items-2-and-3- commis
GenderIT.org • —The world wide web of desire looking at content regulation on the internet“ by Namita Malhotra was published in November in time for the IGF. • In March, GenderIT.org published its first edition of the year, on financing gender and ICT.89 In addition to articles, the issue provides audio casts and coverage of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) panel hosted by the Division for the Advancement of Women of the UN (UNDAW) and coordinated by APC WNSP, where Chat acted as chair and Willie Currie presented, as noted in the last report. In this edition, GenderIT.org tested the new strategy of partnering with a key organisation relevant to the theme by collaborating with the Association for Women‘s Rights in Development (AWID) on the article, —Where is the Money for Women's Rights?“ In addition to increasing distribution, GenderIT.org hopes that such partnering may influence and better inform the ICT and/or gender practices of partners. The next edition, scheduled for June, will likely focus on cybercrime bills. • Dafne August: paper on "Education, equal opportunities and technology" in August. This is a background paper for research on gender and ICTs in secondary schools in a group of LAC countries. The research is funded by IDRC, which recommended PARM LAC for this consultancy.
Contributions to Other Publications • Convergencia tecnologica y participacion popular (Technological convergence and popular participation), ALAI, 13 June 2007, http://alainet.org/active/18033&lang=es • Trabajando por la apropiacion comunitaria de las TIC (ICTs and community appropiation), published in Revista "El Sur", Medicus Mundi, Spain. http://www.medicusmundi.es/publicaciones_2.htm • In September, UNESCO published the book, Building National Information Policies: Experiences in Latin America and the Caribbean, to which Valeria contributed two chapters.90
89 http://www.genderit.org/en/index.shtml?apc=f--e--1&x=95584 90 http://infolac.ucol.mx/observatorio/arte_libro.pdf
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 41 of 56 • —Another Instance where Privatization Trumped Liberalization: The Politics of Telecommunications Reform in South Africa œ A Ten-Year Retrospective“ by Robert B. Horwitz and Willie Currie, Telecommunications Policy 31, September-October 2007. • Also in August, Dafne also wrote an article in English for the Telecentre Times, a quarterly publication of the telecentre movement worldwide with a distribution of 7,000 copies. The article, entitled "Community telecentres: building women‘s empowerment," discusses women and telecentres.91 • Dafne was interviewed by Jennifer Ross of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL) for a feature article on the TBTT Campaign subsequently published in the April/May edition of the eLAC 2010 newsletter.92
Event coverage: In January, Analia coordinated the eLAC meetings (which actually took place at the beginning of February) coverage. She and the LAC Monitor coordinator appointed a person from ITeM (Inés Campanella) to cover the event on site. Inés did a great job, working remotely with Florencia (LAC Monitor content worker). A thematic newsletter is being produced.
March-April Finalised paper on national ICT policy advocacy, initially prepared for the GEM Global Trainers Exchange last year. The paper features interviews with many gender advocates regarding national advocacy strategies and is a basic conceptual document for GEM2 adaptation in this area. It will soon be uploaded to GEM Zone.
91 http://www.apcwomen.org/gem/node/99 92 http://www.cepal.org/socinfo/noticias/noticias/9/32609/NEWS5esp.pdf
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 42 of 56 Appendix 6: Event Participation since 1 June 2007
Participation in events is not an achievement in itself. The overarching achievement of our event participation during the reporting period was the ability to represent APC‘s perspectives and positions on ICT policy and internet rights issues, as developed and implemented through our three programme areas [CIPP, APC WNSP, and Strategic Use Programme (SUP)], in appropriate formats, in a diverse range of spaces to a diversity of audiences, contributing to building greater understanding of ICT policy issues in a coherent and integrated manner.
Events APC participated in between 1 June 2007 and 31 May 2008 June 2007 31/5-2/6 APC Board meeting, Barcelona, Spain 3 Reclaim the Web (GreenNet event), London 4-6 Regional Workshop 'Communication Public Policies and Popular Radio in LAC' for 'Communication and the Constituent Process in Ecuador', Quito(APC/ALER) 5 UK Parliamentary forum on Internet Governance, London 5-6 GKP3 Africa Meeting, Ouagadougou, Burkina-Faso 6-9 ICT Best Practices Forum for West and Central Africa, Ouagadougou, Burkina-Faso (government of Burkina Faso and Microsoft) 11-12 Knowledge Management Conference: Influencing Policy and Practice Global Development Network (Gdnet), Cairo 15-17 I-Commons 2nd Annual Conference, Dubrovnic 24-29 Regional training workshop “Communication, public policies, and the popular/community radio in Latin America” and Public forum, “Communication and the constituent process in Ecuador” (organised by ALER and APC), Quito 25-29 ICANN meeting, Puerto Rico 28-30 Civil Society Forum, Geneva Jenny – facilitated day-long follow-up ICT skills and capacity building training with Sisonke sex worker network. IDRC: Information for Change Workshop: Generating Publishing and Applying Knowledge for Development Copyright Lekgotla (African Publishers Network) July 2007 4-6 Sylvie participated as a trainer in a workshop on online moderation in Brazzaville, Congo for 10 Moderators from Congo, Togo and DRC of the Reseau Sida Afrique network in the framework of their project funded by Harambee project on July 4-6 4-8 World association for community radios (AMARC) Women’s network workshop, Managua, 8-10 Sylvie: participated in a workshop on women, poverty, HIV/AIDS and violence against women organized by Global Fund for Women in Kinshasa, DRC 9-13 ICANN NomCom Meeting, Toronto 15-19 New Economic Partnership for Africa’s Development ICT conference, Nairobi 16-19 Freedom of expression: An exploration of the networked communications environment in Africa, Nairobi, Kenya (Jenny presented on Community Media at this Ford Foundation Consultative workshop organised by Twawesa Communications, Africa Woman and Child Feature Service) 17-18 Sangonet ICT conference 2007, Johannesburg 19-20 APC Africa member project management training, Johannesburg 21 APC Africa member meeting, Johannesburg 22-24 APC WNSP Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) facilitators training, Kuala Lumpur 23-25 International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR) 50th Anniversary conference, Paris 25-27 APC WNSP Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) adaptation workshop, Kuala Lumpur, 28-29 APC WNSP Team Meeting, Kuala Lumpur 31 APC WNSP Drupal training, Kuala Lumpur August 2007 1-2 IICD's Facilitation for Facilitators Workshop, Atuntaqui, Ecuador 2-7 APC Management and Council meeting working group, London 8 X Regional Women Conference, Quito
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 43 of 56 23-27 Quebec Social Forum, Montreal, Quebec 25-29 Women's Electronic Network Training (WENT) 2007 on digital storytelling, Durban, South Africa 31-2/9 European Digital Rights Initiative (EDRI) data retention meeting and AGM, Berlin September 2007 3 Internet Governance Forum consultation, Geneva 4-5 Global Information Society Watch partner meeting, Geneva 6-8 Building Communications Opportunities partner meeting, Berne 9-13 Digital Citizens Indaba on Blogging and Highway Africa: Quality and Professionalism in Journalism and the Media: the case for New Media, Grahamstown, South Africa 10-11 Regional LAC Telecentres Encounter, Santiago, Chile 10-14 SAT-3 submarine cable workshop and first WATRA/ECOWAS mobile roaming conference and exhibition, Abuja 10-14 Economic Commission for Latin American and the Caribbean (ECLAC) Inter-institutional consultation on eLAC meeting, Santiago, Chile 12 ECLAC’s Inter-Institutional Consultation on the eLAC, Santiago, Chile 13-14 II Iberoamerican Encounter 'Development Millennium Goals and ICTs', Santiago, Chile 17-21 Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) Workshops, Research Centre for Women’s Action (CIPAF) and the National commission for the Information Society, Santo Domingo 21-23 European feminist forum programming meeting, Warsaw 23-28 AfriNIC-7 open policy meeting, Durban 24-27 International Conference Web2ForDev 2007, Rome October 2007 4-5 Latin American & the Caribbean regional preparatory meeting for the LAC ministerial conference for the Information Society Buenos Aires 5-7 Strategic planning workshop on gender and Information Society Policies - UN Global Alliance for ICT and development GAID community of expertise on gender and policy related event, Bangalore 7-10 International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) Conference, Montevideo 9-11 UNDP Gender Unit workshop on gender equality and knowledge management, Port-O-Spain 15-19 Third Latin American and the Caribbean Communication Congress – COMLAC, Loja, Ecuador 18-21 Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) for South and East Europe Workshop organized by OneWorld Southeast Europe (SEE), Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina 22-27 TRICALCAR (wireless project in LAC) regional workshop, Rosario, Argentina 28 APC Civil Society Workshop on Open Access to ICT Infrastructure in Africa, Kigali, Rwanda 29-30 ITU Connect Africa Summit, Kigali, Rwanda November 2007 1-2 International forum on learning networks and learning within networks & GKP Latin America and the Caribbean 2007 regional meeting, San José, Costa Rica 4 APC Executive Board meeting, Rio de Janeiro 5-6 Women into IT workshop, Brno, Czech Republic 5-9 WALC 2007 - LAC Workshop on internet and network, technologies, Coro, Venezuela 5-9 APC Council Meeting, Rio de Janeiro 7-9 The African Wireless Broadband Forum, Nairobi 10 APC public event on equitable access, Rio de Janeiro 12-15 Internet Governance Forum, Rio de Janeiro 14-15 Women into IT workshop, Brno, Czech Republic 21-22 WINDS - Programa de cooperacion estrategica en investigacion en TIC entre Europa y America Latina regional conference, Buenos Aires 22-23 Consolidating the network: A collective building of the strategic plan 2008-2010 (IICD and Infodesarrollo.ec workshop), Sangolquí, Ecuador 22-27 Burmese Tech Skills Workshop, Chiang Mai, Thailand 26-30 Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) workshop, Caceres, Spain 27 APC WNSP Women’s Work in ICTs and ICT Education for Girls and Women Roundtable Discussions, Prague 28 Global eSchools and Communities Initiative (GeSCI) Annual General Meeting, Dublin 29-30 International e-Society.Mk conference, Skopje, Macedonia 30 AZUR Développement/AAW workshop on violence against women and ICTs and a radio programme, Congo, Brazzaville December 2007 11-13 Third Global Knowledge Conference, GK3, Kuala Lumpur 11-14 iTrainers workshop, Kampala, Uganda
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 44 of 56 January 2008 14-17 Harambee Workshop: Reinforcing African voices through collaborative processes, Kampala 23 Media Piracy workshop, Johannesburg, South Africa 29-30 APC CICEWA planning meeting, Johannesburg, South Africa 29-31 APC information content planning workshop, Johannesburg, South Africa 30-31 APC WNSP feminist tech camp meeting, Johannesburg, South Africa February 2008 1-7 Board and staff meeting, Ithala, South Africa 4-5 Launch Seminar: Latin America and Caribbean Regional Network of the Global Alliance for ICT and Development, San Salvador, El Salvador 6-8 Second eLAC 2007 Ministerial Conference, San Salvador, El Salvador 8-9 OneWorld South Asia 7th Annual Meeting: ICT and Climate Change, New Delhi, India 9-10 APC Research workshop, Johannesburg, South Africa 12-14 BCO Partner meeting, New Delhi, India 20-22 OSIWA et al Regulators Capacity Building Workshop, Accra, Ghana 23-24 SSRC/Annenberg Media Research Workshop, Pennsylvania, USA 25-7 52nd Session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women, UN Headquarters, New York, USA Mar 26-28 IGF Open Consultation, Geneva Switzerland 28-29 Wireless training meeting, ICATP Institute, Trieste, Italy 28-29 “Community Radios for a Better World” international seminar, AMARC, Bogota, Colombia 28-1 CONGO Board meeting, New York, USA Mar March 2008 10-14 GEM II: Telecentre and Rural ICT4D Thematic Adaptation Workshop, Tagaytay City, Philippines 13 Communication Forum for Constituent Assembly, Quito, Ecuador 16-20 IDLELO3, Dakar, Senegal 18-19 BCO Impact Assessment Workshop, London, UK 20-21 APC Management Meeting, London, UK 31-4 GEM II: Thematic Adaptation Workshop on Gender and ICT Policy Advocacy: Entry Points and Apr Processes, Barcelona, Spain April 2008 2 Presentation on APC WNSP work at Universidad Politecnica de Cataluna 7 Science and Technology Forum for Constituent Assembly, Quito , Ecuador 7-13 Third and final TRICALCAR wireless community workshop for the Mexico, Caribbean and Central American region. Hosted by LaNeta, the workshop took place from 7-13 April in Tlayacapan, Morelos, Mexico 14-15 Local Governments and Connectivity in Iberoamerica, Quito, Ecuador 16-17 SIDA Roundtable: ICT and Democracy, Uppsala, Sweden 21-22 OSIWA High level planning meeting on Convergence and Regional Regulation: Capacity building and advocacy, Accra, Ghana 22 Global e-Schools and Communities Initiative (GeSCI) advisory council meeting, Dublin, Ireland May 2008 12-15 ITU Telecom Africa 2008, Cairo, Egypt 13 IGF Open Consultations, Geneva, Switzerland 13-16 Linking Alternatives III/Enlanzando Alternativas III, Lima, Peru 13-16 Ceremony of the World Information Society Award 2008, Geneva, Switzerland 14-15 IGF Advisory Group closed meeting, Geneva, Switzerland 18-20 UNDESA-GAID Annual Meeting, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 19-25 CICEWA East Africa workshop, Nairobi, Kenya 23 Stakeholder consultation on public participation in internet governance, Geneva, Switzerland 26-30 LACNIC XO and ISOC LAC meeting, Salvador, Brazil
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 45 of 56 Appendix 7: APC’s G eographic and Strategic Partnerships, M ay 2008
Countries and regions
APC works in the following countries, either directly through regional projects such as Communication for Influence in Central, East and West Africa (CICEWA), Gender Evaluation Methodology for Internet and ICTs (GEM), TRICALCAR (Latin American Regional Initiative for Wireless Networking), or through our members or partners who are based locally.
Africa: Botswana, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Congo Brazzaville, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
Asia-Pacific: Australia, Bangladesh, Cambodia, China (Hong Kong), India, Japan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, New Caledonia, Pakistan, Philippines, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Thailand.
Europe: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Kosovo, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Romania, Serbia, Spain, and the United Kingdom.
North America: Canada, Mexico, and the United States of America.
South and Central America: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Haiti, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
Implementing partners, networks and strategic partnerships
APC member organizations:93 ♦ Nodo Tau and Wamani (Argentina); ♦ apc.au (Australia); ♦ Bangladesh Friendship Education Society œ BFES, and Voice (Bangladesh); ♦ Bytes for All.org (Pakistan); ♦ One World South Eastern Europe (Bosnia-Herzegovina); ♦ RITS (Brazil); ♦ BlueLink (Bulgaria); ♦ Protégé QV (Cameroon); ♦ Alternatives and Web Networks (Canada); ♦ Open Forum and Open Institute (Cambodia); ♦ Colnodo (Colombia); ♦ AZUR Développement (Congo Brazzaville); ♦ Sula Batsu (Costa Rica); ♦ ZaMirNET (Croatia); ♦ Econnect (Czech Republic); ♦ FUNREDES - Networks and Development Foundation (Dominican Republic); ♦ ArabDev (Egypt); ♦ Green Spider (Hungary); ♦ Kine (Italy);
93 http://www.apc.org/en/members
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 46 of 56 ♦ JCA-NET, JCafe (Japan); ♦ ALIN-EA Arid Lands Information Network œ ALIN, African Research and Computing Centre œ ARCC, Kenyan ICT Action Network œ KICTANet (Kenya); ♦ LaNeta (Mexico); ♦ Fantsuam Foundation (Nigeria); ♦ Centro Peruano de Estudios Sociales - CEPES (Peru); ♦ WomensHub and Forum for Media Alternatives - FMA (Philippines); ♦ StrawberryNet (Romania); ♦ ENDA Tiers Monde (Senegal); ♦ Women'sNet, SANGONeT, Ungana-Afrika and CECS (South Africa); ♦ Jinbonet (South Korea); ♦ Pangea (Spain); ♦ WOUGNET and CIPESA (Uganda); ♦ GreenNet and Computer Aid International (UK); ♦ Third World Institute (Uruguay); ♦ Institute for Global Communications and LaborNet (USA); and ♦ EsLaRed - Escuela Latinoamericana de Reds (Venezuela).
International strategic partnerships:94 • 80/20 Thinking • Article 19 • Bellanet • Building Communications Opportunities Alliance (BCO) • Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) • Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) • Communication Rights in the Information Society (CRIS) • Council Of Europe (COE) • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) • Global Alliance for ICTs For Development (GAID) • Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP) • Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing Countries (Hivos) • International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) • International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications (INASP) • IT+46 (Sweden) • ItrainOnline partnership (formed by APC, FAO, UNESCO, IICD, Bellanet, INASP, OneWorld and Telecentre.org) • One World International • Panos London • Privacy International • Tactical Technologies • Telecentre.org • wire.less.dk • World Association of Community Radio (AMARC)
United Nations agencies: • International Telecommunications Union • UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) • UN Development Programme (UNDP) • UN Division for the Advancement of Women (UNDAW) • UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) • UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA)
94 See http://www.apc.org/en/about/partnerships for a more comprehensive list.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 47 of 56 • UN Economic Commission for Europe Aarhus Secretariat (UNECE Aarhus) • UN Education and Science Organisation (UNESCO) • UNDP‘s Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (RBEC).
Africa: ° APC members in Africa (see above) ° African Internet Service Providers‘ Association (AFRISPA) ° Communications Regulatory Authority for Southern Africa (CRASA) ° Free and Open-source Software Foundation for Africa (FOSSFA) ° International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) ° Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) ° NetTel@Africa ° One World Africa ° Open Society Institute Southern Africa ° Open Society Institute West Africa ° Panos Institute for West Africa ° Panos London ° Research ICT Africa (RIA!) ° Shuttleworth Foundation ° The Link Centre, University of the Witwatersrand ° United Nations Economic Commission for Africa ° West African Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (WATRA)
Through APC-Africa-Women we work with: ° African Women's Development and Communication Network (FEMNET) ° Famafrique ° ENDA Synfev (ENDA APC member), Senegal ° AMARC, Africa Women's Programme ° Women'sNet (APC member), South Africa ° ArabDev (APC member), Egypt ° Women of Uganda Network (WOUGNET) ° Isis-WICCE, Uganda ° Fantsuam Foundation (APC member), Nigeria ° Tanzania Gender Networking Programme (TGNP) ° Tanzania Media Women's Association (TAMWA) ° BAOBAB for Women's Human Rights, Nigeria ° Women's Health Project, South Africa ° Coalition on Violence against Women, Kenya ° Arid Lands Information Network (ALIN) (APC Member), Kenya ° African Gender Institute (AGI), South Africa ° Women Farmers Advancement Network (WOFAN), Nigeria ° Radio Voice of the People, Zimbabwe ° Zambia Association for Research Development (ZARD)
Latin America and Caribbean (LAC): • APC members in LAC (see above) • Agencia Latinoamericana de Información (ALAI) • Asociación Latinoamericana de Educación Radiofónica (ALER) • International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) • Organización Caribena y Latinoamericana de Comunicación Católica (OCLACC) • Radialistas • Red Ecuatoriana de Información y Comunicación para el Desarrollo (Infodesarrollo.ec)
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 48 of 56 • World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters in LAC (AMARC-ALC)
Asia-Pacific: ° Akshara (India) ° Asia Pacific Women's Information Network Center (APWINC) South Korea ° Asia Pacific Women's Watch (Thailand) ° Global Knowledge Partnership in South and South East Asia ° Hong Kong Women's Federation (Hong Kong) ° Isis International Manila (Philippines) ° IT4D ° ItforChange ° LiRNE Asia ° One World South Asia ° OpenNet Initiative ° Pacific Women's Bureau, South Pacific Commission (Noumea) ° Panos South Asia ° Telecentre.org
Implementing partners of the Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM): ° African Women's Development and Communications Network (FEMNET) [Africa Region] ° AMARC Africa [Africa Region] ° Bulgarian Gender Research Foundation [Bulgaria] ° Centre for Women's Research (CENWOR)[Sri Lanka] ° Chasquinet and Colinas del Norte [Ecuador] ° Community Communications (c2o) / Web Origami Kit (WOK) [Australia] ° Fantsuam Foundation [Nigeria] ° Foundation for Media Alternatives [Philippines] ° InfoCon / Distance Education Project [Mongolia] ° Initiative Fifth Woman [Slovakia] ° Isis-Women‘s International Cross Cultural Exchange (Isis-WICCE) [Uganda] ° Karat Coalition [Central and Eastern Europe] ° Modemmujer [México] ° Mothers4Mothers [Malaysia] ° Neighbourhood Information Units, ATI/Colnodo [Colombia] ° Philippine Council for Health Research and Development (PCHRD) / Multi-Purpose Community Telecentres [Philippines] ° Popular Radio Schools Foundation [Ecuador] ° Rede Mulher de Educacao [Brazil] ° SEF Foundation (Equal Opportunities for Women)[Romania] ° Women‘s Electronic Network Training Workshops [Asia-Pacific] ° Women's Issues Information Centre [Lithuania] ° Women‘s Network, AMARC LAC [Ecuador and Bolivia] ° Women of Uganda Network (WOUGNET) [Uganda] ° Women'sNet [South Africa] ° ZaMirNET [Croatia] ° Zimbabwe Women‘s Resource Center and Network (ZWRCN) œ Zimbabwe
APC funding partners 2000 œ 2008 • Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA): Knowledge and Capacity for Civil Society Engagement in ICT Policies: Leveraging the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 49 of 56 • CISCO: Capacity Building for Community Wireless Connectivity in Africa (wireless equipment for workshops) • Communication Rights in the Information Society (CRIS): CRIS Campaign and Global Governance Project (GGP) Toolkit • Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO): ICT Policy for Civil Society Training in Colombia; ICT Policies and Civil Society project (ICT policy handbook and curriculum) • Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGIS):Core support to APC • Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst e.V. (EED): National ICT policy portals • Frederich Ebert Stiftung (FES): ICT Policy for Civil Society Training in Colombia • GTZ: APC ActionApps Reseller Training in Africa • Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO):IMARK module —Building Electronic Communities and Networks“ • Ford Foundation: CIPP core support • Global Knowledge Partnership (GKP): GEM consultancy; Gender and ICT Awards • Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing Countries (Hivos): Global ICT Policy Monitor project (core support to CIPP and APC-Africa-Women); GenARDIS project • InfoDev: Policy dialogue and consensus-building workshop on —Expanding Affordable Access in Africa“ • Institute for Connectivity in the Americas (ICA): Betinho Prize 2005; Weaving Community Wireless Networks in Latin America and Caribbean (TRICALCAR) • International Development Research Centre (IDRC): Betinho Prize 2005; Africa ICT Policy Monitor; Africa Hafkin Prize 2004œ5, Capacity Building for Community Wireless Connectivity in Africa; Capacity Building and Institutional Support; Gender Research in Africa into ICTs for Empowerment (GRACE); GenARDIS project; GenARDIS project evaluation; Institutional Support Project (INSPRO); Making EASSy Easy: media and ICT policy meeting; Wireless Going Forward: meeting of all wireless partners; Gender Evaluation Methodology (GEM) II; GEM workshop in Asia; Harambee project; Wireless Training workshop at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) • International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD): GenARDIS • Open Society Institute (OSI): ICT Policy for Civil Society Training in Colombia; Capacity Building for Community Wireless Connectivity in Africa; Secure Online Communications; Ensuring Affordable and Open Access to EASSy: consultation for key stakeholders; Africa Wireless Capacity-Phase II planning meeting • Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA): Africa ICT Policy Monitor Project; Creative Commons Southern Africa • Rockefeller Foundation: Multimedia Toolkit Project • Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC): Gender and ICT policy advocacy; core support to APC • Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA): GenARDIS project • UK Department for International Development (DFID): Gender and ICT • Evaluation Methodology (GEM); Building Communication Opportunities (BCO) Alliance; Catalysing Access to ICTs in Africa (CATIA) Component 1c • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): Dialogue and exchange workshop on open access policy and advocacy in Eastern and Southern Africa • United Nations Education Science and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO): Multi-Media Toolkit (MMTK)
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 50 of 56 Appendix 8: W SIS follow -up mechanisms
Engaging in post WSIS processes in general, has proven to be very challenging in several ways. There are four formal processes and various informal but related processes that collectively are meant to feed into the UN system wide monitoring process.
(1) WSIS Action line follow-up and implementation
The WSIS action line follow-up process is charged in some ways, with a much more difficult task - to monitor the implementation (by all stakeholders) of activities outlines in the WSIS Action Plan (and logically, activities that emerge that are relevant to the action lines).
The process is more traditional (than the IGF) in the sense that all UN processes have monitoring and implementation plans and processes. These normally comprise:
ò a common monitoring template or report format which is completed by all participating stakeholders ò an annual reporting process or meeting ò is overseen by a specialist UN commission or expert group which makes recommendations by way of a declaration to all stakeholders
The WSIS follow-up process also has some of these elements, but in addition, attempts to be more creative in how it approaches monitoring of implementation (for by example, distributing action line monitoring across various UN agencies, and by experimenting with multi-stakeholder facilitation of action lines).
However, in some respects, this combination of approaches has contributed on the one hand to the lack of a coherent, independent and systematised monitoring process and on the other, has not maximised the potential benefit of working with multiple stakeholders in the process itself.
This has led to a very complex process involving ten or more UN agencies and five regional United Nations Economic Commissions - and is characterised by distributed responsibility for monitoring, a perspective informed more by intergovernmental and UN agency implementation rather than that of all stakeholders, lack of an independent monitoring framework and a mixed focus/purpose in annual follow-up meetings (monitoring, best practice, reporting etc).
The WSIS action line facilitators and UN regional Commissions report to the CSTD annually.
(2) The Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
The Internet Governance forum responds to one of two outcomes of the WSIS that relate specifically to internet governance.
The IGF appears to date, to be the most useful WSIS follow-up space in relation to one of the WSIS outcomes - internet governance. Albeit, it's mandate is not one of monitoring implementation persé, but rather of providing a platform for dialogue, deepening understanding, identifying priorities and encouraging collaboration on activities between multiple stakeholders in relation to the development and evolution of the internet
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 51 of 56 It has a clear mandate (outlined in the Tunis Agenda) and an evolving agenda that is discussed and developed by the community involved with the IGF, supported by a multi- stakeholder advisory group. As a new process, the community working in the IGF is somewhat free to develop ways of working that respond to the needs and priorities of interested stakeholders.
The IGF secretariat reports to the CSTD annually, but its activities are in the main disconnected from other WSIS follow-up activities.
(3) 'Enhanced Cooperation'
'Enhanced cooperation' is a term which refers to the second of the WSIS outcomes related to internet governance. Its meaning is ambiguous, some feel intentionally so, and many feel the term if code for the internationalisation of ICANN95 - the private corporation responsible for the policy development and management of domain names and numbers. But, as outlined in the Tunis Agenda, it relates to the need for enhanced cooperation:
—.. to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.“ [Tunis Agenda Para 69]
And that such cooperation should include:
—..the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet resources.“ [Tunis Agenda Para 70]
The process towards enhanced cooperation was supposed to start in 2006, but little work has been done to date, and that work which could be considered contributing towards enhanced cooperation is not being reported yet, into the CSTD process.
In May 2008, the Secretary General approached various organisations involved in public policy making 'associated with the coordination and management of critical internet resources', requesting a report some time later in 2008.
As of yet, there is nor formal reporting to the CSTD
(4) Digital Solidarity Fund
Inaugurated in Geneva on 14 March 2005, outside of the WSIS process, WSIS welcomed the DSF as —an innovative financial mechanism“ (§ 28, Tunis Agenda). Initiated in the aftermath of the Geneva Summit on an initiative by the City of Geneva and the President of Senegal, it allows the voluntary commitment of public authorities, including local authorities, and private entities for with the view to transform the digital divide into digital opportunities. During the CSTD session in Geneva, May 26-30, Ambassador Janis Karklins, President of the second Phase of WSIS, reported that follow-up activities of the DSF have been disappointing, and there appeared to be little activity.
There is no formal reporting mechanism to the CSTD
95 www.icann.org
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 52 of 56 (5) Council on Science Technology and Development (CSTD)
The CSTD is the body to whom all stakeholders with responsibility for follow-up and implementation report. The CSTD then reports to the ECOSOC council of the UN General Assembly in its annual meeting.
The various challenges outlined above contribute to making the CSTD's own work, and that of stakeholders wishing to engage in the follow-up process, doubly challenging.
For example: actors responsible for different follow-up processes report independently of one another - e.g. action lines report through the ITU, the regional UN commissions report independently, as does the IGF the format for reporting varies and does not conform to a standard template gaps and anomalies are filled with additional follow-up reports by various consultants, or by inputs from those with expertise or experience in a given area Additionally, the CSTD focuses not only on monitoring of implementation, but addresses two priority themes during each session. Although this is useful in terms of focussing the international community on priority themes (such as bridging the digital divide) it creates a certain lack of clarity of focus and specific purpose for each CSTD session.
(6) Related Spaces
In addition to the 'formal' WSIS follow-up there are of course other important policy spaces that are related to the substance of the WSIS process, such as:
- the Global Alliance on ICTD (GAID) - WIPO (in relation to Development Agenda) - UNESCO (in relation to cultural and linguistic diversity and access to knowledge) - OECD Ministerial Forum on Future of the Internet Economy
Navigating these various spaces and being able to participate in them effectively is impossible for all but those with the most extensive resources - resources which certainly are not within reach of any civil society organisation, most developing country governments, smaller agencies and commissions, small business and in some cases, even larger business interests.
(7) Post Tunis mechanisms allowing for NGO inputs
A table outlining the current lines of reporting of WSIS follow-up up areas into UN system wide monitoring is attached in the next page.
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 53 of 56 New financing mechanism Post Tunis mechanisms allowing for NGO inputs UN multistakeholder initiative Outside of the WSIS GENEVA SUMMIT - 10-12 December 2003 Outside of the WSIS process process TUNIS SUMMIT - 16-18 November 2005 UN ICT Task Force Digital Solidarity Fund - DSF Established at the request of ECOSOC in March 2001, the ICTTF is aimed at supporting at Multistakeholder policy WSIS Implementation at Systemwide follow-up the global level the efforts to dialogue on Internet the international level to WSIS bridge the digital divide and ICT Governance for development. Finalized in Inaugurated in Geneva on 14 Tunis in Nov. 2005 March 2005, outside of the Internet Governance WSIS Multistakeholder Commission on Science and WSIS process. Forum IGF Implementation Technology for Development www.unicttf.org
WSIS invited the UN Secretary MS Implementation at the international level is facilitated by WSIS welcomed the DSF as General to convene the IGF for WSIS requested ECOSOC to “an innovative financial various UN agencies taking into multi-stakeholder policy account the themes and action lines review the CSTD to oversee the mechanism” (§ 28, Tunis dialogue and clarified its in the Geneva Plan of Action (§108 follow-up to WSIS in a multi- Global Alliance for ICT Agenda). mandate, structure and to 110). Action line meetings take stakeholder approach (§ 105). and Development functions (§ 67 and 72 to 79, place in Geneva, May, Annually Initiated in the aftermath of the Tunis Agenda) 9th Session, May 2006 Geneva Summit on an initiative C1. Role of public governance 10th Session, May 2007 GAID was established to bring authorities & all stakeholders in the by the City of Geneva and the Open Consultation and Multi- 11th Session, May 2008 together all stakeholders President of Senegal, it allows Stakeholder Advisory Group promotion of ICTs for development [UNDESA] 12th Session, May 2009 involved in ICT policies for the voluntary commitment of meetings: 13th Session, May 2010 development to ensure an public authorities, including C2. Information & communication infrastructure: [ITU ] effective multi-stakeholder local authorities, and private Feb, May and September C3. Access to information & stdev.unctad.org collaboration, intended to entities for with the view to annually knowledge: [UNESCO] replace the UNICT TF at the transform the digital divide into C4. Capacity building [UNDP] end of its mandate in 2005. digital opportunities. Internet Governance Fora C5. Building confidence & security in the use of ICTs [ITU]
Partnerships with civil society C6. Enabling environment [UNDP] Athens, Greece Nov 2006 C7. ICT Applications: Consultations regarding focus, entities. Rio, Brazil Nov 2007 E-government [UNDESA]; E- governance and mandate of Hyderabad, India Dec 2008 business [UNCTAD]; E-learning GAID took place throughout Cairo, Egypt Nov/Dec [UNESCO]; E-health [WHO]; E- 2005, including in Tunis during 2009 employment [ILO]; E-environment [WMO/UNEP]; E-agriculture [FAO]; the WSIS Phase II, and are still Tbc E-science [UNESCO] conducted periodically. Nov/Dec 2010 C8. Cultural diversity and identity, linguistic diversity and local content [UNESCO] www.un-gaid.org www.intgovforum.org C9. Media [UNESCO] C10. Ethical dimensions of the Information Society [UNESCO] C11. International and regional cooperation [UNDES]
www.itu.int/wsis/implementation APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 54 of 56 Appendix 9: G ISW atch 2008 Table of Contents
Section 1) Thematic reports GISWatch Thematic Report - Net Peter Lange Neutrality GISWatch Thematic Report - Open Sunil Abraham standards GISWatch Thematic Report - Ben Akoh Spectrum Management GISWatch Thematic Report - Trends in Russell Southwood Technology FUNREDES (Daniel Pimienta) GISWatch Thematic Report - Content Section 2) Institutions David Souter GISWatch Institutional Overview Section 3) Indicators Amy Mahan and Mike Jensen GISWatch Indicators Report Section 4) Regional reports (template approved) Abi Jagun GISWatch REGIONAL REPORT - SSA Don Hollander GISWatch REGIONAL REPORT - Pacific GISWatch REGIONAL REPORT - Jeremy Druker Former Soviet Union GISWatch REGIONAL REPORT - Karen Banks Western Europe Section 5) Country reports (Template approved) Nodo Tau GISWatch Country Report - Argentina GISWatch Country Report - Bytes for All Bangladesh GISWatch Country Report - Bosnia OWPSEE Herzegovina BlueLink GISWatch Country Report - Bulgaria Escola de Artes, Ciências e Humanidades (Pablo Ortelado) GISWatch Country Report - Brazil Protégé QV GISWatch Country Report - Cameroon Patricia Peña GISWatch Country Report - Chile Colnodo GISWatch Country Report - Colombia GISWatch Country Report - Congo AZUR Developpement Brazzaville Sula Batsu GISWatch Country Report - Costa Rica ZaMirNet GISWatch Country Report - Croatia Alternatives DRC GISWatch Country Report - DRC IMAGINAR - Infodesarrollo (Hugo Carrión) GISWatch Country Report - Ecuador ArabDev GISWatch Country Report - Egypt Ethiopian Free and Open Source Software Network (EFOSSNET) GISWatch Country Report - Ethiopia IT for Change GISWatch Country Report - India Hopeton Dunn GISWatch Country Report - Jamaica GISWatch Country Report - Andrew Beklemishev Kazahkstan
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 55 of 56 KICTANet GISWatch Country Report - Kenya Civil Initiative on Internet Policy GISWatch Country Report - (CIIP) Kyrgyzstan LaNeta GISWatch Country Report - Mexico Fantsuam GISWatch Country Report - Nigeria Bytes for All GISWatch Country Report - Pakistan Radio Viva GISWatch Country Report - Paraguay Consorcio para el Desarrollo Sostenible de la Ecorregion Andina GISWatch Country Report - Peru Al Alegre GISWatch Country Report - Philippines StrawberryNet GISWatch Country Report - Romania GISWatch Country Report - South SANGONeT Africa Pangea GISWatch Country Report - Spain GISWatch Country Report - Comunica-CH Switzerland Civil Internet Policy Initiative (CIPI) GISWatch Country Report - Tajikistan WOUGNET GISWatch Country Report - Uganda ObservaTIC GISWatch Country Report - Uruguay
APC report to the Ford Foundation, July 2008 - Grant # 1065-0731 page 56 of 56