Re-Conceptualizing the Global Digital Divide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Re-conceptualizing the Global Digital Divide Re-conceptualizing the Global Digital Divide by MIRA BURRI*, Berne, Ph.D., Senior Research Fellow at the World Trade Institute of the University of Berme. Abstract: The article seeks a re-conceptualization of such as global spillover of local decisions, regulation the global digital divide debate. It critically explores through code, and proliferation of self- and co-reg# the predominant notion, its evolution and measure- ulatory models. It is maintained that as the prac# ment, as well as the policies that have been advanced tice of intervention intensifies in cyberspace, !ultiple to bridge the digital divide. Acknowledging the co!# and far-reaching points of control outside formal le# plexity of this inequality, the article aims at analy%# gal institutions are created, threatening the availabil# ing the disparities beyond the connectivity and skills ity of public goods and making the pursuit of public barriers. Without understating the first two digital di# objectives difficult. This is an aspect that is rarely ad# vides, it is argued that as the Internet becomes !ore dressed in the global digital divide discussions, even sophisticated and more integrated into economic, so- in comprehensive analyses and political initiatives cial, and cultural processes, a “third” generation of di- such as the World Summit on the Information Soci- vides becomes critical. These divides are drawn not at ety. Yet, the conceptualization of the digital divide as the entry to the net but within the net itself, and limit impeded access to content may be key in terms of access to content. The increasing barriers to con- ensuring real participation and catering for the long- tent, though of a diverse nature, all relate to some term implications of digital technologies. governance characteristics inherent in cyberspace, Keywords: Global Digital Divide; Access to Content, Cyberlaw © 2011 Mira Burri Everybody may disseminate this article by electronic means and make it available for download under the terms and conditions of the Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL . A co#y of the license te$t may be obtained at htt#%&&nbn'resolving! de&urn%nbn%de%000('d##l-v)'en*! +his article may also be used under the ,reative ,ommons "ttribution'-hare"like )!0 .n#orted License, available at htt#%&& creativecommons!org&licenses&by'sa&)!0&! Recommended citation: Burri, Re'conze#tuali2ing the Global Digital Divide, 3 (2011) J5P5+EC 216, para 1. A. Introductory Remarks quire knowledge, “enhance educational systems, improve policy formation and execution, and wi- 1 Closing the digital gap has been viewed in all dis- den the range of opportunities for business and course flows as unambiguously positive and of pri- the poor.”1 mary importance. Especially in the initial years of the discussions on the digital divide, there seemed 2 Beyond economic development, it is also of- to have been a broad understanding that ten maintained that bridging the global digi- tal divide active participation in the information revolu- tion will promote a country’s economic develop- “would facilitate the flow of information that helps ment […] [and that] the Internet and new com- subvert authoritarian and repressive govern- munications technologies offer the less developed ments, thus promoting democracy, human rights, countries unprecedented opportunities to ac- 3 217 2011 MIRA BURRI and civil society, as well as transparency, open- 5 Second, with regard to policy design, it has been ack- ness, and accountability of governing agencies.”2 nowledged that there exist no “one-size-fits-all” so- lutions, as developing countries have proved to be 3 These far-reaching promises have been translated profoundly diverse with starkly different economic, into a number of policy initiatives. The grandest social, and institutional conditions and technology among them is certainly the World Summit on the adoption patterns.11 Accordingly, the measures for Information Society (WSIS). The WSIS, organized un- bridging the global digital divide are now much more der the auspices of the International Telecommuni- pragmatic. They are targeted at specific goals and cation Union (ITU), comprised a pair of global sum- use tailor-made tools that are meant to provide not mits held in Geneva in December 2003 and Tunis in only one-off aid but also conditions for sustainable November 2005, as well as an elaborate preparatory access to information, which go far beyond cheap process involving a series of large regional confe- computers to involve local capacity-building and rences and meetings held between May 2002 and deeper social and institutional reforms.12 the Tunis summit. The WSIS outcome documents, the Geneva Declaration of Principles 20033 and the 6 While most of these initiatives would fall under the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society 2005,4 set category of development aid, it must be stressed that forth key principles for building an inclusive infor- the role of law, in particular international econo- mation society, recognizing that education, know- mic law, although not directly targeted at the digi- ledge, information, and communication are at the tal divide, has been significant in reducing the entry core of human progress, endeavor, and wellbeing, thresholds to cyberspace. International trade rules and highlighting the relationship between the WSIS have contributed by addressing broader economic action lines and the Millennium Development Goals concerns of dismantling barriers to trade, liberali- (MDGs).5 Bridging the digital divide has been an es- zation of markets and spurring competition, foreign sential element of the WSIS process. Following up, direct investment and private–public partnerships.13 manifold initiatives have been launched, mobilizing Here, it is essential to understand that the digital state and non-state agencies as well as civil society.6 divide issues cannot be isolated and disconnected from other policy domains such as telecommunica- 4 With the benefit of hindsight, two observations tions and media regulation, standardization, trade can be made in this respect. First, the extreme op- in networked goods and services, intellectual pro- timism of the early days of ICT aid has been now perty, or competition policy, and there is a strong somewhat reduced. It has been acknowledged that need to “view these issues in a more holistic man- there are “substantial disparities in every […] dimen- ner – as elements of a single overarching policy space sion of life from health care and nutrition to educa- rather than as a random assortment of disconnected tion and longevity,”7 and it would be rather naïve topics that are somehow related to ICT.”14 to expect that there will be no absolute inequalities between rich and poor nations in the virtual world. It would also be unrealistic to assume that the In- B. Beyond the “First” Divide ternet would “suddenly eradicate the fundamental and intractable problems of disease, debt, and disa- 7 Over the years, diverse points of critique have targe- dvantage facing developing countries.”8 Also in this ted different aspects of the existing initiatives aimed sense, it was recognized that the impact of ICT is in- at bridging the digital divide. It is, for instance, often herently unequal: “[a]lthough in its initial years of maintained that very few of the ICT for development mass diffusion the Internet was widely heralded as a (ICT4D) initiatives have worked in practice;15 that potential equalizing tool across nations, the largely the neo-liberal paradigm that underlies the WSIS is unequal patterns of its diffusion globally suggest that misplaced and there is no real (financial) commit- it may end up contributing more to rising inequali- ment from developed countries;16 that the WSIS pro- ties rather than levelling the playing field across na- cess has in fact achieved little and has abandoned its tions.”9 Indeed, because technology and the social higher objectives.17 The critique we develop in the practices of its use are constantly evolving, and be- following sections is somewhat different. We argue cause there are many variables within the complex that as digital technologies advance and as the ins- notion of the divide, titutional ecology of the networked digital environ- ment evolves, attention should be shifted from ac- [t]he digital divide amplifies the already existing cess to technology to access to content. social inequalities cumulatively. An important ex- perience of developed countries is that the problem $% of the digital divide persists even in periods when I. The Many Divides ICT penetration in society is high, since new tech- nologies and tools (e.g. broadband, mobile devices, 8 To be sure, the focus so far has been predominantly Web 2.0, etc.) enter the markets, generating new on simple Internet access, i.e., on the practical pos- sibility of opening a web page and surfing the net lines of division.10 3 218 2011 Re-conceptualizing the Global Digital Divide through a device (be it a computer, mobile phone, having the technology later is the difference bet- TV set, or game console). In the early discussions, ween being a passive consumer and being an en- this – let us dub it the “first” divide – was thought gine and driver of the medium. Being there when sufficient to becoming a citizen of the information the architecture is defined means one’s needs and society, and it was envisaged that the positive eco- demands will be reflected in the face of the new nomic and social spillovers of being linked to the In- 25 ternet, as sketched above, would somehow automa- medium. tically unfold. 12 Admittedly, with the greater sophistication of the digital divide debates over time, this second “skills” 9 Connectivity, however, is nothing but the first tier. tier of separation has also gained prominence and As the Internet becomes ubiquitous and penetra- increasingly more suitable tools have been imple- tes all facets of contemporary societal life, new and mented to address it.26 This is important and is con- different tiers of division and discrimination seem sistent with the “capabilities approach” as put for- to emerge.