WSIS and Beyond, a Reality Check: An Interview with Charles Geiger on the Post-WSIS Process

In this 20-page interview with Charles Geiger, former Executive Director of the Tunis Phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), who is now Special Adviser to the United Nations (UN) Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), Reza Salim asks about the WSIS conferences structure, outcome documents, difficulties in WSIS implementation and follow-up, and what might be is missing from the 2003 follow-up. The discussion includes the need to develop a conceptual framework to lead to using information and communication technology (ICT) for poverty reduction and reaching the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and whether there will be a WSIS follow-up summit in the near future.

Geiger begins by mentioning some of the reasons why the WSIS was considered successful, including its multi-stakeholder approach - business entities, civil society organisations, international organisations, and governments; and trust built through the PrepCom process and the WSIS intergovernmental bureau members, as well as the members of the Consultative Committee of Business Interlocutors (CCBI), and the members of the Civil Society Bureau (CSB). These resulted in an advanced multi-stakeholder practice and, as stated here, "probably the closest one can get today to 'global governance structures'". Also, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and the Global Knowledge Partnership "held, during the Geneva Summit, in parallel to the Summit and under the same roof, an ICT for Development (ICT4D) Platform."

Geiger found that the process and participation was as important as the outcome documents. It created the "WSIS-spirit... the joy of creation, the pleasure to meet and to exchange ideas..." Geiger details subsequent actions, sticking points, and solutions still sought on topics such as finance and internet governance. However, as indicated by Geiger, due to the fact that no implementation secretariat was agreed upon, each stakeholder has to define its own responsibility. There is no coordination mechanism. With regard to follow-up, as benchmarks were not set, and as recommendations and commitments were not quantified or were not quantifiable, follow-up is difficult. The Commission on Science and Technology, responsible for WSIS follow-up at the regional and international levels, can only look at the big picture. The Commission has no authority regarding implementation, it can only make recommendations to the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). “Action Line Facilitation”, an informal platform for implementation set up to spur action on certain themes, was new to the UN, and meetings on action lines have not been prioritised by stakeholders.

In terms of progress on WSIS themes, Geiger sees that the goal of having ICT access for half the world's population has been reached in 2008, though not through community facilities as envisioned in 2003, but through personal access to mobile telephony. The financial mechanism for assess, Universal Access or Universal Service Funds, has facilitated this access, but, as stated here, more money is available in these funds. He suggests that "an intelligent use of these funds (e.g. for public backbone projects, public WiMax or LTE access points, Telecenter projects, public Internet Exchange points etc.) could be made and that Governments with underused Universal Access or Services Funds should look at new ways of using these funds for the benefit of rural or otherwise disadvantaged communities."

Regarding a poverty reduction strategy, Geiger states that "the WSIS outcome documents, in my view, do not contain a clear conceptual framework or a strategy on how ICTs should be used for poverty reduction/alleviation." He finds their development perspective surfacing in the "equality of access" language, but he recommends the World Development Report (WDR) 2000/2001 “Attacking Poverty” for a bottom-up perspective on the creation of "enhanced opportunities, through empowerment and participation at the local, national and international level and through enhanced security for [economically] poor people" as a starting point to develop an ICT-based framework for poverty reduction.

Geiger details an overview of why empowerment, opportunity, and security, in that order, would make a basis for an ICT framework, including the following:

• "Experiences of many [non-governmental organisations] NGOs show that ICTs (especially local radio, but also video, the Internet and very recently mobile phones) can empower weaker sections of the community. Paolo Freire, if he would still be with us, would probably speak about 'conscientization' through ICTs. I think he would consider ICTs as a “liberation technology”. Empowerment is also a method for deepening democracy and participation. It can be used by NGOs and Governments alike. The new technologies (especially web.2.0 applications on the Internet, and mobile phones) have the advantage that the user can decide what knowledge he/she would like to access. The focus of NGOs usually is on groups that social discrimination processes have excluded from decision-making processes through - for example - discrimination based on disability, race, ethnicity, religion or gender. The focus of Governments may be larger: Government can make general use of ICTs e.g. in decentralization projects, in order to create better governance, more transparency and accountability."
• "I would not hesitate to include, in this chapter on empowerment, the distance education projects, and the ICT-based literacy campaigns and health and sanitation awareness projects. Film and video can be used to reach out to illiterate people (one of the reasons why bandwidth is important also in rural areas). In the same chapter on empowerment belongs also the “communication for development” (or short C4D) approach..."
• "ICTs can be used as a tool to enhance opportunities, especially economic opportunities...We are talking about the micro and household level.... The newest trend is to offer market information also through [short message service] SMS or through a literate intermediary who will access the information for you. The latter is a very practical solution for illiterate persons...Such information also helps farmers not to become victims of middlemen who pay too low a price.."
• "Finally, it is easy to find examples for ICTs as a tool to increase human security: The range goes from tsunami warnings to hurricane watch, monsoon forecasts, long-term weather and crop information, information about wave heights and wind speeds for rural fishermen, etc. Also, the use of ICTs in health (e.g. through the use of electronic registers) can contribute to more human and maternal security. But I would like to enlarge this picture: The multilateral donors (especially the World Bank and the [International Monetary Fund] IMF) have for a long time underestimated the importance of institutions like agricultural extension, health services, veterinary services and even courts and schools. Poor people rely on affordable services, they are their safety network, and ICTs can be used to strengthen these services...[I]ncreasing opportunities and human security has also to do with the creation of content in local language."

Geiger concludes by suggesting that there may be a future WSIS conference connected with the Millennium+15 Summit and that there is a possibility of a future separate UN Conference, as a spin-off of WSIS, in a multi-stakeholder setting, that will deal with the theme of Internet Governance.

Note: The opinions expressed in the text are those of the author, and do not necessarily tally with or reflect the views of the institutions with which he is or was affiliated.