By Valeria Betancourt for APCNews QUITO, Ecuador,
Published onPage last updated on
The word participation has a thousand and one meanings (even more so when it is linked to the term “public policy”). It is a term that has remained in vogue for a few decades and that has even been adopted in the speeches (scarcely in practice) of governments.
Currently, no one is unaware of the transformation of the relationship between governments and civil society. There are no doubts as to the leading role that civil society has to play in the definition of public policy, in order to ensure that social agendas are met and citizenship strengthened. This is easier said than done.
But… have we, the civil society organisations (CSOs) of Latin America and the Caribbean asked ourselves how we engage in participation? What types of participation do we assume and immerse ourselves in? What type of power do we produce and reproduce when we seek to establish ourselves as the actors of public policy? Do we respond to collective agendas and political projects or do we insist on individual positions and the financial survival of our own organisations? How do we develop our participatory practices? It is necessary to consider these aspects when processes that, in one way or another, affect the definition, development, characteristics and impacts of ICT public policy threaten our region.
The objectives established by eLAC2007
It is widely known that the governments of Latin America and the Caribbean adopted the regional plan of action for the information society, eLAC2007, in June 2005 in Rio de Janeiro. They developed a mechanism for its implementation in November of the same year during the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), which was held in Tunisia.
The agreement indicates, on the one hand, that the implementation mechanism should “operate in tight collaboration with civil society, the private and academic sectors, according to the principles and the agreements reached in the Geneva and Tunis phases of the World Summit, as well as the Bavaro and Rio de Janeiro regional conferences”. On the other hand, the agreement itself requests the “establishment of a virtual collaboration space with discussion fora to guarantee an inclusive, participatory, transparent and multilingual process”, with the support of the Economic Commission for Latin America (CEPAL).
On their part, civil society organisations have requested, through formal and informal channels nationwide, as well as at the regional level, the creation of effective participation mechanisms and criteria for the inclusion of all interested parties in conditions of equality.
What real results have been reached to date?
eLAC2007 contains 30 objectives. Nonetheless, it seems that its implementation revolves around seven objectives that suggest the formation of regional thematic working groups (labour, electronic government, financing, legal framework, cultural industries and content, alternative technologies and software). Where are the remaining objectives? What is being done to ensure that they are met? How are different visions, inputs, needs and actors being integrated?
And the key question is: How is eLAC2007 related to the WSIS implementation processes?
It is enlightening to get a bird’s eye view of the multisectoral participation model in the constitution of eLAC2007’s regional working groups: the scarce dissemination of information, the absence of consultative channels, the discretion in the selection of national actors participating in the official process, the speeches from official representatives that mistake civil society with the private sector, the bureaucratic jumbles, the praising of expert technical groups, the distorted visions of representation – both in the case of official actors as well as civil society- to name a few.
This is applicable at the national level (with a few exceptions, such as Peru and Nicaragua, which are systematically working with civil society actors) and at the regional level, through the implementation mechanism. CEPAL has proposed an activity envisioning the future within the framework of eLAC2007, with the intention of “creating future common visions for the development of the Information Society” (1). However, access to the questionnaire developed to collect visions is restricted.
What has civil society done and what can it do
We, the various actors share a joint responsibility for this situation. Hence, there are some concerns pending concerning what course of action is to be taken to ensure that the principles of ‘multisectorality’, participation and transparency in the implementation of eLAC2007 become a reality. We also have yet to define how to take up and reinvigorate issues that were not considered by eLAC2007 and that are fundamental, and even a priority, for the development of the information society in our national contexts.
It would be interesting to point to the answers of the interested parties, particularly governments, and the eLAC2007’s implementation mechanism (made up of Ecuador, Brazil, El Salvador and St Lucia).
From the perspective of civil society organisations (CSO), it would be important to consider answers and aim at defining alternative strategies to link to eLAC2007 and to become involved from the national level. CSOs harbour enormous potential and various aspects for which their experience, their visions, their knowledge and energy are key can be identified if the objective is to work towards ICT access and its use for development.
Important advances have been made in the positioning and participation of CSOs as active actors in ICT policy. Nevertheless, there are also important tasks pending. These include the formation of lasting, effective, systemic, and collective alliances that will allow for the creation of stronger and more cohesive actors vis-à-vis national and regional ICT policy.
In alliance, CSOs could, among other things, work for the establishment and broadening of real participation and communication channels with governments; the securing of financial resources that will support action; access to relevant information in an opportune manner; research on priority issues; the generation of common political positions vis-à-vis global and regional policy specific issues and processes; joint proposals for alternative approaches to ICT access and its use for development that benefits the majority.
Civil society organisations have the possibility to redefine our participation and to change the democratically deficient conditions in which we carry out or work (and that we in some measure implicitly accept) into opportunities to renew and broaden our strengths and to merge into politically, technically, economically and socially viable proposals.
Not only does this apply to increased visibility, being present and being consulted. It involves being proactive and purposeful actors with the ability and desire to transcend our own agendas. This means deepening democracy through our own participation. It entails being a part of political decisions, of influencing public policy and reclaiming the public domain.
NOTES
(1) http://www.cepal.org/cgi-bin/getprod.asp?xml=/socinfo/noticias/paginas/
7/24537/P24537.xml&xsl=/socinfo/tpl/p18f.xsl&base=/socinfo/tpl/top-bottom.xsl
(2) A user name and password are requested to access the questionnaire. http://www.elac2007.info/
