Changing Internet Policy: Experience from 17 Countries

1
Changing Internet Policy Experience from 17
Countries

• George Sadowsky
• USAID dot-GOV Project
• Global Internet Policy Initiative
• george.sadowsky_at_internews.org
• http//www.usaid.gov/info_technology/dotcom/dotgov
  .html
  
• www.internetpolicy.net
• DOT-COM/InterAction Speaker Series
• June 5, 2003

2
Introduction

• Outline of presentation
• Historical background
• The case for the importance of policy
• The GIPI initiative
• NGO to civil society
• The dot-GOV initiative
• USAID to USAID Mission to host government
• Complements activities of GIPI
• This presentation represents a work in progress
• These are partial results from 2 years (maximum)
• Policy details are at http//www.internetpolicy.ne
  t/

3
Some history

• Although the Internet is 35 years old,
• 10-15 years ago, penetration in developing
  countries was limited mostly to developed
  countries
  
• Fundamental challenges were posed by
• Very high connectivity costs, unreliable
  connectivity, only relatively low bandwidth
  possible
  
• Lack of critical mass of trained people at all
  levels
  
• Fewer reasons to connect lack of content or
  applications
  
• Hostility of PTTs
• Following maps illustrate penetration and are
  courtesy of
  
• Larry Landweber and the Internet Society
  (1991-1997) (ftp.cs.wisc.edu/connectivity/)
  
• Mike Jensen (final map, 1998)

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
Internet Connectivity 1998 (courtesy Mike Jensen)
17
The Internet Society Workshops

• Internet Society workshops were designed to
  ameliorate this condition held along with INET
  conferences
  
• Workshops spanned 1992-2001
• 1500 trained directly, about 1500 more in
  spin-offs students came from almost all
  developing countries
  
• Started with 4 training tracks
• Basic connectivity at the country level
• Reliable routed structure with critical mass
  in-country
  
• Resource discovery, then content creation
• National net management, ISP business management
• Tracks evolved as Internet and related knowledge
  spread
  
• In 2001, training evolved to a mix of advanced
  technology and policy issues

18
Policy most important inhibiting factor

• Infrastructure now exists in critical mass
• But clearly not ubiquitous!
• Rural areas still pose significant connectivity
  problems
  
• Critical mass of trained people will exist
• No country has enough trained people yet
• But governments lag in understanding
• Ignorance of innovation and its potential
• Fear of revenue loss, loss of power, control
• Classical telephony model entrenched, based on
  significant regulation this model is being
  extended to the Internet
  
• Restrictive policy now may be the most important
  factor inhibiting the spread of the Internet
  
• Degree varies from country to country

19
GIPI Improving Internet policy

• Project started in late 2000, now in 17
  countries
  
• Goal to make the Internet as available and
  affordable as possible to as many people as
  possible in a country
  
• Why? Internet is a superb carrier of all types of
  information, contributes substantially to many
  kinds of development
  
• Different countries want it for different
  reasons
  
• Methodology national policy reform change
  legislation and regulation
  
• Continuous in country advocacy presence
• Targeted external expert assistance
• Partnership CDT and Internews
• CDT Internet policy issues in depth in US
• Internews open media in many countries

20
GIPI has projects in

• Armenia
• Azerbaijan
• Belarus
• Bosnia
• Bulgaria
• Georgia
• India
• Indonesia
• Kazakhstan

• Kyrgyzstan
• Nigeria
• Russia
• Serbia (Yugoslavia)
• Tajikistan
• Vietnam
• Ukraine
• Uzbekistan

21
GIPI assumptions

• We think we know the general policies for
  facilitating Internet affordability and growth
  
• But each country must interpret and apply
  according to local conditions
  
• And each country needs to understand what is
  happening elsewhere and what best practices are
  emerging
  
• Successful process is bottom up, working with
  coalitions
  
• Examine benefits of widespread Internet in the
  country
  
• Consider alternatives and successful environments
  elsewhere
  
• Move toward influencing government on a national
  scale
  
• Government eventually must be a full partner in
  the process
  
• Full time local coordinator essential for
  success
  
• Must understand technology to be thoroughly
  credible
  
• Must understand legal and political processes
• Most important, must be able to form coalitions
  of civil society
  
• ISP community one of the most important

22
Policies for Internet growth (1)

• Reliance on free market forces
• Support for entrepreneurial activities
• No special licensing of ISPs
• Transparent and open regulatory and legislative
  processes
  
• Low telecomm prices through competition
• Strongly implies telecomm liberalization
• Independent regulatory authority
• Cost based local loop pricing
• Flat rate per call pricing whenever costs can
  support it
  
• Effective measures to deal with cybercrime
• Privacy protection for individuals and for data

23
Policies for Internet growth (2)

• Confidentiality of user information
• Recognition of digital documents, authentication
• Removal of superfluous barriers to entry
• Non-discrimination by telecoms vis-à-vis other
  ISPs
  
• Use of international technical standards
• Adherence to technology neutral policies
• Protection for intellectual property
• No ISP liability for content carriage
• Encouragement of local language content
• May imply using code sets for non-Latin alphabets

24
GIPI coordinators job description

• Within context of GIPI policies for Internet
  growth
  
• Form coalitions business, ISPs, education,
  health, NGO community
  
• Help coalition to bring upward pressure on
  government
  
• Form an ISP association if none exists
• Form an Internet Society chapter if none exists
• Work toward introducing competition in telecomm
  services
  
• Work toward a national event to examine ICT
  policy
  
• Make visible ICT policies from more rapidly
  developing economies
  
• Share approaches with other GIPI coordinators
• Call in international help at critical times
• Work cooperatively with all sectors of society,
  help them to push for liberalization of ICT
  legislation and regulation

25
GIPI policy support

• Training sessions for GIPI coordinators
• Stockholm 2001 workshop on policy and advanced
  technology, in conjunction with INET 2001
  
• Berkman Center workshops, CFP conferences, etc.
• Evaluation of draft laws and regulations
• Preparation of policy papers on various ICT
  subjects
  
• Addressing country specific and general problems
• Special missions for specific purposes
• Web site contains all papers and all country
  reports
  
• http//www.internetpolicy.net/

26
The dot-GOV project

• Part of DOT-COM project having broader ICT
  scope
  
• dot-ORG addresses access and infrastructure
  issues
  
• dot-EDU addresses education and application
  issues
  
• Dot-GOV is a government to government program
• Projects in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Romania,
  Southern Africa, continental Africa, Rwanda,
  Vietnam, others soon
  
• Focus upon entire spectrum of telecomm and
  policy
  
• Building and assisting regulatory authorities
• E-commerce and trade policy agreements
• E-government activities
• Regional harmonization of regulatory practices
• Training regulatory experts
• Capacity building in governments in area of ICT
  policy competence
  
• dot-GOV and GIPI are complementary and work
  together
  
• Deliver by and large the same policy principles
  and implementation strategies

27
Results and lessons learned

• Working from within the system seems to offer
  good possibilities of success
  
• Internet policy depends critically on telecomm
  policy
  
• Cant reform one without reforming the other
• Insert the wedge for change in place anywhere
  there is an opportunity
  
• Governments are not monolithic many inside want
  change also
  
• Be there when the balance starts to tip
• One full time person can accomplish a great deal
• Solid coalitions of civil society can effect
  consideration of change
  
• External pressures to reform outweigh arguments
  for status quo
  
• But without help, change can be enormously slow
• Unfortunately, some large exogenous factors
  cannot be controlled
  
• Obtaining mindshare, changing policy perceptions,
  takes time
  
• But it has the possibility of being sustainable

28
Thank you!George SadowskyUSAID Dot-GOV
ProjectGIPI Global Internet Policy
Initiativegeorge.sadowsky_at_internews.orghttp//w
ww.usaid.gov/info_technology/dotcom/dotgov.htmlht
tp//www.internetpolicy.net/