From the MDGs to the NUA: Evolution of Global Frameworks

As one way to respond to Grand Challenges, the global frameworks we have studied are by no means perfect. But, I claim that they are the best that we have and that optimism can be found in the fact that with each new framework, we seen an evolution toward a more inclusive idea of development and how we wish to see the world.

Our initial global framework for global development was the GDP, which simply measured the income of a country. From there, we were able to grow into a more inclusive understanding of development with the introduction of the Millennium Development Goals, meant to take on challenges such as eradicating poverty by 2015. Clearly, we have not reached that point yet, making the point that these frameworks are not perfect. In addition, the Millennium Goals were not as clear with their targets and not as inclusive as they should have been. For example, there was no mention of persons with disabilities.

However, from the Millennium Development Goals came the more inclusive and specific SDGs, after which came the CRPD, and the NUA, all of which outlined goals even more inclusive of all people, with more specific targets, and with the potential for increased sustainability. As we move forward, each of these frameworks becomes more and more successful. Each of these documents has redefined development in a more progressive way.

An additional challenge stems from the fact that international law is incredibly difficult to enforce. While we have the International Court of Justice, it is difficult to navigate and often shaky in its role. What we can count on though, is the desire of nations to maintain norms, moral expectations and standards, and to meet the expectations of the United Nations rather than to come under scrutiny at the feet of the international community. The power of this desire is shown through the many successful laws and treaties upheld by the UN as well as by the large numbers in which countries sign and ratify the documents that become global frameworks.

While they are not perfect, the global frameworks we have continue to grow, evolve, and succeed.

Digital Divide(s)

As we dove further into the Digital Divide, I realized that physical access to ICT’s is just one small piece of a much larger puzzle. As with most development issues there are layers of complexity. I was particularly moved by the MacBride Report and its affects. There are so many issues with the media and accessing information that the report highlighted. I was particularly struck by the United States’ reaction to the report. The US was so offended by the communication problems that the report unearthed, like the concentration and commercialization of media, that they actually left UNESCO. This reaction exposes a deep, underlying issue in the Digital Divide and why it exists. Since all media outlets are in the North, the Global South has no control over the type of information they receive through the media. They have no agency over the information that is considered important or newsworthy. And furthermore, states like the US intend to keep the divide, hence the visceral reaction to the MacBride report. This creates a huge development challenge. What good is physical access to ICT’s if the intellectual material is still dictated by another? Just because someone has physical access to computers and internet does not mean that the Digital Divide is solved.

Another issue with the Digital Divide is the skills divide and the knowledge divide. Both of these divides highlight the continued commitment that needs to be made to truly bridge the gap between those who have access to technology and those who do not. If you do not know how to use the technology, then the skills divide will prevent you from accessing any information at all. Furthermore, if information is not available in your language, or reflects your political views, interests etc., then technology is not really accessible to you either. Technology should provide the opportunity for all to thrive and be connected. However, if you cannot access information that is relevant to you, then all the technology in the world is useless to you. This is a huge challenge for solving the Digital Divide, especially with languages. As more and more people gain access to technology, it will have to be adapted in more languages. It is not just the keypad or interfaces that needs to adjust, but the information itself. If there is no online content in your language, then the physical technology holds no purpose. The complexity of the Digital Divide goes far beyond physical access to ICT’s and it will take a lot of innovation and investment from the international community to solve this divide.

Governing the Internet

The biggest problem with governing the Internet is that not one entity can claim ownership over it. While it was developed originally in the United States as a military tool, the US cannot and should not maintain control over the entire web. This is not a problem in that one entity should claim ownership as it is and should remain a shared resource. The problem is that it requires a vast number of stakeholders in the Internet to come together to govern it together. When framed this way, it becomes less of a problem and more of a challenge or opportunity for collaboration.

This opportunity was taken advantage of with after the 2005 Summit in Tunis at which WSIS introduced a shared aim to maintain equal access to and treatment of different states in their access to the Internet as well as the importance of net neutrality. In response, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has begun to transition away from being a United States dominated power and is now an international forum for monitoring of the logistics of the Internet.

Additionally, the Internet Governance Forum allows for a balanced and shared overseeing of the right to the Internet, access to it, and issues of neutrality. The IGF notably has a number of inclusive initiatives based on region, age (youth), and provides a “tool kit” for those outside of the organization looking to be involved and have their voice heard regarding the resource that connects us more than any technology ever has.

Not only is this magnificent in that it allows for shared overseeing of the right to the Internet as well as the importance of neutrality and increase access, this collaboration also marks a significant group of stakeholders working together for a shared goal. In what feels like an increasingly divided world, this is no small feat.

Digital Divide(s)

The term “Digital Divide” refers to the concept of a division in access to certain technologies that prevents communication and at times, further development with a community or country. Depending on the source utilized there can be one digital dived or multiple digital divides. Most of the discussed digital divides center upon demographical separations both domestically and internationally. These separations often occur along age, income, and geographical location divides. The presence of digital divides presents a large problem in our continuously globalizing society. Predictably, there are a number of different reports written on the subject.

This phenomenon of digital divides was explored thoroughly in the 1995 report titled, “Falling Through The Net.” The report, published by the United States National Telecommunications and Information Administration explores the digital divides that exist within the United States. Some of the most prominent divides found were between age and geographical location. The report is considered a key perspective in the discussion on ICTs and digital divides. However, “Falling Through the Net” was not the only report released that touched on the concept of digital divides. The 1981 report titled, “Many Voices, One World” explored similar topics. The report was published by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and is often referred to as the McBride Report. Chapter 6 specifically of Part II of the report explores the disparities in communication technologies. It also expresses the need to address these disparities. These two reports, “Many Voices, One Voice” and “Falling Through the Net” brought attention to the concept of a digital divide (or multiple digital divides) to the attention of the international community. They also facilitated the initial attempts to address the existence of digital divides and the various repercussions of their existence.

As stated previously, addressing digital divides is essential in an increasingly globalized society. As discussed in the two previous classes, ICTs are critical to developing more inclusive urban areas and the inclusive, sustainable development of society as a whole. In fact, many of the goals and ideals set forth in the New Urban Agenda will be exceedingly difficult to address should these digital divides persist. Therefore, it can be argued that the very existence of digital divides makes sustainable, inclusive development exceedingly difficult. Similar opinions, as is noted by Megan as well, are expressed in other documents associated with this class including the WISIS +10 outcome document and the WISIS +10 matrix. Looking into the future, addressing digital divides will be essential if the international community hopes to achieve true inclusive and sustainable development.

Sen’s Theory Toward Inclusive Development

Development is a loaded term, difficult to define in one finely packaged sentence. Traditionally (and wrongly), the picture that comes to mind with “development” is a cross-comparison, one side in a remote village with no running water, children working the fields rather than attending schools, etc. with the other side taking the shape of a large city, covered in high-rise buildings, cars crowding the streets, the latest mobile technologies in everyone’s hands. In the past, “development” was seen as a mission, something the picture on the right needed to intervene and help the picture on the left achieve. I recall being guilty of this myself, even. In a World Studies course in middle school, a woman came to speak to us about Africa as a continent. She showed us a series of pictures, some of naked children, wild animals, women with water in jugs on their heads, and small huts and some of tall buildings, bustling city centers, and highway systems. She asked us “which of these photographs are of Africa?” and we all chose those that seemed to fit our definition of “underdeveloped,” a notion that she quickly turned over on its head.

Much like this guest speaker did for me (and I am so grateful to her that she did), Amartya Sen has done for development as a concept on a global scale. In Development as Freedom, Sen has changed the discourse on development from the “developed” saving or fixing the “underdeveloped” with an end goal of increased income to an understanding of freedoms and unfreedoms. Thanks to Sen, we know that it is an unfreedom for people and entire countries to be left out of the discussion on what makes them “developed” with countries that claim to be already developed making all of the rules.

He defines development as discourse and more importantly, development as freedom, noting that it goes beyond income and applies to freedoms as the opportunities and choices that exist for people. These choices may included where you live and who you live with, what type of transportation you take, where you go to school, what you study in college, and what career you will have.

In turning our previous notions of development on its head, Sen acknowledges that by these standards, some “developed” countries are not truly developed at all and sets the standard for inclusive and sustainable development. As we move from the Millennium Development Goals to the SDGs to the CRPD, WSIS, and Habitat III and the NUA, it is exciting to see the impact a theory of inclusive development has on the progress we are making and the lens through which we frame these goals and their results.

ICT’s and Sustainable Development

ICT’s are crucial for the success of sustainable development because they aid the technological advances that are necessary in a community. Without access to telephones in the 1980’s, The Missing Link report clearly shows deficits for communities that lack that technology. Without the same access to computers in urban areas, for elderly people, and low income households, the Falling Through the Net Report in 1995 showed the inequalities that the lack of ICT’s can maintain. I had never considered the importance of technology and its role in increasing development for everyone. The Digital Divide is a phenomenon that is still affecting communities all over the world. Without the proper access to broadband, cellphones or reliable service, people are continuing to be left behind.

I am particularly interested in the digital divide in remote and rural areas. Over 70% of the world’s PWD population lives in rural areas, so how do we ensure that they are receiving the access they need to ICT’s? I am still wrestling with the best way to increase inclusion for people in rural areas and especially PWD. Will service be provided most effectively through the government or the private sector? With the push for privatization and liberalization within this field, I am hesitant to believe that the private sector alone will solve the digital divide. Like we discussed in class, what incentives do private investors have to expand their services to rural and remote areas? If more money is to be made in the densely populated areas, how do we ensure access to technology for those most in need of their services?

I also think that total government monopoly would be a mistake. As we have seen in the past with large State Owned Enterprises (SOE’s) in China and Korea, they often become expensive to maintain and inefficient to sustain. I think that the 2000 Falling Through the Net recommendations provide a great balance between the two sectors. With strong government regulations and tax incentives, I think that companies could be persuaded to invest in expanding their services to rural and remote areas. This would encourage the private sector to innovatively come up with cost effective ways to expand their business while also relieving the state of these large, expensive enterprises.

Whatever tactics country’s employ, it is imperative that they do so quickly and efficiently. As the world becomes more and more dependent on ICT’s for business, trade, e-commerce, banking, investments, and personal connections, marginalized groups in rural and remote areas are being further disadvantaged. If ICT’s development in these communities increased, I think the development field would see a huge increase in agency and capability for these populations. They would be able to check the global prices of their goods, engage in education, finance their own businesses and so much more without relying on others.

ICTs and Sustainable Development

In recent years, ICTs (information and communications technology) have often been thought of as the key to sustainable and inclusive development, both in rural and in growing urban areas. ICT is a broad term that encompasses a variety of different technologies. However, in the context of development and inclusive development, ICTs generally serve to improve accessibility and improve inclusivity within countries. The WISIS +10 meeting (World Summit on the Information Society) in December of 2015 and the corresponding WISIS +10 outcome matrix explored how ICTs could be used to achieve sustainable, inclusive development. The WISIS +10 matrix found relevant WISIS action lines within all of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This demonstrates the widespread depth and application of ICTs and the developmental process.

However, the study of the role of ICTs in development began far earlier than 2015. The Maitland Commission, published a report titled, “The Missing Link” in 1984 explored the role that telecommunications played in development and the inequities in access to telecommunications that existed. It was published by the International Telecommunication Union. This report is largely viewed as an important step in understanding the relationship between ICTs and development. The report, “Falling Through The Net” published in 1995, continued to build upon the ideas introduced within the Maitland Report through internet accessibility. It also laid the groundwork for future analysis and discussion on the role ICTs in development including the WISIS +10 meeting.

ICT are and should be an inarguable part of sustainable, inclusive development. As was explored in the previous class and blog post, ICTs are essential to the creation of “smart cities.” Smart city initiatives, as outlined in the New Urban Agenda (NUA), are key to successful, inclusive development. Nowhere are ICTS more applicable than in the ever-expanding urban areas throughout the world. However, important steps must be taken to ensuring that ICTs and many of the recourses that they seek to increase access to. As is explored in the Maitland Report, there are often access divides within location and incomes. This phenomenon was explored further in the report further in the report titled, “Falling Through the Net.” However, since the publication of the Maitland Report in 1984, a great number of initiatives have been implemented to try to reduce these gaps. While these initiatives have been met with varying degrees of success the expansion of ICTs throughout the world is undeniable. Because of this steep increase, it can be anticipate that their expansion should continue to increase. However, the inclusive distribution of ITCs and the recourses that they help to access will be much harder to achieve.

MDG’s, SDG’s, the HLPF and Persons with Disabilities

The Sustainable Development Goals, an improvement on the Millennium Development Goals, are a set of seventeen goals that address the grand challenges our world society. These goals include poverty eradication, inclusive cities, zero hunger, affordable and clean energy, clean water and sanitation, good health and well-being, quality education, etc. Because monitoring and implementation proved to be such a pertinent issue with the Millennium Development Goals, additional measures were taken for the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. In the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, each of seventeen goals has a target and indicator attached to it. The targets and indicators are meant to serve as a follow-up and review mechanism for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. The targets and indicators of each goal allow stakeholders to better understand steps needed to achieve these goals and allows for increased accountability of stakeholders. While the Sustainable Development Goals are an improvement on the Millennium Development Goals, the SDG’s still face large challenges.

The High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) was created to act as a governing body over the States. The HLPF acts as a body that oversees States and ensures that States are participating fully and taking steps toward achieving the SDG’s. It is important to note that the HLPF prides itself on being inclusive, however, there are many barriers in place that make the HLPF rather exclusive. In order to participate at the HLPF, you must be a representative of a member state or accredited by ECOSOC to participate. If you are not a representative of a member state, participation at the HLPF is limited to the participation of the nine major groups. These major groups include women, children, farmers, indigenous people, local authorities, businesses, civil society, and workers and trade unions. This is increasingly challenging because key stakeholders are left out of the conversation. For example, persons with disabilities do not constitute a major group and therefore do not have direct access to the HLPF. Groups that are not included in the major groups framework are unable to make recommendations, submit documents, attend meetings, access official information and documents, and organize round tables related to the implementation of the SDG’s. This is problematic because key voices and expertise are left behind.

Specifically, in regards to persons with disabilities, while the SDG’s did improve by including 11 explicit references to persons with disabilities, the highly politicized mechanisms in place for implementation of the SDG’s falls short of ensuring that these explicit references will actually be implemented. The HLPF should follow suit of the Third UN World Conference of Disaster Risk Reduction (WCDRR) that took place in Sendai, Japan. This conference was the first conference that was not only accessible to both participants and speakers with disabilities, but also allowed for a tenth major group to participate – persons with disabilities. It is essential that the HLPF incorporate persons with disabilities because they are the experts in this field – they are the only ones who can truly speak to the challenges they face and the importance of incorporating these challenges into the movement toward inclusive sustainable development.

 

Digital “access” Divide

When I think of the digital divide, the first word that comes to mind is “access.” The digital divide refers to the existing gap between those who can access the internet and those who can’t. Internet access is one of the many resource that people in industrially developed areas take for granted. I think I can speak for my fellow college students (and probably most of our parents) when I say we get frustrated with slow internet connection – let alone no connection at all! We rely on the internet to engage with our community. Access to this form of communication has become a lifeline to the rest of the world – or at least that’s how the people see it who have used it.

Falling through the Net is one of the key documents that addresses the digital divide. In Part II, the authors focus on three main aspects of internet access and usage. Two are related to where and how the internet is accessed. Then, the final area focuses on how people use the internet. I venture to say that most people in industrially developed countries rarely have to consider the first two areas. We can connect to wireless, broadband internet from university campuses, our homes, office buildings, and even many public spaces. Accessibility is something that we take for granted – and this document forces its audience to consider how difficult it is for people in less developed regions to access internet.

Furthermore, whether the internet is accessed via phone or computer does not normally make much of a difference for those of us in the industrially developed world. We know that if for some reason we cannot access the internet through our computer, we can use our phone. Likewise, if we can’t access the internet at work, we can access it at home or any number of public places. It is important to point out that Falling through the Net reports that most people who access the internet outside of their homes do so through work. This says a lot about what we as a global society use internet access for. We not only use the internet for communication, but the nature of the communication has other societal byproducts. To continue this point, Macbride Commission Report argues that it would be shortsighted to see technological advancements as merely technological (78). The reason I am relating these two points is to demonstrate how central the internet is to our work life. It is not only a milestone in regards to technological advancements, but also in regards to economic and social connections.

Development Theory

What do we mean when we say that a person or a group or a country is better off? This complex question drove Amaryta Sen to write Development As Freedom, in which Sen tackles the issue of development. Unlike my fellow classmates, development was not an area that I focused on during my academic studies. As such, Development As Freedom was my introduction to development theory. Development is a multi-disciplinary field that is convoluted by a myriad of perspectives as to what constitutes development of a nation. Prior to Sen, development was largely measured by economic growth. This idea of development as a measure of economic prosperity is culminated in Why Nations Fail. In Why Nations Fail, Acemoglu and Robinson address development in regards to economic growth of a nation and the inclusivity of the institutions of a nation. However, in Development As Freedom, Sen challenges this predominate view by claiming that money is not a measure of all things. Instead, Sen argues that development is the process of expanding human freedoms. Sen focused on the concept of freedom, rather than the means to achieving freedom. He believes that freedoms are restricted by social, political, and economic opportunity. Sen asserts “development consists of the removal of various types of unfreedoms that leave people with little choice and the opportunity of exercising their reasoned agency.” Sen’s assertion led to a critical paradigm shift in the field of development that focuses on the expansion of individual freedom as the primary end and primary means of development.

In International Development Studies, Sumner and Tribe address the three inter-related views on development including: (1) the long-term process of structural change in the international system, (2) short to medium-term process, and (3) development as a discourse. Contextually, these inter-related views on development and the paradigm shift in the field of development brought about the discourse of inclusive sustainable development and more importantly, disability inclusive development. The idea of development as a means of expanding freedoms is especially challenging when viewed from the perspective of persons with disabilities. There are over one million individuals in our world that face a myriad of unfreedoms because of their disability. Inclusive sustainable development practices aim to tackle these unfreedoms. Specifically, efforts focused on disability inclusive development are culminated in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

Upon my introduction to development theory, the idea of freedom as the primary end and the primary means of development, was inspiring. Sen highlights the importance of freedoms that allow people to help themselves and influence the world; this inspired me to choose my capstone topic focused on disaster risk management at the community level. My capstone project, when viewed from a larger context, is an attempt to reduce the unfreedoms that communities face in building resilience to natural disaster. It highlights the importance of freedoms that allow communities to help themselves in the face of natural disaster.

Viewing development as a means to expand human freedoms is essential to achieving inclusive sustainable development.