Corporate social responsibility is, perhaps worryingly, a recent trend. I say worryingly, because it implies that being socially responsible is a recent recognition and it suggests that it may fade away. This "trend" is connected to another potential fad: sustainability. In both cases the matter is fundamental for society, because the point is that corporations should be socially responsible and strive for sustainability of their company and of the world at large. Of course, common sense dictates that this should be the norm. However, traditionally the problem has been that sustainability and social responsibility have often been seen as opposed to profit. In other words, a company can either act responsibly or make a profit. ICT enters the picture because some believe that it enables companies to be more effective in striving for both social responsibility and sustainability. But, as we know by now, ICT is usually a double-edged sword and its effects do not necessarily have a positive impact.
In Fuchs (2008) paper most of the myths surrounding the benefit of ICT for sustainability are debunked. Some still believe that ICT enables people to get in touch without the need for physically transporting themselves: this should reduce transport-related CO2 emissions. However, the fact is that telework has actually grown together with transportation requirements (not against it). A teleworker on average makes more trips to visit clients than an office worker, so commuting increases. In addition, the Internet helps us get in touch with old friends or create new social ties which increase our desire or need to make (longer) trips, which is aided by the fact that travel itself is made easier by the Internet (booking a cheaper trip, making plans, finding out requirements, getting tourism information, etc.). Another myth is that the post-industrial economy is a weightless one (as when Negroponte suggested a shift from atoms to bits in his 1995 book, Being Digital), which would imply a reduction in physical trade and thus CO2 emissions. This is far from the truth. To begin with, e-commerce platforms originally supported the buying and selling of tangible goods (from books and CDs to clothing and collectibles) which rather than being weightless, only worsened the problem, because it opened up the market from farther away, implying longer travel distances and often in small quantities (even today if I order a book from Amazon it will probably go through at least four different cities before reaching me). But the real omission is that the digital age by no means replaces the "old" economy, it only adds to it, or in Touraine's words rather than post-industrial, it becomes hyper-industrial (e.g. rather than saving paper we now have more to print and faster ways to do it). We have already observed that globalized capitalism is intertwined with ICT and this means, for instance, that traditional clothing brands which were usually produced and sold in Colombia are now produced in China and sold all over the world, increasing CO2 emissions. In any case, the fact remains that fossil fuels are still by far the energy behind modern industrial economies (with no signs of slowing down, except due to their exhaustion - peak oil, for instance) and the single largest contributor to material outflows (pollution). ICT itself, as an industry, is very resource intensive (and rapidly growing in terms of energy consumption through increased usage) and the fact that digital devices have a low life span only increases the amount of waste generated. This doesn't mean that ICT cannot result in benefits for sustainability. Despite the fact that it is still limited, ICT enables the distribution and sharing of information to increase ecological awareness and helps support the organization and deployment of environmental activism (which has led to actual results in terms of halting polluting enterprises or forcing a change in policy). This may be labeled as environmental informatics (coupled with cyberprotest) but its reach is still not widespread nor enough to contain or counterbalance unsustainable human activity...yet. For starters, the role of ICT with respect to sustainability needs to encompass not just ecological sustainability, but also technological, economic, political and cultural aspects.
The key point remains, however, there is still a widely held dichotomy between profit and sustainability. What is required is an explicit distinction between profit-pursuing and profit-maximizing. Profit making is legitimate and actually needed for sustainability, but the logic changes completely when it is led by profit-maximizing, because the latter implies stronger trade-offs where profit always takes precedence over people and planet. Hence the recent calls for a "triple bottom-line" of people, planet and profit (though it is still unclear whether they are truly given the same weight, or whether indeed people and planet should come before profit as sustainability would imply). For this to happen corporations need to embrace corporate social responsibility not as an appendix which they need to comply with (something they usually due by outsourcing their corporate social responsibility program!) but as a compromise which may (and in most cases should) lead to a critical examination of their business model and bottom line. This is because traditional business models are built under the profit-maximizing logic of capitalism and if this is not placed under scrutiny then real sustainability can hardly be achieved.
With respect to the ICT industry, this dichotomy permeates business models when the choice is between open or proprietary modes of production. In Busch (2010) the hypothesis is that open modes of production are more ethical and hence required of a corporate citizen (corporate citizenship is a term closely related to corporate social responsibility). On one end of the spectrum are the defenders of strong protection of intellectual property, who argue that this guarantees innovation and efficiency in the long run . On the other end of the spectrum lies the "free" alternative, where the argument is that open and free sharing of knowledge is at the basis of human good will and fosters a sustainable, inclusive society. Both positions, in Bush, are seen as libertarian, but not aimed at freedom in the liberal sense, because they refer to an arbitrary freedom and not a generalized and inclusive freedom. A more nuanced open alternative is one where free and open access conduces to cheaper software, reduces vendor lock-in, contributes technology transfer to the developing world and enables more effective teaching and learnign of new technology development and use. While ICT companies would claim to agree with these goals, their business models still mostly rely on exclusive licensing, proprietary source code and closed standards, not to mention prohibitive pricing which widens digital divides. In many cases, this leads to a systemic degradation of the ICT industry as a whole, as with the "Cold War" effect of patents. While patents are supposed to foster innovation, in practice big ICT companies end up building huge walls made up of hundreds of patents just as a threat or as a protection against lawsuits from competitors. Since the effect is a systemic Cold War, no single company has the power (or perhaps the willingness) to open up their modes of production. Since the early days, the major players in the ICT industry have sued and counter-sued each other to ridiculous levels. These lawsuits take time (often many years) and require sustaining a team of (very expensive) lawyers and may end up in costing companies hundreds of millions of dollars which could have gone instead into what the patents where supposed to protect: socially meaningful innovation. This is no mere localized or minor issue, just looking at the past few years and only looking at the mobile device sector, the fact is that most of the big companies are suing each other (Apple, Microsoft, Google, HP, Motorola, Oracle). A "few" examples:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/184474/apple_sues_nokia_whos_next.html
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2371822,00.asp
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/handheld/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=223101180
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/06/motorola_sues_apple/
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/desktop/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=229000550
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-07/nokia-sues-apple-over-technology-used-in-iphone-ipad-update5-.html
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/htc-sues-apple-over-patent-infringement/34362
http://www.examiner.com/smartphones-in-national/microsoft-sues-google-over-android-os-patent-infringements
http://tech.gaeatimes.com/index.php/archive/google-sues-microsoft-over-hosted-email-battle/
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9180678/Update_Oracle_sues_Google_over_Java_use_in_Android
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20018305-56.html
http://gizmodo.com/#!5677354/apple-sues-motorola-over-multitouch
Ethically, access to knowledge is a basic human right and copyright seems to be a failed ideology with no empirical or normative support. The trend towards a read-write culture, as opposed to a read-only culture, seems to be an unstoppable aspect of a sustainable information society, but one which is constantly under threat, with costly implications in terms of digital inclusion.
viernes, 15 de abril de 2011
jueves, 7 de abril de 2011
ICT in Latin America and Colombia (Apr. 5)
In order to contextualize ICT development within our region, we revised the ECLAC (CEPAL) document from 2003 by Katz and Hilbert indicating the "road towards an information society in Latin America and the Caribbean", which we had already seen when discussing the information society. The first noticeable idea is a clear and urgent call for a transition towards the information society in the region, framed almost as a "now or never" justified by a shortening window of opportunity. Not only is the window for entering the information society closing rapidly, they claim, but it would also be enormously costly for future generations if we do not heed this call. The authors also point out that we have wrongly adopted foreign (theoretical) models for understanding and pushing forward this transition. Wrongly, they say, because in our region there has been weak economic growth, unstable economic conditions, ICT has not been a national priority and public services and regulation are immature. This means that considering our peculiarities and priorities is critical for a successful reduction of international and intra-national digital divides in the region. For instance, we have the most unequal society in terms of income in the whole world and we still have pressing educational needs (high illiteracy in several countries in the region, such as Haiti). In addition, we have unequal conditions in terms of urbanization (ICT development has been highest in the most urbanized areas in the region). Moreover, we have a sizable (yet vulnerable) indigenous population which has been mostly excluded either due to specific educational or cultural considerations or because there is almost no indigenous (language) content for them (or generated by them) on the Internet. From a technical point of view, the region has not been successful in choosing or adopting strategic standards related to ICT (notably going against the majority of the world in the early adoption of the TDMA standard for mobile phone communication and not having a regional agreement in terms of digital television). Finally, in terms of software, we have been slow in adopting strategic applications for industry, given that the basic application services and software were not there in the first place to allow smooth evolution towards more sophisticated enterprise-wide systems. This is coupled to the lack of strategy and understanding of the risks and opportunities of free software (which may have a higher total cost of ownership when it is not adequately supported) vs. vendor-specific software (which may lead to a lock-in effect or potentially hurt technological sovereignty).
Things have changed since 2003 and we have made some important (yet unequal) progress in ICT in the region. Accordingly, we looked at another ECLAC document, this time from 2010 by Parada in order to have an updated view of ICT statistics and the current state of affairs. What is more meaningful in this document is that it contains the effect of national digital agendas which had mostly been put into place around the time of the first ECLAC document. The author reiterates on the main sectors that would benefit from ICT, as identified earlier by ECLAC: e-government, education, health care and productivity. The document clearly demonstrates an important increase in the number of Internet and mobile phone users in the region, though not evenly distributed and crucially still behind in terms of broadband access, with respect to OECD averages. A critical factor for this slow spread and adoption of broadband (and ICT in general) is the vicious circle between income and tariffs. The lower the income in a country, the higher the connection and access tariffs tend to be. This creates an obvious digital divide in which people from "rich" countries get to pay less for their broadband access than people in "poor" countries, which becomes even more apparent when it is considered as a percentage of GDP per capita. While in developed countries, consumers pay less than 1% of their income (GDP per capita) for broadband access, in our region it can be more than 95% of average income (e.g. Honduras and Bolivia). A major technical impediment for widespread broadband in the region are the main backbones of the Internet with submarine cables that do not reach beyond the coastline. This is part of yet another vicious circle: most Internet content is in English and based in the USA and even local content from Latin America is still mostly hosted in US servers, making traffic slower (to make a local connection or access local content, traffic often has to go back and forth through US-based servers) and again posing a threat to technological and information sovereignty.
Lastly, we considered Ngwenyama and Morawczynski (2009) in a paper that focuses on the key factors that affect ICT expansion in Latin American emerging economies (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Perú). For starters, they are critical about the role that ICT has for development in the region. On the one hand, ICT may have the spillover effects hoped for in ECLAC documents (health and governance, among others). On the other hand, development through ICT is not guaranteed and developing countries actually get less return on investments made on ICT than developed countries (the reasons for this include those discussed above in the ECLAC documents). Since their emphasis is on emerging economies, they assume that such economies are characterized by rapid growth together with liberalization and free market policies. The premise is that trough privatization and regulation, ICT expansion and use is more efficient. We must note, however, that they are saying privatization and regulation, not privatization and deregulation, suggesting that privatization needs to be coupled with effective regulation of the ICT sector in order for the benefits to reach more population. Although the authors are not specific about it, regulation means fighting monopoly, controlling tariffs, imposing standards and other measures which the US or the EU effectively use to promote a fair ICT market in their regions (for instance, enforcing a limit on roaming charges for mobile phone service providers as the EU did last year). Through a statistical study (using ITU and World Bank data), the authors test their hypotheses regarding the influence that (1) economic factors, (2) usage fees & tariffs, (3) human capital, and (4) geography & civil infrastructure have on ICT infrastructure expansion efficiency. Though the model mostly holds, it shows the limitations of such large-scale simplifications, producing results that are even surprising for the authors (Colombia was found as the most efficient between the five selected countries for the period 1994-2001). In the end, they suggest some policy recommendations centered around a careful assessment of local conditions and capacities, and a complementarity in the different ICT investment strategies through more synergistic nation-wide planning.
In order to bring down these macro-level analysis and data to the human level, we used a movie to illustrate some of the potential effects and perceptions of ICT for real people. When it comes to technology, a good source of critical thinking on its motivations and effects has often been found within a film genre which might be labeled "paranoid (post)apocalyptic sci-fi". This label includes movies (often based on books) such as Blade Runner, 1984, Brazil or Matrix. These films often serve as a social critique of current times, using the future as proxy and they vary between highly advanced futuristic technology (obviously gone wrong) to more plausible situations in the near future. In this case, and given our special interest in Latin America this week, we had a screening of Sleep Dealer, a Mexican film from 2008 which includes a water-based conflict together with the dystopian outcomes of social networks and outsourcing (virtual work) on a global scale, centered around the US-Mexico border. Although the film may be indeed placed as paranoid apocalyptic science fiction, it often seems disturbingly plausible in a not so distant future. That is, of course, unless we prevent it from getting to that point.
Things have changed since 2003 and we have made some important (yet unequal) progress in ICT in the region. Accordingly, we looked at another ECLAC document, this time from 2010 by Parada in order to have an updated view of ICT statistics and the current state of affairs. What is more meaningful in this document is that it contains the effect of national digital agendas which had mostly been put into place around the time of the first ECLAC document. The author reiterates on the main sectors that would benefit from ICT, as identified earlier by ECLAC: e-government, education, health care and productivity. The document clearly demonstrates an important increase in the number of Internet and mobile phone users in the region, though not evenly distributed and crucially still behind in terms of broadband access, with respect to OECD averages. A critical factor for this slow spread and adoption of broadband (and ICT in general) is the vicious circle between income and tariffs. The lower the income in a country, the higher the connection and access tariffs tend to be. This creates an obvious digital divide in which people from "rich" countries get to pay less for their broadband access than people in "poor" countries, which becomes even more apparent when it is considered as a percentage of GDP per capita. While in developed countries, consumers pay less than 1% of their income (GDP per capita) for broadband access, in our region it can be more than 95% of average income (e.g. Honduras and Bolivia). A major technical impediment for widespread broadband in the region are the main backbones of the Internet with submarine cables that do not reach beyond the coastline. This is part of yet another vicious circle: most Internet content is in English and based in the USA and even local content from Latin America is still mostly hosted in US servers, making traffic slower (to make a local connection or access local content, traffic often has to go back and forth through US-based servers) and again posing a threat to technological and information sovereignty.
Lastly, we considered Ngwenyama and Morawczynski (2009) in a paper that focuses on the key factors that affect ICT expansion in Latin American emerging economies (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Perú). For starters, they are critical about the role that ICT has for development in the region. On the one hand, ICT may have the spillover effects hoped for in ECLAC documents (health and governance, among others). On the other hand, development through ICT is not guaranteed and developing countries actually get less return on investments made on ICT than developed countries (the reasons for this include those discussed above in the ECLAC documents). Since their emphasis is on emerging economies, they assume that such economies are characterized by rapid growth together with liberalization and free market policies. The premise is that trough privatization and regulation, ICT expansion and use is more efficient. We must note, however, that they are saying privatization and regulation, not privatization and deregulation, suggesting that privatization needs to be coupled with effective regulation of the ICT sector in order for the benefits to reach more population. Although the authors are not specific about it, regulation means fighting monopoly, controlling tariffs, imposing standards and other measures which the US or the EU effectively use to promote a fair ICT market in their regions (for instance, enforcing a limit on roaming charges for mobile phone service providers as the EU did last year). Through a statistical study (using ITU and World Bank data), the authors test their hypotheses regarding the influence that (1) economic factors, (2) usage fees & tariffs, (3) human capital, and (4) geography & civil infrastructure have on ICT infrastructure expansion efficiency. Though the model mostly holds, it shows the limitations of such large-scale simplifications, producing results that are even surprising for the authors (Colombia was found as the most efficient between the five selected countries for the period 1994-2001). In the end, they suggest some policy recommendations centered around a careful assessment of local conditions and capacities, and a complementarity in the different ICT investment strategies through more synergistic nation-wide planning.
In order to bring down these macro-level analysis and data to the human level, we used a movie to illustrate some of the potential effects and perceptions of ICT for real people. When it comes to technology, a good source of critical thinking on its motivations and effects has often been found within a film genre which might be labeled "paranoid (post)apocalyptic sci-fi". This label includes movies (often based on books) such as Blade Runner, 1984, Brazil or Matrix. These films often serve as a social critique of current times, using the future as proxy and they vary between highly advanced futuristic technology (obviously gone wrong) to more plausible situations in the near future. In this case, and given our special interest in Latin America this week, we had a screening of Sleep Dealer, a Mexican film from 2008 which includes a water-based conflict together with the dystopian outcomes of social networks and outsourcing (virtual work) on a global scale, centered around the US-Mexico border. Although the film may be indeed placed as paranoid apocalyptic science fiction, it often seems disturbingly plausible in a not so distant future. That is, of course, unless we prevent it from getting to that point.
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)