Acumen

• Strategic Information Policy
• Social Information Provision
• The Information Workforce
• Performance Measurement
• Libraries, Musuems and Archives
• About Us

The International Framework of Information Policies

Nick Moore, Acumen

In years to come, we will look back on the 1990s as the time when we learned how to use information to transform the shape of our lives.

The impetus for this has undoubtedly been the development of information and communication technology as a powerful and flexible resource that can be used to improve nearly all aspects of life. By the end of the century we will have had forty years in which to consolidate our ability to use a technology that continues to fall in price as quickly as it expands in capacity.

Countries all over the world are now trying to transform themselves into information societies - societies that can grow and prosper through the more effective use of information and its associated technologies.

The Global Policy Response

One of the interesting things about the changes that are taking place is the fact that formal frameworks of policy are being established to steer the development of information societies. There can be few other examples of technological change stimulating formal policy creation in order to bring about social change.

The movement began in the USA during the 1992 Presidential Election campaign when Vice President-Elect Al Gore set out his ideas for developing information superhighways. By this he meant a network of telecommunications that would enable America to communicate and use flows of information in a wide variety of ways. The use of the term 'superhighways' was no accident - Al Gore's father was a politician who is credited with launching the development of the network of interstate highways in the USA.

The idea became accepted as the National Information Infrastructure and formed a major part of the programme of the first Clinton administration.(1)

In Europe, Jacques Delors recognised the potential threat of such a development to the competitiveness of the European economy and, in his final White Paper as President of the Commission(2), he set out his ideas for developing a comparable European network of high-capacity telecommunications.

Since then there have been numerous follow-up reports, studies, policies and action programmes designed to increase Europe's capacity to exploit information as an economic and, increasingly, a social resource.(3)

At that time, in the early 1990s, Singapore was the only other country to have well-developed plans for a fully-fledged information society.(4) These originated in a longer-term process of economic re-structuring and owed little to the ideas of Al Gore or Jacques Delors. Indeed, Gore and Delors could have learned a great deal from the approach that was being followed by Singapore.

Since then, many countries have grasped the need to make a rapid transition to become information-intensive societies and there has been a steady flow of information policies and vision statements defining the goals of information societies and setting out programmes that will enable countries to attain the goals.

Common goals

One of the most interesting things is the similarity in the goals of information policy. Countries large and small, developed and undeveloped, capitalist and socialist, all share a set of aspirations that are remarkably similar(5).

The first priority is an efficient, high-capacity telecommunications system that is universally accessible. Without this, the scope for developing an information society is very limited. These telecommunications systems are often referred to as the backbone of an information society. It would be more accurate to describe them as the nervous system through which messages can be transmitted and on which the whole body, or society, depends.

The second goal is the development of an economy in which organisations in both the private and public sector use information as a resource to raise levels of productivity and to improve competitiveness. At one level, the intention is to improve the efficiency of existing organisations. At a more fundamental level, however, the aim is to re-structure the economy, moving into higher value-added industries that, almost be definition, are more information-intensive in their operation.

Closely related to this is the need to develop the quality of the education and training system to satisfy the demand for skilled labour. Increasingly, however, it is recognised that to create a society in which information is used for the common good, it is necessary to develop a culture in which there is a genuine, and continuing, desire to learn.

There are political goals, with information societies seen as a way of strengthening democracy through the development of an informed citizenry. And finally there is a cultural dimension with countries trying to use the information society to strengthen local culture and to protect it from the incursion of a bland, global culture.

Different motivations

In developed countries the main motivation comes from fear.(5) Countries are afraid that they will lose their dominant position in a rapidly changing global economy, and the information society is seen as a way of avoiding this. Associated with this there is a concern about social disruption brought about by high levels of unemployment and by other structural changes in society. This produces pressure to exploit an economic opportunity in the hope that, by maintaining or, if possible, increasing levels of national income it will be possible to prevent social dislocation and, critically, bring more of the workforce into employment.

Outside the developed countries the motivation is different. Here the move towards an information society is seen as the next step in a process of economic development within a competitive global economic system. Motivation comes from a realisation of what might be achieved rather than from a fear of what might be lost.

Different mechanisms

There are also marked differences in the ways in which countries have gone about re-positioning themselves as information societies. At one extreme is the neo-liberal, or market-driven approach. Here, market forces are all-important and the state plays a minor role, simply ensuring that the conditions are right for the private sector and stepping in wherever there is market failure. Clearly in such circumstances, profit is the most important determinant of the direction that the information society takes.

At the other extreme there are the dirigiste, or interventionist approaches of countries like Korea and Singapore. Here the state is seen as the key player, working in partnership with the private sector to achieve a set of goals that have been established by the state. The public sector is an active partner, undertaking investment and managing both risk and competition so that private and public goals can be achieved successfully.(5)

Developments in Europe

Europe has been in the forefront of developments towards an information society. Progress has been helped greatly by a favourable set of conditions that, together, have provided a firm foundation on which development could take place.

First, and perhaps most important, nearly all of Europe is served by efficient telecommunications systems. Further, the introduction of competition, following the European Commission's Directive in 1990(6), along with technological advances, has meant that the overall levels of productivity in the telecommunications systems have risen significantly. As a result, costs have reduced, capacity has expanded and it has been possible to finance the necessary capital investment largely out of revenue income.

Businesses and households have also been quite willing to invest in computers and other hardware. As a result most European companies have access to computers and make significant use of information and communications technology.(7) Also, the number of European households that own a personal computer is growing at over 30 per cent each year.(8, 9) The overall number of personal computers in Europe is forecast to double between 1997 and 2000.(9)

Europe also has a strong information industry. It is true that the European hardware industry has been unable to compete with companies in North America and East Asia, but there are significant strengths in the software industry and, particularly in the information content industries of publishing and broadcasting. Here, European companies compete very successfully in global markets.

All these factors are reinforced by a highly educated population supported by strong education and training services, and by well-established democratic structures that support open, information-intensive societies.

Together, these factors have given European countries the potential to create the economic, social, political and cultural structures that together constitute an information society.

The role of the European Commission

The European Commission has played an important part in stimulating information society developments within the member states. The Commission gave such developments a high priority in the mid-1990s at a time when others were only beginning to become aware of the need for change. It created a framework of policy within which development could be planned and it stimulated the process through an extensive range of support actions.

Between 1995 and 1998 there has, however, been a significant shift in the priorities of the Commission. At first, development was seen in almost exclusively economic terms. The goal was to ensure that European companies were able to compete successfully in a global economy. To do this they would have to be able to raise productivity levels through the better use of information and communication technology.(10, 11)

As the decade has progressed, however, the emphasis has broadened and the goal is now to promote a much wider process of social and cultural change. Here, the vision has been established by the High Level Expert Group established by Commissioner Padraig Flynn, (12, 13) supported by the Information Society Forum.(14, 15) Their vision of the European information society is much more wide-ranging and is concerned with creating a learning society in which the benefits of information and communications technology will be used, and controlled, by everyone.

The economic dimension cannot, however, be forgotten, rather the focus of policy has broadened to encompass social, political and cultural issues. On this basis, it now becomes clear that the development of a European information society involves policy at three levels.

At the industrial level we need to create effective information industries that can compete in an increasingly important global market while also satisfying the information demands that arise within Europe.

At the organisational level we must create a culture in which organisations in the public and private sector use information as a resource to improve productivity, to increase effectiveness and to raise levels of competitiveness.

Finally, at the social level we must develop an information-intensive social system that enables people to use information constructively in their roles as citizens, consumers and participants in the democratic process.

Running parallel to these three levels is a need to evolve a framework of legislation and regulation that will enable the society to function equitably and consistently within a global context.

The responses of the member states

The member states have responded in different ways. In part the differences reflect the variations in economic capacity of the different countries. They also reflect differences in political philosophy and views of the role of the state in shaping economic and social change.

It is possible to identify three groups: the Northerners, who have adopted a formal, policy-driven approach in which the state has taken the lead; the Southerners in which the state and the private sector share responsibility within a relatively unstructured system; and a Middle Europe group in which a belief in the power of markets is being replaced by a more interventionist model.

The Northern group is making the most rapid progress towards an information society. Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden are ahead of the other member states in almost all respects.

Each country has carefully worked-out policies that are based on thorough analysis of the issues. In each case this analysis was undertaken by a high level group consisting of people from within government and experts from industry and the academic world. These groups analysed the problem, defined a vision of what an information society should be and set out a programme of action to be pursued by the government, working in close collaboration with the private sector. (16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)

In each of the countries the development of these policies was given political backing at the highest level. In Sweden, for example, the prime minister chaired the commission of enquiry for the first year and gave the policy his personal backing. In other countries, the implementation of the policies was steered by senior ministers, again working with clear support from the prime minister.

These countries also benefited from an early start. In Finland, consideration of the issues began in earnest following an OECD report in 1992. In the other countries, serious policy development began in 1993-94 with key reports published in 1994 and programmes of action beginning soon after.

Another common characteristic is the broad view of developments that was adopted from the outset. Each country was concerned with much more than economic development. Social transformation was the clear imperative and, perhaps because of this, the state was seen to play a key role in the process of development. Key to the success of the policies was coordination and joint development. There was a recognition that the creation of an information society involved several government departments and, while one might be given the responsibility to lead the process, high-level coordination was essential.

This broad view also meant that a wide range of initiatives was set in train to bring about the changes. Steps were taken to secure the commitment of the private sector, particularly in the creation of the information infrastructure, but the programme of activities extended well beyond to involve the whole of the public sector, particularly local municipalities. There was a strong sense of the government committing resources in order to lever investment from the private sector and this strategy appears to have been successful.

In Denmark, for example, the Ministry of Research is leading a government initiative to develop, by 2000, self-service entry-points to all parts of the government service and, to facilitate this, they made all forms for citizens and businesses available on the Internet by the end of 1998. Denmark is also committed to the creation, by 2001, of a cohesive digital research library structure that will harness the capacity of the main libraries in the country.

In Finland, the National Post gave everyone an e-mail address to stimulate the take-up of electronic mail. They also developed the concept of a computer driving licence : a basic test of the essential skills required to use personal computers. 25,000 people passed the test in the three years following its introduction in 1995 and it has since been developed as a European licence.

In the Netherlands the government supported the creation of SeniorWeb: an organisation designed to promote the use of information and communication technologies among older people. It offers training, support and a starter pack which consists of a computer, modem and Internet connection. The government also has an ambitious programme to integrate information and communication technology into all levels of the Dutch education system.

In Sweden, Toppledarforum has been established to promote electronic communication between administrations, citizens and local businesses. They have also instituted a major training and re-skilling programme to meet shortages of skilled labour in the information technology industries and to re-equip unemployed people with the abilities they need to move into jobs in an expanding sector of the economy.

Denmark, Finland and Sweden, along with Norway, which is similar in many respects,(22) have gone a long way towards re-defining themselves as Nordic information societies. They have developed globally-successful industries that excel in high valued-added, information-intensive production; they have begun the process of social, cultural and political transformation and they have built on a tradition of high quality education. In the coming decade these Nordic countries will be the first to make the full transformation to information societies.

The Netherlands shares many of the characteristics of these Nordic countries and fully justifies its place among the Northern group.

The Southern group consists of Greece, Italy and Spain. Portugal shares some of the characteristics of the Southern group but in other respects it is rather different.

Within the Southern Group there appears to be a reluctance to give a high priority to information society developments and, while there is some activity within national governments and local and regional administrations, there is nothing like to impetus that is a characteristic of the Northern group.

That being said, there are two exceptions which, together, suggest that even in this group there are signs of change. Most significant is Portugal which has produced a very thorough, wide-ranging policy document that provides a very positive framework for the development of an information society.(23)

The second example is Italy which is also changing. The government has established an Information Society Forum that has published an overall plan(24) and this has been followed up by a statement on infrastructures from the Ministry of Industry and Communication.(25)

In Greece, however, there has been no noticeable attempt to develop an information policy. It is possible that the need to manage a major upgrade and extension of the telecommunications infrastructure has pre-occupied the policy makers but this does not fully explain the lack of policy impetus.

It is perhaps more likely that the lack of policy is a consequence of a political and administrative tradition that is very different from that found in Northern Europe. If that is so, it serves to make Portugal's Green Paper and Italy's Information Society Forum all the more significant.

The lack of a formal policy, however, has not held up the development of some impressive applications in these countries. In Spain, for example the government has developed a very successful system for the payment of unemployment benefits through automated teller machines, using smart cards and fingerprint identification. And in Italy the Ministry of Finance has introduced an electronic income tax form - something that other countries have wanted to do but have hesitated because of the complexity.

In Portugal there is an extensive public information programme delivered through kiosks. Originally intended just for one-way communication it is now being made interactive. The government has also designated seven digital cities that will serve as laboratories to explore the application of information and communication technology.

Despite the progress made with these individual applications, there is a general lack of coordination in these Southern European countries and this will be a barrier to effective future development. Much of the value of technological applications in the information society lies in the opportunities they offer to cut across departmental boundaries and to take a holistic view of an individual's needs. Without coordination and a joint approach to solutions, much of this potential value will be lost.

The Middle Europeans consist of a large group of countries: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom. It is possible that Portugal should be included in this group.

These are the late starters which have only recently begun to give high priority to the development of a coordinated set of information society policies. Germany and Luxembourg published their information society policies in 1996. (26, 27) Austria, Belgium, France, Ireland and Portugal published documents in 1997 (28, 29, 30, 31, 32) and the United Kingdom produced its first consolidated policy statement in 1998.(32)

It is interesting to speculate on the reasons for the delay. In some cases, notably Austria, priority in the early part of the 1990s was being given to the infrastructure and the need to develop an effective telecommunications service. In Ireland and Portugal a process of rapid and seemingly sustainable economic growth has focused political attention on information-based economic development and from this has come a wider concern about the societal implications.

It is possible that in Belgium and Germany the split between the federal level of government and the states discouraged the creation of a national policy. Certainly in both countries there are well-developed policies at the level of the state administrations.

In France and the United Kingdom, a change of government has brought a change in thinking about the need to define policy on issues such as the development of an information society and this has been accompanied by a change in thinking about the respective roles of the state and the private sector. Broadly, a belief in the power and importance of market forces has been replaced by a more interventionist form of thinking. It is possible that the change of administration in Germany will produce a similar change there.

Whatever the reasons, these countries are following three or four years behind their Nordic neighbours in the development of information society policies.

Close examination of some of the policies also reveals a degree of superficiality when compared to those of countries like Sweden or the Netherlands. A possible exception is Portugal where the policy was developed through an extensive process of public consultation and Ireland's where the policy document was produced by a specially-formed Commission. In contrast the policies of France and the United Kingdom could be criticised for being political statements that lack any real grounding in analysis and careful reflection by knowledgeable partners.

Despite this apparent superficiality, the policies have been given a high level of political backing. In many cases the policies have been produced and published by the prime minister's office and the prime minister has been closely involved in the promotion of the policy documents and in some of the higher-profile activities that are associated with them.

In the case of the United Kingdom, the policy statement is less a vision of the future, although this is its sub-title. Rather, it draws together a number of developments that have been put in place during the previous four or five years. It is, therefore, a rationalisation of what has been taking place and, as such, provides a basis for further development.

Compared with the Northern group of countries, the Middle Europeans demonstrate a marked lack of coordination in the development of the policies. Whereas the leading group adopted a coordinated approach within government from the outset, a common feature of the Middle group is the development of separate policies by each individual ministry. In France, for example, each department has been asked to develop its own policies following the publication of the national plan. This seems to run counter to the idea of a coordinated, coherent approach to a set of developments that cut across established departmental boundaries.

Despite this lack of a coordinated policy framework, each country has developed a range of applications to promote the development of an information society. In Austria, all schools have been given 20 hours of free Internet connection a week and the Ministry of Economic Affairs makes available grants to enable small firms to buy in consultancy to develop telematic applications.

In Belgium much of the development is taking place at a local level: in Brussels there is a network linking the most important social, scientific and economic institutions, while in the Charleroi Region a research and training institute has been established to diffuse expertise among companies.

Local initiatives are also characteristic of developments in France. On the Plateau de Vercours it is possible to buy stored value cards that provide Internet access in post offices. At a national level, Agence France Presse has created Mercure, an electronic news service to deliver information to local authorities over the Internet.

In Germany the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Technology has established a competition to stimulate the use of multimedia among older people, while in Bavaria, a high-capacity network has been established linking medical centres to enable clinicians to communicate while also providing an electronic information source for patients.

Telecom Éireann in Ireland has awarded a major grant to the town of Ennis to support its development as an information-age town. Each household will have a free telephone connection, voicemail, reduced cost computers, modems and smart electronic cash transfer, all designed to test the universal development of information-society applications.

In the United Kingdom the government has launched two networks, one linking schools, the other linking public libraries. Together they will complement JANET, a network connecting higher education institutions, and are designed to promote the concept of lifelong learning.

Developments Outside Europe

There are numerous other examples of information society developments.

In the USA there are two parallel strands for the development of policy: one within government, the other acting in an advisory role outside the formal structure.

The Information Infrastructure Task Force was established by the President to articulate and implement the administration=s vision for the National Information Infrastructure. It consists of high-level representatives of the Federal agencies that play a major role in the development and application of information and telecommunications technologies. As such, it is part of the executive arm of government. It operates under the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Economic Council.

The Advisory Council on the National Information Infrastructure is a larger body that provides advice on technical and other matters. Strictly they advise the Secretary of Commerce on matters concerning the development of the national information infrastructure. The 37 members represented a wide range of interest groups and stakeholders. The Council delivered its final report in February 1996.(33)

The work of these two bodies has provided a framework for the development of a wide range of applications.

The task of developing a vision of Canada as an information society was delegated to the Information Highway Advisory Council drawn from a range of constituencies. This body produced one of the most thorough and authoritative documents about information societies.(34)

In Australia the task of developing the plans for an Australian information society was originally given to a group that was similar in composition to the Canadian Advisory Council. Before it had done much work, however, there was a change of government and the group was suspended. It was replaced by the Information Policy Advisory Council which, in August 1997 produced a report setting out the vision for a >new commonwealth of information= (35) .

This identified a number of Australia=s comparative strengths and encouraged the government to establish a Ministerial Council for the Information Economy, supported by the Australian National Office for the Information Economy. In 1998 the Council produced its report which takes the vision somewhat further and sets out a strategy for attaining it (36). In the meantime, the individual states are competing with each other for the development of an infrastructure and economic framework that will attract and sustain information-intensive companies.

In Japan there is a characteristic overlapping division of responsibilities between ministries. There are two leading organisation: the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications and the Ministry of International Trade and Industry. In addition, the Ministry for Education, Science and Culture is responsible for a number of programmes that have a bearing on the development of information policy.

The Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications produced two important documents in 1994. First was a report of an enquiry conducted by the Telecommunications Council.(37) This analysed the current state of Japan=s telecommunications and information infrastructure, reviewed the implications of an >info-communications infrastructure= on society and the economy and suggested an approach towards the development of the networks and the applications that would use them.

This was followed by a White Paper.(38) This advocated the development of an >info-communications economy and society= built around sophisticated telecommunications and with a heavy reliance on multimedia. Meanwhile at the Ministry of International Trade and Industry the Information Industry Committee of the Industrial Structure Council issued a report that argued that Japan should take further steps to exploit information and communications technology throughout society.

In May 1994 the Ministry of International Trade and Industry published its response to this report.(39) This assessed the need to spread information technology and networks into industry, the home and into the public sector. It went on to recommend action to stimulate the use of information technology in education, research, medical and welfare service, administrative services and libraries. It also considered the need for standardisation, security and the protection of intellectual property rights, concluding with recommendations for stimulating the development of multimedia software, general software and databases.

The Ministry for Education, Science and Culture has put in place a large-scale programme to raise levels of computer literacy throughout the school system. Despite its high-technology culture, computer-use is not widespread in Japan. This is, no doubt, due to the difficulties in handling the three types of Japanese characters in word processing and other applications. There is now, however, a recognition of the need to catch up. The Ministry has set out teaching guidelines for information literacy in elementary, middle and high schools.

The Ministry is also responsible for promoting database development and use and for developing scientific and technological information systems, including the National Centre for Science Information Systems which links all universities and which provides a wide range of online services.

While impressive, these large countries face major problems of coordination and scale. Perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, it is to a small country that we have to turn to find the most comprehensive approach to the development of an information society.

In Singapore, responsibility has been placed firmly with the National Computer Board as the lead agency within government for the advancement of Singapore as an information society.

The National Computer Board is a statutory Board established initially with the aim of computerising government and later charged with supervising the overall development of Singapore as an >Intelligent Island=. It is, therefore, executive rather than advisory.

It is possible to identify four phases of development in Singapore. First there was the National Computerisation Plan(40). This aimed to computerise ministries and departments to improve efficiency, effectiveness and service to the public; to expand the supply of computer professionals; and to support expansion of software and services industries.

It was followed by the National Information Technology Plan.(41) This set out a strategic framework to develop the information technology capacity of Singapore, to build the networks and to develop applications.

The third phase was Information Technology 2000 - the Intelligent Island.(43) This was a comprehensive development plan formulated by the National Computer Board in consultation with 200 senior executives from 11 major economic sectors. It has five strategic thrusts: to develop Singapore as a global hub; to boost the national economic engine; to link communities locally and globally; to improve the quality of life in Singapore; and to enhance the potential of individuals.

Finally, there is the IT 2000 Action Plan: From Vision to Reality(42). This focuses on three areas of development: a wide range of applications aimed at economic sectors such as TradeNet for the import-export sector or LawNet for the legal community and includes the Library 2000 blueprint for a borderless library; Middleware, re-useable common services that can be used by different sectors that ensure data security, billing, directory services, etc.; Telecommunications network services with high bandwidth and universal access. In addition, there is a range of supporting actions to create the necessary social, economic, legal and regulatory environment.

There four phases have culminated in the latest encapsulation of Singapore as an information society: Singapore ONE. (43) This represents the next stage in the development of the Intelligent Island. Singapore ONE is a development plan that has two main strands: the infrastructure and the applications. The infrastructure will consist of a broadband core that will connect several local access networks. The core will be built and owned by an industrial consortium. The local access networks will be owned by Singapore Telecom and Singapore Cable Vision. The long-term aim is to provide broadband connections to the home.

The applications and services are regarded as the key to the success of the venture. Developments are taking place in four areas:

Government

To bring government services closer to the public through kiosks and one-stop shops.

Home

Mainly focused on entertainment - video on demand - personal transactions - home banking, electronic shopping - and access to electronic information services through the Internet.

Education

Access to multimedia teaching and learning materials for distance learning and student collaboration.

Business

This includes business services - video conferencing - electronic business information, electronic commerce and teleworking.

The pilot network to support these developments was operational by 1998, mainly carrying government-originated information. During the period 1999-2004 attention will be concentrated on extension of network access and expansion of content.

The National Computer Board is an executive agency. Its plans and the overall vision are developed by the Board working in consultation with a wide range of individuals mainly in the industrial sector. It has been given the clear lead responsibility within the Singaporean administration. The result is an impressive example of what can be achieved and a vivid illustration of what life in an information society will be like.

Elsewhere in East Asia there has been a wave of policy formulation designed to position countries so that they can take full advantage of the twin strands of technological convergence and globalisation. In almost every case, the plans received a setback with the recession of the late 1990s, but it was a pause on a longer process of transition rather than a significant turn around.

In Malaysia Dr Mahathir set out a grand vision for the creation of a Multi Media Super Corridor. This was closely identified with the Prime Minister=s vision of Malaysia as a country that would be fully developed, economically and socially, by 2020. The Multi Media Super Corridor was a physical space linking the capital with the new administrative centre of Putra Jaya and incorporating the new airport. It was to be fully wired with high-capacity networks and a wide range of incentives were offered to encourage high technology companies to relocate. The economic downturn has put the plans on hold at the time of writing but there are signs that the initiative is soon to be revived.

Korea, in contrast, has avoided undue reliance on one big project. Rather, the government has developed a far-reaching set of policies that together are shaping Korea as an Asian information society. The government set the overall approach in 1997 with a Master Plan for Informatization. Since then each Ministry has developed their own plans within this overall framework. There has been a long series of plans, reports, White Papers and vision statements to provide guidance and strategic direction. The most recent is Korea=s vision for the information society, published in 1999 and providing a summation of progress and the plans for the future.

Other countries that are developing policy frameworks for their information societies and economies include China, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. Throughout the region there is a recognition of the strategic necessity of bringing about structural economic and social change to enable the countries to capitalise on the opportunities that are becoming available.

Future Progress

The pace of development is accelerating and the prospect of having fully-functioning information societies throughout the developed world is coming closer. And many of the newly industrialised countries are working to develop information-intensive economies that will give them a competitive advantage in a global economy.

We have largely overcome the major technological problems. This is not to say that further development is unnecessary or that it will not take place. Far from it. Simply that the technology that we now have available will permit us to do everything that we need to do in order to create an effective information society. There are continuing problems of investment and it will be a long time before we have ensured that there is universal access to information throughout Europe. But technology is no longer a barrier.

In Europe and North America the information industry is also set to continue its rapid path of expansion. The US information industry is still the global leader but since the 1980s the European information industry has grown faster than the rest of the European economy (44) and we can look forward to a time which is not far off when the information industry is a major contributor to the overall European economy. It is also very well-placed to compete in the global economy. Organisations within the developed countries are using information more and more creatively as a business resource and they are becoming more effective as a result. European and American companies are leading the way in the development of knowledge management techniques.

Electronic commerce is likely to be a big driver of economic growth in the future and there are already signs that companies in North America and, to a lesser extent, Europe are beginning to realise the potential that is on offer.(7) In both regions governments are actively supporting the growth of electronic commerce and small countries are beginning to jump on the band waggon B Bermuda recently announced its intention to become a centre for offshore electronic commerce.

We are also developing information-intensive social systems. Information and communications technology is being used to deliver public services more effectively and consumers now have more information available to them than ever before. We still have some way to go before we have social systems in which all citizens have easy access to authoritative information and the ability to use it. But a good start has been made.

It has become clear that to function effectively, information societies need a sound legal and regulatory framework and a well-established tradition of respect for the law. The framework needs to be updated constantly to take account of changes in technology and its application and to ensure that the laws are in harmony with global laws and regulations. But the mechanisms exist to ensure that this happens. We are also beginning to extend the framework of individual rights to accommodate the intellectual rights that will define citizenship in an information society (45)

We still have a very long way to go before we have created the kind of learning society that is envisaged in the report of the European Commission=s High Level Expert Group.(13) And it will be necessary to invest much more in the whole education system so that we develop the intellectual capital that will be so important in the future global information society. We will also need to link to this a change in our culture so that we reinforce in everyone the desire to learn.

We must also recognise that the technology of global communication brings with it a considerable threat to national and local cultures. There is a real danger that distinctive cultures, in all their richness and diversity, will become smothered by a bland global culture, manufactured in Hollywood and designed to meet the desires of the majority - desires that can be manipulated to suit the requirements of the owners of the cultural industries.

There is also a residual danger that the introduction of an information society will reinforce and deepen social exclusion rather than help to overcome it. A recent report from the US Department of Commerce (46) suggests that the gap is widening and is doing so on racial and economic lines. In Europe we already have a society in which a significant minority are excluded from the mainstream of social benefit through poor education, lack of employment, low incomes, disability and poor housing. We must work hard to ensure that the creation of an information society does not exclude them further. Equally, we must begin to think about a global policy framework to ensure that the development of information societies does not increase the North-South divide.

References

1. Information Infrastructure Task Force. National Information Infrastructure: an agenda for action. US Government Publications Office, 1993.
2. European Commission. White Paper on growth, competitiveness and employment: the challenges and ways forward into the 21st century. COM (93) 700 Final, 1993.
3. European Commission. The European Society in action. European Commission, 1995.
4. National Computer Board. Information Technology 2000 - the Intelligent Island. Government of Singapore, 1991.
5. Moore, Nick. Policies for an information society. Political Quarterly, July 1997, 68(3) 276-283.
6. European Commission. Directive on competition in the market for telecommunications services (90.388/EEC). European Commission, 1990.
7. Spectrum Moving into the information age: international benchmarking study 1998. Department of Trade and Industry, 1998.
8. The European multimedia business. Financial Times, Telecoms and Media Publishing, 1998.
9. European computer literacy: the 1997 Olivetti personal computer report, 1997.
10. European Council. Europe and the global information society: recommendations to the European Council. (Bangemann Report) European Council, 1994.
11. European Commission. Europe's way to the information society: an action plan. European Commission. COM (94) 347 Final, 1994.
12. European Commission, High Level Expert Group. Building the information society for us all: interim report. European Commission, 1996.
13. European Commission, High Level Expert Group. Building the information society for us all. European Commission, 1997.
14. European Commission, Information Society Forum. Networks for people and their communities. European Commission, 1996.
15. European Commission, Information Society Forum. Report. European Commission, 1997.
16. An action programme for electronic highways. Government of the Netherlands, 1994.
17. Ministry of Finance. Finland towards the information society: a national strategy. Finnish Government, 1994.
18. Ministry of Research. Information society 2000: Report from the Committee on the Information Society by the year 2000. Danish Government, 1994.
19. Ministry of Research and Information Technology. From vision to action: Info-society 2000. Danish Government, 1995.
20. Swedish Information Technology Commission. Information technology: Wings to human ability. Prime Minister's Office, Sweden, 1994.
21. Vision on acceleration. Government of the Netherlands. 1995.
22. Ministry of Government Administration. Central government information policy, 1994.
23. Information Society: the Green Paper on the information society in Portugal. Missao para sociedade da informacao, 1997.
24. Promotion of information society development: a reference scheme. Information Society Forum, Italy, 1997.
25. Information society infrastructures. Ministry of Industry and Communication, Italy, 1998
26. Ministry of Education, Science and Research. Info 2000: Germany's way to the information society. 1996.
27. Report on the information society in Luxembourg. Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, 1996.
28. Information Society: Report of the working group of the Austrian Federal Government, 1997.
29. Federal action plan for the development of an information society. Government of Belgium, 1997.
30. Government action plan to prepare the entry of France in the information society. Office of the Prime Minister, 1997.
31. Information Society Commission. National information society strategy and action plan. Government of Ireland, 1997.
32. Central Office of Information. Our information age: the Government's vision. London: Central Office of Information, 1998.
33. Advisory Council on the National Information Infrastructure. A nation of opportunity: final report of the United States Advisory Council on the National Information Infrastructure,1996.
34. Information Highway Advisory Council. Connection, community, content: The challenge of the Information Highway. Ministry of Supply and Service, Canada, 1995
35. Information Policy Advisory Council A national policy framework for structural adjustment within the new Commonwealth of Information, 1997
36. Ministerial Council for the Information Economy Towards an Australian strategy for the information economy Australian National Office for the Information Economy 1998
37. Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications, Telecommunications Council. Reforms toward the intellectually creative society of the 21st century. Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications, Japan, 1994.
38. Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications. Communications in Japan. Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications, Japan, 1994.
39. Ministry of International Trade and Industry. Program for advanced information infrastructure. Ministry of Trade and Industry, Japan, 1994.
40. National Computer Board. National Computerisation Plan. Government of Singapore, 1981.
41. National Computer Board. National Information Technology Plan. Government of Singapore, 1986.
42. National Computer Board. IT 2000 Action Plan: From Vision to Reality. Government of Singapore, 1995.
43. National Computer Board. Singapore ONE. Government of Singapore, 1996.
44. European Commission, Information Market Observatory. Annual report on the European information market. European Commission, 1997.
45. Moore, Nick. Rights and responsibilities in an information society. Journal of Information Law and Technology, 1998 (1).
46. Falling through the Net: A report on the telecommunications and information technology gap in America. US Department of Commerce 1999

Copyright © 2004, Acumen Research and Consultancy Ltd. All rights reserved.