A new global partnership: the report of the high-level panel on the post-2015 development agenda

The long awaited report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, entitled A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, was published just a few days ago on 30th May.  The 27 member panel responsible for the report included representatives from government, business and civil society from all regions of the world. Their  optimistic report suggests that we can and must eliminate extreme poverty by 2030.

Unfortunately, as evidenced in the title of the report itself, this has been a missed opportunity, and the new agenda will do little to change the lives of the world’s poorest and most marginalised people.  It is more of the same, rather than a radical departure from the MDG consensus of the last 15 years.  By retaining a largely absolute definition of poverty, and claiming that it actually can be eliminated through economic growth, this agenda will serve further to increase inequalities in the interests of the world’s richest individuals and countries.  The focus of the report on the ‘economic’, on the myth of ‘sustainable’ development, and on fundamental misunderstandings about the interests underlying ‘partnerships’ all mean that the proposals will be unable to deliver on the needs of the world’s poorest and most marginalised peoples.

The panel reached consensus on five transformational shifts that it claimed are necessary to achieve the elimination of poverty:

  1. Leave No One Behind: The MDGs aimed to halve extreme poverty (now defined as people earning less than $1.25 a day). The High Level Panel report proposes ending poverty by 2030 – as it says, “We should ensure that no person – regardless of ethnicity, gender, geography, disability, race or other status – is denied universal human rights and basic economic opportunities”.  This focus on previously excluded groups is indeed a step forward, although there is little agreement on how it can be achieved.
  2. Put Sustainable Development at the Core: The report seeks to bring together the social, economic and environmental aspects of development, focusing especially on a desire to “halt the alarming pace of climate change”.  It is a shame that so little is said about the political and cultural agendas that are such a critical part of ‘development’.  It also fails to recognise the highly contentious character of the notion of “sustainable development” which increasing numbers of people now see as being a contradiction in terms!
  3. Transform economies for jobs and inclusive growth: This proposal lies at the heart of the agenda.  The report emphasises that “We call for a quantum leap forward in economic opportunities and a profound economic transformation to end extreme poverty and improve livelihoods”.  From DFID’s overview of the report, this means “a much greater focus on promoting jobs through business and entrepreneurship, infrastructure, education and skills, and trade”. This places the economy rather than social justice, cultural meaning, or political practice at the heart of the development agenda.  Imagine the impact that this high-level transformative shift would be if it had been reworded to read “Transform societies to ensure social justice and equality of opportunity”!
  4. Build peace and effective, open and accountable institutions for all: The report claims that “Freedom from fear, conflict and violence is the most fundamental human right, and the essential foundation for building peaceful and prosperous societies”.  This places the agenda firmly upon a human rights basis, but does little to focus attention on the individual and collective responsibilities that are essential to make this happen.
  5. Forge a new Global Partnership: The report emphasises that “Perhaps the most important transformative shift is towards a new spirit of solidarity, cooperation, and mutual accountability that must underpin the post-2015 agenda”.  I completely agree that partnership is crucial for effective delivery of development interventions, but the report fails sufficiently to address the complexity of delivering partnerships on the ground, and the interests that underlie them.

The illustrative 12 universal goals and 54 national targets associated with the recommendations make interesting reading.  As the report emphasises, “the shape of the post-2015 development agenda cannot be  communicated effectively without offering an example of how goals might be framed”. For ease of information, these are summarised below:

1. End Poverty

  • Bring the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day to zero and reduce by x% theshare of people living below their country’s 2015 national poverty line
  • Increase by x% the share of women and men, communities, and businesses with secure rights to land, property, and other assets
  • Cover x% of people who are poor and vulnerable with social protection systems
  • Build resilience and reduce deaths from natural disasters by x%

2. Empower Girls and Women and Achieve Gender Equality

  • Prevent and eliminate all forms of violence against girls and women
  • End child marriage
  • Ensure equal right of women to own and inherit property, sign a contract, register a business and open a bank account
  • Eliminate discrimination against women in political, economic, and public life

3. Provide Quality Education and Lifelong Learning

  • Increase by x% the proportion of children able to access and complete pre-primary education
  • Ensure every child, regardless of circumstance, completes primary education able to read, write and count well enough to meet minimum learning standards
  • Ensure every child, regardless of circumstance, has access to lower secondary education and increase the proportion of adolescents who achieve recognized and measurable learning outcomes to x%
  • Increase the number of young and adult women and men with the skills, including technical and vocational, needed for work by x%

4. Ensure Healthy Lives

  • End preventable infant and under-5 deaths
  • Increase by x% the proportion of children, adolescents, at-risk adults and older people that are fully vaccinated
  • Decrease the maternal mortality ratio to no more than x per 100,000
  • Ensure universal sexual and reproductive health and rights
  • Reduce the burden of disease from HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, neglected tropical diseases and priority non-communicable diseases

5. Ensure Food Security and Good Nutrition

  • End hunger and protect the right of everyone to have access to sufficient, safe, affordable, and nutritious food
  • Reduce stunting by x%, wasting by y%, and anemia by z% for all children under five
  • Increase agricultural productivity by x%, with a focus on sustainably increasing smallholder yields and access to irrigation
  • Adopt sustainable agricultural, ocean and freshwater fishery practices and rebuild designated fish stocks to sustainable levels
  • Reduce postharvest loss and food waste by x%

6. Achieve Universal Access to Water and Sanitation

  • Provide universal access to safe drinking water at home, and in schools, health centers, and refugee camps
  • End open defecation and ensure universal access to sanitation at school and work, and increase access to sanitation at home by x%
  • Bring freshwater withdrawals in line with supply and increase water efficiency in agriculture by x%, industry by y% and urban areas by z%
  • Recycle or treat all municipal and industrial wastewater prior to discharge

7. Secure Sustainable Energy

  • Double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix
  • Ensure universal access to modern energy services
  • Double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency in buildings, industry, agriculture and transport
  • Phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption

8. Create Jobs, Sustainable Livelihoods, and Equitable Growth

  • Increase the number of good and decent jobs and livelihoods by x
  • Decrease the number of young people not in education, employment or training by x%
  • Strengthen productive capacity by providing universal access to financial services and infrastructure such as transportation and ICT
  • Increase new start-ups by x and value added from new products by y through creating an enabling business environment and boosting entrepreneurship

9. Manage Natural Resource Assets Sustainably

  • Publish and use economic, social and environmental accounts in all governments and major companies
  • Increase consideration of sustainability in x% of government procurements
  • Safeguard ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
  • Reduce deforestation by x% and increase reforestation by y%
  • Improve soil quality, reduce soil erosion by x tonnes and combat desertification

10. Ensure Good Governance and Effective Institutions

  • Publish and use economic, social and environmental accounts in all governments and major companies
  • Increase consideration of sustainability in x% of government procurements
  • Safeguard ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
  • Reduce deforestation by x% and increase reforestation by y%
  • Improve soil quality, reduce soil erosion by x tonnes and combat desertification

11. Ensure Stable and Peaceful Societies

  • Reduce violent deaths per 100,000 by x and eliminate all forms of violence against children
  • Ensure justice institutions are accessible, independent, well-resourced and respect due-process rights
  • Stem the external stressors that lead to conflict, including those related to organised crime
  • Enhance the capacity, professionalism and accountability of the security forces, police and judiciary

12. Create a Global Enabling Environment and Catalyse Long-Term Finance

  • Support an open, fair and development-friendly trading system, substantially reducing trade-distorting measures, including agricultural subsidies, while improving market access of developing country products
  • Implement reforms to ensure stability of the global financial system and encourage stable, long-term private foreign investment
  • Hold the increase in global average temperature below 2⁰ C above pre-industrial levels, in line with international agreements
  • Developed countries that have not done so to make concrete efforts towards the target of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance to developing countries and 0.15 to 0.20% of GNP of developed countries to least developed countries; other countries should move toward voluntary targets for complementary financial assistance
  • Reduce illicit flows and tax evasion and increase stolen-asset recovery by $x
  • Promote collaboration on and access to science, technology, innovation, and development data

As will be clear from this listing, this appears to be something of a “shopping list” reflecting the interests of those who put the agenda together.  The gaps are perhaps as interesting as the things that are actually included in the list!  Given my own interests in the uses (and abuses) of ICTs in and for development, I am particularly disappointed that so little is mentioned about them in the 54 targets listed above (although see Goal 8).  Given the importance of the Internet, and the role of ICTs in the global economy, it is both surprising and disappointing to find so little amongst the goals or targets.  Likewise, whilst women and girls are acknowledged in a specific goal, the 10-15% of the world’s population who are recognised as having some kind of disability are not explicitly mentioned in a target at all.

Given the ‘management’ of the world’s development discourse, it is scarcely surprising that this report has turned out as it has, but I remain deeply saddened and frustrated that this important opportunity has been largely wasted.  Yes, there are of course some good things in the report, but I do wish that there had been the collective will really to address the underlying causes of poverty head on.  Sadly, what I wrote back in 2007 in my paper entitled “No end to poverty” remains as valid today as it did then (for a summary see this blog post)!

2 Comments

Filed under Development, ICT4D

Discussions on educational partnerships

For those interested in education partnerships The Partnering Initiative is convening what should be a very interesting breakfast event next week on 5th June at the Science Museum in London and there are still some places available (details at http://bit.ly/16ppNr7).   Oh yes, and I am moderating a ‘table’ – be warned, it could be controversial!

In essence, the event is designed to explore how collective action can maximise the impact of business investments in education and skills.

As the organisers say, “Education is a fundamental pillar of sustainable development and underpins enduring prosperity and economic growth. Yet, achieving quality ‘Education for All’ remains a major global challenge. There is a growing trend of businesses investing in education and skills both for philanthropic reasons and to help ensure their own long term sustainability. However, businesses have tended to support their own, often isolated projects. Could a move towards stronger collective approaches lead to more effective, transformational delivery of education and skills? How can such approaches be encouraged and supported?”

Speakers include:

  • Ben Dixon – Head of Social Performance, BG Group
  • Olav Seim – Director, Global Partnerships ED/EFA, UNESCO
  • Darren Towers – Head of Sustainability and Environmental Leadership, EDF Energy
  • Professor Timothy Unwin – Secretary General, Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (yes, I think that’s me!)

Places are limited, so please register your interest with jessica.mcghie@iblf.org – do include your name, organisation and job title.

Leave a comment

Filed under Education

Stockholm Internet Forum 2013: enabling an Internet for all

I have been privileged to have been asked to write a provocative thought piece for this year’s Stockholm Internet Forum to be held next week (22nd-23rd May in Stockholm).  In this, I argue that to date ICTs have actually increased, rather than reduced, inequality in the world.  Much more serious effort therefore must be made to ensure that the poorest and the most marginalised of the world’s people should have access to the Internet.  This is a moral, rather than an economic, agenda.

In writing the paper, I was asked to suggest what I think are some of the most important policy actions that need to be taken.  These are summarised below:

  1. Although ICTs and the Internet do indeed have the potential to help transform the lives of poor people, technologies have generally always been used primarily by those in power to maintain their positions of power.  Hence, we must begin by making a firm commitment to ensuring that we will enable the poorest and most marginalised to have similar connectivity to that through which the world’s richest now benefit.
  2. Regulation must be made to work efficiently and effectively, so that the market can indeed deliver for as many people as possible.  This requires that regulators adopt a fair pricing policy, not seeking to reap too many additional financial benefits for governments, but rather placing primary emphasis on the means through which as many people as possible can access commercially available Internet connectivity.
  3. In some contexts, Universal Service (or Access) Funds can provide a means whereby states can direct additional resources specifically to the needs of poor and marginalised communities.  However, to date, many such funds have failed to deliver on their expectations, and they remain unpopular among companies providing telephony and broadband services who see them primarily as a tax that reduces their potential to deliver services more cheaply than could be provided by the state or civil society.
  4. Effective multi-stakeholder partnerships between states, the private sector, civil society and international organisations are an essential element in delivering connectivity to the poorest and most marginalised communities. Such partnerships are not easy to implement, but given the complexity of the technologies, the diversity of interests involved, and the need for financial investment, they remain essential.
  5. The need for collaboration and co-operation between international initiatives designed to support broadband for all.  Duplication of effort is wasteful of precious resources, and seeking to reinvent the wheel means that many lesson from previous failures are not sufficiently learned.
  6. There needs to be a passion amongst the world’s leading researchers to design innovative solutions that are focused particularly on reducing the costs of access to the Internet as well as provision of electricity, rather than reaping the maximum profits from so doing.
  7. One of the reasons for the high cost of Internet access in many of the poorest countries is that companies have sought to extract high short-term returns on investment.  Investing in what were previously seen as public sector utilities is a challenging business, but ultimately governments have the responsibility for ensuring that all of their peoples can have access to and benefit from such utilities, and must therefore play a significant role in their support.
  8. Without reliable sources of electricity, any use of ICTs is impossible.  Innovative solutions to the provision of electricity, particularly in rural areas are thus an essential precursor for Internet access.
  9. Finally, Internet access that is affordable by the poor, together with the electricity necessary to power it, are not enough by themselves.  Digital resources and peer communities that deliver on and support the content and communication needs and aspirations of poor people and marginalised communities must be developed and made as widely accessible as possible.

Clearly, there are many more actions that need to be taken, but I do think that these can make a significant difference, albeit in different measures and balance in different countries.  I hope that one of the outcomes of the Forum will be that everyone present can commit to taking real action to enable the world’s poorest and most marginalised to benefit from the potential of the Internet.

4 Comments

Filed under ICT4D, Politics

Hostageria de Poblet: peaceful place to stay to the west of Barcelona

There is always a tension in writing about hidden away places where I have enjoyed staying.  Were they to become overly popular, that would destroy much of their secrecy and solitude!  However, earlier this year I discovered somewhere really lovely, and hope that by mentioning it here others will take the opportunity to enjoy what it has to offer.

The Royal Monastery of Santa Maria de Poblet in La Conca de Barberà just to the north of Reus and Tarragona, and some 130 kms west of Barcelona, is one of a group of Cistercian monasteries founded in Catalunya in the 12th century, shortly after the conquest of the province by the Catalan-Aragon monarchy.  Others  include the monasteries of Vallbona de les Monges in l’Urgell and Santes Creus in L’Alt Camp.  One day I must walk the Ruta del Coster that joins them all up!

The monastery of Santa Maria de Poblet itself had become very run down by the early 19th century.  The confiscation of church lands in 1835 and the consequent expulsion of the monks led to further decay, and it has only been in recent years that some of its character has been restored.  A community of monks returned to the monastery in 1940, and in 1991 it was declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO.  Since then it has attracted increasing numbers of visitors, many of whom are drawn there by its magnificent setting among woods and streams sheltered by the Prades mountains.

In 2010 a new modern guesthouse, the Hostageria de Poblet, was built within the old walls of the monastery, and it provides a simple, minimalist place to stay. For those who like quiet, hidden away places, set amidst vineyards and rolling hills, the Hostageria is most definitely worth a visit.  As their brochure notes, “There are no televisions in the rooms to respect the silence and the living dynamics of the monastery”.  That having been said, the guesthouse does have Internet access for those who do not want to escape the modern technological world completely!  Currently, the Spring price for a double room varies between $49 and $59, which makes them really excellent value for money.

The Hostageria also has a restaurant that serves delicious local food – but do note that the lunch menu is much more extensive than that available in the evenings.  Alongside the restaurant is a culinary school, designed to provide both a theoretical and practical training for people living in the comarca of Conca de Barberà.  The Spring menu offers three courses for €20, with a typical choice being

  • Torradeta d’escalivada i formatge de cabra gratinat
  • Llom de bacallà a la mel a l’estil dels monjos de Poblet
  • Iogurt del monjos amb gelat de nata i xarrop de grosella

The monastery also has its own wines, developed in collaboration with the Cordoniú Group. Nine hectares within the walled enclosure were planted in 1989 with Pinot Noir grapes, chosen in memory of the Cistercian wine makers of Burgundy.  Although Pinot Noir is not widely grown in Catalunya, the wines from the monastery, include the 100% Pinot Noir Abadia de Poblet, as well as a lesser wine known as Intramurs, which is a blend of Cabernet Sauvignon, Tempranillo and Merlot, and both are definitely worth tasting while staying there.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Leave a comment

Filed under Photographs, Restaurants, Wine

Valuing the impact of wind turbines on rural landscapes: Conca de Barberà

I have been lucky enough to spend a few days walking in the Conca de Barberà county, or comarca, in Catalunya, and was very surprised – and indeed saddened – to see the visual impact of large numbers of wind turbines almost wherever one looked.  The selection of images below gives an indication of the scale of the issue:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Whilst it was a cloudy day, and the images do not do full justice to the visual impact, especially around the small village of Flores, these pictures do convey something of the dramatic change they have made to the landscape.  Moreover, standing next to them one can also most definitely appreciate the noise impact they have – no longer are these hilltops a place of silent reflection, tempered only by the song of birds and the occasional dog barking in the villages nearby!

This raises very real questions about how landscapes are valued, and the politics of energy.  There have been many attempts to place a ‘value’ on landscape change, but these have mostly focused on somehow trying to calculate an economic cost of the change, often in terms of the loss of income.  Thus, if an area has previously gained an income from tourism, and the landscape change means that this is reduced, then it is clearly possible to estimate such a loss.  Other measures draw on the amount that people would actually pay not to have a change imposed on a landscape.  However, it is actually extremely difficult to place any kind of economic value on the emotional impact of a landscape change.  This area of Catalunya is at the heart of the Ruta del Cister, the triangle of Cistercian monasteries that were built there from the 12th century onwards.  The impact of the wind turbines has completely transformed the peace and tranquility of the landscapes, in a way that no simple economic measure can ever grasp.  Although some people might  think that these human feats of engineering have an attraction of their own, representing progress that no medieval Cistercian nun or monk could ever imagine, I find the juxtaposition of these two cultures concerning and depressing.

Reflecting on this dramatic transformation, I started to think further about the two kinds of power that this transformation represents.  On the one hand, the wind turbines represent the physical power of a new means of producing electricity.  However, each turbine actually only produces relatively little power. Estimates vary hugely, but as a general figure it is often argued that one turbine can produce enough energy for around 500 households a year – depending on the efficiency at which they function.  All the turbines in the images above therefore produce really rather little electricity, but at a very significant change to the landscape.  This transaction reflects a second kind of power, political power, since it illustrates yet another way through which a largely urban population exploits rural areas for their own interests.  This despoliation of the landscape is nothing other than a means through which the urban bourgeoisie seeks to maintain its ever increasing patterns of consumption.

Surely it would be much ‘fairer’ for the environmental cost to be paid by those living in urban areas, by for example constructing new styles of energy efficient housing and taxing air conditioners, rather than destroying the rural landscapes that they rarely visit, either physically or in their imaginations!

7 Comments

Filed under Photographs, Wildlife

Great new book on evaluating communication for development

I have always had huge admiration for the work (research and practice) that Jo Tacchi does.  It is therefore great to see her latest book, written together with June Lennie, published at the end of last year: Evaluating Communication for Development:a Framework for Social Change (Routledge, 2012).

As the publisher’s blurb notes, “Evaluating Communication for Development presents a comprehensive framework for evaluating communication for development (C4D). This framework combines the latest thinking from a number of fields in new ways. It critiques dominant instrumental, accountability-based approaches to development and evaluation and offers an alternative holistic, participatory, mixed methods approach based on systems and complexity thinking and other key concepts. It maintains a focus on power, gender and other differences and social norms. The authors have designed the framework as a way to focus on achieving sustainable social change and to continually improve and develop C4D initiatives. The benefits and rigour of this approach are supported by examples and case studies from a number of action research and evaluation capacity development projects undertaken by the authors over the past fifteen years.

Building on current arguments within the fields of C4D and development, the authors reinforce the case for effective communication being a central and vital component of participatory forms of development, something that needs to be appreciated by decision makers. They also consider ways of increasing the effectiveness of evaluation capacity development from grassroots to management level in the development context, an issue of growing importance to improving the quality, effectiveness and utilisation of monitoring and evaluation studies in this field.

The book includes a critical review of the key approaches, methodologies and methods that are considered effective for planning evaluation, assessing the outcomes of C4D, and engaging in continuous learning. This rigorous book is of immense theoretical and practical value to students, scholars, and professionals researching or working in development, communication and media, applied anthropology, and evaluation and program planning”.

1 Comment

Filed under Communication, ICT4D

ICT4D Collective and Centre recognised as world’s 10th top science and technology think tank

ICT4D-72dpiforwebI am deeply humbled that the ICT4D Collective and Research Centre that we tentatively created at Royal Holloway, University of London, back in 2004 has just been recognised as the world’s 10th top Science and Technology Think Tank in the 2012 Global GoTo Think Tank Report launched at the World Bank and the United Nations in New York last week.  This accolade is all the more special because the ranking is based very largely on peer review, and therefore reflects the opinions of many people in the field who I respect enormously.  More than 1950 experts and peer institutions participated in the ranking process for the report which was produced by the Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program at the University of Pennsylvania.

Boy on streetThe Collective was established above all else to bring together colleagues who are committed to undertaking the highest possible quality of research in the interests primarily of poor people and marginalised communities.  Its work is premised on the assumption that ICTs can indeed be used to support poor people, but that we need to work tirelessly to overcome the obstacles that prevent this happening.

LogoIn 2007, we were delighted that the Collective and Centre was given the status of the UNESCO Chair in ICT4D, and although I am now only an Emeritus Professor at Royal Holloway, I am very privileged that for the time being I retain this title while also serving as Secretary General of the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation.  It is great to be able to draw on my past research and teaching experience in this new role, to help governments across the Commonwealth use ICTs effectively and appropriately for their development agendas.

Then, in 2009 Royal Holloway, University of London, formalised the position of the ICT4D Collective by creating a new multidisciplinary research centre on ICT4D, that brought together expertise primarily from the schools and departments of Geography, Computer Science, Management and Mathematics (Information Security), with contributions also from colleagues in Earth Sciences, Politics and International Relations, and Information Services.  This provides really excellent opportunities to develop new research at the exciting boundaries between disciplines.

Scholars 1Over the eight years of the existence of the ICT4D Collective, we have focused on a wide range of activities, but have particularly sought to serve the wider interests of all researchers and practitioners working in the field of ICT4D.  We were thus delighted to host the 2010 ICTD conference, which brought more than 500 colleagues to our campus, and we were immensely grateful to the generous sponsorship from global institutions that enabled us to provide scholarships for people to attend from across the world (pictured above).  We have also focused much attention on supporting doctoral researchers, and it is excellent to see them now flourishing in their subsequent careers.

LanzhouMost recently, under new leadership, the Centre is continuing to thrive, and has launched an exciting ICT4D strand within its established Master’s programme on Practising Sustainable Development.  In 2012, a Branch of the UNESCO Chair in ICT4D was also established at Lanzhou University in China, reflecting the growing collaboration between our two institutions, and recognising the huge importance that China is increasingly playing not only in terms of the practical implementation of ICT initiatives, but also into research in this area.

A huge thank you to all who suggested that the ICT4D Collective and Centre should be recognised in this way.  It is a massive spur to us all to keep up the work that we have been doing, and to share it more effectively with all those interested in, and committed to, using ICTs to support poor people and marginalised communities.

The top 20 ranking of Think Tanks in Science and Technology from the 2012 Global GoTo Think Tank Report is given below:

1. MIT Science, Technology, and Society Program (STS) (United States)
2. Max Planck Institute (Germany)
3. RAND Corporation (United States)
4. Center for Development Research (ZEF) (Germany )
5. Information and Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) (United States)
6. Battelle Memorial Institute (United States)
7. Technology, Entertainment, Design (TED) (United States)
8. Institute for Future Technology (IFTECH) (Japan)
9. Consortium for Science, Policy, and Outcomes (CSPO) (United States)
10. Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) (United Kingdom)
11. Science and Technology Policy Research (SPRU) (United Kingdom)
12. Institute for Basic Research (IBR) (United States)
13. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) (South Africa)
14. African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) (Kenya)
15. Bertelsmann Foundation (Germany)
16. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) (Austria)
17. Energy and Resources Institute (India)
18. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) (India)
19. Santa Fe Institute (SFI) (United States)
20. African Center for Technology Studies (ACTS) (Kenya)

14 Comments

Filed under Higher Education, ICT4D, ICT4D conferences, ICT4D general, ictd2010, Photographs, Postgraduate supervision, Universities

The Internet and Development: a critical perspective

9780199589074_140I am delighted to see Bill Dutton’s magisterial edited The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies (Oxford University Press, 2013) just published.  This is a really excellent and authoritative review of current research on all aspects of the Internet, with some 26 chapters from leading figures in the field.  The 607 page book is divided into five main parts:

  1. Perspectives on the Internet and Web as objects of study
  2. Living in a network society
  3. Creating and working in a global network economy
  4. Communication, power, and influence in a converging media world
  5. Governing and regulating the Internet.

Two of the real strengths of the book as an introduction to the field of Internet studies are the very readable style of most of the chapters, and the comprehensive bibliographies that accompany them.

I was delighted to have been asked to write the chapter on the Internet and Development, which Bill suggested should be sub-titled “a critical perspective”!  As I write in the summary, “This chapter explores research on the complex inter-relationship between the Internet and ‘development’, focusing especially on the effects of the Internet on the lives of some of the poorest people and most marginalised communities.  Much of the literature on Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) suggests that the Internet can indeed bring very significant benefits in the ‘fight against poverty’ (see, for example, Weigel and Waldburger 2004; Rao and Raman 2009; Unwin 2009), but other research is marshalled in this synthesis to challenge this assumption.  In essence, I argue that the expansion of the Internet serves very specific capitalist interests, and that unless conscious and explicit attention is paid to designing interventions that will indeed directly serve the needs of the world’s poorest people, then the Internet will only replicate and reinforce existing structures of dominance and control. This argument supports the need for more research that challenges taken-for-granted assumptions about the Internet and development”.

In essence, the Internet is not some benign force for good as is so often supposed.  Instead it is being shaped and reshaped by a relatively small group of people with very specific interests.  It is absolutely essential that those committed to trying to ensure that digital technologies are used to serve the interests of all peoples in the world, and particularly the poorest and most marginalised, do indeed continue to challenge many of the all too often taken for granted assumptions that the Internet is necessarily automatically a force for positive “development”.

1 Comment

Filed under Development, ICT4D

Fieldfares in Virginia Water

Looking out into the back garden this morning, across the tracks of the Muntjac deer that crept in over the snow yesterday, I saw a small flock of fieldfare – beautiful birds from the same family as the much more common song thrush.  Sadly, they are on the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds’ (RSPB) Red List, indicating that they are of the highest conservation priority.  I have never seen them before where we live, and they seem to have been attracted by the hawthorn berries and rose hips in the hedge at the end of the garden.  As the RSPB says, fieldfares are “Best looked for in the countryside, along hedges and in fields. Hawthorn hedges with berries are a favourite feeding area”.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

2 Comments

Filed under Photographs

Passwords, PIN numbers and cybersecurity

Ever since one of my websites was hacked a few months ago, I have taken a much more personal interest in issues of cybersecurity.  Whilst I have spoken and written many times on the subject, it is only when things really affect you in a personal way that you begin to gain different understandings of the issues.  It represents a shift from a theoretical understanding to a practical one!

I thought I knew most of the various recommendations concerning password and PIN security, and that I had indeed followed them.  However, no digital system is ever completely secure, and the level of sophistication now being used by those intent on stealing identity data, particularly with respect to banking information, is becoming very much more sophisticated.

There are many well known organisations providing advice and recommendations, such as Sophos, Symantec and Kaspersky Lab, but there are rather few places where all of this information is brought together in a single place.  The level of insecurity, and the apparent disinterest among vast numbers of people in doing much about their digital security is not only surprising, but is also deeply concerning.  So, in this posting, I have tried to bring together some of the more interesting observations that have recently been made about passwords and PIN numbers, in order to try to persuade people to take action on this really rather important topic!

Most popular PIN codes and iPhone passcodes
There are numerous articles on the most popular PIN codes – in other words the ones that no-one should actually use! One of the best is Daniel Amitay‘s experiment, where he used Big Brother’s passcode set up screen as a surrogate to estimate iPhone passcode usage, and discovered that the top ten codes listed below represented 15% of all passcodes used:

  1. 1234
  2. 0000
  3. 2580
  4. 1111
  5. 5555
  6. 5683
  7. 0852
  8. 2222
  9. 1212
  10. 1998

None of these are surprising, given that they represent easily remembered structures around the keypad. The passcode 1998 features because it is a year of birth and as Amitay goes on to point out other birth years also feature highly among passwords.

What is perhaps even more worrying is that research by Sophos in 2011 suggested that 67% of consumers do not even use any passcode on their ‘phones, so that a passer-by can access all of the information on the ‘phone without even having to bother to hack the code.

Four digit codes are also commonly used by banks to enable customers to access money through cashpoint machines (ATMs).  Research summarised by Chris Taylor (on Mashable) notes that 27% of people use one of the top 20 PINs for their banking, with the most popular number (1234) being used by a massive 11%.  The top 20 PIN codes he lists are as follows:

  1. 1234 (10.7%)
  2. 1111 (6.0%)
  3. 0000 (1.9%)
  4. 1212 (1.2%)
  5. 7777 (0.7%)
  6. 1004 (0.6%)
  7. 2000 (0.6%)
  8. 4444 (0.5%)
  9. 2222 (0.5%)
  10. 6969 (0.5%)
  11. 9999 (o.5%)
  12. 3333 (0.4%)
  13. 5555 (0.4%)
  14. 6666 (0.4%)
  15. 1122 (0.4%)
  16. 1313 (0.3%)
  17. 8888 (0.3%)
  18. 4321 (0.3%)
  19. 2001 (0.3%)
  20. 1010 (0.3%)

Chris Taylor goes on to comment that although there are 10,000 possible combinations of four digits, 50% of people use the most popular 426 codes!  As he says, “Pick up an ATM card on the street, and you have a 1 in 5 chance of unlocking its cash by entering just five PINs. That’s the kind of Russian Roulette that’s going to be attractive to any casual thief”.

There is therefore  really quite a high probability that even without watching someone enter their PIN number and then stealing the card, or using sophisticated technology to ‘crack’ someone’s PIN code, criminals would have a pretty good chance of accessing someone’s bank account just by using the most popular codes above.  The implication for users is clear: use a PIN code that is not among the most common!

Passwords
The situation is scarcely better with passwords that people use for their online digital activities. Numerous surveys have all pointed to the same conclusion, that a very small number of passwords continue to be used by large numbers of people.  These change a bit over time, and vary depending on cultural context and country, but the message is clear.  Even without sophisticated programmes to crack passwords, those wishing to access personal information can achieve remarkable success just by trying to use the most common passwords!  The most common passwords, in other words those to be avoided, are listed below:

Splashdata 2012

Sophos Naked Security 2010, based on leaked Gawker Media passwords

1

password

123456

2

123456

Password

3

12345678

12345678

4

abc123

lifehack

5

qwerty

qwerty

6

monkey

abc123

7

letmein

111111

8

dragon

monkey

9

111111

consumer

10

baseball

12345

11

iloveyou

0

12

trustno1

letmein

13

1234567

trustno1

14

sunshine

Dragon

15

master

1234567

16

123123

baseball

17

welcome

superman

18

shadow

iloveyou

19

ashley

gizmodo

20

football

sunshine

21

jesus

1234

22

michael

princess

23

ninja

starwars

24

mustang

whatever

25

password1

shadow

A slightly more sophisticated approach is that adopted by those wishing to break into networks by testing them automatically against a much larger number of different passwords.  One of the best publicised accounts of this was the Conficker worm, which used the passwords in the chart below to try to access accounts (Sophos, 2009):

Worm

Again, this clearly indicates that considerable care needs to be taken in choosing passwords, and ensuring that they are at the very least more complex than those listed above.

Tips to reduce the risk of fraud through mobile devices and digital technologies
Much has been written about sensible advice for reducing the risk of fraud through mobile passcodes, banking PINs and online login passwords.  Such tips will never eliminate really determined people from hacking into your identity, but a few simple steps can at least make it more difficult for the less determined.  These include:

  • Always secure your ‘phone with a PIN code, or better still a password (iPhone users can do this simply in Settings>General>Passcode Lock).  This will help to prevent all of your contacts, photos, e-mails and other personal information being accessed immediately by anyone who picks up your ‘phone.
  • Reduce the time before your ‘phone automatically locks so that it is as short as possible, preferably no more than a minute
  • Always use complex passwords, that preferably include lower case and upper case letters, numbers and special characters
  • Use passwords that are at least 8 characters and preferably more than 12 characters in length
  • Frequently change your passwords at random intervals, so that possible hackers are unaware when to expect changes
  • Use different passwords for different accounts, so that if one password is ‘broken’ this will not permit access to your other accounts
  • Think about using a service that tests the strength of a proposed password (such as The Password Meter, Microsoft’s password checker, or Rumkin’s strength test) – for the hyper-security-conscious person, it is probably best to do this from a computer other than your own!
  • Never, under any circumstances give your passwords or PIN codes to other people

Ultimately, passwords and PIN numbers are just part of a wider defence needed against digital theft.  Human action, be it using the ‘phone in an unsafe public place or unfortunately responding to a phishing attack, is still the cause of much digital grief.  As I write, Sophos has just for example reported a phishing attack through a security breach on the Ethiopian Red Cross Society’s website purporting to be a Google Docs login page.

If the worst happens, and you do lose a ‘phone there are at least two important things to do:

  • Ensure you have software on the ‘phone that can enable you to track it (as with the Find My iPhone app, or for Android ‘phones there are apps such as Sophos’ Mobile Security app)
  • If there is no chance of getting the ‘phone back, then remotely delete all of its content as swiftly as possible, remembering that if it has been backed up on a laptop or cloud facility, then all of the data can be restored at a later date.

Working together, and sharing good practices in personal digital security we can do much to help reduce digital identity theft.

3 Comments

Filed under 'phones, ICT4D general