This blog is no longer updated.
Please visit http://inno-grips.portals.mbs.ac.uk/

Thank you,
moderator

The full text of the declaration is accessible here, and also set out below as full text paragraphs.

Do you have any comments?

June 2008 – The Civil Society-TUAC Seoul Declaration

CIVIL SOCIETY – TUAC
THE SEOUL DECLARATION TO THE OECD MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE
ON THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNET ECONOMY

Seoul, Korea
16 June 2008

This gathering of civil society organizations and organized labor at the OECD Ministerial Conference on the Future of the Internet Economy provides a unique opportunity to bring to the attention of the OECD Ministers assembled and the OECD member countries the concerns and aspirations of people around the globe, those who are on the Internet and those who are not.

We thank the OECD and the Government of Korea for the opportunity to organize a civil society and labor event and to participate in the OECD Ministerial Conference. Civil society and labor together prepared a paper for the OECD and organized a conference “Making the future of the Internet work for citizens, consumers and workers.” A wide range of organizations participated in this effort, and this Declaration builds on its results.

A BROAD FRAMEWORK FOR THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNET ECONOMY
The policy goals for the Future Internet Economy should be considered within the broader framework of protection of human rights, the promotion of democratic institutions, access to information, and the provision of affordable and non-discriminatory access to advanced communication networks and services. Compliance with international human rights standards and respect for the rule of law, as well as effective human rights protection, must be the baseline for assessing global information society policies. Economic growth should be for the many and not the few. The Internet should be available to all. We therefore call attention of the OECD to Ministers to the following issues and we make the following recommendations:

• Freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is being violated around the globe by state censorship and by more subtle measures such as content filtering, privatized censorship and restrictions on so-called ‘harmful content’. We urge the OECD to defend freedom of expression and to oppose mandated filtering, censorship of Internet content, and criminalization of content that is protected under international freedom of expression standards.
• Protection of Privacy and Transparency. We reaffirm our support for the OECD Privacy Guidelines as a fundamental policy instrument setting out minimal requirements for the transborder flow of personal data. We recommend adoption of the recent policy guidance on RFID and Online Identity Theft as Council Recommendations. We call on OECD countries to adopt and enforce data protection laws covering all sectors, both online and offline, and to establish international data protection standards that are legally enforceable. We further urge member states to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability for all data processing for border security, identification, and decision-making concerning individuals.
• Consumer Protection. Trust and confidence are critical to the success of the Internet economy. The OECD should ensure that consumer protection laws are properly enforced and cover digital products to the same extent that other consumer goods and services are covered. We recommend that the OECD adopt the policy proposals on Empowering Consumers in Communications Services and in Mobile Commerce as Council Recommendations, and that the OECD member countries implement these recommendations. We support the OECD’s efforts to facilitate cross- border enforcement of anti-spam laws and to develop effective online dispute resolution mechanisms.
• Employment, Decent Work and Skills. We recommend that OECD Member countries promote learning and training opportunities for workers and address the technological and organizational change in the workplace. We further urge the OECD to lower the carbon footprint of the ICT industry and to promote compliance with core labor standards and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
• Promotion of Access to Knowledge. We support open access to government-funded scientific and scholarly works and endorse the OECD Principles and Guidelines for Access to Research Data. We support the OECD Recommendation for Enhanced Access and More Effective Use of Public Information. OECD countries should oppose extensions of copyright terms and private ownership of essential knowledge and cultural information that can be made available on the Internet. We recommend that the OECD undertake a study on the importance of copyright exceptions for education, libraries and archives, the disability community, and new innovative services.
• Internet Governance. Internet governance structures should reflect democratic values and be transparent and publicly accountable to users. Global Internet policymaking should involve equal participation of all people, countries, and stakeholders. We call upon the OECD member states to support the Internet Governance Forum and to promote the multi- stakeholder process of the World Summit on the Information Society.
• Promotion of Open Standards and Net Neutrality. Standards-making processes should be open and should encourage competition. This promotes innovation and development. We support the procurement policies that promote open standards, open data formats, and free and open software. We further recommend that the OECD Member Countries oppose discrimination by network providers against particular applications, devices, or content and preserve the Internet’s role in fostering innovation, economic growth, and democratic communication.
• Balanced Intellectual Property Policies. We urge the OECD member countries to maintain a balanced framework for intellectual property protection that is least intrusive to personal privacy, least restrictive for the development of new technologies, and that promotes creativity, innovation, and learning. We support the OECD Policy Guidance for Digital Content. OECD countries should oppose proposals that would deny individuals access to all Internet services and opportunities based on alleged copyright infringement. We are also concerned about the secrecy of the “Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” (ACTA) treaty process and the possibility of policies that may limit legitimate business activity, the participative web, and e-government service delivery.
• Support for Pluralistic Media. The Internet is a universal platform for innovation, growth, and the ability of people to express and share their views. New forms of media and new applications are emerging that challenge old paradigms and enable broader public participation. At the same time, dominant Internet firms are moving to consolidate their control over the Internet. It is vitally important for the OECD to develop a better understanding of the challenge industry consolidations pose to the open Internet. The OECD Policy Guidance on Convergence and Next Generation Networks provides a basis this work.
• Inclusive Digital Society. The Internet should be accessible to all. OECD member countries should ensure that all residents have the means to access the Internet and should provide public Internet access, training and support. Particular attention should be paid to rural, remote and aboriginal populations, as well as the disability community.
• Cultural Diversity. We support the efforts of the OECD to promote access to the full range of the world’s cultures and to ensure that the Internet economy reflects the true diversity of language, art, science, and literature in our world. The deployment of International Domain Names should be a priority.

PARTICIPATION OF CIVIL SOCIETY AND LABOUR
This participation of civil society and organized labor reaffirms the role of all stakeholders in the Future of the Internet Economy. Now it is time to formalize this process.

In 1998 civil society and labor urged the OECD Ministerial Conference in Ottawa to establish an Advisory Council, similar to the Business Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) for business and the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) for labor. We said that this new Advisory Council should include civil society groups in such fields as human rights and democracy, privacy and data protection, consumer protection, and access to information and knowledge.

We urge the OECD to establish now the Civil Society Advisory Committee. The creation of an OECD Civil Society Advisory Committee is necessary to help realize the democratic goals of inclusion, participation, transparency and accountability at the OECD.

The OECD offers an important forum for the discussion of policies concerning the future of the Internet. We welcome this dialogue and urge the Ministers and members countries of the OECD to fully engage civil society and labor organizations within their own countries.

In all decisions related to the Internet economy, we advise the OECD Ministers and the members countries to give particular attention to those indicators concerning literacy, education, and health. The success of the Internet Economy should be measured by the well-being of citizens, and not simply the extent of technology diffusion.

The workshop was kicked-off by an important address of Prof. Ian Miles who explained the context of the workshop within the GRIPS project. Then, Dr. Yanuar Nugroho made a case for “Innovation for development: a lesson from internet appropriation in Indonesian civil society organisations“, continued by a presentation of Dr. Isabel Álvarez entitled “FDI and world inequalities: The role of absorptive capacities“. After lunch, Mr. Swayan Chaudhuri delivered a presentation on “Economic Innovation, Development & Growth: Dynamics of Technological Change and Public Policy in South Korea“, followed by a plenary discussion.

On the second day, Ms. Waraporn Yangsap presented her research “Understanding and Unlocking the Productive Potential of IPRs in the Globalised Knowledge Based Economy” which was followed by Ms. Lois Muraguri‘s presentation “The impact of IPRs on domestic innovation: choosing appropriate policies for biotechnology-led development and technology transfer“. All participants and Prof. Miles then engaged in an intensive discussion before the workshop concluded.

We will post here, in this blog, our full report and presentation material of all presenters. So, keep tuned-in!

Here, development is understood as no longer a linear, straightforward application of ‘best practices’ or mere transfer of knowledge and adoption of innovations; and whose success relies mainly on the elite and the superiority of certain institutional frameworks supporting innovations. Take the intellectual property rights (IPR) regime for example. While on the one hand IPR may have supported innovation by means of securing incentives to business and investment, on the other, IPR regime has put burden to many developing economies in their development (the case of sub-Saharan Africa encountering difficulties in getting affordable medicines is well known, as are other cases in developing countries in Asia and Latin America involving the implementation of IPR). Therefore, instead, development should be understood as multifaceted process where innovation is only one aspect and that it involves multiplicity of actors and frameworks with equal importance.

In order to address this issue, a couple of initiatives have been introduced by the INNO-GRIPS project. One of them was a think-tank meeting in Rabat, Morocco on the 6th and 7th of December 2007, which brought together academic researchers, some major development organisations and DG Enterprise of the European Commission. The meeting confirmed that since the international economical, institutional and technological context has evolved considerably over the last twenty years, the understanding of innovation and development need to be re-examined. In addition, there was a concern that National Innovation Systems in most developing countries are not sufficiently viable and effective to provide the necessary flexible and transversal public support to innovation.

In response, and continuation to, to the think-tank meeting, INNO-GRIPS team at Manchester recently organised an early-career researchers’ workshop on Innovation and Development on the 9th and 10th of April 2008. But before we report the workshop, do you have any views on the topic: Innovation and –or for– development?