By Paul Ulrich and James George Chacko

In a metaphor of a journey, ICT policies and e-strategies represent a road map guiding countries to becoming an information society and knowledge economy. The worldwide technology revolution makes such strategies imperative. Unlike the previous industrial revolution, the knowledge revolution encompasses all aspects of society, so e-strategies must go beyond technical goals in addressing the challenge of universal access to, and use of, ICTs. Policies and e-strategies alone cannot guarantee the desired outcome: development implies action, not just policy or strategy documents written but never implemented - a failing that frequently occurs when those who commission studies neglect to act upon their recommendations.

In determining what strategy to pursue, countries need to assess their degree of e-readiness - to see where they stand along the route to develop a networked society. By understanding their national strengths and weaknesses with respect to the use and development of ICTs, leaders can position their countries to take advantage of emerging opportunities and stave off competitive threats. Many governments have already done such assessments of their countries' e-readiness; others have had them done by external bodies that compile comparative e-readiness rankings and indices. Once completed, these analyses should make ICT policy makers better able to go after the "low-hanging fruit"- the easier-to-implement approaches that will yield the most benefit at the least cost, and ideally with a relatively quick return on investment.

In crafting ICT policies, policy makers face nine major challenges[1]:

1. A need for vision and leadership;

2. Consistency with other national development goals;

3. Coordination within government;

4. Consultation for consensus on objectives and approaches;

5. Implementation of articulated and realistic plans of action;

6. Resources prioritised and not based on mere wishful thinking;

7. Supportive legal framework to enable ICT policies;

8. Supportive policy frameworks to facilitate implementation; and

9. Objectives against which to monitor progress and produce defined results.

There is no boilerplate for successful ICT policies and e-strategies. Policy makers must identify examples of successes either within their own borders, or in other, similar countries, and adapt them as necessary to fit their nation's unique circumstances. Despite this caveat, a few principles are common to most, if not all, successful approaches.

First, be specific in setting goals. Establish a baseline of indicators that characterize the present and the trend leading up to it. Formulate goals and monitor progress toward achieving them.

Second, do not re-invent what has already worked elsewhere. Use the Internet and other ICTs to research and identify best practices from other areas. For example, somewhere in the world, a cyber law already exists and addresses an issue that your country may also face. Work from that as a draft rather than starting from scratch.

Third, prioritise your objectives. Some may be in conflict; others may deserve simultaneous but separate approaches. For instance, resources going into achieving universal access promote societal equity and economic growth in the long run, but may subtract from investments needed to spur earlier, more direct paybacks for the economy.

Fourth, be patient. Policy incentives to attract foreign investment, for example, generally only influence decisions over the medium- to long-term. Most good policies yield their greatest results over decades, not years, and rarely in months. Analyse the stages through which other countries' successful ICT industries have passed and determine where, if any, opportunities exist for leapfrogging these stages with modern or emerging ICTs.

Fifth, let government drive ICT initiatives-with investments, but most importantly, with conducive policies to encourage private capital and entrepreneurship.

Sixth, engage stakeholders as early as possible with consultative and participatory workshops and seminars with citizens, the private sector, academia and civil society. For the general public, awareness campaigns and educational programmes may be the best tools for appropriate and productive adoption of ICTs.

Governments cannot do it all, nor should they try to, rather, governments must enlist the help of civil society and the private sector to achieve multinational, national and local aims. Governments, however, must set the rules of the game, serve as a catalyst for ICT initiatives, particularly those related to public goods, and ensure that the proper enabling environment exists for all actors involved in the process. An enabling environment means not just the encouragement of ICT investments in human and physical capital or better integration with a globalised economy, but also the protection of consumers' and businesses' rights as they make use of modern technology. Governments also face the dual task of harnessing ICTs for creating jobs through economic growth while promoting equitable development, especially for the marginalized, often overlapping, groups of the poor, women, ethnic minorities and rural inhabitants.

Governments must keep abreast of ICT developments even if they do not immediately adopt them. This monitoring is far from easy, as changes happen much faster in ICTs than in any other realm of development. For instance, the sceptics who question the attention devoted to modern ICTs when half the world has never even made a phone call are probably relying on data that may have been true five years ago but which are now outdated and misleading. Certainly, political leaders must ensure that their people have the basics, but they must also look to how their countries can apply the latest technologies to generate jobs, economic growth and ways to mesh efficiently with an increasingly globalised world. Hence, ICT should be seen as an enabler that complements other existing basic services. The challenge leaders face is in justifying high investments in ICTs when other basic services are lacking. ICTs should be adopted not for their own sake, but to provide the most appropriate, citizen-centric solutions.

-----------------------

[1] These were the conclusions reached at the Asian Forum on Information and Communication Technology Policies and e-Strategies, held in October 2003 in Kuala Lumpur, organised by UNDP Asia Pacific Development Information Programme (APDIP). The recommendations are documented in the forthcoming book "ICT Policies and e-Strategies in the Asia Pacific: A Critical Assessment of The Way Forward". See www.apdip.net for details on draft chapters and overview.

By Paul Ulrich and James George Chacko
Paul ULRICH
Director for the Asia-Pacific
Pyramid Research
Over the past 18 years, Paul has worked for the private sector, NGOs, and donor agencies in economic, business, and strategy consulting in 56 countries. With proficiency in multiple foreign languages, expertise in strategic applications of information and communication technologies (ICT), and skills in macroeconomics, finance, and econometrics, he most enjoys using cross-disciplinary approaches to applying ICT for developmental objectives. Paul has an undergraduate degree from Yale and graduate degrees in public administration and development economics from Harvard and Stanford.
James George Chacko
Programme Specialist
UNDP Asia Pacific Development Information Programme
James is the Programme Specialist for Access and Partnership Development at APDIP. His work includes developing strategies for APDIP's equal access program and he focuses on ICT and Millennium Development Goals, e-government and e-governance, learning and literacy, regional ICT policies and e-strategies, ICTs and gender, rural area connectivity and sustainability, new methods of access, open source, and ICT and SMEs. He is also engaged in research and documentation of best practices from the region in specific thematic areas related to access, governance, and sustainability. He is a recipient of several awards including the British Chevening scholarship and the Liam Holden Memorial prize.