To define and distribute functions to each of the involved actors (institutions or individuals), establishing specific capacities and resources;
To consider the larger amount of possible actors who might support and be involved in the different processes (state, market-enterprises and entrepreneurs-, civil society, university, citizens, etc.);
To consider not only the usual public sector “areas" related to the Information Society such as telecommunications, infrastructure, science and technology, but also other instances from the executive authority, like education, social development, health, legislative branches, regulators, etc;
Intersectoriality assumes attempting different modalities to join the public sector, the social sector, the private sector, and the academic sector. All of which may encourage within their own institutions intra-sector and internal consensual policies.
Each of the institutions will present different levels of development, conditions and capabilities for their participation and joint actions;
To understand that roles can vary (for example, in many countries, the NISP creation has been the result of a government with strong leadership role, whereas in others, it has arisen like an initiative from the market, or by strong campaigns from the civil society sector);
To respect the essence of each actor and her/his own activities. With this in mind, each actor will be able to maintain it independence against the others.
Table 2. Summary of the Introduction Summary A The present impulse and expansion of the Information Society (IS) devel has been accompanied by outstanding efforts in developing and oping disseminating tools for planning, pursuit and evaluation of those proce processes. After individual and often isolated initiatives to ss (or formulate NISPs, countries have started to harmonize criteria, The methodological tools, etc. among them devel opme nt The different world wummits and the large numbers of proce international meetings and events at regional level, as well as the ss) role of the different international organizations such as UNESCO, and have had a fundamental role.
the role of UNES Because of this, experiences have started to be replicated and the CO obstacles may be able to be overcome opportunely.
What This template is a methodological proposal based on the is this international experience and the good practices that have been templ detected.
ate To The governmental officers and civil servants of the national or whom local state (sometimes with the support of an expert team, this sometimes with the only assistance of their staff), who face the templ exciting challenge of initiating, reviewing or updating the process ate is of an NISP elaboration.
addre ssed Key 1. No country starts at “Zero”, since all countries have some factor experience on the Information Society, beyond their level of s to development.
use 2. Each country boards the fast Information Society train at its own this station; it is essential to take into account the national and regional Guide circumstances, since each situation has unique characteristics.
3. Start from each countrys own reality and needs, identifying the economic strengths and weakness, cultural diversity and institutional conditions in order to foster IS policies.
4. Recognize the role of the government and of the governmental agents acting as coordinators for the whole process.
5. Consider the intersectorial and multistakeholder approaches as central points of the NISP strategy in each country.
2.3. STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK 2.3.1. Milestones The NISP definition and implementation is a process of strategic planning. As mentioned earlier in this document, the sequential stages to create, implement and improve an NISP entail only an ideal construction to facilitate its analysis. This guide features diverse milestones to understand each stage of an NISP.
The various amounts of activities and processes can be defined sequentially in the following way (Illustration 3):
Illustration 2. Milestones in the process of constructing a NISP For a public policy formulation on Information Society, it is necessary to undertake a series of processes that involve people, groups and institutions. Activities are promoted and executed, information is generated and interchanged, and a collective production is directed through a decision making process.
These processes will be conditioned by external political and economic factors, by the national context and internal factors, and the expression of the diverse sector interests.
Table 3. Milestones components Involved actors Formulation of the During this stage, the governmental representatives NISP in charge who will assume the responsibility for initiating the formulation of the NISP, together with the other involved social actors, will develop a series of processes. These technical and political officers will be supported during the whole process- or at least part of it- by a group of experts on the Information Society who will contribute their knowledge and advice. In this context, an intersectorial strategy is required.
Objectives To prepare the dianostics in which the NISP will be based.
To formulate the NISP - including deciding the goals, strategies, and actions that will be implemented in the next phase.
Outcomes An NISP Plan of Action, providing gudelines, a defined strategy, a timeline, a budget, a list of involved actors, and the institutional transformation required to implement the NISP.
List of experts on the Information Society.
List of research centers working on Information Society.
Diagnostics of the present situation regarding the Information Society, at national, regional, or local level.
Diagnostics of the present situation regarding the Information Society areas (such as e-government, mgovernment, education for Information Society, eheath, among others) at national, regional, or local level.
List of goals to be achieved by the NISP.
Strategies to be used to achieve the goals, timeline, agents in charge of the accomplishment of each goal, financial, human and technological resources assigned to each goal.
Description This phase concerns the implementation of the gudelines and strategies that were planned in the previous stage. This phase will incorporate possible rectifications or modifications if external or internal changes have happened (management changes, macroeconomic crises, evaluations, new political definitions, etc.). Decisions should be taken on resource allocation, governmental and multisakeholder bodies charged with the implementation of the NISP, distribution of tasks, and the adjustment of the project to the real context in which the NISP will be developed.
It will be useful for the governmental body responsible for the implementation, together with the involved stakeholders, to define tools and instruments to check indicators, survey results, and use of the impact assessment to be used in the follow-up, monitoring, control and adaptation stages.
Objetives The implementation phase gathers all the aspects related to the implementation of the NISP as planned in the elaboration phase, through a set of instruments and actions. In this phase, the implementation does not depend so much on the expert team, but on the government and other social actors.
Outcomes Projects derived from the Action Plan.
List of Tasks’ assignations.
Description In this phase, the NISP’s results as well as the impacts of the whole NISP building process are evaluated using sets of indicators.
To monitor and assess the NISPs execution, impacts, and achievements.
Outcomes An Assessment report of each of the NISP phases.
An assessment report of the partial and/or total results achieved by the NISP.
Tip 1. Factors which impact the NISP dvelopment process Every phase will undergo permanent evaluation and adaptation actions. This process will allow to: assess expected and unexpected results, and evaluate required adjustments. Many qualitative and quantitative indicators tools are available for governmental officers, experts groups and other involved actors.
The phases to plan and carry out the NISP’s guidelines and strategies are shown as a model to facilitate working on the NISP.
This model allows each country to assume a position according to its own development stage, culture, and socio-economic context.
In the process of elaborating public policies, it is necessary to consider each and every one of these phases.
Example 16. Actions implemented in Africa and Europe In Africa, development process cycle for the National Information and Communication Infrastructure policies and plans (NICI) is summarized as follows:
The first phase of the methodology concentrates on the development of the framework document. The framework document, among other things provides an analytical basis for the development of the subsequent policy document and plan. This is achieved through a baseline study, which establishes benchmarks so that subsequent monitoring and evaluation can assess the effects of identified programmes on the target population.
This phase concentrates on the development of the policy document, which provides details of the government’s policy commitments in relation to what needs to be done through the exploitation and development of ICTs.
This phase of the methodology is devoted to the development of the first plan guided by the government’s policy commitments detailed in the policy document. This plan, the first of series of rolling plans serves as a cornerstone of the government’s socio-economic development plan over a specific time frame.
Phase 4: This final phase involves the actual implementation of the specific programmes in the plan. Once the plan is developed and implemented, progress is monitored and evaluated on a regular basis. The monitoring and evaluation exercise will be based on the analysis of relevant indicators to assess progress towards Information Society development and socio-economic impact14.
Within the existing tools addressed to experts to plan and update NISPs, the report “Good Practices in Information and Communication Technology Policies in Asia and the Pacific:
Promotion of Enabling Policies and Regulatory Frameworks for Information and Communication Technology Development in the Asia-Pacific Region” (ESCAP, 2004) is intended to be a resource for ICT policy planners and decision makers and offers policyoriented perspectives on three major sets of issues:
Understanding the background and process of ICT policy formulation and implementation relevant to the Asian and Pacific countries;
- Sharing the rich and diversified experiences of selected countries of the region in ICT policy development through best practices;
- Developing materials for awareness and capacity-building programmes at the national and regional levels.
See page 28 of the quoted report for scheme on NICI cycle Source: African Information Society Initiative, The approach of the report "Rethinking the European ICT agenda - Ten ICTbreakthroughs for reaching Lisbon goals" (MEA, 2004) consisted of five phases a) The preparation phase was used to determine the outlines of the study in order to establish the main issues under investigation. An e-Boardroom session with industry leaders and policy makers was held to verify the first results of the desk study concluded in an outline paper b) The second phase consisted of an extensive interview round, with opinion leaders, Information Society decision makers throughout Europe and the five reference countries to identify new insights, new perspectives, discontinuities, and a new sense of urgency that would give rise to the formulation of new policy questions. As annex D shows, over 90 thought-leaders were interviewed. These interviews resulted in an extensive list of policy questions and breakthroughs.
c) During the third phase the ranking and selection of this master list of policy questions and breakthroughs took place in several workshops with representatives from the ICT industry, users and policy makers for the Information Society.
d) During the selection phase the African Information Society Initiative made the final selection of the main breakthroughs and policy questions using the input of Information Society policy across Europe during the second e-Boardroom meeting and some additional interviews.
e) Finally the fifth phase consisted of the elaboration of the results, some additional interviews to further verify the outcomes and the writing of the report.
Source: MEA, 2.4. Starting point: formulation of a National Policy for Information Society (NISP) 2.4.1. Introduction to the starting point Illustration 3. Starting point Starting point Origin Formulation of the NISP Evaluation International experiences, supported by international organizations, such as UNESCO, have shown the importance of a planned and organized effort to reach the expected results. This is proved not only in governmental circles, but also in the market, the nonprofit organizations, NGOs, and the Academia. These actors have been taking actions to limit improvisation, make decisions in a conscious way, and improve the quality of their interventions.
Milestone The NISP formulation phase corresponds to the foundational or re-foundational moment of the public policy (in those cases where the current policy implemented is being reviewed or updated). It is a key stage that requires an accurate definition of all the issues that will influence the upcoming phases of the process.
According to ECLAC (Hilbert et al., 2005), the extent of actors’ participation is a determining factor of the duration of this phase because it is closely related to the process of generation of consensus among the diverse actors or stakeholders. The entire process will be determined by the complex search for consensus in relation to the policy objectives to be implemented, the actions to be defined, and the legitimacy and commitment assumed by the involved actors.
Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.