Monday, February 1, 2010

Micorjustice Videos on youtube and microjustice4all.org


I haven't had a chance to view all three parts but the microjustice documentary (made up of a few videos) is really progressive for its size and focus on the developing world.  Just that fact that a start up NGO HAS video clips of sorts and a presence on youtube. You can view he videos here on ILA microjustice4all website or on youtube (User- Microjusticia). I'll comment more about it using my filmmaker's eyes combined with my international development sensibilities when (if?) I next get a chance.

(Also note that Microjustice is a different user (under microjustice.org) and also has an older 2008 promo micorjustice ad video here regarding a google project.). I'm not sure yet how this fits into the overall context of the microjustice movement, but I'm guessing that it's an early version of a promo video. More when I find out...

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Call for papers- TPRC 38th Research Conference

George Mason University School of Law hosts TPRC'38th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy Oct. 1-3, 2010. TPRC is now soliciting abstracts of papers, panel proposals, and student papers for presentation at the 2010 conference. The deadline for abstracts and panel proposals is March 31, 2010. Proposals should be based on current theoretical or empirical research relevant to communication and information policy, and may be from any disciplinary perspective. TPRC seeks submissions of disciplinary, comparative, multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary excellence. Subject areas of particular interest include, but are not limited to 11 listed topics below. Click the links for more information on TPRC's website.  
  1. Network Competition, Policy and Management
  2. Broadband Deployment, Adoption and Measurement
  3. Spectrum Policy
  4. Societal Issues: Universalty and Affordable Access
  5. The Transformation and Future of Media
  6. The Transformation and Future of Intellectual Property and Digital Rights
  7. Privacy, Security, Identity and Trust
  8. Internet Governance and Institutional Strategies for Information Policy
  9. Advanced Mobile Services:  Broadband, Video and New Applications
  10. The Internet Ecosystem
  11. Other Emerging Topics are highly encouraged

Thursday, January 28, 2010

The Asia Foundation's most recent report about Legal Empowerment

The Asia Foundation (which we affectionately call TAF), where I used to work and which is an expert in law and governance in Asia, has a new blog post on Legal Empowerment by Debra Lardner my friend and colleague. In fact, TAF has often been given credit as the first to coin the term 'legal empowerment' in a 2001 TAF study funded by the ADB. Since then, TAF has also published a related report on Legal Identity and Poverty and most recently, Legal Empowerment for Women and Disadvantaged Groups

In any event, Debra's post on The Legal Empowerment Approach, which appears on TAF's blog, summarizes this most recent study and some of its findings: 
By Debra Ladner

Decades of heavy investment in “supply side” rule of law initiatives in Asia and elsewhere have yielded limited results. Programs focused on training judges and other court officials, introducing modern case management systems, and reforming court procedures have not consistently translated into improved access to efficient and fair justice institutions for ordinary citizens, and particularly not for the poor, women, and other vulnerable groups. Frustration with these disappointing results has led to increased attention on legal empowerment as an alternative approach.

Legal empowerment programs have proliferated in recent years. Rather than focusing on improving judicial institutions and processes, the legal empowerment approach seeks to build the capacity of citizens and communities to enforce their rights through legal and administrative procedures. These programs generally combine activities including the dissemination of information on legal rights and procedures, community based trainings, legal counseling and paralegal services, community organizing, advocacy, and even efforts aimed at reforming laws and legal institutions.

As an organization at the forefront of supporting legal empowerment efforts throughout the Asia-Pacific region, The Asia Foundation has undertaken a number of studies to critically evaluate the efficacy of legal empowerment as a strategy for improving local governance and alleviating poverty. The most recent study, “Legal Empowerment for Women and Disadvantaged Groups,” which the Foundation implemented with support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), examined two key questions: First, can legal empowerment initiatives make development assistance more effective, particularly in reaching women and disadvantaged groups? And, second, how can we evaluate the impact of legal empowerment efforts?

The first question recognizes that there is often a gap between the objectives of mainstream socioeconomic development projects and their results, particularly in reaching vulnerable groups. This gap may be due, in part, to the fact that development projects rely on the active engagement of key stakeholders, including both citizens and local-level officials. However, these individuals, particularly women and other disadvantaged groups, often lack the know-how, confidence, time, or incentives to participate in ways envisioned by the project, while the government officials responsible for administering a program may be unfamiliar with their obligations to extend services to all members of the community. The study hypothesized that legal empowerment could help bridge this gap by providing vulnerable groups with the information, training, assistance, and confidence needed to enforce their legal rights.

To test this hypothesis, the project added pilot legal empowerment components to ADB-funded development projects in Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Pakistan. These legal empowerment initiatives were specifically designed to enhance the effectiveness of the larger development assistance projects, particularly in terms of their positive impact on the lives and women and disadvantaged groups. In Indonesia, for example, a legal empowerment component was added to the ADB’s Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Sector Project (NUSSP), which aims to provide low income families and communities with resources to improve their homes and neighborhoods. To access the project’s resources, however, potential beneficiaries must navigate a range of administrative procedures. These requirements present a major obstacle to ordinary citizens, particularly to the poorest of the poor, who generally lack the necessary knowledge, skills, and confidence to navigate such hurdles. The legal empowerment initiative included a range of activities to help overcome these barriers: a media campaign to raise awareness among both citizens and government officials responsible for administering the NUSSP; a series of briefings and trainings on how to access funds available through the NUSSP; a guided tour of the land agency office to educate participants on land registration procedures; and a mapping of local community needs to promote the interests of poor residents.

The second question the study examined was how to evaluate the impact of legal empowerment projects. Legal empowerment is a gradual process of change. It doesn’t happen overnight and its effects are not always tangible or easily observed and quantified. We can have a high degree of certainty about superficial measures, such as the number of individuals trained or the number of brochures distributed. But it is very difficult to answer the more important questions: What, if any, practical, concrete impacts do legal empowerment activities have on people’s lives? Are there clear, measurable differences we can expect to see between a person who is legally empowered and one who is not?

A distinctive feature of the study is that it not only asked these tough questions; it also included a rigorous monitoring and evaluation methodology, which was designed to test the effectiveness of the various legal empowerment strategies employed in the pilot projects. The monitoring and evaluation effort included baseline and end-of-project surveys administered in both intervention sites that received legal empowerment and control locations that did not. The surveys examined changes in four components of legal empowerment – knowledge, confidence, strategies used to assert one’s rights, and the outcomes of those strategies. For example, respondents were asked where they would seek assistance to deal with certain problems; whether or not they are able to participate in local level decision making bodies; and if they are confident in their ability to follow official instructions when seeking government services.

This methodology provided a basis for comparing differences between individuals who received legal empowerment and those who did not, giving us a more objective basis for understanding what works and what doesn’t, and why. The findings suggest that legal empowerment can indeed assist in advancing the goals of development assistance programs, while the recommendations include practical strategies for the integration of legal empowerment components in future sectoral development programs. Read the full report.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

3rd #ICT4D Twitter Chat "Working with Local Governments"

I have been attending these now monthly #ICT4D Twitter Chats (organized by ICTWorks) since the first chat in November, but I missed the third chat last Friday because I was filled up with appointments in Serbia. So I was looking forward to the chat summary on ICTWorks' website, and it was posted yesterday, which I reproduce and adapt here, so that you can see what are current issues facing practitioners : 




Last Friday, the third monthly #ICT4D Twitter Chat brought together 30 of the field's thought leaders (follow them all) to focus on and discuss ways that ICT4D can and does work with local governments, especially in situations like the recent disaster in Haiti.
Four questions guided the conversation (full transcript) which once again was a fast, free-flowing exchange of ideas:




  • Do you work with local governments or bypass them? Why?


  • What are the keys to project success with local governments?


  • How can you work with compromised governments, like Haiti?


  • What lessons for ICT have been learned so far in the Haiti relief effort?
Keys to success with local governments
One of the critical success factors identified collectively by the group was the importance of having a strategic personal relationship with a "project champion" in either a local government or other community leadership role. Because ICT4D projects by their very nature are long-term investments in the future, this local connection brings a strategic perspective and focus, as well as providing an opportunity to ensure the work is based on real, expressed needs of people in the area being served -- not just those of donors and interest groups "back home".
An interesting discussion during the event turned on the question of assigning credit for successful ICT4D implementations. While the group believed in the importance to position the local government or community champion as the driving force behind such projects, it's also important not to lose your own individual or organizational identity. Making sure people remember who helped make a solution possible will prevent costly searches for expertise in the future.
Working in a time-critical disaster relief context, like has been happening in Haiti in the past few weeks, brings some unique issues. Participants generally believed that when peoples' lives are on the line, it's important to "do" first, and inform others later. Waiting to get approvals from a local government in shambles is often not the best course of action.Learning from ICT deployments in Haiti
However, major functions of ICT4D-focused relief groups should be focused on quickly identifying local "hubs" of knowledge and communication in the community, and helping rebuild communication infrastructure for these governments as well as major NGO's. Without these critical links in place, a coordinated relief effort just is not possible, resulting in wasted resources and delays in response.
In a situation like Haiti, with at least 150,000 known dead at the time of writing this article, lack of interoperability and cooperation between groups has undoubtedly cost an untold number of lives. The ICT4D community can learn from this, however, and take steps to proactively coordinate resources (e.g., local disaster contingency plans by organizations based in the community, and open standards for ICT response systems). This coordination in advance will help make the response more timely and effective in the critical hours after a disaster strikes. It's our responsibility as ICT4D professionals to work toward that end today to save lives tomorrow.
Recommended NGO's in Haiti- Finally, we asked participants to suggest some of their favorite relief organizations using ICT in Haiti. Here's a list of those shared:

Get more details here at the chat summary on ICTWorks' website

Monday, January 25, 2010

Conference on Law and Policy Issues in Cloud Computing by UC Berkeley Schools of Law and Information, March 12 2010

The Berkeley Center for Law & Technology and the UC Berkeley School of Information will host a conference on March 12, 2010 on campus- "Emerging Law and Policy Issues in Cloud Computing" -to explore the emerging legal and policy issues raised by the increasing use of cloud computing. Speakers from government, corporations, academia, and law firms will discuss privacy concerns,  regulatory issues, consumer protection, intellectual property questions, and best practices for practitioners.

As more and more computing activity shifts to the cloud, individuals and corporations are entrusting their data and its processing to third parties operating in a virtualized computing environment.  New business models have arisen to meet the opportunity presented by cloud computing, but many of the legal issues surrounding activity on the cloud remain unresolved. 

Panelists include representatives from companies at the forefront of cloud technology such as IBM, Microsoft, Salesforce.com, Sun, and Intuit; legal academics from leading universities including UC Berkeley, the University of Chicago, the University of Ottawa, and the University of Mannheim; government officials from the Federal Trade Commission; and practitioners with extensive experience advising their clients of the benefits and risks of the cloud and negotiating deals for vendors and customers.

Agenda Topics/Speakers:


Regulatory & Jurisdictional Issues 
Cloud computing is inherently multijurisdictional.  This panel will discuss the differing, and often contradictory regulations that cloud providers must navigate in order to provide their services.  Who can demand data from cloud providers and how should cloud providers handle requests for data from third party sources (both public and private)?  Which country’s data retention and data access laws apply to data stored in a cloud environment?  The panel will also discuss best security practices for cloud providers.
  • Duane Valz, Chadbourne & Park LLP (moderator)
  • Michael Geist, University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law
  • Barbara Lawler, Intuit
  • Rich Sauer, Microsoft  
  • Adam Miller, California Department of Justice

Privacy & Security Does the cloud require a new privacy framework? This panel will address the privacy threats that arise due to remote hosting and processing of data.  Does the cloud permit increased third party access to data for both private individuals (via subpoena) and governments (via the Patriot Act, for example)?  To what extent may cloud providers mine user data for economic and strategic gains?  Who is responsible to ensure compliance with national and local privacy laws?  This panel will attempt to structure policies to relieve the tension between cloud users’ privacy rights and cloud provider’s legal and economic obligations.
  • David Fagan, Covington & Burling LLP (moderator)
  • Paul Schwartz, BCLT & Berkeley Law 
  • Michelle Dennedy, Sun Microsystems
  • Thomas Fetzer, Univ of Mannheim Law School
  • Alan Raul, Sidley Austin LLP
Consumer Protection, Data Portability and Competition 
The benefits of cloud computing can obscure the risk of data loss and data removal.  Moreover, the difficulty of moving data (including e-mail, photos, audio and video) from one vendor's cloud application to another  and the advantages provided by vendor access to information about user behavior  can effectively lock-in consumers and decrease competition.   Is government regulation required to protect cloud users and their data?  Are limits on the use of user datastreams by intermediaries necessary to protect consumers and promote competition?
  • Daren Orzechowski, White & Case LLP (moderator)
  • Randal Picker, University of Chicago Law School
  • Carl Settlemyer,  Federal Trade Commission
  • Lydia Parnes, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati PC (fmr FTC)    
  • Jason Schultz, Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic

The Art of The Deal
Experienced practitioners will discuss the typical terms and conditions of agreements between users and vendors at various levels of cloud computing: infrastructure-as-service (IAS), platform-as-a-service (PAS) and software-as-a-service (SAS). They will also discuss ways to negotiate resolutions when the parties' interests are conflicting.
  • Renzo Marchini, Dechert LLP (moderator)
  • Julian Millstein, Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • John Moss, Salesforce.com 
  • Peter Tennent, IBM                                           
  • Stephen Gillespie, Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Issues in the Cloud
This panel will address the intellectual property issues that arise in the cloud. Do the notice and takedown provisions provide an adequate structure to regulate copyright infringement in the cloud?  Do the anticircumvention portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act remain relevant in a cloud environment?  How do intellectual property holders enforce their rights given the increased anonymity of both users and content providers?  Will trade secrecy increase in importance when software is no longer distributed to users?  Will jurisdictional and infringement issues reduce the effectiveness of patent protection for online software?
  • Evan Cox, Covington & Burling LLP (moderator)
  • Pam Samuelson, BCLT & Berkeley Law
  • Jule SigallMicrosoft
  • Lee Van Pelt, Van Pelt, Yi & James LLP


Sunday, January 24, 2010

Announcing: Center for Justice, Law, and Development

Johannes Wheeldon, a fellow Law and Development practitioner and academic, is the Director of the Center for Justice, Law, and Development, a new resource for law and development, with the goal of promoting discussion between students, researchers, and practitioners. The center will focus initially on justice issues in the Former Soviet Union, the role and potential of diasporas in development, and more general trends in international development.

Monday, January 18, 2010

WSIS Forum 2010 open consultation: Call for participation

WSIS implementation is 5 years old! I've been keeping track of WSIS general happenings since the first Geneva WSIS in 2003. I'm impressed by the passionate movement in ICT4D, even though there are ideological wars, politicking, and the usual challenges in implementing an international agenda. I'll be interested to hear what some of the key issues are at this upcoming annual WSIS conference.

For the first time, too, WSIS is using an online social networking platform to promote discussion, walking the talk. I blogged about the new site, as well as their choice of software as a platform, earlier. 

Here's a reproduction of the call for participation from UNESCO

UNESCO, together with ITU, UNCTAD and UNDP, is organizing an open consultation for the upcoming World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum 2010. All individuals, networks and organizations interested in this issue are invited to participate in the three-fold process, consisting of an online discussion, a questionnaire and a review meeting.
2010 is a turning point towards the achievement of the WSIS goals by 2015. This year’s Forum, which will be held in Geneva (Switzerland) from 10 to 14 May 2010, is an important opportunity to review the progress made in the WSIS implementation during the last five years and to reconsider strategies for the remaining five years.

Following the outcomes of the 2009 WSIS Action Line Facilitators Meeting on 22 May 2009, as well as several exchanges among WSIS stakeholders, an open consultation, focusing on the themes of the 2010 Forum, has been set up.

The process will be carried out in three phases:

  • An online multi-stakeholder consultation is taking place on the online WSIS Community platform until 5 February. Stakeholders are invited to express and exchange their ideas in order to generate possible themes and potential speakers for the 2010 Forum. To join this discussion, please click here
  • Stakeholders can also submit their official contributions, by 5 February, through an online questionnaire or by sending a query to: wsis@itu.int
  • All submitted comments will be examined during the Final Review Meeting, which will take place at the ITU Headquarters in Geneva on 10 February. To register for this meeting please click here. Remote participation will also be possible via webcast, the link to which will shortly be available on the Forum’s website.
The WSIS Forum builds upon the tradition of the annual WSIS May meetings. The 2009 Forum attracted more than 400 participants representing governments, civil society/NGOs, private sector and intergovernmental organizations from around the world. The new format of the 2010 meeting is the result of last year’s open consultations with all WSIS stakeholders. 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...