ABOUT

  • Mainly about engagement and collaboration using social media and events, with some asides on living in London. More about David Wilcox and also how the blog started.
  • Search

    WWW
    http://partnerships.typepad.com/civic/

« Journal issue on Designing for Civil Society | Main | Does technology matter much to planners? Should it? »

Comments

While one can be pretty cynical about the outcomes of WSIS, its Eurocentrism (meaning that people other than bureaucracts in other continents are pretty much excluded for financial reasons) in having an active role, I must say that being involved in the formation of the Australian statement has lead to some good thinking on the part of people engaged in the process. The statement which emerges (see www.ccnr.net/wsis/) will be no masterpiece of post-post-modernism or any other ism, but perhaps the first time that a group of civil society people from around the country -- not all of whom knew each other (mostly academics/semi-academics and others, men and women) have put their brains to such issues -- so it will probably set the tone in Australia for a while around the relationship between civil society, ICTs, and other groups (especially government). Even working out who and what is civil society lead to lots of good debate.

Second, the hopes for GCNP and other groups to become a global movable feast of 'experts and activists' is probably going through something of reality check at the moment and expectations are becoming more modest. As Australians and Kiwis well know, there is a tyranny of distance which ICTs can't necessarily ameliorate.

Please submit all relavant informations belongs to the civil society

It seems you may have missed the big issue there: who is going to control the Internet? There are reports that a group of countries is trying to move its control to a UN organization. The U.S. and others are resisting. Seems that's the real issue there.

The comments to this entry are closed.