Information Policy Research Project Working Papers Developing Information Policies for a Canadian “Information Infrastructure”: Public Interest Perspectives in a Research Framework Andrew Clement, Joanne Marshall, Stephen McDowell, Vincent Mosco & Cheryl Buchwald December 1995 Working Paper No. 1 Faculty of Information Studies University of Toronto Suggested citation: Clement, A.; Marshall, J.; McDowell, S.; Mosco, V. & Buchwald, C. 1995. Developing information policies for a Canadian ‘information infrastructure’: Public interest perspectives in a research framework. Information Policy Research Project, Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto. Working Paper No. 1. Toronto, ON. Developing Information Policies for a Canadian “Information Infrastructure”: Public Interest Perspectives in a Research Framework Andrew Clement, Joanne Marshall, Stephen McDowell, Vincent Mosco & Cheryl Buchwald This is the first in a series of Information Policy Research Project (IPRP) Working Papers which will elaborate on the issues and perspectives identified in the proposal for this research. This Working Paper presents a broad framework for coordinating a variety of collaborative, interdisciplinary research efforts focused on prominent information policy issues. The IPRP has been funded for $77,000 for three years (1995-1998) by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Strategic Grants Program in the Science and Technology Policy theme area. Summary This research investigates public policy issues relevant to current initiatives to build a Canadian "information infrastructure". It focuses on four issues that are commonly identified as central to public interest concerns - privacy, universal access, employment and governance. Understanding these issues is essential to dealing with the far reaching implications of the current wave of technological change that is transforming the information and communications infrastructures on which modern life is based. Each of these broad issues is complex, long-standing, and fundamentally unresolved. At stake are major policy decisions in a variety of areas: privacy and access legislation, governmental funding priorities, regulatory reform of electronic media, technological design, and massive financial investments. Even after decades of prior research and debate, these issues have vigorously re-emerged in new forms with the current round of rapid technological and institutional change. Consequently, our aim is not so much to present a particular set of policy "solutions" to these issues, as to map the terrain in which particular (and likely only temporary) stabilizations can occur. The model of policy development we use as a framework to structure this investigation involves a cyclic process, with five distinguishable stages: issues, agendas, policies, practices, and experiences. The process is propelled by various actors, encountering each other in a variety of venues. It is convenient to focus on two main transformational sequences: policy creation - how advocates convert issues via agendas into policies; and policy implementation - how policies, whether formal or de facto, are put into effect and shape what people actually do. The cycle is completed as their experiences influence their perception and formulation of issues. This research recognizes that there is no single "public" interest perspective. Indeed, members of the public adopt multiple and, in some ways, contradictory roles - the three common ones being those of Consumer, Worker, and Citizen. We will examine closely the interactions between perspectives and issues, for they provide a major impetus to the policy process throughout the development cycle. Within a broad, multi-dimensional research schema as sketched above, each member of the research team will investigate a particular "slice". The methods will be largely qualitative ethnographies, archival analysis and in-depth interviewing of key informants. By providing a common framework and carefully articulating the relationship between the various "slices", it will then be possible for the project as a whole to assemble a relatively coherent understanding of current policy development activities and where they may be heading. Context U.S. Vice President Al Gore launched the U.S. on its National Information Infrastructure (NII) initiative in 1993. More popularly known as the "information highway", the NII promises "a seamless web of powerful, interconnected networks, allowing for two-way communication of any kind from anyone to anyone else, any time, anywhere" (Ellis, 1994). This vision has been given such prominence as to now be widely promoted in industrialized nations as an inevitable, imperative and imminent reality. While the claims for its benefits and speed of development are often highly exaggerated, there is little question that we are witnessing a phenomenon of long-term and wide ranging social significance. The foundations are now being laid in such areas as technical standards, pricing and services, regulatory frameworks, ownership patterns, terms of access and geographical reach that will have enduring significance for future social, cultural, political and economic life. At the moment, these developments are largely driven by market forces as businesses large and small jockey for a "piece of the action". Amid this clamour and turbulence, those who speak for the "public interest" struggle to specify those interests, let alone get themselves heard clearly. In contrast to the US, where a vigorous public discussion about major aspects of the NII is now underway, the Canadian debate is only just beginning (CPI, 1994). We urgently need to understand how people may be affected by these developments and how they may gain effective influence over the policy development process. Our research aims to contribute to such a discussion by studying current policy developments and engaging directly with the principal actors. Scope and Objectives In the current debates over information policies and information infrastructures, four broad issues consistently recur: privacy, universal access, employment and governance. Privacy is "the claim of individuals, groups, or institutions to determine for themselves when, how and to what extent information about them is communicated to others" (Westin, 1967: 7). The concept of privacy is rapidly being eroded by the amassing, trading and selling of personal information in public and private sector databases (Bennett, 1994; CPSR, 1993a,b; Clarke, 1991; Gandy, 1993; Kling, 1994; Mowshowitz, 1994; Shattuck, 1991). A recent Gallup survey shows that nearly 85% of Canadians fear that the information highway will be a threat to their privacy (Globe and Mail, May 3, 1994). The Federal Privacy Commissioner, in his latest Annual Report, correspondingly calls for much stronger protective legislation. Behind such broad agreement about the importance of privacy lurk deep divisions and uncertainty. The current legal framework, based on Fair Information Practices developed in the 1970's (Flaherty, 1989), is not likely to be adequate for proposed interactive multi-media networks. We will examine whether conventional notions of privacy are adequate, and explore how the policy proposals by various advocates compare with each other. Universal access is the notion that society should distribute certain basic goods and services to all citizens at little or no cost without reference to means or needs (Marsh, 1975, Seldon, 1967). It is a long-established principle in Canada that has been applied to education, information and communication policies, among others. Although - from a technical perspective - accessibility is the obverse of privacy, and certainly more in keeping with the general ethos of networking, it too is vague. Wide acknowledgement of the general concept masks considerable uncertainty. The federal government has committed to redefining universal access as it will apply to the information infrastructure. However, changes in the political climate over the last 15 years have led public interest groups to fear that the government and private sector will define universal access in narrow terms. Thus, who will be able to connect to the high-speed network? What information sources and services will be available once connected? Will there be a diverse range of services available without specific governmental intervention, or will a few commercially dominant offerings crowd out alternatives? It also remains to be determined just how vital these various forms of access are. If they are not considered to be as valuable as other universal social services, then claims on the common purse may simply serve as a means for a public underwriting of private gain. We will be interested in examining the various definitions of universality that are proposed, to see how they compare to more traditional notions, and to assess to what degree they correspond to public and private needs. Employment and workplace issues are often overlooked as information policy matters, but with the growing recognition that we are witnessing profound transformations of jobs, work organizations, and labour markets associated with the rapid deployment of information technologies, these issues must come increasingly to the fore. In particular, much research is needed to understand better how the nature and experience of work is being affected by organizations restructuring themselves to face the contemporary challenges of globalization of markets and technological turbulence. Governance is the overarching issue, for it encompasses decision making in the pursuit of the public interest. It goes well beyond privacy, accessibility, and employment issues to include specifically broad social and economic development questions. There are two main aspects to consider: How do we, as citizens, give shape to the new means of communication? Conversely, how will these means affect our decision making? The former concerns the relationships among governing bodies: What are the relationships among subnational, national and supranational levels of governments that are promoting development through the use of information and telecommunications technologies? How are these relationships ordered on a global basis for public governance of telecommunications technology? Can a theoretical link be proposed between the geographic scope of governance and the type of social and economic development which is pursued through the use of communications technology? The latter concerns the impact of the new media on forms of governance. There is wide speculation that the expanding sources and channels of information and the opening of novel discussion forums (e.g. "electronic town halls") will broaden the scope of participation in public affairs at all levels. New forms of political mobilization and decision making may be enabled. On the other hand, experiences with these electronic forums suggests that they can easily become chaotic and overwhelming to participants. Consequently, our objective is to identify how the various policy proposals affect the opportunities and constraints for participation, and how actual experimental implementations bring these possibilities into effect. Each of the four broad issues is complex, long-standing, and fundamentally unresolved. Even after decades of prior research and debate, these issues have vigorously re-emerged in new forms with the current round of rapid technological and institutional change. Our aim is therefore not so much to present a particular set of policy "solutions" to these issues, so much as to map the terrain in which particular (and likely only temporary) stabilizations can occur. A key to this mapping effort is the adoption of a model of policy development which we will use as a framework to structure the investigation. It involves a cyclic process, with five distinguishable stages: Fig. 1. Policy Development Cycle The process is propelled by various actors, encountering each other in a variety of venues. For purposes of convenience, we will focus on two main transformational arcs: policy creation - how advocates convert issues via agendas into policies (i.e. Issues->Agendas->Policies); and policy implementation - how policies, whether formal or de facto, are put into effect and shape what people actually do (i.e. Policies->Practices->Experiences). The cycle is then completed as people’s experiences influence their perception and formulation of issues. On the policy creation side, this project will focus on how policy advocates such as the Coalition for Public Information (CPI), Stentor, and others address the central issues and develop agendas which they promote in prominent forums, such as IHAC and the Canadian Network for the Advancement of Research, Industry and Education (CANARIE). Out of these presumably will come some identifiable policies. International comparisons will also be made, notably with the U.S. On the policy implementation side, we will be interested to see how various "public access" projects (e.g. Cultech/Intercom, the Social Development Network and the Toronto and National Capital Freenets) address these issues in practice and how their eventual "users" react to them. We will also conduct organizational case studies of firms and government departments that are leading adopters of advanced networking technologies (e.g. telework experiments), again focusing on issues of privacy, universal access, employment and governance. This research recognizes that there is no single "public" interest perspective. Indeed, members of the public adopt multiple, and in some ways contradictory roles - the three common ones being those of Consumer, Worker, and Citizen. Even these roles are not in themselves monolithic, but they do provide a useful starting point for analysis and are often associated with particular interest groups claiming to represent that perspective. These divisions will also help to structure the activities of the research team. Each of the intersections between interest perspective and policy issue raises distinctive questions and agendas. While we will explore the most prominent of these, we are also interested in the tensions and overlaps between them (e.g. privacy concerns of workers versus consumer demands for accessibility). It is these interactions, and particularly the need to reconcile differences, that provide a major impetus to the policy process throughout the development cycle. Potential Significance of This Research The IPRP’s proposed research will draw on and integrate insights from public policy documents of various institutions and academic literature in fields such as the social uses of technology, information policy, communications policy, economic and industrial policy, and inter-governmental and international relations. It will also incorporate linkages with representatives of different governments, major industrial enterprises and public interest advocacy groups. In doing so, it will contribute to the development of a multidisciplinary collaborative research base to provide input into one of the most significant science and technology policy debates currently taking place in this country. It will also enable further contributions by establishing an information policy analysis capability at the University of Toronto. This research will contribute to Canadian science and technology policy in four main areas: - identifying options and tradeoffs among current policy proposals in the key issue areas; - analyzing the policy development process as it is taking place; - studying the effect of information policies as they are implemented in leading adopters and information infrastructure field trial experiments; and; - providing a forum where major policy actors can exchange views, share research, identify commonalities and clarify differences. This research directly considers questions of the implications of technology for the nature of society. Similarly, by addressing the actual process of policy development, involving government, industry and citizen groups throughout the entire cycle of issues, agendas, policies, practices and experiences, it will produce socially relevant, pragmatic, problem-oriented research in the science and technology policy area. The combined examination of information and telecommunications developments in light of privacy protection needs, universality of access, employment issues, and the scope and form of governance may also enhance the elaboration of new theoretical and methodological approaches. It can thus contribute to improving both the process and the substance of science and technology policy in Canada. The Research Team Investigators Andrew Clement, Associate Professor, Faculty of Information Studies (FIS)/ University of Toronto. (Principal Investigator) PhD in Computer Science. Main project responsibilities: supervision of graduate assistants; overall coordination; information technology expertise; privacy, universality and governance issues; worker and citizen perspectives; practices and experiences stages. Joanne Marshall, Associate Professor, FIS/University of Toronto. PhD in Behavioural Science (adoption and diffusion of information technology). Main project responsibilities: supervision of graduate assistants; instrument design; access issues at practices and experiences stages; consumer and worker perspectives. Stephen McDowell, Visiting Assistant Professor 1995-1996, Department of Telecommunication, Michigan State University; and Research Associate, School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University. PhD in Political Science. Main project responsibilities: political analysis; governance issues, and comparison of Canada and U.S. policy issues. Vincent Mosco, Professor of Journalism, Mass Communications/Carleton University and Research Associate of the Harvard University Program on Information Resources Policy. PhD in Sociology. Main project responsibilities: supervision of graduate assistants; sociological methodologies; universality and governance issues at all stages; worker and citizen perspectives. Other Project Members Prof. Ellen Balka, Women's Studies/Memorial University - Access issues. Ross Barclay, Research Assistant, FIS/University of Toronto. Cheryl Buchwald, Doctoral Candidate, FIS/University of Toronto. Richard Cavanagh, Partner, Stentor. Arthur Cordell, Partner, Industry Canada. Prof. David Crowley, Communications/McGill University - Access and governance issues. Maureen Cubberley, Partner, CPI. Prof. Sue Easun, FIS/University of Toronto - Access and intellectual property issues. Caroline Haythornthwaite, Doctoral Candidate, FIS/University of Toronto. Lewis Kaye, Research Assistant, Carleton University. Prof. Herbert Kubicek, Informatics/Bremen University (Germany) - Privacy and public access issues. Simon Mielniczuk, Research Assistant, Social Development Network. Kirsti Nilsen, Doctoral Candidate, FIS/University of Toronto. Margaret Oldfield, Consultant & Researcher Prof. Jo Ann Oravec, Public Affairs/City University of New York (CUNY) (USA) - Privacy issues. Leslie Regan Shade, Consultant & Researcher, McGill University. Sam Sternberg, Consultant & Researcher. Jaine Stockler, Research Assistant, FIS/University of Toronto. References Bennett, Colin J. (1994) Protecting privacy across borders: European policies and prospects. Public Administration. 72(1): 95-112. Coalition for Public Information (CPI) (1994). Future-Knowledge: A Public Policy Framework for the Information Highway. Toronto: CPI. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) (1993a). Serving the community: A public-interest vision of the National Information Infrastructure. CPSR. [Online]. Available at (file nii_policy). Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (1993b). Sen.[ator] Simon introduces major privacy bill. CPSR Alert: An Online Newsletter. 2.06. [Online]. Available at Ellis, David (1994) Culture and the Information Highway: New Roles for Carriers and Content Providers. Ottawa: Stentor Telecom Policy Inc. Flaherty, David (1989). Protecting Privacy in Surveillance Societies: The Federal Republic of Germany, Sweden, France, Canada, and the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press. Gandy, Oscar (1993). The Panoptic Sort: A Political Economy of Personal Information. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Kling, Rob, & Allen, Jonathan (1994). How the marriage of management and computing intensifies the struggle for personal privacy. In D. Lyon & E. Zureik (eds.), New Technology, Surveillance and Social Control. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Marsh, Leonard (1975). Report on Social Security for Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Mowshowitz, Abbe (1994). Social control and the network marketplace. In D. Lyon & E. Zureik (eds.), New Technology, Surveillance and Social Control. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Seldon, Arthur, & Gray, Hamish (1967). Universal or Selective Social Benefits? London: Institute of Economic Affairs. Shattuck, John (1991). Computer matching is a serious threat to individual rights. In C. Dunlop & R. Kling (eds.), Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. Boston, MA: Academic Press: 439-445. Westin, Alan F. (1967) Privacy and Freedom. New York, NY: Atheneum. About the IPRP Working Papers Series The Information Policy Research Project (IPRP) Working Papers Series is intended to provide a pre-publication forum for dissemination of research conducted by members of the IPRP. Abstracts of Working Papers will be made available on the Internet, from IPRP’s home page at URL http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/research/iprp.htm. We plan to publish an edited collection of revised versions of these papers. Authors welcome your comments. To order copies, please e-mail to iprp@fis.utoronto.ca, or contact Andrew Clement (details on next page). Currently available: 1. Clement, A.; Marshall, J.; McDowell, S.; Mosco, V. & Buchwald, C. 1995. Developing information policies for a Canadian ‘information infrastructure’: Public interest perspectives in a research framework. Information Policy Research Project, Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto. Working Papers Series No. 1. Toronto, ON. 2. Buchwald, C. 1995. Canada in context: An overview of information policies in four industrialized countries. Information Policy Research Project, Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto. Working Papers Series No. 2. Toronto, ON. Works in progress: Buchwald, C. Canada’s Coalition for Public Information: A case study of a public interest group in the information policy-making process. Buchwald, C. Recalling the past: Canada’s experiences with universality in relation to information infrastructure access. Clement, A. & Mielniczuk, S. Access, privacy, participation and governance in public interest information infrastructure: Building Ontario’s Social Development Network. Clement, A. & Shade, L. R. Defining and maintaining universal access to basic network service: Canadian directions in an international context. Clement, A. & Stockler, J. P. Selling information technology: Images and metaphors. Easun, S. Do children have a right to know?: Representation of minors in the Canadian information policy arena. Marshall, J. Information policy issues at the firm level: Case studies of five Canadian industry sectors. McDowell, S. Non-commercial stakeholders and Canadian Information Highway debates: Redefining public policy without public interest groups? McDowell, S. & Maitland, C. Regulating content and converging information services: Comparing Canada and the United States. Mosco, V. Myth-ing links: Power and community on the information highway. Nilsen, K. Canadian government information policy: Moving from an access to a market approach. About the Information Policy Research Project The Information Policy Research Project (IPRP) was established in June 1995 to undertake a program of research and dissemination of knowledge about information policy development for the Canadian information infrastructure. IPRP, in collaboration with the government, private sector and non-profit associations, will contribute public interest perspectives to the current policy development discussions. IPRP is supported by a grant from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council. Current Project Members Ellen Balka Herbert Kubicek Ross Barclay Joanne Marshall Cheryl Buchwald Simon Mielniczuk Richard Cavanagh Stephen McDowell Andrew Clement Vincent Mosco Arthur Cordell Kirsti Nilsen David Crowley Margaret Oldfield Maureen Cubberley Jo Ann Oravec Sue Easun Leslie Regan Shade Caroline Haythornthwaite Sam Sternberg Lewis Kaye Jaine Stockler For further information or to order Working Papers, contact: Andrew Clement (Principal Investigator) Information Policy Research Project Faculty of Information Studies University of Toronto 140 St. George Street Toronto, Ontario Canada M5S 3G6 Phone: (416) 978-3111 Fax: (416) 971-1399 E-mail: clement@fis.utoronto.ca URL: http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/research/iprp/ The authorship of this paper reflects the people who prepared the original SSHRC grant proposal. Clement/Marshall/McDowell/Mosco/Buchwald:Developing...