Human capabilities and information and communication technology: the communicative connection

Ethics and Information Technology - Tập 13 - Trang 93-106 - 2010
William F. Birdsall1
1Bedford, Canada

Tóm tắt

The potential contributions information and communication technology (ICT) can make to advancing human capabilities are acknowledged by both the capability approach (CA) and ICT communities. However, there is a lack of genuine engagement between the two communities. This paper addresses the question: How can a collaborative dialogue between the CA and ICT communities be advanced? A prerequisite to exploring collaboratively the potential use of particular technologies with specific capabilities is a conceptual framework within which a dialogue can be undertaken to advance the operationalization of capabilities through the use of ICT. A communicative connection constituted of a dialogic space consisting of the CA and ICT communities and a set of normative values and objectives is proposed. The normative values of the communicative connection are derived from the human right to communicate (RTC) which serves as axiomatic principle of the communicative connection. The shared objectives are to operationalize through the use of ICT both the capability and the right to communicate, which are distinct but present in and reinforce each other. Alternative concepts of communication and freedom of expression to those held by the two communities is presented along with a comparison of the values embodied in the RTC and found in the CA.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Alampay, E. (2006). Beyond Access to ICTs: Measuring capabilities in the information society. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 2(3), 4–22. Article 19. (2003). Global campaign for free of expression. Statement on the right to communicate. London: Article 19. BBC. (2010). Internet access is a ‘fundamental right.’ March 8, 2010. http://.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8548190.stm. Birdsall, W. (2006). A right to communicate as an open work. Media Development, 53(1). http://www.waccglobal.org/en/20061-celebrating-cultural-diversity/558-A-right-to-communicate-as-an-open-work.html. Birdsall, W. (2008). Constructing a right to communicate: the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. Global Media Journal. 7(Fall): http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa08/gmj-fa08-birdsall.htm. Birdsall, W. (2009). Putting practice into theory: A right to communicate research strategy. In A. Dakroury, M. Eid, & Y. Kamalipour (Eds.), The right to communicate: Historical hopes, gGlobal debates, and future premises (pp. 285–304). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Birdsall, W. et al. (2005). Toward an integrated knowledge ecosystem. Ottawa: Canadian Association of Research Libraries. http://www.carl-abrc.ca/projects/kdstudy/public_html/results.html. Birdsall, S., & Birdsall, W. (2005). Geography matters: Mapping human development and digital access. First Monday, 10(10). http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1281/1201. Brown, M. (2003). Who owns native culture?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bullen, D. (2002). Advocating a ‘right to communicate’. In M. Greene (Ed.), New code words for censorship: Modern labels for curbs on the press, (pp. 93–97). Reston, VA: World Press Freedom Committee. Burch, S. (2007). The right to communicate: new challenges for the women’s movement. Women in Action (2). 2http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=688&Itemid=200. Canada Department of Communications. (1971). Instant world: A report on telecommunications in Canada. Ottawa: Information Canada. Clinton, H. (2010). Remarks on Internet freedom. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, January 21. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/technology/internet/13iht-piracy13.html?_r=1. Cmiel, K. (2004). The recent history of human rights. American Historical Review, 109(1). http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/109.1/cmiel.html. Coeckelbergh, M. (2010). Human development or human enhancement? A methodological reflection on capabilities and the evaluation of information technologies. Ethics and Information Technology. doi: 10.1007/s10676-010-9231-9. Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. (2009). The internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice and policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. d’Arcy, J. (1969). Direct broadcast satellites and the right to communicate. EBU Review, 118, 14–18. d’Arcy, J. (1983). An ascending progression. In D. Fisher & L. S. Harms (Eds.), The right to communicate: New human rights (pp. xxi–xxvi). Dublin: Boole Press. Dakroury, A. (2009a). Communication and human rights. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Dakroury, A. (2009b). The baron of the right to communicate: Jean d’Arcy (1913–1983). In A. Dakroury, M. Eid, & Y. Kamalipour (Eds.), The right to communicate: Historical hopes, global debates, and future premises (pp. 21–41). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Dakroury, A., Eid, M., & Kamalipour, Y. (Eds.). (2009). The right to communicate: Historical hopes, global debates, and future premises. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. De Santis, M. (2010). Is broadband basic service? Ottawa: Public Interest Advocacy Centre. http://www.piac.ca/telecom/is_broadband_basic_service/. Deneulin, S. (2009). Democracy and political participation. In Deneulin, S., & Shahani, L. (Eds.), An introduction to the human development and capability approach. Ottawa: Earthscan/IDRC. http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-146723-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html. Deneulin, S., & Shahani, L. (Eds.). (2009). An introduction to the human development and capability approach. Ottawa: Earthscan/IDRC. http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-143029-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html. Dershowitz, A. (2004). Rights from wrongs: A secular theory of the origins of rights. New York: Basic Books. Fisher, D. (1982). The right to communicate: A status report. Paris: UNESCO. Fisher, D. (2002). Right to communicate: A new beginning. http:\\www.righttocommunicate.org. Hamelink, C. (2004). The 2003 Graham spry memorial lecture: Toward a human right to communicate. Canadian Journal of Communication, 29(2).http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1436/1548. Hamelink, C., & Hoffmann, J. (2008). The state of the right to communicate. Global Media Journal: American Edition, 7(13). http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa08/gmj-fa08-hamelink-hoffman.htm. Harms, L. (2002). Some essentials of the right to communicate. http://www.righttocommunicate.org/viewReference.atm?id=35. Hicks, D. (2007). The right to communicate: Past mistakes and future possibilities. Dalhousie Journal of Information and Management, 3(1). http://djim.management.dal.ca/issues/issue3_1/hicks/index.htm. Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Howard, R. (1995). Human rights and the search for community. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Human Rights and Capability Association. (2010). Call for papers: 2010 Conference of the HDCA. http://www.capabilityapproach.com/Conference.php?grpcode=conference0&groupid=conference&sid=1128dd4ac0f7f07a8fb575643994eaeb . International Telecommunications Union (2010a). Measuring the information society. Geveva: International Telecommunications Union. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/2010/index.html. International Telecommunications Union. (2010b). ITU Sees 5 Billion mobile subscriptions globally in 2010. ITU Press Release. February 15, 2010. http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2010/06.aspx. Johnstone, J. (2007). Technology as empowerment: A capability approach to computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, 9(1), 73–87. Kuhlen, R. (2003). Change of paradigm in knowledge management: framework for the collaborative production and exchange of knowledge. World Library and Information Congress: 69th IFLA General Conference and Council, Berlin. http://www.inf-wiss.uni-konstanz.de/People/RK/Vortraege03-web/rk_ifla03_for_publ300803.pdf. Lee, P. (2008). Toward a theology of communication rights. Paper presented at the Social Communications and Theology Project Conference, September 16-18, 2008, St. John’s University, New York. http://spics.net/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=5&Itemid=99. Lukes, S. (2008). Moral relativism. New York: Picador. McIver, W. Jr., & Birdsall, W. (2004). Technological evolution and the right to communicate. EJC/REC: The Electronic Journal of Communication, 14(3–4). http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/014/3/01433.html. McIver, W. Jr., Birdsall, W., & Rasmussen, M. (2003). The internet and the right to communicate. First Monday, 8(12). http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1102/1022. Nussbaum, M. (2000). Women and human development: The capability approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nussbaum, M. (2007). Human rights and human capabilities. Harvard Human Rights Journal. 20:21-24. http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss20/nussbaum.pdf. Nussbaum, M. (2009). Capabilities and constitutional law: ‘Perception’ against lofty formalism. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(3), 341–357. Oosterlaken, I. (2009). Design for development: A capability approach. Design Issues, 25(4), 91–102. Oosterlaken, I., van den Hoven, J., Kandachar, P., & Mani, M. (2009). Technology and human development: A capability approach. Delft University of Technology/Indian Institute of Science. http://www.ethicsandtechnology.eu/images/uploads/Research_proposal_TechnologyHumanDevelopment_CapabilityApproach.pdf. O’Siochru, S. (2010). Implementing communication rights. In M. Raboy, & J. Shtern (Eds.), Media divides: Communication rights and the right to communicate in Canada (pp. 41–59). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2010. Ponelis, S. & Britz, J. (2008). To talk or not to talk? From Telkom to Hellkom: A critical reflection on the current telecommunications policy in South Africa from a social justice perspective. International Information and Library Review, 40(4), 219–225. http://www.up.ac.za/dspace/bitstream/2263/8904/1/Ponelis_To(2008).pdf. Raboy, M., & Shtern, J. (2010). Media divides: Communication rights and the right to communicate in Canada. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Rasmussen, M. (2003) Information Rights and the Law: The Right to Communicate in the Canadian Charter. In K. Adams & W. Birdsall (Eds.), Access to information in a digital world (pp.135–148). Ottawa: Canadian Library Association. Renfrew, C. (2008). Prehistory: The making of the human mind. New York: Modern Library. Richstad, J. (2003). Right to communicate in the Internet age. In C. Bertrand (Ed.), An arsenal for democracy: Media accountability systems (pp. 35–48). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Richstad, J., & Anderson, M. (1981). Policy context for news and a ‘new order’. In J. Richstad & M. Anderson (Eds.), Crisis in international news: Policies and prospects (pp. 26–27). New York: Columbia University Press. Rideout, V. (2008). Public interest in communications: Beyond access to needs. Global Media Journal: American Edition, 7(13). http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa08/gmj-fa08-rideout.htm. Ritzer, G. (2010). Globalization: A basic text. Oxford, UK: Wiley. Sen, A. (2005). Human rights and capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 151–166. http://origin-www.unicef.org/socialpolicy/files/Human_Rights_and_Capabilities.pdf. Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Shannon, C. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423, 623–656. (Reprinted with corrections) http://cm.belllabs.com/cm/ms/what/shannonday/shannon1948.pdf Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Shearer, K., & Birdsall, W. (2006). A researcher’s research agenda for scholarly communication in Canada. New Review of Information Networking, 11(1), 99–108. Shue, H. (1980). Basic rights: Subsistence, affluence, and U.S. foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Simon, J., & Durant, J. (Eds.). (1995). Public participation in science: The role of consensus conferences in Europe. London: Science Museum. Socolovsky, J. (2009). In Sweden, ‘Pirates’ make the web a political cause. National Public Radio. September 14. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112767746. Stewart, F. (2010). Power and progress: The swing of the pendulum. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 11(3), 371–395. United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/. United Nations Development Program. (2001). Human development report 2001: Making new technologies work for human development. New York: United Nations. United Nations Development Programme. (1999). Human development report 1999: Globalization with a human face. New York: Oxford University Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2000). Human development report 2000: Human rights and human development. New York: Oxford University Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2002). Human development report 2002: Deepening democracy in a fragmented world. New York: Oxford University Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2003). Human development report 2003: Millennium development goals: A compact among nations to end human poverty. New York: Oxford University Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2004). Human development report 2004: Cultural liberty in today’s diverse world. New York: New York University Press. United Nations Development Programme. (2009). Human development report 2009: Overcoming darriers: Human mobility and development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Vigorito, A. (2010). Bibliography on the capability approach 2009–2010. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 11(3), 475–477. Vizard, P. (2006). HDCA approach and human rights. Human Development and Capability Association Briefing Note 1. Boston, MA: Human Development and Capability Association. http://www.capabilityapproach.com/thematic/Vizard%20Briefing%20Note.pdf. WorldPublicOpionion.Org. (2008). World public opinion and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Washington, DC: Program on International Policy Attitudes. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/dec08/WPO_UDHR_Dec08_rpt.pdf. Wresch, W. (2009). Progress on the global digital divide: an ethical perspective based on Amartya Sen’s capabilities model. Ethics and Information Technology, 11(4), 255–263. World Press Freedom Committee. Challenges. http://www.wpfc.org/Challenges.html. Zheng, Y. (2007). Exploring the value of the capability approach for E-development. In Proceedings, 9th international conference on social implications of computers in developing countries. Sao Paulo, Brazil, May, 2007. http://www.ifipwg94.org.br/fullpapers/R0078-1.pdf.