Measuring ICT for Development and Building of the Information Society in Asia and the Pacific

IDD/TP-09-08 (Version 1.0) ESCAP Technical Paper Measuring ICT for Development and Building of the Information Society in Asia and the Pacific

IDD/TP-09-08 (Version 1.0) ESCAP Technical Paper Measuring ICT for Development and Building of the Information Society in Asia and the Pacific

IDD/TP-09-08 (Version 1.0) ESCAP Technical Paper Information and Communications Technology and Disaster Risk Reduction Division Measuring ICT for Development and Building of the Information Society in Asia and the Pacific Prepared by Atsuko Okuda with inputs from Khiam Jin Lee and Raphaelle Delmotte Authorized for distribution by Xuan Zengpei December 2009 Abstract One of the major achievements of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was the global discussion, agreement and partnership towards the internationally agreed information society indicators with a view to measuring ICT for development. Based on discussions prior to and during the WSIS, the Geneva Plan of Action made a number of suggestions and recommendations which included the establishment of coherent and internationally comparable indicator systems. This paper aims to review progress made in some countries and assess how a subregional approach could accelerate the promotion of the above indicators by sharing knowledge, expertise and experience. In particular, this paper examines the case of the ASEAN countries and how successful examples of Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, for instance, could be applied to and assists other ASEAN countries through regional cooperation mechanisms and frameworks Disclaimer: The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this paper do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. References and maps obtained from external sources might not conform to the UN Editorial guidelines. The content in this document is the opinions and view points of the author's and not that of ESCAP or IDD and this publication has been issued without formal editing. Ms Atsuko Okuda, IT Officer, Information and Communications Technology and Disaster Risk Reduction Division, ESCAP, United Nations Building, Rajdamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand. E-Mail address: escapidd@un.org Mr Khiam Jin Lee, Economic Affairs Officer, Information and Communications Technology and Disaster Risk Reduction Division, ESCAP, United Nations Building, Rajdamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand. E-Mail address: escap-idd@un.org Ms Raphaelle Delmotte, Intern, Information and Communications Technology and Disaster Risk Reduction Division, ESCAP. i

CONTENTS 1. Introduction... 1 2. Objectives of this paper... 7 3. The digital divide in Asia and the Pacific measured by ICT indicators... 8 3.1. Readiness among Asian and Pacific countries towards ICT indicators...9 4. Progress made among the ASEAN countries... 13 4.1 Thailand...13 4.2 Malaysia...14 4.3 Singapore...15 4.4 Lessons learned and good practices...16 5. Conclusions and Recommendations... 18 List of Tables Table 1: Proportion of countries collecting household ICT indicators...10 Table 2: Coverage of collected household ICT indicators (per cent of population)...11 Table 3: Institutions collecting ICT indicators in the region.. 12 List of Figures Figure 1: ITU website on Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development...2 Figure 2: UNCTAD website on Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development...2 Figure 3: Snapshot of the website on the revision to ICT indicators...3 Figure 4: Snapshot of Manual for Measuring ICT Access and Use by Households and Individuals...4 Figure 5: Snapshot of Manual for the Production of Statistics on the Information Economy...4 Figure 6: UNCTAD publication on ICT indicators...5 Figure 7: ITU list of national statistical offices and international agencies involved in the initiative...6 Figure 8: IDA facts and figures on ICT use in Singapore...15 Figure 9: Ideal virtuous circle...17 ii

1. Introduction One of the major achievements of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was the global discussion, agreement and partnership towards the internationally agreed information society indicators with a view to measuring information and communication technology (ICT) for development. Based on discussions prior to and during the WSIS, the Geneva Plan of Action made a number of suggestions and recommendations which included the establishment of coherent and internationally comparable indicator systems. 1 The fact that there were no such internationally comparable indicator systems posed serious drawbacks across the world. It hampered the private sector to make investment and business decisions in a certain country, while making it difficult to set up baseline figures and benchmarks in measuring progress towards narrowing the digital divide. Driven by the international partnership among the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), International Telecommunication Union (ITU), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Bank, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations regional commissions, the initiative called Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development 2 was formed in 2004. The Partnership aimed to establish a common set of ICT indicators, whereas core indicators will be harmonized and agreed upon internationally. Subsequently, the Partnership also aims to build capacity among national statistical offices in developing countries to develop statistical programmes on the information society. Finally, the Partnership intends to build an international database on ICT indicators and made it available on the Internet. 3 The Partnership has accomplished a number of achievements so far. Information on activities and core indicators has been made available on the Internet. The publication entitled Core ICT Indicators 4 was published in 2005 to define each indicator with methodological notes. The Report of the Partnership on Measuring Information and Communication Technology for Development: information and communications technology statistics 5 was submitted to the Fourth Session of the Statistical Commission in February 2009. The report noted that progress was made in the development of standards of ICT indicators and some of the core indicators had been revised. 1 2 3 4 5 Esperanza Magpantay, Project document: partnership on measuring ICT for development, paper presented at the Joint ITU/ECA regional workshop on Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Indicators, Gaborone, Botswana, 26-29 October 2004 (http://www.itu.int/itu- D/ict/partnership/material/Partnership%20Project%20Document%2023%20June.pdf). http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/partnership/ More about the Partnership on http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/partnership/fomap.html. Partnership on Measuring Information and Communication Technology for Development, Core ICT Indicators (Beirut, UN-ESCWA, 2005). http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/partnership/material/2009-19-ict-e.pdf 1

Led by UNESCO and other the United Nations agencies, a series of consultations on ICT indicators related to education and e-government were organized and subsequently recommended the inclusion of respective indicators as core indicators. On another front, OECD and other agencies have been spearheading international work on measuring economic impacts of ICT. Figure 1: ITU website on Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development Figure 2: UNCTAD website on Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development 2

The revised core indicators are found at http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/partnership/ material/coreictindicators_e_rev2.pdf. The 2005 version of the core indicators are available at http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/partnership/material/coreictindicators.pdf. Figure 3: Snapshot of the website on the revision to ICT indicators In the area of capacity building, various manuals were compiled and made available for national statistical offices as well as ICT and other stakeholders. The most recent manual was published by ITU in 2009 as Manual for Measuring ICT Access and Use by Households and Individuals. 6 6 http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/ind/d-ind-itcmeas-2009-pdf-e.pdf 3

Figure 4: Snapshot of the Manual for Measuring ICT Access and Use by Households and Individuals It supplements another manual published by UNCTAD in 2009, entitled Manual for the Production of Statistics on the Information Economy. 7 Figure 5: Snapshot of the Manual for the Production of Statistics on the Information Economy 7 http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/sdteecb20072rev1_en.pdf 4

In terms of the publication of ICT statistics, the Partnership compiled and published a global overview entitled The Global Information Society: a Statistical View 8 in 2008. The document highlights various ICT indicator initiatives as well as use of ICT indicators across the world. Various publications include Use of Information and Communication Technology by the World s Children and Youth, 9 Measuring Information and Communication Technology availability in Villages and Rural Areas. 10 UNCTAD published an overview entitled Measuring ICT: the global status of ICT indicators. 11 Figure 6: UNCTAD publication on ICT indicators Accordingly, various training courses were organized by the partner organizations. The most recent of such courses includes the training by ITU based on the above manual in October 2009 in Thailand 12 and in May 2009 in India. 13 On the part of ESCAP, the Asian and Pacific Training Centre for Information and Communication Technology for Development (APCICT) organized a training course for the production of statistics on the information economy in February 2008 in collaboration with UNCTAD and the United Nations Statistical Institute for Asia and the Pacific (SIAP). 14 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/material/lcw190_en.pdf http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/material/youth_2008.pdf http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/material/measuring%20ict_web.pdf http://new.unctad.org/upload/docs/the%20global%20status%20of%20ict%20indicators.pdf http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/conferences/bangkok09/index.html http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/conferences/india09/index.html http://www.unapcict.org/events/statistics 5

The progress was also discussed at the WSIS Forum in May 2009 in Geneva. 15 The meeting noted that ICT infrastructure and access indicators were widely available, while social and economic indicators were less frequently used. 16 It was also mentioned that measuring of ICT impacts has just begun in developing countries. Thus, the meeting recommended that the emphasis should be placed on further capacity building on the production of statistical data, including measuring of ICT impacts and indicators related to e-government. The efforts by various partner agencies and national statistical offices have been shown in the increasing number of countries which have started using ICT indicators and collecting data. 17 Figure 7: ITU list of national statistical offices and international agencies involved in the initiative 2. Objectives of this paper In this background, it would be imperative for ESCAP member States to continue and expand their efforts in implementing the internationally agreed ICT indicators for measuring the progress made towards development of an inclusive, people-centered information society in Asia and the Pacific. 15 16 17 http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/conferences/geneva09/index.html http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/conferences/geneva09/ge09_summary.pdf http://www.itu.int/itu-d/ict/links/ 6

This paper aims to review progress made in the region as a whole and some select countries and assess how a subregional approach could accelerate the promotion of the above indicators by sharing knowledge, expertise and experience. In particular, this paper examines the case of the ASEAN countries and how successful examples of Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, for instance, could be applied to and assists other ASEAN countries through regional cooperation mechanisms and frameworks. 3. The Digital Divide in Asia and the Pacific measured by ICT Indicators The ICT statistical data has been instrumental in determining the progress as well as identifying gaps and areas for further intervention. Based on the latest figures on ICT access, ESCAP could identify emerging regional trends and subregions and income groups which may need strengthened intervention in meeting the WSIS objectives by 2015. The number of fixed telephone lines started declining among advanced countries in the region. Based on the statistics, (data in seven out of 58 member countries, and one out of 14 least developed countries (LDC) are not available at the time of compiling this report), it can be summarized that fixed line has grown very slowly compared with other communication means or has decreased in an increasing number of countries. Mobile technology is one of the most rapidly expanding technologies in terms of the speed of expansion and reach to un-connected segments of population and its prevalence has been growing rapidly especially in the developing countries for the past several years. Even though data is not reported by six member countries, 2003 and 2008 mobile cellular subscription data shows that the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of industrialized countries, including Australia, Japan, and the Republic of Korea usage has increased at stabilized rates of 7.8 per cent, 5.0 per cent and 5.9 per cent respectively. On the other hand, subscription rates have exploded in developing countries, often reaching or exceeding double digits, partly because the baseline data in some countries were low. In fact, growth exceeds triple digits in countries which are both landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) and LCDs, such as Afghanistan, Bhutan and Nepal, with growth rates of 101.3 per cent, 150.1 per cent, and 105.0 per cent respectively, which indicates the existence of underlying demand for communication means and unavailability of other means, such as fixed telephone lines. Another identified trend is a disparity in growth among developing countries and subregions. According to the 2008 data, coverage was relatively high in LLDC, such as Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Armenia, with 96.1, 75.0, and 61.0 per 100 populations respectively, while the growth rates in small island developing states (SIDS) are generally lower, with several having only single digit growth. However, these figures need to be assessed in more detail within an overall picture which combines growths and coverage of other means of communication, such as fixed telephone lines, Internet and broadband networks to elicit a conclusion. 7

There are huge digital divides in the number of Internet users between developed or advanced countries and developing countries. The data in 2008 indicates that Internet users per 100 populations are 77.83 in the Republic of Korea, 69.22 in Japan, 67.28 in Singapore and 62.57 in Malaysia. In contrast, in the same year, only 0.3 per 100 populations in Bangladesh, 0.5 in Cambodia, 0.1 in Myanmar and 0.14 in the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste subscribed to the Internet. This remains a serious problem, although this figure might not include occasional use of the Internet at Internet cafes or other public access points. However, examining the other figures and tables on fixed telephone lines and much less available broadband networks, such usage might not be prevalent in unconnected and underserviced areas among developing countries. Globally, the mode of access to information has been changing from dial up telephone lines to mobile and optic fiber cables, which allow people to access information through the Internet, and to use more bandwidth intensive applications, such as video streaming. Data for nearly half the countries in Asia and the Pacific (28 countries out of 58) has not been provided, but CAGR on the fixed telephone lines in many developed or advanced countries have shown slowdown: Singapore (16.7 per cent), Japan (15.1 per cent) and the Republic of Korea (6.3 per cent). It seems that fixed lines have passed their peak in those countries. On the other hand, 11 of 13 LDC do not share the updated data of fixed broadband Internet subscriptions, but deployment of broadband Internet seem to have increased rapidly between 2003 and 2008 in developing countries. Two LDC, namely Cambodia and Maldives, show CAGR of 80.9 per cent and 96.5 per cent. Other non-ldc countries indicate similar growth rates for the same period. For example, CAGR is 169.7 per cent in Azerbaijan, 252.7 per cent in Kazakhstan, 130.5 per cent in India, 232.2 per cent in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and 165.7 per cent in Viet Nam. However, it should be noted that the baseline figures of many LDCs in 2003 are very low to compare with. In developing country groups, although data has not been calculated for SIDS due to lack of information, other LDC and LLDC show very slow broadband growth. The figure for LDC in 2008 indicates the average of 0.02 per 100 population, meaning that only 2 out of 10,000 people, and five out 1,000 LLDC people have broadband access. It seems that there needs to be prioritization to establishing the penetration of Internet before accessing broadband. 3.1. Readiness among Asian and Pacific countries towards ICT indicators The above mentioned publication The Global Information Society: a Statistical View 2008 stated as one of the conclusion that developed economies in general are well advanced in collection and use of ICT indicators, supported by extensive ICT infrastructure, affordable services and wide ICT usage. The report also made another observation of a need to distinguish core and non-core indicators. Some of the core indicators rely on relatively well established data sources, such as infrastructure data collected by ITU and other organizations, while other non-core indicators would have to be collected using household and business surveys which require significant resources. When implemented, 8

survey scope may vary from one country to the other. The scope differences could include the age of the individuals defined in the survey, which may have a significant impact. The report pointed out that there was a relationship between the availability of data and data collection requirements. For instance, the household indicators were available for developed economies, while the availability of such indicators was lower among developing countries. It was also mentioned that well established ICT indicators have data of high quality and internationally comparable than the other indicators. As of 2005, there was no individual ICT use indicator or business use indicator available for LDCs. Regarding the ICT industry data, it was pointed out that the definition of the ICT industry and requirements for national accounts were not consistent; thus many countries were unable to provide the data related to the ICT industry as per the international standard definition of the ICT industry. Regarding the usage and impact of ICT evidenced by the ICT indicators, the report indicated positive effects of ICT on businesses. The economic side of the ICT usage and impacts might be easier to measure than the social aspects. The challenges identified in the publication include the following: For core ICT indicators which are survey-based, the data collection would require adding ICT questions or developing stand-alone ICT survey. There is a need for harmonizing survey-based indicators. The ICT impact concepts and measurement models should be developed to ensure linkage to ICT policy formulation and implementation It is critical to adhere to the definition of the core indicators and recommended methodologies to enable international comparisons of data The efforts by LDCs to collect ICT indicators should be strengthened and supported further. In relation to the readiness of Asia and the Pacific in applying such indicators and collecting data, some developing countries seem to be lagging behind, as indicated in the aforementioned publication Measuring ICT: The Global Status of ICT Indicators. Generally speaking, the proportion of countries collecting household ICT indicators in Asia and the Pacific in 2005 was lower than other regions, such as Latin America and Caribbean. 9

Table 1: Proportion of countries collecting household ICT indicators Source: Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, Measuring ICT: The Global Status of ICT Indicators (United Nations ICT Task Force, 2005). The coverage of population of collected household ICT indicators in Asia and the Pacific show even lower percentage compared with other subregions. 10

Table 2: Coverage of collected household ICT indicators (per cent of population) Source: Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, Measuring ICT: The Global Status of ICT Indicators (United Nations ICT Task Force, 2005). Based on the findings of the report, it seems that there is a correlation between demand for ICT indicators and actual data collection. Among ESCAP member countries, Hong Kong, China; Mongolia; Singapore and Thailand indicated very high demand for ICT business indicators, while India; Macao, China; Malaysia and Vanuatu reported high 11

demand. At the same time, Hong Kong, China; Macao, China; Philippines; Singapore and Thailand reported collecting 10 or more ICT business indicators. Some countries, such as the Philippines, have a sectoral approach where line ministries are in charge of collecting such data and information. Other countries, such as Maldives, Sri Lanka and Cambodia, reported that they don't have any financing available to undertake such indicator initiative. Table 3: Institutions collecting ICT indicators in the region Source: Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, Measuring ICT: The Global Status of ICT Indicators (United Nations ICT Task Force, 2005). Thirty nine per cent of the countries, including Islamic Republic of Iran, Vanuatu and Federal State of Micronesia, reported that they don't have a definition for ICT in relation to collecting statistical data. Among the countries which recently implemented the collection of ICT data, Thailand is one of the countries which used the most ICT variables. Especially noticeable is the limited collection of data related to broadband subscription among developing countries. 12

4. Progress made among the ASEAN countries Some countries among the ASEAN region have been making conscientious efforts in collecting, analyzing and publishing ICT statistical data to the public. In this chapter, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore are cited as good examples, and this report examined the types of indicators used and modified to suit the needs of the countries. Annex I, II and III illustrate the indicators used by the three countries respectively and progress made in the production of ICT statistical data. 4.1 Thailand The Thai government launched its ICT policy on 18 February 2008. The main goals are to increase the use of broadband, increasing ICT use for rural communication, developing industries of software and hardware, developing e-governance, education and health. It is expected that the ICT indicators are selected and intended to measure the progress made in the above policy focus areas. The concept of collecting ICT indicators has developed in Thailand in parallel with the National Information and Communication Technology Master Plan (2002-2006). It has been formulated under the National IT Policy (2001-2010) to exploit the benefits of technology for national development. 18 In Thailand, several agencies are involved in ICT indicators. They include the National Electronics and Computer Technology Centre (NECTEC), the National Telecommunication Commission (NTC) and the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology (MICT). Indicators used by Thailand show both compliance and deviation from internationally agreed indicators. Similarities include a special care given to adopt same categories as the internationally agreed indicators, if not by name, still in focus: it concentrates on general indicators, household indicators and business indicators. The level or units used however are not always the same: individuals are used rather than households in some indicators and definitions of some indicators might not be the same as corresponding international indicator (such as population above six years old, or not precisely stating for how many minutes phone costs per months are being calculated, if any). Three approaches were adopted to establish a list of indicators: Use of existing administrative records Survey and census (adding ICT questions to existing statistical surveys or conducting new ones specific to ICT) Use data provided by private organizations 18 Phumisak Smutkupt and Kasititorn Pooparadai, ICT indicators initiatives in Thailand: progress and lessons learned, paper distributed at the WSIS Thematic Meeting on Measuring the Information Society, 7-9 February 2005, Geneva (http://www.itu.int/md/dologin_md.asp?lang=en&id=d02-isap2b.1.1-c- 0022!!PDF-E). 13

In addition, the National Electronic and Computer Technology Centre (NECTEC) used other mechanisms: Truehits.net 19 (to monitor website users) Service E-readiness Explorer (SEE) Evaluation programme (online survey of e- government services) Internet user profile survey (carried out on an annual basis) In order to establish a list of ICT indicators as comprehensive as possible, several sources were used, such as the ICT Master Plan, the OECD proposal for a core list of indicators, e-asean Readiness Guide, etc. Initially, 129 indicators were identified and divided into three groups (Group I, II and III) according to data availability and clear definition. Ninety five indicators were located into groups I and II and 38 into group III. Since data comes from various sources, cooperation with correspondent agencies was undertaken to evaluate the availability of indicators. Out of this process, only 52 indicators are collected, divided into 8 groups: telecommunications (8) Internet (14) Broadcasting (1) E-commerce (1) ICT market and industry (5) ICT human resources (13) ICT in government (3) R&D and patents (5) ICT indicators and statistics were first printed and released by NECTEC in the booklet Thailand ICT Indicators: moving towards the information society 20 in October 2003, during the APEC Summit in Bangkok. Positive response was received. The second publication was issued in 2005 as Thailand ICT Indicators 2005. 21 Other ICT-related statistics can be found on the NECTEC website. 4.2 Malaysia Malaysia is known for strong government support for knowledge society vision, Multimedia Super Corridor, featured by high mobile penetration and commercial WiMAX initiatives for broadband Internet access. 22 The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) carried out Household Use of the Internet Surveys in 2005 and 2006 to investigate Internet access and use, including type of access, B- to-c e- 19 http://truehits.net/ 20 NECTEC, Thailand ICT Indicators: Moving towards the Information Society, Series I, 2 nd ed., October 2003 (http://www.nectec.or.th/en/images/pdf/publications/ict_indicators2003.pdf). 21 http://www.nectec.or.th/2008/pdf/ict_indicators2005.pdf 22 Madanmohan Rao, Regional Report: South-East Asia, in Global Information Society Watch 2008 (http://www.giswatch.org/gisw2008/regional/pdf/se_asia.pdf). 14

commerce, average use per week and purpose of use. The target population was the Internet users, regardless of age, who accessed the Internet from a dialup or xdsl connection from their own homes at least once in the past month. Users of wireless access were excluded from the surveys. Selection of units was done by random digit dialing on the public switched telephone network with further screening of the household performed by a question on access to the Internet. As a second sampling stage, a member of the household was selected at random by asking which user in the household had the next birthday. Data were collected during the same telephone call. 4.3 Singapore Singapore s ICT development is characterized by well established government agencies, such as the InfoComm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA) and Media Development Authority (MDA). Through its Intelligent Nation 2015 project, the country aims to develop the national broadband network, while actively engaging global ICT industry. 23 IDA publishes extensive data and information on the ICT use in the country. IDA conducts surveys on ICT industry, labor force, e-government perception, usage by household and businesses and consumer awareness and satisfaction. Since IDA is also mandated to create a conducive environment through policy and regulations, the statistical work of IDA is strategically positioned within the organization to ensure linkage between ICT statistics and policies and regulations. Figure 8: IDA facts and figures on ICT use in Singapore 23 Madanmohan Rao Regional Report: South-East Asia in the Global Information Society Watch 2008 at http://www.giswatch.org/gisw2008/regional/pdf/se_asia.pdf 15

4.4 Lessons learned and good practices There are some lessons learned and good practices which are generally applied to all the countries and which are elicited from the ICT indicator efforts made by the above three countries. Some challenges are addressed by Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, while some general recommendations may still apply to them. In the report entitled ICT Indicators Initiatives in Thailand: Progress and Lessons Learned, 24 a few lessons learned based on the experience in Thailand were shared, which include the following: The recognition of the importance of ICT indicators is critical to ensure the successful development and implementation of any ICT statistics initiatives; Coordination among various agencies and stakeholder is a major undertaking; from the beginning, roles and responsibilities of each agency should be clearly defined and understood by all contributing parties; ICT indicators should be promoted widely to the public to increase cooperation; The initial cooperation should be transformed into long term partnership among contributing agencies; The political commitment would be important to endorse and enforce cooperation; The selection of initial ICT indicators needs special attention to ensure coverage of important ICT sectors; The purpose of each ICT indicator should be defined and linked to the information necessary for ICT policy formulation and implementation. The importance and relevance of ICT indicators to evidence-based decision and policy making was also reiterated during the meeting on the Partnership organized in March 2009 in Cairo. The meeting also reviewed the efforts towards establishing e-government indicators, ICT databases, assessment of ICT impacts and capacity building in various regions. A report in the Global Information Society Watch highlighted a role of ICT indicators as an advocacy tool. 25 There are different reasons for developing indicators with different purpose, focus and perspectives. In particular, ICT indicators have important roles to play in formulation, implementation and evaluation of ICT policies and strategies which are articulated in the above article as follows: Need assessment Monitoring progress Providing evaluation and feedback 24 25 Phumisak Smutkupt and Kasititorn Pooparadai, ICT indicators initiatives in Thailand: progress and lessons learned, paper distributed at the WSIS Thematic Meeting on Measuring the Information Society, 7-9 February 2005, Geneva (http://www.itu.int/md/dologin_md.asp?lang=en&id=d02-isap2b.1.1-c- 0022!!PDF-E). A. K. Mahan, ICT Indicators for advocacy, in Global Information Society Watch 2007 (http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0002576/4-gisw_2007.pdf). 16

Used properly, ICT indicators can help define the problems and challenges which need to be addressed and monitored by ICT initiatives, policies and strategies. Despite international consensus, there seems no sweeping consensus on the conceptual models. Figure 9: Ideal virtuous circle Source: A. K. Mahan, ICT Indicators for advocacy, in Global Information Society Watch 2007 (Uruguay, APC and ITeM). The need for the above-mentioned conceptual framework is also highlighted in a report entitled Global Information Society Watch 2008. 26 In choosing indicators, the report recommends the following considerations: The international comparability to be ensured through universally accepted measures of ICT adoption; The conceptual framework should aim to provide measure of actual uptake and use; In order to monitor the digital divide, ICT indicators should focus on personal rather than business uses; ICT indicators should evolve to take into account new technologies and infrastructure and services; ICT indicator data should be provided by credible organizations. Based on the indicators developed by Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, it is obvious that there is a fine line between ensuring international comparability and addressing need for measuring ICT development at the national level by linking ICT indicator efforts to ICT policy implementation. The above Global Information Society Watch predicted that the smallest number of indicators is likely to be the most inclusive and comparable across countries, due to lack of data in developing countries. 26 Mike Jensen and Amy Mahan, Measuring progress, in Global Information Society Watch 2008 (http://www.giswatch.org/gisw2008/pdf/measuringprogress.pdf). 17

Another concern expressed in the above report is the time difference. In some cases, the data is available only one year or two years after. In order to support policy formulation, implementation and evaluation, it would be critical to make this lag as short as possible. Among the three countries compared in the above chapter, it seems that this situation also applies to them. Related to the definition and need for flexibility to take into account new technologies, there have been a question on how to account for those with mobile broadband access or Internet protocol TV which might not be taken into account in the current set of indicators. On a related note, the total number of Internet users can be counted only if users of Internet café or public access points are included. While establishing a methodology to capture the total number of Internet users might be difficult, the current data might not capture the true dynamism of the Internet use at the national level. This point is also underlined in another ESCAP report entitled Compilation and development of ICT indicators and e-readiness assessments in more detail. Among the three countries, many indicators do not provide gender-disaggregated data, which would make analysis on the gender digital divide difficult. Thus, there is basically very limited data and information if and when government agencies or NGOs wishes to launch programmes or initiatives to ameliorate the gender digital divide. The divide seems to start from the lack of basic information, despite the abundance of general ICT data and statistics. 5. Conclusions and Recommendations Globally, the importance of ICT indicators has increasingly been recognized and embraced by ESCAP member countries. In this report, examples of Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore were cited as good examples. For a successful implementation of such initiatives, a lot of coordination on a large scale needs to be achieved, and for this reason various actors (government, private sector, etc.) need a common understanding from the start of their roles and contributions in the process. Awareness and understanding of ICT statistics could help further promote the use and demand for such statistics among the general public as well. In addition to the development at the national level, subregional and regional dimensions of ICT indicator initiatives could be equally important in building an inclusive and development-oriented information society. Within the ASEAN region, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore are more advanced in the production and publication of ICT data and information, while other countries may be lagging behind. Although a number of capacity building initiatives have been implemented by the United Nations and other agencies in the subregion, a question arises on if there is any role the e-asean can play in assisting the countries without ICT statistical capabilities. Such capabilities would also assist member countries and stakeholders to more easily identify business opportunities and gaps to be filled and addressed in the formulation and implementation of ICT policies and strategies. 18