In the decade since the founding of the Community of Democracies, which met June 2-4 in Poland, a major change has been the explosion of technology and the tools it has created, both for those supporting the free flow of ideas and other democratic values and for authoritarian states interested in the opposite, curtailing information and suppressing human rights.
Speaking on a panel [3] in Krakow, NDI's chief technology officer, Chris Spence [4], explored the role of technology in democratic development and the risks its use poses in closed societies.
"Our view is that technologies are clearly a net positive for democracy...because of the important role [they] can play in consolidating democracy in fragile and transitional democratic states," he said. In such places, democracy, which hasn't fully taken root, "risks backsliding toward authoritarianism if nascent democratic institutions are not strengthened. Creative uses of technology in these environments can and do help make these institutions more efficient, accessible, transparent and effective and thus help democracy deliver for their citizens."
Spence noted that in the early 1990s NDI began to recognize the important role technology plays in politics and democratic development, and began to develop creative ways to integrate technology tools and approaches into its democracy support programs.
He cited two current NDI programs:
"The introduction of these tools in the absence of good civic or political organization is not enough."
Spence noted that while technology tools are useful and frequently necessary, to be most effective in bringing about political reform, they must be used to support well-organized political activities by strong organizations, typically civic groups or political parties, with long-term plans for change. "The introduction of these tools in the absence of good civic or political organization is not enough," he said.
Spence also addressed the risks associated with the introduction of technology tools in authoritarian states, which usually have technological advantages over their citizens. "In closed societies, citizens and civic groups are at a technological disadvantage and need to be very deliberate in building communication strategies that take into account a full understanding of risk," he said. "They must include a combination of the right technologies and procedures that are designed for their specific environment."
The “New Technologies for Democracy” panel was moderated by Teymoor Nabili of Al-Jazeera. Panelists included Matt Harrison from the Prometheus Institute; Walid Al-Saqaf, an online journalist and activist from Yemen; Susan Pointer, director of public policy and government relations at Google for Southern and Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa; and Wael Abbas, a well-known Egyptian blogger and activist.
Related:
Pictured above: A map from www.afghanistanelectiondata.org [5]
Published on July 16, 2010
Links:
[1] http://www.ndi.org/New_Technologies_Create_Opportunities_Risks
[2] http://www.ndi.org/node/16644
[3] http://www.ndi.org/files/New_Technologies_for_Democracy_Poland_0710.pdf
[4] http://www.ndi.org/spencec
[5] http://www.afghanistanelectiondata.org
[6] http://www.ndi.org/High_Level_Review_is_Needed_for_Afghan_Electoral_Reform
[7] http://www.ndi.org/node/16109
[8] http://www.ndi.org/Citizen_Hotline_Launched_Uganda
[9] http://www.ndi.org/Panels_Explore_Roles_of_Technology_Party_Internationals