<incom> forget stockholm

[Daniel Pimienta]

Peter,

I am doing a study of South-South Cooperation promises in the context
of Information Society and I would be interested in reading the conclusion
of your economical approach, beyond what is exposed in the TRACNET web sites.

The conclusion we are reaching in our side is that what is required
is not simply the promotion of South-South cooperation but rather a
complete redifinition of "cooperation for development", in a better word that
it should be an inherent structural part of the Information Society.
As such the concept would need a holistic revamp with a new paradigm
perspective (as it has been required for education, health or gouvernance,
for instance).

This new paradigm calls for a multi pole (combinations of North and South),
multi stakeholder, multi lateral and multi centered (e.g. more descentralized
pattern, somehow what you call CCSD) approach.

The first absolute priority would be the definition of an ethical chart for
cooperation, associated with subsequent education mechanisms to adopt
and reinforce it. I say the definition (not "redefinition") since we have
not found any explicit, existing and applicable definition of ethical
rules to frame cooperation for development.

Daniel

PD: In my opinion, the issue for the Sockholm Challenge is that it first
tried (as Bangemann Challenge) to answer the question of North-North
cooperation for IS (with a local government perspective) and seemed to
be suited for that purpose. It has then been extended to North-South
cooperation without providing the change of structure to accomodate
players from the South.

Somehow EU has made the same mistake with the @LIS program in LA&C:
applying the IST EU framework to another region without adaptation
played as an antagonist factor for the genuinely wanted inclusion
and has left Community players on the side and provoke some weird
economical equations...