COMMENTS BY DR. ADAMOLEKUN

Dr. Ladipo O. Adamolekun
Lead Public Sector Management SpecialistWorld Bank

Thank you very much. I guess I came to manage the previous discussions. I am going tohighlight few points from different presentations that were quite striking.

The World Bank’s relationship with the NGOs is quite long and it’s very consistent tosee how NGOs are continuing to evolve. So what we have, there is a case of one of thesituations in the East Asia and Pacific. What I would draw is, as I said comment onthese presentations including one commenting on last speaker. What I found interestingis that Professor Kataoka’s feedback and that by Mr. Nanri. There were someconceptions, which focus on conceptual issues. Professor Kataoka for instance made acomment about the space that exists for NGOs to operate as a result of government’s
focusing on universalism and their uniformity. Thereby leaving NGOs space to focus on
the needs of stakeholders as well as gives us impedes. That is very useful and very
important point. And the second point of his paper, which is also very important, iswhether NGOs can initiate social networks to better carry out their activities. I thinkthese two ideas, which I got from his paper, help us to focus sharply on how NGOs
contribute to the development process.

Now, the use of e-governance is a tool they use if like ICT both in making use of thatspace as well as their networks. Social networks in fact are facilitated by the use of ICT.
The conceptions that Mr. Nanri emphasises are truly interesting. They take us tolegitimacy, transparency and accountability in the relationship between NGOs andstates and also with CSOs as Professor Colette pointed out. He also called them CBOsand NGOs. After all it’s extremely interesting because all speakers have attempted toform and tried to triangulate a relationship of NGOs to CSO and state relationships. Thefocus was on two key elements - information and communication. And in fact by tiny
virtual information and communication, all you have to do is to make use of higher
technology and this is the theme of this IIAS congress. The natural fact in thepartnership that we talked about information is pusher both for interaction between theCSOs and the states. Now, once you get the information, you have to communicate itand disseminate it as printed out and ICT is going to be a very useful tool. So, I foundthose two conceptual papers very useful for this discussion.

Now I will draw our attention to two case studies- the Korean case study and the Hong
Kong case study, unlike the other two which are likely conceptual. These are theillustrations of what has happened in the ground. What I take from Professor Park’s
paper, very interesting paper actually, is on page 17 of his presentation. It gives family
relationships with NGOs and government and necessity of NGOs. Actually this is notjust on his paper. In fact, I think this is a very important point probably through theentire IIAS congress, which is how the e-governments have facilitated direct contact
with citizen and governments.

I think it is very important point that the citizen’s direct and random accesses to theinformation and to professional expertise on the Internet. And not to make thebypassing of NGOs happen, the NGOs have to raise the level before citizens in fact
continue to see there as relevant and as useful and familiar roles. I like the idea of chatrooms that citizens are not doing it as individuals. They can in fact use chat rooms tobring together some discussions on going policies like the oppositions in government’s
initiatives and so on. It is not intermediated by NGOs but in fact through groups ofcitizens who chat in the Internet. I have mentioned what I saw in the exhibition held at
this convention complex, which is about a country where that kind of citizen chat rooms
on the Internet exists in secret places and I think it seems to be interesting. I don’t knowwhether they are really attracted by the NGOs but I found that it deserves their attention.

Finally let me turn to the case study on Hong Kong, I think there are several messages.
One is the role of government in providing funds to NGOs in developing their ICT
capacity. Another paper was presented at the IIAS congress. The question was whoshould bear the cost of e-governance; the individual users, the affected parties or public
sector that is taxpayers? Now the answer in Hong Kong is that is taxpayers. When you
are showing what individuals can do, they are demonstrated both in terms of salarydifferences as well as education differences. And more or less with this point that isgiven certain differences, particularly the emphasis plays on the entirely the disabledand poor. Clearly there is a role of government but the dynamic of the outcome depends
on the emphasis on NGOs relying on the states. I am not sure and I don’t know whether
it comes out clearly or not, whether the resources are kept to be available to everyone.

I really want to comment the availability of data in Hong Kong and policy that was
institutionally published in 2001 and some revised policy in 2003 which takes us to all
the recent changes. Focal comment on this is what last speaker called “digital divideparadigms”. I will put it as possibly as higher level. People are handed by fairly states;
concept of fair states. For that, we also need the concept of virtual states that is thestates that can communicate with cyber states. You can not have a greater paradox andthat kind of gap and they are so solid that they are in fact called virtual. That is theextreme of gap but all is not lost because in fact that is their stock. If you take theDemocratic Republic of Congo as an example of fair states and it is trying to reestablish itself. At the peak of its failure, it was NGOs that were providing healthservices, maintenance and educational services. The NGOs of course again were using
their ICT and their social networks. Both national and international NGOs obtained
success to meet and maintain both health and educational services. So in a sense,
whether it is a fair state or virtual state, we find that NGOs, CSOs and CBOs have theirroles to play.