Discussion
Mr. Hughes asked a question to Mr. Jacobsen as to how access to the Internet is being promoted outside of the classroom in Denmark.
Mr. Jacobsen responded that there was currently no initiative in Denmark to provide PCs to students in their homes, but that a scheme was being planned to provide Internet access to students who live close to university campuses.
Dr. Jung noted that Denmark has established flexible training schemes for IT training. She noted that universities in Korea have been criticized for not providing the skilled manpower required by IT companies. She asked who were the main actors in providing these flexible training courses in Denmark.
Mr. Jacobsen responded that the universities were not as developed as the vocational training schools in providing flexible IT courses, and about fifty such vocational institutions were providing training and courses around the country. He added that it was incumbent upon the government to encourage universities to offer more such flexible courses.
Ms. Hu shared with participants Singapore's experience in building and creating specialist manpower. She noted that leverage is used on IT companies to help put in place training courses to develop Java programmers, for example.
Mrs. Birkett referred to the presentations of both Ms. Neri and Mrs. Bahweres concerning the provision of telecommunications services infrastructure, and questions as to how to increase availability and lower costs. She asked how such issues were being addressed in overall policies in Indonesia and the Philippines and how open infrastructure provision was to other service providers.
Mrs. Bahweres responded that computers and access to e-mail were only available in the larger cities, because of the expense of telephone charges in rural Indonesia. She stated that the telecommunications infrastructure in the country is still limited, pointing out that the number of telephone subscribers in Indonesia is less than the number of mobile telephone subscribers. She explained that this was an obstacle to Internet access, due to the lack of usage of landlines in Indonesia.
Mrs. Birkett asked what the position in Indonesia was concerning competition--whether there was a policy to use competition to overcome problems of availability and high prices, and if the growth in mobile telephone services was due to competitive practices.
Mrs. Bahweres responded that the telecommunications industry was still a monopolized industry in Indonesia, although this was expected to change in the future, with an additional provider being given the opportunity to participate in the market. She stated that with the entry of another provider, it was hoped that infrastructure costs would decline.
Ms. Neri commented that in the Philippines there was a directive, initiated by former President Ramos, that all government agencies be connected to the Internet. She added that by the beginning of 2001 all government departments were online, including both the legislative and judicial institutions; however, only a few local governments and municipalities are linked to the Internet. She commented that there was an insignificant number of private homes connected to the Internet in the Philippines, the cost factor proving too high for most people.
Mr. Kim commented on the phenomenon of mobile telephones usage usurping fixed access line usage in Indonesia and asked Mrs. Bahweres for clarification of this issue. He asked what the percentage of mobile telephone usage was in Indonesia, and whether there was any prospect for the rise of mobile phone Internet use in Indonesia.
Mrs. Bahweres responded by noting that there are approximately 6 million mobile telephone subscribers in Indonesia, and less than that for fixed access lines. She added that there were currently three mobile phone companies offering services, whereas the fixed access lines were still provided by a monopoly-run enterprise. She noted that the cost of using a mobile phone is still high in Indonesia and doubted that people would be inclined to use mobile telephones to access the Internet.
Mr. Caquot asked Ms. Neri if the Philippines encouraged people to study abroad in order to cultivate IT skills. Ms. Neri responded that the Japanese government has a project called the Philippines Software Development Institute, and experts from Japan travel to the Philippines to conduct courses. In addition, Filipino professionals are invited to go to Japan to study technologies that are not yet available in the Philippines. She added that other countries offered such programs to Philippine nationals, but it was not often that people were sent abroad, due to budgetary constraints. Ms. Neri explained that IT professionals who have worked overseas are encouraged to disseminate the knowledge gained from their experience abroad.
In regard to the Indonesian situation, Mr. Ishikawa pointed out that Indonesia covers an area the same size as the United States, spread over many disparate islands, and its efforts to disseminate and develop IT were hit by the financial crisis three year ago. He noted that according to a report from a Japanese research team, the international community has much to offer Indonesia and the Philippines in the area of IT. Mr. Ishikawa also noted that the high English language ability of people in the Philippines was a definite advantage in IT development.
In response to a comment from Dr. Choi concerning cultural diversity and the potential for cultural clashes through the Internet, Mr. Ishikawa responded that G8 leaders had highlighted the utility of IT in promoting cultural diversity and exchange at the Kyushu-Okinawa Summit in July 2000. He emphasized the fact that both G8 leaders and education ministers had highly commended the opportunity provided for international exchange by IT.
Dr. Kim mentioned that discussions in Korea were taking place about the prospect of overseas educational institutions entering the country and establishing universities and other learning centers. He noted that such discussions had focused on the potential for cultural clashes. Against this background, he stated the need to be clear on the principles of cultural identity and the purposes for which such principles are used.
Mr. Lindroos noted that the seminar had mainly discussed human resources from a technological viewpoint, but that communication was also important. He added all countries had something to offer in the field of communications.
Mr. Ishikawa quoted several lines from the G8 Communiqué Okinawa 2000 on the issue of cultural diversity: "Cultural diversity is a source of social and economic dynamism which has the potential to enrich human life in the 21st century, as it inspires creativity and stimulates innovation. We recognise and respect the importance of diversity in linguistic and creative expressionﾉIncreased interaction among peoples, groups and individuals is bringing greater understanding of and appreciation for what is interesting and good in every culture. Promoting cultural diversity enhances mutual respect, inclusion and non-discrimination, and combats racism and xenophobia. Increased encounters between different cultures foster creative cultural interaction. IT opens up unprecedented opportunities for individuals to create and share cultural content and ideas inexpensively and world wide. Experience shows that diversity can arouse interest, engender initiative and be a positive factor in communities seeking to improve their economies, particularly when assisted by the extraordinary means of the IT society."
Mr. Ishikawa emphasized the need to place the positive side of the coin on the table and to use the occasion of the ASEM Seminar on the Digital Opportunity to further develop the digital opportunity.
Back to Index