Global ICT performance in 2011

The Global Information Technology Report 2012 published by the World Economic Forum should be used as a meaningful guideline for the government agency designated to be in charge of Information Communications Technology. I presume that is the Department of Science and Technology since the bill creating the Department of Information Communication Technology has been shelved. It is a 400 page document worth reading and absorbing. This columnist will cover some of its highlights in relation to the Philippines but it is far from being comprehensive. I strongly recommend that interested parties go to the internet where it is available in its entirety.

The Philippines has been ranked in the third quartile of the 142 countries being rated. In 2011, it was ranked 86. In 2012 it has remained in the same level. The top 10 countries in descending order were: Sweden, Singapore, Finland, Denmark, Switzerland, Netherlands, Norway, USA, Canada and United Kingdom. Other ASIAN economies in the top 20 were Taiwan (11), Korea (12) Hong Kong (13) and Japan (19). Our ASEAN neighbors were also rated: Malaysia (29), Brunei (54), Thailand (77), Indonesia (80), Vietnam (83), Cambodia (108) and Timor Leste (132). Six out of the nine ASEAN countries rated were better than the Philippines. The figure below enumerates the pillars which is the basis for the country rankings:

Phl ICT performance

Before I proceed to present Philippine performance compared to selected ASEAN countries. I would like to quote what the Global Report commented on four ASEAN members:

“Thailand (ranked 77^th) is followed closely by three fellow ASEAN members: Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines. The performance of these four countries, which together are home to almost 500 million people, are remarkably similar across the different components of the index, and disappointing too…..When it comes to ICT usage, all four countries display very limited uptake among the population, especially Indonesia where the internet is used by less than 10 percent of the population…..As for the efforts of the respective governments in using and promoting ICT, they remain very timid, with the exception of Vietnam, which ranks 48^th in government usage, while the others are found beyond the 70^th mark. In light of the many shortcomings, the economic and social impacts of ICT in these countries are necessarily limited. No doubt these countries could learn from Singapore and Malaysia.”

Phl performance vs. 4 ASEAN countries

The Global Report has 53 indicators within the 10 pillars depicted earlier. I have chosen to select 11 indicators rating the Philippines 62 and below which can be considered average performance and 17 indicators with a rating of 100 and above which indicates need for improvement. The rating is the Philippines’ rank out of 142 economies. Below are the charts making the comparison.

Average performance of Phl

Phl performance: needs improvement

Changing role of regulators

By the end of 2011, 158 separate telecommunication/ICT regulators had been established worldwide. “In recognition of the technological convergence taking place between infrastructure and content, many regulators are now moving to adopt growing responsibilities over the regulation and monitoring of content and broadcasting. Some of the countries have also moved to expand the mandate of the regulator to include information technology, broadcasting content, and/or spectrum management.”

“As the internet becomes embedded in many more everyday objects, some observers suggest that the role of ICT regulators in a converged ICT environment will be far more pervasive and touch on many more facets of our hyperconnected lives than just competitive market structure, network interconnection, pricing and consumer protection. The advent of high-speed networks and new kinds of content creates an important leadership role for government policymakers and ICT regulators in stimulating the demand for broadband and in promoting investment infrastructure. In fact, ICT regulators may become indirectly involved in many more spheres of influence, reflecting the involvement of ICT infrastructure and services in many aspects of our lives.”

Conclusion

Clearly, the Philippines needs to improve its performance in ICT if it is to be globally competitive. Equally important is the regulators’ recognition of the magnitude of their responsibilities. It is of paramount importance that the government leadership demonstrates political will and determination to move forward in this world of technological convergence. Technology delayed is development denied.