🪁 Documentation
Nov 1 | SESSION 9 — Enabling Innovation for inclusion: spectrum sharing policies, spectrum innovation; the commons revisited; sharing economy, autonomous networks
In this free flow session, Martha Suarez and Steve Song shared their experiences in the field of spectrum policy and regulation, and invited participants to chip in their thoughts and questions.
Key highlights:
- One important lesson about spectrum: nothing seems to happen very quickly when it comes to spectrum. The process of assigning spectrum often takes years and that possesses a challenge in terms of advocacy around spectrum.
- In working with authority and spectrum, there are regulations in place. Traditionally, the way spectrum has been managed works this way: it is a public resource, but the licenses belong to companies, and they can use the spectrum for a period of time.
- There is a possibility for a mix of new frameworks — licensed and unlicensed. However, regulators and authorities would be questioning the investment beforehand: what is going to be the benefit? How is it going to impact the economy of the country?
- Three things regulators often consider before a change of framework in the regulation to create a new ecosystem: technology, regulation in place, and private sector.
- Two important trends that shape the way we engage:
- Manufacturing: with regulations in place, setting up networks and equipment now come at lower prices. But it begs the question: if the tech is cheap, how to lock the regulatory framework around that? There is a proliferation of tech — if we have the framework, can we transform it in terms of affordability?
- The cost of spectrum: Currently the cost is high as they are made to fit the affordability of big operators, and this excludes everybody else, especially small operators and community networks. This is one of the key barriers that really needs the involvement of CSO’s advocacy.
- Traditionally we are used to a narrow ecosystem with very few stakeholders, and we rely on them for broadband access. What should we do to expand connectivity, especially when the tech is cheap? Create conditions for a wider ecosystem so we could have different entities deploy networks according to their needs. The problem is not access to the resource physically, but it’s the access from a legal perspective.
- There are now many campaigns involving tribal lands where they have successfully managed for spectrum to be parts of their tribal rights. Now is the time for indigenous advocacy around the spectrum as the means and the technology to make that spectrum accessible to indigenous communities already exist.
- Spectrum sharing and dynamics spectrum is important. You save cost migrating the users and the use is efficient, it can create new options for new applications, and create new use cases.
- The regulators need to create a smarter condition for users to make smarter decisions about rural access. One of them is creating a clause in the regulation to grant the right to protection from interference that guarantees no one will interfere with the operator and allows the regulator to reserve the right to introduce sharing services in areas where they are not planning to deploy networks. Regulators can also propose more innovative regulations and have more say in defending public resources and stakeholders.
- The issue of transparency (funds, tower assignments, etc.) is key for regulators in every aspect. This is why advocacy is important.
- Two ways to begin to open spaces for the creation of public policies from the voices of grassroots communities:
- Find a regulator friend and “build human connection that unlocks possibilities”
- Public consultation for spectrum regulation — craft your message strategically to capture the attention of the regulators. Attend a few so you could learn how to craft this message.
- Collective action is key because our resources are small compared to big operators when it comes to engaging regulators.
Memorable quotes:
“Defending public interests is quite limited. This is why we are here: to encourage you to say that civil society needs to be more engaged on this issue.” — Steve
“For indigenous communities who have long standing claims to their territories, do the territories extend into the airwaves? This is a question that is being asked by indigenous communities around the world.” — Steve
“The analogy of having spectrum as property right: in cities, spectrums are like houses, restaurants, shops, etc. Unlicensed spectrum is like a public park — everyone can use it.” — Martha
“There is hope, but we need CSO’s voice to do this for us to be able to share resources and do this at much lower cost. Just like open source for web industries, this can happen at spectrum regulation too.” — Steve
“I would draw on the African proverb — If you want to go fast go alone, if you want to go far go together. Acting collectively is the key to our strength.” — Steve
Nov 5 | SESSION 10 — Feminist Tech Innovation led by women, gender and sexuality-diverse individuals and groups for the public interest
Jac and Tania facilitated this storytelling session on what it means to have technological innovations within the framework of a feminist tech. Moreover, in building feminist tech innovation, who is it for and who makes the decision for the processes and output?
Key highlights:
What’s the first thing that came to your mind when we say feminist technology?
- Tania: A technology or a new thought that materialised that can help everyone, not someone specifically.
- Lilian: Curiosity — more about what's happening in the moment and to create something
- Emily: more ways we can create or cultivate allies for more partnership especially as women in tech, for the future generation
- Brunz: Much more related to the how then what
- Upasana: Innovation around us is built with the idea of men as the interest and so a lot of the innovation do not take into account of women — feminist innovation addressed the requirements of women basically. Feminist technology tries to bridge the gap of gender inequality and conscious of various intersectionality and make an effort for more justice in how something is also made and the values that people innovate.
- Cyn: tech is about the values we bring to the thinking, designing, use and relationship that we have with the tech and what it enables
- Who is it for is super critical, but also the question of why is it being done in the first place, and whose reality it envelopes, who will be actually benefiting? Who is being made central in this innovation?
Search engine results coming up differently for people in different regions/ countries. In any tech innovation market, look to the people that are associated with the results. Begs the Q: Who is building these (search engines)? Not only that, are the same people being highlighted are also going to be the reference for someone new in the Internet?
What are feminist innovations that you have encounter?
- Brunz on Maria Lab (https://www.marialab.org/) : Impressed about the creation of the process — like in CN, not just installed the network but also teaching and providing tools that would give the communities autonomy on using the infra. They also provide tools for organisations that need online communication or tools for supporting their meetings along with specialised support for collectives or groups. More than the results, this is an example of the process and building together that is innovative.
- Brunz on Vedetas (https://vedetas.org/): Designed it in a way that women are involved in the decision making e.g. where the routers are, who is responsible to do the troubleshooting etc. Not only feminst infra, but also intersectional — include people of all races and ages. Mindful not to reproduce the colonialist views on the way of enhancing knowledge in order not to exclude more people and women who had been oppressed.
Who inspired you in the fields of tech innovation and why?
- Tania: Elektra, programmer, hacker working with electronics and protocols in mesh networks – who does things on her own terms. Taught Tania that sometimes we complicate things and we need to go out and do the things we enjoy.
- Jac: Pi Villanueva from APC WSNP — learned that tech is political. “When you think of tech, who do you think of tech?” Told the story about how tech was pioneered and dominated by women until recently.
- Jac: Designer from Indonesia (I’m sorry I missed the name) — she makes deliberate changes to how she accesses all of her devices because getting used to the interface means you are getting used to particular tech and she doesn’t want to become set in her ways.
- Kgopotso: her grandmother (the book she wrote of her grandmother: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lqEm_ganEpljByEVWaGrdr4adtAxcAIZ/view). A feminist community builder and Kgopotso’s everyday inspiration. Avid tech user, never one without her cell phone. Taught her that the narrative that age does not apply to tech is not necessarily true, if the tech is relevant, everyone would use it.
- Cyn: From the elders in her family. Feminist tech should allow us to share joy, and at them same time not destroy the planet we are in. Lots of fast tech is designed with no mindfulness, abuses the resources and the planet, and corrodes our brain with its addictive nature. Found wisdom in the moderation older people have with their body and relationships in tech.
- Emily — feminism is to remove the stereotypes where women were believed to not belong in spaces of tech.
Memorable quotes:
“For me, cooking a meal with where everybody can eat with one hand could be a feminist technological innovation.” — Tania
“These stories taught me about where to invest my time — is it related to how to do what we want to do? Coming from my ego or coming from innocence, or utter desire to just do something?” — Tania