Why and Howto Plan the Islands'Information Society

PlanningConcise

Guidelines

**** ** ** ****

Models for European Digitallslands

- - ------ - ----

II

Models for European Digitallslands

Why and how to plan theislands' Information Society

A Concise Manualfor

Developing Regional Planning Initiativeswithin an

Information Society Framework

2

Introduction 3Background 3Whya Planning Manual? 4The Intended Readership 4How to Use the Concise Planning Manual 4The Structure and Layout of the Concise Version of the Planning Manual................................ 5

Chapter 1: Structures & Organization 61.1 The Regional Steering Committee 61.2 Management Unit 61.3 Work Groups 71.4 The use of Consultants 7

Chapter 2: Baseline Audit and Benchmarking 82.1 Baseline audit 82.2 Benchmarking 8

Chapter 3: Analysis 93.1 Strategic Gap Analysis 93.2 Developing the Regional SWOT 93.3 Regional Situation Analysis 93.4 Identifying Key Issues 10

Chapter 4: Considering the Options 114.1 Options Paper 114.2 Awareness-Raising and Public Participation 114.3 Public Debate Regarding Priorities 124.4 Partnerships 124.5 Networks :............................................................................ 14

Chapter 5: Formulating the Strategy & Building Consensus 155.1 The Strategy and Action Plan 155.2 Developing a Vision 155.3 From Visions to Objectives....................................................................................................... 165.4 From Objectives to Priority Actions 165.5 From Priorities to Measures and Projects Proposals 16

Chapter 6: Embedding the Strategy & Action Plan 176.1 Final Version of the Strategy & Action Plan 176.2 Identifying and Securing Sources of Development Finance 176.3 Integration of The Strategy & Action Plan into Regional Development Plan 18

Chapter 7: Implementing the Strategy & Action Plan................................................................... 207.1 Programme management arrangements................................................................................. 207.2 Feasibility Studies 207.3 Selection of Projects 217.4 Monitoring and Evaluation Systems........................................................................................ 227.5 Periodic Revisions of the Strategy and Action Plan 22

Finally 24

Edited by:

INSULAIntemational Scientific Council for Island Development

cloUNESCO1, rueMiotlis

75732 Pans, FRANCETel.: +33145.68.40.56, Fax: +331 45.68.58.04

E·mail: insula@unesco.org

MEDIS Project Consortium:INSULA· SILTANET LId.

PROODOS S.A· ITER • CIESERIS@ • ANCINET - HIIU MAAVALlTSUS

UNESCO (Spoosonng partner)CEMR (Sponsonng partner)

Introduction

Background 1

In the last decade, information and communications technologies (ICTs) have becomeso pervasive that they have given rise to a number of new concepts such as the Infor-mation Society 2, the Digital Revolution and the Knowledge-Based Economy. The factthat these technologies are already influencing, directly or indirectly, the lives of manypeople is not disputed, nor is there any doubt that they will continue to affect a growingnumber of people. However, it is equally certain that ICTs affect different people and dif-ferent regions in different ways. Some are benefiting from the opportunities that thesenew technologies and their applications bring whilst others are lagging behind and arefaced with a growing threat of exclusion.At a regionallevel, the development or acceleration of the information society neces-

sitates a number of pre-conditions: amongst these are widespread access to advancedtelecommunications infrastructure and affordable services, a criticaí mass of demand,and the skills to use and develop ICTs and their applications. Each is necessary andnone is sufficient. It might be argued, however, that the appropriate infrastructure isespecially necessary. But there is mounting evidence that private sector telecommunica-tions operators are concentrating their attention in the most lucrative markets wherereturns on investment are both greater and faster. Typically, this agglomeration effect isbenefiting the richer, more densely populated and least peripheral areas and leaving thepoorer, more sparsely populated and more peripheral regions at a further disadvan-tage3. Nowhere is this more evident than in many insular and ultra-peripheral regions.

If Less Favoured Regions (LFRs) in general, and insular regions in particular, are tograsp the benefits and opportunities that the information society has to offer, they needto engage in strategic and concerted actions to accelerate its development. A significantnumber of LFRs4 have already set out to establish and implement regional information

1 This Concise Manual to developing regional planning initiatives within an information society framework is a substan-tiafly summarized version of the deliverable "European Islands and the Information Society: Planning Manual" adetailed manual, developed within the MEDIS Models for European Digital Islands (IST-1999-20896) project. fundedby the European Commission's 1ST Programme

2 The Information Society (IS) is one in which a community has the skifls and affordable access to afl forms of electronicservices when and where they are wanted. Such a society is characterised by a wide range of electronic services,both public and private. Furthermore, the people in the society have an awareness of and the ability to use existingservices and also do use them in every day life

3 See, for example, the Final Report of the ASPECT (Analysing Spatial Planning and Emerging CommunicationsTechnologies) Project, co-financed by the European Commission under INTERREG IIc, www.region-numerique.org/aspect, January 2002.

4 From 1994 to 1997, the Commission (DG XIII and DG XVI) co-financed the IRISI (Inter-Regional InformationSociety Initiative) pilot project in which six EU regions sought to develop IS strategies and actions plans and theintegration of these into Regional Development Plans and their Structural Funds programmes. The six regionsworked coflaboratively through a Learning network to share experience and good practice and to pro vide one anotherwith mutual support. The pilot project was deemed a sufficient success that the Commission launched a cafl foflowingwhich a further 22 regions foflowed (1996-99) a similar process and methodology in the RISI (Regional InformationSociety Initiative) project.

4

society strategies and actions plans, with assistance from the European Commission,and there is therefore a substantial amount of experience and good pracfice".

Why a Planning Manual?The MEDIS Models for European Digital Islands (IST-1999-20896)6 project had theobjective to create a Planning Manual to provide help to those who are responsible for,and involved in, the development of a regional information society strategy and actionplan. The intention has been to provide, as simply and clearly as possible, a step-by-step guide in the form of tips, tools and templates to be used as a supplement to earlierguides. This Concise Version of the Manual has as its goal an easier and primary intro-duction to the Planning Manual itself, and all its tools, as well as serving the purpose offacilitating the wider dissemination of the ideas behind the Planning Manual.

The Intended ReadershipThe information society will affect all sectors of society and the economy. In principie,therefore, all should have the opportunity to be involved in attempts to shape and accel-erate it. In practice, of course, this is not feasible. Nonetheless, it is advocated that abroad regional partnership should be created in which the representatives of all key sec-tors of the regional community should be included.

How to Use the Concise Planning ManualAs previously stated, no two regions are identical. In an islands context, some islandterritories are large and some are small. Some island regions are archipelagos, consist-ing of a large number of small islands whilst others are large territories in their own right.Some islands are relatively prosperous whilst many are relatively poor. Some islandsare located close to the mainland, many others are quite isolated, being located at sig-nificant distances from the mainland, but they are all dependent on air and sea transpor-tation that can be subject to disruption. Like mainland regions, island regions vary intheir administrative, legal and cultural characteristics.

Variations such as these make it more difficult to define a single methodology that willbe appropriate to all in all circumstances. However, despite the important variations thatexist, the methodological approach offered in this Manual has been tried and tested in28 (mainland) reqions' that also displayed significant differences and there is goodreason to believe, for the most part, that the processes proposed here for developing an

5 See /he Guide /0 Developing Regional Informa/ion Socie/y Ini/ia/ives, unpublished bu/ available on reques/ fromghughes@irisi.u-net.com. A shorl version of /he Guide in 5 European languages is available from /he EuropeanCommission (DG Regio).

6 MEDIS aims /0 pro vide a forward looking analysis of /elecommunica/ion, /elematic infras/ruc/ure and service needsin European islands. The resulls are lo benefi/ communities and adminis/ra/ive organisations in islands, peripheraland lesser developed regions in Europe. A planning manual, /aking in/o accoun/ /he resul/s of /he projec/, will helpEuropean islands build up /heir own developmen/ s/ra/egies.

7 The 28 IRISI and RISI regions

information society strategy and action plan can be applied in island regions and ter-ritories. This experience is further enhanced by the studies conducted during the Medisproject and the use of the method presented in this manual in a pilot experience on theEstonian island of Hiiumaa.

The methodology and especially the tools rnentionec" in this manual have been cus-tomized to suit islands and LFRs with limited previous experience in planning, but canequally well be used in larger communities or by experienced planners. By using themanual, the planner should be able to avoid mistakes and futile work. One of the virtuesof the manual is that it makes it easier to repeat the work after a few years, taking advan-tage of the lessons learned in the first round of planning.

In this Concise Planning Manual the word region is used throughout the text, not inthe sense of an administrative unit, but in the meaning of an undefined territorial area ofany size. Thus, the word region could mean an island, a group of islands, a mainlandarea with islands, purely a mainland area, a village, a town, a m~nicipality, a county, aprovince, a prefecture, a NUTS II or III-region, etc.

The Structure and Layout of theConcise Version of the Planning ManualIf a community decides to initiate a planning process aimed at development of the regionalInformation Society, the first phase should be to establish a management structure for theplanning process. This is described in Chapter 1 - Structures & Organization. The follow-ing step is to get information about the present status of the Information Society in theregion, as described in Chapter 2 - Baseline Audit and Benchmarking. Chapter 3 describesthe Analysis of the material gathered in the baseline audit and benchmarking procedures.This chapter also describes the instrument offered by a SWOT-analysis (Strengths, Weak-nesses, Opportunities, and Threats). In Chapter 4 we describe the creation of an optionspaper as well as the importance of awareness raising and a public debate regarding theoptions. The raising of awareness among the wider public is an action that must be presentthrough the whole planning process. The important concept of creating networks and part-nerships is also described in Chapter 4. The following step, Chapter 5, describes how toformulate a vision and develop it into a Strategy and Action Plan. Chapters 6 and 7 dealwith the embedding and implementation of the Strategy and Action Plan, in which the selec-tion of projects, monitoring and evaluation are important parts.

It must be pointed out that even if the different actions in the Planning Manual aredescribed in a sequential order, several of them could and should be performed simulta-neously. In so me cases a different order can be applied. Actions like awareness raisingand public debate, as well as the creation of networks and partnerships, should beactive during the whole process.

8 These lools may be downloaded on MEDIS websile (www.teleinsula.com/medis) or by requesl al insula@unesco.orgTheyare designed following Ihe same pattern of Ihe Chaplers of Ihis Concise Manual.

6

THE CONCISE PLANNING MANUAL FOR AN INFORMATION SOCIETYA Step by Step Approach

Chapter 1: Structures & Organization

1.1 The Regional Steering CornrnitteeIn the case of the RISI (Regional Information Society Initiatives) regions, the chairper-sons in the majority of Regional Steering Committees (RSC) appear to have beenappointed either by the regional authority or by the leading organisation involved in pro-posing the initiative. Projects in the RISI-regions have unequivocally demonstrated theimportance of effective leadership at the highest level and that the appointment of thechairman of the RSC needs to be considered with great careo

To be effective, the RSC has to be of a manageable size, but also ensure the repre-sentation of all the key players/sectors in the region. That includes representatives ofthe regional and local authorities, universities and research institutions, the telecom-munication operators, hardware and software suppliers, large private sector corpora-tions and small/medium sized enterprises, the media, the health services, educationsystem and transport sectors, to name some examples of large groups of regional play-ers. The composition of the RSC should also include participation from groups withbroad representation in the society, such as trade unions, as well as marginal groups,such as disadvantaged people and ethnic minorities.

The size of the RSC must be decided in accordance with regional conditions, but as aguideline the average of the steering committees in the RISI-regions varied in sizebetween 15 and 25 members. The main tasks of the Regional Steering Committee is toappoint the management unit and the work groups, to give these bodies necessaryfinancial means and to ensure that the planning process advances in accordance withthe time table also set by the RSC. The RSC should also have plenary discussionsabout all documents of significance, such as the options paper, the vision and the strat-egy and action plan.

1.2 Managernent UnitThe Management Unit (MU) will comprise a small team of 3-5 people. Ideally, membersof the management team should possess a range of complementary skills and exper-tise (project management, administrative, technical etc.). The Director of the Manage-ment Unit must be a good integrator with influence and also someone who is especiallysensitive to political contexts, a diplomat and a soft leader. The other members of theMU should be analysts, promoters, organisers, money hunters, and diplomats (integra-tors of disparate interests). The main task of the MU is to supervise the process, to keep

it moving, make the subcontractors and work groups do their assigned tasks and be theadministrative body of the planning process.

There are many good arguments why the MU should be anchored inside the regionalgovernmental structure. Quicker progress is often achieved if the authority of the gov-ernment can be used when dealing with the many participants. However, promotion ofthe information society is sometimes challenging to existing structures and there couldbe some long-term advantages from putting the management structures in an externalbody, for example a non-profit organization or foundation ..

1.3 Work GroupsIn order to get a wide participation in the planning process it is advisable to establishthematic Work Groups (WG). A work group can represent thematic concerns connectedwith a certain sector in the society, geographical dispersion, or just to perform a specificfunction in the planning process. Much of the work in the work groups is based on vol-untary work from the participants, but they must also have access to assistance fromthe paid aides if so needed. It is usually necessary to have a person in each work groupresponsible for documentation, for arranging and summoning meetings and for keepingthe contact with the MU and other WGs.

1.4 The use of ConsultantsIn a small island or region there is often a lack of experience in how to manage planningprocesses and in project management. The existing administrative bodies are usuallyfully occupied with the daily routines. Therefore it can be a good idea to bring in consult-ants to work with the planning process. Consultants will contribute with their expertise,methodological abilities and "good practice" from other regions. External consultantsare also independent of the regional actors and look at things with an external, moreobjective, perspective. An external consultant can contribute with the external perspec-tive and international experiences, while the local consultant already knows a lot aboutthe peculiarities of the region and no time will be wasted on that. The choice of profilefor the consultants is a task that also requires a specific competence from the projectmanagement, as well as continued management during the process.

Chapter 2: Baseline Audit and Benchmarking

2.1 Baseline auditIt is important, at the outset, before beginning the development of The Strategy andAction Plan, to know what is already happening and available within the region. In orderto get a view of the regional situation it is necessary to make a baseline inventory todescribe where the region stands in relation to other regions, the rest of the country andin a global perspective. This baseline inventory should of course cover all aspects ofthe leT and IS development in the island or region, such as telecommunications struc-ture and capacity, skills and awareness in the population, enterprises and educationalsystem, but also traditional indicators for regional development.

Inventory indicators will be found from several places. In some cases there alreadyexist databases that monitor regional structures and present them in a way that makes itpossible to benchmark them against other regions and to observe developrnent overtime. In other cases, and this will most probably be the case in the search for indicatorson the Information Society, you will have to establish the databases yourself throughsurveys and other means of collecting data. The basic data material must be analyzedand presented in such a way that it is an aid to the overall analysis of the regional situa-tion. This material should be preserved and sto red so it can be used again as a bench-mark platform when repeating the inventory after a few years.

2.2 BenchmarkingBenchmarking is used to monitor performance over time and in relation to other units,such as other regions, the national average and the European average, but it is impera-tive to consider carefully what to benchmark and against whom. There is not yet any uni-versally agreed consistent set of measures with which to conduct inter-regional bench-marking of the Information Society. However, the work for establishing statistical indica-tors for the Information Society has already begun and will soon emanate in commonlyaccepted indicators. Moreover, no two regions are the same in terms of their character-istics, so one is rarely comparing like with like. However, despite the difficulties, it is stillmost important to undertake some benchmarking in order to persuade policy makers(at alllevels) to take the information society seriously.

The purpose of benchmarking is to improve competitive performance in your region. Itprovides a basis for establishing rational performance goals through the search for bestpractices that willlead to superior performance.

The benchmark process in itself requires some time and must be conducted by per-sons with analytical and methodological ski lis. It is not advisable to have the workinggroups do the benchmarking themselves. The same persons should preferably beresponsible for both the collection of baseline data and the benchmarking procedure.'

89 In terms of a definition we might say that "benchmarking" is the continuous process of measuring your products,

services, processes and practices against the toughest competitors (those recognised as world leaders).

Chapter 3: Analysis

3.1 Strategic Gap AnalysisStrategic gap analysis is a systematic examination of the current status of the Informa-tion society in a region and where the "gaps" are. A gap analysis could focus on differentsteps in the process. For example, it can be used to identify gaps in the development ofthe information society in specific sectors (e.g. public administration, health, education,etc.) or even in the strategy itself.

When conducting a gap analysis it is very important to define points of reference. TheBaseline Audit and Benchmarking process will allow a selection of measurable targets tobe used as points of reference. Baseline Audit and Benchmarking will also help to identifythe gaps as far as initiatives already undertaken are concerned. Ad-hoc actions andprojects usually lack coherence and continuity and do not address integrated needs, aswas revealed in the MEDIS research during the examination of islands case studies. Con-tinuous (at set intervals) evaluation is necessary to achieve successfu I results.

3.2 Developing the Regional SWOTA SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) is important forevaluating the regional context in which Information Society development is shaped andplanned. A SWOT analysis must be as objective as possible to provide a context inwhich possible responses to the threats and opportunities can be generated and subse-quently evaluated - and this might include the development of scenarios. To ensureobjectivity, external facilitators (i.e. from outside the region) could be employed.

The Regional SWOT enables multiple perspectives of different regional actors to bebrought together into a single coherent document.

3.3 Regional Situation AnalysisThis step is actually a synthesis of the above paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 that aims, togetherwith the results emanating from the work described in Chapter 2, to provide a completepicture of the region as far as the context for the development of the Information Societyis concerned. This synthetic approach should address issues such as: an individualinterpretation of IS that takes local needs into account and enables national and/orregional authorities to establish a coherent strategy; the community's level of familiari-zation with new technologies; the availability and success rate of existing informationSociety (IS) applications; the participation and activities of local economic actors.

At this point it is useful to address the impact of the geographical nature of the regionin the process and more specifically the "insularity". Insular regions often consist of agroup of islands, with different levels of development. Different islands, althoughbelonging to the same region, have distinct needs and in most cases economies ofscale cannot be achieved. This fact, when applicable, should be taken into account in

10

all steps of the process (e.g. a regional SWOT analysis could be the synthesis of anumber of local SWOT analyses), in order to achieve a regional situation analysisthat represents the whole region and not only the more advanced islands.

3.4 Identifying Key IssuesThe interpretation of the IS is more than the introduction of some technological systemsin place. The deployment of the IS is affected by a number of factors that the MEDISteam considers as critical factors= tor 15 development in European Insular regionsand isolated areas.

The regional prerequisites should be analysed in terms of technological development,social cohesion, policy making and local key actors, which are the critical factors affect-ing IS development. This analysis will help the region at a later stage to optimise policydecisions and actions regarding future initiatives, or benchmarking against current per-formance.

" ' .... need lar aclion. indicates the issues. the contexl and the way lorward in the areas al regutatory, investment and demand suppoil poIicies. Coherentprogress in these areas wilt be important lar harmanious regional devetopmenr. eohesion and the Information Society. COM (97)7/3, Brossets

Chapter 4: Considering the Options

4.1 Options PaperAn Options Paper is one way of providing the starting point for a region-wide publicdebate regarding the planning process. It is beneficial to keep the options open andthereby encourage innovative ideas and creative thinking.

Primarily, the Options Paper is a tool for generating a public debate within a region oninformation society issues and therefore the target audience should be the citizens andenterprises. An effective Options Paper will also be a tool for bringing about changes inpolicy. The widespread debate is intended to give legitimacy to subsequent outcomesand conclusions.

In general, regions can follow one of two approaches in the development of theirOptions Papers, both of which are valid. A 'visionary' approach, providing a vision ofwhat technology might do within a region or, a more analytical and 'inward' approach,working up from a baseline assessment and the SWOT analysis of the region's position.

In both cases, the Options Paper will assume the character of a consultative docu-ment (or "Green Paper"). A key issue is how to engage people who are not familiar withinformation society issues, or who have a less positive attitude.

4.2 Awareness-Raising and Public ParticipationThe process of raising the awareness about possible impacts of the Information Societyplays an important part when the population and the key actors in the region are to beinvolved. Awareness is also an important factor in building consensus and partnerships.At the same time, other activities, such as the baseline audit and the inventory of theICT projects in the region are important parts of the process.

Essential elements in raising the awareness about the Information Society issuesand impacts amongst the regional population include: discussion about the needs andpriorities; engagement of a wide range of people; information to all the sectors of theregional community and economy; building networks and identifying potential partners;generating commitment and consensus.

Essential issues for an awareness raising campaign: what must be communicated;why it must be communicated; to whom it should be communicated; how and when itshould be communicated; who does the communicating.

There are many potential audiences: regional work groups and their chairpersons;regional promoters of ICT projects and applications; local and regional politicians,including regional planning authorities; Monitoring Committees for Regional StructuralFunds; special interest groups (such as large organizations and unions); press andother media (generally); industry and commerce, especially powerful lobby groupsdirectly related to the information society (e.g. hardware and software vendors, telecom-

12

munications operators, media content developers, publishers etc.); the general public,especially the citizens and representative organizations in the regions.

A variety of tools and techniques can be employed as part of an awareness raisingcampaign. These include the use of: direct interaction in the form of: meetings, semi-nars and workshops, conferences, symposia, summer schools and other educational'events', presentations and demonstrations; traditional (print) media, examples: officiallpolicy documents, newsletters/leafiets, books/pamphlets, guidelines/advisory, pressreleases/press articles/supplements, posters and brochures; other electronic/digitalmedia, examples: e-mail and file transfer, bulletin boards, www-pages & archive,CD-ROM, TV and radio.

Reach out to the widest regional audience possible. Encourage participation. Gener-ate (and listen to) feedback, as well as information.

4.3 Public Debate Regarding PrioritiesThere is nothing deterministic about the shift to the Information Society. The technologi-cal, economic and societal changes associated with ICTs and the Information Societyare not wholly exogenous but can be infiuenced by societal choices. However, in orderto shape the Information Society at the regionallevel, and to ensure that the benefitswill be maximized and the risks minimized, it is recommended to engage the region inan explicit planning process, which should be based on a widespread public debate.

Regional information society initiatives need to be demand-driven and, therefore,responsive to the needs of the organizations and citizens in the region. The develop-ment of such a response should thus be essentially bottom-up. Since the responses tothe challenge posed by the Information Society will affect all sectors of the society, theapproach needs to be inclusive, engaging the representatives of all the social groups aswell as the key economic players.The debate should be maintained throughout the process, as a continuous feedback loop,keeping people informed, inviting their comments and feedback, maintaining the interest,and commitment, and ensuring ongoing relevance of the initiative and its outcomes.

Public debate should be the centerpiece of the process - providing opportunities forawareness raising, participation and involvement, networking and exploration. Owner-ship matters and the process should be based on negotiating a stakeholders' model ofregional development. The strategy and strategy development process should proposethe content, systems and the structures necessary to bring about a re-orientation in deci-sion making and, with it, a successful change.

4.4 PartnershipsParticipation, networking and partnership are quite closely related concepts. A networkimplies the existence of benefits and obligations, whilst participation is a much looserform of social interaction in which there is a potential for benefits but no obligations, and

1I

a partnership implies a closer relationship in which there may be formal and contractualtieso The development of the Information Society at regionallevel will benefit from crea-tion of such partnerships.

For partnerships at the initiative level, obligations tend to be informal only and this iswhy binding large numbers of diverse institutions together is so difficult. The key organiza-tions (key players) rarely share the same vision or the same expectations, and thus donot tend to share equally the sense of social obligation to the collective (regional) good.

In partnerships at the project level, partners are bound together around a better andmore closely defined purpose. The partnership is stronger because of the more realisticexpectations on realizable and tangible benefits, as well as due to the smaller number andgreater homogeneity of partners.

In order to create partnerships it is necessary to identify potential key partners. This isan activity that must be ongoing all the time and many partners will probably find eachother spontaneously during the process. The top-down and bottom-up approachesshould both be taken into account. In small islands/regions there exists a common com-plaint that the voice of the region is not heard in the central government. This fact talksstrongly for a bottom-up approach; however the best results usually come from the finebalance between the top-down (initial ideas, funding) and the bottom-up (discussion,real needs) approaches.

The Regional Steering Committee and the work groups will form a natural basis forthe creation of regional partnerships. It is also most important to enhance the creation ofpublic/private partnerships. However, regions sometimes encounter problems in engag-ing the private sector, beca use the private sector often require that a proposition is com-mercially attractive, even if the investment is desperately needed for a 'greater commongood'. Therefore project partnerships need to be based on ' win-win' situations for thepotential partners. Partnerships between public and voluntary sector organizations tendto present fewer problems, since they share the same culture and common commitmentto public service. ,

Regional "public/private" partnerships consist of arrangements between local andregional authorities and private sector bodies aiming at providing public infrastructure,community facilities and related services. Through this agreement, the skills and assetsof each sector (public and private) are shared in delivering such services or facilities foruse by the general public. Such partnerships are characterized by the sharing of invest-ments, risks, responsibility and benefits between the partners. The reasons for estab-lishing such partnerships can vary depending on the specific subject of agreement, butgenerally involve the financing, design, construction, operation and maintenance ofpublic infrastructure and services. The partners have to execute a tight collaborationscheme, like in a "coloured puzzle" in which different pieces exist: each one has itsplace and individual and specific skills, but all of them have the same goal - that is,making the picture complete.

4.5 NetworksNetworking as a concept is widely discussed but its popularity tends to be accompaniedby a general vagueness about what the idea exactly entails. Fundamentally, we candescribe networking as a set of mechanisms for mutual support, exchange of experi-ence and sharing of good practice on the grounds that experience shows that regionslearn better and faster by being part of a collaborative learning network. Learning fromeach other plays an important part in developing competence and in securing achieve-ments.

Networking is a new concept for organizations, associations and enterprises to organ-ize themselves with the aimof achieving a greater good, but also a new form of workingfor individuals, inside an organization as well as between individuals from differentorganizations. Especially the management of regional, inter-regional and internationalprojects implies networking as a new working culture that is fast becoming more andmore frequent. This new concept of work is by nature mostly performed in a virtualmode, location and distance is of no importance, and networking also challenges thestructures and hierarchies inside the organizations and in the traditionallabour market.

Networking is a way of achieving economies of scale in areas common for the partici-pants, whilst retaining the advantages of individual specialization and freedom of action.Networks should be designed so that they generate added value through cooperationat a variety of levels in the belief that we all have something to learn from each other.

Regional networks are easier to establish than inter-regional networks, and will prob-ably also be easier to sustain and develop over time since the participants might haveprevious experience of each other. However there might exist afear for competition andlost business opportunities among those that would be the most appropriate partners ina network. This must be overcome by the creation of win-win situations for all the partici-pants and by the concentration on wider goals than the present situation.

Inter-regional networking offers the participants a more global, or at least European,perspective on the information society development. It takes time and effort, commit-ment, resources, trust and goodwill, a willingness to be open and to learn from others,and a clear view of what you are trying to achieve. But, despite the obstacles, difficultiesand challenges, the eventual rewards make it worthwhile.

14

Chapter 5: Formulating the Strategy& Building Consensus

5.1 The Strategy and Action PlanA strategy often starts with a vision, which is expressed through an overall objective(e.g. "to become a competitive, inclusive and dynamic knowledge-based region"). Thestrategy is then an elaboration of the vision.

The key components of the strategy are the priorities. Each priority is realizedthrough a number of measures - each of which may have specific objectives of its ownand in addition to that some targets associated with each objective. The targets of themeasures should add up to the targets of the priorities.

Finally, the measures of the strategy or in a plan are implemented through specificprojects. Each project contributes to the objective(s) of one or more measures and toone or more priorities. In other words, projects seldom map one-to-one with a singlemeasure. For example, large integrated projects may involve some development of theinfrastructure, provision of public access, development of some new services as well assome training of leT ski lis. Such a project is likely to contribute to a number of measuresand even a number of priorities.

A strategy (the vision and the priorities) and an action plan (the specific measuresand operational mechanisms) are often adopted without knowing the projects. In theStructural Funds, for example, organizations and consortia/partnerships will be invitedto tender in a competitive process.

So, projects will be proposed and the manager of the funds will make choicesbetween competing proposals.

In other words, the project proposals are a response to the strategy and action plan.

5.2 Developing a Vision,It's useful to develop a vision for the region in terms of the Information Society. In fact,most organisations have a vision statement that defines the overall context for the devel-opment of a strategy and action plan.

Developing an agreed vision statement is useful beca use it helps to promote the initia-tive and the strategy development process. Also, the process of agreeing a vision state-ment brings together the range of perspectives and priorities, and the different ambi-tions of a potentially disparate group of participants in the region and it tends to empha-size (social) values as well as (economic and technological) ambitions - and thereforesets the tone for the subsequent work. You can usually tell from a vision statement theextent to which a region is more concerned with, say, being inclusive than it is withbecoming more competitive.

5.3 From Visions to ObjectivesOnce each work group has agreed on a vision, or once a vision statement for the initia-tive as a whole has been agreed on, the next step is to define a set of objectives thatindicate what must be done to achieve the vision.

To develop a coherent set of objectives is perhaps the most important single step informulating a strategy and action plan. Objectives clarify in a concrete way what needsto be done to develop the regional information society and, by debating objectives, thepartners in the process begin to see where their organization could fit in and have a roleto play. Debate also brings together organizations which, in other contexts, may berivals but which in this setting can exploit their common aims and objectives and withthe potential synergy to benefit the region as a whole. This process helps to identify allthe stakeholders whose interests should be taken into account.

5.4 From Objectives to Priority ActionsOnce the objectives are clear, each work group should start considering how they couldbe achieved. However, at this stage it is important to re-consider the Regional SWOTgrid so as to be sure that the key issues are being addressed. The aim is to relate eachobjective to the regional SWOT, identify the key issues arising (in terms of gaps, bar-riers, impacts and priorities), propose a set of possible actions (options), and to deter-mine the priority order for the individual actions proposed.

The process is designed to ensure that proposed actions relate to the regional needs(as determined by the SWOT) and that work group members thoroughly consider therational selection and prioritisation of proposed actions (potential projects).

16

5.5 From Priorities to Measures and Projects ProposalsA small island or region will probably go directly from the priority actions to the projectlevel. In a larger region, or if substantial funds are available, there could be an idea todefine a set of measures for each priority. The measures are useful when the effort andthe shape of the projects are to be fit in the overall strategy given by the priorities.

Strategies can take many different shapes, forms and styles. Thus, for example, astrategy can be structured around: pilot projects and demonstrators; an experimentalapproach - creating the 'information society laboratory'; a few highly visible (strategic)flagship projects; a list of projects which fit the chosen strategy and inviting tenders tocarry them out; a list of priority fields which comprise the strategy but allowing projectsto be proposed (within these fields) in a bottom up fashion; the Big Bang! -throwingmoney at as many projects as possible in the hope that a critical mass will develop and'take-off' occurs. This may appear as a lack of strategy from a content perspective, but itmay be the best process-based approach to strategy for getting things started!

Chapter 6: Embedding theStrategy & Action Plan

6.1 Final Version of the Strategy & Action PlanAfter the Strategy and Action Plan (SAP) has been approved by The Regional SteeringCommittee it should become an official and public document by a decision taken by theproper authority, probably the body that appointed the RSC (for example The RegionalGovernment, The County Council, The Union of Municipalities). However, before thefinal decision, a draft version of the SAP should be referred back to all key actors forconsideration. Comments should be requested from all actors that may be affected bythe SAPoReserve one month time for this consideration.

Key actors to be asked for their comments should include at least all those mentionedin1.1and4.2.

Comments received from the consideration round will of course have a varied con-tent; some of the comments will probably be opinions that have been rejected earlier.The RSC will have to weigh carefully all comments against the draft of the SAP to see ifany changes are necessary before making the decision about the final version of thedocument. Finally, the SAP should be approved by the body that appointed TheRegional Steering Committee, if the RSC did not obtain this authorization from thebeginning.

After the Strategy and Action Plan has been approved, the plan should immediately bepromoted both to the general public, and especially to all actors that will be concerned bythe plan. The methods and channels for promotion should at this stage of the planningprocess be well developed. The promotion of the plan should be performed in the sameway as the campaign of awareness raising (described in Chapter 4 items 4.3 and 4.4).

6.2 Identifying and Securing Sources of Development FinanceInsular regions vary considerably in their legal and administrative power and compe-tence, as well as in their level of administrative authority. This must be taken intoaccount in order to develop a realistic strategic plan. It is important to locate the initiativewithin the mainstream of the regional development, and thus ensure that the initiativeenjoys the full support and commitment from the regional authority.

Sometimes it will be necessary to involve the administration at a higher level, for exam-pie, when an archipelago or island is part of a region and lacks its own public administra-tion with decision making powers.

The potential sources of financing are also closely related to the priorities of regionaland national planning as well as by the Structural Funds of the European Community.

The Strategy and Action Plan will be put to practice during a time period of several years,which must be considered when the financial estimations and budget are being made. It

18

should be kept in mind that the vision is based on a long term view and the action plan ona medium term view, while the projects tend to be shorter in their orientation.

Most of the regions already have a regional development plan with a set of strategicpriorities. In addition, most ofthe European islands are defined as Objective 1 or Objec-tive 2 areas entitling them to support from the EC Structural Funds correspondingly.These regions will be working within the framework of priority measures identified in theRegional Operational Programme under the Community Support Framework (CSF).The Structural Funds are an important catalyst for financing the Information Societystrategies. Structural Funds commitment necessitates, first, that information society pri-orities are consistent with existing priority measures and, second, that the informationsociety measures are defined and introduced in the Programming Document.

New instruments made available by the European Commission, such as the Innova-tive Actions Programme, facilitates the assumption of some additional risks associatedwith new technologies, and provides a context to validate some innovative solutionsbefore they are massively applied using the mainstream Structural Funds.

6.3 Integration of The Strategy & Action Planinto Regional Development PlanA Strategy and Action Plan Iying on a bookshelf is of no use to anyone. So, it is just asimportant to have an effective implementation of the strategy, as it is to have a gooddevelopment and definition of the strategy.

Implementing a regional information society strategy and action plan requires signifi-cant investment resources. In the rich, core regions, market forces are likely to stimulatesufficient private investments but in islands and less favoured regions (LFR), the publicauthorities and public funds have a catalytic role to play.

The fundamental task for regional information society initiatives is to persuade deci-sion-makers to see that the Information Society cannot be ignored, that it must beplanned for, and that its implications must be taken into account in the Regional Devel-opment Plan (RDP) and Structural Funds' Single Programming Document (SPD).

Mainstreaming the Strategy refers to the optimum outcome in terms of StructuralFunds' financial support for information society priorities. Mainstreaming, in this sense,is important in islands and LFRs since the Structural Funds represent a significant ele-ment of a region's public investment capacity.

It must be kept in mind that the development of the Information Society in itself is onlya means for achieving various goals: improved regional competitiveness, enhanced jobprospects and job security, greater social cohesion, better quality of life, and so on.Efforts to win Structural Funds' support for information strategies must always focus onthis point.

Usually there are also other regional development resources available, some ofwhich may derive from the Member State government. To gain access to such

resources for information society purposes, the Strategy and Action Plan will need to beadopted by the regional authority and incorporated into the Regional Oevelopment Planand is sometimes referred to as 'embedding'.

The mainstreaming of the Strategy should not only be focused on getting full benefit ofthe Structural Funds. There is a danger of shooting beside the target. It must not be forgot-ten that the Regional Strategy and Action Plan should primarily use the existing regionaland local resources available as the primary asset in the implementation process.

The procedure of mainstreaming and embedding the Strategy are essentially exer-cises in persuasion and inftuence. They can be seen as 'social processes' that connectthe results and outputs of the regional initiative to existing and new regional policies.The higher the real commitment and the greater the number of people active in both theregional initiative and in the mainstreaming and embedding efforts, the higher the likeli-hood of influencing and connecting to the regional policy.

In terms of mainstreaming, the aim is to obtain an agreement about the inclusion ofspecific priorities and/or measures for the development of the Information Society in theregion's Single Programming Oocument (SPO), ensuring a clear allocation of funds forimplementing information society priorities.

In terms of embedding, it is important from the outset to recognize the region's devel-opment priorities as laid out in the ROP. Regional information society initiatives shouldseek to support and reftect these priorities in their Strategy and Action Plan, demonstrat-ing how ICTs could be used to achieve such priorities better, faster or cheaper. At thesame time, however, the emerging information society may suggest that aspects of theROP need to be updated in the light of technological advances and the competitiveimpacts that the new technology can have.

20

Chapter 7: Implementing theStrategy & Action Plan

7.1 Programme management arrangementsWhile the strategy covers a longer time perspective, the action plan takes into accountwhat needs to be done in the medium term view. In brief, this requires the establishmentof criteria for project selection; the evaluation and selection of the projects themselves,including feasibility studies where appropriate, the design and creation of mechanisms tomonitor and evaluate projects, systems to monitor the strategy itself and the provision ofguidance and support to project teams and proposers. In parallel with these new activities,the Regional Steering Committee must maintain their existing activities. These include:new surveys to update inventaries and maintenance of databases; promoting the initia-tive and other 'communications' tasks; ensuring that awareness raising is extended andits content updated; maintaining communication with, and support to, networks; extend-ing participation, improving partnerships and consensus; continuing to participate in theregional development policy process; secure continued financing of the Plan.

The implementation of the strategy begins with the action plan, after it has beentested for consistency and coherence, been circulated for consultation and, after anynecessary modification. The implementation phase of the Action Plan means anincreased workload has to be managed and an increased complexity of operations thatrequires a broader range of skills. This suggests that a new stage of development hasbeen reached and the time has come to review and evaluate the management systemsand operations, the Management Unit in particular.

The following questions arise:• Is the Steering Committee working satisfactorily?• Are the resources of the Management Unit appropriate to their actual and anticipated

workloads?• Have Working Groups been effective to this date

Followed by a review of structures, personnel etc, and any changes necessary, theisland/region should stand ready to face the next majar phase of its development inwhich securing funding is a vital factor. Provided that the Strategy and Action Plan hasbeen successfully mainstreamed and integrated with regional policy, regional fundsshould be available to finance a range of projects that can give substance to the actionplan. On this basis, we might assume that the regional authority would also take respon-sibility for the initiative and for the maintenance costs.

7.2 Feasibility StudiesPrior to project tenders it is sometimes appropriate to conduct feasibility studies toensure that the project should be done and actually can be done. A feasibility study is

a controlled process for identifying problems, opportunities or mandates. With a feasibil-ity study you can determine objectives, describe current situations and successful out-comes, and assess the range of costs and benefits associated with several alternativesto solve a problem.

Normally a feasibility study precedes a conventional application development project,and secondly, demonstrates a case for investment or funding support.

The approach in a feasibility study may differ in many respects due to the focus of theproposed project or application, the scope and scale of it, and the likely sources for fund-ing. It will be especially important in cases where grant support is sought to ensure thatthe feasibility study meets the eligibility and other selection criteria decided by the fund-ing regime.

The scale and scope of a feasibility study should be identified and clearly com-mensurate (in terms of time and cost) with the anticipated scale of the project underinvestigation. The following could be used when determining the scale and scope of thestudy.• Small Scale Pre-Feasibility Study that involves mainly a few days of desk research.• Larger-Scale Pre-Feasibility Study culminating in a report which enables informed

first-stage investment decisions.• Final Feasibility Study that involves a more in-depth report on the viability of the

project and includes a detailed site survey if appropriate for the project. The reportproduced should be suitable for applying for investment capital, site acquisition ordevelopment consent.

In practice, these studies should focus on technical feasibility, financial/economic fea-sibility, operational feasibility and socio-political feasibility.

7.3 Selection of ProjectsThe allocation of funds for actual projects is generally done on the basis of a recom-,mendation by a selectian panel appointed by the funding authority. Besides appointingthe selection panel, the funding authority must also define the criteria ior selectianand design the selectian pracess. The existence of clear criteria and a transparentselection process is important in order for all participants to feel comfortable about thefinal selection of projects.

It is assumed that the project selection panel only has the power of recommendation(project labeling) and is not empowered itself to make the financial allocations. This isimportant for two reasons. First, according to the particular grant regime, the regulationsmay not allow such decisions to be formally delegated. Second, this two-stageapproach (recommendation followed by formal approval) allows a further check on thevalidity and propriety of the decision-making. It is recommended that the composition ofthe project selection panel must be such that it is capable of understanding and embrac-

22

ing the needs and aspirations of all sectors of the regional community and includes amix of suitably qualified Management Unit staff and impartial external experts.

Given the range of project criteria and the varied judgements of selection panel mem-bers, mechanisms/processes need to be developed to combine criteria in order to allowcomparison with other projects and against any the project benchmarks developed. Theuse of a weighted scoring system (since it is highly unlikely that all the criteria would beconsidered of equal importance) and radar plots can be useful in this context.

7.4 Monitoring and Evaluation SystemsThe programme needs monitoring and evaluation. While an evaluation is a means tosee if the programme reached its proposed objectives, monitoring is an internal processto see that the programme and its activities are conducted in accordance with a termwe call 'good governance'.

Monitoring is the supervision of the management of the programme. The monitoringprocess makes sure that the budget is followed, that calls for proposals are made, thatproper documentation and other requirements applied in modern governance exists. Ifthe programme is run as a part of the regional authority the proper monitoring systemprobably already exists inside this authority. If the programme is run as a partnershipproject, the monitoring process becomes very important and the system of monitoringshould be established at an early stage in order to keep the partners confident in eachother and in the partnership.

Evaluation is an independent and objective examination of the background, objec-tives, results, activities and means deployed in a project or programme. Furthermorethe intention of an evaluation is to draw lessons of what may become more widely appli-cable. An evaluation tries to determine the quality, value and importance of the project,initiative or programme. Try to plan the evaluation process as an integral part of the pro-gramme from the beginning. Do not forget that the evaluation process also needs itsown management and financial resources.

7.5 Periodic Revisions of the Strategy and Action PlanIn order to meet the changing circumstances and conditions in the region, the Strat-egy and Action Plan should be revised and amended periodically. It is possible thatsome of the objectives of the SAP are reached quicker than expected, and it createsthe need for a revision of the SAP in order to effectively use the funds available onother objectives.

The periodic reviews could be performed at preset intervals decided by the RegionalSteering Committee, or the reviews can take place when the situation so requires.

Depending on the estimated size of the revision of the SAP, the work can either bedone directly by the Management Unit and approved by the Regional Steering Commit-tee or, if the revision is considerable, the revision of the SAP could be done by a working

group specially established for this task. This work group could, for example, be madeup of all the chairpersons from the work groups used during the initial planning process.

The revision of the Strategy and Action Plan will more than likely require an evaluationof the analysis conducted during the initial steps of the process. A supplementary bench-marking exercise might also be necessary, taking into account the new situation.

This last step described in the planning manual demonstrates clearly that the plan-ning process is not strictly sequential and internal loops between the various stepsexists, an important issue always to be kept in mind.

24

Finally

Now you have gone through the Concise Version of the Planning Manual, you shouldget into the tools mentioned at the end each pertinent section this version. You shouldalso have become sufficiently interested in this sequence of actions so as to embark onthe use of the Planning Manual itself.

Further to the above although this Information Society Concise Planning Manual andthe Information Society Planning Manual itself deal with regions, the reader could alsouse it for small island states, as the problems and concerns encountered here are easilytransposable to the latter. If these are not members of the European Union the recom-mendations on EU policies and procedures are invalid, though similar instances may befound to operate in other institutional environments.

Last but not least all those involved in using this Concise Planning Manual or the Plan-ning Manual itself should remember that:

Planning is a learning process and one gains experience from the plan-ning process itself and from the following stages of embedding and imple-mentation. Then one starts again with a new planning process but nowwith obtained experience. With the help of this Concise Planning Manualand its big sister Planning Manual, we hope that the accumulation of expe-rience will be faster and more significant. We wish all regional actors goodluck in their endeavours towards the Information Society.

The full Planning Manual can be obtainad in CD-ROM fromINSULAInternational Scientific Council for Island Developmente/o Unesco1, rue Miollis75015 - ParisFranceTel.:+331 45684056Fax: +33 1 45683804E-mail: insula@unesco.org

Models for European Digitallslands.April2002

www.teleinsula.com/medis/

European Commlsslon. 5'" Framework Programme. 1STKA1

•maulaSiltaNet

erisweJES

~UJ1--

::::: Instituto Tecnológico y de• Energías Renovables S.A.

.•. Hiiu.•..•. Maavalitsus

-~~mm