SPEECH BY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC MARTTI AHTISAARI

AT THE "HUMAN FACE OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY" CONFERENCE IN HELSINKI ON 9.6.1999

A SECOND STAGE IN BUILDING THE INFORMATION SOCIETY MUST BE COMMENCED - WITH PEOPLE RATHER THAN MACHINES IN THE MAIN ROLE

Do we have the patience and composure to succeed in the information society of the future?

The latter half of this decade has been a period of technological success for our country, which has been suffering from a recession. For many years now, Finland has been the world leader in terms of Internet connections. More than half of the Finns now possess our own national trump, a mobile phone.

Finland's role as a leading architect of the information society is recognised in Europe. Also on a global scale, we are seen as a laboratory of the potential of the future, as a testing ground where a nation is boldly applying new technology.

Finnish companies, with Nokia in the vanguard, have restructured and internationalised. Our know-how has increased the value-added input also in traditional sectors. Finland is finding the road that leads to a society of advanced knowledge and skills.

That being the case, is all well?

Yes, provided we are able to maintain the present pace of renewal. What is even more important, however, is to recognise also our weaknesses, which could easily be forgotten if we allow ourselves to be lulled into a sense of self-satisfaction.

The information society consists of more than just technology or contents understood in a narrow sense. It also embraces the structures of society, the work done in it and the economy. Above all it involves people themselves - the human face of society.

If the information society is understood only through technology, it has no value. Only the effects on human life of the changes it brings make it worth striving for. We must break down hierarchic structures in societies and organisations, give citizens equal opportunities to avail themselves of new services and above all promote sustainable development as part of building the information society.

We need political, economic, cultural and communicational insight and skill before a network economy and a network culture are born of the information network.

We are proceeding to a new stage in our labour of construction. The frame of the house that we call the information society is nearing completion; now its interior has to be decorated.

One of the features emphasised in Finland's new information society strategy is a restructuring of means of exercising democratic influence. Yet our administrative machinery, our economic thinking and our management models are still based on those that applied during the industrial era or even when Finland was a society of distinct estates.

It is important to bring the various actors in society closer together and to eliminate hierarchic boundaries and ways of doing things. This will not happen without resistance.

The most important challenge with respect to ensuring balanced development has to do with preventing a division of our society and the global community into two halves. The world must not be split into recipients of information and citizens who are deprived of it.

Information networks and the new media system can become a global concentration of the few and a temple of commercial greed that spreads supranational banality everywhere, a place to which billions have access, but where only the few have a real right or opportunity to engage in interaction.

The other alternative is that networks could be a foundation on which to develop civil society and for study, work and interaction that take account of the needs of citizens.

These alternatives are not technical, but rather - and to the greatest degree - political and economic.

We must answer the following questions: Is the information society being built from the top down or from the bottom up? Is it being built by a few global alliances from afar to near or by millions of citizens from near to afar?

The Nordic welfare state tradition and the operational models that civil society offers could be the trump cards that we can place alongside technological capability.

That we avail ourselves of the potential of information networks in everyday life and work is a prerequisite for success. This has been seen long ago in the United States, where the entertainment and news industry was quick to ensure a dominant position for itself on the information highway.

Europe has fallen behind in the development of both technology and cultural, informational, educational and work models. In the sector of technology we Finns are an exception in our continent, but where contents are concerned our status as a small language area and market means that we are still a fairly insignificant actor. These are questions that must now be addressed.

One of the purposes of this gathering is to outline the direction of a national initiative so that we Finns can proceed with a shared view towards a humane information society in Europe and be the central force in its implementation. The European Union's motto in the information society — People First — suits also us as a strategic point of departure. Our culture, our sense of social responsibility and the structure of our society might have been created specifically for human-scale methods and models of action.

European nations bigger than us have become aware both of the potential that the information society brings and the threats that it creates. They are already responding by increasing resources. That means a toughening of competition.

Nevertheless, we Finns have good prospects of attaining the status of a European pioneer.

That is why I hope we shall find initiatives and projects that are nationally formulated and apply to the whole of Europe, and which will add Finland's contribution to the development of European know-how.

It is important that we have the sense to concentrate our strengths rather than trying to be jacks of all trades.

During the initial stages of developing enterprise in the cultural sector there is a need also for inputs of public resources, but these must be seen as investment, which will be recouped many times over moderately soon.

Smallness is our strength. Small companies and communities are of central importance in promoting Finnish culture and know-how. Our knowledge and skill are largely based on our ability to network small innovative forces with large and traditional actors. Small companies gain strength from big ones, which in turn benefit from the ability of the former to produce innovations quickly.

A striving for openness and networking applies also to governance. This striving has traditionally led many national development projects, but it is not essential to do things that way now, when a new trend and spearhead projects are being launched. When new things are being done, the actor with the best ability is not necessarily a ministry, a large organisation or a national agency. Or at least they should not lead or carry through projects without cooperating with other expert instances.

Citizens disengaging themselves from following social affairs or from participating in them is such a serious problem that it must be taken note of. Information networks offer great opportunities to implement grass-roots democracy in practice.

The fact that a national strategy on the information society has been drafted has given the development of our society a visionary and goal-directed dimension. As a continuation of that work, we should now set ourselves new challenges on the basis of our national tradition of ability, our cultural background and our new European status.

We ought to find a broad national consensus and draft a Finnish initiative to present to other European countries.

We are not only in an advantageous position to present initiatives, we also have an obligation and the ability to do so.

First of all, we must define our areas of strength with respect to contents and promote the preservation of our technological superiority. The goal must be to commercialise Finnish information work, cultural and educational products and methods so that they can be at the service of Europe.

Our strength lies in Finland's long history of popular education, good teaching and many applications of technological educational aids. The models of the citizens' information society distinguish us from the big commercial players.

Second, I appeal to media companies, trade unions and NGOs as well as to the educational authorities to work in support of the basic goal in our national strategy, to keep all citizens involved. A hundred years ago, our common goal was popular education, promoting Finnish cultural identity and literacy, to arrange programmes of education for women and workers, to provide training for people in rural areas and to get the press to support all this.

Now that we face the challenge of a new kind of literacy, involving media training, interactive information technology skills, learning working methods and how to manage flows of information, our school system will not be able to cope with the task on its own. There is a danger of the adult population being dropped off the train unless we can bring about as broad and inspiring a desire for education as we had a century ago.

Third, we must use cooperation, networking and effective financing in an effort to eliminate the obstacles that the smallness of our language area and market causes. Large companies would be well-advised to seek new methods of working by networking with small actors, and by deriving the benefits of and supporting projects that these actors launch.

In working life we have been able in recent year to get together and reach agreement based on the interests of the nation as a whole. With the advent of the information society, networking and project-type tasks are causing significant changes in working life, and the effects of these changes can be surprising. Fourth, I hope that organisations will begin developing a network economy and labour-market practices that promote employment.

Fifth, administrative reform should be gotten under way on the basis of the models with which the information society provides us. Dismantling sectoral administration and creating networks that transcend the demarcation lines between sectors of administration as well as effective implementation of the information society on the local level are essential steps if we want to improve our prospects of national success.

With the aid of these projects, we could forge a national initiative and present it as a model to the whole of Europe during the latter half of our semester in the Presidency of the EU.

I hope that the will for this kind of national effort will be found in both the business and the administrative sectors.

We Finns do not want to play a role only as pioneers in technology and trail-blazers in its applications; we also want to develop human values for it.

That is not only a means of ensuring our own success, but also work for equality and peace at its finest.