Information and Global Security A Cautionary Tale? (published in EPS Quarterly, November 2006, see www.epsusa.org) by Raul Caruso*

Is there a relation between information and security? Does more information lead to a more secure world? These questions are not new. The spread of information is often linked with the advancement of liberal ideas – like human rights concerns, the promotion of democracy, and the development of civil society. This also appears to be confirmed by anecdotal and historical evidence. Dictatorships have always been committed to the restriction and manipulation of information through several means. In this decade, information circulation has witnessed an unprecedented growth. It is constantly disseminated through Newspapers, magazines, TVs, radios and the Internet. The evolution of the latter, in particular, has established a new frontier in information management and circulation. However, a huge disparity in the access to the World Wide Web does exist. According to Internet World Stats, estimates for 2006 show that 69% and 38% of North Americans and Europeans respectively have access to Internet, whilst only 3.6% of Africans and 10.8% of Asians do. What I suggest here is a re-consideration of the well-known proposal of closing the digital divide, which, a decade ago, seemed to constitute a major issue for international organisations like the UN and the World Bank. This proposal now appears to be gone for good. However, re-evaluating such a proposal raises questions about the role of information and its circulation. As economists, we often tend to believe in a benign impact of information on individuals’ choices. However, there are several theories suggesting an ambiguous impact of information. Here I would espouse one of them: the theory of cognitive dissonance as * Raul Caruso, Institute of Economic Policy, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Milano (Italy). Member of NEPS (Network of European Peace Scientists). email: [email protected]. The author wishes to warmly thank Andrea Locatelli and Lou Zarro.

1

Formattato: Inglese (Regno Unito)

expounded by Leon Festinger. The basic idea surrounding this theory is that people are uncomfortable with dissonant cognitions. Feasible reactions to dissonance are (a) changing one or more beliefs; (b) acquiring new information to increase the existing consonance; (c) reducing the importance of dissonant cognitions. Thus, on one hand, individuals may have a tendency to deal with dissonance by searching for new information. This could contribute to shaping the beliefs of individuals, making them persistent over time. If I was sure to have ‘God on my side’ I could search for information confirming that I am firmly committed to the defeat of an unfaithful enemy. If I was completely sure that the ‘War on Terror’ is devoted to eradicate terrorism and promote democracy, I could lower the relevance of the dissonant record of the Abu Ghraib tortures within the set of my beliefs. On the other hand, dissonance created by the acquisition of new information can induce a change in my beliefs. Therefore, in the cases quoted above, I could modify my belief and no longer justify either the self-proclaimed leader who promotes violence based upon religious beliefs or the ‘commander in chief.’ This kind of approach appears to be particularly relevant for the World Wide Web. Contrary to other media, while surfing the Internet, individuals are not simply exposed to information, they actually search for information. Then, if we believe in the cognitive dissonance theory, both the dissemination of information on the Internet and the evolution of the network become sensitive issues. Firstly, one should recall the nature of information itself. Information is often considered as a public good – i.e. non-rival and non-excludable. Albeit desirable, this is not always the case. Public information is nothing but the disclosure of information already privately available to some. Once disclosed, information becomes a public good, but it still has a cost of production, transmission and storage before it can be appropriable so it can become a private good. The circulation of information would depend also upon the availability of technology and the existence of high costs. In fact, in spite of the astonishing development in technologies, fixed costs of Internet (communication lines and routers) still remain very high, while marginal costs are supposed to be almost negligible. But, the latter can be raised quite dramatically because of congestion. An adequate mechanism of pricing could contribute to solving this problem. If we recognize information as a public good, public subsidies to cover both the fixed and the marginal costs would represent a desirable policy. Secondly, the Internet exhibits the feature of positive network externalities. The value of the network is proportional to the number of users. However, there are still doubts about the exact law

2

governing the evolution of the Internet. Some studies show that it follows a power-law. This would shape mergers and connections between larger and smaller networks. This is a critical issue to be investigated, because the future infrastructure and stability of the Internet will depend upon this too. Phenomena of concentration can arise and lead to the establishment – amongst millions of nodes – of a few major hubs governing the circulation of information. In such a case, one-sided information, misinformation and manipulation can follow. It is easy to find empirical evidence in this respect. Upon searching ‘war on terror’ on Google,1 the major search engine on the Internet, the first three links (out of 88,800,000), are relative to a videogame. The next three links are CNN, a web-page of the US Defence Department and the BBC. The good news is that at the eighth place is Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia. Using another search engine (Alltheweb), videogames do not appear, but the rest is similar. The website of US Defence Department appears first. Thus, a global policy devoted to spreading Internet facilities all around the world, namely closing the digital divide, would constitute a desirable policy if and only if (a) public subsidies are included to cover both the fixed and the marginal costs and (b) adequate institutions of governance for the Internet are also established. As Luigi Campiglio argued, a kind of anti-trust institution for the Internet should be designed and could be fundamental for a balanced evolution of the web. I am aware that the latter proposal does constitute a slippery ground, given that management of the Internet has always been a highly politicized issue. However, what appears to me is that an indiscriminate development of the Internet could undermine – rather than favour – the spread of uncensored and independent information. In such a view, a global and comprehensive policy on the World Wide Web could also contribute to global security.

Since I am based in Italy, I report results as they appeared on the Italian version of Google. Note that a web-surfer cannot jump to the American version of the website. This also would require more attention.

1

3

REFERENCES AKERLOF G.E., DICKENS W.T., (1982), The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance, The American Economic Review, vol. 72, no.3, pp. 307-319 ARROW K., (1995), Information Acquisition and the resolution of conflict, in Arrow K., Mnookin R.H., Ross L., Tversky A., Wilson R.B., (eds.), Barriers to Conflict Resolution, W.W. Norton, New York. ARROW K., (1963), Uncertainty and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care, The American Economic Review, vol.53, no.5, pp.941-973. BARABÁSI A.L., ALBERT R., (1999), Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks, Science, vol. 286, 15 October 1999. BARKER P., (2003), Cognitive Dissonance, Beyond Tractability, Burgess G., Burgess H. (eds.), Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, available at www.beyondtractability.org/essay/cognitive_dissonance/ BOULDING K.E., (1966), The Economics of Knowledge and the Knowledge of Economics, The American Economic Review, vol. 56, no. 1/2, pp.1-13. BOULDING K.E., (1956), The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society, University of Michigan Press. CAMPIGLIO L., (2003), Economia dell’informazione e delle reti, in W.G. Scott, M. Murtula, M. Stecco (eds.), Manuale di management. Strategie, modelli e risorse dell’impresa nell’economia digitale, Il Sole 24 Ore, Milano, pp. 3-13. CAMPIGLIO L., (1999), Mercato, Prezzi e Politica Economica, Il Mulino, Bologna. (chap. 5) DEZSÖ Z., ALMAAS E., LUKACS A., RACZ B., SZAKADAT I., BARABASI A.L., (2006), Dynamics of Information access on the web, Physical Review, vol. 73, 066132. ECONOMIDES N., (1996), The Economics of networks, International Journal of Industrial Organization, vol. 14, pp. 673-699. FESTINGER L., (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford University Press. GALTUNG J., (1964), Foreign Policy Opinion as a function of Social Position, Journal of Peace Research, vol. 1, no.3/4, pp. 206-231. HIRSHLEIFER J., (1971), The Private and Social Value of Information and the Reward to Inventive Activity, The American Economic Review, vol. 61, no.4, pp. 561-574. KATZ M.L., SHAPIRO C., (1985), Network Externalities, Competition and Compatibility, The American Economic Review, vol. 75, no.3, pp. 424-440. MORRIS S., SHIN H.S., (2002), Social Value of Public Information, The American Economic Review, vol. 92, no.5, pp. 1521-1534.

4

Formattato: Italiano (Italia)

MACKIE-MASON J.K., VARIAN H.R., (1994), Some economics of the Internet, University of Michigan, available at http://wwwpersonal.umich.edu/~jmm/papers/Economics_of_Internet.pdf NAKATA H., (2006), Modelling choice of information acquisition, mimeo. ODLYZKO A., TILLY B., (2005), A refutation of Metcalfe’s Law and a better estimate for the value of networks and networks interconnections, available at http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/metcalfe.pdf SCHLICHT E., (1984), Cognitive Dissonance in Economics, Schriften des Vereins für Sozialpolitik, Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Neue Folge 141, 61—81, available at www.vwl.unimuenchen.de/ls_schlicht/mitarbeiter/es/paper/schlicht_cognit ive-dissonance-in-economics.pdf YU PETER K., (2002), Terrorism and the global digital divide: why bridging the divide is even more important after September 11, posted February 11, 2002, available at http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020211_yu.html.

Formattato: Inglese (Regno Unito) Codice campo modificato Formattato: Inglese (Regno Unito) Formattato: Inglese (Regno Unito)

Formattato: Inglese (Regno Unito)

5