Responsible Governance of IT for social inclusion

 

Although the emergence and diffusion of new media and technologies is accelerating, the implementation of related standards cannot catch up the speed of technology. And very often, the lack of a framework or standard that defines these media and technologies overlooks the more fundamental and important human needs that organizations rely on. As such, keeping up with today's ever-increasing social demands and rapid technological changes may feel like an overwhelming burden to the top managers of an organization. The purpose of this document is to find out for IT governance decision makers in organizations what issues need to be addressed in IT governance.

This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 reviews ISO/IEC 38500 and its associated benefits and terminology. Section 3 explains terms and existing standards related to social inclusion and accessibility in IT. Section 4 provides two short cases. One is the Korean government's digital inclusion policy and governance that has continued for the past 20 years. Another story is about platform owners who are willing to make additional investments so that people with disabilities can participate in activities without restrictions in the digital space called Metaverse. Section 5 discusses the lessons learned.

 

 

2. Governance of IT

 

• Fundamental Definition of Good Governance

Simply put, ‘governance’ refers to the decision-making process and the process by which decisions are implemented. This term, which simultaneously considers decision-making and its implementation, has become a familiar terminology to the chief executives in organizations and to stakeholders in international organizations. For example, UN ESCAP suggest good governance has 8 major characteristics. It is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making. It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society [1].

 

• Governance of IT

The use of IT is critical to the success of most organizations. IT can enable new business models and significantly improve organizational performance to meet the needs and expectations of an organization's stakeholders. As the threats and opportunities that may arise through newly emerging technologies increase, the need for IT-related governance is bound to increase. This is the background why ISO/IEC 38500, a governance standard for IT, was established [2].

The standard provides three tools to help organizations achieve good governance of IT: principles, model, and framework. The principles are derived from ISO 37000, the governance standard for organizations. It provides fundamental truths and assumptions that enable faster, more coordinated, agile, agile, adaptive and responsible decision making, especially in the absence of clearly defined rules. The 11 principles shown in the Figure 1 represent all of principles specified in ISO 37000, which include social responsibility and accountability.

Figure 1. Governance Overview and Principles (Source ISO 37000)

 

The governance model is represented in Figure 2. It includes Engage stakeholders and key tasks of governance such as evaluation, direct and monitoring (EDM), and management that implements the parameters set by these governance organizations. It also consists of an IT governance framework within which the entire organization operates.

External factors beyond an organization include the evolution of IT and the IT activity experiences of members of society. These two external factors create institutions and regulations, and also provide new business opportunities for organizations. The governance organization considers these opportunities and systems, evaluates, directs, monitors, executes, and manages them through proper governance. And it produces outcomes called effective performance, responsible stewardship, and ethical behavior.

Figure 2. Governance Model (Modified from Source ISO/IEC 38500)

 

3. Digital Inclusion

 

• Definition of inclusion

Inclusion or inclusiveness is defined as practice of including stakeholders. Inclusion involves stakeholders from different groups being accepted, welcomed, and enabled to have a voice and develop a sense of belonging [7]. Similarly, inclusivity is defined as capability of a product to be utilized by people of various background [10].

According to the ITU-T definition, digital inclusion is defined as ‘equitable, meaningful, and safe access to use, lead, and design of digital technologies, services, and associated opportunities for everyone, everywhere’ [3].

 

• Equitable, meaningful and safe access

It is an important goal for the whole of society that all people, regardless of their age, size or ability, have access to the broadest range of systems.  Some people with specific needs (i.e. related to differences in age, gender, and abilities) may have barriers to access and use digital information and services [4]. Surprisingly, the number of these people is not small. According to the UK's Equality Act, approximately 22% of the population is disabled, and this number is increasing due to aging and the growing digital divide [5].

The highest standard related to the human rights of persons with disabilities is the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. According to Article 21 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, disabled people must be guaranteed the right to obtain and share necessary information and express their opinions on an equal basis with non-disabled people. Organizations must recognize the rights of people with disabilities and provide reasonable accommodation to them.

This UN Convention also describes obligations should not be unbalanced or impose an excessive burden on the organization [5]. Unfortunately, there have been many unintended legal disputes between organizations and people with disabilities due to differences in perspectives on universal and reasonable convenience and unreasonable burdens [5].

Responding to UN Convention as well as increased need of user accessibility, IEC, ISO and ITU encourage the development of standards that take account of the widest range of characteristics and abilities of persons, including in particular those of older persons, children and persons with disabilities. Consequently, the IEC/ISO/ITU Joint Policy Statement on Standardization and Accessibility sets out the basic principles for ensuring that the needs of older persons, children and persons with disabilities are incorporated in the standards development process, providing justification on human rights and economic grounds [8].

One of the core points of the Joint Policy Statement is “accessible or universal design”, which aims at ensuring that products, systems, services, environments and facilities can be used by persons from a population with the widest range of characteristics and abilities. In this perspectives, governance of IT can influence “system designs” and therefore can contribute to increasing accessibility and minimizing the presence of systems that limit accessibility. If accessibility considerations are included in governance, system designers might recognize the need for accessibility features earlier in the design process, which enables producers, possibly at little to design and produce systems that are accessible.  

Another core point is to train standards developers on the importance of accessibility Standards developers need to consider accessibility in their work, especially key documents such as ISO/IEC Guide 71 Guide for addressing accessibility in standards. ISO/IEC Guide 71:2014 outlines the goal of accessibility, which are perceivability, understandability, controllability, usability, error tolerance, equitable use, compatibility with other systems, which is the broadest set of principles of accessibility in the standard. It also describes human abilities and characteristics to assist standards developers in identifying accessibility needs of diverse users in diverse contexts of use. It also emphasizes that one-size-fits-all solutions seldom meet every person’s needs and that accessible features can benefit majority of the population.

There has been great stream regarding accessibility of IT. One notable standard for IT accessibility is the WCAG (Web Contents Accessibility Guidelines) standard proposed by W3C. It includes four principles: perceivable, operability, understandable, and robustness. As the IT environment develops rapidly, not only the way to access digital information and services, but also the social relationships experienced by people with disabilities are changing [4, 5, 6]. WCAG 2.0 (ISO/IEC 40500) is one of the most important guidelines for accessibility for people with disabilities, but it lags far behind in emerging digital environments due to its limitations in focusing on web access. For example, WCAG needs to expand its principles of communication, interactivity, and mobility in new digital environments such as the Metaverse.

In summary, i) Issues of accessibility of systems have become more critical as the number of people (such as older persons, children, persons with reduced abilities and persons with disabilities) with diverse user accessibility needs has increased. ii) there are potential risks and controversies in societal expectations of digital inclusion, which implies equitable, meaningful and safe access; iii) There are still no clear guidelines on accessibility related to evolving digital technologies, and it is difficult to keep up with the pace of IT evolution with detailed guidelines.

 

• Accessibility and Providing reasonable accommodation

Clearly distinguishing between “accessibility” and "reasonable accommodation" both of which are mentioned in UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is crucial. On one hand, the definition of accessibility is extent to which products, systems, services, environments and facilities can be used by people from a population with the widest range of user needs, characteristics and capabilities to achieve identified goals in identified contexts of use [11]. On the other hand, accommodate is defined to adapt to or adjust to [12]. Accommodation can vary according to differing abilities, specific individual needs, and circumstances. Therefore, it can be diverse based on organizational policies that cover adjusting premises, working hours, job responsibilities and equipment, and providing accessible information and assistive technologies.

While accommodation is for the individual and is reactive to the situation, accessibility is for the group and is proactive. The GSA 508.gov site, a U.S. accessibility agency, explains convenience and accessibility with examples as shown in the Figure 3 below.

 

Figure 3. Equality, Accommodation, and Accessibility (Source: GSA Section 508.gov)

 

• Calling for Ergonomics or Human factors

Above mentioned perspectives regarding digital inclusion call for the more fundamental objectives which are enhancing total system performance and human well-being. ISO 27500 The human-centered organization – Rationale and general principles provides extensive body of human factors knowledge as well as rationale and general principles of human centered organization especially for executive board members. It also explains the seven principles. The first two of these principles are i) capitalize on individual differences as an organizational strength, ii) make usability and accessibility strategic business objectives.

Ergonomics means scientific discipline concerned with the understanding of interactions among human and other elements of a system, and the profession that applies theory, principles, data, and methods to design in order to optimize human well-being and overall system performance [13]. The benefit of human centered approach is to make for executives to utilize diversity and accessibility as strength and strategic objectives not to perceive it as burden imposed to organization.

 

 

4. Case Study

 

4.1. Governance of Web Accessibility in South Korea

• Web accessibility related systems

The Korean government established the Framework Act on Informatization Promotion to prevent discrimination and protect the rights of the disabled, and to bridge the digital gap for information-vulnerable groups such as the disabled and the elderly living in a digital society.

Since Korea enacted the Framework Act on Intelligent Information and the Act on Prohibition of Discrimination and Rights Relief for Persons with Disabilities in 2000, the 'Korean Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (it is based on WCAG2 which is ISO/IEC 40500), the 'Mobile Web Content Accessibility Guidelines' and the 'Web Accessibility Quality Mark Certification System' have been established and implemented to support these laws. etc. are being done.

Among these, the web accessibility quality mark certification system refers to a certification system that recognizes the level of web accessibility and grants a quality mark symbolizing it to excellent sites that comply with web accessibility standard guidelines so that disabled and elderly people can use the website without inconvenience. Since 2007, six organizations, including the National Information Society Agency, have voluntarily implemented a certification system that grants quality certification marks to web accessibility sites. In 2013, the legal basis for web accessibility quality certification was established by establishing web accessibility quality certification in the Framework Act on National Informatization. Accordingly, the web accessibility quality mark certification, which had been independently operated by the National Information Society Agency, ended in 2013, and since 2014, a nationally recognized web accessibility quality certification agency has been selected, operated and ruled by the Ministry of Science and ICT.

 

 

 

Figure 4. Web accessibility certification mark in South Korea

 

The Korean Web Content Accessibility Guidelines were revised and announced as KWCAG2.2 in accordance with W3C's WCAG2.2 in December 2022. KWCAG continuously strives to comply with the accessibility standards published by W3C. Currently, W3C has started a project to develop accessibility related to the metaverse and a working group has been in operation since 2021.

• Establish effective governance

Information accessibility problems arise complexly due to the capabilities of each stakeholder, technical issues, and political and social environmental factors. Achieving the goal of ensuring information accessibility cannot be achieved through government efforts or systems, and above all, it is necessary for all stakeholders to share the meaning of information access rights and the goal of improving information access rights [6].

The problem of insufficient accessibility cannot be solved through technical methods alone. For example, providing virtual reality services in a form that guarantees accessibility to some people with disabilities may be an overdue burden. It is not easy for an organization to come up with a response to excessive demands that are difficult to implement in real world scenario and to persuade people with disabilities. Therefore, a decision-making process and coordination involving stakeholders such as companies, civic groups, and central and local governments is necessary [6]. In addition, it is important that the governance organization that establishes, implements, evaluates, and monitors policies and that items established in detail are well implemented at the management stage [6].

 

11.  

4.2. Efforts to improve accessibility by VR metaverse platform owners

• Considerations

The terms VR or metaverse themselves are not yet standardized. Additionally, clear obligations and reasonable accommodations cannot yet be defined in VR/Metaverse for the disabled. However, one can refer to the Americans with Disabilities Act, US Section 508, and the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act.

Let’s consider the convenience/accommodations that must be provided to the disabled through the digital environment called VR/Metaverse. Here, different conveniences should be provided for the visually impaired, hearing impaired, physically disabled, cognitively disabled, and the elderly (Figure. 5).

 

 

Figure 5 Accessibility factors to consider by type of disability (Source: Korea Federation of the Blind)

 

W3C has been operating a working group on XR accessibility user requirements since 2021 (https://www.w3.org/TR/xaur/). What is clear is that there is no standard for reconsidering VR/Metaverse accessibility for people with disabilities that organizations can refer to right now.

 

• Real-world scenarios

Despite the lack of standards, leading platform owners are already providing excellent examples and guidelines for VR/Metaverse accessibility.

Microsoft's Canetroller provides cane equipment that helps visually impaired people move in a VR environment in the same way as they can by identifying obstacles with a cane. Samsung Electronics has developed and provides Re!rumino, goggles that help people with amblyopia see clearly in a VR environment.

Roblox, known as a gaming platform, and Unity, a game engine, provide best practices for improving accessibility provided to developers. These examples cannot be said to be guidelines only for the disabled, but they are beneficial to both disabled and non-disabled people in that they provide a system that is easier to recognize. The accessibility guidelines for Oculus, the VR goggles provided by Meta, include examples for color blind people. UNREAL, famous for its game engines, is more proactive in providing accessibility features and TTS (Text to Speech) widgets for the visually impaired. There are also attempts to develop standards and technology to convert metaverse information in real time for the visually impaired. The National Palace Museum provided by Nara.Labs provides magic for both the visually impaired and non-visually impaired to view, experience, and move around the museum. This service integrates a disabled-friendly information platform provided by Apple and a tactile pad for the visually impaired provided by Dot. Let's take an example that should be familiar to you. Street Fighter, a classic computer game that we loved as children, is one of the games loved by the visually impaired, and competitions between the visually impaired are held every year. The game company is releasing features to increase convenience, such as voice control for the visually impaired.

 

 

Figure 6. Metaverse convenience functions for the visually impaired

 

The accessibility modules developed by these platform owners may not be compatible with each other. There are no clear standards or interoperability protocols that they can refer to for VR metaverse services. But why do these platform owners invest in convenience features for people with disabilities?

 

5. Summary and Discussion

Good governance for IT must be participatory, accountable, equitable and inclusive. The voices of the most vulnerable groups in society, such as the disabled and the elderly, must be included in the decision-making process [1].

There are the UN Convention, web accessibility standards, and various regulations and obligations in country, but in order to be effective, a governance system that can include the voices of stakeholders must be established, and detailed items that are actually operated must be implemented and monitored. Experts argue that an EDM mechanism of governance is important. Additionally, experts emphasize the importance of responsive convenience for individual disabled people who need specific help rather than proactive accessibility for everyone.

Even the newly emerging services yet be clearly defined, such as VR Metaverse, and there are no clear obligations or pressures, but leading platform companies are already providing features that can create reasonable convenience for people with disabilities or directly implementing products and services. It is easy to imagine if there is a service with a manual that is easy to use to people with cognitive disabilities and it provides a clear and intuitive user interface, this service will be preferred by not impaired individuals as well. The concept of designing services with cognitive disabilities in mind can lead to user-friendly interfaces that benefit a wider audience. Simplicity and clarity often enhance the overall user experience, making it more accessible and appealing for everyone. The recognition that considering social inclusion at the top-level investment decision-making process can lead to the emergence of innovative technologies and the creation of a passionate customer.

In an era of turbulent technological development, technical standards may not meet various expectations. On the other hand, governance standards are becoming more important than ever in this environment. Organizational executives must carefully consider how to provide reasonable accommodations to vulnerable groups without imposing an undue burden. SC40 will need to develop guidelines for using ISOC/IEC 38500 to pursue good governance and solve social problems. What blocks should be added to governance standards for rational organizational decision-makers to achieve effective outcomes while considering social inclusion? Perhaps it will be ergonomics, user experience, individual consideration, and reasonable convenience. The figure below presents the factors we need to consider based on the issues discussed previously. We may need to do more discussion, debate, and research on this over a long period of time. What is clear is that this initiative will be a participatory, accountable, and inclusive process for sustainable growth for us and future generations.

 

 

Figure 7 Considerations for social inclusion in the view of governance of IT
 

Acknowledgement

Author (Sojung Kim) thanks to Steve Tremblay, Max Shanahan, Max Blecher, Junao Xue, Yvett Backer, José Costa, Okazaki Yasuko, Gargi Keeni, Sanjiv Agarwala, Lisa Cook, Patricia Kenyon, Yonosuke Harada, Ian Hirst , Geoff Clarke, Donghnan Han, Hyun W. Ka, all members in mirror committee of South Korea, and anonymous reviewers from JTC1/SC7 and TC159 for their kind support.