The CTU has been promoting throughout the region the principles of 21st Century Government which, being citizen-centric and seamless, clearly demonstrate the value, in particular, of countries adopting an enabling national digital identity system and its beneficial effects on national development. This is especially true for Caribbean countries, where the digitalisation of services can advance economic recovery, increase competitiveness and efficiency, and enhance functional cooperation, entrepreneurialism, innovation and citizens’ welfare.

The notion of digital identity is gaining significant traction in international fora and entities such as the United Nations and the World Bank are now promoting the use of digital identity systems, globally. Several Caribbean countries have commenced, or are currently in the process of initiating projects to implement digital identity systems, for example, the OECS Digital Transformation Project which involves Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and initiatives in other countries such as Jamaica, Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago. However significant strengthening of institutional capacity, robust governance structures and system integration will be required to support the provisioning of planned national digital identity systems and mutual recognition of digital identities among Caribbean countries.

The fundamental step towards adopting an effective national digital identity system, as outlined in the CTU’s Handbook for the Implementation of Digital Identification Systems in the Caribbean, is the development of a clear, implementable framework that is relevant to the local and regional context. This is of the utmost importance, as it provides the structure around which the entire digital identity system is planned, designed, implemented, operated and improved. The Caribbean has suffered in the past from approaches to the adoption of technology that ultimately proved ineffective, having neglected to pay sufficient attention to the analysis of its local and regional context and the relevant frameworks that would effectively guide its implementation.

Assessment of the local context should include, among other things, the supporting legal and regulatory frameworks and the main demography to be served. This would identify issues that may arise from gaps in existing regulations and laws that can potentially impact the adoption of a digital identity system. Effective measures for amending applicable regulations and laws to address any such gaps must be instituted prior to officially pursuing and implementing digital identities, given that a number of jurisdictions have seen legal challenges to the constitutionality of mandatory ID systems.

Appropriate legal controls for security, data protection and privacy, as well as cyber security must also be in place. Robust legal and trust frameworks are important factors in providing adequate levels of assurance for users and to facilitate interoperability and harmonisation of common cross-border systems.

Additionally, technical system design will need to consider a number of factors, including the number of citizens expected to use the digital identity system, how often they might do so, and the total number of services provided within the digital identity system. Success will depend very much on the correct assessment of these factors.

Equally important, are national multi-stakeholder consultations and assessments to foster acceptance and adoption of the new models by end-users as well as various government and private-sector institutions that would rely on the digital identity systems. It is recommended that governments.

consult with individual stakeholder groups to understand their particular experiences and challenges with the existing identity systems. This would inform appropriate re-engineering of the digitally-enabled systems and processes as well as identify capacity-building needs of users and other stakeholders to be addressed during implementation in order to maximise adoption. A practical step towards understanding the current identity system landscape would be to take stock of the identity ecosystem and its stakeholders.

Once a government has thoroughly assessed the local context and decided on its role, it should take measures to ensure that the digital identity system will be sufficiently adopted. Several optional measures have been recommended in CTU’s Handbook for the Implementation of Digital Identification Systems in the Caribbean, each having its specific peculiarities from both the citizens and service provider perspectives. The important factor for Caribbean governments, is to clearly and precisely define the role they will play in all aspects of adoption. Government must establish itself as the lead and most involved stakeholder from the inception, in order to successfully drive the national digital identity programme.

It is also important for government to assess its own capacity and experience in the field of digital identity nationally and be willing to source specific expertise that can be leveraged regionally. This would provide significant insight into the national strategic goals for digital identity, and the preferred implementation approaches.

As regards infrastructure, Caribbean countries need to ensure that a widely accessible, resilient high-speed broadband Internet is in place to support an online identity solution. This will also facilitate cross-border electronic transactions as part of the digital economy. Digital ID systems can be interoperable without the need for harmonisation into a common system through adopting minimum interoperability standards, legal and trust frameworks. This would provide for levels of assurance, set baseline rules and build confidence and acceptance in respective national digital identity systems.

The operational models selected for adoption directly influences the stakeholders and actors involved in the digital identity system. For this reason, governments need to carefully evaluate their options and pursue governance, architectural, technical and adoption models that suit the country-specific approaches or needs. Government may act in the dual role of the regulator and identity provider or simply be the regulator of a separate authorised identity provider. Regardless of the governance model adopted, checks and balances must be maintained over the organisations involved. Ultimately, a robust multi-layered institutional governance structure will be eventually needed as the digital identity environment matures.

The architectural model may follow different approaches, including a centralised system with a single identity provider that collects and manages all the information and data (recommended as the logical starting point for most Caribbean countries), a distributed system with multiple identity providers (may serve as the next evolution of identity providers in the Caribbean); or a system with intermediaries between identity provider(s) and the other elements that act with specific verification or control functions (may serve as an advanced country and regional model). The selected architectural model will determine how the digital identity system will be built and evolved and inform the options to be considered for the digital identity technology solution.

Finally, the economic aspects need to be considered. For any national digital identity system to be successful, realistic and sustainable goals need to be established and pursued. Governments therefore need to plan in advance how the system will be sustained, for instance, internally by generated revenues, or externally by government subsidies.

There is no one single model for a national digital identity approach that is better than another and no one-size-fits-all solution, as each country has its own distinctive characteristics, needs and goals. The CTU’s Handbook  provides a summary of the main elements of sufficiently mature national digital identity systems which represent an invaluable source of information that can be referenced by Caribbean Governments, to draw lessons-learned about different approaches adopted globally, but adapted for the Caribbean context.

References:

World Bank. 2019. ID4D Practitioner’ Guide: Version 1.0 (October 2019). Washington, DC: World Bank. License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO (CC BY 3.0 IGO).

International Telecommunication Union, Digital Identity Roadmap Guide. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO (CC BY 3.0 IGO).

World Bank. 2018. Technology Landscape for Digital Identification, Washington, DC. World Bank License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO (CC BY 3.0 IGO).

Caribbean Telecommunications Union. Towards 21st Century Government: Issue 1.5 (January 2018).

CARICAD, CDEMA Recommit to Capacity Building

The Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA) and CARICAD have renewed their joint commitment to capacity building in the Caribbean with the signing of a second memorandum of understanding (MOU) in December 2021.

Executive Director of CARICAD Devon Rowe stated that, “This second agreement further strengthens our collaboration and comes at a time when the COVID-19 pandemic and the global response to it have reshaped the thinking of many. The continuation of this MOU offers the opportunity to build on the gains of the past and the forging of new solutions for an environment that is evolving in front of our very eyes.”

CDEMA Executive Director, Elizabeth Riley indicated that since the first signing in 2016, the two agencies have collaborated in several capacities over the years, including response to disaster events and strategic planning and noted that for the CDEMA Coordinating Unit, the second MOU constitutes a renewal, extension and expansion of its institutional commitment to this partnership.