Hello friends,

The “Empowering Girls and Women” objective of the conference continues to dominate the discussions. The idea that investing in women is also investing in social welfare is a popular one among speakers and commitment makers. Presenters also continue to drive home the importance of mobile infrastructure and internet access in developing areas as keys to economic development.

Arthur, Charly and I have all been talking about our growing disenchantment with the conference. Members are certainly raising important questions and promoting worthy causes, but there is clearly a bias toward—even an over-reliance on—technological, “magic bullet” solutions, rather than solutions that address the systemic causes of poverty and gender inequality. One of the most interesting aspects of the CGI commitments is their small-scale nature. Programs like the “Ring the Bell” campaign are great examples of this mentality. But the ideas coming out of the “headlining” conferences with business leaders and heads of state cling to a handful of buzzwords: micro-lending for women, social networking, leap-frogging, mobile access, internet-based employment, maternal health…and it’s frustrating that the discussion has become so unfocused.

It is also frustrating that a conference focused on “Empowering Girls and Women” hardly touches the other half of the problem, “Not Oppressing Girls and Women in the First Place.” In his “Meeting of the Minds” conference with CNBC, Clinton says: “The reason women and girls are important is that most of the people who never go to school in the world are girls, most of the people who are denied access to education beyond high school are girls…I did this partly because I think this is a really big long term economic issue for the United States. Any time you give up more than 50% of your human potential, you’re playing Russian roulette with your future, and there’s more than one bullet in the gun.” In the same address he says that women are, in many places, considered property, but somehow this issue of inequality is filed under “economic problems” rather than “human rights violations”? What do you think, is it important to address this issue from both sides or should there be a focus on constructive, market-based, and educational initiatives that aim to close the gender-gap?

Today I’ll leave you with this: At a press conference discussing connecting refugees with mobile technology, musician and former refugee Emmanuel Jal performs a spoken-word piece about his experiences as a child soldier in Sudan.

That’s all for now,
Meg