<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body dir="auto" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Please see below for an outline of the IGF session "Best Practice
Forum 1: Developing meaningful multistakeholder participation
mechanisms" which is from 4:30 to 6pm on Day 2. I can't attend
because I am moderating another session at the same time, but I note
that "review of working definition of multistakeholderism" is one of
the topics for review.<br>
<br>
It would be great if we could contribute, even if not more broadly
approved yet, a draft definition of multi-stakeholderism coming out
of the LiquidFeedback experiment hosted at Best Bits
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bestbits.net/lf/">http://bestbits.net/lf/</a>). But so far there has been only one
proposal posted there (the NETmundial definition, by me), and very
little discussion. Now would be an excellent time to join if you
have a proposal about how to define multi-stakeholderism.<br>
<br>
Please see my earlier message of 31 July and 15 August about this
for more information, and contact me for your invite code if you
want to participate.<br>
<br>
On Aug 20, 2014, at 7:37 PM, Avri Doria <<a
href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><span>Topic 1 - Definitions, attributes and commonalities</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Review of what we mean by Best practice. What criteria
do we compare</span><br>
<span>or measure against?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Review of working definition of multistakeholderism.</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Topic 2 - Stakeholders</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Does rejection of the method by some stakeholders,
render the method</span><br>
<span>ineffective?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Is the multistakeholder model about stakeholders or
stakeholder groups?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Is the Tunis Agenda breakdown of stakeholder groups
appropriate and</span><br>
<span>helpful?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Topic 3 - Trust</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- How is trust developed and how is it lost in
multistakeholder practice?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Can power imbalance be mitigated in multistakeholder
practice? How?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Topic 4 - Accountability and Transparency</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- How is accountability & transparency in stakeholder
groups achieved?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- How does the model deal with representational legitimacy
issues?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Topic 5 - Next Steps</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- How can practice be improved?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- What should the IGF do next on this BP theme</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>--</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>_Organization of the 90 minute session_</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>One thought about organizing the session with many
panelists (not sure</span><br>
<span>of the final count yet, somewhere between 5-10) is to see
if they can</span><br>
<span>take some of these topics/questions and do 2 minutes of
thought</span><br>
<span>provocation using the material in the report to kick off
each topic of</span><br>
<span>the discussion. I would like to maximize the amount of
time for participants</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>I suggest limiting all speakers, including moderators,
panelists (people</span><br>
<span>on the dais) and participants (people in the room) to 1-2
minute</span><br>
<span>interventions.</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>To do this we would need technical intervention to pull
this off.</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Can remote moderator run a count down clock?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>- Some conferences use green, yellow and red lights. Not
sure if that</span><br>
<span>is good or bad. Or possible.</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span> _Program_</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>1. Panelist intros 10 @ 2 minutes each = 20 minutes</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>2. Each of 5 issue topic sets is given 10 minutes each,
with a panelist</span><br>
<span>giving a 1-2 minute intro - 50 minutes</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>3. Each Panelist gives 1-2 minute conclusion that can
bring together the</span><br>
<span>threads the panelist thinks important from the discussion
- 20 minutes</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Does is seem workable? Fixes?</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>The planning was done considering 10 panelists, if we have
fewer</span><br>
<span>panelists, there will be more time for the participant
discussion.</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>If so, will need panelist volunteers for the 5 topic
areas:</span><br>
<span></span><br>
<span>Topic 1 - Definitions, attributes and commonalities</span><br>
<span>Topic 2 - Stakeholders</span><br>
<span>Topic 3 - Trust</span><br>
<span>Topic 4 - Accountability and Transparency</span><br>
<span>Topic 5 - Next Steps</span><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>