<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Dear Ephraim,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I think you have just said something really important. I remember posting to the ISOC policy list about the TFM very early, right after it was agreed by the UNGA in late July, and I provided further updates to try and generate interest subsequently. I saw very little response or reply from anyone about it and as you say the deadline is now passed. Of those nominated or who put their names forward there were very few from the traditional IG or WSIS CS community - and few from other WSIS communities either.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I actually think the TFM will end up being a key, if not the key, forum where ICT4D issues are discussed and taken forward. Its annual forum will be in New York immediately before the main political SDG follow-up meeting each year and so it will naturally attract very high level engagement, and since it has a multi-stakeholder model that is actually quite similar to the IGF, it seems to me the IGF will need to think very carefully about how to stay politically relevant. I’m sorry to say it …</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">More about the TFM below from something I drafted for others:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="font-family: OpenSans;"><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div class=""><div class=""><div class=""><div class="">Some of you have seen messages in various email lists on the t<span class="">he </span><a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/technology/facilitationmechanism" class="">Technology Facilitation Mechanism</a><span class=""> (“TFM”) which was created as a part of the package known as the “Addis Ababa Action Agenda” that the UNGA passed in late July; the Agenda is very comprehensive but fundamentally deals with how the SDGs are to be financed and is therefore of high political significance. The TFM is the part of it that seeks to bring together Science and Technology writ large to bear on meeting the SDGs. </span><span class="">The TFM was launched in New York jointly by France and Brazil at a </span><a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=13&nr=1746&menu=1634" class="">meeting on the 26th</a><span class="">.</span></div><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The TFM includes three parts:</div><div class=""><ol class=""><li class="">An interagency coordination process for the UN system led by 8 IGOs - links are to info on their focal points: <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=278&menu=1455&template=375" class="">DESA</a>,<a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=64&menu=1455&template=375" class="">UNEP</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=71&menu=1455&template=375" class="">UNIDO</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=67&menu=1455&template=375" class="">UNESCO</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=59&menu=1455&template=375" class="">UNCTAD</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=295&menu=1455&template=375" class="">ITU</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=289&menu=1455&template=375" class="">WIPO</a>, <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=6&nr=76&menu=1455&template=375" class="">World Bank Group</a>.</li><li class="">A <a href="https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/technology/facilitationmechanism" class="">multistakeholder forum (annual) </a> as part of its work, guided by 10 non-state participants, that reports at the highest level of SDG follow-up and which meets in NY each year. </li><li class="">An online portal aggregating everything related to ICTs and STI in SDG follow-up.</li></ol><div class=""><b class="">Why should WSIS-focussed stakeholders care?</b></div><div class=""><ul class=""><li class="">The Multistakeholder forum is to be held just before the high-level meeting each year that is for follow-up to the SDGs and the forum reports to that meeting. This gives it real political weight because ICT ministers will quite naturally want to participate so they can be connected to SDG follow up. </li><li class="">Anything connected to the SDGs immediately has much higher political importance in many countries than WSIS does. This is because, frankly, there are in aggregate hundreds of billions - and maybe more - development dollars that will be spent in pursuit of achieving the SDGs and given that this is spent in developing countries that means it matters. </li><li class="">To the extent that the TFM becomes the nexus through which ICT-related spending on development is related to the SDGs that means it is automatically politically connected to all that money.</li></ul></div><div class=""><b class="">If the IGF has no relation to the TFM’s multistakeholder forum (and development issues) then it risks withering at the level of political significance</b> - for the simple reason that it far away from the political centre in NY where ICTs related to the SDGs will be discussed and has no direct connection to the UN interagency task team that the TFM has created. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Right now, the TFM is new and it has no agenda or work programme. I believe it is essential that to prioritise working with member-states and the lead UN agencies to ensure it gets a good agenda. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><b class="">There are only 10 slots for non-state participants. The TFM is bigger than just ICTs so only some of those 10 slots will go to Internet/ICT focussed groups. We should care - very much - about who gets those slots. </b></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 31 Oct 2015, at 12:22, Ephraim Percy Kenyanito <<a href="mailto:ekenyanito@gmail.com" class="">ekenyanito@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family: OpenSans; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><div class=""><div dir="auto" class=""><div class="">While we're on the topic, Ian, does the CSCG actively monitor UN calls for CS representation in relevant spaces? For instance, did the CSCG ever discuss the call for nominations for the Adis Ababa Technology Facilitation Mechanism Advisory Group? The call has now passed (last weekend I think), and IMO it's a real shame that we didn't have a broader CS discussion about this. The TFM is passing under people's radar, but could end up being influential in the broader IG ecosystem. </div></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>