<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear Parminder,<br>
<br>
If I recall, objections to the 2011 multi-lateral, inter-state
Internet governance body actually arose from the fact that the
proposal did <i>not</i> follow the OECD model. <br>
<br>
The OECD model is to produce non-binding soft law in a
multi-stakeholder context. On digital issues, civil society has
direct input into that policy-making process, and this has been the
case since the Seoul Ministerial in 2009 (the recent formulation of
the Committee on Digital Economy which you refer to was a change in
name only, nothing changed functionally with respect to the nature
or scope of digital issues undertaken or civil society's role
therein). <br>
<br>
The key to the OECD is that it generates lots of policy reports or,
at most, soft law instruments -- nothing binding comes out of it. In
this context, it's useful for civil society to engage with other
stakeholders to attempt to resolve policy issues. We definitely do
not have the final say on these policies, nor do we have a veto on
par with state parties. But the OECD operates on a multi-stakeholder
principle, meaning they will keep working until views of all member
states and of the four stakeholder groups (which include, as
relevant: the business community, the technical community, a trade
union community and on telecommunications and digital issues, civil
society). To date there has been only one single occasion where a
policy document was adopted by the OECD over the sustained
objections of civil society. <br>
<br>
Even that policy documents, though, have no binding effect on
anyone. In practice, many, many OECD policies remain largely
unimplemented by OECD member states. They tend to form more of a
reference or normative statement that is at most useful as one
single input into domestic policy-making processes (I note
incidentally that I do a lot of national policy development and that
in my experience most OECD policies tend to be more useful to civil
society than to other segments of society, for whatever that's
worth).<br>
<br>
My understanding of the proposed 2011 UN governance body at the time
(and please correct me if I'm wrong) was wholly different. It was to
be based on a command and control model. It envisioned something
similar to ICANN (which, unlike the OECD, directly implements its
policies by its control of the root, etc), but with governments at
the helm as opposed to the stakeholder model. Indeed, one element of
the proposal would have been to place ICANN (and perhaps some of the
other technical communities) under the control of the new UN
governance body. This is very different from the OECD soft
policy-development process.<br>
<br>
All the best (and happy 2016 !),<br>
Tamir<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/28/2016 8:59 AM, parminder wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:56AA1ED6.7070207@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 28 January 2016 06:48 PM,
Lea Kaspar wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJTVAjy9wD2rSAUDVbHL3UHxjv0kJmvNV3mJgm8Ta6eEiPaP_g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Parminder, the assumption of the contradiction
seem like a non sequitur. Why would interest to engage in a
process like the OECD have to imply a normative endorsement of
the status quo? Working with the system that we've currently
got can go hand in hand with efforts to make the system as a
whole better. Not to mention the value of damage control.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes Lea, that can be... But does there exist any plan of the
engaged civil society to tell the forthcoming OECD Ministerial
that the model of Internet policy making that they employ is
really a inter-governmental (pluri or multi lateral) one and not
multistakeholder one, and as such not really acceptable to civil
society, even though we may be working with you per force. And
also ask these governments how they brazenly run such a inter-gov
policy system when they criticise any similar effort by UN as
being distastefully inter-gov and multi-lateral, and say pious
things like that Internet is just not the kind of thing to be
governed in an inter-gov manner. Are we ready to make such a
statement at the Ministrial, while, ok, accepting your logic, not
stopping to engage with OECD's policy processes, in a 'damage
control' way, as you put it?<br>
<br>
All these civil society actors and groups were around in 2011 when
they shouted down India's Internet policy mechanism proposal which
was deliberately shaped exactly on the OECD's model as being
inter-gov and multilateral, and thus unthinkably bad, representing
the worst things that any human mind could ever come up with... <br>
<br>
In fact, it is just 2-3 years ago that OECD's Committee on Digital
Economy was formed, morphed from the earlier committee on
computers, communication and information policy -- this happened
much after the civil society's raucous denouncement of India's UN
proposal.... Did, at that point when this committee was being
formed, civil society tell OECD that Internet cannot be governed
in an inter gov manner, and when they are forming this new
committee thy should make it genuinely multistakeholder.... No, no
one spoke a word.... I am ready to be told that I am wrong. To
repeat, not one word was said, much less a statement made. it was
not that civil society asked for it, and they were refused,
whereby I may accept what you are saying... They never uttered a
single word.... Such is its pusillanimity in front of the
powerful, while the real job of civil society is to challenge the
most powerful. <br>
<br>
And now, in preparation for the forthcoming Ministerial, when in
the civil society advisory group to OECD's committee, an odd voice
recently spoke about whether OECD's process is multistakeholder
enough, the general consensus was, leave that aside, lets focus on
substantive issues!!<br>
<br>
When we are in a discussion about the global policy stage,
suddenly no one can even think of any important enough non ICANN-y
Internet-related public policy issues at all - we have spent years
wondering whether any or enough of such issues even exist. It is
a real joke!.. Just shift the scene, we are at the OECD, and such
policy issues roll out like no ones business - work in the
Internet age, sharing economy, economics of data, algorithmic
economy, policy implications of internet of things, big data and
social profiling ........... The list is unending. Civil society
itself actively keeps suggesting new policy areas and engaging
with them.<br>
<br>
People like Nick Ashton will actively argue at global forums like
this, that no, there is no need to have a separate Internet or
digital policies related body, and all such areas can very well be
dealt by policy bodies looking at respective impacted domains
(work, education, governance, etc) ... But no one tells OECD's
Digital Economy Policy Committee that it is superfluous when OECD
has about 50 other committees dealing with every possible area,
where, by that logic , specific issues of Internet impact could
have been adequately dealt with. <br>
<br>
Lea, you really see nothing contradictory or amiss here!?<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJTVAjy9wD2rSAUDVbHL3UHxjv0kJmvNV3mJgm8Ta6eEiPaP_g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Warm wishes,</div>
<div>Lea</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 1:13 PM,
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"
target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
<br>
<div>On Thursday 28 January 2016 06:32 PM, Carlos
Afonso wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Grande Parm,
"Global IG civil society" as a monolithic bloc? Could you elaborate?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Dear Carlos,<br>
<br>
Nice to hear from you!<br>
<br>
I should not have generalised. My apologies. But
the civil society section that engages with OECD's
Internet policy processes is really a pretty big
part of the civil society groups dominant in the
global IG space. So, my question may be taken just
as being addressed to this quite big civil society
section, vis a vis their apparently contradictory
stand when they are at the OECD (the club of the
rich countries) vis a vis when they are at the UN (a
grouping of all countries) .<br>
<br>
best regards, parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>fraternal regards
--c.a.
On 1/28/16 10:00, parminder wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Thanks Carolina for compiling this information.
As global IG civil society preparesin full enthusiasm to participate in
the OECD ministerial on digital economy policy, I would ask what has
become my pet question...
Why would you not support the same model of Internet policy making if
all governments instead of just the 34 richest ones are involved, if the
stakeholder participation processes remain exactly the same as with this
OECD process? (And that would include your native country, Brazil.)
I cant make it simpler.
Can all this enthusiasm notbe considered a pro rich countries approach?
Not something that behoves global civil society, which is supposed to be
on the side of the weaker and marginalised, groups and people.
parminder
On Thursday 28 January 2016 07:18 AM, Carolina Rossini wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi all.
Today, we - at PK- have published a couple of short texts about what
is going on in preparation for the OECD Ministerial Meeting. The
Ministerial will take place in Cancun in June 2016.
We've also included information on how to participate. The most
important step is to become a member of CSISAC, the civil society
coalition that channels the participation and concerns of CS in the
OECD.
Best, Carol
· OECD Sets the Scene for Future Decades of ICT Policy Development
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/blogs/oecd-sets-the-scene-for-future-decades-of-ict-policy-development" target="_blank">https://www.publicknowledge.org/news-blog/blogs/oecd-sets-the-scene-for-future-decades-of-ict-policy-development</a>
· Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.publicknowledge.org/organization-for-economic-co-operation-and-development" target="_blank">https://www.publicknowledge.org/organization-for-economic-co-operation-and-development</a>
· OECD Ministerial Meetings
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.publicknowledge.org/oecd-ministerial-meetings" target="_blank">https://www.publicknowledge.org/oecd-ministerial-meetings</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>