<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18865"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>And to
you Hakik..</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>Yes,
Universal Service Funds have not been well spent in many instances... Lots of
reasons for that... the original legislation/policies, often established under
the direction or influence of folks like the World Bank or USAID, were
frequently seriously flawed and much too stipulative i.e. were directed for
example, towards extension of fixed line telephone service (most were
established 10-15 years ago) in terms of technology infrastructure rather than
normative in terms of standard/outcome setting... Few seem to have effective
research or evaluation components and little real understanding of the impact of
(univerally serviced) ICT on Development...and so on.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>I'ld
be very willing to pursue this discussion with you or any others interested
but its probably a bit of a deviation for the current areas of concern on the
governance list so maybe it should be taken off-line for any folks with an
interest...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial>Best,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=195560017-26122009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial>Mike</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT size=2
face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Hakikur Rahman
[mailto:email@hakik.org] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 25, 2009 10:40
PM<BR><B>To:</B> Michael Gurstein; governance@lists.cpsr.org; 'Jean-Louis
FULLSACK'; 'William Drake'<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [governance] Re: AW:
[tt-group] FW: GAID<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Dear Michael,<BR><BR>Happy
Holidays!<BR><BR>Yes, at this point I would agree that many developing nations
are clearly out of focus in spending for this sort of 'service area' (which
directly or indirectly relates to ICT4D), as you have mentioned. Perhaps, lack
of knowledge/expertise at the both levels, policy initiators and
practitioners. Any thoughts or action plans in diminishing these
gaps!<BR><BR>Best regards,<BR>Hakik<BR><BR>At 06:26 AM 12/24/2009, Michael
Gurstein wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>Hakik,<BR></FONT> <BR><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>The Universal
Service Funds I was referring to were national funds, often set up at the
time of privatization of PTT's. These funds retain a small percentage
of overall telecommunications revenues in national funds generally to be
used to ensure "universal (telecom) service" in otherwise un-serviced
areas.<BR></FONT> <BR><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>M<BR></FONT>
<DL>
<DD><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR>
<DD>From:</B> Hakikur Rahman [<A href="mailto:email@hakik.org"
eudora="autourl"> mailto:email@hakik.org</A>] <BR>
<DD>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 23, 2009 9:38 PM<BR>
<DD>To:</B> Michael Gurstein; governance@lists.cpsr.org; 'Jean-Louis
FULLSACK'; 'William Drake'<BR>
<DD>Subject:</B> RE: [governance] Re: AW: [tt-group] FW:
GAID<BR><BR></FONT>
<DD>To me major donor agencies have shifted their prime focus in other
wings, not very specific to ICT4D. Are the Universal Services fund
accessible to developing economies? It will be great to learn about links
providing information on them.<BR><BR>
<DD>Thanking you,<BR>
<DD>Hakik<BR><BR><BR>
<DD>At 10:46 PM 12/23/2009, Michael Gurstein wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">
<DD><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>The issue is only partially one of lack
of funding for ICT4D projects... In fact, in many cases/places there are
funds available for ICT4D (particularly now with ioncreasingly
widespread mobile and broadband infrastructures) either through donor
resources or from Universal Services funds but there is an overall lack
of knowledge/experience/capacity to spend this money in an appropriate
and useful/effective way.<BR></FONT>
<DD><BR>
<DD><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>Doing the assessments, building the
knowledge bases, bringing together those with the experience as
developers and end users, developing the multistakeholder issue oriented
dialogues and networks is the role that is currently lacking and has
been lacking since WSIS and before. The GAID said they would do some of
this but they didn't, the IGF dilettantes at the edges but only muddies
the waters, the ITU is too clearly top-down (in current speak
non-multistakeholder...) <BR></FONT>
<DD><BR>
<DD><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>So where to go from here...<BR></FONT>
<DD><BR>
<DD><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>Best to all for the season!<BR></FONT>
<DD><BR>
<DD><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>M</FONT>
<DL>
<DD><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----
<DD>From: Jean-Louis FULLSACK [ <A href="mailto:jlfullsack@orange.fr"
eudora="autourl">mailto:jlfullsack@orange.fr</A>]
<DD>Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 7:44 AM
<DD>To: governance@lists.cpsr.org; William Drake
<DD>Subject: re: [governance] Re: AW: [tt-group] FW:
GAID<BR><BR></FONT>
<DD>Hello Bill, Wolfgang and all<BR>
<DD>I think there is also another issue to be dealt with very urgently
: financing the ICT4D projects and -first of all- the WSIS Action Plan
objectives. Remember : the two "hot potatoes" of WSIS were Internet
governance and financing for "bridging the digital divide".<BR>
<DD>The fisrt one was (partly) resolved by setting-up the IGF.
Therefore I was asking for a "Financing Mechanisms Forum (FMF)" since
the beginning of the WSIS follow-up process. Without any success. <BR>
<DD>During the the last (or better : the "first") WSIS Forum held in
May my proposal didn't recieve any support from the CS side (except
from some African grassroot orgs). Therefore I submitted a personal
request to the ITU SG for this demand to be taken in consideration, in
June after recovering from my heart attack. I was told by a person of
ITU to present this proposal as a contribution to the September
meeting, convened bu the UNGIS and the ITU, whose topic was precisely
the financing mechanisms for ICT4D. But unfortunately I couldn't go to
Geneva, my surgeon having advised me against, for medical reasons.
That's why my "FMF" proposal is still pending.<BR><BR>
<DD>As Wolfgang mentions, in 2010 we are at the halfway between Tunis
and the deadline of the WSIS Action Plan. We should take profit of
this opportunity to push this proposal in the foreground of our
demand. <BR>
<DD>With my best wishes for a merry Christmas and a happy and peaceful
New Year to all of you<BR>
<DD>Jean-Louis Fullsack
<DL>
<DD>> Message du 23/12/09 15:31
<DD>> De : "William Drake"
<DD>> A : "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
<DD>> Copie à : "Tim Unwin" , "George Sadowsky" , "Michael
Gurstein" , "tt-group@vancouvercommunity.net" ,
"governance@lists.cpsr.org"
<DD>> Objet : [governance] Re: AW: [tt-group] FW: GAID
<DD>>
<DD>>
<DD>> Hello
<DD>>
<DD>> I understand George's perspective, it's hard not to be
frustrated and
<DD>> a bit cynical about the way things played out with GAID,
although to
<DD>> me it's more a matter of missed opprtunities to have a
useful and
<DD>> inclusive space in the UN for ICT4D than of wasted
resources (costs
<DD>> were a drop in the bucket, really). The fact that per
Michael we
<DD>> can't really know what's going on within the UN with the
next (if any)
<DD>> steps is symptomatic of the long standing problems. Re:
Wolfgang's
<DD>> suggestion, I would be rather surprised if the ITU were to
accept
<DD>> making it's "forum" an open multistakeholder process rather
than a
<DD>> showpiece for itself, they could have done this already and
have
<DD>> showed no inclination. And It might be risky given the
stuff with IGF
<DD>> etc. But perhaps it'd be a good way to call their bluff and
feed into
<DD>> the Plenipot discussion...?
<DD>>
<DD>> Bill
<DD>>
<DD>> Sent from my iPhone
<DD>>
<DD>>
<DD>> On Dec 23, 2009, at 3:54, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
<DD>> e> wrote:
<DD>>
<DD>> > Dear list
<DD>> >
<DD>> > one opportunity to have a more strategic brainstorming
around a
<DD>> > reasonable Follow up of GAID could be the IGF
consultations in
<DD>> > February in Geneva. I propose to have on Wednesday,
February, 10,
<DD>> > 2010, over lunch (1315 - 1500) a meeting of people
present in
<DD>> > Geneva. We had a similar meeting last year (in the ITU
Montbrillant
<DD>> > Building) where we identified an "identity crisis of
GAID" with no
<DD>> > consequences after the meeting. The meeting was
chaired by Bill and
<DD>> > Sarbulan was online from NY.
<DD>> >
<DD>> > Any proposal?
<DD>> >
<DD>> > BTW I could imagine to move the "WSIS Forum", which is
emerging from
<DD>> > the annual meetings of the Actions Lines, into
something which could
<DD>> > absorb previous UNICTTF/GAID activities. My impression
is that so
<DD>> > far the "WSIS Forum" is mainly in the hand of the ITU
and other
<DD>> > IGOs, having the lead position in the Action Lines.
The WSIS Forum
<DD>> > could be further "multistakeholderised" and the
responsibility to
<DD>> > organoze the meeting - convened by the
UN/ITU/UNESCO/FAO/ILO - could
<DD>> > go to a MAG like group. Do not forget that 2010 makrs
half way
<DD>> > towards 2015m the dateline for the Geneva and Tunis
Commitments.
<DD>> >
<DD>> > Wolfgang
<DD>> >
<DD>>
____________________________________________________________
<DD>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<DD>> governance@lists.cpsr.org
<DD>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
<DD>> governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org
<DD>>
<DD>> For all list information and functions, see:
<DD>> <A href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
eudora="autourl">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A>
<DD>>
<DD>> <BR><BR></DD></DL></DD></DL>
<DD>____________________________________________________________<BR>
<DD>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
<DD> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>
<DD>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR>
<DD>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR><BR>
<DD>For all list information and functions, see:<BR>
<DD> <A
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
eudora="autourl">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A></DD></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DD><BR><BR></DD></DL>____________________________________________________________<BR>You
received this message as a subscriber on the
list:<BR> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>To be removed
from the list, send any message to:<BR>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<BR><BR>For all list information and
functions, see:<BR> <A
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
eudora="autourl">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A></BLOCKQUOTE>!DSPAM:2676,4b35b01a177555616417546!
</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>