<!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 8.00.6001.18943"></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010>Well
put Jean-Louis...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=976383207-01102010></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010>Your
comments rather parallel my own on the other list...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=976383207-01102010></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010><SPAN
class=281130203-29092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial>You will excuse
me if I'm just a wee bit cynical and skeptical about what a "huge *win* this is"
especially when the defining characteristic of this one seems to be to jetison
all of those few gains that civil society managed to make as they/we worked
our way through the entire process--i.e. transparency, accountablity,
multistakeholderism, and a pragmatic neutrality around funding
mechanisms.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010><SPAN
class=281130203-29092010></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010><SPAN
class=281130203-29092010>Might not this be worthy of a comment/statement by
the IGC?</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010><SPAN
class=281130203-29092010></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=976383207-01102010><SPAN
class=281130203-29092010>M</SPAN></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT size=2
face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Jean-Louis FULLSACK
[mailto:jlfullsack@orange.fr] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, October 01, 2010 7:11
AM<BR><B>To:</B> governance@lists.cpsr.org; MichaelGurstein<BR><B>Subject:</B>
re: [governance] New Blogpost: Investment 58-Poverty 14: The UN's Broadband
Commission for Digital Development vs. the MDGs<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR>>
This may be of interest...<BR>> <BR>> M<BR><BR><STRONG>Of course
Michael, it is !</STRONG><BR><BR>I do share your opinion about the rather
problematic relation(s) between Broadband access and Poverty alleviation, and
all this discourse that was poured on the folks attending the WSIS meetings.
This whole process tried -and is still trying- to instrumentalize ONGs for
disseminating ICT gear at any cost for the POSSIBLE "benefit" of DCs and their
populations. Whereas the REAL benefit goes to the private sector :
manufacturers, vendors, advisers, service providers and operators. <BR><BR>I
think that the economical and above all the financial aspects and issues of
ICT/BB dissemination in DCs, let's say sub-Saharean Africa, should be
thoroughly and objectively analyzed and published. Just as an example : Does
Africa REALLY need eight submarine cables from Dakar to the Cape (there are
three ones in service and by the end of next year there are five other ones to
come) ? At an average cost of 300 to 400 M$, this means a total investment of
around 3 billion dollars ! This is 2 billions too much, or a hold-up of 2
billions from the basic needs in DCs, i.e. food, water, sanitation and energy
(remember : WEHAB, the Jo'burg UN Develoment Summit program, nowhere even
mentions ICT !). Who will ever carry out such a survey ? Maybe research teams
in Universities, through a holistic, multidisciplinary approach (human,
sociologic, economic, financial, environmental, ...). Why not with you,
Michael ? <BR><BR>In the meantime, this hold-up is sponsored by the UN and
-first of all- the ITU. <BR><BR>BTW : The CS in completely absent in
this "BB4D Commission". This shows how high is multi-stakeholdership right
now, and how inclusive are the two vice-chairs of the WSIS ... and of the
"Commission". As far as the co-chairs are concerned, the first one isn't
actually an example of democratic governance, and the second is quite simply
the wealthiest man in the world ... A methaphor when we consider the billion
people still suffering from poverty and hoping for a better future.
<BR><BR>Best regards<BR>Jean-Louis Fullsack<BR>CSDPTT and CESIR<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ff0000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px">>
Message du 28/09/10 07:25<BR>> De : "Michael Gurstein" <BR>> A :
governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR>> Copie à : <BR>> Objet : [governance]
New Blogpost: Investment 58-Poverty 14: The UN's Broadband Commission for
Digital Development vs. the MDGs<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> This may
be of interest...<BR>> <BR>> M<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Investment
58-Poverty 14: The UN's Broadband Commission for Digital<BR>> Development
vs. the MDGs<BR>> <BR>>
http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2010/09/27/investment-58%E2%80%94poverty-14-th<BR>>
e-un%E2%80%99s-broadband-commission-for-digital-development-vs-the-mdgs/<BR>>
<BR>>
____________________________________________________________<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>>
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance<BR>> <BR>> Translate this
email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t<BR>>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>