Anriette,<div><br></div><div>you wrote : </div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>T<i>here was a lot of common ground. E.g. on the last day business<br>
presented a proposal for MAG composition and selection which was not<br>that different from the one that India proposed on the previous day.</i></div><div><i>presented a proposal for MAG composition and selection which was not</i></div>
<div><i>that different from the one that India proposed on the previous day.</i></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Can you elaborate a bit on the different elements ?</div><div><br></div><div>Best</div><div><br></div>
<div>Bertrand</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hi all<br>
<br>
If we had a very strong chair, more time, and good process, we might<br>
have achieved a result. But we might also not have.<br>
<br>
The background issues are very powerful and it was remarkable to see the<br>
cycle at first glance. At the beginning of the Montreux meeting they<br>
dominated.. then a kind of semblance of real work started and continued,<br>
if not very efficiently, until the final afternoon of the second meeting<br>
in Geneva. Then they took over again.<br>
<br>
What are the background issues?<br>
<br>
- enhanced cooperation<br>
(whether you think it is already happening or not)<br>
<br>
- long term institutional set up for internet policy<br>
(whether you believe there should be something at UN level or not.. how<br>
intergovernmental it should be, and fear that business will become<br>
subject to more regulation)<br>
<br>
- multi-stakeholder participation in policy-making<br>
(here there is a huge range... from a minority of governments who are<br>
really not comfortable with it, but who were fairly silent during the<br>
meeting, to quite a few who believe in it but who want it to be more<br>
structured, e.g. only private sector associations as opposed to<br>
individual companies and more 'representative' CS participation, to<br>
those who are happy with it as it is now.. and lots of variety in-between)<br>
<br>
- greater focus on developing country issues/concerns<br>
(One divider here is that some countries want a platform to talk about<br>
financing, which of course others want to avoid. The developed countries<br>
did not really make much effort in this direction. Non-governmental<br>
entities did.. developing countries, with the exception of South Africa,<br>
mentioned this, but approached it in terms of UN resolutions rather than<br>
practical suggestions.)<br>
<br>
- policy focus of the IGF<br>
(this appeared to be a foreground issue... e.g. some of us proposed that<br>
the IGF should focus on key policy questions every year, at least as one<br>
of its agenda setting mechanisms. Others disagreed.. but I think the<br>
reason they did was not because the thought it was a bad idea for the<br>
event, but that it could in some way lead to more international<br>
policy-making, if not at the IGF, somewhere else at global level.)<br>
<br>
<br>
In other words, other than for the non-governmental stakeholders this<br>
process was not really about IGF improvements, but about the IGF being a<br>
stage for other plays.<br>
<br>
It would have taken a very strong and committed chair, and much more<br>
time, to make the common ground that was in the room produce results.<br>
<br>
There was a lot of common ground. E.g. on the last day business<br>
presented a proposal for MAG composition and selection which was not<br>
that different from the one that India proposed on the previous day.<br>
<br>
But the key would have been for the chair to contain the background<br>
political issues.<br>
<br>
Anriette<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 26/03/11 15:26, Lee W McKnight wrote:<br>
> At least to me CSTD is looking...not so competent at the moment.<br>
><br>
> So Wolfgang's worry about the multistakeholder process being discredited by this bumbling interregnum I'm not sure is main thing.<br>
><br>
> So main thing is probably ensuring next IGF is substantive and well-run, even in absence of Nitin and Markus; IGC's part is submitting - solid workshop proposals, which we haven't been talking about much while trying to get the cstd thing to amount to something.<br>
><br>
> Anyway, real choice to me (from cheap seats far from Geneva) is: 1) continue to push back on CSTD/submit alternate report; 2) move on, let CSTD chair's report close this sorry chapter - we can say we told them it was not set up properly, but so what - and spend our time pulling together good workshop proposals for Nairobi.<br>
><br>
> Right now I am thinking 2) is more important for IGF in long run than 1).<br>
><br>
> But I look forward to hearing from others that were there what they think priorities should be now.<br>
><br>
> Lee<br>
> ________________________________________<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> [<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>] On Behalf Of Marilia Maciel [<a href="mailto:mariliamaciel@gmail.com">mariliamaciel@gmail.com</a>]<br>
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 9:00 AM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>; parminder<br>
> Subject: Re: [governance] No concluding ending for CSTD WG to IGF improvement<br>
><br>
> i agree. We are in a very important moment. I am in transit but will<br>
> also share my impressions early this week as well.<br>
><br>
> On 3/26/11, parminder <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> It was an unfortunate ending to the process. Why it happened is complex<br>
>> but important to analyse and understand, for the future of IG. Will<br>
>> share a detailed report within a week. parminder<br>
>><br>
>> On Saturday 26 March 2011 12:15 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote:<br>
>>> As I reported yesterday to this list, the Chair did not try to produce<br>
>>> the report of the WG, and will only transmit his own "neutral" summary,<br>
>>> with compilation as annex or data.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Several members stayed for a while and chatted what to do next.<br>
>>> Some will try to extend the mandate, ask CSTD Chair for that and<br>
>>> keep on, some gave up. There is possibility for us, IGC, to make<br>
>>> our own version, bit similar to the CS Declaration at WSIS if<br>
>>> we agree.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Many people said 4 days are not enough to discuss and conclude such<br>
>>> politically complex issue. Some pointed out that waiting till UN GA<br>
>>> resolution passage made everything delayed. We also did not have<br>
>>> online collaboration/communication tool in the course of work.<br>
>>> We were late to propose that. etc etc.<br>
>>><br>
>>> So now, I would like to hear your comments - what to do? What is best?<br>
>>> Let's think together.<br>
>>><br>
>>> izumi<br>
>>> ____________________________________________________________<br>
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade<br>
> FGV Direito Rio<br>
><br>
> Center for Technology and Society<br>
> Getulio Vargas Foundation<br>
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil<br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
><br>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
><br>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
><br>
> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div><font color="#888888">--<br>
------------------------------------------------------<br>
anriette esterhuysen <a href="mailto:anriette@apc.org">anriette@apc.org</a><br>
executive director<br>
association for progressive communications<br>
<a href="http://www.apc.org" target="_blank">www.apc.org</a><br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>____________________<br>Bertrand de La Chapelle<br>Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32<br><br>"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry<br>
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")<br>
</div>