<html><head></head><body><p dir="ltr">I would certainly agree that mixing these strands together has been unhelpful - though I would argue that even with governance, a national, multi-stakeholder consensus about what governance - to what purpose - would be an important element of the strand. Much of the international debate about Internet governance seems to me devoid of any connection with how the output would benefit real people's lives.</p>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Anja Kovacs <anja@internetdemocracy.in> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><br />I wouldn't actually agree that an approach that starts from the national level is the only way forward. In the analysis of the Internet Democracy Project, among important reasons why more progress has not been made on various goals set out in the WSIS Action Lines is not only because Action Lines have been implemented in too top-down a fashion, but also, and relatedly, because the Action Lines mix together two types of issues: those that fundamentally rely on the input of the larger development community, and those that are Internet governance issues in the more narrow sense. The latter frequently cut across Action Lines, and as long as they are not addressed adequately, it is unlikely that the development agenda that is at the heart of the Action Lines will take off either. The former is in many cases the foundation for the success of the latter. <br />
<br /></div>For this reason, the Internet Democracy Project proposed in September, when the first inputs into the preparatory process for the ITU's High Level Review meeting were due, to actually rearrange the Action Lines to make sure both aspects of the Action Lines get their due. This would entail highlighting, and addressing, the Internet governance agenda that is embedded in the Action Lines separately, without at any point losing sight of its connectedness with the development agenda. We resubmitted this proposal as an input into the zero draft of the zero draft of the WSIS+10 vision in November, please see: <a href="http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/inc/docs/phase2/rc/V1-D-2.docx">http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/inc/docs/phase2/rc/V1-D-2.docx</a> <br />
<br /></div><div>While many development issues in the Action Lines require action first and foremost at local and national levels, many of the Internet governance issues are really global public policy issues (and by splitting the two strands, where to engage can become much more clear for a range of actors). We therefore also made this proposal an integral part of our proposals for the evolution of global Internet governance. If much of the groundwork to enhance cooperation has already been done in the context of the Action Lines, why not build on this rather than constituting a new, government-dominated body? This would also ensure that the enhanced cooperation agenda, too, is tethered quite closely to development - that seems to be the case only rarely now. <br />
<br /></div><div>Different issues require action at different levels and through different processes. The challenge is not which one to chose, but how to hold on to, organise and maximise the multitude. <br /></div><div><br /></div>
Best,<br /></div>Anja<br /><div><div><div><div> <br /></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 December 2013 06:06, michael gurstein <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">+1<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">M<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <a href="mailto:nashton@consensus.pro" target="_blank">nashton@consensus.pro</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:nashton@consensus.pro" target="_blank">nashton@consensus.pro</a>] <br />
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, December 01, 2013 4:05 PM<br /><b>To:</b> michael gurstein; <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; bestbits<br /><b>Subject:</b> Re: [bestbits] FW: Broadband Manifesto<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><div><div class="h5"><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p>The merits of the report aside, your point, Michael, is one I believe strongly to be true: the whole WSIS follow-up system is top-down, because the ITU took control of it. What's needed is national-level action plans, drawn up by all stakeholders, which can then be compared like-for-like as to results internationally so countries can learn from what works in other countries. The irony is that this model is how "Agenda 21" the climate change process from the first Rio conference works; sadly WSIS didn't pick this up despite it postdating Rio by more than a decade.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>In the WSIS review, we should fix this. The digital divide is not going to be met in Geneva at one-annual "WSIS review" meetings where INGOs (however well-meaning) compare notes and report cards - it will be met at the grassroots level, with buyin from that level.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><u></u> <u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">
Anyone wondering why a grassroots/community informatics perspective is necessary in the WSIS and related ICT4D venues should take a close look at this corporate driven top-down techno-fantasy of what could/should be done with no attention being given to how it might actually be accomplished on the ground even after almost twenty years of similar pronouncements and failed (and hugely wasteful) similarly top down initiatives.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">M<span><u></u><u></u></span></p><div><p> <u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><cite><span style="font-style:normal"><a href="http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/67.asp" target="_blank">http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/67.asp</a><u></u><u></u></span></cite></p>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span>Broadband infrastructure, applications and services have become critical to driving growth, delivering social services, improving environmental management, and transforming people’s lives, according to a new Manifesto released by the Broadband Commission for Digital Development and signed by 48 members of the Commission, along with other prominent figures from industry, civil society and the United Nations. “Overcoming the digital divide makes sense not only on the basis of principles of fairness and justice; connecting the world makes soun d commercial sense,” the Manifesto reads. “The vital role of broadband needs to be acknowledged at the core of any post-2015 sustainable development framework, to ensure that all countries – developed and developing alike – are empowered to participate in the global digital economy.”</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div><div><p> <u></u><u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">Supporting Document<u></u><u></u></span></p><p><b><i> <u></u><u></u></i></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/working-groups/bb-wg-taskforce-report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/working-groups/bb-wg-taskforce-report.pdf</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<div><p> <u></u><u></u></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><br />-- <br />Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.<u></u><u></u></p></div></div></div></div><br />____________________________________________________________<br />
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br />
<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br />
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br />
<a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits</a><br /></blockquote></div><br /><br clear="all" /></div></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>