[bestbits] FW: Broadband Manifesto

Mon Dec 2 17:16:49 EST 2013

Anja,

I really haven't followed or kept up with the Action Lines process. The few
times that I did take a look it seemed to be mostly around fairly empty
self-congratulations about the success of one pilot project or paper
exercise or another with little real connection with what might be happening
on the ground. 

Rather I've tried to spend my time at my "day job" which is helping in
various ways to support/enable bottom up development processes. As I tried
to point out in my reply to George's comments on my earlier post the
connection that I see between bottom up development (the kind that actually
works) and say a WSIS process is that global policy influences national
policy and national, multilateral and foundation funding. Bottom up
development will only go so far until it runs into a policy or a funding
blockage.  If the supporting mechanisms/policies aren't there initiatives
fail and ladders quickly turn into snakes.  Then, the people with the fewest
resources are required to start all over again while the those with the most
get to jet off to another international conference talking about which
square "Action Line" peg can be snaffled to fit into the required round hole
so as to appear to be supportive of "Poverty Reduction" or whatever the
flavor of the day happens to be.

Action Lines aren't "development" they are a way of describing (or in most
cases mis-describing) development activities taking place (or not) rather
far distant from wherever those Action Lines are being discussed. The non-IG
part of WSIS should be about the reality of development and a WSIS +10
either takes a close look at what worked (or more likely, didn't) on the
ground and starts from there or it isn't about anything at all.

M  

From: Anja Kovacs [mailto:anja at internetdemocracy.in] 
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 11:39 AM
To: michael gurstein
Cc: Nick Ashton-Hart; IGC; bestbits
Subject: Re: [bestbits] FW: Broadband Manifesto

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.  

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:
http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/inc/docs/phase2/rc/V1-D-2.docx 

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. 

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. 

Best,

Anja

On 2 December 2013 06:06, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

+1

M

From: nashton at consensus.pro [mailto:nashton at consensus.pro] 
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2013 4:05 PM
To: michael gurstein; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits
Subject: Re: [bestbits] FW: Broadband Manifesto

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.

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.

michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

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.

M

http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/67.asp

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."

Supporting Document

http://www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/working-groups/bb-wg-taskforce-
report.pdf

-- 
Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits

-- 
Dr. Anja Kovacs
The Internet Democracy Project

+91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs
www.internetdemocracy.in <http://www.internetdemocracy.in/> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131202/779218b9/attachment.htm>