[governance] Striking the right balance between private and public interests on the Internet

[David Allen]

Jovan wrote:
>A few points on the discussion about public/private interests and 
>the Internet?
>
>
>The WSIS IG debate could have been more productive had it initiated 
>a discussion on striking the right balance between public and 
>private interests on the Internet. One main advantage is that the 
>discussion on public/private interests does not follow the 
>predominant geo-political division lines. The public/private debate 
>is taking place in many countries (in the USA ? cable operators as 
>ISPs and the protection of the public nature of the Internet) as 
>well as at the international level (WTO: various services ? mainly 
>education, UNESCO ? multilingualism, etc.).
>
>The private/public debate is not specific to this time or only to 
>the Internet. It is as old as the market economy itself (even older 
>? Roman law specifies various instruments for limiting private 
>ownership through the interest of others or the community). 
>Thousands of pages have been written on how to harmonise private and 
>public interests. National laws in many countries restrict private 
>ownership in various ways (e.g. providing critical services, 
>anti-monopoly legislation, labour standards).
>
>One problem is that the mechanisms for creating a proper 
>private-public balance are not well developed at the international 
>level. They remain predominantly national, while the market, in the 
>meantime, has become global. This imbalance is addressed in various 
>forms. Business initiatives, such as Global Compact, try to promote 
>socially responsible business activities. The question of balancing 
>private and public interests is also the crux in, for example, the 
>WTO and the ILO debates.
>
>There is also a fast growing volume of work on the public interest 
>and the Internet. Lessins and Milton have written about it. As was 
>mentioned in previous inputs, the APC have contributed a lot to this 
>field. It is also present in policy debates. During one of the 
>PrepComs, Bertrand made a very eloquent intervention, linking civil 
>society?s raison d??tre in the IG debate to the promotion of global 
>public interests. In Tunis, the World Banke had very good panel on 
>public interests and the Internet.
>
>
>Here are a few follow-up points:
>
>- the key is how to establish a balance between private-driven 
>Internet development and the public interest. Civil society could 
>play a vital role in striking this balance, through an informed and 
>inclusive debate. It should make use of its expertise in this field 
>by identifying problems and suggesting ?win-win solutions? whenever 
>possible;
>
>- Google and other companies, which show more sensitivity to public 
>interests, might be interested in becoming constructive players in 
>various private-public initiatives;
>
>- while keeping in mind some broader concepts, such as ?global 
>public good,? the debate should focus on concrete issues (e.g. a few 
>months ago Djibouti was disconnected from the Internet due to a 
>business decision by the bandwidth provider based in the United Arab 
>Emirates; a possible multilateral arrangement should specify that 
>private operators who provide the only national link to the Internet 
>should engage in broader consultations before they disconnect 
>countries from the Internet; some fund or international mechanism 
>should be established for reacting to situations when a country is 
>in danger of being completely disconnected from the Internet).
>
>
>Seiiti Arata sent an e-mail about research on public and private 
>interests on the Internet. This research is still in its early 
>phase, but is a good basis for a more comprehensive analysis. Please 
>send an e-mail to Seiiti and his team? The public-private balancing 
>act will be one of the topics at the IG Conference in Malta 
>(http://www.diplomacy.edu/Conferences/IG/). Hope to see you in Malta.
>
>
>Regards, Jovan

A simple note, one suggestion, a slight twist on the private/public 
question presented here:

If we deal in terms of tension between public and private - rather 
than balance - we open the possibility to see events in a dynamic 
frame, to understand the story across time.  And whether indeed we 
use either the word 'balance' or the word 'tension' - a picture 
across time can open a new world for policy.

I quite appreciate Jovan's discussion.  It seems to me to point to 
important possibilities.  If there is interest, I will provide more 
on the implications of adding an approach across time, off list or on.

David Allen

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance