[governance] New version of WSIS CS statement: Two IG issues

[William Drake]

Hi,
Hi,

Two thoughts for the caucus regarding the IG elements of the overall text
Ralf just circulated on Plenary.  He wants to finalize this by Friday.

First, on pg 1:

"Civil society entered the Tunis Phase of WSIS with these major goals:
·	Agreement on financing mechanisms and models that will close the growing
gaps in access to information and communication tools, capacities and
infrastructure that exist between countries, and in many cases within
countries.
·	Ensuring that our vision of the ‘information society’ is human-centred,
framed by a global commitment to human rights, social justice and
inclusive development.
·	Achieving a sea change in perceptions of participatory decision-making.
We wanted the WSIS to be a milestone from which the inclusion of civil
society participation would become more comprehensive and integrated at
all levels of governance and decision making at local, national, regional
and global levels.
·	Agreement on strong commitment to the centrality of human rights,
especially the right to access and depart information and to retaining
individual privacy."

Suggest the addition of:

*Agreement on a substantively broad and procedurally inclusive approach to
Internet governance, the reform of existing governance mechanisms in
accordance with the Geneva principles, and the creation of a new mechanism
or forum to promote multistakeholder dialogue, analysis, trend monitoring,
and capacity building in the field of Internet governance."

[certainly these were goals going in for a number of us]

Second, on p.10:

"Element two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum
In specific reference to the Internet Governance Forum, in addition to
continuing to develop the consensus notion of the CS Internet Governance
caucus, discussions are under way to create a new working group that will
focus on making recommendations on the modalities of the new forum."

How about the following:

""Element two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum
The CS Internet Governance Caucus will actively participate in and support
the work of the IGF, and is exploring ways to enhance its working methods
and engagement with relevant stakeholders, especially the research
community, to these ends.  In addition, discussions are under way to
create a new working group that will make recommendations on the
modalities of the IGF."

[there's a strong expectation/hope, per the WGIG report, that a
scholarly/academic network will develop around the IGF to provide
analytical support, and it is arguably desirable that caucus provides one
of the key focal points for that.]

---

Lastly, while this doesn't pertain to the IG sections of the text, I have
a question:

Pg. 1:"societies in which the ability to access, share and communicate
information and knowledge is treated as a public good"

Pg. 2: "Internet access, for everybody and everywhere, especially among
disadvantaged populations and in rural areas, must be considered as a
global public good."

Can someone explain to me according to what understanding of economics CS
should declare an ability, or Internet access, to be public goods, bearing
in mind the two key dimensions thereof:

Non-rivalrous — its benefits fail to exhibit consumption scarcity; once it
has been produced, everyone can benefit from it without diminishing
other's enjoyment.
Non-excludable — once it has been created, it is very difficult, if not
impossible, to prevent access to the good.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good

Best,

Bill


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