AW: [governance] Burr & Cade: proposal for introducing multi-lateral oversight of the root

Mawaki Chango ki_chango at yahoo.com
Fri Jul 21 11:03:04 EDT 2006


hi,

--- Wolfgang Kleinw├Ąchter
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

> Ian:
> 
> Maybe we need to define a multistakeholder model? To me it is
> something like a model which involves all parties
> appropriately utilising their various strengths to achieve
> outcomes ....
> 
> Wolfgang. 
>  
<snip>
>  
> My understanding is that Multistakeholderism (a form of a
> flexible triangular relationship based on the specific
> strengths and opportunities by the involved parties with
> regard to specific issues) is the basic principle, but the
> concrete design of the "triangle" depends  from the given
> issue. While some areas like IP number allocation or DNS
> management can be done under private sector leadership (with
> limited governmental involvement if it comes to ccTLDs etc.)
> fighting cybercrime or protecting human rights governmental
> leadership is needed (but needs also a rational involvement of
> private sector and civil society, partly as watchdog). 


to follow up on Ian's interesting question & view, and
Wolfgang's response to that, I recall something similar was
discussed during the WGIG retreat at Chateau de Bossey, while
drafting the final report. More specifically, in the subgroup
that discussed in detail the different IG models, it was
proposed that on some issues (strongly impacting/involving
national & public policies and authorities), governements may
have the leading role and the other stakeholders an advisory
one, whilst for more technical and practical issues (including,
I think, management), the private sector and CS would have the
lead and governments advise.

I perfectly recall who initially brought up that idea during the
retreat discussions, but I won't say it - not that much because
of the Chattam House rule, but mostly because some are inclined
to value or disqualify ideas based on who proposed them - e.g.,
because the proponent would be, allegedly, from a non-democratic
country, or just from a part of the world they don't like. I
prefer to discuss the ideas...

So back to "Multistakeholderism," the above proposal
consolidated  with the views expressed in the previous emails on
the subject make me think of a model that I would call the
"cursor model" for multistakeholder processes. Obviously, the
cursor goes where the stake is bigger (bigger role and
responsibilities) in a specific issue area, without breaking the
constant cooperation among the multiple players.

Regards,

Mawaki

>  
> With other words, in the 21st century diplomacy you will have
> "governance triangles" everywhere, but each triangle is
> different, according to the specific substance of the issue.
> Such an approach allows also a bottom up policy development
> process, that is you can involve all stakeholdes in the buPDP
> via public calls for proposals etc. Bbut if it comes to
> decision making,  the specifcs of the issue will determine
> what the best way is. Sometimes you need legally binding
> agreements (and then you need governments), sometimes an
> informal arrangement or "rough consensus" by involved parties
> is enough. And then no govenrment is needed. The result is -
> as I have it described in another paper - that Internet
> Governance as a multilayer multiplayer mechanism constitutes
> something like a "tower of triangles" with no single model.
> Look forward and be innovative.
>  
> Best
>  
> w
>  
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list