FW: [governance] Program for IGC at IGF
George Sadowsky
george.sadowsky at attglobal.net
Mon Oct 23 07:36:21 EDT 2006
Comments below.
At 11:55 AM +0530 10/23/06, Parminder wrote:
>
>George
>
> >I'm
> > concerned
> > about the economic health of the Internet industry in a
> > country, and
> > that's very much a function of the government's attitude
> > toward
> > competition, free enterprise, laissez-faire (or not), and
> > transparency, in procurement, in giving licenses, in creating
> > or
> > destroying barriers to entry, etc....
>
>I know that is the dominant take on the issues, which we keep trying
>to challenge.
Why? Why not see your own vision as a complement to it?
> I know pro-competition policies are important, but has it occurred
>to you that large scale public investment in ICT infrastructure (and
>ICT infrastructure, apart from telecom access, also includes
>software, hardware, localization, service delivery systems etc)
>plays an important role in reaching the benefits to all people - as
>it has done in case of all important infrastructure in the
>yesteryears in developed countries as well. Indian governments, for
>instance, are putting in a lot of public investments into this after
>they have seen that private investments really did not reach ICT
>benefits to all.
Yes, it has occurred to me. Check the writings in my bibliography. Look at:
http://www.internetpolicy.net/
the project that I've been directing for the lpast 5 years. I want
the Internet industries in each country to thrive because of what a
strong Internet industry can do for social and economic development.
And when the government engages in various kinds of subsidization to
assist the industry by investing in local capacities of various
kinds, so much the better.
>
>But I notice that you speak of the 'economic health of the Internet
>industry' and not about socio-economic development of a country/
>society, so you may to that extent be right in your partial view of
>things.
Let's be clear. Internet is a means to various ends, open societies,
pluralistic democracies, economic growth. One can concentrate upon
the dynamics of the industry and still be very conscious that the
reason why it's important lies beyond the industry itself.
>
>This was however beside the point on the national versus
>international issues debate. But it does go to show that we all have
>a good view of the importance of national policy space (governmental
>or multistakeholder).
>
>So since we are on eve of an international forum, and the discussion
>started in that context, the onus is on whoever speaks that the
>'international space is not significant' and not the other way
>around. In a similar way, if we were in a national policy space
>speaking exclusively of importance of issues that pertain to
>international spaces and cannot be taken up nationally will be an
>avoidable distraction.
>
> > Just trying to restore a sense of balance to the discussion
> > ...
>
>So, the balance, in the present context, lies in engaging with what
>is important from a global policy spaces perspective.
And in not misidentifying what is important in the global policy space.
>
>
>Parminder
>
>
>
>________________________________________________
>Parminder Jeet Singh
>IT for Change, Bangalore
>Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
>Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
>Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
>www.ITforChange.net
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: George Sadowsky [mailto:george.sadowsky at attglobal.net]
> > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:28 AM
> > To: Milton Mueller; governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Program for IGC at IGF
> >
> > Milton,
> >
> > I'm concerned with a slightly broader aspect, although my
> > focus in
> > this thread is clearly upon access, in a larger sense. I'm
> > concerned
> > about the economic health of the Internet industry in a
> > country, and
> > that's very much a function of the government's attitude
> > toward
> > competition, free enterprise, laissez-faire (or not), and
> > transparency, in procurement, in giving licenses, in creating
> > or
> > destroying barriers to entry, etc....
> >
> > The healthier and fairer that the industry is, the more
> > prices to
> > consumers of Internet services will reflect real costs and
> > not
> > monopoly status, the more customers are able to trust the
> > access they
> > have as being confidential, then the faster the Internet will
> > grow
> > and serve the developmental goals of the country. And, if
> > the
> > country has reasonable consumer protection legislation, it is
> > likely
> > to really benefit the growth of e-commerce on the net and not
> > retard
> > it. These are issues that are directly affected by national
> > government policy, legislation and regulation.
> >
> > What I do disagree with is Avri's assertion that it is ONLY
> > on the
> > international stage that Internet issues can be dealt with.
> > I do not
> > disagree with the implication that there do exist issues that
> > require
> > international attention.
> >
> > Just trying to restore a sense of balance to the discussion
> > ...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > George
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > At 4:05 PM -0400 10/22/06, Milton Mueller wrote:
> > >This is an interesting discussion. I find myself agreeing
> > with both Avri
> > >and George. The positions can be reconciled by noting that
> > George is
> > >talking mainly about the relationship between Internet
> > access and the
> > >physical layer (wireless, broadband and other forms of
> > infrastructure
> > >development) whereas Avri is refrring to "the Internet" as a
> > whole which
> > >is of course global in scope and a layer 3 issue.
> > >
> > >There is no doubt in my mind that the policies that affect
> > the
> > >availability of physical infrastructure in a country are
> > primarily
> > >national in development and application. And they are
> > affected not only
> > >by national telecom policies, they are powerfully affected
> > by national
> > >economic development policies, for if people have enough
> > money to buy
> > >services lots of infrastructure development issues take care
> > of
> > >themselves more readily, as the Chinese have learned.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>>> george.sadowsky at attglobal.net 10/22/2006 9:01:20 AM >>>
> > >Avri,
> > >
> > >Let's look at access policy _within_ a country, e.g.
> > licensing of
> > >ISPs, decisions with regard to ISP liability, monopoly
> > telecomm
> > >carriers, not-level playing fields, licensing of ISPs,
> > licensing of
> > >wireless frequencies and devices. etc. These are all
> > issues of
> > >national policy.
> > >
> > >It may be that international best practices can provide good
> > >guidelines, but these are more likely to be de facto
> > standards set by
> > >industry than the result of intergovernmental action.
> > >
> > >Perhaps we have different definitions of policy.
> > >
> > >George
> > >
> > >At 12:04 AM +0200 10/22/06, Avri Doria wrote:
> > >>Hi,
> > >>
> > >>On 21 okt 2006, at 21.11, George Sadowsky wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>What I am reacting to is what I observe is the
> > conventional wisdom
> > >>>that I find faulty: that Internet governance and related
> > Internet
> > >>>issues are essentially international in character,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>I disagree. I think it is only on the international stage
> > that
> > >>governance and other Internet issues can be dealt. I don't
> > believe
> > >>that it is up to governments to do it though i do see them
> > having
> > >>some role. i don't believe there is is any right of
> > nations to make
> > >>policy vis a vis the Internet. They may do so, and they
> > even get
> > >>away with it at the moment, but i think we lose a major
> > battle the
> > >>second we start to believe that they have some _right_ to
> > do so. I
> > >>tend to view the IGF and other international, but not
> > >>intergovernemental, organizations as a bulwark against the
> > >>continuing nationalization of the Internet.
> > >>
> > >>>that wanted to emasculate ICANN
> > > >
> > >>interesting image, but i do not see what being masculine,
> > or having
> > >>masculine external attributes, has to do with being an
> > effective
> > >>international organization. not that i am prepared to
> > argue that
> > >>the current ICANN incarnation is particularly effective,
> > though i
> > >>think that has more to do with its form of governance and
> > its lack
> > >>of freedom from national and other government pressure.
> > >>
> > >>a.
> > >>___________________________________________________________
> > _
> > >>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
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20061023/de064395/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20061023/de064395/attachment.txt>
More information about the Governance
mailing list