[governance] Muti-stakeholder Group structure (some ideas)

Jeanette Hofmann jeanette at wzb.eu
Fri Jun 1 03:53:35 EDT 2007

Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au> wrote:
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>>> 1) On the composition :
>>>     * it should be a single body : separating the constituencies would
>>>       be detrimental to fruitful interaction and lead to silo approaches
>>>       preventing consensus; a step backwards in the process;
>> My view is that practicality requires some degree of separation between 
>> them, because each of the stakeholder groups is accustomed to making 
>> decisions in quite different ways and it is going to take some time (and 
>> trust) before these will begin to converge.
> I strongly disagree with Jeremy's conclusion:  Precisely because
> the ways of thinking and decision-making traditions differ between
> the categories of stakeholders, genuine cooperation and trust can
> develop only in the "single body" model.

In my view, the various groups should form one single body but that the 
recruiting mechanisms to that body will be different. It seems naive to 
think that governments would ever adopt the same selecting mechanisms we 
use. I also don't believe that it is possible to reflect the major 
groups of governments with 5 geographical seats.
> Of course such multistakeholder bodies should not be given tight
> deadlines to produce decisions or other deliverables shortly after
> formation - learning to effectively work together takes time.  But
> taking this time is greatly preferable to having a separate-bureaus
> structure where you can wait forever before decision-making practices
> "will begin to converge."
> Greetings,
> Norbert.
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:

More information about the Governance mailing list