[governance] Comments on Rio - Suggestions for Delhi - main

[William Drake]

Hi,

Too much mail so briefly, I hope we can suggest

> We propose that 'An assessment of the current global policy institutional
> framework and mechanism for the Internet, in terms of existing and emerging

As an overarching focus of the meeting (and the forum), rather than just one
session.  Do away with the four generic main session topics from Athens and
replace with new ones, one of which could be development, another could be
assessing implementation of the WSIS principles (how are transparency and
inclusion done across native administrative and intergovernmental
institutions, best practices etc---a linked workshop could go deeper into
this).  If someone could explain IG and the environment (as opposed to
Internet/ICT and the environment) and we can agree there's something there,
maybe that'd interest people and please Fujitsu etc.

BD

On 2/13/08 12:57 PM, "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> Some views have been expressed on this list that repeating the same main
> themes - that are just too general - will not contribute to any meaningful
> impact of IGF, and will not enable it to move towards fulfilling its
> mandate. (APCs statement also is against recycling the same main themes in
> the plenary.) This was also accepted by the IGC when we proposed 4 new
> themes during the May 2007 consultations.
> 
> I am suggesting one such main themes. Responses to this suggestion, and
> other possible themes are welcome.
> 
> 
> 'Main issues for discussion at IGF New Delhi'
> 
> We are of the opinion that we should move towards taking up of more specific
> issues of global Internet related public policy for discussion in the
> plenaries and the associated workshops, from different speakers just making
> what are often disconnected statements on diffuse and general issues that
> are the subjects of the plenaries at present. A set of issues should be
> chosen for the New Delhi with this spirit.
> 
> We propose that 'An assessment of the current global policy institutional
> framework and mechanism for the Internet, in terms of existing and emerging
> policy related challenges'  (crisper title welcome) be one of the main
> session themes. 
>  
> IGF was borne is an context which recognized significant gaps in the global
> Internet public policy  framework, and one its public policy tasks has to be
> a continued multi-stakeholder examination of this framework, and come out
> with suggestions for evolutionary/ corrective possibilities, if any. No body
> is making such an assessment at present at a time when new challenges in the
> area of global Internet public policy keep emerging. IGF is an important
> responsibility of doing this as per its mandate.
> 
> We will like specific workshops (of type A) devoted to examining the issue
> of ensuring transparency, accountability and multi-stakeholder-ism in all
> for a involved in Internet governance and another one devoted to developing
> a code for public participation in all such fora (Swiss and APC
> contributions mention these)
> 
> Both these workshops can feed into the main session on 'assessment of the
> current global policy institutional framework' proposed above
> 
> (ends)
> 
> Parminder 


____________________________________________________________
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