[governance] main themes

[Parminder]

Bill

 

Would it not be better to use 'Swiss gov' instead of Swiss OfCom in the
theme proposals. Makes it weightier and also more accessible to everyone.
Parminder 

 

  _____  

From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net] 
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:31 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: RE: [governance] main themes

 

 

Below is the text for the proposed caucus statement on themes for IGF Delhi.
As with other statements, we may read out a shorter version of the statement
as per time available, but good for the caucus to adopt a full length
statement. 

 

 (starts)

 

As suggested in our earlier statement (depending on which statement goes
first), CS IGC is of the opinion that the four general themes of access,
openness, diversity and security (with CIRs added in Rio) have served a
useful purpose in organizing the IGF meetings in its early formative stages,
by which we mean its first two meetings in Athens and Rio. We should now
move on more purposefully to the serious business of providing directions,
ideas and possibilities to global public policy making in the Internet
arena, which is a primary mandate of the IGF. 

 

We are of the opinion that the above general themes of access, openness,
diversity and security should remain cross-cutting themes for overall
organizing of the substantive aspects of the IGF. However, the main sessions
should address specific public policy issues that are considered most
important in the current global context. A series of thematic workshops
should also be organized around these main sessions, whose output should
feed into them. Adequate preparatory work should go into preparing the main
sessions and the connected workshops using dedicated working groups. These
WGs should also synthesize some outcome documents for each main theme.

 

For Delhi, we suggest the following main session themes.

 

1. Enhanced Cooperation - what was meant by the Tunis Agenda, and what is
the status of it

 

Tunis Agenda speaks of the need for enhanced cooperation for global Internet
policy making. There are different views about what exactly is meant by this
term, and what processes will/ can constitute enhanced cooperation. IGF is
the right forum to deliberate on the meaning and possibilities of this term,
through wide participation of all stakeholders in the multi-stakeholder
spirit of the WSIS.  It is quite possible that such an open discussion
pushes the process of EC forward, which at present seems to be caught in a
kind of a limbo, or at least some degree of confusion. 

 

2. 'Network Neutrality - ensuring openness in all layers of the Internet'

 

Network neutrality has been an important architectural principle for the
Internet. This principle is under considerable challenge as Internet becomes
the mainstream communication platform for almost all business and social
activities. These challenges are most manifest in the physical layer, but
also increasingly in the content and application layers. This session will
examine the implication of this principle, and its possible evolutionary
interpretations, for Internet policy in different areas.  

 

3. "Internet Governance for Sustainable Communities"

 

(Thomas's current formulation speaks only about CIRs and sustainable
communities. I am encouraging him to develop a broader theme of connecting
the issue of sustainable communities to IG in all layers - logical,
application, content and software. CIRs implicated in logical layers can be
one set of issues developed through a thematic workshop and fed into the
proposed main session. Issues of local connectivity solutions (and a global
policy environment encouraging it), local content, community appropriation
of technologies, etc could also be connected to 'sustainable communities'.
More suggestions are welcome here))

 

 

4. A Development Agenda for Internet Governance

Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for the IGF.
Development also was listed as a cross-cutting theme of the Athens and Rio
conferences, but neither featured a main session that devoted significant,
focused attention to the linkages between Internet governance mechanisms and
development.  However, at Rio a workshop was organized by civil society
actors in collaboration with the Swiss Office of Communications and other
partners from all stakeholder groupings on, "Toward a Development Agenda for
Internet Governance."  The workshop considered the options for establishing
a holistic program of analysis and action that would help mainstream
development considerations into Internet governance decision making
processes. Attendees at this workshop expressed strong interest in further
work on the topic being pursued in the IGF.  Hence, we believe the
Development Agenda concept should be taken up in a main session at New
Delhi, and that this would be of keen interest to a great many participants
there.  We also support the Swiss OfCom's proposal to consider establishing
a multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop recommendations to the
IGF on a development agenda.


5. Transparency and Inclusive Participation in Internet Governance

The WSIS principles hold that Internet governance processes "should be
multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of
governments, the private sector, civil society and international
organizations." Governments invoked these principles throughout the WSIS
process, and in the Tunis Agenda mandated the IGF to, "promote and assess,
on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet
Governance processes."  Nevertheless, the IGF has not held any follow-up
discussion on how to pursue this key element of its mandate.  The Internet
Governance Caucus has consistently advocated programmatic activity in this
arena, and hence welcomes the Swiss OfCom's statement that implementation of
the WSIS principles should be added as a cross-cutting issue at the core of
all IGF discussions.  To help kick-start that cross-cutting consideration,
we propose that a main session in New Delhi concentrate on two WSIS
principles of general applicability for which progress in implementation can
be most readily assessed: transparency, and inclusive participation.  The
session could consider patterns of practice across Internet governance
mechanisms, and identify generalizable lessons concerning good or best
practices.

 

6. Netizens - on the Internet as a support for grassroots democracy and
participation in governance issues.

 

(Ronda's text is awaited. Suggestions welcome, as for other categories.)

 

(ends)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080221/3b46af22/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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