SV: [governance] IGC statement for open consultation

Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
Sun Sep 14 05:15:30 EDT 2008


 

Parminder

 

One thing on the agenda is the nature and role of dynamic coalitions. This is important for civil society. Some of us may have some views on it. If so, please share them in the next 48 hours. If we see consensus or rough consensus of views we will present those on IGC's behalf. Even otherwise, members attending the consultations can convey different viewpoints of IGC members on this and other issues to the MAG. 

 

Wolfgang:

 

The Dynamic Coaliations (IGF-DC) are real innovations in international policy making. The big difference to "Working Groups" we know from the UN is the open multistakeholder composition, the bottom up approach and the flexible procedures. One of the key procedureal discussion point is now, as I can see it, should we formalize IGF-DCs or not? I think it is too early to push the IGF-DCs into a formal procedure. We have too less experiences and best practices so far. We need a little bit patience and have to wait how the bottom up discussion works and which outcomes are produced. For the moment the only thing I would propose is to define a set of criteria under which a group can be call itself an IGF-DC. Openess, multistakeholder, bottom up, transparent, related to the WSIS process could be some of them. 

 

With regard to "outcomes" I would not recommend to follow the established procedures from international negotations, that is to have at the end recommendations, resolutions, declarations or legally binding conventions. I would prefer to invent something new which could be called "messages", "opinions" or "signals". Such messages, opinions or signals could be .- like RFCs - emerge via a bottom up discussion process and be fixed when something like "rough consensus" becomes visible. If if there is no rough consensus but a 50:50 constellation you could send two conflicting "signals" to the world, bringing light into the argument of the conflicting parties. 

____________________________________________________________
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