[governance] Should IGF negotiate recommendations? (Re: IGC

Thu Jul 16 09:32:39 EDT 2009

Dear Parminder,

In a certain way, it paradoxically may be more powerful for your position to
simply restate what is already in the Tunis Agenda (ie the explicit mention
of recommendations) rather than introducing a new formulation regarding
"non-binding statements" which has the same problem (how do you prepare an
IGF non-binding statement) and is only weaker. The "non-binding" precision
may in addition be considered superfluous, as the IGF itself is non-binding.

The IGF is an ongoing process (provided of course it is continued :-) and
the goal is to invent new modes of expression that all actors progressively
feel comfortable with.

Best

Bertrand

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

>  Dear Bertrand,
>
> Thanks a lot for the detailed email and a constructive suggestion.
>
> First of all, the title of the thread may be misleading - as i said it is
> mostly about the language used. The proposed statement speaks of
> 'non-binding statements' and at no place refers to recommendations. So it
> only goes far as what would be covered by your formulation, and the kind of
> processes that Jeannette suggested earlier, without binding ourselves down
> too much to some limited possibilities that can expand in the future.
>
> The operative sentence from your formulation
>
> "The IGC believes that it is important ... for the outcomes of workshops
> and main sessions, and of the IGFs in general, to be presented in more
> tangible, concise and result-oriented formats."
>
> is quite fine with me.
>
> parminder
>
>
> Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I've only been following the discussions on the satement only in the last
> hour or so - being stuck in my bed with an awful back ache due in part to
> the long economy-class flight coming back from the ICANN meeting in Sydney
> (would support business class tickets indeed ..). Want to congratulate
> Ginger for an amazing job and her patience.
>
> Just a few comments if I can help on the issue of "recommendations", with a
> proposed formulation in the end.
>
> 1) The title of the thread (should the IGF *negotiate* recommendations ?)
> goes beyond what the Tunis Agenda says ("make" recommendations). I do not
> think anybody in the IGC wants to go backwards on the Tunis document : the
> capacity of IGF to produce recommendations is in the text and it is
> important. What the reluctant people mean is that "negotiations" as a way to
> produce recommendations is the wrong way to go. The experience of those of
> us who participated this year in meetings like CSTD and ITU WTPF shows the
> danger of reverting to traditional ways of intergovernmental negotiations.
>
> 2) During the Hyderabad meeting last year, an interesting distinction was
> made between "recommendations *by* the IGF" and "recommendations *at* the
> IGF". This would mean that groups of actors, including Dynamic Coalitions
> for instance but also ad hoc gatherings after a workshop, could take the
> opportunity of an IGF meeting to prepare recommendations that they would
> make public at the IGF and invite other actors to join. This is a truly
> multi-stakeholder and bottom-up approach.
>
> 3) In such an approach, some process could be envisaged for the IGF to
> record such recommendations in a specific rubric, like the IGF site already
> incorporates the reports of the workshops. In the simplest form, the reports
> themselves can already contain such recommendations.
>
> Because of the above, I do not think the opposition in the IGC is between
> those who want recommendations (as a condition of IGF's credibility) and
> those who oppose recommendations in general. The debate is more around how
> to produce something useful  without getting in traditional negotiation
> mode. The answer in my view is that the IGF's main mission is to build
> consensus on 1) the correct understanding of an issue and its various
> dimensions, 2) the existence (or not) of a commonly agreed goal, and 3) the
> best procedural method to address the issue (this can mean for instance, a
> recommendation for a specific group to be formed, or for an issue to be
> addressed by a given organization - or a group of them).
>
> The term recommendation evokes for too many, the lengthy "resolutions"
> adopted in traditional fora. On the other hand, the IGF, in its innovative
> manner, could come up with much more specific guidance, for instance if a
> critical mass of the relevant actors dealing with an issue get together at
> an IGF meeting and, in the course of a workshop, agree on a specific action
> (cf. the notion of roundtables when an issue is considered "ripe" or
> "mature"). Recommendations can be on an issue-by-issue basis and do not
> necessarily engage all of the IGF.
>
> In that context, I'd like to contribute a possible formulation, trying to
> combine the two proposals under discussion :
>
> Q6 Tunis Agenda 72g mandates the IGF to make recommendations "where
> appropriate". This dimension of the IGF mandate should not be forgotten, but
> this does not necessarily mean traditional resolution drafting. The IGC
> believes that it is important in that respect for the outcomes of workshops
> and main sessions, and of the IGFs in general, to be presented in more
> tangible, concise and result-oriented formats. IGF participants should also
> be encouraged to engage in concrete cooperations as a result of their
> interaction in the IGF or in the Dynamic Coalitions and to present their
> concrete recommendations at the IGF, that would be posted on the IGF web
> site.
>
> This is just a starting proposal. Feel free to edit as needed.
> I hope this helps.
> Best
> Bertrand
>
>

-- 
____________________
Bertrand de La Chapelle

Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32

"Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint
Exupéry
("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090716/e735c863/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