[governance] IGF as an umbrella facilitator for Internet Governance?

[Ian Peter]

I'm interested to know what others think of the concept raised by Fouad
Bajwa of IGF developing as an "umbrella facilitator". Is this something
civil society broadly supports and is it something we should raise as part
of the IGF review?

More on Fouad's thoughts below.


On 16/10/09 7:13 AM, "Fouad Bajwa" <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Bertrand,
> 
> Anriette's question is very valid and when it will come down to review
> panels, I would not deem them to be the best approach. The review
> panels will have to be first lead with a multistakeholder but more
> "involved group". We have the governments, the ICANN and the various
> technical internet community and technology-non-technology Civil
> Society. The review panels should be adopted with a more dynamic
> approach and above all, a concrete team should be available above the
> review panels to quickly note, review and disseminate.
> 
> One thing about IGF's approach that has confused me within the MAG as
> well is its lack of interest to touch the policy side of things
> whereas consensus and collaborative resolutions to issues, finding
> solutions to problems and recommending through resolutions is a UN
> mechanism then why cannot that be included as an exploration within
> the IGF process.
> 
> The second thing I am more interested in is the institutionalization
> of the IGF and acting as an umbrella facilitator than just a dialogue
> facilitator (this is one area IGF has been very successful in) but
> this model will only evolve if the IGF acts as an umbrella forum to
> which every participating member country conducts a regional IGF and
> contributes back to the main IGF. This is pretty nascent but I would
> like the Review Panel to take institutionalization of the IGF into
> account since if the IGF is continued, it should evolve into a much
> more concrete role and other organizations like the ITU, UNGAID, CSTD,
> UNESCO etc. should be involved in such a way that they can realize
> that IGF is the right way to move instead of everyone trying to push
> their ticket into the process and also realize that everyone is a
> stakeholder of the Internet and IGF is a very powerful example that
> everyone can move into the dialogue process and real actions can be
> resolved to benefit the global internet citizenry at large.
> 
> One thing that intimidates alot is the over emphasis on ICANN and the
> tug-of-war that exists within the minds of the stakeholders. Yes ICANN
> is one part of the problem but we have to realize that ICANN is not
> the convergence and convergence will reform its power structures and
> one thing is there for the IGF to be present when it happens, that is,
> when the name space opens up and as convergence continues to take
> place, other forms of name space attributes are continuing to be
> evolved through research and one day we will have a very different
> name space structure and that future is not so far.
> 
> The role of the Review Panels has to be very dynamic bringing its
> members in an equal level and a very fast and efficient process
> because Internet Governance will continue to evolve therefore why
> should the review process be slower on a fast moving bullet technology
> train?
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle
> <bdelachapelle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> Could this list also address Anriette's concrete second question ? What do
>> you think the review process should be ? Fundamentally, the community is
>> facing a now recurring problem (cf. WGIG, MAG,...) : how to compose a
>> multi-stakeholder group for a given task, so that it is sufficiently
>> diverse, balanced and representative of the variety of viewpoints ?
>> 
>> In addition, what do you tink the timing is ?
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> Bertrand
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> snip
>>> 
>>> Second question is about the submissions on the review panels. What is
>>> the process likely to be?
>>> 
>>> Anriette
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the
>> Information Society
>> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign
>> and European Affairs
>> 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")
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


____________________________________________________________
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