[governance] Reposting Workshop 2: Successes and failures of Internet governance, 1995 - 2010, and looking forward to WSIS 2015

[William Drake]

Hi

On Apr 11, 2010, at 3:05 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

> Description:
> This workshop will compare the changing institutional and procedural approaches that have been applied to the problems of Internet governance over the last 15 years, and facilitate the sharing of various perspectives about the effectiveness and legitimacy of each approach.  

Could someone provide some examples to clarify the focus here?  What institutional and procedural approaches to which problems of Internet governance would we be talking about?  Only actually existing or also proposed?  Is the idea to consider the relative merits of, for example, intergovernmental vs. MS vs. private sector arrangements?  If so, a comparative assessment would probably be better if one could identify issue spaces to which the different models were applied, e.g. intergovernmental vs PS approaches to privacy rules, rather than comparing apples and oranges.

> In each case reference will be made to the WSIS process criteria which recommend the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society, and international organizations in Internet governance arrangements.

Would this be the criteria for making judgements as to which is a success and which is a failure?  In which case everything that's not MS would be deemed a failure? (!) Or  would there be some other criteria?  If so, could we have an illustration or two of successes and failures and the basis for the judgement?
> 
> In parallel, the workshop will also look back to the period of 2003-2005 when the first meetings of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was held, and forward to a future meeting in 2015.  Questions to be asked include, would the same decisions about Internet governance that were made in 2005 have been made today,

Is there any reason to believe they would not be?

> are the WSIS process criteria due for revision,

Clearer and more precise, operational language on transparency, democratic, full involvement, etc would certainly be useful, and one would think a strong workshop could be organized on these and their application across cases.

> and how will the role of private actors differ between the two summits?

Don't understand what this is getting at, even if we replaced "will" with "did."

Best,

Bill

> 
> Format:
> The workshop will take a interactive panel format, beginning with brief presentations from experts from each of the stakeholder groups (including academia), followed by a moderated between panelists and the floor.
> 
> — 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100413/54df4b91/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t