OFFLIST:Re: [governance] Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

[Parminder]

Ginger Paque wrote:
> Hi everyone... I just got in to Geneva, and see that there have been 
> no responses to this. Jeremy, if it is ok with you, I think we should 
> follow up on Parminder's proposal.
>
> Parminder: can you write up the actual wording for your proposal? I 
> think it is better if it comes from someone in the list. If you and 
> Jeremy agree, we can post:
>
> Parminder, since there have been no comments, please post your 
> proposed wording as soon as possible. 
Ginger/ Jeremy/ All,

See if the following works. (At the airport, leaving for Geneva. So wont 
be able to comment any further throughout the day.)

(proposed statement begins)

IGC proposes three themes for main sessions for IGF Vilnius:

Network Neutrality - Ensuring Openness in All Layers of the Internet

A Development Agenda for Internet Governance

Internet Rights and Principles

It is significant to note that on the themes of Network Neutrality and 
Development Agenda workshops have been organized in a few earlier IGFs, 
including 3 hour workshops on both of these themes at IGF Sharm.Thus, 
the two topics have considerable maturity  within the IGF, while 
constituting important issues requiring urgent attention of the global 
IG community. The dynamic coalition on Internet rights and principles is 
one of the most active DC and has done good work in the area of IRP. 
Including IRP as a main theme, apart from the theme's intrinsic 
importance, will be  a good way to mainstreaming the work of DCs in the 
IGF.

A brief description of the three proposed themes is given below:

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. This main session will examine the implication of 
this principle, and its possible evolutionary interpretations, for 
Internet policy in different areas. Issues about the openness of the 
Internet architecture are increasingly manifest in all layers of the 
Internet today.

A Development Agenda for Internet Governance

Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for the 
IGF.  But while development has been posed as a cross-cutting theme of 
IGF meetings, they have not featured a broadly inclusive and probing 
dialogue on what Internet Governance for Development (IG4D) might mean 
in conceptual and operational terms.  To address this gap, the IGC 
previously has advocated a main session on A Development Agenda for 
Internet Governance, and some its members have organized workshops or 
produced position papers elaborating different visions of what such an 
agenda could entail.   In light of the related discussions during the 
Sharm el Sheikh cycle, we renew our call for a main session on this 
theme.  The dialogue at Vilnius could, inter alia, identify the linkages 
between Internet governance mechanisms and development, and consider 
options for mainstreaming development considerations into IGF 
discussions and Internet governance processes, as appropriate.  We also 
continue to support the Swiss government''s proposal to consider 
establishing a multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop 
recommendations to the IGF on a development agenda.

Internet rights and principles

A main session on 'Internet rights and principles' would explore a rights-based discourse in the area of Internet Governance. While it is relatively easy to articulate and claim "rights" it is much more difficult to agree on, implement and enforce them. We also recognize that rights claims can sometimes conflict or compete with each other. There can also be uncertainty about the proper application of a rights claim to a factual situation. The change in the technical methods of communication often undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply legal categories. These complexities, however, only strengthen the case for using the IGF to explicitly discuss and debate these problems. Internet governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical principles and, increasingly, on the Internet's functionality as a giant global marketplace. With the Internet becoming  increasingly central to many social and political institutions, an alternative foundation and conceptual framework for IG can be explored in looking at 'internet rights and principles'.


The IGC affirms it support and assistance to develop main sessions based 
on these themes, and look forward to a fruitful and purposeful IGF Vilnius.

(Statements ends)

Parminder









> We will then open for comments and call for consensus... unfortunately 
> probably 24h and 24h due to time constraints.
>
> Can you guys please try to get back to me asap?
>
> Thanks!
> Ginger
>
> Parminder wrote:
>> I support Bill's draft below... I propose that co-coordinators take 
>> this language for dev agenda, and the Hyderabad statement's for NN/ 
>> Open Internet, and if the decision is to include 'Internet rights and 
>> principles' in the list, abstract a short para on it from the earlier 
>> statement which is relatively  not very sharp, and in size no longer 
>> than the paras on dev agenda and NN. We shd put it out for a day or 
>> so of last comments and then a final version for a consensus call 
>> over 48 hours.
>>
>> In the statement we should also mention that special 3 hour workshops 
>> on the two themes of dev agenda and NN were organized last year, 
>> which represents a certain degree of maturity of these themes within 
>> the IGF context. And if 'internet rights and principles' is included 
>> as a main theme, that the DC on IRP has been doing good work in this 
>> area for considerable time now, an dis in fact the most active 
>> dynamic coalition (the much celebrated concept in the IGF).
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>> William Drake wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> With just a few days to go before the OC, I'm not clear if we are 
>>> proceeding with a theme statement or have given up on the idea.  In 
>>> the event that it's the former, I just reread what we agreed for 
>>> Hyderabad, and we really can't use it anymore, it's dated.
>>>
>>> On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Parminder wrote:
>>>
>>>>     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 government,
>>>>     Brazilian Internet Steering Committee 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 Hyderabad, and that this would be of keen interest
>>>>     to a great many participants there. We also support the Swiss
>>>>     government's proposal to consider establishing a
>>>>     multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop
>>>>     recommendations to the IGF on a development agenda.
>>>>
>>>
>>> How about something like this, which doesn't change the substantive 
>>> thrust of what was previously agreed:
>>>
>>> A Development Agenda for Internet Governance
>>>
>>> Development is a key focus of the Tunis Agenda and its mandate for 
>>> the IGF.  But while development has been posed as a cross-cutting 
>>> theme of IGF meetings, they have not featured a broadly inclusive 
>>> and probing dialogue on what Internet Governance for Development 
>>> (IG4D) might mean in conceptual and operational terms.  To address 
>>> this gap, the IGC previously has advocated a main session on A 
>>> Development Agenda for Internet Governance, and some its members 
>>> have organized workshops or produced position papers elaborating 
>>> different visions of what such an agenda could entail.   In light of 
>>> the related discussions during the Sharm el Sheikh cycle, we renew 
>>> our call for a main session on this theme.  The dialogue at Vilnius 
>>> could, inter alia, identify the linkages between Internet governance 
>>> mechanisms and development, and consider options for mainstreaming 
>>> development considerations into IGF discussions and Internet 
>>> governance processes, as appropriate.  We also continue to support 
>>> the Swiss government''s proposal to consider establishing a 
>>> multi-stakeholder Working Group that could develop recommendations 
>>> to the IGF on a development agenda.
>>>
>>> Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100206/69589607/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