[governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

On 8 Nov 2010, at 07:59, parminder wrote:

> (this is why I asked how substantive policies can be ever developed through these models and i dont think I got the response.)


I had not understood this question properly.

And of course, I am not sure if I do yet.

Are you asking: "How can use a stakeholder model on issue beyond CIR since that have never been used on other areas beyond CIR before?"

Or put another way: "Please prove that that the multistakeholder model will work for things other than CIR?"

For the many reasons I have argued, that are not topic dependent, I believe that the multistakeholder model is a viable method of deepening democracy along the lines of representation+participation+advocacy.

While these democratic multistakeholder models are new in the area of CIR, they are even newer in other areas.  and while I think I understand why the ontogeny of these models is CIR related, I see no barrier to the basic model being applied in other areas to the advantage of the world's peoples.

However, at the moment they are still the only models I see that take us beyond simple trust in the most basic of democratic forms - trusting our sometime representative governments and the IGO that the bureaucrats from those nations create. My advocacy is for the use of various forms of multistakeholder model in any and all policy issues.  The modalities f the model with vary with implementation and with topic area, as will the mix of stakeholders

> 
> On 08.11.2010 09:29, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>> 
>> But the key question in my note which I would appreciate an answer to from
>> yourself or any of the others who are advocating for multistakeholderism
>> remains
>> 
>>> who is representing the
>>> broader public interest (certainly not a very narrowly based and
>>> non-representative in any sense, CS)--including for example, those
>>> with no or limited access; those for whom access is unavailable or
>>> highly restricted because of geography, disability or cost; or those
>>> with access but who are lacking in the opportunity to make effective
>>> use of that access in support of better living circumstances for
>>> themselves and their families and communities.

Although I like Jeannette's answer quite a bit, I would like to ad something.

I think that we see a lot of representation of those interests in this very caucus.  From IT4Change projects and their  championing of the people in the areas around Bangalore and in India in general, in the APC membership of local organizations that deal with all sorts of issues that relate to the poor and to the marginalized populations, to your advocacy in terms of the people involved in telecenters, the consumer groups that have gotten invovled in almost all organizations,  etc...   And this is just one of the civicl society groups. In some cases the presentation of interests comes by participation of groups such as the International Red cross in various organizations like ICANN. In some cases these interests are represented by those who work in the foundation created by the megacorps.  And of course to some extent those population are represented by the representation democracy in the democratic countries.  

Again with my constant proviso that there is further to outreach and more groups to be brought in, the point is that there is a constant elevation of the interests of the many in a multistakeholder organization.  That advocacy is somewhat fluid and is more likely to represent the interests of a population that the populations directly, but on occasion, especially with groups like APC for example, as far as I understand, the local populations have  a lot to say about the positions their umbrella groups take.

So the broader public interests are being represented by the amalgam of those who participate and advocate.  and the mode direct participation we get at various layers of the efforts, the better off we will be.

So again, I apologize for taking this theoretical approach, but I still see no other model than the multistakeholder model to further the interests of the many in a deepening od democracy by combining the representation+participation+advocacy.  What we still need to do is to learn how to make that model work in many situation beyond CIR where it has had it first real test.  I see establishing this model, in various modalities to be a primary requirement for future success of civil society's goals.  And thus I advocate for it.

a.


____________________________________________________________
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