Multistakeholderism and Public Policy: (was) RE: [governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Michael Gurstein]

I fear that Avri ("I believe that the multistakeholder model...") and
Jeanette ("multistakeholderism...is useful in "nailing jello to a wall") are
lapsing into arguments based on faith (Avri) and hope (Jeanette), (I'll
leave off discussing who here is advocating "charity" ie.
multistakeholderism turning its attention to the burdens of supporting
service for the unserviced).

Since neither of them nor others have chosen to answer my rather simple and
straightforward question:

>>> 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.

... The answer is that from my observation there has been little or no
progress in this area at the global level. In fact, given the more or less
complete absence of support for even the slight progress that was made in
WSIS, in the recent ITU/UNESCO Broadband report (see my blogpost on this)
arguably the international multistakeholder activity has simply provided a
cover for the evident inaction.

Meanwhile the quite considerable progress that has been made in this area
has all occurred at the national level as a result of the actions of
governments responding to national political/representative forces among
others ... E.g. the entrance into the constitution of Costa Rica and Finland
of a right to the Internet, legislation in various countries affirming and
supporting universal Internet access as a necessary goal (France, Spain, New
Zealand)and very widespread movements on the part of a number of governments
(Australia, Hong Kong, Malaysia among others) to extend Internet/broadband
access to the entire population. Of even more importance has in fact been
the actions on the ground driven by commercial and consumer forces to extend
mobile/Internet access to huge numbers of previously unconnected.

I too feel that there is a need at the global level for some form of
"Internet governance" and specifically to help to define, enhance and where
necessary enforce the broad global public interest. But I don't think that
that this can be based on either faith, hope or charity.  

Rather it needs, from the CS perspective, to be based on a clear
definition/articulation of what is the (global) public interest in the areas
being discussed in IG and then the mobilization of the broad coalition of
those working to support the public interest first to develop transparent
and inclusive frameworks within which those interests can be articulated and
then to develop the means for ensuring that the public interest so defined
becomes both the global and the local reality.

Mike Gurstein

-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 11:45 PM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: SECOND DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation




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=

____________________________________________________________
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