[governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

[Lee W McKnight]

Hi,

Wading in.

1st re OECD: I agree it is way more important than commonly recognized, partly because they keep a relatively low profile as 'the rich countries club' as as an early/long-range policy formulation and discussion shop.  mainly working on other parts of the world economy.

2nd re why OECD doesn't open up membership further: basically it comes down to getting things done, which is hard enough with 30 member states and as we all know very slow, cumbersome and difficult if reconciling 200+ national viewpoints.  

3rd Parminder is completely correct to point out that policies affecting the Internet have originated - or have been facilitated - by OECD efforts.  For example when seeking to reform ICANN's closed/arbitrary (ie opposite of 'open transparent and accountable') procedures for gTLDs last decade, I didn't waste a lot of time at ICANN meetings, instead I sought to appear before OECD's ICCP and ask them to study the issue. Which they did and followed with recommendations that ICANN become - more open transparent and accountable in its policymaking processes. So if you're unhappy with gTLDs being for sale, it is (partly) my, Milton's and OECD's fault. 

4th Parminder's question on why it is ok for CS folks to be happy that they wedged open a little the OECD processes to include a Civil Society Information Society Advisory Committee - great question.  I'm happy because it is progress, one institution at a time - even if frankly the time and cost burden on cs in participating means that I personally haven't been able to participate actively or attend any meetings these past few years.  But it is a step in the right direction.  And the CS orgs which have carried the load I believe have done a good job at representing broader CS, partly or especially because - they know that broader CS will not be invited regularly into this club.

As for where developing countries might seek instead to gather and engage in similar activities, great question especially at this G-20 summit time.  In general the G-20 shares the OECD characteristic of being small enough in membership to be manageable within its scope; it also shares the OECD's characteristic of being an exclusive club, one of great importance to the world economy.  The BRICs have their seats of power at this table; but rest of world....is not invited.  

So re-creating an OECD-like public policy discussion forum is no small task and requires a small and very smart core staff to do the work which member countries have to pay for.  I don;t see the political will or $ for that.  I do see a number of UN-related entities like UNCTAD, ITU-D, UN-GAID, which probably think that is what they are doing but not at least in my view with the impact of OECD.  Note OECD makes recommendations and is quite explicit in favor of democratically elected governments, and open markets. In fact if you don't practice both you need not apply. Actually noone should apply since they aren't accepting new members.  But note OECD does try to share data and work results freely, their website is a treasure trove.

Returning to EC statement and IGF's evolution, what I oppose is folks claiming we live in the best of all possible IG worlds now and who fear all changes....some of whom are same folks who resisted for years discussions of complete no-brainer topics like discussing Critical Internet Resources at IGF. 

So personally I am strongly sympathetic to Parminder's core point - at least in my view - of enhanced cooperation needing to be really and truly engaged at this time , without assuming CS must be as diplomatically polite as other groups at the table, because we are not.

Lee
________________________________________
From: Marilia Maciel [mariliamaciel at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:49 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] FINAL? DRAFT statement on enhanced cooperation

Dear Parminder,

I could never follow the process in OECD as close as it deserved, but your e-mail has really caught my attention.
I would like to learn more about this arrangement in OECD. Could you (or anyone else on the list) please share some resources?

Thank you.
Marília

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 9:25 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net<mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:

Hi All

I am still not able to understand how so many of those who are against any new institutional framework for evolving global IG related public policies, which is democratic in inclusion of all countries and stakeholders,  have enthusiastically supported a similar framework among OECD countries? I mean the OECD's Committee For Information, Computer and Communication Policy, which has a very active portfolio for helping develop Internet policies, esp those with trans-border ramification. Many CS members in the IGC have actively organized themselves to associate with the work of this OECD's institutional framework.

Why should such a framework not exist at a global level? And I do think that OECD's framework is not multistakeholder enough. My proposal is for a global framework of similar kind (to OECD's) that will help develop globally applicable Internet related public policies, which is what the 'enhanced cooperation' process is about, that is much more multistakeholder than the existing OECD one

I request a specific response for those who have supported the OECD framework rather enthusiastically, and this includes most here on the IGC list who now oppose similar new institutional developments at the global level , how do they justify this opposition now, for a similar global institutional framework.

Unfortunately, many developing country IGC members here have gone along with this opposition to a global UN anchored body, which can be  no different from the OECD arrangement. I am able to unserstand thier stanc eeven more.

Should we depend on OECD to make global Internet policies. That is what is being said in this support for a OECD framework but opposition to a similar global framework one, for addressing the urgent need for global Interent related public policies. .

For this reason I cannot support the present draft statement. But if someone can give me some justification clarifying the above paradox, I am very much willing to listen.

Parminder



____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org<mailto: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



--
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
____________________________________________________________
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