[governance] eNabler

Avri Doria avri at acm.org
Sat Oct 2 10:32:18 EDT 2010 

Hi,

If I understand the current conversation this is one of the very important thing that I believe the IGC has done, consistently promote a model where civil society in its various manifestations has a seat at the table, and in fact even has the opportunity to organize the table and provides an environement where people want to brig others into their causes have a venue to discuss and attract. Is that what we mean by enabler?  i sometimes think of the IGC as a little bbit advocacy, a little bit organizer and a lot of clearinghouse and match maker.

It is true that in recent years it has focused on the IGF, both the international forum and the many nation and regional efforts.  There have been some other efforts undertaken by IGC members in places like ICANN and the OECD, though these have been far smaller and have not involved the IGC in an organizational sense.  I personally think it would be good for the IGC to get more drawn into these other organizations organizationally once the individuals have opened the door by their individual efforts - and it is up to the leaders who have broken through in these organizations to bring the rest of us along - if they can.  We also have members of this group who are becoming active in the RIR scene like ARIN and RIPE.  Perhaps at some point the IGC can offer some support to their efforts, if we care and if they try to recruit us.

In terms of the ICT efforts, I have often looked at these, especially from the vantage point as a person who develops  (or tries to develop) solutions for ICT4D, and not understood what good they were doing, or what a governance oriented organization could offer to these efforts.  The understanding of what governance has to offer to ICT4D is just beginning to grow, and that is due to efforts of members from the IGC, especially people like Bill Drake, who have been trying to bring these issues center stage for a while by organizing meetings and creating opportunities for people to speak.  Would be good to see people get behind this.

Next week we get the ITU plenipot.  We mostly acknowledge  that there should be more of an effort to get the ITU to accept a civil society presence/voice, and there even been suggestions of things the IGC could do, like try to become affiliate members, but we have never followed through (i am personally interested in this if anyone else wants to work on it).  I wonder how many individuals from the IGC are there on their own this week.  I wonder if there is something we can still do remotely to try and have some impact on what happens there.  Probably too late  but still - statement can always be made in the public sphere and blogs can always be written.  At least we have had Wolfgang and others to keep us informed and to work on building our capacity until hopefully someday we learn why and how to involve ourselves.

The IGC has grown in both scope and stature partly because of the leadership of our coordinators over the last few years.  It is slow, but I believe t is steady.  We have seen in the congratulations to Ginger about how much she has done in various areas, e.g. remote participation, to raise the level of participation.

This group is first and foremost a catalyst, and I must say, whether through the efforts of individuals who sometimes get support and sometimes don't, or through group actions, it changes the efforts it gets involved in.  Yes, it needs to do more and yes we desperately need more active members who take initiatives and bring others, including sometime the whole group together.

a.



On 2 Oct 2010, at 09:42, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:

> Dear all,
> 
> I fully support Wolfgang's vision of an IG Web (I usually call it the Internet Governance Network) linking all stakeholders and their various governance frameworks through a common "governance Protocol" allowing circulation of information upwards and downwards (also sideways of course). 
> 
> The Internet has unified hundreds of thousands of heterogeneous networks through a simple set of protocols (TCP/IP to make it simple) making them interoperable without changing their respective architecture; the HTTP/HTML protocols have allowed millions of heterogeneous databases to become interoperable and form the World Wide Web, irrespective of the kind of software or data structure they are using; likewise, I strongly believe that the interaction modalities that we are experimenting in the IGF (and ICANN) will ultimately allow billions of heterogeneous stakeholders/human groups to interact in a global governance network, without having to change their internal governance framework (every human group has some internal governance framework, ie : modalities for decision-taking).  
> 
> The replication of national and regional IGFs goes in that direction and I expect all international organizations will progressively establish their own MS Forums to interface with the global process. This was emerging slowly during a discussion last week at the OECD around the notion of a Global Forum on Broadband and the Internet Economy. 
> 
> While many actors feared at first that this would come as a competition to the IGF, it was clearly discussed as a way to provide "input" into the annual IGF and a tool to focus OECD activities on what it is concerned most with (the economic dimension). Still work to do but this is where I think it is going. 
> 
> The general challenge is to promote the implementation of multi-stakeholder participatory processes as interoperability standard among heterogeneous governance frameworks. Isn't it what the IGF mandates requests in its paragraph 72i : Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance processes. 
> 
> Best
> 
> Bertrand
> 
> 2010/10/2 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> Lee
> 
> this is the way would should move forward, linking various initiatives/institutions together in a network sending (political) messages foreward and backward. Such an "IG Web" would reflect/mirror then architecture of the Internet and would leave the knowledge/power/decision making capacity at the "edges" (with the option to enhance knowledge etc. by other peers).
> 
> On the other hand, by reading the report from the eNabler meeting I was rather confused. Since UNICTTF  I feel here running in a revolving door missing the exit: Good intentions, (sometimes) big names, big plans, no money, but rather obscure realities. Anyhow it is always worth to support good intentions and to enable people to do things which are helping to implement MDG and WSIS Goals.
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> wolfgang
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Fra: Lee W McKnight [mailto:lmcknigh at syr.edu]
> Sendt: lø 02-10-2010 00:42
> Til: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro; Avri Doria
> Emne: RE: [governance] IGC profile: some handfuls of people and a
> 
> 
> 
> Sala,
> 
> To Avri's point that it is up to folks on the list to  make it whatever they want: thanks for volunteering to prep an IGC FAQ and list of URLs : )
> 
> With that 'done' I have been meaning to raise a second point which does touch on Michael's curmudgeonly critique re the distance between IGC/IGF and folks on the ground actually trying to do ICT4D, with or without broadband to acknowledge Jean-Louis' point.
> 
> Here's my 5 cents:
> 
> UN - GAID is working on something they are calling the 'e-Nabler' which would essentially be an online/semi-automated strategic plan development tool, intended to help folks - on the ground - trying to plan - ICT deployments for development.
> 
> Frankly the thing could be a flop/waste of time; or maybe not. It is intended to provide tools to help folks go from Millenium Development Goals to specific actionalble implementations, which would be a good thing, if done right.
> 
> They acknowledge that they are particularly weak on - policy. We IGCers seem to prefer the word 'governance.'
> 
> So my thought: what if Wolfgang's 'messages from IGF' actually had - particular receivers in mind?
> 
> Namely, folks on the ground trying to do ICT4D.
> 
> This would be relatively simple to implement, since the 'e-nabler' is theoretically updated/refreshed regularly - say annually.  Like when there are fresh 'messages.'
> 
> So each year's IGF process could have a known target audience, which would help make UN-GAID's grand plan more viable - since if there is not fresh input the thing will grow stale and fall apart quickly I warned them last month.
> 
> Anyway, the e-nabler is in the early beta stage, but if this doesn't seem entirely crazy as a notion to the folks bridging IGF & GAID - such as Derrick, Marilyn, and a few others could talk it up a little on the gaid side, and - igc can advocate and/or prepare to implement -in its workshops next year - messages to gaid/to planners trying to get things done in challenging circumstances.
> 
> Of course messages could come in both directions, but seeking to build in feedback loops is generally a good thing right.
> 
> Anyway, just a thought, which if some of you like - I also volunteer Sala to put into motion : )
> 
> Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro [salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 2:57 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Avri Doria
> Subject: Re: [governance] IGC profile: some handfuls of people and a curmudgeon?
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> Michael raised a valid point. As a relatively new kid on the block, I
> think that there should be an information (FAQ) list of URLs to show
> members how they
> can involved ie. increased and widened participation. What essentially
> is the "letter" and "spirit". Criticism must not be taken personally
> but is a mere tool in refinement and it is a wise man or person who
> accepts correction (ancient proverb). I love what
> CS Lewis said in his classic, "An Experiment in Criticism", "My own
> pair of eyes are not enough for me, let me see through other pairs of
> eyes."
> 
> Warm Regards from sunny Fiji,
> Sala
> 
> 
> On 10/2/10, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Oct 2010, at 12:06, Meryem Marzouki wrote:
> >
> >> My conclusion is that, far from being curmudgeonly as he warned this
> >> wasn't his intention, Michael raised a very legitimate and of utmost
> >> importance question. It probably deserves more serious thinking than what
> >> it got so far, but obviously only in case democratic participation is an
> >> issue..
> >
> >
> > wow, that is loaded language.
> >
> > 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
> 
> 
> --
> Salanieta Tudrau Tamanikaiwaimaro
> P.O.Box 17862
> Suva
> Fiji Islands
> 
> Cell: +679 9982851
> Alternate Email: s.tamanikaiwaimaro at tfl.com.fj
> 
> "Wisdom is far better than riches."
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Délégué Spécial pour la Société de l'Information / Special Envoy for the Information Society
> Ministère des Affaires Etrangères et Européennes/ French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
> 
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry
> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")

____________________________________________________________
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

More information about the Governance mailing list