[governance] RE: WSIS Forum 2011
Carlos A. Afonso
ca at cafonso.ca
Mon Sep 6 21:19:31 EDT 2010
Milton, some of your arguments make little sense, sorry -- we are
talking about CS worldwide, not American CS concentration in a 300 mi
radius around NY. In this case, let us move it to São Paulo -- the
metropolitan area alone has thousands of registered NGOs...
I think that having to choose only between NY and Geneva, I would stick
to Geneva. Moving to NY would still keep it in the "Elizabeth Arden"
circuit which does not change things much, except that Wolf's arguments
regarding this move continue to make sense to me.
And there is the non-trivial visa question -- it is an obvious mistake
to think Swiss visas are as difficult to obtain as a US one.
frt rgds
--c.a.
On 09/06/2010 06:12 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> I view the groundswell for Geneva on this list to be a bit self-serving.
> Of course your Geneva-based orgs want it to stay there. I don’t see why
> IGC should endorse that as a “pro civil society” position. The only
> argument of any merit is the visa difficulty issue – if, as Tracy calls
> into question, that difference still exists.
>
> I have my own self-interest, of course, but it seems to me that WSIS and
> IGF both are highly Euro-centric operations and it would be good to move
> it away from Europe for at least once. Whether its NY or Vancouver or
> Hong Kong or Panama matters less to me, although of course NYC is most
> convenient to me.
>
> Wolfgang’s argument that there are more CS organizations in Geneva seems
> false to me; there are probably more CS organizations in the 300-mi
> radius of NYC (which includes Montreal and probably also Toronto) than
> anywhere else in the world.
>
> As a strict empirical test of the “reduced participation” claim, let me
> point out that the March 2004 WGIG-inspired meeting in New York was more
> widely attended than any subsequent WGIG consultation. I think you can
> count on a bang-up turnout, if nothing else, if you hold it in NY.
>
> *From:* William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 06, 2010 3:23 PM
> *To:* Sivasubramanian M
> *Cc:* Governance List
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: WSIS Forum 2011
>
> Hi
>
> Just read the ICC's statement, which states in part, "The WSIS action
> lines Forum events in Geneva have drawn upon the fact that many key
> organizations are located in Geneva, and the participation of many
> stakeholders, business included, has been facilitated by the fact that
> other WSIS related activities take place around the same dates. This has
> enabled participation by many because it took into account the limited
> time, financial and human resources of many across stakeholder groups.
> Organizing the WSIS action lines Forum 2011 in New York risks decreasing
> participation because it would require extensive travel for those
> participating in the other WSIS related activities in May in Geneva.
> Feedback from ICC BASIS members and other stakeholders indicates that
> obtaining visas for the US is extremely difficult for many particularly
> from developing countries. This would in turn decrease the range of
> participants. ICC BASIS supports having the WSIS action lines Forum 2011
> hosted in Geneva, or by the next lead facilitator, UNESCO in Paris."
>
> http://www.iccwbo.org/uploadedFiles/BASIS/Documents/ICC_BASIS_stmt_re_WSIS_Forum_2011_venue_FINAL_6Sept10.pdf
>
> Is this a reasonable position from an IGC perspective…?
>
> Best,
>
> Bill
>
> On Sep 6, 2010, at 8:56 PM, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>
>
>
> 2010/9/6 William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> <mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>>
>
> Hi,
>
> We can toss around ideas about where an ideal venue that causes the
> least hassle for the most people might be, but the WSIS Forum will be
> held in either New York or Geneva. Lee is probably right about
> mainstreaming; the question is, on what/whose terms? Personally, I have
> never noticed that all that many CS people actually attend the WSIS
> Forums in the first place; they're certainly not much in evidence on the
> panels, which are largely selected by ITU on an "expert" rather than
> "stakeholder" basis. But to the extent that IG/ICT-oriented CS people do
> wish to attend, one would think there's probably greater synergies and
> cost effectiveness for them in keeping it in Geneva during the same two
> week bloc as the IGF consultation (assuming those remain in Geneva) and
> the CSTD. For CS people working in the other areas that are in the UN
> NY's bailiwick, e.g. disarmament et al, NY is obviously more convenient,
> but would they be all that interested enough in the typical WSIS Forum
> topics to attend? Unclear. And I suppose one could widen the optic
> further and wonder whether this might fit in with larger discussions
> about the management of ICT-related activities connected to DESA…
>
> Should there be an IGC response to ITU's "Open Consultation" (means we
> can use their website, not enter the building), or would consensus being
> difficult to achieve?
>
> If CS does not assert its stakes in WSIS process, the WSIS panels could
> be engineered to lead to conclusions that the ITU desires, which would
> be a step back from the progress that the IGF has made.
>
> There needs to be an IGC response. Also, IGC could reach out to fair and
> neutral international organizations to object to and alter the process.
>
> Sivasubramanian M
>
>
> Best,
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Sep 6, 2010, at 6:35 PM, Lee W McKnight wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Speaking as an academic for whom I admit New York City is
> convenient and would lowering my personal costs and logistics
> hassles, we can agree that UN venue decisions have impacts that may
> vary depending upon where one is coming from. Geneva is a fine
> (expensive) city, New York has its virtues too.
> >
> > A move to New York for wsis 2011 would to me signal a
> mainstreaming of IG issues wthin UN system; as would establishment
> of a permanent secretariat in yet a 3rd (developing?) location.
> >
> > But Wolfgang, the argument that it would be more difficult to get
> media/public attention - in New York City - doesn't make much sense
> to me. In principle it should be easier. There's certainly plenty of
> media outlets hanging around already looking for things to talk and
> write about.
> >
> > Anyway, as I suggested before, while civil society has some
> success at substantive issues around IG, venue/location decisions I
> am afraid remain power politics/business as usual choices.
> >
> > Lee
> > ________________________________________
> > From: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
> [wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de
> <mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>]
> > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 11:33 AM
> > To: wsis-info at itu.int <mailto:wsis-info at itu.int>
> > Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> > Subject: [governance] WSIS Forum 2011
> >
> > Dear friends
> >
> > I disagree with the argument that a move from Geneva to to New
> York of the WSIS Forum 2011 would improve outreach and bring WSIS
> implementation forward. In contrary I am afraid that a move to
> NewYork will weaken in particular the involvement of civil society
> and the academic community as important stakeholders in the WSIS
> process. A large number of civil society organisations, including
> represenations of organisations from developing countries, are based
> in Geneva or not far from Geneva. Moving the event to New York would
> create additional costs and logistic problems for them which would
> result in lower participation of civil society organisations. This
> would certainly undermine the multistakeholder nature of the WSIS
> implementaiton process.
> >
> > Another risk moving the WSIS Forum 2011 to New York would be that
> the important WSIS issues would be discussed in the shadow of more
> important political and security issues which dominate the day to
> day UN acitvities in New York. The WSIS Forum would be just "another
> conference" and would have difficulties to get the needed public
> attention.
> >
> > Finally I want to flag that in same week the European Union has
> its annual Future of the Internet Week meetings under the Hungarian
> Presidency in Budapest.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Wolfgang Kleinwächter
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
> Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
> <mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> <http://www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html>
> www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/williamjdrake>
> ***********************************************************
>
--
Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
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