AW: [governance] CSTD IX. Conclusions and recommendations

Thu Feb 3 23:05:46 EST 2011

Enclosed is our first set of inputs to the draft structure of WGIGF 
report circulated by the WG chair.

And thanks Miguel for your very good points. parminder

Miguel Alcaine wrote:
> Dear all,
>  
> I am also late to participate in this thread again.
>  
> This might be one of my last active contributions to this mailing list 
> because in a short period of time, I will start working for an entity 
> where it is not possible to fit as civil society. Once the formalities 
> are done, I will post those details in this list. Dear colleagues: 
> Keep the great work, not only around the IGF and the UN, but all 
> around the IG ecosystem.
>  
> I read all emails, highlighted some ideas and used them to prepare the 
> following comments as a draft summary (with some twisting sometimes 
> but hopefully without hurting the original idea) of this thread so 
> far. I expect, we will be in a position to submit something based on 
> this to the Secretariat as soon as possible.
>  
>  *There is no suggestions yet on remote participation or national and 
> regional IGFs. Are they in another email thread?*
>  
> ***Here is the start of the draft summary***
>  
> 1) IGF mandate is defined in the Tunis Agenda, as well as the recent 
> UN General Assembly's directions to improve the IGF towards some 
> specific purposes.
>  
> *2) IGF*
>
>     2.1) People support having 2 days of workshops (workshop phase)
>     and consecutively 2 days of main sessions at IGF meetings. There
>     is awareness of the risks of high ranking participants chossing
>     only to be in the main session days. For that risk, there was a
>     suggestion to schedule something to attrack this people to assist
>     from the beginning but not in parallel with workshops. To my
>     knowledge there were no specifics on this suggestion.
>     2.2) The need for a positive output from IGF is widely shared. The
>     word "messages" is the best among other possible choices. They
>     should be non negotiated text from a recognized (and respected)
>     source as the chair, a rapporteur the secretariat or something
>     else. (This idea is taken to another level in the MAG section)
>     2.3) To be innovative and creative, 7 new roles for IGF were
>     propossed: i) observatory, ii) clearinghouse, iii) laboratory, iv)
>     school, v) scout, vi) early warning system and vii) wachtdog. Of
>     those iii and iv received support while on the others there is a
>     need for further discussion to clarified them.
>
>  
> *3) Workshops.* There are two kinds of workshops. The first type 
> should work in harmony with the respective main session.
>
>     3.1) The bar should be higher to accept propossals.
>     3.2) The quality and the assurance of quality need to be improved.
>     3.3) Should have A declared purpose or goal as part of the
>     evaluation process was suggested.
>     3.4) Could also identify messages that should be passed to the
>     respective main sessions.
>     3.5) Organizers should be efficient and held accountable.
>     3.6) There was even a suggestion to work backwards between the
>     respective main session and the workshops. This is to identify the
>     different parts a topic may have and guide the workshops in this
>     sense (This is exactly how the subrgroup mailing list  made for
>     the IG4D session for the last IGF and my best guess is that the
>     same approach was followed by the subgroup on cloud computing).
>     3,7) The merge of different workshops, apparently similar, has not
>     worked out well in general (it does not work electronically and in
>     a "short" period of time).
>     3.8) Workshops atracting the same audience should not happen at
>     the same time.
>     3.9) Need to keep a truly multi stakeholder nature for the workshops.
>     3.10) As a result of the preceding suggestions, there might be an
>     increase in negative responses to propossals.
>
>  
> * 4) MAG*
>
>     4.1) It was suggested that links should be established between the
>     MAG and other bodies wit actual decision making power, including
>     to feed into the EC mechanism, if it exists in the future.
>     4.2) As usually there is no time to transform rough material into
>     material that is fit for policy making during wrap up at workshops
>     or main sessions and therefore there is a need for more time and
>     more careful discussion to transform these summaries into
>     something that can serve as input for policy, MAG sould be charged
>     with proposing action lines regarding policies and regulation,
>     based on the input received from the IGF.
>     4.3) Should also be responsible to foster coordination with other
>     organizations on the IG ecosystem.
>     4.4) Should  communicate the aforementioned action lines regarding
>     policies and regulation to the spaces/ forums/ bodies etc that
>     should and would make actual policies, and 
>     4.5) MAG should keep up an ongoing process of reviewing what has
>     been happening to the outcomes of the IGF, and how well or not
>     they have been followed up".
>
>  
> * 5) Intergovernmental Machinery*
>
>     5.1) Amend ECOSOC res 2007/8 to require the IGF Secretariat to
>     submit directly its respective report to the CSTD Secretariat, as
>     it is the case already explicitly for GAID. This will be in
>     addition of what DESA includes in its respective report, as GAID
>     and IGF are part of DESA.
>     5.2) As CSTD is in charge of assisting ECOSOC with the system-wide
>     follow-up of WSIS, including the IGF, the CSTD and its Secretariat
>     should adopt - mutis mutandis - some of the effective practices of
>     the IGF and its Secretariat, like keeping its multistakeholderism,
>     remote participation and real time transcripts.
>
>  
> *** end of the draft summary ***
>  
> Best,
>  
> Miguel

-- 
PK

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110204/ea9db6bd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ITfC - First set of comments to the WGIGF.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 111818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110204/ea9db6bd/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t