AW: [governance] CSTD IX. Conclusions and recommendations

["Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"]

Hi
 
with regard to "outcomes" the problem is whether the "outcome" has to be a "negotiated text" where everybody agrees, or a "non-negotiated text" in form of a summary from a recognized (and respected) source as "the chair", a "rapporteur", the "secretariat" or something else. I made the proposal already in a 2007 MAG meeting to have non-negotiated "messages" (two or three from each workshop, formulated by the chair or the rapporteur of the workshops) instead of negotiated "recommendations". And the Brazilian host considered it seriously to have instead of a (negotiated) "IGF Declaration from Rio" a document titled "IGF Messages from Rio". However, nothing worked and we got only the "Chair´s summary" and the book (the summarized proceedings) as outcome from the Rio meeting (and the subsequent IGFs). 
 
I am aware that this will trigger a debate about the nomination of chairs or rapporteurs. However the message from a workshop could be "one group says so and the other group says so". The message in this case would be: This is an important issue, but there is no agreement. And if you have 60 workshops you would have 60 rapporteurs (with about 150 messages) which guarantees to a certain degree diversity and a fair reflection of all positions. 
 
It works quite well in EURODIG.
 
Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Roland Perry
Gesendet: Mi 26.01.2011 11:53
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] CSTD IX. Conclusions and recommendations



In message <4D3FDBCD.7080102 at itforchange.net>, at 14:01:09 on Wed, 26
Jan 2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes
 >>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.

>Agreed. Though it should not merely be a copy of the present kind of
>report that goes to the DESA. IT should be substantive, laying out the
>key public policy issues chosen were discussions, the outcomes, and
>proposed follow ups.

Outcomes?

Something more substantial than "we have to discuss this again, because
we ran out of time when the interpreters needed their lunch break" I
presume.
--
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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



____________________________________________________________
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