[governance] Agenda for IGF Nairobi - IGC proposals

Sun Mar 13 04:21:18 EDT 2011

Vijay, It is past midnight here, I am logging off


On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:
> As we are entering the new phase of IGF, it could be a good idea to
> review and re-emphasize the concept of multi-stakeholder deliberations
> and multistakeholder governance. Is there a way to introduce thematic
> discussions on this foundation topic and dispel doubts and deal with
> the hesitations?
>
>
> Sivasubramanian M
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>> Sorry to take so long to reply to this -
>>
>> In addition toi the excellent proposals put forward by Parminder, I wonder
>> if we should tackle the general A2K area – access to knowledge. I personally
>> would like to see a plenary session (I think IGF plenary topics have become
>> boring and repetitive) - but at the least a good workshop would be useful.
>>
>> Others involved in this general area might have suggestions – but it is
>> certainly a subject area where we can get some excellent input from all
>> stakeholder groups and some stimulating debate.
>>
>>
>> Ian Peter
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 15:50:55 +0530
>> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
>> Subject: [governance] Agenda for IGF Nairobi - IGC proposals
>>
>> Hi Jeremy
>>
>> I think we should two separate threads for the next IGF's agenda, which
>> hopefully will be taken up in the Feb MAG meeting, and for our inputs into
>> the WG on IGF improvements. Both are very distinct issues and separately
>> quite important . So excuse me to have this thread on 'agenda for IGF
>> Nairobi'.
>>
>> I am particularly eager to get this discussion going, because I feel that
>> IGC should be doing much more on substantive issues, and its almost singular
>> focus on process issues is what has kept it insulated from much of the civil
>> society outside the IG realm, which compromises its legitimacy.
>>
>> In middle of the hot discussions on composition of the WG on IGF
>> improvements, Sala posted an email on the (globally) historic FCC decision
>> on network neutrality. While there are some good points there, there has
>> been a sellout on excluding mobile Internet from regulations disallowing
>> pay-for-priority. (To read this in the context of my earielr emails pointing
>> to how mobile Internet in India is already breaching NN boundaries.)
>>
>> This FC decision has the potential of splitting up the Internet into the
>> open fixed line variety and corporate content dominated mobile Internet. Why
>> should there be two kinds of Internet? Why do freedoms and rights count on
>> one kind and are not so important on the mobile Internet? What does this
>> mean for developing countries where mobile is slated to become the by far
>> the dominant platform for Internet?
>>
>> I also consider it very significant that it is perhaps the first time ever
>> in any substantial policy matter of such huge consequence that the policy
>> framework was largely written up as a result of negotiations between two
>> largest corporate players in the area - google and verizon - and then the
>> government rubber stamped it. If this the new global governance model we are
>> moving towards? I keep getting this picture in my mind of our health policy
>> frameworks soon being written by drug companies and health insurance
>> companies, and maybe the large private hospital chains, if they are big
>> enough, before plaint governments rubber stamp it. That is exactly what
>> happened in the present instance vis a vis the new communication
>> infrastructure of the Internet that came with such egalitarian promises.
>>
>> Anyway back to the topic,
>>
>> The next IGF just must take up 'Network Neutrality' or in fact ' Mobile
>> Network Neutrality' as its key plenary theme. Otherwise IGF and the real
>> world IG would be two very different worlds.
>>
>> It should also continue with the plenary topic - 'development agenda for IG'
>>
>> And I propose a third topic
>>
>> 'Cross border Issues and implications of IG'
>>
>> CoE is discussing it, no reason why IGF should not.
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>
>> I would like us to move towards preparing a submission about the
>> programme of the 2011 IGF meeting.  Simultaneously, we can discuss IGF
>> improvements, which if minor could go into that submission, but
>> otherwise can be input for our new CSTD working group on the IGF.
>>
>> This is an exercise that we have, of course, gone through before.  So it
>> is useful for us to look at some previous submissions on the programme
>> of the IGF and on improvements, and see what we can simply rewrite and
>> reuse.  Here are relevant links:
>>
>> PROGRAMME:
>>
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/8 (Hyderabad)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/5 (Sharm)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/26 (Sharm)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/32 (Sharm)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/34 (Vilnius)
>>
>> IMPROVEMENTS:
>>
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/6 (funding, deeper discussion, WGs)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/7 (format improvements, IGF as town-hall)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/9 (MAG improvements)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/30 (MAG, funding, intersessional work)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/33 (MAG, outputs, intersessional work)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/41 (MAG improvements, links from IGF)
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/45 (outputs, difficult issues, virtual IGF)
>>
>> I would suggest that people go through these and pick out the highlights
>> that they would like to reiterate... as well, of course, as contributing
>> any new points in light of the changed landscape since last November.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> PK
>>
>> ________________________________
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
____________________________________________________________
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