AW: [governance] E-G8 second day reporting

[Divina MEIGS]

That's what I mean indeed. It seems we never had a "convening power" with
business, and I don't think the  international chamber of commerce is enough
representation for that community, in spite of its loyal presence to IGF...

We have to think of other ways of engaging with big business, and it might
be via small businesses (arguably part of civil society in UN listings). We
should identify their representatives in WIPO and other arenas and make an
effort to drag them out, person per person...

We do have to ask ourselves what we want to do as CS caucus. I was hard put
the last two days claiming any legitimacy for our constituency, which is
normal but debilitating. Maybe we should turn ourselves into an association
or ngo of some kind to be able to attend such fora and to make declarations
on the same standing as isoc or quadrature du net... We have to be more
incisive and more aggressive even inside the CSTD and ECOSOC world because
of course we shouldn't allow just the G8 dictate the agenda, even if comes
from countries that purport to be democratic ...

Maybe we should declare ourselves as a federation of associations and groups
welcoming all sorts of members, so that we send the message across that
there is a critical mass of people seriously thinking about these issues,
with a certain memory of past events and advances (so as not to start from
scratch like yesterday where i had the feeling i had to explain "governance"
and "multistakeholderism" to these top CEOs). Critical mass is what gets
attention of governements and businesses alike, because it is attached to
amount of votes and of sales... We have to start appearing as the global
public opinion on these issues, even if we know we are still rather
sphericules of opinion, but one has to start. Our colleagues in the Arab
spring countries could teach us quite a few lessons, in that way.

Best
Divina
ps: don't get me wrong: i don't think we did badly this time around in
Paris, and the media coverage is rather favorable to us, but it clearly was
too much improvised ...


Le 26/05/11 13:47, « Roland Perry » <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> a
écrit :

> In message <CA03EF21.2134A%divina.meigs at orange.fr>, at 11:50:57 on Thu,
> 26 May 2011, Divina MEIGS <divina.meigs at orange.fr> writes
>> It could be an interesting outcome to have a major endorsement by the G8
>> states of a concerted strategy around the critical ressources of the
>> internet
> 
> The post-Okinawa G8 Dotforce meeting I went to (in UK) was all about
> Development Issues (access, primarily).
> 
>> it would have to be truly multistakeholder or it would totally
>> unacceptable ...
> 
> What G8 has is "convening power", they can easily get a whole bunch of
> multinational CEOs to the table. The same is true of the World Economic
> Forum.
> 
> For whatever reason, the IGF is still has some way to go in this regard
> - although it got off to a reasonable start in Athens, the last couple
> of years I've seen a trend for the main sessions to rely on speakers who
> were "there anyway" (for workshops perhaps), rather than because they
> wanted to make a special trip to appear.


____________________________________________________________
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