[governance] ITRs: What if...

[Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am suddenly curious to hear others' views about the following scenario:
>
> Is there any one here who thinks it would be a better process or that
> a better outcome could be reached if the world's telecom operators
> meet directly with internet connectivity and large service providers
> to try and define what the operating relationship of the two sectors
> should be (while recognizing each other as two separate business
> sectors) and maybe spell out what they would need governments to
> assist with, if anything, in order to foster affordable access and
> economic growth across the world?
>

Many would argue that the World Telecom operators are also large service
providers - most Telcos and ISPs have evolved from their traditional
business models. Whilst there will always be a need for "carriage" - there
is an increasing strategic business models that looks at "Content".  It
might be worthwhile noting that there are countries in Europe, Africa and
the Pacific where Government still controls some of the Telecommunications
Entities which means that they have not been privatised.

Aside from Telecommunications Infrastructure, there is a trend where
countries are now moving to control the ccTLDs and you see that from some
of the redelegations that has been happening where laws are passed to see
Governments sieze control of what they perceive as a national resource.

Should we worry about it? I don't think there is cause for worry, there is
so many more important things that they need to worry about such as what
David Conrad earlier this year pointed out to the list such as rolling out
energy grids etc for the developing world. However, for countries who have
national deficits and struggle with resources for capital expenditure for
massive infrastructure rollout, they will always be on the lookout for
sources of revenue and diverse sources of revenue.

>
> Is that in the realm of "practical possibility" at all? (It may be
> hard to see companies put resources in possibly lengthy negotiation
> process if they don't need to do that to improve their bottom line or
> at least retain their market.)
>



> If that were to be possible, IGF could be the place for other
> stakeholders to help define the qualitative benchmarks (some sort of
> Digital Development Goals) to guide the conference of Operators and
> Providers on their economic growth and social development agenda.
>
> Or do you think, I would make more sense after a good night sleep?
> Thanks,
>
> Mawaki
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121214/f67fc3d6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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