IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality check on economics)

Tue May 29 13:34:55 EDT 2012

Norbert,

Of course, that is really up to those countries and if/how they arrange it
depends on their internal processes and I would guess very much how they
prioritize these issues.  My guess is that they respond (like everyone else)
to crises, positive invitations and the advice of trusted advisors (for many
in many LDC's Internet issues are still seen within the telecom domain where
the trusted advisor is still the ITU!).

Being pro-active in engaging these folks in informed Internet policy related
issues would seem to me to be a good strategy from anyone's perspective
given the risks of uninformed action in these areas down the road. (This BTW
is a fairly strong argument for a WSIS.2...

(And no, I'm not absolutely sure that "it is possible to "separate out
technical from policy issues"' but I am completely sure that it is not a
productive, useful, or in the long term beneficial strategy to leave the
"policy" issues to be addressed in what is largely a "technical" forum (or
forums)--wrong people, wrong mind-sets, wrong framing of issues etc.etc.

How to get the right (mix of) people, right mind-sets, right framing of
issues together to address these issues is I think what we are currently
talking about on this list. The mix certainly should include technical folks
(if for no other reason than to ensure that the non-technical folks don't
bollocks up the technical matters) but the issues that need to be addressed
go way beyond anything that technical folks have any useful input into (as
technical folks) and need to be addressed by the array/mix appropriate to
the particular issue or issues.

M

-----Original Message-----
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:39 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: Re: IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality
check on economics)

...

Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> replied:
> Norbert, as I said earlier I have no direct knowledge of the IETF, 
> what I do know from my experience with various LDC's is that they are 
> unlikely to have the expertise required for participation.

Ok, but they could of course find one or more persons (of any
nationality) who have the necessary expertise, and hire them to represent
their interests.

This doesn't have to cost a lot of money in relation to the budget of a
government of a poor LDC. Even if it's a single technically and socially
competent person who attends the face to face meetings, particpates by email
in between, and regularly visits the government and other stakeholders in
the country whose interests he represents for information and discussions, a
single person could IMO make a huge difference!

In fact, if that's still too expensive, the governments of several LDCs with
similar situations and similar interests could jointly fund such a
representative.

> Further it would not be seen as a useful use of resources to acquire 
> the expertise since the issues being addressed were not ones that 
> would be appearing on the political/policy radar to those making such 
> decisions.

The key question here is IMO whether it is a correct assessment that
acquiring the expertise for participation (by hiring a knowledgeable person
who will inform and represent them) is not a "useful use of resources" for
them -- or is it maybe a key problem that no-one has explained to them that
they could participate, and what the benefits of doing so would be?

> Many/most would be relying on the ITU to guide them in these areas and 
> to provide training as might be seen as necessary/useful.

There might be a conflict of interests here, since ITU's strong interest is
to continue to be perceived as *the* relevant and important institution.

> So, what is necessary I think, is to recognize that in the absence of 
> effective and visibly effective participation the political battles 
> that will be fought in its absence are less likely to have generally 
> useful and acceptable outcomes.

I strongly agree with this assertion.

We absolutely need what you very appropriately describe as "effective and
visibly effective participation" of all kinds of stakeholders, including LDC
governments.

> For our purposes here it is eminently more desireable to separate out 
> technical from policy issues surrounding EC and to ensure that the 
> broadest possible consensus is achieved around the means for moving 
> forward on both of these fronts since the Internet policy related 
> issues at least, are starting to very quickly appear on the 
> political/policy radar in a number of LDC's--some for "good" reasons 
> but many for less beneficent ones.
>
> Having an appropriately structured session discussing at least the 
> policy aspects of EC at the IGF would I think, be an important 
> beginning in this process.

Are you sure that it is possible to "separate out technical from policy
issues"?

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- 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