[governance] Internet as a commons/ public good

[Garth Graham]

On 2013-04-24, at 12:10 AM, Norbert Bollow wrote:

> Governance of the epiphenomenon has always been primarily through the processes of parliamentary democracy that shape the laws that govern
> democratic societies; 


Not quite.  Inge Kaul finds the standard definition of public goods that assumes the sovereignty of nation states in regulation to be of “limited practical-political value:”  
 
“The shifts between private and public thus reflect greater shared concern for the public domain among all the main actors—the state, businesses, civil society organizations, and households—and for what others expect of them and how their private activities affect others. A wider arena, and probably a new era, of publicness have emerged.” (1)
 
She redefines the definition “to require public goods to be inclusive (public in consumption), based on participatory decision-making (public in provision) and offering a fair deal for all (public in the distribution of benefits).”(2).  She sees that, in spite of their legislative and coercive powers, more than nation states are involved in addressing the problems of undersupply and market failure.  She sees a need to develop, “a more systematic approach to public policy partnerships.”(3).  In her terms, Internet governance as a public good could be viewed as emerging “against the wishes of the state.” (4).
 
“Goods often become private or public as a result of deliberate policy choices. That is why consideration should be given to expanding the definition—to recognize that in many if not most cases, goods exist not in their original forms but as social constructs, largely determined by policies and other collective human actions. According to this revised definition, public goods are nonexclusive or, put differently, de facto public in consumption.” (5)
 
“Public goods are not just market failures, and they are not merely state-produced goods. The public and private domains exist on their own, beyond states and markets. …. It can even be argued that the state and the market are part of the public domain: they are both public goods.” (6).
 
Personally, I find that phrase “public policy partnerships,” to be a bit more euphonious and helpful than the mouthful “multi-stakeholderism."

GG
 
(1). Inge Kaul and Ronald U.Mendoza. Advancing the Concept of Public Goods. In: Inge Kaul, Pedro Conceicao, Katell Le Goulven and Ronald U. Mendoza, editors. Providing Global Public Goods: Managing Globalization. Oxford University Press, 2002. 88-89. P78.  http://web.undp.org/globalpublicgoods/globalization/pdfs/KaulMendoza.pdf
 
(2). Inge Kaul. Public Goods: Taking the Concept to the 21st Century. Paper prepared for the Auditing Public Domains Project, Robarts Centre for Canadian Studies, York University, Toronto, 2001. 3.
http://www.yorku.ca/drache/talks/pdf/apd_kaulfin.pdf
 
(3). Inge Kaul. 16
 
(4). Inge Kaul. 9.
 
(5). Kaul – Mendoza. 80-81.
 
(6). Kaul – Mendoza. 88.
-------------- 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