[governance] Internet as a commons/ public good
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Thu Apr 25 02:37:41 EDT 2013
I am happy to add at the end
Internet must also be promoted (or some better word) as a vehicle (?) of
free expression and for free flow of information, knowledge and ideas.
Subject to wordsmith-ing..
However, at this point I think we need to perhaps put a stop to further
expanding the desirable characteristics of the Internet and
corresponding policy objectives. Otherwise it will become an unending
process.
parminder
On Thursday 25 April 2013 10:15 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
> Hi, I also came late to this round of exchanges, but now have a simple
> question.
>
> In the current version, there is no mention about the "free flow of
> information
> (and knowledge and/or ideas) nor freedom of speech/press/assembly.
>
> If there have already been good discussion about these values most civil
> society proponents subscribe to, then fine. But if not, I think we
> should address
> these in some way.
>
> izumi
>
>
>
>
>
> 2013/4/25 Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>>
>
> Folks, let us not sound like WCIT deliberations... and be stuck on
> the order of words or their esthetics, if not their politics.
> I see nothing wrong with McTim's formulation and am not sure what
> positive difference the latest change proposed by Parminder (on
> this specific phrase) makes, while it slows down the rhythm of
> reading and maybe the comprehension.
>
> "through open, bottom-up, transparent, participatory democratic
> processes involving all stakeholders". [McTim]
>
> vs.
>
> "through due democratic processes, that are open and transparent,
> and involve all stakeholders." [Parminder]
>
> Or would the following satisfy all parties? "... through open,
> bottom-up, transparent, participatory and due democratic processes
> involving all stakeholders". If so please (Parminder) go ahead and
> add.
>
> Furthermore...
>
> *The design principles and policies that constitute its governance
> ensure its stability, functionality and security, and aim at
> preserving and enhancing the global commons and global public good
> character of the Internet the combination of which has made
> previous innovations possible. Therefore, in the face of the
> growing danger for the Internet experience to be reduced to closed
> or ***
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] yes, but they are also, and should be also,
> aim at preserving and enhancing the private good aspects of the
> Internet. As the success of the internet rests on a creative
> combination of both, why are we emphasizing only one aspect of
> this? /*
>
> *proprietary online spaces, we urge that the preservation and
> enhancement of the Internet's global commons and public good
> dimensions***
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] what are these dimensions? Why not specify
> them? Why not also recognize that we should not interfere with the
> innovation and creativity that has come from affording
> entrepreneurs and individuals to experiment and innovate with new
> private services? /*
>
> I'm in violent agreement with Parminder's earlier response to the
> above. You know Milton, as well as. I do that once first movers
> settle in, they tend to foreclose the opportunities for potential
> newcomers by all sorts of tactics, whether directly or indirectly.
> Left to their own devices, things become naturally skewed towards
> entrenched interests while raising entry barriers and stifling the
> potential for innovations, etc. As has already been said, this is
> about re-adjusting the scale and striking again a healthy balance
> between the two ends in order to maintain and foster the creative
> combination you're talking about.
>
> As to the question about determining the global commons and global
> public good dimensions and for the sake of simplicity, I suggest
> we maintain the same expression to mean the same thing wherever
> that thing need to be expressed. So let's drop "dimensions" repeat
> again "global commons and global public good character".
>
> Re. the following proposition that has been dropped: "While the
> design principles and policies that constitute its governance
> should ensure its stability, functionality and security, they must
> also aim at..." the reason why I put this in earlier is that I
> remember one of us stating that, in a sense, the stability,
> functionality and security may be (some of) the salient dimensions
> of the public good-ness of the internet as opposed to the internet
> itself in the technical sense. That idea started generating some
> agreement and no opposition. Now I observe that the reason why it
> has been dropped was that we were hesitant using a prescriptive
> tense but instead used the indicative present tense, to which
> someone objected that the internet *is* not stable nor secure (or
> something along those lines.) Now that we have clarify the tense
> and the intent, and keeping in mind that that phrase is about the
> principles guiding the *governance* of the internet but not the
> internet itself, perhaps the basis for dropping that sentence
> should not hold any longer. If you think otherwise and believe
> that proposition does still not belong here, please do let us
> know. For now I will put it back in because I think that's the
> logical thing to do, but please be reassured, I'm not making a
> religion out of it. I have also added a variation of the same as
> option in square brackets in the version below (please not that
> ICANN always refers to their mandate, particularly the clauses
> mentioning the need to maintain stability and security, when
> making policy... so that's a fact.)
>
> And lastly, I feel there's something too vague about the last
> proposition:
>
> *... we urge the preservation and enhancement of the Internet's
> global commons and public good dimensions."*
> *//*
> Shouldn't we try to be specific at on one of the following two
> things: either who we are urging or at least the framework where
> the preservation and enhancement is being promoted or needs to
> take place.
>
>
> *"We recognise the Internet to be a global, end-to-end, network of
> networks comprised of computing devices and processes, and an
> emergent and emerging social reality. In that sense, it is an
> intricate combination of hardware, software, protocols, and human
> intentionality enabling new kinds of social interactions and
> transactions, brought together by a common set of design
> principles. The design principles and policies that constitute
> Internet's governance should be derived through **open, bottom-up,
> transparent, participatory democratic processes involving all
> stakeholders. Such principles and policies must aim at**ensuring
> its stability, functionality and security as well as [or: While
> such ***principles and policies strive to **ensure stability,
> functionality and security of the Internet, they must also aim at]
> *preserving and enhancing the global commons and global public
> good character of the Internet, the combination of which has made
> previous innovations possible. Therefore, in the face of the
> growing danger for the Internet experience to be reduced to closed
> or proprietary online spaces, we urge that the governance of the
> ***Internet* promote the preservation and enhancement of the
> Internet's global commons and public good character."
> *
> Mawaki
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Garth Graham
> <garth.graham at telus.net <mailto:garth.graham at telus.net>> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> <mailto: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
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org <mailto: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
>
>
>
>
> --
> >> Izumi Aizu <<
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
> Japan
> www.anr.org <http://www.anr.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130425/88afaa87/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list