[governance] Civil Society (was Re: caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting)

[Avri Doria]

On 17 Feb 2013, at 06:39, parminder wrote:

>  i spoke of mistrust of normatively loose conceptions of multistakeholderism, and not necessarily of multistakeholderism..


thank you for bringing this out clearly.  Though I try to avoid the use of the word multistakeholderism as I beleive any discussion of -isms is problematic based of the dogmatic notions that are contained in most -ism containers, I have a similar problem with the multiple contradictory ways in which "multistakeholder" is being applied.

I think, however, that the problem is endemic to any multistakeholder model or implementation.  We all come to it with our stakeholder group's and personal PoV.  In fact some of us, e.g. those who work with government or business or who are part of several stakeholder groups, come with multiple PoV on how the multistakeholder model is to be done.  

I think coming up with a more developed set of working guidelines on what it takes for a organization to reasonably consider its self as providing a Multistakeholder environment would be a useful thing to do.  I think it needs to be done through both theory and the practical study of what is being done.  I think the IGF is a perfect place for such explorations, and review.

avri

* IGF -0 Interent Governance Forum
* PoV - Point of View
-------------- 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