[governance] Workshop Proposals - a few days to go

[Norbert Bollow]

Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:

> If it seems ok, then the coordinators can put as the first for the 48
> hour agreed text process.

Anriette, maybe you could quickly clarify - does the past tense
"proposed" imply that have you already submitted this at the IGF
website?

If not, what's your view on Adam's suggestion to use this text as the
starting point for an IGC consensus process?
 
Greetings,
Norbert


> On Tuesday, March 19, 2013, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> 
> > Dear all
> >
> > Here is the description of the workshop I proposed. I have included
> > and built on Nnenna's suggestions.
> >
> > Anriette
> >
> > Proposed title:
> >
> > "From lessons learnt to good practice: Strengthening accountability
> > and transparency in MS processes"
> >
> > Such a workshop could be jointly convened by the three
> > non-governmental stakeholder groups in the IGF and used
> > to share experiences, raise concerns, and try and identify good
> > practice approaches. We could also discuss the composition of these
> > constituency groups, including ambiguity around the definitions of
> > the TA community and the challenges that arise at times in CS from
> > having a mix of organisational members and individual CS activists
> > and analysts.
> >
> > The outcomes of discussion at the workshop could become an input to
> > the CSTD WG on EC.
> >
> > The objectives of the workshop could be defined as follows
> > (building on the remarks of Nnenna Nwakanma on the IGC list):
> >
> >
> > 1. Highlight lessons learned from our involvement in
> > multi-stakeholder processes
> >
> > 2. Explore what has worked or not worked in terms of how stakeholder
> > groups are defined and represented
> >
> > 3. Build a common understanding on what would constitute sufficient
> > transparency, openness and inclusion in such processes and discuss
> > possible principles to work from
> >
> > 4. Propose working methods for going forward
> >
> > 4. Deepen the Enhanced Cooperation discussion and contribute a
> > working document to the CSTD WG on EC.
> >
> >
> > Discussion between the three groups could potentially begin in the
> > build up to the IGF. There is certainly interest on the IGC list to
> > initiate such discussion. We could also use the opportunity of the
> > next IGF open consultation to have a face to face discussion.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >


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