CS consensual statement on MSism WAS Re: [governance] Vint Verf tells us the conclusion of the complex IANA transition process

[Deirdre Williams]

Yesterday the Caribbean Telecommunications Union added Principles for a
Seamless ICT Space - A preliminary discussion paper V 2.0
<http://www.ctu.int/download/Principles%20for%20a%20Singles%20%20ICT%20Space%202.0.pdf>
to
the list of documents <http://www.ctu.int/component/content/article/163> for
the Caribbean IGF to be held next week in Nassau. The CTU was set up by
CARICOM, the Caribbean Community, and clearly defines itself as an
intergovernmental organisation. On page 9 of the document you will find
this list:

"6. The Role of Stakeholders

The following outlines the roles of each of the major stakeholders in
making the Single

ICT Space a reality:

 Governments

 Regulators

 Operators

 CARICOM Institutions

 Other Caribbean Organisations" (I have edited it to leave only the
bullets)

My initial response was - "I" am not there - but I will be there, at the
meeting, at the CTU's invitation, as a full participant. So what's going on?

I would propose that a great part of the difficulty of definition is caused
by the word "stakeholder", because a stakeholder is seen as being one with
a tangible, concrete investment in a process. Google and Facebook etc
qualify, "we" don't. But the issue isn't that type of investment. The issue
is approach or perspective. POV (point of view) would be better than
stakeholder. The CTU's list accords perfectly with its perspective as an
intergovernmental organisation. Currently the list I quote above is what is
ethically possible for that organisation. But at the same time they are
opening themselves to consider POVs of other people and groups.

What we need to do is start thinking about different approaches, and open
negotiations among the points of view to meld them into a whole.
"Stakeholder" sounds like a sort of ownership and distorts the argument.
Please try to think about it this way and see if it makes sense to you.

Deirdre




On 30 July 2014 20:24, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Correction:
>
>  ...qualifying the need for distinction between stakeholder groups *[erase
> --> which are regularly raised] when faced with nominating
> representatives/delegates as a flaw (...) and then *faulting the
> Geneva-WSIS type of MSism for it...
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:20 PM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > McTim,
>>> >
>>> > You keep making this point that all the woes of MSism come from, and
>>> only
>>> > from, the ITU/WSIS breed.
>>>
>>> I've never made that point.  I HAVE however consistently pointed out
>>> that what goes on in Geneva is "meta-IG" and that BUTOC (Bottom Up,
>>> Transparent, Open, Consensus-based) processes are far superior to
>>> those where governments have a greater role than anyone else.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I feel pretty sure having read you more than once qualifying the
>> need for distinction between stakeholder groups which are regularly raised
>> when faced with nominating representatives/delegates as a flaw (eg, CS vs.
>> business reps or CS vs. Technical community reps), and then faulting it
>> onto the Geneva-WSIS type of MSism... like they created it. This is quite a
>> different problem from the question of governments having greater role.
>>
>> But if you think that is a misreading from my part, then I hope this
>> would also mean that you're hereby recognizing that the difficulties coming
>> with grouping and labeling stakeholders --which inevitably requires
>> distinguishing between them-- do not particularly originate from the
>> Geneva-WSIS type of MSism.
>>
>> Thank you for the links to useful resources.
>> Best,
>>
>> Mawaki
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140731/46b4dba9/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