[governance] TIME-SENSITIVE: World Economic Forum and their Initiative with Internet Governance

Tue Sep 2 13:09:22 EDT 2014

I should have also noted that a very significant proportion (probably a majority) of those academics/researchers engaged with the Community Informatics network are from Less Developed Countries including a significant component currently based in LDC’s either as academics or as grad students.

M

From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 8:21 AM
To: 'governance at lists.igcaucus.org'; 'Ian Peter'; 'fadi.chehade at icann.org'; 'alan.marcus at weforum.org'
Cc: ciresearchers at vancouvercommunity.net
Subject: RE: [governance] TIME-SENSITIVE: World Economic Forum and their Initiative with Internet Governance

Ian, 

This may be a side issue for this group but I don’t know where else to direct this.

As you know I believe, the NetMundial meeting apparently chose, at least informally to assign the identification of its “academic” component to the GIGAnet group.  There was no explanation or rationale given for this of which I am aware and there was no response to the concerns I raised in this regard at the time on behalf of the academic/research component of the Community Informatics community. 

At the time I pointed out that while the GIGAnet grouping includes many of those with a specific interest/expertise in the more formal and institutional mechanisms and processes of Internet Governance it by no means is inclusive of the broader research/academic community with an overall interest in the governance of the Internet particularly as it might apply to issues of development. It does not to the best of my knowledge include those with for example a specific interest in or expertise in ICT4Development issues where for example those grouped within the Community Informatics network of which I am a part, would probably represent the current largest such grouping.

Since the overall intention of the NMI appears to be inclusive of both more formal Internet Governance issues and Development issues as they may pertain to Internet Governance I see no reason for this new initiative to not be rather more inclusive in its identification of its “academic” representation than was NetMundial.

I would thus request that the IGC and others of those interacting with the NMI convey this message to them and strongly urge them to ensure an inclusive process for the identification of the academic component of the NMI’s steering committee.

Mike

Michael Gurstein, Ph.D. 
Adjunct Professor: School of Library, Archival and Informations Sciences (iSchool)

University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CANADA

Executive Director: Centre for Community Informatics Research, Development and Training (CCIRDT) 
Vancouver, BC CANADA 

tel/fax: +1-604-602-0624 
email: gurstein at gmail.com 
web: http://communityinformatics.net <http://communityinformatics.net/>  
blog: http://gurstein.wordpress.com <http://gurstein.wordpress.com/>  
twitter: @michaelgurstein 

From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 1:45 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Mawaki Chango
Subject: Re: [governance] TIME-SENSITIVE: World Economic Forum and their Initiative with Internet Governance

Just posted this response on Best Bits – also now here FYI

Just adding here a couple of perspectives from my earlier phone call -

The WEF representatives seem to be listening and adapting at IGF – so I think this is still quite fluid. Yesterday it was still NetMundial – I am personally glad they have moved away from that while they figure out what this initiative is. 

Also at my phone call they wanted to nominate two of the four civil society reps themselves – a couple of US based NGOs they work with regularly – this was identified as an issue and I am glad the CS reps were able to get that changed today.

They were also prepared to give us a more reasonable deadline for nominations than originally intended – which would have been the middle of next week!  The timetable is still tight (by September 21), but is enough time for us to discuss our levels of involvement and get a process under way at the end of this week. 

So there are some positive signs. Also the level of CS representation – 4 of a committee of 15 – is quite reasonable.

But I do get the feeling that things might continue to change and that there is a great uncertainty about the degree to which the staff assigned to this might be able to obtain strong WEF backing for initiatives – and what those initiatives might be.  

I suspect others who are at IGF might get to talk further with WEF, and those who were at the Geneva meeting might also have additional perspectives.  It would be good to share those perspectives here and on other lists so that we can react appropriately.

Ian Peter

From: Mawaki Chango <mailto:kichango at gmail.com>  

Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 6:30 PM

To: Internet Governance <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>  

Subject: [governance] TIME-SENSITIVE: World Economic Forum and their Initiative with Internet Governance

Dear All,

This Tuesday morning, in Istanbul, the members of the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group attending the IGF2014 (Deirdre Williams standing in for Mawaki Chango from the IGC, Jeremy Malcolm from Best Bits, Norbert Bollow from JNC, Chat Garcia from APC and YJ Park as an observer; the others could not make it) met with Alan Marcus, Danil Kerimi and Alexandra Shaw from the World Economic Forum about our potential role in nominating representatives to the transitional steering committee of what we had all known as the NETmundial Initiative.  This followed on from a phone call that the chair of our group, Ian Peter had had with them yesterday Istanbul time.

One of the first points that was made in the meeting was that at the WEF they do not regard "NETmundial Initiative" as the name of the initiative, although some of their early champions (notably ICANN of course) have been calling it this.  So it seems that they will be willing to call it by another name from now on, and suggested "Global Net" which is an anglicized version of NETmundial.  Presumably, many of us will warmly welcome this news.

Their description of their vision of the initiative was otherwise mostly consistent with earlier accounts, though they did stress that the formation of a new institution to house the initiative now seems unlikely since they have been listening to pushback about this.  They see the initiative as a platform for working groups to execute projects that the community has identified as important, and the first four projects that were unveiled at the Geneva meeting were merely intended as examples of four such projects that had been identified by the Ilves Panel, on which some "quick wins" might be achieved.

The value add of the WEF, they explained, is to bring in high-level participation from companies and governments that are otherwise not part of Internet governance discussions.  The steering committee would include all stakeholders to ensure that all perspectives have a voice about shaping the Initiative including its projects. They are looking for a committee maximum size of about 15 people. The other members would be 3-4 from each one of the following groups: business (including at least two representatives at CEO level), government, intergovernmental organizations, tech community (notably ISOC and ICANN) and academics. Please note: they confirmed their intention to treat academic community separately to Civil Society or technical community or any other grouping – as per NetMundial and 1net patterns.

The original conception of WEF was that they would appoint half of the civil society representatives on the transitional steering committee because they are project partners that WEF has worked with before.  Several members of our Coordination Group suggested that their constituencies would probably push back against this, and that if the purpose of the steering committee was in part to draw on the legitimacy that civil society participation provides, it would make sense that we be empowered to self-appoint all of our own representatives.  WEF seemed to accept this counsel, with the result that we would be asked to make four appointments.

They were unclear about exactly what the time commitment for transitional steering committee representatives would be, or exactly what the responsibilities would entail, though forming an accountable permanent steering committee structure for launch around the next Davos meeting (if possible) was one of the responsibilities envisaged.  They did assure us that if travel to meetings was required, expenses would be paid for those who required this.

Criteria for appointment are still to be discussed by the Coordination Group, but from WEF's perspective, they agreed that they would not insist on a previous working relationship with WEF as a criterion, but they would require that the participants are able to be constructive and can work towards the formation of consensus.  They said that they would value people who can be bridge makers between the culture of the WEF and that of our constituencies, because they acknowledged that they would probably make (more) mistakes and would need help in correcting these. 

WEF, after our request, have extended our deadline to submit names till September 21 – and there are still some details to finalize. The timetable CSCG is discussing would see us begin a call for nominations probably no later than Friday – the last day of IGF – to allow discussion and further clarification before we commence any such process.

I am posting this to begin such a discussion – others present at the meeting may want to add comments of their own and discussions will also occur on other lists.

Examples of previous multi-stakeholder initiatives that they pointed to as being analogous to The-Initiative-Formerly-Known-as-NETmundial included Grow Africa (http://growafrica.com/) and their climate change work (http://www.weforum.org/issues/climate-change-and-green-growth). The News Release from the live event launching the initiative can be found here: http://www.weforum.org/news/new-initiative-internet-governance-live-event?news=page

Warm regards,

Mawaki 

IGC Co-coordinator

  _____  

____________________________________________________________
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140902/5f5f3ff7/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