[governance] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF - World Economic Forum (WEF) Collaboration Discussion Document

LB at lucabelli.net LB at lucabelli.net
Mon Feb 11 14:32:40 EST 2019

 I agree almost entirely with Lee's 2 cents with one notable exception.
 While NetMundial Initiative miserably failed, the proposed "collaboration" between IGF and WEF will stay, once it is "approved" (I do not know by whom, as the MAG is a mere programme committee to which the IGF mandate does NOT give such authority, but this is another story)
 The WEF-NMI partnership miserably failed because NMI (itself created basically by WEF and one other person) failed. On the contrary, the IGF will stay for at least the rest of the current mandate. Should any sort of cooperation be "approved", this will also last for - at least - the rest of the mandate. Given the current approval rate of WEF, this may not be an optimal choice...

 IMHO, every IGF participant is totally free to participate and work with the WEF but equating this kind of personal engagement to othe fact that "Collaboration between the [IGF and WEF] is already underway" is a deliberate fallacy that sceptics may think only aims at present the institutional cooperation between IGF  and WEF as something already exisitng (which is not the case).
 Furthermore, the same sceptics may also think that - as it happened at the time of the WEF-NMI fiasco - the proposed "collaboration" is exclusively in the interest of the WEF and the person promoting the collaboration on the other side.
 Although one should aknowledge that at least, now, we are spared the "mother of all bottom-up initiatives" rhetoric, it would be interesting to know why is the MAG chair proposing this "coperation" with WEF and not with other entitie. And on what basis is this kind of special cooperation created knowing that the IGF mandate (clearly defined para 72 of the Tunis Agenda https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/documents/doc_multi.asp?lang=en&id=2267|0 ) does not mention such possibility? And most importantly, why is the MAG (chair) self-attributing this new cooperation creation power rather than focusing on a the implementation of what the IGF mandate asks and that whoudl propably give more visibility and credibility to the entite IGF process i.e. "where appropriate, make recommendations." (see para 72.g of the Tunis Agenda)?

 If MAG members started to read the IGF mandate or the contributions received during the IGF stock-taking consultations (or ideally both), they may find an ample range of ideas to strengthen the IGF other than WEF vassalage. 
Luca Belli, PhD 
Professor of Internet Governance and Regulation, FGV Rio de Janeiro Law School 
Chercheur Associé, Centre de Droit Public Comparé, Université Paris 2



This message, as well as any attached document, may contain information that is confidential and privileged and is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this email or attached documents, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email by mistake.

--------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF - World Economic Forum (WEF) Collaboration Discussion Document
From: "Lee W McKnight" <lmcknigh at syr.edu>
Date: 2/11/19 12:55 pm
To: "Michael J. Oghia" <mike.oghia at gmail.com>, "arsenebaguma at gmail.com" <arsenebaguma at gmail.com>, "governance" <governance at lists.riseup.net>

    My 2 cents,
 As Parminder notes there is a history here we cannot pretend never happened.
 Still, being even more cynical than Parminder ( if that is possible ; )  there is a reason WEF is circling back around IGF now - billionaires hoarding the world's wealth are not being treated as glamorously as they once were, and they don't like it.
 And - yes WEF (staffers & consultants) are quality folks and do produce useful and interesting data and reports, some of which could be fruitfully input into IGF discussions.
 So I see it like this, a small wef collaboration as humble contributors to - coalitions - proposing workshop topics  for future IGFs are welcome like anyone else.  Which they can do their own PR around if they want, once a particular panel/topic is accepted by MAG, or a dynamic coalition of mutual interest does something interesting.  
 But a prospective Big WEF collaboration with IGF to trade enhanced PR for IGF with our collective help glossing over my cynical point , is just a cheap sell-out of the IGF mission.  And will not be credible or effective anyway given prior history, and current global inequality trends which WEF institutionally is stuck on wrong side of - without a change in its mission and approach, and which an IGF collaboration could not gloss over. 
 Maybe that's 3 cents, but to summarize, if WEFers can humble themselves sufficiently to pitch in and help out through IGF, great. But a Netmundial v2.0 WEF/IGF thing will inevitably flop like 1.0  and not be worth the bother, or taint.
 From: governance-request at lists.riseup.net <governance-request at lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Arsène Tungali <governance at lists.riseup.net>
 Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 10:25:36 AM
 To: Michael J. Oghia
 Cc: governance
 Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF - World Economic Forum (WEF) Collaboration Discussion Document  

Thanks, everyone for sharing your thoughts here, this thread is mostly
 for your information as well as to see what members think about this
 discussion on the MAG.
 My impression so far is that many of the reactions here are mostly
 turning on the side of WHY the WEF?
 I would like to suggest us to also think on the "WHY NOT"? Is there
 anything fundamental that is wrong with the WEF that would endanger
 any possible collaboration with the IGF? Can we think on that
 direction as well?
 Are there other organizations you feel would be problematic should
 they seek any formal form of collaboration with the IGF?
 2019-02-11 17:03 UTC+02:00, Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>:
 > Hi Arsene,
 > Thanks for sharing this with us. In line with what has already been said,
 > the WEF and its networks are free to participate in any part of the IGF's
 > work (intersessional activities, organising workshops, etc.). Thus, I don't
 > see why there needs to be any kind of formal arrangement - and this isn't
 > with regards to Davos, by the way. I'm thinking here about the reports and
 > such the WEF publishes. In general, I usually welcome calls for closer ties
 > and collaboration; however, I think that if the WEF wants to collaborate
 > more closely with the IGF, they should see how their expertise, contacts,
 > and donor networks can better support the IGF's existing mechanisms and
 > infrastructure. Even looking at the recommendations, I don't see any that
 > are not just as applicable to any other stakeholders already participating
 > in the IGF, so why make any special exception?
 > Perhaps I'm naive, though.
 > Best,
 > -Michael
 > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 3:14 PM Arsène Tungali <governance at lists.riseup.net>
 > wrote:
 >> Hi all,
 >> Meant to share this document here to have your thoughts about the
 >> collaboration between the IGF and WEF that MAG Chair is pushing for.
 >> I would like to hear your thoughts on the questions mentionned at the
 >> last page of the document.
 >> Regards,
 >> Arsene
 >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 >> From: "Lynn St.Amour" <Lynn at internet-matters.org>
 >> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2019 15:32:46 -0500
 >> Subject: [IGFmaglist] IGF - World Economic Forum (WEF) Collaboration
 >> Discussion Document
 >> To: IGF Maglist <Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
 >> Cc: Derek O'Halloran <Derek.OHalloran at weforum.org>
 >> Dear MAG members,
 >> please find below a document in support of a discussion on possible
 >> ways to increase collaboration between the IGF community and the World
 >> Economic Forum (WEF).  It builds on past collaborative efforts and is
 >> in support of Agenda item 4 in the IGF Open Consultation meeting:
 >> "Updates from related Internet Governance initiatives and processes,
 >> followed by open discussion on possible IGF 2019
 >> activities/collaboration”.
 >> Thank you to Derek O'Halloran and the WEF staff for their help
 >> creating this document.
 >> Best regards,
 >> Lynn
 >> --
 >> ------------------------
 >> **Arsène Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>*
 >> Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
 >> <http://www.rudiinternational.org>*,
 >> CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*,
 >> Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC)
 >> GPG: 523644A0
 >> 2015 Mandela Washington Fellow
 >> <
 >>  http://tungali.blogspot.com/2015/06/selected-for-2015-mandela-washington.html
 >> >
 >> (YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member
 >> <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. UN IGF MAG
 >> <https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/pi2247.doc.htm> Member
 >> ---
 >> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
 >> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
 **Arsène Tungali* <http://about.me/ArseneTungali>*
 Co-Founder & Executive Director, *Rudi international
 CEO,* Smart Services Sarl <https://www.smart-kitoko.com/>*,
 Tel: +243 993810967 (DRC)
 GPG: 523644A0
 2015 Mandela Washington Fellow
 (YALI) - ICANN GNSO Council Member
 <https://gnso.icann.org/en/about/gnso-council.htm> Member. UN IGF MAG
 <https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/pi2247.doc.htm> Member
--- To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190211/3428d34c/attachment.htm>

More information about the Governance mailing list