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

Tue Feb 12 05:39:53 EST 2019

Digging down the history path is a good thing. It's also true that WEF is
opposite of openness and transparency, but how long should we continue in
SILO. It's a question that needs to be truly answered by everyone of us.
Please don't get me wrong, I am not advocating for WEF, but exploring
collaborative opportunities that can influence stakeholders to do the right
thing in a right way. There might be the motive behind this collaboration,
no doubt, but I believe collaborative efforts can lead to desired outcomes.
Maybe we could suggest the best way to go about it to the MAG.

@Parminder, I just realized that you were the one I met during the
eCommerce Week. We should have gone to the coffee joint :)

Regards.
Peter

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:33 PM <LB at lucabelli.net> wrote:

> 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
> www.internet-governance.fgv.br
> @1lucabelli
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*
> *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
> <igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>>
> >> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> **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>
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>

-- 
<https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
Peter Taiwo Akinremi
about.me/petertaiwoakinremi
<https://about.me/petertaiwoakinremi?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api&utm_content=thumb>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190212/d5a2d203/attachment.htm>