[Governance] Today - 16 Years of IGF Evolution and Strengthening – Taking Stock and Looking Forward
anriette at apc.org
Thu Nov 18 04:16:06 EST 2021
Thanks for sharing the link Ayden. And thanks to all who participated.
Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com
Chair, United Nations Internet Governance Forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group
Senior advisor global and regional internet governance
Association for Progressive Communications
www.apc.org // afrisig.org
On 2021/11/17 22:13, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> I really enjoyed this session; thank you Anriette and Bill for moderating!
> A recording is on YouTube here for those who were unable to attend
> live: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85gIrQd5RNo
> Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Wednesday, November 17th, 2021 at 13:39, Anriette Esterhuysen via
> Governance <governance at lists.igcaucus.org> wrote:
>> Dear all
>> As we move closer to celebrating the IGF's 15th anniversary, please
>> do join this IGF2021 Preparatory and Engagement Phase session on
>> Wednesday, 17 November, at 13h00 UTC
>> Looking forward to lively and useful discussion.
>> *16 Years of IGF Evolution and Strengthening – Taking Stock and
>> Looking Forward*
>> Wednesday, 17th November, 2021 (15:00 SAST) - Wednesday, 17th
>> November, 2021 (16:30 SAST)
>> /Facilitated by MAG Chair in collaboration with the MAG Working Group
>> on IGF Strategy and Strengthening/
>> Interactive moderated panel that will look back and take stock of how
>> the IGF has evolved and what its key achievements have been; reflect
>> on the current and future internet governance ecosystem and the IGF’s
>> role in this ecosystem, particularly in the context of ‘digital
>> cooperation’ and the UN-Secretary General’s proposed ‘global digital
>> compact’. The panel will consider the role the IGF has and can play
>> in inclusive internet governance, both through the further
>> development of the multistakeholder approach and through closer
>> engagement with multilateral processes. Finally the session will
>> consider what is meant by the idea of a “stronger, more focused and
>> impactful IGF” and propose specific steps to be taken to establish a
>> stronger, more strategic IGF that operates on the basis of a
>> multi-year plan working to the goal of the idea of an “IGF plus” with
>> the institutional capacity, leadership and oversight needed to see it
>> through the renewal of its mandate in 2025 and beyond.
>> Process: The meeting will divided into roughly three parts with
>> panelists speaking @ 20 minutes in each, with the remaining time
>> reserved for open discussion with all participants.
>> Moderators: Anriette Esterhuysen, MAG chair and William Drake,
>> Columbia University, former MAG and WGIG member
>> Rapporteurs: Giacomo Mazzone, past MAG member and member, MAG
>> WG-strategy, Roman Chukov and Amrita Choudhury (MAG WG-strategy
>> Part I: Past/Origins
>> 1. Markus Kummer – IGF Support Association, WGIG and past IGF
>> Executive Coordinator and interim MAG chair - CONFIRMED
>> 2. Wolfgang Kleinwächter – WGIG and EuroSSIG - CONFIRMED
>> 3. Christine Arida - Strategic Planning Sector Head at National
>> Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (NTRA) of Egypt a past
>> host country of the IGF - CONFIRMED
>> PART II – Present dynamics
>> 4. Fiona Alexander – past MAG member and previously with the NTIA
>> and member of MAG WG strategy - CONFIRMED
>> 5. Flavio Wagner - past MAG member and member of MAG WG-strategy -
>> 6. Parminder Jeet Singh, IT For Change (cs) - CONFIRMED
>> 7. Esteve Sanz, Head of Sector EC - member of MAG WG-strategy (gov)
>> - CONFIRMED
>> Part III: Futures/Options
>> 8. Yu Ping Chan, Office of the UN SG’s Envoy on Technology - CONFIRMED
>> 9. Concettina Cassa - past MAG member and co-chair WG-strategy (Gov)
>> - CONFIRMED
>> 10. Mark Carvell - EuroDIG Member and former UK government policy
>> advisers and MAG member. Member of MAG WG-strategy - CONFIRMED
>> Questions and topics to be addressed
>> Part I: Past/Origins
>> 1. Over the years there have been various expressions of frustration
>> with the IGF supposedly being just a “talk shop” that does not take
>> binding decisions. But this is an essential part of the IGF’s DNA,
>> as it is what governments and stakeholders at the 2005 Tunis WSIS
>> summit thought was needed and what they could agree to. To set the
>> stage for our discussion, please reflect on the considerations and
>> processes that shaped the fundamental features of the IGF’s design
>> and made it what it has become today.
>> 2. The IGF Mandate approved by the 2005 Tunis WSIS summit included
>> provisions stating that the IGF should “Promote and assess, on an
>> ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet
>> Governance processes;” and “Identify emerging issues, bring them to
>> the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public, and,
>> where appropriate, make recommendations.” To what extent has the IGF
>> pursued these objectives? What has been achieved or not regarding
>> these functions, and why?
>> 3. The global Internet governance agenda has evolved significantly
>> over the past sixteen years, with many of the issues and political
>> dynamics that animated early IGFs drifting from center stage while
>> new ones came to the fore. What have been the key shifts in
>> substantive focus and institutional dynamics over the course of the
>> IGF’s history to date?
>> Part II – Present dynamics
>> 1. Name one positive change or achievement that you feel can be
>> attributed to the IGF. Is there anything significant that might have
>> turned out differently if we had not had the IGF?
>> 2. Has the IGF altered the global discourse or debate in any
>> significant ways? How much does such discourse and soft norms matter,
>> relative to negotiated formal agreements?
>> 3. The IGF has spawned new collaborative processes that work on an
>> intersessional basis and then feed into the meetings, e.g. the policy
>> networks, the NRIs, the DCs and the BPFs. Have these efforts yielded
>> any important results? What could be done to increase their salience?
>> What roles could they play going forward as the landscape of Internet
>> governance and digital cooperation continues to evolve?
>> 4. How has the multistakeholder approach worked in the IGF? Is it
>> continuing to develop conceptually and practically, or has it
>> stagnated? If it has, what can be done to renew it?
>> Part III: Futures/Options
>> 1. There have been various calls, including from high-level
>> government figures, for the IGF to produce more tangible outcomes.
>> What forms could these take? What would be needed for the
>> international community to agree to such a process and outcome?
>> 2. With regard to the United Nations’ Roadmap and Common Agenda,
>> what roles and value-added do you see for the IGF? Do you see a
>> specific role of the IGF with regard to the proposed Global Digital
>> 3. What is your view of the terms of reference for the new
>> Leadership Panel (formerly referred to as the MHLB)? How can we make
>> this a useful grouping? What about the MAG, do its terms of
>> reference and functioning need to change?
>> 4. Proposals have been made for the IGF Secretariat and MAG to work
>> collaboratively on a multi-year plan. Do you think this is feasible?
>> How would you go about developing and implementing such a plan?
>> 5. Name one aspect of how the IGF operates that you would change,
>> and one aspect you would like to retain.
>> Anriette Esterhuysen - anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com <mailto:anriette at apc.org//anriette at gmail.com>
>> Chair, United Nations Internet Governance Forum Multistakeholder Advisory Group
>> www.intgovforum.org <http://www.intgovforum.org>
>> Senior advisor global and regional internet governance
>> Association for Progressive Communications
>> www.apc.org <http://www.apc.org> // afrisig.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Governance