Public Policy 

Internet Governance

ISOC's blog on IGF 2006

RSS feed    Atom feed

Concluding thoughts on IGF Athens

During his closing remarks at the Internet Governance Forum meeting in Athens, Nitin Desai, the Chairman of the IGF, said:

“I think … the Internet philosophy of bottom-up, of people of diverse cultures from different countries working together informally in order to make things work somehow seems to have percolated through even into our debates and our deliberations. And in many ways, what we are seeing is really one of the great, potentially greatest, impacts of the Internet, the way in which it can bring people together from different parts of the world and make them feel that they are part of a single community. I think this is truly extraordinary.”

For me these words summarize the value and success of the IGF process – bringing together stakeholders to discuss challenges and opportunities related to the Internet and ICTs, and particularly as they impact the developing world. The Athens event focused on four broad areas that are incredibly important to spurring the spread of the Internet – openness, diversity, security and access. Within each of these areas many of the major issues facing developed and developing countries were addressed, both in the main sessions and in the workshops. The horizontal focus on capacity building and development was the glue that tied the sessions together, with many speakers raising the need for skills development, enabling environments and action at the local/national level. What was clear is that the format of the event allowed for a more dynamic and collaborative experience: the discussion among equals approach made for a broader and more open exchange of views than would have been possible in a more traditional intergovernmental meeting.

The next IGF is in Rio in November 2007. Ensuring the continuity of the multi-stakeholder dialogue will be imperative as will the focus on capacity building and development. The IGF is a new model, one that will grow in stature as the discussion around best practices, dynamic collaboration and experience sharing delivers increasing value. A continued discussion on the issues raised in the main sessions in Athens will be essential, as will increasing the participation of developing countries and increasing remote participation through the IGF’s web-based tools.

I would like to thank ISOC’s membership and the many friends of ISOC who participated in the Athens event. From the speakers and workshop organizers and panelists, to those who helped the event’s smooth running, I believe that the ISOC community made a substantial contribution to the success of the first IGF.

Posted: Tuesday, November 28th, 2006 by Matthew Shears

WSIS and the IGF

Someone mentioned that the IGF has given us what the WSIS did not: the start of a substantive discussion on issues of importance to developing countries in the realm of ICTs, Internet and development. WSIS was largely monopolized by a politicised discussion of issues related to the management and adminstration of the Internet. But that was not supposed to be the case. The motivation for the WSIS was basically to seek to harness the power of ICTs for development and for meeting the MDGs. It did not. And clearly the discussion on ICTs for development was barely touched upon. But the IGF and its multi-stakeholder dialogue has proven to be an incredibly valuable space for airing different views on a range of very important issues. Yes, at times, the contentious Internet governance issues cropped up largely raised by the same small subset of nations. But this event brought diverse stakeholders together to compare experience and best practices, to appreciate the spectrum of views on issues of clear importance to developing countries. The various initatives that have sprung from the IGF is a good indicator of the importance of this event to catalysing groups of stakeholders to actually do something to effect change. This space for dialogue is proving to be a useful tool for addressing some of those issues that are fundamental to developing country access.

Posted: Friday, November 3rd, 2006 by Matthew Shears

Capacity building workshop

I was a panelist in the APC organized Capacity Building workshop Thursday AM. The multi-stakeholder panel comprising APC, ISOC, ICC/BASIS, Diplo, NRO/Afrinic, CIPESA discussed some of the critical focus areas and principles for effective capacity building. Some of the key themes that came through in the discussion were included the following: share experience; partner – don’t duplicate; go local; understand what is needed – not what you think is needed; undertake ongoing skills development and not one-off training; focus on adding value – play to your strengths; build communities to leverage the capacity building; drive to self-sufficiency (train the trainers). Based on some of the others things that we have heard throughout this IGF it is clear that there is an abundance of equipment but not of skills. One of our ISOC colleagues said that 100 additional trained engineers would make all the difference in his country – kind of sums up the issue for me. This IGF has brought this capacity building focus in much greater focus and we must ensure that it continues to be one of the core focus areas in Rio.

Posted: Friday, November 3rd, 2006 by Matthew Shears

What are we doing? Where are we going?

Having been at many WSIS conferences and here in Athens, I notice ISOC is incredibly more visible here than it has in all but the last two WSIS events. The difference is remarkable, and I feel the current situation accurately reflects ISOC’s importance and role as one of the important stewards of the Internet founders’ spirit.

Having said this, I don’t know if doctors have a name for my condition, but I can’t help myself to think of what will happen after these four days in Athens. More specifically, what will we have achieved and where can we take this?

What has been achieved:

1. What applied to WSIS continues to be true of the IGF: it is a great learning experience for most attendees. People who don’t know much about the inner workings of the Internet get to know more about it, and people in the know learn how design and use issues can be of concern to users of the network. I’d estimate the learning happens as much in the sessions and workshops as it does in informal meetings betweeen and after the official events.
2. Another interesting outcome of the IGF is what is now called in IGF lingo “dynamic coallitions”. These are groups of people interested in one specific area of Internet governance who whish to pursue post-IGF on-going work on a subject in order to better study and–hopefully–solve a specific problem. Diplomats call this policy-setting, or reaching an agreement.
3. We are breaking new ground in the area of collaboration between governments and the rest of the world. This may not seem such a big deal for someone who has not tried to supply unsollicited input in UN-run conferences, but the deepening unification in status of all IGF participants, whether they are from governments, business, NGOs, the technical or academic sectors, is truly remarkable. The corresponding IGF lingo for this interaction is “multi-stakeholder participation”, and for this we must credit the work of civil society representatives during the four years of the WSIS process. The IGF will be remembered as THE forum where a new way of enabling a constructive dialogue between governments and other constituencies will have emerged.
4. Lastly, I think it is obvious that civil society representatives have learned and implemented new skills in interacting with government representatives. They have fine-tuned their strategies as well as learned the language and etiquette that are required in order to interact constructively with government representatives.

Where can we take this?

1. This meeting of conversations on Internet governance must move forward. Our challenge is to engage in such a way that all stake-holders continue to find some use in attending and the meetings and contributing to the discussions. Government delegates probably consitute the most fragile constituency in this respect. It is up to other constituencies to ensure that governments stay part of the process; without active involvement of governmenncts, the IGF will fall apart.
2. In order to ensure that the IGF eventually produces more useful output than cross-training of participants, I think we need a follow-up process that will enable IGF participants and other interested parties to go further and collaborate between IGF meetings. The emerging dynamic coalitions could be provided with a framework to discuss discrete issues and, eventually, propose policy texts. It has been suggested many times before and throughout WSIS and the IGF that the IETF working model could be used as a starting point for this model.

Posted: Thursday, November 2nd, 2006 by lfaubert@conceptum.ca

PICISOC IGF workshop

Sorry I wasn’t able to get to this workshop as it fell during the same time as I was assisting facilitate the main access panel as a part of my Advisory Group role, but Franck Martin captured the stream:

http://www.peachymango.org/tiki-view_blog.php?blogId=2

Thanks Franck!

Note: I understand all sessions and workshops have been archived and we will try and get the links up asap.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by Matthew Shears

ISOC/Internet community participation workshop

On Tuesday we also held our participation workshop in which members of the Internet community reviewed the participation mechanisms in their respective organisations followed by a wide-ranging discussion on multistakeholderism and local capacity building. Following on the heels of the local access workshop we organised I was pleased to see yet again a full house. The questions and the composition of the audience brought home, however, how important it is that we take this type of workshop out of these types of meetings and reach more diverse audiences. A good number of the participants were clearly very familiar with the organisations and their participation processes and it is a reminder that we cannot depend on international events as a mechanism for disseminating information about what we do as a community. It was heartening, however, to hear one person, a Member of the European Parliament, preface their question by effectively saying that they were not aware that we had such processes and commended them.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by Matthew Shears

ISOC: a strong presence at IGF

ISOC’s delegates at IGF hold a meeting on Tuesday October 31, 2006 to assess ISOC’s participation in the first half of forum. The meeting gathered the more than 20 chapter delegates, board members, staff and members of ISOC that participate in the meeting.

The participants said that they are so far satisfied with the high number of ISOC participants and the major achievements of these participants including:

• The remarkable speech of Lynn Saint Amour, CEO in setting the scene in the first day
• The two successful workshops organized by ISOC in the second day (Building local access and Participation)
• The high number of former and current ISOC members on panels
• The positive roles that former and current ISOC members, such as the Egyptian Minister of Communication Tarek Kamel, are playing in the forum

The participants also agreed that the delegates should work more to have ISOC’s voice heard during the remaining days.

The meeting also used the occasion to discuss issues that concern the activities of the chapters around the world.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by Dawit Bekele

ISOC and the legal issues of Internet Governance

I sat on a panel organized by the World bank and other partners this morning.Panel topic was “building local capacity on legal issues of the Internet governance”. The turnover was important, with a major participation from Governments (approx.40%), Business sector (20%) and civil society(30%) and others (academia..etc). one particular issue of interest was how to develop a dialogue between interested stakeholders so that the international law making process take into consideration every one’s needs and expectations, while altogether benefitting all. It appears that one need to reinforce capacity for negociation in developing countries, while conducting more advocacy in developed countries as to the inportance of working towards a win wi situation. there was also another issue regarding ’sovereignty’versus’international’ and how to reconcile both. I see a role for ISOC here, particularly in buidling capacity of decision makers, of lawyers as related to internet issues and in facilitating knowledge sharing as relates to international law making process.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by Pierre Dandjinou

Internet governance and ISOC for all and by all

Since the first phase of WSIS in Geneva, matters relating to Internet governance have evolved.
If we want the internet to be for all,then it must be by all and particularly with respect to governance matters.

Since the Geneva meeting of 2003, I have observed that IGF has become a very important forum for multistakeholder participation.

Now at the IGF, a lot of speeches are being made and many people are patiently listening to them. Soon it will be time for all to act.

In this general context, ISOC’s presence is felt more and more.It will continue to be like this if we continue to work together and make it possible for those who cannot communicate in English to take part in the debates.

Internet governance begins with effective and efficent governance within ISOC structures.Internet for all is also ISOC for all and by all.

With everybody’s will and contribution, I have no doubt that we will succeed to accomplish our aims.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by pbatreau@epistrophe.fr

ISOC and the importance of capacity building

Some quick impressions related to capacity building. Many have questioned the focus of the IGF – why capacity building? And what is ISOC’s role? I felt that the Minister of Communications from Egypt, Tarek Kamel put his finger on it. The minister spoke of the role ISOC has had in facilitating the roll-out of the Internet and the requisite training. Many here have commented on these early days when ISOC was instrumental in this crucial task. This was echoed again in our ISOC Chapter meeting last night. The issue of capacity building and ISOC’s role in driving in the Internet space is as relevant today as it was ten years ago. Our Chapter meeting discussion pointed to the need to continue to do so and at the same time to explore how we can assist in further contribute to bring about ongoing and sustainable capacity building. Building communities, increasing know-how transfer, finding mechanisms to ensure continued training and growing local technical expertise are essential to taking this to the next level.

Posted: Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 by Matthew Shears