Re: [council] FW: [soac-discussion] Public Participation Committee public session, invitation for SO/AC leaders' participation

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi

On Mar 2, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

> Bill,
>  
> Thanks Bill.  Please respond to the three questions for Council discussion.

Sorry to be slow to respond but in the usual pre-departure frenzy.  
>  
> 
> From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 1:02 PM
> To: Olga Cavalli
> Cc: Gomes, Chuck; GNSO Council List
> Subject: Re: [council] FW: [soac-discussion] Public Participation Committee 
> public session, invitation for SO/AC leaders' participation
> 
> I too would be very interested in this.  I've been inter alia trying to 
> encourage formation of a Development interest group in the NCSG, have 
> organized three IGF workshops on development and Internet governance, will be 
> writing about it for the UN, etc...
> 
> Bill
> 
> On Mar 2, 2010, at 5:06 PM, Olga Cavalli wrote:
> 
>> Chuck,
>> I would be willing to participate in this pannel, although I am not sure if 
>> it overlaps with other meetings or activities I must be involved in.
>> Regards
>> Olga
>> 
>> 2010/3/2 Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Please see below a very late request for GNSO participation in a panel that 
>> will be discussing the following in Nairobi:
>>  
>> "a) What are the three most important improvements ICANN can make to its 
>> public participation processes to facilitate greater engagement by 
>> developing world stakeholders?
Reduce the information overload barrier to entry.  The current approach is in 
effect to throw people into the deep end of the pool and say ok, learn to swim. 
 This is not how government staff and many others from developing countries 
experience their entree into other international institutions dealing with 
Internet and ICT issues, and the noticeable contrast can be alienating.  I've 
had ministry and NGO people say they can't figure out where to start, it's too 
overwhelming, and you can't just pop in, sample, and figure out what's most 
relevant like you might elsewhere, it feels like an up front long-term 
commitment to full body immersion is required.  So revamp the maddeningly 
newbie-unfiendly info architecture and content of the website, or at least 
provide a parallel track that defines issues and their interrelationships in a 
digestible form and then allows people to build their knowledge from step a to 
b to c.   Maybe hire a couple staffers to serve as sherpa or focal points with 
an explicit "there are no dumb questions" mandate, and/or have a volunteer 
buddy system—ongoing and for meetings.  Expand translation support.  Figure out 
some way to prepare people for the cultural style aspect—discussions in ICANN 
are much more aggressive and challenging (and, I am routinely told, "American") 
than what many people are used to from their home cultures or other 
international spaces they work in.

Significantly expand outreach and capacity building efforts.  I agree with Tim 
that the roving meetings are insufficient for this purpose, particularly given 
the nature of the agendas and the difficulties of trying to plug in and play 
(although they can be used as platforms, e.g. NCSG is having a meeting with 
East African noncommercial actors in Nairobi the night before Constituency Day, 
which some will hopefully feel inspired to attend).  One or two annual regional 
seminars of a capacity building nature would be really helpful (could in 
parallel reduce regular meetings to two, or stop the roaming).  Could also make 
better use of other opportunities like the IGF; currently, ICANN does a ninety 
minute open forum that's a quick show and tell of the basic institutional lay 
out and current issues, but it could be doing more extended capacity building 
sessions.   Partner with bodies that provide education and capacity building.  
Commission an book/manual that maps stuff out in a manner that works for 
educators and end users (and do NOT call it ICANN for Dummies...there's a lot 
of sensitivity about being talked down to, I've sat with developing country 
government and NGO folks in WSIS/IGF meetings and seen rather adverse reactions 
to ISOC presentations etc).  

More generally, recognize that improvements to the PPP can only get us so far 
as long as the larger political problems are not addressed.   While there's 
been progress in expanding GAC and drawing developing country people to 
in-region meetings, there are still widespread perceptions out there that 
suppress engagement and inter alia steer people toward intergovernmental bodies 
as the places to address Internet issues, including some that are in ICANN's 
turf.  This is especially the case with ministry of communication and foreign 
affairs types; many Group of 77 representatives (it's actually 130 countries 
now, including China) will tell you their governments don't participate because 
they don't want to "legitimate ICANN," that ICANN is dominated by the US 
government and US corporations so their interests could never get a fair 
hearing, that ICANN still needs to be made subject to some sort of 
intergovernmental oversight or be replaced for certain functions, etc.  So 
there's a need for some soft power and diplomatic engagement, cultivation of in 
country-constitutencies (including other government ministries), recruitment of 
developing country people into visible leadership positions across the 
organization, and on and on.  By themselves, a better web site, more 
translation services, travel grants, and so on aren't going to win hearts and 
minds and build support and engagement; a holistic strategy is needed.

>> b) Should ICANN incorporate a greater focus on the developing world in its 
>> work and if so, how?
>> 
>> 
ICANN needs to better reflect the global topography of Internet usage or there 
will be all kinds of ramifications over time.  A few options might include:

Consider establishing some sort of identifiable home for development in the 
ICANN nexus, even if small.  Signaling is important, and almost every relevant 
intergovernmental body has a development branch or office of some sort. And has 
development promotion as an explicit part of its mission.  Yes ICANN is not the 
UN and its mission should not be greatly expanded, but it is an international 
body that sets policies that affect developing countries, and there's no place 
tasked with identifying and suggesting approaches to development concerns.  
Could be centralized, or feed into/support efforts at the SO/AC level (e.g. the 
nascent development interest group in NCSG).   

Add a development session as a regular feature of the meeting programs.

Where relevant, factor a development assessment into the decision making 
process as a standard element, so that when pricing of new gTLDs or EOIs or 
vertical integration or whatever is being addressed, questions about the 
possible impact across developing countries (recognizing there's great 
heterogeneity in that category) are at least considered, maybe even addressed 
through special provisions etc. 

>> c) How can the work of ICANN be given greater relevance where there is low 
>> Internet density per capita - and what priority should be given to reaching 
>> stakeholders in countries with the lowest Internet connection density? (see 
>> the World Bank statistical link under "Materials and References" below to 
>> look up statistical information of the kind referenced)."
>> 
>> 
Obviously, the needs of the least developed countries are different from those 
of upper income developing countries.  While ICANN's not in the business of 
supporting infrastructure deployment, FDI, domestic regulatory reform and the 
other top priorities in the LDCs, it could liaise with organizations that are 
where issues relevant to its mission are part of the mix. And per the above, 
undertake some targeted efforts to identify the special needs of LDCs with 
respect to its operations, support or provide capacity building, help cultivate 
communities of interest, etc.  

Maybe some of the above sounds like mission creep and doesn't appeal to 
everyone here.  Where you stand depends in part on where you sit, and I'm in 
Geneva amidst an intergovernmental/NGO nexus that's heavily focused on 
developing country concerns and wherein one can routinely hear things said 
about ICANN that would make your head spin.

Best,

Bill
>> 
>> Note that this conflicts with the "Registration Abuse Policies Initial 
>> Report Information Session" on Wednesday afternoon in Nairobi.
>> Because of the late notice on this, it really is not possible to develop a 
>> GNSO position on the issues to be discussed, so I believe the best we can do 
>> is to identify a volunteer who would for the most part participate in a 
>> personal capacity and attempt to represent to the best of her/his ability 
>> what they understand to be views of GNSO community members.
>> 
>> Is there anyone who would be interested and willing to participate on this 
>> panel in Nairobi?  Please respond as soon as possible if you are interested. 
>> It might be helpful if any volunteers would provide brief personal answers 
>> to the three questions to allow other Councilors to comment between now and 
>> 10 March and thereby obtain a little broader GNSO input before the session.
>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>> 
>> From: owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:owner-soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nick Ashton-Hart
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 10:32 AM
>> To: soac-discussion@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [soac-discussion] Public Participation Committee public session, 
>> invitation for SO/AC leaders' participation
>> 
>> Dear SO and AC leaders:
>> 
>> On Wednesday 10th from 1600-1730 local time in Nairobi, the Board's Public 
>> Participation Committee will hold its public meeting.
>> 
>> The PPC has asked me to ask you if a representative from each of the ACs and 
>> SOs would care to be  a part of the session by participating in a panel, 
>> alongside the members of the PPC, to lead the discussion  of the various  
>> items on the agenda, and of course to participate in the discussion 
>> directly. If one of you, or someone you wish to nominate from your 
>> community, is unable to attend in-room we can arrange for  you to be able to 
>> participate remotely via audio bridge.
>> 
>> The full agenda may be found at http://nbo.icann.org/node/8950; I have not  
>> pasted it below since the hyperlinks would not be  usable and as you will 
>> see when you browse the agenda the hyperlinks are quite integral to the 
>> whole. 
>> 
>> Finally, I hope you will accept my apologies in advance for  posting the 
>> agenda assuming that some members of the SOs and ACs would be willing to 
>> participate as described. Given the subject, it seemed that I would be on 
>> safe ground to  make that assumption.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>  
>> Nick Ashton-Hart
>> Senior Director for Participation and Engagement
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>> Tel: +33 (450) 42 81 83
>> USA Tel: +1 (310) 301-8637
>> Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44
>> Mobile: (Switzerland): +41 79 595 5468
>> email: nick.ashton-hart@xxxxxxxxx
>> Win IM: ashtonhart@xxxxxxxxxxx / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@xxxxxxx / Skype: 
>> nashtonhart
>> Online Bio:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> ***********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> Senior Associate
> Centre for International Governance
> Graduate Institute of International and
>  Development Studies
> Geneva, Switzerland
> william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
> ***********************************************************
> 
> 

***********************************************************
William J. Drake
Senior Associate
Centre for International Governance
Graduate Institute of International and
 Development Studies
Geneva, Switzerland
william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
***********************************************************