Session
Organizer 1: Tereza Horejsova, DiploFoundation
Speaker 1: Alberto Cerda, Civil Society, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Speaker 2: Anju Mangal, Intergovernmental Organization, Asia-Pacific Group
Speaker 3: Grace Mutung'u, Civil Society, African Group
Speaker 4: Hannah Slavik, Civil Society, Eastern European Group
Speaker 5: Livia Walpen, Government, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Bertrand de la Chapelle, Civil Society, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Susan Teltscher, UN, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Dr. Tereza Horejsova, DiploFoundation
Dr Katharina Hoene, DiploFoundation
Pavlina Ittelson, DiploFoundation
Round Table - 60 Min
The session will be participant-driven. Instead of formal presentations, lead participants will give a 2-minute pitch in which they will explicitly describe a particular problem and suggest an approach to finding solutions. The subsequent discussion will be led by an experienced moderator.
Speakers at this workshop have been specifically chosen to reflect diverse standpoints and complement each other. We have invited a gender balanced group of speakers, which represents the perspectives of different geographical areas - Europe, USA, Africa (Kenya), Asia-Pacific (Fiji) and South America (Chile). In addition to these criteria, each of the speakers represents a different stakeholder group and perspective on the issue - we have gathered funders, large and small nonprofits, academia, an international organisation, and a government. All of the speakers are highly qualified to address any aspect of the topic, some of them are from developing countries and others work with the developing countries in their professional capacities.
The need for capacity development in Internet governance and digital policy is voiced substantively and regularly in official speeches and documents. Experienced facilitators and consultants are active in this area. However, supply and demand do not always match.
What does capacity development need to look like? What is the learning of activities on capacity development that could be useful to newcomers? Are there particular opportunities, risks, and benefits associated to capacity development in coming years?
Quality capacity development requires resources, and very often those most qualified in education cannot devote the time and effort required for fundraising. Who should pay for capacity development activities? Those most in need, such as those from least developed countries (LDCs), find it difficult to pay. Several pioneer countries (e.g. Switzerland, with the Geneva Internet Platform project) have gone beyond their own capacity development needs and expanded their provision to the global community. Going further, should the responsibility for funding lie with developed country governments, intergovernmental organisations, with the private sector, or with the numerous foundations or NGOs? What, if any, is the responsibility of participants to self-fund?
The format of the session is designed to encourage the discussion between the speakers and audience members, including online participants. The discussion will be moderated by an experienced moderator streamlining the conversation. Rather than speakers, those listed above will serve as resource persons to ensure a provocative and lively discussion.
This is a continuation of the discussion undertaken at the WSIS Forum 2018 and at RightsCon 2018. The IGF regularly devotes attention to the issue of capacity development and we hope this session will contribute to the ongoing discussion.
Full remote participation, possibly including also remote speakers. Experienced remote participation moderator, taking not only questions from the remote room, but also from Twitter. Preference for questions will be first given to remote participants, challenging the traditional dynamics of leaving them till the end.
0 - 5 minutes - welcome and summary of previous discussions on this issue 5 - 20 - contributions by resources persons on practical challenges in capacity development 20 - 25 - summary of the contributions 25 - 50 - discussions in the wider round-table setting 50 - 60 - summary and next steps We will discuss very practical questions connected to capacity development and brainstorm about a draft 10-point action plan drawing on points suggested at the last discussion Diplo organised on this issue.
Report
- Session Type (Workshop, Open Forum, etc.): workshop
- Title: The challenges of capacity development: practical approach
- Date & Time: 12 November, 10.10 – 11.10
- Organizer(s): DiploFoundation
- Chair/Moderator: Tereza Horejsova
- Rapporteur/Notetaker: Katharina Hoene
- List of speakers and their institutional affiliations (Indicate male/female/ transgender male/ transgender female/gender variant/prefer not to answer):
· Jorge Cancio, OFCOM, male
· Alberto Cerda, Ford Foundation, male
· Anju Mangal, SPC, female
· Grace Mutung‘u, Kenya ICT Support Network, female
· Hannah Slavik, DiploFoundation, female
· Susan Teltscher, ITU, female
- Theme (as listed here):
Digital Inclusion & Accessibility
- Subtheme (as listed here): digital capacity building
- Please state no more than three (3) key messages of the discussion. [150 words or less]
· The need for capacity development in Internet governance and digital policy is voiced substantively and regularly in official speeches and documents. Experienced facilitators and consultants are active in this area. However, supply and demand do not always match. The multistakeholder nature of Internet governance does not always match involvement of all stakeholder groups in capacity development programmes.
· The current discourse lacks opening some very practical and concrete questions such as: What does capacity development need to look like? What is the learning of activities on capacity development that could be useful to newcomers? Are there particular opportunities, risks, and benefits associated to capacity development in coming years?
· Quality capacity development requires resources, and very often those most qualified in delivering training cannot devote the time and effort required for fundraising. This brings the question of financial responsibility to implement capacity development programmes.
- Please elaborate on the discussion held, specifically on areas of agreement and divergence. [150 words] Examples: There was broad support for the view that…; Many [or some] indicated that…; Some supported XX, while others noted YY…; No agreement…
- Please describe any policy recommendations or suggestions regarding the way forward/potential next steps. [100 words]
- What ideas surfaced in the discussion with respect to how the IGF ecosystem might make progress on this issue? [75 words]
- Please estimate the total number of participants.
- Please estimate the total number of women and gender-variant individuals present.
- To what extent did the session discuss gender issues, and if to any extent, what was the discussion? [100 words]