[IGFmaglist] Proposal for a BPF on Remote Participation

Wisdom Donkor wisdom.dk at gmail.com
Wed Mar 22 11:27:56 EDT 2017


Thanks for the info.

*WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,
OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
Email: wisdom.dk at gmail.com
Skype: wisdom_dk
facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
Website: www.data.gov.gh
www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Mamadou LO <alfamamadou at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all!
>
> If you have not seen that yet; some interesting recommendations relating
> to overall participation in the document below : IV/ Broadening
> participation and capacity building
>
>
> Report of the working group on imrovements to the Internet Governance Forum
>
> http://unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/a67d65_en.pdf
>
>
> <http://unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/a67d65_en.pdf>
>
> <http://unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/a67d65_en.pdf>
>
> *===================================================================
> Mamadou LO*
> Chef du Département Communication et Information Documentaire
> Head of Communication and Information Department
> Crédit Agricole Sénégal
> Tel : 221 77 645 59 57
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *De :* Igfmaglist <igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org> de la part de
> Wisdom Donkor <wisdom.dk at gmail.com>
> *Envoyé :* mardi 14 mars 2017 18:58
> *À :* Renata Aquino Ribeiro
> *Cc :* MAG-public
> *Objet :* Re: [IGFmaglist] Proposal for a BPF on Remote Participation
>
>
> Dear Renata,
>
>
> Thank you very much for kick starting BPF the remote participation. bellow
> is my general thought;
>
>
> A common thread weaving through the current public participation isthe
> need for new approaches that emphasize  interaction between stakeholders,
> decision makers and the public as well as deliberation among participants.
> Increasingly complex decision making processes require a more informed
> citizenry that has weighed the evidence on the issue, discussed and debated
> potential decision options and arrived at a mutually agreed upon decision
> or atleast one by which all parties can abide. We explore the recent
> fascination with deliberative methods for public involvement first by
> examining their origins within democratic theory, and then by focusing on
> the experiences with deliberative methods within the igf community. In
> doing so, I think we answer the following questions “What are deliberative
> methods and why have they become so popular? What are their potential
> contributions to the community?” this is critical to the the basis for
> developing general principles that can be use to guide the design and
> evaluation of public involvement processes for the igf community.
>
> issues and needs:
>
> While effective enough to attract usage, the tools for remote
> participation could needsubstantial improvement.
>
> These include:
>
> 1. Improvements in the underlying network. Throughput and bandwidth are
> not always sufficient for the volume of data required. Some of this is due
> to inherent latency in transcontinental connections and under-provisioned
> networks, while other problems arise from national network configuration
> and policies. That is, some problems are technical and may be fixable with
> technology alone, others aren’t. National infrastructure and the ability of
> the scientific communities to influence that infrastructure to optimize
> their work varies greatly from region to region. Since traffic often
> crosses multiple administrative domains, optimizing performance for our
> applications is not always straightforward changes in technical
> configuration and policy need to be negotiated case by case. The best time
> to do this may be before collaborationagreements are signed, rather than
> afterwards. It also should be recognized that in some cases (e.g. the
> Chinese national firewall), our ability to effect change is probably nil.
>
> 2. Better and more widely deployed monitoring portals and tools. End users
> often do not always have access to tools that allow them to readily assess
> the state of the network and thus the expected performance of remote
> participation tools. This can lead to unrealistic expectations and
> frustration or conversely to unnecessary passivity in the face of fixable
> problems.
>
>  3. Tools for telepresence. While these are steadily improving, they do
> not yet come close to supporting the level of ad hoc interpersonal
> communications that characterize fusion control room operations.
>
> 4. Documentation. The quality of documentation and information sharing
> about experimental operations, data management systems, analysis and
> visualization tools, remote participation tools, etc.
>
> *WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
> E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
> ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
> Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,
> OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
> Email: wisdom.dk at gmail.com
> Skype: wisdom_dk
> facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
> Website: www.data.gov.gh
> www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>> As it was raised on the last MAG Meeting, there could be a new
>> intersessional activity called BPF on Remote Participation.
>>
>>
>> This is an outline of the proposal for this BPF. Please send in your
>> comments directly to me or to the list. You may also comment direclty
>> on the document.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fYChgZI1YUCLwI43gTWGoTHp
>> 0aW8EEsTLlvPkfmxpg8/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> BPF Remote Participation
>>
>>
>> Background
>>
>> Remote participation enables online participants to have their voice
>> heard in meetings and events worldwide, enabling full and equal
>> participation whether online or in room. It maximizes the
>> possibilities of the use of internet for inclusion. It has to be more
>> prioritized as an action events can move forward. There should be also
>> a concern on making remote participation sustainable, either as a
>> knowledge system and as an economic investment. A Best Practices fórum
>> investigating these aspects of remote participation and documenting
>> guidelines would be important to increase inclusion and outreach for
>> participants online, onsite, moderators, chairs or speakers.
>>
>>
>> ***Charter****
>>
>>
>> Purpose
>>
>>
>> Enlist recommendations for effective remote participation, reviewing
>> on documents previously published in IGF groups, Dynamic Coalition on
>> Accessibility and other spaces.
>>
>> Examine research such as done by Workshop 250 IGF2016 – How to make
>> remote participation sustainable.
>>
>> Develop a survey for remote participation strategies.
>>
>> Develop groups on social media and mobile messaging to complete remote
>> participation strategies.
>>
>> Articulate with working groups for reporting and outreach and
>> intersessional activities of IGF2017 to examine a complete remote
>> participation strategy.
>>
>> Establishing thematic sessions on the issue at IGF2017
>>
>>
>> Output
>>
>>
>> Data on survey about remote participation categorized and visualized.
>>
>> Report on guidelines for remote participation
>>
>> Planning a session for the IGF community on the 2017 edition of the forum
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Igfmaglist mailing list
>> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20170322/274c9864/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list