[Wg-mwp] Suggestion on IGF major intersessional policy program

Wout de Natris denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl
Tue Dec 5 05:55:20 EST 2017


Dear all,


Following comments by Markus, Renata and Jim.


I fully agree that there is an end to where the secretariat can stretch itself and that we should not actively go in search of that end.


But, I do think that it is important to find out what topics are of great importance for or a grave concern of different stakeholders participating in the IGF and whether they think the IGF could play a positive role towards an outcome. If something is of importance to stakeholders, support ought to follow and support is one of the topics this WG is looking into.


This is something my "constituents" are very much interested in finding out. Does the interest in, support for, participation in and outcomes of the IGF grow when the relevancy of topics grows? Because if it does not, what does that tell us about the (importance attached to the) IGF? Then this is what it is; at least for the foreseeable future.


So, no, we should not be looking for topics to be pressed on the new MAG, but, and this is a MAG WG after all, we can come up with topics, underscored by examples, that drive this discussion forward. A discussion for the new MAG to initiate. A discussion towards more support for the IGF from all angles: inclusion; relevancy to stakeholders; financial or in kind support; a shared and accepted responsibility for outcomes; more active participation; etc. And on top of that a (pre)selection process that allows for the topics of importance to each stakeholder group to be identified in a timely manner and recognised as such.


If we work from the premiss that the current activities do not allow for a higher level of support and commitment, this WG is looking at options to change that for the positive. That has to include new ideas able to initiate change.


Best,


Wout


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
De Natris Consult

Kamerlingh Onnesstraat 43                                                        Tel: +31 648388813

2014 EK Haarlem                                                                          Skype: wout.de.natris

denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl<mailto:denatrisconsult at hotmail.nl>

http://www.denatrisconsult.nl

Blog http://woutdenatris.wordpress.com


________________________________
From: Wg-mwp <wg-mwp-bounces at intgovforum.org> on behalf of Jim Prendergast <jim at GALWAYSG.COM>
Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 10:57 PM
To: Renata Aquino Ribeiro; wg-mwp
Subject: Re: [Wg-mwp] Suggestion on IGF major intersessional policy program

I too am concerned with workload on the secretariat and I think the questions Renata raises are important ones.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wg-mwp [mailto:wg-mwp-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Renata Aquino Ribeiro
Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 12:12 PM
To: wg-mwp <wg-mwp at intgovforum.org>
Subject: Re: [Wg-mwp] Suggestion on IGF major intersessional policy program

Hi

I agree with Markus points.

And also I'm concerned about the timing of this.

When is the new MAG being seated?

They will already have this decision made for them for IGF2018?

Will the outcomes of the Taking Stock session be disregarded?

There could be several points made there about CENB and intersessional activities that need to be discussed before this anticipated renewal for 2018 of this work.

So seems rather rushed to approve this now. And risky, without public feedback from Taking Stock.

Best,

Renata


On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Markus Kummer <kummer.markus at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Flavio, all,
>
> Thank you for getting this discussion started. To begin with, I would
> like to give a brief reminder of how the intersessional policy
> programme got started. We launched it as a third track of
> intersessional work, besides the DCs and BPFs. By now the NRIs are in
> the process of establishing themselves as a 4th track.
>
> Your suggestion, that is to ask the MAG whether to continue CENB or
> selecting another theme, makes much sense. However, going ahead with
> two themes in parallel would not be resource neutral - it would need
> additional Secretariat support. Before considering this option, it
> would need a careful analysis whether the Secretariat would be able to
> support two parallel themes adequately.
>
> Lastly, allow me alto make the point I raised on the call in the form
> of a
> question: should the identification of new themes not better be made
> by the broader community instead of by this small group? Are not the
> DCs, BPFs and NRIs better placed to do so?
>
> Best regards
> Markus
>
>
>
>
> On 3 Dec 2017, at 23:17, Flávio Rech Wagner <flavio at inf.ufrgs.br> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues of the WG-MWP
>
> Following our meeting from last Wednesday, please find below a
> proposal of a contribution our WG could extend to the MAG regarding
> the major intersessional policy program.
>
> The MAG launched in 2015 a major intersessional policy program
> addressing the theme "Connecting the Next Billion", as a
> community-driven process that is facilitated a MAG member, with
> support from the IGF Secretariat. In 2016 and 2017, the program has
> been extended and continued as "Connecting and Enabling the Next
> Billion(s)". It is up to the MAG to decide on the continuation of this program.
>
> In the first meeting of our WG, while reviewing our charter, following
> opportunities (among others) have been identified as part of the
> contributions our WG could address:
>
> d.       Early identification of key themes could be useful also for the
> selection of new major policy questions to be addressed by dedicated
> working groups during the intersessional work, supporting increased
> collaboration inside and outside of the IGF ecosystem, such as the
> Connecting and Enabling the Next Billion(s) (CENB)
>
> k.       In support of several points above, the MAG could identify relevant
> societal (social, economic, ..) themes that are not yet adequately
> addressed by the IGF, which would increase the IGF’s relevance and
> usefulness for other communities and entities, which could become new IGF partners.
>
> From the above considerations, our WG could propose to the MAG two
> possible lines of action:
>
> 1) Extend the CENB for one or more years, considering that there are
> very relevant and timely issues still to be addressed in this regard
> under the umbrella of the IGF. This extension should be done, of
> course, in close consultation with the team that is responsible for this effort.
>
> 2) Choose another relevant, broad policy issue for the intersessional
> policy program. This new major policy work could be used also to
> increase IGF's relevance and usefulness for other communities that are
> not well represented at the IGF.
>
> Please notice that points 1 and 2 above are not mutually exclusive.
> The MAG could choose to continue the CENB effort, but in parallel
> launch a new major policy program.
>
> Our WG could identify broad themes to be addressed as a new major
> intersessional policy program and offer these themes as suggestions to
> the MAG. If you think this is an appropriate contribution from our WG,
> we could start collecting initial ideas regarding potential themes.
>
> I'm looking forward to your comments and suggestions.
>
> Best regards
>
> Flavio
>
>
> --
> Prof. Flávio Rech Wagner                 Tel: +55-51-3308 9494
> Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul  Fax: +55-51-3308 7308
> Instituto de Informática                 E-mail: flavio at inf.ufrgs.br
> Porto Alegre, Brasil                     URL: www.inf.ufrgs.br/~flavio<http://www.inf.ufrgs.br/~flavio>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
>

_______________________________________________
Wg-mwp mailing list
Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
_______________________________________________
Wg-mwp mailing list
Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org/attachments/20171205/e46ef732/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list