[Wg-mwp] Suggestion on IGF major intersessional policy program
elizabeth.thomas-raynaud at iccwbo.org
Tue Dec 5 08:22:39 EST 2017
Thanks for taking the initiative to make your proposal, Flavio. I have a lot of sympathy for what I perceive to be your goals.
If I understand what you are seeking is a path the community would choose deliberately across all stakeholders (as ultimately reflected in the MAG not just our group) as was done with the CENB. Something that could be a build for the IGF community over many years - as the CENB has been.
The concern is of course - how limited the resources are at the Secretariat for the current load of proliferating intersessional activities and expectations but also how challenging it would be if they continue to be spread out across too many different streams of work, without any deliberation on priorities and best use of those resources. Until such time as a tap of new funds to support this expansion comes in, we must see some effort to choose what can be supported and what cannot be carried on if we want to see IGF sustainable and strengthened rather than depleted.
In my humble opinion I feel that the community following closely this work is also being spread too thinly across these fields and failing to recognise or address both that and the resources of the Secretariat would counter to our goals.
I was writing this earlier and got interrupted but in the meantime Wout has come through with his perspective which make an important point I wanted to get to - intersessional work that is selected with intention to strengthen the IGF because it brings together the community of stakeholders and drives towards common goals is what should be given priority. It is worth taking some time to consider by the MAG WG and then the MAG supporting and endorsing it as representatives from the community selected to do so.
I don’t have the answers and I think they cannot be found before the IGF this year but I support the merits of this goal and pursuit so I feel this committee could spend more time exploring this question in the new year - taking into account of course what was learned from IGF 2017.
Look forward to seeing everyone soon in Geneva.
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
Project Director, ICC Business Action to Support the Information Society (BASIS)
Senior Policy Executive, Digital Economy
From: Wg-mwp [mailto:wg-mwp-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Renata Aquino Ribeiro
Sent: 04 December 2017 18:11
Subject: Re: [Wg-mwp] Suggestion on IGF major intersessional policy program
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.
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
> 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
> 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
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
> Wg-mwp mailing list
> Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
Wg-mwp mailing list
Wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
More information about the Wg-mwp