[Wg-mwp] Ideas for further discussion - A POLL AMONG THE IGF GLOBAL PARTICIPANTS

Mazzone, Giacomo mazzone at ebu.ch
Mon Oct 23 15:19:51 EDT 2017

Dear all,
Following the debate we had and the exchange that followed, here it is in writing my proposal I made orally during the confcall.

Our working group is trying to figure out what could be a pluriannual working plan for the MAG and for the IGF, in execution of the UNGA mandate of 2016. Who else is better placed to do so than the whole population of the next IGF in Geneva ? there we shall have, we hope, a couple of thousands of people dealing from all over the world with the IG related issues, plus, we hope, some international organization, that usual don't deal with these issues, but will be attracted by the debate.

Why don't use this opportunity to consult the participants on what they think could be the better agenda for a multi-year plan ?
We have enough expertise to know how to deal with a gigantic doodle on these matters , don't you think so ?
We can make it fully open (no boundaries and ask everybody to express its priorities and its schedule according to its needs freewheelin'. Or we can try to channel these answers through some boundaries in order to make easier the analysis and to reduce the risk of misinterpretation.
Of course MAG could be a perfect textbed for this streamlining of the topics. But I think that in the scope of WG there is to go ahead even if the MAG is not ready to do this preliminary selection.

Just as a rough idea, please find here below a preliminary draft of how the questions could look like:
And of course dozen of variants are possible, such as  quoting what a friend said brainstorming on this idea: we could also (and first) poll the MAG as they are meant to advise the SG on behalf of the broader IGF community.  This would also give our work this year a good start.  And we would compare against the broader community.  Perhaps the WG could draft a poll for the current MAG to complete?
I find also this an excellent way to proceed.

Food for thoughts for our next confcall.




> (if we leave the answers open)



> Which are the most urgent problems that the Governance of the Internet need to tackle ?

I am not sure what or who is meant by the "Governance of the Internet",  do you mean the IGF or the IGF plus intersessional activities (IGF ecosystem?)?


> 1), 2) 3) 4, 5)


> [please list in order of priority]



> Based on your experience and knowledge of the IG current debate, which one of the above mentioned problems could be solved ?


IG issues rather than IG debate?  And solved is very difficult as with so many of the complex issues, they are never actually solved, the problem space evolves.  Thinking about cybersecurity, for example.  Maybe "addressed" or "advanced" rather than solved?

> 1), 2) 3) 4, 5)


> [please list with 1-2-3-4-5 those that you think could be solved]



> How long could take for you to solve your priority n.1 (see question 2)


> 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, god knows ?



> Which of the existing international bodies could be part of the solution to  this problem ?


> IGF  WSIS ITU ICANN UNGA/CSTD g7 g20  / None of them / Somebody else

this question could be specific to each issue identified.

From: Wg-mwp [mailto:wg-mwp-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Wout de Natris
Sent: jeudi 19 octobre 2017 16:56
To: wg-mwp at intgovforum.org
Subject: [Wg-mwp] Ideas for further discussion

Dear all,

Following up on our excellent discussion just now I would like to share some initial ideas to contemplate as potential ways forward and to find engagement from (now absent) stakeholders. They are presented pointwise only and can be elaborated upon when taken up as relevant suggestions.

1) Find solutions and ways forward for complex issues concerning Internet Governance involving several stakeholder groups within the context of the IGF;
2) Compile current best practices from around the globe and translate them into guides for the world to learn from on selected topics;
3) Bring stakeholders together around a specific topic, aimed at formulating potential solutions and find support for implementation of said within multiple stakeholder groups;
4) To involve absent stakeholders by:

  *   find and address the topics that entice them to join;
  *   formulate invitations to join in a personalised way;
  *   an active invitation policy through present stakeholders.
5) Let stakeholders decide on what the best format for their respective challenge is, whether a BPF, Working or Expert Parties/Groups, brainstorm sessions, mailing lists, ??? as they see fit;
6) Decide whether there is room within the IGF for spontaneous action between stakeholders or that all needs to go through the MAG first;
7) Establish whether IGF funding issues change when the "right" topics are addressed so that the secretariat can supply support functions to all groups: What topic or call for action would make you support the IGF financially?
8) If there are several, different initiatives around the globe, within different organisations, around the same topic, could the IGF have a liaising role between these organisations or better, assume a coordinative role and bring them together?
9) Please follow up with your ideas.

In my opinion there is a need to not only discuss the topic of strategic mulityear workplan from a theoretical point of view. Those not engaged now, will not engage from theory. There has to be an element of "yes, you will get to work on ways forward, on solutions, etc." Only through the practical, aloof or absent stakeholders may be enticed to deliver input. From the moment it helps them find solutions to their respective issues.

Looking forward to hear your ideas.


Wout de Natris

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
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>


Blog http://woutdenatris.wordpress.com

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/wg-mwp_intgovforum.org/attachments/20171023/24e263ff/attachment.html>

More information about the Wg-mwp mailing list