[Chapter-delegates] [FOR COMMENT] ISOC input on IGF program, agenda and format

[Carlos Vera]

Excelent comments. We at ISOC Ecuador would like to recommend to include a 
note to focus of the IGF issues. For several reasons, IGF have some emergent 
issues that includes another topics not related to IG such us health, 
infrastructure, education and so. In despite of this are very important 
issues, are not relevant to discussion here.

Personally on several meetings including the IGF in Rio, we were able to 
observe large and complicated discussions on those not IG related issues. 
Trying to avoid this is not simple but necessary to concrete the work on IG.

Carlos Vera
ISOC Ecuador
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Graham" <graham at isoc.org>
To: "ISOC Extended Board" <isoc-ext-board at elists.isoc.org>; "Chapter 
Delegates" <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Cc: "ISOC Staff" <staff at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 6:27 PM
Subject: [Chapter-delegates] [FOR COMMENT] ISOC input on IGF program,agenda 
and format


All,

In June, the IGF Secretariat posted a paper on the program, agenda and
format for the next IGF in Hyderabad, December 3-6.  See:

<http://intgovforum.org/hyderabad_prog/ProgrammePaper.05.06.2008.pdf>.)

A public comment period was established, and the paper will be
discussed at the open consultation meeting in Geneva on September 16,
and at the MAG meeting the following 2 days.  Although the comment
period ended on 15 August, some issues of concern have come up in the
last week that convince me we should make a formal contribution, which
will be posted to the IGF Secretariat web site, even though it may be
too late to make it into the Secretariat's summary of contributions.

Below you will find a draft of the input I would recommend that we
(ISOC) provide to the IGF.  I would invite you to provide your
comments on the points made or to propose additional points for
consideration.  To ensure that it is available to be read widely
before the mid-September meetings, I would appreciate it if you can
send them to me at the latest by the end of your day, THURSDAY, AUGUST
28.  Of course, if you can send them earlier I will appreciate it.
That will give me time to do a final revision after considering your
inputs, and get it to the Secretariat before September 1.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Bill
==========================================
Notes for comments to IGF Hyderabad meeting paper

ISOC is pleased to note the decision to focus on the overall theme for
Hyderabad as “Internet for all” as the in analogy with UNESCO’s
“education for all.”  ISOC hopes the MAG will keep in mind that it is
important the ultimate meeting agenda and sessions not lose focus on
this important overall theme.  These comments should be read in
support of this need.

ISOC supports the concept of Main Session Workshops as an innovation
for Hyderabad.  We believe this type of session will allow
presentations to be more detailed, and thus more supportive of the
cross-cutting theme of capacity building.  By urging those who
proposed workshops to work together with the MAG to organize the main
session workshops, we believe a diversity of views will also be
presented.

ISOC believes great care needs to be taken in organizing the Main
Session Debates.  The concept of open debate is not without cultural
bias; it is more natural and easier for some cultures to engage in
debate as a form of interaction than for others.  Care must be taken
not to bias the ability or propensity to participate.  With that goal
in mind, ISOC would like to present the following suggestions:
--      Moderators must be sensitive to both the content and tone of
the debate, and be quick to deal with inappropriate types of exchange
--     Those wishing to raise topics for debate and questions on the
topics should be encouraged to log those in advance of the session.
This material can serve as a guide for the debates.
--     Give special consideration to requests by the rapporteurs of
independent (i.e., non-main session) workshop to report into the main
session debates the results of their workshops.
--     Care must be taken to ensure that the debates address the
breadth of their subjects, and not get bogged down on one topic.
--     Similarly, the moderator must ensure that the debates are not
dominated by any one point of view or any one stakeholder group.
--     The MAG should take on the responsibility of preparing the
debate moderators, and be available to provide advice if needed during
the sessions.

ISOC supports the decision to schedule workshops in parallel to the
main sessions, and the objective of maximizing the opportunity of open
dialogue and the exchange of ideas; trying to create feedback loops
between the different types of sessions; etc., as set out by the
paper.  In a multi-stakeholder environment such as that of the IGF,
one of the critical tools for participation is of course
interpretation into a variety of languages, ideally the six official
languages of the United Nations.  While we fully understand the cost
implications and thus the impossibility of having interpretation
provided for all sessions by the IGF Secretariat, we applaud the
decision to schedule the main session workshops and debate in
facilities where full six language interpretation can be provided.  In
addition, we would encourage workshop organizers to consider possible
ways to encourage and enable participation by non-English speakers.

We also support the plan to make efforts to improve the possibility of
remote participation in the IGF.  We believe that this can be a
significant way to add value to the event as a focal point for global
discussion of Internet governance issues.  We would urge that planning
for remote participation also consider whether it could be possible
for speakers to participate directly in the main sessions, either as
speakers or participants in the debates.

The format of the session is appropriate and will facilitate the
objectives of the Hyderabad meeting.  We believe care should be taken
in scheduling independent workshops on themes related to the main-
session workshops.  The following suggestions are offered as an
obviously incomplete list of areas requiring attention:
--      Where possible, independent workshops on a theme (e.g.,
Promoting Cyber-Security and Trust) should be scheduled before the
main session workshops and debates on the same topic, with the goal of
enhancing the level of discussion in the main sessions.
--      Where not possible to do so (primarily on the theme of
Reaching the Next Billion), independent workshops on that theme should
not be scheduled at the same time as the main sessions on the same
theme, to avoid overlap for participants wanting to attend both.

The two final main session topics (Taking stock/way forward and
Emerging issues) are obviously the least well developed.  ISOC hopes
that these can be fleshed out during the September Advisory Group
meeting, so participants will have a chance to prepare for them.  [Any
specific suggestions we’d like to see included in the Emerging Issues
session particularly?]

Finally, ISOC would like to express gratitude in advance to the Indian
government.  From the information provided to date, it is clear that
India has learned much from the first two sessions of the IGF, and has
arranged to hold the third IGF in an excellent facility, including
several innovations taking into account lessons learned from the
Athens and Rio meetings.  We look forward to participating actively in
the third IGF, and to the success of the meeting.



========================
Bill Graham
Global Strategic Engagement
The Internet Society
graham at isoc.org
tel  +1.703.439.2157








_______________________________________________
Chapter-delegates mailing list
Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates