Sounds so obvious that we can only wonder why it is not there already. Thanks Sam.

Dorothy K. Gordon
Director-General
Ghana-India Kofi Annan Centre of Excellence in ICT
Mobile: 233 265005712
Direct Line: 233 302 683579
Website: www.aiti-kace.com.gh
Encrypt Everything - https://gpgtools.org https://silentcircle.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Lanfranco" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August, 2014 2:33:42 PM GMT +00:00 Casablanca / Monrovia
Subject: The Role of Experts in ICANN deliberations:

The Role of Experts in ICANN deliberations : 

This issue is churning away in the background of various discussions so here is a contribution to thinking about how to handle it. 

There are two areas of concern with regard to the role of experts in ICANN deliberations. The first, of course, is the selection of appropriate experts for the issue/task at hand. As everyone involved in policy and project implementation knows, knowledge and expertise only have meaning in context, and excellent credentials applied to the wrong task produces a double risk. The advice will be out of context, and there is the risk of legitimating the advice based on the credentials of the expert, rather than on the suitability of the advice to the context. In fact, this is always a problem, no matter how the expert selection process is undertaken and by whom. 

This leads to the second concern, and one that is present in ICANN deliberations. That is once the expert opinion is tabled it is given undue weight in decision making independent of its actual relevance and strengths. This has happened with some of the content of recently retained ICANN expert panels, in particular the one on enhanced multistakeholder engagement. 

There is a long standing tried and true protection against the risks associated with both of these concerns. The British call it the Green Paper process, and it would be simple to incorporate it into ICANN’s use of retained expertise to assist in decision making. It is very much like the terms of reference currently being used for the IANA stewardship coordination group. An agreed upon simple statement could be a mandatory part of the charter, or terms of reference, for any expert group convened within ICANN. Something like: 

This expert group will identify issues and options, and may suggest recommendations for policy or implementation, to be used as input into the subsequent multistakeholder dialogue and multistakeholder recommendations for action. 

While there will still be differences of opinion as to who should be retained as experts, such a process reduces the critical role of expert selection in the ultimate policy decisions, and allows the stakeholder groups to insure that subsequent use of advice is based on the relevance of the advice to the issues at hand. It focuses on usable outputs and not expert credentials, and minimizes the extent to which decision making can selectively pick elements of the advice based on self-interest. 

Sam L.