NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Sam Lanfranco <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Sam Lanfranco <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:16:17 -0400
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2658 bytes) , text/html (3416 bytes)
While Wolfgang's breakdown is a nice breakdown for multistakeholder 
models, the bigger question lurking in the background is:

  "/Is there Internet Governance outside the multistakeholder model?/"

Looking at the Internet from an economist's perspective, it is a terrain 
of increasingly differentiated products and processes. One would expect 
vested interests and special interest groups to split off the parts of 
Internet governance of key interest to them and address those interests 
in what they view as the most favorable policy venues. The history of 
the past 70 years suggests that special interests with power (a.k.a. 
governments and big business) press their interests in multinational 
venues, and increasingly in multilateral trade agreements that have 
little in common with the trade agreements of 50 years ago. Those venues 
focus on policy issues like intellectual property and such...with 
Internet governance a rising item on those agendas. One might expect 
ICANN's remit to be more clearly, and tightly, defined as this process 
unfolds, but as it unfolds all of us will have to be active as 
stakeholders in a wider array of Internet governance activities if an 
open and free Internet is to be sustained.

Sam L.

On 9/22/2016 1:02 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> Avri:
> "..there is no multistakeholder model without governments,...."
>
> Wolfgang:
> I see four models
> 1. ICANN model (with governments in an advisory capacity)
> 2. WSIS model (with non-governmental stakeholders in a consultation process)
> 3. IGF model (all stakeholders on equal footing with no decision making capacity)
> 4. NetMundial model (all stakeholders on equal footing with limited decision making capacity)
>
> RIRs and IETF are special cases, open to everybody but too Special.
>
> Interesting experiences emerge in some countries at the national Level.
>
> Lets wait and see what Fadis "many little ICANNs" will produce.
>
> We are still in an early phase. There is no "BEST practice", but there is a growing number of "good practices".


-- 
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
  邦有道,贫且贱焉,耻也。邦无道,富且贵焉,耻也
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
email: [log in to unmask]   Skype: slanfranco
blog:  http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852



ATOM RSS1 RSS2