I fully agree with the sense of the comments posted here on 
non-commercial stakeholder effort within ICANN’s policy process. The 
dedicated volunteers within NCSG work very hard, are too few in number, 
carry a disproportionate load, and make a significant impact. These 
comments are addressed to the challenges ahead.

My earlier reference to “Whack-a-Mole” referred to the fact that the 
non-commercial sector is at a resource disadvantage compared to the 
commercial and government stakeholders who maintain a strategy of 
sustained effort at multiple levels, inside and outside ICANN, in 
addressing the ICANN/Internet policy agenda. The challenge is to get 
beyond that disadvantage. Based on lessons learned from stakeholder 
mobilization elsewhere, the options are pretty clear. If a constituency 
cannot mobilize resources it mobilizes people. If the policy agenda is 
both within and outside ICANN that mobilization has to promote 
engagement inside and outside ICANN. [When I discussed this layered 
strategy with CSG members, during an interview, they dismissed it].

Constituency members within NCSG are already stretched thin. This means 
developing strategic alliances with others. While ICANN pursues 
ICANN-centric outreach efforts focused on drawing stakeholders into the 
ICANN policy agenda, others should pursue Internet-centric outreach 
efforts. Efforts to be focused on drawing stakeholders into a policy 
agenda more directly linked to their interests as stakeholders at the 
national and global level. Success on this front will enhance the 
leverage and legitimacy of NCSG stakeholder voices within the ICANN 
policy process.

With regard to how non-commercial stakeholders work together here, it is 
not about the relative size of membership lists within ICANN. Expanding 
those lists may produce more volunteer effort, will produce more 
logistical problems around face-to-face events, but will hardly make a 
dent in the extent to which there is a wider global non-commercial 
stakeholder representation within ICANN policy development. Policy is 
about more than good ideas versus bad ideas, it is frequently about our 
stakeholder interests relative to your stakeholder interests. That is 
why we prefer democracy over technocracy, and that needs broader 
knowledgeable engagement and reasoned dialogue around policy.

The non-commercial stakeholder voice within ICANN is strengthened when a 
dedicated non-commercial volunteer core within the policy process can 
point outside the walls of ICANN and say “Do you hear what those voices 
are saying?”. It is strengthened when the other stakeholder groups hear 
those voices directly , outside ICANN, when they are elsewhere lobbying 
on behalf of their own stakeholder interests.

As the new Chair of the NPOC policy committee this is the two-path 
strategy I am proposing. We will increase the NPOC participation in 
internal policy discussion, and we will work with others to strengthen 
not-for-profit knowledge and engagement in Internet policy, both within 
and outside ICANN.

Sam L.


-- 
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
in an unjust state" -Confucius
------------------------------------------------
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