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