Forum NETmundial Initiative: Food for Thought With the maturing of the Internet ecosystem, in addition to the land rush to grab new gTLDs, there is a land rush to grab control of aspects of global Internet governance, and these go well beyond the proposed internal changes in the balance of power within ICANN, as flagged by Robin’s comments with regard to ICANN and GAC. The 900 pound gorilla quickly growing in a closet in Switzerland is the new NETmundial Initiative being hosted into existence by the Swiss based World Economic Forum. It builds on the Brazilian NETmundial event but has no formal relationship with that event. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_2NETmundialInitiativeFAQ.pdf In the words of the Forum "...the Initiative will seek to make a contribution to the positive evolution of multistakeholder Internet governance...". Some insight into how this will be pursued is reflected in Forum’s approach to this task, drawing on its "leader-level multistakeholder communities". The participants list for in its initial scoping workshop today (August 28, 2014) is at: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_4NETmundialListofParticipants.pdf The rationale for this Forum effort notes (no surprise to any of us) that: "There are a range of non-technical policy challenges…. which would benefit from the participation of economic, security, human rights and other institutions and experts in a multistakeholder setting in order to strengthen understanding, enhance trust and identify potential areas of common ground". The second area of effort (again no surprise to any of us) is to galvanize support for capacity building for: "a) to support developing countries which wish to enhance their access to the Internet and build their own multistakeholder governance frameworks; and b) to explore ways to strengthen the capacity of the decentralized Internet governance ecosystem to respond through distributed governance groups to specific issues or problems that arise, including those encountered by developing countries which may not be in a position to readily identify relevant expertise and resources." The plan is to follow today’s meeting with "…a six month period of consultations with a broad range of stakeholders and experts regarding whether and how to establish a dedicated organizational structure to support these activities going forward, whether or not connected to the Forum." What are we to take away from this? I will note only two of several likely outcomes where civil society will have to remain aware and engaged. 1. There is a high probability of the establishment of a new "dedicated organizational structure" as a significant Internet governance player. 2. The tendency will be toward a "leader-level" (top-centric) notion of multistakeholder engagement and a focus on "the transnational nature of the Internet" [Forum wording] From a civil society perspective many of the challenges and tasks here are similar to those faced within ICANN’s multistakeholder processes, with one major exception. There is the issue of whether or not to establish a dedicated organization. Civil society could argue that there are already adequate venues to address the Forum’s concerns, but that would probably be counter-productive. There will be bottom up multistakeholder involvement via the public comment process, but that is a limited option in terms of actual decision making here. As an opening position for civil society dialogue around this initiative I would suggest that civil society approach the initiative at three levels: 1. It insists in a full dialogue on what sort of multistakeholder engagement model is being considered if such an organization is to be established. 2. It stresses full transparency and accountability along with a broad definition of who constitute stakeholders and their roles in decision making. 3. At the same time civil society organizations: (a) look inward to increase the transparency and accountability of their own leadership – some of whom are part of the "leader-level" group in this Forum initiative; and (b) turn more of their efforts toward deepening and broadening awareness and engagement of their own constituencies in these deliberations and the core issues at stake. A significant part of this civil society effort would focus on the second area of effort in this Forum NETmundial Initiative. That is capacity building work and it is needed independent of the establishment a dedicated organization as a result of these efforts. As I say above….food for thought…to feed the dialogue. Sam L.