Ayden,

Short comment: To be clear, the question of why we need regions was not mean to open up a Yes/No discussion, it was to address the HOW we get there.
    WHAT is the issue:         Goal of greater geographic diversity and inclusiveness in ICANN processes
    WHY is this an issue:      ICANN is committed to a multistakeholder model of engagement in policy formation and implementation within its remit
    HOW do we get there:  (a) how should regions be defined; (b) what are the entitlements of regions; (c) what are the obligations of regions

At the core of defining regions there are three considerations:
    (1) For each member in each region does that membership give that member an adequate and equitable voice? (Are they in the right region?)
    (2) What entitlements flow from membership in an ICANN region grouping? (How are they equitably distributed among members?)
    (3) What obligations flow from membership in an ICANN regional grouping? (How are they equitably honored across members?)
 
If I were retained as a strategic planning consultant here I would work the group through questions 1,2, & 3, and take the need for regions as given. 

Sam L.

On 2016-04-05 9:31 AM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
Hi Sam et al,

Thanks for your interesting comments. I like that you've started from the basic question of why do we even have or need regions. I've been thinking about that this morning - I think geographical boundaries and ensuring diversity here matters, but I struggle to understand how much it matters. As best I can tell, ICANN established regions to ensure 'diversity' on the Board of Directors, and from that the regions have come to be seen as a mechanism for ensuring population diversity in ICANN activities. As Milton noted there are other areas where we can forge commonalities (languages, economic grounds, cultural factors) -- and probably more effectively -- so should we ask for a new regions framework (rather than a geographic regions framework)?

There is now a second draft of our statement on Google Docs. For those who have read the first draft, the only additions are paragraphs 3, 4, 5, and 7. I think paragraphs 5 and 7 could be a little contentious. I'm not precious about language; if anyone would like to revise or reword it, please do. This is just a draft. Once I have some feedback from the community on these points, I'll look to strengthen the conclusion of the statement in a third draft by adding some 'asks'. Please feel free to edit the document and to add new bullet points or arguments I may have missed.

The deadline for consultation responses on this report is 24 April. I'd like to get a 3rd draft ready by next Tuesday (12 April) with a view to submitting this to the Comments Forum on 19 April.


I welcome and look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Best wishes,

Ayden
    [rest deleted]