IGF 2016: Enabling Inclusive and Sustainable Growth

The role of the Internet in promoting economic and social development is often cited as a reason for the inclusion of Internet-related topics in bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements such as TPP, TTIP, TISA and RCEP. However, the secrecy that clouds the negotiation of such agreements has stoked suspicion and opposition from stakeholders who expect that Internet-related public policy development should, in words of the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement, “enable the full and balanced participation of all stakeholders from around the globe, and made by consensus, to the extent possible.”

How can this gap be bridged, in practical terms that go beyond grand statements of principle? At the beginning of this year, a network of activists, scholars and industry leaders came together to address this question. The first outcome of that meeting was the release of the Brussels Declaration on Trade and the Internet, which asserts that “Any international rulemaking process that affects the online and digital environment should adhere to human rights and good governance obligations to actively disseminate information, [and] promote public participation”.

A more enduring outcome was the formation of an Open Digital Trade Network as an outcome-oriented platform for collaboration on projects to catalyze specific reforms to trade negotiation processes. This workshop will present some of the most promising (and the most challenging) avenues for such reforms, and invite ongoing collaboration. There is also the possibility, to be discussed at this workshop, that the network could be more formally integrated with the Internet Governance Forum through the formation of a related Dynamic Coalition.

Speakers provisionally confirmed:

Paiva Véliz, Marcela
Hellerstein, Judith
Kilic, Burcu
Snead, David
Munoz Tellez, Viviana

This Workshop session, comprising contributions from a variety of stakeholders, will explore the current discussions and analysis to date on the impact of the expansion of the Internet’s namespace via ICANN’s New gTLD Program. The workshop will include discussion and updates on the different formal reviews ICANN has initiated ahead of a potential new application round. In particular, the Session will encourage debate and discourse, both from the physical and on-line audiences, on the contribution new gTLDs have made to consumer choice and competition and what, if any, policy and implementation changes are necessary or desirable ahead of any subsequent application round. The session will specifically seek contributions from participants that do not normally engage in the on-going debate at ICANN meetings. 


The issuance of diverse generic domains (especially where in no Latin script) is conducive to sustainability and inclusive growth. 

Speakers provisionally confirmed:

Atallah, Akram 
Cavalli, Olga
Crépin-Leblond, Olivier M.J.
Doria, Avri
Mosweu, Gao
Olufuye, JImson
Richards , Megan 
Zuck, Jonathan

There is an ongoing debate about the answerability of IG organizations and the various stakeholder groups involved,to the broader community and how to build that in practice.Continuing a previous IGF discussion regarding civil society participation in policy-making, this workshop will focus on civil society’s transparency, openness and answerability. The goals are to evaluate the current situation in different areas associated to IG including trade and cybersecurity, highlighting existing efforts to build frameworks and/or principles such as ICANN reform or Brussels Declaration and outline set of principles . 

The roundtable focuses more on global organizations or processes in order to build practices that can be applied or adapted to other areas, also adjusted to national levels.

To steer an interactive discussion leading to actions-oriented outcomes the question below will be addressed:
1- How international organizations build their “constitution”, structure and processes to respond to expectations such as transparency, openness,diversity, inclusion, legitimacy, representation and accountability
2- How stakeholders in particular civil society strategize their participation ? what are they using as mechanisms and approaches to justify their actions and maintain transparency?
3- What is the influence of processes and restructuring within the organizations and stakeholders in term of agenda-setting, issues framing and yielding outcomes?
4- Can we envision a set of principles, best practices, mechanism or even process template that can be shared between all IG organizations and processes?

Speakers :

Jeanette Hofmann, WZB
Andres Piazza, LACTLD
Tatiana Tropina, Max-Planck Institute
Burcu Kilic, Public Citizen
Michele Woods, WIPO
Matthew Shears, Center for Democracy & Technology.
Jay Sudowski, Internet Infrastructure Coalition

Agenda:
1- Setting the scene : 
explaining context and objectives behind the roundtable (5min) 
2- Discussants' interventions:
going through the questions and presenting different experiences and cases (45min) 
3- Q&A session:
with the audience, interaction between discussants (40min) 
4- Wrap-up:
recommendations & summary of the discussion (10min) 

A prerequisite for attaining inclusive and sustainable growth through the power of the Internet is the trust all stakeholders have in the stability, security and availability of the network. The Global Commission on Internet Governance has undertaken an extensive program of research and through its deliberations believes that the necessary level of trust and confidence can only be achieved through a normative process. All stakeholders must collaborate to arrive at a broadly agreed social compact ensuring that the Internet continues on track to become more accessible, inclusive, secure and trustworthy. This social compact will require a very high level of agreement among governments, private corporations, civil society, the technical community and individuals. Governments can provide leadership, but cannot alone define the content of the social compact. Achieving agreement and acceptance will require the engagement of all stakeholders in the Internet ecosystem. The social compact must offer a framework where each actor understands that they have the responsibility to act not only in their own interest, but also in the interest of the Internet ecosystem as a whole. 

This workshop will bring together members of the Global Commission and researchers who contributed to their work, to describe their reasoning and their conclusions, and to engage in an active debate and problem solving session with participants on the topic of the essential elements of a social compact, mechanisms to achieve agreement, and the best ways to build on that agreement to make Internet governance more inclusive and supportive of sustainable growth around the world.

Read the Global Commission's statement: Toward a Social Compact for Digital Privacy and Security
Read the Global Commission's final report and find more of its research: One Internet

Speakers:

Moderator: Laura DeNardis, American University - Director, Global Commission on Internet Governance

Ambassador Latha Reddy, Commissioner, Global Commission on Internet Governance
Ambassador Eileen Donahoe, Commissioner, Global Commission on Internet Governance
Emily Taylor, Research Advisory Network, Global Commission on Internet Governance
Pablo Hinojosa, Strategic Engagement Director, APNIC
Sally Wentworth, VP of Global Policy Development, Internet Society

Skeptics remind us that non-commercial users are the consumers of Internet rules, they can never participate as equals in the processes that create those rules. They also argue that multistakeholder governance is a hoax, a nice way of making non-commercial users feel they are a valued part of the process, while the decisions that matter are actually made by a powerful few. But is that so? This session will discuss where and how non-commercial Internet users have been able to participate in Internet policymaking as equals with much more powerful stakeholders and have been able to make decisions. The successful cases we look at will include: the non-commercial users constituency (NCUC) work in policy development at ICANN, efforts at the IETF, and decisionmaking in ccTLDs.

This workshop is not about the participation of non-commercial users in certain processes, it is rather about what non-commercial users have achieved and what this tells us about the collaboration between stakeholders and successes of the multistakeholder approach.

In the months leading up to the IGF in December, we will crowd source success stories and invite many to tell us how they have been involved with multistakeholder process. Other multi-stakeholders involved in these specific cases will also be invited to give their view of the how the multistakeholder discussions and outcomes developed, with collective learning about the experience.The outcome of the workshop might contradict with the general conception that noncommercial users cannot engage with decision-making at Internet governance organizations. 

Speakers provisionally confirmed:

Corinne Cath
Rachel Pollack
Tatiana Tropina, Max-Planck Institute
Farzaneh Badii, Internet Governance Project
Giovanni Seppia, Eurid 

Today part of a social network has become a necessity, people need to be updated and socially present. The Central Unit of Medical Cooperation (UCCM) was not present in social networks or had a blog or website that would enable direct publication of timely information to meet the information needs of users. Given the objective advantages of social networks, the real needs of finding a direct line of communication with the scattered Cuban collaborators in more than 65 countries, to make known to everyone the fundamental concepts of Cuban medical cooperation, as the main achievements and results of this cooperation assistance. The Ministry of Public Health of Cuba and UCCM have approved the initiative inserted in social networks making appropriate and professional Internet and TIC, through the development of a website and a Facebook profile for UCCM, for the official disclosure of relevant information related to cooperation. This will improve the quality of communication and disclosure of medical services and international cooperation provided by our country under the principles of solidarity and internationalism. With this project we aim to increase levels of visibility in cyberspace professional services practitioners, academics and health services available from the international medical cooperation, Constitute a means for direct exchange and feedback with Cuban partners health and those with relatives, contribute to the socialization of published content, generate user traffic to both platforms and serve as a tool to measure the extent and impact of the disclosure of the results of the Cuban medical cooperation abroad.

Our session seeks to explore the contours of the multistakeholder model by examining the role played by civil society actors in the IANA Transition Process. ‘Roles and responsibilities’ of stakeholders to enable inclusive and sustainable growth as envisioned by the WSIS process continues to be at the heart of internet governance discussions. Civil Society as a stakeholder group encompasses incredible diversity within itself. By examining the experiences of civil society stakeholders in the IANA transition, the session will throw light on the role, successes and failures of this stakeholder group in the process. The IANA Transition is seen as a prime example of multistakeholderism in practice. An important aspect discussed apart from the diverse viewpoints within the stakeholder group will be regarding participation from marginalized actors and barriers to participation for actors from developing countries and regions. The IANA transition is an ideal case study because, it will have participants look to future multistakeholder engagements such as the continuing work stream 2 of ICANN accountability enhancements among others. This will enable new participants to get involved and old participants to refine the multistakeholder model to make it more inclusive. The discussion will be steered by the diverse and vibrant non-commercial stakeholder group composed of members of civil society, along with members from technical and academic communities. The session will feed into the goals of more inclusive governance models and the diversity within this stakeholder group fits into the larger theme of the IGF 2016 of enabling inclusive and sustainable development.

Speakers provisionally confirmed:

Bhavana, Aarti 
Doria, Avri
Gross, Robin 
Mueller, Milton
Peake, Adam 
Scholte, Jan-Aart
Shears, Matthew
Stoll, Klaus 
Ten Oever, Niels 

Legitimacy of multistakeholder IG processes and outcomes are inextricably linked with participants’ legitimacy and accountability. Critics of multistakeholder IG point to lack of clarity over who participates and what institution/organization/entity they represent. They see incongruity when individual stakeholders offer personal opinions alongside representatives of organized collections of individuals, representatives of entities/interest groups, and government representatives who see themselves as responsible for meeting the needs of millions of citizens. 

While supporters of multistakeholder IG believe the openness of IG processes is one of its core strengths, for critics, this openness can enable “bad actors” and others to “capture” or distort what should be consensus-based decision-making process. The result is that critics of multistakeholderism, and marginalized voices in IG processes, have less confidence in IG processes to contribute, as part of the WSIS and SDG frameworks, to achieving inclusive and sustainable growth.

Many multistakeholder IG processes have rudimentary ways to prioritize views of representatives of groups over individuals. e.g.:

• CSTD’s working groups asked stakeholder groups to nominate a limited number of representatives
• ICANN’s Cross-Community Working Groups prioritize representatives of ICANN constituencies (“members”) over individuals (“observers/participants”).

However, there are other ways stakeholders can achieve disproportionate influence, including:

• Informal sources of power (expertise, seniority/age, ubiquitous presence)
• Misrepresenting the size and decision-making processes of a group a stakeholder asserts to represent

This workshop will build on the Multistakeholder BPF and stakeholder legitimacy and accountability work in other sectors to identify and manage challenges in IG stakeholder legitimacy.

Background paper (PDF)

Breakout group documents:
(These are fully editable, so feel free to add your responses to the topics directly into the documents at any time before the session as well as during the session)

1. Is there a need to prove the legitimacy of stakeholder groups and their members, and if so, what are ways that legitimacy can be established?
2. Stakeholder groups and their configurations
3. Levels of stakeholder representation (individuals through to aggregated groupings)
4. How do stakeholders manage the participation of entities or individuals that are not deemed to have a high level of legitimacy in a process?

Breakout group facilitators:

Tereza Horejsova

Dominique Lazanski

Jim Prendergast

Samantha Dickinson