[WG-Strategy] This Wednesday - 16 Years of IGF Evolution and Strengthening – Taking Stock and Looking Forward

Carlos Afonso ca at cafonso.ca
Mon Nov 15 13:45:04 EST 2021


Dear Anri & all, I did not receive the zoom link.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 15/11/2021 14:02, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> Dear all
> 
> As we move closer to celebrating the IGF's 15th anniversary, please do
> join this IGF2021 Preparatory and Engagement Phase session on Wednesday,
> 17 November, at 13h00 UTC
> 
> https://www.intgovforum.org/en/node/15588
> 
> Looking forward to lively and useful discussion.
> 
> Anriette
> 
> *16 Years of IGF Evolution and Strengthening – Taking Stock and Looking
> Forward*
> 
> Wednesday, 17th November, 2021 (15:00 SAST) - Wednesday, 17th November,
> 2021 (16:30 SAST)
> 
> /Facilitated by MAG Chair in collaboration with the MAG Working Group on
> IGF Strategy and Strengthening/
> 
> Interactive moderated panel that will look back and take stock of how
> the IGF has evolved and what its key achievements have been; reflect on
> the current and future internet governance ecosystem and the IGF’s role
> in this ecosystem, particularly in the context of ‘digital cooperation’
> and the UN-Secretary General’s proposed ‘global digital compact’. The
> panel will consider the role the IGF has and can play in inclusive
> internet governance, both through the further development of the
> multistakeholder approach and through closer engagement with
> multilateral processes. Finally the session will consider what is meant
> by the idea of a “stronger, more focused and impactful IGF” and propose
> specific steps to be taken to establish a stronger, more strategic IGF
> that operates on the basis of a multi-year plan working to the goal of
> the idea of an “IGF plus” with the institutional capacity, leadership
> and oversight needed to see it through the renewal of its mandate in
> 2025 and beyond.
> 
> Process: The meeting will divided into roughly three parts with
> panelists speaking @ 20 minutes in each, with the remaining time
> reserved for open discussion with all participants.
> 
> Moderators: Anriette Esterhuysen, MAG chair and William Drake, Columbia
> University, former MAG and WGIG member
> 
> Rapporteurs:  Giacomo Mazzone, past MAG member and member, MAG
> WG-strategy, Roman Chukov and Amrita Choudhury (MAG WG-strategy co-chairs)
> 
> Panelists:
> 
> Part I: Past/Origins
> 
>   1. Markus Kummer – IGF Support Association,  WGIG and past IGF
>      Executive Coordinator and interim MAG chair - CONFIRMED
>   2. Wolfgang Kleinwächter – WGIG and EuroSSIG - CONFIRMED
>   3. Christine Arida - Strategic Planning Sector Head at National
>      Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (NTRA) of Egypt a past host
>      country of the IGF - CONFIRMED
> 
> PART II – Present dynamics
> 
>   4. Fiona Alexander – past MAG member and previously with the NTIA and
>      member of MAG WG strategy - CONFIRMED
>   5. Flavio Wagner - past MAG member and member of MAG WG-strategy -
>      CONFIRMED
>   6. Parminder Jeet Singh, IT For Change (cs) - CONFIRMED
>   7. Esteve Sanz, Head of Sector EC - member of MAG WG-strategy (gov) -
>      CONFIRMED
> 
> Part III: Futures/Options
> 
>   8. Yu Ping Chan, Office of the UN SG’s Envoy on Technology - CONFIRMED
>   9. Concettina Cassa - past MAG member and co-chair WG-strategy (Gov) -
>      CONFIRMED
> 10. Mark Carvell - EuroDIG Member and former UK government policy
>      advisers and MAG member. Member of MAG WG-strategy - CONFIRMED
> 
> Questions and topics to be addressed
> 
> Part I: Past/Origins
> 
> 1. Over the years there have been various expressions of frustration
> with the IGF supposedly being just a “talk shop” that does not take
> binding decisions.  But this is an essential part of the IGF’s DNA, as
> it is what governments and stakeholders at the 2005 Tunis WSIS summit
> thought was needed and what they could agree to.  To set the stage for
> our discussion, please reflect on the considerations and processes that
> shaped the fundamental features of the IGF’s design and made it what it
> has become today.
> 
> 2.  The IGF Mandate approved by the 2005 Tunis WSIS summit included
> provisions stating that the IGF should “Promote and assess, on an
> ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet Governance
> processes;” and “Identify emerging issues, bring them to the attention
> of the relevant bodies and the general public, and, where appropriate,
> make recommendations.”  To what extent has the IGF pursued these
> objectives?  What has been achieved or not regarding these functions,
> and why?
> 
> 3.  The global Internet governance agenda has evolved significantly over
> the past sixteen years, with many of the issues and political dynamics
> that animated early IGFs drifting from center stage while new ones came
> to the fore.  What have been the key shifts in substantive focus and
> institutional dynamics over the course of the IGF’s history to date?
> 
> Part II – Present dynamics
> 
> 1.  Name one positive change or achievement that you feel can be
> attributed to the IGF. Is there anything significant that might have
> turned out differently if we had not had the IGF?
> 
> 2. Has the IGF altered the global discourse or debate in any significant
> ways? How much does such discourse and soft norms matter, relative to
> negotiated formal agreements?
> 
> 3.  The IGF has spawned new collaborative processes that work on an
> intersessional basis and then feed into the meetings, e.g. the policy
> networks, the NRIs, the DCs and the BPFs.  Have these efforts yielded
> any important results? What could be done to increase their salience?
> What roles could they play going forward as the landscape of Internet
> governance and digital cooperation continues to evolve?
> 
> 4.  How has the multistakeholder approach worked in the IGF? Is it
> continuing to develop conceptually and practically, or has it stagnated?
> If it has, what can be done to renew it?
> 
> Part III: Futures/Options
> 
> 1.  There have been various calls, including from high-level government
> figures, for the IGF to produce more tangible outcomes.  What forms
> could these take? What would be needed for the international community
> to agree to such a process and outcome?
> 
> 2.  With regard to the United Nations’ Roadmap and Common Agenda, what
> roles and value-added do you see for the IGF?  Do you see a specific
> role of the IGF with regard to the proposed Global Digital Compact?
> 
> 3.  What is your view of the terms of reference for the new Leadership
> Panel (formerly referred to as the MHLB)? How can we make this a useful
> grouping?  What about the MAG, do its terms of reference and functioning
> need to change?
> 
> 4. Proposals have been made for the IGF Secretariat and MAG to work
> collaboratively on a multi-year plan. Do you think this is feasible? How
> would you go about developing and implementing such a plan?
> 
> 5.  Name one aspect of how the IGF operates that you would change, and
> one aspect you would like to retain.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WG-Strategy mailing list
> WG-Strategy at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-strategy_intgovforum.org
> 

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
[emails são pessoais exceto quando explicitamente indicado em contrário]
[emails are personal unless explicitly indicated otherwise]

Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br




More information about the WG-Strategy mailing list