IGFWatch news

The Secretariat's stranglehold on remote participation

By terminus - 7/7/2008 As some readers might know, I am one of the founders of the Online Collaboration Dynamic Coalition of the IGF, which began in early 2007 with grand ambitions to help the IGF Secretariat to drag the frankly rather embarrassing official IGF Web site into the Web 2.0 era, by opening it up to the community to collaborate on developing the IGF's online presence, drawing on a pool of information from official, host country and community sources. These plans were given short shrift by the Secretariat, who insisted that on maintaining the strict separation of information into official, host country and community silos, that had been so ineffective in Athens.

Book announcement: Multi-Stakeholder Governance and the Internet Governance Forum

By terminus - 22/5/2008 Multi-Stakeholder Governance and the Internet Governance Forum

MAG's May meeting: debates and a role call, otherwise no surprises

By terminus - 17/5/2008 The report of the May meeting of the IGF's MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group, formerly just Advisory Group) was posted yesterday. It is the third such report, and the first to contain a schedule listing all those who participated in the meeting, not just the appointed members. These include such shadowy figures as the "Regional Coordinators" - who had never been identified by name before now - and those who are worrying classed together as "Advisors and Others".

Steps towards Hyderabad

By terminus - 14/5/2008 The May open consultation held in preparation for the third meeting of the Internet Governance Forum, to be held this year in Hyderabad, India, finished about twelve hours ago. As usual, progress is slow, with many of the same points being raised time and again without any decisions being taken on them. Having said that, there does now seem to be a firmer resolve to increase the focus and interactivity of the Hyderabad meeting and its interconnection with the IGF's subsidiary processes.

Was my judgment on the IGF too harsh?

By terminus - 5/5/2008 Since a number of the shortcomings of the IGF Secretariat and Advisory Group that I have highlighted in my research are now being addressed, it might be argued that the verdict of my thesis (and the forthcoming book into which it has been adapted) has become too harsh. For example, I wrote of the process by which the Advisory Group was appointed for Athens, and re-appointed for Rio, that:In no sense could the Secretariat's selection of candidates for the Advisory Group, in a closed process pursuant to criteria that were never published, be described as consensual or democratic.

Submission on the draft programme for the Hyderabad meeting

By terminus - 30/4/2008 The draft programme for the Hyderabad meeting incorporates a number of incremental improvements to the programmes for the Athens and Rio meetings which take into account some of the concerns and suggestions that civil society and other stakeholders have long expressed. However whilst this movement is in the right direction, the rate of progress remains too slow in light of the fact that at the mid-term of its initial five year mandate, the IGF remains incapable of fulfilling each of the roles that the Tunis Agenda sets out for it.

February open and MAG meetings: IGF reform is a hard slog

By terminus - 2/3/2008 These comments on the flurry of IGF developments during February is a little belated, since my dissertation on the IGF is due this month, and it will not be possible to reference those developments in the submitted version (particularly when I am attempting to reduce, not increase its word length). However it would be remiss of me not to make a few brief comments here.

Advisory Group decides not to open its mailing list

By terminus - 7/2/2008 Last month, an edited compilation of the mailing list discussions of the Advisory Group on the issue of its own rotation was posted to the IGF's Web forum. Now the IGF's Web site tells us that this was not simply a one-off:Digests of the discussion held within the Advisory Group are available on the Forum Section on a regular basis.Sure enough, a second such document has just been posted, covering the Advisory Group's own views of the calls for improvement of its transparency.

Feedback for Taking Stock of Rio

By terminus - 29/12/2007 As last year, an online form is available for posting feedback about the Rio meeting. Whilst submissions will probably eventually be archived on the IGF Secretariat's Web site, in the meantime I'm posting my contribution here:

Policy development at the edges: conclusions on IGF 2008

By terminus - 16/11/2007 The most significant development of the Rio IGF meeting was the dawning acknowledgement, particularly evident during the session on Taking Stock and the Way Foward, that the conference format of the annual plenary meetings is increasingly irrelevant to the work of the IGF. It is becoming obvious to many that another three years of the same dry platitudes on openness, security, diversity and access are going to achieve nothing, and that the IGF must move on. Even the addition of a plenary session on the provocative issue of critical Internet resources this year was insufficient to generate any new spark.

«Previous Page · 1 2 3 · Next Page»

IGFWatch news

Navigation

Contribute

Quick links

Publications

IGFWatch news