The Working Group on Internet Governance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Regulatory Consultation: a MENA-OECD Practitioners' Guide
Regulatory Consultation A MENA-OECD PRACTITIONERS’ GUIDE FOR ENGAGING STAKEHOLDERS IN THE RULE-MAKING PROCESS Regulatory Consultation.indd 1 09-Nov-2012 5:45:09 PM ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgements. This guide is based on the work of the regional initiative of the MENA-OECD Governance Programme and the 2011 OECD publication: “Regulatory Consultation in the Palestinian Authority” which has been prepared in cooperation with the Palestinian Authority within the framework of the MENA-OECD Initiative. In addition, this guide refers to the upcoming OECD progress report on the implementation of regulatory reform in MENA countries and summarises the outcomes of the policy dialogue organised by the MENA-OECD Working Group IV on Regulatory Reform. The OECD Secretariat owes special thanks to the Palestinian Authority in completing the above-mentioned 2011 OECD publication: Minister Ali Jarbawi; Deputy Minister of Justice, Khalil Karaja Al-Rifai; Mousa Abu Zeid, President of General Personnel Council; Head of the Secretariat of the Council of Ministers, Naim Abu Al Hommos; Acting Head of the Diwan al-Fatwa wa’ Tashri’, Ali Abu Diak; he Legal Adviser of the President, Office of the President, Hasan Al-Ori and the Special Advisor to the Minister and Head of Aid Management and Coordination Directorate of the Ministry of Planning and Administrative Development, Mr. Estephan Salameh. The OECD is grateful to the delegates of the regional working groups of the MENA-OECD Governance Programme for their active engagement in completing the work and discussing the Guide’s key findings: the Working Group IV on Regulatory Reform, chaired by Tunisia and co- chaired by Canada, France and Italy, the Working Group II, chaired by the United Arab Emirates and co-chaired by Italy and South Korea as well as of the MENA-OECD Governance Programme. -
Stakeholders' Involvement and Participation in the Internet Governance Ecosystem: an African Perspective
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Center for Global Communication Studies Internet Policy Observatory (CGCS) 12-2015 Stakeholders' Involvement and Participation in the Internet Governance Ecosystem: An African Perspective Enrico Calandro Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/internetpolicyobservatory Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons Recommended Citation Calandro, Enrico. (2015). Stakeholders' Involvement and Participation in the Internet Governance Ecosystem: An African Perspective. Internet Policy Observatory. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/internetpolicyobservatory/17 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/internetpolicyobservatory/17 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Stakeholders' Involvement and Participation in the Internet Governance Ecosystem: An African Perspective Abstract From an African perspective, internet governance requires not only an understanding of the variability in access to and use of the internet across the continent, but also an understanding of the disparities between developed and developing countries’ abilities to effectively participate in global internet governance debates. Few developing countries participate in these debates, and even fewer are active in agenda-setting for global internet governance. This paper seeks to understand how these factors transect with the notion of multistakeholder participation as a form of governance for internet policymaking, which is often informed by assumptions from more mature markets and Western democracies. It does so by exploring the evolution of multistakeholder participation through mapping the main international and regional instruments of the internet governance ecosystem in Africa. It critically assesses the ability of current multistakeholder initiatives to provide Africans with a compass to guide them through the miasma of cybercrime, political surveillance, censorship and profiteering that threaten the openness of the internet. -
LACTLD REPORT the Latin American and Caribbean Cctld Publication
ISSN: 2301-1025 2nd year, 3rd edition twitter.com/lactld facebook.com/LACTLD LACTLD REPORT The Latin American and Caribbean ccTLD publication ANOTHER YEAR OF GROWTH AND CHANGES The Internet is constantly evolving. So are its challenges. The opportunities for development, participation and representation of stakeholders in the region encourage us to face 2014 with high expectations. IETF, by two regional technical experts Address: Rbla Rep. de México 6125, CP 11400, Security: personal data protection in Latin America Montevideo, Uruguay Tel.: + 598 2604 2222* (General Contact) Email: [email protected] www.lactld.org Enhanced cooperation and Internet governance EDITORIAL STAFF CONTINUED COLLABORATION: LACTLD Report LACTLD REPORT FIRST ANNIVERSARY 3rd edition 2nd year, 2013 Dear Readers, Board of Directors Eduardo Santoyo Another year ends – with plenty Luis Arancibia of debates, discussions and Víctor Abboud joint efforts to stimulate the Clara Collado ccTLD growth, both within and Frederico Neves outside the region of Latin America and the Caribbean. In Editorial Board Eduardo Santoyo this letter I would like to thank Luis Arancibia you all for your hard work and Clara Collado also invite you to continue Carolina Aguerre sharing the rewarding task of promoting Registry cooperation General Coordination and development during 2014. Marilina Esquivel The third issue of the LACTLD Report contains various articles and piece of news. A relevant announcement Editorial assistant is that the publication is now catalogued under the ISSN system, which will Sofía Zerbino enable to index and reference globally. In terms of the information, there is Art & Design information about ICANN’s new Engagement Center in Latin America and the Frida Caribbean, which opened in Montevideo, Uruguay and it aims to increase the representation of diverse stakeholders within the scope of this organization. -
Mapping Stakeholderism in Internet Governance Project
Policy and Regulation Initiative for Digital Africa (PRIDA) Mapping Stakeholderism in Internet Governance Project (Project Output A5.4, A5.5, A5.7) Table of Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Internet Governance ............................................................................................................. 3 What is Internet Governance? ........................................................................................... 3 The evolution of Internet governance ................................................................................. 3 Figure 1: Timeline for the establishment and growth of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 5 The core guiding principles of Internet Governance ........................................................... 5 Multistakeholderism - Internet governance actors .............................................................. 5 Governments ................................................................................................................. 6 The private sector .......................................................................................................... 8 Civil Society ................................................................................................................... 8 International organisations ............................................................................................. 8 Technical community .................................................................................................... -
Freedom of Information: a Comparative Legal Survey
JeXo C[dZ[b ^h i]Z AVl J^[_cfehjWdY[e\j^[h_]^jje Egd\gVbbZ9^gZXidgl^i]6GI>8A:&.!<adWVa 8VbeV^\c [dg ;gZZ :megZhh^dc! V aZVY^c\ _d\ehcWj_edehj^[h_]^jjeadem_iWd ^ciZgcVi^dcVa ]jbVc g^\]ih C<D WVhZY ^c _dYh[Wi_d]boYedijWdjh[\hW_d_dj^[ AdcYdc! V edh^i^dc ]Z ]Vh ]ZaY [dg hdbZ iZc nZVgh# >c i]Vi XVeVX^in! ]Z ]Vh ldg`ZY cekj^ie\Z[l[befc[djfhWYj_j_ed[hi" ZmiZch^kZan dc [gZZYdb d[ ZmegZhh^dc VcY g^\]i id ^c[dgbVi^dc ^hhjZh ^c 6h^V! 6[g^XV! Y_l_bieY_[jo"WYWZ[c_Yi"j^[c[Z_WWdZ :jgdeZ! i]Z B^YYaZ :Vhi VcY AVi^c 6bZg^XV! ]el[hdc[dji$M^Wj_ij^_ih_]^j"_i_j gjcc^c\ igV^c^c\ hZb^cVgh! Xg^i^fj^c\ aVlh! iV`^c\XVhZhidWdi]cVi^dcVaVcY^ciZgcVi^dcVa h[WbboWh_]^jWdZ^em^Wl[]el[hdc[dji WdY^Zh! VYk^h^c\ C<Dh VcY \dkZgcbZcih! VcY ZkZc ldg`^c\ l^i] d[ÒX^Vah id egZeVgZ iek]^jje]_l[[\\[Yjje_j5J^[i[Wh[ YgV[ig^\]iid^c[dgbVi^dcaVlh#>cVYY^i^dcid iec[e\j^[gk[ij_edij^_iXeeai[[ai ]^h ldg` l^i] 6GI>8A:&.! ]Z ]Vh egdk^YZY ZmeZgi^hZ dc i]ZhZ ^hhjZh id V l^YZ gVc\Z jeWZZh[ii"fhel_Z_d]WdWYY[ii_Xb[ d[ VXidgh ^cXajY^c\ i]Z LdgaY 7Vc`! kVg^djh JCVcYdi]Zg^ciZg\dkZgcbZciVaWdY^Zh!VcY WYYekdje\j^[bWmWdZfhWYj_Y[h[]WhZ_d] cjbZgdjh C<Dh# Eg^dg id _d^c^c\ 6GI>8A: \h[[Zece\_d\ehcWj_ed"WdZWdWdWboi_i &.!IdWnBZcYZaldg`ZY^c]jbVcg^\]ihVcY ^ciZgcVi^dcVa YZkZadebZci! ^cXajY^c\ Vh V e\m^Wj_imeha_d]WdZm^o$ hZc^dg ]jbVc g^\]ih XdchjaiVci l^i] Dm[Vb 8VcVYVVcYVhV]jbVcg^\]iheda^XnVcVanhi 68dbeVgVi^kZAZ\VaHjgkZn Vi i]Z 8VcVY^Vc >ciZgcVi^dcVa 9ZkZadebZci ;gZZYdbd[>c[dgbVi^dc/ 6\ZcXn8>96# ÆJ^[\h[[Ôeme\_d\ehcWj_edWdZ_Z[Wi IdWn BZcYZa ]Vh ejWa^h]ZY l^YZan! b_[iWjj^[^[Whje\j^[l[hodej_ede\ 6 8dbeVgVi^kZ AZ\Va HjgkZn Xdcig^Wji^c\ id cjbZgdjh 6GI>8A: &. -
The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority Over ICANN?
The Future of Internet Governance: Should the United States Relinquish Its Authority over ICANN? Lennard G. Kruger Specialist in Science and Technology Policy September 1, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44022 The Future of Internet Governance: Should the U.S. Relinquish Its Authority over ICANN Summary Currently, the U.S. government retains limited authority over the Internet’s domain name system, primarily through the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions contract between the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). By virtue of the IANA functions contract, the NTIA exerts a legacy authority and stewardship over ICANN, and arguably has more influence over ICANN and the domain name system (DNS) than other national governments. Currently the IANA functions contract with NTIA expires on September 30, 2016. However, NTIA has the flexibility to extend the contract for any period through September 2019. On March 14, 2014, NTIA announced the intention to transition its stewardship role and procedural authority over key Internet domain name functions to the global Internet multistakeholder community. To accomplish this transition, NTIA asked ICANN to convene interested global Internet stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. NTIA stated that it would not accept any transition proposal that would replace the NTIA role with a government-led or an intergovernmental organization solution. For two years, Internet stakeholders were engaged in a process to develop a transition proposal that will meet NTIA’s criteria. On March 10, 2016, the ICANN Board formally accepted the multistakeholder community’s transition plan and transmitted that plan to NTIA for approval. -
Mapping Multistakeholderism in Internet Governance-FINAL
Evidence for ICT Policy Action Discussion Paper Mapping Multistakeholderism in Internet Governance: Implications for Africa Enrico Calandro, Alison Gillwald & Nicolo Zingales Research ICT Africa Research ICT Africa (RIA) is a non-profit public research network concerned with information and communication technology (ICT) development policy and governance. It is based in Cape Town, South Africa and is under the direction of Dr Alison Gillwald. It aims to bridge the strategic gap in the development of a sustainable information society and a knowledge-based economy by conducting research on the policies and governance of the necessary ICT to document efficient governance in Africa. Initially financed by the International Development and Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada, the network tries to extend its activities through national, regional and continental partnerships. The creation of the Research ICT Africa network meets the growing need for data and analysis necessary for an appropriate but visionary policy in order to propel the continent into the information age. Through the development of a network, RIA seeks to build an African knowledge base capable of supporting the ICT policy and regulation processes, and to ensure that the development of these processes is monitored on the continent. The research comes from a public interest agenda in the public domain, and individuals, public and private sector entities and civil society are also encouraged to use it for training and future research or to make the most of it in order to enable them to participate more efficiently in the formulation of ICT policy and governance on national, regional and global levels. This research is made possible thanks to significant funds received from the IDRC, to which the members of the network express their gratitude for its support. -
About the Internet Governance Forum
About the Internet Governance Forum The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) – convened by the United Nations Secretary-General – is the global multistakeholder forum for dialogue on Internet governance issues. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 1 The IGF as an outcome of WSIS 2 IGF mandate 2 THE IGF PROCESS 3 IGF annual meetings 3 Intersessional activities 4 National, regional and youth IGF initiatives (NRIs) 5 PARTICIPATION IN IGF ACTIVITIES 6 Online participation 6 COORDINATION OF IGF WORK 7 Multistakeholder Advisory Group 7 IGF Secretariat 7 UN DESA 7 FUNDING 7 IMPACT 8 LOOKING AHEAD: STRENGTHENING THE IGF 8 The IGF in the High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation’s report 8 The IGF in the Secretary-General’s Roadmap for Digital Cooperation 9 9 1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT The IGF as an outcome of WSIS Internet governance was one of the most controversial issues during the first phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS-I), held in Geneva in December 2003. It was recognised that understanding Internet governance was essential in achieving the development goals of the Geneva Plan of Action, but defining the term and understanding the roles and responsibilities of the different stakeholders involved proved to be difficult. The UN Secretary-General set up a Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) to explore these issues and prepare a report to feed into the second phase of WSIS (WSIS-II), held in Tunis in November 2005. Many elements contained in the WGIG report – developed through an open process and multistakeholder consultations – were endorsed in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society (one of the main outcomes of WSIS-II). -
Internet Users Per 100 Inhabitants
5. SECTION ON PERSONAL DATA ON THE INTERNET 5.1 Introduction: The context of conditions of access to Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Latin America The conditions of access to and use of information and communication technology (ICT) differ substantially in developed countries and in the developing world. While the former are concerned with issues related to network use, for the latter, universal access continues to be a challenge present on the agenda of their public policies and governments.40 Historically, the use of the Internet in Latin America begins in 1996 and evolves slowly: in 1998, less than 1% of the population was connected (Hilbert, 2001,) a figure that represented the highest- income individuals. As of that year, the percentage of the Latin American population on the Internet began to expand and rapidly evolve, reaching 9.9 million in 2000, a number that jumped to 60.5 million in 200541. Graph 13 shows the evolution of the number of Brazilian and Mexican Internet users from 2000 to 2010: Graph 13: Number of Internet users per 100 inhabitants Internet users per 100 inhabitants 40 A research project of the UNCTAD performed in 2002 in 51 countries shows the differences between these two groups of countries with regard to the strategies used to develop their information society. A concern with awareness, training and education appear repeatedly in both groups. However, the developed countries tend to prioritize regulatory and legal aspects, while the developing countries prioritize the development of infrastructure and the universalization of access (UNCTAD, 2002). 41 E-Marketer data available at: www.emarketer.com/Reports/All?Latam_aug06.aspx. -
A Learning Guide to Public Involvement in Canada
A Learning Guide to Public Involvement in Canada Mary Pat MacKinnon Sonia Pitre Judy Watling February 2007 Canadian Policy Research Networks is a not-for-profit organization. Our mission is to help make Canada a more just, prosperous and caring society. We seek to do this through excellent and timely research, effective networking and dissemination, and by providing a valued neutral space within which an open dialogue among all interested parties can take place. You can obtain further information about CPRN and its work in public involvement and other policy areas at www.cprn.org The Parliamentary Centre is an independent, not-for-profit organization whose mission is to strengthen legislatures in Canada and around the world. The Centre's guiding principle is that legislatures should play an important role in ensuring that state institutions are accountable, open and participatory. The Parliamentary Centre specializes in assisting legislatures internationally through assessment missions, capacity development and confidence building programs, research and publications as well as exposure to the experience of the Canadian Parliament. More information about the Parliamentary Centre and its work in parliamentary strengthening and democratic governance is available at www.parlcent.ca Canadian Policy Research Networks Inc. 600-250 Albert Street Ottawa, ON K1P 6M1 Tel: (613) 567-7500 Fax: (613) 567-7640 Web Site: www.cprn.org 1 Preface This document provides the reader with a self-managed learning guide to public involvement in Canada. An earlier version of the document was prepared for two researchers from the National People’s Congress of China who completed a three month study attachment to learn about public involvement practice and theory in Canada. -
Internet Governance and the Move to Ipv6
Internet Governance and the move to IPv6 TU Delft April 2008 Alex Band & Arno Meulenkamp Internet Governance Community Policies Internet Resource Statistics IPv6 2 Internet Governance ISOC IETF ICANN / IANA RIRs 4 The 5 RIRs 5 What is RIPE NCC? RIPE NCC is –a Network Coordination Center –an independent organisation –a not-for-profit membership association –one of the 5 Regional Internet Registries 6 Registration 7 Goals of the IR System: Registration Why? Ensure uniqueness of IP address space usage Provide contact information for network operators How? RIPE Database Results: IP address space allocated uniquely Contact information available for Internet resources 8 Aggregation 9 Goals of the IR System: Aggregation Why? Routing table grows fast Provide scalable routing solution for the Internet How? Encourage announcement of whole allocations (min /21) Introduction of Classless Inter Domain Routing (CIDR) Results: Growth of routing table slowed down 10 Conservation 11 Goals of the IR System: Conservation Why? IP address space is limited resource Ensure efficient usage How? Introduction of CIDR Community based policies to ensure fair usage Results: IP address space consumption slowed Address space allocated on ‘need to use’ basis 12 IP address distribution IANA RIR LIR /23 /25 /25 End User Allocation PA Assignment PI Assignment 13 Community Policies Policy Development Cycle Need Evaluation Proposal Execution Discussion Consensus 15 How policy is made ICANN / IANA ASO AfriNIC RIPEReach NCC consensus ARIN across communitiesAPNIC LACNIC AfriNIC -
Parliamentary Consultation on the Proposed Charter of the Commonwealth
STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE A Charter “Fit for Purpose”: Parliamentary Consultation on the Proposed Charter of the Commonwealth April 2012 1 Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français. Des renseignements sur le comité sont donnés sur le site : www.senate-senat.ca/foraffetrang.asp. Information regarding the committee can be obtained through its web site: www.senate-senat.ca/foraffetrang.asp. 2 A Charter “Fit for Purpose”: Parliamentary Consultation on the Proposed Charter of the Commonwealth 3 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................. 7 THE COMMITTEE ........................................................................................................................ 9 ORDER OF REFERENCE ........................................................................................................... 13 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 15 A. Background to the Committee’s study .............................................................................. 15 B. The Committee’s Consultation Process ............................................................................ 15 II. THE COMMONWEALTH AND THE PROPOSED CHARTER ....................................... 16 A. The Commonwealth