IGF 2014

Discussion of how accountability goals are achieved at ICANN under its multi-stakeholder governance processes. To whom is ICANN accountable and what are the mechanisms for ensuring that accountability is adequate? In what way do these mechanisms need strengthening or further improvements, particularly in light of NTIA’s announcement to transition out its current role? How do checks and balances on power, such as structural separation of key DNS operations encourage accountability? How have ICANN’s Affirmation of Commitments and the Accountability and Transparency Review Team fostered (or undermined) accountability goals at ICANN? What lessens were learned from the AoC and ATRT processes on achieving accountability under a multi-stakeholder governance regime? What is the role of ICANN's Ombudsman Office in achieving accountability for the institution?

In 2009, ICANN entered into an Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) with the US Department of Commerce (DOC). The AOC promotes ICANN’s accountability to the global Internet community, e.g. through a system of multistakeholder reviews of its performance in relation to public interest criteria. But it also moderated rather than ended the exclusive relationship between ICANN and the DOC, and affirmed ICANN’s commitment to remain a nonprofit corporation headquartered in the US with offices around the world. Now, with ICANN’s accelerating globalization efforts and the DOC’s announced desire to transition its role regarding the IANA functions to the global multistakeholder community, new and pressing questions are being raised about the AOC and its potential alternatives.

The NonCommercial Users Constituency of ICANN (94 civil society organizations and 252 individuals in 81 countries) proposes this workshop to explore some of these questions. Should the bilateral relationship be replaced by a “Web of Affirmation of Commitments” between ICANN and the world’s governments and relevant nongovernmental actors, as advocated by an ICANN Strategy Panel? Could the US role simply be removed from the equation, rather than being replaced by formal agreements with other parties? Would another arrangement better promote globalization and multistakeholderism while preserving the security, stability and unity of the Internet? How far can ICANN’s globalization be advanced while preserving ICANN’s legal status and nexus of contractual relationships? Could the innovative AOC serve as a model for other global Internet governance issue-areas? The workshop would bring together architects of the AOC with other leading proponents of ICANN’s globalization.

One tool for conserving IPv4 addresses is called Carrier Grade Network Address Translation, or simply CGN.

This workshop will discuss the implications of the deployment of CGNs on Internet users, applications designers, law enforcement and access providers.

However, the use of Network Address Translation doesn’t come for free. However, recent research shows that Internet application developers and Internet users will bear most of the impact of CGN implementation:

• How will developers of applications, such as online gaming and VoIP, cope with multiple CGN implementations - having to find workarounds for each?
• What will consumers do when they find that applications they count on no longer function correctly and that troubleshooting those problems becomes more difficult?
• Will Law Enforcement be able to manage when they find that traditional techniques for identifying and tracking criminals no longer work in the presence of CGNs?

This means that access to the Internet, that most basic foundation of the Internet’s global success, is substantially different than it was just five years ago. What does this mean for Internet Governance? Clearly, this is an area where new technology has implications for Internet governance and policy making.

The Internet ecosystem distributes decision-making throughout the network of networks and throughout the network of stakeholders. The decision of ISPs to deploy CGN technology is an example of a case where individual decisions at some points of the network have implications on a much wider range of Internet stakeholders and users.

There is an current trend among international IG organisations to work toward more globalisation, bringing and including more stakeholders.

As example, ICANN is increasing its efforts toward globalization and removing the perception of being an US-centric organization by establishing new offices and initiating new outreach projects. However, the main issues regarding developing countries’ participation, including all stakeholders, remain open and unresolved. These include, inter alia, incorporating developing countries’ issues into the policy development process, e.g .for the new gTLD program; under-representation of developing country applicants for gTLDs, and relatively few accredited registrars; and representation in policy development bodies like the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO). Stakeholders from developing regions often struggle to voice their opinions or to be effective within ICANN. Moreover, concern about developing countries’ challenges and interests has not always been been widely shared across the private sector community.

Accordingly, this workshop will explore such questions as:
1- How do we assess the extent to which the ICANN multistakeholder model for policy development is working for developing countries, particularly with respect to the new gTLDs?
2- How can developing countries’ concerns be systematically included in policy development processes in ICANN and other IG structures?
3- How can developing country participation in the GNSO process be enhanced?
4- How can ICANN become more fully globalized and responsive to the concerns of developing countries’ governments, civil society, business and technical communities?
5- How does the ICANN experience compare with civil society participation in other Internet Governance spaces.
6- What lessons does the ICANN experience offer for developing country participation in other global governance spaces?
7- What lessons can ICANN learn from different experiences in IG structures?

NCSG is the voice of civil society and nonprofit organizations in ICANN’s domain name policy
body, the GNSO, with more than 400 organizational and individual membership. It is composed of two constituencies, Noncommercial Users Constituency and Non ­Profit Operational Constituencies

Agenda:
1- Setting the scene : explaining context and objectives (10min)
2- Panelists' presentations: going through the questions above (25min)
3- Q/A session with the audience (40min)
4- Wrap-up: recommendations & actions (15min)

This workshop will focus on how government and private sector partnerships combine to build out affordable (UN and A4AI regional pricing benchmarks) and reliable Internet access to more and more of the remaining billions of citizens yet to be connected and how key areas of governance in both regulations and policy have come to the forefront to both help and hinder this process. For example; in the critical area of access pricing such issues as tower sighting fees, right-of-way fees, bandwidth competition, local IXPs , duties and fees on equipment and content all pay a roll in establishing affordable pricing. In the area of content controls evidence shows that countries that do not fix fees on or control content experience more cross boarder data traffic which leads to quicker economic growth through enhanced trade, jobs, tourism, industry, health care and education to name but a few critical areas. So panel speakers and audience participation will inform this discussion and raise additional questions. Additionally, as connectivity is built out what impact do governance issues like mandating the keeping of information about citizens be held inside their home country have on the proven benefits of the free flow of information? All of these governmental issues have profound impacts access and economic growth.

 

IGF 2014 WORKSHOP

Global Access; Connecting the Next Billion Citizens

Technology Education Institute

 September 5, 2014, 9:00am, Room #1

 

Welcoming remarks: Ambassador David A. Gross, Wiley Rein, LLP  (Moderator) (3 minutes) (CONFIRMED)

 

Format: Each panelist having 5 minutes for remarks with remaining time for audience participation. At the end of each panel and following the important audience participation, Ambassador Gross will put his considerable (two decades plus) experience in the Internet governance policy space to work summing up with concise conclusions focused on outcomes and their potential impact on Internet governance policy.

 

Theme Questions:

 

How are developed and developing countries partnering with tech/communications companies to provide robust and affordable (UN/A4AI regional benchmark pricing) Internet Access to their rural citizens?

 

As countries consider their Internet architecture, Open Vs. Closed, how do the economic benefits; job growth, trade, tourism, healthcare, education, stack up for each?

 

Content creation and dissemination comes to the forefront again and again as a key driver of access. What are the best ways to support a healthy content environment?

 

Part 1:  THE BIG PICTURE; Access Challenges in the Northern Hemisphere/Southern Hemisphere (35minutes)

 

• FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, Government (confirmed)
• Mark Summer, NGO, Co-Founder, inveneo (confirmed)

 

Examples of Successful, Sustainable, Affordable and Scalable Broadband Build out Models in Rural areas in developing countries

 

• Robert Pepper, Corporate, VP Global Technology Policy, Cisco (confirmed)
• Paul Mitchell, Corporate, General Manager, Technology Policy, Microsoft (confirmed)
• Dominique Lazanski, Private Sector, Public Policy Director, GSMA (confirmed)
• Nizar Zakka, NGO, CEO IJMA3 USA, WITSA Public Policy Chairman (confirmed)
• Audience participation

 

Part 2:  How Economics and Governance issues impact Internet Architecture [25minutes]

• Sam Paltridge, IGO, Directorate, Science, Technology, and Industry, OECD (confirmed)
• Mongi Marzoug, Corporate, Orange, VP Internet Governance/ Digital Development Africa & Middle East (confirmed)
• Alison Gillwald, NGO, ED for Research, ICT Africa (confirmed)
• Nnenna Nwakanma, NGO, Africa Coordinator, A4AI  (confirmed)
• Audience participation

 

Part 3: THE Internet ACCESS Driver…Content; what are some of the components that make up a healthy content ecosystem?   [20min]

• Thomas Spiller, Corporate, VP Global Public Policy Europe, Di The Walt Disney Company (confirmed)
• Subi Chaturvedi, NGO, Assistant Professor, Lady Shri Ram College for Women University, Delhi University (confirmed).  
• Michael Kende, NGO, Chief Economist, ISOC (confirmed)                                   
• Audience participation

 

Remote Moderator: Roslyn Layton, Aalborg University, PHD fellow