Internet governance and the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)

Prepared for the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), this 32-page paper explores the issue of Internet governance in the context of the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) - a United Nations (UN) conference on information and communication. In June 2004, APC and other delegates began meeting in Hammamet, Tunisia as part of the first 'prepcom' of phase two of the WSIS. To help provide input to debate about the issues that, according to APC, emerged as the "most contentious" during the first (Geneva-based) stage of WSIS, APC commissioned this and other discussion papers from civil society thinkers in the field of information and communication technology (ICT) for development. Here, Adam Peake discusses Internet governance in the context of ICT initiatives in developing countries.

Excerpts from the paper follow (please note: footnotes have been omitted):

Introduction:

Internet governance is one of the most high profile issues to emerge from the WSIS
process.

The common vision for the 'Information Society' developed during WSIS was of a
"people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society", its
creation would require new forms of partnerships and cooperation among
governments and all other stakeholders. Yet these essential, commonly agreed
principles jarred with the view that Northern-led processes dominated the
governance of the Internet, and that developing nations were largely absent from
those processes. Such concerns were accentuated by the perception that critical
Internet governance functions were controlled by the United States.

The "rules of the game" for the 'Information Society' are being made in many
different global policymaking frameworks, and developing nations and civil society
have not participated to the extent they must. The global discussion starting now
about Internet governance is an opportunity to redress this situation, and in
discussions since the Summit the need to ensure that developing nation
stakeholders have the capacity and opportunity to contribute effectively and
meaningfully to ICT policymaking has been recognised.

The purpose of this report is to describe our current understanding of the debate
about Internet governance in WSIS, and to examine the main policy issues that are
being considered in that discussion. The report will also suggest opportunities for
developing nation stakeholders to contribute to the processes that are defining the
Internet governance landscape.

Internet governance and the Geneva Summit

Discussion about Internet governance during the preparatory meetings
(PrepComms) leading to the Geneva Summit was confused.

Activities associated with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers (ICANN) - the domain name system, particularly country code top-level
domain (ccTLD) names, IP number addresses, the root server system, and
multilingual or internationalised domain names - were the focus of debate. But
multiple views were expressed about what was and was not "Internet governance",
and what public policy issues were involved. Some developing nations noted that
they were unable to participate in many of the decision making processes about
these policies, and felt unable to manage resources they believed they had a right to manage, particularly a sovereign right in the case of ccTLDs. The level of
disagreement was exacerbated by the perception of US domination of the Internet
and its governance.

Civil society's contributions on these issues during the PrepComms were presented
by the Internet Governance Caucus and focused on three main themes:

Policy advocacy: For general principles of inclusive participation, transparency, and democratic accountability in ICT policymaking. Particularly reforms to facilitate the full and effective participation of developing nations and other marginalised groups.

About ICANN: Civil society participants generally took the position that while it was far from perfect, ICANN was also not fundamentally 'broken'. ICANN needed further reform not replacing.

Multi-stakeholder processes: As it became clear that the discussion among
governments was most likely deadlocked, civil society proposed that after the
Summit some form of multi-stakeholder process should be established to discuss
the problems and look for solutions.

Civil society participants also lobbied government delegates, particularly to correct misconceptions about what different entities involved in Internet policy and administration did, and in some cases about how the Internet worked. However,
views on Internet governance, its problems and solutions varied among civil society
participants almost as much as they did among government delegates. Today, civil
society does not have a unified position on Internet governance, the range of issues involved are too broad and civil society too diverse. The Internet Governance Caucus is working to ensure that civil society is represented in all ongoing activities in WSIS around Internet governance...