[WG-P3] ITAC Supports OECD Multistakeholder Approach
J. Trent Adams
adams at isoc.org
Fri Jul 1 13:19:38 EDT 2011
You've probably seen this on the Kantara community list, but here you go
in case you're not subscribed to it.
I'm happy to join the P3WG call next Thursday to talk about ITAC and the
OECD high level meeting. I do have another ISOC call that overlaps the
first half, but I should be able to make the second half of the call.
On 7/1/11 11:15 AM, J. Trent Adams wrote:
> All -
> You may have heard this via other lists, but I wanted to close the loop
> with Kantara about our involvement with the Internet Technical Advisory
> Committee (ITAC) to the OECD. Specifically, as it relates to the
> communique published this week.
> As a reminder, ITAC was formed in 2009 as a mechanism to provide neutral
> technical advice to the OECD. We joined the Business and Industry
> Advisory Committee (BIAC), Civil Society Information Society Advisory
> Committee (CSISAC), and Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) around the
> table of OECD member states.
> As part of the "OECD High Level Meeting On The Internet Economy" held in
> Paris this week, we were asked (for the first time) to directly
> participate in the drafting of, and become a direct signatory to, a
> "Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making".
> Working on this was a fascinating illustration of the multistakeholder
> process in action. Up until this point, these communiques and similar
> declarations have been made entirely by the OECD member states (often
> with input from the advisory committees, but without requiring their
> buy-in). This time, however, we were full participants in the
> discussions, negotiations, and ultimate decision-making.
> What sets this one apart is that the previous declarations required
> buy-in by members who follow a more traditional model of hierarchical
> decision-making. The inclusion of the advisory councils introduced a
> more dynamic, loose coalition representing more consensus-oriented
> entities across a broad spectrum of interests. The result was both more
> inclusive, as well as having the potential to be more contentious.
> During the process, it became clear that some interests required more
> careful balancing in light of the expanded set of participants. As the
> deadline for the approval of the document at the high level meeting
> loomed, engaged participants worked long, hard hours together to
> maximize agreement and minimize disagreement. While a vast majority of
> the statements in the document were entirely non-contentious (as was the
> primary goal), a few points remained outside the realm of full consensus.
> Fortunately, the majority of participants, including ITAC, were
> ultimately comfortable with the final version and signed on.
> The OECD announcement is here:
> The full communique is here:
> ITAC's announcement of support is here:
> The lone dissent came from CSIAC, and their official statement on the
> communique is here:
> In related news, ITAC held its first face-to-face meeting in conjunction
> with the high level meeting (where Kantara presented it's Trust
> Framework model to the committee). The attending members all worked
> closely together on this communique, and it clearly represents a
> collaborative effort to build and represent consensus that helped
> improve the final document.
> Also, you'll notice that the only two comments showcased on the OECD
> announcement page are members of ITAC: Vint Cerf (representing NRO) and
> Tim Berners-Lee (W3C). That speaks volumes about how highly they value
> our participation.
> I will try to attend the P3WG call next Thursday to report out on the
> meeting and answer any questions (on the communique, the process, or our
> report to the committee).
> Finally, many (many) thanks to all of the ITAC members who worked hard
> on this communique both prior to and during the meeting. I'm not
> kidding when I say it took loooong hours to get done. The last thing
> that participants wanted to do was give up evenings in Paris to sit in
> conference rooms hammering out a compromise... but they did.
J. Trent Adams
Outreach Specialist, Trust & Identity
e) adams at isoc.org
More information about the WG-P3