Internet Society The Internet Society at the 2012 Internet Governance Forum, 13 Nov 2012

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Evolution of the Internet Governance Forum

Description

Markus Kummer, Vice-President of Public Policy of the Internet and the former Executive Coordinator of the IGF. He talks about his experiences as both a participant and a delegate and how the IGF has transformed the Internet.

A

Could you introduce yourself please?.

B

I'm markus kummer, vice president for public policy for the internet, society.

A

Now markus,, this isn't your first igf, you've been to quite a few of them?.

A

I've been there since the beginning, yes,. I was the executive coordinator of the igf and I prepared.

B

The first five igf meetings- and this is my second igf meeting as a participant.

A

Now my question for you is: how do you see the igf from the secretariat's point of view and now going to.

A

The other side, from the internet society,. How is that different,? Are there any differences for you?.

B

It's noticably different, yes,, when you are in charge of the secretariat and you are under permanent.

B

Stress to make sure everything works right and, as a secretary of the conference, I did not really have.

B

The opportunity to participate in workshops,, I was always up on the podium, sitting there for every.

B

Session and so I didn't really see that much of what's happening, outside.

B

Now, as a participant for the internet society, I'm heavily involved in a number of workshops.

B

And speaking roles,, I moderate in two workshops and I must say they are all very interesting and I find it.

B

Much more enjoyable to be able to engage in substantive discussions rather than to have to.

B

Make sure that everything works ok and is prepared,. The chairman's summary of the meeting,.

B

So it is quite a different experience and obviously the igf has evolved quite dramatically since athens.

B

Athens was the first meeting,. We did not know how it would turn out,. We did not know whether people.

B

Would be interested,, but we were surprised to see that we filled a room with 800 participants.

B

There were many more than we had expected,. I think we had more than a thousand participants then,.

B

Workshops,, maybe 30, 35 workshops,, so that was also much more than we had originally anticipated.

B

But people were still very nervous in athens, they distrusted what would come out of it,.

B

They were nervous, they would be captured, that we would try to impose their position.

B

And it was tried very hard to make sure that every session would be very balanced and that all.

B

Stakeholders would be represented, that all different views would be represented on the many issues,.

B

And via rio, hyderabad,, sharm el sheikh, vilnius, people got to know each other,.

B

They got used to the format, and now here at the event, you feel that people are really quite.

B

Comfortable with this format,, which is an open discussion, forum, there's no decision making.

B

Involved, and they have begun to listen to each other,, they talk to each other and I've heard.

B

More than one say: "I have not changed my opinion,, but I understand better where you've come from",.

B

Or "I've changed my opinion a little bit, but not my position completely",. So this is very helpful.

B

So,, maybe you can touch a little bit on the idea of multistakeholderism, and the significance of that?.

A

You kind of touched a little bit on hearing different viewpoints,, but why is multistakeholderism so important?.

B

It's basically no one stakeholder group can do it. Alone. governments,, they don't have the.

B

Technological knowhow to understand necessarily the technical implications a decision may have on the.

B

Technology., at the same time, engineers may not know the political implications. The technology.

B

May have,, so the dialogue is important.. Business, of course, is important,. They are the drivers,.

B

To a large extent, it's business driven,, the development of the internet.

B

And civil society, lastly, is also important as a watchdog,. They have strong advocacy groups on.

B

Issues such as human rights, privacy and they need to watch what governments are doing.

B

Governments, by definition they want to regulate,, they want to impose their position and sometimes.

B

They don't think of unintended consequences., it is good. We have civil society watchdogs.

B

To actually point out what could be bad if governments actually enact any given? Policy.

B

So,, no one single group can do it. Alone, possible action can only emerge from dialogue.

B

Between the stakeholders.

A

Now the internet society hosted a pre-igf event on enhanced cooperation,. Could you maybe touch.

A

Upon that, and maybe compare and contrast, the differences between multistakeholderism and.

A

Enhanced cooperation, or how they're related?

A

well enhanced cooperation was one of the outcomes of tunis, and it's full of creative.

B

Ambiguity, the language negotiators found in tunis, allowed everybody to claim victory.

B

In other words, you can read into it what you want,, depending on your perspective.

B

There is one paragraph I think, which is clear,, that requires all relevant organisations to produce.

B

Performance reports,, but the rest... yes,. We have to enhance cooperation.. Our interpretation was always.

B

It's enhancing cooperation within organisations,. Every organisation needs to be better.

B

And between organisations, and we as the internet society- think we are doing this,. We have become.

B

Observers in a number of inter-governmental organisations from the un, ecosoc, wipo,, we have.

B

An observer role in the oecd, that is enhancing our cooperation with other organisations,. We are.

B

Going to be an observer in the council of europe,, we have participated as observers.

B

In regional conferences, preparing the world conference on international telecommunications.

B

Now, others see paragraphs that would insititute a new institution or a new process.

B

We don't see it that way,, but as it doesn't go away, we thought, let's have an event to discuss this.

B

And we did have this event,. It basically came out of a meeting last may of the commission on.

B

Science and technology for development,, when there was a deadlock on this precise issue.

B

There was a proposal to set up a working group to deal with this,. We don't think this is necessary.

B

But we did not exclude the possiblity, but we insisted, like others and also like governments,.

B

Some governments, that it should be a multistakeholder working group if ever it should be set up,.

B

That this should only be done as a result of a process of a mapping exercise to look at actually what.

B

Is the problem we want to address.? The deadlock was then amplified because some countries did not.

B

Want to subscribe to this compromise, which was emerging,, they said, no, the working group.

B

Should be government only,? That was what made the negotiations collapse.

B

So,, we thought it would be worthwhile getting together again and discussing again what.

B

We want to discuss,, there was a south african participant who said "talking about talking".

B

That's what they did after apartheid and I think it's quite a good description. before you actually engage.

B

In a formal process, you really ought to know what you want to address and that has been taken up.

B

Also in various sessions- and there is a strong possibility- it will come up again,. Maybe it will be.

B

In the general assembly,, it will definitely be in the next session of the commission of science.

B

And technology for development, again, we are willing to talk,. We are not excluding the setting up.

B

Of a working group,, but at this stage we don't think it will produce much in terms of results.

B

One final question: for you.: what is your hope for the future of internet governance,.

A

And where do you see the forum from now on?.

B

Well, I think the forum is here to stay, the issues relating to internet governance are not issues.

B

Which will go away,? They are complex issues and the fundamental tension between the internet as a.

B

Borderless technology and an international system- that's built on national borders will remain.

B

So we have not found a solution yet. now there are organisations for each of these issues.

B

When you go for intellectual property, you go to the world intellectual property organisation,.

B

When you talk about trade, it's the world trade organisation,, but none of these organisations have.

B

Multistakeholder processes,, so it's very unlikely that these organisations are able to come up with viable.

B

Solutions, and here the igf can play a vital role in preparing decisions that are taken. Elsewhere.

B

It will not make the decisions,, but it can shape the decisions.

B

Great, well, thank you very much for your time,. We appreciate it.

A