Page 80

CEP template 2012

Go v e r n a n c e f o r i n c l u s i o n : P a r t i c i p a t i o n a n d d i a l o g u e Establishing consensus in multi-stakeholder ICT contexts One of the most fascinating aspects of seeking global agreement on particular aspects of ICT policy and internet governance is the process used to seek consensus. When combined with the election of representatives from different constituencies, most consensusbuilding models use an aggregative process, whereby agreement is sought at one level (for example the local level) and then representatives from that level meet at a higher level (such as the regional level) to seek wider consensus. This can be a very effective mechanism for reaching consensus, but the ways in which the governance of such structures operate can lead to very different outcomes. This is highly pertinent to discussions about governance of the internet as well as ICT partnerships more generally. Five main principles and issues are particularly pertinent: Consensus building requires good will on behalf of all of those involved. Put simply, if there is not a desire to reach agreement on the part of some of those involved then no amount of skilled negotiation will reach a successful outcome. Agreement on issues at the appropriate level or scale. It is important to identify the level at which issues are likely to be seen as most contentious and try to reach agreement on these issues appropriately, ensuring that sufficient time is devoted to their resolution. Moderation of the consensus-building process requires great skill and patience. All too often inexperienced chairs or moderators are charged with seeking to reach agreement among a particular constituency; this can rapidly lead to dissatisfaction and disenfranchisement with the entire process. The choice of representatives. Choosing the correct representatives to carry forward the discussion at a higher level is critical. Such people need to combine excellent negotiation skills with empathy for the different perspectives that they need to represent. They also need to be trusted by their constituencies. Ultimately, those involved in building consensus need to adhere to the fundamental negotiating principle that they should focus particularly on ‘What can’t you live with; what can’t you live without?’ Models of reaching consensus To date, most attempts to reach consensus on global internet governance issues have been based primarily on attempts to reach agreement within the sectoral framework described above and held within the orbits of ITU, ICANN and IGF forums. It is nevertheless possible to conceive of alternative frameworks, not least where multi-stakeholder consensus is reached first at lower scales and then aggregated upwards. To an extent this is what the IGF has advocated through its national initiatives, but these do not always focus on delivering practical outcomes and are insufficient in number to provide the basis for a global framework of agreement. One potential scenario could be to conceive of a much more bottom-up framework for multi-stakeholder decision-making with respect to internet governance that could involve: 1. The lowest level discussions taking place in national forums that brought together representatives of governments, the private sector and civil society 2. National representatives of each sector meeting together to reach regional consensuses, such as for West Africa, South Asia and Europe 3. Representatives from these regions meeting to thrash out global agreements, which would truly be built from more open, transparent and representational deliberation In this framework, novel uses of ICTs could themselves be used to ensure that, at the lowest level, as many people as possible are involved in debating these issues through online debates and discussion forums. Commonwealth frameworks The Commonwealth’s system of international organisations, associated organisations and accredited organisations provides a rather simpler structure for representation than some of the global forums described in the box: ‘Internet developments’, although there are many organisations that use the term Commonwealth in their names but have no official legitimacy. The Commonwealth represents one-third of the world’s population and if agreements can be reached among its diverse membership then these can provide valuable frameworks for wider global discussion. Hence, the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation is working with interested parties to craft frameworks and templates on matters such as internet governance and cyber-security that build on the values and aspirations of the Commonwealth, as formalised in the Commonwealth Charter of March 2013. These are not in any sense formal treaty documents, but they derive from consensus-building consultations with members and are intended to provide all stakeholders with frameworks for delivering practical actions in these key areas of importance. Endnotes 1 See also the UN Global Compact’s list of civil society organisations available at: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/participantsandstakeholders/ civil_society.html accessed on 12 November 2014. Commonwealth Governance Handbook 2014/15 78 TIM UNWIN has been secretary general of the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO) since 2011 and was chair of the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission in the UK from 2009–14. He is also UNESCO chair in ICT4D; emeritus professor of geography at Royal Holloway, University of London; and honorary professor at Lanzhou University in China. Unwin leads the CTO’s work on ICTs for people with disabilities and ICTs in education, focusing on skills development and entrepreneurship. He is a member of DFID’s Digital Advisory Panel and of the ITU’s m-Powering Development Advisory Board. He has particular interests in crafting multi-stakeholder partnerships, and in the interface between ethics and ICTs.


CEP template 2012
To see the actual publication please follow the link above