|
|
 Add Blog |
 |
 |
 |
Would you like to add one? Click here.
You must be a TakingITGlobal member and be an attendee to this event before you can add a blog post. Either login, or register.
|
|
|
Event Blog  |
|
|
|
  WSIS II PrepCom 2 Final Report - Posted By: Terri Willard
Last week I wrote up a report on WSIS - primarily aimed at Canadian civil society. By the time I finished it, though, we realized it might be an interesting overview for other groups as well. It is now posted online as the IISD Commentary, "WSIS Unfolds: Finding the right way to Tunis".
Enjoy!
| March 15, 2005 | 12:00:58 |
|
|
 And gone is my virginity… - Posted By: Eddy Bruin
This is my first prepcom and I'm really impressed. Not only by this
expensive city, but also by the people. I didn't really know what to
expect, but I'm really pleased I meet some members of the youth
caucus. They really gave me inspiration and motivation.
The UN building, all the languages, all that people, it's just great!
I see laptops with Chinese windows, French windows, Spanish windows,
English windows, and Russian windows. I see lots of women, men and
young people working together. This really is the best place were
'Nations unite'. I learned a lot the past few days and next time I'll
be back and (more) prepared.
I'm really motivated to proceed my national campaign and I hope I can
come with some good statements for the youth caucus. Keep up the good
work everyone!
| February 25, 2005 | 13:37:41 |
|
|
  Final tired thoughts - Posted By: TT
Hmm...Final evening - my final tired thoughts
1. Engaging on the 'documents: A lot more preparation on all grounds including Youth caucus to feed into these but first a proper orientation around the issues at hand. Major parts are shifted till the next prepcom - IG mainly.
2. On Words to Action: NYC Phase II up and Running with initial 8 countries, WSYA and Radio on Better track, partnership with Milset for Parallel Youth COngress on Track, ICV and YC collarborating on national strategies...great...did Ileave anything out? Reserved a whooping 300 m2 for the Pavillion today with no idea who would be paying - hope we get the request and can have a jamboree...
3. People: So many 'new' faces to the whole process - missing a lot of actors from phase II - what happens to conitnuity? Pressure becomes a lot more on those who have been engaged so far even though they find this phase a bit blurry as well
4. Supporters: A huge thanks to the following organisations fo rthier support - SchoolNet Africa (www.schoolnetafrica.org) as the Executive Secretariat (hey if they don't say 'Go' I may no tbe able to; IISD www.iisd.ca - For Terri :-); CTA (www.cta.nl) for the First mini-grants for the Rural National Youth Campaigns; to the World Summit Award and ICNM (www.wsis-award.org); to TIG for the Technical Platform;to the various organisations the Youth Caucus memebrs who were aroudn belong to...If I have forgotten any please forgive
Hmmm...
| February 25, 2005 | 13:32:10 |
|
|
  Digital Divide almost closed! Right... - Posted By: Nick Moraitis
Well... the World Bank has (apparently!) come out today with a report saying that all the good people who've been hard at work at the WSIS Prepcom 2 in Geneva shouldn't worry so much, because the Digital Divide is well on the way to being closed and in fact we've already exceeded targets we set for 2015 in the WSIS Action Plan. I guess this is like those other World Bank reports where they said Argentina was a model economy just before it went into depression, and that building huge dams was great for the environment just before they flooded ancient valleys.
Yes, I admit the World Bank does have a point when it says more than half the world's population lives within mobile telephone reception. But really - when did reception equal having a phone? And when did having a phone equal 'digital divide bridged'. I mean, people had phones years before anyone even came up with the term 'digital divide'. It's this oversimplification of the debate on the digital divide which is at the heart of the WSIS problem.
Really, what the UN should be exploring is whether people have freedom to express themselves through technology or whether they get locked up in jail like those in blog-unfriendly regimes the world over. Or whether there is effective financing for content in local languages and about local issues. Or whether education systems are effectively responding to the changing expectations of their tech-savvy pupils. And whether people are literate in the first place.
WSIS- and the digital divide - was never meant to be about phones.
~
I had a great time in Geneva last Thurs-Monday working with the Youth Caucus and reconnecting with great friends. And while perhaps the crowd in Geneva was smaller this time and less focused on the policy debates under discussion in the main halls, it was really heartening to see the number of cool projects - from the World Summit Award to the Youth Radio to the National Rural Youth Campaigns for the Information Society getting off the ground. Great to see those who were there.
| February 25, 2005 | 12:54:21 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 7 - Closing Plenary - Posted By: Terri Willard
So... here we are... the closing plenary. Hard to believe.
The discussion started off with an exploration of the "operational modalities" for the Tunis Summit. It sounds like they are trying to keep things as identical to the Geneva Summit as possible in terms of the agenda, "overpasses" (special passes given to governments and civil society for what they know will be events that everyone wants to go to, but with only 3000 seats in the hall, there will not be space for) to the opening plenaries, etc. The only big differences are that they are going to try to find a way to make the official roundtables a bit more exciting and that civil society will have two chances each afternoon to present, instead of one.
Shifting to discussions on moving the texts ahead, the President of the PrepCom has come out with some suggestions. Basically, he put forward that there NOT be an intersessional (hooray!!!! Too expensive). Instead, the Political Chapeau and Chapter 2 of the Operational Plan (Financing) will be forwarded to PrepCom 3 for the next reading and discussion. The Group of the Friends of the Chair will keep working on Chapters One (Implementation Mechanisms) and Chapter Four (The Way Ahead) of the Operational Part and bring a next round of documents forward to PrepCom 3. Chapter 3 on Internet Governance will take a bit more work. Around July 18, the WGIG will release its report and all stakeholders can submit comments and drafting proposals for the text of Chapter 3 by August 12. There was a ton of debate as to what happens next, with some countries all for the Bureau and WGIG starting work on drafting Chapter 3 in August and others saying nothing should happen until PrepCom3. The President fought hard to find a way to say "We'll keep talking about a way to reconcile those irreconcilable positions between now and PrepCom3." Now they've suspended the plenary to go duke it out behind closed doors.
On the surface, though, it all sounds terribly civilized. It all sounds terribly civilized. They are now looking for a "minimal common denominator of our joint vision."
Maybe it's the fever, but I'm finding this all highly amusing late on a Friday. Nevertheless, I think this is my signal to head out and call it a night. I'm supposed to take IISD's Geneva based interns out for dinner in two hours and it would be mighty nice to go back to the hotel and get rid of my paper-filled backpack first.
So... that's all from me for the PrepCom. Hope you've all enjoyed the coverage. I'll post a summary report on Monday accessible from http://events.takingitglobal.org/wsis2prepcom2/attending
| February 25, 2005 | 11:59:30 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 7 - Swiss Proposal Re: Paper on Implementation - Posted By: Terri Willard
Hmmm.... walking into the closing plenary, I happened to grab a copy of the "Proposal of the Swiss Delegation for a Paper on the Implementation of the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action." From the 1.5 page document, it sounds like this proposal is the Swiss attempt to break some deadlocks around Chapter One of the Operational Part (Implementation Mechanism). If you look at the most recent Compilation of Comments on Chapter One, it's obvious that many countries and civil society are trying to insert real content into that Chapter regarding the types of initiatives that should be implemented. The problem is that this document wasn't really meant to do that. That was what the Plan of Action in Phase I was for.
So the Swiss are suggesting that the ITU and WSIS Secretariat work together on a paper regarding the implementation of the Geneva Declaraion and Plan of Action. On the surface, it seems like a reasonable recommendation.
My only concern is that the ITU doesn't seem to recognize that civil society exists. Before this PrepCom started, the ITU issued a "Preliminary stocktaking report" about activities that are going on around the world. When I read this document, it was obvious that a) either civil society hasn't been entering data in the WSIS stocktaking site; or b) that the ITU didn't think the civil society initiatives were important since they weren't as big or flashy as the initiatives started by the governments or UN agencies. Either way, it ends up looking like the only people doing any work are governments and the UN. It's frustrating since at the end of the day, there is a whole host of CSOs doing the implementation of these government and UN projects because they have greater on-the-ground capacity to deliver the programmes. But, they don't get any recognition in the UN documents.
So... I'm all for a nice paper to break the deadlock on Chapter One, but could we have the SDC and the GKP watching over their shoulder to make sure that the role of civil society in implementation is acknowledged properly???
| February 25, 2005 | 09:21:54 |
|
|
  Blog-o-Rama - Posted By: Andy Carvin
I've been posting lots of messages to my blog from the Prepcom; you can find them at www.andycarvin.com. I've also created a blog aggregator called WSISblogs.org, which I would love to use to aggregate this TIG prepcom blog, but there doesn't appear to be an RSS feed for it. If there is one, please let me know. -andy
| February 25, 2005 | 05:46:37 |
|
|
  Quo Vadis: Where do we go from Geneva? - Posted By: 'Gbenga Sesan
The WSIS process has been a long journey. The first phase having ended, all eyes are on the possible outcomes of the second phase and every family, caucus, delegation and interest group keep flying different colours - all towards the major objective of an all-inclusive Information Society.
Just today, the Digital Solidarity Fund (which has been decsribed as one of the major "wins" for developing nations in this process) sailed through "multiple readings" and was agreed on. Well, the text relating to the fund was agreed on and the hope of all is that the funds will also keep being "agreed upon". The various streams of the WSIS process in phase II - especially the debates on Internet Governance, Financial Mecahnisms and the Political Chapeau - are ongoing at varying speeds and would have reached an "agreed" stage in a few hours, noting that the second preparatory meeting ends tomorrow.
So, where do we go from here? The answer will vary for different people but if you may allow the thoughts of a passionate stakeholder who believes that we owe ourselves a better society especially building on the WSIS process, the next few lines would interest you.
It is the duty of Government delegations to return to their respective countries and deliberately broadcast the outcomes of the process (to date) to their respective national stakeholders. This is also true for regional representatives and their sub-regional counterparts. We have come to appreciate the place of inclusion in national processes and while some nations, sub-regions or regions may not be able to boast of bottom-up consultations leading to the WSIS, this would be a great time to do so.
At the end of the WSIS process, each nation would need to answer the question from her citizens - what do we benefit from the process? Many people in rural Nigeria are not bothered about the sub-section of chapter 27 or 28 that may be of immense interest to certain people; their question (and they have a right to ask) is, "where does my next meal come from and how do you (yes, you) explain why you have spent from my uncle's tax (since I'm not employed and my aunt is under-employed) to finance national input into the WSIS process?"
The Civil Society occupies a major space that is dear to the heart of many citizens. Will each civil society organisation be able to translate the "chapeau" into visible action for the average citizen? Will the networks that the civil society has been able to create survive the process and find meaningful expression and be available as a platfrom for progress? The civil society has made multiple requests and has expressed diverse possibilities, would development be visible if these are engaged?
Would the DSF (among other outcomes of the WSIS process) empower civil society organisations? Would the outcome of the finacial mechanisms debate also help increase support for these actors? The question on the mind of civil society
organisations who have benefited from the process through networks and new ideas would be how to replicate this same
"success" back at home - especially for those who work with communities that care less about Internet "governance"and more about livelihood.
The Private Sector, International Organisations, United Nations Agencies and all other stakeholders within the process have the moral right to support this global opportunity"of building an all-inclusive society that focuses on people and development over profit and technology.
For young people, it is time to prove that our energies can help propel development. We discovered a best-practice effort during the first phase, the National Information Society Youth Campaigns. 21 countries, 5 continents, 20 regional and national conferences, over 200 workshops, over 40 radio programs, 5 video conferences, over 100,000 brochures, over, 50 media stories... the impact speaks for itself. You should have been there to see the faces of some rural youth literally glow when they learnt of the role of ICTs and had the opportunity of being taught in their own local language! Have you seen the Youth Caucus movie from phase 1? You need to, it speaks for the impact and possibilities of youth energy.
The campaigns have already taken off in some countries for Phase 2, and during this soon-to-be-concluded PrepCom 2, some eight (8) countries have been announced as receipients of small grants for campaigns focusing on rural youth. Expect the reports, prepare to see the multimedia outcomes... but beyond all these, the second phase campaigns will help connect rural youth to the process. Many of them have never touched a computer (and that's if they've even seen one) and may not do so very soon if there's no intervention to highlight the need to "wade through the waters of life"in order to get access to one. In Africa, where rural youth account for majority of the population, it is hoped that this campaign will help build a bridge across hydra-headed divides. The African Youth ICT4D Network, which was launched during the African Regional WSIS meeting in Accra, has a responsibility in this direction - and they will surely stand up to it.
Where do we go from here? Between now and the next PrepCom in September, - and the summit in Tunis- meetings will hold and documents will be produced but the true indices of growth within the Information Society would be the possibility of linking these processes with tru and appropriate action.
| February 24, 2005 | 10:14:26 |
|
|
PrepCom 2 Day 6 - Podcast with Youth Caucus Members - Posted By: Terri Willard
After the Youth Caucus meeting this morning, Andy Carvin abducted a group of us for a podcast interview which he has posted on his blog page.
| February 24, 2005 | 10:11:20 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 6 - What Happened to Civil Society - Posted By: Terri Willard
I've had a series of very interesting conversations today regarding "What has happened to civil society in WSIS Phase II?" On the one hand, there's good news - the youth caucus is not the only civil society family struggling to be effective. On the other hand, there's bad news - the youth caucus is not the only civil society family struggling to be effective. As one Canadian put it, "Why does it seem like we've be moving away from a real multi-stakeholder process?" (Side note: I think Canadians have been genetically modified to revere the concepts of "multi-stakeholder" and "process"... there's no other way to explain the national passion for these issues).
So why has civil society crumbled, particularly at PrepCom 2? At PrepCom 1, everyone liked to blame the fact that the meeting was in Tunisia for the problem. But, now we're starting to see that relocating to Geneva hasn't made much of a difference.
After a lot of brainstorming (and coffee), we're starting to understand that there are a lot of reasons for civil society implosion:
* The structure/format of the prepcom has not been very civil society firendly. Most of the work was quickly referred into sub-committees rather than dealt with in plenaries. According to UN/WSIS rules, civil society can have speaking slots in plenaries... but in sub-committees, they only have observer status. So, we have to work through governments, which is fine, but it's very hard with the difficulty in accessing the newest versions of the texts and accurate compilations of inteventions by various governments. We end up reacting to texts instead of being proactive in terms of stating what we really want.
* There has also been a lot of turnover in terms of people within families. For example, sometime around Tuesday we realized that of all of the youth caucus members present, only Titi and Nick had been involved in prepcoms in Phase I. Everyone else had only been able to participate in the Summit. We assumed everyone had experience in the issues and in the negotiating/lobbying process and skipped doing any capacity-building at the beginning of the prepcom. That was a mistake. Unfortunately, I think it's one that has been made by many groups.
* A corollary is that whenever there are new people involved in a process, there is a tendency to rehash discussions which have been had previously and to reinvent the wheel. While completely understandable, it makes it hard to move forward onto new topics until everyone feels they have had their say on the fundamentals.
* The WSIS leadership and governments have been very strict in terms of what issues they consider being "on the table". These are Internet governance, financing, and follow-up mechanisms to WSIS. For civil society, these are hardly ringing calls to action. We tend to identify with words like education, human rights, environment, peace, and health... which are seen as completed in Phase I.
* Civil society is not structured correctly to deal bring cross-cutting development issues forward into the topics which are being discussed. The family structure, based on stakeholder groups (women, youth, people with disabilities, etc) worked ok in Phase I when groups were fighting to see how many times they could get there group mentioned in the text. Now though, it's getting in the way of dealing with cross-cutting substantive issues which the groups have in common interest. What we need is some form of civil society leadership that can look at the issues each family has been raising for far, identify the areas of common concern and create working groups based on THOSE issues.
* And last, but VERY far from least, is that people need to feel like they are working for something. In phase I, a lot of civil society believed that their participation would result in new funded partnerships and/or recognition through the media, etc. That didn't happen. There was no new $ for 99% of the new civil society partnerships and ideas and the media ignored the Summit nearly entirely. So, there's no intrinsic motivation to be here and to work hard. No one believes there will be a personal or organizational payoff. So you have to REALLY care about the texts and principles to spend 12 hours a day slogging through words and phrases.
But the real question is, what can we do to turn these factors around before PrepCom 3 and any potential intersessional?
| February 24, 2005 | 10:04:54 |
|
|
Youth Community - Posted By: Eddy Bruin
We had a discussion on Youth community's this morning. Terry told a bit on how the Youth Caucus and the YCDO got started and were they are now. She also suggested that (young) people should be updated on documents concerning youth and ICT so that the don't invent the wheel again . We all agreed on that.
One hour later there was a meeting in the same room about the new WSIS-online website. www.wsis-online.net changed things a lot! And I think that it is very important that the Youth Caucus uses this platform.
On the new Wsis-online website it is very easy to find people and events in which you’re interested in. The website has the ability to match your interests on events en people. You can also add your own events, you can upload documents and you can even start a forum concerning your events.
People can subscribe to a newsletter about your event or they can submit that they’ll be at your event. This way you can see who will come at your events and this way you know who is interested in you, your event and/or your organization.
I see great opportunities for the Youth Caucus here. We can sign up as a organization and start posting documents concerning youth and ICT. This way we’ll have a good kind of ‘portal’ for our documents and to events we’re interested in. This way other people will see where we’re at and we’ll see who’s interested in the same topics as we are.
The new website will be finished begin march and will be promoted at Governments, NGO’s and Private sector. I was really impressed by the structure and I recommend that the Youth Caucus will use the website as much as they can.
| February 24, 2005 | 09:44:31 |
|
|
  building a community - Posted By: Kuba
It is my first PREPCOM. There are still some things I not really clear for me. But the Youth Caucus is working hard, trying to involve new members and empower them for a stronger impact on the PrepCom's results. It is somehow strange, but on the other hand optimistic that people from around the globe, of different cultures and languages meet during those few days to work together. And it's fun. Each day small steps are made, but I am sure they will build a massive jump for the WSIS in Tunis. And it's not about building the Information Society, nor about sustainable development with the ICTs. It's about building a community that understands the needs and desires of the youths today.
If somebody told me that before I came here I would say it's a little bit of propaganda, but actually it turned out to be true. It's nice to be a part of that! jakub
| February 23, 2005 | 14:49:18 |
|
|
building a community - Posted By: Kuba
It is my first PREPCOM. There are still some things I not really clear for me. But the Youth Caucus is working hard, trying to involve new members and empower them for a stronger impact on the PrepCom's results. It is somehow strange, but on the other hand optimistic that people from around the globe, of different cultures and languages meet during those few days to work together. And it's fun. Each day small steps are made, but I am sure they will build a massive jump for the WSIS in Tunis. And it's not about building the Information Society, nor about sustainable development with the ICTs. It's about building a community that understands the needs and desires of the youths today.
If somebody told me that before I came here I would say it's a little bit of propaganda, but actually it turned out to be true. It's nice to be a part of that! jakub
| February 23, 2005 | 14:48:51 |
|
|
MindFlow: A "Tale" of Challenges and Opportunities - Posted By: 'Gbenga Sesan
The past few days have been very "tasking" - even before arriving Geneva.
The WSIS process has been described by many people as many things. My thought-line has however been that the process is to you what you make of it - many people, people-groups, nations, or entities have benefited and many othes have successfully "invested" in the Swiss economy.
For young people, the process has been quite interesting. From the first PrepCom (and the setting up of the Youth Caucus) to the implementation of the National Information Society Youth Campaign, and now the World Summit Youth Awards, its been a string of opportunities and action-laden efforts.
The other side of the process has been the challenge that some face. From those who have missed meetings due to logistics and others who have become disjointed from the process, we have a great challenge to get everyone back on track. On track to where? To the place where the WSIS (and related meetings) meet with development opportunities along the line of:
- Personal Development: How can young people learn from the process and be able to identify opportunities?
- Nation Building: At what point should young people who have been quite "withdrawn" from contributions to their polity have a change of attitude? For youth from developing countries, is it possible for us to change the way things are building on the platform of the WSIS process?
- Regional Cooperation: African youth (for example) created the African Youth ICT4D Network. How can youth engage such platforms - after bridging gaps that may be specific to their regions (language, cohesion/duplicity, etc)?
- Global participation: Youth have proved to be an all-important stakeholder in the WSIS process but how can we scale up on our efficiency and real impact?
I'm allowing my fingers to "roll" because as I walked the corridors (and had my fair share of getting lost in Geneva) in the last few days, I've been asking myself questions and analysing the good - and not-too-good of this process.
There are challenges. Yes. There are opportunities. Yes. The destination is clear. Yes? No? I would think "yes", saying that our destination is translating words into action. The WSIS process, for example, has provided a platform for Nigeria's youth to give input into the national ICT agenda and I can bet its been quite impressive (maybe even more) for others too.
In the next few days, PrepCom II will be over and there will be plans for PrepCom III (September 2005, Geneva); Tunis Phase (November 16 - 18 2005, Tunis); and more. What's next for you? You can be sure that between now and Tunis, National Youth Campaigns for phase II will focus on RURAL Youth. Connect with your national campaign coordinators and let's weave a web of progress - building on this all-inclusive platform.
Catch you at the "action spots"...
| February 23, 2005 | 12:09:46 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 5 - Governments Deadlocked - Posted By: Terri Willard
More fun briefings this morning... Apparently, the negotiations around the documents have pretty much ground to a halt.
Don't get me wrong, people are still talking. It's just that they're not listening. And no one seems to feel any sense of time pressure. Many countries are increasingly pushing for an intersessional in July after the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) issues its final report. Since Itsumi seems on side with that (even though there's no money for it and no clue of how to stretch limited funds any further), many governments seem to have kicked back and decided that they don't want any progress right now.
In terms of the process of the negotiations, word is that the chairing continues to be a bit waffly, to put it mildly. Progress is pushed ahead, even when there is no consensus. And compilations of comments and inputs to the text under negotiations are a) missing many inputs from governments and civil society and b) few and far between. As far as anyone can tell, there's no evil conspiracy afoot; it just looks like sheer mismanagement and inexperience. So CSOs and governments scramble from day to day to figure out what version of what text is under negotiation that day in which room. Added to that is the continuing tension over how strictly to stick to procedures. Yesterday, a kerfuffle broke out in an official working group between the Canadians and Brazilians after the chair recognized someone from the CRIS campaign, who came up with some good compromise language. The Brazilian rep objected on procedural grounds. The Canadian noted the language was great. When the words stopped flying, the Canadian delegation proposed the CRIS language; the Brazilians accepted it. The whole conflict was about procedures and precedents. Welcome to the UN, eh?
On another note... there are some rumblings of concern about what rules will be followed at the Latin American regional meeting in June. In the last phase, ECLAC was the formal organizing body. This time, there's a movement afoot to have GRULAC run the meeting. What's the difference? Well... there are really 2: a) Canada and the US are members of ECLAC but not GRULAC; and b) ECLAC is a UN body bound to follow UN procedures regarding participation of non-governmental stakeholders, GRULAC is not. So, some LAC civil society is getting nervous that they might not have a seat at the table in June in Brazil. It's a diplomatic game at the moment, but it's not clear to me who is playing for what in terms of concessions and stakes in this.
| February 23, 2005 | 09:43:10 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day - Putting the Family Back into Civil Society - Posted By: Terri Willard
Have you ever had a thought that started off making you laugh and then left you thinking, "Hmmm..."???
Last night, after 12 hours in the PrepCom Cybercafe, Titi was talking about the proliferation of "families" within the Civil Society Bureau. For those of you not familiar with the CS families, this was an innovation in Phase I to enable civil society groups to cluster themselves for the purpose of providing input to the formal governmental process. The youth caucus represents the youth family on the CS bureau.
Anyway... after 12 hours yesterday I couldn't help but thinking that in Phase II, many CS families are starting to take themselves far too seriously - even if they aren't contributing much to the negotiations underway on financing and Internet governance. So my mind started to wander into what would make PrepCom3 more fun and interesting.
Then it hit me out of nowhere - THWAP! Drag queens in plenary. That's what I want to see.... I want Ru Paul in plenary noting that youth and women in developing countries can implement local ICT4D projects for less than the price of a decent Prada bag in New York and that we should just get on with it. Every 5 minutes last night, I'd start laughing out loud thinking about the reactions of government delegations.
But... after dinner, as the night progressed and insomnia set in around 2:30 AM, I started wondering why the LGBT community ISN'T involved in WSIS at all. Seriously.
On the historical front, there has been a long association between the LGBT community and the development of the information society. Alan Turing, who helped develop one of the first series of computers was gay. And when I look around me in North America, I find that many of my LGBT friends are working on software development, database administration, and content/graphics industries. Many are also involved in ICT4D but find it easier to get by internationally by sticking to talking business with friends and colleagues.
More importantly, though, I think that the LGBT community should become openly involved in WSIS on the grounds that as we learned in the early days of AIDS, "Silence = Death." Freedom of expression and association are at the heart of many discussions about the information society. For many LGBT folks scattered around the world, the Internet is literally a lifeline - connecting them to others, cultivating an understanding of different perspectives, finding self-worth, and locating critical health and human rights information. When gay youth are committing suicide at higher rates than other young people, I start to define access to information and support as fundamental health and human rights issues.
Adding to the human rights concerns, through their Internet use, individuals from the LGBT community can also be stalked, identified, harassed, and set up for arrest by their governments. In many countries where homosexuality is illegal, there are also weak privacy laws that allow these types of online state policing activities to occur.
But... will the LGBT family ever show up in plenary? Sadly, no. Not likely even through the human rights caucus. Someone, somewhere will always insist that there are more pressing issues and that we can't deal with the "fringe" until issues of accreditation of Tunisian and Chinese human rights activists for the Summit are dealt with. And even the cultural diversity folks often seem to put limits on what kinds of diversity are acceptable. Meanwhile, the LGBT groups around the world are trapped battling for their survival and rights and can't look up long enough to notice that international negotiations of deep concern to them are happening at all...
It's too bad.... Something needs to shake up the complacency and self-satisfaction starting to spread in the ICT4D circles.
(Additional note on the photo: I originally thought about putting up a photo of a drag queen, but the LAST thing I want to do is reinforce stereotypes of what the LGBT community is "like". Then I found a photo of an apparently pro-LGBT woman holding this sign, meant to be interepreted as sarcasm. I really liked it but had to crop out the context in order to make the sign legible at the size allowed in the blog.)
| February 23, 2005 | 09:13:16 |
|
|
The Genevan Transport System - Posted By: TT
I have learnt the following:
1. Does not speak any language outside of Ticket, Passport and amount of Swiss Francs
2. Does not care that you had to run to catch the bus because you were late for a meeting since they are such timely people
3. That a weekly ticket really is better if you are staying for a week or not...
Hmmm...I owe them a lot of money...but now have a had a full well grounded and rounded experience of the Genevan Canton...Though a friend tells me these 'Greenbeings' only show up at the end of the month when they are trying to meet thier monthly quota's :-)
| February 23, 2005 | 05:23:10 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 5 - Youth Policy Input Reappears! - Posted By: Terri Willard
It's always nice to find that a problem is primarily a communications one :-)
Now that Robert is back home from the World Program of Action for Youth Review meeting in New York, he dropped me a note letting me know that Youth Caucus issues group has been making contributions to the WSIS Process through the Group of the Friends of the Chair. All documents are avilable there! Somehow wires just got crossed and links to those documents were not posted on the WSIS Youth Caucus site for everyone to be able to access. We're working on fixing that. In the meantime, I've posted links to them in the "Documents" page under the WSIS II PrepCom 2 page on TIG.
These include inputs on the chapeau and operational mechanisms, financing mechanisms, and early thoughts on the operation of the Working Group on Internet Governance. They are quite thorough and well worth familiarizing yourself with.
I've also uploaded another very cool document there - a draft chapter on youth and ICTs for the World Programme for Action on Youth (WPAY) review. Franziska Seel led a team of WSIS Youth Caucus members in developing this document.
The next step is turning these into a 1-2 page document with bullet points that can be distributed here tomorrow or Friday. I'm hoping the issues group can tackle that virtually...
| February 23, 2005 | 05:19:33 |
|
|
So Far - Posted By: TT
Okay...Keeping it Short so I don't speak outside of content based stuff...
Discussionon Implementation and FOllow-up after Tunis - has been transferred to Prepcom 3 and no assurances that any formal follow-up wil be done in between...Hmmm
What does this portend for other discussions around Financing and Internet Governance...And most folks still have global funding mechanisms in mind- no light on the Nation's capabilities to support little 'unglobal' schmes and initiatives within the information society in thier boundaries - or maybe they are not forgettign it simply that it is not well articulated...Hope the fog gets clearer as we move along to the end of the meetings...The Rural Youth National Cmapaigns (we are looking for a better acronym so I will try various ones out as the days go by) were annouced and a mail sent to the wider list...Looking for more funding so if you know of any one or organisations- please buzz and bug me with the information...WSYA is also getting into better shape (www.youthaward.org) so is the Radio channel (www.wsya-radio.org)
Forgive all Typos in this email as I type at 8:40 pm Genevan time in the Cyber Cafe in the wise and ancient UN A Building next to the only entrance still open (I got locked in last week Tuesday as I thought it was the glory days of CICG at Perpcom I when we could work till late and still get out without trying to talk to a Camera :-))
Enjoy...Till I find space to sit again...
| February 22, 2005 | 14:34:58 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 4 - Tuesday YC Woes - Posted By: Terri Willard
Arg. I finally finished the first issue of the Youth@WSIS newsletter about 30 minutes ago. We've email Adina for approval to circulate it; in the meantime, Titi printed out one copy and ran upstairs with it to run the youth event from 12-1 PM announcing the initial countries to be funded through the Rural Youth Information Society Campaigns.
I'm a bit frustrated at the moment... the first issue of the newsletter was supposed to be done early this morning. But, we're seriously lacking volunteers to get the writing done. People seem happy to write about their own initiatives (which is AWESOME!), but other stories about caucus events and policy perspectives end up not getting done. I'm not quite sure how we're going to get tomorrow's newsletter done, although I feel much more confident about Friday. Mostly I just wish I had even some vague skill with layout and design. Blech. Not my speciality.
I think my bigger frustration at the moment is the lack of substantive policy input coming from the caucus at this prepcom. As far as I can tell, the youth issues working group never finished the revisions of their draft input (back in December) or submitted it to the WSIS Secretariat. This leaves the team here a bit adrift as to what positions to lobby on regarding financing, governance, and the operational plan. So, the group has really scattered with each person meeting and greeting to advance their own interests and projects. It makes sense since most of them are a) paying their own way here, b) on a government delegation, or c) have been able to attend through funding they have for particular projects. You dance with the one that brought you. But, it's still sad to not be able to have another layer of participation as a group.
I think another basic challenge is that most youth caucus members don't have strong opinions regarding the topics under discussion here. Financing? "There should be more of it through existing mechanisms, new mechanisms, and entrepreneurial models." Internet governance? "?" Operational plans? "Just get on with it!!!" So no one shows up at the "policy team" meetings for the youth caucus... and those that do quickly get diverted back into discussions about specific projects and initiatives unfolding over the next 12 months.
It's amazing the difference between Phase I in which there were significant fellowships for youth to attend as part of the caucus and Phase II where that is absent. $ truly does make a difference when it comes to dedicating time and effort.
| February 22, 2005 | 06:29:44 |
|
|
Initial Thoughts - Posted By: TT
Wearing a Titi Hat: Being at Prepcom 2 in this Phase has been kinda intense - its still the same pletora of issues: Meetings over meetings creating a pressurised atmosphere to be at all and do all...
Add to this the fact that I personally find the Palais quite daunting navigatinally...
The prepcom issues: Financing, Internet Governance, follow-up to the Summit, Political chapeau etc etc...well lwill fill you in as I go along though I have been here for a week by tomorrow - more of House Keeeping and Planning around the National Youth Camapigns, World Summit Youth Awards and Partnerships with the International Conference of Volunteers...
Working for the organisation that is the Executive Secretariat (www.schoolnetafrica.org)also means I have to wear that hat intermittently depending on who els eis around form there...welll all good...
| February 21, 2005 | 12:28:01 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 3 - Financing ICT4D: A View from the South - Posted By: Terri Willard
The session this afternoon was organized by the Instituto del Tercer Mundo and the Third World Network and attracted approximately 50 participants. The presenters approached the idea of financing ICT4D from a Global Public Goods (GPG) perspective. Some strategies for financing included: internalizing externalities, adding a global tax, and to reach the remaining needs - sort out who is going to fund what, where.
The perspectives from Africa focused on the types of ICT investment desired. This ranged from ICT access, use and social approapriation by the poor to us of ICTs for economic growth and development. They argue that finaincing ICTs should primiarily focus on poverty eradication. They really wanted to see more research on how to make global public goods framework operational and expresed concerns that the DSF approach could perpetuate funding of small scattered pilot projects, rather than the scale-up which needs to occur.
The GPG perspective is interesting... Roberto Bissio explained how connecting a village in Peru adds value and business opportunities to the network as a whole. It's not just value for the community. But, the burden of paying for the connection is all on the poor people and/or their governments with no help from all of the others who will benefit. These other people are seen in the system as free riders. Need to think of and design mechanisms so they pay for part of the benefit - considering they have the ability to pay and the "let the market provide" isn't working. Markets have taken the cream of high density upper class urban markets but has no interest in the rest.
But how do you finance GPGs? ODA funds aren't there and increasing in the way they should have been... and they go to the flavour of the month in development. Only real long term solution is some form of taxes (with that name or another). Can be on computer appliances or micro-chips (where it's easier to gather since there are smaller number of producers). Or on domain names or other aspects. UNDP proposed a tax on email at one point... Bissio suggested that we need to fight to keep the idea of taxes on the table.
Martin Khor raised the unsolved issue of whether an additional new fund (one way or another) for ICT4D is needed. He acknowledged that many donors seem to be back at the table to discuss increasing aid flows through the MDGs or other mechanisms. But since MDGs are silent on flows of information and knowledge, we're a bit in the dark. The debate is more on the method of financing... Don't really need an international body in chanrge of it; national governments can develop and administer it.
| February 21, 2005 | 07:58:48 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 2 – Global ICT Policy and Development Alliance - Posted By: Terri Willard
Drafts of a concept note (dated 13 February) have started to circulate around the PrepCom regarding a proposed “Global ICT Policy and Development Alliance”.
According to this concept note, “The GIIC, GKP, GBDe, WEF, G8 DOT-Force, and the UN ICT Task Force among others, were launched at various points in time to bring stakeholders together for global policy debate, knowledge sharing and advocacy. While laying important foundations, these forums have had limitations that impeded their impact, such as the level and effectiveness of participation and engagement, in particular of the private sector and civil society in certain instances, and lack of ability to effectively reach out to non-specialized policy makers and development stakeholders… Against this background, a broadly shared sense among key stakeholders is emerging that these early forums and processes were first steps… The Secretary General of the United Nations has endorsed the proposal of the Chairman of the UN ICT Task Force to launch a Global Alliance for ICT and Development and asked the Task Force to develop, in consultation with all stakeholders, concrete proposals.”
I can’t help but wonder if I’m the only one who finds this idea amusing?
First, no one seems to have told that the GKP and WEF that they are supposed to be dead. While the rest of the alphabet soup was set up as a succession of time-bound inter-governmental processes, the GKP and WEF are ongoing. So, at heart this concept is a criticism of the GKP and WEF for not being multi-stakeholder enough. On the GKP side, they have strong participation from southern civil society and some small business. On the WEF side, they have strong participation from governments and large business. Is it only me who finds these to be nicely complementary?
Second, why would anyone believe that the Alliance would magically be able to get all stakeholders happily cooperating around the same table? How would it overcome the “limitations that have impeded the impact” of previous attempts at creating an umbrella mutli-stakeholder partnership for ICT4D?
Third, somewhere underneath it all, I think we’re all just scared that when WSIS ends, we’re going to end up back home and lonely. Let’s face it… from the G8 DOTforce to now, it’s been an amazing ride. Many people involved in these processes and dialogues have developed great friendships. We love getting together a few times per year to commiserate over the ideas we’re developing and to try to develop workable projects and partnerships. Those working on ICT4D in a given country or organization are usually few and far between in comparison to other development issues like water or health. We need each other for emotional and creative support. And you can bet that civil society will support this idea because they are more scared than others that if this all ends, we’ll have to start paying our own way to get together again. End result, we all scatter back to our bi-lateral projects on the ground. Which may or may not be a bad thing, depending on how you look at it.
Looking forward to the session on Monday about this to see where the discussions go.
| February 18, 2005 | 17:05:01 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 2 – Youth Caucus Meeting - Posted By: Terri Willard
We had a great Youth Caucus meeting this morning from 10-11 AM in Room XXII. This will be our normal meeting time and place over the coming week.
The turnout was excellent for the meeting – 18 people drifted in over the hour, about half youth and half youth supporters and those who work with/for youth. All world regions were represented, although Latin America unfortunately had no young person present (but Gloria Bonder from FLACSO Argentina came to wave the flag for the gender caucus and to try to continue to work on ways to increase participation of Latin Americans in the PrepComs). It was great to see many new people in the room who are just beginning to be involved in WSIS.
Since it was the first meeting, we spent most of the time on introductions and a history of the Youth Caucus. Titi did a great job at outlining the process and achievements of Phase I before moving on to highlighting the activities of the Caucus in Phase II. She noted that Phase II for us is really about extending the community of young people involved by reaching out to rural youth, with a special focus on rural young women.
At this PrepCom, we have three main areas of action to organize around:
• Policy inputs – At this prepcom, the government delegations are negotiating on two main issues (Internet governance and ICT4D financing) and how to fit these into two documents (a political “chapeau” and an “operational plan” to make the action plan more concrete). The Youth Caucus policy working group provided written inputs on these documents prior to the prepcom, but we need to reinforce them and encourage government delegations to take up the issues highlighted in the texts.
• Communications – We need to continue to flow information in a timely manner between the youth caucus and the rest of the prepcom – both directions. We need to make sure that concerns and ideas of young people NOT in Geneva are raised and addressed; and we need to make sure that we let young people know what issues are being discussed, what decisions have been made, and where there is still room for influence. Our main tools available are the WSIS Youth listserv, the WSIS youth site, and the Youth@WSIS newsletter.
• Event – The Youth Caucus has a couple of large official announcements to make next week. These are regarding the launch of the WSIS Youth video (made during phase I), the launch of the World Summit Youth Awards (and WSYA Radio), and the Rural Youth National Campaigns on the Information Society (I hope I got that name right). The event is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday with some negotiation currently over who which other caucus we might be able to trade with in order to get a good room at a good time (10 AM is not the best; lunchtime is slightly better).
After the meeting Titi asked the youth participants at the meeting to volunteer for teams working on each of these 3 areas. The Event team was scheduled to meet at 2 PM (Serpentine cafeteria) and the Communications Team at 3 PM (Cybercafe, of course ;-) )
We also had a few good updates from participants about other opportunities that are under development. For example,
• Gloria Bonder (Steering Committee for the Gender Caucus) noted that the gender caucus in Latin America will be meeting twice (April – Buenos Aires, July – Rio) and really would like to involve more young people in the region.
• Moncef Jendoubi (Jeunesse-Science Association) gave an update on the planned “World Congress on Youth in the Knowledge and Information Society”, which was originally conceived as a youth “parallel event” during the Tunis Summit. There are discussions underway regarding how the Youth Caucus might partner with this event and bring it more inside the official process. Historically, “parallel” youth events have little/no impact on summits and end up frustrating and alienating the youth participants. No one wants to see that happen, so it’s important to set realistic expectations for the event.
• Titi mentioned a number of other forums and processes which the youth caucus needs to stay in touch with. These include the UNICT Taskforce, which will be having a meeting on education and youth in April in Ireland. It is likely that whatever they come up with will be added to the WSIS “operational plan”, so we need to make sure that it includes the ideas and priorities of young people. Also, this year the African Development Forum in July/August this year will focus on youth and ICTs. We need to keep those links strong.
On Monday, the youth caucus meeting will likely be more substantive in nature with reports on sessions from Friday AND discussions regarding key opportunities for policy input that day. If anyone in Geneva or not in Geneva has something to put on the agenda, please let us know!
| February 18, 2005 | 14:30:00 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 2 - Elearning for Sustainable Development - Posted By: Terri Willard
Dr. Hy Dao (Head of the Meta-data and Socio-Economics Unit for UNEP/DEWA and GRID Geneva) gave a presentation from 1:30-2:45 today on the "E-learning GEO Data Portal". About 10 people showed up.
Basically, the project seems to have started since UNEP in Geneva wanted to implement a concrete activity growing out of the WSIS Plan of Action related to "Capacity Building" (f and n). Working with Geneva Intl Academic Network, UNEP/DEWA/GRID-Europe, and the University of Geneva (SUPPREM Virtual Campus – and Dept of Geography).
The first half of the presentation discussed how the university's approach to distance learning is designed according to principles of a cognitive apprenticeship approach in which teamwork is required since the group is undertaking tasks more difficult than any one can manage independently.
Starting 3 years ago, through SUPPREM, courses are taught in English, German French and Italian about environment, economic, socio-politics and tools and methods. Using the tools for continuing education at the University of Geneva; can take course 100% virtually and get a discount on their academic credits.
The university has been working with DEWA since WSIS I to develop training materials around the GEO Data Portal tools. The Portal wasn't meant originally for the general public, but rather for technical experts collaborating on the development of GEO reports at various levels. However, an increasing number of students and others are making use of it. UNEP was hopeful that creating an e-learning tool about the Portal would enable more people to make better use of the site.
The e-learning platform has been built around open source or free software (Apache server, php scripting language, MySQL database, Mapserver, JpGraphs).
• Standard – SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model)
• Content organizer - Reload editor (Reusable eLearning Object Authoring & Delivery)
• Quizzes – Hot Potatoes
• Stand-alone web server (packed on the CD) – MicroWeb
• E-learning platform – Dokeos (not done yet)
This enables the university and UNEP to redistribute the material as they like. The training material has been put on CD-ROM (only for Windows machines so far) and on the web at http://www.grid.unep.ch/wsis/
They will test this material with students at the university in different courses. Will put students straight into GEO Data portal w/o training. Then put others using the training material to see if they can make better use of it.
In terms of questions raised by the audience.. there were many. I tried to keep my inteventions polite (since IISD is a GEO Collaborating Center and I really do like working with UNEP), but it was hard at time. I just get frustrated when UNEP doesn't seem to think things through fully....
My big concerns were in the "So now what?" category. How is UNEP promoting these tools (I pointed out that the GEO Data Portal Tutorial and User Guide page doesn't even have a link to the e-learning tool online)? When will the CD and online tools be joined by a real online course that uses all of the beautiful pedagogy spoken of in the first part of the presentation? The answers were less than stellar (although they did empahsize that the CD was just burned yesterday and this is all very new). They promised to put the link up on Monday and said that the SUPPREM course would be ready in another month. BUT, they admitted that the SUPPREM course has been funded through Swiss resources and there have been no discussions within UNEP regarding whether/how to make the course (for credit or a non-credit version) available to the people actually working in the GEO collaborating centres!!! And while I think it's nice that Swiss students and those who can pay have access to nice online training using UNEP data sets, I kind of think that UNEP has a responsibility to integrate this with their capacity building efforts with their southern collaborators. Call me crazy...
We also spent a lot of time on a question raised by Dr.-Ing. Yola Georgiadou, an Associate Professor from ITC in the Netherlands. It's her first time involved with WSIS and she was asking why there was nothing in the WSIS Declaration and Action Plan about Geospatial data. This led to a good discussion of the lack of coordination within UNEP regarding WSIS (even Dr. Hy Dao noted that he had difficulty registering for the Prepcom since he did not know who the point person for WSIS was in UNEP). My gut feeling (which I shared) was that the causes were likely many in Phase 1: preoccupation with the WSSD at the same time, perhaps a feeling that geo-spatial data was "old news" and not worth putting on the table at WSIS, and the excitement of the GeSI team (which led to their voices being the only UNEP ones heard in Phase I). It's unclear how to turn things around at this point...
Other interesting issues raised by participants:
* How will all of the GEO data sets on the CD be updated? Answer: They're not. It's important, but not in anyone's budget right now. If you want the latest data, you have to go to the portal web site.
* How to get the raw data distributed as widely as possible so people can draw their own conclusions from it rather than being spoonfed a few interpretations of it by large organizations or governments? I actually helped field that and outlined the role of GEO COllaborating centres and national partners in both collecting and disseminating data.
I don't know... All in all, what they've done is technically nice. But it still seems like UNEP didn't really think things through fully in the project in terms of really using the technology to build people's capacity. The problem isn't a technical one - it's a planning and partnership one.
| February 18, 2005 | 13:06:24 |
|
|
  At the Civil Society Bureau - Posted By: Luke Cholerton-Bozier
I represented the Youth Caucus at the WSIS Civil Society Bureau meeting yesterday here at the PrepCom2 at Geneva. It was strange, and interesting, to see how these things work and the problems that Civil Society need to over-come if we want to become more effective. For example, bureau members get caught up on the slightest of slight details, such as how to vote on issues, rather than getting into the think of the issues. Yesterday, several people held up the meeting for at least ten minutes just arguing about which voting method would be best to select bureau-to-bureau (Governmental/Civil Society) meeting facilitators. Crazy, really, and I hope that we can move on and be just a bit more efficient.
| February 18, 2005 | 07:36:24 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 1 - Recap - Posted By: Terri Willard
One of the biggest challenges of reporting out from a PrepCom is that it's impossible to be in 100 places at once. Fortunately, daily briefings within caucuses and delegations each morning help to clarify what happened in the previous day.
So... Before getting going on Day 2, I just wanted to add in some other observations of others from yesterday (gleaned from the Canadian and youth meetings this morning).
1) Plenary Session - I did a bit of reporting out on this yesterday. To add to what I noticed, apparently there has been some additional confusion in that the chair of session (from Argentina) was extremely vague over which text would be under discussion. The recommendations from the task force report were summarized into Chapter 2 of the "Operational Part" document. A first "official" version was released in January. An "alternative draft text" was released in February. Additional confusion was created by the fact that the official reps from the financing task force Secretariat were scheduled to leave Geneva on Friday and over the weekend - leaving no one to defend the taskforce's work in the negotiations next week. That's now changed fortunately. In terms of substance, there is also a lot of confusion of what delegations mean when they talk about the Digital Solidarity Fund. It's increasingly clear that some are talking about MUCH more than the existing fund designed and supported by municipalities. If a recommendation were to come forward "supporting" the DSF, what vision of the DSF is being supported?
2) Civil Society human rights meeting - Apparently, this session yesterday was quite explosive. It brought to a head the concerns simmering since WSIS I PrepCom 2 regarding the accreditation of human rights NGOs for the Summit in November. Many Tunisian and Chinese human rights reps are basically being forced to be accredited under the banner of other organizations (often in Switzerland or France).
3) Joint Civil Society and Bureau Meeting - Civil society submitted a list of suggestions regarding how it would like to be involved in the Tunis Summit. Unfortunately, most are inconsistent with existing UN rules and have no chance of being implemented (e.g. giving standing to CSOs to participate formally in the Summit). I'll see if I can find a copy and post or link to it.
| February 18, 2005 | 06:30:45 |
|
|
PrepCom2 Day 1 - Wandering in Circles - Posted By: Terri Willard
Well... anyone who thinks that the PrepComs of the WSIS first phase were confusing ain't seen nothing yet.
Phase II prepcoms are back in Geneva again - but at the Palais des Nations this time. The labyrinthine building matches the the maze of discussions underway. I managed to get lost with the Irish delegation on the way over this morning after registering at the ITU building. Then, I wandered in circles for 30 minutes trying to find the youth caucus meeting location after lunch. I never did find it and ended up back at the Cybercafe for another 3 hours. Somehow, being on line there makes it infinitely easier to find people than wandering the hallways. Titi, Luke, Thomas, and the Canadian delegation eventually found their way by. Word of pregnancy travels fast here... a lot of the Canadian delegation was curious about my new approach to growing the youth caucus :-)
In any case... I found my way into the plenary session this afternoon regarding the taskforce report on financing ICT4D. I've been hoping to brush up on the issue since I'll likely end up presenting on it in Winnipeg in May for the Canadian WSIS civil society meeting. I was hoping that IISD's president, David Runnalls, would be able to - but he's out of town. So, I think we'll work on the presentation together and I'll deliver it (hopefully not to an empty room - the session is on a Sunday morning).
All in all, I find the taskforce report amusing. I think my favourite paragraph is:
"As the Task Force report has documented, nearly every major financial institution, organization, company, and Government agency that deals with the ICT development sector is almost constantly in some stage of self-evaluation, reorientation, and exploration of new and improved modes of operation. It is difficult to pinpoint specific changes that any individual or group of mechanisms should urgently undertake, which those institutions themselves are not already actively considering to one degree or another."
It's true... but as the delegation from Ghana pointed out, it seems like a bit of a cop-out. The taskforce was supposed to specifically look at the idea of the Digital Solidarity Fund put forward by the government of Senegal in Phase I. When it tanked politically in the Phase I prepcoms, it was reforumlated into a more grassroots level initiative with support from several local governments. But it hasn't really grown or gotten far. The taskforce basically chickened out and said, "Since the Digital Solidarity Fund doesn't really exist yet operationally, we can't comment on it." It's a bit lame... they COULD have commented on the ideas and principles of a voluntary unified fund, whether it exists in reality or not.
So... now we're up to each delegation standing up and asking the same question, "Ummm.. exactly where are the recommendations in the report that we are supposed to vote on bringing forward to Tunis? While a lovely document, there's nothing here we can bring forward."
| February 17, 2005 | 10:35:46 |
|
|
|
|
Host Organization
|
 |
|
|
 |
International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
Over the last 135 years, the Union's mandate has expanded to cover the invention of voice telephony, the development of radiocommunications, the launch of the first communications satellites, and, most recently, the technological convergence that heralds the dawn of a new,...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
view more
Home
Browse Resources