International trade agreements and Internet governance – Pl 04 2017: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:


== Further reading ==  
== Further reading ==  
'''Until 30 April 2017.''' Links to relevant websites, declarations, books, documents. Please note we cannot offer web space, so only links to external resources are possible.  
 
Example for an external link: [http://www.eurodig.org/ Main page of EuroDIG]
Bauer M; Ferracane M F; Lee-Makiyama H; Marel E V D (2016). Unleashing Internal Data Flows in the EU: An Economic Assessment of Data Localisation Measures in the EU Member States. ECIPE Policy Brief No. 3. Available at http://ecipe.org/publications/unleashing-internal-data-flows-in-the-eu
 
Crosby D (2016). Analysis of Data Localization Measures Under WTO Services Trade Rules and Commitments. E15 Initiative Policy Brief, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development and The World Economic Forum. Available at http://e15initiative.org/publications/analysis-of-data-localization-measures-under-wto-services-trade-rules-and-commitments
 
Drake, William J (1993). Territoriality and Intangibility: Transborder Data Flows and National Sovereignty. Beyond National Sovereignty: International Communications in the 1990s, edited by Kaarle Nordenstreng and Herbert I. Schiller, Ablex, pp. 259-313. Available at http://tinyurl.com/wjdrake-tbdf-1993
 
European Commission (2017) Building A European Data Economy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic And Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2017) 9 final. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-building-european-data-economy
 
Geneva Internet Platform [GIP] (2016) WTO Public Forum. Available at https://dig.watch/events/wto-public-forum
 
Maciel M (2016) E-commerce in the WTO: The next arena of Internet policy discussions? DiploFoundation blog, 20 September. Available at https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/e-commerce-wto-next-arena-internet-policy-discussions
 
Malcolm J (2017) Will the TPP Live on in NAFTA and RCEP? Electronic Frontier Foundation. Available at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/will-tpp-live-nafta-and-rcep
 
Pérez M F (2016). Corporate-Sponsored Privacy Confusion in the EU on Trade and Data Protection. EDRi, 12 October. https://edri.org/corporate-sponsored-privacy-confusion-eu-trade-data-protection/
 
Pepper R; Garrity J; LaSalle C (2016). Cross-Border Data Flows, Digital Innovation, and Economic Growth, in The Global Information Technology Report 2016: Innovating in the Digital Economy, edited by Silja Baller, Soumitra Dutta, and Bruno Lanvin, The World Economic Forum, pp. 39-40. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-information-technology-report-2016
 
UN Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD] (2015) Information Economy Report 2015: Unlocking the Potential of E-commerce for Developing Countries. Available at http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ier2015_en.pdf
 
World Trade Organization [WTO] (1998a) Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Available at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/wkprog_e.htm
 
World Trade Organization [WTO] (1998b) The Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Note by the Secretariat (S/C/W/68). Available at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/ecom_e.htm
 
WTO member countries have recently submitted papers and proposals in preparation for the 11th Ministerial Conference of the WTO (MC11), scheduled for December 2017 in Buenos Aires.
 
• GC/116: circulated at the request of the delegations of Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, the EU, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore, and Turkey.
     
• GC/94 USA: circulated at the request of the delegation of the United States
 
• GC/96r1: circulated at the request of the delegation of Japan.
 
• GC/98: circulated at the request of the delegation of Brazil
 
• GC/99: circulated at the request of the delegations of MIKTA countries.
 
• GC/100: circulated at the request of the delegation of Japan
 
• GC/117: circulated at the request of the delegation of Singapore
 
• GC/110: circulated at the request of the delegations of China and Pakistan
 
• GC/115: circulated at the request of the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay.
 
 


== People ==  
== People ==  

Revision as of 11:32, 11 May 2017

Programme overview 2017

PL 4: Trade agreements in the digital area Consolidated programme 2018 overview

To follow the current discussion on this topic, see the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page


Final title of the session: Please send the final title until latest to wiki@eurodig.org. Do not edit the title of the page at the wiki on your own. The link to your session may otherwise disappear.

Session teaser

Are trade negotiations the next arena of Internet policy discussions? What are the pros and cons from a European standpoint?

Keywords

Digital trade, e-commerce, trade agreements, WTO, data flows, data localisation

Session description

WTO instruments already include binding provisions applicable to the Internet, and more specific Internet provisions may be included in pending regional and mega-regional agreements, such as the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA), and the EU-Canada Comprehensive and Trade Agreement (CETA) . Cross-border data flows, data localisation, mandates for the disclosure of the source code of digital products and the use of cryptographic technologies are topics which are being addressed in these various contexts. This plenary session will discuss the pros and cons of digital policy issues in trade negotiations from a European standpoint. Are European actors influencing these developments? Which of these actors have had more or less influence on European policies, through what mechanisms? What are the key European positions and alliances at the WTO and in bilateral negotiations? Which are the main initiatives aiming to achieve policy coherence within the EU (e.g. EU Commission Staff Working Document on the free flow of data and emerging issues of the European data economy)? Come share your views with us!

Format

Until 30 April 2017. Please try out new interactive formats. EuroDIG is about dialogue not about statements, presentations and speeches. Workshops should not be organised as a small plenary.

Further reading

Bauer M; Ferracane M F; Lee-Makiyama H; Marel E V D (2016). Unleashing Internal Data Flows in the EU: An Economic Assessment of Data Localisation Measures in the EU Member States. ECIPE Policy Brief No. 3. Available at http://ecipe.org/publications/unleashing-internal-data-flows-in-the-eu

Crosby D (2016). Analysis of Data Localization Measures Under WTO Services Trade Rules and Commitments. E15 Initiative Policy Brief, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development and The World Economic Forum. Available at http://e15initiative.org/publications/analysis-of-data-localization-measures-under-wto-services-trade-rules-and-commitments

Drake, William J (1993). Territoriality and Intangibility: Transborder Data Flows and National Sovereignty. Beyond National Sovereignty: International Communications in the 1990s, edited by Kaarle Nordenstreng and Herbert I. Schiller, Ablex, pp. 259-313. Available at http://tinyurl.com/wjdrake-tbdf-1993

European Commission (2017) Building A European Data Economy. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic And Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. COM(2017) 9 final. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-building-european-data-economy

Geneva Internet Platform [GIP] (2016) WTO Public Forum. Available at https://dig.watch/events/wto-public-forum

Maciel M (2016) E-commerce in the WTO: The next arena of Internet policy discussions? DiploFoundation blog, 20 September. Available at https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/e-commerce-wto-next-arena-internet-policy-discussions

Malcolm J (2017) Will the TPP Live on in NAFTA and RCEP? Electronic Frontier Foundation. Available at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/will-tpp-live-nafta-and-rcep

Pérez M F (2016). Corporate-Sponsored Privacy Confusion in the EU on Trade and Data Protection. EDRi, 12 October. https://edri.org/corporate-sponsored-privacy-confusion-eu-trade-data-protection/

Pepper R; Garrity J; LaSalle C (2016). Cross-Border Data Flows, Digital Innovation, and Economic Growth, in The Global Information Technology Report 2016: Innovating in the Digital Economy, edited by Silja Baller, Soumitra Dutta, and Bruno Lanvin, The World Economic Forum, pp. 39-40. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-information-technology-report-2016

UN Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD] (2015) Information Economy Report 2015: Unlocking the Potential of E-commerce for Developing Countries. Available at http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ier2015_en.pdf

World Trade Organization [WTO] (1998a) Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Available at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/wkprog_e.htm

World Trade Organization [WTO] (1998b) The Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Note by the Secretariat (S/C/W/68). Available at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/ecom_e.htm

WTO member countries have recently submitted papers and proposals in preparation for the 11th Ministerial Conference of the WTO (MC11), scheduled for December 2017 in Buenos Aires.

• GC/116: circulated at the request of the delegations of Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, the EU, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore, and Turkey.       • GC/94 USA: circulated at the request of the delegation of the United States

• GC/96r1: circulated at the request of the delegation of Japan.

• GC/98: circulated at the request of the delegation of Brazil

• GC/99: circulated at the request of the delegations of MIKTA countries.

• GC/100: circulated at the request of the delegation of Japan

• GC/117: circulated at the request of the delegation of Singapore

• GC/110: circulated at the request of the delegations of China and Pakistan

• GC/115: circulated at the request of the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay.


People

Please provide name and institution for all people you list here.

  • Focal Point: Marila Maciel (DiploFoundation)

Focal Points take over the responsibility and lead of the session organisation. Focal Points are kindly requested to observe EuroDIG's session principles. Focal Points work in close cooperation with the respective Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the EuroDIG Secretariat.

  • Subject Matter Expert (SME): Frederick Donck (ISOC)

SMEs are responsible for the clustering of submissions into a thematic category they have an expertise in. They define subtopics and identify submissions which fall under this subtopic. The aim is to verify submissions which can be merged in one session. In the course of the session organising process SMEs will serve as a mentor for the respective category by supporting all Focal Points.

  • Key Participants (for workshop) or Panellists (for plenary)

Until 15 May 2017. Key Participants (workshop) are experts willing to provide their knowledge during a session – not necessarily on stage. Key Participants should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Panellist (plenary) will be selected and assigned by the org team, ensuring a stakeholder balanced dialogue also considering gender and geographical balance. Panellists should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Please provide short CV’s of the Key Participants involved in your session at the Wiki or link to another source.

  • Moderator

Until 15 May 2017. The moderator is the facilitator of the session at the event. Moderators are responsible for including the audience and encouraging a lively interaction among all session attendants. Please make sure the moderator takes a neutral role and can balance between all speakers. Please provide short CV of the moderator of your session at the Wiki or link to another source.

  • Remote Moderator

Until 15 May 2017. The Remote Moderator is in charge of facilitating participation via digital channels such as WebEx and social medial (Twitter, facebook). Remote Moderators monitor and moderate the social media channels and the participants via WebEX and forward questions to the session moderator. Please contact the EuroDIG secretariat if you need help to find a remote moderator.

  • Organising Team (Org Team)

As they sign up The Org Team is a group of people shaping the session. Org Teams are open and every interested individual can become a member.

William Drake

Valentina Pellizzer

Arandjel Bojanovic

  • Reporter

Until 15 May 2017. The Reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:

  • are summarised on a slide and presented to the audience at the end of each session
  • relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
  • are forward looking and propose goals and activities that can be initiated after EuroDIG (recommendations)
  • are in (rough) consensus with the audience
  • are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place

Please provide short CV of the reporter of your session at the Wiki or link to another source and contact the EuroDIG secretariat if you need help to find a reporter.

Current discussion, conference calls, schedules and minutes

See the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page. Please use this page to publish:

  • dates for virtual meetings or coordination calls
  • short summary of calls or email exchange

Please be as open and transparent as possible in order to allow others to get involved and contact you. Use the wiki not only as the place to publish results but also to summarize the discussion process.

Contact

Get in contact with the Org Team by sending an email.

Video record

Will be provided here after the event.

Transcript

Will be provided here after the event.

Messages

Please provide a short summary from the outcome of your session. Bullet points are fine.