Difference between revisions of "WS 4: Your IG ecosystem may be out of date. Please check for updates"

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Format)
(Video record)
 
(31 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
This session will aim to raise participants’ awareness of the current status of the internet governance ecosystem - including major issues and debates, both globally and in Europe:
 
This session will aim to raise participants’ awareness of the current status of the internet governance ecosystem - including major issues and debates, both globally and in Europe:
  
Part One: Setting the scene: Overview of key global IG developments in 2015 as well as major IG debates and challenges ahead.
+
::Part One: Setting the scene: Overview of key global IG developments in 2015 as well as major IG debates and challenges ahead.
 
+
::Part Two: Mapping the European IG ecosystem: Identifying priority IG issue areas in Europe, including challenges and potential ways to overcome them.
Part Two: Mapping the European IG ecosystem: Identifying priority IG issue areas in Europe, including challenges and potential ways to overcome them.
 
  
 
== Keywords ==
 
== Keywords ==
#netgovernance, #multistakeholder, #IG, #IGF2016, #ecosystem, #WSIS+10, #ICANN, #enhancedcooperation, #ISOC, #ITU, #GIPO, #internetmanagement, #IGstrategy, #IGecosystem, #globalpublicinterest, #IANA
+
netgovernance, multistakeholder, IG, IGF2016, ecosystem, WSIS+10, ICANN, enhancedcooperation, ISOC, ITU, GIPO, internetmanagement, IGstrategy, IGecosystem, globalpublicinterest, IANA
  
 
== Format ==  
 
== Format ==  
Line 23: Line 22:
 
:a. Initially, participants will be asked to identify priority/key IG issues facing European countries (e.g. digital divide, privacy and data protection, cybersecurity, etc.);
 
:a. Initially, participants will be asked to identify priority/key IG issues facing European countries (e.g. digital divide, privacy and data protection, cybersecurity, etc.);
 
:b. Participants will then be divided into groups, and each group will be asked to look at one or several main IG issues, according to the previous block, with the aim to identify:
 
:b. Participants will then be divided into groups, and each group will be asked to look at one or several main IG issues, according to the previous block, with the aim to identify:
::i. 3 main challenges in addressing the issue(s)
+
::i. Three main challenges in addressing the issue(s)
 
::ii. Examples of good practices in addressing the issues/challenges (if these can be identified)
 
::ii. Examples of good practices in addressing the issues/challenges (if these can be identified)
 
::iii. Potential solutions and next steps.
 
::iii. Potential solutions and next steps.
Line 29: Line 28:
 
== Further reading ==  
 
== Further reading ==  
  
Internet Policy and Governance: Europe’s role in shaping the future of Internet Governance. European Commission, Brussels. (12.02.2014) [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0072&from=EN Here]
+
:i. Internet Policy and Governance: Europe’s role in shaping the future of Internet Governance. European Commission, Brussels. (12.02.2014) - [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0072&from=EN Here]
  
Outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society. United Nations, General Assembly. (13.02.2015) [http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN95735.pdf Here]
+
:ii. Outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society. UN General Assembly. (13.02.2015) - [http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN95735.pdf Here]
  
OECD Principles for Internet Policy Making. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014) [https://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/oecd-principles-for-internet-policy-making.pdf Here]
+
:iii. OECD Principles for Internet Policy Making. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014) - [https://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/oecd-principles-for-internet-policy-making.pdf Here]
  
Internet Governance – Council of Europe strategy 2016 – 2019. Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers. (30.03.2016) [https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805c1b60 Here]
+
:iv. Internet Governance – Council of Europe strategy 2016 – 2019. Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers. (30.03.2016) - [https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016805c1b60 Here]
  
Best Practise Forum (BPF) on Strengthening Multistakeholder Participation Mechanisms. Internet Governance Forum. (2015) [http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/documents/best-practice-forums/developing-meaningful-multistakeholder-participation-mechnisms/580-igf-2015-bpf-strengthening-multistakeholder-participation-mechanisms-1/file Here]
+
:v. Best Practise Forum (BPF) on Strengthening Multistakeholder Participation Mechanisms. Internet Governance Forum. (2015) - [http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/documents/best-practice-forums/developing-meaningful-multistakeholder-participation-mechnisms/580-igf-2015-bpf-strengthening-multistakeholder-participation-mechanisms-1/file Here]
  
An Introduction to Internet Governance. Kurbalija, J., DiploFoundation. (2014) [http://www.diplomacy.edu/sites/default/files/An%20Introduction%20to%20IG_6th%20edition.pdf Here]
+
:vi. An Introduction to Internet Governance. Kurbalija, J., DiploFoundation. (2014) - [http://www.diplomacy.edu/sites/default/files/An%20Introduction%20to%20IG_6th%20edition.pdf Here]
  
Survey on Internet Governance in South Eastern Europe and the Neighbouring Area. SEEDIG Annual Meeting, Belgrade. (22.04.2016) [http://www.seedig.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/SEEDIG-IG-survey-April-2016.pdf Here]
+
:vii. Survey on Internet Governance in South Eastern Europe and the Neighbouring Area. SEEDIG Annual Meeting, Belgrade. (22.04.2016) - [http://www.seedig.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/SEEDIG-IG-survey-April-2016.pdf Here]
  
 
== People ==  
 
== People ==  
 
*'''Focal Point'''  
 
*'''Focal Point'''  
Lea Kaspar. Global Partners Digital. United Kingdom.
+
:i. Lea Kaspar. Global Partners Digital. United Kingdom.
 
*'''Key participants'''
 
*'''Key participants'''
'''Until 15 May 2016.'''
+
:i. Dominique Lazanski - [https://uk.linkedin.com/in/lazanski LinkedIn]
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.  
+
:ii. Jovan Kurbalija - [https://ch.linkedin.com/in/jovan-kurbalija-90834629 LinkedIn]
Panellists should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session.
+
:iii. Megan Richards - [https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/megan-richards Profile page]
Please provide short CV’s of the participants involved in your session at the Wiki or link to another source.  
 
 
*'''Moderator'''
 
*'''Moderator'''
'''Until 15 May 2016.'''
+
:i. Aida Mahmutović
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.
+
:ii. Lea Kaspar
*Please provide short CV of the moderator of your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
 
 
*'''Remote moderator'''
 
*'''Remote moderator'''
'''Until 15 May 2016.'''
+
:i. Oksana Prykhodko - [https://uk.linkedin.com/in/oksana-prykhodko-b8913015 LinkedIn]
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.
 
 
*'''Org team'''  
 
*'''Org team'''  
Cristina Monti. European Commission. Belgium.  
+
:i. Cristina Monti. European Commission. Belgium.  
  
Grigori Saghyan. ISOC Armenia. Armenia.
+
:ii. Grigori Saghyan. ISOC Armenia. Armenia.
  
Oksana Prykhodko. iNGO European Media Platform. Ukraine.
+
:iii. Oksana Prykhodko. iNGO European Media Platform. Ukraine.
  
Ana Neves. Department for the Information Society. Portugal.
+
:iv. Ana Neves. Department for the Information Society. Portugal.
  
Anelia Dimova, Ministry of Transport, Information Technology and Communications, Bulgaria.
+
:v. Anelia Dimova, Ministry of Transport, Information Technology and Communications, Bulgaria.
  
Lee Hibbard, Council of Europe, France.
+
:vi. Lee Hibbard, Council of Europe, France.
  
Michael J. Oghia, Non-Affiliated, Turkey.
+
:vii. Michael J. Oghia, Non-Affiliated, Turkey.
  
Narine Khachatryan, Safer Internet Armenia & Media Education Center, Armenia.
+
:viii. Narine Khachatryan, Safer Internet Armenia & Media Education Center, Armenia.
  
 
*'''Reporter'''
 
*'''Reporter'''
'''Until 15 May 2016.'''
+
:i. Erwin Yin - [http://www.gp-digital.org/staff/erwin-yin Profile Page]
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 ==
 
== Current discussion ==
Line 94: Line 82:
  
 
Planning Call #2 - 4th May @ 9am (BST)
 
Planning Call #2 - 4th May @ 9am (BST)
 
Planning Call #3 - (TBC)
 
 
Planning Call #4 - (TBC)
 
  
 
== Mailing list ==  
 
== Mailing list ==  
 
Contact: ws4@eurodig.org
 
Contact: ws4@eurodig.org
  
== Remote participation ==
+
== Video record ==
 +
[https://youtu.be/otK8V2Lf_Pk?list=PLit-Hh_9fzQ6-DZOlraRuIwNM7kyFW-Mi See the video record in our youtube channel]
 +
 
 +
== Transcript ==
 +
[[Transcript: Your IG ecosystem may be out of date. Please check for updates]]
 +
== Messages == 
 +
1. Internet Governance for Cybersecurity
 +
:Differences in the understanding of basic terms within Cybersecurity between different actors are a major stumbling block to progress on internet governance for cybersecurity. Before sound progress can be made, all parties must form a common understanding of cybersecurity. Cybersecurity should also not be seen as adversarial to human rights, rather they should complement each other.
  
 +
2. Regulatory/Judicial Challenges for the Digital Single market.
 +
:Individuals and countries do not have a common place to address their concerns, which raises difficulties as the economy transitions into the digital/online sphere. There is a vital need for debate surrounding whether companies have a duty to pay taxes to countries in which they provide services for the use of local infrastructure, with companies such as Uber and Airbnb as prime examples of this debate.
  
== Final report == 
+
3. Human Rights
Deadline 2016
+
:Human rights issues are hugely broad and cannot be understood as a monolithic issue that exists unrelated to other internet governance issues. Rather it should form the basis of internet governance. Human rights should apply equally online and offline –all internet governance discussions should keep this in mind. Education, particularly for the younger generation, is vital in ensuring human rights are understood and respected equally both online and offline.
  
 
== Session twitter hashtag ==   
 
== Session twitter hashtag ==   
Hashtag:
+
Hashtag: #eurodig16
  
 
[[Category:Sessions]][[Category:Sessions 2016]][[Category:Participation in IG policy making 2016]][[Category:Participation in IG policy making]]
 
[[Category:Sessions]][[Category:Sessions 2016]][[Category:Participation in IG policy making 2016]][[Category:Participation in IG policy making]]

Latest revision as of 13:49, 18 July 2016


Please use your own words to describe this session. You may use external references, websites or publications as a source of information or inspiration, if you decide to quote them, please clearly specify the source.


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

Session teaser

Navigating the Internet Governance Ecosystem. Where are we and where are we heading?

Session description

This session will aim to raise participants’ awareness of the current status of the internet governance ecosystem - including major issues and debates, both globally and in Europe:

Part One: Setting the scene: Overview of key global IG developments in 2015 as well as major IG debates and challenges ahead.
Part Two: Mapping the European IG ecosystem: Identifying priority IG issue areas in Europe, including challenges and potential ways to overcome them.

Keywords

netgovernance, multistakeholder, IG, IGF2016, ecosystem, WSIS+10, ICANN, enhancedcooperation, ISOC, ITU, GIPO, internetmanagement, IGstrategy, IGecosystem, globalpublicinterest, IANA

Format

The workshop will be divided into two parts. In the first part, (co-)Moderators will invite key discussants to provide input and set the scene (Part One in the session description). The rest of the session (Part Two in the session description) would be an interactive dialogue among all participants:

a. Initially, participants will be asked to identify priority/key IG issues facing European countries (e.g. digital divide, privacy and data protection, cybersecurity, etc.);
b. Participants will then be divided into groups, and each group will be asked to look at one or several main IG issues, according to the previous block, with the aim to identify:
i. Three main challenges in addressing the issue(s)
ii. Examples of good practices in addressing the issues/challenges (if these can be identified)
iii. Potential solutions and next steps.

Further reading

i. Internet Policy and Governance: Europe’s role in shaping the future of Internet Governance. European Commission, Brussels. (12.02.2014) - Here
ii. Outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society. UN General Assembly. (13.02.2015) - Here
iii. OECD Principles for Internet Policy Making. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014) - Here
iv. Internet Governance – Council of Europe strategy 2016 – 2019. Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers. (30.03.2016) - Here
v. Best Practise Forum (BPF) on Strengthening Multistakeholder Participation Mechanisms. Internet Governance Forum. (2015) - Here
vi. An Introduction to Internet Governance. Kurbalija, J., DiploFoundation. (2014) - Here
vii. Survey on Internet Governance in South Eastern Europe and the Neighbouring Area. SEEDIG Annual Meeting, Belgrade. (22.04.2016) - Here

People

  • Focal Point
i. Lea Kaspar. Global Partners Digital. United Kingdom.
  • Key participants
i. Dominique Lazanski - LinkedIn
ii. Jovan Kurbalija - LinkedIn
iii. Megan Richards - Profile page
  • Moderator
i. Aida Mahmutović
ii. Lea Kaspar
  • Remote moderator
i. Oksana Prykhodko - LinkedIn
  • Org team
i. Cristina Monti. European Commission. Belgium.
ii. Grigori Saghyan. ISOC Armenia. Armenia.
iii. Oksana Prykhodko. iNGO European Media Platform. Ukraine.
iv. Ana Neves. Department for the Information Society. Portugal.
v. Anelia Dimova, Ministry of Transport, Information Technology and Communications, Bulgaria.
vi. Lee Hibbard, Council of Europe, France.
vii. Michael J. Oghia, Non-Affiliated, Turkey.
viii. Narine Khachatryan, Safer Internet Armenia & Media Education Center, Armenia.
  • Reporter
i. Erwin Yin - Profile Page

Current discussion

See the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page.

Conference call. Schedules and minutes

Planning Call #1 - 13th April - Summary of Call

Planning Call #2 - 4th May @ 9am (BST)

Mailing list

Contact: ws4@eurodig.org

Video record

See the video record in our youtube channel

Transcript

Transcript: Your IG ecosystem may be out of date. Please check for updates

Messages

1. Internet Governance for Cybersecurity

Differences in the understanding of basic terms within Cybersecurity between different actors are a major stumbling block to progress on internet governance for cybersecurity. Before sound progress can be made, all parties must form a common understanding of cybersecurity. Cybersecurity should also not be seen as adversarial to human rights, rather they should complement each other.

2. Regulatory/Judicial Challenges for the Digital Single market.

Individuals and countries do not have a common place to address their concerns, which raises difficulties as the economy transitions into the digital/online sphere. There is a vital need for debate surrounding whether companies have a duty to pay taxes to countries in which they provide services for the use of local infrastructure, with companies such as Uber and Airbnb as prime examples of this debate.

3. Human Rights

Human rights issues are hugely broad and cannot be understood as a monolithic issue that exists unrelated to other internet governance issues. Rather it should form the basis of internet governance. Human rights should apply equally online and offline –all internet governance discussions should keep this in mind. Education, particularly for the younger generation, is vital in ensuring human rights are understood and respected equally both online and offline.

Session twitter hashtag

Hashtag: #eurodig16