[NCUC-DISCUSS] Fwd: Civil society and non-commercial engagement in ICANN - new draft approach

Fri Nov 13 14:07:21 CET 2015

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Adam Peake <adam.peake at icann.org>
> Date: November 12, 2015 at 4:08:23 PM GMT-3
> To: Tapani Tarvainen <tapani.tarvainen at effi.org>, Klaus Stoll	<kdrstoll at GMAIL.COM>, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>, Alan Greenberg	<alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> Cc: Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, Jean-Jacques Sahel	<jean-jacques.sahel at icann.org>, Heidi Ullrich <Heidi.Ullrich at icann.org>
> Subject: Civil society and non-commercial engagement in ICANN - new draft approach
> 
> Dear Tapani, Alan, Bill, Klaus:
> 
> The civil society engagement strategy has been updated to reflect comments received up to and during the ICANN Dublin meeting.  New version of the draft approach is online athttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>
> 
> I would be grateful if you would forward the message below and attachments to the NSCG, NPOC, NCUC and relevant At Large lists.  The covering note below is long, but I hope useful.
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Adam
> 
> Adam Peake
> Senior Manager, Civil Society Engagement
> ICANN
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> Thank you for the comments on the civil society engagement strategy.  We have just published as revised google doc 
> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xC5pxWr4uzkU_Uoi3guGFEFrP9LHYk_KV11mRlBcqWQ/edit?pli=1>
> 
> This doc reflects comments on the first version, comments made during the webinar, meetings with civil society organizations and individuals over the past few months and meetings at ICANN Dublin.  We also considered how ICANN's business engagement team and regional engagement teams have developed contacts and content over the past few years.  
> 
> In the new document you will see some text in square brackets. We have used this when there is a word or phrase that has not received clear agreement, comment or support.  We would welcome thoughts from the community on whether to include or remove in each case. If no comments are received in support we will remove the text in bracket by default.
> 
> 3 files attached:  the original document made available for comment as a google doc in July (clean original), a document tracking changes between the original and the version online now, and a copy of the google doc with comments (copy made at the end of the Dublin ICANN meeting.)
> 
> The following provide an explanation of how changes were made. 
> 
> Notes:
> 
> There was a suggestion to include "global" public interest, as the term isn't defined in ICANN, reverted to the more commonly used public interest, and also retaining global community as common ICANN usage. 
> 
> Editorial changes made to emphasize that ICANN will strengthen diversity.  This emphasis is carried forward in a number of places in the document. 
> 
> A new second paragraph added to explain the goal of strategy, and reflecting various comments received.
> 
> Addition of reference to representatives of noncommercial individual Internet users and academia with interest in Internet-related policy added.  Intent is to give clarity to the definition of civil society within ICANN. "Representatives of" is in square brackets, in this context it refers to At Large Structures (ALS), suggested as a more precise way to refer to individual Internet users, and it should be those ALS that self-select as being civil society.  Include or not?
> * We are be interested in comments on whether the strategy should also include individuals or remain focuses on organizations? 
> 
> The new sentence added to clarify that not-for-profit organizations serving the interests of commercial organizations, for example trade associations, would not be eligible for consideration as civil society under this definition. There was a comment about specific instances and organizations.  We suggest that the NCSG's and At Large's  respective membership processes judge whether or not an individual organization is/is not appropriately civil society. National situations lead to different organizational arrangements, charitable and not-for-profit status, etc.
> 
> Within ICANN responsibility for academia is divided between two ICANN staff groups: The Development and Public Responsibility Department (DPRD) is responsible primarily for education activities, organizing courses and such like, the global stakeholder group is responsible for engagement.
> 
> Editorial changes to remove the use of "our" and "we", etc. in the document. 
> 
> In the section long term goals, the bullet "To increase awareness…" moved to the first position and "DNS and Internet governance ecosystem" added.  Clarification on mission relevance included, plus some minor editorial changes.
> 
> We expect to develop graphics showing how civil society is organized in ICANN and how it contributes to the policy processes. 
> 
> Section1, structured approach: 
> In addition to the broad civil society engagement plan, support will also be available from the staff team for NCSG and relevant At Large Structures to sustain their communications and outreach plans.
> 
> Staff is aware of comments that better coordination is required between At-Large and the Global Stakeholder Engagement teams in their outreach efforts and participation in local events.
> 
> Section 2, tailored content and communications:
> Emphasis added recognizing the importance of activities that focus on awareness raising for civil society organizations not yet engaged with ICANN.  There should be a balance between information that serves existing ICANN civil society organizations and those that are outside the ICANN circle. Need to develop content that clearly distinguishes between the missions of the ICANN civil society groups, this should be finalized after ICANN55.
> 
> The examples of content and communications listed were suggested mainly during discussions with civil society organizations, and also from members of the GSE team based on their experience of engagement with all stakeholders and regionally. Suggestions for other activities/communications types welcome. Please make suggestions about prioritization of these activities.
> 
> Section 3 engagement activities:
> 
> Acknowledging the comments received about the importance of ICANN Fellows and NextGen program participants, who should be encouraged to join and contribute to their relevant ICANN constituencies. In-reach will also be a focus of engagement strategy, this should include training and further support for ICANN volunteers.  Propose that when ICANN staff participate in national/regional IGFs they present a consistent message civil society involvement.  This should describe how civil society works in ICANN, civil society's focus areas, etc, and nor try to represent civil society opinions. 
> 
> Internal organization:
> 
> A comment about coordination between the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions noted.
> 
> It was suggested that a small group of people from NCSG (NCUC/NPOC), At Large, and Fellows/NextGen if they wish, might form a small working party to help develop the strategy approach, working through monthly calls.  This contact group would bring information to the process from the broader community.  Volunteers for this group would be welcomed.  
> 
> Annex:
> Roadmap of external activities for partnership in FY16 will be maintained as a separate document and online calendar.  The calendar will be one of the functions available in a new constituency membership management system, expected to be available soon.  Thanks to NARALO for a list of events, these will be included in the overall events listing.  The community can share events relevant to civil society interested in ICANN and Internet policy, and suggestions for events where ICANN might organize a session or contribute in some way would be helpful.
> 
> The new membership management system will provide better visibility of current members, and their areas of interest and expertise.  
> 
> There were comments about the need to translate some materials.  Suggestions as to key documents for translation, and into which languages would be welcomed.  
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Adam
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ICANN Civil Society engagement approach July 2015.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 23126 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: comparision changes ICANN CS engagement.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 44546 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment-0001.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DRAFT Approach ? CS ICANN google doc.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 14108 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment-0002.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20151113/9712b001/attachment-0003.html>