The NETmundial Initiative (NMI) was a controversial effort to create a new platform for internet governance issues. The NMI was named after an internet governance conference held by the Brazilian government and DNS overseer ICANN in May 2014; it was intended to help turn the conference's final principles into action.[1]
Despite the backing of both the US and Brazilian governments, the initiative ran into trouble almost immediately when it was revealed that the three lead organizers had decided to award themselves 'permanent seats' on its 25-member council, leading to comparisons with the United Nations' Security Council.[2] Despite efforts by the organizers to respond to criticism, the initiative was rejected by a number of key internet organizations including the Internet Society[3] and the Internet Architecture Board.[4] As a result, two of the five proposed permanent seats were never taken up.[citation needed]
The initiative ran for 18 months until its 'mandate' ran out in July 2016. Just prior to that deadline, both ICANN and the World Economic Forum said they were withdrawing from the project.[5] At a planning meeting, the US government representative called for the NMI to be shut down. ICANN and the WEF had contributed $200,000 each. Plans for re-election of council members were postponed and then cancelled. The remaining member - CGI.br - initially suggested it would continue the initiative in some form but in August 2016, the initiative announced an open call[6] for a new group to take over the 'solutions map' that was its most significant work product.
Background
The NETmundial meeting held in São Paulo, Brazil, in April 2014 saw 1,480 people from 97 countries come together to discuss internet governance issues in light of mass surveillance by the US government revealed by Edward Snowden. Attendees came from a wide range of sectors: government, private sector, civil society, technical community, and academia.[7]
Its concluding, non-binding Multistakeholder Statement contained a shared set of Principles and a Roadmap to guide the evolution of Internet cooperation and governance.[8] Months later, DNS overseer the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), and the World Economic Forum (WEF) funded an 'initiative' named after the conference with the goal of working together to apply the NETmundial Principles to address Internet issues in concrete ways.[citation needed]
The NMI was launched in on 6 November 2014 as an "open source platform" and a "shared public resource" that would provide help to any "calls for assistance on non-technical issues."[2] ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade said: "If there is a cybersecurity issue, or someone who has figured out how to protect children through a browser," then they could use the platform to connect with others as well as crowdsource and fund their efforts.[This quote needs a citation]
However plans announced at the same time to create a 25-member Inaugural Coordination Council on which the three organizers would give themselves "permanent seats" sparked immediate criticism and led to a lack of support that blighted all future efforts.[citation needed]
Mission and Scope
The NMI's self-created mission was to "provide a platform that helps catalyze practical cooperation between all stakeholders in order to address Internet issues and advance the implementation of the NETmundial Principles and Roadmap."[9]
Its Terms of Reference, along with other guiding documents were developed based upon these principles and in consultation with the global Internet community. Its scope included promoting the application, evaluation, and implementation of these principles and operating as an impartial clearinghouse for information about governance issues.[1] It planned to produce a platform on which diverse actors could present projects, solicit partners and establish collaborative relationships.[10] It also hoped to facilitate participation in the Internet governance ecosystem, particularly by stakeholders from the developing world, and advances multistakeholder processes at the global, regional and national levels.[1]
It noted that it would not act as a policy-making body, but would seek to complement and support existing Internet governance dialogue, processes and institutions including the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and the global Internet technical community.[1]
Rationale and Commitment
The Multistakeholder Statement generated at the initial NETmundial meeting in São Paulo, Brazil, in April 2014, identified a need to develop "operational solutions for current and future Internet Issues."[1] The NMI vows to operate in a "multistakeholder, open, transparent and inclusive manner, as a part of the Internet governance ecosystem."[1] Capacity building and financing are essential elements of the NMI's commitment to enabling diverse stakeholders to effectively participate in Internet governance development.[1]
Coordination Council
The NMI's inaugural Coordination Council composed of representatives from all stakeholder groups and geographies.[11]
Members of the inaugural Council included prominent leaders in the Internet governance ecosystem. Nii Narku Quaynor, Jack Ma, Fadi Chehade, Richard Samans, Virgilio Almeida, Jean-François Abramatic, Lu Wei, and Secretary Penny Pritzker. Initially intended as a 25-member council, only 23 councillors were ever chosen after the two seats set aside for internet organizations and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) were not taken up following rejection[12] of the initiative.[13]
The council was tasked with guiding the development of the initial phases of the NMI. It shut down in July 2016.
Secretariat
A joint secretariat, formed by staff from the three organizing partners: The Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) carried out the administrative and secretarial tasks of the NMI.[citation needed]
Council Meetings
The inaugural meeting of the NMI council was postponed due to controversy over its formation and approach. An initial first meeting was planned for 19 January, just before the annual WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland. It was cancelled however after internet groups refused to join and the business community sent a long list of questions about the initiative.[14]
A first "working meeting" took place at Stanford University on March 31, 2015. Observers were refused entry and told the meeting would be live-streamed. The Coordination Council produced a draft Terms of Reference for public comment. Council members previewed the NETmundial Solutions Map and the two projects submitted to the NETmundial platform.[15][16]
The results of the meeting went out for public comment and were met with 23 responses, most of them highly critical.[17] The NMI Council "acknowledged the need to ensure that, as the Initiative develops further, it must adhere to the highest standards of transparency and inclusiveness, as well as expand its global reach."[18] The Council agreed to take steps designed to promote "greater understanding and clarity about the Initiative's organization, role, and activities."[18]
The inaugural Council meeting took place in São Paulo, Brazil, on June 30, 2015.[19] The meeting was webcast and remote-participation enabled. Any observers that wished to be present were asked to send an "expression of interest" with spaces limited to 20 people.[20] At it, the Council adopted the Terms of Reference and adopted an operations and governance framework plus an initial approach to provide support for projects through the online collaboration platform. The Council endorsed the NETmundial Solutions Map and Collaborations Platform and discussed a third proposed activity of establishing a space for sharing best practices on local multistakeholder Internet governance structures in order to support "capacity development efforts for developing-country communities, governments and underserved stakeholders."[21]
Controversy
The NMI faced controversy from the moment it was first announced and a failure of all major internet organizations (with the exception of organizer ICANN) to support the initiative led to its inevitable decline and collapse.
Leading up to and following the initial scoping meeting of NMI in Geneva, Switzerland in August 2014, several participants expressed concerns over NMI's proposed organization and activities. Those concerns intensified following the official launch in November of that year. ISOC, the IAB and ICC BASIS published statements outlining their concerns. One main civil society expressed qualified support.[22] while another was openly hostile toward the initiative[23]
Business lobbying group NetChoice said the initiative lacked proper backing and called on ICANN to end its leadership of the NMI.[24] The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called it flawed, closed, top-down and opaque.[25] And a session at the annual Internet Governance Forum was titled: "Should we support the NetMundial Initiative?"[26]
A joint statement between ICANN and ISOC, following a meeting between the two organization in light of ISOC's rejection of the initiative read: “We had a very constructive, frank, and candid discussion on Internet Governance that included the NETmundial Initiative (NMI). On NMI we did not resolve all of the outstanding issues. The ISOC attendees, the IAB and IETF chairs would rather see the structure defined after setting the terms of reference and scope of the work. More work needs to be done by NMI and with the various committees involved.”[27]
According to Julia Pohle in the Global Policy Journal, there were three main controversial issues surrounding NMI raised by civil society and the technical community: permanent seats on the NMI Council, potential interference with the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and concern over disproportionate involvement in decision-making by economic and political elite.[28] NMI retracted the notion of permanent seats on the Council, and said it would support the efforts of the IGF as well as address concerns regarding adherence to bottom-up, multistakeholder consensus-driven governance.[citation needed]
However, with a continuing lack of support and even outright hostility toward the idea by the very stakeholders that the NetMundial Initiative purported to represent, the organization faded. When ICANN and the WEF withdrew their financial support for the initiative, planned council elections were cancelled and proposed meetings to look into reviving the approach never happened.[citation needed]
Related Research Articles
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers is a global multistakeholder group and nonprofit organization headquartered in the United States responsible for coordinating the maintenance and procedures of several databases related to the namespaces and numerical spaces of the Internet, ensuring the Internet's stable and secure operation. ICANN performs the actual technical maintenance work of the Central Internet Address pools and DNS root zone registries pursuant to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) function contract. The contract regarding the IANA stewardship functions between ICANN and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the United States Department of Commerce ended on October 1, 2016, formally transitioning the functions to the global multistakeholder community.
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is a standards organization that oversees global IP address allocation, autonomous system number allocation, root zone management in the Domain Name System (DNS), media types, and other Internet Protocol–related symbols and Internet numbers.
The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) is a committee of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and an advisory body of the Internet Society (ISOC). Its responsibilities include architectural oversight of IETF activities, Internet Standards Process oversight and appeal, and the appointment of the Request for Comments (RFC) Editor. The IAB is also responsible for the management of the IETF protocol parameter registries.
The Internet Society (ISOC) is an American nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1992 with local chapters around the world. Its mission is "to promote the open development, evolution, and use of the Internet for the benefit of all people throughout the world". It has offices in Reston, Virginia, U.S., and Geneva, Switzerland.
The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was a two-phase United Nations-sponsored summit on information, communication and, in broad terms, the information society that took place in 2003 in Geneva and in 2005 in Tunis. WSIS Forums have taken place periodically since then. One of the Summit's chief aims is to bridge the global digital divide separating rich countries from poor countries by increasing internet accessibility in the developing world. The conferences established 17 May as World Information Society Day.
The Association for Progressive Communications (APC) is an international network of organizations that was founded in 1990 to provide communication infrastructure, including Internet-based applications, to groups and individuals who work for peace, human rights, protection of the environment, and sustainability. Pioneering the use of ICTs for civil society, especially in developing countries, APC were often the first providers of Internet in their member countries.
Technology governance means the governance, i.e., the steering between the different sectors—state, business, and NGOs—of the development of technology. It is the idea of governance within technology and its use, as well as the practices behind them. The concept is based on the notion of innovation and of techno-economic paradigm shifts according to the theories by scholars such as Joseph A. Schumpeter, Christopher Freeman, and Carlota Perez.
The Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) was a United Nations multistakeholder Working group initiated after the 2003 World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) first phase Summit in Geneva failed to agree on the future of Internet governance. The first phase of World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) agreed to continue the dialogue on Internet Governance in the Declaration of Principles and Action Plan adopted on 12 December 2003, to prepare for a decision at the second phase of the WSIS in Tunis during November 2005. In this regard, the first phase of the Summit requested the United Nations Secretary-General to establish a Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG).
Internet governance consists of a system of laws, rules, policies and practices that dictate how its board members manage and oversee the affairs of any internet related-regulatory body. This article describes how the Internet was and is currently governed, some inherent controversies, and ongoing debates regarding how and why the Internet should or should not be governed in the future.
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is a multistakeholder governance group for policy dialogue on issues of Internet governance. It brings together all stakeholders in the Internet governance debate, whether they represent governments, the private sector or civil society, including the technical and academic community, on an equal basis and through an open and inclusive process. The establishment of the IGF was formally announced by the United Nations Secretary-General in July 2006. It was first convened in October–November 2006 and has held an annual meeting since then.
Satish Babu is a Free Software activist, early Internet advocate, and development professional based out of Kerala, India. He is the founding Director of the International Centre for Free and Open Source Software (ICFOSS), an autonomous academic/research institution of the Government of Kerala, India, where he worked from March 2011 to September 2015. He was earlier the CEO of SIFFS, an NGO of small-scale artisanal fishers of south India; a co-founder and President of InApp Information Technologies; and is associated with international and national professional societies such as IEEE, Internet Society (ISOC), ICANN, and the Computer Society of India (CSI).
Brazilian Civil Rights Framework for the Internet is the law that governs the use of the Internet in Brazil and sets out guidelines for state action and rights and duties for users and operators.
Multistakeholder governance is a practice of governance that employs bringing multiple stakeholders together to participate in dialogue, decision making, and implementation of responses to jointly perceived problems. The principle behind such a structure is that if enough input is provided by multiple types of actors involved in a question, the eventual consensual decision gains more legitimacy, and can be more effectively implemented than a traditional state-based response. While the evolution of multistakeholder governance is occurring principally at the international level, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are domestic analogues.
Anriette Esterhuysen is a human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa. She has pioneered the use of Internet and Communications Technologies (ICTs) to promote social justice in South Africa and throughout the world, focusing on affordable Internet access. She was the executive director of the Association for Progressive Communications from 2000 until April 2017, when she became APC's Director of Policy and Strategy. In November 2019 United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres appointed Esterhuysen to chair the Internet Governance Forum’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group.
The Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network, also known as "I&J Policy Network", "Internet & Jurisdiction, or simply "I&J", is the multistakeholder organization fostering legal interoperability in cyberspace. Its Secretariat facilitates a global policy process between key stakeholders to enable transnational cooperation and policy coherence. Participants in the Policy Network work together to preserve the cross-border nature of the Internet, protect human rights, fight abuses, and enable the global digital economy. Since 2012, the Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network has engaged more than 300 key entities from different stakeholder groups around the world, including governments, the world's largest Internet companies, the technical community, civil society groups, leading universities and international organizations.
Multistakeholder participation is a specific governance approach whereby relevant stakeholders participate in the collective shaping of evolutions and uses of the Internet.
Marilyn Cade was an Internet activist and one of the co-founders of ICANN.
European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG) is a Pan-European multi-stakeholder forum focused on Internet Governance. It is a regional sub-forum of the global Internet Governance Forum (IGF). It is an annual meeting with open participation and changing locations across European countries. Participants come from the private sector, governments, civil society, academia, and the technical community. Notable participating institutions are the European Commission and the Council of Europe.
The African Internet Governance Forum (AfIGF) is a multistakeholder forum that facilitates dialogue on Internet governance issues. It is one of the 19 regional IGF initiatives and aims to address and discuss the issues of all 54 nations in Africa.
South Eastern European Dialogue on Internet Governance (SEEDIG) is an officially recognized subregional multistakeholder Internet Governance Forum on Internet and digital policy issues. This subregional IGF National and Regional Initiative (NRI) is of particular relevance for South East Europe and its neighbours. SEEDIG has been founded in 2014 and is structured as an open and informal space for different stakeholders to discuss Internet-related issues. Annual forums are held in different parts of the region. The first annual forum was held in June 2015 in Sofia, Bulgaria.
↑ Iana; Domain Names; Icann; Net Neutrality; Fcc; off, This $199 home air-quality gizmo will tell you to VOC right; war, Nest rival: Smartmobes will decide who survives the Internet of Stuff; AT&T, Verizon and pals eat own head in effort to kill off net neutrality. "Internet cash-point boss says 'no thanks' to ICANN's web power grab". Retrieved 2016-08-29.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
↑ Iana; Domain Names; Icann; Net Neutrality; Fcc; fired, Who runs this world? Sony Pictures CEO jokes about getting UK culture minister; lawsuit, FCC hit with SEVENTH net neutrality; ticket, Mega fatcat Kim Dotcom in deportation drama over SPEEDING. "NetMundial consultation produces collective, apathetic 'meh'". Retrieved 2016-08-29.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
