[NA-Discuss] Cities, Citizens, and Internet Governance - A submission to NETmundial

Wed Mar 12 17:03:51 UTC 2014

Hi Tom,

You're raising good points. Good luck.
Just a clarification. Do you suggest that Cities  should form a new 
ICANN constituency outside GeoTLDs and the GNSO? Wouldn't it be viable 
inside a GeoTLD constituency?

Louis Houle
Président
Société Internet du Québec - ISOC Québec
Louis.Houle at isocquebec.org
www.isocquebec.org
Visitez le www.naralo.org

Le 2014-03-11 00:09, Thomas Lowenhaupt a écrit :
> Folks,
>
> I submitted the below to NETmundial. Your thoughts appreciated.
>
> Best,
>
> Tom Lowenhaupt
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Cities, Citizens, and Internet Governance
>
>
> Submitted to NetMundial by Thomas Lowenhaupt on behalf of 
> Connecting.nyc Inc.
>
>
> March 8, 2014
>
>
> Summary
>
>
> Most of us live in cities that are only now beginning to take 
> advantage of that critical Internet infrastructure, the Top Level 
> Domain. While our lives are increasingly affected by digital 
> developments enabled by the Internet, city residents have scant access 
> to the governance structures that establish the policies, standards, 
> and practices that guide the Net's operation. This submission suggests 
> ways cities and their residents can better participate in Internet 
> governance at the local and global levels.
>
>
> Background
>
>
> When ICANN earnestly activated its new TLD issuance responsibilities 
> in 2005, its initial inclination was to view cities as outside the 
> scope of entities eligible for Top Level Domains. After a persuasive 
> campaign by representatives from Berlin, Barcelona, New York, Paris, 
> Tokyo and other global cities, that viewpoint changed and cities were 
> included within ICANN's 2008 resolution authorizing a new TLD program.
>
>
> As the ICANN community struggled through the long process of 
> developing an Applicant Guidebook, many in the city-TLD community 
> noted that the needs of cities and their probable use of TLDs differed 
> in significant ways from those of generic and business TLDs. And they 
> urged that a different set of requisites for city-TLDs be established. 
> Additionally, these proponents urged that cities be forewarned about 
> the implications of a TLD, enabling cities to better prepare for the 
> responsibilities entailed in their planning and operation.
>
>
> However, the challenges surrounding the completion of an Applicant 
> Guidebook and pressure from eager applicants did not allow for 
> applicant categories. And the only significant interventions  were 
> those proffered by ICANN's Government Advisory Committee (GAC) on 
> behalf of the integrity of geographic names.
>
>
> As of March 2014 it seems likely that approximately 35 cities will 
> receive TLDs in the coming year.
>
>
> This submission advances two topics for consideration by NETmundial. 
> The first involves changes to the city-TLD issuance and development 
> process and for the inclusion of cities in Internet governance 
> processes. The second suggests a means for cities and individual 
> Internet users to better participate in Internet governance processes.
>
>
> Cities and Top Level Domains
>
>
> Cities are amongst the oldest and most complex entities we encounter 
> in our daily lives. They house more than half our planet's population, 
> with U.N. estimates projecting that will rise to 75% by mid-century. 
> Cities are the places from which a preponderance of ideas and economic 
> development emerge. And there's growing acceptance that a sustainable 
> planet is likely to arise from the efficiencies of urban areas.
>
>
> To date, the digital needs of cities have been given short shrift by 
> Internet technologists and the Net's governance ecology. As remedy, we 
> offer the following suggestions.
>
>
>  *
>
>    The Roadmap should recommend a more robust process for issuing
>    city-TLDs. This should include a recommendation that the TLD issuing
>    entity provide an informative and enlightening application process
>    for cities considering TLD acquisition. While the "letter of
>    non-objection'" required of the 2012 city-TLD applicants held the
>    spirit of informed consent, the inclusion of a detailed scoping of a
>    city-TLDs utility to residents, local businesses, quality of life,
>    government operation, and global identity would better contribute to
>    their efficacious planning and development.
>
>
>  *
>
>    Cities do not have a formal place in the Internet governance
>    ecology. While a City-TLD Governance and Best Practices workshop was
>    held at the 2010 IGF in Vilnius, follow-up has been scant. At ICANN,
>    there's a move to include city-TLDs within the Registry Constituency
>    of the GNSO, but only as part of a broader geographic
>    representation. However, considering their size, their unique needs,
>    and their importance to the global economy and a sustainable planet,
>    we urge that cities be considered a full stakeholder within any
>    multistakeholder regime.
>
>
> A Message From The Bottom
>
>
> Our lives are increasingly affected by digital activities enabled by 
> the Internet. Yet Internet users have modest access to the "bottom-up" 
> governance structures that establish the policies, standards, and 
> practices that guide the Net's operation.
>
>
> Here in New York City we've experienced a small inkling of the 
> potential of bottom-up participation in Internet oversight and 
> management through two At-Large Structures. One is operated by the New 
> York Internet Society, a chapter of the global Internet Society, and 
> another by Connecting.nyc Inc., an advocacy and education organization 
> focused on the development of the .nyc TLD. For those not familiar 
> with the role of the At-Large Structures within ICANN, here's a brief 
> history.
>
>
> In its early days ICANN provided for strong representation of 
> individual Internet users in its decision making processes. It did so 
> by allocating 5 seats on its board of directors to be filled by 
> Internet users, with each of ICANN's regions selecting one member via 
> a direct election. One such election was held and, for a time, 5 ICANN 
> board members were selected by individual Internet users.
>
>
> The corporation found fault with the selection process and replaced 
> the user-selected members with an appointed At-Large Advisory 
> Committee and a Nominating Committee charged with selecting several 
> board members.
>
>
> In recent years the At-Large was reconstituted and now participates in 
> selecting one (1) voting member to ICANN's board of directors. This 
> member is selected via a multi-staged process that provides for each 
> At-Large Structure (organizations with membership and other 
> structures) casting a vote for its preferred board member.
>
>
> While one board member is better than none, by any measure, under 
> today's governance formation, the world's 2+ billion individual 
> Internet users and the At-Large Structure's impact on ICANN's 
> governance decisions remains tenuous.
>
>
> In our role as an At-Large Structure Connecting.nyc Inc. has observed 
> a significant improvement of the At-Large's operation over the past 
> several years. As one example, this past year the At-Large made 
> significant contributions more than a dozen ICANN policy considerations.
>
>
> But far more can be achieved by expanding and enhancing user 
> engagement the through the following actions.
>
>
>  *
>
>    The number of seats selected by individual Internet users on ICANN's
>    board of directors should be increased. Reverting to the original 5
>    seats seems a reasonable short term target.
>
>
>  *
>
>    The new board seats should be allocated as of old, one per ICANN 
> region.
>
>
>  *
>
>    The new seats should be selected by direct vote of each region's
>    At-Large Structures. (There are currently 180 At-Large Structures in
>    the 5 regions.)
>
>
>  *
>
>    The number of At-Large Structures should to be increased with
>    additional resources provided to facilitate their operation.
>
>
>  *
>
>    Care should be taken to assure that participation by the poor and
>    the marginalized is facilitated.
>
>
>  *
>
>    Concomitant with this resource allocation there needs to be improved
>    transparency and accountability measures for the At-Large.
>
>
>  *
>
>    In those instances where At-Large Structures exist in cities with
>    TLDs, city government should be provided with ex officio 
> participation.
>
>
> For those interested in learning more about the At-Large, an At-Large 
> Summit is to be held during ICANN's June 2014 London meeting, with a 
> representative from each of the At-Large Structures in attendance.
>
>
> If is our belief that engaging cities as stakeholders and expanding 
> the At-Large will democratize and enhance the ICANN's operation.
>
>
> -----
>
> Connecting.nyc Inc. is a New York State not-for-profit formed in 2006 
> to advocate and facilitate the development of the .nyc TLD as a public 
> interest resource. In 2012 it was recognized as an At-Large Structure 
> by ICANN.
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>