NETMundial+10

Contributor: Cristian Leon, AlSur

Stakeholder Group

Country

I - PRINCIPLES FOR INTERNET GOVERNANCE PROCESSES

I - A) THE 2014 NETMUNDIAL PROCESS PRINCIPLES

1. The 2014 NETmundial meeting adopted a set of 10 Principles for Internet Governance Processes. In light of the rapid technical, social, and economic evolutions that have taken place since then, please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

The 10 “NETmundial Internet Governance Process Principles” adopted in 2014 remain relevant to address today’s digital governance challenges

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Our persistent difficulties in dealing with digital issues largely stem from insufficient inclusion of all relevant stakeholders in policy discussions

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Our persistent difficulties in dealing with digital issues reflect different interests, priorities and value systems of distinct stakeholders

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

2. After reviewing the set of Principles for Internet Governance Processes from NETmundial 2014, do you think they need to be supplemented, in order to guide the development of the governance of the digital world? Please detail.

Technological Advancements: The digital world is constantly evolving with new technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and the Internet of Things (IoT). These advancements may introduce new governance challenges that were not addressed in the original principles. Emerging Issues: Issues such as cybersecurity, data privacy, and online misinformation have gained prominence since 2014. Supplementing the principles could help address these emerging challenges and provide guidance on how to navigate them effectively. Inclusivity and Diversity: The original principles aimed to foster a multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance. However, ensuring the inclusivity and diversity of stakeholders in decision-making processes remains an ongoing challenge. Supplementing the principles could provide clearer guidance on how to achieve meaningful participation from all relevant stakeholders. Global Events and Changes: Geopolitical shifts, legislative changes, and global events can impact the landscape of internet governance. Supplementing the principles could help address these changes and ensure that governance processes remain adaptable and responsive. Human Rights and Ethics: As digital technologies increasingly impact various aspects of society, it becomes essential to uphold principles related to human rights, ethics, and accountability. Supplementing the principles could help reinforce these values and ensure that they are integrated into governance processes.

Most importantly. The principles of Internet governance should reflect the fact that Internet governance has become a term that needs to be revisited after ten years. The governance institutions of 2013 do not look the same ten years later. Of particular importance is the fact that regional and national legislatures have---in the past ten years---moved decisively to regulate the Internet, thus becoming a major source of *governance* without being subjected to the NetMundial principles (for good reasons).

I - B) STAKEHOLDER RESPONSIBILITIES

3. The 2014 NETmundial statement includes the following “multistakeholder” Internet Governance Process Principle: “The respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders should be interpreted in a flexible manner with reference to the issue under discussion”. The distribution of roles and responsibilities between stakeholders is an ongoing (and contentious) subject of debate. In this regard, please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Each stakeholder group has different roles and responsibilities, depending on the topic and phases of specific governance processes

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Most digital governance processes are applying the above mentioned “multistakeholder” principle

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

4. Do you see room for improvements in the implementation of the above mentioned “multistakeholder” principle? If yes, what would you suggest?

Yes, there is always room for improvement in the implementation of the multistakeholder principle in internet governance processes. While the concept of multistakeholderism aims to ensure that a diverse range of stakeholders are involved in decision-making processes, there are often challenges in achieving meaningful participation and representation from all relevant groups. Here are some suggestions for improving the implementation of the multistakeholder principle: Enhanced Participation Opportunities, Capacity Building, Transparency and Accountability, Balanced Representation, Adaptive Governance Structures,  Conflict Resolution Mechanisms and Continued Dialogue and Collaboration.
"We need a translation of what multistakeholderism means when dealing with regional and national legislation. This requires from us to *move up* the theoretical ladder in order to identify the core political and procedural principles behind the multistakeholder approach, namely---at least---participation, inclusion, deliberation, representation. All of these principles apply, with different names, to law-making procedures at regional and national levels. However, because of the potential transnational effects of regional or national statutes, these principles should be adapted to the global nature of the Internet (and, thus, what we have learned regarding the multi stakeholder approach to Internet governance should inform those legislative processes...)"
Most multistakeholder participation is only done by global north and supported by its CSO/goverments. States in the Global South should support most participation of its CSO.

I - C) COORDINATION

5. Numerous initiatives and processes have emerged to address the broad diversity of issues raised by the digital revolution. Sometimes, multiple processes address the same issues in parallel. Please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Separate siloed discussions on a specific issue risk creating incompatible and even conflicting outcomes.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Distributed initiatives on a particular issue can help cover the diversity of approaches and perspectives.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Better coordination is needed between processes dealing with overlapping issues

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

6. If you believe better coordination is needed, please suggest ways to do so and specific text or language that could be included as recommendations in a NETmundial+10 outcome statement.

Better coordination among stakeholders is indeed crucial for effective internet governance. Here are some ways to improve coordination and specific recommendations that could be included in a NETmundial+10: Collaborative Working Groups, Alignment of Strategies and Policies, Engagement with Relevant Organizations and Initiatives (to leverage synergies and avoid duplication of efforts). This could include collaborating with IGF, ICANN and regional internet governance forums to exchange information, coordinate activities, and promote cooperation. Promotion of Multistakeholder Partnerships and Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms: This could include developing indicators, benchmarks, and reporting mechanisms to measure the effectiveness of coordination activities and ensure accountability.
"The UN should be the primary *loci* of Internet governance debates, but even within the UN there are competing programs and agencies. All these should come together under the same process. This would make participation more efficient and outcomes more legitimate. The initiatives and governance spaces (whether these are to discuss or to make decisions) that operate pushed by national states, by the private sector, by scholars, and by civil society, should be part of a coordinating committee also centralized in the UN.

There is broad consensus to support the multistakeholder approach, but little common or broadly-shared understanding about how to put it into practice. NETmundial+10 aims to help operationalize, through guidelines, principles and mechanisms, improvements for multistakeholder collaboration.

II - A) PARTICIPATION IN MULTILATERAL PROCESSES

7. Some multilateral processes offer the possibility for non-governmental stakeholders to contribute through consultations. However, these examples remain limited and there is often no transparency on how these inputs are taken into account in subsequent stages of discussions among States. Please indicate below your degree of support for the following statements:

Since NETmundial 2014, opportunities for non-governmental stakeholders to participate in multilateral processes have been improved

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

More transparent mechanisms should be put in place regarding how input from non-governmental stakeholders is taken into account

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Relevant non-governmental stakeholders should be able to attend/observe multilateral negotiations on digital issues.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

Relevant non-governmental stakeholders should be able to contribute in a meaningful way to multilateral negotiations on digital issues.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I don't know / I'd rather not respond

8. Please suggest ways to improve meaningful participation of non-governmental stakeholders in multilateral processes and add specific text or language in that regard that could be included as recommendations in a NETmundial+10 outcome statement. If possible, please indicate examples you know of meaningful participation of stakeholders in multilateral-driven processes.

Capacity building programs should be established to enhance the skills and knowledge of non-governmental stakeholders, enabling them to meaningfully contribute to multilateral processes
Providing resources and support to ensure equitable access to meetings, remote participation options, and language translation services to overcome barriers to participation.
Establishment of formal consultative mechanisms or advisory bodies within multilateral processes to ensure meaningful participation of non-governmental stakeholders. These mechanisms should provide opportunities for stakeholders to contribute their expertise, perspectives, and recommendations to decision-making processes, through regular consultations, working groups, or expert panels.
We emphasize the importance of promoting transparency and accountability in multilateral processes to ensure meaningful participation of non-governmental stakeholders. This includes providing clear information about decision-making processes, timelines, and outcomes, and establishing mechanisms for stakeholders to hold decision-makers accountable for their actions, such as publishing meeting minutes, documents, and decisions, and conducting regular reviews of stakeholder engagement efforts.
We encourage the fostering of collaboration and partnership among non-governmental stakeholders, governments, and international organizations to leverage collective expertise and resources in addressing common challenges and advancing shared goals in multilateral processes. This includes supporting initiatives, projects, and joint efforts that promote collaboration and cooperation across sectors and stakeholders.
Reduce the number of events, venues, and organizations developing IG processes; force states to support a participation fund to be distributed by an independent coordinating body; develop participation mechanisms that consider the voices of non-governmental stakeholders seriously (including through online participation, document comments, and so on...); secure access to non-governmental stakeholders to major events. An example of useful participation of civil society is the UPR process in the Human Rights Council, in Geneva, where delegations from different countries can be approached during sessions by interested civil society organizations.
Providing funding for travel and accommodation is essential for civil society, especially for organizations that are not based in Europe or the United States.

II - B) GUIDELINES FOR MULTISTAKEHOLDER CONSENSUS-BUILDING AND DECISION-MAKING

Principles of open and inclusive multistakeholder collaboration in digital governance are scattered in various foundational documents and declarations. The characteristics enunciated below are distilled from some of those documents that deal with multistakeholder collaboration processes as well as from current good practices and experiences.

The aim here is to obtain feedback from the community as to the relevance of each of these characteristics, with a view to elaborating a sort of “gold standard” or “protocol of protocols” that may serve national, regional, and global communities to establish and develop multistakeholder collaboration processes and mechanisms, as well as to assess processes and mechanisms that are presented as being multistakeholder.

9. Please rank the relevance of the following guidelines in the order of importance in your view. Assign a number from 1 to 12 to each item, where 1 indicates the most important and 12 indicates the least important:

Multistakeholder processes should be accessible to all stakeholders, regardless of their background, status, or level of expertise.

Multistakeholder processes should empower stakeholders by providing them with the necessary information, resources, and skills to participate effectively.

Stakeholders should treat each other with mutual respect, recognizing the value of diverse viewpoints and contributions.

Multistakeholder processes should involve informed and deliberative discussion among stakeholders.

Stakeholders should share responsibility for the outcomes of the multistakeholder process.

Multistakeholder processes should be governed by the rule of law, with respect for constitutional principles, human rights, and legal frameworks.

Mechanisms for resolving conflicts among stakeholders should be in place to enable decision-making.

Digital governance processes should be flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances, evolving technologies, emerging issues, and changing geopolitical dynamics.

Decisions should consider the long-term implications and sustainability of outcomes.

Capacity-building efforts enhance understanding and skills of stakeholders, particularly those from developing countries and underrepresented communities.

Multistakeholder processes should strive to treat all stakeholders fairly and equitably, considering their respective needs, capacities, and vulnerabilities.

A global multistakeholder approach to digital governance should recognize the need for collaborative action across national borders and stakeholder groups.

10. Please identify up to three relevant items from the above list you consider are not being effectively implemented in current digital governance processes.