Replies to the Questionnaire
<< Start < Prev 23/40 Next > End >>

Comments on the Formal consultation with Forum participants In accordance with
Paragraph 76 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society


Affiliation: AT&T Services, Inc.

Name: Jeff Brueggeman

Responses:

1. To what extent has the IGF addressed the mandate set out for it in the Tunis Agenda?
AT&T Comments on the Continuation of the Internet Governance Forum
July 15, 2009


AT&T Inc., on behalf of its affiliated companies, (“AT&T”) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the desirability of the continuation of the Internet Governance Forum (“IGF”) in accordance with Paragraph 76 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society. AT&T has actively participated in all three annual IGF meetings, as well as public consultations and other IGF-related meetings. We strongly support the continuation of the IGF and its truly unique model of multi-stakeholder interaction, which promotes an open and non-binding exchange of ideas and information on Internet governance policy issues.

AT&T is a global IP network and Internet provider and, as such, is a major stakeholder in the Internet community. In this role, and in its position serving Internet end users around the globe, AT&T is directly impacted by Internet governance issues and thus has a significant interest in the success of the IGF and the broader WSIS principles. AT&T has had a positive experience with the IGF process, which is helping to promote ongoing dialog, consensus-building and sharing of best practices. In addition, the presence of the IGF has helped to increase the participation of businesses from countries such as Brazil, India and now Egypt in Internet governance discussions. This provides a good indication that the IGF process is taking root and creating a “culture” of inclusion and participation. AT&T recognizes that IGF is an important catalyst for promoting ongoing interactions and will continue to serve a unique role in helping to achieve the broader goals of the Internet and information society.

The IGF has been effective at focusing on the mandate established by the WSIS principles and the Tunis Agenda, while also providing a forum for discussing a broad range of policy issues. The meeting agendas appropriately have emphasized a number of key themes, such as expanding access and inclusiveness of the Internet, safeguarding the privacy and security of Internet users, and maintaining the security and stability of critical Internet resources. Importantly, these policy discussions have been evolving over time, so that the IGF process now encompasses both an exchange of views on challenging issues and an exchange of best practices and consensus views on more mature issues. For example, there has been a consistent focus on ideas and strategies for reaching the billions of people worldwide who currently are not connected to the Internet. This discussion has covered a wide range of creative solutions for expanding the availability of affordable Internet access, but also identified some of the challenges of enabling access for populations with unique needs (e.g., children, users with disabilities and communities with no written language).

At the same time, the flexibility of the workshop and dynamic coalition process has allowed a diversity of issues and views to be brought into the IGF process. Indeed, one of the most significant developments is the emergence of the multi-stakeholder participatory culture of the IGF in addressing a range of topics where there is potential disagreement among community stakeholders. The same divisive issues that arose in the WSIS process are now being constructively discussed and debated in a multi-stakeholder environment where different stakeholders are deepening their understanding of views and concerns, and considering how to work together. Bringing together different participants and viewpoints is a unique contribution of the IGF. We have seen the development of new interactions and relationships, which contributes to greater understanding of the issues among diverse stakeholders.

Moreover, the IGF is having a broader impact beyond the annual meeting. The policy dialog and exchange of ideas is now being expanded and continued throughout the year through the emergence of regional and national IGF meetings, ongoing dynamic coalition discussions and the public consultations hosted by the IGF Secretariat. These opportunities for interaction are, in themselves, facilitating new interactions and openness to working across traditional stakeholder lines. These are additional positive indicators of the culture being established by the IGF community and the desire of participants to build on their experience at the annual IGF meetings. In these respects, the IGF is reflective of the Internet itself – it is flexible, rapidly evolving, inclusive and participatory.

AT&T has benefitted from its participation in the IGF process. Once again, the foundation of the IGF is a truly multi-stakeholder process that incorporates the diverse views and perspectives of the Internet community. The IGF is helping to foster a growing global network of business participants that are more engaged in the ongoing policy discussions and more linked to the Internet community. The unique IGF model has been successful in bringing together interested stakeholders in a unique and non-binding forum for the sharing of views, information, knowledge and experiences on a range of issues related to Internet governance. In the case of AT&T, the IGF has led us to become more engaged in global Internet policy discussions as a result of our participation in the IGF, and it has helped us to develop positive relationships with other Internet stakeholders. While it may be difficult to quantify, the IGF has had an important impact as a catalyst for consensus building, capacity building and the dissemination of information and best practices.

Looking forward, we support providing the IGF Secretariat with the necessary resources to support participation and outreach. This includes support for regional and national IGF meetings, as well as continued efforts to expand remote participation and online tools to extend the reach of IGF interactions to additional stakeholders. The IGF Secretariat also has provided an important function by documenting the policy discussions that are taking place at IGF meetings and distributing information to the community. We support the continued expansion of mechanisms for the IGF to share best practices and other relevant information, and to capture the direct and indirect impact that the IGF is having in broader Internet community.

In summary, AT&T strongly supports the continuance of the IGF. Experience has shown that the IGF serves an important purpose by providing a unique forum for bringing together diverse stakeholders on an equal footing to engage in an ongoing public policy dialog on Internet governance issues. AT&T recommends that the IGF be charted for at least an additional five years, in order to provide stability for IGF participants and stakeholders. We look forward to continuing our active participation in the IGF process and engaging in meaningful interactions with other stakeholders from across the Internet community.

2. To what extent has the IGF embodied the WSIS principles?
Please see question #1.

3. What has the impact of the IGF been in direct or indirect terms? Has it impacted you or your stakeholder group/institution/government? Has it acted as a catalyst for change?
Please see question #1.

4. How effective are IGF processes in addressing the tasks set out for it, including the functioning of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), Secretariat and open consultations?
Please see question #1.

5. Is it desirable to continue the IGF past its initial five-year mandate, and why/why not?
Please see question #1.

6. If the continuation of the Forum is recommended, what improvements would you suggest in terms of its working methods, functioning and processes?
Please see question #1.

7. Do you have any other comments?
Please see question #1. ?chronoformname=FormalConsult032009View&respcnt=23?>

Top of Page

 
Joomla Professional Work

Latest News

Popular

Copyright © 2005-2010 Internet Governance Forum. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Level A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0