Internet Society Chapters 

Meetings

ISOC Chapter meeting at IGF Athens

There were over 20 persons (apologies if we have missed someone.):

Chapters/members

• Morocco (Hilali and Jamari)
• Quebec (Faubert)
• Pacific Islands (Singh)
• Mali (Diakite)
• Senegal (Corenthin, Maye Diop, Mohammed Diop)
• Ghana (Quaynor)
• Benin (Dandjinou)
• France (Batreau, Bachollet, Ambry)
• Sweden (Franberg)
• Pierre Ouedraogo
• Walda Roseman

Trustees

• Desiree Miloshevic
• Veni Markovski
• Patrik Fältström

Staff

• Lynn St.Amour
• Matthew Shears
• Karen Rose
• Dawit Bekele

Summary of discussions

Lynn St.Amour introduced Karen Rose (ISOC Director of Education and Programs) and Dawit Bekele (ISOC Bureau Africa Manager) and outlined the other newcomers in the membership/Chapters area.  Lynn also reviewed the 2007 – 2009 budget and planning cycle that will be discussed at the upcoming board meeting in San Diego and the multi-year strategic initiatives, urging members to submit ideas.

Matthew Shears reviewed ISOC’s presence and purpose at the IGF.  He thanked those present for coming and participating – ISOC has brought a sense of balance to many of the discussions.  He commented that the first day had a low point - when the departing ITU SG (Yoshio Utsumi) - spoke and a number of high points, including when Tarek Kamel spoke in the opening session mentioning ISOC and its contribution to the spread of the Internet, and Lynn’s contribution in the afternoon which set the scene and brought focus to the debate.  He noted the ISOC presence was significant.

Others offered their general views on the IGF and ISOC’s presence, some pointing to the successful discussions on access and participation in the ISOC workshops.  It was noted that ISOC is seen as a “doer” rather than a “talker” in these discussions.  It was also suggested that there was a need to bring more of the community together at such events – perhaps even have ISOC briefing meetings on a more regular basis during conferences, etc.  Some concern that ISOC needs to ensure that security and privacy are also high on its list of focus areas.  Also, a suggestion was made that ISOC’s training should evolve with the needs of the community – a new phase of training is needed where that emphasizes ongoing training and self-sufficiency to build capacity.

A very useful discussion followed on IDN and what concrete next steps could be taken among members of the ISOC community.  Mohammed Diop, Patrik Fältström and Alex Corenthin agreed the need to work closely and to leverage other ISOC initiated work such as the Unicode and IDN Africa project launched last year.

The discussion turned to next steps – what follows on from the IGF in Athens.  How can ISOC maintain its leadership position in Internet governance matters? Some suggested creating coalitions on specific topics, others driving the Internet governance debate to the local level.  What was clear is that ISOC needs to pursue a program of activities in the run-up to Rio given the Brazilian focus on control issues related to the root and critical resources.  It was suggested that ISOC highlight in Rio best practices from across the range of the Internet governance issues, and how with the right enabling environment the spread of the Internet can occur.

The discussion turned again to capacity building and the need to leverage ISOC’s training and education programs.  Those that have come through ISOC programs continue to build networks and contribute to capacity building.  But, it was suggested that ISOC should create the next wave of people who will change the situation in Africa, who are ready for the new challenges.  The training and education programs may have to change accordingly.  It was suggested that ISOC support a drive to have E-commerce in Africa within five years.  It was noted that the Regional Bureaus will play a key role in this respect for ISOC and will help identify key areas of potential focus.  Karen Rose described developments in the education area noting that it will be strengthened with the new staff resources now on board at ISOC.  She commented on the need to work with chapters and the Bureaus to identify education needs and suggested that perhaps regional Education Advisory Groups could be formed to provide focused input on education challenges and opportunities in the regions. 

Public policy issues were also discussed, including the need to educate more in the context of Internet governance.  It was seen as critical that ISOC and its Chapters be heard in Rio and greater coordination between the two was needed.  Discussions with policy makers needed to occur at national and regional levels.  The challenge, it was noted, is that the same people are at the IGF and the same discussions are occurring.  Also, it was suggested that ISOC public policy positions should be made more available and ISOC should seek to have a clear position on a range of issues in the Internet governance space.  Certain key issues needed to be reemphasized in Rio including Access, the focus on youth, etc. 

There was general agreement that the discussion had been very fruitful and it was agreed that such discussions should be encouraged online.  It was also noted that there was a need to think further on the issue of language within ISOC and how ISOC could better accommodate those for whom English is not the mother tongue

There was a brief related discussion about the Chapter delegates list and how it was not really providing the right vehicle for substantive communications.  Matthew Shears and Karen Rose agreed to review the Chapter delegates list (with the membership function) and see if there was not a better way to structure the lists going forward.