Internet Governance
Internet Governance Forum (IGF)
Statement by Matthew Shears at the Closing Ceremony of the Internet Governance Forum in Rio
November 2007.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honor to be a speaker at the closing ceremony. My name is Matthew Shears, with the Internet Society. I have led the Internet Society’s engagement with the IGF since the forum’s inception. I am also a member of the Advisory Group to the IGF.
Matthew Shears addressing the IGF closing session
I would like to make a few comments on Rio and the way forward to Delhi. First though, a word or two on the community that I represent.
The Internet community has supported, contributed to and participated in the WSIS, and IGF since their beginnings. Yet our commitment to sharing the Internet and the benefits of this technology with the whole world, regardless of race, color, politics, nationality or any other differentiation among human beings or nations, long predated the WSIS. At the Internet Society, for example, we have been working to expand the reach of the Internet since 1992.
The Internet community’s goals and actions are consistent with the output documents of the WSIS, and the principles and purpose embodied in them. This community’s engagement with all stakeholders in Rio is yet another clear indication of our commitment to multistakeholderism. We have organized workshops across stakeholders and sponsored speakers from around the globe; we have had productive discussions with governments, international organizations, Civil Society, and the private sector, all with the aim of pursuing our common objective of increasing the availability of, and access to, the Internet.
We have all had a very productive 4 + days. The diversity of sessions, the workshops, open forums, best practices forums, and of course the main panels has been truly rewarding. In fact the challenge has been to choose between them. Fortunately, strategically placed snacks along the hallways gave us the energy to cover as many sessions as possible without falling over from exhaustion.
We have seen the continuation of this unique multi-stakeholder model in action. We have seen yet again the value of frank discussion on a range of important issues to the future of the Internet. Rio has reinforced the importance of a dynamic and collaborative experience sharing environment: the workshops are an embodiment of this.
We have had a robust discussion across the range of issues encompassed in the new theme area of critical Internet resources. The main panel highlighted the issues, but the workshops dug into them and gave all stakeholders an opportunity to discuss the issues in greater depth. The Internet community welcomes this dialogue and hopes that it will encourage further engagement by all stakeholders in the open policy development processes of the Internet organizations.
So now we are onto Delhi with the cumulative experience of IGF Athens and IGF Rio.I would like to offer one or two observations.
Part of the IGF’s purpose is to engage broadly across stakeholders and across regions. The ability to reach beyond the physical confines of an IGF is an expectation. Remote participation is therefore an essential tool. Yet, there was but one question for the access panelists through the remote channels. This is not a criticism of the IGF Rio infrastructure, but this should cause us to think about how we make this event ever more relevant to those who do not have the wherewithal to attend in person. We must shape the IGF to encourage greater and more diverse participation – if we fail in this respect, the IGF will have failed.
The IGF can evolve further, this all will probably agree on. However, there is, in true multistakeholder fashion, a diversity of views as to how it should evolve. We are of the firm belief that the IGF can evolve so that it brings greater value to participants without becoming burdened by further processes and structure. Undoubtedly there are some important issues that need to be addressed before Delhi, but they should not undermine this grand experiment.
Defining success is always difficult for these types of events. It should not be measured by whether we can tick the boxes in the mandate but rather by understanding how the main sessions, the workshops or the best practices forums resonate with the participants and bring about change.
Let me give you a very concrete example. Yesterday, after the workshop on the root server system, and the best practices forum on Internet Exchange Points, some government representatives approached the speakers asking how they could go about installing root server instances and Internet exchange points in their countries. That is success. And if those expressions of interest result in concrete actions back home, then the IGF will have had the type of impact we have been hoping for. This is what we should be seeking to build on for Delhi.
Finally, I would like to quote the Secretary-General of the United Nations who said in his opening statement read by the Under Secretary-General:
“This forum is modest in its means, but not in its aspirations. It may have no power to make decisions, but it can inform and inspire those who are in a position to make them.”
Ladies and gentlemen, we must keep these words in mind as we take the IGF forward. Let us build on Rio and work together to create an IGF in Delhi that will inform and inspire all participants.
Thank you.
