Bertrand de La Chapelle

1) IS THERE A NEED FOR A NEW ARRANGEMENT OR BODY ?

Clear need for a Forum FUNCTION (no existing space for multi-stakeholder interaction). This could require an additional body - or, rather a new framework allowing the creation of several ad hoc bodies or spaces following similar rules / procedures (see below reply on functions and thematic structuring).

2) WHAT FUNCTIONS SHOULD IT EXERCISE ?

Proposed roles for the Forum Framework (non exhaustive list):

- AGENDA-SETTING : allowing all actors to collectively identify their issues of common concern or interest

- CONVENING : help gather the relevant stakeholders around each issue or theme ("relevant" is a delicate word, opening up the broad question of who has a stake; but the principle could be : such a forum is by principle accessible to any entity with a stake in the issues it addresses)

- CATALYZING : fostering the formation of issue clusters, thematic networks of actors and the setting up of multi-stakeholder working groups when appropriate

- IMPROVING COHERENCE : on a given issue, help agencies and organizations with overlapping / complementary competences distribute responsibilities and workload among themselves (the extent to which the Forum could have the responsibility to solve competency disputes between competing bodies is an open question)

- CAPACITY BUILDING : awareness building and training, particularly in developing countries, both for governments and other actors

- VALIDATING CONSENSUS ON CONCRETE RECOMMENDATIONS : organize broad consultations on the result of the work of thematic groups, to verify that resulting recommendations are broadly accepted

3) WHAT KIND OF PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES SHOULD IT ADDRESS ?

A GLOBAL PUBLIC INTEREST MISSION : The Forum could have "the global public interest mission of ensuring the optimum development and functioning of the Internet and the applications it supports". Its members would pledge to contribute to this mission. A RIGHT OF INITIATIVE : Consequently, the Forum would have the right of initiative and be able to address ANY ISSUE its members collectively decide is an Issue of Common Concern or Interest related to this general mission. Appropriate procedures for this Agenda-setting function need to be determined (see below : structuration).

4) WHERE SHOULD IT BE ANCHORED ?

The formulation of the question introduces two biases :

- ANCHORED (or even linked): the term seems to imply a dependency or a hierarchy; it would be much better to say "supported by" or better use the term "HOSTED";

- INSTITUTION : The singular is uselessly restrictive; to clearly establish the multi-stakeholder nature of this Forum and promote geographical balance, it should be ideally supported or hosted by a (limited) number of institutions of various nature : some belonging to the UN system, some from civil society, some governments or private sector groupings or any combination thereof. In such a context, certain actors could take a leading role along geographic or thematic lines (deciding to fund and facilitate a specific action or group or process). As an interesting example, the World Wide Web Consortium has been, almost from its inception, supported by several different hosts, geographically distributed.

5) HOW SHOULD IT BE FINANCED ?

First of all, financing should ideally be MULTI-STAKEHOLDER, combining contributions from governments, private sector, civil society (foundations or networks ?) and potentially international organizations. Open questions are : membership fees or not ? voluntary contributions or rule ?

As a general principle, the structure of the resources of the Forum could be a matter for the members to decide.

As a start-up point, THREE LAYERS or sources of financing could be envisaged :

- a core financing by a group of hosts and a few additional founders, to guarantee setting up and viability for an initial launch period (at least three years)

- ad hoc financing for specific activities catalyzed by or initiated within the Forum (working groups, studies, ...) and supported by specific convenors (see below : Structure)

- a portion of revenues of self-supporting activities to be established under the auspices of the Forum or as the result of its own propositions (cf registration fees for ICANN)

One of the goals should be to see the resources of this Forum be linked, if possible to the efficiency/usefulness of its action, in a POSITIVE FEEDBACK LOOP.

6) HOW SHOULD IT BE STRUCTURED ?
The governance of this multi-stakeholder Forum will be a matter for its members to decide - through a GOVERNANCE CHARTER for instance. A key aspect would probably be an issue-based architecture.

Such a Framework could include some or all of the following features :

ONLINE-OFFLINE ARTICULATION : a combination of offline meetings and online tools (synchronous and asynchronous)

SELF-SUSTAINED THEMATIC NETWORKS : governments or other actors could volunteer to host, support or lead them and the governance of each network would be multi-stakeholder

STRUCTURATION IN CLUSTERS : issue networks could be grouped in a limited number of large clusters and cluster "convenors" be designated to facilitate ongoing work

THEMATIC MEETINGS : several thematic meetings (by clusters for instance) could be organized during the course of the year

ANNUAL MEETING : an annual meeting would gather a limited number of actors (200 - 300 ?) to review progress, determine orientations or new agendas and allow networking among participants. The limited number is justified by efficiency reasons. But the modalities for the designation of these actors will be critical, with an objective of geographical, gender and thematic balances. This would be discussed during the drafting of the Forum's Charter

FACILITATION GROUP : a limited group (12-15 people) could have the responsibility to ensure continuity of work and articulation between the networks and themes. Its members would be designated for a limited period (two to three years). The ultimate denomination of this group (facilitation, steering, coordination, commission, advisory, board, ...) will depend on the exact missions it will be given by the members in the Charter;

DISTRIBUTED SUPPORT TEAM : a limited full-time facilitation team (secretariat) would be set up, ideally in a geographically distributed form, at the location and with the support of the potential Hosts (see contribution above on : where should a Forum be anchored ?)