You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 17 Next »

Summary: Phases 1&2; Phase 3

Documents for Review:

GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 10-11 v1 07 June 2017.pdf – On hold pending evaluation of Geographic Names Facilitated Session at ICANN59.

GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 19 v1 13 July 2017.pdf – Begin discussion on 13 July 2017

GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 30 v1 13 July 2017.pdf – Begin discussion on 13 July 2017 (time permitting)

Consensus Call:

CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 13 v3 13 July 2017.pdf

Implementation Plans Completed and Approved by Consensus:

CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 8 v4 12 April 2017.pdf – 04 May 2017

CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Review Implementation Charter Recs 14&15 v2 13 April 2017.pdf – 04 May 2017

CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 16 v2 15 May 2017.pdf – 29 May 2017

CONSENSUS CALL-GNSO Review Implementation Charter Rec 24-25 v4 22 June 2017.pdf – 10 July.

Implementation Plans Ongoing and Approved by Consensus:



Brief Statistics:

PhaseRecommendationsApprovedConsensus CallsUnder ReviewStaff to Draft

Detailed Status:

Phase 1: Work Already Underway

Approved by Consensus:

Recommendation 8: That Working Groups should have an explicit role in responding to implementation issues related to policy they have developed.

Recommendation 14 & 15: 14 – That the GNSO further explores PDP ‘chunking’ and examines each potential PDP as to its feasibility for breaking into discrete stages. 15 – That the GNSO continues current PDP Improvements Project initiatives to address timeliness of the PDP.

Recommendation 16: That a policy impact assessment (PIA) be included as a standard part of any policy process.

Recommendations 24 & 25: 24 – That the GNSO Council and Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies adhere to the published process for applications for new Constituencies. That the ICANN Board in assessing an application satisfy itself that all parties have followed the published process, subject to which the default outcome is that a new Constituency is admitted. That all applications for new Constituencies, including historic applications, be published on the ICANN website with full transparency of decision-making. 25 – That the GNSO Council commission the development of, and implement, guidelines to provide assistance for groups wishing to establish a new Constituency.

Out for Consensus Call:

Recommendation 13: That the GNSO Council evaluate and, if appropriate, pilot a technology solution (such as Loomio or similar) to facilitate wider participation in Working Group consensus-based decision making.

WG Reviewing Charters:

Recommendations 10/11  10 – That the GNSO Council develop criteria for Working Groups to engage a professional facilitator/moderator in certain situations. 11 – That the face-to-face PDP Working Group pilot project be assessed when completed. If the results are beneficial, guidelines should be developed and support funding made available.  Status: On hold pending evaluation of Geographic Names Facilitated Session at ICANN59.

Recommendation 19: As strategic manager rather than a policy body the GNSO Council should continue to focus on ensuring that a Working Group has been properly constituted, has thoroughly fulfilled the terms of its charter and has followed due process. Status: Staff is revising with additional references and then will send for a one-week review.

Recommendation 30: That the GNSO develop and implement a policy for the provision of administrative support for Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies; and that Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies annually review and evaluate the effectiveness of administrative support they receive.  Status: Staff has sent the draft charter to the Working Group for review.  Discussion will commence on the list and at the meeting on 27 July.

Phase 2: High Priority Recommendations

Approved by Consensus:


Out for Consensus Call:


WG Reviewing Charters:

MOVED FROM PHASE 1 TO 2: Recommendation 18: That the GNSO Council evaluate post implementation policy effectiveness on an ongoing basis (rather than periodically as stated in the current GNSO Operating Procedures); and that these evaluations are analyzed by the GNSO Council to monitor and improve the drafting and scope of future PDP Charters and facilitate the effectiveness of GNSO policy outcomes over time.  Status: On hold pending implementation review.

MOVED FROM PHASE 1 TO 2 AND ON HOLD: Recommendation 33: That Stakeholder Groups, Constituencies, and the Nominating Committee, in selecting their candidates for appointment to the GNSO Council, should aim to increase the geographic, gender and cultural diversity of its participants, as defined in ICANN Core Value 4.  Status: On hold pending results of the Work Stream CCWG Subteam diversity questionnaire.

MOVED FROM PHASE 1 TO 2: Recommendation 31: That the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group on GAC Early Engagement in the GNSO Policy Development Process continue its two work streams as priority projects. As a part of its work it should consider how the GAC could appoint a non-binding, non-voting liaison to the Working Group of each relevant GNSO PDP as a means of providing timely input.  Status: Resume discussion in Phase 2.

Staff to Draft Charters:

Recommendations 26, 27, 28, 29: 26 – That GNSO Council members, Executive Committee members of Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies and members of Working Groups complete and maintain a current, comprehensive Statement of Interest on the GNSO website. Where individuals represent bodies or clients, this information is to be posted. If not posted because of client confidentiality, the participant’s interest or position must be disclosed. Failing either of these, the individual not be permitted to participate. 27 – That the GNSO establish and maintain a centralized publicly available list of members and individual participants of every Constituency and Stakeholder Group (with a link to the individual’s Statement of Interest where one is required and posted).  28 – That section 6.1.2 Membership of Chapter 6.0 Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies: Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines of the GNSO Operating Procedures be revised to clarify that key clauses are mandatory rather than advisory, and to institute meaningful sanctions for non-compliance where appropriate. 29 – That Statements of Interest of GNSO Council Members and Executive Committee members of all Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies include the total number of years that person has held leadership positions in ICANN.

Recommendation 6: That the GNSO record and regularly publish statistics on Working Group participation (including diversity statistics).

Phase 3: Medium and Low Priority Recommendations

Approved by Consensus:


Out for Consensus Call:


WG Reviewing Charters:


Staff to Draft Charters:

Recommendation 20: That the GNSO Council should review annually ICANN’s Strategic Objectives with a view to planning future policy development that strikes a balance between ICANN’s Strategic Objectives and the GNSO resources available for policy development.

Recommendation 21: That the GNSO Council should regularly undertake or commission analysis of trends in gTLDs in order to forecast likely requirements for policy and to ensure those affected are well-represented in the policy-making process.

Recommendation 7: That Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies engage more deeply with community members whose first language is other than English, as a means to overcoming language barriers.

Recommendation 35: That the GNSO Council establish a Working Group, whose membership specifically reflects the demographic, cultural, gender and age diversity of the Internet as a whole, to recommend to Council ways to reduce barriers to participation in the GNSO by non- English speakers and those with limited command of English.

Recommendation 22: That the GNSO Council develop a competency-based framework, which its members should use to identify development needs and opportunities.

Recommendations 1, 2, and 3: 1 – That the GNSO develop and monitor metrics to evaluate the ongoing effectiveness of current outreach strategies and pilot programs with regard to GNSO Working Groups. 2 – That the GNSO develop and fund more targeted programs to recruit volunteers and broaden participation in PDP Working Groups, given the vital role volunteers play in Working Groups and policy development. 3 – That the GNSO Council reduce or remove cost barriers to volunteer participation in Working Groups.

Recommendations 5 & 9: 5 – That, during each Working Group self-assessment, new members be asked how their input has been solicited and considered. 9 – That a formal Working Group leadership assessment program be developed as part of the overall training and development program.

Recommendation 12: That ICANN assess the feasibility of providing a real-time transcription service in audio conferences for Working Group meetings.

Recommendation 17: That the practice of Working Group self-evaluation be incorporated into the PDP; and that these evaluations should be published and used as a basis for continual process improvement in the PDP.

Recommendation 4: That the GNSO Council introduce non‐financial rewards and recognition for volunteers.

Recommendation 34: That PDP Working Groups rotate the start time of their meetings in order not to disadvantage people who wish to participate from anywhere in the world.

Recommendation 36: That, when approving the formation of a PDP Working Group, the GNSO Council requires that its membership represent as far as reasonably practicable the geographic, cultural and gender diversity of the Internet as a whole. Additionally, that when approving GNSO Policy, the ICANN Board explicitly satisfy itself that the GNSO Council undertook these actions when approving the formation of a PDP Working Group.

  • No labels