As a form of participatory democracy that builds on the other forms of democracy practiced in the world today, the variety of multistakeholder models have a promising future.
However, multistakeholderism is not monolithic, it must recognize the different roles played by different stakeholders in different issues. And that any person, alone or as part of a group should be able to contribute fully to that process according to their expertise and interests.
Furthermore, multistakeholderism is threatened by those who reject this form of democracy, oftentimes by the same states who reject democracy. This rejection of multistakeholderism finds support in all other sectors, but at this point in time those who support the model form a rough consensus in its favor.
Multistakeholderism is a form of democratic action that is still evolving and still needs a fair amount of care and attention to thrive. NETmundial has given the world one of its first examples of multistakeholder decision making modalities. This points the way forward for multistakeholderism.
1) What are the current deficiencies in the ICANN multistakeholder model?
- Is the ICANN model suitable for other organizations?
2) Discussions about multistakeholderism often refer to the concept of an "equal footing". Recognizing that different roles are played by different stakeholders in different issues, what do we mean by "equal footing", and how can we ensure that an appropriate balance of interests is achieved when addressing each issue?
- What is essential to ensuring the full participation of all interested parties?
3) Is it a problem that the stakeholder groups are typically divided in the configuration of Government, Civil Society, Private Sector?
- How can these different groups self-organize and being inclusive?
- Should there be more flexibility to allow for other interests, such as an always equal role for the technical community, and inclusion of the broader academic community as a unique stakeholder group?
4) What can ICANN learn from NETmundial, its process and recommendations (reference Internet governance process principles