FW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Civil Society and the Multi-Stakeholderism

Sat Apr 2 16:36:31 BST 2005

Hi, Elizabeth, Claudia, and everyone -- Richard Jordan here, still the Northern Co-Chair of the CSD/NGO Steering Committee (CSD being the UN Commission on Sustainable Development).

I think it was perhaps during the first Prep Com or after the first Prep Com for the Geneva phase of the Summit that I may have sent an email that outlined the process of the Steering Committee, which came about during the process that formed the CSD itself in the UN system.

That process has, along the way, suffered from a great deal of contention between elements within the Steering Committee and also from the outside. I will not go into that matter today.

Suffice it to say that ALL of the NGO caucuses in the Steering Committee were established with both gender balance at the leadership, one male and one femal Co-Chair, and geographic balance, one of the two Co-Chairs had to be from the North and the other one from the South.

It would seem that in examining the concept of the multi-stakeholder process you all are assuming that the history of the WSSD multi-stakeholder process ONLY goes back to maybe 2001 or 2000.

Minu's work, and I have known Minu for quite some time, is quite valid and a good contribution to the process.

The North and the South Caucuses of the Steering Committee may be discussing some ideas that will again bring the Steering Committee into the forefront of the sustainable development agenda.

The process that the CSD Secretariat has instituted after the CSD revised its multi-year framework after CSD 10 has been to divide the leadership roles among three networks of NGOs, of which the Steering Committee is NOT one.

I think that it is important to realize that in the CSD structure currently, where there is a review year on sectoral issues, such as freshwater, sanitation and human settlements, followed by a year in which a set of policy decisions on the topic(s) -- there are clusters -- are negotiated by governments, that the Steering Committee broke new ground in: gender balance, geographic balance, and invitations for new groups -- the approximately 40 "caucuses", which I outlined in a previous email as being continuing mechanisms that exist not just during CSD but during the year as well -- to operate.

So I think that in terms of multi-stakeholder dialogues, there are discussions right now going on within the UN system, at least among NGOs, as to new modalities of working within the UN system.

So please realize that multi-stakeholder approaches pre-date WSIS by quite some time.

Many thanks, Richard Jordan - Northern Co-Chair of the CSD/NGO Steering Committee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elizabeth Carll, PhD" <ecarll at optonline.net>
To: plenary at wsis-cs.org
Subject: FW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Civil Society and the Multi-Stakeholderism
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:34:57 -0500

> 
> 
> Claudia,
> 
> An excellent suggestion to begin to reflect on identifying key words.  A
> shared understanding of concepts and constructs, will help build a shared
> vision for civil society.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Elizabeth
> 
> Dr. Elizabeth Carll
> Focal Point to WSIS
> International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies;
> Chair, Media/ICT Working Group,
> UN NGO Committee on Mental Health, New York;
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org]On Behalf
> Of Claudia Padovani
> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 12:57 AM
> To: plenary at wsis-cs.org
> Subject: R: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Civil Society and the Multi-Stakeholderism
> 
> 
> Ciao to all and apologies for not having been active on the list after
> prepcomII (just struggling with professional commitments). I would like to
> thank Ralf for his contribution on multi-stakeholderism which is a very
> useful update on discussions that are developing within the CS sector, while
> introducing some issues that deserve being further reflected upon. I have a
> few comments and a couple of suggestions.
> 
> Research we conducted after Geneva on documents has shown that even within
> civil society org there are quite different understanding of processes,
> actors and respective involvement (Continuum, vol 18 n. 3). This is normal
> and diversity can be constructive, but it is also important to be kept in
> mind: for some governance is mainly a national matter, for others
> governments still have to play a central role; the multi-level dimension is
> clearly crucial to local authorities; governments are interested in
> procedural aspects while the CS alternative declaration clearly focused in
> the "quality" of multi-actor involvement.
> 
> In this sense I support Wolfgang and Rikke's comments and would suggest
> that, alongside with a CS effort to develop own stocktaking exercise
> according to its own standards, we could also develop a reflection on
> standards about multi-stakeholder processes. A good starting point in this
> sense is offered by Hemmati's and others' work within the earthsummit
> process. On http://www.earthsummit2002.org/msp you find a synthesis of such
> efforts in terms of MSP goals, terminology, different types of MSPs and
> values base (among which effectiveness, equity and transparency.
> Maybe a discussion within this group (or the working method WG) could start
> by identifying key words concerning civil society involvement in processes
> and clarify them, in order to have a shared understanding that would allow
> us to be more effective in our future actions; to then develop a framework
> that would reflect our interest in being involved while indicating concrete
> proposals.
> 
> I also suggest that since some of us have been reflecting and writing about
> these aspects, it would be good to have a space, maybe on the
> worldsummit.2005 site, where these contributions could be made available to
> all and the public, together with reports from different events that have
> been organized and reference to initiatives that are being developed around
> the multi-stakeholder issue. This would contribute in reducing the existing
> fragmentation while fostering the discussion in order to be able to develop
> concrete proposals for the follow ups to WSIS.
> 
> I would be interested in this and willing to cooperate. Best wishes
> claudia
> 
> 
> 
> -----Messaggio originale-----
> Da: plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org [mailto:plenary-admin at wsis-cs.org] Per conto
> di Ralf Bendrath
> Inviato: mercoledì 30 marzo 2005 5.56
> A: wsis-cs-plenary
> Oggetto: [WSIS CS-Plenary] Civil Society and the Multi-Stakeholderism
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> following up on the recent discussions about our take on
> multi-stakeholderism (ranging from the CS press release, the CS-PS
> statement, and the stocktaking database to the Global Alliance
> discussions), I have just published a lenghty piece on
> multi-stakeholderism in the WSIS context at www.worldsummit2005.org.
> 
> I have tried to give a rough summary of the points raised and also relate
> it to larger developments and possible roads ahead.
> 
> Have fun!
> 
> Best, Ralf
> 
> 
> Civil Society and the Multi-Stakeholderism
> Discussion emerging about opportunities and strange bedfellows
> 
> 29 March 2005. Civil Society involved in WSIS has finally started to
> discuss the strategic and political implications of multi-stakeholder
> processes like the World Summit on the Information Society. Besides the
> usual “we have to be involved if we have the chance”, there is a lot of
> scepticism, but not yet a full understanding of how to use these new
> structures in global governance. More...
> 
> http://www.worldsummit2005.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary