[Rigf_program] Regarding UN ESCAP [was Poll: APrIGF 2014 Host Evaluation - Call for Preferences & Comments]

Kabani kabani.asif at gmail.com
Fri Sep 6 13:58:05 HKT 2013 

+ 1 Peng

On Friday, September 6, 2013, Ang Peng Hwa (Prof) wrote:

> Fyi and for the record.
>
> UNESCAP has been disappointing in its record of involvement with the
> APrIGF. In the Singapore meeting, and based on the suggestion of
> Parminder, the Bangkok office was approached a couple of times for
> support. We were looking for financial support first. But nothing there. A
> rep? Yes, at first. Then maybe. Then, sorry.
>
> In Tokyo, there was no one from ESCAP either.
>
> I have recounted the sorry episode to Parminder.
>
> In Chinese culture, a big shot must be approached three times. Only when
> he says no the third time then can you take it that he means no. I suppose
> from that perspective, no harm giving UNESCAP another shot. (Pun
> unintended.)
>
> Regards,
> Peng Hwa
>
>
>
> On 5/9/13 3:30 PM, "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> >Hi Parminder:
> >
> >You have sent your comments to the right place, I think you can now
> >consider them being considered!
> >
> >Government participation is a challenge, we've tried a couple of ways to
> >get more govt members involved with not enough success.  There was one
> >government person in the lunch meeting where we considered the proposals
> >to host the 2014 meeting (and thank you to her for joining and talking
> >part.)
> >
> >That said, overall attendance by governments is quite high, and thanks to
> >the Korean hosts/Korean government for that.
> >
> >About your second point, I hope we are all aware of this challenge and
> >the separation of program committee and host committee means there is
> >little or no likelihood of such problems.  Supporters should be
> >recognized and thanked, or there wouldn't been a well functioning meeting
> >and many from participants fromdeveloping countries would not be able to
> >attend, but balance important.  I think this Seoul IGF has it right.
> >
> >Adam
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sep 5, 2013, at 3:30 PM, parminder wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks Adam
> >>
> >> If possible please consider the suggestion that I gave in my last email
> >>in the proposed agenda item in today's meeting about review of process.
> >>
> >> To sum
> >>
> >> 1. Ask for government agencies support and partnerships
> >>
> >> 2. Make clear that there will be no quid pro quo for funding support in
> >>terms of visibility (inside the forum), agenda shaping or speaking slots
> >>(generally, taking from UN IGF norms in this regard).
> >>
> >> 3. Seek a plan for involving local level UN agencies
> >>
> >> 4. Seek a plan for partnership with and outreach to NGOs, especially
> >>those that work on issues related to marginalised sections of the
> >>society ( all these should be serious considerations for selection)
> >>
> >> Separately, at the APrIGF MSG level, please approach UNESCAP and other
> >>regional UN agencies to be a part of the APrIGF organising/ management
> >>system.
> >>
> >>
> >> best, parminder
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thursday 05 September 2013 09:22 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> >>> Hi Parminder,
> >>>
> >>> Can't speak for everyone or the MSG, so just my understanding.
> >>>
> >>> The meeting RFP is online
> >>>
> >>><
> http://aprigf.asia/documents/APrIGF_Request_for_Proposals_Local_Host.pd
> >>>f>
> >>>  (and was developed though discussion on the open list, which of
> >>>course doesn't make in perfect, but does mean it was created through a
> >>>transparent process.)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sep 2, 2013, at 1:21 PM, parminder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Dear All
> >>>>
> >>>> I will not get into comparative evaluation since I can be considered
> >>>>an interested party :). I of course will like to have it in my country
> >>>>which is India.
> >>>>
> >>>> On another note, as I see the bids, while they mention the likely
> >>>>corporate sponsors that the potential hosts should be able to attract,
> >>>>there is no mention of the existing/ likely partnerships with
> >>>>national/ state/ local government agencies. If I remember right, the
> >>>>official document of APrIGF which is used for inviting bids for
> >>>>hosting APrIGF does not make this demand, of listing government
> >>>>involvement/ partnerships, while it does ask for potential corporate
> >>>>funding sources. (I may be wrong. Can the secretariat please forward
> >>>>to me the concerned document. Thanks.)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> You're right, there's no requirement to list government involvement or
> >>>support, only to invite government speakers.  And it might be a good
> >>>idea to make recommendation that the host seek government support for
> >>>holding the meeting.  But best to discuss this to make sure there
> >>>wouldn't be any unexpected consequences.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Also, I have since long been asking for involvement of regional UN
> >>>>agencies in organising APrIGF. As far as I know there has been no
> >>>>serious effort made in this direction. But again I may be wrong and am
> >>>>happy to be corrected. Especially UNESCAP should be invited into the
> >>>>organising committee. (UNESCAP, incidentally, is now a member of UN
> >>>>Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation.)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The IGF's organized under UNDESA and I believe UNESCAP would be from a
> >>>different arm of the UN (As a par of ECOSOC having ESCAP participate in
> >>>the CSTD process is logical and a fit with the usual UN structures).
> >>>Informing regional UN organizations (also UNDP?) might be helpful, but
> >>>perhaps not in the organization of the event.  And I don't think we did
> >>>that this year, however there was  outreach to the regions governments,
> >>>and the local hosts have been successful in providing support for
> >>>representatives from some developing country governments.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Lastly, connected to the recent controversy on what got called as
> >>>>'commericialisation of the IGF' ( including by Markus Kummer), I will
> >>>>like to seek a clarification about what is the quid pro quo if any for
> >>>>the corporate funding that may be sought. And whether it is made clear
> >>>>to potential bidders that while 'voluntary' funding is welcome, it
> >>>>would not be against any special favours, of visibility, agenda
> >>>>setting or speaking slots.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The agenda, workshops, speakers etc are developed by the program
> >>>committee, not by the local host.  Thus I think the risk of the type of
> >>>commercialization you are concerned about is minimal.  The program
> >>>committee runs an open process, from discussing the themes and agenda
> >>>to selection of workshops.
> >>>
> >>> Hope this helps.
> >>>
> >>> Adam
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> thanks, parminder
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Saturday 31 August 2013 10:26 PM, APrIGF Secretariat wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Dear MSG members,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After several call meetings to discuss about the 2014 local host,
> >>>>>would like to further call for preference and comments from all the
> >>>>>MSG members to both proposals.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Attached again the revised comparison sheet and the 2 proposals.
> >>>>> 1. ISPAI & NIXI
> >>>>> 2. Department of Computer Science, University of Philippines Cebu
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Selection Process:
> >>>>> - Secretariat has sent the comparison sheet to both proponents
> >>>>>allowing supplementary information submission by 3 Sep
> >>>>> - MSG to further comment and indicate preferences on the mailing
> >>>>>lists by 4 Sep (Wed)
> >>>>> - Comments will be bring forward to draw a recommendation
> >>>>> - Meeting will be held in Seoul to ratify the final decision
> >>>>> *Remote participation is available and encouraged for those PC
> >>>>>members who cannot attend physically
> >>>>> *WebEx meeting details will be provided soon.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1st meeting
> >>>>> Date: 5 Sep (Thu)
> >>>>> Time: 13:00 - 14:00 (Korea Time UTC+9)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2nd meeting (Depends on progress on Thu)
> >>>>> Date: 6 Sep (Fri)
> >>>>> Time: 13:00 - 14:00 (Korea Time UTC+9)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Important To-Do:
> >>>>> - Please kindly confirm your participation on-site by 2 Sep (Mon) so
> >>>>>that KISA can prepare the lunch box for us?
> >>>>> - Could you also confirm your remote participation so that we can
> >>>>>ensure enough quorum and stakeholder representation?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you very much for your attention. We hope the process outlined
> >>>>>would help strengthen our transparency and multi-stakeholder
> >>>>>participation on the process.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best Regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yannis Li
> >>>>> Secretariat of APrIGF
> >>>>> DotAsia Organisation Ltd.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>--------------------------
> >>>>> Address: 12F, Daily House, 35-37 Haiphong Road, Tsim Sha Tsui, Hong
> >>>>>Kong
> >>>>> Tel: +852 5802 2500   ＿Fax: +852 5802 2502  ＿
> >>>>> http://www.aprigf.asia
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Rigf_program mailing list
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rigf_program at aprigf.asia <javascript:;>
> >>>>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Rigf_program mailing list
> >>>>
> >>>> Rigf_program at aprigf.asia <javascript:;>
> >>>> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Rigf_program mailing list
> >Rigf_program at aprigf.asia <javascript:;>
> >https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY:This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and
> may be confidential and/or privileged.If you are not the intended
> recipient,please delete it,notify us and do not copy,use,or disclose its
> content.
>
> Towards A Sustainable Earth:Print Only When Necessary.Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rigf_program mailing list
> Rigf_program at aprigf.asia <javascript:;>
> https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program
>


-- 
Sent from iPad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20130906/6ca65632/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at aprigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program

More information about the Rigf_secretariat mailing list