Economies covered

  • 2009-2010 Edition dr_dot2009-2010
  • 2007-2008 Edition dr_dot2007-2008
  • 2005-2006 Edition dr_dot2005-2006
  • 2003-2004 Edition dr_dot2003-2004

Click the dot to read the chapters. 

.af Afghanistan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.au Australia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bd Bangladesh dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bn Brunei Darussalam dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bt Bhutan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.cn China dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.hk Hong Kong dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.id Indonesia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.in India dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.ir Iran dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
.jp Japan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.kh Cambodia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.kp North Korea dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008

.kr South Korea
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.la Lao PDR
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.lk Sri Lanka
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mm Myanmar
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mn Mongolia
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mo Macau
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mv Maldives
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
.my Malaysia
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.np Nepal
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.nz New Zealand
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.ph Philippines
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.pk Pakistan
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.sg Singapore
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.th Thaïland
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.tl / .tp Timor-Leste
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.tw Taiwan
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.vn Vietnam
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
SAARC dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008
ASEAN
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
APEC dr_dot2009-2010
dr_dot2005-2006

Internet governance

Article Index
Internet governance
WSIS and governance of the internet
Enabling meaningful participation
Defining Internet governance: Scope and responsibi
Defining internet governance: key issues
Ten urgent issues and their solutions
Internet governance broadly
Internet pricing and interconnection
Spam
Network security, cyber crime and control of conte
Conclusion: Good governance in the region
Notes

Defining Internet governance: Scope and responsibi


Disagreement among governments in WSIS over Internet governance has revolved around two issues: the scope of its definition and who should be responsible for it.

In terms of scope, some envisage a narrow or restricted definition of governance of the Internet, in terms of technical coordination issues such as those managed by ICANN. Others take a broader or extensive view of governance on the Internet, relating to what the Internet carries and enables, with consideration given to a wide range of issues, such as e-commerce, intellectual property, technical standards, privacy and content. However, there is general agreement by both groups that ICANN is central to the debate.

The second area of disagreement is over responsibility for Internet governance and whether a new intergovernmental process is required or whether to stick with the status quo. Many developing nations, particularly China, South Africa, Brazil and most Arab states, have expressed the view that Internet governance is a matter related to national sovereignty and that an intergovernmental process, preferably under the UN (with ITU being specifically mentioned), is needed where governments could discuss policy issues of international scope. For developing nations, this “one-stop shop” for Internet and ICT-related policy activities has obvious appeal.

Most developed nations, including the USA, the European Union, Japan, Canada and Australia, have supported the current system of private sector leadership. They are referring to the narrower definition of Internet governance, particularly to ICANN’s responsibilities, while at the same time recognising that the Internet has developed successfully through self-regulation and so this should be encouraged to continue. They are proposing that, since private sector leadership works, there is no need for wholesale change.

The divergence of views between the developed and the developing world, and the challenge to the current system of Internet governance, is illustrated by the position stated by China at a meeting in September 2004 to discuss the formation of WGIG. The Chinese delegate commented that private sector leadership in Internet governance had served well up to now, but that was the past and it was time to move on. The Internet was too important and the biggest problem of today’s Internet was the lack of a legitimate organisation under the UN.

WGIG is taking a broad view of what constitutes Internet governance,6 reasoning that it must begin by taking an inclusive approach or risk immediately alienating some from the process. It has not taken any position on issues of responsibility. The Internet is recognised as the foundation of the information society. It provides an innovative environment that enables faster and cheaper communication. It is becoming the basis of global trade and an important means to help achieve many essential development goals. But the price of this success includes not only the effects of increased scale but also tensions arising from operating in a global environment which is multilingual, multicultural, multi-jurisdictional and cross-border. These tensions manifest themselves in problems associated with the allocation of Internet resources such as those ICANN oversees, multi-lingualism, interconnection arrangements and pricing, spam, cyber crime and security, and they are also the issues most often and most emphatically raised as those WGIG should address. They are the focus of this chapter as well.



 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh