[Icann-see] Future of SEEDIG: call for comments (DL: 12 July)

[Valentina Pavel]

Dear all,

>From my point of view SEEDIG is a much needed event for the region,
especially in terms of awareness, sharing practices and information and I
think it should become one of the traditional events for discussing IG
issues.

Since it is a very young initiative, for ensuring the success of the future
editions I believe SEEDIG should be organized in conjunction with EURODIG
(or other similar events) because of the following reasons:


   - there will be more attendants (attendants will be able to receive
   travel support more easily, rather than justifying attendance to a stand
   alone event)
   - it would be easier to pitch for funding opportunities (2 in 1 - bundle
   event)
   - less effort for promoting the event (SEEDIG piggy backs on top of
   EuroDIG until it grows further)
   - less cumbersome for the organizing team in terms of logistics, legal
   issues, setting up partnerships, registration etc
   - we benefit from general support from EuroDIG Secretariat (until the
   team gets more experienced I think it this is very important)

At this incipient stage I do not see any strong reason for organizing the
event specifically in the SEE region. I think the event can be anywhere
provided that SEE region people are able to attend.
To conclude, this is just a short list of reasons why I think the next
SEEDIG should be organized together with EURODIG 2016.

Best,

Valentina


On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Sorina Teleanu <sorina.teleanu at cdep.ro>
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> On behalf of the SEEDIG executive committee, I am writing to you with
> regards to the future of SEEDIG, and, more specifically, a potential SEEDIG
> 2016 meeting.
>
> As you know, SEEDIG 2015 was organised in conjunction with the eighth
> EuroDIG, for several reasons. The most important ones were related to the
> fact that EuroDIG itself was held in the SEE region, and that we had an
> opportunity to create some connections between SEE Internet
> governance-related realities and the pan-European debates. The funds
> allocated from the EuroDIG budget (for logistics, catering, travel support,
> as detailed in our report), as well as the general support from EuroDIG
> Secretariat for a first SEEDIG meeting have been equally important.
>
> I. Key questions
> As there seems to be at least a majority of views that SEEDIG should
> continue (and not remain a one time event), we need to determine how this
> moving forward should/could actually happen.
> The two main questions that we now need to ask ourselves are the following:
>
>   1.  Should a SEEDIG 2016 meeting be held again in conjunction with the
> EuroDIG meeting to be hosted in Brussels? OR
>
>   1.  Should a SEEDIG 2016 meeting be held in the SEE region, as a
> stand-alone event?
>
>
> II. Issues to consider
> However, determining how SEEDIG 2016 would look like is not just a matter
> of picking a location, as there are several important issues that need to
> be considered before making a decision:
>
>   1.  participation (attendance at the meeting) and influencing factors
> (travel costs, travel funds, etc.);
>
>   2.  financial resources /sponsors;
>
>   3.  host for the meeting (including broad-based stakeholder conditions
> in the host country);
>
>   4.  partners/supporters;
>
>   5.  maintaining linkages between SEE and the wider Europe.
>
>
> III. Possible approach
> Drawing on several informal discussions held with some of you in the weeks
> following SEEDIG (including the ICANN meeting in Buenos Aires), one
> possible approach for SEEDIG 2016 could be to:
>
>   *   keep the SEEDIG and EuroDIG preparatory processes together, but have
> the SEEDIG meeting organised somewhere in the region, at a time that
> precedes the EuroDIG meeting.
>
> III.1. Implications
> In practical terms, the approach above would mean that:
>
>   1.  The call for proposals for topics for SEEDIG and EuroDIG 2016 are
> launched at the same time (October until December 2015), as part of a
> single process.
>
>   2.  SEEDIG is represented at the EuroDIG preparatory meeting. A
> preparatory meeting for SEEDIG is also intended to be held in the host
> country (for the purpose of checking the logistics and related issues).
>
>   3.  SEEDIG-related content continues to be hosted on the EuroDIG website
> and wiki.
>
>   4.  SEEDIG takes place in a country within SEE and the neighbouring
> area, some time before the EuroDIG meeting, and becomes an integrated
> milestone in the EuroDIG preparatory process. Results should feed directly
> into the EuroDIG session planning process and become an inclusive part of
> the EuroDIG programme. SEEDIG could actually be the place to prepare, inter
> alia, a SEE-focused session at EuroDIG.
>
> III.2. Advantages
> Such an approach would have several advantages, among which:
>
>   1.  SEEDIG, as a meeting, remains in the region. This would respond to
> the concerns raised by some of you with regards to both the difficulty for
> most stakeholders in SEE to attend an event outside the region, as well as
> to a potentially limited relevance of having a SEE event held in Western
> Europe. And it could/should encourage significant participation from within
> the region, given that the travel costs involved are expected to be
> self-manageable by many potential participants.
>
>   2.  SEEDIG and EuroDIG remain interlinked, thus responding to the need
> to ensure that the voices of SEE stakeholders go beyond the SEE region and
> that the pan-European debates on Internet governance are also considering
> SEE concerns.
>
>   3.  SEEDIG continues to benefit from support from EuroDIG (in terms of
> preparatory process, hosting content and funding for some SEE attendees to
> participate in the EuroDIG meeting), and, possibly, its partners, thus
> gaining more recognition within the Internet governance ecosystem.
>
>
> III.3. Challenges
> There are, of course, a number of challenges that would need to be dealt
> with, in the case of this approach being taken forward:
>
>   1.  Financial resources. SEEDIG will need to have its own budget, and,
> thus engage in fund raising activities, including within the region.
> Additionally, legal issues will have to be considered, such as: setting up
> a bank account, responsibility and liability in terms of managing
> contracts, invoices, reporting on the finances (i.e. what entity would do
> this?), etc.
>
>   2.  Keeping the SEEDIG 2015 supporters as partners. We would need to
> finding a way to enhance such partnerships, as they would demonstrate that
> SEEDIG is backed by others and does not try to isolate itself from other
> entities and processes in the Internet governance ecosystem. Having this
> kind of institutional support would also help us when approaching possible
> sponsors.
>
>   3.  Ensuring that the linkages with EuroDIG mean more than just having
> SEEDIG messages presented at EuroDIG. Finding a way to bring a significant
> number of SEE participants to EuroDIG (in addition to them participating in
> SEEDIG) and to actively involve them in the EuroDIG process and meeting is
> an important aspect to consider. (More travel and time resources will be
> needed.)
>
>   4.  Identifying a host. During the discussions in Buenos Aires,
> Serbia/Belgrade was mentioned as a possible location, given that the
> country has a working multistakeholder Internet governance model in place
> and this can be useful as an example for participants in SEEDIG. In
> addition, another argument invoked for having the next SEEDIG meeting in
> Serbia was related to the experience the various entities in the country
> have in organising/hosting Internet governance events (EuroDIG 2011, DIDS,
> etc.).
>
>   5.  Human resources to run the preparatory process. Organising SEEDIG as
> a stand-alone event would require more efforts, both in terms of logistics
> and programme. The organising group would, therefore, need to be
> reinforced, and more volunteers would have to be involved in the process.
>
>
> IV. Call for comments
> Given all of the above, you are all kindly invited to provide your input
> with regards to the future of SEEDIG, in the form of comments, suggestions,
> support for or disagreement with the aforementioned possible approach,
> etc., until Sunday, 12 July 2015. Please send your input to this mailing
> list and to see at intgovforum.org.
>
> All input will be compiled by the executive committee, shared with the
> list, and further discussed at a virtual meeting, to be held after the
> above-mentioned deadline (details to be communicated later). It is expected
> that a final decision  regarding the approach for a SEEDIG 2016 meeting
> (questions at point I.A and B above) will be taken at this virtual meeting.
> Once this decision is made, further discussions will be held with regards
> to the preparatory process for SEEDIG 2016.
>
> Thank you and we are looking forward to your feedback.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Sorina
> (on behalf of the executive committee)
>
>
> ---
>
> Sorina Teleanu
> Parliamentary assistant
> Chamber of Deputies
> Parliament of Romania
> 2-4 Izvor Street, Bucharest, Romania
> Tel: +40 21 414 1842
> _______________________________________________
>
> Ova e-mail poruka je poverljiva i namenjena iskljucivo primaocu.
> Neovlascena distribucija, prepravka ili objavljivanje njenog sadrzaja je
> zabranjena. Ako ste ovaj e-mail primili greskom, molimo vas da obavestite
> administratora liste putem telefona +381 11 7281281.
>
> This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the recipient.
> Unauthorized distribution, modification or disclosure of its contents is
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
> mailing list administrator by telephone +381 11 7281281.
>
> -----
>
> Icann-see mailing lista
> Icann-see at rnids.rs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.rnids.rs/pipermail/seedig/attachments/20150712/5b3f55d3/attachment.htm>