Towards a Typology of Internet Governance Socio-technical

Arrangements

Internet Governance : Transparency, Trust and Tools

Paris, June 12th, 2009

Romain BadouardFrancesca Musiani

Cécile MéadelLaurence Monnoyer-Smith

Socio-technical Arrangements

Internet Governance

Multistakeholderism

Openness

Technical Standards

Critical Resources

Normative procedures

Introduction

ICANN

FDI

IGF

AFNIC

W3CIETF

ENISA

Theory of Reflexive governance (Habermas, Beck)

Theoretical framework

Democratic Legitimacy

Role of Civil Society

Challenges in reflexive governance (Dedeurwaerdere)

Emergence of cooperative structures

Compromises between new and old forms of governance

Reflections on common goods (Delmas-Marty)

The study and the objectives of the IG3T workshop series

The aim of the study

The study of production of norms and standards in order to determine innovative coordination principles 

The specificities of IG arrangements vis-à-vis more traditional forms of governance

Development of a methodological tool for research

Proposal of ideal-types of procedural behaviour

A process of dynamic co-construction between procedures and outcomes takes place

Reflexivity influences the establishment of new kinds of procedure

There is a link between openness, inclusiveness, and normative processes

Hypotheses

Actor/procedure

W3C IETF AFNIC ICANN FDI IGF ENISA

Three key moments

Integration : a certain number of actors gather around a particular IG-related issue

Normative Process : the format of the procedure is chosen and the norm produced

Assessment : the norm becomes operational and the procedure is assessed

Method

The codification of procedural criteria

Past works on codification : mostly of discourses

Attribution of numerical values

Organization in scales

Construction of axes and graphs

W3C IETF ICANN FDI AFNIC IGF ENISA INTEGRATION

Openness 3-Open to all with formal conditions

4-Open to all without

conditions 2-Cooptation

3,5-Open to all with monetary conditions

3,5-Open to all with monetary

conditions

3,5-Open to all with monetary

conditions

1-Designation by external

mechanisms

Variety 2 types of actors 5 types of

actors 4 types of actors 3 types of actors

3 types of actors

5 types of actors 2 types of actors

NORMATIVE PROCESS

Format of the procedure

2,5-Internal definition with advices from stakeholders

3-Consensus 2-Internal Definition

1,5-Internal definition with

external restraint

1,5- Internal definition with

external restraint

1,5- Internal definition with

external restraint

2-Internal definition

Production of the Norm

2-Units working in common by consensus

2-Units working in common by consensus

1,5-Independant units coordinated ex

post to reach a compromise

1,5- Independant units coordinated ex

post to reach a compromise

1,5- Independant

units coordinated ex post to reach a compromise

3-Consenus ar Large (involving

the public)

1-Independant units coordinated

ex post

Link between production and

decision 3-Imposition

2- adoptation

with reservation

3-Imposition 1-Recommandation 3-Imposition 1-

Recommandation 1,5-Strong

recommandation

ASSESSMENT

Feedback 2-Return by internal way

3-Return by internal and external way

3-Return by internal and external way

2-Return by internal way

2-Return by internal way

3-Return by internal and external way

2-Return by internal way

Accountability 3-Recommandation 4-Request 2,5-Advice

/recommandation 3-Recommandation 2-Advice 1-Not formalised 1-Not formalised

Integration

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5

Openness

Variety

W3C

ICANN

AFNIC

ENISA

IETF

FDI

IGF

Normative Process

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

W3C IETF ICANN FDI AFNIC IGF ENISA

Format of the Procedure Production of the norm Link between production and decision

Assessment

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5

Accountability

Feedback

W3C ICANN AFNIC ENISA IETF FDI IGF

Overall levels of performance

IETFIGF

FDIICANN

AFNICW3C

ENISA

84,28%

37,11% 52,83% 60,69%37,11% 52,83%

21,38%

70,80%

48,91%

27,01%

63,50%

56,21%

78,10%

34,31%

98,40%

90,99%

61,35%

53,94% 61,35%

39,12%

9,48%

Integration Normative ProcessAssessment

Towards a Typology

The expert type

The open type(s)

The hybrid type

Weak integration, collective work among involved actors, strong link between production and decision

High level of integration translating into the following stages more or less effectively

Good integration level but restrictive modalities of implication, possibility for feedback but no formal consideration guaranteed

Concluding Remarks

Involvement of a wide variety of actors ; importance of consensus-seeking

Reflexivity : relevant criterion to assess the link between norm and procedure

Observation in our three types of a reciprocal and interactive construction of norm and procedure