Internet awareness and importance of School of Internet governance

You may be an expert in Information Communication and Technology (ICT) but with rapid growth and changing technology you never know what you would be lacking when it comes to Internet and THIS IS A REALITY!
As things are rapidly changing and ICT is taking its leap towards the next billion, technology and internet has changed so much that keeping it within one form or idea is completely illogical. From the daily commodity to human rights, people have their own definitions and interpretations.

“Technology and internet with better innovation, INTERNET is CHANGING lives and societies which is a reality.” 

Though technology is taking its leap but still there are variations of internet laws, policies and standards practiced. There is a huge gap and definitions in terms of adaption and adjustment of open standards which is creating problems of digital divide and net neutrality. In most of the developing countries, at individual level there is a lack of awareness of internet rights and principles whereas on the same people use the latest and smartest technology which is pushing them towards exploitation and manipulation. These manipulation characterizes in various ways of standard of quality, limitation in use, access, cost, frauds, crimes, bullying, discrimination etc.

Apart from this the current threat of Cyber terrorism and warfare is yet another problem that has created a bigger problem in context of understanding the new technology. On one hand there are people who have limitation of use and standards whereas on the other side of the world people have no barriers in context of use and values. This difference in perspective and concept has created a new ideology of how can technology be more controlled in creating a better management system. Though it may sound very facilitating but on the other side it also invites threats of privacy and surveillance which is unavoidable. 

In a global perspective, if you look at the internet management and mechanism, in most developing and least developed countries there are problems of access and infrastructure and in some countries there are issues of awareness and concepts. These differences at individual level may not look big but at global level it creates huge gaps of technological barriers in terms of management and discrimination of rights.

As dynamic and collaborative as the internet, it functions in networks that integrate various fields and sectors. With such vast majority of applications and uses, the overall industry cannot be characterized in specific topics or issues as each region and nation has its own complexity in term of internet and its governance.  Today’s internet is all about collaboration. If there are any gaps in between the internet ecosystem there would be problems of communication and management. The world of internet has accepted the concept of MULTISTAKHOLDERISM where every voice and stakeholder counts. In such scenario the gaps in between nation and at regional level creates greater problems of communication and governance.

Reality of today, Internet has been passed on to most of the developing countries and least developed countries without preparation where externalities are manipulating the situation. In most of these countries they lack the basic concept of internet core values which results in failing to create better picture in the large internet hemisphere. 

Technological adaptation is happening so randomly where lack of standardization and open standards is creating barriers of digital divide and net neutrality and creating digital fragmentation at regional and national level.   

From Internet of Things (IoT) to the smart technology of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the expectation and the growth of the new age technology has taken its toll over the limitation of policy and control mechanism. Technology has driven over the expectation of the definition and interpretation where it’s exceeding the expectation of its own growth and popularity. This overwhelming outburst of knowledge and development cannot be controlled with limitations, where policy, rules and regulation can be a factor to facilitate but not a factor to control or to regulate.

Internet of today's is not popular or famous because it was developed for development or developed within developed country but it is popular and famous because it lobbies the main idea of openness and freedom. It spreads within the vast majority of people who thrive among the great distance crossing borders, culture and religion. Its acceptance to the human world is the great example of human evolution process that has never stopped and always moved on with the quest of building and find the new innovation for the best.

With the growth in information technology there is a great need to spread the awareness about the internet governance process. The way technology is adopting people is the way how technology should be applied and adapted in terms of policy and other mechanism. Technology is for the people and people should use it for development process for the benefit of humanity

In such course of action, spreading the awareness of open standards and internet core values there are various school of internet governance established.

In such aspiration of creating a better Internet in Asia Pacific, the Asian School of Internet Governance has been established. The school is the brain child of Prof. Dr Kilnam Chon who is called the father of internet in Asia. The APSIG2016 was held in Asian institute of Technology in Thailand from September 11 to 14. It had 38 participants from 20 countries including 3 guests. The school also offers 10 classes including Role Play Class and Hot Topic Session.

I participated as a civil society candidate and contributed to the brainstorming session and collaborated in creating a better understanding of internet governance perspective of the Asia Pacific region. Coming down from a least developed country and voicing issues of internet rights and principle is not just very overwhelming but at times it tests your skills and endurance. I think School of Internet Governance (SIG) is not just an eye opener for refreshing the knowledge buds to update with the new development but is good platform to share your knowledge and capacity.

The main objective of the APSIG is to train new generation leaders and to create a collaborative platform of knowledge sharing and networking of opinions in all aspects related with Internet Governance from an Asia Pacific perspective

Importance of APSIG

1.       Awareness of internet governance and collaborative issues

2.       Creating global platform of knowledge sharing

3.       Developing effective communication of issues and problems

4.       Promoting open standards

The APSIG 2016 was a support by various technology organization like Google, Internet society, ICANN  and APTLD 

I personally believe that capacity building and awareness program like these should be a priority of every nation and should have a national school of internet governance in every country. I think the time has come when people have to be given the basic core values of internet where people should have the right to tell the world what they want. Democracy of today doesn’t give the right to forecast control and surveillance but it focuses in growth and development listening and catering the voice of the public.

One world internet, one value humanity and one voice equality

By Shreedeep Rayamajhi

Read More

What is APrIGF ?

Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum (APrIGF) serves as a platform for discussion, exchange and collaboration at a regional level, and also where possible to aggregate national IGF discussions, ultimately advance the Internet governance development in the Asia Pacific region.

In 2010, while the global IGF is already in its fifth and final year of its initial charter, and Regional IGFs have been established in many other regions, including Africa, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, to date, Asia has seen no parallel forum for discussing Internet governance issues at a regional level. For the first time, the APrIGF is therefore being convened with objectives to raise awareness and encourage participation from relevant stakeholders around the region on Internet governance issues, as well as to foster multi-lateral, multi-stakeholder discussion about issues pertinent to the Internet in Asia.

The multi-stakeholder approach is a core principle of the APrIGF with the emphasis on the diversity of participants and openness of the discussion. Valuing the youth as an important stakeholder and the future generations of the Internet, a Youth IGF also become an integral part of the APrIGF whereby they are held in parallel annually featuring a simulation of the multi-stakeholder discussion model among the young people on various Internet governance issues.

Here is a list of previous APrIGF along with YIGF.

Event	Year	Date	City/Region
APrIGF	2016	July 26 - 29	Taipei, Taiwan
YIGF	2016	July 26 - 29	Taipei, Taiwan
APrIGF	2015	June 30 - July 03	Macao, SAR
YIGF	2015	June 30 - July 03	Macao, SAR
APrIGF	2014	August 03 - 06	Delhi, India
YIGF	2014	August 03 - 06	Delhi, India
APrIGF	2013	September 04 - 06	Seoul, Korea
YIGF	2013	September 03 - 06	Seoul, Korea
APrIGF	2012	July 18 - 20	Tokyo, Japan
YIGF	2012	July 19	Tokyo, Japan
APrIGF	2011	June 16 - 18	Singapore
YIGF	2011	June 16 - 18	Singapore
APrIGF	2010	June 14 - 18	Hong Kong, China
YIGF	2010	June 12 - 14	Hong Kong, China

Multi-Stakeholder Steering Group (MSG)

The APrIGF is managed by The Multi-Stakeholder Steering Group (MSG) of APrIGF is a self-organised committee with members from around the AP Internet Community formed with the below objectives:

• To support and ensure the proper conduct of the organizational work of the annual Asia Pacific Regional IGF,
• To promote and encourage dialogue among all stakeholders involved with Internet governance related issues in the Asia Pacific region, and
• To act as an interface between the Asia Pacific IGF community and the global IGF community.
• The membership emphasizes the inclusion of multi-stakeholders and so is open to any interested individuals within the AP region who are committed to:

The Organisational Principles of openness, transparency and multi-stakeholder cooperation,
Devote some time and effort in support of the APrIGF, and Maintaining and demonstrating respect for all other members.

Read More

Internet Safety and Awareness

Internet Safety and Awareness

1. Never disclose your private detail information openly in internet
2. Always use verified software and keep it update
3. If you are never sure of anything do not press Okay
4. If you receive any email or phone call or SMS never give your information always reconfirm
5. Do not make your Social Media and Information public
6. Always read the privacy policy before accepting
7. Never use pirated software’s
8. Change your password regularly
9. Always use difficult password and lock your devices with password

Read More

Common Terminologies for Internet Governance

Open Standards
"Open Standards" are standards made available to the general public and are developed (or approved) and maintained via a collaborative and consensus driven process. "Open Standards" facilitate interoperability and data exchange among different products or services and are intended for widespread adoption.
Other elements of "Open Standards" include, but are not limited to:

• Collaborative process – voluntary and market driven development (or approval) following a transparent consensus driven process that is reasonably open to all interested parties.
• Reasonably balanced – ensures that the process is not dominated by any one interest group.
• Due process - includes consideration of and response to comments by interested parties.
• Intellectual property rights (IPRs) – IPRs essential to implement the standard to be licensed to all applicants on a worldwide, non-discriminatory basis, either (1) for free and under other reasonable terms and conditions or (2) on reasonable terms and conditions (which may include monetary compensation). Negotiations are left to the parties concerned and are performed outside the SDO.
• Quality and level of detail – sufficient to permit the development of a variety of competing implementations of interoperable products or services. Standardized interfaces are not hidden, or controlled other than by the SDO promulgating the standard.
• Publicly available – easily available for implementation and use, at a reasonable price. Publication of the text of a standard by others is permitted only with the prior approval of the SDO.
• On-going support – maintained and supported over a long period of time.

Standardization
Standardization is the process of developing, promoting and possibly mandating standards-based and compatible technologies and processes within a given industry. Standards for technologies can mandate the quality and consistency of technologies and ensure their compatibility, interoperability and safety. Standards organizations such as ANSI (American National Standards Institute), IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) exist to promote standardization and endorse official standards (also known as de jure standards) for given applications. A lack of standardization often manifests in large numbers of incompatible proprietary formats for a given technology and for technologies that must interoperate. That all-too-common situation hinders the adoption and advancement of the technology and industry.

The burgeoning Internet of Things (IoT) is a current case in point. The main purpose of the IoT is enabling almost any object imaginable to be connected and to transmit data over the Internet. Although that scenario is increasingly becoming realized, incompatible formats and market fragmentation are slowing adoption.


Multistakeholder

Multistakeholder is a collective decision-making that allows the Internet to evolve with in the various stakeholders in the internet ecosystem. It is a driving day-to-day work and strategic direction in what we used to think of as largely intergovernmental decision-makers.  It is a way of doing things that can be used anywhere, from solving a specific problem or to helping an institution evolve. The multistakeholder principles that have made the Internet such a success are increasingly being used to make the Internet’s policy and governance space work. They are now an accepted international norm for how the Internet is governed.

A Multistakeholder Model is an organizational framework or structure which adopts the multistakeholder process of governance or policy making, which aims to bring together the primary stakeholders such as businesses, civil society, governments, research institutions and non-government organizations to cooperate and participate in the dialogue, decision making and implementation of solutions to common problems or goals. A stakeholder refers to an individual, group or organization that has a direct or indirect interest or stake in a particular organization; that is, a given action has the ability to influence the organization's actions, decisions and policies to achieve results.
The Multistakeholder Governance Attributes are:

• Inclusiveness and transparency;
• Collective responsibility;
• Effective decision-making and implementation;
• Collaboration through distributed and interoperable governance.
• Stakeholders work towards a common goal
• Work involves different sectors and scale
• The objective is focused to bring about change
• Deal with structural changes
• Agreements are created based on cooperation
• Stakeholders deal with power and conflict consciously
• Bottom-up and top-down strategies are integrated in governance and policy making

Digital Divide
Digital divide is a term that refers to the gap between demographics and regions that have access to modern information and communications technology, and those that don't or have restricted access. This technology can include the telephone, television, personal computers and the Internet.

It refers to any inequalities between groups or countries measured in terms of access to, use of, or knowledge of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Digital divide inside any country refers to inequalities mainly among individuals and households. Some researchers suggest that digital divide is not only about gap in access and connectivity to ICTs only but extends into political and cultural realm of any society

Net Neutrality
Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication. The term was coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu in 2003, as an extension of the longstanding concept of a common carrier, which was used to describe the role of telephone systems.

Read More

Higlights of IGF 2016

•  Many sessions throughout the week provided the community with vibrant spaces to explore the important question of how to harness renewed global interest in increasing meaningful, empowering access to the Internet in a way that supports development efforts in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Participants reiterated that digital literacy and the development of local and culturally diverse and relevant content is fundamental for inclusive growth. An emerging consensus has developed amongst the IGF community that the Internet’s core values of openness, freedom, resilience, safety, and decentralisation are fundamental for enabling inclusive and sustainable growth - as is also expressed by UNESCO’s Internet Universality framework.
  
• Many delegates emphasized that international cooperation and strategic partnerships cultivated through the IGF can help bridge digital divides and provide crucial new opportunities for people living in poverty, women and girls, children, persons with disabilities, older persons, indigenous peoples, marginalised groups, as well as rural communities that still lack acceptable and quality access and training in the use of ICTs and the Internet. 
  
• The IGF has remained a critical platform to facilitate dialogue on human rights and their connections with Internet policy and governance; while discussions about the importance of human rights on the Internet have similarly become increasingly prominent at the IGF. This year, increased attention has also been paid to the importance of civil and political rights - including the ways in which the promotion and protection of these rights can support sustainable development.
  
• The successful transition of the IANA functions to the multistakeholder community in October of 2016, only a few months prior to the 11th IGF, marks an important milestone for the multistakeholder Internet governance community. The transition was finalised after many months of careful planning and deliberation by community volunteers; leading to productive exchanges about the post-transition IANA and the new community-based accountability mechanisms to ensure transparent and stable management of this crucial Internet function. At the IGF, various workshops and sessions endeavoured to learn from the successes and challenges of this important multistakeholder exercise.
  
• A number of sessions addressed the growing challenges stemming from increased use of the Internet around the world, along with the ways in which such use may threaten the security and development benefits of the Internet. Stakeholders stressed the need for cybersecurity measures to be implemented in cooperation with all stakeholders and international expert bodies; with the IGF providing a unique space for such collaborative efforts. Security 3 professionals, law enforcement agencies, programmers, and business people, among others, have to work together in order to address new threats and challenges to online security for both individuals and organizations. Cyberattacks, cybercrime and issues related to privacy and surveillance are challenges that require urgent collaboration and cooperation as well.
  
• In the Internet’s tradition of allowing for unlimited creation of new opportunities, the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence have the potential to bring about groundbreaking benefits to mankind and our quality of life. The challenge is to foster this continuous development and to enable the IoT to further grow into the Internet and Internet governance processes. Issues and challenges such as standardisation, interoperability, and security are very similar to issues the Internet dealt with in its young history, and offer substantial opportunities for multistakeholder cooperation and mutual learning.
  
• National, Regional and Youth IGFs (NRIs) have been emerging spontaneously ever since the IGF was convened in 2006. They are independent in their work, and organized in accordance with the core IGF principles of being multistakeholder, bottom-up, inclusive, open, transparent and non-commercial. The NRI network nearly doubled since the 10th IGF; growing from 37 NRIs at the end of 2015 to a current record of 72 recognised NRIs. The NRIs are active and immensely useful contributors to the IGF community’s intersessional activities. The linkages between the NRIs and the global IGF have increased significantly thanks to many joint work activities such as the organization of sessions held during the 11th IGF, collaborative work on developing publications containing guidelines, and best practices on how to establish and run a successful NRI. Records from the NRIs’ regular fortnightly meetings also serve as valuable and tangible inputs to the global IGF; providing more local and issue- specific perspectives to policy challenges.
  
• In 2016, the IGF furthered its work on Policy Options for Connecting and Enabling the Next Billion(s). This year, the intersessional initiative focused on local and regional specificities to enabling meaningful access and also investigated how ensuring meaningful Internet access can support the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). CENB Phase II of this seminal work builds on the IGF community's work on this topic in 2015 (Phase I). Together, over 120 substantive contributions from a diversity of stakeholders and stakeholder groups are reflected in this initiative, which helps to illustrate the need for not only enabling more people to access the Internet, but also for them to benefit from and be empowered by the developmental potential of the Internet.
  
• The IGF Best Practice Forums (BPFs) continue to offer unique platforms to investigate topical Internet policy challenges by collecting community input and experiences in a flexible and bottom-up manner. The BPFs gather knowledge that exists with different groups, organizations, experts and individuals, to make it available as a useful resource to the broader community in the form of tangible best practice outcome documents. Through their substantive outreach efforts and continued calls for input and contributions, the BPFs enabled more diverse and varied participation in IGF processes, including from a richer variety of regions and stakeholder groups. By continuously involving new people in their work, the various BPFs also contributed to enlarging the global footprint of the IGF. As a part of the 2016 community intersessional activities, the third cycle of BPFs focused on Gender and Access, Understanding the Commercial and Economic Incentives behind a Successful IPv6 Deployment, Contributing to the success and continued development of Internet exchange points (IXPs), and Building Confidence and Security in the use of Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) through Enhanced Cooperation and Collaboration. BPFs worked throughout the year in an open and inclusive way via open mailing lists, regular virtual meetings and BPF workshops during the 11th IGF meeting.
  
• Using their first-ever shared main session at IGF 2015 as a starting point, IGF Dynamic Coalitions held regularly monthly meetings and coordinated closely before IGF 2016. Over the course of the year, DCs have made significant progress toward synchronising their work and adopting fundamental common standards of transparency and inclusiveness (open archives, open membership, open mailing lists), and have developed agreed-upon targets and deadlines for the publication of substantive papers. They have also jointly participated for the second time in a survey exercise to gather feedback on their papers. While there are currently 16 DCs, the community of DCs is also growing: two new coalitions, on ‘Community Connectivity’ and on ‘Innovative Approaches to Connecting the Unconnected’, emerged in 2016. Several more have recommitted to their activities, notably the coalitions on Internet and Climate Change and the Youth Coalition. Other groups, on defining “publicness” in the digital age and on schools on Internet governance, are in an exploratory phase and have expressed interest in launching DCs of their own.
  
• The participation of Governments and policymakers has increased significantly this year, with far more open forum sessions held than in any previous IGF. Organizers of these 32 open forums – a session type traditionally reserved for governments, IGOs and relevant international organizations – included the Governments of China, Cuba, Egypt, Germany, Indonesia, Japan and Mexico, as well as the African Union, European Commission, Organization of American States (OAS), and OECD. A delegation of 12 members of the European Parliament, the largest ever to come to an IGF, was also in attendance.
  
• The IGF brought together a number of UN and intergovernmental organizations as organizers of Day 0 events, open forums, and workshops. Over the course of the week, WIPO, which actively participated in the meeting this year, the ITU, UNESCO, the office of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, the World Bank, and the OECD all held or coorganized sessions. As an indicator of the expanding relevance of Internet governance in diverse policy areas, for the first time UN Women and UNICEF also organized IGF events - on SDG 5 and the use of ICTs by women, and children’s rights research, respectively.
  
• WIPO's participation in the 11th IGF again demonstrated the numerous areas of convergence between intellectual property (IP) and Internet governance. A balanced and well-functioning IP system contributes to inclusive and sustainable growth on the Internet by providing guarantees and incentives for innovation to take place and for creators to flourish.
  
• The World Economic Forum (WEF) made significant contributions to the meeting. It participated in a Main Session on the IGF’s intersessional activities, and held both a Day 0 event and open forum on connectivity, which brought in a number of partners including the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Global Connect, and the Alliance for Affordable Internet, as part of its ongoing Internet for All initiative.
  
• In order to help orient first-time participants to the IGF and to help them understand the organizational processes, as well as to foster their integration into the IGF community, a set of continuous activities throughout the 2016 programme was developed under the Newcomers Track by the MAG and the IGF Secretariat. Communication with new IGF participants will be continued intersessionally through a dedicated IGF newcomers mailing list. 
  
• For the first time in the IGF workshop proposal process, proposers this year were invited to define their workshops with thematic tags, including write-in tags of their own choosing. As part of an approach to structuring the programme in a bottom-up way, the most popular tags 5 were used to determine the sub-themes for the 2016 meeting. This saw the inclusion of youth issues and sustainable development as new, discrete sub-themes. Although they did not constitute their own themes, tags on trade, digital literacy, and connecting the unconnected were also frequently used and were some of the most discussed issues in workshops.
  
• As an initiative of the MAG Working Group on New Session Formats, and with support from the Secretariat, the IGF this year introduced new session types in the programme, including lightning and unconference sessions. The experimental session formats provided an opportunity to engage with IGF participants, in particular young people, within settings that were informal and immensely lively. The 20-minute lighting sessions proved to be very popular. Held every day of the meeting during the lunch breaks, in a communal and central outdoor area of the venue, the sessions covered topics as varied as broadband affordability; Internet governance challenges in the Middle East and North Africa; the accountability of algorithms; and access to knowledge and culture online. High-scoring workshop proposals with compatible formats, which were not originally selected during the IGF 2016 workshop evaluation process, were re-formatted for the lightning sessions programme. Workshop proposers seized this opportunity enthusiastically and the 24 slots allocated to the lighting sessions were quickly filled. Unconference, in which participants proposed topics for presentation and discussion on a communal board, gave space to unplanned sessions on digital violence; African Internet rights; and free trade and Internet governance in Latin America.
  
• The IGF Village included a record number of booths, with having 40 exhibitors presenting, (double since last year); and gave exhibitors from across the stakeholder spectrum the opportunity to advance their work, network and create partnerships among the IGF’s participants.

Read More

IGF 2016 and its Facts

 

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2016 is the 11 IGF hosted by the  United Nations. The United Nations Secretary-General formally announced the establishment of the IGF in July 2006 and the first meeting was convened in October/November 2006.
This year the  IGF2016 has been themed ‘Enabling Inclusive and Sustainable Growth’ which is being organized  at the PALCCO Centre from 6-9 December 2016 in Jalisco,
 Mexico.

The IGF 2016 is an open platform for consultation with the growing IGF multistakeholder community, with an aim to enhance capacity building and participation from stakeholders from developing countries, youth and those joining the IGF online.


This year the IGF secretariat has changed its format introducing new segments like:
1. Newcomers Track: The IGF 2016 Newcomers Track aims to help participants attending the IGF annual meeting for the first time, to understanding the IGF processes and to foster the integration of all new-coming stakeholders into the IGF community.

2. New session Format:These session include various sub-session
a. 20-MINUTE LIGHTNING SESSIONS :Lightning sessions are intended as quicker, more informal versions of full-length talks or presentations. High-scoring workshop proposals with compatible formats which were not originally selected during the IGF 2016 workshop evaluation process have been brought in and re-formatted for the lightning sessions programme.
b. CORNER SESSIONS: Corner sessions take place simultaneously in four corners of a room. They emerge based on what the participants present most want to talk about: issues are proposed on post-its placed on a board, and the most popular ones move on to discussion into the corners of the room.
c. UN-CONFERENCE SESSIONS: Un-conference sessions are talks which are not pre-scheduled. Participants reserve a speaking slot by signing themselves up on a scheduling board on a first-come, first-serve basis on the day of the Un-conference.

There were 272 workshops or sessions in IGF 2016, In the course of four days, more than 2000 delegates from 83 countries participated with thousands more stakeholders actively engaging online. 

Read More