Network of Excellence in Internet Science (JRA4, Governance, Regulation & Standards, C. Marsden,...

Network of Excellence in Internet Science

Kick-off Meeting

Brussels, 21-22 December 2011

Chris Marsden (Essex)

FP7-ICT-2011.1.6-288021 EINS

JRA4: Governance, Regulation & Standards

Brussels, December 21-22, 2011

Audience Participation!

• While you watch this PPT:o send a short email about your experience with:

1.Standards bodies• What you did, what the result was, other actors (note SEA2 work ongoing)

– Standards case study• Any unusual/counter-intuitive example - hold-ups, forum shifting• Examples of civil society involvement (and multiple hat wearing)

– Standards literatureo Different literatures in each disciplineo Legal, social science, economic, comp.sci. etc/

• Email [email protected] Thank you!

EINS Kick-off Meeting


WP Objectives

• Regulatory and governance mechanisms behind development of Internet standards. o to draw lessons from social scientific analysis o to ensure the appropriateness of the standards o as the Internet gets deeper into the social fabric.



Partners in JRA4

Total Effort 26.5 months (530 days)• Socio-legal studies/coordination/deliverables

ESSEX 90 days

• Economics and game theory WARW 40 days

• Inter-disciplinary information studies drawing on socio-economic and political analysis

Total 430 days = 63% of research effort NEXA 80days, LU 60days, IMDEA 50days 40days: IBBT, Savoie, UPMC, Institute of Informatics and Telematics of CNR, Stockholm 20days: UNIBO, Delft

• Draws on inter-disciplinary approaches LSE 100 days (note reallocation from JRA6) UiO 20 days Oslo contribution relies on compilation of existing research/analysis



Tasks in JRA4

• R4.1 Overview of regulatory and governance methodologies

• R4.2 Cataloguing governance tools for standards • R4.3 Standards body case studies • R.4.4 Map New Participants in Standards Task • R4.5 Cross-Mapping governance



R4.1 Overview of methodologies• Essex, UPMC, Savoie, Warw, Oslo, NEXA, UNIBO, CNR, Stockholm, LSE• Develop multi-disciplinary catalogue of

methodologies o To aid better understanding of challenges to better participative decision-making, o including open-source governance approaches o e.g. open-source standards for hardware as well as software



Task R4.2 Cataloguing governance toolso UESSEX, NEXA, UoS, CNR

• Development of tools that help • Scientifically designed legitimate governance • Towards a better understanding

o of needs and requirements for Internet design o based on broad socio-political buy-in o (or at least better informed acquiescence) o in the design process and outcomes.



• Goal not only to present and understand the various methodologies, o but also clarify their standing, o specific policy needs they address, o gap analysis to understand growing legitimacy

problems and potential solution or bypass. 1.Leads to regulatory governance taxonomy

– various methodologies classified and understood. – drive governance tool development JRA4.2 – based on dedicated use cases in Task R4.3 – cross-mapping in Task R4.4



Task R4.3 Standards body case studies

• NEXA, LSE, UiO• Construct a living catalogue:

o standards bodies and their functions. o both telecoms and Internet standards,

• Complex interplays and trade-offs between the various institutions o design choices relating to software and hardware, to

privacy, security, and extensibility.



Task R4.3: Legitimacy Gap Lessons

• Cases studies can represent ability to o Develop study of governance and regulation

of the Internet as a whole, other rapidly developing technology-led sectors with a potential legitimacy gap between

best practice design and socio-political trust in expert design.

• Essential governance questions identified



R.4.4 Map New Participants in Standards Making

• Civil Society, Wider Participation UNIBO, NEXA, LSE, MLS, LJU

• Identify potential new participants• success factors of differing approaches

o including alternative or similar examples, o to the well-known US examples

Creative Commons, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Software Foundation, Centre for Democracy and Technology, Free Press

o within the European standards sphere.



Task R4.5 Cross-Mapping governanceo UESSEX, UPMC, UoS, WARW, UoP, MLS

• cross-mapping governance methodologies and policies by crossing them with, o categories of non/human actors defining and executing them o the layer at which they operate.

• 3-dimensional matrix analysed/assessed o for compliance with democratic values,

e.g. transparency, legitimacy, accountability, fundamental rights.

• Gap analysis may identify lacunae



WP Action List for the 1st Year

• Task R4.1: series of events and workshops o with the relevant JRAs o with external communities both on- and off-line.

• Milestone R4.1 (M12)• Initial outline of catalogues • plus full draft of methodologies; • Hypotheses for governance & regulation taxonomy



Deliverable R4.1 Outline overviews of Tasks R4.1-R4.4 M12

• Full first overview of o regulatory and governance methodologies, o test candidate case studies for examination

• Tentative hypotheses as to a governance and regulation taxonomy presented o strawman for further refinement and analysis o moving from Task R4.1/4.3 to explore within Task 4.2.



Interdependencies with other WPs

• Outcomes include strong collaboration with SEA2 on ICT standard-setting institutions

• Also JRAs dealing with standards making



WP Impact

• Outreach to social science researchers via long-established connections to the o European (EuroCPR), o United States (TPRC), and o international academic communities

E.g. GIGANET, IAMCR, International Telecommunications Society



Ultimate objective of JRA4

• To disseminate and collaborate research methodologies in new methods of regulation –

• including stakeholder dialogues and choices that affect the present and future Internets -

• considering concerns from various stakeholders and design communities.

E.g. participation, democratic values, network growth and complexity, interoperability, security, privacy

• Note importance of close collaboration with SEA2



Issues to be discussed and decided


1. How do the various sub-tasks fit together i.e. methodology development, stakeholder mapping, case studies

• How are the practical elements of these tasks divided does the same person/team contribute to all of these tasks related to a

specific set of case studies, or are they more separate?• How will workflow be organized

e.g. linking case studies with analytic activities that follow

Network of Excellence in Internet Science (JRA4, Governance, Regulation & Standards, C. Marsden,...

Technology

Transcript of Network of Excellence in Internet Science (JRA4, Governance, Regulation & Standards, C. Marsden,...