The Role of Transnational Elites in shaping the evolving Field of Internet Governance

La gouvernance de l'Internet est une thématique récente dans la politique mondiale. Néanmoins, elle est devenue au fil des années un enjeu économique et politique important. La question a même pris une importance particulière au cours des derniers mois en devenant un sujet d'actualité récurrent. Forte de ce constat, c ette recherche retrace l'histoire de la gouvernance de l'Internet depuis son émergence comme enjeu politique dans les années 1980 jusqu'à la fin du Sommet Mondial sur la Société de l'Information (SMSI) en 2005. Plutôt que de se focaliser sur l'une ou l'autre des institutions impliquées dans la régulation du réseau informatique mondial, cette recherche analyse l'émergence et l'évolution historique d'un espace de luttes rassemblant un nombre croissant d'acteurs différents. Cette évolution est décrite à travers le prisme de la relation dialectique entre élites et non-élites et de la lutte autour de la définition de la gouvernance de l'Internet. Cette thèse explore donc la question de comment les relations au sein des élites de la gouvernance de l'Internet et entre ces élites et les non-élites expliquent l'emergence, l'évolution et la structuration d'un champ relativement autonome de la politique mondiale centré sur la gouvernance de l'Internet. Contre les perspectives dominantes réaliste et libérales, cette recherche s'ancre dans une approche issue de la combinaison des traditions hétérodoxes en économie politique internationale et des apports de la sociologie politique internationale. Celle-ci s'articule autour des concepts de champ, d'élites et d'hégémonie. Le concept de champ, développé par Bourdieu inspire un nombre croissant d'études de la politique mondiale. Il permet à la fois une étude différenciée de la mondialisation et l'émergence d'espaces de lutte et de domination au niveau transnational. La sociologie des élites, elle, permet une approche pragmatique et centrée sur les acteurs des questions de pouvoir dans la mondialisation. Cette recherche utilise plus particulièrement le concept d'élite du pouvoir de Wright Mills pour étudier l'unification d'élites a priori différentes autour de projets communs. Enfin, cette étude reprend le concept néo-gramscien d'hégémonie afin d'étudier à la fois la stabilité relative du pouvoir d'une élite garantie par la dimension consensuelle de la domination, et les germes de changement contenus dans tout ordre international. A travers l'étude des documents produits au cours de la période étudiée et en s'appuyant sur la création de bases de données sur les réseaux d'acteurs, cette étude s'intéresse aux débats qui ont suivi la commercialisation du réseau au début des années 1990 et aux négociations lors du SMSI. La première période a abouti à la création de l'Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) en 1998. Cette création est le résultat de la recherche d'un consensus entre les discours dominants des années 1990. C'est également le fruit d'une coalition entre intérêts au sein d'une élite du pouvoir de la gouvernance de l'Internet. Cependant, cette institutionnalisation de l'Internet autour de l'ICANN excluait un certain nombre d'acteurs et de discours qui ont depuis tenté de renverser cet ordre. Le SMSI a été le cadre de la remise en cause du mode de gouvernance de l'Internet par les États exclus du système, des universitaires et certaines ONG et organisations internationales. C'est pourquoi le SMSI constitue la seconde période historique étudiée dans cette thèse. La confrontation lors du SMSI a donné lieu à une reconfiguration de l'élite du pouvoir de la gouvernance de l'Internet ainsi qu'à une redéfinition des frontières du champ. Un nouveau projet hégémonique a vu le jour autour d'éléments discursifs tels que le multipartenariat et autour d'insitutions telles que le Forum sur la Gouvernance de l'Internet. Le succès relatif de ce projet a permis une stabilité insitutionnelle inédite depuis la fin du SMSI et une acceptation du discours des élites par un grand nombre d'acteurs du champ. Ce n'est que récemment que cet ordre a été remis en cause par les pouvoirs émergents dans la gouvernance de l'Internet. Cette thèse cherche à contribuer au débat scientifique sur trois plans. Sur le plan théorique, elle contribue à l'essor d'un dialogue entre approches d'économie politique mondiale et de sociologie politique internationale afin d'étudier à la fois les dynamiques structurelles liées au processus de mondialisation et les pratiques localisées des acteurs dans un domaine précis. Elle insiste notamment sur l'apport de les notions de champ et d'élite du pouvoir et sur leur compatibilité avec les anlayses néo-gramsciennes de l'hégémonie. Sur le plan méthodologique, ce dialogue se traduit par une utilisation de méthodes sociologiques telles que l'anlyse de réseaux d'acteurs et de déclarations pour compléter l'analyse qualitative de documents. Enfin, sur le plan empirique, cette recherche offre une perspective originale sur la gouvernance de l'Internet en insistant sur sa dimension historique, en démontrant la fragilité du concept de gouvernance multipartenaire (multistakeholder) et en se focalisant sur les rapports de pouvoir et les liens entre gouvernance de l'Internet et mondialisation. - Internet governance is a recent issue in global politics. However, it gradually became a major political and economic issue. It recently became even more important and now appears regularly in the news. Against this background, this research outlines the history of Internet governance from its emergence as a political issue in the 1980s to the end of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in 2005. Rather than focusing on one or the other institution involved in Internet governance, this research analyses the emergence and historical evolution of a space of struggle affecting a growing number of different actors. This evolution is described through the analysis of the dialectical relation between elites and non-elites and through the struggle around the definition of Internet governance. The thesis explores the question of how the relations among the elites of Internet governance and between these elites and non-elites explain the emergence, the evolution, and the structuration of a relatively autonomous field of world politics centred around Internet governance. Against dominant realist and liberal perspectives, this research draws upon a cross-fertilisation of heterodox international political economy and international political sociology. This approach focuses on concepts such as field, elites and hegemony. The concept of field, as developed by Bourdieu, is increasingly used in International Relations to build a differentiated analysis of globalisation and to describe the emergence of transnational spaces of struggle and domination. Elite sociology allows for a pragmatic actor-centred analysis of the issue of power in the globalisation process. This research particularly draws on Wright Mill's concept of power elite in order to explore the unification of different elites around shared projects. Finally, this thesis uses the Neo-Gramscian concept of hegemony in order to study both the consensual dimension of domination and the prospect of change contained in any international order. Through the analysis of the documents produced within the analysed period, and through the creation of databases of networks of actors, this research focuses on the debates that followed the commercialisation of the Internet throughout the 1990s and during the WSIS. The first time period led to the creation of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in 1998. This creation resulted from the consensus-building between the dominant discourses of the time. It also resulted from the coalition of interests among an emerging power elite. However, this institutionalisation of Internet governance around the ICANN excluded a number of actors and discourses that resisted this mode of governance. The WSIS became the institutional framework within which the governance system was questioned by some excluded states, scholars, NGOs and intergovernmental organisations. The confrontation between the power elite and counter-elites during the WSIS triggered a reconfiguration of the power elite as well as a re-definition of the boundaries of the field. A new hegemonic project emerged around discursive elements such as the idea of multistakeholderism and institutional elements such as the Internet Governance Forum. The relative success of the hegemonic project allowed for a certain stability within the field and an acceptance by most non-elites of the new order. It is only recently that this order began to be questioned by the emerging powers of Internet governance. This research provides three main contributions to the scientific debate. On the theoretical level, it contributes to the emergence of a dialogue between International Political Economy and International Political Sociology perspectives in order to analyse both the structural trends of the globalisation process and the located practices of actors in a given issue-area. It notably stresses the contribution of concepts such as field and power elite and their compatibility with a Neo-Gramscian framework to analyse hegemony. On the methodological level, this perspective relies on the use of mixed methods, combining qualitative content analysis with social network analysis of actors and statements. Finally, on the empirical level, this research provides an original perspective on Internet governance. It stresses the historical dimension of current Internet governance arrangements. It also criticise the notion of multistakeholde ism and focuses instead on the power dynamics and the relation between Internet governance and globalisation.

Global Internet governance and the public interest in communication

Élaborée à partir d’une étude de cas extensive focalisant sur les perspectives multiples et concurrentes ayant émergé lors des négociations sur la gouvernance de l’Internet, thématique ayant dominé l’agenda politique du Sommet mondial sur la société de l’information (SMSI), cette thèse examine les manières avec lesquelles les débats mondiaux sur la gouvernance de l’Internet influencent la notion d’intérêt public en communication. Établie sur la base d’une observation participante extensive, d’entrevues semi-structurées et de l’analyse d’une documentation formelle et informelle associée au SMSI, cette thèse fait état de l’émergence des enjeux associés à la gouvernance de l’Internet au SMSI et présente une analyse approfondie des négociations ayant porté sur cet enjeu. Le cadre théorique développé par Lawrence Lessig au travers duquel « le code est la loi » est appliqué afin d’expliquer comment les différents acteurs ont débattu et ultimement atteint un consensus sur les frontières venant séparer les enjeux normatifs de politique publique et les questions techniques de régulation et de gestion du réseau. Cette thèse discute également de l’évolution des débats autour de la gouvernance mondiale de l’Internet ayant pris place à la suite de la conclusion du SMSI. Sur la base de cette étude de cas, un ensemble de conclusions sont formulées sur les acteurs et les caractéristiques institutionnelles ayant influencé les négociations sur la gouvernance de l’internet. Il est également suggéré que le SMSI a redéfini une discussion étroite sur la gestion d’un ensemble de fonctions techniques de l’Internet en un domaine de politique publique plus large de gouvernance mondiale de l’Internet. Il est également défendu que la notion d’intérêt public dans la gouvernance mondiale de l’Internet est conceptualisée autour des processus de participation et d’intégration des différentes parties prenantes au processus politique. Les implications directes et indirectes qui découlent de ce constat pour comprendre plus largement la notion d’intérêt public dans le domaine de la communication sont également présentées et discutées. En conclusion, cette thèse s’interroge sur les implications programmatiques des éléments ayant été précédemment soulevées pour la recherche médiatique et communicationnelle.

Internet Governance: problematiche e prospettive della nuova frontiera del Diritto Informatico

Questa tesi si propone di mettere in evidenza la forte spinta innovatrice che internet potrebbe dare allo sviluppo della democrazia, avendo abbattuto in maniera brutale i confini geo-politici, democratizzato addirittura all'esasperazione la libertà di parola e la possibilità di ognuno di far sentire la propria opinione ad un pubblico globale, rendendo sterile qualsivoglia regolamentazione locale e creando nuove e importanti problematiche di portata universale. Sulla rete viaggiano senza soluzione di continuità dati di ogni tipo, si concretizzano transazioni, si intrecciano relazioni, il tutto sorpassando agilmente le barriere fisiche dei confini nazionali, la distanza, le leggi, mettendo quindi l’umanità di fronte alla nuova sfida di armonizzare i vari ordinamenti giuridici, superare il concetto di sovranità nazionale e di creare un meccanismo democratico e partecipato di gestione della rete. La extraterritorialità della rete e il fatto che non si possa qualificare un "popolo sovrano" appartenente a questa entità, ha come vedremo posto l’umanità di fronte a nuove e ardue sfide: la necessità di regolare un mezzo così potente e diffuso ha portato negli anni ad un lungo dibattito, che vedremo, e che pone questioni di importanza capitale per la società di oggi così come la conosciamo: "si può esigere che l’evoluzione tecnologica della rete sia orientata al raggiungimento di obiettivi di interesse pubblico?", "chi deve gestire la rete?", "usufruire di internet è un diritto della persona?", "chi è il soggetto che ha possibilità e facoltà di intervenire efficacemente per la normazione della rete? I privati, lo Stato, gli utenti, o è necessario un quadro concertato che consideri tutti i pareri e gli interessi sulla questione?".

The puzzle in the bits: Cybersecurity, digital warfare and the future of Internet governance. CEPS Commentary, 26 June 2013

CEPS Senior Research Fellow Andrea Renda persuasively shows in this new CEPS Commentary the extent to which the global economy has become heavily reliant on the Internet, but observes that this phenomenon is becoming increasingly insidious. It is efficient, no doubt: but he asks whether it is also secure?

The Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NETmundial)

This case study examines NETmundial, the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, which was held in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 23 and 24 of 2014. The meeting was convened by 1net, a coalition of This case study examines NETmundial, the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, which was held in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 23 and 24 of 2014. The meeting was convened by 1net, a coalition of stakeholder groups involved in Internet governance discussions, in partnership with the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), in response to revelations of mass surveillance of communications by the United States. It sought to develop a set of universally acceptable Internet governance principles as well as a way forward for the evolution of the Internet governance system, which together could serve as a framework for the governance and use of the Internet. It convened 930 participants from 110 different countries, representing civil society, the private sector, academia, the technical community, governments and intergovernmental organizations, as well as over 1000 remote participants from 23 countries around the globe. It also employed a content contribution platform that sought to crowd source inputs from stakeholders for the production of the outcome document. The meeting served as a demonstration of the multistakeholder process in action: in the production of the outcome document, stakeholders with a diverse range of backgrounds and interests collectively negotiated the inclusion or exclusion of highly sensitive and complex issues. While the process of achieving rough consensus involved sometimes messy debates and there were procedural imperfections, the case is informative for its structured production of bottom-up multistakeholder outcomes.groups involved in Internet governance discussions, in partnership with the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), in response to revelations of mass surveillance of communications by the United States. It sought to develop a set of universally acceptable Internet governance principles as well as a way forward for the evolution of the Internet governance system, which together could serve as a framework for the governance and use of the Internet. It convened 930 participants from 110 different countries, representing civil society, the private sector, academia, the technical community, governments and intergovernmental organizations, as well as over 1000 remote participants from 23 countries around the globe. It also employed a content contribution platform that sought to crowd source inputs from stakeholders for the production of the outcome document. The meeting served as a demonstration of the multistakeholder process in action: in the production of the outcome document, stakeholders with a diverse range of backgrounds and interests collectively negotiated the inclusion or exclusion of highly sensitive and complex issues. While the process of achieving rough consensus involved sometimes messy debates and there were procedural imperfections, the case is informative for its structured production of bottom-up multistakeholder outcomes.

Rising China and Internet governance: Multistakeholderism, fragmentation and the Liberal Order in the age of digital sovereignty

In its open and private-based dimension, the Internet is the epitome of the Liberal International Order in its global spatial dimension. Therefore, normative questions arise from the emergence of powerful non-liberal actors such as China in Internet governance. In particular, China has supported a UN-based multilateral Internet governance model based on state sovereignty aimed at replacing the existing ICANN-based multistakeholder model. While persistent, this debate has become less dualistic through time. However, fear of Internet fragmentation has increased as the US-China technological competition grew harsher. This thesis inquires “(To what extent) are Chinese stakeholders reshaping the rules of Global Internet Governance?”. This is further unpacked in three smaller questions: (i) (To what extent) are Chinese stakeholders contributing to increased state influence in multistakeholder fora?; (ii) (how) is China contributing to Internet fragmentation?; and (iii) what are the main drivers of Chinese stakeholders’ stances? To answer these questions, Chinese stakeholders’ actions are observed in the making and management of critical Internet resources at the IETF and ICANN respectively, and in mobile connectivity standard-making at 3GPP. Through the lens of norm entrepreneurship in regime complexes, this thesis interprets changes and persistence in the Internet governance normative order and Chinese attitudes towards it. Three research methods are employed: network analysis, semi-structured expert interviews, and thematic document analysis. While China has enhanced state intervention in several technological fields, fostering debates on digital sovereignty, this research finds that the Chinese government does not exert full control on its domestic private actors and concludes that Chinese stakeholders have increasingly adapted to multistakeholder Internet governance as they grew influential within it. To enhance control over Internet-based activities, the Chinese government resorted to regulatory and technical control domestically rather than establishing a splinternet. This is due to Chinese stakeholders’ interest in retaining the network benefits of global interconnectivity.

Propriedade intelectual e governança da Internet

Artigo comissionado ao Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade (CTS), da Escola de Direito da Fundação Getulio Vargas, pela RITS – Rede de Informação para o Terceiro Setor, com o intuito de colaborar com as reflexões sobre o processo do Internet Governance Forum, principalmente no que diz respeito à segunda edição do fórum, realizada no Rio de Janeiro, nos dias 12 a 15 de novembro de 2007, e suas repercussões.

Net Neutrality Compendium: Human Rights, Free Competition and the Future of the Internet

The ways in which Internet traffic is managed have direct consequences on Internet users’ rights as well as on their capability to compete on a level playing field. Network neutrality mandates to treat Internet traffic in a non-discriminatory fashion in order to maximise end users’ freedom and safeguard an open Internet. This book is the result of a collective work aimed at providing deeper insight into what is network neutrality, how does it relates to human rights and free competition and how to properly frame this key issue through sustainable policies and regulations. The Net Neutrality Compendium stems from three years of discussions nurtured by the members of the Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality (DCNN), an open and multistakeholder group, established under the aegis of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF).

Governança da internet no espaço regulatório global: o idiossincrático modelo de gestão da ICANN

O presente trabalho pretende descrever e analisar a evolução institucional da Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), organização responsável pela gestão dos nomes de domínio e protocolos de comunicação entre computadores em rede ao redor do mundo. Iniciando sua trajetória como instituição privada estadunidense e vinculada ao departamento de comércio do mesmo país, a ICANN passa por diversas modificações estruturais ao longo da última década, de forma a englobar representantes de diversos setores sociais em suas atividades. Algumas peculiaridades em sua estrutura que ainda a vinculam aos Estados Unidos, no entanto, são objeto de controvérsia entre aqueles que buscam uma democratização da internet em nível global.

La gouvernance de l'Internet : principes fondamentaux et valeurs de droit public

Organizada pelo Centro de Direito Público Comparado (CDPC) da universidade Paris II Panthéon Assas e com o apoio da Fundação Getúlio Vargas, a conferência Governança da Internet: Princípios Fundamentais e Valores do Direito Público será realizada no dia 08 de junho, das 15 às 17:30 no capus da Universidade em Paris.

Copyright in the EU Digital Single Market. Report of the CEPS Digital Forum. June 2013

The scope and enforcement of copyright in the digital environment have been among the most complex and controversial subjects tackled by lawmakers all over the world for the last decade. Due to the ubiquitous use of digital technology, modern regulation of copyright inherently touches on numerous areas of law and social and economic policy, including communications privacy and Internet governance. Modernising the EU’s copyright framework is considered a key step towards achieving the goal of an EU Digital Single Market in the context of the ‘Digital Agenda for Europe’, an initiative launched by the European Commission in May 2010. How can the EU make copyright fit for purpose in the Internet age? What are the most suitable and realistic policy options to achieve the objective of a Digital Single Market in the creative content sectors? To give comprehensive answers to these questions, the CEPS Digital Forum formed a Task Force on Copyright in the EU Digital Single Market to foster a multi-stakeholder dialogue on the major challenges for copyright law in the online content sector today. Drawing on the discussions and input gathered by the Task Force, this report contains the conclusions and policy recommendations organised around three main themes: licensing rules and practices in the online music and film sectors, the definition and implementation of copyright exceptions in the digital environment and the present and future of online copyright enforcement in Europe.

Privacy and surveillance in the digital age: a comparative study of the Brazilian and German legal frameworks

This briefing is an input to the discussions that will take place in the session “Privacy under mass surveillance: a multi-stakeholder international challenge” to be held on November 9th in João Pessoa, Brazil, during the “Day Zero” of the Internet Governance Forum. This document is one of the outputs of the first phase of the project “Privacy in the digital age: fostering the implementation of the bilateral German-Brazilian strategy in response to massive data collection”, jointly developed by the Center for Technology and Society of the Rio de Janeiro Law School of the Getulio Vargas Foundation and the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), with the support of FGV. The project Privacy in the Digital Age seeks to identify legal, political, technical, and economic incentives for the implementation of resolution 168/67 on Privacy in the Digital Age, proposed by Germany and Brazil, and approved by the United Nations General Assembly and to identify other potential areas of collaboration between Germany and Brazil in the field of Internet Governance.

Submission to IGF MAG from the Center for Technology and Society of the Getulio Vargas Foundation Law School (CTS/FGV)

10. Internet Governance Forum, João Pessoa - PB

The Concept of Transparency in International Relations: towards a critical approach

Transparency is an important concept in International Relations. The possibility of realizing transparency in practice operates as a central analytical axis defining distinct positions on core theoretical problems within the field, from the security dilemma to the function of international institutions and beyond. As a political practice the pursuit of transparent governance is a dominant feature of global politics, promoted by a wide range of actors across a vast range of issue areas, from nuclear proliferation to Internet governance to the politics of foreign aid. Yet, despite its importance, precisely what transparency means or how the concept is understood is frequently ill-defined by academics and policy-makers alike. As a result, the epistemological and ontological underpinnings of approaches to transparency in IR often sit in tension with their wider theoretical commitments. This article will examine the three primary understandings of transparency used in IR in order to unpack these commitments. It finds that while transparency is often explicitly conceptualized as a property of information, particularly within rationalist scholarship, this understanding rests upon an unarticulated set of sociological assumptions. This analysis suggests that conceptualizing ‘transparency-as-information’ without a wider sociology of knowledge production is highly problematic, potentially obscuring our ability to recognize transparent practices in global governance. Understanding transparency as dialogue, as a social practice rooted in shared cognitive capacities and epistemic frameworks, provides a firmer analytical ground from which to examine transparency in International Relations.