Visionaries Multimedia

Internet Governance Policy Survey - November 2007

This Web page contains some of the qualitative written elaborations  gathered among the data in a survey of IGF participants that was fielded to measure attitudes about current and likely Internet governance policy initiatives. Responses were gathered from 206 IGF attendees, roughly 15 percent of Forum participants, representing 60 countries. The Internet Governance Forum in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Nov. 12-15, 2007, was the second of five annual global events that attract stakeholders who come together to discuss issues tied to the future of information and communications technologies.  Respondents were asked to provide written elaborations about their concerns for the future of the Internet in open-ended response boxes on the survey; some chose not to reply to every question asked, so you will not find 206 responses to each question. The researchers express their thanks to survey respondents, some of whom spent up to an hour carefully considering and providing their input for this survey. The written responses were sometimes composed in a mix of languages and some were written with grammatical or syntax errors but had a discernible meaning; these have been edited to bring clarity for use on this site. Please address any inquiries about the data to predictions@elon.edu.

To return to the IGF Survey Statistics page, click here.

To return to the first IGF Rio Survey page, click here.

This page contains responses to the question on concerns about the future of CRITICAL INTERNET RESOURCES. To go to other open-ended responses, click on the appropriate category below:
ACCESS
DIVERSITY
OPENNESS
SECURITY
PUBLIC POLICY
EMERGING CONCERNS
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS/QUESTIONS

REASON TO ATTEND IGF

Open-ended response number one

REQUEST MADE OF RESPONDENTS:

List the most important future concern(s) you have about CRITICAL INTERNET RESOURCES and Internet governance.

My concerns about Critical Internet Resources include the IPv6 address space and its assignment in a sane manner. My concerns about Internet Governance are that we should be moving on from just talking about the issues and we should be taking steps to alleviate them.

Imperialism of some governments and worldwide organisations.

The proprietization of Critical Internet Resources through ever-expanding intellectual-property rights.

Antagonism and distrust between the Internet technical community and civil society.
Information security is the chief concern.

Stability and independence of the Domain Name System are my concerns.

I am afraid that virus of artificial-intelligence attack will break the system if it is too monopolized.

Avoid governance that impede on the openness and accessibility of the net.

Overcontrol and interference through regulation is likely to cause more distortions than solutions. I am concerned that regulations will exacerbate problems rather than solve them, much like price controls can distort supply.

The control of the critical Internet resources by hegemonic forces.

Freedom and no control from any individual governments and/or any UN organization. Maintenance and improvement of the multistakeholder policy.

Internet neutrality; filtering; privacy issues.

Centralized points of information storage.

Security, security, security.

Overregulation (re-regulation) of liberalised Internet functions by governments. Nationalised Internet infrastructure resulting from attempts to control Internet functions (operational and administrative) at national level.

Cultural hegemony by the US; further marginalization of developed countries.
Net neutrality.

Political agendas arising from "Global Community Control." The Oil for Food program and the human rights efforts of the UN are two examples.

Avoidance of government influence/UN-ization for reasons not linked to functioning of/access to the Internet.

Number-one concern: There are people who make their careers around these topics.
Control of the Domain Name system should be managed by a neutral body.

I am concerned that CIR and governance will fall under corporate and government control and will not serve as global public good.

I am concerned that governments and special interests will manage to censor the free flow of information globally. It is OK if individual cultures want to apply their values inside their cultures, but they should NOT be allowed to impose such cultures on other non-believers.

Breaking a device that works!

The strategic choice of Internet governance will be dictated by the interests of the USA.

The inequity in access.

Internet controlled by private companies whose sole concern is to make money.

My worries are that the control of Internet access be dependent upon a few countries. We have examples in Thailand - the Internet facilities were shut down during the military coup - and examples of Chinese unable to see the Internet websites of the western countries because the access to DNS is controlled.

We often miss the boat by generalizations. Healthcare could be improved by Internet access, but just having Internet access will not necessarily improve health care. Internet access must be part of an all-around ICT solution for development.

1) The challenge that we will face to guarantee IPv6 deployment with the ending of IPv4 availability for less-developed countries. 2) Routing inside less developed countries to reduce telecommunications price and allow digital inclusion. 3) Last-mile access in developing and less-developed countries.

Provide international support (funds and personnel) to develop accessibility in languages with non-ASCII scripts (not only for domain names, but in general).

As WGIS report states, CIR are unilaterally controlled by one country.

Access, security, worldwide agreements about what can be posted - avoiding pages that increase violence and anything against human rights.

One country's monopoly over the root-server systems.

Lack of security on the Internet transactions and the cost of bandwidth in the developing countries.

My concern is localisation of universal Internet content.

SPAM, cybercrime, IDN are my concerns.

The overreaction of governments.

Democratic access.

1- Security; 2- Online education; 3- Information.

Security, Language, Complexity: The world might be marching slowly towards virtual world, eg. Second Life. This might end up in a new evolution of human beings.
My concern is that privilege and divide will be sustained.

The cost of Inter-nation Internet Connectivity (IIC), especially for developing and least-developed countries. These are the most poor, the least connected, and the biggest cost-bearers, especially with the very small markets in some of these countries.

My concern is reconciling democracy with maintaining efficiency.

The internationalization of ICANN international arrangements for terms of trade in Internet inter-country interconnections.

My concerns are security; children’s sites that should be controlled; wrong or misleading information.

Top-level domains as a matter of sovereignty, not a matter of commercial choice, like .tv and .la.

protection of privacy, right to remain anonymous; availability of basic resources (AS, IP addresses, domain, safe servers).

The Governance Structure is currently skewed against developing countries.
How to regulate Internet in a democratic basis; how to extend access; how to integrate different knowledge/cultural systems.

Internet access. Internet price.

Smooth transition to IPv6.

Openness and standards.

Economic strains on the current model limit infrastructure re-investment (needed for the deployment of IPv6). Must look more than one quarter out - and must be able to re-coup investment.

Concerns: security, content, diversity, cost of access.

Access for the disabled, illiterate.

The internationalization of ICANN.

Control of the resources. Monitoring.

Increasing multi-stakeholder participation.

That we spend too much time discussing it, and not enough time doing it.

Access; content; content in local languages; capacity building.

Security and stability of access.

Ensuring that the resources are kept open and affordable.

Access is still limited. Prices are still high in some places. Security is still a problem to be addressed.

Diversity and inclusion.

Domain names. IPv6 convergence.

Awareness. Infrastructure. IP addresses. Security.

Education, spreading its access and making it available for the other 4 billion that do not have access.

Internet access in developing countries. Local content.

Wimax; Wifi.

Security is a major problem; protecting our children and ourselves against predators is a must.

The gap between those who know the Internet and those who don't have access; securing the infrastructure against abuse.

Funding; technology access; Open Educational Resources promotion; human resource development; bandwidth.

Focus on political control rather than facilitating Internet’s contribution to economic development.

Need to build public confidence in the Internet in every country. This means we must also address the questions of child safety, among other things.

The natural resources are limited and we are facing a crisis in the near future; over-consumerism.

Governance has to start at school, to educate the youth, and spread it from there.
Transition to IPv6. Getting next several billion Internet users online.

1- The second generation of the Internet and the developing countries; 2- Openness of the Internet ; 3- Access; 4- Security.

Availability of resources.

IPv6 deployment.

I'm personally probably more interested in getting WiFi Internet access all over the world so I can use it if I travel to those countries.

Commercial ISPs will not invest in infrastructure for areas deemed to have a low return on investment and this widens the digital divide.

More dynamics in public policy related to the use of information and continuous training of individuals in order to include socio-digital.

Access to the Internet remains vital, we can not talk about anything else if not we are conscious that the world is not est'a connected to the Internet and with less than 15% of the population online, we cannot think of building things on the Internet but think of how we can improve access. Create content for a global audience that does not yet exist is not reasonable. Parallel is important to address the other issues: content, regulation, etc. But without access the rest of the goals fall in a market broken.

Access and security are crucial issues, as well as network security and anti-pornography.

Universal access to the citizens. And network neutrality.

Interconnection between contents.

Security and regulation.

Fairness, quality and seguridad (security).

Dissemination of information, security of the database, the Internet evolution.

Network neutrality and liberty of expression; privacy; security.

No diversity and privacy.

It's necessary to pay attention to the resources critical to teams and individuals as well as to provide access to those who today do not have Internet. As for the regulations, it is necessary that the countries consider the proposed and possible in a uniform manner, and a global forum is useful in this process.

Control of servers.

I do not think we should change what is working.

Equitable distribution of IPv6 addresses and equitable distribution of the costs of accessing Internet.

The lack of transparency and non-democratic.

Lack of access, diversite linguistic, cybercrime.

Security.

Automatically translated text.

The failure of all parties concerned.

The influence of the entrenched telecommunications operators; an excess of regulation and taxes.

1 - That the gap between developed nations and those that are developing will never be reduced; 2 - That advanced countries own and control most resources of the Internet and its governance and developing countries' participation is still weak and negligible in this nascent process; 3 - That Internet Governance becomes a kind of club of the rich because the places where these forums are held seem unreachable without external support or government aid.

Content; security.

Yes, only one or a few countries manage to prevent any link to a common resource.
The risk of splitting the Internet; Internet's ridre/penuze.

The inability of humans to agree on a subject when they are too numerous.

That superstructures such as ITU and the UN will seize power, and you begin to know the structures blocking as they veto rights, conceal security, etc.

Confiscation of data exixtantes by lea gestinnaires areas non proficiency (in terms of the flow of information) of information available on the Internet; authentication of the information by including the bloggers on the Net manifests the determination of denigration and malinformatiom domt some use (especially from the African continent) to pose as a valid organization disposes of a support to African countries in their determination to give their populations access to this tool.

A project of the Elon University School of Communications
All rights reserved. Contact us at predictions@elon.edu