Dear all,

In January, ICANN policy development staff begun circulating this discussion paper [PDF] on how to best leverage volunteers to produce high-quality policy outcomes.

In it, it flagged some issues with the multistakeholder model with which ICANN’s Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) currently develops gTLD policy. There are concerns that the multistakeholder model does not scale and that project milestones are not being achieved as a result.

The paper says there have been a number of challenges encountered in working groups. Key among the challenges are increasing participant and observer numbers, divergent motivations and desired outcomes, and difficulties in reaching consensus. Even where consensus is reached, there is a perception that it can sometimes be reached through exhaustion (and as a result may hold no long-term legitimacy).

To quote from the paper, “Without properly addressing challenges faced in implementing the current volunteer model, there is a risk of strain on staffing resources, logistical problems, climbing costs, and attrition by core community members. These issues could result in stagnation of policy and advice development activities. At stake is the credibility and legitimacy of the ICANN global multistakeholder model, especially as ICANN faces greater scrutiny following the IANA-transition.”

Over the past two months, in Los Angeles and in San Juan, the GNSO Council, as manager of the gTLD policy development process, has had discussions around how it can and should act in addressing challenges if/when these occur. The GNSO Council has subsequently agreed to develop a white paper-type proposal setting out possible changes to the policy development process to address the specific challenges encountered.

ICANN has also published a video this week discussing the path ahead for what has been termed "Policy Development Process 3.0" - https://youtu.be/BTErFlcxK-M. 

Best wishes,