Proposals for Introductory and Concluding Sessions; Consistent Reporting
DAY 1
The Introductory Sessions will “set the scene” for each of the IGF main themes during the week. Specifically, the Introductory Sessions will cover the theme’s narrative, explore different sub thematic areas, preview different types of sessions (Workshops, Open Forums, Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, NRI Collaborative Sessions and Main Sessions[a]) under the theme, and feature a scene-setting speaker.
Agenda
Organization
* Note: The starting point for sub-themes are the “flow” documents submitted by groups during the June 5-7 meeting Berlin. As per the above, groups should finalize these sub-themes by 8/7. The documents identified sub-themes per theme as the following:
[Considering this moment for participants expectations survey - mobile app SCHED]
[Maybe creating a word map at this moment and other in the wrap-up session].
DAY 4
The Concluding Sessions will bring together discussions in the various workshops and other sessions during the week under each of the three IGF main themes. Concluding Sessions will provide an opportunity to discuss and distill material for the IGF2019 messages related to each one of main themes. Representatives of BPFs, DCs and NRIs as well as Main Session organizing teams will be invited to take part to share take-aways from the sessions they organized.
The aim of the Concluding Sessions is not to negotiate a single message or solution on a given topic, but rather to provide a concise summary, a menu or road map of suggestions raised by the community during the week.
Format
Concluding Sessions will be organised in break-out groups clustered around the thematic work streams or subthemes of each thematic track, as identified by the respective MAG Working Groups.
Participation
All IGF participants are welcome to join the Concluding Sessions. It is, however, particularly important that the rapporteur, moderator or a designated organizer from each session under a thematic track be present in order to provide feedback from their session. This could happen in the form of answering their policy questions, sharing case studies that have emerged in their session, posing questions they could not resolve or sharing messages they consider taking forward
Agenda
MAG member to welcome attendees, link back to the expectations noted during the Introductory session and the theme’s narrative
Participants break into discussion groups per sub-theme and discuss take-aways from their respective sessions
Break-out groups report back to plenary on their discussions, noting key issues emerging from their sessions, sharing any solutions, initiatives, best practices raised as well as any policy issues, questions that require further research, discussion or action. A final round of reactions and inputs from participants is encouraged. 60 mins
MAG member provides a brief summary and concluding remarks
Organization
Organisers of IGF workshops and other sessions will be requested to provide a short report with the main take-aways of their sessions, immediately following the conclusion of their session.
Another long report with the full account of the session discussion will be required to be submitted a few weeks after the IGF in the deadline indicated by the Secretariat.
Short session summaries should include:
2-3 paragraph short summaries could be considered for each session taking place at IGF (Main Session, Workshop, Open Forum, and NRI, DC and BPF sessions). To support this, time (approx. 5 mins) should be allocated at the end of each session to reflect on the main findings of the session.
During the Concluding Sessions break out groups will discuss take-aways from their sessions, based on the short reports. These break-out groups will be clustered considering the thematic work streams or sub-themes of each thematic track, as identified by the respective MAG Working Groups.
Rapporteurs, moderators or a designated organizer from different sessions will participate in these break-out groups to provide feedback from their particular sessions. This could happen in the form of answering their policy questions, sharing case studies that have emerged in their session, posing questions they could not resolve or sharing messages they consider taking forward.
The concluding session will also feature a plenary moment where each group will share the highlights of this last conversation and encouraging a final round of reactions and inputs from participants.
To prepare consistent reports for each track, feedback from rapporteurs and the short summaries could be organized into policy areas (social/cultural, technical, economic,legal, governance), to provide the comprehensive policy overview of each track at the IGF. In a visual way this would look like this:
| Inclusion | Security | Data |
Economic | idea i from WS x | idea k from WS z idea i from WS x | idea i from WS x idea j from WS y |
Social/cultural | idea j from WS y | idea i from OF x | idea k from WS z idea i from OF x |
Technical | idea i from OF x idea i from NRI session x | idea j from WS y | idea i from NRI session x |
Governance | idea k from WS z | idea i from NRI session x | etc. |
Concluding Sessions - 1 hour, 50 minutes
DAY 4
The concluding Sessions would bring together discussions in the various workshops and other sessions on each one of the 3 theme tracks. The session agenda would be structured around the sub-themes each one of the sessions of the theme track identified based upon the content of selected workshops and clustered according the thematic work streams of each theme track.
The concluding session should serve as a mechanism to discuss and distill material for the IGF2019 messages related to each one of the 3 particular theme tracks. Invitation also will be made to the BPFs, DCs and NRIs to take part in order to input with their take-aways from their organised sessions.
IGF messages should be able to provide a holistic, 360 degrees view on the topics discussed and consider all policy angles. The concluding session must not create a situation where a single message or solution is negotiated on a given topic, but rather to provide a concise summary of what was raised by the community.The result should look like more as menu or road map of suggestions to address the specific topic moving forward in other spaces.
In preparation for the Concluding session
In all cases, the organisers of the workshops and other sessions on each one of the 3 particular theme tracks will be requested to provide a short report with the main take-aways of their sessions. Summaries from the main sessions, OFs, NRI, DC and BPF sessions, etc will be welcomed to incorporate to one of the break out groups of any of the 3 theme tracks, providing them flexibility to identify the better fit for their contribution.
To facilitate this, a common reporting template should be used. Building on 2018 experience, this will be the short report that should be requested from all organizers to submit immediately after the end of the session.
Another long report with the full account of the session discussion will be required to be submitted a few weeks after the IGF in the deadline indicated by the Secretariat.
Short session summaries should include:
2-3 paragraph short summaries could be considered for each session taking place at IGF (Main Session, Workshop, Open Forum, and NRI, DC and BPF sessions). To support this, time (approx. 5 mins) should be allocated at the end of each session to reflect on the main findings of the session.
At the Concluding session
There will be a tailing session for each one of the 3 themes tracks.
Each concluding session will be organised in break out groups clustered considering the thematic work streams or subthemes of each theme track, as identified by the respective MAG Working Groups. For example, for Security & Safety, Stability & Resilience track they should be: 1) Security 2) Stability & Resilience, 3) Safety, 4) Technology, Industry & Trade, 5) Internet ethics, and 6) Human Rights).
Rapporteurs, moderators or a designated organizer from different sessions should [d][e][f][g]come in during the ‘tailing session’ to provide feedback from their particular sessions (basically share their short summary). This could happen in the form of answering their policy questions, sharing case studies that have emerged in their session, posing questions they could not resolve or sharing messages they consider taking forward, and encouraging a final round of reactions and inputs from the participants in the tailing session.
At the end of the concluding session should be a plenary moment in which one rapporteur of each break out group selected by each group will share the highlights of this last conversation, in order to summarize the recommendation flow coming from each theme track.
To prepare consistent reports for each track, feedback from rapporteurs and the short summaries could be organized into policy areas (social/cultural, technical, economic,legal, governance), to provide the comprehensive policy overview of each track at the IGF. In a visual way this would look like this:
| Inclusion | Security | Data |
Economic | - idea i from WS x | - idea k from WS z - idea i from WS x | - idea i from WS x - idea j from WS y |
Social/cultural | - idea j from WS y | - idea i from OF x | - idea k from WS z - idea i from OF x |
Technical | - idea i from OF x - idea i from NRI session x | - idea j from WS y | - idea i from NRI session x |
Governance | - idea k from WS z | - idea i from NRI session x | - etc. |
[Daniela suggested that this could be accompanied by an artist/graphic designer that could paint something reflecting this recommendation flow at the moment of the session. This graphic and the summary of recommendations provided by the rapporteurs should be natural candidates to bring to the closing session, maybe for a MAG member involved in the theme track working group?].
[a]Only workshops have subthemes identified. Please confirm how to divide the subgroups for consistent reporting.
[b]Break out groups in their own languages
[c]How many volunteers? 7 for 5 minutes each?
[d]I think it will be necessary make it mandatory as part of the organiser responsability when workshop selection will be informed.
[e]OK, I just noted it could also be a moderator or one of the organizers, just to be sure someone can attend even if the rapporteur has other commitments at that time
[f]Agree, this has to be mandatory for Organiser! Has to be part of his responsability.
[g]Agree but there should be a way to control this, and it is easier asign a primary responsability to organiser to find a person to fulfill this role.