IGF Climate Change

Fri Sep 27 22:25:25 EEST 2019

Hi Ayden, all

I think the wider discussion on transparency of funding is important,
although I would not want to derail the thread and its main topic by
commenting back on that here and now.

However your point about ICANN's tactical move with the carbon footprint
thing is something to keep in mind in how we advocate for footprint
reduction. That must not mean reducing the diversity/scope of the community
who participates in f2f.

More generally, as the community, it seems we are somewhat in the backseat
when it comes to the determination of how ICANN thinks about carbon
footprint and its reduction. While we collectively reflect on "upgrading
the multistakeholder model" or whatever that may be they are after, this is
one good example of how, in the end, the community is relegated to a
passive role outside of the traditional PDP silos (and even then?) ICANN is
now maybe (?) spending some (?) money thinking (?) about its carbon
footprint; it produces blogposts once in a while. No idea about internal
processes and what is being done, and maybe more importantly no formal
avenue for input. We should engage with their blogposts (and we do - thanks
again Michael) but at the same time I feel like there is little we can do
besides just that, at least in the current framework.

Can corporate practices can be changed by nice words and well-intentioned
meetings? I don't know. Maybe. But I have doubts... Maybe ICANN will
change, but I also have doubts about whether that change will be the one we
actually want, or the one that we benefit us all (and our environment) the
we we would want to.

I don't mean this as a turndown, but more as something that should be
brought up in the whole let's make ICANN great again thingamajig.

Best,

On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 6:50 PM Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is an interesting conversation and I was hoping to post something
> more thoughtful. Alas, I have not had the time to perfectly compose my
> thoughts here just yet.
>
> I want to comment on ICANN Org’s likely motives and the recent blog post
> on ICANN’s carbon footprint. I think we need to keep this in context —
> ICANN Org does not have a track record of acting in good faith, and it’s
> recent statements that suggest a possible need to re-assess the value of
> funding travel to face-to-face meetings could seriously harm the interests
> of non-commercial users of the Domain Name System.
>
> There are many ways in which ICANN Org could and should lower its carbon
> footprint. It could stop printing so many brochures. It could reduce
> internal staff travel. It could stop using paper coffee cups at its
> offices. Instead, what it is proposing is reassessing how much community
> travel to policy forums it funds. Note, ICANN is not suggesting trimming
> down the number of meetings — just the number of participants it funds.
> This will harm civil society, not industry or government, who will be able
> to self-fund their participation. If ICANN cares about reducing its carbon
> footprint, I would prefer we push for enrolling in schemes like a
> Compensaid which plants trees and funds alternative aviation fuels.
>
> In our personal and professional lives it is sensible for us to consider
> our individual carbon footprints. But please do not think ICANN is
> reassessing it’s carbon footprint because it cares about the environment.
> It’s track record suggests otherwise. ICANN has historically always sought
> to discourage civil society participation in its policy making processes,
> and this to me is a rather transparent attempt at hindering our
> participation in meetings where we are having an impact and protecting
> rights.
>
> The issues we defend at ICANN matter. They are important. We are upholding
> the rights of dissidents to be able to use the Domain Name System to
> express their political views. We are connecting women with shelters and
> health clinics. We are empowering communication networks in authoritarian
> regimes. None of this is popular, but doing this work does require us to
> participate in face-to-face meetings. Those of us who do know that many
> decisions are made in hallways, and not on the record. Remote participation
> is not a substitute here.
>
> We should, of course, be prudent with our resources and make sure they are
> being properly allocated. If we are giving travel to individuals who do not
> participate in policy work (and unfortunately, we do - we do not hold
> ourselves accountable), that is unacceptable and must change. Those who do
> not contribute to our policy objectives should not be receiving civil
> society’s precious and limited travel resources.
>
> I understand that some NCSG members (including some who do not even meet
> our membership eligibility criteria) are privately lobbying for our
> resources to be cut. I think this is dangerous and misguided.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 14:29, Alejandro Acosta <
> alejandroacostaalamo at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> Hello there,
>
>   This is quite interesting topic and I usually try to pay attention.
>
>   What I'm going to say probably does not fall 100% in ICANN ecosystem but
> anyhow I want to mention it.
>
>   As many of you probably know, when IETF (or other organization) develop
> protocols they take into consideration many variable such as performance,
> security, compatibility, and many more. However, my perception is that
> energy saving & climate are not fully considered.
>
>   I have commented out about this previously:
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yedgGRf2oaSKNGssVQBcTdJm4JQ
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/X9twxdqy2Izvm8Ln0PXisy8t2Jk
>
>
>
>
>   If my perception is wrong just ignore this message.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Alejandro,
>
>
>
> On 9/26/19 3:23 AM, Michael J. Oghia wrote:
>
> Dear Peter, dear Raphael,
>
> Peter – Thank you so much for sharing these and inviting me to
> collaborate, it's really my pleasure. Thank you for advancing this
> discussion, and as the IRPC is working so hard to do, we absolutely
> *cannot* separate climate and environmental justice from human rights.
> They go hand-in-hand, and even if it's cliche to say this, it doesn't make
> it any less true: we need the planet much more than it needs us. So, all of
> us need to do our part as much as possible.
>
> Raphael – indeed, I checked the US EPA's carbon calculator, and the number
> equivalent was something like 1,036 cars being driven per year or something
> like that. What that doesn't take into account, though, is that it's not a
> flat comparison. Regardless, though, I'm happy to push for this topic. We
> have no other choice.
>
> Again, I am well, well aware that there are many, many pressing problems
> that civil society should address within the ICANN ecosystem and limited
> capacity. Given the community's role in shaping the direction of ICANN,
> however, I think it's important for us to be aware of our responsibility
> too.
>
> Best,
> -Michael
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 7:37 PM Peter Micek <petermicek at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> To continue the good thoughts and ideas, I'm happy to say that Access Now
>> published another climate post today, on the occasion of the UN Sustainable
>> Development Summit.
>> https://www.accessnow.org/sustainability-and-digital-rights-how-theyre-connected-and-what-that-means-for-our-work/
>>
>> We go into more detail on some links we see between digital rights and
>> environmental justice. We focused on building a sustainable internet,
>> reducing e-waste, and protecting environmental defenders. Thanks to Michael
>> Oghia for the research and references.
>>
>> This post comes on the heels of our new commitment to reduce the
>> environmental footprint of RightsCon, beginning with our June 2020 event in
>> Costa Rica:
>> https://www.rightscon.org/technology-in-the-time-of-climate-crisis/
>>
>> Let's keep these ideas moving. Is there any mechanism or meeting being
>> planned to more formally unite the climate justice and IG and digital
>> rights worlds?
>>
>> Best,
>> Peter
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 5:00 AM Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Continuing the thread that Nick began a few days ago,  Adam Peake was so
>>> kind to share a blog post about ICANN's carbon footprint that Goran just
>>> published two days ago (it's great that all of these points are
>>> converging). You can read it here:
>>> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/icann-s-carbon-footprint-blog
>>>
>>> While I'm probably not the first person to raise this issue, I did specifically
>>> raise it
>>> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20170815_aviation_the_dirty_not_so_little_secret_of_internet_governance/>
>>> – multiple times – with Goran and the board. Regardless of the response
>>> (i.e., support or lack of support) from the community, I knew it was
>>> important to do so. Goran told me, point blank, during the open session
>>> with him and the board during ICANN 60 (Abu Dhabi) that he was going to
>>> make this a priority, though it will take time. The fact that this is
>>> happening, even after some time, shows real sincerity on his part, and I
>>> think we should continue to advocate for ICANN Org to be transparent about
>>> this facet of our work.
>>>
>>> I'm encouraged by this, and while it is a relatively small step, it's
>>> still one in the right direction. This is probably a low priority for most,
>>> but I think support for positive action is important
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> -Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 5:30 PM Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Bruna,
>>>>
>>>> This is definitely more of a case study of the dangers of spreading
>>>> dis/misinformation (and I say that as someone who was raised in a
>>>> climate change-denying household for the record). This would align quite
>>>> well with what we at GFMD (my organisation) are working on in our advocacy
>>>> work, and the Earth Journalism Network (an Internews project) is very
>>>> interested in this topic, too. To me, addressing how misinformation is
>>>> exacerbating the climate crisis seems like a much more pressing and
>>>> underdiscussed topic than the entirety of sustainability itself.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> -Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 7:17 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey all, my two cents:
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe that additionally to that, we could consider addressing the
>>>>> misinformation component to Climate change. I guess Trump and now my
>>>>> President with the entire fire at the Amazon situation have been part of a
>>>>> series of world leaders that have been denying the some climate incidents
>>>>> and helping spread inaccurate information about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> In practical terms, I dont really know how to address this, but maybe
>>>>> a call to world leaders and organizations in not spreading misinformation
>>>>> and promoting full disclosure of information regarding this subject ?
>>>>>
>>>>> best,
>>>>> B
>>>>>
>>>>> Le lun. 23 sept. 2019 à 14:15, Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com> a
>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Michael.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (FYI adding Carlos and Roli)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it sounds like we have identified several problems, and we have
>>>>>> some ideas for potential solutions (I like focused problem-based policy
>>>>>> challenges!).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In terms of the IGF - would it benefit to see if we can create an
>>>>>> additional specific session to convene and discuss this, outside of the
>>>>>> Internet Rights and Principles Coalition (IRPC) one?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nick
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nick Shorey
>>>>>> Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988
>>>>>> Email: lists at nickshorey.com <lists at nickshorey.com>
>>>>>> Skype: nick.shorey
>>>>>> Twitter: @nickshorey
>>>>>> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
>>>>>> Web: www.nickshorey.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23 Sep 2019, at 19:09, Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed I have Nick! I don't mean to monopolise this thread either,
>>>>>> it's just something I've been following for some time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In terms of your question, I think the best policy outcome could be
>>>>>> two-fold:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Internally: recognise how IG has a massive footprint, and address it
>>>>>> accordingly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Externally: work with the private sector to ensure that
>>>>>> sustainability is infused into the core of technological design, and work
>>>>>> toward creating more circular economies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It will absolutely take multi-stakeholder collaboration too!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 6:49 PM Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all - Adding Corinne who replied on the ISOC list and has been
>>>>>>> engaged in this area.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael - Thank you for sharing all this information - you certainly
>>>>>>> have been busy on this topic!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you could see a policy outcome agreed at the IGF as a response to
>>>>>>> a single aspect of the Internet climate impact problem, what would it be?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nick Shorey
>>>>>>> Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988
>>>>>>> Email: lists at nickshorey.com <lists at nickshorey.com>
>>>>>>> Skype: nick.shorey
>>>>>>> Twitter: @nickshorey
>>>>>>> LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
>>>>>>> Web: www.nickshorey.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 23 Sep 2019, at 18:23, Michael J. Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Nick,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's a lot of ground to cover here. Let me address your points
>>>>>>> inline
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 6:09 PM Nick Shorey <lists at nickshorey.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *1. What debate is currently taking place on this topic and where?*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MO: As I said, within the IG space, it's limited. I've written a lot
>>>>>>> about this (see my CircleId <http://www.circleid.com/members/7683>
>>>>>>> profile, for instance), and even wrote about carbon offsetting
>>>>>>> <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20170815_aviation_the_dirty_not_so_little_secret_of_internet_governance/>
>>>>>>> as it relates to IG and aviation in general and ICANN in particular.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This isn't meant to be self-promotion, but merely to help illustrate
>>>>>>> how there is room for this in the IG ecosystem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So far, there is some discussion in the ITU (e-waste, for instance)
>>>>>>> and within the IGF with the IRPC but it's largely glossed over or taken
>>>>>>> only as an individual stakeholder-related issue (e.g., what data centers,
>>>>>>> private tech companies, governments, etc. are doing about it, and not what
>>>>>>> we are all collectively doing).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did an entire session on this topic in 2017 at EuroDIG. You can
>>>>>>> see all the information about the session, including a list of resources
>>>>>>> I've compiled related to ICTs and sustainability at:
>>>>>>> https://eurodigwiki.org/wiki/WS_11_2017
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *2. Where (if any) do the gaps exist in current policy debate or
>>>>>>>> initiatives?*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are many. I outline at least some of them in this chapter (Ch.
>>>>>>> 4) for the DC3's 2017 report outlining all the elements of sustainable
>>>>>>> internet access contrasted with sustainable development: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/19401/Community
>>>>>>> networks - the Internet by the people%2c for the
>>>>>>> people.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
>>>>>>> <http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/19401/Community%20networks%20-%20the%20Internet%20by%20the%20people%2c%20for%20the%20people.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *3. What can we do to progress this topic through dialogue and
>>>>>>>> actions?*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Know what's already out there. Here are some notable examples and
>>>>>>> resources:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. The ICT for Sustainability (ICT4S) community: http://ict4s.org
>>>>>>> 3. The https://ClimateAction.tech <https://climateaction.tech/>
>>>>>>>  community
>>>>>>> 4. The IEA's Digitization and Energy report
>>>>>>> <https://www.iea.org/digital/%C2%A0> and Greenpeace's Click Clean
>>>>>>> <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/click-clean/>
>>>>>>> campaign
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've also attached slides from a presentation I give that explains
>>>>>>> more about it. Happy to be a resource!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> -Michael
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <Internet & Sustainability (Oghia).pdf>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>>>
>>>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>>> @boomartins
>>>>>
>>>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20190927/d0bae1b8/attachment.htm>