ATLAS IIのこと
北村泰一 (NICT/ISOC-JP) (kita@jp.apan.net)
樋口貴章 (株式会社ミライト情報システム/ISOC-jp)(higuchi.takaaki@miraitsystems.jp)

ATLAS IIとは…
http://atlas.icann.org•

2nd At-Large Summit••

ATLAS Iは2009年3月ICANNメキシコシティで開催

目的
1. At-Large体制の活発化
2. ICANN活動を良く知り、理解すること
3. マルチステークホルダーモデルの具体例を示すこと
2

ATLAS II会議概要~プレナリ(全体会議)~•

ICANN活動の理解を深めるためのセッション•

会議期間前にも5回のcapacity building目的のwebinarが開かれた。

•

ICANN会議プログラムとの衝突をさけるため、早朝に設定。
•

でも、時間通り始まらない。

•

開始時間にスタッフがようやく揃うのが、普通。☺

•

可能な限り母国での討論が推奨されている。

•

フランス語、スペイン語領域の人は、母国語を使う傾向が高かった。
3

ATLAS II会議概要~ Thematic Groups~•

5つのグループに分かれて討論を行なう。

•

各グループには5つの質問がだされ、グループとしての回答をまとめる。

•

回答はDeclarationとしてまとめられ、最終日ICANN理事グループに提出された。

4

1. The future of multistakeholderism
2. The globalization of ICANN (北村, 同通なし)
3. Global Internet: The User Perspective
4. ICANN Transparency and Accountability
5. At-Large Community Engagement in ICANN (樋口, 同通なし)

5

TGs

~ 質問および報告~•TG1:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ATLAS+II+Thematic+Group+on+the+Future+of+
Multistakeholder+Models•TG2:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ATLAS+II+Thematic+Group+on+ICANN+Transpa
rency+and+Accountability•

TG3:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ATLAS+II+Thematic+Group+on+the+Global+Inter
net%3A+The+User+Perspective•

TG4:
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ATLAS+II+Thematic+Group+on+ICANN+Transpa
rency+and+Accountability•

TG5: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ATLAS+II+Thematic+Group+on+AtLarge+Community+Engagement+in+ICANN
6

各TGのページへのアクセスの仕方•

https://community.icann.org/dashboard.action•

At-Largeタブをクリック•

At Large Summit IIをクリック•

左サイドバーに各TGメニューが表示されているのでそこをクリック7

Declaration
http://atlas.icann.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/07/ATLAS-II-Declarationwith-appendix-RC1.pdf•

http://altas.icann.org• declarationをクリック• Declarationは、各TG毎にRecommendation(提案)を上げている。また、Observation(背景)を示したグループもある。
•8

TG1: The Future of Multi-Stakeholder Models
Recommendations. R-1. ICANN should continue to support outreach programmes that engage a broader audience, in order to reinforce participation fromall stakeholders.
. R-2. ICANN should increase support (budget, staff) to programmes having brought valuable members to the community.
. R-3. ICANN should continue to shape an accountability model reaching not only Board members but all parts of the ICANN community,
in order to develop a more transparent and productive environment.
. R-4. ICANN should study the possibility of enhancing and increasing the role of Liaisons between its different Advisory Committees andSupporting Organizations (AC/SOs) to do away with the “silo culture”.
. R-5. ICANN should examine how best to ensure that end-users remain at the heart of the accountability process in all aspects
pertaining to the transition of stewardship of the IANA function.
. R-6. ICANN’s MSM should serve as the reference in encouraging all participants (individuals or parties) to declare and update existingor potential conflicts-of-interest, each time a vote takes place or consensus is sought.
. R-7. A periodic review of ICANN's MSM should be performed to ensure that the processes and the composition of ICANN’s constituent
parts adequately address the relevant decision-making requirements in the Corporation.
. R-8. The ALAC has the duty to keep track of action taken on all of the above recommendations.

Observations. O-1. As no single MSM can serve as a universal reference, the community must foster consideration and innovation of different
models, allowing the best possible implementation of MSM for any particular decision-making requirement;. O-2. The composition, segmentation ("silos") and diversity of ICANN’s constituent parts should be flexible, as different areas of policy
may call for different groupings of interested communities.
. O-3. Cross-community cooperation should be the default mode; segmentation should only be engaged when the MSM provesineffective;. O-4. The MSM requires efficient processes, clarity of scope, a sufficiently open membership, as well as enhanced engagement between
different parts of the Internet ecosystem.
. O-5. Fellowship programmes should be enhanced to expand eligibility of participants to disadvantaged people and communities
everywhere.

9TG2: Globalisation of ICANN
Recommendations. R-9. ICANN should open regional offices with a clear strategy, subject to a cost-benefit analysis, focusing
on the areas where the access to the Internet is growing, and where such growth is more likely to occur.
. R-10. The next evolution of language services must adopt further extension of live scribing for all
meetings and generally extend the current interpretation and translation processes and make translation
available in a timely manner.
. R-11. ICANN must implement a range of services to facilitate access according to various criteria (gender;cultural diversity) and user needs (disabilities, etc...).
. R-12. In collaboration with At-Large Structures, ICANN should put in place campaigns to raise awarenessand extend education programmes across underrepresented regions.
. R-13. ICANN should review the overall balance of stakeholder representation to ensure that appropriate
consideration is given to all views, proportionally to their scope and relevance.
. R-14. ICANN should adjust its contractual framework to minimize conflict between its requirements andrelevant national laws.
. R-15. ICANN should examine the possibility of modifying its legal structure befitting a truly globalorganization, and examine appropriate legal and organizational solutions.
. R-16. ICANN needs to improve their direct communications regardless of time zones.
. R-17. ICANN needs to be sensitive to the fact that social media are blocked in certain countries and, inconjunction with technical bodies, promote credible alternatives.

10

TG3: The User Perspective
Recommendations. R-18. Support end-users to take part in policy development.
. R-19. Eliminate barriers to participation and engagement with ICANN processes and practices.
. R-20. Input the user perspective, wherever necessary, to advance accountability, transparency and policy
development within ICANN.
. R-21. Encourage public campaigns on using the Internet for education, information, creativity andempowerment.

Observations. O-6. Focus on education, digital literacy and the empowerment of the user community and, where possible,
on building, maintaining and operating computers & programmes.
. O-7. Promote, globally, the fundamental rights of Internet users, and thus re-establish trust in the Internet;
demand effective protection against arbitrary and pervasive surveillance, collection, treatment, handling anduse of personal data; permit users to obtain the deletion of their private data from servers and databases;
ensure compatibility between the rights enjoyed by users and the terms of service of private companies
serving the Internet community.
. O-8. Obtain openness and transparency from each country’s ccTLD (or Country Code) operator.
. O-9. Promote the use, by individuals and organizations, of secure, efficient, easy-to-use interoperable online
identity credentials; promote web standards favouring user autonomy and security (e.g. XML and Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines), with the active participation of impacted communities.
. O-10. Foster substantial local content, beyond infotainment; ensure access to truthful information andknowledge.

11TG4: ICANN Transparency and Accountability

Recommendations. R-22. Members of the general public should be able to participate in ICANN on an issue-by-issue
basis. Information on the ICANN website should, where practical, be in clear and non-technicallanguage.
. R-23. The roles and jurisdiction of the Ombudsman should be expanded. The ICANN website
should provide a clear and simple way for the public to make complaints.
. R-24. Both the areas of the Ombudsman and Contractual Compliance should report regularly on
the complaints they received, resolved, pending resolution and actions taken to address issues
raised by unresolved complaints.
. R-25. To enhance ICANN's community effort on building a culture of Transparency andAccountability, as called for in the recommendations of ATRT2, oversight of the Board's decisions
now requires an effective mechanism of checks and balances, capable of providing true multistakeholder oversight and effective remedies.

12

TG5: At-Large Community Engagement in ICANN
Recommendations. R-26. Current policy management processes within ICANN are insufficient. ICANN must implement a workable Policy Management Process System, available for use across the SO/ACs, in order to: enhance Knowledge Management, improve the effectiveness of all ICANN volunteer communities,
 improve cross-community policy-specific activity,
 enhance policy development metrics,
 facilitate multilingual engagement, create a taxonomy of policy categories,
 provide policy development history as an aid for newcomers.
. R-27. The Board must implement ATRT2 Recommendation 9.1, regarding Formal Advice from Advisory Committees.
. R-28. The ALAC should work with all RALOs and ALSes to map the current expertise and interests in their membership, to identify Subject Matter Experts and facilitate policy communication.
. R-29. The ALAC should implement an automated system for tracking topics of interest currently being discussed among the various RALOs, and accessible by everyone.
. R-30. For each Public Comment process, SOs and ACs should be adequately resourced to produce impact statements.
. R-31. ICANN and the ALAC should investigate the use of simple tools and methods to facilitate participation in public comments, and the use of crowdsourcing.
. R-32. ICANN should ensure that all acronyms, terminology in its materials are clearly defined in simpler terms.
. R-33. The ALAC should arrange more At-Large Capacity Building Webinars.
. R-34. In collaboration with the global Internet user community, the ALAC shall reiterate the link between the fundamental rights of Internet users, and the Public Interest.
. R-35. The ICANN Board should hold a minimum of one conference call with the At-Large Community in between ICANN Public Meetings.
. R-36. The At-Large Community should envisage conference calls with other ACs and SOs in between ICANN public meetings to improve collaboration and engagement.
. R-37. Additional logistical support from ICANN is needed to improve the At-Large wiki.
. R-38. ICANN should ensure that its Beginner Guides are easily accessible.
. R-39. ICANN should encourage “open data” best practices that foster re-use of the information by any third party.
. R-40. ICANN should offer a process similar to the Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program (CROPP), but applicable to short lead-time budget requests not related to travel.
. R-41. The ALAC should work with the ICANN Board in seeking additional sources of funding for At-Large activities.
. R-42. ICANN should enable annual face-to-face RALO assemblies, either at ICANN regional offices or in concert with regional events.
. R-43. RALOs should encourage their inactive ALS representatives to comply with ALAC minimum participation requirements.

13

Declarationの総括部分•In the course of the ICANN-50 Meeting in London, the Chair of the ICANN
Board of Directors, and the corporation’s CEO, underlined the need toplace the user perspective at the centre of this organization’s work. The
ALAC is pleased to convey to the leadership of ICANN, and to its global
community, its eagerness to fully assume its role in achieving thisobjective.

•ICANN側では、この半年で声明文に対しての見える行動をとることが求められている。

14

ATLAS II修了証

15

各RALOの紹介パンフレット表紙
16

ICANN Singaporeでの各ALS代表者紹介パンフレット
17

参加者に渡された会議時の名札
およびATLAS II参加者のタグ
18