[CWG-Stewardship] Principles: Capture

[Sivasubramanian M]

Dear Milton,

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

> Martin:
> I do not know what "who nominally should be able to drive consensus"
> means. The word 'nominally' is not what bothers me, it is the word "drive
> consensus." I think it should say something like, "whose agreement or
> nonobjection would be required to achieve consensus."
>
> Further, the definition is a bit one dimensional. One can capture
> institutions in many more ways than simply dictating or defining consensus.
> For example, one could capture a process by gaining the power to exclude
> critical or dissenting voices from ever being represented in a consensus
> process (e.g., something akin to the way nominating committees often work -
> the alternate views or controversial people are never selected by those in
> power and then the select group has no trouble at all achieving consensus).
>

​Without any allusion to any Nominating Committee,  if a legitimate and
"fair" Nomcom excludes an extreme or harmful voice, it might rather be
categorized as "retention of control" rather than the opposite - "capture".
Retention of control is defensive while capture is an offensive move.  ​At
the same time, there is the danger of such a selection process itself being
captured in pursuit of narrow interests with a view to determine the course
of the selection process by making it work by excluding voices that would
question the narrow interests ( I am using words like 'legitimate', 'fair'
'narrow', try replacing them with simpler words - good and bad, without
asking profound questions such as what is good or how do we decide what is
good). In such an instance where the selection process is captured for
illegitimate ends, then it would amount to capture through Nomcom.
Otherwise a good Nomcom could work in ways that are not easily understood,
and it may not be termed as "capture" as such.


> The concept of "capture," which has its roots in regulatory economics
> referring to the capture of regulatory agencies by the regulated industry,
> and is not just about consensus. It's also about revolving doors between
> regulator and industry, about dominating the information flow within an
> institution, etc.
>

​"Capture" means​ different things to different people in different
environments.

Sivasubramanian



>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-
> > bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Martin Boyle
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 3:12 AM
> > To: Alan Greenberg; CWG Stewardship
> > Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles: Capture
> >
> > Thanks Alan, that is helpful.
> >
> > Just so I am sure that I understand the implications correctly, what we
> are
> > saying is that there needs to be a positive engagement to support any
> > particular outcome or decision or direction of travel.  Limited response
> and
> > abstentions (unless because of conflict of interest, I suppose) would be
> a
> > measure of capture.
> >
> > Obviously the principles are not the place to set markers, but your draft
> > footnote would at least give a measureable basis for capture that might
> need
> > to be addressed in the final proposal.
> >
> > Thanks for your proposal.  I'd welcome any comments on it from other
> > participants or members of the CWG.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-
> > bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
> > Sent: 06 January 2015 02:13
> > To: CWG Stewardship
> > Subject: [CWG-Stewardship] Principles: Capture
> >
> > A long time ago, I said I would come up with a footnote for the
> Principles
> > document that defined Capture.
> >
> > "A group can be considered captured when one or more stakeholders are
> > able to effectively control outcomes despite lack of agreement from other
> > stakeholders who nominally should be able to drive consensus.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> > CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
> > _______________________________________________
> > CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> > CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
> _______________________________________________
> CWG-Stewardship mailing list
> CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150107/1fc5cc2d/attachment-0001.html>