Thx @OCL. I resolve to stop using the word “multistakeholderism”!
I will defend the term, and continue to use it based on my personal understanding which I believe is sensible and easily understandable.
To me, multistakeholderism ("m17m"*) is a political philosophy that all parties affected by a governance process ought to have a voice in that process, distinct from democracy in that it seeks a balance between populism and technical expertise.
There are multiple implementations of m17m, many here have experienced a few, I offer some examples:
- ICANN's of course
- American political town halls
- The Netmundial conference in São Paulo
- IETF, complete with humming-based decision-making
- ISO and many standards-making bodies
Some are better than others, and some (most?) only present a facade of broad participation layered over a real process controlled by insiders. But as an aspirational approach to governance, to me true m17m is worth pursuing.
- Evan
(*) - I use m17m for "multistakeholderism" much like
i18n is used as an abbreviation for "internationalisation", and I'm lazy when I type. The abbreviation MSM (MultiStakeholder Model) to me means something different, the specific form of m17m used by ICANN which has essentially appropriated the term.