[TF-CBA] Defining the Needs of Regional Capacity Building

Fouad Bajwa fouadbajwa at gmail.com
Sun Feb 2 07:50:11 CET 2014


Hi Christine and Fahd,

I am not against the idea of the needs survey but if we look at the
MESWG, there was an assessment of the domain names industry so far in
numbers.

I am all for need assessments but they should serve a specific
purpose. For a larger multi-country programs, there are baseline
surveys, that identify the state of the industry, ecosystem or
regional environment what the situation for starting a program is.

Yes we can develop subgroups but based on prior experience so that
what is constructive does deliver on its targets.

I respect Tijani's recommendation but at the same time stress that a
needs assessment is carried out for a particular community. You cannot
have a single survey shot at 4 or 5 different community groups on the
notion that all will have similar needs. The few similar areas from a
pest analysis may be:

1. IG in general, this heavily differs for Arab World, Iran,
Afghanistan and Pakistan. I can atleast speak for Pakistan and
Afghanistan.

2. Introduction to the DNS industry - ccTLD wise, nothing much to
gain, gtld and idn level- everyone needs preliminary and expert
knowledge across the region.

3. The dynamics of the industry - Mostly business driven.

4. The technicalities of the DNS/Root/IPv6 management - highly technical.

As I stress again, we have to revisit the MESWG document. It provides
a first level basis analysis of the MEAC DNS Industry or Ecosystem. I
will only support a case-to-case needs assessment.

For example, the Summer Schools in IG targets University students,
Members of Internet community, i*organizations,
government/regulators/legislative organizations, civil society,
business, law enforcement, dns/IP engineers, root managers, ixp
managers, resource organizations, NICs, economists, political
scientists, people that may or may not be directly involved with the
internet, may be participating in present regional or global Internet
settings and finally people that may deserve to be supported and
funded to start the inclusion of various countries that are yet to be
involved.

Also, I completely support your recommendation as well Christine and
it is the most pragmatic way forward but I don't want this group to
fall prey to a system that is including these 21 people to deliver for
the TF-CBA not to slow down its work by giving advice for surveys and
assessments.

If we want, we can recruit regional universities in Qatar and UAE to
carry out economic an feasibility studies and in fact we have alot of
Big4 consulting firms to that.





On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Fahd Batayneh <fahd.batayneh at icann.org> wrote:
> Hi Fouad,
>
>
>
> I circulated my initial email based on what some members on the call had
> suggested, and I could sense consensus there within those on the call. As an
> ICANN staff, I am not here to drive what the TF-CBA wants to do, but rather
> to assist on the sidelines on what you plan on doing.
>
>
>
> Also, you mention that "I am not supporting any survey outside the remit of
> the DNS forum". Why are you suggesting the ME DNS Forum?
>
>
>
> Fahd
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fouad Bajwa [mailto:fouadbajwa at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2014 8:58 AM
> To: Fahd Batayneh
> Cc: TF-CBA; tf-cba-owner at meswg.org
> Subject: Re: Defining the Needs of Regional Capacity Building
>
>
>
> Hi Fahd,
>
>
>
> Thanks for suggesting this but let me put a hold on some things and meter
> the enthusiasm.
>
>
>
> You can understand the temperature of the needs during the various DNS
> forums you are conducting. I hate such quickly triggered surveys without a
> reasonable hypothesis challenged at least by 3-4 people.
>
> What did we have the MESWG doing if this is the way you want to go.
>
>
>
> I proposed TF-CBA in a horizontal format so we could review each thing that
> came up collectively and intelligently, not to jump at each suggestion.
> Kindly hold on these things until and unless the steering group has
> discussed this on their own and a needs assessment is not a one day
> activity, it takes months and should be sensitive to a number of conditional
> and unconditional variables.
>
>
>
> Where I support the proposal, I didn't want to put my thumb down just then
> in the meeting. It was a proposal, it wasn't approved by me nor did I get a
> chance to defend my pow in a steering committee meeting.
>
>
>
> Needs assessment is what we covered to a great deal during the MESWG
> strategy development. The needs assessment in this case is specific to a
> region. I cannot apply what Pakistan needs to Iran, there may be
> similarities but never the same solution.
>
>
>
> Our CBA primary challenge is to address awareness and if we believe that we
> are stepping into the region with an assessment that there is a good
> understanding of the DNS industry, sorry to say, that is not the case and if
> it were, the MESWG wouldn't have the goals it has now set out for the
> region.
>
>
>
> I will suggest to keep the issue of needs assessment country, partner and
> training specific instead of throwing a new bulldozer at the group.
>
>
>
> This TF has been designed to develop curriculum and provide instruction.
> When I see the need assessment part as if we were an NGO come into challenge
> the whole work already done, it becomes questionable.
>
>
>
> Lets stay focused to a training by training initiative, the steering
> committee can assess in the end of need assessments or not.Do the survey at
> the DNS Forum if you will need to but I am not putting this TF into these
> academic style speed breakers.
>
>
>
> To this end, I am not supporting any survey outside the remit of the DNS
> forum.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Fahd Batayneh <fahd.batayneh at icann.org>
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> One of the items that came out of the TF-CBA first call is to define
>
>> the capacity building needs of the region. May I suggest we form a
>
>> sub-group to brainstorm this topic and draft an initial survey before
>
>> circulating it to the TF-CBA At-Large.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> After the survey is out and we get the results back, we can define the
>
>> Implementation items for FY14 (from now all the way to June 30th 2014).
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Any volunteers for this initiative?
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> My role as ICANN staff is to assist you with the logistics of this,
>
>> and will be working with you on the sidelines. Remember, this is a
>
>> community driven initiative and not an ICANN initiative per-SE.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Thank you,
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> Fahd
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards.
>
> --------------------------
>
> Fouad Bajwa
>
> ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
>
> My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
>
> Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor
My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/
Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa


More information about the TF-CBA mailing list