Internet Governance | Science & Technology for UPSC CSE PDF Download

Introduction

Internet governance refers to the development and application of rules, norms, principles, and practices by various stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and businesses, to facilitate the evolution and use of the internet. It encompasses technical, civil, political, and security aspects.

Internet Governance Aspects

• Technical Aspects:
  • Control over DNS servers is a crucial technical aspect of internet governance.
• Civil Aspects:
  • Protection of privacy and freedom of expression are essential civil aspects.
• Political Aspects:
  • Maintaining national sovereignty is a significant political concern.
• Security Aspects:
  • Ensuring data security and cybersecurity are vital for internet governance.

Issues with ICANN's Current Role

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) faces several challenges in its current role:

• It is transnational but not truly global.
• Dominated by non-state actors, which is problematic for countries like China and Russia.
• It represents one of the few centralized points of control over the internet.
• Oversight by the United States.

Assessment of Internet Governance Models

Model 1 - Intergovernmental Oversight:

• Pros:
  • Democratizes oversight with nation-state representation.
  • Gives power to enforce public policy.
  • Curbs influence of non-state actors.
  • Utilizes international law for accountability.
• Cons:
  • May erode the bottom-up process of internet development.
  • Not all nation-states are democratically elected.
  • National security and sovereignty may overshadow citizens' interests.
  • Bureaucratic involvement may slow decision-making.
  • Risk of promoting vested business interests.
  • Potential fragmentation of the global internet.

Model 2 - Hierarchical Multi-Stakeholder Organization:

• Pros:
  • Strengthens the bottom-up approach.
  • Limits excessive nation-state power.
  • Practical and conducive to business growth.
• Cons:
  • Challenges in recognizing stakeholders.
  • Nation-states maintain control in policy formulation.

Model 3 - True Multi-Stakeholderism (Proposed by Internet Governance Forum):

• Pros:
  • Genuine multi-stakeholderism.
  • Effective check on nation-state power.
• Cons:
  • Involvement of unelected representatives in decision-making.
  • Challenges in developing consensus.
  • Difficulty in assigning votes to civil society and private players.

India's Stand

India advocates a state-centered multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance. It asserts government's "supreme right and control" over international security matters:

• Government is considered an important stakeholder and custodian of global internet security.
• The body managing the internet should be accountable to governments, especially in security and public policy areas.

Assessment of India's Stand

• India's stance reflects concerns about potential corporate dominance, especially by U.S. corporations, if internet governance is left unchecked.
• It has caused disappointment among the Indian private sector and civil society groups who fear excessive state control.
• India is yet to strike a balance between safeguarding its political values, supporting its flourishing IT sector, and addressing civil society concerns.

Conclusion

Internet governance is a complex issue with multiple models and perspectives. Finding a balance between state control, multi-stakeholder involvement, and safeguarding the interests of citizens and businesses remains a significant challenge in the evolving landscape of internet governance.