[Sixth of eight commentaries in a sub-series on ICANN and Internet governance]

Developing nations tend to see Internet governance as a function of national government, and many proposals for reform are calling for greater involvement of national authorities in ICANN (and any new bodies that may be created). However, some commentators point out the risk that this would erect national boundaries on the global network, highlighting the problems that could entail. Many fear that a greater government role will not only bring Big Brother-like control, but also hinder the development of the Internet which up to now has been largely driven by the private sector. The experience of African countries with monopoly fixed-line telecom operators may be instructive: they typically have far fewer fixed lines than mobile phones or Internet users.

The allocation of IP addresses is an example where more government control could prove to be limiting to African Internet communities. The current system allows ISPs in all countries to get whatever IP addresses they need, independent of national boundaries. The International Telecommunications Union has proposed a new method for IP address allocation that would involve national authorities and spread block IPv6 allocations across nations. This is relevant to Africa, where nations that are not ready to use the allocations now could nonetheless hold them for later use. However, putting address allocations into the hands of national governments would give them the power to unfairly allocate addresses only to an incumbent telecommunications provider and squeeze out competition (as South Korea has done). Government control over IPv6 allocation ultimately means government control over who can get access to the Internet, and would strengthen governments’ abilities to engage in censorship and surveillance.

Beyond the narrow world of ICANN, it seems clear that African Internet communities have something unique and powerful to contribute to the global debates on the broader components of Internet governance. Africans continue to be saddled with the world’s worst communications infrastructure, thanks to a long legacy of mismanagement. African Internet users have insights into the relative pros and cons of centralized governmental control versus decentralized authority, and into the imbalances that exist in the flows of money that pay for the network. A few African governments -- such as Uganda -- have privatized their telecommunications industry and opened up markets. Yet overall African governments have historically not been the most reliable advocates for their Internet communities; rather, many have a long record of protecting the rights and prerogatives of government officials and telecom monopolies.

At the same time, the African Internet community (including the pioneering ISPs, wireless companies, websites, e-commerce businesses, bloggers, and so on) contains some of the most energetic, skilful, and entrepreneurial contributors in the world. More than anyone else in the world, African Internet communities have discovered ways to use the inherent decentralized power of the Internet to free themselves from the high prices, bad service, and mismanagement of their telecom monopolies -– learning important practical lessons about how Internet management problems should be addressed and solved. The interests of Africa’s Internet pioneers and users, which should be central to these broader global debates about the future the Internet, are at risk of invisibility, lost in the shadows of their governments.

What Do You Think?

• Do you think that current proposals for Internet governance reform are pitting African Internet communities against national governments?
• Is government involvement in Internet governance likely to be a help or hindrance to Internet development in Africa?
• Is the African Internet community in a good position to work with national governments?
• Has the story of Africa's Internet pioneers been lost in the debate on Internet governance?

Please share your views with us via email or post them in the "comments" box under this commentary. (Email responses will be posted to the website too.)

Want to know more about ICANN and Africa?

See the CIPESA public briefing on ICANN, Internet governance and Africa, 7 October.

Acronyms Used Here

• ICANN = Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
• IPv6 = Internet Protocol version 6
• ISP = Internet Service Provider
• GAC = Government Advisory Committee (to ICANN)
• UN = United Nations
• WGIG = (UN-sponsored) Working Group on Internet Governance