[IP] Good Riddance to Copenhagen, or the Internet way

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Ed Gerck, Ph.D." <egerck@nma.com>
Date: December 19, 2009 3:14:14 PM EST
To: David Farber <dave@farber.net>, Ip Ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Subject: Good Riddance to Copenhagen, or the Internet way

[Dave: For IP, with your consideration]

In Newsweek,  Sharon Begley talks about the failure of the UN-sponsored international negotiations in Copenhagen to reach a legally binding treaty to reduce greenhouse gases, and defends proponents of a limited member approach with legal agreements to enforce change. The article is at: http://www.newsweek.com/id/227515

The article misses a counterpoint voice, and that is not the UN.

Imagine if us on the Internet development side would _not_ have followed the approach of "just a promise to keep talking and try really, really hard to agree" to voluntary standards. Image if we had insisted on "a treaty" and insist that "a legally binding accord should be reached next year".

What I am saying is not that treaties and binding commitments have become impossible in the Internet age, where people and countries are becoming more and more empowered (a good thing).

What I am saying is that a much more nuanced and sophisticated approach is called for than the rather simplist's view spoused in Begley's article. Surely, reducing the number of people at the table is going to, mathematically, reduce the number of independent opinions. But that is also, mathematically, an assurance that such simplistic view will not represent what is best for all parties left off the table. "What is good for me is good for the world" types may disagree but we are now past that blotch in our history.

Welcome to the Internet world, could Begley have counterpointed.

The counterpoint is that it may well be, as with Internet standards, that a a legally binding accord will never be reached and that insisting on doing so will only create ill-will and wasted time. Instead, just a promise to keep talking and try really, really hard to agree to voluntary standards may be the most effective approach to achieve change.

Best regards,
Ed Gerck
www.gerck.com




-------------------------------------------