Content Comparison

• Policy Processes
• Transparency/Accountability
• Reviews/Improvements

In fulfillment of Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT) Recommendation No. 6, Staff has identified topics that are subject to formal policy development processes, and those that are generally within the ICANN Board level Organizational Administration Function. While Recommendation 6 has been completed, the work performed identified an area in which improvement is required – how the Board obtains the advice that it needs from the ICANN community beyond the traditional public comment process.

The document posted for public comment is intended to guide discussions in Toronto on enhancing the process by which the ICANN Board seeks advice from the community on topics that are not subject to formal policy development processes. It is hoped that these discussions could lead to a consistent and predictable process to be adopted by the ICANN Board for such inquiries.

ATRT Recommendation No. 6. States that:
"The Board should clarify ... the distinction between issues that are properly subject to ICANN's policy development processes and those matters that are properly within the executive functions performed by the ICANN staff and Board and, as soon as practicable, develop complementary mechanisms for consultation in appropriate circumstances with the relevant SOs and ACs on administrative and executive issues that will be addressed at Board level."

In fulfillment of this Recommendation No. 6, a document was produced that specifically set forth the topics that are subject to policy development processes, and those that are generally within the ICANN Board level Organizational Administration Function. While Recommendation 6 has been completed, the work performed identified an area in which improvement is required – how the Board obtains the advice that it needs from the ICANN community beyond the traditional public comment process. Recently, issues have surfaced where the Board has sought in-depth input or advice from the community, and has specifically requested portions of the community to come together for that purpose.

Through the completion of this work, the BGC identified an area where process improvement will benefit the ICANNcommunity, namely, how the Board seeks community input and advice outside of the formal policy development processes. A brief discussion of some of the hallmarks of this "Community Input & Advice Process" is described in the document posted for public comment. As seen in the rise of cross-community working groups on issues such applicant support in the New gTLD Program, or the Implementation Recommendations Team providing expert guidance on trademark protections, having well-defined mechanisms to provide input and guidance to the Board is necessary.

In Toronto, a working session is scheduled to begin discussions on whether such a mechanism should be formalized to allow for clear understanding of the consultation mechanisms and the issues for which it is helpful to be invoked.

• Please review and comment on the Community Input and Advice Function Paper [PDF, 223 KB].
• Fulfillment of ATRT Recommendation No. 6 Report [PDF, 270 KB] describes the circumstances for which the defined policy development processes are applicable.
• For information on the Toronto Session on this topic, please see: http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34195

• For more information on the work of the ATRT, please see http://www.icann.org/en/news/in-focus/accountability.
• For a better understanding of the GNSO's formal policy development processes, please see Annex A of theICANN Bylaws, as well as the GNSO's PDP Manual [PDF, 126 KB].
• For more information on the formal policy development processes for the ccNSO, please see Annex B of theICANN Bylaws.