• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.68-77
• /
• 2013

This article consists of 3 parts. Part I is multi stakeholder approach on Internet governance system. Part II is analysis of the Korean Internet governance system. In this part, I explain relevant laws in Korea, including Korean Internet Address Resources Act. Part III is my suggestion on Korean Internet governance system using a multi stakeholder approach. First of all, the keyword of the Internet governance system is decision making process: that is, consensus based versus top-down approach. Then who are major players in Internet governance in national level? Government, or Private sectors such as business and civil society. Korean legal system for Internet governance shows a top-down decision making process. Major players are the government (that is, Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning) and KISA affiliated with the government. Other players include Internet Address Policy Committee, Korea Internet Governance Alliance, and NGOs. The key statute for Internet governance in Korea is Internet Address Resources Act of 2004. Articles 3 and 5 require the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning to take a proactive role in Internet governance. The government shall consult with the Internet Address Policy Deliberation Committee for Internet governance. Yet this Committee is established under the control of the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning. All members of this Committee are also commissioned or nominated by the Chairman of the Ministry. Meanwhile, there are also non-official organizations, including Sub-committee on Address & Infrastructure of Korea Internet Governance Alliance. I suggest to reform decision making process of Korean Internet governance system based on BOTTOM-UP process for CONSENSUS BASED DECISION. My suggested system includes the following: (1) The government hands over a major role in Internet governance to INDEPENDENT Internet policy organization. And the government participates in such organization as ONE of the players. (2) Nomination of this committee member must be bottom-up process for a genuine multi-stakeholder model including civil society, commercial organization, end-users and experts. (3) The government should establish plan for supporting the private sector's international activity on the long-term basis.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.68-76
• /
• 2002

As modern public administrations are constructing homepages based on GIS and enhancing public services through interactive communication with their citizens, cyber governance and internet GIS have been conglomerated more than before. As such, the transformation from 'GIS for public management' to 'Internet GIS for cyber governance' is in progress. In the future, cyber governance based on Internet GIS can be a new paradigm for public management. The aim of this study is to look for the applications of internet GISs for cyber governance. For this purpose, the study examines characteristics of cyber governance and internet GIS and analyses similarities between them. Based on this analysis, the study proposes various ways of applying internet GISs for cyber governance.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.63-76
• /
• 2013

This short report introduces the general background why Brazil conference is being prepared and what topics would be undertaken and what goals are being taken into account. It overviews what differences from traditional telecommunication governance, internet governance has had in its historical development and how such differences had been formed from its technological differences and the regulatory policy shift from common carrier regulation to privatization. Moreover, the fact that open, voluntary, bottom-up, diverse stakeholder's participation had evolved throughout the historical development of the internet, had established the present multistakeholder governance model from technological standardization to addressing scheme policies. ICANN, which has governed internet addressing schemes since the earlier 2000s, had developed address policies including IANA function from Jon Postel and technical community's legacy management system into contract based formation between ICANN and gTLD, ccTLD registries. And it made dispute resolution policies responding to trademark disputes and resolved gTLD monopoly issue by introducing new TLD generation and the separation of registry and registar. However, there had been challenges on the legitimacy of ICANN due to its dependency on the Federal Government of the U.S. particularly in its oversight role over ICANN and IANA contract. WSIS raised up internet governance issues including addressing governance, and set up IGF as a discussion platform for multistakeholders to discuss and share all views on other internet related public policies. IGF's loose and non-binding discussion once frustrated governments and other stakeholders, but more focused discussion and visible outcomes have consolidated its unique role for internet governance discourses. Particularly, IGF addressed many emerging internet related issues like cybersecurity, privacy, net neuratlity, development related issues. WTPF of 2013, after WCIT debate on whether traditional telecommunication regulation could be applied to internet infrastructure, suggested other governance issues such as the transition to ipv6, IXP coordination etc. How to make sure the legitimacy of internet addressing governance and how and where other internet related public policies could be undertaken are fundamental tasks for internet governance. Brazil conference, which has been motivated by the breakdown of trust in internet governance from NSA mass surveillance revealed by Snowden, faces these questions and try to make consensus on principles, institutions and roadmap for internet governance in multistakeholder participation way.

• Journal of Internet Computing and Services
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.111-120
• /
• 2015

Internet has changed global information society in many ways. Among others, combination of internet's technological characteristics and internet ecosystem has altered global information governance. This paper argues that internet governance is rooted in the multistakeholder model in which diversified actors including government, private sector, and civil society are connected closely. Players have increased a lot in the global information governance. In particular, civil society have more involved in the decision making process. In the international politics arena, power shift from intergovernmental organizations to civil international organizations has increased. ICANN and IGF(Internet Governance Forum) have played critical roles in internet governance. Internet governance shows new phenomena of global information governance.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.58-67
• /
• 2013

An essential prerequisite for negotiating governance of 'internet,' a world of 'end to end' nature, is to guarantee end-users' participation. Internet Governance Forum (IGF), the outcome of World Summit on the Information Society(WSIS) Tunis Agenda, has played an important role as a representative mulitistakeholder - based governance model, which puts emphasis on wide range participation of stakeholders. Notwithstanding multistakeholderism materialized in IGF has been challenged, IGF itself is a unique place for participation to broad internet governance discourse, as all voices get hearing grounded on openness, inclusion, and transparency, quite distinct from the multilateral negotiation based model such as 'Conference on Cyberspace.' Therefore civil society which represents end-users' interest, as a crucial stakeholder of internet governance, should establish more strategic and coordinated approach to IGF itself as well as reformation discourse of internet governance. In this regard, civil society groups of Korea, began with hosting workshops and Open Forum at the 2013 IGF in Bali, Indonesia. This report also describes the detailed activities of Korean civil society group in 2013 IGF.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.237-253
• /
• 2018

In order to understand China's internet governance, this paper examined 1,931 Internet policies of China by bibliometric techniques. Specifically, the bibliometric techniques include simple document counting, co-word analysis, collaboration network analysis and citation analysis. The findings include: (1) China's Internet legislations mainly emphasized e-commerce and Internet governance, and, to some extent, neglected personal data protection; (2) China's Internet is under intensive multiple regulatory controls by central government. A large number of government agencies are involved in Internet policy-making. The Propaganda Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Information Leading Group of the State Council, enforced fewer policy documents, but occupy higher positions in the Internet governance hierarchy; (3) China's Internet legislation system is primarily composed of industry-specific administrative rules, rather than laws or administrative regulations. Nevertheless, laws and administrative regulations received significantly more citations owing to their superior force. This paper also discussed current gaps in China's internet governance and how the country's internet policies are situated in the broader global context.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.95-100
• /
• 2013

Having taken actions for 2 years, Net Neutrality User Forum has realized Net Neutrality as a international issue of future Internet. Although the Internet design principle (layering, module, IP protocol) has enabled the end users to communicate each other without any additional permission or interference, in the reality, the end users have been tracked by both companies and governments, and the communications could be blocked, or restricted by surveillance devices, such as DPI, which could change the whole Internet design principle. Given that the Internet is a large community of the equal end-users based on end-to-end principle, it's essentially the issues of the whole Internet users, rather than of one nation, and we should focus on developing the transparent and participatory ways in Internet governance. The current Internet governance discussion have taken placed in ICANN, IGF, etc., in bottom-up processes of multistakeholderism to reflect the views of end-users. However there have been the controversial issues in Internet Governance, such as the position of government as a stakeholder, global north-south problem, transparency, so we have faced the debate on the new or evolving frame of Internet governance.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.35-51
• /
• 2013

The Digital Cold War argument has become one of the heatedly discussed foreign policy agendas in the U.S. Considering the authority and power of the U.S. government and Internet companies in the cyberspace, this shift is not negligible in understanding not only the changes in the U.S. foreign and military policies but also that in the operations of the global Internet governance. Given these circumstances, I seek to explain the origins of and test the theoretical validity of the Digital Cold War argument. In particular, I analyze how the political concerns of the Chinese authorities shaped the characteristics of their control of the domestic Internet and their approach to the global Internet governance. The findings indicate that the Chinese way of the Internet governance is more concerned of their domestic political stability than overthrowing the current Internet governance regime, which many supporters of the Digital Cold War argument cited as the key evidence of such political contentions. Though the Digital Cold War argument is theoretically unwarranted, its growing popularity and the historical lessons of the Cold War have broad implications to the understanding of the impacts of the great power rivalries on the future Internet governance.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.21-34
• /
• 2013

The multistakeholder model of Internet governance is based on the belief that the stakeholder groups should be able to agree on the rules and principles in governing the Internet space. The global expansion of the sweeping influence of the Internet has heightened the awareness of international governments on the importance of Internet governance, but since the Internet has developed mostly through voluntary participation by various groups, the organization with the greatest ability to manage the Internet space currently is ICANN(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), the U.S. based organization that manages the assignment of Internet domain names and IP addresses. Although ICANN has attempted to globalize its operation, governments in some nations are voicing dissatisfaction over the fact that the voice of the governments are not adequately represented within ICANN. This paper examines how the concept of multistakeholderissm has been used in WSIS(World Summit on Information Society), ICANN(Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) and the ITU(International Telecommunication Union) as an important principle in emphasizing their roles in Internet governance.

• Review of Korean Society for Internet Information
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.5-20
• /
• 2013

ICANN has been governing the Domain Name System(DNS) "technically" since 1998. The architecture is called Internet Governance, and it brings about many different discourses; "What does that govern?", "Who delegate its role to ICANN?"," How could the regime ensure fairness?" etc. This article will analyze on Internet Governance by applying the government approach of Foucault, and try to compare two parts, the 'core' and the 'edge' of Internet Governance for method. Whereas the 'core' of it refers the site that be governed by the formal contract directly, the 'edge' as the rest of it means informal friendly relations with ICANN. The 'core' rule was stemmed from technological community such as IAB or IETF historically. They had invented new world and its population to integrate the technical order as protocol and the semiotic order as language, that be based on new government mode. On the other hand, ".KR" domain, one of the 'edges', has been evolved into more heterogeneous system, through contest and conflict between traditional state and Internet Governance. The governed object of ".KR" domain is situated in the crossing of each other the 'protocol user', the 'language-semiotic user' and the' geographical resident'. Here the 'geographical resident' rule was weird for DNS, so that shows the internal lack of Internet Governance. It needs to move to the concept of 'Hangeul(Korean-language) user' rather than the 'geographical resident'.