Abstract
This chapter summarizes the findings from the previous analyses and discusses the overall legitimacy of the IANA transition process according to the selected normative criteria. The results suggest that despite the IANA transition’s success in removing US government oversight, it neither consisted of nor produced an improved model of multistakeholder governance. Based on the IANA transition case, the chapter concludes that multistakeholderism risks resulting in misleading rhetoric that legitimizes power asymmetries, rather than being a performative concept leading toward the democratization of transnational policy-making. Finally, the chapter calls for a reform of multistakeholder governance toward a model of digital constitutionalism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
http://netmundial.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/NETmundial-Multistakeholder-Document.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2020.
- 2.
- 3.
https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rfp-iana-stewardship-08sep14-en.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2020.
References
Carr, M. (2015). Power Plays in Global Internet Governance. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 43(2), 640–659.
Chenou, J. M. (2014). From Cyber-Libertarianism to Neoliberalism: Internet Exceptionalism, Multi-stakeholderism, and the Institutionalisation of Internet Governance in the 1990s. Globalizations, 11(2), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2014.887387.
Cheyns, E., & Riisgaard, L. (2014). Introduction to the Symposium: The Exercise of Power Through Multistakeholder Initiatives for Sustainable Agriculture and Its Inclusion and Exclusion Outcomes. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(3), 409–423.
Doria, A. (2014). Use [and Abuse] of Multistakeholderism in the Internet. In R. Radu, J. M. Chenou, & R. Weber (Eds.), The Evolution of Global Internet Governance (pp. 115–140). Berlin: Springer.
Hofmann, J. (2016). Multistakeholderism in Internet Governance: Putting a Fiction into Practice. Journal of Cyber Policy, 1(1), 29–49.
Jongen, H., & Scholte J. A. (2019). Legitimacy in Multistakeholder Global Governance—Patterns at ICANN. Paper presented at the GigaNet Annual Symposium.
Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. (2014). The Politics of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives: The Crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2033-3.
Mueller, L. M. (2010). Networks and the States. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Mueller, L. M., Mathiason, J., & Klein, H. (2007). The Internet and Global Governance: Principles and Norms for a New Regime. Global Governance, 13, 237–254.
Post, D. G., & Kehl, D. (2015). Controlling Internet Infrastructure: The ‘IANA Transition’ and Why It Matters for the Future of the Internet, Part 1. https://static.newamerica.org/attachments/2964-controlling-internet-infrastructure/IANA_Paper_No_1_Final.32d31198a3da4e0d859f989306f6d480.pdf. Accessed 15 September 2019.
Tsingou, E. (2015). Club Governance and the Making of Global Financial Rules. Review of International Political Economy, 22(2), 225–256.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Palladino, N., Santaniello, M. (2021). Conclusion: The Misleading Rhetoric of Multistakeholderism. In: Legitimacy, Power, and Inequalities in the Multistakeholder Internet Governance. Information Technology and Global Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56131-4_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56131-4_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-56130-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-56131-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)