At-Large Advisory Committee

At-Large Advisory Committee
Name	At-Large Advisory Committee
Formation	2002
Headquarters	Los Angeles
Leader title	Chair
Leader name	Daisy Bersier
Parent organization	Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

At-Large Advisory Committee is a volunteer-based body created to provide advice on behalf of global individual Internet users within the framework of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). It interacts with a range of international institutions and stakeholders, including national telecommunications regulators, regional Internet registries, civil society organizations, and technical communities, to channel user perspectives into multistakeholder policymaking processes. The committee has engaged with notable events, personalities, and institutions across Internet governance, standards development, and human rights advocacy.

History

The committee was formed during ICANN reform discussions that involved figures such as Vint Cerf, Jon Postel, Esther Dyson, and representatives from United Nations bodies including the International Telecommunication Union and the Internet Governance Forum. Early milestones include alignment with initiatives from World Summit on the Information Society and exchanges with regional bodies like European Commission delegations, African Union representatives, and the Organization of American States. Over time the committee intersected with policy debates featuring actors such as Tim Berners-Lee, Sheryl Sandberg, Marietje Schaake, and advocacy groups like Electronic Frontier Foundation and Access Now. Its evolution reflects interactions with standard-setting organizations including the Internet Engineering Task Force, World Wide Web Consortium, and the Regional Internet Registries such as RIPE NCC and APNIC.

Structure and Membership

Membership has drawn individuals from regional networks, civil society, and stakeholder communities connected to institutions like University of California, Berkeley, University of Oxford, Stanford University, and think tanks such as Brookings Institution and Chatham House. The committee's internal roles have included chairs, vice-chairs, liaisons to entities such as the ICANN Board and advisory bodies like the Governmental Advisory Committee, and working groups with links to bodies including ICANN Supporting Organization representatives and GNSO constituencies. Regional leaders have coordinated with continental organizations like the European Commission, African Union, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, and national regulators such as the Federal Communications Commission and Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.

Roles and Functions

The committee has issued policy advice and statements on topics intersecting with rights and technical interoperability, engaging with actors such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and standards organizations including the IETF and W3C. It has contributed to deliberations on domain name policy, data protection, and freedom of expression alongside institutions like the European Court of Human Rights, United States Department of Commerce, and Council of Europe. The committee has advised on outreach and capacity-building efforts with partners such as Internet Society, UNESCO, ICANN fellowship program, and regional NGOs like Article 19 and LACNIC-affiliated groups.

Decision-Making and Processes

Decision-making processes have involved internal bylaws influenced by precedents from organizations like Council on Foreign Relations, Transparency International, and procedural models used by the United Nations General Assembly and World Trade Organization. The committee has employed consensus-building techniques seen in IETF working groups, relied on public consultations akin to those run by the European Commission, and coordinated with election processes comparable to those in International Olympic Committee for representative selection. Liaison roles with the ICANN Board, Governmental Advisory Committee, and constituency groups required adherence to timelines set by international forums such as the Internet Governance Forum and multilateral dialogues like WSIS Forum.

Regional and Stakeholder Groups

Regional structures have mirrored arrangements in organizations like African Union Commission, European Commission, ASEAN, and Organization of American States platforms, with stakeholder engagement models comparable to World Economic Forum multistakeholder panels and OECD consultations. The committee has worked with youth and civil society networks that include alumni of programs from United Nations Development Programme, Global Network Initiative, and regional registries such as LACNIC, AFRINIC, and ARIN. Collaboration has extended to technical communities and industry bodies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and standards actors including IETF and W3C.

Impact and Criticism

The committee's impact has been noted in policy inputs that reached the ICANN Board, influenced debates involving the Governmental Advisory Committee and informed discussions at the Internet Governance Forum. Supporters cite engagement with rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Electronic Frontier Foundation as evidence of civil-society representation. Critics and commentators from outlets such as The Guardian, Wired, and think tanks like Cato Institute and Berkman Klein Center have questioned representativeness, transparency, and effectiveness, pointing to tensions similar to those observed in multistakeholder models debated at World Summit on the Information Society sessions and in policy reviews by entities such as the United States National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Category:Internet governance organizations