• ol21feb input5 en

last modified April 19, 2021 by facilitfsm


 

 ENES FR - PT

1Page sinthesis+9Page document : download EN - descargar EStélécharger FR download PT

 

Contribution to April 10th discussion on Criteria for joining the WSF International Council (Caritas)

 Sintesis  -   Point A - Point B Point D  criteria1 2  -  Criteria 3 - Criteria 4 5 6 Criteria 7 8  -  Annex Use of criteria

 

Part I : One page synthesis ( download here)

A/ Discussion about Criteria for joining IC have resumed after 4 years (January 2017 Porto Alegre) The transcription of interventions in the recent discussion April 10th on criteria is visible here (finalization in progress) and can give way to more discussion.

B/ 4 basic issues appear after his first round of exchange, 

  • 1/ Need to formalize in terms of behavior and not in terms of opinion,the relation of IC members  to an explicitly defined mission and tasks list of IC, that are linked to a set of WSF principles, which can be discussed and changed. (The Casablanca 2013 IC meeting description of IC task is joined as document) (introducing criteria 1 & 2)
  • 2/ Need to internalize formally the possibility that the WSF set of principles be discussed and changed in IC along protocol of decision by consensus. (criteria 1 & 2)
  • 3/ Need to clarify specific aspects of inclusion of facilitating groups of social forum processes, which are intrinsically different from IC member organizations. (introducing criteria 7 & 8)
  • 4/ Need to monitor through IC meetings agenda and tasks, relevant usage of available energy in IC towards WSF process facilitation 2021/2022. This includes deciding at which pace we want to take this discussion on criteria and further and how, proactively or not, we want to use those criteria in the way to Mexico should we get to agree on them.

C/ Discussion in this first session has not reached maturity; and requires more discussion sessions. Finalizing it and further agreeing on how and when to use those criteria, may not be a priority task in IC in the coming months.

D/ Outline of a set of 8 Criteria for inclusion in IC – Also a compact Term of reference for IC

  • 1 (added) Manifesting understanding, and support/agreement or acceptance/respect, of the following existing consensus formulation of mission of IC, reading as ( agreed formulation to be discussed serving as minimum Terms of Reference for IC)
    1A/ Facilitate WSF process World scale manifestations –1B/ Be at the core of WSF facilitating community – 1C/ Assess/update/  WSF principles – 1D Decision by consensus – 1E/ IC member protocol for political expression
  • 2 (added) Manifesting understanding, and support/agreement or acceptance/respect, of the following consensus formulation of generic facilitation tasks of IC to be contributed to in criteria 5 (list to be discussed using Casablanca task list as a base (download)
  • 3. civil society organizations organicity and relation to WSF principles
    3A/ Organicity: web presence, Decision and representation protocols - 3B/ Assert some, or all, generic values, goals, actions, mentioned in WSF principles - 3C/ Assert agreement with the whole set of WSF principles
  • 4. International dimension and age of entity
    4A/ International activity - 4B/ Active participation, in presence or on line, in one earlier WSF event or 2 years existence 
  • 5. Time and resource for Contribution to IC mission and tasks
    5A/ Previous participation in IC commission - 5B/ Commitment to presence in IC meetings and contribution to IC tasks - 5C/ Commitment to  sharing   a " Our contribution to  WSF facilitation  annual report
  • 6. Recommendation for inclusion from 3 IC member entities (one recommendation per year)
  • 7.(added) case of social forum process facilitation groups, (alternative to Criteria 3)
    7A/ Facilitated process : Level of compliance with set of WSF principles–7B/  Group effective activity (past and furure manifestation - frequency of meetings) - 7C Group  inclusiveness  - 7D/  Facilitated Process Participants direct participation in WSF world scale manifestation
  • 8 (added) Case of inclusion of past “worldWSF event” local facilitation committees (alternative to Criteria 3 or 7)
    8A/ Clarify the willingness to use this possibility - No requirement about criteria  4 or 7

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

 

Part II Developing  Synthetic points  A B C  and  D (formulation o 8 criteria)

Point A/ Discussion about Criteria for joining IC have resumed ( last elements was in salvador de bahia 2015 - porto alegre 2016 - montreal 2016 - porto alegre 2017) ( references can be sent about those discussions)

    • 1/ Caritas as IC member had announced an input on IC inclusion criteria in march 20th IC meeting, at a time  when this discussion was scheduled for april 24th - This input was made april 9th a few hours after the secretariat message announced that the topic of the april 10th meeting would be focused on this issue, which was not initially expected ( see this input http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/ol21feb-input4.5 where a formulation of mission , tasks and inclusion criteria for IC appear in a same document)
    • 2/ Transcription of the discussion april 10th is visible here http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-extended/online-202104-extension1 ( finalization and translation  in progress ) and can fuel further the discussion 
    • 3/ Here is below, a contribution from Caritas representation for a possible formulation of a more comprehensive “8 IC inclusion criteria document”, starting from the 6 criteria document proposed by the April 10th discussion proposed facilitators, and taking stock of inputs in IC list on april 9th and discussion of IC meeting April 10
    • 4/ It would have been good preparing in a wider subgroup  the document proposed as base for the april 10th discussion with more time of preparation in a sub group with more than 2 persons, in the dynamics of what would be and  “IC operation facilitation group” / (based on experience of “articulation” group last year).We welcome discussion on the relevancy of this “IC operation facilitation group” in a next to come IC meeting 

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

 

Point B/ 4 basic issues appear after this moment of discussion of april 10th

1/ Need to internalize in the criteria the behaviour of members towards formal description of IC mission and tasks, that are indeed linked to a “set of principles” , so we have a sustainable IC with an identity

This mission and tasks logically contextualizes the inclusion criteria in IC. (The casablanca description of IC task is here and will be circulated as a document) .The mission and task of IC are dependent on the vision of the WSF process that is conveyed in the prevailing set of principles .

Can IC and WSF be sustainable without an explicit set of principles, whatever it may be? We think no. 

The set of criteria that was put in discussion on april 10th is mentioning the existence of this set of principles in a non meaningful way in criteria 1.and is not giving any idea of what are the mission and tasks of the IC 

Indeed, the principles are, at the same time,

  • 1/ positioning ideologically generic goals and actions of participant organizations in WSF process and
  • 2/ defining WSF process in its ways of implementation with horizontality, diversity, nature of open space with autonomous participants, and collective facilitation through consensus decision which makes the process exist and stay common . 

Both dimensions 1 and 2 of the WSF principles ( whatever changes may be made to them ) need to be fully taken in consideration by IC members. 

We propose to include these dimensions in two ways . Criteria 1 and 2 on mission and tasks of IC which are related to accepting/ respecting these principles, and adapting the entity behaviour in IC in consequence, and criteria 3 is about declaring the specific collective opinion of the entity about part of totality of those WSF principles 

So these formalized criteria would also constitute minimum terms of reference of the IC .


2/ Need to internalize formally the possibility that these set of principles be discussed and changed in IC along protocol of consensus decision, in order to have sustainable criteria 

These principles were adopted in 2001 and were considered then unanimously supported by IC members .

They were assessed in a written discussion towards the 2008 IC meeting in Abuja, when the IC members refrained from starting a concrete change process of those principles valuing their role in the sustainability of the WSF process.

Since Paris IC 2011, the non effectiveness of IC has been a topic of discussion, and curiously this has not led to much more explicitation of tasks of IC ( it was starded in casablanca but not taken further) and  introduction of  a review of compliance of IC member organizations with those tasks. The perspective of two WSF events in Tunisia and one in Montreal has kept the momentum 

In Montreal IC 2016 however, through discussion on two concrete political issues, it has become visible that some IC members were willing to turn IC in a more political body, and to resort to declarations in the name of IC on other issues than facilitation and, mainly through this vision of IC role, some were led to questioning the nature of open space of WSF, and hence questioning  the current set of WSF principles, 

So we have now IC member organizations who entered in IC declaring they adhered to the original set of WSF principles,  having changed their minds, and developing a narrative of “renovation”, including renovation of principles . At the same time, other IC member organizations are willing to keep to these principles and vision of IC with the perspective of developing further facilitation of the process and better implementing its manifestations and functions,  based on those principles. 

So it is realistic to distinguish “behaviour commitment” from an IC member organization to respect the terms of reference of IC (mission, tasks, principles) and the “opinion” of this IC member organisation about those terms of reference

One can argue  that experience of wsf 2021 virtual indicates there is a lot to do, together, in our diversity, with the existing set of WSF principles, and this is of course an opinion.

 

3/ Need to clarify specific aspects of inclusion in IC of facilitating groups of social forum processes, which are intrinsically different from IC member organizations 

The criteria formulation document proposed for April 10th  discussion and some interventions in the discussion  refer simply to “forums” ( not even “social forums”) 

In fact, generically, as per discussions in 2015-2018 on this topic , the entities liable to be included in IC are the “facilitating groups of social forum processes” thematic or geographic (down to national scale). These entities are very specific and require specific inclusion criterias ( see criteria 7 and 8)  

Taking into account the autonomy of each social forum process, outside the "WSF world scale process",  it is the relation to the prevailing set of WSF principles and the willingness to contribute to IC seen as a facilitating community for this “world scale wsf process” that are a guide to formulate those specific criteria

 

4/ Need to monitor, through IC meeting agenda and tasks, relevant usage of available energy in IC towards WSF process facilitation 2021

This energy needs to be in the first place inverted in overall WSF world process facilitation needs for 2021 and 2022, and Issues about IC itself are relevant only  inasmuch IC be dysfunctional in contributing to this facilitation.

Towards and during the WSF 2021 event, IC members organizations have managed to cooperate inside a “facilitating group wsf 2021 virtual event”, giving more or less energy to facilitating the event and to participating in it ( see the table which only shows the participation aspect  http://openfsm.net/projects/wsfic_fsmci/ol21feb-input3

As an example,  it is a fact no message related to further manifestation of the WSF process in 2021 has been sent, since january 30th, to the 1300 participant organizations that answered the invitation to participate in WSF 2021 virtual event.and the 9500 individuals that opened an account in  https://join.wsf2021.net/  

This silence comes in contrast with the fact that IC developed during months in 2020 discussions where many spoke about the urgency to develop  perspectives, articulations and actions in the pandemic context.

In the year 2021 and up to mexico 2022 event, while broad facilitating/working  groups for  WSF process 2021 and/or WSF process 2022 can be formed around an experienced IC, IC members will have to allocate their available energy  for IC between two line of action  

  • 1/ stimulating participation and articulations in the WSF process through an effective facilitating IC, or 
  • 2/ introverting IC in internal procedural discussions/decisions, somehow confounding meaningful” participation in WSF” and “participation in IC”, with the outspoken perspective/goal from some members entities to bring in new entities soon in IC (on which grounds?)

This energy allocation implies deciding at which pace and up to where we want to take forward  this discussion on  IC  inclusion criteria, and how, proactively or not, we want to use those criterias in the way to Mexico, should we get to agree on them ( see annnex 1) 

While being observers in meeting in Mexico, IC members need to discuss what needs to be done, from IC, in the co-responsibility effort to facilitate the wsf process in 2021 towards the Mexico WSF world event by May 2022

-----------

point C/ This April 10th first step of discussion was taken

The substantial additions below to the document proposed by the April 10th discussion facilitators, mainly through addition of criteria 1, 2, and 7  indicate that the discussion on IC  inclusion criteria, can be deeply connected to the issue of mission of IC, and has not yet reached maturity. 

Finalizing the discussion  with a decision, and then further agreeing on “how”, “when”,  and “for what” use those criteria, may not be considered a priority for IC  in the coming months. (opinions about this expressed in the April 10th discussion)  

 ----------

 

point D/ Contributive document 8 Criterias for inclusion in IC - as input to IC April 10th discussion

(Adding 3 criteria 1 2 annd 7   to the april 10th based document main additions in blue)

Criteria 1 (added) Manifesting the understanding, and support/agreement with, or acceptance/respect of, the current consensus formulation about the mission of IC, reading as follows:   1A/ facilitate WSF process World scale manifestations –1B/ be at the core of WSF facilitating community – 1C/  update/ approve WSF principles – 1D decision by consensus – 1E/ protocol for political expression  - reading as ( formulation  to be discussed included in the criteria of inclusion)

  • 1A/ IC scope/mission is to care about, develop and “facilitate” the WSF process, find formats and moments for implementing manifestations of the “World scale WSF process” (eg the 14 world social forum events since 2001, built in co-responsibility with local event facilitation committees, and from now on, the possible moments between those events) along a vision given by a set of  principles exposed in the  WSF charter. This scope is not “lead” politically the process, since the participant organizations in the process are autonomous, and the other social forum processes,  thematic /geographic down to national scale, are recognized as autonomous.
  • 1B/ IC is also meant to be at the core of the “global WSF process facilitating community” That is why “facilitating groups of social forum processes” of thematic or national and above scale can be invited as member entities of IC, although they are of different nature than organizations.  At the same time  
    • 1/ Their autonomy in developing their respective social forum process is recognized and respected in IC,  which does not exclude exchange of experiences and vision , and 
    • 2/  their contribution potential to the “World scale WSF process” vitality is also recognized,  while size and multi thematic scope of WSF world process can account for the need to have a clearcut implementation of WSF set of principles, clearer than in other scales of implementation
  • 1C/ This mission of IC implies evaluating through experience, and updating if deemed necessary, the set of WSF principles, (through the adoption and care of which IC instituted itself).
  • 1D/ in order to maintain a common “world scale WSF process”, all meaningful facilitation and internal organizing decisions in IC are taken by consensus between IC member entity representatives.
    • This implies  :1/ an interactive quality discussion for decision announced with prior notice, 2/ a written consensus proposal formulation, modifiable in the discussion, and 3/ a clear “support or acceptance check period” about the finally proposed formulation in the IC mailing list. This implies also a discussion in presence for any “frame changing” decision about principles of WSF, role of IC, task and decision mode of IC.
  • 1E/ About political expression of IC member organizations, the consensus expression channel is “ IC member organization declarations” with a list of signatories organizations ( see  http://openfsm.net/projects/icmembers-declarations )
    • note : A “facilitating group of social forum process” cannot be signatory of such declarations , while their representatives in IC can collect signatures of specific organizations which are present in the considered facilitating group)  

------------ 

Criteria 2 (added) Manifesting the understanding, and support/agreement or acceptance/respect, of the consensus formulation of  the main generic facilitation tasks of IC reading as  follows, and  to be considered in criteria 5

 

( using casablanca 2013 IC task list - list to be discussed included in the criteria of inclusion) (download)

1/ Discuss political geopolitical context in order to contextualize wsf process – 2/ Sustain Methodological discussion on how to organize events, sustain processes and initiatives – 3/ Facilitate dialogue between local and global struggles and alternatives – 4/ Facilitate linkage between regional forums processes–5/ Identify tasks/issues about concretely facilitating WSF process and launch/review work of open contributive groups addressing those tasks/issues -6/ Spread knowledge on WSF charter of principles and process – 7/ Develop and promote use of appropriate Communication tools – 8/ Define date and place and format of WSF events – 9/ Monitor and contribute to Practical organization of WSF events – 10/ Finance IC activities/meetings – 11/ Monitor financing of WSF events – 12 assess formulating updates and changes in the WSF set of principles

 -------------

 

Criteria 3. civil society organizations organicity and relation to WSF principles 3A/ Organicity: web presence Decision and representation protocols - 3B/ assert some, or all, generic values, goals, actions, mentioned in WSF principles - 3C/ assert agreement with the whole set of WSF principles 

  • 3A/ Asserting being an organic network, movement, or organization of civil society with an active internet website/webspace , showing existence of a continued operation, and of established protocols for decisions and representation in general
    •  ( Note : in relation with the current set of generic WSF principles, the facilitating groups of social forum processes, whatever their practice, are not considered organic networks/organizations, and their inclusion in the IC is assessed through criteria 7) 
  • 3B/ Asserting being an entity whichopposes neoliberalism and world domination by capital and any form of imperialism”, and is committed “to the construction of a planetary society oriented to a fruitful relationship between human beings and these with the Earth ”. (excerpt from the WSF Charter of Principles) 
  • and optionally
  • 3C/‘Asserting considering itself a “participant entity” in the WSF “process”, as the words “participant” and “process” are described in the set of WSF principles , and supporting the current WSF principles 

  

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

Comments on criteria 3 :  

C1/  the size of “excerpts” of WSF charter  mentioned in point 3B  could be extended among the various generic positioning elements about values, goals, actions, contained in WSF principles - see colorized prevailing set of principles ( 1 4 8 10 11 12 14 ) http://openfsm.net/projects/ic-methodology/charter-fsm-wsf-en-colorized 

C2/ Putting  point 3C as an option,  when it was facially a systematic “requisite of opinion” in earlier practice of IC inclusion since 2001, is a realistic change, and is balanced by incorporation of criteria 1 and 2 which are “requisite of behaviour” 

  • Option 3C barely reinforces criteria 1 and 2 if the organization has already expressed “support”,  and not just “acceptance”  in those two criteria). This includes  support to the other function 2 of principles  in defining  what is and  what is not WSF and some rules of operation or facilitation ( principles 6 and 7 particularly)
  • Clarity in options expressed by organizations coming to contribute in IC commissions, and eventually in the IC, about  criteria 1 2 3  , is stimulating IC members entity  reflection about the WSF process. Taking option 3C makes more sense when organizations have a hand on  experience of the WSF process, as there is a self education process about participating in WSF, which is  leading to better understanding the differences between “participation” and “facilitation”. 
  • With this set of criteria it is formally possible to include in IC organizations that barely “accept”  criteria  1 and 2 and do not use option.C  in criteria 3, when they  want  to come and contribute in IC missions and tasks

C3/ Complying  with criteria 1 and 2  is not a matter of opinion but a matter of behaviour, and all IC member entities are committing  to somehow  contribute to effective IC facilitation tasks and decision processes in frame defined in criteria 1 and 2 .

  • Among the IC  Casablanca tasks  in criteria 2  is currently   Task 6 / Spread knowledge on WSF charter of principles and process.  Contributing to this task  raises a  point about how this WSF knowledge is formalized and spread and the motivation to perform this task, depending on the opinion/vision the organization has about the WSF principles and the process.( see comment 2 above) 
  • Some IC member organizations “who do not approve  but accept“ the WSF  principles, are developing dialogic efforts in influencing other IC members in changing the set of WSF principles, through discussion in the broader the WSF space context , and discussion towards  decisions made in IC context. 
  • At the same time, they are supposed to  stay objective when presenting in their activity about task 6  the existing terms of reference  criteria 1 and 2 and the set of WSF principles 

C4/ How the inclusion process would be “monitored” in IC, according to what candidate organizations express here in criteria  1 2  3 . This  will need more discussion - see also the Annex 1.

  • Of course, IC member organizations can change their mind about the relevancy of the prevailing set of WSF principles, and some have. Among them, some have opted out of IC, and have contributed to other international constructions, ( and still can participate in WSF) and some have chosen to stay. 
  • Staying , they  are complying  with this set of 8 criteria, which is meant as retroactive for all IC member entities, thus  they  explicitly committing to respect the existing  prevailing consensus formulation about criteria 1 and 2., which can be changed through internal IC discussion and decision

---------


Criteria 4. international dimension and age of entity

4A/ international activity - 4B/ active participation, in presence or on line, in one earlier WSF event or 2 years existence principles 

  • 4A/ Have significant continental /regional or international activities. (Nationally active entities, networks and movements can be invited to join the networks and movements that are already members of the CI, participating in this way.) 
  • 4B/ Have actively participated In at least one edition of the WSF. (condition that will start to apply after the edition of the WSF in Mexico, when two editions with the possibility of virtual participation will have been held.) using “active participation formats” ( i-e self organized activities  and initiatives) 
  • Up to mexico 2022 this criteria 4B would be completed by having more than two years of existence

---------

Criteria 5. Time and resource for Contribution to IC mission and tasks

Demonstrate interest and capacity to contribute concretely to tasks described in criteria 2 and fulfilling of mission described in criteria 1. 

This is a permanent requirement : 5A/ previous participation in commission - 5B/ commitment to presence in meetings and 5C/ contribution to tasks outside meetings - 5D/ commitment to a WSF facilitation contribution annual report

  • 5A/ having participated for some time in an IC commission work, previous to asking joining IC
  • 5B/ .Commiting to Make 2 representative person ( 3 for entities included through criteria 7 o 8 ) assigned  collectively available to A/ actively participate in the IC meetings and meetings of one or more of its commissions meetings and
  • 5C/ Committing  to make these persons, or others assigned from the entity, available to contribute to take up tasks outside of meetings, with time and or ressources,
  • 5D/ in discussion committing  to issue a yearly public report (min x pages) about their contribution to WSF facilitation tasks ( criteria 2) and other optional elements, that can be commented by other IC members entities 

---------

Criteria 6. Recommendation for inclusion from IC member entities

Be nominated/ supported for being included by three organizations that are already members of the IC 

  • 6A/ One same IC  member entity cannot support inclusion of more than one organization a year
  • 6B/ IC member Organizations cannot support candidacy of facilitation groups of social forum process they are part of)

---------


Criteria 7. case of social forum process facilitation groups, (replacing Criteria 3):

Those groups are welcome in IC ( see point criteria 1 C ) and they are intrinsically different from member organizations, as they do not represent politically the organizations participating in their respective social forum process, which cannot be assimilated to members of an organization.

Additional specific criteria 7 A B C D apply replacing criteria 3 : 7A/ Facilitated process : Level of compliance with set of WSF principles–7B/ Group effective activity (past and furure manifestation - frequency of meetings) - 7C Group inclusiveness - 7D/ Facilitated Process Participants organization direct participation in WSF world scale manifestations

  • 7A/ Coherence of implementation of the facilitated social forum process with WSF principles
    • A reference to the set of WSF principles should be visible in the web communication of the facilitating groups , even if conherence is not complete – noting that this common reference to set of WSF principles and possible participation in IC is not meaning a loss of autonomy of the facilitating group ( see criteria 1B) 
    • Ideological positioning of the social forum process that is facilitated should be visible from the reference document of the process and the reference to WSF principles
  • 7B/ Effective activity of the facilitated social forum process : 1/ a first significant manifestation of the process already existing in a not too distant past ( max three years?) 2/ a public freshly updated documentation of meetings of the facilitating group ( min 4 meetings a year?)3/ an action towards a next (max three years?) scheduled manifestation of the facilitated social forum process
  • 7C/ inclusiveness and diversity of participation in the facilitating group in the local context of the social forum process that is facilitated.(including assess if and how IC member organizations, active in a considered region or thematic, are involved in the considered social forum process)
  • 7D/ Willingness from the facilitating group  to stimulate direct participation of the organizations participant in “its” respective process to the” world scale WSF process manifestations" that IC is co-responsible for. This  direct participation and expression is important to avoid developing a pyramidal practice of representation of participant organizations as if they were "members" of their social forum. They are not members they are participants   
  • Compliance with criteria 4  In the case of national scale social forums, international direct activities of participant organizations involved  in the considered social forum process in the context of “world WSF process” is a way to comply with criteria 4. . International presence is more self evident in thematic forum processes and regional processes
  • Compliance with criteria 5  and 6 : same criteria than organizations

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

Criteria 8 (added) Case of inclusion of past “world WSF event” local facilitation committees -Historically it is an accepted practice that each local WSF event facilitating committee, after completion of its event, may be included in the IC even after the event process is not more active, as a tribute to contribution demonstrated and experience gained in facilitating the WSF process. This possibility has not been used in many cases, or has been reflected through inclusion of national scale organizations in IC) 

8A/clarify the willingness to use this possibility case by case  subject to discussion - ( No requirement about criteria  4 or 7)

WSF 2001-2003 possibility not used corresponds to inclusion of brazilian  IC member organizations CBJP CUT ABONG Oxfam brazil IBASE - WSF 2004 possibility not used so far,  was through IC member organizations, might be re-assessed - WSF 2005 - 2006 - 2007 - 2009 possibility not used so far - WSF 2011 possibility not formally used ( might be assessed as there is some  presence  from this group) - WSF 2013-15 possibility not used as option was taken to include  2 Tunisian IC member organizations FTDES UGTT -WSF 2016 -2018 possibility used : CTSM  and  Colectivo Bahiano - (overview to be reviewed)  


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


Annex1 : Discussion on the conditions and modalities for implementation of those IC inclusion  criteria, if/ when those would be defined.

This discussion remains to be made at a reasonable pace, in relation with issue C in  part I  above. Some initial elements : 

It seems widely agreed that existing IC member entities should show their compliance with the formalized set of criteria, if and when it is defined

The issue of limitation of number of member entities in IC can be pragmatically assessed. Some first elements, and more to come through discussion,

  • 1/ IC, with 50 member organizations is able, with a minimum effort, to stimulate a participation of 1300 organizations in wsf 2021. This refers to the fact that quality of facilitating contributions in IC is paramount.
  • 2/ in 50+ meetings in its 20 years history, IC meetings peaked in 100 participants in presencial meetings, which is not per se indicative of an operational size limit. 
  • 3/ It can be useful to comment on questions such as :  
    • Is IC perceived as transparent and informative enough through some documentation protocols of meetings or its possible website? Where can WSF facilitation energy be invested elsewhere than in IC ? Is the contribution through and around IC commissions offering a concrete perspective to those organizations interested to contribute to facilitating the wsf process ?  Is formalizing better what is the scope of IC ( criteria 1 and 2)  reducing  the confused candidacies thinking to join IC as a political body? 
    • Are participation modalities in IC able to accommodate contributions of current IC members? Is the number of IC members making consensus decisions protocol difficult to implement? Is the quality of contributions and facilitating energy in and around IC increasing ? Can there be more effort made by IC by developing WSF facilitating energy that is contributed by each member entity ( criteria 5) ? etc 

Some preliminary partial considerations on use of the criteria

The primary task of IC expansion commission when restarted is to develop the participation in the wsf process 2021  towards Mexico  2022, and not care about IC membership. 

  • However, a subgroup of Expansion Commission could, if there is a decision for this  before  Mexico , use the agreed set of criteria when relating, under instructions by IC plenary meetings, to organizations, networks and social movements and facilitation groups of active social forum processes, willing to contribute to facilitation of WSF process in connection with IC.
  • The goal, when assessing candidacy to IC participation, is to strengthen IC as a facilitating community of WSF process, which implies that organizations and entities are coming in IC for clearly contributing to the mission and task described in criteria 1 and 2, that can be updated by decision in IC 

Three circles of contribution to facilitation tasks of " world scale WSF process" could be distinguished

  • A/ willingness to contribute in “WSF facilitating projects” self organized by IC members o participant organizations with or without relation with IC commission - this may not be a spontaneous expectation but could be an indication from the IC to certain groups 
  • B/ willingness to contribute in some IC commissions, ( are those commissions open to non iC member participation? Is there a inclusion assessment protocol to join a commission? ). Participation in commission brings experience and understanding about WSF facilitation, and demonstrates willingness and contribution capacity to IC concrete facilitation tasks, as described in criteria 2 and referred to criteria 5 
  • C/ willingness to join IC as a member entity ( decision made in plenary IC meetings) Inclusion of contributive candidate entities complying with criteria can be made using priorities : 1/  those from regions of the planet that are currently “underpresent” in the Council, 2/ inclusion of facilitating groups of Thematic and geographic social Forums processes 3/ inclusion of entities actively involved in organizing those social forum processes, as an alternative to 2