Re: [ga] Are the Falkland Islands and Bermuda in Europe?

["Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette@wz-berlin.de>]

On 8 Jun 2003 at 16:24, Marc Schneiders wrote:

> The 5 regions used by ICANN to ascertain geographical representation have
> made me uncomfortable for several reasons. One of these is that they are
> not nearly of equal size in whatever way you measure that size
> (inhabitants, internet users, size of territory).

Dear Marc, it is not always size that matters.  
> 
> A few days ago a revised version of the allocation of countries and
> territories has been put up on the ICANN website. It will be discussed in
> Montreal.
> 
> http://www.icann.org/montreal/geo-regions-topic.html
> 
> If I understand it, Bermuda and the Falkland Islands are now in Europe.
> The same is true for some French territories. Please, note that the
> European Union does think that some of these countries/territories are
> in Europe and others not. (http://europa.eu.int/abc/maps/index_nl.htm)
> 
> The reason seems to be the citizenship of the people who live there.  I
> don't know about Bermuda and the Falklands, but the two former Dutch
> colonies, which are also in 'Europe' now, elect their own parliament etc.
> They are independent politically.  The Dutch government does not speak for
> Aruba or the Netherlands Antilles. It fights with them occasionally.
> 
> Is this change to the regions not a step back to colonialism?
> 
> Anyway, what I would really like to see, is a more balanced regional
> division. Look at the 'facts' (population and territory) of the present
> regions within ICANN:
> 
> Asia-Pacific			3798		15,568
> Africa                           840		11,698
> Europa				 728		 8,875
> Latin America-Caribbean		 531		 7,964
> North America			 319		 7,699
> 
> (Source: http://www.prb.org/pdf/WorldPopulationDS02_Eng.pdf)

If you choose population as the criteria, half of the board should be determined 
by Asia pacific. 

> 
> The proposed changes don't influence these numbers much as they concern
> mainly small islands. There is no improvement in them, as far as I can
> see.
> 
> Some may find it important to take the number of internet users into
> account. Here are some data (for what they are worth):
> 
> Europe          190
> Asia/Pacific    187
> US/Canada       183
> Latin America   33
> Africa          6
> Middle East     5
> 
> (Source: http://www.nua.ie/surveys/how_many_online/)
> 
> This would suggest 3 regions not 5:
> 
> America                         216
> Europe, Africa                  196
> Asia/Pacific/Middle East        192

Your proposal implies a lack of independent representation for Africa and the 
Middle East as well. In this sense, your model reproduces the digital divide. 

It also implies that the cut of regions would have to be adjusted quite often due to 
changing user populations. Sounds like a lot of trouble to me. 

Besides, your "balanced regional division" lacks any notion of qualitative criteria 
such as culture. 

Jeanette 


> 
> 
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> 


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html