Abstract
Governance of the Internet is a matter of global importance and concern. The multi-stakeholder (MS) and multilateral (ML) forms have been presented as two competing and plausible models of Internet governance. Drawing on actor–network theory (ANT) and building on an interpretive case study of rich archival data, this paper examines how the focal actor’s (i.e. the U.S. government’s) beliefs influence the choice of Internet governance form. It further explores the strategies of the focal actor to translate the interests of the ML network’s supporters, with a view to enrolling them in the MS governance network. The analysis shows how the focal actor has established the MS governance form through the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) as an Obligatory Passage Point to keep the Internet successfully operational. The analysis also illuminates the combination of structural and collaborative strategies employed to allay the growing dissatisfaction with the MS governance form. The paper suggests that whilst the protocols and technical standards of the Internet are increasingly relegated to the background, the social and political network that Internet artefacts draw together in a meta-form has grown in prominence. It also argues that there may be a hierarchy of beliefs, which influence how actors enact their translation strategies. Finally, the paper discusses parallels between the MS/ML forms of Internet governance and IT governance in organizational contexts.
Highlights
Debates on how the Internet should be governed are pervasive
One of them offered by DeNardis et al (2013) segregates Internet governance into six functional areas: (1) control of Critical Internet Resources (CIRs), (2) setting Internet standards, (3) access and interconnection coordination, (4) cybersecurity governance, (5) information intermediation, and (6) architecture-based intellectual property rights enforcement. Each of these functional areas may have different types of administration structure optimal for their operational stability (DeNardis et al, 2013), this study focuses on the control of CIRs, which to a large extent is governed by Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Timeline of Focal Actor’s Strategies In line with the evidence of strategies employed by the focal actor, we present the findings of our study through a timeline (Figure 1), which indicates major events which strengthened the ML-MS controversy and measures taken by the ICANN-network towards addressing those controversies
Summary
Debates on how the Internet should be governed are pervasive. The arguments especially focus on the extent of participation of its varied stakeholders in transnational decision-making and governance. Some noteworthy examples include the contentious allocation of ‘.amazon’ (Sepulveda, 2017) and ‘.xxx’ (ICANN, 2007) global Top Level Domains (gTLDs), and the US National Security Agency’s (NSA) surveillance activities (Birnbaum, 2013) Each of these and similar other decisions, since the Internet’s inception, have led Internet stakeholders across the world to deliberate on the legitimate form of governing trans-national issues of the Internet. Brazil professed its support for the MS (ICANN) governance for the Internet, clearly indicating its change in stance (Trinkunas & Wallace, 2015) In the meeting it called upon the support of all countries to the MS governance form and helped the focal actor mobilize other actors towards joining this form. In his analysis, Mueller (2013), highlighting the mobilizing role of Brazil, notes:
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
