Jump to content

Policy Process Steering Committee: Difference between revisions

From ICANNWiki
Caterina (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Caterina (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 31: Line 31:
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}


[[category: glossary]]
[[category: Glossary]]
[[Category: Committees]]
[[Category: ICANN Bodies]]
__NOTOC__
__NOTOC__

Revision as of 21:39, 8 September 2011

The Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) was established to review and recommend changes for the GNSO policy-making processes. The main goal of PPSC was to develop recommendations for the process changes required by the GNSO Improvements Report and acknowledged by the Board.[1] The PPSC consisted of two teams, the Policy Development Process Work Team and the Working Group Work Team. The PDP-WT was tasked with developing a new policy development process, directing it towards an open community WG approach, while the WG-WT was tasked with developing a new Working Group Model. The PPSC itself served as a coordinating body for these two teams. The PPSC was terminated when the GNSO adopted the resolution 20110428-2 at its meeting held on 28 April 2011, although the Policy Development Process Work Team is still active.[2]

The PPSC produced a proposal based on the results of its efforts, consisting of suggested changes to the bylaws. Other duties assigned to the PPSC by the GNSO Council were to provide guidelines to shape proper interaction between GNSO volunteers and the ICANN staff, as well as duties related to establishing GNSO-related drafting team guidelines.[3]

Membership[edit | edit source]

The PPSC was comprised of the following members:

  • 1 representative from each constituency (did not need to be a GNSO Council member)
  • GNSO council chair or vice chair
  • 1 Nominating Committee appointee to the GNSO

Also included as appointed representatives/observers were liaisons from the GAC and ALAC.

Prior to being disbanded, the members of the PPSC were:

Unless otherwise determined, the decision-making process used by the PPSC was to be made using a “full consensus of the members” process.[4]

References[edit | edit source]