The objectives of this regional report are to:
The research team's methodology had five components:
In November 2000, there were 16.45 million Internet users in Latin America, corresponding to 4.04% of the worldwide total. (Source: Nua Internet Surveys).
About 3.9% of the people in Latin America and the Caribbean have regular access to the Internet. That situation varies, however, from country to country, from about 0.09% penetration in Haiti to 9.4 % in Uruguay. (Source: Nua Internet Surveys - see Appendix I).The number of people in Latin America concerned with ICANN-related issues is very low. Those few who are involved come mainly from several well-defined groups:
At present, Latin America is moving forward with the creation of a Regional Internet Registry (RIR). When finished, we expect the RIR to be a new locus for discussion of and work on ICANN-related matters.
Many countries from Latin America have experienced totalitarian governments during their history, but recently democracy has consolidated in the region. There are some important differences among their electoral systems. Some are based on geographical models of representation, while others have direct nationwide elections to elect the President. In the last few years some countries have experimented with the inclusion of a second, "runoff" round of elections in Presidential elections.
In many countries voting is compulsory, and as a result the percentage of citizens who vote is very high. The Preferential Voting System used by ICANN in the 2000 election is absolutely unknown in Latin America, and is not used in any public election, most of which are carried out through direct votes. In some cases, as mentioned above, there is a second round between the two candidates with the highest number of votes. This occurs only if no one obtains more than 50% of the votes in the first round.
People felt that it would have been extremely useful to have had more detailed information on the process being used in the 2000 election, and more time to consider one's options. For example, details of activated membership on a country-by-country basis were not published.
As of July 31, 2000, 6,486 people from the Latin American region registered as At-Large members, representing 4.09% of the total.
The table below compares the number of Internet users with the number of hosts in some of the more Internet-adapted countries, and with the number of At-Large members. If we compare the percentage of users in each country to the total of the region, and At-Large membership percentages from each country to the total of the region, we can see that only three countries (Brazil, Chile and Ecuador) have a higher percentage of At-Large members than Internet users. In the case of Ecuador this can probably be justified by the role played by some NGOs in promoting membership.
Brazil has the highest number of At-Large Members, with 80.13% of the At-Large members in the entire region. In Brazil, there was a large campaign promoting membership in the last few days before the July 31 deadline. In Uruguay, the other country providing candidates to the At-Large election, the percentages of users and At-Large members were quite similar to one another.
| Country | No. Internet Users | % LAC Internet Users | Internet Penetration Rate | No. At-Large Members | % LAC At-Large Members | No. Internet Hosts | No. At-Large Members/No. Users |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 9,840,000 | 59.82% | 5.70% | 5197 | 80.13% | 662,910 | 0.0528% |
| Mexico | 2,500,000 | 15.20% | 2.49% | 270 | 4.16% | 495,747 | 0.0108% |
| Argentina | 900,000 | 5.47% | 2.44% | 295 | 4.55% | 177,216 | 0.0328% |
| Chile | 625,000 | 3.80% | 4.12% | 258 | 3.98% | 64,081 | 0.0413% |
| Colombia | 600,000 | 3.65% | 1.51% | 60 | 0.93% | 53,683 | 0.0100% |
| Peru | 400,000 | 2.43% | 1.50% | 63 | 0.97% | 11,724 | 0.0158% |
| Venezuela | 400,000 | 2.43% | 1.70% | 32 | 0.49% | 16,694 | 0.0080% |
| Uruguay | 300,000 | 1.82% | 9.40% | 111 | 1.71% | 42,927 | 0.0370% |
| Costa Rica | 150,000 | 0.91% | 4.04% | 26 | 0.40% | 10,963 | 0.0173% |
| Guatemala | 65,000 | 0.40% | 0.51% | 5 | 0.08% | 0.0077% | |
| Cuba | 60,000 | 0.36% | 0.54% | 4 | 0.06% | 0.0067% | |
| Jamaica | 60,000 | 0.36% | 2.26% | 3 | 0.05% | 0.0050% | |
| Panama | 45,000 | 0.27% | 1.60% | 21 | 0.32% | 0.0467% | |
| El Salvador | 40,000 | 0.24% | 0.65% | 4 | 0.06% | 0.0100% | |
| Bolivia | 35,000 | 0.21% | 0.43% | 6 | 0.09% | 0.0171% | |
| Trinidad y Tobago. | 30,000 | 0.18% | 2.55% | 6 | 0.09% | 0.0200% | |
| Dominican Rep. | 25,000 | 0.15% | ---- | 15 | 0.23% | 8,882 | 0.0600% |
| Ecuador | 20,000 | 0.12% | 0.15% | 30 | 0.46% | 0.1500% | |
| Honduras | 20,000 | 0.12% | 0.33% | 10 | 0.15% | 0.0500% | |
| Nicaragua | 20,000 | 0.12% | 0.42% | 8 | 0.12% | 0.0400% | |
| Paraguay | 20,000 | 0.12% | 0.36% | 5 | 0.08% | 0.0250% | |
| Bahamas | 15,000 | 0.09% | 5.09% | 4 | 0.06% | 0.0267% | |
| Belize | 12,000 | 0.07% | 4.82% | 1 | 0.02% | 0.0083% | |
| Antigua y B | 8,000 | 0.05% | 5.50% | 4 | 0.06% | 0.0500% | |
| Barbados | 6,000 | 0.04% | 2.19% | 4 | 0.06% | 0.2000% | |
| Haiti | 6,000 | 0.04% | 0.09% | 5 | 0.08% | 0.0833% | |
| Other | 71,500 | 0.43% | 2.08% | 39 | 0.60% | 0.0545% |
Sources:
Number of users and penetration - Nua Internet Surveys
Number of hosts in Latin American countries - NIC México (www.nic.mx) August 2000.
It is worth noting the big difference in the number of men registered members compared with women.
| Gender of members. | |
| Female | 294 |
| Male | 3158 |
| No response | 96 |
| Age | |
| 16-19 | 154 |
| 20-29 | 1211 |
| 30-39 | 1069 |
| 40-49 | 653 |
| 50-59 | 253 |
| +60 | 45 |
| No response | 163 |
| Role/Occupation | |
| Business | 473 |
| Computer Software | 601 |
| Education | 329 |
| Government / Public Service | 273 |
| Internet Business | 1065 |
| Law | 139 |
| Non-Profit Organization | 86 |
| Not Employed | 9 |
| Self-Employed | 222 |
| Student | 203 |
| No response | 148 |
| Source Learned About the Election | |
| At Work | 370 |
| Banner Advertisement | 6 |
| 2129 | |
| Friend/Acquaintance | 421 |
| Newspaper/Magazine | 118 |
| Other | 126 |
| Print Media | 21 |
| Search Engine | 11 |
| Website | 183 |
| No response | 163 |
The majority of those interviewed agreed that the technical problems of the 2000 election constituted a major shortcoming that may have distorted the election process. All agreed that the process was badly conceived, but that the procedures, once established, were generally well supervised. The majority of those interviewed mentioned that the main reason that Latin American users registered was in order to vote for someone specific.
The number of activated members in Latin America was 3,548, representing 54.7% of the total number of registered members (6,486). Low activation membership percentages were similar to those seen in the rest of the world.
| LAC | TOTAL | LAC % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Registration | 6,486 | 158,593 | 4.09% |
| Activation | 3,548 | 76,183 | 4.66% |
| Votes | 1,402 | 34,035 | 4.12% |
Some of the reasons why the number of activations was significantly lower than the number of registrations included:
The people interviewed agreed that the persons who were nominated by the nomination committee turned out to be generally the right ones. Some would have preferred to have had more candidates from the region, and/or female candidates. There was some confusion regarding the self-nomination process, however. Many people interpreted that phase of the election as 'voting,' not just a show of support for a potential candidate.
In several Latin American e-mail lists there were requests for clarifications, and some of the candidates nominated by the official committee were asked why they had not appeared on the member-nomination ballot.
For the majority of interviewees, the election campaign had little effect because so many voters had made their decision in advance. Many also criticized the lack of information in different languages, the lack of debates organized by ICANN (either through in-person meetings or through electronic means such as public chats). People believed that there were not adequate opportunities for exchanging ideas and positions between candidates and the At-Large Members. There were no public debates, and the electronic Q&A forum organized at members.icann.org saw very little activity.
The Nomination Committee named three candidates to the Latin American Ballot: (Patricio Poblete from Chile, Raúl Echeberría from Uruguay and Ivan Moura Campos from Brazil). Both Patricio and Raúl had served previously as Names Council Members, and both are well known in the ICANN community. Ivan Moura Campos is Coordinator of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, which has been very involved in all ICANN matters; he, as well, is well known in Latin America as an expert in ICANN-related topics.
In the self-nomination process, two additional candidates joined the ballot: Claudio Silva Menezes and Aluisio S. Nunes. Both are from Brazil, and neither are well known within the Internet Latin American Community as regards domain names, Internet addresses or public policies. Claudio got a significant level of support.
The result of the election was:
| Ivan Moura Campos | 946 |
| Claudio Silva Menezes | 157 |
| Raúl Echeberría | 141 |
| Aluisio S. Nunes | 79 |
| Patricio Poblete | 79 |
Due to the high number of registered Brazilians, the result of the election seems to have been rather predictable. Most of those interviewed felt that the problems encountered in the registration and activation phases were enough to distort the final result of the election. However, most of them also believed that the election of Ivan Moura Campos was a positive outcome, and that he is doing a good job as an ICANN Director so far. Many interviewees also commented on the nationalist influence on the campaign and on the election itself, although most believed that such influence was generally unavoidable.
The electoral process in Latin America had many problems and obstacles.
ICANN could not guarantee equal opportunities to all its potential voters. The sending of PINs by surface mail was a problem, and it could become an even bigger problem in future elections. In Latin America, few would have faith in any election system where the right to vote depends on postal services or the capabilities of failure-prone servers.
For many people, such obstacles were clues to a larger, more difficult problem: can we find meaningfully representative systems when we are working with electoral universes of undefined character and scope?
However, none of those interviewed felt that the technical problems were due to any bad intentions or any conspiracy. The electoral process, in the view of all those interviewed, was well conducted under the procedures that were established.
Most of those interviewed agreed that the main reason behind people becoming At-Large members was their desire to vote for a specific candidate. This also was the main reason mentioned by several interviewees who are important stakeholders in the region.
Those interviewed were asked about possible explanations for the low rates of activations and votes. In Latin America, only 54.7 % of people activated their membership, and only 21.6 % of the registered people actually voted.
The main reasons cited for this discrepancy were:
Most of those interviewed agreed that an At-Large membership is necessary and important for ICANN's future. Their opinions divided, however, when they were asked about the role of such a membership. Everyone agreed that At-Large membership would be an important way to keep the community informed, and to educate people about ICANN's structure. Some felt that the membership could enable members to propose and discuss their interests, and to vote to express their positions.
Others felt that At-Large members should have the right to participate and vote about some things, but only those matters under consideration by the Board.
About half of the people interviewed proposed to continue having direct elections, as they believed that this is the most democratic way to ensure a strong public voice in ICANN. But the other half proposed some kind of indirect election mechanisms.
Those who proposed indirect elections argued that:
Nearly all of the people interviewed agreed that any future elections should include some kind of sub-regional component.
Several proposals were suggested:
Those who proposed indirect elections offered different implementation suggestions, but all of them agreed that some kind of At-Large Council should elect the At-Large Directors. Some felt that it would be a more effective way to represent not only the current regions, but also certain sub-regions with similar cultural, geographic and political situations. Every sub-region would have representatives in one of those councils, and they would participate formally in ICANN's structure.
| 2.2.3 Europe | 2.2.5 North America |
© 2001 NAISProject.org
Privacy Policy
webmaster@naisproject.org