OneWorld.net (U.S.)

1 History and structure of OneWorld

Origins of OneWorld OneWorld Online (OWO) registered as an internet company in 1995. Its first office was a four-room annexe to a rural homestead near Oxford, UK, owned by the founder directors, husband and wife team Peter Armstrong and Anuradha Vittachi. It arose from the founders’ concern at the failure of conventional media to offer a fair voice to issues of poverty and human rights and their belief that the internet was at last the medium to redress the public agenda and create effective linkages with the developing world. OWO’s owner was the OneWorld Broadcasting Trust (OWBT), a UK charity working with conventional media to encourage coverage of global social issues.

The OneWorld partnership Early work of OWO focused on the provision of specialist technical advice and help to major non-profits in the UK needing to bring their material into the new internet world. The original websites for Oxfam and Christian Aid, among others, were built by OWO. From this period dates OneWorld’s reputation for software engineering services to the NGO sector.

OWO also brought to bear the media experience of the founders by pooling material published by civil society into a professionally edited news portal. The company’s flagship product, oneworld.net, rapidly gained audience, awards and recognition by NGOs for raising the profile of the sector. The concept of OneWorld’s partnership with civil society soon arose; in return for a modest subscription, OneWorld would feature a partner’s content in the pages of the portal, bringing the issues to a greater audience and leading the audience to the partner’s site. The resulting database feeds a focused search engine.

oneworld.net The flagship English language portal extended from traditional sector `news’ into a rich user experience, developing through regional editions, specialist theme channels and interactive opportunities such as the Jobs page. oneworld.net now benefits from editorial contributions resourced from across the global network and provides a navigation route to alternative language material emerging from new centres and partners. The site receives over one million page views per month.

Core technology This complex structure of material depends on sophisticated software to `spider’ partner sites for content, classify the material for the search engine and enable editors to build pages into the portal. The range of spider, search and authoring software tools represents the core technology platform at the heart of OneWorld’s output. A new generation of these tools is due for completion in autumn 2002.

The international dimension and IGG1 The OneWorld model attracted interest outside the UK. During 1997-8 spontaneous initiatives emerged using the OneWorld name, some under full control of the home company, others at arm’s length. The company attracted funding to establish small operations in Zambia, India and Costa Rica. Rapid growth of OneWorld distorted the balance of the parent organization, OWBT. The governance structure required revision.

The first International Governance Group (IGG1) was established in February 1999 to review and advise on the emerging network’s governance requirements. IGG1 reported in November 1999 to the Boards of OWBT, OWO and OneWorld Europe. Based on its recommendations, in December 1999 a new OneWorld International Foundation (OWIF) was constituted in the UK as the governing body to draw together the emerging global enterprise in the shape of `OneWorld centres’ – each being an autonomous organisation responsible for supporting partners within a defined geographical area and publishing local sites and editions.

The original OneWorld company was sold by OWBT to the new OWIF for a nominal sum and renamed OneWorld International Ltd (OWIL). Its governance would be by a Board of UK-based Non-Executive Directors, while the parent OWIF would govern the network as a whole through its international Board of Trustees. This remains the governance structure of the network today.

2 OneWorld centres

Definition The Memorandum and Articles of Association of OWIF define a OneWorld centre as `a centre which has entered into a Network Agreement with the Company’.

The Network Agreement (formal contract between a centre and OWIF [on behalf of the network]) states: `The Centre is an autonomous and independent association of individuals which intends to pursue similar activities at a regional level in the region/country.’ And: `The Centre has the legal capacity and necessary authority to enter into a legally binding Agreement.’

OneWorld’s Strategic Framework states: ` Centres are independent geographical groups dedicated to fostering the Aims of OneWorld through activities bound by this Strategic Framework. … It is envisaged that Centres will remain relatively small and efficient units, maintaining a balance between local and global interests.’

Aims The aim of having centres is implicit firstly in the three published aims of OneWorld and especially in the second and third aims of bringing together a global community through active online partnerships and of transcending geographic and linguistic barriers (www.oneworld.net/about/principles).

The aim of having centres is broadly understood within the OneWorld network as facilitating the benefits of working globally, in as close contact as possible with in-country partner organizations, in a range of languages, with accurate knowledge of regional and in-country issues, and minimizing centralization.

As OneWorld’s draft Strategic Objectives (March 2002, p.4) state:

OneWorld adopted the model of autonomous regional or national Centres principally for the following reasons: · Effective outreach of the work of OneWorld, in particular recruitment of partners and creation of content reflecting regional perspective. · Vehicle for devolving governance, this being consistent with OneWorld values.

Role, rights, responsibilities OneWorld’s understanding of the role, rights and responsibilities of centres is embodied in the following documents: OWIF’s Memorandum and Articles of Association, Criteria for New OneWorld Centres, Guidelines for Establishing a OneWorld Centre, Strategic Framework and Network Agreement.

These documents establish the following principles:

· Centres engage in three core functions: (1) partnership recruitment and management, (2) content production, focused primarily on the centre’s own and partners’ websites, and (3) supporting the network. `Supporting the network’ is not formally defined but is understood to include a range of functions, including the promotion of OneWorld products and participating in network-wide activities. · Full centres are or should be autonomous and self-governing in relation to OWI. · Each full centre is accepted in principle as having an equal voice in the decision-making of the network. · Centres `may enter into strategic alliance – ruled by a unique agreement - with organisations and networks’ (Strategic Framework). · `Each OneWorld Centre should be capable of an independently balanced budget with each business plan setting targets for %age of income to be derived from a diverse range of income generating resources’ (Strategic Framework).

Under the terms of the Network Agreement, each centre also:

· Is licensed to use the names, trademarks, logo, etc of OneWorld. · Nominates one or more persons for election to the OWIF Board of Trustees. · Is free to develop additional activities as long as they do not contravene OW’s Guiding Principles.

In addition, the relevant documents state or imply that centres are responsible for:

· Pursuing objectives, conducting activities, etc. consistent with OneWorld’s vision and values. · Following OneWorld’s Guiding Principles and acting within its Strategic Framework. · Collaboration in common languages: `Centres working in a common language will collaborate to bring content together in a shared format’ (Strategic Framework).

Current OW centres and main variations Up to May 2002 OneWorld stated in its promotional literature that it had 10 centres: OW Netherlands, OW Spain, OW Finland, OW UK, OW Africa, OW South Asia, OW Latin America, OW Italy, OW Austria, and OW US. (A small OneWorld edition has also been published under the name `OW in Germany’.) At the May 2002 OWIF Board of Trustees meeting, OW Latin America signed the Network Agreement as OW Central America, and OW Canada was admitted to the network. Excluding OW in Germany, there are therefore now (July 2002) 11 full centres, with two more (OW Brazil and OW Ukraine) due to be admitted to the network at the November 2002 OWIF Board meeting.

However, according to the formal definition of being signatory to the Network Agreement - and by implication being self-governing in relation to OWI and participating on an equal basis in network decision-making - the number of full centres is in fact just 8: OW Netherlands, OW Spain, OW Finland, OW UK, OW Italy, OW US, OW Central America and OW Canada.

Of the remaining 3 centres, OW Africa and OW South Asia are currently wholly owned by OWI, referred to internally as `offices’, managed by in-country teams and a OWIL-based Programme Manager, and funded via OWI. They are agreed to be working towards self-governance (by March 2003), although this has not been formally recognized by their joint signing with OWIF of a Letter of Intent (LOI: a document covering the process of a new centre beginning to work as part of the network but not yet admitted as a full centre).

The status of OW Austria was formally defined by the signing of an LOI in May 2002.

In different ways and at different times the three Southern `offices’ or `centres’ have sometimes taken on the role and functions of, and been considered as, full centres, and sometimes not.

All current OneWorld channels except for Media Channel are based at Southern offices and centres. The Digital Opportunity Channel is a joint project based at OW South Asia and the Digital Divide Network in Washington, USA.

The current model accepts in principle both country centres - i.e. 7 out of 8 current full centres - and regional or subregional centres, i.e. OW Central America and the two Southern offices at OW Africa and OW South Asia.

Centre boards and governance Of the 8 full centres, Spain, UK, US, Central America and Canada are subsidiaries of parent organizations, while Finland, Italy and the Netherlands are fully independent organizations, with their own governing boards.

A lack until relatively recently of information and documentation about centres’ own governance and their boards was partly addressed in preparing the `OneWorld Centres and Network Reports’ (agenda item 12) for the May 2002 OWIF Board. This document describes a variety of governance arrangements at the subsidiary and independent centres.

3 OneWorld International Foundation (OWIF)

Role and aims OWIF was registered in 1999 as a limited-liability non-profit-making company under English law. Its defining document - the Memorandum and Articles of Association - states that the objects (aims) of OWIF are `to advance sustainable development education particularly by means of multi-media broadcasting’.

Role As www.oneworld.net/about/foundation states, OWIF

· is the guardian of OneWorld's vision; · guides the direction of the OneWorld network, sets out the overall aims and values of the OneWorld network and oversees their adherence; · is the home of the international Board of Trustees; · wholly owns OneWorld International Ltd, a not-for-profit company carrying out the day-to-day support and coordination of the work of the network of OneWorld centres.

According to the Network Agreement: `The Foundation is the owner of the goodwill attaching to the names oneworld.net, OneWorld and OneWorld network in English and the corresponding names in all other languages … and is the registered proprietor of trademarks and logos associated with the Names.’

Under English company law, OWIF has a range of powers and obligations that are to be exercised collectively by its `members’. OWIF’s `members’ are in the first place the Trustees. See below under `Board of Trustees’. Some of their responsibilities are delegated to the OWIF Director and, through her, to other OWIF employees. See below under `OWIF team’.

Many of OWIF’s key functions were stated in the 1999 IGG1 Report (pp. 8-9) that led to the establishment of OWIF and OWIL: `to agree a broad overall strategy’; `to agree a 12 month working plan’; `to determine the basis for and receive the contributions payable by each of the centres’; `to provide an ambassadorial (networking and fundraising) presence’; to be OW’s `legal personality’; `to receive and disburse international grants and other charitable or covenanted funds’; `to accept or reject membership by centres’; `to observe English charity laws’; `to provide intellectual leadership to the network’.

Aims Until recently OWIF had no formally stated aims separate from those of OneWorld as a whole. However, as part of the business planning process in 2001-2, OWIF formalized its aims and objectives, and the following wording was approved by the OWIF Board at its May 2002 meeting:

Aims OneWorld International Foundation aims: 1. To be the custodian of the OneWorld network’s developing vision, values, identity and creative synergy. 2. To facilitate strategic and intellectual leadership for the network. 3. To promote the network’s vision, values and identity through external representation.

Objectives 1. To promote diversity across the OneWorld network, including in terms of geography, gender, language, and power status (`class’). 2. To strengthen bonds and creative synergy, and to maximize `network advantage’, across the network. 3. To ensure good network governance. 4. To provide support, leadership and external representation for the network. 5. To anticipate and address any significant problem that may affect the network. 6. To promote network-wide mutual learning.

Board of Trustees: composition, role, powers, responsibilities Composition According to the Memorandum and Articles of Association (M&A) of OWIF: `The business of [OWIF] is managed by the Board of trustees.’ The Trustees are, by law, both the `members’ and the `directors’ of OWIF. Oneworld.net states that the Board is:

· the governing body of the whole of the OneWorld network · composed democratically of trustees nominated (one per centre) by the network's centres around the world.

When OWIF was established in 1999, the model of a charity under English law was consciously adopted (see Minutes of the Inaugural Meeting of the Board of Trustees, held December 1999). This established that the Trustees would direct the activities of the organization. Although Trustees would be mainly nominated by the centres, they would not act as centre representatives on the Board but `act independently in the best interests of the Foundation as a whole’.

The `Appointment and Co-option of Trustees’ document states:

A Trustee of the OneWorld International Foundation should: · be a resident of or in the country or region covered by the Centre making a nomination · have substantive experience in one or more of the following fields: human rights, sustainable development, information and communications technology, media · have experience in governance … The Constitution states that: ‘Each OneWorld Centre shall nominate one or more persons for election to the Board. The Board of Trustees may call for further nominations and shall then elect one nominee from each OneWorld Centre to be a Trustee.’ … A bye-law of the Constitution adopted at the Board Meeting on 26 April 2000 states that: `Trustees shall be nominated and elected for a fixed term of three years. Following this, they may be re-nominated and re-elected for a further term of three years and in exceptional circumstances for one further year. No Trustee shall stand for a period longer than seven years.’ … The Constitution also states that: ‘The Board of Trustees may co-opt up to one third of the total number of Trustees onto the Board at any one time. In the election and co-option of Trustees the Board will use its endeavours to ensure that the Board has an appropriate diversity in terms of region, gender, and ethnicity.’

Similar criteria to those for nominated and elected Trustees will be adopted for the appointment of co-opted Trustees.

At the Inaugural Meeting of the Board of Trustees, December 1999, it was suggested that the term of office of coopted Trustees should be 2 years, with an option to be re-elected for a further 2 years (see minutes). This principle has not yet been formally ratified.

Role, powers, responsibilities The role of the Trustees is stated at www.oneworld.net/about/foundation:

· They are `the guardian[s] of OW’s vision’. · They guide `the direction of the OW network in its mission to harness the democratic potential of the internet to promote sustainable development and human rights’. · They set out `the overall aims and values of the network and oversee[s] adherence’. · They are `the governing body of the OW network’.

Key areas of Trustee decision-making responsibility include:

· election of new Trustees; · appointment of OWI Directors; · approval of terms of reference for Board-level positions and committees; · approval of appointment of OWI company secretaries and auditors; · appointment of OWIL Non-Executive Directors; · approval of OWI annual financial accounts, interim financial reports and annual budgets; · approval of OWI’s financial strategy; · approval of key network governing documents, e.g. the Strategic Framework and Editorial Standards, and terms of reference for network-wide committees; · admission of new centres - the Trustees `maintain a legally binding Network Agreement …signed by each applicant centre before the Foundation admits it … as a OneWorld International centre’ (IGG1 Report, 1999); · approval of major new initiatives, such as setting up an endowment fund or developing a new pilot project; · resolution of any important matter that proves insoluble by any other network body or mechanism.

It is understood that individual Trustees have a responsibility to bring to the Board issues arising from the centre that nominated them (or that they may be considered to representing through co-option) while simultaneously being `above’ any disputes between centres and basing their judgements on the needs of the network as a whole. Discussions leading up to and during the May 2002 OWIF Board meeting concluded that:

The Trustees’ terms of reference (TORs) should make explicit the responsibility to bring issues from their centre to the OWIF Board. Each OWIF Board agenda should specify a time for Trustees to bring forward these issues from their individual centres, which they will continue to resolve in a synergistic spirit. (Minutes, item 9)

Legal responsibility of Trustees The extent to which Trustees are legally responsible for the work of OWIL was raised in discussions at the May 2002 Board meeting and Foundation Forum. The issue had been raised at previous Board meetings:

Lindsay [Driscoll – OWI’s solicitor] explained that fiduciary duties under English law oblige the Trustees to act in a reasonable and proper manner; however, the Constitution protects the Trustees from any personal financial risk in respect of the Company’s debts. ... Louk asked whether the Foundation would be taking on any liabilities as a result of the transfer [of OneWorld Online Ltd from the OneWorld Broadcasting Trust to the Foundation, with a name change to OneWorld International Ltd]. Lindsay explained that any liabilities of OneWorld Online are held within the company itself and limited under its own Constitution. (Minutes of Inaugural Meeting of Board of Trustees, December 1999, items 2 and 10)

James was uncertain as to what responsibilities could be delegated to the lower board and requested that the division in both legal and decision-making responsibilities between the 2 boards be documented for practical reference. (Minutes of Fourth Meeting of Board of Trustees, June 2001, item 10)

During the May 2002 Forum discussions, the OWIL Business Director and Company Secretary stated his view that `the OWIL Board’s Non-Executive Directors took over formal legal responsibilities [for OWIL] once appointed by the OWIF Board’ (Foundation Forum notes).

OWIF team: role and responsibilities OWIF is staffed by its Director, Governance Manager, and Administrator. The team’s primary task is generally understood as supporting the OWIF Board in its governance role. At the same time, the Trustees see themselves as supporting the OWIF Director in her work. And informally there is a network-wide acknowledgement that the OWIF Director is, in moral rather than operational terms, the `leader’ of the network (in so far as leadership is invested in a single person).

During the 2002-3 business planning process the role of the OWIF Director – supported by the OWIF team, and jointly with the OWIL Director – in providing or facilitating leadership for the network was recognized as a core network service. Linked to this was recognition of the OWIF team’s role as the network’s policy unit, also accepted as a core service.

The job descriptions of the OWIF team include, among other functions:

· ensuring that OWIF operates within its M&A; · making recommendations to the Trustees on the acceptance of prospective new centres; · maintaining OneWorld’s written Guiding Principles and ensuring that the network operates in line with them; · monitoring observance of the Strategic Framework, and facilitating and monitoring observance and interpretation of OneWorld’s values; · establishing benchmarks and indicators for OneWorld’s aims and reporting progress to the OWIF Board; · proposing a broad overall strategy to be expressed in OneWorld policy documents; · liaising with OWIL to ensure close cooperation, including in coordination and support of OneWorld fundraising; · presenting proposals to the Trustees by which centres financially support the work of OWIL; · providing an ambassadorial presence for the network and its vision through production and dissemination of materials, visits, articles, speeches, presentations and interviews; · developing and sustaining a group of International Advisers.

A number of these functions are undertaken jointly with OWIL. See section 4.

4 OneWorld International Ltd (OWIL)

Role and aims OWIL is a not-for-profit company and the wholly owned subsidiary and operational arm of OWIF. According to the IGG1 report (p.9):

The Foundation’s day to day coordination with the centres would be carried out by its wholly owned company…The company’s aim would be to ensure OneWorld as a whole functions smoothly and effectively…In particular, the company would maintain and develop central technical systems…for the entire network. It would also coordinate the day-to-day contact with the centres, both in terms of editorial and partnership management, and would look after such editorial and partnership matters as fall outside the remain of particular centres – e.g. administering partners in , say, China or Australia, who do not yet have a local centre to attach themselves to. The company would also earn fees carrying out appropriate online production s for partners…

OWIL’s aims - until modified for the OWI 2002-5 Business Plan – were stated as:

· To be the agency for introducing Centres into the OneWorld family. · To be the provider of reliable and innovative internet technology relevant to the work of Centres. · To be the store of information and support for management of Centres. · To be the coordinator of oneworld.net and its equivalent in other world languages. · To be the agency for creating an impact of the OneWorld network which is greater than the sum of its parts. · To generate a surplus for the Foundation of 10% of non-grant income.

Modified for the Business Plan, the joint role and aims of OWIF and OWIL are now stated as follows (use of square brackets indicates aims that apply fully or in part to OWIF rather than, or as well as, to OWIL):

Role of OneWorld International · To deliver a range of technology and other functional services which benefit all Centres and create the basic resource platform for Centres to make their contribution to network objectives. · To pioneer, develop, and integrate new content and partnership products into the network.

Aims of OneWorld International · [[To be the custodian and advocate of the OneWorld Network’s developing vision, values, identity and creative synergy.]] · [To provide strategic and intellectual leadership for the Network and the OneWorld brand.] · To be the provider of reliable and innovative internet technology relevant to the work of Centres. · To be the pioneer and incubator for new internet products and ideas to further the mission of OneWorld. · To be the store of information and support for management of Centres. · [To be the agency for creating an impact of the OneWorld Network that is greater than the sum of its parts, and for introducing Centres into the OneWorld family.]

OWIL Board: role, composition, powers, responsibilities OWIL’s Board was established on the basis of the IGG1 report (1999, p.9) to have `a strong emphasis on practical experience relevant to the online environment’. In composition, the IGG1 report stated that it should comprise `1 trustee from the OWIF board; five non-executive trustees (experts in human rights, online journalism, etc.); 2 executive directors from the company’.

The `non-executive trustees’ have subsequently become known as Non-Executive Directors. Their criteria for appointment and Terms of Reference have not been formally defined. However, the OWIL Executive Director defined the role in a June 2000 email:

1. To represent an area of expertise … and to bring expertise of governance to our growing operation. 2. To attend at least half of the 4-6 board meetings a year and to give time to reading the board papers. Board meetings will be held in central London. In time there may be the possibility of occasional attendance by video conference link. 3. Beyond board meetings, non-executive directors' advice on particular issues and attendance at particular events will always be welcome but never required. 4. The appointment is for 3 years, with an option for renewal for a further 3 years. 5. Non-executive directors have equal voting rights with the other directors. 6. The role is unpaid, but reasonable expenses will be covered. 7. As directors of a limited company, the non-executive directors have the normal limited liability under company law, so long as they are not acting irresponsibly.

Further clarification of the responsibilities of the OWIL Board was provided by the OWIL Business Director during OWI Foundation Forum discussions in May 2002: `the OWIL Board’s Non-Executive Directors took over formal legal responsibilities [for OWIL] once appointed by the OWIF Board.’

OWIL team: role and responsibilities The role of the OWIL team is broadly, as quoted above from the Business Plan, to deliver technology and other `core‘ services to the OneWorld centres, enabling centres to make their contribution to network objectives, and to pioneer, develop and integrate new products into the network (R&D).

OWIL’s core and product services are defined in the Business Plan (May 2002 version for OWIF Board, p.13). Core services are essential to the work of all centres, while product services develop new ideas for prospective benefit of the network and are optional for centres.

Core services Following extensive consultations with Centre Directors during 2001-2, the Business Plan has come to identify OWIL’s core services to the network as:

· Leadership (delivered jointly with OWIF): centre support, policy, international networking. · Network coordination: network management structures, committee terms of reference, facilitation of `network effect’, monitoring strategic framework and network agreement, knowledge management, core service standards. · Evaluation: benchmarking and monitoring OneWorld core aims. · Strategic alliances: identifying, negotiating and maintaining key alliances, including potential competitors. · New centres: maintaining admission criteria and information pack, negotiating and coordinating launch of new centres. · Donor relations: maintaining ethical principles, network database and committee management. · Corporate relations: as above. · Technology: authoring system, hosting, email, search and spider, jobs database, partnership database, extranet, fault reporting and management, stats, interactive tools. · Promotion: visual identity and brand development, trademark protection, audience building, media coordination. · Partnership and membership: policy guidelines, product coordination, committee management. · Content: editorial strategy and principles, stats analysis, audience surveys, competitor analysis, product review, architecture, legal guidelines.

Besides leadership, several of these core services have in the past also been – and perhaps continue to be – considered part of OWIF’s role, e.g. with regard to `establishing benchmarks and indicators for OneWorld’s aims …’ – see above, section 3. The extent and implications of such potential areas of overlap have not been systematically assessed.

The Business Plan states: `the definition of core services will be reviewed annually by Centre Directors in the light of experience and shifting priorities’.

Product services According to the Business Plan (p.14):

Product development is critical to maintaining OneWorld’s position as the recognised provider of new technology applications to civil society and is an historic strength of the company. The direction of product development … will typically seek to raise the value of the partnership package so that more partners join OneWorld, encourage new categories of OneWorld partner, explore the potential of new technology and build audience.

Product development is seen as `a collaborative and non-exclusive process; Centres may themselves work with new ideas from the outset with OneWorld International playing only a supporting role’. All OneWorld product development is required to involve an exit strategy, to ensure that new developments are disciplined by, and integrated with, network requirements and to prevent unlimited expansion by OWIL. Each new product should, therefore, either (1) move from OWIL to a centre for lead agency responsibilities (if not originally led by a centre), (2) become a core service or (3) be abandoned.

The main products currently under development are:

· OneWorld Radio. · Thematic channels. · oneworld.net. · ItrainOnline. · OneWorld TV. · SouthEast Europe Initiative. · Yahoo syndication. · Jobs database. · Neutral Ground. · Open Knowledge Network.

5 Other parts of the network

International Advisers The Adviser’s TORs state:

…OneWorld International Foundation is gathering a diverse group of ‘expert friends’ … to be known as International Advisers. These Advisers … will be contacted on an individual basis as the need arises.

Role An International Adviser will: · have expertise in one of a wide range of development issues, e.g. media, grassroots activism, governance, economics, information management and law · offer specialist guidance to the Trustees and Directors of OneWorld International · offer their services pro bono in their individual, not organisational, capacity but will have no legal responsibilities · be prepared to offer occasional advice via email, voice chat or phone. An Adviser may also be requested to meet with staff, Trustees or other Advisers, but without there being any obligation to do so · allow their name to be used in stationery or publicity documents · be prepared to endorse OneWorld activities Appointment · International Advisers will be approved for appointment by the Trustees of the OneWorld International Foundation on the recommendation of the Director · Initial appointments are for three years and will then be reviewed by the Trustees. Further reviews will be made every three years thereafter · An International Adviser may leave at any time they wish · The Trustees may cancel an appointment if this becomes necessary in their view.

By June 2002, 23 people had confirmed in writing or verbally their willingness to be International Advisers after receiving a written invitation from the OWIF Director.

Partners The Strategic Framework states: `OneWorld partners are those organisations working in the fields of human rights and sustainable development, which meet the Partnership Criteria and have entered into a Partnership Agreement with OneWorld International or an independent OneWorld centre.’

OneWorld’s partnership principles are stated at www.oneworld.net/about/principles:

Partnership with OneWorld means membership of a community of organisations working from a range of perspectives and backgrounds to promote sustainable development and human rights. OneWorld aims for partnership to reflect no single orthodoxy, but to nurture debate and to value difference by promoting inclusive and participatory global communication.

Who can be a OneWorld partner? OneWorld assesses applications on a case by case basis using the following guideline criteria. · Organisations working in the fields of sustainable development or human rights. This may include publicising, campaigning, researching, debating or implementing work in these areas. · Branches, departments or projects that work in the fields of sustainable development or human rights as part of larger organisations with wider aims. However, where the wider organisation is seen to significantly contravene the aims of the OneWorld community, the application will be refused. · OneWorld gives special priority to partnership applications from NGOs based in the South. · In considering applications for partnership, OneWorld bases its definitions of 'human rights' and 'sustainable development' on key documents (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Rio Declaration, the Child Rights Convention and others) which offer guidance on these terms. However, these documents are not considered to be unquestioned authorities.

Who cannot be a OneWorld partner? · Organisations whose activities significantly contravene OneWorld objectives of promoting human rights and sustainable development will be excluded from the partnership. · OneWorld is supportive of change by peaceful means. Therefore organisations directly or indirectly involved in the use of violence do not have a place in the OneWorld community. · OneWorld embraces all human differences and cannot accept organisations advocating intolerance on the grounds of ethnicity, gender, disability, sexual orientation, or religion. · OneWorld cannot accept political parties. · Commercial organisations are not specifically excluded, but will be required to demonstrate how their activities will benefit the shared aims of OneWorld. · OneWorld also reserves the right to refuse applications on the basis of editorial judgements, including the quality, updatedness, relevance or presentation of information on a prospective partner's site. · Being a OneWorld partner brings an organisation into an ever-growing global network of organisations that share a common aim of using the internet to promote human rights and sustainable development and a shared vision and values.

By June 2002 OneWorld had an estimated 1,250 regular partners in 89 countries plus about 250 international OW Radio and OW TV partners.

Strategic and operational allies According to the Strategic Framework:

In order to significantly strengthen the impact of their work, OWI or an independent OneWorld Centre may enter into strategic alliance – ruled by a unique agreement - with organisations and networks.

OneWorld will form strategic alliances with organisations and networks whose activities are consonant with OneWorld’s vision and values. Network-wide alliances In practice, OneWorld’s network-wide strategic and operational alliances involve a diversity of relationships, some more formal than others, made chiefly by OWIL and OWIF. Formal memoranda of understanding (MOUs) are known to have been signed with APC (1999), Hivos (2000), Civicus (2002) and Netaid (2002). Other major relationships include:

· DFID, DGIS and SDC - strategic alliance with the governments of the UK, the Netherlands and Switzerland under the umbrella of the Building Digital Opportunities programme. · DOT Force – OneWorld has chaired the G8 Genoa Action Group on local content. · UN ICT Task Force – OneWorld invited to co-chair the working group on local content. · World Economic Forum – OneWorld has participated for two years, despite its reservations; OneWorld has been asked to chair a new subcommittee on local content/digital divide, with delegates from Sun, the World Bank, HP and Vivendi. · World Social Forum - OneWorld Italy has led with close contact with the organisers; OneWorld had a strong delegation in February 2002. · World Bank Development Gateway – dialogue about possible collaboration has continued, with important reservations on OneWorld’s part. · UNDP ICT Against AIDS Coalition – OneWorld is a founding partner. · Global Knowledge Partnership – OneWorld is a network member. · ItrainOnline partnership with APC, Bellanet, INASP, IICD, IISD. · Panos – operational alliance based on joint projects. · AMARC – as Panos.

In addition, in the words of the 2001 OWI Annual Report, `OneWorld enjoys a number of strategic relationships with technology, media and telecommunications companies who share our vision of a world without poverty and injustice…’ Private-sector organizations are generally considered below as `donors’. Also, content agreements have been signed with the media organizations Guardian Newspapers and Inter-Press Service, and a collaboration has developed with the management and technology services corporation Accenture through the DOT Force-backed OKN project.

Centre alliances OneWorld’s centres have their own independent strategic relationships. In one sense, the parent organizations of OW Spain, OW UK, OW US, OW Central America, OW Canada and OW Austria - respectively Fundación Un Sol Món/Caixa Catalunya, Panos, Benton, Acceso, Alternatives and Südwind – should be seen as indispensable strategic partners of the network.

In addition, OW Finland, OW Italy and OW Netherlands (which do not have parent organizations) and OW Canada (which does) have strategic relationships with the organizations that provide members of their respective governing and advisory Boards and that in some instances were involved in setting up the centre. In the case of OW Italy, Fondazione Fontana was the original parent and retains involvement, while for OW Netherlands the original parent NCDO similarly remains closely involved.

Other strategic relationships and institutional partners reported to the OWIF Board in May 2002 include:

· OW Italy: IOL, Vita, Italian and World Social Forum, Social Watch, Attac. · OW Finland: Kepa, Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. · OW US: Ashoka/Changemakers, Baido, CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Civilrights.org, InterAction. · OW Spain: CONGDE (Spanish platform on NGOs for Development). · OW Netherlands: OnzeWereld (OurWorld magazine). · OW Africa: Panos Southern Africa. · OW Canada: CIDA, IDRC, Bellanet. · OneWorld Radio SEE: Radio Refugee Network, Association of Independent Media (Yugoslavia).

Donors – governmental, corporate and third-sector sponsors The OneWorld network’s main current and recent donors, many of them listed in the OWI 2001 Annual Report and at http://www.oneworld.net/about/supporters/, include:

Governmental (`statutory’) · UK Community Fund · DFID (UK Government) · Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGIS) · CIDA (Canadian Government) · SDC (Swiss Government)

Corporate sponsors · British Telecom · Real Networks · Sun Microsystems · Cable & Wireless · Yahoo! (syndication agreement) · Young & Rubicam (pro-bono services)

Third sector · Ford Foundation · Hivos · Parthenon Trust

Considerable efforts are under way to widen the range of statutory donors – e.g. proposals to the European Union – and corporate sponsors. In the latter case, a variety of engagement tools such as joint projects are under consideration and development.

In addition, OneWorld centres have a range of current and prospective donors, including (as reported to the OWIF Board, May 2002):

· Local authority, the EU, private foundations (OW Italy) · UK DFID, NORAD (Norwegian Government), SIDA (Swedish Government), British Telecom (OW UK) · Benton Foundation (parent; OW US) · Caixa Catalunya (parent; OW Spain) · NCDO (OW Netherlands) · Hivos (OW Central America) · Austrian Foreign Ministry (OW Austria) · CIDA (Canadian Government; OW Canada)

Other stakeholders OneWorld has a range of target groups, supporters and end-users. Whether some or any of these groups can usefully be termed `beneficiaries’ is debatable. The term `beneficiary’ is seen by some to imply an old-fashioned, paternalistic, top-down `philanthropic’ approach to development cooperation, rather than the horizontal mutuality that is more in line with today’s thinking. This is despite the fact that governmental donors, for example, still tend to use the term `beneficiary’.

In an important sense, all OneWorld’s stakeholders – not least the teams and Board members - are the intended beneficiaries of improvements in human rights and sustainable development.

However, the statement – often made – that OneWorld is morally accountable to poor and marginalized people indicates that ultimately we see them as key stakeholders in the success or failure of our enterprise.

OneWorld’s Guiding Principles speak about a `global audience’ and `global community’. The OWI 2001 Annual Report defines the core audiences as:

· NGO professional staff and management. · Policy-makers and opinion formers. · Students, academics and educators. · Media and journalists. · General public from partner supporters to concerned citizens worldwide. · Children and youth.

We could also categorize OneWorld stakeholders from among the above more narrowly, for example as:

· Subscribers to OW centre edition and channel newsletters. · Participants in OW channel and centre discussion fora. · Users of the jobs and volunteers services, support centre and shop. · Organizations (mainly NGOs) paying for technology services. · Participants in training courses and workshops organized by OneWorld centres.