Internet Governance is emerging as a new, important global policy domain. Nevertheless, there is a total lack of consensus about how to define it, and an ample margin of ambiguity regarding both the concept of governance and the “boundaries” of the Internet. Since the early 90's, different actors have strategically produced different definitions of “Internet” and “Governance” to mark off sets of ... [Show full abstract] legitimated issues, actors and fora in the management of the Internet. In other words, definitions have been regulative resources activated by actors in their struggle for the governance of the Net. In doing so, they are traces of this power struggle that can be analysed through written documents.
This paper aims to investigate such definitional struggle through a content analysis of documents presented at the World Summit on the Information society in 2015, a focal point of conflict in the Internet governance global arena.
In these work I combined Hajer’s discursive methodology and discursive coalition framework with approaches developed within Narrative Policy analysis that have described analytically the structural elements of policy narrative.
The analysis led to the identification of four competing discourse coalitions: neoliberals, sovereigntists, constitutionalists and developmentists. Moreover, the investigation suggests that neoliberals and sovereigntists have been meeting on the terrain of cybersecurity policies.