[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] On extending 3.5

[Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Colleagues,

During today's call Evan asked me a question regarding the the 
elements of 3.5.
These are:

   1. Least developed countries: category 199;
   2. Landlocked Developing Countries: category 432; or
   3. Small Island Developing States: category 722.

Where "category" refers to a UN DESA [1] reference.

I pointed out that had the .ps work-around not previously occurred, 
with this criteria we would not be able to distinguish a Palestine 
application from the Occupying Power, though Palestine, particularly 
Gaza, but also the West Bank and the refugee camps in the adjacent 
states, is economically distinct from a developed economy. I continued 
that with this criteria, no Native American or First Nation 
(Indigenous) application could qualify, and here in this note add that 
with the exception of Bolivia and Paraguay, as landlocked developing 
countries, and Haiti as a least developed country, the same result is 
likely.
As I observed in answering Evan's question, the utility of criteria of 
the form as is current in 3.5 is obvious.
Then there is the issue of an ALAC-co-chartered group exclusively 
relying upon the abstraction of Countries and States, which may suit 
the needs of the GAC in expressing the "public interest" as perceived 
by sovereigns, but omits non-state public interests, for which the 
ALAC was created as an advisory committee in the Corporation ByLaws.
Evan asked if I could come up with an additional criteria, and I have 
been writing a long note (now 6 pages) on the tax exempt bonding 
authority of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes in the United States 
to support a distinction between the economic capabilities of 
non-tribal public and quasi-public entities and tribal entities, 
again, in the United States. I'm in the process of adding to this a 
summary of the access to investment capital for First Nations in Canada.
My goals is a category statement similar in size to the draft criteria 
of 3.5 (a model for terseness, 10 words total, ignoring the category 
references), with a hideously long rational for the readers who want 
the full justification, by Monday.
Eric

[1] links courtesy of Rahman Khan John, in the call-time JAS Chat (via 
skype)
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/index.html
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_definitions.shtml
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/profile/