Hubs/Implementation/Regional Hubs Draft Plan/Interview 9

This page is part of the Implementation Report for Regional Hubs. It regards specifically Interview 9.

Background

Date: July 10, 2021
Duration: 1 hour
Profile: Wikipedia Editor - User Group Leader (active online and offline)
Region: Western Asia
Gender: Man
Interview language: Arabic

Questions and answers

1. How do you envision a hub in your region by 2030?

I see our regional hub as a small structure with a number of employees. Its main purpose will be the support of the local communities and help them in their administration and organization. I prefer that the hub is not 100% decentralized. There should be a tie with the WMF, and a degree of reporting to it. This said, the hub shall be independent to some extend for several reasons: (1) First it makes work faster and much more efficient and (2) it allows each hub to work with its own ways and policies, that are more adapted to the context where it operates.
The reason why I do not want to see the hubs 100% decentralized is because I would like to see the WMF as a hub of hubs, coordinating work, and also ensuring that no work is done in double in two different regions. The WMF can ensure a smooth coordination and collaboration between the hubs, which can prove being helpful.
One important question that needs to be solved is the funding. Each country and region have their own contexts. These are not always well understood from the WMF, who impose their policies and rules on all regions. A simple example is that providing gifts in cash is not accepted. I can understand that it is easy in Europe and USA to send Amazon gift cards, but in our regions we do not have Amazon, and we do not use gift cards, or even worse, Amazon does not deliver to our countries. This complicates things a lot for us, and discriminates winners living in some areas. Having a hub with staff from our region, understanding our context, and who can allow funds to be used according to it is a necessity for us.
In an ideal world, the hub should be legally separated from the hub, and have its own legal structure. This will help it to be independent from the American law, which is very beneficial for our community in the Arabic region.

2. What do you define as your region? How many hubs do you need?

I do not have a strong opinion about the subject, and I think that the choice for each region should go to the local community, who knows its context best, such as the culture, the language, and different ethnicities in the region.
In our specific case, I support the idea of one single hub in the Arabic-speaking countries. I mentioned earlier that I think that decentralization is good. I believe that this can be implemented even inside the hub, so that minorities do not feel overwhelmed by the majority.
I see many benefits in having one big and strong hub in the region, that can keep specificities for each country and area. The Arabic Wikipedia, with more than a million articles can be the central element of this hub, and gather the different actors of the region.

3. What will the roles and responsibilities of a regional hub be?

As you know, the Affiliates Committee is the structure responsible over affiliates of the movement. It is the entity that has enforcement power over affiliates, including asking them about their responsibilities. I think that it is the Affcom that should enforce this also coming to hubs. One of the problems with the Affcom is that it puts a lot of barriers but no solutions. I know for instance that they do not allow a chapter to stretch over more than a country, but on the same time, they do not offer other alternatives, and say that they cannot give the "hub" structure at this moment to a community that asks for it.
However, I do not think that it is the Affcom who will decide on what these roles and responsibilities will be. These has to be defined by the communities (and enforced by the Affcom).

4. How can we ensure that the regional hubs will not overlap with the local affiliates?

As I mentioned earlier, the regional hub would be a high-level coordinating entity, mostly supporting the community. It will not drive day-to-day projects, which will be the responsibility of local affiliates. The hub is facilitating and helping, but not doing the work that the groups would like to do. The hub can also be a mediator, and solve conflicts in the region.
For example, if we talk about the WikiArabia conference, it is the local affiliate that will be the main organizer of the event, but the hub can definitely support, especially with the heavy administrative tasks that overwhelm the volunteer team, such as visa preparation or hotel and flight booking.
In the countries without affiliates, the hub can have a very positive role, by encouraging the creation of local affiliates, and supporting the emerging leaders there to take more responsibilities in the future. This can even be one of the biggest arguments why we need regional hubs.

5. Do you foresee a specific location for the regional hub?

Unfortunately, most of the countries in our region have difficult political situations, and face many challenges. This affects even creating groups, and ensuring that all the community will be served if one location or the other will be served. If there is the possibility to have a hub in a neutral country (not in the region, but close to it), that could be an excellent initiative.
Logistically, it can be better to have the staff work remotely so that they can be distributed across the region. We saw that there is a possibility to work digitally and remotely with COVID-19. This can be a good alternative and avoid many problems.
The European Union can be an excellent reference example in terms of collaboration for the hub. I am specifically thinking about the weight each area/country shall have, based for example on its activity and number of editors.

6. How will the regional hub come into existence? Who should do what?

There is no magical solution for this. I think that the WMF should definitely be involved in this activity. Our voice as a community should reach the WMF and the Board of trustees, so that the decision makers can support us in creating a regional hub. The idea of a hub should become a reality in the minds of the Board, because they are the ones who take the decisions. The question is then: How to reach out to the board to ask them to enable us to create a hub? What do we need to do before?
A first step is to have an agreement within the regional community, at least on the highest level, so that this agenda can be pushed forward. Transparency is key, so that the community is fully aware about each step and action, and so that the volunteers see legitimacy in this process.

Key Takeaways

The regional hub would be a small structure with a number of employees. Its main purpose would be to serve the local community in "non-volunteer" matters. The WMF can be seen as a "hub of hubs", coordinate between these structures, and ensures a good communication and collaboration.
There should be one single hub for the Arabic-speaking region, centralized on the Arabic Wikipedia, but being decentralized and flexible enough to support the smaller projects and minorities in the region, and serve them as well. This is better than having many small hubs spread across the region.
One of the problems with the Affcom is that it puts a lot of barriers but no solutions. I know for instance that they do not allow a chapter to stretch over more than a country, but on the same time, they do not offer other alternatives, and say that they cannot give the "hub" structure at this moment to a community that asks for it.
Each country and region have their own contexts. These are not always well understood from the WMF, who impose their policies and rules on all regions, resulting in discrimination for some Wikimedians. Having a hub with staff from our region, understanding our context, and who can allow funds to be used according to it is a necessity for us.
In an ideal world, the hub should be legally separated from the WMF, and have its own legal structure. This will help it to be independent from the American law, which is very beneficial for our community in the Arabic region.
One important advantage of a regional hub is that our local communities will not "suffer" from being tied with a Foundation obliged to abide by the American law, given that many countries in our region do not see USA and organizations coming from it with a good eye.
In the countries without affiliates, the hub can have a very positive role, by encouraging the creation of local affiliates, and supporting the emerging leaders there to take more responsibilities in the future. This can even be one of the biggest arguments why we need regional hubs.
Logistically, it can be better to have the hub employees work remotely so that they can be distributed across the region. We saw that there is a possibility to work digitally and remotely with COVID-19. This can be a good alternative and avoid many problems.
The idea of a hub should become a reality in the minds of the Board of Trustees, because they are the ones who take the decisions. The question is then: How to reach out to the board to ask them to enable us to create a hub? What do we need to do before?