Scramble for Internet: you snooze, you lose | IGF 2023 WS #496

11 Oct 2023 00:30h - 01:30h UTC

Event report

Speakers:
  • Olga Makarova, Private Sector, Eastern European Group
  • Roberto Zambrana, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
  • Milos Jovanovic, Private Sector, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
  • Otieno Barrack, Technical Community, African Group

Table of contents

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the IGF session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed. The official record of the session can be found on the IGF's official website.

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Moderator 2

The discussions held at the Internet Governance Forum shed light on the ongoing struggle of Global South countries to ensure internet access and treat it as a basic human right. These discussions reveal a disparity in approaches to internet access and function between the Global North and the Global South. While the Global North countries have a different approach towards internet access, the Global South representatives focus on the fundamental aspects of internet functioning and the importance of internet as a fundamental human right. This discrepancy in perspectives highlights the disparities and challenges faced by countries in ensuring equal access to the internet.

Furthermore, following its withdrawal from the G8 in 2014, Russia has shifted towards aligning more with the Global South. Although specific reasons for this shift are not mentioned, this change in alignment could potentially impact Russia’s stance on global issues and its interactions with other countries in the future.

The discussions at the Internet Governance Forum offer a vital platform to address the crucial issues related to internet access and governance. By acknowledging and understanding the differing perspectives and challenges faced by countries in the Global South, there is an opportunity to bridge the digital divide and promote equal and inclusive access to the internet for individuals worldwide.

Moderator 1

The perspective of the global South is essential in discussions about fragmentation, particularly regarding technology and infrastructure issues. These countries often face challenges due to vulnerable infrastructure and poor internet governance, which can lead to frequent internet shutdowns. Such disruptions can have significant impacts on the economies, education systems, and overall development of these nations.

International cooperation is emphasised as a key approach to address these challenges. By promoting partnerships and collaborations, it becomes possible to ensure that all countries and regions have equal access to technological equipment and innovation. This is particularly important in bridging the existing digital divide between the global North and South.

Representatives from the global South tend to highlight the fundamental significance of the internet in discussions about fragmentation. They argue that access to the internet should be considered a basic human right, as it facilitates communication, access to information, and opportunities for socioeconomic development. Their perspective is influenced by the ongoing struggle to guarantee internet access for their populations, which is often hindered by various factors such as limited infrastructure, socioeconomic disparities, and inadequate internet governance frameworks.

It is interesting to note the stance of the Russian Federation in these discussions. Despite being geographically considered part of the global North, Russia has shown alignment with the perspectives of the global South. This shift in alignment became more noticeable after the country’s withdrawal from the G8 in 2014. It indicates that Russia is placing greater importance on addressing the challenges faced by the global South, particularly concerning fragmentation and internet governance issues.

In conclusion, the global South perspective holds significant weight in discussions about fragmentation, as these countries grapple with issues of infrastructure vulnerability and internet governance. International cooperation is crucial to ensure equitable access to technology and bridge the digital divide. The global South emphasises the essential nature of the internet as a basic human right, while the Russian Federation’s alignment with the global South highlights their shared concerns regarding fragmentation and the need for inclusive internet governance.

Roberto Zambrana

The internet was initially designed to connect the scientific and academic community, but it quickly expanded as people recognized the benefits and wanted to join for services like email and access to information. This early growth and widespread adoption of the internet marked a positive development.

However, as the internet continued to expand, issues started to emerge. One major concern was the security of the internet. With more users and an increase in the exchange of information online, there was a greater risk of cyber attacks and breaches. Governments also took actions that could be seen as leading to the fragmentation of the internet, potentially dividing it into smaller, controlled networks. These negative aspects raised concerns about the future of the internet.

Furthermore, the technical dimensions of the internet itself presented challenges. New protocols that altered the original architecture had the potential to lead to fragmentation. The introduction of the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) was a significant advancement that facilitated the growth of the internet. However, changes like these could also contribute to fragmentation if not carefully managed.

Another factor that could contribute to fragmentation is the lack of actions to provide internet services to everyone. In many parts of the world, particularly in the Global South, over half of the population remains unconnected to the internet. This lack of accessibility and the failure of stakeholders to take action to address it hinder the expansion and unification of the internet.

Despite these challenges, there is recognition that maintaining respect for internet sovereignty is crucial. The internet should be treated as an entity deserving of respect, and there should be active exchange and adherence to the principles on which it was originally designed. This positive stance suggests that upholding internet sovereignty is necessary to preserve the integrity and functionality of the internet.

In conclusion, the internet’s original purpose was to connect the scientific and academic community, but it quickly evolved as people sought to benefit from its services. However, challenges such as security issues, potential fragmentation caused by technical changes and government actions, a lack of actions to provide internet services to all, and the need to maintain respect for internet sovereignty have emerged. These issues represent significant hurdles that need to be navigated to ensure the continued growth, accessibility, and integrity of the internet.

Milos Jovanovic

Internet fragmentation is a complex issue that takes on three forms: Technical, Governmental, and Commercial. Technical fragmentation concerns issues with the underlying infrastructure of the internet, such as inconsistent network protocols and incompatible standards. Governmental fragmentation involves internet access and information flow being restricted by governments through censorship and content filtering. Commercial fragmentation involves business practices that prevent certain users from creating and spreading information, such as targeted advertising algorithms.

To maintain a sovereign internet, it is important to focus on critical infrastructure, ensuring the stability, security, and resiliency of the internet’s underlying infrastructure. This includes protecting information channels through encryption techniques.

However, geopolitical issues and interests hinder the development of a minimum common framework to manage internet fragmentation. Different regions hold different perspectives and approaches to internet governance, leading to fragmented development and lack of consensus.

Emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), Blockchain, automation, and 5G/6G networks also impact internet fragmentation. AI presents challenges in defining its boundaries and ethical use. The implementation of these technologies can either exacerbate or alleviate fragmentation, depending on how they are developed and deployed.

Internet fragmentation is expected to continue and deepen due to a multipolar world and shifting power dynamics. Challenges exist in parts of the world, such as Africa, that are less connected. Bridging the digital divide and ensuring equitable access can help mitigate the negative effects of fragmentation and reduce inequalities.

In conclusion, addressing technical, governmental, and commercial aspects of internet fragmentation, ensuring critical infrastructure, considering the impact of emerging technologies, and promoting global cooperation are necessary to manage and reduce the negative impacts of fragmentation.

Olga Makarova

The analysis delves into two main topics: technological revolutions and internet fragmentation. It asserts that these revolutions follow a cyclical pattern that can be predicted. The cycle begins with an eruption and frenzy, characterized by rapid growth and excitement surrounding a new technological advancement. This is followed by a crash, where the initial enthusiasm subsides, leading to a decline in the market. Regulatory intervention then comes into play, as authorities step in to establish rules and guidelines to govern the technology. Finally, the revolution reaches its ultimate maturity, where the technology becomes an integral part of society. Currently, the analysis posits that we are in the midst of the fifth technological revolution, referred to as the information and telecommunication age.

Moving on to internet fragmentation, the analysis suggests that this phenomenon can occur due to a combination of technological, political, and economic factors. The internet is described as a collection of interconnected but autonomous systems. Fragmentation, as the analysis points out, lacks a clear-cut definition, making it a concept that is difficult to pin down. It argues that fragmentation may manifest in various forms, leading to potential consequences for connectivity and access.

Furthermore, the analysis proposes the idea of employing mathematical models to gain an understanding of and predict internet fragmentation. It highlights an older model from 1997 that quantifies fragmentation in terms of distribution, intentionality, impact, and nature. The analysis expresses optimism about the potential usefulness of mathematical models in comprehending the complexities of internet fragmentation.

In conclusion, the analysis provides valuable insights into the predictable cycle of technological revolutions, specifically focusing on the current information and telecommunication age. It also explores the potential for internet fragmentation, noting its potential consequences on connectivity and access. Additionally, the proposal to employ mathematical models as a tool for understanding and predicting internet fragmentation adds another layer of interest to the analysis. Overall, it offers a comprehensive overview of these topics, shedding light on past trends and potential future developments.

Otieno Barrack

The analysis explores the topic of internet governance, with a particular focus on its relevance in the Global South. It highlights the fact that many nations in the Global South are utilising systems and solutions that were largely designed in the Global North. This reliance on infrastructure not specifically tailored to their needs has resulted in a number of issues, such as internet shutdowns due to weak infrastructure.

The rise of internet shutdowns in the Global South is a growing concern, as they have a significant impact on local internet economies. This emphasises the need for internet governance to be applicable at a local level, despite its global public good nature. Design principles specific to internet infrastructure in the Global South need to be considered to ensure effectiveness and reliability.

Investment in the correct technological competence is also crucial. The private sector must invest in the appropriate technological capabilities to prevent infrastructure compromise. Poorly executed investments in technological competence can result in significant problems and hinder the development and stability of internet systems.

Additionally, the government plays a key role in creating a level playing field for all actors in internet governance. Their involvement ensures that the interests and needs of various stakeholders are taken into account. By fostering a fair and inclusive environment, the government can help promote the stability and growth of internet systems.

The analysis also highlights the negative effects of internet shutdowns on both local and global internet economies. Studies have shown that these shutdowns incur significant costs that extend beyond the immediate disruption of internet access. This further underscores the importance of addressing internet governance issues and safeguarding the stability and accessibility of internet systems.

In conclusion, the analysis emphasises the importance of relevant and applicable internet governance at a local level in the Global South. It stresses the need to consider region-specific design principles, as well as the significance of private sector investment in the appropriate technological competence. The role of the government in creating a fair and inclusive environment for all actors in internet governance is also highlighted. Lastly, the detrimental impact of internet shutdowns on local and global internet economies serves as a compelling argument for addressing these issues and ensuring the stability and accessibility of internet systems.

Speakers

&

’Dr

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more

&

’Moderator

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more

&

’Moderator

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more

&

’Olga

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more

&

’Otieno

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more

&

’Roberto

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

words

Speech time

0 secs

Click for more