Towards inclusive digital innovation ecosystems – do’s and don’ts and what next?

Towards a fair digital future: Experts discuss inclusive innovation at WSIS session

At a recent session titled “Towards Inclusive Digital Innovation Ecosystems,” moderated by Ms. Anita Gurumurthy, Executive Director of IT4Change, experts gathered to discuss the challenges and opportunities in creating equitable digital innovation ecosystems. The session was held in the context of the approaching WSIS plus 20 milestone and the persistent digital divides that pose a serious threat to inclusive development.

Dr. Shamika Sirimanne, Director of the Division on Technology and Logistics of UN Trade and Development, highlighted the dominance of the US and China in the data economy and the need for a level playing field through global data governance and regulation. She emphasised the importance of infrastructure, skills, and a shared understanding of data taxonomy and governance at the global level.

Ms. Vahini Naidu, Programme Coordinator of the Trade for Development Programme of the South Centre, discussed the impact of trade and intellectual property regimes on the policy discourse on data for development. She stressed the need for holistic discussions that consider development perspectives and the importance of international cooperation and inter-agency collaboration. Ms. Naidu also suggested that mandatory disclosures on digital transactions could help develop more inclusive governance.

Ms. Yolanda Martinez, Senior Project Coordinator of the GovStack Initiative from ITU, presented GovStack’s work in enabling digital teams in government to design user-centred digital services. She highlighted the potential of AI to democratise access to government services and the importance of open-source AI models for inclusive digital innovation.

Dr. Carlos Baca, an expert in ICT networks and community technicians from Rhizomatica, spoke about the importance of enabling environments for community-led innovations and the right to choose and access technologies that are relevant to them. He called for policies that support innovation at the edges and ensure community voices are included in decision-making processes.

Ana Neves, vice-chair of the CSTD, added that the key to the future is in the implementation and impact of technologies, advocating for countries to become producers and not just consumers.

The session concluded with the announcement of a dedicated working group by UN Trade and Development to engage in a multi-stakeholder dialogue on the fundamental principles of data governance, which was seen as a significant step towards a more equitable data-driven world. The experts agreed on the need for a comprehensive approach that integrates the right to innovate, respects diverse perspectives, and ensures that all countries and communities can participate as producers in the digital economy.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Good morning, everybody. This is a small but I think engaged group and we hope there are many more that are joining us online. My name is Anita Gurumurthy and I am Executive Director of IT4Change and I am extremely honored to moderate a session today titled Towards Inclusive Digital Innovation Ecosystems, Do’s and Don’ts and What Next. And the context of this I will just explain in a few sentences so that the bulk of the session can be with our esteemed speakers. The idea of innovation ecosystems is increasingly gaining traction because as we approach the WSIS plus 20 milestone, we notice that the divides in digital innovation present a serious challenge. And we know that a complex of technological and institutional capabilities from connectivity infrastructures to data, compute power, socio-economic policy choices and of course global governance mechanisms. All of these determine who builds innovation, who benefits from innovation, who gains, who loses and on the final score card what we actually see. These capabilities are also tied to rules and regimes because much of this is not just about the societal infrastructure but it is also about economic infrastructure. And so these rules and regimes that have shaped development in the international arena historically, of course human rights as well, include less discussed issues which we think are extremely crucial. These are trade, intellectual property, access and benefit sharing for natural resources, financing for development among others. So at this particular conjuncture it would really be very, very important to and also opportune to reflect upon appropriate digital governance processes. both globally and nationally to examine their implications for development and human freedoms. We have a short 45-minute session and we have four speakers. I’d like to just briefly introduce them but also request them to start off their pitch by also sharing a little bit more about what they do in relation to innovation ecosystems. Dr. Shamika Sirimane, Director of the Division on Technology and Logistics of UN Trade and Development. We also have Vahini Naidu, Program Coordinator of Trade for Development Program of the South Centre. We have Yolanda Martinez, Senior Project Coordinator of GovStack Initiative from ITU and we have Dr. Carlos Baca, who is an expert in ICT networks and community technicians from Rhizomatica. So I will get right away into the first question and this is for Dr. Shamika Sirimane. The question is very simple but I’m sure the answer is very profound. Shamika, what do you think are conditions that are necessary for a more equitable data economy?

Dr. Shamika Sirimanne:
You will have four minutes. Thank you, thank you so much. You know, when we talk about the equitable data economy, when we start talking about who is, we need to say who benefits now from the data economy, data-driven economy. And it’s very clear, it’s only two countries. It’s the U.S. and China and then you have the rest of the world. You see, together these two countries account for about half the world’s hyperscale data centers, the world’s highest rates of 5G adoption and almost 90 percent, they own almost 90 percent of the largest platforms in the world. So it’s basically a U.S.-China story and then you have the rest of the world story. And I think the concern that they, in fact, during COVID-19 and after COVID-19, they have been strengthening their dominant position along the entire global value chain, data value chain. It’s a collection of data, storage of data, processing and analysis of this data, gathering intelligence of this data and monetizing that this intelligence so created. So the story of the developing countries, I mean, except China, of course, is that they are concerned that they will become mere providers of data to these massive platforms for free, and then they will pay for the platforms to get back the intelligence that the platforms have created. So we have this very unequal dependence. So how do we make an equitable data economy? I think you started saying that, you know, we need the infrastructure, we need the capabilities, you know, they’re all very important, not just any old infrastructure, but we need a very fast, high quality connectivity to address the massive, you know, to deal with massive amount of data. And then, of course, you need the skills and so forth. But what is extremely important is to create a level playing field, and that can all be done by having global data governance and regulation. And this requires, it’s a massive area of work, it starts at the, you know, what the definition, the taxonomy of data, we don’t even know, we just say data. What are we talking about? Is it personal data? Is it, you know, within the personal data, you see what sensitivity of data we are talking about? Is it commercial data? And, you know, there’s a whole gamut of data, and we don’t know, we don’t have definitions. We don’t collect data, and there are no data sharing principles when it comes to the global issues of the, you know, pandemics, the climate issues. And, you know, how do we rein in the digital platforms? Once the platform is created, it’s very difficult for a developing country to come up with yet another Facebook. It will not work, because there are network effects that prevent them doing. And then, extremely important for all of us, our data privacy, data security, cyber security, you know, do I have the rights that I have in the physical world, in the digital world? So there’s a whole gamut of very diverse set of things on which we all need to agree at the global level. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Thanks so much. Have a great day, everyone. See you next time. Take care. Bye. Take care. Bye. Bye. Bye. is not a phenomenon, it’s not a local phenomenon. You know, data would cross borders increasingly. I mean, when I do something on Facebook, sitting somewhere, and, you know, my data is gone, and being analyzed, and, you know, looked into in the United States. So, you see what I mean? So, it has to be these regulations and the governance need to be global. So, we need all that to have an equal, you know, some equity in this data-driven world. So, let me stop here.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Thank you very much. I really appreciate this coming from UN Trade and Development, because I think we need to listen to much of this in, you know, in these August gatherings, and the issues of inequality and innovation are seldom spoken about. I’d like to now call upon Vahini and ask her the question with her long-standing experience in trade negotiations. Previously, Vahini used to be a trade negotiator on behalf of South Africa, but now she is with the South Center. Vahini, how is the trade and intellectual property regime shaping the policy

Ms. Vahini Naidu:
discourse on data for development? Thank you, Anita, and good morning, colleagues. So, essentially, what we’re seeing, you know, in the trade and IP environment is that there are a lot of new provisions that are entering the policy discourse on data for development, but they are having different kinds of impacts. So, we note that they are significantly influencing the policy discourse by trying to balance innovation incentives with also equitable access. Unfortunately, in practice, in terms of the actual provisions that are being negotiated in trade agreements, it’s not happening in the way in which we would like to see them kind of, you know, emphasize the digital industrialization and data for development components. So, for example, you know, in the IP regime, we are increasingly seeing a lot of provisions on the restriction or the prohibition on the disclosure of source code, you know, and so this is basically restricting governments from requiring the transfer of or access to source codes. And, in fact, this is actually stronger than the IP protection that the WTO requires under the TRIPS agreement. It also constitutes, for example, performance requirements under the TRIMS agreement. And we note that for developmental policy space, as Shamika has just mentioned, you know, governments, of course, need access to the source code for a variety of reasons, not limited to competition law, financial regulation, and in court cases, for example. as well as government procurement and technology transfer. But also in the trade policy domain, we are increasingly seeing provisions that are also trying to constrain data for development by requiring the unfettered transfer of cross-border data flows. Most notably, in the African continental FTA negotiations under the digital trade protocol, there are quite significant and concerning provisions in that agreement in which it is envisaged that there would be completely free cross-border data flows, non-disclosure of source code, prohibition of data localization requirements, as well as a completely deregulatory approach to artificial intelligence. And so to answer the question, I think that increasingly, we are seeing a narrowing of policy space through IP and trade policy regimes in terms of data for development. But just one promising area where we are seeing some kind of potentially positive developments, and that is the reference and the acknowledgement of the term digital industrialization in the WTO work program on electronic commerce coming out of the WTO MC-13. Being negotiated amongst a subset of members where we note that the U.S., for example, has withdrawn their support on some of the more contentious proposals, and these relate to cross-border data flows, source code disclosure, non-discrimination of digital products, and this is primarily because the U.S. Congress wants to rein in big tech and address competition and anti-competitive practices. So I’ll stop here. Thank you.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Thank you very much, Vahini. I think the note of promise also somehow seems to require us to do a little bit more on various issues, including… in relation to cross-border data flows, connecting, of course, to what Shamika said about the absence of consensus and definitions, and how do we move forward at a global level with standards with respect to what is data and what are the different types of data. The second issue is, of course, what is worrisome is also practices with respect to trade secrets, not just intellectual property in the conventional sense of patents, but also trade secrets. And this really stifles innovation capabilities, particularly of not just MSMEs, you know, that’s what we thought all along, but also large players from the developing South, because precisely owing to the network effects that Shamika mentioned, we actually see that there are enclosures already of data. So how do you really then begin to even talk about digital industrialization in the global South? So that is somewhat of a sobering reflection. And yet, I think there will probably be ways forward. And what we see in the WSIS Plus 20 review process here is the stupendous work of the UN agencies and the different action lines. And we are witness to the extraordinary efforts. We only hope as, you know, civil societies, scholarly organizations, we can forge something ahead that can push towards a strong mandate from the WSIS Plus 20 process for interagency coordination towards a more equitable future. I would like to then now call upon Yolanda to bring to bear upon all of this the most crucial question about the lessons we can draw from digital innovation for social and public value creation, because this is a very important and often forgotten dimension that, of course, there is the commercial value creation from data. But oftentimes, governments which really sit on top of such precious data sets want to create social and public value. And Yolanda, maybe what practices would be really… recommended for the WSIS plus 20 process in this regard for enabling conditions for equitable innovation.

Ms. Yolanda Martinez:
Hello everyone and thank you for the invitation to be part of this panel and I would like to build on my previous panelists have mentioned and we are today in an era where digital technologies can be the main difference and the capacity of government to leverage those digital technologies to innovate on how they tackle a development challenge is should be never it is in everyone’s agenda and what we do from GovStack is to enable digital teams in government to design digital services based on user needs on user journeys and on live events and we do this taking advantage of technology agnostic technical specifications and API definitions that facilitate one of the biggest lessons and challenges that we see in many countries around the world both global south and north which is interoperability and how we facilitate data sharing across many different ministry and sectors in government to really create seamless experience and proactive services is very different having to go to many government websites to access services than to receive a text message in your phone once you have 65 years and you’re ready to retire that says congratulations Yolanda you have reached 65 years according to our legislation in country x you’re entitled to a pension you don’t need to do anything please validate your bank account and you’re going to start receiving your pension next month. I come from Mexico and that service that now I explained to you in seconds in reality takes a lot of paperwork to showcase that you have reached 65 when the government has my birth certificate. A lot of paperwork to justify that you work in many different entities and that you compile enough resources to have a pension. We are in 2024. The more we use digital technologies to democratize access to government digital service that make the life of citizens easier, fosters innovation. If we want to encourage entrepreneurship, but we put a lot of barriers for young people to open up companies by having to carry out many documents from one entity to another. If you had to go to a notary, pay sometimes more than a thousand U.S. dollars to be able to open a company, that’s a huge barrier. And all those bureaucracy takes a lot of time that should be delivered, that should be devoted to innovate. So I invite all of you to become familiar to what we’re doing in GovStack. We work in four verticals. Number one, technical specifications to save a lot of time to developers by drafting functional requirements, API definitions for the most common reusable software components in any government services, identity, payments, information mediator, security, registries, scheduling, messaging. And together with those 11 technical specifications, we have a sandbox. And in the sandbox, we have more than five open source digital software products that are compliant with the specifications that showcase many different use cases. Our aim is to really shorten significantly from service design concept to quick prototyping within weeks. We launched last year a global challenge, especially targeting women working in digital government teams. We were surprised with the reception of this type of initiative. 240 women applied. We selected 139, representing 59 countries. We trained them eight weeks on all the GovStack offering and resources, which everything is open source and available to be reused, and 14 teams were able to create 14 prototypes that all of you are welcome to explore. We’re launching today at 4, the GovStack eLearning Hub, with the objective to facilitate access to these resources, and a global certified program for GovStack architects aimed to facilitate for any solution architect, a person both in public and in private sector, to leverage of GovStack resources. So very much looking forward to get to know which organizations represent and how we can leverage all these resources and create better partnerships for us. Thank you. Thank you so much, Yolanda. I

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
think, you know, we just waited and waited for this kind of international, you know, coherent framework for governments, because many governments in the past 10 years have struggled to achieve the kind of cross-ministerial integration, which is so based on simple protocol standards and this international initiative to, you know, bring all of them on a platform and enable that kind of thing, with, of course, debates and deliberations on human rights and other issues of public participation in the construction of these standards, I think is a very important initiative. Thank you for sharing more. We will, of course, look up GovStack. But on that note, I think one of the most crucial voices here is from the community end, and I invite Professor Carlos Baca to talk about what is it that is often missing in these debates on digital innovation from his own experience. I also invite Ana, who is the chair of the CSTD. Welcome. Thank you so much for joining us today. And we hope at the end of the first round, you could perhaps make an intervention, and then we will continue the

Dr. Carlos Baca:
second round. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for having me here. It’s very important. to make these discussions and also to include the ways in which the communities are making their own innovations. We need to depart from this that the communities for so many years have been doing the necessary innovations to sustain their lives. And that’s why they are continuing existing, a lot of indigenous communities and we have these beautiful, beautiful territories that is part of the essential future of the humanity. So yes, we have a very, very big challenge because a lot of people still don’t have access to digital technologies. It’s a lot of people, it’s not a few people, it’s a lot of people. So a lot of the topics that we share in these discussions need to depart from that, that a lot of maybe one-third of the population are not connected. And not connected because the hegemonic model doesn’t work for everyone. This is another key issue. There are different ways to live and these different ways of life need to be part of these new models of how we integrate the people to the digital society. And for that, it’s important to depart from the idea of innovation, of connectivity, of access, of the main concepts that we are talking about. And for example, talking about innovation, we always think that it will be something that we can scale and massive technology in which everyone can participate in it and we can escalate the projects. When we talk about innovation in the community, we are talking about solving problems. that they are facing in the reality today, no? So I will give you two examples, no? One of these is in the Sierra Norte in Mexico, sorry, in the Sierra Traumata in Mexico, in the north of Mexico, they have these radiocitos chismosos, they call it like this, like this is some radios, like the police radios, no? They used to communicate each other, but they don’t have enough battery and they, a lot of the communities don’t have electricity. So what they invented was a system with a lot of batteries, no? They don’t, AA batteries, Duracell battery, and make their own system to maintain charges for several days. So this was an innovation. But other one is one of the communities receive a TV transmitter, and they say that, oh, this is really nice. They try to make their own community television. But after some years, they detected that this is not, this wasn’t a good idea because they need a lot of resources to make a television, no? So they transform one of the people there who used to work in the electricity issues, a works and a repair the transmitter and make it for radio, for FM radio without any knowledge, previous knowledge. So this is two kind of innovations that are a part of this long history of community communications, no? And there is a lot of learning there that we need to take in account. But now we have other kind of innovations. So one of the most amazing cases I have the opportunity to know is the HIKO Media. They are a community. Radio in New Zealand, and they are helping through a training algorithm for natural algorithm processing to rescue the Maori language. Not only the Maori language in the dictionaries, but also through all the archives that they have through the years of the programs in their own language. So they are using now AI to do that. And another case is one of the projects that we are implementing from Resomatica that’s called Hermes. And Hermes is a radio network in which we can transmit data, a very few data, maybe an email and photograph some kind of this information. We needed to make this innovation because in regions like the Amazon or the Sierra Tarahumara or these type of regions where the communities are very small and very far between each other, the technologies that we have now are not enough. So we needed to implement a technology that can transmit information very, very far with a low cost and with a low difficulty to use. So Hermes now is installed in the Amazon region, also in Sierra Tarahumara in Mexico. But just two weeks ago, we installed the same technology for community fishermen fishermen in Bangladesh. So this is very useful for a lot of things. For example, when the people get hurt in the lakes, so they can share a photograph or they can use it for a to say how many foods and goods they have in the community. So they can ask, for example, for that or to reach. veterinary to help them to the animals. So just to finish, sorry, just two ideas to finish. So we need to rethink the idea itself of innovation, connectivity, etc., and include these other types of understanding that. And one of the main things that we always talk about, but it’s very difficult to implement in the reality, is that we need to relate all the innovations with social processes and real needs in the community. This is part of the key.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Thank you very much. And with that, I would also like to add that there have to be appropriate legal policy regimes that encourage innovation at the edges, because without that, it’s going to be extremely difficult. So thanks for bringing that up. We want to go into a second round and a quick round, but a very significant round on what next for an agenda on digital

Ana Neves:
innovation capabilities. But may I call upon Anna-Christina Neves, who is the chair of the CSTD, to perhaps speak to this question for a minute on how you think that in the digital services plus 20 agenda, we should integrate the right to innovate perspective. Good morning, Anna Neves. I’m the vice chair of the CSTD. Your question, well, is a very good one, of course. And my answer to that is, for the time being and where we are in 2024, is to now that we have a map of the most important technologies that will impact our lives and that impact companies and impact our societies. I think the time is innovate in the way how we implement these technologies. the way we impact. Two days ago, I’ve been asked, what do you think is the best architecture for internet governance? And I said that now it’s the moment to better understand how to implement, how to impact. So it’s a matter of how to perceive these technologies and how we could use them in the most inclusive way for all the countries become producers and not consumers. And so the implementation is now, I think, the key word for the future, for the very short future. So I think that when we think how to implement, how we are going to use this technology, how it can be used and how can I use it with a mind to produce or to implement a service. In that way, you are innovating. So much more important than to think about the governance now, I think it’s the way we are going to implement. So to implement this for this country to become a producer, for this country to develop a service, what we have to do to implement, to impact. So I think that implementation and impact, it’s the best way for us to see the future because then we will be innovating. It’s not only words but implement and impact. Thank you so much for that. I think, Shamika, this may be a useful segue to bring you in. on the next steps towards a well-governed data regime? Of course, if he knew the answer, we wouldn’t be here,

Dr. Shamika Sirimanne:
but over to you. Thank you. Thank you, Anita. Let me start from what Anna said, because what Anna said was a conversation we had at the CSDD. How do we make sure that this data-driven work will be inclusive? And there was a whole theme on data for development in the last CSDD. And this is the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, ECOSOC Commission, and that Anna then chaired. And the commission also used its convening power to bring all the UN agencies who are working on bits and pieces of data governance. So ITU was there, the WHO, you know, there was UNESCO coming and talking about AI for ethics, and then the human rights that was represented. And they can, the CSDD convened the entire, which is doing. Now at the end, and we had a resolution, and which is an extremely resolution, I think it’s an historic resolution. And the member states asked CSDD to establish a dedicating working group that would engage in a comprehensive and inclusive multi-stakeholder dialogue on the fundamental principles of data governance at all levels as relevant to the development dimension. So this work will begin soon. And if you need a governance, and you need to agree on the fundamental principles, and based on that, then you can develop, you know, various aspects of regulatory and governance approaches at the global level. I think this is the foundation. So this work, we will begin. I think it’s very good. It’s a multi-stakeholder, because the commission knows how to work in a multi-stakeholder fashion. I mean, honestly, I have worked in many parts of the UN, And I was quite surprised in a very positive way when I started to work for the Secretariat of the Commission, that the Commission is really a multi-stakeholder place. And even when we negotiate, as you know, I think you’ve been with the, you know, WG-EGS, the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation, you know, there is the space for all the communities, the civil society, the academia, and other experts to engage with the Commission. So I think this is a good beginning. And we should give a big hand to our Anna, because she was the chair of the Commission at that point in time.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Thank you so much. And I think this is extremely important. We’ll track the resolution. And hopefully, you know, this will see, and I think I didn’t know about this information. Thank you for sharing this. I’d like actually Vahini to address this, because I, what are the immediate imperatives at the multilateral level, because there is data, and in relation to data are many other regimes. And we really need to achieve, for instance, in financing, in trade, in intellectual property, in order to benefit, in order for data revolution to benefit equity in the world, we really have to address many imperatives, and I would like you to weigh in on that.

Ms. Vahini Naidu:
Thank you so much. You know, it’s very interesting to have heard these prior interventions. And I think one of the biggest challenges in the trade and IP domain is that these very hardcore rules are being locked in, you know, in these systems, and they are legally binding rules. And I think these holistic discussions to see the overlaps and the interlinkages to bring about more inclusive development in the digital economy is not really being addressed in a very effective or meaningful way. And so I guess the first kind of recommendation that I would put on the table would, of course, be to enhance international cooperation, interagency collaboration, you know, for looking at these issues in a more holistic way and not particularly in a very mercantilist way. You know, one of the immense challenges we found in the negotiations, for example, in the African Continental FTA on the digital trade protocol was essentially that the rules were being driven by big corporate interests, by big foreign corporate interests, and not necessarily, you know, African development policy interests in terms of, you know, trying to bridge the digital divide, trying to incorporate industrial development through the digital economy, et cetera. And so I think it would be really important that we look at these rules being very fit for purpose for the particular countries in which these rules are being developed. And I also think linked to this notion of implementation and impact will also be, it will be very, very important to enhance meaningful cooperation. And in this respect, you know, the implementation capacity should be, or rather the linking the implementation or your ability to implement digital trade rules should be linked to your implementation capacity. And if you do not have it, then I think better terms of engagement and agreements should be developed amongst like-minded countries, for example, to ensure that there can be, you know, better conditions for technology transfer for enhanced cooperation. And I think finally, I would like to just emphasize that one of the low-hanging fruits is also this notion that a lot of information or the global digital landscape is unknown in many, many developing countries. And I think the disclosure of data at an international or multilateral level will be really important. So from a trade perspective, for example, we note that many of the activities, the transactions, the revenue, the electronic transmissions that are being conducted by technology corporations are not really collected. And so we don’t really know the true extent. And if there was some kind of, you know, mandatory disclosure or some kind of requirement in which we had more information about the digital economy, then we could develop rules that are actually fit for purpose and would actually potentially lead to more inclusive data for development governance. Thank you.

Ms. Yolanda Martinez:
Thank you for those extremely concrete suggestions, Vahini. I’m sure the proposed exercise that the CSTD is undertaking will hugely benefit from those because they directly connect to the development question. I’d like to pose the next question to Alanda. What do you think is the next frontier for emerging technologies? for digital inclusion? How do we revolutionize digital inclusion? I’m very fascinated but interesting with what digital technologies can bring because at the end as has been said before implementation and impact is what makes a difference and I think today thinking on the new generation of digital government services AI came to play a very democratizing role and what we aim in GovStack is to complement foundational building blocks meaning built on top of identity interoperability payments etc a ledger of open source AI models we run a hackathon with the colleagues of the open source enabler ecosystem project which is also part of the digital services division in ITU and the objective was to make an open call to startups and developers to use open source retrieval models to better explain different government procedures and I’m very fascinated with what this opportunity brings in terms of for example people with disabilities that may not necessarily have the opportunity to use a hardware right but they can use natural language I’m very fascinated with the opportunity that that brings in terms of inclusion as I mentioned before I am from Mexico and in Mexico we have 68 indigenous languages officially recognized so having the opportunity to use your own language to interact and to access very basic information about how to request a government service I think is a is an amazing opportunity with that comes an important element of building capacity to be able to train local governments, state-level governments, national governments on how to use the benefits of all these toolings in respecting privacy and human rights. So, on that note, I think the exercise that ITU together with UNDP had been doing in terms of DPI safeguards plays a very important role in providing a global framework that then you can leverage with Costa to make it very action-driven and very easy to implement. A very important element is to never lose sight that technology is just an enabler. It’s very important to always understand the community context the end user needs because it’s very different to design a service in a rural community in Mexico than in a very complex area like Mexico City. So, I think all that into play, the main objective, at least what we do in GovStack, is to really leverage a standard-based technology agnostic technical specification, make it extremely easy for digital teams to deliver. But, of course, you need context and you need sectorial experts to leverage all those resources to make meaningful, and customizable services to user needs.

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
Thank you very much. I already feel quite hopeful and optimistic, but I mean, knowing that these initiatives are also being rolled out through sandboxes, training programs, local government ability to define what they want to do is really, really encouraging and emboldening. And on that note, I would really like to pose a question to Carlos on the appropriate policy conditions for innovation at the edges. And when we mean edges, we don’t only mean the technical community, but we mean communities that are in the real world that do not necessarily need to know a lot of technology to be able to be part of the innovation ecosystem.

Dr. Carlos Baca:
Thank you, I will try to be very short with this answer, but yes, the communities need to have this enabled environment, not only to develop their own projects, but also to access to relevant content to produce this content and to share this content, for example, to access to services to know it is really, really, really important. Also to have the conditions to decide or to choose what technologies are important for them, to choose what technologies are important to them, they need to have the opportunity to access to the technologies. So this is really, really important. For that, it is also important to build a scenario in which capacity building, innovation, and collaboration with the tech community are part of the discussion and the communities can access to these things. And also in the capacity building, how to learn from their learning processes, and how we can include in our capacity building regime, something that is useful for them. We think also that we also need to depart from the right from this connection. A lot of communities don’t want to be connected, as we understand connection. So this is really important. And finally, we think that it is important to talk about accessibility. As Yolanda mentioned, there are very different ways to use and to access technologies and to appropriate the technology. So it is very important to talk about not only connectivity and access, but also accessibility to the technology. For that, the communities need to learn from each other. be part of the design in different kind of levels and involving, but they need to be part of this. And finally, for this WSIS 20 plus 20 review, we think that it is really, really important to include them in the conversations, to include the communities here, but not here at itself in this kind of spaces, but more how to reach the information and to let them have an important voice in the forums and the decision-making spaces that they have. 20 years ago, they have a forum in which the communities participate and they find a lot of things that we are now using for these kind of projects, but we need to do the same this time to implement this kind of action. Thank you for an excellent conversation to the panelists. I just

Ms. Anita Gurumurthy:
wanted to posit a few takeaways for people in the room. And I think this is one of my favorite sessions, not only because we are here, but I think this is important to the conversation because these bring up some meta principles. First is how can all countries and people become producers? It’s been an old question, but it’s equally relevant today from the WSIS. The second, I think, is the important information from UN trade and development that member states have now dedicated themselves to authorize a working group, which is multi-stakeholder, to dialogue on the fundamental principles of data governance as relevant to the development dimension. And this links back to what Vahini was saying, that we need a holistic discussion on development. We’re not only looking at competitive growth, but we’re also looking at non-mercantilist public value creation in societies, with better terms of engagement for developing countries. And certainly, one very unique idea that Vahini proposed, that we often talk about platforms, information at national levels. How about if we think about a framework through which disclosures are necessary globally? This ties back to a lot of work that UNCTAD has been doing on standards with respect to data governance definitions and taxonomy. Only when you have information from the private sector, can you actually build this in any meaningful manner and therefore mandatory disclosures may be important on transactions, electronic transmissions, etc. I also really love the idea of open source AI models, which allow you to plug and play and build through and allow many communities, including women engineers and women scientists to participate. And thank you for bringing up the natural languages example. I think accessibility is extremely important and the role of sectoral experts. So health is not the same as education is not the same as transportation. And there is a whole lot of expertise in our economies and societies. So we really need to integrate. And finally, Carlos’s caution that, you know, we don’t form the community, that there needs to be an enabling environment for the entire debate to be defined in a manner in which accessibility perspectives, standpoints and worldviews that are alternative also need to be tabled. Thank you very much for staying with us and a round of applause to the excellent panelists. Thank you very much.