Uncategorized

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Pavlina Ittelson, Executive Director, Diplo US

The European Commission has launched a new initiative called Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE), led by the Diplo Foundation and funded by the European Commission. This project aims to enhance civil society participation in international Internet governance (IG) processes, with a particular focus on the Global South. The goal is to address the challenges faced in IG, including the fragmentation of forums, lack of capacity and understanding of human rights impacts, and the requirements of technological development. The initiative seeks to promote a more inclusive approach to Internet governance by involving civil society in a multi-stakeholder manner, allowing for the inclusion of diverse perspectives. By doing so, it can bring attention to issues such as women’s rights, language and culture aspects, and the rights of indigenous groups, which are currently underrepresented in Internet governance forums. The lack of diversity and inclusion within specialist standardization bodies is also highlighted as a concern. Efforts should be made to address these disparities and ensure that a wider range of perspectives are considered in decision-making processes. Capacity building, grassroots participation, and engagement guidance are identified as key areas requiring attention for civil society organizations to effectively contribute to IG processes and advocate for their interests. Partnerships between civil society organizations from the Global North and Global South are encouraged to facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration for a more equitable and effective approach to Internet governance. Trivial technical solutions are seen as potential remedies for scalability issues within IG, such as replacing challenging anti-bot measures to improve accessibility and user experience. Opportunities for public engagement are found in the environmental sector and youth rights, where public involvement can contribute to progress. While collective input from civil society organizations is valuable, it is important to strike a balance between collective action and the preservation of diverse opinions and perspectives. Ensuring that diverse voices are included is essential for effective decision-making processes. Collaboration between organizations and network building can greatly benefit civil society by amplifying their impact and creating a stronger collective voice. Navigating participation procedures in various international bodies remains a challenge for civil society, but strategic engagement in specific forums can help achieve their goals. Long-term involvement and understanding trends are considered crucial for success. In conclusion, the CADE project aims to empower civil society and promote their active participation in international Internet governance. Addressing the challenges of fragmentation, capacity building, diversity, and inclusion is crucial to achieving a more inclusive and effective approach to Internet governance. Through partnerships, collaboration, and strategic engagement, civil society can play a significant role in shaping the Internet’s future.

Viktor Kapiyo, Member of the Board of Trustees, Kenya ICT Action Network

Civil society organizations from the Global South face various challenges in their work. One major challenge is the difficulty in accessing global processes due to financial barriers. These organizations often lack the necessary resources to participate in international meetings and forums, limiting their ability to have their voices heard on important issues. Additionally, the limited internet reach in the Global South further exacerbates this problem, hindering their ability to engage in online discussions and access relevant information. Furthermore, there are only a few organizations in the region that focus on internet governance, isolating the voices of civil society in these discussions.

However, there is a positive sentiment towards the need for awareness and capacity building among more people in the Global South. The Kenya School of Internet Governance has played a critical role in this regard, having trained nearly 5,000 individuals on internet governance in just six years. The idea is to make internet governance conversations accessible to everyone, acknowledging that anyone with an email is a stakeholder. This approach recognises the unique contexts of local organizations and aims to amplify their voices in global discussions.

Collaborative approaches and coalition-building are also considered crucial in the field of digital rights. By forming partnerships and working together, organizations can address the lack of linkages that previously existed across various digital rights organizations. This collaboration allows for collective problem-solving, knowledge exchange, capacity building, and resource leveraging. By combining the competencies of different organizations, particularly in terms of physical presence and understanding local dynamics, their collective impact is strengthened.

Additionally, partnering with organizations from the Global North can benefit those in the Global South. Global North organizations often have established relationships with policymakers and a better understanding of local dynamics, which facilitates the presentation of views by Global South organizations. Such partnerships also lead to capacity building and knowledge exchange. Global North organizations possess technical resources, such as ICT skills, which Global South organizations can leverage to enhance their work.

Funders also play a crucial role in strengthening civil society organizations. However, disjointed and fragmented funding can create problems for these organizations. Global South organizations often find themselves competing for the same funds to address similar problems, hindering collaboration. Moreover, funders’ goals do not always align with the specific needs of organizations in the Global South. Therefore, it is essential for funders to coordinate their goals and understand the dynamics of Global South organizations to provide effective support.

Building good relationships with legislators and demonstrating expertise is crucial for civil society organizations when trying to influence legislation. It is important to establish these relationships before submitting views and demonstrate the potential value that the organization can bring to the legislative process.

Working collaboratively with other civil society organizations and presenting a united front can add weight to arguments. This approach demonstrates strength in numbers and increases the impact of advocacy efforts.

Finally, being prepared for potential counterarguments and understanding the local context are crucial for civil society organizations. By being well-prepared, organizations can effectively respond to opposing arguments and address the specific concerns and needs of their local communities.

In conclusion, civil society organizations from the Global South face various challenges, including limited access to global processes, internet reach, and organizational capacity. However, there is a positive sentiment towards the need for awareness, capacity building, and collaboration. Partnering with organizations from the Global North, coordinating funders’ goals, building relationships with legislators, working collaboratively, and being prepared are essential strategies for strengthening civil society organizations and making a meaningful impact.

Marlena Wisniak, Senior Advisor, Digital Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit ‎Law Stichting

Stakeholder engagement is considered a vital component of policymaking at all levels. It emphasises the need for collaboration, iteration, and inclusivity, ensuring that stakeholders’ voices are heard and that they have influence over the decision-making process. However, there is a clear power imbalance between stakeholders, hindering inclusivity in policymaking. This asymmetry of power is evident in the unequal playing field between civil society, the private sector, and states, as well as regional disparities and safety issues that impede activist participation.

To address these challenges, transparency in stakeholder engagement is essential, ensuring public visibility of participation mechanisms and discussion outcomes. Proper resourcing, including financial contributions and trainings, is crucial for effective multi-stakeholder participation, particularly for marginalized groups and non-digital rights organizations.

Participation in standardization processes, especially in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), is complex due to its technical nature. Civil society’s limited representation in standardization bodies, with a disproportionate focus on digital rights organizations and AI expertise, hinders diversity and inclusivity in these processes.

Global North organizations can learn from global majority-based organizations to incorporate diverse perspectives. However, stakeholder engagement faces resistance in many countries outside the United States and Europe, requiring innovative advocacy strategies.

International governance mechanisms may have limited influence in the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) but greatly impact national regulations within the global majority. UNESCO guidelines and recommendations from entities like the United Nations (UN) shape national regulations, though enforcement can sometimes become problematic.

The diversity of civil society and the global majority, including different languages and cultural norms, should be considered in policymaking and stakeholder engagement processes.

In the context of internet governance, there is a need for more inclusive perspectives. Incorporating learnings from initiatives like the Digital Services Act (DSA) Human Rights Alliance is important in shaping international internet governance.

While inclusive informal networks exist, coordination among these networks proves challenging, impacting effective stakeholder engagement and collaboration.

Privileged and well-networked organizations have the advantage of exposure and influence, creating an unequal platform for stakeholder engagement. This inequality must be addressed to achieve inclusivity.

Organizations need to take responsibility for bringing in new voices and perspectives, such as offering panel spots to others or having someone accompany them to ensure representation.

Understanding the UN advocacy process is challenging, even with dedicated UN advocacy officers, hindering effective stakeholder engagement in international policymaking.

In conclusion, stakeholder engagement is crucial for effective policymaking, necessitating the addressing of power imbalances, promoting transparency and accountability, providing resources and training, and embracing inclusivity. Considerations include international governance mechanisms, language and cultural diversity, and coordination within informal networks. Call for organizations to bring in new voices persists, while understanding the UN advocacy process is crucial to effective stakeholder engagement.

Jovan Kurbalija, Executive Director, DiploFoundation

The analysis of the speakers’ statements reveals several noteworthy points regarding the impact of triviality on people’s participation in large systems. One speaker highlights the influence of navigation experience in UN corridors on individuals’ sense of belonging and their feeling of being part of the process. The speaker suggests that this experience can shape people’s participation in the system, implying that a positive and inclusive navigation experience can enhance engagement.

Another significant concern raised by the speakers is the accessibility of documents from various international bodies such as the UN, EU, and others. It is argued that the lack of interactivity in PDF formats can hinder the accessibility of these documents. The speakers suggest that the static nature of PDF formats may limit the ability of individuals to engage with the content effectively, potentially excluding certain groups from participating fully.

Furthermore, the design of UN Secretary General policy briefs is highlighted as not being online-friendly. It is suggested that the current design may pose challenges for users trying to access and engage with the content online. This aspect negatively affects the user experience and may impede people’s ability to participate in policy development processes.

The sentiment among the speakers towards the current state of information accessibility in policy development processes is largely negative. The mention of the European AI Act exemplifies this sentiment, as its complex display hinders consultation, potentially limiting effective engagement. However, there is a positive aspect as well. The analysis reveals an acknowledgement of the importance of encouraging alternative thinking and creativity in the current world context. This suggests that fostering diverse perspectives and innovative approaches can contribute to more inclusive and effective policy development.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the importance of considering the impact of triviality on people’s participation in large systems. It emphasizes the need for a positive and inclusive navigation experience in institutional settings such as the UN. Additionally, it underscores the significance of improving the accessibility of documents from international bodies, including the design of policy briefs. The sentiment of connectivity and engagement in policy development processes is largely negative, but there is a recognition of the value of alternative thinking and creativity. These insights provide valuable considerations for policymakers and institutions aiming to enhance public participation and effective governance.

Peter Marien, Teamleader Digital Governance, European Commission

The need for strong participation of civil society in global digital governance is emphasised as a positive argument in the context of the EU. The EU strongly advocates for civil society involvement as it believes that without it, societies tend to drift off in directions that are not aligned with a human-centric model. Similarly, advocating for multi-stakeholder level discussions is seen as positive and necessary. It is argued that certain discussions should not be limited to intergovernmental talks alone.

However, there is a negative aspect to consider as well – the lack of knowledge and capacity within civil society organisations. It is observed that civil society faces challenges internally within the European Commission, and there is a general lack of know-how when it comes to global digital governance. This lack of expertise and capacity hinder the effective participation of civil society in shaping digital governance policies.

The importance of inclusion of the Global South in digital dialogue is seen as a positive argument. It is noted that there is currently a gap in participation from the Global South in global digital governance. An initiative led by the DiploFoundation known as the Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE) project is mentioned as being instrumental in addressing this gap.

Furthermore, it is highlighted that more capacity and resources are needed for civil society to participate meaningfully in internet governance discussions. The fast-paced nature of the internet scene and the increased global attention to these issues, particularly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, create a demand for civil society to possess not just the know-how, but also the necessary resources for participation.

Peter Marien, a supporter of civil society’s meaningful participation in internet governance discussions, emphasises the importance of investment in capacity building and resource allocation. He argues that adopting new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), requires resources for meaningful participation, especially since AI has become a fundamental topic in internet governance.

Initiating consultation processes with the general public is seen as beneficial and positive. Notably, a Nobel laureate journalist actively interviewed a random selection of individuals, which had a significant impact. Extensive consultation processes, which sometimes receive thousands to tens of thousands of inputs from society and are sometimes even analysed by AI, occur in EU legislation processes.

Additionally, it is argued that consultation processes should also involve non-experts, as citizens, despite lacking expertise, can have a notable impact. This underlines the value of diverse perspectives and the democratization of public engagement.

In terms of diplomacy and communication, it is acknowledged by Peter Marien that sensitivity should be maintained when dealing with such matters. This implies that diplomatic interactions require a tactful approach to foster constructive dialogue.

Peter recommends seeking dialogue and creating a trusted relationship with the involved government when it comes to government relations and policy-making. He refers to experiences in other countries, like Kenya, where open dialogue has been beneficial.

Finally, it is suggested that reaching out through other organizations that may have better access to open dialogue can be fruitful. By collaborating with strategic alliances and other organizations, civil society can effectively enter the conversation and contribute to the discourse on internet governance.

In conclusion, the expanded summary highlights the need for strong civil society participation, the importance of multi-stakeholder discussions, the lack of knowledge and capacity within civil society, the inclusion of the Global South, the necessity for increased capacity and resources, Peter Marien’s support for investment in capacity building, the benefits of initiating consultation processes with the public including non-experts, the importance of maintaining sensitivity in diplomacy and communication, the significance of building a trusted relationship with the government, and the suggestion of reaching out through other organizations for open dialogue. These various aspects contribute to shaping effective global digital governance and promoting a human-centric model. The summary aims to be an accurate reflection of the main analysis text.

Tereza Horejsova, Outreach Manager, Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, IGF MAG Member

The arguments and stances presented emphasize the importance of civil society in policy processes. Civil society organizations are viewed as crucial actors in policy development, as they often prioritize the interests of individuals. They provide multiple perspectives and efficient coordination mechanisms, enabling policy processes to benefit from a wide range of viewpoints.

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is highlighted as a significant platform for civil society to engage with others and influence relevant issues. Traditionally, the IGF has been dominated by civil society participation, and it offers a safe space for civil society to have a say in the governance of the internet.

Moreover, the contribution of all stakeholders, including the private sector and civil society, is considered vital for the development of digital policy. It is argued that it would be absurd to discuss digital policy without consulting these stakeholders, as their involvement ensures a more inclusive and comprehensive approach.

The Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFC) is recognized for acknowledging the importance of multi-stakeholder cooperation in capacity building related to cyber security. The GFC serves as a platform for actors involved in cyber security to come together and work collaboratively towards building expertise in this field.

Despite these positive aspects, there are concerns about the effectiveness of consulting civil society organizations in a superficial or “tick-the-box” approach. Civil society organizations have varied agendas and objectives, making it challenging to consult them effectively. Some policy fora are criticized for conducting pro-forma consultations that do not necessarily lead to meaningful outcomes. This lack of sufficient coordination of priorities among donors is seen as a barrier to the effective involvement of civil society organizations in policy forums.

On a different note, Tereza Horejsova’s perspective is highlighted, as she believes in the importance of introducing new and inexperienced voices in panels. She encourages experimenting with panel compositions to achieve fresh perspectives and downplays the risks associated with having first-time panelists. This approach fosters inclusivity and contributes to reducing gender inequalities and promoting diversity in panel discussions.

In summary, the arguments and stances presented emphasize the crucial role that civil society organizations play in policy processes. They bring valuable inputs, diverse perspectives, and efficient coordination mechanisms. The Internet Governance Forum and the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise are identified as important platforms for civil society to engage in relevant discussions. However, there are concerns about the superficiality of consultations and the lack of sufficient coordination among donors. Additionally, Tereza Horejsova’s perspective highlights the need for inclusivity and fresh perspectives in panel compositions. These observations underscore the significance of multi-stakeholder cooperation and the active involvement of civil society in policy development processes.

Audience

Technical standards bodies can be complex and overwhelming, making it challenging for new participants to navigate and contribute effectively. These bodies consist of numerous working and study groups within each organization, leading to a fragmented landscape. It can be difficult for newcomers to determine which meetings to attend and how to make meaningful contributions. The dominance of the United States and Europe in these bodies further complicates the situation, potentially marginalising participants from other regions around the world.

However, there are strategies and structures that can support and facilitate smoother participation. One such approach is the provision of engagement strategies and support, such as financial assistance and assistance with visa processes. For instance, Article 19’s Global Digital Program offers support structures that take care of finances and visa processes for participants. They also provide one-on-one mentorship to help participants understand complex concepts and bounce ideas off after meetings. This support helps participants overcome logistical barriers and align the priorities of civil society organisations with the needs and objectives of technical standards bodies.

Cooperation and collaboration between the Global North and Global South in technical standards bodies should embrace an inclusive approach and avoid a white-saviorist mentality. There is much to learn from the Global South, and creative advocacy strategies can flourish outside of the US and Europe. By embracing a collaborative approach that respects the knowledge and expertise of all regions, technical standards bodies can become more equitable and representative.

International governance mechanisms have a significant impact on national regulation, particularly in the global majority. Entities like UNESCO recommendations can disproportionately influence national regulatory frameworks, potentially shaping policies that may not be in the best interests of countries in the global majority. Therefore, it is important for these governance mechanisms to involve a diverse range of voices and perspectives to ensure fair and inclusive decision-making processes.

It is crucial to acknowledge that civil society and the global majority are not monoliths. There is significant diversity within regions, and even within a single country like India, there are multiple languages and perspectives. Recognising this diversity strengthens the ability to address inequalities and promote inclusivity within technical standards bodies.

Capacity building is a process that takes time and cannot be achieved in a day. This is particularly evident in areas like climate change, where developing the necessary expertise and infrastructure to meet the goals outlined in global agreements like the Paris Agreement is a long-term endeavour. Recognising the gradual nature of capacity building is crucial to avoid unrealistic expectations and foster sustainable progress.

Citizen participation at the local level plays a crucial role in addressing global issues. As demonstrated during the Paris Agreement process, citizen assemblies can provide valuable input and insights. Encouraging citizen participation in different parts of the world can foster capacity building and contribute to global efforts to address pressing challenges.

Institutional capacity building is vital for civil societies. By strengthening their institutional structures, civil society organisations can better engage with governments and stakeholders to influence policy making. For example, the pending implementation of India’s Personal Data Protection Act and Digital India Act highlights the need for a strong front when dealing with governments. These regulations will impact the digital activities of 1.4 billion people, emphasising the importance of civil society organisations advocating for their interests.

When engaging with governments and policymakers, alternative methods of engagement beyond traditional consultation processes should be explored. Consultation processes prior to the introduction of a bill in India, for example, have proven to be more fruitful in generating meaningful engagement. Finding ways to engage directly with parliamentarians and government officials can lead to more effective and impactful involvement.

While common input by civil society organisations can be valuable, it is important to strike a balance between shared perspectives and maintaining a variety of opinions and perspectives. Overlooking the diversity of opinions within civil society organisations can limit the range of perspectives presented and potentially hinder inclusive decision-making processes.

Collaboration between donors is crucial for promoting synergies and avoiding duplication of efforts. Donors such as the European Union and the State Department are often working on similar projects but may not be collaborating effectively. Encouraging collaboration among donors can lead to more efficient and coordinated support for initiatives and maximise impact.

Creating a wider network of civil society organisations can foster sharing and collaboration. This approach allows organisations to build upon each other’s work, share resources, and learn from one another’s experiences. By creating a supportive network, civil society organisations can collectively address challenges and contribute to social progress.

Rules for interaction in vast spaces, such as international forums and technical standards bodies, need to be shared and clarified to facilitate effective engagement. Currently, the lack of definitive rules and different interaction styles across spaces can hinder meaningful communication and collaboration. Workshops to brief participants on interaction techniques and establish common ground for engagement are proposed as a possible solution.

In conclusion, navigating and contributing to technical standards bodies can be challenging due to their complex nature. However, supporting engagement strategies, fostering collaboration, and promoting inclusivity are essential for facilitating participation and ensuring the effective functioning of these bodies. Empowering civil society organisations, embracing diverse perspectives, and building strong institutional capacity are key components of this process. By working together, stakeholders can foster meaningful dialogue, create impactful policies, and drive positive change towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Annemiek Toersen

The Netherlands Standardization Forum plays a significant role in promoting interoperability and provides advice to the Dutch government regarding the use of mandatory open standards. The forum consists of approximately 25 members from various sectors, including government, businesses, and science. One of their key efforts is the compilation of a list of mandatory open standards, primarily focused on public sector organizations. This ensures effective communication and information sharing between different governmental entities.

Open standards are essential for secure and trustworthy data exchange, enabling seamless communication and compatibility between different systems and technologies. They also contribute to accessibility for all individuals, regardless of their technical capabilities, and promote vendor neutrality by reducing dependence on specific vendors.

The Netherlands Standardization Forum utilizes the internet.nl tool to monitor and measure the growth of internet security standards and other open standards. This tool helps conduct annual reviews of procurement tenders, assessing the government’s performance in implementing open standards. The forum reports these results to the cabinet, ensuring transparency and accountability in open standards adoption.

Annemiek Toersen, a supporter of the forum, advocates for the use of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to prevent Internet hijack. To support its adoption, Toersen proposes sponsoring courses on RPKI to educate and train personnel within Dutch government institutions.

Education and workshops play a crucial role in promoting the adoption of open standards. By providing information and training, governments can make informed decisions and effectively implement these standards. The European Union (EU) also monitors the adoption rate of internet standards, including RPKI, to ensure that European countries stay up to date with the latest advancements.

Internet.nl, an open and accessible tool, is available worldwide for implementation. It has already inspired countries like Australia, Brazil, and Denmark to adopt it. The availability of an English version facilitates global cooperation, and the team behind Internet.nl offers assistance and support to ensure successful implementation.

For a procedure to be accepted, substantial deployment and support are necessary. The involvement of multiple organizations helps validate its efficacy and practicality for wide-scale implementation. Public discussions and workshops are necessary to improve routing security and advance technologies like RPKI.

In conclusion, the Netherlands Standardization Forum plays a vital role in promoting interoperability and advising the government on the use of mandatory open standards. Open standards facilitate secure data exchange, accessibility, and vendor neutrality. The forum uses the internet.nl tool for monitoring and measurement, and Annemiek Toersen supports the use of RPKI. Education and workshops are crucial for the widespread adoption of open standards, and the EU monitors the adoption rate of internet standards. Internet.nl is available worldwide, and the acceptance of a procedure requires substantial deployment and support. Continued efforts are needed to progress security measures and advocate for improved strategies in the digital realm.

Olaf Kolkman

Routing security is a critical concern when it comes to safeguarding the core of internet infrastructure. The argument is that protecting the routing space is vital, as it serves as the backbone of the internet. To address this issue, a prioritization of routing security is necessary.

The Mutually Agreed Norms on Routing Security (MANRS) have been established to tackle routing security challenges. MANRS offers a set of measures that participants in the routing system agree to adopt. Different programs are available for Internet Service Providers (ISPs), Content Delivery Networks (CDNs), Internet exchange points, and vendors. The MANRS Observatory helps track incidents and community adoption, ensuring transparency and accountability.

Another proposed measure is the implementation of certification schemes to enhance routing security. Participants can obtain certification through an audit scheme, potentially increasing their market value. The argument suggests that a certification scheme could create higher value in the market, thereby incentivizing participants to prioritize routing security.

Collaboration among routing system participants is emphasized as a crucial aspect in addressing common action problems. The lack of visibility among participants is seen as a challenge, but by making each participant’s commitment to routing security visible, this issue can be overcome. Increased visibility could incentivize the adoption of routing security measures and promote a more secure routing system.

Olaf Kolkman, although not directly involved in the process, raises a question about the specific Request for Comments (RFCs) used in the initiative. He suggests forwarding the question to individuals such as Bart or Rüdiger, who may have the answer. This demonstrates a willingness to seek expertise and knowledge from relevant sources.

In conclusion, securing routing is of utmost importance for protecting the core of internet infrastructure. Initiatives such as MANRS and certification schemes aim to enhance routing security. Collaboration, visibility, and certification can incentivize participants to prioritize and adopt routing security measures. Seeking input from relevant experts highlights the commitment to obtaining accurate information. An integrated approach is necessary to address challenges and ensure the secure functioning of the routing system.

Verena Weber

Routing vulnerabilities persist in the world of internet security due to various challenges. These challenges include the collective action problem, where the actions of one actor depend on others in the system. The cost of implementing routing security practices is also a challenge. Furthermore, available security techniques require a layered approach, which can increase the risk of mistakes.

To improve routing security, there is a need to enhance the measurement and collection of time series data on routing incidents. Governments can support this effort by funding and ensuring continuous measurement. Several countries, such as the United States, Netherlands, Brazil, and Switzerland, have shown a proactive approach towards routing security and can lead by example.

Governments can play a significant role in bolstering routing security by implementing best practices, facilitating information sharing, and defining common frameworks with the industry. Information sharing and wider adoption of implemented practices can also contribute to improving the situation.

At a broader level, awareness-raising and training at the EU level are important to equip individuals with the necessary knowledge and skills to tackle routing security challenges effectively.

In summary, routing vulnerabilities persist due to various challenges, but governments have an increased interest and can play a crucial role in improving routing security. By actively engaging in efforts to enhance data collection, implement best practices, and facilitate information sharing, governments can strengthen routing security. Additionally, awareness-raising and training at the EU level are essential for addressing routing security issues effectively.

Moderator

During the discussion, operators expressed concerns about the deployment of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI). Some operators were hesitant to pay for routing securities, raising doubts about the effectiveness and value of such investments. These concerns indicate a negative sentiment towards RPKI deployment. It was also noted that further steps, including ASPATH validation, are needed to enhance routing security measures. This suggests a neutral stance towards the need for additional measures to improve the security of routing.

Operators’ skepticism about investing in routing securities reflects their reluctance to allocate resources without clear benefits or guarantees. This negative sentiment emphasizes the need for persuasion and reassurance to encourage operators to adopt and invest in routing security measures.

Furthermore, there was a request for clarification regarding the tracking of governments on internet.nl. The concern raised implies uncertainty or confusion about the extent to which governments can monitor or track activities on the internet.nl platform.

On a positive note, it was highlighted that Annemiek Toersen’s team provides assistance and inspiration to other countries through the English version of internet.nl. This knowledge exchange among countries, such as Australia, Brazil, and Denmark, illustrates the positive impact Annemiek Toersen’s team has in promoting the use of internet.nl and its code.

Lastly, the moderator sought clarification from Annemiek on RPK standards during the discussion, indicating a need for further understanding or insight into the implementation and impact of RPK standards.

In conclusion, the discussion highlighted concerns and skepticism among operators regarding RPKI deployment and investing in routing securities. The need for additional measures, such as ASPATH validation, was emphasized to enhance routing security. There was also a request for clarification regarding government tracking on internet.nl. However, the positive contribution of Annemiek Toersen’s team in supporting and inspiring other countries with the English version of internet.nl was acknowledged. Further clarification on RPK standards was sought from Annemiek, indicating a desire to gain more insights into this topic.

Katsuyasu Toyama

The deployment of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), specifically the use of Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs), varies across regions. Europe and the Middle East have greater adoption of ROA, with approximately 70% usage, while Africa and North America lag behind with less than 30%. This difference was observed in data from APNIC Labs.

One of the contributing factors to the slower adoption of ROA is the lack of knowledge and skills among internet service provider (ISP) operators. In Singapore and Thailand, it has been reported that some operators lack the necessary expertise to effectively implement ROA. This skills gap impedes the deployment of ROA and highlights the need for more practical understanding in this area.

Another challenge arises from the operation of ROA cache servers, which are currently available as open-source software. Efforts in Japan are being made to provide ROA cache servers at Internet Exchange Points (IXPs), but concerns have been raised regarding the security of the communication channel between routers and the ROA cache. The absence of encryption raises security concerns and emphasizes the need for improved measures in this domain.

To encourage broader adoption of RPKI and ROA, it is recommended that organizations or governments issue recommendations for their deployment. In Singapore, for instance, governmental regulations have helped to some extent in promoting ROA implementation. Such industry or country-level recommendations can lead to wider adoption and improved routing security.

The occurrence of route leaks underscores the importance of striving for improved global routing security. Route leaks have negative impacts on internet stability and security. The need for enhanced security measures, such as Autonomous System Path (ASPATH) validation, is evident. However, ASPATH validation is acknowledged as an imperfect solution that requires further development to address existing limitations.

The enforcement of RPKI is currently driven by penalties imposed on non-compliant entities. Although this serves as a motivation for deployment, operators remain skeptical about investing in routing securities. Their skepticism may stem from concerns about practicality, effectiveness, and potential costs associated with implementing such measures.

In conclusion, the deployment of RPKI, particularly the use of ROA, varies across regions, with Europe and the Middle East leading in adoption. The skills gap among operators, challenges related to ROA cache server operation, and operator skepticism towards investing in routing securities present obstacles to wider adoption. However, recommendations from organizations or governments, improved global routing security measures, and ongoing efforts in ASPATH validation can contribute to broader deployment of RPKI and advancement in routing security.

Audience

The analysis examines the discussions surrounding the implementation and adoption of Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) and routing security. Various speakers shared valuable insights and perspectives on the subject.

One speaker highlighted the commitment of a non-profit organisation to provide free online training in technologies such as BGP security and RPKI. This initiative aims to assist individuals facing budget constraints that prevent them from travelling or attending physical training sessions. The organisation’s focus on social impact rather than profit-making reinforces their dedication to promoting knowledge accessibility.

Another speaker emphasised the flexible training programs offered by the organisation. They expressed a willingness to negotiate tailor-made programs to suit the community’s needs. Additionally, they were open to discussions about offering discounts for training sessions, considering factors such as the number of participants and potential impact.

The analysis also discussed the automation of RPKI, with contrasting viewpoints presented by two speakers. One speaker suggested that automation has facilitated the expansion of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) with web servers, citing the example of Let’s Encrypt, which provided free certificates based on Acme. This automation was seen as a catalyst for PKI expansion. However, another speaker disagreed, emphasising the importance of resource holders personally signing statements within the portal. They argued that the process of signing statements is not so complex that it should be automated, underscoring the significance of individual responsibility in this regard.

A digital platform called internet.nl was mentioned, which currently checks only Route Origin Authorizations (ROAs) and not Route Origin Validations (ROVs). This limitation in checking ROVs was acknowledged, as it necessitates separate ISP space that has an invalid route to perform the check. This insight provides context to the capabilities and limitations of the internet.nl platform.

The European Union (EU) was mentioned as monitoring the adoption rate of modern internet standards, such as RPKI and “manners.” This observation indicates the EU’s interest in promoting the usage of these standards and highlights their commitment to enhancing internet security and infrastructure.

The analysis revealed the existence of several Request for Comments (RFCs) that have established RPKI-related standards. These standards pertain not only to the establishment of ROAs and origin validation but also introduce new objects in RPKI, such as the upcoming “ASPA.” The inclusion of these standards demonstrates ongoing efforts to develop and enhance RPKI.

The incomplete implementation of BGP-SEC, a standard specifically designed for RPKI, was a concern discussed by one of the speakers. They expressed their worries about the lack of comprehensive BGP-SEC implementation, which requires significant resources. This issue was described as often overlooked in discussions surrounding RPKI and routing security. This observation highlights a potential blind spot within the ongoing discourse and emphasises the need to address this gap to ensure the effective implementation of RPKI.

The audience also raised important points regarding the need for discussions and improvements in the implementation and deployment of BGP-SEC and routing security. It was suggested that the current focus seems to be on the immediately available options, potentially neglecting the necessity for further advancements and enhancements in the field.

Furthermore, resource allocation was deemed crucial for the future development and deployment of RPKI and routing security. The audience stressed the importance of securing necessary resources, including personnel and adequate security measures, to effectively drive advancements in these areas.

In conclusion, this analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the discussions surrounding RPKI implementation and routing security. The insights shared by various speakers shed light on the commitment of organisations to offer free online training and tailor-made programs, the potential of automation in RPKI, limitations of existing platforms, the EU’s monitoring efforts, the establishment of RPKI-related standards, concerns related to incomplete BGP-SEC implementation, and the need for discussions and resource allocation. These discussions contribute to a holistic understanding of the challenges, opportunities, and directions for improvement in the realm of RPKI and routing security.

Bastiaan Goslings

The analysis of the provided information reveals several important points regarding routing security and the adoption of open standards in the internet infrastructure. One key aspect is the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI), which offers a more secure method of routing security by using cryptography to verify the originating network of routing information. This prevents impersonation and unauthorised usage. Efforts to promote the use of RPKI and improve routing security are seen as crucial and should be intensified.

The MANRS initiative also plays a significant role in protecting the core of internet infrastructure by promoting routing security. Bastiaan Goslings, a proponent of the initiative, is positive about its next level, MANRS+. There is also an encouragement for participants to spread awareness and convince other networks to join MANRS. This highlights the collective effort required to enhance routing security.

RIPE NCC plays a vital role in providing training courses on RPKI and BGP security, which are essential for the adoption of open standards. They offer free online courses, conduct webinars and host meetings to educate individuals on RPKI and other routing security measures. Additionally, RIPE NCC is open to providing tailor-made trainings and considering discounts based on the potential impact and volume.

While RIPE NCC has not implemented an incentive programme like SIDN for adopting open standards, the idea is open for consideration. The decision to adopt such a programme would require the agreement of the members. This emphasises the importance of collective decision-making within member-based organisations.

The automation of creating RPKI space is not a straightforward process and may be perceived as technically complex or costly. However, it is worth noting that automation, as exemplified by the creation of “Let’s Encrypt,” has proved successful in facilitating the adoption of open standards in the Web PKI realm. This suggests that further advancements in automation could address the perceived complexity associated with implementing RPKI.

Regarding certificate validation, Internet.nl primarily checks Regional Internet Registry (RIR) and Autonomous System (AS) Operator certificates, rather than Route Origin Authorisation (ROA) certificates. This underlines the specific focus of certificate checking on the platform.

The analysis also emphasises the need for further improvement beyond the creation of ROAs and validation in internet regulation. Discussions have taken place regarding organising workshops for Dutch government policymakers and cooperation with RIPE to achieve these improvements. This signifies an acknowledgement of the necessity to go beyond the existing tools and approaches to enhance internet regulation.

In conclusion, the analysis reveals the importance of routing security and the adoption of open standards in the internet infrastructure. Efforts to promote the use of RPKI and improve routing security are crucial. The MANRS initiative plays a significant role in this regard, with supporters like Bastiaan Goslings actively encouraging participation and spreading awareness. RIPE NCC provides essential training courses and is open to considering incentives. Automation of the RPKI space and further improvements in internet regulation are also areas of interest. Overall, the analysis highlights the ongoing efforts and challenges in enhancing routing security and promoting the adoption of open standards in the internet infrastructure.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Audience

The discussion revolves around the impact of technology, particularly AI, on freedom and democracy. There is a neutral sentiment overall, with a focus on whether AI will lead to more freedom and democracy or have the opposite effect. One argument is that authoritarian rulers might use technology to establish more control rather than promote freedom. This raises concerns about the potential misuse of AI in authoritarian regimes.

Moving on to the potential application of generative AI in developing countries, the sentiment remains neutral. It is recognised that generative AI has the potential to benefit these nations, although specific evidence or supporting facts are not provided. Nonetheless, there is an interest in exploring the application of generative AI in developing countries, highlighting a desire to leverage technology for their development.

Another aspect discussed is the need to redefine the term ‘developing countries.’ This argument emphasises the existence of highly functional digital societies in Estonia, Finland, Norway, and the Netherlands. These societies serve as examples of how advancements in technology can lead to progress and development. The recommendation is to learn from these societies and implement their successes in other parts of the world. Young people are seen as crucial in this process, as they can observe and learn from these digital societies, then bring back knowledge to design and restructure their own societies. The high youth population in regions like India, the continent, and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) further amplifies the importance of involving the young generation in shaping the future.

The impact of AI on human creativity and its contribution to human resources is considered in a neutral sentiment, without specific arguments or evidence provided. The broader question of how AI will affect human creativity and its implications for the workforce remains unanswered.

Concerns are raised about the use of native AI in developing countries with limited resources and infrastructure. The sentiment is concerned, with a focus on the potential widening of the technology gap in these nations. The argument questions whether native AI will exacerbate inequalities and further marginalise resource-poor countries.

In conclusion, this analysis highlights various viewpoints on the impact of technology, specifically AI, on freedom, democracy, development, and creativity. While concerns are raised regarding the potential misuse of AI and widening technology gaps, there is still potential for positive outcomes through the application of AI in developing countries. The role of young people and learning from successful digital societies are also emphasised in shaping a better future for societies worldwide.

Atsushi Yamanaka

In a recent analysis, different viewpoints on the topic of Artificial Intelligence (AI) were discussed. Atsushi Yamanaka, a senior advisor on digital transformations at JICA, shared his belief that AI has both significant potential and notable threats. With 28 years of experience in the field, Yamanaka advises JICA on incorporating technology elements into various projects and supporting digital transformation initiatives.

One area where Yamanaka sees promising potential is the use of generative AI models for local African languages. He highlighted how this application could play a crucial role in promoting digital inclusion in developing economies. By developing AI models for African languages, barriers in digital literacy could be overcome, enabling more people to benefit from technology. Yamanaka’s colleague, who studied AI in Japan and now works at Princeton, is actively working on generative AI models for African languages.

However, the analysis also acknowledged the potential risks associated with the rise of generative AI. It highlighted the concern that this technology could lead to an increase in misinformation, making it increasingly difficult to distinguish between real and fake information. As a result, trust in digital technology may be undermined, presenting challenges for individuals and societies. These issues underscore the importance of responsible development and deployment of AI technologies.

Another argument made in the analysis was the need to establish a consensual framework for AI regulations. The participation of emerging countries was emphasized, as developing nations should play an active role in global discussions on AI regulations. The aim is to avoid creating multiple fragmented models or regulations and instead work towards a unified approach that addresses the concerns and interests of all stakeholders.

Concerns were raised about the potential impact of AI technology on labor. The recent work by the International Labor Organization indicates potential job losses resulting from the introduction of AI. In the United States, for example, the Screenwriters Guild has expressed concerns about AI replacing their jobs, sparking fears of a potential backlash reminiscent of the Luddite Movement of the 19th century. These concerns emphasize the need to consider the potential negative consequences on employment and to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to mitigate any adverse impacts.

Privacy invasion was another aspect discussed in the analysis. The Chinese AI-based scoring system was highlighted as an example of technology that invades privacy. The system reportedly monitors and scores every aspect of citizens’ lives. This raises concerns among privacy advocates and highlights the ethical considerations that need to be taken into account as AI technologies continue to evolve and become more integrated into daily life.

The analysis also touched upon the digital gap between developed and emerging economies. The argument was made that AI technology, particularly new technologies, could actually help reduce this gap. Unlike traditional barriers to communication, there are no interaction barriers in digital technologies, making their adoption in developing countries more feasible. Furthermore, emerging economies might even contribute more to the growth and development of these technologies.

Interestingly, the analysis noted that developing countries have the potential to be at the forefront of innovation in AI technologies. It emphasized that a significant amount of innovation is already emerging from these regions and suggested that they might contribute more to innovation in digital technologies than Western countries. This insight challenges the notion that developing countries will necessarily lag behind in the adoption and advancement of AI technologies.

In conclusion, the analysis delved into various aspects of AI and provided different perspectives on its potential, risks, and implications. It emphasized the need for responsible development, consensual regulatory frameworks, and the active participation of emerging countries in shaping AI technologies. While acknowledging the threats and challenges associated with AI, the analysis also highlighted the opportunities for promoting digital inclusion and reducing the digital gap. Ultimately, it asserted that each society should have the agency to manage its own governance in line with its specific needs and circumstances.

Robert Ford Nkusi

Robert Ford Nkusi is a prominent figure in the field of software testing qualifications in Rwanda. He is currently leading a software testing qualifications team and has made significant contributions to the Rwanda Software Testing Qualifications Board. This demonstrates his expertise and leadership in the industry.

Furthermore, Robert has been involved in the design of the implementation plan for the Child Online Protection Policy in Rwanda. Working under the United Nations, he played a crucial role in developing a comprehensive plan to safeguard children online. This highlights his commitment to promoting child safety and creating a secure digital environment for young users.

In addition to his work in software testing and child protection, Robert has also contributed to the regional framework for the one network area in the East African region. By circumventing data roaming costs, this initiative has greatly benefited individuals and businesses in the area. Robert was actively involved in setting up the one network area and played a vital role in the successful proof of concept testing.

Notably, Robert has led efforts in managing cross-border mobile financial services, which have become increasingly popular in the East African community. By facilitating convenient and secure transactions across borders, these services have contributed to economic growth and poverty reduction. Robert’s involvement in this area demonstrates his expertise in the intersection of finance and technology.

Currently, Robert is engaged with JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) in implementing an ICT industry promotion project in Uganda. The four-year project aims to build capacity in the ICT industry and foster innovation and infrastructure development. By leveraging international partnerships, Robert is actively working towards advancing the ICT sector in Uganda.

The potential of generative AI in predicting and mitigating harmful online content was discussed. Robert highlighted how AI can aid in keeping children safe online through the issue of Child Online Protection. However, caution is required with the implementation of generative AI, as its accurate responses can make users less questioning, potentially leading to unforeseen negatives. It is crucial to strike a balance between the benefits and risks of this technology.

Moreover, African countries have shown exemplary progress in implementing and regulating AI technologies, challenging the traditional divide between developed and developing economies. By successfully adopting and regulating AI, these countries have demonstrated their capability in technological advancements.

The debate on long-term leadership and its relationship with authoritarianism was also explored. The definition of democracy and authoritarianism can differ based on the context, and it was argued that long-term leadership is not necessarily synonymous with authoritarianism. This raises important questions about the nature of political leadership and the impact it has on governance.

Furthermore, the potential of generative AI to transform politics was highlighted. The use of AI in predicting political outcomes and shaping political discourse has the ability to revolutionize the political landscape. However, it is important to critically analyze the impact of AI on democratic processes and ensure that it is used responsibly and ethically.

An interesting observation arising from the analysis is the need for collective efforts and shared learning in policy-making for AI technologies. Developing economies, like those in Africa, have successfully implemented technological solutions such as mobile money. It is suggested that developed countries, such as those in the G7, can learn from these successes and collaborate in policy-making to ensure the responsible use of AI technologies.

In conclusion, Robert Ford Nkusi is a leader in software testing qualifications, with notable contributions in the fields of child protection, regional frameworks, cross-border financial services, and ICT industry promotion. The potential and challenges of generative AI were explored, along with the successful implementation of AI technologies in African countries. The complex relationship between long-term leadership and authoritarianism was discussed, and the transformative potential of AI in politics was examined. Overall, these insights shed light on the intersection of technology, governance, and societal progress.

Sarayu Natarajan

The discussion examines the implications of generative AI across various domains, acknowledging its advantages and disadvantages, especially in relation to technology and society. It highlights the study of algorithmic and platform-mediated work, digitization, and digital infrastructure in the context of generative AI, with a focus on effective government-citizen communication.

Data governance is identified as a critical area of focus within generative AI, necessitating exploration of sustainability financing, governance, and digital system replication worldwide. The discussion also raises concerns about the impact of generative AI on the labor market, particularly in developing regions, where workers involved in data annotation and labeling are often overlooked in broader AI conversations.

Furthermore, limitations and biases in data structures restrain the full potential of generative AI, particularly in addressing gender and race representation in the developing world. The potential for generative AI to propagate disinformation and misinformation is also highlighted as a significant concern.

To address these issues and ensure meaningful digital lives and futures, the discussion emphasizes the need for governance and regulation to be considered during AI deployment. Inclusive frameworks of governance and regulation involving global participants are deemed essential to manage the impact of AI across all regions and promote equitable outcomes.

Additionally, the role of generative AI in the creative domain is explored, with the recognition that it can assist in certain types of literature creation. However, it is underlined that the education system and society should continue fostering creativity to avoid over-reliance on AI.

Overall, the analysis delves into the multifaceted implications of generative AI, highlighting the importance of governance, fairness, and ethics. The discussion emphasizes the need for thoughtful and inclusive approaches to harness the potential benefits of generative AI while mitigating its challenges.

Tomoyuki Naito

During the IGF 2023 sessions, Prime Minister Kishida emphasized the importance of generative AI and knowledge sharing for all participants. This highlights the recognition that generative AI has the potential to greatly impact various sectors, and therefore, it should be accessible to everyone.

The discussions at the IGF have brought international experts together, who have acknowledged the threats posed by generative AI. This recognition has sparked thoughts on how to counter these potential threats. The fact that these concerns are widely recognized at an international level shows the serious consideration being given to generative AI.

Tomoyuki Naito, the moderator of the session, specifically emphasized the need to explore the opportunities and threats of generative AI in the context of global south economies. This highlights the importance of understanding how generative AI can impact the economic growth and development of these regions. By recognizing the specific challenges faced by global south economies, tailored strategies can be developed to leverage generative AI for their benefit.

The panel discussion aimed to gather expert opinions on the threats and opportunities presented by generative AI. The first half of the discussion was dedicated to capturing the perspectives and insights of the panelists to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the various viewpoints. The second half of the discussion, on the other hand, was planned to encourage public opinions and comments, fostering a more inclusive and democratic approach to addressing these issues.

Naito’s belief that experts are actively working on addressing the potential threats to privacy and security posed by generative AI is significant. It indicates that these concerns are not being overlooked, and there is a collective effort to develop strategies to mitigate these risks. The fact that many sessions at the IGF have already discussed the potential threats of generative AI further strengthens the notion that this is a widely recognized issue. Moreover, the concerns shared by international experts highlight the seriousness with which these potential threats are being taken.

One noteworthy observation from the discussions is the recognition that countries can proactively utilize new technologies, such as generative AI, for their own economic and social development. This signifies a shift in mindset, where new technologies are seen as opportunities rather than threats. By leveraging these technologies effectively, countries can drive economic growth and social progress.

In conclusion, the IGF 2023 sessions shed light on the importance of generative AI and knowledge sharing for everyone, specifically in the context of global south economies. The discussions recognized the potential threats posed by generative AI and emphasized the need for expert opinions and public engagement. However, there is a collective effort to address these threats and proactively utilize new technologies for economic and social development. Overall, the sessions provided valuable insights and highlighted the significance of inclusive and informed decision-making in the field of generative AI.

Safa Khalid Salih Ali

Generative AI has emerged as a powerful tool with the potential to revolutionize various sectors. The analysis reveals several key benefits and applications of generative AI. Firstly, it can significantly reduce the time spent on data analysis by automating routine tasks. This allows businesses and organizations to derive insights more quickly and efficiently. By eliminating the need for manual data analysis, generative AI enables professionals to focus on improving the quality of their work, ultimately enhancing productivity.

Furthermore, generative AI can play a crucial role in predicting and managing economic crises. By utilising generative AI, experts can develop prediction models that help identify potential crises and take preventive measures accordingly. This is particularly relevant to sectors such as finance and banking, where generative AI can aid in risk assessment and fraud detection. By analysing historical data, generative AI can predict consumer behaviour and help financial institutions make informed decisions to mitigate risks and enhance security.

In the realm of fintech, generative AI has the potential to enhance customer experiences. By providing immediate solutions in emergency situations, generative AI can improve customer satisfaction levels. Additionally, generative AI can democratise financial services by allowing all participants to easily access the services they need, such as virtualized access through chatbots. This fosters financial inclusion and reduces inequalities by ensuring that all citizens have equal opportunities in accessing financial services.

Another significant application of generative AI lies in policy simulation. By simulating the effects of different policies, generative AI can assist policymakers in addressing weaknesses and making informed decisions. Through simulation, potential issues can be identified and resolved before they negatively impact society. For example, the analysis highlights a situation in Sudan where a war could have been preempted if generative AI had been used to simulate the consequences of certain policies.

While the benefits of generative AI are clear, it is crucial to address certain challenges. Developing countries face significant data challenges and lack the necessary knowledge and infrastructure to fully harness the potential of AI. Therefore, it is essential to establish systems that support AI development in these countries. By doing so, they can benefit from the transformative power of generative AI and drive economic growth.

In conclusion, generative AI has immense potential to revolutionize various sectors and bring about significant benefits. Its ability to streamline data analysis, aid in predicting and managing economic crises, enhance customer experiences, simulate policies, and foster financial inclusion makes it a valuable tool for the future. However, ensuring that developing countries have the necessary capacity and resources to tap into this potential is crucial. Generative AI can truly transform industries and bring about positive socio-economic changes when effectively implemented.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Owen Later

Microsoft has made significant efforts to prioritise the responsible use of AI technology. They have dedicated six years to building their responsible AI programme, which involves a team of over 350 experts in various fields including engineering, research, legal, and policy. Their responsible AI standard is based on the principles outlined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), emphasising the importance of ethical AI practices.

In addition to their internal initiatives, Microsoft recognises the need for active participation from private companies and the industry in AI governance discussions. To foster collaboration and best practices, they have founded the Frontier Model Forum, which brings together leading AI labs. This forum focuses on developing technical guidelines and standards for frontier models. Microsoft also supports global efforts, such as those taking place at the United Nations (UN) and the OECD, to ensure that AI technology is governed responsibly.

Another crucial aspect highlighted by Microsoft is the importance of regulations to effectively manage the use and development of AI. They actively share their insights and experiences to help shape regulations that address the unique challenges posed by AI technology. Furthermore, Microsoft aims to build capacity for governments and industry regulators, enabling them to navigate the complex landscape of AI and ensure the adoption of responsible practices.

Microsoft emphasises the need for safeguards at both the model and application levels of AI development. The responsible development of AI models includes considering ethical considerations and ensuring that the model meets the necessary requirements. However, Microsoft acknowledges that even if the model is developed responsibly, there is still a risk if the application level lacks proper safeguards. Therefore, they stress the importance of incorporating safeguards throughout the entire AI development process.

Microsoft also supports global governance for AI and advocates for a representative process in developing standards. They believe that a global governance regime should aim for a framework that includes standard setting, consensus on risk assessment and mitigation, and infrastructure building. Microsoft cites the International Civil Aviation Organization and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as potential models for governance, highlighting the importance of collaborative and inclusive approaches to effectively govern AI.

In conclusion, Microsoft takes the responsible use of AI technology seriously, as evident through their comprehensive responsible AI programme, active participation in AI governance discussions, support for global initiatives, and commitment to shaping regulations. They emphasise the need for safeguards at both the model and application levels of AI development and advocate for global governance that is representative, consensus-driven, and infrastructure-focused. Through their efforts, Microsoft aims to ensure that AI technology is harnessed responsibly and ethically, promoting positive societal impact.

Clara Neppel

During the discussion, the speakers highlighted the ethical challenges associated with technology development. They emphasised the need for responsibility and the embedding of values and business models into technology. IEEE, with its constituency of 400,000 members, was recognised as playing a significant role in addressing these challenges.

Transparency, value-based design, and bias in AI were identified as crucial areas of concern. IEEE has been actively engaging with regulatory bodies to develop socio-technical standards in these areas. They have already established a standard that defines transparency and another standard focused on value-based design. These efforts aim to ensure that AI systems are accountable, fair, and free from bias.

The importance of standards in complementing regulation and bringing interoperability in regulatory requirements was emphasised. IEEE has been involved in discussions with experts to address the technical challenges related to AI. An example was provided in the form of the UK’s Children’s Act, which was complemented by an IEEE standard on age-appropriate design. This highlights how standards can play a crucial role in ensuring compliance and interoperability within regulatory frameworks.

Capacity building for AI certification was also discussed as an essential component. IEEE has trained over 100 individuals for AI certification and is also working on training certification bodies to carry out assessments. This capacity building process ensures that individuals and organisations possess the necessary skills and knowledge to navigate the complex landscape of AI and contribute to its responsible development and deployment.

The panel also explored the role of the private sector in protecting democracy and the rule of law. One speaker argued that it is not the responsibility of the private sector to safeguard these fundamental principles. However, another speaker highlighted the need for legal certainty, which can only be provided through regulations, in upholding the rule of law. This debate prompts further reflection on the appropriate roles and responsibilities of different societal actors in maintaining democratic values and institutions.

The negative impact of uncertainty on the private sector was acknowledged. The uncertain environment poses challenges for businesses and impedes economic growth and job creation. This concern underscores the need for stability and predictability to support a thriving and sustainable private sector.

Lastly, the importance of feedback loops and common standards in AI was emphasised. This includes ensuring that feedback is taken into account to improve and retrain AI systems. Drawing from lessons learned in the aviation industry, the development of benchmarking and common standards was seen as vital for enabling efficient and effective collaboration across different AI systems and applications.

In conclusion, the speakers underscored the importance of addressing ethical challenges in technology development, specifically in the context of AI. IEEE’s involvement in shaping socio-technical standards, capacity building for AI certification, and the need for transparency, value-based design, and addressing bias were highlighted. The role of standards in complementing regulation and promoting interoperability was emphasised, along with the necessity of legal certainty to uphold democracy and the rule of law. The challenges posed by uncertainty in the private sector and the significance of feedback loops and common standards in AI were also acknowledged. These insights contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding the responsible development and deployment of technology.

Maria Paz Canales

The discussion on artificial intelligence (AI) governance highlighted several key points. Firstly, there is a need for a clearer understanding and clarification of AI governance. This involves the participation of various actors, including civil society organizations and communities that are directly affected by AI. Civil society organizations require a better understanding of AI risk areas, as well as effective strategies for AI implementation.

Another important point is the evaluation of AI’s impact on rights, with a specific focus on inclusiveness. It is essential to assess the effect of AI on civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Unfortunately, the perspectives of communities impacted by AI are often excluded in the assessment of AI risks. Therefore, it is necessary to include the viewpoints and experiences of these communities to comprehensively evaluate the impact of AI. This inclusive approach to AI impact assessment can lead to the development of responsible and trustworthy technology.

The discussion also emphasized the importance of education and capacity building in understanding AI’s impact. The public cannot fully comprehend the consequences of AI without being adequately educated about the subject in a concrete and understandable way. Therefore, it is crucial to provide not only technical language but also information on how AI impacts daily life and basic rights. By enhancing education and capacity building, individuals can better grasp the implications and intricacies of AI technology.

Furthermore, it was highlighted that there should be some level of complementarity between voluntary standards and legal frameworks in AI governance. This includes ensuring responsibility at different levels, from the design stage to the implementation and functioning of AI systems. The relationship between voluntary standards and legal frameworks must be carefully balanced to create an effective governance structure for AI.

In addition, the discussion underscored the importance of accounting for shared responsibility within the legal framework. It is crucial to establish effective communication between the different operators involved in the production and use of AI. This communication should adhere to competition rules and intellectual property regulations, avoiding any violations. By accounting for shared responsibility, the legal framework can ensure ethical and responsible AI governance.

Lastly, the discussion emphasized the need for a bottom-up approach in AI governance. This approach involves the active participation of societies and different stakeholders at both the local and global levels. Geopolitically, there is a need to hear more about experiences and perspectives from various stakeholders in global-level governance discussions. By adopting a bottom-up approach, AI governance can become more democratic, inclusive, and representative of the diverse needs and interests of stakeholders.

In conclusion, the discussion on AI governance highlighted the importance of a clearer understanding and clarification of AI governance, inclusiveness in impact assessment, education and capacity building, complementarity between voluntary standards and legal frameworks, the consideration of shared responsibility, and a bottom-up approach in AI governance. By addressing these aspects, it is possible to develop responsible and trustworthy AI technology to benefit society as a whole.

Thomas Schneider

The topic of AI regulation is currently being discussed in the context of its application. The argument put forth is that instead of regulating AI as a tool, it should be regulated in consideration of how it is used. This means that regulations should be tailored to address the specific applications and potential risks of AI, rather than imposing blanket regulations on all AI technologies. It is believed that this approach will allow for a more nuanced and effective regulation of AI.
Voluntary commitment in AI regulations is seen as an effective approach, provided that the right incentives are in place. This means that instead of enforcing compulsory regulations, which can often be complicated and unworkable, voluntary agreements can be more successful. By providing incentives for AI developers and users to adhere to certain standards and guidelines, it is believed that a more cooperative and collaborative approach can be fostered, ensuring responsible and ethical use of AI technology.
The Council of Europe is currently developing the first binding convention on AI and human rights, which is seen as a significant step forward. This intergovernmental agreement aims to commit states to uphold AI principles based on the norms of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. The convention is not only intended to ensure the protection of fundamental rights in the context of AI, but also to create interoperable legal systems within countries. This represents a significant development in the global governance of AI and the protection of human rights.
The need for agreement on fundamental values is also highlighted in the discussions on AI regulation. It is essential to have a consensus on how to respect human dignity and ensure that technological advancements are made while upholding and respecting human rights. This ensures that AI development and deployment align with society’s values and principles.
Addressing legal uncertainties and tackling new challenges is another important aspect of AI regulation. As AI technologies continue to evolve, it is necessary to identify legal uncertainties and clarify them to ensure a clear and coherent regulatory framework. Breaking down new elements and challenges associated with AI is crucial to ensuring that regulations are effective and comprehensive.
In solving the problems related to AI regulation, it is emphasized that using the best tools and methods is essential. Different problems may require different approaches, with some methods being faster but less sustainable, while others may be more sustainable but take longer to implement. By utilizing a mix of tools and methods, it is possible to effectively address identified issues.
Stakeholder cooperation is also considered to be of utmost importance in the realm of AI regulation. All stakeholders, including governments, businesses, researchers, and civil society, need to continue to engage and cooperate with each other, leveraging their respective roles. This collaboration ensures that diverse perspectives and expertise are taken into account when formulating regulations, thereby increasing the chances of effective and balanced AI regulation.
However, there is also opposition to the creation of burdensome bureaucracy in the process of regulating AI. Efforts should be made to clarify issues and address challenges without adding unnecessary administrative complexity. It is crucial to strike a balance between ensuring responsible and ethical use of AI technology and avoiding excessive burdens on AI developers and users.
In conclusion, the discussions on AI regulation are centered around the need to regulate AI in consideration of its application, rather than treating it as a tool. Voluntary commitments, such as the binding convention being developed by the Council of Europe, are seen as effective approaches, provided the right incentives are in place. Agreement on fundamental values, addressing legal uncertainties, and stakeholder cooperation are crucial aspects of AI regulation. It is important to strike a balance between effective regulation and avoiding burdensome bureaucracy.

Suzanne Akkabaoui

Egypt has developed a comprehensive national AI strategy aimed at fostering the growth of an AI industry. The strategy is based on four pillars: AI for government, AI for development, capacity building, and international relations. It focuses on leveraging AI technologies to drive innovation, improve governance, and address societal challenges.

Under the AI for government pillar, Egypt aims to enhance the effectiveness of public administration by adopting AI technologies. This includes streamlining administrative processes, improving decision-making, and delivering efficient government services.

The AI for development pillar highlights Egypt’s commitment to utilizing AI as a catalyst for economic growth and social development. The strategy focuses on promoting AI-driven innovation, entrepreneurship, and tackling critical issues such as poverty, hunger, and inequality.

Capacity building is prioritized in Egypt’s AI strategy to develop a skilled workforce. The country invests in AI education, training programs, research, and collaboration between academia, industry, and government.

International cooperation is emphasized to exchange knowledge, share best practices, and establish standardized approaches to AI governance. Egypt actively participates in global discussions on AI policies and practices as a member of the OECD AI network.

To ensure responsible AI deployment, Egypt has issued a charter that provides guidelines for promoting citizen well-being and aligning with national goals. These guidelines address aspects such as robustness, security, safety, and social impact assessments.

Egypt also recognizes the importance of understanding cultural differences and bridging gaps for technological advancements. The country aims to address cultural gaps and promote inclusivity, ensuring that the benefits of AI are accessible to all segments of society.

Overall, Egypt’s AI strategy demonstrates a commitment to creating an AI industry and leveraging AI for governance, development, capacity building, and international cooperation. The strategy aims to foster responsible and inclusive progress through AI technologies.

Moderator

In the analysis, several speakers discuss various aspects of AI and its impact on different sectors and societies. One key point raised is the need for more machines, especially AI, in Japan to sustain its ageing economy. With Japan facing social problems related to an ageing population, the introduction of more people and machines is deemed necessary. However, it is interesting to note that while Japan recognises the importance of AI, they believe that its opportunities and possibilities should be prioritised over legislation. They view AI as a solution rather than a problem and want to see more of what AI can do for their society before introducing any regulations.

Furthermore, the G7 delegates are focused on creating a report that specifically examines the risks, challenges, and opportunities of new technology, particularly generative AI. They have sought support from the OECD in summarising this report. This highlights the importance of international cooperation in addressing the impact of AI.

Egypt also plays a significant role in the AI discussion. The country has a national AI strategy that seeks to create an AI industry while emphasising that AI should enhance human labour rather than replace it. Egypt has published an AI charter for responsible AI and is a member of the OECD AI network. This showcases the importance of aligning national strategies with global initiatives and fostering regional and international collaborations.

Microsoft is another notable player in the field of AI. The company is committed to developing AI technology responsibly. It has implemented a responsible AI standard based on OECD principles, which is shared externally for critique and improvement. Microsoft actively engages in global governance conversations, particularly through the Frontier Model Forum, where they accelerate work on technical best practices. Their contributions highlight the importance of private sector involvement in governance discussions.

UNESCO has made significant contributions to the AI discourse by developing a recommendation on the ethics of AI. The recommendation was developed through a two-year multi-stakeholder process and adopted by 193 countries. It provides a clear indication of ethical values and principles that should guide AI development and usage. Furthermore, UNESCO is actively working on capacity building to equip governments and organizations with the necessary skills to implement AI systems ethically.

In terms of addressing concerns and ensuring inclusivity, it is highlighted that AI bias can be addressed even before AI regulations are in place. Existing human rights frameworks and data protection laws can start to address challenges related to bias, discrimination, and privacy. For example, UNESCO has been providing knowledge on these issues to judicial operators to equip them with the necessary understanding of AI and the rule of law. Additionally, discussions around AI governance emphasise the need for clarity in frameworks and the inclusion of individuals who are directly impacted by AI technologies.

The analysis also suggests that responsible development, governance, regulation, and capacity building should be multi-stakeholder and cooperative processes. All sectors need to be involved in the conversation and implementation of AI initiatives to ensure effective and inclusive outcomes.

An interesting observation is the need for a balance between voluntary standards and legal frameworks. Complementarity is needed between these two approaches, especially in the design, implementation, and use of AI systems. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the importance of a bottom-up approach in global governance, taking into account diverse stakeholders and global geopolitical contexts. By incorporating global experiences from different stakeholders, risks can be identified, and relevant elements can be considered in local contexts.

Overall, the analysis provides insights into various perspectives on AI and the importance of responsible development, global collaboration, and inclusive policies in shaping the future of AI.

Set Center

AI regulation needs to keep up with the rapid pace of technological advancements, as there is a perceived inadequacy of government response in this area. The tension between speed and regulation is particularly evident in the case of AI. The argument put forth is that regulations should be able to adapt and respond quickly to the ever-changing landscape of AI technology.

On the other hand, it is important to have risk frameworks in place to address the potential risks associated with AI. The United States has taken steps in this direction by introducing the AI Bill of Rights and Risk Management Framework. These foundational documents have been formulated with the contributions of 240 organizations and cover the entire lifecycle of AI. The multi-stakeholder approach ensures that various perspectives are considered in managing the risks posed by AI.

Technological advancements, such as the development of foundation models, have ushered in a new era of AI. Leading companies in this field are primarily located in the United States. This highlights the influence and impact of US-based companies on the development and deployment of AI technologies worldwide. The emergence of foundation models has disrupted the technology landscape, showcasing the potential and capabilities of AI systems.

To address the challenges associated with rapid AI evolution, the implementation of voluntary commitments has been proposed. The White House has devised a framework called ‘Voluntary Commitments’ to enhance responsible management of AI systems. This framework includes elements such as red teaming, information sharing, basic cybersecurity measures, public transparency, and disclosure. Its objective is to build trust and security amidst the fast-paced evolution of AI technologies.

In conclusion, it is crucial for AI regulation to keep pace with the rapid advancements in technology. The perceived inadequacy of government response highlights the need for agile and adaptive regulations. Additionally, risk frameworks, such as the AI Bill of Rights and Risk Management Framework, are important in managing the potential risks associated with AI. The emergence of technologies like foundation models has brought about a new era of AI, with leading companies based in the US driving innovation in this field. The implementation of voluntary commitments, as proposed by the White House, aims to foster trust and security in the ever-evolving landscape of AI technologies.

Auidence

The discussions at the event highlighted the challenges that arise in capacity building due to time and financial commitments. Ansgar Kuhn from EY raised the problem of time commitments related to the capacity building process, which may bring additional financial burdens for various parties. Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and civil society organizations might not be able to afford the cost of someone who isn’t directly contributing to their main products or services. Academics may also struggle to get academic credit for engaging in this kind of process.

To address these financial and time commitment issues in capacity building, participants stressed the importance of finding solutions. Ansgar Kuhn specifically asked for suggestions to tackle this problem, underscoring the need to explore feasible strategies to alleviate the burden that time and financial commitments place on different stakeholders.

There were also concerns raised about the implementation of responsible AI, particularly regarding the choice between system level guardrails and model level guardrails. The discussion highlighted worries about tech vendors providing unsafe models if responsibility for responsible AI is pushed to the system level. This sparked a debate about the best approach to implement responsible AI and the potential trade-offs associated with system level versus model level guardrails.

Moreover, the event touched upon the Hiroshima process and the expectation of a principle-based approach to AI. The previous G20 process, which focused on creating data free flow with trust, served as a reference point for the discussion. There was a question about the need for a principle approach for AI, suggesting the desire to establish ethical guidelines and principles to guide the development and deployment of AI technologies.

In conclusion, the discussions shed light on the challenges posed by time and financial commitments in capacity building and the need for solutions to mitigate these issues. Concerns about system level versus model level guardrails in responsible AI implementation emphasized the importance of balancing safety and innovation in AI. The desire for a principle-based approach to AI and the establishment of ethical guidelines were also highlighted.

Prateek Sibal

UNESCO has developed a comprehensive recommendation on the ethics of AI, achieved through a rigorous multi-stakeholder process. Over two years, 24 global experts collaborated on the initial draft, which then underwent around 200 hours of intergovernmental negotiations. In 2021, all 193 member countries adopted the recommendation, emphasizing the global consensus on addressing ethical concerns surrounding AI.

The recommendation includes values of human rights, inclusivity, and sustainability, serving as a guide for developers and users. It emphasizes transparency and explainability, ensuring AI systems are clear and understandable.

UNESCO is implementing the recommendation through various tools, forums, and initiatives. This includes a readiness assessment methodology, a Global Forum on the Ethics of AI, and an ethical impact assessment tool for governments and companies procuring AI systems.

The role of AI in society is acknowledged, with an example of a robot assisting teachers potentially influencing learning norms. Ethical viewpoints are crucial to align AI with societal expectations.

Prateek Sibal advocates for inclusive multi-stakeholder conversations around AI, emphasizing the importance of awareness, accessibility, and sensitivity towards different sectors. He suggests financial compensation to facilitate civil society engagement.

In conclusion, UNESCO’s recommendation on AI ethics provides valuable guidelines for responsible AI development. Their commitment to implementation and inclusive dialogue strengthens the global effort to navigate ethical challenges presented by AI.

Galia

The speakers in the discussion highlight the critical role of global governance, stakeholder engagement, and value alignment in working towards SDG 16, which focuses on Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. They address the challenges faced in implementing these efforts and stress the importance of establishing credible value alignment.

Galia, one of the speakers, emphasizes the mapping exercises conducted with the OECD regarding risk assessment. This suggests that the speakers are actively involved in assessing potential risks and vulnerabilities in the context of global governance. The mention of these mapping exercises indicates that concrete steps are being taken to identify and address potential obstacles.

Both speakers agree that stakeholder engagement is essential in complementing global governance. Galia specifically highlights the significance of ensuring alignment with values at a global level. This implies that involving various stakeholders and aligning their interests and values is crucial to achieving successful global governance. This collaborative approach allows for a wider range of perspectives and enables a more inclusive decision-making process.

The sentiment expressed by the speakers is positive, indicating their optimism and belief in overcoming the challenges associated with implementation. Their focus on credible value alignment suggests that they recognize the importance of ensuring that the principles and values underpinning global governance are widely accepted and respected. By emphasizing stakeholder engagement and value alignment, the speakers underscore the need for a holistic approach that goes beyond mere top-down control and incorporates diverse perspectives.

In summary, the discussion emphasizes the vital aspects of global governance, stakeholder engagement, and value alignment in achieving SDG 16. The speakers’ identification of challenges and their emphasis on credible value alignment demonstrate a proactive and thoughtful approach. Their mention of the OECD mapping exercises also indicates a commitment to assessing risks and vulnerabilities. Overall, the analysis underscores the significance of collaboration and the pursuit of shared values in global governance.

Nobuhisa Nishigata

Japan has emerged as a frontrunner in the discussions surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) during the G7 meeting. Japan proposed the inclusion of AI as a topic for discussion at the G7 meeting, and this proposal was met with enthusiasm by the other member countries. Consequently, the Japanese government has requested the OECD to continue the work on AI further. This indicates the recognition and value placed by the G7 nations on AI and its potential impact on various aspects of society.

While Japan is proactive in advocating for AI discussions, it adopts a cautious approach towards the introduction of legislation for AI. Japan believes that it is premature to implement legislation specifically tailored for AI at this stage. Nevertheless, Japan acknowledges and respects the efforts made by the European Union in this regard. This perspective highlights Japan’s pragmatic approach towards ensuring that any legislation around AI is well-informed and takes into account the potential benefits and challenges presented by this emerging technology.

Underlining its commitment to fostering cooperation and setting standards in AI, Japan has established the ‘Hiroshima AI process’. This initiative aims to develop a code of conduct and encourage project-based collaboration in the field of AI. The process, which began in 2016, has seen a shift from voluntary commitment to government-initiated inclusive dialogue among the G7 nations. Japan is pleased with the progress made in the Hiroshima process and the inclusive dialogue it has facilitated. It is worth noting that despite unexpected events in 2016, the process has continued to move forward successfully.

Japan recognises the immense potential of AI technology to serve as a catalyst for economic growth and improve everyday life. It believes that AI has the ability to support various aspects of the economy and enhance daily activities. This positive outlook reinforces Japan’s commitment to harnessing the benefits of AI and ensuring its responsible and sustainable integration into society.

In conclusion, Japan has taken a leading role in driving discussions on AI within the G7, with its proposal being well-received by other member countries. While cautious about introducing legislation for AI, Japan appreciates the efforts made by the EU in this regard. The establishment of the ‘Hiroshima AI process’ showcases Japan’s commitment to setting standards and fostering cooperation in AI. Overall, Japan is optimistic about the potential of AI to generate positive outcomes for the economy and society as a whole.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Audience

In the analysis, multiple speakers highlight key points regarding Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) and its implications. The first speaker stresses the importance of sustainable DPIs that take into account environmental factors. They assert that the Global Digital Compact (GDC) claims for sustainable DPIs align with the G20 meeting in India, which established a common agenda. The positive sentiment suggests a consensus on the need for sustainable DPIs.

The second speaker focuses on the significance of DPI by design, implementation, and governance. They provide Estonia’s success in digital government and connected government as an example. By adopting DPI by design, Estonia has effectively demonstrated the value of integrating digital technologies into government functions, resulting in positive outcomes. This observation strengthens the argument for the importance of DPI.

On the other hand, the third speaker raises concerns about the potential impact of mass surveillance. Although no supporting facts are provided, the negative sentiment suggests that the speaker believes mass surveillance has detrimental consequences. This viewpoint serves as a cautionary reminder to consider the potential risks associated with DPI, particularly in relation to individual privacy and civil liberties.

The fourth speaker advocates for a specific framework on “human rights by design.” They emphasize aspects such as privacy, freedom of speech, dignity, and autonomy. By unpacking the concept of human rights by design, the speaker highlights the need for clarity and guidelines to ensure DPI does not infringe upon fundamental rights. This argument underscores the necessity to address potential ethical and legal concerns related to DPI.

The fifth speaker argues for safeguards that can potentially halt or reverse harmful systems, specifically mentioning the importance of safeguards for digital identification. They highlight the significance of the ability to reconsider, reevaluate, and reinstate changes to negate any harms associated with DPI. This perspective supports the idea that proactive measures should be in place to mitigate any adverse effects of DPI.

Lastly, the sixth speaker expresses concerns over the right to anonymity and stresses the need for private space to protect civil and political rights. They mention that the right to anonymity is essential for freedom of speech and other civil liberties. This negative sentiment suggests worries about potential infringements on individual rights and the necessity to protect them in the context of DPI.

In conclusion, this analysis presents a comprehensive overview of various perspectives surrounding DPI. The speakers highlight the importance of sustainability, design, governance, human rights, safeguards, and individual rights within the realm of DPI. While positive sentiments indicate consensus on certain aspects, negative sentiments caution against potential risks and encourage the implementation of necessary precautions.

Eileen Donahoe

The analysis explores several key points regarding the role of digital technology in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It highlights the immense potential of digital technology in accelerating the attainment of these goals. However, it raises concerns that only a small percentage (2%) of government forms in the United States have been digitized. This lack of digitization not only leads to significant time wastage for the public but also results in the loss of $140 billion in potential government benefits each year. This underscores the urgency for governments to prioritize the digitization of their public infrastructure.

The discussion also emphasises the need to embed human rights into digital public infrastructure. While there is a strong desire to expand access to digital services, it is crucial to ensure that the most vulnerable and marginalised communities are protected. The risk of inadvertently developing into surveillance states through digitisation must be carefully mitigated.

Furthermore, the analysis underlines the importance of a global multi-stakeholder approach, where governments collaborate with the technical community, civil society, academic experts and the private sector. This approach fosters collective involvement and cooperation in setting digital technology standards and policies. Eileen Donahoe stresses the significance of this approach to enable a smooth transition from domestic to global multi-stakeholder processes. However, it is acknowledged that this transition can be challenging for governments.

To facilitate the multi-stakeholder input processes, it is recommended to use the Human Rights framework as a global standard. The universality and recognisability of human rights frameworks make them an ideal basis for collaboration and adherence to global standards. Governments are more likely to feel comfortable adopting these global standards as they have already committed to upholding human rights.

The analysis further discusses the importance of global open standards in increasing accountability. Global open standards provide a valuable tool for well-intentioned governments, ensuring that the standards deployed are of a consistently higher calibre compared to what would occur if governments were left to their own devices. Through a global digital compact process with follow-up, soft norms can be established, adding pressure and encouraging accountability.

In addition, the analysis supports the building of a mutual learning ecosystem in different regions. It suggests that Digital Public Infrastructures (DPIs) should be made more context-sensitive. Building on the progress achieved during the Indian presidency, there is a call for expanding and adapting these principles to new areas. Regular reviews and discussions, guided by a safeguards framework, act as reference points for evaluating the progress and efficacy of DPIs.

Lastly, the analysis emphasises the importance of a cross-disciplinary approach. It highlights the necessity for collaboration between experts in norms, law and technologists to effectively implement human rights by design. A shared language is crucial for enabling effective collaboration and understanding between these different disciplines.

Overall, the analysis underscores the need for robust and safeguarded digital public infrastructure, the importance of a global multi-stakeholder approach, and the significance of embedding human rights principles into digital technology. It also highlights the value of global open standards, mutual learning and a cross-disciplinary approach. These factors collectively foster accountability, context sensitivity and progress in the field of digital technology and its impact on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

Speaker 1

The speakers in the discussion emphasized the significance of digital public infrastructure (DPI) and the successful implementation of DPI in Estonia. They pointed out that Estonia has long been a digital leader, and the philosophical and practical origins of DPI can be traced back to this country. They highlighted the principles of openness, transparency, and inclusiveness as the basis for Estonia’s digital reform. The government of Estonia, in collaboration with the private sector, has worked on digital identity, which is an essential component of DPI.

Trust and collaboration were identified as vital elements for the successful implementation of DPI. The speakers emphasized that the Estonian government and private sector combined resources and contributed equally to DPI, which helped build trust among stakeholders. Equality in contribution and responsibility was deemed crucial for fostering collaboration in DPI projects.

The discussion touched upon the need for governments to focus on fixing fundamental aspects such as data governance and digital authentication before moving on to advanced concepts like artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), and blockchain. The speakers argued that many governments and societies are currently discussing advanced concepts without having firmly established the basics. Therefore, DPI serves as a reminder to prioritize the foundational aspects of digitalization.

The importance of sharing and collaboration among governments in the field of digital public infrastructure was emphasized. The speakers noted that while many governments make their tools available, there is a lack of reusing and collaboration. However, some countries, such as Estonia, Finland, and Iceland, have made progress in this area by developing certain digital products collaboratively and making them globally available. The speakers called for a greater push for sharing, reusing, and collaboration among governments to enhance the effectiveness of digital products.

Sustainability and mindset change were identified as challenges in implementing digital public infrastructure. The speakers acknowledged that changes take time and that people can be resistant to change. They also emphasized the importance of continuity as various projects come and go. The example of Internet voting in Estonia was highlighted, as it took several years for it to become popular and widely accepted.

The discussion concluded by highlighting the global nature of guaranteeing privacy, security, and human rights in the digital realm. The speakers stressed that these issues require concerted efforts from both the government and the private sector. Ensuring privacy and security is not solely the responsibility of the government or the private sector. The speakers also emphasized the importance of global movements in addressing these issues.

In conclusion, the discussion shed light on the significance of digital public infrastructure and its implementation in Estonia. The principles of openness, transparency, and inclusiveness were identified as driving forces behind Estonia’s digital reform. Trust, collaboration, and equal responsibility were deemed vital for successful DPI implementation. The need for governments to focus on fundamental aspects before advancing to advanced concepts like AI and blockchain was highlighted, along with the importance of sharing and collaboration among governments. Sustainability, mindset change, and guaranteeing privacy, security, and human rights were identified as challenges that require joint efforts from the government and the private sector.

Moderator – Lea Gimpel

Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) is defined as society-wide digital capabilities that are essential for citizens, entrepreneurs, and consumers to participate in society and markets. It serves as the foundation for public service delivery in the digital era. DPI does not refer to foundational software or physical infrastructure such as fibre optic cables.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries heavily invested in DPI to facilitate faster and prompt response. This shift to digital platforms resulted in the adoption of services like digital ID, payment systems, data exchange systems, and civil registries. However, the speedy implementation sometimes compromised the security, safety, and inclusivity of the systems.

Lea Gimpel advocates for the safe, secure, and inclusive implementation of DPI. Attention needs to be given to avoid risks such as data privacy issues, mass surveillance, and exclusion of vulnerable groups. DPI has an extended risk due to its implementation at population scale, and technologies with societal functions have long-term impacts.

To address these risks, the UN Tech Envoys Office and UNDP launched the Universal DPI Safeguards initiative. It aims to develop safeguards against risks in DPI designs, implementation, and governance.

The movement around DPI focuses on people’s protection and service delivery, emphasizing the approach over technology. Eileen Donahoe advocates for the use of technology to advance the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and expand access to digital services globally. Embedding human rights by design into digital technology is also important in preventing the unconscious drift towards becoming surveillance states.

The United States lags significantly in digitizing government communication and rebuilding its infrastructure. Only 2% of federal government forms have been digitized, resulting in unclaimed government benefits worth $140 billion each year. The implementation of DPI is not solely applicable to low and middle-income countries, high-income countries also need to discuss their approach.

Successful DPI implementation in Estonia highlights the need for DPI standards and the integration of human rights by design. Concerns about potential surveillance risks arise if DPI is not correctly implemented. The speed of DPI implementation often makes implementing safeguards difficult, and the right to anonymity in DPI and Digital ID systems should be ensured.

Sustainability is an important consideration in DPI, as discussed at the G20 meeting in India. Insufficient safeguards in digital ID systems call for DPI safeguards that allow for system stop, reconsideration, or rollback if harm is found. Enforcement is required to ensure compliance with DPI safeguard frameworks. Global open standards increase accountability and add value by monitoring everyone’s system.

The government’s role is crucial in the digital era. It needs to be a partner for citizens and the private sector to build an innovation ecosystem that is crucial for the evolution of digital economies. Existing initiatives like the Global Digital Compact and Open Government Partnership provide an opportunity to create commitment for the DPI Safeguards Initiative.

Cooperation, sharing of technology, and learning are important for effective implementation at scale. Changing mindsets during implementation is crucial for success.

In summary, DPI enables citizens, entrepreneurs, and consumers to participate in society and markets. The Universal DPI Safeguards initiative addresses risks and develops safeguards. The movement around DPI emphasizes people’s protection and service delivery, focusing on the approach over technology. Human rights by design and the use of technology to advance the SDGs are crucial considerations. The United States needs to digitize government communication and infrastructure. High-income countries also need to discuss their approach to DPI. Standards, safeguards, and the right to anonymity are important in DPI implementation. Sustainability, enforcement, and global open standards play crucial roles. Government partnership and cooperation are essential, and existing frameworks provide opportunities for commitment. Effective implementation at scale requires cooperation, technology sharing, and mindset changes.

Robert Opp

The concept of digital public infrastructure should be seen as an approach rather than a technology or set of technologies, with a governance structure and appropriate safeguards. This approach is important for solving immediate problems and ensuring the future success of infrastructure projects. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) aims to complement consultations with ground-level work in three to five countries, testing and applying the emergent framework. They will gather feedback from the field tests to inform the development of safeguards. The UNDP also plans to support countries in implementing the framework and addressing knowledge gaps. Mindset change and incentivizing collaboration are necessary to advance digitalization. Overcoming the current mindset issue requires collective effort and a shift in thinking. Collaboration is crucial for developing scalable ways to implement digitalization. The safeguard initiative is a positive step towards changing mindsets and promoting the implementation and scalability of digital solutions. Sharing and collaboration are crucial for developing and implementing digital solutions. It is important to incentivize people to collaboratively work towards digitalization. The challenge of keeping up with emerging technologies like artificial intelligence requires continuous learning and adaptation. Developing a global approach with safeguards is essential for the success of digitalization efforts. Rolling out this approach quickly with trust and sharing is necessary. In conclusion, the concept of digital public infrastructure as an approach, along with governance structures and safeguards, is important for solving problems and ensuring success. The UNDP’s efforts to complement consultations with ground-level work and support implementation are valuable. Mindset change, collaboration, and safeguards are necessary for digitalization. Sharing and collaboration are key for developing digital solutions. The challenge of emerging technologies like AI requires continuous learning. A global approach with safeguards is crucial, and it should be rolled out quickly with trust and sharing.

Amandeep Singh Gill

Amandeep Singh Gill emphasizes the need for a safeguards framework for digital public infrastructure (DPI) due to the risks and issues related to safety, security, data protection, and societal inclusion/exclusion. It is important to address these concerns to ensure the effective and ethical use of DPIs. Gill advocates for multi-stakeholder participation in building and managing the safeguards framework, including contributions from the private sector and civil society. This collaborative approach ensures diverse perspectives and expertise are considered, leading to more comprehensive and effective solutions.

The foundations of DPI are based on international human rights commitments and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Recognizing the significance of these frameworks, DPIs are designed to align with and support the principles and objectives outlined in these global agendas. By incorporating human rights and SDG frameworks into DPIs, it becomes possible to promote inclusivity, sustainability, and socioeconomic development.

DPIs not only target government services but also play a critical role in boosting the innovation ecosystem by reducing barriers to innovation. By providing an enabling environment and infrastructure, DPIs encourage the development and adoption of new technologies, fostering digital innovation across various sectors. This not only benefits the public sector but also stimulates economic growth and offers new opportunities for businesses, including the emerging Fintech sector.

Promoting a digital economy that includes businesses from different sectors, such as Fintech, is crucial in building robust DPIs. Lowering entry barriers to innovation and increasing demand for digital services and products are central to DPIs. By creating a dynamic national digital economy, DPIs contribute to decent work and economic growth as outlined in SDG 8.

DPIs should also incentivize integration and usage in sectors that may initially not see the need for digital services. For example, it is crucial to demonstrate the benefits of using DPIs in agriculture to farmers who may not immediately recognize the advantages. By showcasing the value and potential of DPI services tailored to their specific needs, farmers can be encouraged to adopt digital solutions, leading to increased productivity and improved agricultural practices.

The G20 presidency offers an opportunity to make the digital development movement more sustainable and contextually relevant in Africa and Latin America. By building on the work conducted during the Indian presidency and collaborating with international partners, it is possible to address the specific challenges and opportunities faced by these regions, ensuring inclusive and equitable digital development.

Regular discussions and soft pressure can be cultivated to improve DPIs. By facilitating ongoing dialogue and regular review of principles and action frameworks, it becomes possible to identify areas for improvement and encourage adherence to established standards. This continual accountability and open communication contribute to the evolution and refinement of DPIs, aligning them with evolving needs and technological advancements.

Strengthening mutual learning ecosystems in various regions is a priority. Promoting cooperative learning environments and exchanging best practices between different regions can help accelerate digital development and enhance the effectiveness of DPIs. The success of the Nordic region in creating a mutual learning ecosystem serves as an example to be emulated in other parts of the world.

An initiative has been launched to unpack the concept of the right to anonymity. Amandeep Singh Gill is open to ideas and assistance in exploring this concept further. This initiative aligns with SDG 16, which focuses on peace, justice, and strong institutions. Unpacking the right to anonymity is crucial in ensuring the protection of digital rights while maintaining a balanced approach to privacy and security concerns.

In conclusion, Amandeep Singh Gill highlights the importance of implementing a safeguards framework for digital public infrastructure. This framework should address risks and issues related to safety, security, data protection, and societal inclusion/exclusion. Multi-stakeholder participation, aligning with human rights commitments and SDG frameworks, boosting the innovation ecosystem, and promoting a digital economy across sectors are key elements in building robust DPIs. The G20 presidency provides an opportunity to make digital development more sustainable, while continuous discussions and follow-up can drive improvement and accountability. Strengthening mutual learning ecosystems and exploring the concept of the right to anonymity are further steps towards promoting inclusive and ethical digital practices.

Henri Verdier

France has been at the forefront of developing digital public infrastructure (DPI), even before the term was officially coined. Their focus has been on aspects such as digital identity and public APIs. They understand the importance of public service rules, such as neutrality, accessibility, and equal access, in constructing DPI. By incorporating these rules, France aims to create a reliable and fair digital environment.

Notably, France recognizes the significance of the digital commons and the need for a free and neutral internet. They argue that DPI and the digital commons are essential for achieving this goal. While DPI refers to the infrastructure, the digital commons encompass concepts such as free software, open standards, and shared resources. The convergence of DPI and the digital commons has the potential to create a powerful and inclusive digital space.

In contrast to France’s proactive approach, Europe has stopped building public infrastructure since the 1970s. However, France insists that Europe should continue developing public digital infrastructure as digital identity and infrastructure for payment are as crucial in the digital age as roads were a century ago.

France also recognizes the potential for innovation and value creation through the OpenGov movement. They highlight that unleashing innovation in government processes can create significant value. This has been demonstrated in the past with initiatives focused on data and source code, and now with infrastructure development. France believes that the OpenGov movement can serve as a third source for unlocking value in the digital landscape.

Moreover, France acknowledges that public service can be implemented by the private sector, as long as certain rules are respected. They emphasize that while the private sector can finance public services, it should not take all the added value. This approach allows for greater flexibility and efficiency in the provision of public services.

Cooperation and community-building are highly valued by France. They argue that more emphasis should be placed on these aspects, rather than simply sharing code. Good documentation and specific types of codes are considered important details in the pursuit of effective collaboration.

However, France also recognizes the challenges that governments face in implementing digital transformations. They find it difficult to adhere to open standards and build small, reusable pieces of infrastructure. The historical context of digital disruption further complicates these projects. France advocates for a simpler, more efficient, and sustainable approach to digital transformations in government.

Using simple, open, and reusable standards can lead to more inclusive and sustainable infrastructure. An example of this is the case of Tuk-Tuk drivers in Bangalore, who developed a cost-effective solution to call a rickshaw, using Indian rules and leveraging infrastructure such as UPI and bacon. France emphasizes the value of adopting such standards to ensure that infrastructure is accessible and beneficial to all.

While infrastructure is vital, France also recognizes that it alone cannot protect democracy if it is misused for malicious purposes. A strong focus on implementing rules within the infrastructure is insufficient. Additional measures are necessary to safeguard democracy and ensure its integrity.

Efficient enforcement of approaches is key to success. By prioritizing efficiency, implementation and enforcement can be carried out in the most effective manner. This approach helps drive progress and ensures that initiatives are impactful and sustainable.

Lastly, France firmly believes in empowering people, unleashing innovation, and guaranteeing fundamental freedom as the most efficient way to promote economic and social development within a country. They advocate for a holistic approach that considers the importance of technology, innovation, and freedoms in shaping a prosperous and inclusive society.

In conclusion, France’s approach to developing digital public infrastructure is rooted in the principles of public service rules, open standards, and the use of digital commons. They stress the importance of continuing to build public digital infrastructure, advancing the OpenGov movement, and promoting cooperation and community-building. France recognizes the challenges of implementing digital transformations, but also highlights the potential for inclusive and sustainable infrastructure through the use of simple and reusable standards. They underline the need to protect democracy beyond infrastructure and advocate for efficient enforcement. Ultimately, France believes in harnessing the power of innovation and empowering individuals to drive economic and social development.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Man Hei Connie Siu

The speakers at the discussion highlighted the persistent disparities in access to care, despite the progress made in digital health. They argued that digital health has not necessarily improved health equity and mentioned two key factors contributing to this issue: the digital divide and low digital health literacy.

The digital divide refers to the gap between those who have access to digital technology and those who do not. This divide disproportionately affects disadvantaged communities, including low-income individuals, rural populations, and marginalized groups. As digital health relies on technology, those without access are unable to benefit from its potential advantages. This creates a further divide in healthcare, perpetuating existing health inequalities.

Low digital health literacy is another barrier to achieving health equity. Many individuals lack the necessary skills and knowledge to navigate digital health information and services effectively. This can prevent them from accessing healthcare resources, making informed decisions, and actively participating in their own care. Addressing this issue requires comprehensive frameworks and assessment tools that capture and assess various dimensions of digital health literacy. By understanding individuals’ abilities and needs in this area, tailored interventions can be developed to enhance digital health literacy and bridge the gap.

Policy solutions were proposed as a means to bridge the digital divide and ensure that digital health truly advances healthcare outcomes for all. It was emphasised that these solutions should be inclusive and consider the unique needs and challenges faced by marginalized communities. By actively addressing these disparities, policymakers can promote equity and ensure that the benefits of digital health are accessible to all.

Throughout the discussion, the importance of promoting inclusivity and equitable access to digital health resources was stressed. It was highlighted that this not only requires action at the policy level but also requires advocacy for strategies that effectively address the unique needs of marginalized communities. By prioritising inclusivity and equity, digital health initiatives can contribute to reducing health disparities and improving overall healthcare outcomes.

In conclusion, while progress has been made in digital health, disparities in access to care persist. The digital divide and low digital health literacy contribute to these disparities, hindering efforts to improve health equity. Policy solutions, comprehensive frameworks, and tailored strategies are needed to bridge this divide, enhance digital health literacy, and promote equitable access to digital health resources for all individuals and communities. By addressing these issues, digital health has the potential to play a significant role in advancing healthcare outcomes and reducing health inequalities.

Audience

The current state of digital health needs to be improved in order to effectively handle future pandemics, according to experts. With the potential for another pandemic like COVID-19, it is crucial to address the shortcomings of the existing digital health infrastructure. The main concerns revolve around overcrowded healthcare facilities during pandemics, which can lead to increased transmission rates and overwhelmed healthcare systems. To mitigate these challenges, it is essential for individuals to receive accurate and timely medical advice and treatment remotely.

There is a growing need to provide accessible treatment and advice without physical visits, especially for vulnerable populations such as the elderly or those with underlying health conditions, who may face higher risks during a pandemic. The reliance on telemedicine and digital healthcare services has become necessary to ensure their safety and well-being.

The argument for improving digital healthcare in pandemic response is compelling. The current system falls short of meeting the demands and implications of a crisis like COVID-19. Enhancing virtual consultations, remote monitoring, and telehealth services would allow individuals to access medical advice, receive prescriptions, and monitor their health from the comfort of their homes.

Additionally, digital health should aim to provide consistent and accurate medical advice and treatment. The decentralization of healthcare during a pandemic can result in inconsistencies and disparities in the quality of care received by individuals in different locations. By standardizing and improving digital healthcare services, individuals can have confidence in the advice and treatment they receive, regardless of where they are located.

In conclusion, the current state of digital health needs to be improved in order to effectively handle future pandemics. The concerns over overcrowded healthcare facilities, the need for individuals to receive accurate and remote medical advice and treatment, and the importance of providing accessible healthcare for vulnerable populations all highlight the urgency of enhancing digital healthcare services. By integrating telemedicine and digital health into the healthcare system, it is possible to enhance access, ensure consistent care, and improve overall pandemic response capabilities.

Geralyn Miller

The analysis examines the perspectives of various speakers on topics related to health, technology, and social determinants. One key point is the importance of addressing social determinants of health to improve health outcomes. It is emphasized that social determinants, including economic policy, development agendas, and social policies, have a significant impact on health outcomes, contributing to around 30 to 55% of health outcomes. The argument put forward is that tackling these determinants is crucial for achieving better health outcomes.

Another important theme is the use of data and technology to understand and address health disparities. The Microsoft AI for Good team has developed a health equity dashboard that provides insights into disparities and outcomes. Partnerships between Microsoft and other organizations, such as the Humanitarian Action Program and Bing Maps, are highlighted as a way to map vulnerable areas. The argument is that data and technology play a crucial role in addressing health disparities.

The analysis also emphasizes the impact of partnerships on social determinants. LinkedIn’s Data for Impact program is mentioned as an example of a partnership that provides professional data to organizations like the World Bank Group. LinkedIn’s data has informed a $1.7 billion World Bank strategy for Argentina. The argument is that partnerships with various entities can have a significant impact on social determinants.

Additionally, the promotion of digital skilling is highlighted as a way to contribute to health equity. Microsoft’s Learn program offers free online learning resources, including role-based learning paths for AI engineers and data scientists. The argument is that digital skilling is important for advancing health equity.

Microsoft’s responsible AI initiatives are also highlighted, emphasizing their focus on fairness, transparency, accountability, reliability, privacy, security, and inclusion. It is crucial to ensure that AI systems and their outputs are understood and accountable to stakeholders, including patients and clinicians.

Furthermore, the analysis advocates for a policy of accountability in AI development, ensuring that products are safe before being released to the public. Brad Smith, Microsoft’s President, has testified in the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee, stressing the importance of accountability and safe AI deployment. The argument is that technology creators should take responsibility for the impact of their technology.

The value of cross-sector partnerships is also highlighted, particularly during the pandemic. Different types of partnerships, including governance-sponsored consortiums, privately funded consortiums, and community-driven groups, have played a crucial role. The argument is that cross-sector partnerships are invaluable in addressing health crises.

Moreover, the analysis recognizes the importance of standards work during the pandemic. The use of smart health cards to represent vaccine status, the development of smart health links encoding minimal clinical information, and the efforts of the International Patient Summary Group in standardizing clinical information for emergency services are underscored. The argument is that the momentum around this standards work should be maintained and expanded.

The analysis also acknowledges the challenge of keeping up with the pace of innovation.

Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of gatherings and dialogue among people with similar interests for advancing in the field. It also advocates for the integration of technological training into the academic system.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights several key points relating to health, technology, and social determinants. It underscores the importance of addressing social determinants of health, utilizing data and technology to understand and address disparities, forming partnerships, promoting digital skilling, adhering to responsible AI initiatives, ensuring accountability in AI development, valuing cross-sector partnerships, acknowledging achievements in standards work during the pandemic, and addressing the challenges of innovation. It also recognizes the significance of gatherings and dialogue and the integration of technological training into the academic system.

Debbie Rogers

The analysis highlights the potential of mobile technology in Sub-Saharan Africa to improve health literacy, personal behavior change, and access to health services. In 2007, more people in Africa had access to mobile technology compared to the so-called global north or western countries. This demonstrates the widespread use and availability of mobile technology in the region. REACH’s maternal health program in South Africa has reached 4.5 million mothers, representing 60% of the mothers who have given birth in the public health system over the last eight years. The program has had several impacts, including improved uptake of breastfeeding and family planning.

Low-tech solutions, such as SMS and WhatsApp, can also empower individuals in their health. These low-tech solutions are highly scalable and can be designed with scale and context in mind. Given the ubiquitous nature of mobile technology in Africa, massive scale reach is possible, thereby increasing access to health information and services.

Additionally, designing digital health solutions with a human-centric approach and considering the larger system can enhance health literacy. By placing the human at the center and acknowledging their existence within a larger system, health literacy can be improved without widening the technology-related divide. Using appropriate language and literacy levels makes digital health services more user-friendly. Furthermore, making these services accessible for free or at a reduced cost decreases the barriers to access.

Ignoring the wider context and blindly implementing digital solutions can inadvertently increase the digital divide. It is important to understand the contextual understanding and the impact of these solutions on the existing system. Ignoring the wider context can lead to unintended consequences and exacerbate existing inequalities.

Addressing systemic issues is crucial for improving health in Sub-Saharan Africa. Currently, Sub-Saharan Africa has 10% of the world’s population, 24% of the disease burden, and only 3% of the health workers. Simply training more health workers without addressing these systemic issues will not improve the statistics and may even worsen the situation.

Telecommunication companies can play a role in promoting health equity and bridging the digital divide. The Facebook Free Basics model, for example, provides essential information that is free to access, and people who are given this free access to data then go on to use the internet more, making them more valuable customers. Collaborating with telecom companies to reduce message costs further enhances digital health access. As the reach of large-scale programs increases, the costs for telecom companies are reduced, benefiting both the companies and the access to health information for users.

Digital health solutions should work in harmony with the existing health system. Creating a digital health solution should not overburden the system, and feedback mechanisms are crucial to understand the impact of these solutions on the overall system.

Biases in creating digital health services can be reduced by having a diverse team. The biases that exist in these services are often a result of the people building them not being the ones using them. Having a team that is diverse in terms of gender and race can address these biases and ensure that digital health solutions are more inclusive and equitable.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital health played a crucial role in reducing the burden on healthcare professionals and empowering patients with information. Large-scale networks such as Facebook, WhatsApp, and SMS platforms provided quick and reliable information to people, proving the effectiveness and importance of digital health in times of crisis.

Long-term investment in digital health infrastructure is crucial for preparedness. Digital health platforms that served the needs during the pandemic may no longer exist and need to be maintained for future use. Another pandemic is inevitable, thus preparation is necessary to ensure a timely and effective response.

Technology can be utilized as a great enabler to decrease health inequalities and improve digital literacy. By leveraging technology, health services can reach marginalized populations and bridge the gap in access to information and services. Digital health is a mature field with the potential for large-scale implementation, as evidenced by numerous case studies of successful implementations.

There is excitement and a positive view towards the role of youth in the evolution of the digital health field. Engaging youth and integrating their perspectives can lead to innovative solutions and advancements in the field. This aligns with the broader goals of SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 4 (Quality Education).

In conclusion, mobile technology, low-tech solutions, and digital health have the potential to significantly improve health outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa. Designing solutions with a human-centric approach, addressing systemic issues, collaborating with telecommunications companies, and considering diversity can enhance the effectiveness and inclusivity of digital health services. The COVID-19 pandemic has further emphasized the importance of digital health in reducing burdens on healthcare professionals and empowering individuals with information. Long-term investment in digital health infrastructure and harnessing the potential of technology are vital for achieving health equity, reducing inequalities, and improving overall well-being.

Rajendra Gupta

The analysis highlights the importance of digital health training for various stakeholders in the healthcare sector. Firstly, it emphasises the need for policy makers to be adequately trained in digital health. The International Society of Telemedicine and E-Health, with memberships in 117 countries, is an influential body in promoting digital health training. Additionally, the World Health Organization (WHO) has established a capacity building department in 2019 to support policy makers in this area.

Moreover, it is essential for frontline health workers to receive affordable and accessible digital health training. In India, ASHA workers, who are the first responders in healthcare, will be provided with affordable £1 training in the next two months. This will enable them to effectively utilise digital health tools and technologies in their work.

Patients also need to be trained to use digital health technology effectively. They should be educated on how to open an app, use it, and understand privacy and security measures. The International Patients Union is actively involved in training patients to use digital technology, ensuring they can benefit from its potential in managing their health.

The analysis also highlights the role of governments in addressing health equity and the digital divide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Governments, such as India, have launched initiatives to provide digital healthcare access to underprivileged populations. For instance, India offers free telemedicine services through 160,000 health and wellness centres across the country. Additionally, the government has rolled out 460 million health IDs with plans for 1 billion under the digital health mission. These efforts help bridge the gap in healthcare access and promote health equity.

A well-crafted policy and substantial government investment are deemed essential for the successful implementation of digital health programs. The Indian government, for instance, has established a national digital health mission and is investing in advanced systems like artificial intelligence and natural language processing to enhance telemedicine services. They are also rolling out the Ayushman Bharat Health Account number (ABHA number) to further support digital health initiatives.

Digital health is seen as a promising solution for health inequity and has the potential to bridge the gap between urban and rural healthcare service delivery. Technologies such as conversational AI and chatbots can offer basic health consultations for routine problems, while the creation of 460 million health records in India demonstrates the progress being made in digitising health information.

The analysis also acknowledges the role of technology during the COVID-19 pandemic. It highlights fast-track vaccine development through global collaborations and the use of artificial intelligence for repurposed drug use. The delivery of 2.2 billion vaccinations digitally through a COVID App further demonstrates the readiness of technology in responding to the pandemic.

The momentum of using technology in the health sector must be maintained, with government incentives and flexibility in telehealth during the pandemic playing a crucial role. Additionally, digital literacy is important for anyone in the health sector, with initiatives such as the Digital Health Academy collaborating with Google to create developers for health. Courses on robotics, artificial intelligence, and digital health are being developed to ensure that individuals at all levels of the healthcare sector possess the necessary skills.

It is further highlighted that those who do not understand digital health risk becoming professionally irrelevant. Therefore, it is crucial for healthcare professionals, including doctors, to stay updated on digital health developments to better serve informed patients.

The analysis points out that scalability is crucial in healthcare. This means that the ability to expand digital health initiatives and ensure they are accessible to all is of utmost importance in order to achieve the desired impact in improving healthcare delivery.

Overall, the analysis underscores the importance of digital health training for policymakers, frontline health workers, patients, and the broader healthcare sector. It highlights the role of various stakeholders, including private organisations, civil society, and governments, in promoting digital health literacy, addressing health equity, and bridging the digital divide. The analysis also highlights the potential of technology in managing healthcare, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, it emphasises the need for digital literacy and scalability in order to maximise the benefits of digital health in the healthcare sector.

Yawri Carr

The analysis delves into several key topics related to digital health and technology. One of the main focuses is the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Framework, which aims to harmonise technological progress with ethical principles. The framework advocates for policies that preserve digital rights and establish mechanisms of accountability. This is seen as crucial in guiding the development of digital health technologies, ensuring that they are ethically sound and aligned with societal values.

Ethical considerations in the development of digital health technologies are explored further. It is argued that in competitive environments, where efficiency, speed, and profit are prioritised, ethical concerns can be compromised. This tension between ethics and industry objectives highlights the need for a careful balance between technological advancements and ethical principles, ensuring that technology is developed in a responsible and sustainable manner.

The involvement of youth in digital health is highlighted as a significant factor in bridging the digital divide and enhancing digital health literacy. Youths can play a crucial role in the research process, ensuring that interventions are culturally sensitive and address the specific needs of their communities. Innovation challenges and mentorship programmes are seen as powerful tools for guiding youth in the development of their ideas. Additionally, digital health literacy programmes can be initiated to equip young individuals with the necessary skills and knowledge to navigate the digital health landscape effectively.

The analysis also emphasises the importance of youth participation in internet governance policies. By actively engaging in discussions and decision-making processes, young advocates can ensure equitable access to digital health resources. It is argued that youth coalitions can amplify their collective voice on topics such as digital health equity, ultimately driving positive change and promoting inclusivity in healthcare.

Innovation hubs are suggested as a collaborative platform where young innovators, healthcare professionals, and policymakers can come together to create solutions for digital health challenges. The involvement of supportive companies and resources can aid in filling innovation gaps and promoting meaningful advancements in the field.

During a pandemic, telemedicine and the implementation of robots are highlighted as crucial. Telemedicine enables the delivery of remote healthcare, minimising contact and reducing the risk of contagion for healthcare workers. Robots, on the other hand, can perform tasks considered dangerous or dirty, thus protecting the health of patients and medical professionals.

The analysis also supports the initiative of Open Science, emphasising the importance of open access to data and research. Costa Rica’s proposal for an open science initiative to the World Health Organization (WHO) is highlighted as a positive step towards facilitating collaboration and partnerships for the advancement of digital health technologies.

The role of technology in emergency situations is underscored in the analysis. It is argued that technology can help protect healthcare professionals and patients during emergencies, providing essential support and resources to mitigate risks and ensure effective healthcare delivery.

Finally, the analysis recognises the value of ethicists’ work and emphasises the importance of their active involvement in discussions about responsible AI. Ethicists are seen as vital in ensuring that the development and deployment of AI technologies align with ethical considerations and respect for human values.

In conclusion, the analysis provides a comprehensive examination of various aspects of digital health and technology. It highlights the importance of ethical considerations, youth engagement, innovation hubs, and the role of robots and telemedicine. The insights gained from this analysis further emphasise the need for responsible and inclusive development of digital health technologies, while recognising the value of collaboration, inclusivity, and ethics in driving positive advancements in the field.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Felicia Anthonio

Internet shutdowns have become a widespread problem globally, with detrimental effects on lives and democratic processes. The Keep It On campaign, which aims to combat internet shutdowns, has recorded over 1,200 incidents of shutdowns in approximately 76 countries since 2016. These shutdowns are typically carried out by state actors during critical moments such as elections, protests, and conflicts.

One of the main concerns regarding internet shutdowns is their impact on democratic processes, particularly during elections. The internet plays a crucial role in enabling active participation and promoting transparency and fairness in electoral proceedings. However, when shutdowns occur, it becomes challenging to effectively monitor and ensure the integrity of electoral processes.

Governments often justify these shutdowns as a necessary national security measure to prevent the spread of misinformation. However, in practice, the opposite tends to occur. Shutdowns tend to benefit incumbent governments, as they can control the flow of information and stifle opposition voices. This, in turn, often sparks public outrage and protests. Incidents in countries like Uganda, Belarus, and the Republic of Congo serve as examples of how shutdowns have been used for political gains and to suppress dissent.

Addressing this issue requires the collaboration of various stakeholders, including businesses, big tech companies, and governments. The fight against internet shutdowns necessitates a multi-stakeholder approach, emphasizing the importance of secure, open, free, and inclusive internet access during critical moments such as elections.

Furthermore, it is crucial to highlight that internet shutdowns do not contribute to resolving crises. On the contrary, they tend to exacerbate the situations at hand. Shutdowns provide an opportunity for governments and perpetrators to commit crimes with impunity. Moreover, in conflict situations, shutting down the internet in response to flagged dangerous content ultimately escalates the crisis.

The Keep It On Coalition, a prominent advocate against shutdowns, strongly condemns all forms of internet shutdowns. In addition, they call upon big tech companies to exercise responsibility in promptly removing violent content to ensure people’s safety.

In conclusion, internet shutdowns are an escalating issue that negatively affects lives and democratic processes. The Keep It On campaign’s documentation of a significant number of shutdown incidents highlights the magnitude of the problem. The justifications used by governments for shutdowns often raise concerns about political motivations and human rights violations. Tackling this issue necessitates collaborative efforts between various stakeholders, and it is essential to prioritize secure, open, and inclusive internet access during critical moments. Additionally, internet shutdowns have been observed to worsen crises rather than resolve them, underlining the need for alternative approaches. The condemnation of shutdowns by organizations like the Kipiton Coalition further emphasizes the importance of combating this issue and ensuring the responsible conduct of big tech companies in safeguarding online spaces.

Audience

The speakers discussed several key aspects related to free and fair elections and the issue of internet shutdowns. They emphasised the importance of communication and the role it plays in ensuring fair elections. They highlighted the significance of the internet, GSM networks, and blockchain networks as essential tools for facilitating communication during election processes. Additionally, they emphasised the need for independent observers, journalists, and international organisations to monitor elections and ensure their fairness. These independent entities play a crucial role in preventing election fraud and promoting transparency.

Another critical aspect discussed was the use of blockchain technology in elections. The speakers highlighted the immutability of election results that can be achieved by leveraging blockchain technology. They stressed that this feature is essential in guaranteeing the credibility of election outcomes. Furthermore, they emphasised the role of cryptographic protection in ensuring the security and safety of the election process. Robust cryptographic measures can prevent tampering or manipulation of sensitive election data.

Scalability was identified as another crucial component of free and fair elections. The speakers pointed out that a scalable network is necessary to efficiently manage a large number of voters, such as a population of 300 million. This ensures that the election process can accommodate a significant number of participants without any disruptions or technical limitations.

While the discussion mainly focused on the positive aspects of communication, independent observers, blockchain technology, and scalability, there were also concerns raised regarding the resorting to internet shutdowns by governments. The speakers highlighted that governments sometimes lack alternative tools to address legitimate concerns and therefore turn to internet shutdowns as a means of control. This practice was seen as problematic as it limits citizens’ access to information and disrupts the democratic process.

The potential economic impact of internet shutdowns was also discussed. Lack of reliable connectivity was identified as a significant factor that creates a difficult investment climate. Internet shutdowns and restrictions on data flows were acknowledged as factors that negatively affect a country’s economy.

The Internet Society’s efforts in developing a tool called Pulse to track and provide information on internet shutdowns and data flows were applauded. This tool aims to support activists and democracy by providing digestible information that can help address concerns related to internet shutdowns.

The concerns about potential misuse and the legitimisation of internet shutdowns for specific cases were also raised. It was acknowledged that the legitimisation of internet shutdowns during religious ceremonies or events that might incite violence could encourage misuse of this strategy by other governments. This highlighted the need to explore solutions to address structural issues within governments that may lead to internet shutdowns.

Furthermore, the speakers identified the spread of disinformation as a significant challenge during elections. Disinformation was acknowledged as damaging to the image of political leaders and the democratic process as a whole. It was proposed that internet service providers should be held responsible for controlling the spread of disinformation, and artificial intelligence could be used as a tool to achieve this.

Lastly, the role of digital technology in promoting government accountability and responsiveness was emphasised. It was suggested that the use of digital technology can enhance the accountability of governments, making them more responsive to the needs and concerns of citizens.

Overall, the discussions highlighted the multifaceted nature of free and fair elections. It was concluded that a comprehensive approach involving governments, internet service providers, political parties, and citizens is necessary to ensure the integrity of electoral processes. The discussions also shed light on the challenges and potential solutions related to internet shutdowns, disinformation, and the use of digital technology in elections.

Ben Graham Jones

The discussion revolves around the detrimental effects of internet shutdowns and the importance of safeguarding online rights. The primary argument is that the rights people enjoy offline should not be diminished when they are online. This argument is supported by the agreement at the UN General Assembly that there should be equality between online and offline rights. It is emphasised that internet shutdowns have a negative impact on communication, as they silence the entire population by cutting off their access to the internet.

Another argument put forward is that internet shutdowns exacerbate the problem of disinformation. This is because during shutdowns, state TV or selective channels often remain functional, thereby monopolising the sources of information available to the public. This concentration of information sources leads to a limited pool of information and increases the likelihood of disinformation spreading. The inability to access fact-based information compromises people’s right to access accurate information and undermines the integrity of elections.

The discussions also highlight the need for cross-context learning to effectively counter disinformation. It is suggested that there is considerable overlap in the types of disinformation narratives spread across different electoral contexts. To address this challenge, there is a call for organisations working in vulnerable contexts to learn from other contexts and enhance their preparedness for countering disinformation. This entails shifting efforts from response to prevention and providing fact-based information at an earlier stage.

Furthermore, risk forecasting is deemed crucial in addressing potential internet shutdowns. The discussions stress that by the time an internet shutdown takes place, it is often too late to take substantial action. Therefore, organisations need to map out potential risks and adjust their plans accordingly to minimise the impact of such shutdowns.

Additionally, the analysis reveals that election technology, including blockchain, can become targets for disinformation. While the details and evidence supporting this argument are not provided, it is suggested that election technologies may be vulnerable to misinformation campaigns, potentially undermining the credibility and integrity of elections.

Overall, there is a strong positive stance that internet shutdowns should be fought against. The primary reason cited is that these shutdowns impede the ability of fact-checkers and journalists to perform their roles effectively, thereby undermining freedom of information. The importance of preserving online rights and resisting the negative consequences of internet shutdowns is emphasised throughout the discussions.

In conclusion, the expanded summary delves into the various arguments and evidence related to the negative consequences of internet shutdowns and the imperative to protect online rights. Additionally, the need for cross-context learning, risk forecasting, and the vulnerability of election technology are addressed. The overall message conveys the importance of combating internet shutdowns and their detrimental impact on freedom of information and the integrity of elections.

Kanbar Hossein-Bor

Internet shutdowns have a significant impact on the flow of information, freedom of expression, and human rights. These shutdowns not only hinder individuals’ ability to express themselves online but also threaten the exercise of human rights. It is important to consider internet shutdowns in the context of broader issues, such as media freedom and misinformation.

Recognizing the gravity of the situation, the Freedom Online Coalition issued a joint statement focusing on internet shutdowns and elections. The UK has taken a leading role in addressing this problem by leading a Task Force on Internet Shutdowns as part of the Freedom Online Coalition. This collaborative approach involves stakeholders such as the UK’s Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, Access Now, and the Global Network Initiative. The Task Force, chaired by Kanbar Hossein-Bor, advocates for a multi-stakeholder approach to effectively tackle internet shutdowns and disruptions.

Internet shutdowns not only impact individual rights but also pose a threat to the wider democratic process. By restricting access to the internet, these shutdowns hinder the exercise of offline rights online. Additionally, the economic costs incurred by societies affected by internet shutdowns are substantial.

Despite the challenges, there is a strong desire to support policymakers who may lack the capacity, but not the intent, to address internet shutdowns. This recognizes the need for collaborative efforts between various actors to tackle this issue effectively.

In the face of those with ulterior motives, it is crucial to stand firm and uphold principles of open internet access and the protection of human rights. The comprehensive impact of internet shutdowns has been highlighted by the Oxford statement, and the launch of the FOC statement further emphasizes the urgency of addressing this issue.

In conclusion, internet shutdowns pose a grave threat to the free flow of information, freedom of expression, and human rights. Addressing this issue requires a collaborative, multi-stakeholder approach, as advocated by Kanbar Hossein-Bor and demonstrated through the Task Force on Internet Shutdowns led by the UK. Policymakers must prioritize efforts to combat internet shutdowns, even when capacity is limited, but there is a strong intent to address the issue. It is essential to remain steadfast in the face of those seeking to restrict access to information and suppress rights.

Andrea Ngombet

The analysis highlights several key points concerning internet shutdowns and information control in Congo. During the 2021 elections, the government not only blocked the internet but also telecommunications, justifying this action as a measure against foreign interference and misinformation. However, this move has been widely criticized as an attempt by the government to control the flow of information.

Furthermore, anti-terrorism and cyber-criminality laws have been used to suppress opposition in Congo. Activists were arrested based on their social media posts during the internet shutdowns, raising concerns about the government’s use of legal mechanisms to target dissent and stifle freedom of speech.

The government of Congo is seeking assistance from the Republic of China to acquire advanced tools for internet control, such as a firewall. However, this approach lacks technological sophistication, highlighting the need for aid in developing domestic technology and innovation.

One important argument made is that tech companies like META should play a role in preventing the spread of misinformation, particularly during elections. Through collaboration with META, Congo was able to establish the Congo Fact Check initiative, demonstrating the positive impact of cooperation between tech companies and local organizations.

Civil society organizations also have a crucial role in moderating hate speech and misinformation online. In Congo, META worked with civil society organizations to create a task force on elections, addressing hate speech and misinformation from both the opposition and government. The involvement of civil society organizations can serve as a middle ground, reducing the perceived need for the government to impose internet shutdowns.

Additionally, it is emphasized that big corporations should be encouraged to participate more actively in online moderation efforts. It is noted that these corporations often have a reactive approach to tackling online misinformation. By reaching out to them, local civil society organizations can facilitate their involvement in countering online misinformation and make their efforts more proactive.

In conclusion, the analysis reveals a concerning pattern of internet shutdowns and information control in Congo, which is seen as an attempt by the government to control the narrative during elections. There is a call for tech companies, civil society organizations, and big corporations to proactively work together to prevent the spread of misinformation and hate speech. By doing so, the likelihood of internet shutdowns can be reduced, ensuring the protection of freedom of speech and public access to information.

Nicole Streamlau

Internet shutdowns are increasingly seen as necessary measures to address concerns related to elections, such as interference, disinformation, and post-election violence. Research carried out in Africa has shown a growing acceptance of internet shutdowns as a means of controlling election-related issues. Historical practices like banning opinion polls and political campaigning near voting day have also contributed to this acceptance.

Governments in the global South express frustration with the perceived lack of response, engagement, and oversight from large social media companies. Internet shutdowns are viewed as a form of resistance and sovereignty against the dominance of these companies, which are often based in distant countries. This dynamic highlights the tensions between governments and technology companies in terms of information governance.

The decision to implement internet shutdowns is partly influenced by a lack of information literacy. Governments with limited experience and understanding of online content moderation may resort to internet shutdowns as a response. Oxford University has launched a training program aimed at increasing information literacy among policymakers and judges, promoting a better balance of competing rights and addressing information disorder within a human rights framework. The goal is to reduce reliance on internet shutdowns as a solution.

Policymakers in peripheral markets, such as Ethiopia and the Central African Republic, struggle to understand and engage with technology companies. This observation underscores the difficulties faced by policymakers in regions with limited presence and engagement, in contrast to countries like Germany, which have embassies in Silicon Valley. The complexities of the relationship between policymakers and technology companies contribute to the challenges of addressing issues like internet shutdowns.

In conflict-affected regions, internet shutdowns are becoming accepted by local populations as a means to combat online hate speech and incitement to violence. Research carried out in conflict-prone areas of Ethiopia shows that locals prefer internet shutdowns as a way to avoid exposure to harmful online content. The acceptance of internet shutdowns in these regions arises from a lack of effective alternatives to address widespread hate speech and incitement to violence online.

Overall, while internet shutdowns are increasingly seen as a response to election-related concerns, the lack of information literacy and strained relationships between governments and technology companies contribute to their implementation. However, efforts to enhance information literacy among policymakers and judges through training programs, such as the one initiated by Oxford University, offer a promising approach to reducing reliance on internet shutdowns. Finding effective and sustainable solutions beyond internet shutdowns requires striking a balance between addressing concerns and protecting rights within a human rights framework.

Sarah Moulton

Increased internet disruptions during elections have a detrimental impact on the work of ground observers and pose a serious threat to domestic observer networks. These networks play a crucial role in reporting on electoral processes and collecting vital data. The disruption of internet services hampers their operation, making it difficult to effectively monitor elections and gather accurate information.

Moreover, observers on the ground face higher risks, including the risk of being arrested. This underscores the urgent need to safeguard them and provide them with the necessary tools to measure and report data effectively. Without adequate protection and support, these observers may be deterred from carrying out their important work, compromising transparency and accountability in the electoral process.

The importance of political parties and policymakers engaging in the process is also highlighted. Attendees at the FIFA Africa event in Tanzania displayed interest in the issue, emphasising the need for their active involvement. It is crucial for political parties and policymakers to recognize the significance of internet disruptions during elections and take proactive measures to address this issue.

Early collaboration is essential, with a particular focus on data collection relating to the economic and social impacts of shutdowns. The repercussions of internet shutdowns extend beyond the electoral process and can have a significant negative impact on healthcare and various economic sectors within a country. Therefore, it is essential to gather comprehensive data on these impacts to understand the full extent of the problem and develop effective strategies to mitigate them. Training programs for politicians and political parties can also be instrumental in preparing them for potential shutdowns and equipping them with the necessary skills and knowledge to respond effectively.

Accurate data that reflects the specific local context is vital in reports related to internet shutdowns. It is crucial that policy decisions are based on accurate and contextually relevant information, as the impact of internet disruptions can vary greatly between different regions and countries. The work being done through the Summit for Democracy highlights the recognition of this need and the ongoing efforts to ensure that data used for policymaking accurately portrays the local realities and challenges associated with internet shutdowns.

Collaboration between various stakeholders, including policymakers, civil society, internet service providers, technology platforms, strategic litigators, and international organizations, is paramount. Given the complex and multifaceted nature of internet disruptions during elections, a collaborative approach is necessary to address the issue effectively. All these actors must come together and share their resources, expertise, and data to build a comprehensive case and develop robust strategies for combating internet shutdowns, particularly during election times.

Furthermore, the platform created by the Internet Society is highly valued and supports the measurement of the cost of internet shutdowns. This platform plays a crucial role in helping to quantify the economic impact of internet disruptions and provides valuable insights into the true costs of such disruptions. By highlighting the financial consequences, the Internet Society facilitates a deeper understanding of the gravity of the issue and advocates for necessary actions to prevent or mitigate internet shutdowns.

In conclusion, increased internet disruptions during elections pose serious challenges for ground observers and domestic observer networks. It is imperative to protect and support these observers, provide them with effective tools, and engage political parties and policymakers in addressing this issue. Early collaboration, accurate data collection, and collaboration between various stakeholders are all crucial aspects of combating internet shutdowns during elections. The platform created by the Internet Society is instrumental in measuring the cost of internet shutdowns and emphasizes the need for action.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Moderator – Alexandra Robinson

Women and girls are subjected to significant levels of online harassment and gender-based violence, as highlighted by the analysis. This underscores the urgent need to prioritize their safety in digital spaces. Alexandra Robinson emphasizes the importance of addressing this issue through a combination of law, policy, and civil society movements.

There is a growing awareness in the international community regarding the prevalence of technology-facilitated gender-based violence. The Commission on the Status of Women dedicated a session to the intersection of gender and technology, and global outcomes documents now incorporate language on gender-based violence. These developments indicate an increasing focus on addressing this issue at a global level.

Several countries are taking action by implementing laws and policies to combat technology-facilitated gender-based violence, demonstrating their commitment to protecting the rights of women and girls. This positive step toward achieving gender equality and ensuring the safety of women online.

In addition, there is support for the progression of policy and legal systems concerning gender-based violence, highlighting the need for robust frameworks to effectively address and prevent such violence. This recognition of the importance of institutions and mechanisms to disrupt online harm experienced by women is encouraging.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the high rates of online harassment and gender-based violence faced by women and girls. It emphasizes the significance of prioritizing their safety in digital spaces and the role of law, policy, and civil society movements in addressing this issue. The international community’s increasing awareness of technology-facilitated gender-based violence and implementation of relevant laws and policies offer hope for meaningful change. Achieving gender equality and combating gender-based violence require continued efforts and support for the progression of policy and legal systems.

Karla Velasco

The Association for Progressive Communications (APC) and its member organisations are actively involved in addressing various aspects of women’s rights, sexual rights, and feminist movements. Their work spans approximately 40 countries, mainly in the global south. A significant achievement of APC and its members is the successful recognition of online gender-based violence as a violation of human rights in 2022. This recognition is a result of their continuous efforts and advocacy.

APC aims to create a gender-inclusive internet that goes beyond providing access to the online world. They highlight the importance of understanding the challenges faced by women, as well as individuals from diverse genders and sexualities, online. Critical issues that APC addresses include online gender-based violence and technology-facilitated gender-based violence. They believe that discussions on these topics should not only raise awareness but also focus on the response and remedy for victims and survivors.

Intersectionality is another key focus for APC. They assert that a gender-inclusive internet should consider factors such as race, gender, identity, sexuality, class, and ethnicity. By highlighting these aspects, APC aims to create a comprehensive and inclusive digital space that addresses the needs and concerns of all individuals, regardless of their social backgrounds.

APC promotes a vision of transformative justice, emphasising values such as pleasure, sexuality, joy, and freedom of expression. They believe that promoting a more positive and empowering narrative around gender issues online can lead to societal transformation that respects and upholds the rights and dignity of all individuals.

One important observation is that APC urges the discussion to move beyond acknowledging and condemning online gender-based violence towards implementing measures that provide support and remedies for victims and survivors. They call for comprehensive discussions and actions on victim support and advocacy to ensure that those affected receive the necessary assistance and justice they deserve.

In conclusion, APC and its member organisations play a crucial role in advancing women’s rights, sexual rights, and feminist movements. Through their advocacy and initiatives, they have been instrumental in recognising online gender-based violence as a human rights violation. APC’s emphasis on a gender-inclusive internet, intersectionality, and transformative justice demonstrates their commitment to creating a more equitable and empowering digital world. Their call to prioritise victim support and remedies further reinforces their dedication to addressing the needs and challenges faced by individuals affected by online gender-based violence.

MARTHA LUCIA MICHER CAMARENA

The analysis highlights a concerning issue in Mexico, where digital violence is affecting women, adolescents, and girls. Startling statistics reveal that three out of ten women internet users in Mexico have become victims of cyberbullying. Furthermore, a staggering 74.1% of women victims of digital violence are between the ages of 18 and 30.

What’s more alarming is that the majority of the aggressors responsible for these acts of digital violence are known individuals, with former partners being the main culprits, accounting for 81.6% of the cases. This indicates that digital violence is not a random occurrence but often involves individuals with intimate or prior relationships with the victims.

Recognising the seriousness of this issue, the call for legislation to provide safety for women in digital spaces has been raised. One positive aspect is the existence of the Gender Equality Committee in the Mexican Senate, chaired by a prominent figure who is actively working towards this cause. The committee has successfully enacted important reforms that define digital violence and establish regulations for protection orders in cases of digital violence.

However, despite these positive steps, challenges remain in the judicial system, public ministries, and amongst judges. These institutions and individuals pose significant obstacles to achieving gender equality. Lack of adequate understanding, biases, and systemic issues still prevalent in the judicial system hinder progress in addressing gender-related issues effectively.

On a more positive note, the analysis also highlights significant progress made in the realms of gender equality and women’s rights over the past three decades. This progress is evident considering the participation in the Beijing 1995 Conference, which focused on gender inequality and highlighted various gender-related topics. Notably, these topics were once considered ‘crazy’ but are now internationally recognised areas of concern and focus.

In conclusion, the analysis sheds light on the issue of digital violence affecting women, adolescents, and girls in Mexico. Legislation is urgently needed to ensure their safety in digital spaces. Although advancements have been made in this regard, challenges in the judicial system and among public ministries persist, hindering progress towards gender equality. Despite these challenges, notable progress has been achieved in gender equality and women’s rights, with gender-related issues now receiving international attention and recognition.

Audience

This analysis explores several crucial topics related to gender-based violence, social justice, and the intersection of digital technologies. The speakers discussed the various risks and opportunities presented by the internet in combating gender-based violence and promoting social justice.

One speaker highlighted the work of NGO Diretos Digitales, which operates at the intersection of human rights and digital technologies. They argued that the internet is a place of both risk and opportunity. On one hand, it allows for greater visibility and the potential for addressing social justice issues. On the other hand, it also exposes individuals to risks and potential harm, particularly in relation to gender-based violence.

Another speaker focused on the need for sensible legislation, enforcement, and understanding to address technology-facilitated gender-based violence. They emphasized that standardizing such legislation is currently under discussion. However, they also noted that the legislative aspect alone is not enough to combat this issue effectively.

In connection with this, the importance of legal frameworks that consider the privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information of survivors was raised. The speakers argued that it is not just the rights of offenders that should be considered, but also the rights and protection of those who have experienced gender-based violence.

Furthermore, an intersectional approach, which takes into account contextual and social differences, was advocated. The speakers acknowledged that social problems disproportionately affect individuals in vulnerable situations. Therefore, any efforts to address gender-based violence and promote social justice must consider these differences and work towards a more inclusive and equitable solution.

Lastly, the analysis included a notable call for age-based protections, particularly for adult women, within the legal system. It was highlighted that while there are existing protections for children up to the age of 18 in the speaker’s country, violence against adult women is often normalized and they are not always recognized as victims. This observation emphasizes the need for a comprehensive approach to tackling gender-based violence and ensuring justice for all individuals affected by it.

In conclusion, this analysis highlights the multifaceted nature of gender-based violence and the need for comprehensive strategies to combat it. It underscores the importance of legislation, legal frameworks, and an intersectional approach in promoting social justice and addressing the risks and opportunities presented by digital technologies. Additionally, it raises awareness about the need for age-based protections, especially for adult women. By considering these factors, society can take meaningful steps towards creating a safer and more equitable environment.

Julie Inman Grant

The analysis explores several crucial aspects of online harassment and the urgent need for effective measures to combat it. One notable observation is the disapproval of the term ‘revenge porn’, which is deemed to trivialize and victim-blame. Instead, there is an argument to adopt the term ‘image-based abuse’ to better convey the seriousness and harm caused by such actions. This emphasises the importance of using language that accurately depicts the nature and impact of online harassment.

Another significant finding is the intersectional nature of online harassment. The analysis highlights that indigenous Australians experience twice the amount of online hate compared to other groups. It also reveals the different challenges faced by urban and rural indigenous populations, as well as culturally and linguistically diverse communities. This underscores the necessity of understanding and addressing the unique vulnerabilities and perspectives of these groups to effectively tackle online harassment.

The analysis further emphasises the importance of co-designing preventive solutions with vulnerable communities. It stresses the need to consider diverse experiences and vulnerabilities when designing mechanisms to prevent online harassment. This promotes a more inclusive approach that is better equipped to address the specific challenges faced by different groups, thereby increasing the effectiveness of preventive measures.

Furthermore, the analysis highlights the successful implementation of deterrent powers in curbing online abuses. It indicates a 90% success rate in removing abusive content, which is a positive outcome. Moreover, it suggests that women who sought help had positive responses, affirming the effectiveness of these measures in providing relief and protection to victims.

Finally, an important observation from the analysis is the willingness of the eSafety Commissioner to collaborate internationally. Recognising that online harassment is a global issue, the Commissioner acknowledges the importance of a global approach to addressing it and ensuring a safer online environment for all. This demonstrates the recognition of the need for partnerships and information sharing to effectively tackle online harassment.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the need for a comprehensive and inclusive approach to combat online harassment. It highlights the importance of using appropriate language, understanding the intersectional nature of online harassment, co-designing preventive measures with vulnerable communities, implementing effective deterrent powers, and collaborating internationally. These insights provide valuable guidance in tackling the complex issue of online harassment and ensuring a safer online environment for everyone.

Juan Carlos Lara Galvez

The internet is a space that presents both risks and opportunities. In the context of social justice and combating gender-based violence, the internet has provided a platform for giving visibility to social demands. It has allowed for the amplification of voices and the dissemination of information related to these issues. This is a positive sentiment as it signifies the potential for social change and progress.

To effectively address technology-facilitated gender-based violence, legal frameworks should take a balanced perspective. This means considering the rights of individuals, including privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information of survivors. This approach recognizes the need for sensible legislative efforts and standards that uphold these rights while addressing the issue of gender-based violence. It is a positive stance that acknowledges the importance of striking a balance between protecting survivors and ensuring their rights are respected.

In addition, an intersectional approach is necessary to address the contextual and social differences that exist within gender-based violence. This understanding recognizes that certain issues disproportionately affect people in situations of vulnerability. It highlights the need for a comprehensive and inclusive approach that takes into account factors such as race, class, and sexuality. In particular, it acknowledges that women also face such issues in the public sphere, further emphasizing the importance of an intersectional perspective. This stance is positive and highlights the significance of considering various dimensions of identity and vulnerability in addressing gender-based violence.

However, it is important to note that legislation alone cannot fully resolve complex social issues. While legal frameworks are a crucial component, enforcement and understanding throughout the system are equally important. This neutral sentiment indicates that a comprehensive solution entails not only enacting laws but also ensuring their effective implementation and creating a deeper understanding of the underlying causes and dynamics of gender-based violence. It is a reminder that a multifaceted approach is needed to address the complexity of these social issues effectively.

In conclusion, the internet has the potential to serve as a platform for social change and combating gender-based violence. Legal frameworks should take a balanced perspective, considering the rights of individuals, while addressing technology-facilitated gender-based violence. An intersectional approach is necessary to address the contextual and social differences that exist within gender-based violence and other social issues. However, it is essential to recognize that legislation alone is insufficient in resolving complex social issues and that enforcement and understanding are crucial factors in achieving meaningful change.

Eiko Narita

The analysis highlights several important points related to internet governance and the fight against harm online. One of the main arguments is the significance of multi-stakeholder conversations in this endeavor. These conversations involve various stakeholders such as governments, regulatory bodies, civil society organizations (CSOs), businesses, and rights-based organizations. By including diverse perspectives and expertise, multi-stakeholder conversations can lead to more effective strategies and solutions for combating harm on the internet.

Civil society organizations (CSOs) are specifically emphasized as crucial entities in internet governance. Their role in giving voice to ground realities is recognized, and organizations like PC and Audrey are mentioned as examples. These CSOs play a vital part in ensuring that the internet remains a safe and inclusive space for all users.

Accountability in online digital technology crimes is identified as a significant challenge. The analysis highlights that holding individuals accountable for online crimes is much more difficult than accountability for crimes against humanity such as genocide. This observation sheds light on the complexities associated with addressing online crimes and the need for robust systems and mechanisms to ensure accountability.

The importance of continuing to use platforms like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is emphasized. These platforms provide spaces for interaction and the amplification of important voices. By engaging in ongoing discussions and collaborations through platforms like IGF, the momentum in addressing issues related to internet governance can be sustained.

Additionally, the analysis includes the UNFPA’s efforts to end gender-based violence. It is stated that the UNFPA is actively working with governments and policymakers in this regard. Their commitment to tackling this issue aligns with the Sustainable Development Goal 5 on Gender Equality.

Another noteworthy observation is Eiko Narita’s stance on cybercrime and online harassment. Narita emphasizes that if something is not acceptable to do in person, it should not be tolerated online either. This highlights the importance of creating a safe and respectful online environment and holding individuals accountable for their actions.

Overall, the analysis underscores the importance of multi-stakeholder conversations, the crucial role of civil society organizations, the challenges in accountability for online crimes, the significance of continuing to use platforms for interaction, the efforts of the UNFPA in combating gender-based violence, and the need to address cybercrime and online harassment. These insights shed light on the complexity of internet governance and the ongoing efforts to create a safer and more inclusive internet for all.

Sherri Kraham Talabany

Women and girls in Iraq and across the Middle East face significant risks of online violence, which are exacerbated by the high internet penetration in the region and social conservatism. This online violence poses serious threats to their safety and well-being. Approximately 50% of women and girls in Iraq have either experienced or know someone who has experienced online violence, highlighting the prevalence of this issue.

The consequences of online violence in Iraq are not limited to the digital sphere but often result in real-life tragedies, such as honor killings and increased rates of suicide. This demonstrates that the impact of online violence extends beyond virtual interactions, causing physical harm and loss of lives. Urgent interventions are necessary to address this issue effectively.

To tackle this pressing concern, a nationwide task force has been established in Iraq. This task force focuses on human rights-based legislation and policy to combat Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV). Its objectives include enhancing access to safe and confidential reporting facilities for victims and survivors, as well as promoting skilled investigations into cases of online violence. The task force also aims to train local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to better understand and respond to these unique crimes. These efforts represent positive steps towards providing support and justice to victims of online violence.

Tech companies play a crucial role in addressing and combating online violence. They are urged to establish survivor-centered, rights-focused redress systems that take into account how online violence in the Middle East can lead to real-world harm. Understanding the manifestations of online violence across the region is essential for developing appropriate responses suitable for the unique environment. Tech companies should proactively contribute to creating a safer online space for women and girls in the Middle East.

When formulating internet governance frameworks, it is vital to consider the unique challenges faced by women in the Middle East due to online violence. These challenges should be integrated into emerging policies or regulations concerning internet governance. Broad governance mechanisms must be incorporated to address the specific considerations and situations encountered by women in the Middle East. By doing so, a more inclusive and supportive online environment can be created, prioritizing the rights and safety of women.

In conclusion, women and girls in Iraq and across the Middle East face significant risks of online violence, with high internet penetration and social conservatism exacerbating the issue. The establishment of a nationwide task force in Iraq dedicated to addressing TFGBV represents a positive step towards combatting online violence. The involvement and commitment of tech companies are crucial for establishing survivor-centered redress systems and developing appropriate responses to effectively tackle this issue. Furthermore, integrating the unique challenges faced by women in the Middle East into internet governance frameworks is essential to create a safer and more equitable online space.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Augustin Willem Van Zwoll

During the discussion, the speakers conveyed their positive sentiments towards the USAID and IDRC, commending them for their high standard multi-stakeholder processes. These processes were praised for their ability to connect unconnected topics and tie them into rights agendas. This approach was seen as a commendable effort in promoting human rights and digital development programming.

Another key point raised by the speakers was the need for locally driven action in human rights-centered digital development. They emphasized the importance of adapting donor principles into more concrete tools that can be effectively utilized by local communities. The aim was to empower communities by providing them with practical and actionable frameworks to address inequalities and promote inclusive growth. To achieve this, the speakers expressed their intention to collaborate with fellow members and share best practices to investigate how donor principles can be effectively applied at the local level.

Moreover, the speakers also discussed the integration of various components, including development work, digitalization, connectivity, security, and good governance. Particularly, there was a strong emphasis on integrating cybersecurity tools and good governance for the unconnected third of the world. The need for this integration was driven by the realization that connectivity and digital development can only be truly beneficial when accompanied by secure and stable environments. Combining cybersecurity measures with good governance practices aims to ensure a safe and reliable digital environment for the unconnected population.

To summarise, the speakers exhibited a positive outlook towards the USAID and IDRC’s multi-stakeholder processes, highlighting their ability to connect diverse topics to rights agendas. They also emphasized the importance of locally driven action and the adaptation of donor principles into practical tools for communities. Furthermore, the integration of cybersecurity tools and good governance was recognized as crucial for supporting digital development and connectivity in the unconnected regions of the world.

Audience

The discussion centres around the challenge of integrating human rights principles into the operations of donor governments and foundations without imposing additional burdens on grantees and implementing partners. The main concern is to find ways to incorporate these principles effectively without causing excessive workload or duplication of effort. This is particularly important for donor agencies like 4USAID and IDRC.

Another key aspect highlighted in the discussion is the need for a broader understanding of digital security and resilience. It is argued that a more comprehensive understanding of these concepts would facilitate their integration into the work with grantees, going beyond emergency training for specific actors. This would ensure that digital security and resilience become embedded in the programmatic activities of organizations.

Within this context, the Ford Foundation is praised as a good example of a donor that takes a holistic approach to digital security and safety. Their approach includes building capacity in their grants, considering economic, social, and cultural aspects of digital security. This indicates a commitment to comprehensive and sustainable approaches to digital security.

The discussion also emphasises the need for more creativity in community outreach efforts. It is suggested that organizations should go beyond reaching out to the usual suspects and actively include communities that are commonly marginalized. By adopting a bottom-up approach and collaborating with private foundations, organizations can enhance their outreach efforts and have a greater impact.

Moreover, it is argued that the principles of donors should not only be used to guide their funding decisions but should also serve to facilitate the transfer of funds without imposing excessive bureaucratic measures. The objective is to ensure that funds are efficiently distributed to those in need, without unnecessary delays or obstacles.

Concerns are raised about the potential funding uncertainty following the potential withdrawal of support by Open Society Foundations. It is noted that Open Society Foundations have been major contributors to human rights and digital rights organizations, particularly in global majority countries. Smaller organizations in these countries may face challenges in securing alternative funding sources to sustain their important work.

Furthermore, the discussion highlights the existence of countries where strong civil societies are lacking, resulting in prevalent digital human rights violations. Ratilo from Botswana draws attention to this issue, advocating for financial and legal assistance to protect individuals from such violations. He shares his own experience as a member of parliament, expressing a willingness to take legal action against his government over such violations, despite the financial constraints involved.

In conclusion, the discussion revolves around finding effective ways to integrate human rights principles into the operations of donor governments and foundations. It emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive understanding of digital security and resilience, along with practical mechanisms and tools to align strategies with these principles. The potential withdrawal of support by Open Society Foundations and the need to support civil society and digital rights organizations are also highlighted. Notably, the discussion highlights the challenges faced by countries lacking strong civil societies in combating prevalent digital human rights violations.

Vera Zakem

The donor principles, which have received the official endorsement of 38 member governments of the Freedom Online Coalition, play a crucial role in establishing an international framework for donor accountability. These principles also align with the ethical obligations of donors to ensure that their actions do not cause harm. Additionally, the donor governments have committed themselves to implementing procedures that protect local partners and communities from the potential misuse of digital technologies and data.

However, despite these commitments, the annual Freedom on the Net report released by Freedom House paints a concerning picture. The report reveals that global internet freedom has experienced a decline for the 13th consecutive year. This decline raises concerns about the state of digital rights and the potential threats faced by individuals and communities worldwide.

Nevertheless, there is an argument put forth that it is possible to achieve digital transformation without compromising digital rights. This argument highlights the importance of prioritising safety and security in addressing these issues. Donor governments are believed to better fulfil their mandate when they place safety and security at the heart of their approach to digital transformation.

Overall, these findings emphasize the importance of safeguarding international assistance from digital repression and upholding digital rights throughout the process of digital transformation. This requires a comprehensive and ethical approach that takes into account the potential harm caused by the misuse of digital technologies and data.

Moderator – Lisa Poggiali

During the discussion, several important points were raised by the speakers. The breakout groups were organized around internal and external components, with each group focusing on a different question. This structure allowed for a comprehensive exploration of the various aspects and perspectives related to the topic at hand.

The inclusion of online groups in the discussions was widely supported, with a commitment made to involve them in the conversation. This recognition of the importance of diversity and inclusivity in decision-making processes aligns with the goal of reducing inequalities (SDG 10).

One of the participants, Lisa Poggiali, expressed appreciation for the idea of clarifying roles among stakeholders and partners. This notion of clearly defining responsibilities and actions of different actors is seen as valuable in fostering more effective collaboration and accountability in digital development. Poggiali also advocated for concrete commitments and actions by individual governments within their legal and strategic frameworks.

In moving forward, Poggiali suggested the development of toolkits as the next step in implementing the Freedom Online Coalition. These toolkits would provide specific guidance and resources for different stakeholders, including civil society, diplomats, and development actors. This approach aims to empower and equip these actors with the necessary tools to promote digital freedom and security.

Concerns were raised regarding the uncertain landscape of donor funding. The indication that Open Society Foundations may decrease their funding for various organizations has raised questions about the future financial support for initiatives and projects in the digital rights sphere. It was mentioned that statutory donors often provide larger grants, but it is more challenging to secure their support for smaller organizations.

On a positive note, the potential for partnerships between the private sector and donors in addressing digital security issues was highlighted. Private sector organisations often possess more financial resources than traditional donors, making them valuable allies in efforts to enhance digital security.

The need for greater synergy between conversations about human rights and traditional cybersecurity was emphasised. It was acknowledged that these discussions have been somewhat siloed in the past, and there is a desire to bridge this gap and integrate human rights and democratic values into cybersecurity practices. The Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFCE), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Microsoft, and the government of Sweden were mentioned as entities already working towards mainstreaming digital security with a focus on human rights and democratic values.

The discussion also shed light on the silo effect in conversations about democracy and human rights in technology. These topics have often been isolated from broader global technology discussions, limiting the potential for comprehensive and integrated approaches. The Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Bureau at USAID and other donors have recognised this issue and are actively seeking ways to address it.

The importance of supporting civil society in countries where they lack leverage or resources to hold governments accountable for human rights violations was emphasised. In some instances, digital human rights violations occur, but there is no strong civil society to protect the interests of the community. Additionally, the cost of taking legal action against the government can be prohibitive for individual members of society. Therefore, it was argued that support should be provided to these civil society organisations to empower them to advocate for human rights and hold governments accountable.

The speakers concluded by urging donors to heed the call to support civil societies. The principles discussed throughout the conversation can serve as a foundation for addressing critical human rights issues. Collaboration and support among stakeholders and partners are crucial in achieving the goals set forth in the discussion.

Overall, the detailed discussion highlighted the need for inclusivity, clarity, and collaboration in the digital development sphere. By involving diverse voices, clarifying roles and responsibilities, and fostering partnerships, the participants aim to create a more secure and inclusive digital environment that upholds human rights and promotes sustainable development.

Shannon Green

The Donor Principles for Human Rights in the Digital Age have been developed and endorsed by 38 member governments of the Freedom Online Coalition. Shannon Green, an advocate for digital rights and freedom, applauds this development, stating that the principles serve as a crucial blueprint to protect individuals’ rights in the digital world.

Green highlights the significance of partnership between donors and various stakeholders, including government, civil society, and the private sector. She believes that donors have much to learn from their partners in different sectors and stresses the importance of collaboration in shaping the global digital ecosystem.

The principles are seen as a means to promote safer and more secure environments for partners and local communities. By equipping safeguards, donors can ensure the equitable distribution of programs, addressing concerns of accountability and reducing inequalities.

Green also expresses enthusiasm for the Open Government Partnership’s prioritisation of digital governance. She believes that this focus will result in improved transparency of public oversight of artificial intelligence and data processing systems. Green cites remarkable progress made under the commitments of the Open Government Partnership.

In conclusion, Green perceives the Donor Principles for Human Rights in the Digital Age as a significant contribution to a digital future that respects rights, promotes democracy, and ensures equitable sharing of technology benefits. She urges other donor governments to make concrete commitments aligned with these principles. Overall, the principles are applauded for their potential to protect and uphold individual rights in our digital world while fostering collaboration and safeguarding the equitable distribution of technology benefits.

Moderator – Sidney Leclercq

During a panel discussion, speakers from various countries and organizations provided insights into the implementation of donor principles. The Netherlands, represented by Van Zalt, a Senior Policy Officer, expressed their commitment to incorporating these principles as they assume the chairship in 2024. Emphasizing the importance of localized knowledge and evidence at the Internet Governance Resource Centre (IGRC), Immaculate Kassai, the data protection commissioner from Kenya, highlighted the significance of considering diverse perspectives and contexts when implementing these principles.

Zach Lambell, a Senior Legal Advisor for the International Center for Nonprofit Law, outlined a comprehensive framework for implementing donor principles. He stressed the need for international, domestic, and technical approaches to effectively apply these principles to ensure their adherence across different jurisdictions and organizations.

Michael Karimian, the Director for Digital Diplomacy, Asia and the Pacific, at Microsoft, provided a private sector perspective on donor principles. He recognized the relevance and importance of these principles in promoting responsible and ethical practices within the digital realm.

Closing the panel discussion, Adrian DiGiovanni, the team leader on democratic and inclusive governance at IDRC, shared closing remarks to acknowledge the contributions of all participants and their valuable insights. The discussion emphasized the need for collaboration and cooperation among stakeholders to ensure the effective implementation of donor principles and to promote inclusive and democratic practices in Internet governance.

Overall, the panel discussion underscored the significance of implementing donor principles in different contexts. It highlighted the importance of localized knowledge, international collaboration, and private sector involvement for effectively implementing these principles.

Michael Karimian

The analysis of the various speakers’ viewpoints reveals several important points regarding the role of businesses and the need for certain practices in advancing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One key point is the importance of businesses upholding international human rights norms and laws. Michael, who works on Microsoft’s digital diplomacy team, emphasises the need for responsible behaviour in cyberspace based on international law. This suggests that businesses should align their practices with established legal frameworks to ensure ethical conduct and protect human rights.

Transparency and accountability are highlighted as crucial aspects of businesses implementing human rights policies and grievance mechanisms. It is argued that companies should have publicly available human rights policies that are implemented by accountable teams. Additionally, businesses are encouraged to be transparent in their practices and engage with stakeholders while undertaking human rights due diligence. This approach ensures that businesses are open and receptive to feedback, allowing them to continuously improve their practices and address any potential violations of human rights.

The need for direct connections between businesses and local civil society stakeholders is also emphasised. Transnational private sector companies are often criticised for having weak connections with local communities. Platforms like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and organisations like Access Now are identified as potential facilitators in establishing and strengthening these connections. This suggests that businesses should actively engage with local stakeholders to ensure their operations align with local contexts and address the needs and concerns of the communities they operate in.

The importance of building products that align with human rights and democratic values is highlighted. Donors are encouraged to support products that incorporate “human rights by design” processes. This includes considering salient human rights risks such as privacy, accessibility, and responsible AI when developing new products. By prioritising human rights and democratic values in product development, businesses can contribute to building a more ethical and inclusive technological landscape.

The analysis also recognises the challenge and potential of professional codes of ethics for individuals, organisations, and institutions. It is acknowledged that incorporating ethical codes into university curricula can be difficult. However, continuous training for staff and access to experts within the company are identified as important interim steps. This indicates the importance of ongoing education and professional development to ensure that individuals and organisations are aware of ethical considerations and have the necessary tools to address them.

In the context of digital development and the SDGs, mainstreaming digital security is crucial for low- and middle-income countries. As these countries undergo digital transformation, the threat landscape for cybersecurity expands. Efforts by organisations such as the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFCE), the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Microsoft, and the government of Sweden are mentioned as initiatives aimed at addressing this issue. By prioritising digital security in the realm of digital development, low- and middle-income countries can mitigate risks and create a safer digital environment.

Lastly, it is argued that cybersecurity should be considered in the post-2030 agenda. The analysis does not provide additional details regarding this point, but it implies that cybersecurity is a significant concern that should be addressed in future planning beyond the current 2030 agenda.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the importance of businesses upholding international human rights norms and laws, being transparent and accountable in their practices, and engaging with local civil society stakeholders. It also emphasises the significance of building products that align with human rights and democratic values. The challenge and potential of professional codes of ethics are recognised, and the importance of mainstreaming digital security in digital development is underscored. Additionally, the analysis suggests that cybersecurity should be factored into the post-2030 agenda. These insights provide valuable considerations for businesses and policymakers in their efforts to achieve the SDGs while promoting ethical practices and protecting human rights.

Juan Carlos Lara Galvez

Juan Carlos Lara Galvez, a member of an organization working on digital rights in the global majority, specifically in Latin America, emphasises the importance of engaging with governments and donor governments. These entities provide vital funding for organizations like his that strive to safeguard digital rights. Juan Carlos strongly believes that interacting with governments and donor governments is crucial for the success and sustainability of their work.

Regarding donor principles, Juan Carlos stresses the significance of not only formulating principles but also ensuring their implementation through concrete steps and actions. He highlights that the true measure of success lies in how effectively these principles are translated into tangible outcomes. He acknowledges that while the formulation of donor principles is an inspiring beginning, it is essential to monitor their progress and evaluate their impact on the ground.

An important aspect that Juan Carlos advocates for is stakeholder involvement, participation, and the recognition of human rights in various contexts, including technological development. He is pleased to see that the donor principles acknowledge the need for coordination with stakeholders. Juan Carlos believes that donor governments should actively foster collaboration between different stakeholders to promote and protect human rights. By involving diverse perspectives and including all relevant parties, these issues can be addressed more effectively.

Furthermore, Juan Carlos emphasizes that the priorities of advocacy should come from the ground level. He believes that advocacy organizations themselves, along with the individuals actively engaged in the work, hold valuable knowledge and insights into what is truly needed on the ground. By acknowledging and understanding this knowledge, officials can better advocate for and protect human rights. Juan Carlos highlights the importance of interaction and collaboration between stakeholders as a means to foster the promotion of human rights.

In conclusion, Juan Carlos Lara Galvez underscores the significance of engaging with governments and donor governments, implementing donor principles through concrete steps and actions, involving stakeholders in decision-making processes, and recognizing the importance of advocacy priorities that originate from the ground level. His arguments are rooted in the belief that collaboration and recognition of diverse perspectives lead to more effective promotion and protection of human rights.

Zora Gouhary

Zora Gouhary plays a crucial role in supporting the formation and smooth running of breakout groups for discussions. This process involves the creation of five groups, comprising four in-person groups and one online group. Each group will have its own moderator, ensuring effective facilitation and guidance during the discussions.

The breakout sessions will focus on four key questions, encouraging participants to explore and share their perspectives. These discussions are expected to last approximately 15 minutes, allowing for focused and in-depth conversations within each group.

Furthermore, Zora Gouhary actively facilitates the process of grouping participants. Participants are given the freedom to choose their own groups, potentially leading to a more diverse and engaging experience. Zora’s involvement in this process ensures that the formation of groups is well-organised and efficient.

All contributions made during the breakout sessions will be diligently summarised for later use. This summarisation enables the effective capture and consolidation of key ideas and insights generated during the discussions. By preserving these contributions, valuable information can be used to advance the next steps of the donor principles, indicating that the breakout sessions play a significant role in the overall decision-making process.

In conclusion, Zora Gouhary’s support in forming, moderating, and summarising breakout groups enhances the effectiveness and productivity of the discussions. The inclusion of multiple in-person and online groups, along with Zora’s guidance, encourages diverse perspectives, ensuring that the breakout sessions contribute meaningfully to the advancement of the donor principles.

Adrian di Giovanni

The discussion centres around the significance of donor principles on human rights in the digital age, particularly in response to the rapid advancements in technology. These principles are essential guidelines in establishing a framework to safeguard and ensure accountability for investments in digital initiatives. They are also designed to align with commitments to human rights and democratic values.

Digital technologies are recognized as powerful tools that facilitate information sharing, self-expression, and organization. However, they also present challenges, especially for marginalized and vulnerable communities. In certain cases, these technologies can be used to deny or diminish individuals’ rights, and there is a correlation between technological changes and the decline of democratic processes.

For this reason, it is crucial for donors to take responsibility for ensuring that their actions and investments in digital initiatives do not contribute to the erosion of human rights protections and democratic institutions. This necessitates adopting the principle of ‘do no harm’ when it comes to these investments. By embracing this principle, donors can mitigate adverse consequences and ensure that their initiatives have a positive impact on society.

The donor principles on human rights in the digital age provide an indispensable framework for safeguarding and ensuring accountability in investments related to digital initiatives. These principles are particularly critical in the face of fast-paced technological advancements, which continuously challenge existing norms and regulations. By aligning with commitments to human rights and democratic values, donors can contribute to the preservation and advancement of these fundamental principles.

In conclusion, the discussion underscores the importance of donor principles on human rights in the digital age. As technology continues to rapidly evolve, it is imperative for donors to proactively ensure that their investments do not undermine human rights protections and democratic institutions. This necessitates adopting the principle of ‘do no harm’ and utilizing the donor principles as a framework for safeguarding and accountability. Ultimately, by promoting responsible and ethical practices, donors can harness the full potential of digital technologies while upholding human rights and democratic values.

Allison Peters

The United States government has taken on the chairmanship of the Freedom Online Coalition, an international organization focused on promoting human rights in the digital landscape. This year, the U.S. Department of State and the government view the Coalition as a crucial partner in safeguarding and advancing human rights in the use of digital technologies globally. The U.S. government sees the Coalition as an important platform for global collaboration and sharing of best practices.

As part of its initiative, the Freedom Online Coalition has launched donor principles that provide guidance to donor governments in supporting human rights online. These principles aim to promote and protect human rights while guarding against the potential misuse of digital technologies. Donor governments, including the U.S., play an essential role in driving these efforts by responsibly investing in digital technologies with a focus on human rights.

Allison Peters, an advocate for digital rights, emphasizes the significance of donor governments investing in digital technologies while remaining vigilant against their potential misuse. The donor principles launched by the Coalition provide crucial guidance to ensure responsible investment and prevent any negative consequences that may arise from the misuse of these technologies. Peters highlights the importance of striking a balance between promoting accessibility and innovation in the digital sphere while also safeguarding against any destabilization and infringement of human rights.

Secretary of State Anthony Blinken echoes similar sentiments in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly. He emphasizes the need to govern digital technologies in partnership with those who share democratic values. This approach is essential to address the challenges and potential risks associated with the misuse of digital technologies. By working together and upholding democratic principles, governments can protect human rights, maintain stability, and ensure the responsible use of digital technologies.

In conclusion, the U.S. government’s chairmanship of the Freedom Online Coalition reflects its commitment to promoting and protecting human rights in the digital age. Through the donor principles and collaborations with like-minded partners, such as Allison Peters, the government aims to foster responsible investment and prevent any negative repercussions resulting from the misuse of digital technologies. This concerted effort aligns with Secretary Blinken’s call for governing digital technologies in partnership with those who value democratic principles. With these measures in place, the international community can work towards a digital landscape that respects and upholds human rights while promoting innovation and connectivity.

Zach Lampell

After conducting the analysis, three main arguments related to civil society organizations have been identified. The first argument emphasizes the importance of collaboration between civil society organizations and donor governments in shaping foreign assistance. It is suggested that civil societies should actively engage with donor governments to provide them with comprehensive information about the realities on the ground and the existing gaps in their country’s domestic legislation. By doing so, civil society organizations can influence the allocation of foreign assistance towards addressing these gaps and supporting initiatives that align with their objectives. The evidence supporting this argument includes the advice of Zach Lampell, who advises civil societies to utilize the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, ensuring that the voices and concerns of civil society are heard during the decision-making process on foreign assistance.

The second argument highlights the importance of civil societies pushing for inclusion in standard-setting bodies and integrating human rights protections into internet infrastructure. This argument acknowledges the increasing role of technology and the internet in today’s world, and the need for civil society organizations to actively participate in shaping the standards and practices that govern them. It is suggested that civil societies should seek assistance from the international community in developing their technical knowledge and expertise in this field. Furthermore, working with private companies is recommended to create systems that uphold human rights. This argument promotes the idea that civil society organizations have a crucial role to play in ensuring that technology and the internet serve as tools for peace, justice, and the protection of human rights. The evidence supporting this argument highlights the need for civil societies to leverage their partnerships and engage in collaborative efforts with relevant stakeholders to drive positive change in this area.

The third argument focuses on the significance of facilitating meaningful interaction with stakeholders in the process of drafting legislation. Civil society organizations are encouraged to work closely with donor governments and their own government to create open, public processes for the drafting of legislation. By actively engaging with stakeholders, civil society organizations can ensure that their perspectives, concerns, and expertise are taken into account during the development of legal frameworks. It is stressed that these legal frameworks should uphold international human rights standards and principles. The evidence supporting this argument underlines the importance of collaboration between civil society organizations and both donor and national governments to develop effective and inclusive legislative processes.

Overall, these three arguments analyzed in the research showcase the vital role civil society organizations can play in shaping policies and practices in various sectors. By collaborating with donor governments, pushing for inclusion in standard-setting bodies, and facilitating stakeholder engagement in legislation drafting processes, civil society organizations can contribute to the development of policies and initiatives that align with their objectives and promote peace, justice, and the protection of human rights. This analysis highlights the need for civil societies to actively utilize various platforms and opportunities to advocate for positive change and utilize their expertise to shape a better future for their respective communities and society as a whole.

Nele Leosk

Estonia has demonstrated the transformative potential of technology in various sectors. For the past 15 years, digitalisation has been a top priority for the country, allowing it to shift from being a recipient of aid to becoming a donor. This focus on digitalisation has played a crucial role in shaping Estonia’s development, economic policies, trade policies, and even its tech diplomacy efforts.

The integration of digital tools and processes has enabled Estonia to streamline its government services, making them more efficient and accessible for its citizens. Services such as e-residency, e-tax, and e-voting have facilitated a seamless and transparent democratic system. By placing digitalisation at the core of its development strategy, Estonia has successfully established a digital society that promotes democracy and empowers its citizens.

Moreover, Estonia has shown its commitment to supporting other nations in their development efforts, particularly through capacity building. A notable example is its 14-year partnership with Ukraine, where Estonia has helped them in building a democratic system. Ukraine’s progress in this area has been remarkable, surpassing that of many other countries. This highlights Estonia’s belief that development assistance should focus on enabling countries to develop their own capacities, sometimes even exceeding those of the donors.

Estonia’s approach to development cooperation is characterized by three main priorities: gender equality, collaboration with the private sector, and openness. Gender equality is consistently integrated into all policies and action plans, including tech diplomacy. The country aims to bridge the gender divide and ensure equal opportunities for all. Additionally, Estonia values the use of open-source principles in its development cooperation initiatives, ensuring control and transparency while avoiding dependencies.

Furthermore, Estonia’s development agency, which is only two years old, emphasizes partnerships with private companies and other organizations. This collaboration allows for a broader range of expertise and resources, contributing to national development goals. By engaging the private sector, Estonia harnesses innovation and leverages its potential for driving economic growth and sustainable development.

To conclude, Estonia’s success story exemplifies the positive impact of technology in building democracy, enhancing the economy, rebuilding trust, and establishing transparency and openness. Digitalisation has become a pivotal driver in Estonia’s development strategies, enabling the country to shift from an aid recipient to a donor. Estonia’s commitment to capacity building, gender equality, collaboration with the private sector, and openness further strengthens its approach to development cooperation. Overall, Estonia serves as a model for other nations, showcasing the possibilities and benefits that can be achieved by harnessing the power of innovation and digitalisation.

Immaculate Kassait

In the era of digitisation, the importance of data protection is emphasised, as highlighted by the arguments presented. Kenya has taken steps to address this issue by establishing a legal and institutional framework for data protection. The Office of Data Protection in Kenya has enforced six penalty notices related to the misuse of personal data, demonstrating their commitment to safeguarding individuals’ information. This positive sentiment towards data protection is further supported by the fact that 2,761 complaints have been received regarding data protection issues, indicating widespread recognition of the need for such measures.

However, challenges also exist in the realm of data protection. The newly established Office of Data Protection in Kenya faces operational and resource constraints, hindering their ability to carry out their responsibilities effectively. Additionally, there are concerns regarding the existing legal frameworks which may not adequately address the complexities posed by multinational companies operating in Kenya. The rapid progress of technological advancements, such as Artificial Intelligence, also presents additional challenges as the potential risks and implications on data protection need to be carefully navigated.

To overcome these challenges, collaboration and donor support are seen as crucial factors. Sharing expertise and best practices amongst stakeholders can enhance the regulation of data processing, allowing for a coordinated and effective approach to data protection. Donor support can play a vital role in aligning country-specific legal frameworks with international standards and providing the necessary resources for capacity building. This collaborative effort would enable Kenya to strengthen its data governance mechanisms and better protect individuals’ data.

In conclusion, the arguments presented highlight the significance of data protection in the digital age. While Kenya has made strides in establishing a legal framework and enforcing penalties for data misuse, challenges such as resource constraints, inadequate legal frameworks, and technological advancements remain. However, through collaboration and donor support, it is possible to address these challenges and enhance data governance practices. By doing so, Kenya can ensure the protection of personal data and align with global efforts towards sustainable development.

Speakers

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Audience

The analysis explores various aspects of public interest internet and its societal impact. It highlights the need to understand the funding mechanisms for public interest internet, particularly in relation to the Wikimedia Foundation. Ziske, who represents the Wikimedia Foundation, has requested information on funding in this area, indicating a growing interest in understanding the financial aspects of public interest internet.

Another perspective is sought from Bill, who has a background in research and development (R&D). This aims to gain insights into public interest internet from someone with expertise in innovation and infrastructure. Including Bill’s viewpoint enhances the analysis and provides a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

The analysis also discusses the role of Facebook in providing internet access, especially in many global majority countries. It is noted that Facebook often offers free internet services, positioning itself as the primary gateway to the internet in these regions. However, concerns are raised about the monopoly Facebook has over internet access, which may result in limited choices and potential inequalities in accessing the internet.

Furthermore, the analysis examines the global impact of the internet, highlighting its positive and negative aspects. While the internet has facilitated globalization and connected people worldwide, it has also centralized control and decision-making processes. This centralization undermines the democratic nature of the internet.

A significant issue identified in the analysis is the digital divide, particularly affecting young men and women in grassroots communities. Limited access to necessary infrastructure and content creates a substantial barrier to internet usage for these individuals. Additionally, language and content act as obstacles in bridging this divide.

The analysis also delves into how internet usage challenges social norms, particularly for young women. In many societies, using the internet is stigmatized as it is seen as a threat to established norms. This negative perception hinders women’s empowerment and their participation in the digital space.

Acknowledging the importance of digital literacy, the analysis emphasizes the need to increase digital skills among young people and women. It includes not only basic technological skills but also the ability to generate content and engage in internet activism. Promoting digital literacy can contribute to reducing inequalities and fostering greater gender equality.

Lastly, the argument is made for democratizing access to the internet. The presence of the digital divide within societies and the centralization of control over the internet necessitate equal opportunities for participation and engagement. Democratizing access ensures a more inclusive and equitable digital society.

In conclusion, this analysis sheds light on various issues surrounding public interest internet. It emphasizes the importance of understanding funding mechanisms, gaining diverse perspectives, and addressing inequalities such as the digital divide. Furthermore, it underscores the significance of digital literacy and the need to democratize access to ensure equal opportunities for all.

Rachel Judistari

The analysis sheds light on the crucial role that public interest platforms, such as Wikipedia, play in the digital world. It argues that the current digital landscape is primarily dominated by private and for-profit platforms, which in turn exacerbate existing wealth and knowledge gaps, compromise privacy, and facilitate the spread of misinformation.

However, the analysis also highlights the positive aspects of platforms like Wikipedia. It underscores that Wikipedia is a not-for-profit public interest platform that undertakes consistent technological innovation and actively addresses knowledge gaps. It emphasizes that Wikipedia is a community-led platform, with decentralized community-based content moderation, making it a unique and valuable resource.

The analysis suggests that regulations implemented in the digital space often focus on big tech companies and overlook the diversity of internet services. It argues that policymakers should ensure that regulations uphold protections for human rights and safeguard user privacy, while also fostering meaningful community participation in internet governance. The supporting facts provided highlight that Wikipedia opposes overly broad restrictions with highly punitive consequences and actively encourages meaningful community participation in internet governance.

Furthermore, the analysis points out that Wikipedia is actively involved in training large language models essential for generative AI, thereby contributing to reducing knowledge inequalities. It further showcases Wikipedia’s commitment to knowledge equity by highlighting their launch of knowledge equity funds to create more content and uphold diversity.

The analysis expresses concerns regarding the unintended consequences of public interest technologies. It highlights the potential risks of endangering indigenous languages and criminalizing dissenting voices, urging stakeholders to carefully consider and mitigate such risks.

Addressing the digital divide is seen as a major priority. The analysis points out that in the global south, where many individuals lack access to the internet, public interest platforms like Wikipedia should actively contribute to discussions aiming to bridge this divide.

Content moderation also features as a significant concern. The analysis notes that while Wikipedia puts effort into content moderation, regulations primarily designed for large corporations can complicate this process. The work being done by UNESCO to assist with content moderation is highlighted.

Furthermore, the analysis acknowledges that internet regulations can be new and complex in certain regions. It points out that some regions in Asia consider internet regulation a new concept, and emphasizes the presence of diverse ways of content modifications.

Advocacy for using superior platforms for better content moderation is presented. The analysis mentions the social media platform Mastodon as an example of a better alternative. It also highlights the importance of exceptions being made for public interest platforms, citing Rachel as an advocate for such exceptions.

Engaging young people in digital literacy is identified as a priority. It highlights that Wikimedia is actively working with communities of editors to provide training and focuses on initiatives, like in Cambodia, that involve indigenous young people in creating content and videos to preserve their culture.

Successful engagement with young people, the analysis suggests, can be achieved through collaboration with other organizations. It points out that Wikimedia has collaborated with the Minister of IT in Indonesia and expresses a desire to have more collaborations with youth-led organizations.

The analysis advocates for the promotion of the internet of commons to serve public interest and suggests that exceptions should be made for public interest platforms. However, no specific evidence or supporting facts are provided in this regard.

Diversity within public interest platforms’ community contributions is another important aspect emphasized in the analysis, without any further details or evidence being given.

Finally, the analysis advises policymakers to be mindful of the diversity of the internet ecosystem. It suggests that policymakers should take into account the various perspectives and interests within the ecosystem while formulating regulations. It concludes by highlighting the importance of promoting the internet of commons for public interest and creating an inclusive environment for all stakeholders.

Overall, the analysis provides a comprehensive examination of the role and impact of public interest platforms like Wikipedia in the digital world. It highlights the need to address wealth and knowledge gaps, privacy concerns, and misinformation, while also recognizing the positive contributions of public interest platforms in addressing those issues. It argues for regulations that protect human rights, encourage user participation, and support diversity. The analysis also raises concerns about unintended consequences and identifies priorities such as bridging the digital divide and engaging young people in digital literacy. The insights gained from the analysis shed light on the complex challenges and opportunities in creating a more equitable and inclusive digital ecosystem.

Mallory Knodel

The internet is widely seen as a public good that offers numerous benefits. It empowers communities and provides valuable tools for communication, information sharing, and access to resources. Examples of public goods on the internet include Indymedia, a platform for citizen journalism and protest news, and Wikipedia. These platforms serve as valuable sources of information and rely on the contributions of individuals to create and share knowledge.

However, there is a concern that corporations monopolise user experiences on the internet and engage in anti-competitive practices. While community-driven innovation still thrives alongside corporate platforms, it can be challenging to compete with large corporations that prioritise their own interests. Communities continue to build their own tools and generate content, but they face difficulties in gaining a strong foothold against corporate dominance.

Furthermore, efforts to create a public good internet are often not inclusive. The individuals involved in the hacking culture, which contributes to developing a public good internet, tend to be those with free time or jobs that align with this pursuit. This exclusion of people who lack the time or access to technology creates a barrier to participation and limits the diversity of voices and perspectives in shaping the internet.

To sustain a public good internet, substantial investment is necessary. Public good internet initiatives, being not-for-profit, struggle to maintain themselves without financial support. These initiatives often rely on “bootstrapping” and grow gradually once established. Without sufficient investment, the potential of the public good internet to thrive in many areas is limited.

On a positive note, communities that build public good internet technology tend to be self-perpetuating. By fostering strong community involvement, these initiatives can continue to expand and grow, gaining support and participation from individuals who understand and appreciate the importance of a public good internet.

However, the existence of public good internet is not guaranteed without strong nearby communities. Building a public good internet requires the dedication and collaboration of individuals in a specific locality. Without this local support, it is difficult to establish and sustain a public good internet that truly benefits the communities in the area.

Public interest work on the internet does not necessarily have to be for-profit to be sustainable. There are alternative ways of generating revenue, such as contextual advertising, that can be profitable and less invasive. The focus should be on creating sustainable models that prioritise the public interest.

In contrast, big tech companies are often criticised for prioritising monetisation over innovation. These corporations, with their established platforms and significant influence, can create barriers for competing services and limit the choices available to users. Targeted advertising, a common strategy used by big tech, is seen as invasive and contrary to the public interest. It violates user privacy, and there are concerns about the ethical implications of such practices.

The regulations designed for big tech platforms may inadvertently hinder public interest platforms. While efforts should be made to improve big corporate platforms, it is important to devote attention to public interest platforms, such as Wikipedia, that serve the public good. Current regulations may not fully consider the practices and needs of these platforms, which can impede their ability to operate effectively.

To promote competition and user preference, it is important to have more choices in platforms. The ability to migrate to different platforms encourages healthy competition and provides users with options that align with their values and preferences. Currently, big multinational corporate tech platforms dominate many regions, leaving limited alternatives.

Public platforms, like Wikipedia, should be considered in discussions on content moderation. These platforms have established practices and guidelines for content moderation that can serve as examples for other platforms. It is crucial to learn from these successful models and incorporate their insights into broader content moderation discussions.

In conclusion, building and sustaining a public good internet requires effort, investment, and support. While corporations dominate the landscape, efforts to create a public good internet are still underway. However, inclusivity remains a challenge, and investment is crucial for the success and expansion of public good initiatives. It is important to ensure that public interest work is sustainable and prioritise the public interest over monetisation. While big tech companies have their shortcomings, the existence of more platform choices and proper regulations can foster healthy competition and better serve the needs and preferences of users.

Bill Thompson

The analysis explores various arguments concerning the current state of the internet and its ability to fulfil public service outcomes. One viewpoint asserts that the existing internet standards are inadequate, primarily due to their domination by commercial interests. It is argued that this has hindered the delivery of public service outcomes. Efforts for intervention and regulation are advocated to address this issue effectively.

Another argument suggests that Internet governance needs to be inclusive and representative of a wider variety of communities. Traditionally excluded groups should have a voice in shaping the internet to create a fair digital public sphere. Inclusion and active participation from these communities are considered crucial for better internet governance.

The analysis further highlights the need to reevaluate and reimagine the internet to enhance democracy and protect individuals from surveillance. The current internet structure is questioned as potentially unsuitable for these purposes. A network that safeguards individuals’ privacy from surveillance is deemed necessary.

The limitations of existing protocols are seen as a hindrance to innovation in the design of modern social networks. The emergence of similar platforms that lack innovation and the perceived restrictions of current protocols provide evidence to support this argument. However, the introduction of alternative protocols such as ActivityPub offers the potential for innovation in online social spaces and presents a different lens for constructing such spaces.

Responsibility for delivering various aspects of the public interest internet is viewed as falling on all stakeholders. It is emphasised that these stakeholders should contribute to the public service internet in accordance with its overall interests. This collective approach is crucial to ensure the internet effectively serves the public interest.

Funding of public infrastructure, including the internet, is another debated topic. The argument is made that society should bear the cost of public infrastructure rather than relying on private entities or philanthropy. State funding is considered an acceptable option if it avoids exerting control over content. However, concerns are raised regarding the risk of state-controlled media associated with government funding.

The analysis also calls for a different approach to the internet model. The current model, based on decisions made by a select group of individuals predominantly from North America and Europe, is criticised for its failure to address current challenges effectively. The importance of co-creation and community engagement is emphasised as a means to reshape the internet model and build a more sustainable digital ecosystem.

In conclusion, the analysis presents a range of arguments that highlight the inadequacies of the current internet model in delivering public service outcomes. The influence of commercial interests, limitations of existing protocols, and the need for inclusivity, democracy, and community engagement are all key factors that require attention. Ultimately, a collective effort is necessary to create an internet that effectively serves the public interest.

Anna Christina

The analysis reveals various important aspects concerning internet governance and cultural diversity. One of the key points highlighted is the pressing need for diverse cultural content on the internet, with a specific focus on meeting the needs of indigenous communities. It is pointed out that a significant portion of the current internet content does not relate to indigenous communities. This is particularly relevant in Mexico, which is the 11th country with the most multicultural communities. Efforts should be made to ensure that indigenous cultures and perspectives are represented and celebrated through diverse online content, particularly as it relates to sustainable cities and communities.

Additionally, the analysis underscores the importance of establishing a governance system that fosters balanced and inclusive participation of all stakeholders. This includes promoting transparency, accountability, and stakeholder inclusion in decision-making processes related to internet governance. To this end, UNESCO has been running a consultation since September 2022 to develop guidelines for regulating digital platforms. These guidelines aim to ensure that governance systems are transparent, accountable, and promote diverse cultural content. This is important for achieving peace, justice, and strong institutions.

Furthermore, the analysis highlights the need for active youth participation in internet governance discussions. It is noted that children aged 13 to 18 expressed their desire to participate in governance discussions during the consultations. Recognizing that the youth are the most important users of the internet, their active involvement is required to reduce inequalities and promote peace, justice, and strong institutions.

In terms of implementation and evaluation processes of internet regulation, the analysis emphasizes the importance of involving internet stakeholders. It is observed that civil society participates in advocacy but does not often participate in implementation and evaluation processes. Evaluation is crucial for judging the effectiveness of the governance system. Promoting stakeholder involvement is vital for achieving peace, justice, and strong institutions.

Moreover, the analysis highlights the positive role that community networks in Mexico, Central America, and Latin America play in promoting indigenous expression and cultural content online. These networks were created in partnership with UNESCO and serve as an example of promoting indigenous expression and cultural diversity. This is related to industry, innovation, infrastructure and peace, justice, and strong institutions.

The analysis also addresses the issue of funding public interest technology. It emphasizes that responsibility for funding public interest technology lies with all stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, and users. This collaborative effort is necessary for achieving partnerships for the goals.

Another important aspect brought up in the analysis is the need for a balance of responsibilities and contributions from all involved parties to achieve sustainability. This involves governments, the private sector, and users working together to achieve common goals. This is essential for achieving partnerships for the goals.

The analysis also emphasizes the importance of the consultation process for guidelines and regulations. It notes that building, maintaining, and resisting during this process is crucial. This indicates the significance of active engagement and continuous involvement in shaping internet governance policies. This is closely tied to achieving peace, justice, and strong institutions, as well as partnerships for the goals.

Additionally, the analysis underscores the importance of identifying the roles of different stakeholders in the regulatory process. It is highlighted that this aspect received the least response during the consultation. Involvement is necessary even after regulation happens. This is tied to achieving peace, justice, and strong institutions, as well as partnerships for the goals.

Furthermore, the analysis notes that while good laws and standards are essential, they can be misused in authoritarian regimes. This raises concerns about the potential misuse of laws in authoritarian regimes. This is especially relevant for achieving peace, justice, and strong institutions.

In conclusion, the analysis provides valuable insights into the need for diverse cultural content on the internet, the establishment of inclusive governance systems, the importance of youth participation, stakeholder involvement in implementation and evaluation processes, the role of community networks in promoting cultural diversity, the responsibility for funding public interest technology, the balance of responsibilities for sustainability, the significance of the consultation process, and the role of civil society in fighting against misuse of laws. These findings shed light on the complex nature of internet governance and the importance of fostering cultural diversity in the online world. These aspects are tied to achieving quality education, reduced inequalities, sustainable cities and communities, peace, justice, and strong institutions, industry, innovation, and infrastructure, and partnerships for the goals.

Widia Listiawulan

Traveloka, a publicly traded private sector company, prioritizes innovation and technology to enhance tourism while emphasizing sustainable and inclusive growth. They collaborate with communities, governments, and stakeholders, operating in six ASEAN countries with over 45 million active users monthly. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic, Traveloka’s contribution to Indonesia’s GDP in the tourism sector reached 2.7%. They actively partake in policy-making processes and ensure compliance with local regulations, promoting customer safety. Traveloka’s commitment to sustainability involves working with women and environmental groups, supporting local communities. Their focus on youth involvement and digital literacy empowers young people to contribute to community-building and develop new tourism destinations. Traveloka promotes tourism through local perspectives, valuing the preferences and aspirations of local communities. They also engage in collaboration, partnering with institutions nationally and internationally to provide digital literacy training and foster inclusivity. Moreover, Traveloka advocates for collaboration and public-private partnerships to address technology regulation concerns effectively. They emphasize responsible technology use, focusing on customer needs and societal benefits. Traveloka’s multifaceted approach showcases their understanding of the relationship between technology, community engagement, and responsible business practices in driving positive change in the tourism sector.

Nima Iyer

Nima Iyer, the founder of Policy, a feminist civic tech organisation based in Kampala, Uganda, expressed concern over the commercialisation and politicisation of online spaces. She noticed a shift in how internet spaces evolved over time, from being free and accessible to becoming controlled by commercial interests and divisive politics. Nima believes that this trend has eroded the idea of a free, open, and publicly-owned internet. She argues that the internet should be a space that is not restricted or controlled by commercial or political interests.

Nima advocates for the creation and governance of public internet spaces that are inclusive and free for everyone to use. She is concerned about the diminishing open internet, which was initially intended to be a space that everyone could use freely. Despite the challenges, Nima believes that there is still an opportunity to create public, inclusive, and free digital spaces.

In addition to her concerns about the commercialisation of online spaces, Nima also observes a divide in conversations between for-profit and non-profit tech communities. She maintains separate Twitter accounts for both communities and notes that they discuss vastly different topics, with the for-profit community heavily focused on revenue generation and customer retention. Nima also explores the influence of profit-driven motivation in the innovation space, using the example of Couchsurfing and Airbnb. She believes that profit-driven corporations can have a negative impact on innovation.

Furthermore, Nima questions how to maintain public interest when innovation is dominated by profit-oriented motivations. She notes that the concept of public interest appears to be overshadowed by the quest for profits in the innovation space. Nima also highlights the importance of differentiating the rules for big tech companies and small start-up companies when creating data protection laws. She points out that it is unfair for small companies in their early stages to have to follow the same dense regulatory protocols as larger, technologically advanced companies.

Bill Thompson, another prominent voice in the analysis, suggests that commercial engagement should be allowed in the public service internet, but on public service terms. He believes that the public service internet should support democracy online and a digital public sphere without traditional commercial capture or monetisation. Thompson criticises the current model of a global timeline used by platforms like Facebook and Twitter, arguing that it is not reflective of real life and is not good for civil society. He suggests the need for a different way of thinking and building internet systems, abandoning certain core assumptions of existing models.

In terms of universal internet access, Nima expresses some sadness about the idea of previously disconnected indigenous communities being connected to the global internet. She questions whether constant access to global information is always beneficial. Nima also calls for deliberate design of public spaces, goods, and platforms, highlighting the need to encourage people to use them rather than defaulting to existing ones due to convenience. She advocates for conversation between government officials and civil society for effective legislation.

Throughout the analysis, there are several other noteworthy observations and insights. The importance of encouraging volunteerism and contribution to open-source software and knowledge bases is discussed. The challenge of public infrastructure funding is reflected upon, with a comparison to essential services like sanitation and water. Finally, there is a call for action on the discussed matters and a focus on the next steps to address the issues raised.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the concerns and arguments put forward by Nima Iyer and Bill Thompson regarding the commercialisation, politicisation, and profit-driven nature of online spaces and innovation. They advocate for the creation of public, inclusive, and free digital spaces and the differentiation of rules for big tech and small start-up companies. They also emphasise the importance of deliberate design, conversation between government officials and civil society, and addressing the challenges of universal internet access and public infrastructure funding. Overall, their insights contribute to the ongoing discussions and efforts aimed at creating a more accessible, inclusive, and socially responsible digital world.

Speakers