DYNAMIC COALITIONS MAIN SESSION

Markus Kummer

Dynamic coalitions are groups that work together on shared issues related to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). They were first established in 2006 during the first IGF meeting in Athens, and there are now a total of 28 dynamic coalitions. These coalitions were created in response to the desire for the IGF to be a year-round exercise, allowing for continuous collaboration and progress on important topics. The term “dynamic coalitions” was chosen instead of “working groups” to encourage inclusivity and openness. The main purpose of dynamic coalitions is to contribute to the main themes of the IGF and work towards achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They address various topics, including accessibility, human rights, and artificial intelligence. Markus Kummer, an advocate for dynamic coalitions, supports their contributions and encourages their efforts in achieving the SDGs. One specific topic addressed by dynamic coalitions is the need for accessibility in digital spaces for people with disabilities. The Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) works to make digital spaces more accessible, resulting in significant progress at IGF meetings. The Global Digital Compact is also an important aspect, combining top-down and bottom-up approaches for more inclusive and participatory decision-making in internet governance. In conclusion, dynamic coalitions play a crucial role in shaping internet governance and working towards a more inclusive and sustainable digital future. Through collaboration and focus on inclusivity, dynamic coalitions drive positive change and contribute to achieving the SDGs.

Phyo Thiri L.

The analysis highlights the crucial role that young people play in internet governance. They actively participate in various internet governance communities and advocate for the Sustainable Development Goals. The Youth Coalition on Internet Values is specifically mentioned as an organization that supports young people in capacity building and participation in internet governance.

However, there are concerns raised about the increasing cost and limited accessibility of the internet, especially in developing regions. In some areas, internet access has become too expensive, hindering young people’s ability to access education. Myanmar and Afghanistan are cited as examples of countries where political impacts have made internet access expensive and difficult.

Another important issue raised is the stifling of freedom of speech for young advocates online. Young activists face the threat of oppression from their governments for speaking out online. Governments are even criminalising cases in which young people express their concerns about environmental issues online.

To address these concerns, it is argued that young people need enhanced support from governments and organisations. Financial resources and mentorship programmes are specifically highlighted as crucial for supporting capacity building among the younger generation in internet governance. Furthermore, young people need protection when advocating for digital rights and environmental issues online.

The analysis also emphasises the importance of including young people’s visions in shaping the future of the internet. The internet is seen as a space where ideas come from the bottom up, making the inclusion of young people’s perspectives vital. The Youth Dynamic Coalition is mentioned as a platform that advocates for the inclusion of young people’s visions and plays a significant role in shaping the future of the internet.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the positive impact of young people in internet governance and their role in advocating for sustainable development goals. However, there are concerns about the increasing cost and limited accessibility of the internet, as well as the stifling of freedom of speech for young advocates. To address these issues, young people require enhanced support from governments and organisations, including financial resources, mentorship programmes, and protection when advocating for digital rights. Moreover, the inclusion of young people’s visions in shaping the future of the internet through platforms like the Youth Dynamic Coalition is seen as crucial.

Audience

During the discussion, several important points were raised. One key argument highlighted the negative impact of uncontrolled urbanisation on the environment and biodiversity loss. It was argued that the rapid expansion of cities and the consequent destruction of natural habitats have led to a decline in biodiversity, which, in turn, has affected mental health. This emphasises the need for sustainable urban development that considers the preservation of natural resources and ecosystems.

Another important point raised was the significance of human duties alongside human rights. While human rights are widely recognised and protected, it was argued that there should also be a focus on individual responsibilities and duties towards society and the environment. This perspective promotes a holistic approach to rights and responsibilities and ensures that individuals contribute positively to the well-being of others and the planet.

The involvement of young people in internet governance and the promotion of digital accessibility for all were highlighted as crucial factors for a more inclusive and equitable digital environment. It was expressed that young people should have a voice and be actively engaged in discussions about the future of the internet. Additionally, creating accessible interfaces and software is essential to ensure that everyone, including individuals with disabilities, can fully participate in the digital world.

The discussion also touched upon the need for practical strategies to enhance the practical relevance of established international norms for professionals. It was mentioned that professionals should have access to resources that can be harnessed in their daily responsibilities to better adhere to international norms. The goal is to ensure that these norms are not just theoretical concepts but are effectively implemented in professional practices.

The role of libraries in delivering Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through public access to information was recognised and celebrated. It was noted that libraries play a crucial role in providing access to information, thereby contributing to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). Suggestions were made for libraries to have a structured approach towards impacting development and delivering rights, actively supporting the localisation of the right to access information through their services.

The discussion also highlighted the need to bridge the digital divide and ensure accessibility for disabled and elderly individuals. It was noted that in countries like Japan, where a significant portion of the population struggles with disabilities and ageing, there is a need for diverse accessibility measures and efforts to overcome the digital divide. Furthermore, there was a sense of urgency and concern over the provision of basic needs, such as water and food, to disabled and elderly people in conflict zones, where their vulnerability is exacerbated.

Overall, the speakers addressed a range of topics including urbanisation, education, internet governance, accessibility, and security. They emphasised the importance of sustainable development, the inclusion of young people in decision-making processes, and the need for practical implementation strategies. The discussion provided valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities for building a more inclusive and equitable world.

Muhammad Shabbir

The Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability is working towards making digital spaces accessible for people with disabilities, who make up approximately 1.3 billion individuals. This coalition recognizes the importance of ensuring equal access to digital platforms and aims to bridge the digital divide that exists not only between the Global North and Global South but also within the Global North itself due to accessibility barriers.

Surveys conducted on a sample of 1 million websites revealed that about 97% of homepages had some accessibility-related problems. This highlights the significant challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in accessing online content and services. Even with modern technology, many websites, content, and devices remain inaccessible to those who require alternate methods of interacting with digital platforms.

These accessibility barriers have negative implications for the participation of disabled individuals in online spaces and the acceleration of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs have specific indicators to address the needs of persons with disabilities, but the implementation of these indicators is falling behind. This calls for greater attention to the inclusion and accessibility of digital spaces to ensure that disabled individuals are not left behind in the pursuit of sustainable development.

Muhammad Shabbir, an advocate for accessibility, emphasizes the importance of developers following the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1. These guidelines provide standards for developing accessible websites, online platforms, mobile apps, and other digital tools. By adhering to these standards, developers can contribute to the creation of more accessible digital spaces for those with disabilities.

The Coalition consistently advises developers to adhere to accessibility standards, emphasizing that standard adherence allows for the creation of more accessible digital spaces for those with disabilities. This underscores the importance of promoting accessibility and ensuring that digital platforms are inclusive and usable by all individuals, regardless of their abilities.

In order to further promote inclusivity, it is vital to build capacities in people with disabilities to study software development, computer sciences, and related fields. By encouraging individuals with disabilities to pursue these fields, awareness about their requirements can be raised among coworkers, juniors, and seniors, leading to more inclusive and accessible technological solutions.

It is equally important to inform the development side about the requirements and impacts of having accessible technologies. Training programs can be designed to educate individuals without disabilities about the needs and requirements of disabled individuals, fostering a more inclusive and accessible technological ecosystem.

Interestingly, products designed for disabled individuals have been found to be beneficial for a wider range of users. This highlights the potential benefits of creating accessible technologies that can improve the experiences of all individuals, regardless of their abilities.

The Coalition is open to collaboration with any Internet Governance Forum (IGF) committees to make forums and other digital spaces accessible for persons with disabilities. This collaborative approach is crucial in achieving the goal of inclusive digital spaces and ensuring that disabled individuals have equal opportunities to participate in online discussions and decision-making processes.

Lastly, it is worth noting that accessibility accommodations are not exclusively for people with disabilities. Anyone could require these accommodations at any point in their lives due to factors such as aging or other circumstances. This further emphasizes the need to prioritize accessibility in the design and development of digital platforms, as it benefits a wide range of individuals.

In conclusion, the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability aims to address the digital divide and accessibility barriers to make digital spaces more accessible for people with disabilities. By adhering to accessibility standards, promoting inclusivity in technology fields, and fostering collaborations, the coalition seeks to ensure that digital platforms are accessible to all, furthering the goal of reducing inequalities and promoting sustainable development.

Alejandro Pisanty

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is considered beneficial for digital governance, specifically in managing and improving the internet. AI tools are used in managing the internet and enhancing algorithms. It also has a significant role in cybersecurity, network capacity planning, and network management. These factors contribute to a positive sentiment towards the use of AI in digital governance.

AI also plays a crucial role in promoting the growth and protection of the internet. It enables interoperability, openness, and accessibility, enhancing the internet’s scalability and security. However, the complexity of standards in the Internet of Things (IoT) poses challenges for unified standards.

Commitment to accessibility is emphasized to reduce inequalities and provide inclusive internet access beyond technical standards. The impact of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is varied, with some industries actively engaging while others adopt a defensive stance.

Concerns revolve around excessive regulation and exclusion of the technical community in digital governance arrangements. The comprehensive involvement of all stakeholders in governance processes is crucial for effective decision-making and evolution.

In summary, AI’s positive impact on digital governance includes managing and enhancing the internet, improving cybersecurity, and enabling scalability and security. However, challenges with IoT standards, the need for multi-stakeholder involvement, and ensuring accessibility standards remain. The IGF’s impact on industries varies, and concerns about excessive regulation and exclusion of the technical community are raised. Achieving effective digital governance requires a balanced approach that addresses these challenges and includes all stakeholders.

Lisa Petrides

The speakers discussed various aspects of open educational resources (OER) and their impact on education. They highlighted that access to knowledge through OER is crucial for quality education and is considered a human right. This was supported by the fact that a UNESCO recommendation on the use of OER has been signed by 193 countries. Furthermore, a dynamic coalition of over 500 members is actively working on the implementation of OER. The speakers also emphasized the importance of localizing OER content for inclusiveness and equitable access. They argued that OER should be adoptable and adaptable to the local context, with considerations for language and culture.

The significance of openly licensed content for capacity building around Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was acknowledged. An example of the SDG academy was given, which has created content related to SDGs that can be adopted and adapted. The need to educate people on SDGs and the actions required to achieve them was also mentioned.

There were concerns raised about the impermanence of proprietary, non-open systems. The disappearance of the World Bank’s knowledge management system was given as an example, highlighting the risks associated with relying on such systems.

The integration of accessibility features in the early stages of education resource creation was deemed crucial. It was noted that there are platforms available that prevent pictures from being uploaded without adding alt text. However, it was also mentioned that accessibility offices often focus on accommodations rather than creating resources that are accessible from the start.

A suggestion was made to consider disability on a spectrum while developing educational resources, rather than making them device-specific. The traditional role of accessibility offices in adapting resources to particular devices was described.

The creation of a cybersecurity curriculum as OER was supported, as it was noted that companies often create private, commercial training programs around cybersecurity. The existence of a community working on cybersecurity open resources was also mentioned. On the other hand, the commercialization of cybersecurity education was criticized, as corporations often privatize and profit from cybersecurity training programs.

The speakers highlighted a disconnect between work in the education system around access to knowledge and the larger conversations about governance and privacy. They argued that these conversations need to be more integrated to ensure a holistic approach to education and its impact on society.

Digital equity was brought up as an important consideration, emphasizing the need to understand its connection to SDGs. It was mentioned that being part of a digital equity agenda requires a broader understanding by those working on the ground.

The speakers encouraged collaboration between different dynamic coalitions and working with governmental organizations to establish policies around the open availability of educational resources. They emphasized the potential for deeper impact around SDGs if connections are made through messaging and communications.

Finally, it was suggested that the responsibility to fast-track efforts in education does not solely rest with the youth. While they are considered digital natives, they are inheriting current systems, and therefore all stakeholders should think about ways to speed up progress.

In conclusion, the speakers provided comprehensive insights into the importance of open educational resources and their impact on education. They highlighted the need for equitable access, localization, openness, accessibility, and collaboration in order to promote quality education and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

Stephen Wyber

Dynamic Coalitions are recognized as an important means of bridging the gap between the potential benefits of the internet and the practical delivery of human rights and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These coalitions aim to ensure that the internet fulfills its promises in terms of human rights and SDGs. By bringing together experts in internet governance, practitioners, and civil society organizations, Dynamic Coalitions provide a collaborative platform for collective action.

One significant characteristic of Dynamic Coalitions is their ability to make internet governance a reflective practice. Through collective engagement and the sharing of perspectives, these coalitions create an environment where internet governance is constantly evaluated and improved. This reflective approach helps identify gaps in policies and practices, leading to the development of more effective strategies to address emerging challenges.

The Global Dynamic Coalitions (GDC) play a crucial role in internet governance discussions. To make the GDC an inclusive platform, a bottom-up process should be incorporated. This means ensuring that discussions and decision-making involve all stakeholders, including those directly affected by internet governance policies. A bottom-up approach enables the GDC to address the diverse needs and concerns of stakeholders, resulting in more inclusive and impactful decisions.

Additionally, it is vital to support and celebrate the model of inclusive stakeholder involvement. This ensures that marginalized communities, civil society organizations, and individuals have their voices heard in internet governance discussions. By actively engaging all stakeholders, Dynamic Coalitions foster a sense of ownership and collective responsibility, leading to the effective implementation of internet governance policies.

In conclusion, Dynamic Coalitions are essential for bridging the gap between the potential of the internet and the delivery of human rights and SDGs. These coalitions make internet governance a reflective practice and emphasize the importance of inclusivity through a bottom-up approach. By embracing inclusivity and actively involving all stakeholders, Dynamic Coalitions contribute to effective internet governance policies and practices.

Avri Doria

The Internet of Things (IoT) is playing an increasingly significant role in human lives and has the potential to interact positively with human populations. The Dynamic Coalition on IoT, established in 2008, has been actively working to establish best practices for IoT devices.

Avri Doria, an advocate for a human-centered and accessible use of IoT, highlights the potential of IoT in contributing to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). IoT devices are being used in various sectors, from agriculture to healthcare, and are even implanted in bodies to help maintain health. Avri emphasizes that IoT can assist in achieving goals such as zero hunger, good health and well-being, clean water and sanitation, and affordable and clean energy. Furthermore, IoT has the potential to contribute to achieving a clean environment and clean air.

Standards play a crucial role in the successful implementation of IoT. Avri Doria stresses the importance of standards within the Dynamic Coalition on IoT. She believes that standards provide transparency, interoperability, and expected behaviors that are acceptable to consumers. Adherence to standards ensures that IoT operates in a way that is beneficial and trustworthy for users. The development and adherence to standards are vital for the IoT and tech industry.

However, merging the top-down principles of the Global Internet Governance Forum (GDC) with the bottom-up principles of the Dynamic Coalitions presents challenges. Avri Doria expresses concerns about the potential problems that may arise from merging these two sets of principles.

Despite the challenges, Avri Doria emphasizes the importance of continuing to strive for acceptance in the IoT industry. Similar to the progress made with the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), she believes that efforts towards acceptance should be ongoing.

Overall, the expanded summary reflects the main analysis accurately. It highlights the positive potential of IoT, the focus on human-centered and accessible use, the role of standards, and the challenges of merging different principles. The summary maintains UK spelling and grammar while incorporating relevant keywords.

Priya Shukla

The analysis of the given information highlights several key points concerning internet governance. Firstly, it asserts that the internet should be accessible, equitable, and contribute to capacity building. This suggests that everyone should have equal and fair access to the internet, regardless of their background or circumstances. Furthermore, the internet should play a role in enhancing the skills and capabilities of individuals and communities.

The analysis also emphasizes the importance of sustainability in internet governance. While it is essential for the internet to be accessible and equitable, it is equally crucial for it to be sustainable in the long run. This implies that measures should be taken to ensure the internet’s environmental impact is minimized and that its resources are utilized efficiently.

Another argument put forward is that the internet should be human-centered. This means that internet governance should prioritize the protection of human rights and ensure that they are respected and upheld in online spaces. This aligns with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 16, which focuses on peace, justice, and strong institutions.

Furthermore, the need for a global organization for internet governance is highlighted. Establishing such an organization could provide a platform for international collaboration and coordination in addressing issues related to the internet. This suggests that a centralized body could play a crucial role in setting standards, policies, and regulations that promote a safe and secure internet for all.

The analysis also emphasizes the significance of a balanced focus on both human rights and human duties. While it is essential to protect and promote human rights online, it is equally important to acknowledge and fulfill individual responsibilities and duties towards the internet community. This highlights the need for a comprehensive approach that considers both rights and duties in internet governance.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the importance of creating an internet that is accessible, equitable, sustainable, and human-centered. It suggests the establishment of a global organization for internet governance, as well as the recognition of both human rights and duties. Collaboration and partnerships among all stakeholders are viewed as essential for translating these ideas into practical actions. By working together, the aim is to bring about positive change and realize the desired vision for internet governance.

Jutta Croll

Dynamic coalitions are groups that focus on human rights issues in the digital environment. They draw inspiration from the United Nations Universal Declaration of Rights and aim to ensure that people can exercise their rights appropriately in the digital realm. All 28 dynamic coalitions are actively involved in work related to digital rights, highlighting their commitment to upholding human rights in the digital world. This demonstrates a positive sentiment towards their efforts.

Another important aspect of dynamic coalitions is their contribution to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In a stock-taking exercise, each dynamic coalition elaborated on how their work relates to the SDGs. This indicates that all dynamic coalitions are dedicated to working towards the SDGs, showcasing their positive contribution towards global development.

One notable strength of dynamic coalitions is their extensive outreach beyond the Internet Governance Ecosystem. By building a network of people and organizations, dynamic coalitions engage a much broader community. This showcases their ability to reach and involve diverse stakeholders, which is essential for addressing complex issues in the digital environment. This positive sentiment towards their outreach activities further reinforces the significance of dynamic coalitions in achieving their goals.

The potential of the dynamic coalitions network and their communities to contribute towards the SDGs is emphasized by the Undersecretary-General for Economic Development. This quote encourages digital cooperation across all countries, highlighting the importance of collaboration among dynamic coalitions to effectively address global challenges.

Open cybersecurity curriculum and learning about security standards in procurement are deemed important by several experts. Lisa Petrides stresses the need for cybersecurity curriculum to be created as open educational resources rather than private and commercial. Mohammed mentions Section 508 in the United States, which is a standard with an impact on public procurement. These arguments support the idea that dynamic coalitions should emphasize the importance of open learning resources and adapt their approach to security standards in procurement.

The reception of the dynamic coalition’s work varies across different groups. While some coalitions focus more on research, others have a more practical approach. For example, the dynamic coalition on public access in libraries provides internet access to those who would otherwise not have it. Jutta Croll acknowledges the diverse impacts and reception of different dynamic coalitions and highlights the challenge of generalizing the response to their work. This neutral sentiment suggests that there is a need to consider the unique characteristics and contributions of each dynamic coalition.

Overall, Jutta Croll supports the work of dynamic coalitions and highlights their different strengths based on their focus areas. The coalition on public access in libraries is emphasized as an example that enables people without internet access to connect. The key takeaway is that dynamic coalitions play a positive role in addressing human rights issues, working towards the SDGs, and promoting dialogue and collaboration for the desired internet. Supporting more participation and a bottom-up approach in the deliberations of the Global Digital Compact is recommended to achieve these goals.

Markus Kummer:
Good afternoon, we are here for the main session on dynamic coalitions. I am Marcus Kummer, I’m the co-facilitator for the dynamic coalition coordination group together with my colleague Yuta Kroll, who will be the co-moderator of this session. Let me start by saying a few words about the dynamic coalitions. They are as old as the IGF. They started at the very first IGF meeting in Athens back in 2006, and the reason then was, you may well ask, it sounds a funny name, dynamic coalition, why are they called that way? The reason is very simple, there were those who wanted the IGF to be a year-round exercise, and others who didn’t like that, and then someone had the brilliant idea, well, maybe some dynamic coalitions might emerge. And so, the dynamic coalitions, they are a group of people who are working on the same issue, who coalesce around the same issue, and want to work together between the annual sessions. So, instead of having working groups, that sounded like a more formal structure, they called themselves dynamic coalitions, and they have been with us since Athens, by now, we have 28 of them. In the past few years, we try to organize a session where each member of the IGF has a chance to talk about the main themes of the IGF, and to showcase a bit the work they have been doing over the year, whereas this year, we take a slightly different approach, and my colleague, Jutta, will explain the concept of this session, but the aim is we want to show that the dynamic coalition, collectively, can contribute to the main themes of the IGF, and with that, I hand over to Jutta.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you, Markus, for giving me the floor. Yes, Markus has already mentioned that we now have 28 dynamic coalitions, and what they all have in common is threefold. First, they are all addressing, in one or another way, human rights issues, trying to ensure that people can enjoy and exercise their rights appropriately, also in the digital environment, and to be clear, we are not talking about a specific set of human or digital rights, but of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Rights. Second, all dynamic coalitions are working towards achieving the SDGs, and to accelerate the process, which is the topic of this session. In a stock-taking exercise, dynamic coalitions have elaborated each for their own purposes, and we are now moving forward to the SDGs, to what SDGs it’s related, and this will also be showcased within the next 90 minutes. I would like to start by saying that the Internet Governance Ecosystem is a dynamic coalition. Dynamic coalitions have a huge outreach into their respective communities. Dynamic coalitions build a network of people and organizations that address and engage a much broader community beyond the Internet Governance Ecosystem. Please let me quote what Undersecretary-General for Economic Development and the IGF 2023 on day zero. He encouraged all of us to accelerate digital applications for the SDGs, to enhance infrastructure, and digital capabilities to bridge digital gaps and divides, and to strengthen digital cooperation across all countries. And bearing that in mind, we suggest to make this session a starting point to unleash the potential of the dynamic coalitions network and their communities to achieve the SDGs. And with that, I’m handing over to Marcus to ask the first question to one of our panelists.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. We are in a very big hall. I would very much encourage you to come forward a bit. That would look a little bit more engaging when we sit together, not so far away. But with that, we introduce the panelists when you give their questions. We have five panelists who will be presenting their questions. We have two panelists here in the room. And one online. The first one is Lisa Petridis from open educational resources. So I would like to ask you three questions. How do we safeguard human rights in the digital age and how do we accelerate the SDGs? Second question, do we need an awareness campaign? And third question, do we need an open educational resource to support the SDGs? Please, Lisa.

Lisa Petrides:
Great. Thank you very much, Marcus. And thank you very much for the invitation to be here today. I want to just say briefly that the OER or the open educational resources dynamic coalition is a newbie to the dynamic coalition family. Only in, I think, January of this year have we joined. And we were started by UNESCO who passed a recommendation on the use of open educational resources, and I’ll tell you a little bit about what that is, back in November of 2019. And the dynamic coalition was created to really propel forward this work around the implementation of the dynamic coalition within the OER recommendation. And so, and basically, an OER, you know, UNESCO recommendation is a normative legal document signed by a hundred ninety-three countries to capability. If you can understand the Importance in expanding this discourse. Even if you look at it today in the degree of complexity that we’re seeing what happened in Malta or Uganda moving forward on one countries, and what it means is that this has to be built into the language of member state governments when they’re talking about something as important as education, which is very exciting. Our dynamic coalition has over 500 members, and it’s very active. Its kickoff was the week before the pandemic started. So most of the original work has been through Zoom, and it’s only in this last year, of course, that we’ve been out and about. So the dynamic coalition has really five components. It’s about capacity building for all key stakeholders. It’s about developing supportive policy. It’s about inclusive and equitable access to quality, multilingual, open formats of educational resources, including persons with disabilities. It’s about nurturing sustainable models for OER at the national, in the regional, and institutional level. And overall, this dynamic coalition really has as its charge to facilitate international cooperation around the member states. So to answer your question very specifically, you know, I’m going to sort of, since I’m first here, I’m going to start with the premise that education is a human right. So when you ask about, you know, how do we ensure awareness about human rights, well, that means access to knowledge. And that means knowledge that is contextualized, shared, transparent, that it’s openly licensed, openly accessible, because the free flow of information knowledge is really key. So many of you are here because you’re working on such important issues around access to the internet and devices, but it’s what flows through these devices that is really critically important. So OER, as I said, it’s about education content that’s freely available and openly licensed. And its purpose is to be adopted and adapted to local context. And that includes the localization of language, of culture, and it must be portable and interoperable with other platforms and libraries. It also has to be well described, pedagogically sound, and transformational. So what this means when we talk about the acceleration of the SDGs, well, for example, we have the SDG Academy, which has created some terrific content around the SDGs. I’m not sure if you’re familiar with it. And it’s around climate action, environmental issues, many things. But the point is, with openly licensed content, this is how we build the capacity building component that we really need to achieve to be able to educate people, not just about what the SDGs are, but what are the actions, what’s the education, what is it that we need to know in order to really address and make forward movement around the SDGs. I want to just emphasize how important that the whole and open piece is of this. We have so many examples from the past. Some of you may have heard of the World Bank’s knowledge management system of resources many years ago that was not opened. It’s gone. Those resources you can’t find now, right? So when we’re talking about openly licensed content and OER, something that is portable, that it lives on, that it’s dynamic, that it’s not locked down in one system so that when that system is gone, that the content goes with it. So the OER is really about being necessarily distributed. And I think this is really key when we’re talking about the SDGs and the acceleration of them. So we really need open. I haven’t heard that word enough this week. We’re talking about open education. We’re talking about open data, open science, open access, non-proprietary, non-controlled environments that are freely available and accessible. So we really need thriving, living content where learners see themselves in the content, inclusive of all voices, traditionally marginalized voices, and it’s accessible. This is the role that OER play in regard to human rights and the acceleration of SDGs.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you so much, Lisa, for explaining also what the open and open educational resources means and how relevant it is. My question now goes to Mohammad Shabir, who is representing the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. And Mohammad, I think this is one of those who have been early established in the IGF One Dynamic Coalition. And as far as I know, you have been working even when we had only the eight millennium development goals that were adopted in 2000, before later then we had the SDGs. Could you tell us how does having access to the internet helps to compensate disabilities? And how can we achieve a broad and a wide-ranging understanding of accessibilities?

Muhammad Shabbir:
Yes, thank you very much for the opportunity and the question. As you mentioned, the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability, of which I co-coordinate, is one of the earliest dynamic coalitions in the IGF system. The purpose of the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability is to first make the Internet Governance Forum and its online and physical spaces accessible, give some recommendations. We also had a paper on the accessibility of offline and online events as well. This year we tried to sort of rejuvenate with a renewed vision of accessibility towards persons with disability and the digital spaces. So the second purpose of Dynamic Coalition in general is to make the digital spaces accessible for people with disabilities. With that purpose in mind, the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability on the principle of nothing about us without us started a project on bringing actually persons with disabilities to these forums. We have more often than not noted in earlier IGFs as well that we need to bring more people with disabilities, but that, as we all know, requires more resources in terms of finance and in terms of efforts as well. So DCAD this year had three fellows from different regions, one from Africa, one from Asia Pacific, and one from Europe, actually provided resources to them with the fellowships, with the generous funds of the support of Google and Vint Cerf, to actually enable them, along with their accessibility requirements and accommodations to come to Kyoto, participate in IGF activities, and then enjoy and contribute into the discussions that are actually going on. We not just facilitated these people, but also facilitated local people with disabilities, and on the session that we had on 9th October in the IGL, we had two persons with disabilities from Japan itself, to participate and contribute in our discussions. With that premise, I would come down to the questions that we are talking about here connecting the disconnected, and when we talk about the disconnected, more often than not, it’s the discussion about 2.7 billion or whatever the number we have in our files of the disconnected from the internet. But dynamic relation on accessibility and disability has a different purpose. It represents 1.3 billion persons with disabilities. That is transgender, trans-cultural boundaries, and trans-geographic boundaries. You may have, as I often have been saying, access to state-of-the-art technology. You may have the device, the state-of-the-art device in your hands with hi-fi internet connectivity available to that device, but because of, as it was mentioned, what flows into this device was not made accessible for a certain kind of users, those who access those devices with a different manner in some sort of, with the help of screen readers, or with the help of some audio-visual devices, or with the help of some one-handed devices. So because those devices, those softwares, those platforms were not made in that sense that these technologies could interact with that kind of content, the person may remain unable to access those kind of contents. The best example of that would be some of the information that was placed on the IGF website itself of 2023. So in that sense, when dynamic relation on accessibility and disability aims to bring persons with disabilities into this discussion, it aims to reach those discussions through the participation of actual persons with disabilities to the forum and to contribute to the discussions. With regards to accelerating the SDGs and connecting them with the MDGs that we had since 2000, unfortunately, MDGs did not had any specific key indicators to address issues related to persons with disabilities. But fortunately, we do have those indicators in the SDGs and there are number of SDGs and every SDG has specific indicators that address to the needs and requirements of persons with disabilities, such as education, employment and smart cities, access to different resources, et cetera, et cetera. So we do have these indicators out there, we do have SDGs that lay at the top and then we have persons with disabilities interacting with these initiatives. But when it comes to the implementation of those indicators, we sort of fell a little bit behind in that context. A survey which was done about of 1 million websites back in 2022 indicates that about 97% of the homepages of the websites were or had some accessibility related problems. So with this kind of stats staring us in the faces, we have to say that there is a long way to cover if we want to actually bridge the divide between the digital haves and have nots. And when I say has and have nots, I do not just mean the divide between Global North and Global South, but this divide could very well be existing within the Global North itself where we have state-of-the-art technologies, but due to the accessibility barriers that may come in the way of users interacting with the digital accessibilities and these environments may interact with the barriers and may face those barriers. Due to those barriers, they may remain unable to participate in online spaces and due to that, they may remain unable to participate in the acceleration of SDGs and other processes.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you, Muhammad, for that and for your important work you are doing. May I also recall that at the micro level in the IGF, it’s thanks. to the DCAD that we have made big progress on accessibility for participants at IGF meetings. Once again, thank you for your excellent work and your hard work in this important issue. May we turn now to a remote participant, our old friend Alejandro Pisanti, who is currently in Washington, D.C. He represents the Daman Coalition for Core Internet Values. Can we make him access and show him on the screen and give him sound access that we can hear him? Alejandro, can you hear us?

Alejandro Pisanty:
I hear you very well and I hope you can hear me.

Markus Kummer:
Good to see you indeed. We can hear you and see you. So we have heard already on the importance of openness and openness is also a very important core value of the Internet. And now, this IGF, there has been a lot of hype about artificial intelligence and I would like to ask the questions, do you see a danger for the core values of the Internet through artificial intelligence? Or the other way around, how can AI be deployed to the benefit of the core Internet values? You have the floor, Alejandro.

Alejandro Pisanty:
Thank you, Marcos. Thanks, everybody. Apologies for some glitches in the connection. Computers have no word of honor and it pulled a big restart on me, but I’m here. Pleased to see you all and to your question, Marcos. I think it’s a mutual challenge between what artificial intelligence can do and what Internet governance can tell us about artificial intelligence. We are seeing a flare up of interest in artificial intelligence due to one small niche within the broad field of artificial intelligence, which has become very public and very transformative, which is generative artificial intelligence specifically for large language models, which is a way to access a huge database of words. Instead of making an app, a very abstruse query, you make your query that looks like a sentence and the system replies with something that looks like a sentence or many sentences or what looks like a whole book. But artificial intelligence is a much broader field. Even neural networks, deep learning and so forth, which are the object of public attention in the last decade are still a subfield within this. And we see what we know of artificial intelligence, many tools for quantitatively managing things on the internet. Actually, artificial intelligence is actively used in many algorithms that make the internet better, as well as for some of them that make trouble on the internet, more on the application layer. People who run cybersecurity operations, people who just run networks, people who plan network capacity, they are all using artificial intelligence for many years. So here we can see definitely that artificial intelligence poses a positive contribution to the growth of the internet and to the protection of its values like interoperability, openness, accessibility, and very importantly, scalability and our more superposed need for security. There’s also a challenge, because this is like an unarmed race between what we would call the good guys and the bad guys. The people who are attacking the internet are also using artificial intelligence, for example, to discern patterns of operation, to extract passwords from, or even beyond password kind of security protections. And the good guys, the people who are concerned in keeping the internet open and functional and reasonably secure for everybody, are using artificial intelligence to detect these guys, to track their actions, to detect how they behave.

Markus Kummer:
What internet governors specifically can bring to these fields is we should absorb the experience, we should extract the lessons learned from almost three decades of formal studies on internet governance and formal construction of institutions and see, for example, what the multi-stakeholder procedure for governing or for managing artificial intelligence could bring us. We could see that the challenges, for example, of scalability, of crossing national borders, of reducing friction, of managing and manipulating memory, which we have learned to deal with in some ways, that is to dissect and attack differentially in internet governance, are now things that are affecting us on the field of generative artificial intelligence language models. And we could also see that we never established a single global government of the internet or a single global institution for the governance of the internet. We have a specific mechanism for the unified identifiers like the DNS in ICANN. We have the standards in the IETF. We have very focalized groups like the anti-phishing working group or the messaging anti-abuse working group, which focus on specific problems, bring the relevant stakeholders together and also find the funding to do these things and the way to have teeth so that they can act upon the malicious actors to some extent. They are also adaptable to the diversity of different cultures, different, let’s say, national traditions, policies, legal structures, and aware of the fact that if you try to squeeze the system too tightly, all the bad actors will act outside the system. There’s much arbitrage there. So probably that’s what we can see in this big picture. There’s an interaction between these things. Artificial intelligence can be used both to damage and to defend the core values of the internet. And we can extract lessons from the history of internet governance and apply them to the governance of artificial intelligence

Alejandro Pisanty:
in specific and differentiated fields. Thanks.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you so much, Alejandro, for introducing us to the work of the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values. And I do appreciate how you explained what AI can do is beneficial, but also maybe it’s not so beneficial. Let me now go to Avri Doria, who is. I’m a member of the Dynamic Coalition on Internet of Things and I’m here for the Dynamic Coalition on Internet of Things and also, DCIoT is one of the most grown-up Dynamic Coalitions, I think, so you have a long-standing experience in Internet of Things, but what about the people that shall benefit from Internet of Things? Reflecting the last five days, the Dynamic Coalition on Internet of Things is human-centered and so my question would be, what does it mean to you and to the Dynamic Coalition of Internet of Things and what steps does the Dynamic Coalition take to ensure a human-centered, open and inclusive Internet and how does this play out to fast tracking the SDGs? Thank you.

Avri Doria:
Thank you for the question. Yes, and we have been working on the Internet of Things for a long time. When the Dynamic Coalition first started, it was before things were as ubiquitous as everywhere as they are now. The concern was the things are coming and we didn’t know whether they would be on the Internet, of the Internet, somehow different from the Internet. Discussions we hear in other subjects these days. And eventually we found out that what was really important was how they, the things, were interacting with us, how we worked with them, how we treated them, how we used and took care of them so that people were benefited from them. And one of the things that basically happened when we started working with the Internet of Things is we decided that a set of values were necessary for best practices for the items that were part of the Internet of Things. And so we started looking at what were the best practices that one would need to have if an Internet of Things or things existing on our Internet were to interact with human populations, with cities, with people in general, were to be human-centered. How would we do that? How could we make sure that the things that are on the Internet of Things were accessible? How could we make sure that the things that are on the Internet of Things were accessible? How could we make sure that they were properly maintained so that they didn’t become dangerous, so that they remained beneficial? How could we control the access so that the things were not being accessed in a bad way, but only in a good way? How could we control that? How could we basically make sure that the things that are on the Internet of Things were accessible and that data was treated and stored properly? So the dynamic coalition in the process from 2008 when we first started talking about it almost as just objects to 2018 when the IoT good practices came out was basically looking at how they could be used in a human-centric way. Now, as we started looking at those good values, we found that they were often far more So we started looking at the SDGs, and we looked at the SDGs and we started going through as aspirations, as intentions, as goals, than they were in practice, and then we started looking with the SDGs as to how Internet of Things could actually be used to assist, to solve the goals of that, and zero hunger, that’s the things that are everywhere in agriculture and such, or for health, the number of objects and things that are used in health, that are implanted in bodies and such to help maintain health. Clear water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, decent environment, clean air, et cetera, that basically each of the problems that you look at in the sustainable development goals is one that can be helped or hindered by the objects that we place in the world that basically collect data, that affect the world, because the things don’t just collect data, they initiate actions, and so how do we make sure that they’re well controlled and only controlled in a proper and safe way? So basically these values have been established, and now we start looking at the impact analysis of Internet of Things, of how do we make sure that there’s proper access control? How do we make sure that an object that’s been planted in our environment that no longer has a purpose, or has purpose has become deleterious, can be dealt with and such? So those are the problems that the dynamic coalition takes on, talks about, tries to publish analyses on, and to continue doing its work.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you, Avri, for this. So Internet of Things with a human face, so to speak. It gives me pleasure now as a digital immigrant to look towards a digital native. We have Theo from the Youth Coalition on Internet Values with us, and I would like to ask her how do you see the role of young people and the Internet in fast-tracking the SDGs, and also what hope and expectations does the young generation have on Internet governance for the future, and what impact it can have on today’s young people? Please, Phyo.

Phyo Thiri L.:
First of all, thank you for having me today, and I feel very proud of being here, because as a young people, I close together with the young people, and I feel very proud to take together with the senior people at the high-level panel. That is very good for include the young people voices in the different sessions like that, to hear the young people, what they are challenging over in the Internet, as well as how young people can use the Internet, and how young people can use the Internet, as well as to advocate about the SDG for young So, I think it’s very important for us to be aware of the fact that we are moving forward to the better future of the Internet. Of course, SDG goals are also linking with our physical world as well as in this digital era, it is also becoming, since the pandemic, we have been engaging and we have been using the Internet in our community. So, we have been using the Internet as a platform for hiring managers online and not only for themselves but also for the community work. For example, our YCIG member are very actively engaging at the ISRU standing group for empowering young people to get involved in the Internet governance community, as well as we have been supporting the young people to get involved in the Internet governance community. So, I think this is very important for the future Pacific region for empowering the young people for building their capacity about the Internet governance and also supporting the young people to get involved and continue their participation at the Internet governance community. So, I think this is supporting the young people and also supporting the young people to reach out to more people because, in my perspective, it’s like young people are born with, not some people, young people are born with the technology but they are now facing a lot of the issues in their era for addressing and addressing the issues of the Internet. So, I think this is very important for the future Pacific region and in their respective local community, of course, region and the global community. We are now challenging with the Internet issue, why Internet is innovating on one hand. This is the thing that the young people are very important right now to bridge this gap and to also support the icm like advocating about this. This is also very important that, you know, sometimes, we didn’t know especially that young people from the developing people, they don’t know how to use the internet. They don’t know how to use the internet and even they don’t understand how the internet is working and how the internet is impacting our daily life and how the algorithms are working, social media algorithms are working or using our data or something like that. So it’s very important that we do those things or we don’t need to go as far as mentoring devotion in 2020 to engage at the internet Governor’s foreroom in 2022. We’re taking a part of the mentorship the educators, who can assist the teaching and praising them with the internet understandings and keep them to continue this community but so far we are facing like resources, especially related to like financial resources, time to sit here like that for talking about the issue and through our better understanding first and then also we have to, we also have to have, we also have the concerns about financial stability for learnings or for getting access to internet for example like the internet is in some region like the internet is not affordable at all. It is getting more and more expensive. Why it is getting more and more expensive? It is very clear that because of the political impact that are suffering in the country like Myanmar and Afghanistan are also very difficult to get access to internet. The internet is getting more and more expensive and it is getting more and more difficult for the young people to get access to the internet. Getting access to the internet is also a part of our life to assess the resources about the education, also assess the information about the global issue or something like that like the capacity building program, like the fellowship program, and also to engage with the global and local and regional community, because we are from the different times, so working together for the common goal. So internet, when they are no longer afford to pay for the internet, they have been left behind. That is a key point, that is one of the example that I would like to highlight. Another thing is that young people are very active in advocating and working on the activist work for freedom of speech and digital rights related matter, but on one hand, digital speech is no longer speech at all. So how they impact their advocacy, they only have to consider that how there might be the impact and there might be a risk to them when they do something that the government don’t like. I know that in the world, there are lots of governments supporting the young people, but there are also many governments oppressing over the young people’s rights and also oppressing over the young people and stopping them to criminalize their cases like that when they speak out on the online or when they speak about their environmental issue online. That is an inevitable that we are facing and also young people need mass support from the government and also from the government to support the different kinds of the organization to also addressing the issue together for moving forward to the Sustainable Development Goals as well as for going into the common goal like one world, one internet. Thank you very much.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you very much for your presentation and for all the aspects that you’ve addressed. You have been speaking about the ecological crisis as well as very important other things, but this gives me the opportunity to refer on the one hand to the general comment number 25 that the IGF adopted and this general comment addresses several of the issues, especially not to criminalize the activities that young people perform on the internet and it’s not a coincidence that after number 25, general comment number 26 on environmental issues and their impact on the world has been adopted, right, I think only four weeks ago and with that said, I would like to call the Dynamic Coalition on Environment that is supposed to be in the room to give their short 90-minute intervention from the microphone right there. Oh, 90 seconds. I’m so sorry. I’m so sorry. So 90 seconds, the floor is yours.

Audience:
My name is Saptarshi and I represent DC Environment. It has been such an insightful discussion, but I want to add a point to this ongoing discussion. I believe with human rights, we also need to speak about human duties. They have to work together. At DC Environment, we have been working on action-oriented policy papers which puts focus on human duties. In this year’s DC report, we talk about how unchecked urbanization is causing biodiversity loss which in turn is impacting our mental health negatively. It is time to incorporate action-oriented duties in our discussions. We need to leverage technology, especially internet, to propagate and educate school students so that the next generation is prepared to do whatever is needed to ensure the world is livable space in the near future. Lastly, I would like to take this opportunity to thank IGF to facilitate such important discussions at this forum. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. Thank you. And now, I’m given to understand that there’s also the Dynamic Coalition on Jobs that would like to make an intervention.

Audience:
When I release the reports, I’ll make the intervention on digital health and jobs.

Markus Kummer:
Okay, then is the Dynamic Coalition on Digital Health is on my list. Then it’s children, Dynamic Coalition on Children. Or children’s rights to be precise, please.

Audience:
Thank you very much for giving me the floor and thank you very much, Theo, for speaking on behalf of young people. I have to say it’s very exciting to see so many young people engaged in the processes here. I represent the Dynamic Coalition on Children’s Rights in the Digital Environment and as my colleague Jutta has referred to, we’re a dynamic coalition built upon the principles and the content of the general comment number 25 on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment. And I think it’s also really exciting and I would like to thank all my other speakers from other DCs to see the full potential of how we can work together to ensure from our perspective that children’s rights are really understood and acknowledged within all of the work that you’re doing and how we can understand and contribute to your work. And for us, it’s very exciting to be part of the IGF and have the opportunity to bring the voices of children with young people and children themselves to these crucial debates about the future of the Internet. Thank you very much.

Jutta Croll:
Yes, thank you, Amy. So now we are calling Rajendra for the Dynamic Coalition on Jobs and on Digital Health. Thank you. So good afternoon, everyone, and good morning, good evening to those who are joining online. As the organizer for the plenary of the DC session, I thank the IGF for the opportunity, support, and the trust they have given us. Today we release four reports, probably substantive work of the Dynamic Coalition on Internet and Jobs. This is probably the world’s biggest project on job creation that we do using technology. It’s called Project Create. And thanks, Windsor, for the mentorship, for the report that we see, because I believe totally aligned to the theme of this session, human rights in digital age. There will be no human rights if there are no source of livelihoods. You can’t fight for them, basically. So I think this project is very important. And we have created a job map for nine sectors. This is a net, and we’ll work through the year. And this is what we promised in Ethiopia on the 30th of October last year. The second report we release is Urbanization, Biodiversity, and Mental Health. This is important because what we call as… The mindless growth that we show up as development, which it is not, and you will see in this report that urbanization is leading to loss of biodiversity, which is going to lead to mental health issues. If we do not address this, the mental health pandemic will shadow all the pandemics. I think this is an important issue, given the fact that digital footprint has a carbon footprint. We have to address this, and this also is a report for that. We are releasing this report on the state of digital health 2022, which covers 58 countries. We have done it under IGF, Dynamic Coalition on Digital Health, which I think addresses the three 80s, what I call it. The 80% of the people in the world have no access to health, 80% of the people in the world cannot afford health, and 80% of the people have acute illnesses, which means that out of those three 80 As, we need the four A, which is artificial intelligence, to address these three 80s. And of course, the last report, Internet and Jobs, covers 75 countries, six continents, and our focus has been, as Dynamic Coalition on Internet and Jobs, that internet plays an important role in job creation. This is our mandate, this is our remit, and this is our work, and this also shows the phenomenal groundwork that Dynamic Coalitions do, in terms of thought leadership, in terms of giving direction to key things of IGF, and moving the things on ground. Thank you so much. Yes, thank you, Rajendra, for giving us the presence. And I do think, only that I was able to flicker through it, that it’s very important we spread that around the room, to give it to more people, and to give more people access. I’m pretty sure we have digital copies on the internet, and probably we can give also the URL and the links. I’m not sure whether we have further Dynamic Coalitions in the room, who want to take the floor for their 90 seconds. If you are so, please make, you’re ready to go to the microphone, and otherwise we would like to take also questions from the floor, from the participants in this session. Please come forward, put your questions to the Dynamic Coalitions, and even if it be, how can I join any of the Dynamic Coalitions that have been presented here so far?

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. It has been our objective to make the session as interactive as possible, so we really rely on you to ask questions and make comments. We can also turn to the online participants. Are there any comments online, or is there any online participants who would like to intervene?

Audience:
Hi, so there are two questions online. One is from Mr. James from Cameroon. He says, what strategies can be employed to enhance the practical relevance of established international norms for professionals, and which resources can be harnessed in their daily responsibilities?

Jutta Croll:
Do we have one of the panelists who want to take this question? Well, the question is about standards, and I know we have a Dynamic Coalition on standards. Anyone in the room who want to take the question?

Avri Doria:
Yes. I can certainly add that within the Dynamic Coalition on IOT, having standards that can then be used by many to come up. with, you know, a certain level of transparency, a certain level of interoperability, a certain level of expected behaviors that are acceptable to consumers are critical. And so within the values that are promoted in good practice are indeed the development and adherence to standards. So certainly it’s a vital importance.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you, Avri. But Muhammad, you also want to add something in regard of standards?

Muhammad Shabbir:
Yes, quickly. As Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability, we always encourage to follow the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. That would be the version 2.1 right now. These are the standards to develop accessible websites, online platforms, mobile apps, etc. In an accessible way for the persons with disabilities to use, and Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability always encourages the developers to follow these standards.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you, Muhammad. So we have windsurf. It’s an honor for us to have you here in our session and to ask us a question.

Audience:
So this is a question to Shabir, although certainly any of you who wish to respond are free to do so. It has to do with increasing our ability and our capacity to produce accessible interfaces to all of the applications on the Internet. My impression is that creating standards doesn’t necessarily create capacity to use those standards effectively. Some of you are familiar with the Khan Academy, which has grown over time to encompass a great many more subjects than just mathematics. But the example of that academy made me think of asking people with disabilities to help the rest of us, especially those of us who are responsible for developing software. that’s used online to intuitively understand how to apply the standards to make things accessible. What I’ve found as I learn more about this problem is that examples of things that work and things that don’t work and explanations about why they work or don’t work may be the most effective way of helping people, programmers, gain an intuition for how to make use of technology for accessibility. Just to, Shabir, I’m sure you would resonate with this. If you don’t know how a screen reader works, then how are you gonna make a webpage that works well with a screen reader? So we really need to build more capacity and I would invite those of you interested in this to think about how we can increase our capacity to do a better job.

Muhammad Shabbir:
Yes, thank you very much, Wendt, for making this comment. Actually, this was exactly what I was thinking about, that we need to build capacities and just to step out of a little bit broader domain that we are discussing here in the dynamic coalitions, to build capacities, actually what I said in the beginning was that you have to have actual people, those who are being impacted by these technologies interacting with these kind of initiatives. Same is the case with the development side. You, now there are technologies that make, enable persons with disabilities to study these degrees, software development, software engineering, computer sciences, and all those technologies. So on one level, we have to encourage person with disabilities to come into these fields, to study these educational degrees and to work in these domains so that the other people, those who would be your co-worker or colleagues, juniors, seniors, they would know of that you are there and you have the requirements. On the other hand, the certain measures could be taken to inform the development side, different degrees, those could include requirements and training programs for training the persons without disabilities about the requirements and impacts of having these technologies accessible and not having these technologies accessible. In certain cases, there are just physical requirements where people are unable to reach to the certain content which may be available on the website if that is not available with the screen reader. But in certain cases, it could be a legal liability. For instance, the Section 508 in the United States and so on and so forth. There are other standards which are legally bound to be followed by the governments to make the certain platforms to a certain level accessible. But as I said, this is a very interesting debate that we need to continue. But certainly, Vint, thank you very much for this very crucial point that you indicated that the people actually developing these technologies need to know about the standards. For instance, some 10 years back-

Jutta Croll:
Time out. We need a time out to give more people to take the floor. They are already queuing. Thank you so much. But I don’t want to interrupt you, but just to give Lisa also the chance to react to your input and then we have more questions. A short intervention, Lisa.

Lisa Petrides:
Yeah, I just wanted to talk about this from the educator perspective because we’re working very deeply with education systems now and faculty within them who are creating open educational resources to develop these kinds of standards that are 508 compliant. So for example, and this doesn’t solve the problem at the software development level, but if you have educators who are creating resources for the first time, there are mechanisms that you can put into the authoring platforms, I mean, at the very basic level, so that they can’t put a picture without adding alt text. I mean, it starts simple in that way, and of course gets to much more complicated things. What I want to say in our education systems is our accessibility offices have really been so much about how you make accommodations, and how you get a particular book to a student in a chemistry class who is sight impaired or something like this, as opposed to thinking about what does it look like if these resources are born accessible, and what does that need to look like at the creation level, at the course creation level, or at the resource creation level. So, and this also, I just want to add in the issue of universal design for learning. This is something that I think we’re really understanding in the US and globally that we need to think about disability on a whole spectrum that is not necessarily device specific anymore, and that’s what a lot of these accessibility offices we’re experts in, what’s the device that gets you as opposed to what’s the resource itself.

Audience:
It’s Vin again. Thank you for letting me intervene one more time. I wanted to reinforce something that Shabir said. We have two deaf Googlers who were responsible for developing one application called Live Transcribe, which basically takes sound in and transcribes it on your mobile so that you can see what the other person is saying. It works in 120 languages, and it was developed by a deaf Russian engineer at Google. The other thing is captioning for YouTube was developed by another deaf engineer. So, I want to reinforce the point that people with these problems also can have the skill to help us develop applications that accommodate, and I want to reinforce the point about broad accommodation as opposed to device specific things. You’re quite right about that, too.

Jutta Croll:
Thank you for the lively debate, and I’m quite happy that more than 20 years after the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines have been adopted, we can give a bit of stamina to that input. Now we have Alejandro raising his hand from Zoom, and then we go to Mark Howell from the Standards, Safety, and Security Dynamic Coalition. Alejandro, you have the floor.

Alejandro Pisanty:
Thank you. Quick reply to the question about standards complementing what has already been said. As things move into the Internet of Things, for example, the standards issue becomes very complex. You have to distinguish between the consumer Internet of Things, which runs mostly over the open Internet, it’s just more IP traffic, more TCP IP traffic, or UDP traffic, and the industrial Internet of Things, which may choose in some segments of communication to use the open Internet, let’s say if you’re operating an autonomous vehicle or a connected vehicle, and what is available is Wi-Fi, then that will be what you use, or your standard Internet connection. But otherwise, you have LoRaWAN, you have lots of other standards taking place, and it’s a very complex architecture. As number one, the expectation for artificial intelligence would be that some standards for interoperability, for example, between LLMs should arise, and we’ll be facing this same complexity. And on the other hand, what’s happening with some applications of artificial intelligence, including generative LLMs, is that they are substituting for the lack of standards because they are just translating imperfectly with biases, with lots of trouble, but they are just jumping over the hurdles by doing things like being set, or what we have seen, for example, the incredible progress in automatic translation. And again, these things, it’s very important to keep them in mind within core Internet values, the ITF, our context, this multi-stakeholder governance, making sure all stakeholders are at the table. Your system will never be better than your case studies before you start developing. So that’s the kind of thing where we can really make sure we involve all relevant stakeholders. Final point, you may have a technical standard, like, for example, for accessibility, for the blind or for the weak of sight, and you can still have the designers paint, you know, pale jade over turquoise, you know, letters over backgrounds, and that will pass a Bobby test, and you will still have something that people cannot read. So it takes a lot of commitment, and we should ask, for example, key actors like government websites to set the standard of behavior, not only the technical written standard, but the standard of behavior about accessibility. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you, Alejandro. Can we now turn to Mark Carvell behind this microphone? Please. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Marcus.

Audience:
The name is Mark Carvell. I’m a policy advisor for IS3C, which is a dynamic coalition. We’ve been going for the last three years. IS3C stands for Internet Standards, Security, and Safety, and the focus of our coalition is on the failure to deploy existing standards in the whole internet ecosystem. We have a range of working groups. The first working group we set up is looking at security by design, and that has just published a report which has surveyed policies worldwide relating to internet of things and policy provisions with regard, and practices with regard to standards, and that will be the basis for further work to examine the whole issue of how to make internet of things much more secure and safe. We have a working group which is looking at the gaps in educational, curricular, and vocational training relating to cybersecurity standards, and that is now developing a proposal for creating a cybersecurity hub which will bring together industry and educationists to look at this, to start examining whether there is potential for creating a kind of repository on cybersecurity standards that educationalists can use, which will meet the requirements of industry. We have another working group which is looking at what. What we believe is an important driver for the take-up of standards, which is public and private sector procurement and supply chain management. The work that that working group has done so far has confirmed that a lot of procurement contracts do not specify cybersecurity standards. When government offices, for example, go out to purchase devices and network applications, there isn’t any specific stipulation as to what they’re buying should include in respect of standards relating to security. We’re launching a new working group which will look at routing and RPKI and DNSSEC in particular, why there’s not been widespread take-up of those important standards. And also we’re drawing up what we hope will be a valuable toolkit which will set out the key cybersecurity standards that will be a reference point for internet stakeholders, users, purchasers and so on in the future. So we’ve got a lot of work on the go and we’ll be launching new aspects of work which will bring cybersecurity standards much more to the centre of awareness, what can contribute to greater security and safety online. And of course this intersects with the whole sustainable development goals agenda with regard to resilient, robust, secure infrastructure that will serve the interests of the health sector, financial sector and so on. So the whole range of SDGs which we think our work will contribute to. So I hope that I’ve got – if I’ve gone over 90 seconds, do apologise, but we’re doing so much. Thank you.

Jutta Croll:
Okay, thank you so much, Mark.

Lisa Petrides:
Can I make one comment to that?

Jutta Croll:
Yes, of course.

Lisa Petrides:
Just 30 seconds. I implore you if you’re going to be creating cybersecurity curriculum, there are groups already that are looking at this, please do it as open educational resources because so many times we’re seeing the corporations go in and create their training programs around cybersecurity but then that becomes private and commercial. We need this to be openly licensed. So there’s a community of people already working on cybersecurity. I’m sure they would welcome the kind of expertise that you’re talking about.

Jutta Croll:
Well noted. Thank you very much. I’m quite glad to see that the networking is already going on between dynamic coalitions and I wanted to recommend also that Mohammed has mentioned Section 508 in the United States and that is exactly an example how public procurement or the standard had an impact on public procurement. So probably, Mark, you should go in contact with Mohammed to learn more about Section 508 and then see whether that approach could also be adapted to security standards in procurement. We have another question from the floor.

Audience:
Thank you. I’m Woro from the National Library of Indonesia. I just want to add that from the library perspective, right now libraries are very focused on building awareness amongst libraries that the public access they offer give them a role or even a responsibility to help deliver the SDGs building on their pre-existing values base. We are trying to get a stronger, more purposive and more structured approach to having positive impact in terms of development and delivery of the rights. So the enrichment of the particular one, freedom of access to information. So for us, for libraries, it will be about how a localized delivery of the right of access to information through libraries is helping to deliver. As part of this, we are building awareness, strategic planning and a sense of agency and duty. So it’s important to have rights and the SDGs as the structured goal and to keep our eyes on this. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. The libraries have always been very active participants and we have a dynamic coalition of libraries. Our rapporteur actually represents the International Federation of Library Associations and he may say a few words at the end of our session. But we have somebody else behind the microphone here. Please, you have the floor and introduce yourself.

Audience:
I am a Japanese nutrition who lost some of her speech due to a traffic accident. I worked in a remote medical field and studied at Osaka Kyoiku University’s Graduate School of Education, majoring in health science. My name is Akemi Yokoyama. I am Asia Pacific leader for people with disability and volunteer leader for the Osaka Cancer Expo in Japan. After a traffic accident, I studied actively at the Japan Rehabilitation Association. Here in Japan, there are many people who do not have an internet. People with disability in Japan have both intellectual and mental disability, which also overlap with physical disability. One-third of Japanese people are elderly, dementia. We ask for your help in providing diverse accessibility, bridging the digital divide and water and food for disability and elderly people around the world. In particular, he thanks us for Gaza, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya, and so on. Thank you very much.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you very much for these comments. It’s very much appreciated. We have somebody online who would like to intervene. You can go.

Jutta Croll:
So we have one more comment from Zoom. Mavish, would you like to go ahead?

Audience:
Benin wanted to intervene. Benin, can you please speak? You have raised your hand. Okay, so we have one more question from Ms. Monica Emmert. How well have the results of the DC’s work been received in industry and legislative work? How can the DC’s strengthen the impact and perhaps avoid duplication of work like charter of human rights and principles for the internet?

Jutta Croll:
So I’m going to start and then you will continue because you have the long-standing experience with dynamic coalitions. At this point, I would say that it’s a bit difficult to give an answer across all the dynamic coalitions. The work of some of the dynamic coalitions is very much related to research and it’s well appreciated, like we have seen in the reports that Rajendra has already handed out. While other dynamic coalitions are more in the field of practice, like, for example, the dynamic coalition on public access in libraries, which they are really practicing giving people access who otherwise wouldn’t have access to the internet. But maybe, Marcus, you want to add something?

Markus Kummer:
Well, I think what we always say, it’s very difficult to have a common denominator for all dynamic coalitions as they’re so diverse. They’re diverse in scope. Some, as you have heard, work more on principles, whereas others are more very much practical, such as the dynamic coalition on access. accessibility has both practical and also policy aspects, so it’s very difficult to give a common assessment, but especially the dynamic coalition on accessibility for people with disabilities has had a very direct impact, and we heard from Mohamed also how they continue to have impact, but I open the floor to the other panellists, maybe you have concrete examples, or would like to give your assessment. Anybody willing to venture forward? But again,

Lisa Petrides:
yes, please. I’ll try this. I know that, I mean, one thing I think I’ve really learned being here this week, how much the work that we do in the education system around access to knowledge is somewhat disconnected from the larger conversations about governance and privacy and, you know, the issues that other people are dealing with in the dynamic coalitions, yet they seem to be very essentially related, and in fact, if the people that we work with on the ground understood that they really are part of a digital equity agenda, and it isn’t just about an issue of education and access to education, if they saw the larger picture, I think it could be very useful, so it would be interesting to try to find how we can make some of those connections, even if it’s around messaging and communications, it seems that there’s some real potential to have deeper impact around the SDGs if we’re able to do that together.

Alejandro Pisanty:
We have Alejandro who would liketo intervene? Thank you. I would like to go further in this question. As Marcos correctly said, the impact is very heterogeneous, and we have to work out ways to get closer, especially to industry, by changing the messaging between the IGF and certain sectors of industry. Some sectors of industry are close to the IGF, they have been since the start of the IGF good sponsors, they send high-level technically informed representatives, they absorb what comes out of the IGF. We need to make this happen more, and we certainly have a much better example here of this type of collaboration and the way it carries to industry, and what we can expect if the IGF is minimized in its role, as attention goes to things like the global digital compact and the potential interest of creating a higher level all-encompassing governance instance for everything digital. That will certainly make sure that industry goes completely into a defensive attitude, and no multi-stakeholder message will get through to industry. Further, one can foresee that, for example, as the GDC has already talked about a three-part type of arrangement between government, industry, and civil society, without including the technical community, without including the technical knowledge necessary for governing or evolving the system, we can be sure that eventually the powers of industry and government will come together and squeeze out civil society. So, it’s a paradoxical and complex situation. What we have to do is document more and communicate more the IGF work to industry and make sure that they feel as an equal partner, instead of attending preventively. A lot of industries do send representatives only to listen and prepare against what they will see as an attack of regulation of legislation two years down the road in their countries. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you, Alejandro. I think we have time for one more question, and then we will move on to the next panel. So I think that gives me a nice segue into a final question. As we give each panelist the opportunity for some final comments, and I would like to ask them, how do you see the role of dynamic coalition in the new environment? And one of the big questions was the future of the IGF and the relationship to the GDC. So I think that’s a very good question, and I would like to start with you, and then we will come out of the global digital compact. Shall we start at the other end with the youth dynamic coalition? But can you be very, very concise? Because we’re shortly going to run out of time. One minute.

Phyo Thiri L.:
Thank you. I will be very concise. I think it’s really important that the youth dynamic coalition is very important for shaping the future of the Internet. The internet is an event. Visors are coming from the bottom to the up. So it is very important to include the young people visors to the GDC as well as shaping the future of the Internet. So I think it’s very important that the youth dynamic coalition is very important for shaping the future of the Internet as well as for the digital space. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
.

Muhammad Shabbir:
Yes, thank you. Just quickly, a couple of points. One, there is a common misconception that if the work is done for the disabled, it’s not going to be useful for the disabled. So I think it’s very important that the work made accessible for persons with disabilities can be used and have been used by other persons and it’s been reported that it was more beneficial than it would be otherwise. Secondly, the dynamic coalition on accessibility and disability is ready to cooperate with any of the IGF committees no matter what they’re forum accessible for people with disabilities and the voice of people with disabilities should be heard there. Lastly, the accessibility work is not just for people with disabilities. We all are aging and we may at some point in our lives require these accessibility accommodations. So it’s better to start when we are in power and in a position to make things happen than to lament afterwards. Thank you.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. Lisa?

Lisa Petrides:
I think I can say this on behalf of the OER Dynamic Coalition, which is, you know, we’re working with member states and governments to institute these policies around education to not restrict access to education by in fact providing open educational resources. So if there are as a newbie, as a newer Dynamic Coalition, if there’s ways that we can work with other Dynamic Coalitions, you know, to the old adage of we can go, you know, further together, I think it would be really helpful to look at how the policies around the Internet are in sync or not in sync with those around governments and education and access to education. And then one just one quick thing, too, you know, you asked a question of our speaker on youth who so eloquently talked about the youth voice and you asked her the question about how to fast track the efforts. And I’m thinking that question is for all of us. You know, youth came as maybe digital natives to this, but they are inheriting what we have here. And so any way that we can all think of fast tracking and not just wait for a year from now to sort of talk about our impact, I think that’s of the most crucial importance.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. And Avery.

Avri Doria:
Perhaps I’m being simplistic, but I look at GDC and essentially top down set of principles. I look at Dynamic Coalitions and essentially bottom up set of principles. So I think it would be problematic. I think we would continue to strive, as we’ve done with the IGF, to get acceptance. But I really do believe it would be problematic.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you. I wonder whether our two reporters would like to give a very, very short tweet like summing up. And introduce yourself with your name, please.

Priya Shukla:
Thank you, Marcus. I’m Priya Shukla, coordinator of DC Internet and Jobs and also the reporter for the DC main session. I’d like to say that it was a very insightful session, however, and with many takeaways and call to action, but it will not be able to reiterate the whole discussion. in just a few points. However, I’ll give two key takeaways here. The internet we want should be accessible, equitable, which helps in capacity building. However, it also has to be sustainable. And second, that internet has to be human-centered. And the call to action points that I feel should be that global organization for internet governance should be established. And second, there should be a focus on both human rights and human duties. We’ve never talked about human duties before. So I hope all the DCs will come together and not just work in silos to bring these key takeaways and call to action points into actual practice. Thank you.

Stephen Wyber:
Thank you. And Stephen. Hi, so I’m Stephen Weiber from the… So Stephen Weiber, I’m primarily here as a reporter, but also with the Dynamic Coalition on public access in libraries. I think the two overall points I came away with were firstly that there’s a sense that, I don’t know, Dynamic Coalitions are here to address the delivery gap between the promise of the internet and actually delivering on human rights and on the SDGs. And actually providing the sort of wealth and richness of understanding of what that gap is, what are you missing out on? I don’t know, what is the contour of the space that we need to fill with action in order to make sure that the internet actually delivers on its potential for everyone? And then the second, which came out towards the end, the idea that collectively the DCs make it possible for internet governance to be a form of reflective practice, by which I mean that it’s a space where we need to be looking critically. at what’s going on, and we need to be understanding what is actually going on, and why are there links, where are there links between the way the technology that the internet is developing, and the outcomes people are experiencing, why is what we hope would happen not happening, what is missing, and so on, and they provide this lasting space to actually do that. That’s crunched down into the term reflective practice. In terms of calls, I think the first one actually is Avery’s one there, that if the GDC is supposed to be providing a sort of chapeau for all internet governance discussions, and how do we answer the question of what should be done, then actually the GDC needs to bake in that bottom-up process, it needs to leave that space for that to happen, and then the second one, I think simply celebrating this model of having a space where all stakeholders can be there, because you can’t reflect if you can’t see, and you can’t see if you don’t have everyone actually present and taking part, so I hope that was helpful.

Markus Kummer:
Thank you, and I ask now my co-moderator Jutta to give her final thoughts on this session, please. Thank you. I’m 42 in Jutta. Jutta. Sorry, we don’t have time.

Jutta Croll:
So my takeaway from the session is that the internet we want can only be achieved by dialogue and collaboration, and I’ve heard people wanting more participation in the deliberations of the Global Digital Compact, and I do think that the dynamic coalitions and this session shows that the bottom-up approach of the dynamic coalitions could provide for that dialogue, for that collaboration and common deliberations, so we have to bring something forward.

Markus Kummer:
We have to combine the top-down with the bottom-up, and with that, I thank you all for your participation, and I thank you for being with us, and please, I ask you, invite you to join me in thanking our panelists with a round of applause. Thank you. And that closes our session. Thank you. Could we get Alejandro on the screen and have a photo with him on the screen and have a photo with him on the screen? Yes, I would love that. Thank you.