Canada funds AI mining innovation projects

Canada has announced CAD 6.7 million in federal funding for two AI-enabled mining innovation projects aimed at improving critical minerals extraction and ecological restoration.

The two projects, worth a combined CAD 19.8 million, are led by Novamera Inc. of Oakville, Ontario, and Koonkie Canada Inc. of Vancouver, British Columbia. Funding is being provided through Canada’s Digital Technology Cluster (DIGITAL).

Novamera will receive CAD 3.8 million for a CAD 10.9 million project to advance its Surgical Mining technology, which combines subsurface imaging, AI, robotics and conventional drilling equipment to access mineral deposits with greater precision.

The technology is designed to enable more targeted extraction of critical minerals, including copper and rare earth elements. According to the government, the project will help move the technology from development towards commercial deployment.

Koonkie will receive CAD 2.9 million for a CAD 8.9 million project to develop an AI-powered mine restoration platform. The system will combine environmental DNA analysis, soil health data, remote sensing and Indigenous ecological knowledge to monitor biodiversity and ecological recovery.

Project partners estimate the platform could shorten ecological restoration timelines by five to ten years while reducing restoration costs by up to 40% compared with conventional approaches.

The projects are expected to create up to 35 jobs and maintain a further 37. The government said the investments support Canada’s broader strategy to strengthen critical mineral supply chains, advance clean technologies and improve industrial competitiveness.

Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said the investments would help Canadian companies develop and deploy technologies that improve the precision of critical minerals extraction, support responsible resource development and strengthen mine restoration.

Why does it matter?

Critical minerals such as copper and rare earth elements are essential for AI infrastructure, semiconductors, batteries and clean energy technologies, making mining innovation an increasingly important part of national industrial strategies. AI is also expanding beyond mineral exploration into operational efficiency and environmental management, helping companies improve resource recovery while reducing environmental impacts.

The projects illustrate how governments are using AI to strengthen both the competitiveness and sustainability of critical mineral supply chains. By combining automation, environmental monitoring and Indigenous knowledge, Canada is positioning digital technologies as a key component of responsible resource development.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

From landlocked to digitally connected: WSIS Forum 2026 explores pathways for LLDCs

Connectivity as a development imperative

Digital connectivity must become a central pillar of development strategies for landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), speakers at a high-level dialogue at WSIS Forum 2026 on the Awaza Programme of Action 2024–2034 agreed, arguing that digital transformation can help overcome many of the structural disadvantages associated with geography.

Moderated by Amanda Khozi Mukwashi, UN Resident Coordinator in Angola, the discussion brought together government ministers, international organisations, development banks, and private sector representatives to examine how connectivity can accelerate sustainable development in the 32 LLDCs, home to more than 620 million people. Mukwashi noted that while distance from seaports has historically translated into higher trade costs and infrastructure deficits, the digital era offers an opportunity to ‘redefine what it means to be landlocked.’

Delivering the keynote address, Dr Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, Director of ITU Telecommunication Development Bureau, argued that connectivity should be viewed as a moral imperative rather than simply a technical challenge.

‘Digital transformation is not about replacing human judgement with algorithms,’ he said. ‘It is about amplifying human capacity through data, speed, and reach.’

He outlined three pillars for successful digital transformation: resilient digital infrastructure, digital skills and capacity development, and trusted governance frameworks covering cybersecurity, privacy, and inclusive digital services. ‘Connectivity is not a luxury, it is a utility,’ Zavazava stressed, adding that digital transformation must leave no one behind “not by accident, but by design.”

Closing the digital divide

A video message from Rabab Fatima, UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, highlighted the scale of the challenge. Only 39% of people in LLDCs used the internet in 2024, compared with the global average of 68%, leaving around 359 million people offline.

Fatima described digital exclusion as a ‘new dimension of landlockedness’, arguing that inadequate connectivity increasingly limits access to economic opportunities, public services, and innovation. She called for stronger regulatory frameworks, increased blended finance, and the proposed Infrastructure Investment Financing Facility (IIFF) under the Awaza Programme to mobilise investment in broadband, digital public infrastructure, data centres, and digital skills.

Representing the group of LLDCs, Mirzo Khurshed of Tajikistan emphasised that digital connectivity affects far more than technology.

‘Connectivity is not only about technology, it is also about trade, jobs, education, health, and economic growth,’ he said. While digital technologies cannot change geography, they can reduce many of its disadvantages by improving access to services and enabling participation in regional and global digital markets.

Regional cooperation and financing

Several ministers highlighted the practical barriers faced by landlocked countries.

Zimbabwe’s Minister of ICT, Tatenda Anastacia Mavetera, identified financing as the primary obstacle to implementing national AI and digital transformation strategies. She called for greater regional cooperation, including shared computing infrastructure and collective investment in digital resources.

Botswana’s Minister David Tshere noted that all of the country’s internet bandwidth must transit through neighbouring states, resulting in costs almost four times higher than those faced by coastal countries. He argued that governments must continue investing in ICT infrastructure while strengthening partnerships with the private sector.

Namibia’s Minister Emma Inamutila Theofelus positioned her country as a potential regional digital hub, highlighting its submarine cable landings, port infrastructure, and bilateral cooperation with Botswana, including passport-free travel and the elimination of roaming charges. She invited neighbouring countries to invest in data centres and digital infrastructure, presenting Namibia as ‘a regional digital corridor’ for Southern Africa.

Regional cooperation was also a priority for Paraguay. Ambassador Raúl Cano Ricciardi explained that Paraguay depends entirely on fibre connections through neighbouring countries to access international submarine cables, making cross-border infrastructure and diversified connectivity routes essential for resilience and affordability.

Public-private partnerships

Development partners and industry representatives argued that achieving universal connectivity will require much greater private investment, supported by public financing and regulatory reforms.

EU Ambassador Deike Potzel outlined how the Global Gateway initiative is supporting satellite connectivity, cross-border fibre infrastructure, and investment guarantees designed to reduce project risks and attract private capital. She stressed the importance of regional cooperation, combining physical infrastructure with regulatory reforms and building pipelines of bankable digital projects.

The World Bank’s Sangbu Kim announced the creation of a new Digital Access Fund, combining concessional finance and public-private partnership mechanisms to encourage investment in underserved markets. He argued that infrastructure investments must be accompanied by policies that stimulate demand for digital services in sectors such as healthcare, agriculture, and education.

Private sector speakers echoed these priorities. Ahmed Riad Ismail, Vice President of Global Standardisation at Huawei, said the company’s rural connectivity initiatives had connected more than 170 million people across 80 countries, exceeding its original Partner2Connect commitment. He stressed that governments, operators, technology providers, and international organisations all have complementary roles in expanding connectivity.

Representing MTN, Lele Modise argued that digital infrastructure should now be viewed as essential economic infrastructure, alongside roads, ports, and power networks. She warned that the greatest barrier is not a lack of opportunity but insufficient risk-adjusted capital to move projects from concept to implementation. Predictable regulatory frameworks, transparent licensing, and investment de-risking would be critical to attracting long-term private investment, she said.

Turning ambition into implementation

Throughout the dialogue, speakers repeatedly returned to a common message that the Awaza Programme provides a shared roadmap, but success will depend on implementation rather than commitments alone.

Closing the session, Zavazava reaffirmed that connectivity is ‘not only a technical goal, but a catalyst for economic transformation, regional integration, and sustainable development.’ Delivering on that vision, he said, will require political leadership, innovative financing, strong partnerships, and coordinated action across governments, international organisations, civil society, and the private sector.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

Stanford researchers explore AI’s growing role in scientific discovery

Researchers at Stanford University say AI is transforming scientific discovery by helping scientists analyse complex data, generate hypotheses and design experiments more quickly than traditional methods allow. AI is increasingly being used across fields such as biology, medicine, engineering, and astrophysics to overcome limitations linked to time, resources, and data complexity.

In biology and medicine, AI is helping researchers analyse genetic data, predict biological patterns and develop advanced models for studying disease. Stanford researchers also point to progress towards AI-powered virtual cell models that could accelerate drug discovery and support more personalised healthcare.

AI agents are also becoming part of research workflows by assisting with literature reviews, experiment planning and data interpretation. However, the researchers stress that human judgement remains essential, as AI-generated hypotheses still require scientific validation and assessment of their practical feasibility.

From decoding genetic systems to analysing the structure of the universe, AI is expanding the range of scientific questions researchers can tackle. Stanford researchers argue that future breakthroughs will depend on combining AI capabilities with human expertise to address increasingly complex scientific challenges.

Why does it matter?

AI is increasingly becoming a core research tool rather than simply a productivity aid. By helping scientists analyse vast datasets, generate hypotheses and simulate complex systems, it has the potential to accelerate discoveries in fields ranging from medicine and engineering to climate science and astrophysics.

At the same time, the findings reinforce that scientific progress will continue to depend on human expertise. AI can accelerate analysis and experimentation, but rigorous validation, ethical oversight and critical judgement remain essential to ensuring research results are reliable and reproducible.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

African leaders push for homegrown AI and value creation at WSIS Forum

African experts and industry leaders used the WSIS Forum 2026 to argue that the continent must move beyond digital inclusion towards digital sovereignty, calling for greater investment in industrial capacity, locally developed AI, and value creation from Africa’s own resources and data rather than continued dependence on foreign technologies.

The session, ‘From Digital Inclusion to Digital Sovereignty: Building Capacity, Infrastructure, and Governance for Sustainable Digital Transformation,’ explored how Africa can become not only a user of AI and Industry 4.0 technologies, but also a producer of digital value. Moderated by Adelina Zeqiri of the University of Côte d’Azur, the discussion featured Professor Sama Mbang, Jean Bosco Byiringoro, and Professor Adel Ben Youssef, all founding members of the Alliance for Industry 4.0 and Smart Manufacturing in Africa (ASMA).

Industrialisation remains the foundation of development

Opening the discussion, Professor Sama Mbang argued that Africa risks falling further behind unless it accelerates industrialisation alongside digital transformation.

Drawing on his experience implementing Industry 4.0 solutions in manufacturing, Mbang stressed that industrial development remains the common denominator among prosperous economies.

‘There is no developed country that is not industrialised,’ he argued, adding that industrialisation creates the skills, technology, and productive capacity needed for long-term prosperity.

Mbang introduced ASMA as a platform designed to connect governments, industry, academia, and technical experts around practical projects in smart manufacturing, health, mining, automotive production, agriculture, and digital technologies.

He also highlighted the continent’s long-standing imbalance in global value chains. Although Africa possesses around 68% of the world’s critical minerals, it captures less than 1% of the value added from their processing. Similar disparities exist in pharmaceuticals, where Africa exports raw materials while importing most finished medicines.

According to Mbang, AI should support industrialisation, not replace it.

‘Sometimes talking about AI shifts attention away from the real challenge,’ he observed. ‘Africa first needs the capability to manufacture and transform locally.’

Building African AI for African realities

The discussion repeatedly returned to the distinction between adopting AI and developing AI that reflects African contexts.

Jean Bosco Byiringoro, professor of mechatronics and founder of ASMA, argued that importing models developed elsewhere will not solve Africa’s development challenges because they are built for different industrial environments.

‘What we need is not to import the model,’ he said. ‘We need to build our own model in the African context.’

Byiringoro argued that human capital is the continent’s greatest priority. Rather than focusing solely on software, African countries need engineers, technicians, manufacturers, and researchers capable of building AI systems rooted in local industries and value chains.

He illustrated this through agricultural projects that use digital representations of industrial equipment to help farmers understand production processes and develop new business opportunities. His organisation has already helped more than 2,000 people move into industrial employment through such initiatives.

Africa’s resources create new opportunities

Professor Adel Ben Youssef challenged participants to avoid viewing Africa as a single market, reminding the audience that the continent comprises 54 countries with diverse economic realities.

He nevertheless identified several shared competitive advantages.

Africa’s rapidly growing population, abundant renewable energy resources, and what he described as a ‘last mover advantage’ could allow countries to leapfrog older industrial models and build more sustainable digital infrastructure.

Rather than remaining dependent on foreign data centres, Ben Youssef argued that Africa could become a global location for digital infrastructure powered by renewable energy.

‘The real obstacle is not energy,’ he said. ‘It is political stability.’

He also warned that Africa’s creative industries face a growing threat as cultural content, artistic works, and local knowledge are increasingly used to train AI models without consent or compensation.

‘Most African creative content is being scraped to train AI models,’ he noted, arguing that this represents both an economic and cultural sovereignty challenge.

Human capital before regulation

Audience questions turned to data governance, with participants asking whether Africa should pursue GDPR-style regulation to protect its growing digital economy.

The panellists urged caution.

Ben Youssef argued that simply copying Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation would ignore Africa’s very different economic realities, particularly the importance of informal economies.

Instead, he called for flexible, sector-specific governance frameworks adapted to local contexts and accompanied by fair mechanisms for sharing the economic value generated from African data.

Mbang went further, arguing that the continent’s immediate priority should be creating value rather than replicating regulatory frameworks developed elsewhere.

‘Our fight today is not GDPR,’ he said. ‘Our fight is creating value locally instead of exporting raw materials and importing finished products.’

Byiringoro agreed, insisting that strong regulation can only emerge once countries have developed the human capital and industrial capabilities worth protecting.

Digital sovereignty through collaboration

The discussion concluded with an invitation to governments, universities, businesses, and international organisations to participate in ASMA’s growing network, including its inaugural conference in Dakar later this year.

While the session focused on Africa, speakers stressed that digital sovereignty should not be viewed as economic isolation or geopolitical competition.

Instead, they argued that enabling Africa to capture more value from its own resources, industries, and knowledge would strengthen global prosperity rather than diminish it.

Across the discussion, a consistent message emerged: AI alone will not transform Africa unless it is accompanied by investment in manufacturing, skills, infrastructure, and local innovation. For the panellists, digital sovereignty begins not with owning algorithms, but with building the industrial and human foundations that allow countries to shape their own digital future.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

AI governance must move from principles to practical action, UN dialogue hears

Bridging the global AI divide will require much more than expanding access to AI tools, participants heard during a thematic session of the United Nations Global Dialogue on AI Governance. Speakers argued that countries need digital infrastructure, reliable electricity, skilled workforces, trusted institutions and governance capacity if they are to shape AI on their own terms rather than simply consume technologies developed elsewhere.

Throughout the discussion, governments, UN agencies, academics and industry representatives stressed that the next phase of AI governance should focus on implementation. They called for stronger international cooperation, investment in local capabilities and practical measures to ensure AI contributes to sustainable development instead of reinforcing existing inequalities.

Capacity building means creating AI, not just using it

Opening the session, Robert Opp of the UN Development Programme (UNDP) argued that the world is moving from a digital divide to an AI divide, one shaped not only by access to technology but also by countries’ ability to adopt, govern and develop AI responsibly.

Loretta Hieber Girardet of the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) added that governments need trusted institutions, robust data systems and technical expertise if AI is to improve disaster resilience and public services.

The session’s co-chairs, Rashid Khan, Co-Founder of Yellow.ai, and Mark Alexandre Doumba, Gabon’s Minister of Digital Economy and Innovation, reinforced that message by arguing that AI governance should now move beyond high-level principles towards practical action. Khan said the challenge is no longer agreeing that AI should be inclusive and trustworthy, but creating the standards, infrastructure and skills needed to make those principles meaningful.

Doumba argued that developing countries should not try to replicate the resource-intensive path taken by major AI powers. Instead, they should build AI ecosystems suited to their own economies, languages and cultural contexts.

‘We should not measure success by who builds the biggest models,’ he suggested, but by whether AI creates jobs, improves public services and supports local innovation.

Several participants also stressed that capacity development must extend far beyond basic AI literacy. Shikoh Gitau argued that countries should become creators of AI rather than passive users, describing the goal as building AI ‘for us, by us’. That requires investment not only in technical skills, but also in research, standards, financing and local entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Government representatives echoed that assessment. Speakers from South Africa, Bangladesh, Nepal, Oman and Ethiopia all identified electricity, connectivity, computing power, public-sector capacity and access to quality data as essential foundations for meaningful AI participation.

Environmental sustainability moves to the centre of AI governance

One of the strongest themes throughout the discussion was that environmental sustainability should no longer be treated as a secondary issue in AI governance.

The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) argued that AI depends on extensive use of electricity, water, minerals and manufacturing while also generating growing volumes of electronic waste. Because these impacts extend across entire supply chains, speakers said governance should address AI’s full environmental lifecycle rather than focusing solely on the operation of AI models.

Participants also highlighted questions of environmental justice. Several speakers warned that many of the environmental costs associated with AI infrastructure, including mining, water consumption and waste, are disproportionately borne by communities in developing countries that receive relatively few of AI’s economic benefits.

Rather than assuming AI will automatically solve environmental challenges, panellists called for internationally comparable methods to measure AI’s environmental footprint, greater transparency from technology companies and stronger accountability across supply chains.

The discussion reflected a broader shift in international AI policy debates, with environmental sustainability increasingly treated as a core governance issue alongside safety, human rights and economic development.

Local languages and cultures must shape AI development

Another recurring message was that AI will only become genuinely global if it better reflects the world’s linguistic and cultural diversity.

Estonian President Alar Karis described how Estonia has invested heavily to ensure that AI systems can operate effectively in the Estonian language, despite the country’s relatively small population. Alongside partnerships with companies such as OpenAI and Google, Estonia has focused on training teachers, integrating AI into education and ensuring that modern Estonian-language content remains available for future AI systems.

Other speakers argued that similar efforts are needed worldwide. They noted that current AI models overwhelmingly favour dominant languages, leaving thousands of languages and many indigenous knowledge systems largely excluded from the AI ecosystem.

Several participants warned that countries lacking local datasets, evaluation benchmarks and language resources risk becoming dependent on technologies designed for entirely different cultural contexts.

The discussion also highlighted the importance of standards and international cooperation. UNESCO presented its ongoing work to implement its Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence through large-scale training programmes, language-diversity initiatives and AI competency frameworks for teachers and public officials.

Meanwhile, standards experts argued that participation in international standard-setting should itself be viewed as a form of capacity development, enabling developing countries to help shape the technical foundations of future AI systems.

Trust, children’s rights and implementation now take priority

Beyond infrastructure and capacity, speakers repeatedly argued that trust will determine whether AI delivers a broad public benefit. Participants emphasised that trustworthy AI requires transparent governance, accountable institutions and meaningful public oversight rather than technical performance alone.

Children’s rights received particular attention during the session. UNICEF warned that children are adopting AI technologies faster than adults are learning to regulate them, creating new risks around privacy, safety and development. Representatives called for child-centred benchmarks, stronger safeguards for children’s data and mandatory child-rights impact assessments for AI systems deployed in education, healthcare and other public services.

Several speakers also argued that governance should focus more on AI deployment than on frontier model development alone, ensuring that systems remain accountable throughout their lifecycle and can be adapted to local social and institutional realities.

Closing the session, Khan and Doumba returned to the discussion’s central message: that AI governance should ultimately be judged by practical outcomes rather than technological competition. Countries need the capability to shape AI according to their own priorities, they said, while international cooperation should ensure that no society is left behind.

Participants were encouraged to leave Geneva not simply with new principles, but with concrete commitments on financing, infrastructure, skills and cooperation that can be reviewed when the Global Dialogue reconvenes in 2027.

Track all key moments from the Global Dialogue on AI Governance inaugural meeting on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

UN opens Global Dialogue on AI Governance with call for inclusive and evidence-based cooperation

The United Nations opened its first Global Dialogue on AI Governance in Geneva, calling for inclusive, evidence-based and practical international cooperation to ensure that AI supports development while addressing risks related to safety, inequality, disinformation, children’s rights and human oversight.

The inaugural Global Dialogue on AI Governance is taking place on 6–7 July, alongside the AI for Good Global Summit and the WSIS Forum. Established in 2025, the dialogue is intended to provide a platform for governments and relevant stakeholders to discuss international cooperation, share good practices and support open, transparent and inclusive discussions on AI governance.

Opening the session, Ambassador Egriselda López of El Salvador, one of the dialogue’s co-chairs, described the meeting as the beginning of a broader process rather than a one-off event. She said Geneva should be seen not only as a place of arrival, but as a point of departure for continued work on AI governance.

López stressed that meaningful participation requires more than a seat in the room. Countries also need skills, infrastructure, financing, institutions and partnerships to shape and benefit from AI. Her co-chair, Ambassador Rein Tammsaar of Estonia, said AI is already affecting every country, regardless of its level of technological development, and that governance discussions must therefore include all regions, levels of development and relevant stakeholders.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that AI is advancing at ‘runaway speed’ and is being deployed faster than institutions can manage. He said AI is already reshaping economies, labour markets, elections and security, while society is facing what he described as an experiment being run ‘without a plan’ and ‘without consent’.

Guterres identified three major risks highlighted by scientific evidence: the speed of AI deployment, the concentration of power in a small number of companies and countries, and the erosion of truth through AI-enabled misinformation. He warned that computing power, data and talent remain concentrated, leaving many countries, particularly developing ones, with limited influence over technologies that may shape their futures.

At the same time, Guterres emphasised AI’s potential to support development, including in healthcare, education and agriculture. If shared widely, he said, AI could help make expertise more accessible and become a ‘great equaliser’ of the twenty-first century.

The Secretary-General outlined four priorities for international action: common safety standards, clear red lines grounded in human rights, stronger capacity-building for developing countries and greater transparency about AI’s environmental footprint. He also called for an AI child safety pledge, a global fund and network for AI capacity-building, and an international legal ban on lethal autonomous weapons, which he referred to as ‘killer robots’.

Annalena Baerbock, President of the UN General Assembly, said AI is developing at a pace that does not allow governments the time they had with earlier technological revolutions. She argued that AI cannot be governed by a few actors alone and must be addressed through the UN with participation from all countries and stakeholders.

Baerbock also highlighted harmful uses of AI, including deepfakes and gendered abuse. She said such abuses disproportionately target women and girls and described them as part of a broader challenge to human rights. At the same time, she pointed to AI’s potential to support the Sustainable Development Goals, including through disaster warning, agriculture, health and education.

Doreen Bogdan-Martin, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union, framed the opening as part of a wider ‘Geneva Digital Week’ that brings together the Global Dialogue on AI Governance, the work of the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, the AI for Good Global Summit and the WSIS Forum. She contrasted the current pace of AI governance discussions with the early years of the internet, noting that the UN has moved more quickly to convene global dialogue on generative AI.

Khaled El-Enany of UNESCO focused on implementation, saying that a gap remains between principles and practice. He highlighted UNESCO’s 2021 Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence as a global standard for aligning AI with human rights, sustainability and inclusion. He said UNESCO is supporting more than 80 countries in strengthening legal frameworks, institutional capacities and accountability mechanisms, and noted that over 50,000 civil servants and judicial actors have benefited from UNESCO-supported AI training.

El-Enany also said UNESCO is launching a collective reflection on a new global normative instrument to safeguard children and young people in the age of AI and digital technologies.

Amandeep Singh Gill, UN Under-Secretary-General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies, underlined the scale of participation in the dialogue, noting representation from more than 170 countries alongside scientists, entrepreneurs, civil society, international organisations and technical communities. He said inclusion in AI governance cannot be treated as a one-off exercise, adding that without capacity, ‘dialogues are monologues and science is just abstract’.

Singh Gill situated the dialogue within a longer UN process that includes the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, the Global Digital Compact and the High-Level Advisory Body on AI. He said the process would continue with a second round in New York next year, expected to be held alongside the STI Forum.

The opening session showed broad agreement that AI governance should be inclusive, evidence-based, rights-oriented and supported by practical capacity-building. Speakers repeatedly stressed that AI’s potential benefits for development, education, health and agriculture must be matched by safeguards on safety, accountability, children’s rights, truth, environmental sustainability and human oversight.

Tammsaar closed the opening by saying the discussion had highlighted both AI’s opportunities and the need for stronger international cooperation to ensure that the technology contributes to sustainable development, inclusion and shared prosperity. The meeting then moved to the presentation of the preliminary report of the Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence.

Track all key moments from the Global Dialogue on AI Governance inaugural meeting on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

WSIS Forum 2026 explores how the IGF should evolve after gaining a permanent mandate

The future of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) took centre stage at the WSIS Forum 2026, where policymakers, former diplomats, technical experts and internet governance practitioners discussed how the forum should evolve following the UN’s decision to grant it a permanent mandate.

Speakers agreed that the challenge is no longer whether the IGF should continue, but how it can become more relevant, effective and responsive to emerging issues such as AI while preserving its multistakeholder character. The discussion focused on four broad priorities, such as strengthening government participation, improving intersessional work, deepening links with national and regional IGF initiatives (NRIs), and ensuring the forum has sufficient institutional capacity and sustainable funding.

Governments need a stronger role without changing the IGF’s character

A recurring theme was how to increase meaningful government participation without transforming the IGF into a traditional intergovernmental negotiation forum.

Anriette Esterhuysen, human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa, argued that governments must participate more actively, particularly to strengthen digital policymaking in developing countries, but warned against reducing their involvement to formal speeches by senior officials.

Instead, she said governments should engage openly on practical policy challenges that require collaboration with the wider internet governance community.

Former Latvian ambassador Janis Karklins echoed this view, arguing that governments would only dedicate time and resources to the IGF if it addressed issues directly relevant to their national priorities.

Planning for the upcoming IGF in Nairobi, he suggested, should take into account the policy needs of African governments to ensure the forum delivers practical value.

Jennifer Chung, Chair of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), also stressed that the initiative should be understood as a ‘government dialogue with stakeholders’ rather than a separate government track, preserving the IGF’s long-standing multistakeholder model.

Meanwhile, IGF Programme and Technology Manager Chengetai Masango said discussions on the exact format remain ongoing, with organisers considering how the dialogue could build on existing high-level sessions rather than creating an entirely new structure.

Stronger outcomes through year-round collaboration

Participants also debated how the IGF could produce more tangible results while remaining a platform for dialogue rather than negotiations.

Konstantinos Komaitis opened the discussion by asking how the IGF could move beyond its reputation as a ‘talking shop’ without becoming another UN negotiating process.

Esterhuysen argued that achieving greater impact requires changing the way the IGF works rather than changing its mandate. She suggested more structured intersessional work, thematic synthesis and longer-term collaboration on priority issues instead of relying primarily on standalone workshops during the annual meeting.

Andrea Calderaro, Director of Cyber Diplomacy at the EU Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), similarly argued that the most valuable work happens between annual IGF meetings, with governments and stakeholders conducting national consultations and bringing those experiences into global discussions.

Masango defended dialogue as the forum’s core purpose, but agreed that stronger follow-up and more practical outputs are needed. He said previous initiatives, including voluntary commitments, had not always been sufficiently tracked or incorporated into future work.

National and regional IGFs seen as a growing strength

Speakers also highlighted the growing importance of national, regional and youth Internet Governance Forums, which now number more than 180 worldwide.

Esterhuysen welcomed their explicit recognition in the WSIS+20 outcome document, describing them as one of the IGF’s greatest successes.

Chung said the relationship between the global IGF and NRIs should evolve beyond annual event coordination towards continuous thematic collaboration and shared learning throughout the year.

She noted particularly strong growth among youth initiatives, especially in Africa and Asia, arguing that younger participants increasingly want meaningful involvement in shaping Internet governance discussions rather than symbolic participation.

Esterhuysen proposed a two-way model in which the global IGF identifies concrete policy questions, NRIs and intersessional groups examine them throughout the year, and the Secretariat synthesises the results into practical, non-negotiated policy options for governments and other stakeholders.

Permanent mandate brings new expectations

The discussion also touched on longer-term institutional questions, including funding and Secretariat capacity.

Although speakers acknowledged that financial sustainability remains an important challenge, they agreed that the immediate priority is preparing a successful IGF meeting in Nairobi while gradually implementing reforms in the years ahead.

Calderaro argued that the IGF should increasingly serve as a hub connecting the growing number of international digital governance processes rather than functioning only as an annual conference.

Esterhuysen also urged the forum to become more willing to address politically sensitive issues, including corporate accountability, arguing that its permanent mandate provides an opportunity to take on more substantive policy debates.

Closing the session, participants broadly agreed that the IGF’s future lies not in becoming a negotiating body, but in strengthening dialogue, improving policy-relevant outputs, deepening collaboration across national and regional initiatives, and ensuring governments, civil society, academia, the private sector and technical communities remain equally engaged as internet governance continues to evolve.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

Stronger health data governance seen as key to trusted AI and digital health at WSIS Forum 2026

Strong legislative frameworks for health data governance are becoming essential to ensure that AI and digital health technologies remain trustworthy, equitable and rights-based, speakers said during a session at the WSIS Forum 2026.

The discussion brought together representatives from governments, international organisations, civil society and the private sector, who agreed that while AI and digital technologies are transforming healthcare, governance frameworks have not always kept pace. Speakers repeatedly argued that stronger legislation, greater international coordination and broader stakeholder participation will be necessary to build public trust and enable responsible data sharing across borders.

The session formed part of the WSIS Forum 2026, held in Geneva from 6 to 10 July. Co-organised by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), UNESCO, UNDP and UNCTAD together with more than 50 UN organisations, the forum serves as one of the UN’s principal multistakeholder platforms for digital cooperation and sustainable development.

Trust begins with governance

Opening the discussion, Mathilde Forslund of Transform Health argued that health data has become the foundation of modern healthcare, powering everything from patient care and disease surveillance to AI innovation and health system planning.

However, she stressed that technological progress alone is insufficient.

‘Digital technologies and AI are transforming health systems rapidly, but these benefits will only be realised equitably and responsibly if governance keeps pace and public trust is maintained,’ she said.

Forslund argued that trusted governance requires legislation grounded in human rights, transparency and equity, alongside inclusive decision-making that informs citizens how their health data is collected, shared and protected. She also called for stronger national legal frameworks governing both health data and AI while encouraging greater regional and international alignment to prevent fragmented rules from undermining interoperability and cross-border cooperation.

Rather than starting from scratch, she noted that countries can already build on existing resources, including Transform Health’s Health Data Governance Principles, WHO guidance on AI, OECD recommendations and emerging regional initiatives such as the European Health Data Space (EHDS) and the Africa CDC’s work on continental health data governance.

National legislation provides legal certainty

Drawing on Zambia’s experience, Andrew Kashoka, Director of Information Technology at the Ministry of Health of Zambia, explained that governments increasingly recognise the need for legal certainty as digital health systems expand.

He argued that while policies and strategies provide direction, legislation ultimately establishes enforceable rights and obligations governing consent, privacy, accountability and access to health data.

‘Technology moves faster than policy and policy moves faster than legislation,’ Kashoka observed.

He described Zambia’s National Digital Health Strategy and the country’s participation in the WHO Global Initiative on Digital Health (GUIDE), noting that electronic health records, digital public infrastructure and AI all require strong legal foundations to maintain public confidence.

Kashoka also highlighted the Africa CDC’s continental health data governance framework, saying it provides African countries with shared principles that support legal interoperability, trusted cross-border collaboration, regional disease surveillance and responsible AI innovation.

Coordination, not policy, remains the biggest challenge

Several speakers suggested that governance challenges stem less from the absence of policies than from fragmented implementation.

Linda Bonyo, Founder of the Lawyers Hub and the Africa AI Policy Lab, argued that numerous organisations are already developing health data and AI governance initiatives, but often work independently with limited coordination.

She criticised the exclusion of parliaments and judicial institutions from governance discussions, arguing that legislators and courts play essential roles in creating and interpreting legal frameworks.

Bonyo also called for stronger institutional capacity, particularly among national data protection authorities that increasingly find themselves overseeing AI without sufficient technical expertise or financial resources.

She further highlighted practical barriers limiting African participation in international governance discussions, including visa restrictions and the high cost of attending Geneva-based meetings.

Summarising the challenge, Bonyo remarked that the problem is ‘not a policy problem… it’s implementation,’ urging countries to develop governance frameworks rooted in local realities rather than simply adopting foreign regulatory models.

Private sector and technical standards also matter

Representing the technical and private-sector perspective, Simão Ferraz de Campos Neto, Senior Counsellor at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), argued that clearer rules and common technical standards are essential if health data is to be shared safely without discouraging innovation.

He noted that organisations frequently hesitate to share data not because they oppose collaboration, but because legal uncertainty creates concerns about liability.

Campos Neto called for interoperable technical standards, machine-readable datasets and standardised data-sharing agreements that could make trusted health data exchange significantly easier.

He also cautioned against treating AI as a single technology requiring uniform regulation.

Instead, he advocated proportionate, risk-based regulation that reflects the diversity of AI applications, while avoiding excessive regulatory burdens that could slow innovation.

Momentum builds towards global action

Closing the discussion, Jamal Alshanfari, Ambassador and Head of Oman Health office in Geneva, pointed to growing political momentum following discussions at the World Health Assembly, where member states expressed broad support for developing stronger global health data governance arrangements.

He identified four priorities for the next phase of work. The phases are expanding international consensus, strengthening national legislation and institutional capacity, providing practical implementation guidance, and ensuring that governments, civil society, academia, industry and end users all participate in shaping future frameworks.

Alshanfari also reminded participants that governance discussions should ultimately focus on those most affected by digital health technologies.

‘Everybody forgets about the end user,’ he said, stressing that trust depends on governance frameworks serving citizens as much as institutions.

In her closing remarks, Forslund said the discussion demonstrated encouraging progress across national, regional and global initiatives, while acknowledging that implementation remains the greatest challenge. She pointed to the upcoming World Health Assembly as an important opportunity to advance work on a possible global resolution on health data governance.

The session concluded with broad agreement that trusted AI in healthcare will depend not only on technological innovation but also on stronger legislation, greater international coordination, practical implementation, and governance frameworks that place citizens’ rights and public trust at their centre.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot

South Korea funds AI environmental technology commercialisation

South Korea will invest about 41 billion won by 2027 to support the rapid commercialisation of AI-powered environmental products and services.

The Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment and the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute selected 17 companies for the programme from 145 project proposals.

The projects cover five areas: carbon neutrality, water management, resource circulation, environmental safety and weather and climate monitoring.

Selected initiatives include an AI system that integrates solar power, energy storage and heat pumps to reduce heating and cooling costs by more than 20% compared with existing systems.

Another project will use AI to analyse ageing and fatigue in water supply networks, detect early signs of abnormality, and help prevent sinkholes and other disasters.

In the environmental safety field, selected companies will develop systems that combine CCTV and sensor data to predict and detect indoor air pollution and fire smoke, aiming to reduce exposure time to harmful substances.

The ministry said 16 of the 17 selected companies are small and medium-sized enterprises, while nine are located outside the Seoul metropolitan area.

Officials said the programme aims to bring AI-based environmental products and services to market within one to two years, while supporting domestic innovation and potential overseas expansion.

Why does it matter?

The programme shows how AI is being used as a deployment tool for environmental policy, rather than only as a research technology. Applications such as building energy optimisation, water-infrastructure monitoring and pollution detection can produce practical benefits if they move quickly from pilot stage to commercial use. The focus on SMEs and firms outside the Seoul metropolitan area also links AI innovation to regional development and to the export potential of environmental technology.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

OECD proposes policy priorities for AI use in SME sustainable finance

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has published a policy paper examining how AI and digital tools can help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) gain better access to sustainable finance, where they remain significantly underrepresented.

The paper maps practical applications of AI and digital tools across the entire financing lifecycle, from sustainability data generation and reporting by SMEs to loan origination, credit assessment and portfolio monitoring by financial institutions. The OECD notes that AI has the potential to support the front, middle and back office of lending operations rather than a single stage of the financing process.

Drawing on country examples and recent initiatives, the OECD argues that technological adoption must be accompanied by appropriate governance. It identifies four policy priorities: developing interoperable data infrastructure, strengthening verification mechanisms, creating incentives for SME sustainability reporting and ensuring accountable use of AI in financing decisions.

Why does it matter?

Small and medium-sized enterprises account for much of economic activity and employment but often struggle to access sustainable finance because they lack the resources to produce the data and reporting required by lenders and investors. AI could reduce these costs by automating data collection, reporting and credit assessment, making green finance more accessible to smaller businesses.

The OECD also emphasises that technology alone will not close the financing gap. Real progress depends on reliable data infrastructure, effective verification and clear governance to ensure AI-supported financing decisions are transparent, accountable and fair, preventing existing inequalities from being reinforced.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot