Telecommunications infrastructure

• Recognizing that information and communications technologies present new opportunities and challenges and that there is a pressing need to address the major impediments that developing countries face in accessing new technologies, stressing the need to close the digital divides, both between and within countries and including the rural-urban, youth-older persons and gender digital divides, and to harness information and communications technologies for development, and recalling the need to emphasize quality of access to bridge digital and knowledge divides, using a multidimensional approach that includes speed, stability, affordability, language, training, capacity-building, local content and accessibility for persons with disabilities,
• Stressing, however, that recent progress notwithstanding, important and growing digital divides remain between and within developed and developing countries in terms of the availability, affordability and use of information and communications technologies and access to broadband, stressing also the urgent need to close digital divides, including with regard to such issues as the affordability of the Internet, and to ensure that the benefits of information and communications technologies, including new technologies, are available to all, in this regard reaffirming its commitment to significantly increasing access to information and communications technologies and striving to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet in the least developed countries by 2020, and noting the many efforts to help to bridge digital divides and expand access, including the Connect 2030 Agenda for Global Telecommunication/Information and Communication Technology, including Broadband, for Sustainable Development,
• Recalling the vision of a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented information society, where everyone can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge, enabling individuals, communities and peoples to achieve their full potential in promoting their sustainable development and improving their quality of life, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
• Recognizing that realizing gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls will make a crucial contribution to progress across all of the Sustainable Development Goals, and emphasizing the need to target science, technology and innovation strategies to address the empowerment of women and girls and to reduce inequalities, including the gender digital divide,
• Noting with great concern the fact that a gender digital divide persists in women’s access to and use of information and communications technologies, including in education, employment and other areas of economic and social development, and in this regard welcoming the many initiatives that focus on access, skills and leadership to promote the equal participation of women and girls in the digital age, such as the International Girls in ICT Day of the International Telecommunication Union and the Global Partnership for Gender Equality in the Digital Age, known as the Equals Partnership,
• Recognizing the need to focus on capacity-development policies and sustainable support to further enhance the impact of activities and initiatives at the national and local levels aimed at providing advice, services and support, with a view to building an inclusive, people-centred and development-oriented information society,
• Recognizing also that harnessing the benefits of digital technologies for inclusive, equitable and quality education and lifelong learning opportunities requires the advancement of connectivity, capacities and content, and acknowledging the need for access to broadband Internet and technology devices, digital inclusion and literacy, and to incorporate digital competencies into the education system for the capacity-building of educators and students,
• Recognizing the important contributions and full participation of all stakeholders to help bridge, in their roles and responsibilities, the digital divides,
• Acknowledging that differences in individual stakeholders’ capabilities to both use and create information and communications technologies represent a knowledge divide that perpetuates inequality,
• Reiterating the pledge that no one will be left behind, reaffirming the recognition that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, and the wish to see the Goals and targets met for all nations and peoples and for all segments of society, and recommitting to endeavour to reach the furthest behind first,
• Noting with grave concern that almost half of the world’s population, especially women and girls and people in vulnerable situations, as well as more than four in five people in the least developed countries, do not have access to the Internet, and noting that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates inequalities caused by the digital divides, since the poorest and the most vulnerable who are the hardest hit are also those who lag behind the most in access to information and communications technologies,
• 4. Reaffirms its commitment to bridging digital and knowledge divides, recognizes that its approach must be multidimensional and include an evolving understanding of what constitutes access, emphasizing the quality of that access, and acknowledges that speed, stability, affordability, language, local content and accessibility for persons with disabilities are now core elements of quality and that high-speed broadband is already an essential enabler of sustainable development;
• 7. Welcomes the operationalization of the Technology Bank for the Least Developed Countries, invites Member States, as well as international organizations, foundations and the private sector, to provide voluntary financial contributions and technical assistance to ensure its full and effective implementation;
• 8. Reiterates the call for support for the full operationalization of all components of the Technology Facilitation Mechanism and to explore a voluntary funding model in collaboration with the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the Secretariat and relevant United Nations entities;
• 16. Welcomes the work of the Information for All Programme of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, which aims to assist Member States in formulating policies to bridge digital divides and ensure equitable knowledge societies, and also welcomes the holding of Global Media and Information Literacy Week from 24 to 31 October 2022;
• 17. Recognizes that, despite recent progress and significant gains, there is still uneven growth in access to and the use of information and communications technologies, and expresses concern over the substantial continued digital and broadband divides between and within developed and developing countries, including the fact that while 90 per cent of people use the Internet in developed countries, only 57 per cent of the population of developing countries is online, and that the cost of access is higher in developing countries in relation to average household income, resulting in a lack of affordable access to information and communications technologies;
• 18. Stresses the need to provide universal, meaningful and affordable access to the Internet by 2030, particularly in all developing countries, welcomes efforts by the United Nations to assist countries, upon their request, in achieving this, and calls upon all stakeholders, including the international community, to support further actions, including investment, to improve broadband access and connectivity in developing countries;
• 19. Recognizes the importance of broadband connectivity to users in rural and remote areas, and in this regard notes that small and non-profit community operators, including community networks and other affordable, scalable and inclusive technology and business models that provide last-mile connectivity solutions, as appropriate and among others, can provide these services through, inter alia, appropriate regulatory measures that allow them to gain access to basic infrastructure;
• 21. Encourages research and development, and the development of viable strategies that could result in further competitiveness, investment and rapid reductions in the cost of information and communications technologies, and urges all relevant stakeholders to address the growing digital divides between and within countries through, inter alia, strengthened enabling policy environments at all levels, legal and regulatory frameworks conducive to increased investment and innovation, public-private partnerships, universal access strategies and international cooperation to improve affordability, education, capacity-building, multilingualism, cultural preservation, investment and technology transfer on mutually agreed terms;
• 22. Acknowledges the importance of more inclusive and equitable access to the benefits of the emerging digital economy, and recognizes that collective efforts are needed towards new rule-setting that not only favours large digital enterprises, but also provides for an open, fair and non-discriminatory business environment, including support for the access of micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises, including those owned or operated by women, to finance, information and markets, while protecting and empowering consumers;
• 23. Recognizes that a gender digital divide persists and that, worldwide, 62 per cent of men use the Internet compared with 57 per cent of women, notes that in the least developed countries only 19 per cent of women use the Internet, compared with 31 per cent of men, and calls upon all stakeholders to close the gender digital divide, ensure the full, equal, effective and meaningful participation of all women in the information society and women’s access to information and communications technologies for development, including women’s and girls’ access to new technologies, in this respect reiterates its request for relevant United Nations system entities, including the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women), to support the implementation and monitoring of the action lines contained in the outcome documents of the World Summit on the Information Society by enhancing the emphasis on gender equality and all women’s empowerment, and reaffirms the commitment to ensuring women’s full participation in decision-making processes related to information and communications technologies, including policies and approaches to promote women’s online safety to facilitate their participation in the digital world, and to address any potential negative impacts of digital technologies on gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls, and committing to eliminating, preventing and responding to all forms of violence against women and girls;
• 35. Recognizes that a lack of access to affordable and reliable technologies and services remains a critical challenge in many developing countries, in particular African countries, the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing States, middle-income countries, countries in situations of conflict, post-conflict countries and countries affected by natural disasters, and that all efforts should be deployed to reduce the price of information and communications technologies and broadband access, bearing in mind that deliberate interventions, including through research and development and technology transfer on mutually agreed terms, may be necessary to spur the development of lower-cost connectivity options;
• 37. Further recognizes the need to harness the potential of information and communications technologies as critical enablers of sustainable development and to overcome digital divides, and stresses that capacity-building for the productive use of such technologies should be given due consideration in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development;
• 38. Notes that, while a solid foundation for capacity-building in information and communications technologies has been laid in many areas with regard to building the information society, there is still a need for continuing efforts to address the ongoing challenges, especially for developing countries and the least developed countries, and draws attention to the positive impact of broadened capacity development that involves institutions, organizations and entities dealing with information and communications technologies and Internet governance issues;
• 41. Calls upon all stakeholders to keep the goal of bridging digital divides, in their different forms, an area of priority concern, to put into effect sound strategies that contribute to the development of e-government and to continue to focus on pro-poor information and communications technology policies and applications, including access to broadband at the grass-roots level, with a view to narrowing the digital divides among and within countries and, in turn, building information and knowledge societies;
• 43. Invites all relevant stakeholders to support more comprehensively those countries that are trailing in the digital economy in order to reduce the digital divides, strengthen the international enabling environment for value creation and build capacities in both the private and public sectors;
• 44. Recognizes the critical importance of private sector investment in information and communications technology infrastructure, content and services, encourages Governments to create legal and regulatory frameworks conducive to increased investment and innovation, and also recognizes the importance of public-private partnerships, universal access strategies and other approaches to that end;
• 47. Reaffirms the commitment at the very heart of the 2030 Agenda to leave no one behind and commit to taking more tangible steps to support people in vulnerable situations and the most vulnerable countries and to reach the furthest behind first;
• 48. Recognizes the important role of information and communications technologies for attaining the Sustainable Development Goals and for a sustainable, inclusive and resilient recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, and calls upon all stakeholders in the information and communications technologies sector, including Governments and the United Nations system, to fully consider the health and socioeconomic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic as they strengthen their efforts to bridge the digital divides within and between developed and developing countries, with particular attention to the poorest and most vulnerable, as well as women and girls, and to ensuring affordable and reliable connectivity, the promotion of digital access and digital inclusion, and the expansion of accessible and inclusive distance- learning solutions and digital health services;

Full text of the resolution

Note: The UN General Assembly has been adopting resolutions on ICT for (sustainable) development on an almost yearly basis since 2002.

• 25. […] Consideration could also be given to measures to tax the value of the digital economy, taxation of financial technology innovations, including cryptocurrencies, and a digital development tax, whereby the companies that have benefited for decades from a free and open Internet contribute to the connectivity of the 3.8 billion people who are still offline and to a safer digital world. 
• 48. Quality education (including early childhood education) is a fundamental human right – one of society’s great equalizers, a prerequisite foryoung people to be equipped to exercise their voice and contribute to the social contract, and a foundation for tolerance, peace, human rights and sustainability. […] Students in developing and developed countries alike tell us that they leave the education system without the tools that they need to adapt and thrive in a rapidly changing world, including digital literacy, global citizenship and sustainable development. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that both early childhood education and lifelong learning, so crucial for individuals and society at large, remain an aspiration in most countries.
• 49. […] Digital inclusivity will be a vital part of the Summit, building on existing efforts such as the Giga initiative, which aims to ensure that all schools are connected to the Internet by 2030. Broader investments in the education sector could also be explored, including the next generation of teachers and open-source digital education tools. […]
• 93. [A Global Digital Compact] would outline shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all. Complex digital issues that could be addressed may include: reaffirming the fundamental commitment to connecting the unconnected; avoiding fragmentation of the Internet; providing people with options as to how their data is used; application of human rights online; and promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content. More broadly, the Compact could also promote regulation of artificial intelligence to ensure that this is aligned with shared global values.

Full text of the report

• 7. At the same time, the technological challenge posed by COVID-19 has been tremendous. […] Even as digital technology makes it possible for people in countries with high connectivity to work and learn from home, it is a privilege not enjoyed by all: some people must be physically present for their jobs, while others have lost employment or do not have access to the Internet and technology, in particular the poor and vulnerable. With less access to the Internet, women and girls are disproportionately affected.
• 8. Digital technology does not exist in a vacuum – it has enormous potential for positive change, but can also reinforce and magnify existing fault lines and worsen economic and other inequalities. In 2019, close to 87 per cent of individuals in developed countries used the Internet, compared with only 19 per cent in the least developed countries.

A. Inclusive digital economy and society

Recommendation 1A (global connectivity)

• 13. Meaningful participation in today’s digital age requires a high-speed broadband connection to the Internet. Countries report that 93 per cent of the world’s population live within physical reach of mobile broadband or Internet services. However, only 53.6 per cent of the world’s population now use the Internet, leaving an estimated 3.6 billion without access. The least developed countries are the least connected, at only 19 per cent of their populations.
• 14. Numerous barriers exacerbate the digital divide. First, installing traditional broadband connections is costly, and countries often face difficulties in financing the fibre-optic cables required. Second, market dynamics are often not favourable. Lower purchasing power in the least developed countries is a limiting factor for connectivity providers and, although wireless technology may help to spread broadband coverage further, faster and more cheaply, companies do not have the incentives to pursue this. Finally, the lack of digital skills can also limit the adoption of digital tools.
• 15. The fundamental issue of affordability of access and equipment has to be addressed. In 19 of the least developed countries, the price of 5 GB of fixed broadband is more than 20 per cent of monthly gross national income per capita. Concerted efforts to promote affordability can therefore have real impact; in low- to middle-income countries, breaking up a broadband monopoly can help users to save as much as $7.33 per GB of mobile data. In Myanmar, for example, the creation of a competitive market slashed the cost of subscriber identity module cards from $150 in 2013 to $1.50 in 2015, allowing 2 million new subscribers within the first month. Special attention should also be given to ensuring connectivity in times of crisis and in humanitarian operations. COVID-19 has already shown how connectivity is a critical need. Inaccessibility to the Internet has posed a direct risk to individuals’ ability to save their own lives and livelihoods, as well as for Governments and front-line workers to respond quickly and effectively. In the present crisis, connectivity needs to be prioritized as a foundation to ensure the continuation of critical services, enable digital literacy and promote social inclusion.
• 16. A central challenge to building an inclusive digital economy is that there are no baselines regarding the fundamental level of digital connectivity that individuals need to access the online space. Identifying such baselines, with flexibility to update them as necessary in the light of technology changes, would enable the development of targets and metrics. Risk factors that affect the ability of vulnerable and marginalized groups to have access to connectivity should be specifically identified and addressed.
• 17. Baselines and targets of “affordability” are also necessary, along with universal targets and metrics, such as defining affordable Internet as “pricing 1 GB of mobile broadband data at 2 per cent or less of average monthly income” or ensuring that entry-level broadband services in developing countries cost less than 2 per cent of monthly gross national income. Establishing baselines and targets could form the basis of general cost and investment estimates. For instance, it is estimated that achieving universal, affordable and quality Internet access by 2030 across Africa may cost as much as $100 billion. Achieving connectivity for the 3.6 billion people currently unconnected globally will cost significantly more. In the absence of baselines on fundamental connectivity and affordability, building a financing platform to address these needs will be challenging.
• 18. At the national level, governments and communities, with the support of multi-stakeholder coalitions, can conduct local and regional assessments of connectivity needs in order to develop comprehensive connectivity plans. Real-time data about connectivity levels and projects can be made available to help to develop appropriate financing models. Ambitious regional infrastructure development initiatives, such as GIGA, a groundbreaking partnership to connect every school in the world to the Internet, can provide inspiration.
• 19. Some policies have been shown to promote connectivity, including regulations aimed at creating an enabling environment for smaller-scale providers, including broadband cooperatives, municipal networks and local businesses, by putting in place practices such as facilitating licence exemption and tax incentive schemes.
• 20. As increasingly discussed within the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development, emerging technologies also play a key role in promoting connectivity and the digital economy, as they can help to provide, monitor and finance Internet connectivity.

Recommendations 1C and 1D (digital inclusion)

• 26. Even when ostensibly available, access to digital technologies remains uneven. As the Panel states in its report, “The people being left behind are typically those who can least afford it”. Digital divides reflect and amplify existing social, cultural and economic inequalities. The gender gap in global Internet use is a stark example – in two out of every three countries, more men use the Internet than women. This gender gap has been growing rather than narrowing, standing at 17 per cent in 2019, and was even larger in the least developed countries, at 43 per cent. Similar challenges affect migrants, refugees, internally displaced persons, older persons, young people, children, persons with disabilities, rural populations and indigenous peoples.
• 27. The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the urgency in bridging these divides. Digital tools have been a lifeline for millions of people. Without prompt action, there is a risk of layering the current barriers to digital inclusion on top of existing obstacles to development. In looking towards post-COVID-19 economic support for developing countries, digital tools have to be leveraged for these countries, as well as underserved groups, so that recovery efforts build an inclusive digital infrastructure that would accelerate progress for all.
• 28. The efforts that Member States and stakeholders are already undertaking, including the forthcoming multi-stakeholder action coalition on innovation and technology for gender equality, are much needed.
• 29. Nevertheless, globally, efforts have to be better coordinated and scaled up. A set of metrics to measure digital inclusion will be essential for evidence-based policymaking. In developing these metrics, the underlying definition of what it means to be digitally literate and have digital access has to be based on the fundamental premise that everyone should have an equal opportunity to become empowered through ICT. It means accessibility through not only physical access and skills development, but also design that respects the needs of all people, including those with disabilities, as well as addressing intersectionality, social norms, language barriers, structural barriers and risks, recognizing the importance of locally relevant content. Public-private cooperation will also be important in collecting disaggregated and anonymized data across demographic groups.
• 30. Sound measurement and improved coordination and information-sharing are best done together with guidelines on policies and actions that can help to mitigate the multiple digital gaps. The United Nations system has begun to develop guidance in that regard, though it would benefit from wider advocacy.
• 31. It is also critical to apply a gender lens to all interventions on digital cooperation and technologies. This includes acknowledging gender-differentiated vulnerabilities to digitalization and identifying adequate risk mitigation actions.
• 32. Moreover, greater attention needs to be given to the situation of people on the move, including migrants, or those facing emergency and conflict-affected situations, given that these most vulnerable communities are often absent from digital cooperation discussions and face additional challenges in achieving connectivity.

B. Human and institutional capacity Recommendation 2 (digital capacity-building)

• 33. The need for digital capacity-building is substantial. Achieving real and sustained progress in the various dimensions of digitalization requires skills development and effective training, in particular in developing countries. This is necessary to unlock the benefits of technology, including the more effective use of emerging technologies and ensuring that individuals stay safe, protected and productive online. For example, it is estimated that there will be 230 million “digital jobs” in sub-Saharan Africa by 2030 that could generate nearly $120 billion in revenue, but this would require some 650 million training opportunities by 2030.
• 34. One of the primary challenges to date is that a large part of digital capacity-building has been supply-driven as opposed to needs-based. Insufficient investment also remains a significant limiting factor. Moreover, digital capacity-building has to be tailored to individual and national circumstances. Given variances within and among countries and regions, there is no one-size-fits-all approach, and better evidence is therefore needed of which capacity-building approaches are most effective, considering political, economic and social contexts.
• 35. To overcome these challenges, two aspects are central: greater coherence and coordination in capacity-building efforts; and a concerted effort at scaling up solutions.
• 36. Holistic, inclusive approaches that bring together existing initiatives, United Nations entities, regional and subregional bodies and other relevant organizations that promote digital capacity-building are necessary to improve support for Governments and other stakeholders. In its report, the Panel proposed “digital help desks” as one potential solution that could leverage regional institutions and platforms. Since the issuance of the Panel’s report, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) have begun an initial mapping exercise of existing digital capacity-building initiatives to assess gaps and inform forward-looking solutions. The exercise will be expanded to include a detailed needs assessment component to support capacity-building providers in targeting their services more effectively to meet stakeholder needs.
• 37. The coordination work set out above requires matching efforts at the national level, especially through the United Nations presence on the ground. United Nations country teams, through their resident coordinators, could serve as the system’s in- country focal points on digital cooperation. Country-level support could also be amplified through engagement with local college graduates and other young professionals who could work closely with United Nations actors in launching and managing various rural-centric initiatives to advance broadband access, adoption and meaningful usage.

Global connectivity

• 77. In order to ensure that every person has safe and affordable access to the Internet by 2030, including meaningful use of digitally enabled services, in line with the Sustainable Development Goals, the United Nations will:
  • (a) Support efforts to establish a baseline of digital connectivity that individuals need to access the online space, as well as a definition of “affordability”, including universal targets and metrics;
  • Convene a global group of investors and financing experts to consider the development of a financing platform and find other new models for investment in connectivity, in particular, in hard-to-reach and rural areas;
  • Promote new and potentially transformative models to accelerate connectivity, such as the GIGA initiative of ITU and the United Nations Children’s Fund;
  • Promote the development of enabling regulatory environments for smaller-scale Internet providers, along with local and regional assessments of connectivity needs;
  • Accelerate discussions on connectivity as part of emergency preparedness, responses and aid, including working through the inter-agency Emergency Telecommunications Cluster.

Digital inclusion

• 81. To ensure that the voices of those who are not fully benefiting from digital opportunities are heard, I will establish a multi-stakeholder digital inclusion coalition – an informal network of like-minded Member States, civil society groups, the private sector and other stakeholders on digital inclusion. The development of annual scorecards on digital inclusion and the establishment of metrics to measure both digital inclusion and literacy will accelerate the promotion of an inclusive digital ecosystem. In that regard, I call upon donors to consider funding such detailed data collection as part of larger investments in ICT and other infrastructure. Public-private cooperation will also be important in collecting disaggregated and anonymized data across demographic groups, within ethical, privacy protection frameworks and in accordance with data protection laws.
• 82. In addition, the Secretariat and, where possible, other entities of the United Nations system, will undertake a mapping exercise of digital inclusion initiatives, mechanisms and programmes, which will be provided online. Resident coordinators will be tasked with working with host Governments to develop action plans to improve digital inclusion.

Digital capacity building

• 83. Building on the mapping of existing digital capacity-building initiatives undertaken by UNDP and ITU, which they intend to expand, I will work with United Nations entities to launch a broad multi-stakeholder network to promote holistic, inclusive approaches to digital capacity-building for sustainable development, including a new joint facility for digital capacity development, which will be led by ITU and UNDP.
• 84. The network could also provide a clearing-house function to help to direct specific requests for support to potential providers of guidance, funding and advice on digital readiness and needs assessments, digital strategy support and digital literacy and skills training. This function would be embedded within the broader United Nations system to ensure relevance, impact and a focus on the Goals, for instance, by encouraging collaboration with resident coordinators to assess digital capacity-building needs and identify suitable service providers and knowledge products.
• 85. At the country level, initiatives will be pursued that strengthen capacity-building support, in particular in areas such as increasing Internet connectivity and growing digital economies. For example, opportunities to build on the existing United Nations Volunteers programme will be explored.

Full text of the Roadmap

2.1 Creating an inclusive digital economy

With mobile internet and increasingly powerful and lower cost computing, every person can theoretically connect to anyone else, obtain and generate knowledge, or engage in commercial or social activity. For organisations of whatever size, likewise, there are fewer technical barriers to global economic interaction at scale. Digital technology can support economic inclusion by breaking down barriers to information, broadening access, and lowering the level of skills needed to participate in the economy. 

Of course, this does not mean that everyone and everything should be connected or digitised. Nor does it mean that the social and economic consequences of digital technology are necessarily inclusive or beneficial. Digital technology can both provide opportunity and accentuate inequality.

The challenge for policy makers, and other stakeholders seeking to contribute to progress toward the SDGs, is how to cooperate to leverage technology to create a more inclusive society. As we emphasise in this chapter and our recommendations, we believe digital cooperation must steer how digital technologies are developed and deployed to create meaningful economic opportunities for all.

Developing an inclusive digital economy will require sustained and coherent effort from many stakeholders across all walks of life. National policy frameworks and international agreements need to find ways to promote financial inclusion, innovation, investment and growth while protecting people and the environment, keeping competition fair and the tax base sustainable.

Recommendations

An inclusive digital economy and society

1A. We recommend that by 2030, every adult should have affordable access to digital networks, as well as digitally-enabled financial and health services, as a means to make a substantial contribution to achieving the SDGs. Provision of these services should guard against abuse by building on emerging principles and best practices, one example of which is providing the ability to opt in and opt out, and by encouraging informed public discourse.

1B. We recommend that a broad, multi-stakeholder alliance, involving the UN, create a platform for sharing digital public goods, engaging talent and pooling data sets, in a manner that respects privacy, in areas related to attaining the SDGs.

1C. We call on the private sector, civil society, national governments, multilateral banks and the UN to adopt specific policies to support full digital inclusion and digital equality for women and traditionally marginalised groups. International organisations such as the World Bank and the UN should strengthen research and promote action on barriers women and marginalised groups face to digital inclusion and digital equality.

1D. We believe that a set of metrics for digital inclusiveness should be urgently agreed, measured worldwide and detailed with sex disaggregated data in the annual reports of institutions such as the UN, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, other multilateral development banks and the OECD. From this, strategies and plans of action could be developed.

In this report we have emphasised that the role of digital technologies in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals goes far beyond simply promoting greater access to the internet. With the right blend of policy, investment in infrastructure and human capacity, and cooperation among stakeholders, they can revolutionise fields as diverse as health and education, governance, economic empowerment and enterprise, agriculture and environmental sustainability.

The specific decisions needed to promote inclusivity and minimise risks will depend on local and national conditions. They should consider four main factors.

First, the broader national policy and regulatory frameworks should make it easy to create, run and grow small businesses. These frameworks should ensure that digital service providers – including e-commerce and inclusive finance platforms – support the growth of local enterprises. This requires enabling policies on investment and innovation, and structural policies to ensure fair competition, privacy rights, consumer protection and a sustainable tax base. Efforts to agree regional or global standards in these areas are welcome.

Second, investments should be made in both human capacity (see Recommendation 2 below) and physical infrastructure. Creating the foundation of universal, affordable access to electricity and the internet will often require innovative approaches, such as community groups operating rural networks, or incentives such as public sector support.

Third, targeted measures should address the barriers faced by women, indigenous people, rural populations and others who are marginalised by factors such as a lack of legal identity, low literacy rates, social norms that prevent them from fully participating in civic and economic life, and discriminatory land ownership, tenure and inheritance practices.

Fourth, respect for human rights – including privacy – is fundamental. Panel members had divergent views on digital ID systems in particular: they have immense potential to improve delivery of social services, especially for people who currently lack legal identity, but they are also vulnerable to abuse. As digital ID becomes more prevalent, we must emphasise principles for its fair and effective use.

Achieving this ambition will require multi-stakeholder alliances involving governments, private sector, international organisations, citizen groups and philanthropy to build new models of collaboration around “digital public goods” and data sets that can be pooled for the common good. SDG-related areas include health, energy, agriculture, clean water, oceans and climate change. These alliances could establish minimum criteria for classifying technologies and content as “digital public goods” and connect with relevant communities of practice that can provide guidance and support for investment, implementation and capacity development.

We are concerned that women face particular challenges in meaningfully accessing the internet, inclusive mobile financial services and online commerce, and controlling their own digital IDs and health records. Policies should include targeted capacity development for female entrepreneurs and policy makers. We call on the technology sector to make more sustained and serious efforts to address the gap in female technology employees and management, include women’s voices when determining online terms and conditions, and act to prevent online harassment and promotion of domestic abuse, building upon the work of existing initiatives such as the High-level Panel on Women’s Economic Empowerment.

While some preliminary work is underway, there is currently no agreed set of clear metrics or standards for the inclusiveness of digital technologies and cooperation. While any metrics will evolve over time, we call for research and multi-stakeholder consultation to establish a basis of shared global understanding as promptly as possible. We encourage the UN, international development agencies and multilateral banks such as the Asian Development Bank, the New Development Bank and the World Bank to drive this process by incorporating digital inclusion as a key metric in approving and evaluating projects. Facets of digital inclusion which may be considered include gender, financial services, health, government services, national digital economy policies, use of online e-commerce platforms and mobile device penetration.

Human and institutional capacity

2. We recommend the establishment of regional and global digital help desks to help governments, civil society and the private sector to understand digital issues and develop capacity to steer cooperation related to social and economic impacts of digital technologies.

Many countries urgently need to make critical choices about the complex issues discussed in this report. In what types of infrastructure should they invest? What types of training do their populations require to compete in the global digital economy? How can those whose livelihoods are disrupted by technological change be protected? How can technology be used to deliver social services and improve governance? How can regulation be appropriately balanced to encourage innovation while protecting human rights?

Policy decisions will have profound impact, but many of the decision-makers lack sufficient understanding of digital technologies and their implications. Capacity development for government officials and regulators could help to harness technology for inclusive economic development to achieve the SDGs. Priorities could include diagnostics on digital capacities and how they interact with society and the economy, and identifying skills workers will need. Capacity development initiatives with the private sector would also develop the capacity of officials and regulators to engage with the private sector so they can understand the operations of the digital economy and respond in an agile way to emerging issues (see Recommendation 5B).

For decisions to be well informed and inclusive, all stakeholders and the public need also to better understand the benefits and risks of digital technologies. Decisions around technology should be underpinned by a broad social dialogue on its costs, benefits and norms. We encourage capacity development programs for governments, civil society organisations, the private sector – including small- and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups – consumers, educators, women and youth. Existing capacity development initiatives by civil society, academia and technical and international organisations could benefit from the promotion of best practices.

A regional approach is recommended to develop capacity, to enable differing local contexts to be addressed. Regional help desks could be led by organisations such as the African Union or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, in collaboration with UN Regional Commissions. The regional help desks would: conduct research and promote best practice in digital cooperation; provide capacity development training and recommend open- source or licensed products and platforms; and support requests for advice from governments, local private sector (particularly small and medium enterprises) and civil society in their regions. Staff would have regional expertise, and coordinate closely with the private sector and civil society.

A global help desk to coordinate the work of regional help desks could form part of the new digital cooperation architecture we recommend exploring in Recommendation 5A.

Full text of the report

• 1. We reaffirm our common desire and commitment to the World Summit on the Information Society vision to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented information society, where everyone can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge, enabling individuals, communities and peoples to achieve their full potential in promoting their sustainable development and improving their quality of life, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
• 6. We express concern, however, that there are still significant digital divides, such as between and within countries and between women and men, which need to be addressed through, among other actions, strengthened enabling policy environments and international cooperation to improve affordability, access, education, capacity-building, multilingualism, cultural preservation, investment and appropriate financing. Further, we acknowledge that a gender divide exists as part of the digital divides, and encourage all stakeholders to ensure the full participation of women in the information society and women’s access to new technologies, especially information and communications technologies for development.
• 7. We acknowledge that particular attention should be paid to address the unique and emerging information and communications technology challenges facing all countries, in particular developing countries, including African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States and middle-income countries, as well as countries and territories under foreign occupation, countries in situations of conflict, post-conflict countries and countries affected by natural disasters. Particular attention should also be paid to addressing the specific information and communications technology challenges facing children, youth, persons with disabilities, older persons, indigenous peoples, refugees and internally displaced persons, migrants and remote and rural communities.

1.1. Bridging digital divides

• 21. Despite the previous decade’s achievements in information and communications technology connectivity, we express concern that many forms of digital divides remain, both between and within countries and between women and men. We note that divides are often closely linked to education levels and existing inequalities, and we recognize that further divides can emerge in the future, slowing sustainable development. We acknowledge that, as of 2015, only around 43 per cent of people globally had Internet access, only 41 per cent of women had Internet access and an estimated 80 per cent of online content was available in only one of 10 languages. The poor are the most excluded from the benefits of information and communications technology.
• 22. We further express concern that digital divides remain between developed and developing countries and that many developing countries lack affordable access to information and communications technologies. As of 2015, only 34 per cent of households in developing countries had Internet access, with significant variations by country, as compared with more than 80 per cent in developed countries. This means that two thirds of the households in developing countries do not have Internet access.
• 23. We affirm our commitment to bridging digital and knowledge divides, and we recognize that our approach must be multidimensional and include an evolving understanding of what constitutes access, emphasizing the quality of that access. We acknowledge that speed, stability, affordability, language, local content and accessibility for persons with disabilities are now core elements of quality, and that high-speed broadband is already an essential enabler of sustainable development. We acknowledge, moreover, that differences in individuals’ capabilities to both use and create information and communications technologies represent a knowledge divide that perpetuates inequality. We note, too, the ambition to move beyond “information societies” to “knowledge societies”, in which information is not only created and disseminated, but put to the benefit of human development. We recognize that such divides may change with technological and service innovation, and we call upon all stakeholders, particularly United Nations entities that are facilitating the World Summit on the Information Society action lines, within their mandate and existing resources, to continue working together to regularly analyse the nature of digital divides, study strategies to bridge them and make their findings available to the international community.
• 24. We underscore the need for further development of local content and services in a variety of languages and formats that are accessible to all people, who also need the capabilities and capacities, including media, information and digital literacy skills, to make use of and further develop information and communications technologies. Accordingly, we recognize the vital importance of the principles of multilingualism in the information society to ensure the linguistic, cultural and historical diversity of all nations. We further recognize the value of the variety of interoperable and affordable information and communications technology solutions, including such models as proprietary, open-source, and free software.
• 25. We call, moreover, for a significant increase in access to information and communications technologies, and encourage all stakeholders to strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet for all. We welcome the efforts of all stakeholders in pursuit of these goals, including efforts being undertaken in the Connect 2020 Agenda for Global Telecommunication/ICT Development, adopted by the Plenipotentiary Conference of the International Telecommunication Union in 2014.
• 26. We also recognize digital divides in digital uses and literacy and the need to bridge them.
• 27. We emphasize our concern that only 41 per cent of women have Internet access, and draw attention to the gender digital divide, which persists in women’s access to and use of information and communications technologies, including in education, employment and other areas of economic and social development. We recognize that ending the gender digital divide and the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 5 on gender are mutually reinforcing efforts, and we commit to mainstreaming gender in the World Summit on the Information Society process, including through a new emphasis on gender in the implementation and monitoring of the action lines, with the support of relevant United Nations entities, including the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women). We call for immediate measures to achieve gender equality in Internet users by 2020, especially by significantly enhancing women’s and girls’ education and participation in information and communications technologies, as users, content creators, employees, entrepreneurs, innovators and leaders. We reaffirm our commitment to ensure women’s full participation in decision-making processes related to information and communications technologies.

1.2. Enabling environment

• 28. We recognize that certain policies have substantially contributed to bridging digital divides and the value of information and communications technologies for sustainable development, and we commit to continuing to identify and implement best and emerging practices for the establishment and functioning of education, innovation and investment frameworks for information and communications technologies.
• 29. We recognize the importance of the free flow of information and knowledge, as the amount of information distributed worldwide grows and the role of communication becomes all the more important. We acknowledge that the mainstreaming of information and communications technologies in school curricula, open access to data, the fostering of competition, the creation of transparent, predictable, independent and non-discriminatory regulatory and legal systems, proportionate taxation and licensing fees, access to finance, facilitation of public-private partnerships, multi-stakeholder cooperation, national and regional broadband strategies, efficient allocation of the radio frequency spectrum, infrastructure-sharing models, community-based approaches and public access facilities have in many countries facilitated significant gains in connectivity and sustainable development.
• 30. We recognize that a lack of access to affordable and reliable technologies and services remains a critical challenge in many developing countries, particularly African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States and middle-income countries, as well as countries in situations of conflict, post-conflict countries and countries affected by natural disasters. All efforts should be deployed to reduce the price of information and communications technologies and broadband access, bearing in mind that deliberate interventions, including through research and development and technology transfer on mutually agreed terms, may be necessary to spur lower-cost connectivity options.
• 31. In building the information society, States are strongly urged to take steps with a view to the avoidance of, and refrain from, any unilateral measure not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that impedes the full achievement of economic and social development and hinders the well-being of the people of the affected countries.
• 32. We recognize that the radio frequency spectrum should be managed in the public interest and in accordance with legal principles, with full observance of national laws and regulations as well as relevant international agreements.
• 33. We call for a special focus on actions that improve the enabling environment for information and communications technologies and expand related education and capacity-building opportunities. We also request the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, within its mandate related to the follow-up to the World Summit on the Information Society, and all action line facilitators, within their respective mandates and existing resources, to work with all stakeholders to regularly identify and promote specific, detailed actions to support the enabling environment for information and communications technologies and development and provide the demand-driven policy advice, technical assistance and capacity-building, as appropriate, to realize them.

1.3. Financial mechanisms

• 34. We welcome the fact that total public and private spending on information and communications technologies has increased substantially in the last decade, now reaching trillions of dollars annually, and that it has been complemented by a proliferation of new financing mechanisms, both results marking progress on paragraphs 23 and 27 of the Tunis Agenda.
• 35. We recognize, however, that harnessing information and communications technology for development and bridging digital divides will require greater and sustainable investment in infrastructure and services, capacity-building, promotion of joint research and development and transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms. These mechanisms remain a primary focus for all countries and people, particularly developing countries.
• 36. We commit to efficient public resource allocation to deployment and development of information and communications technology, recognizing the need for budgeting for information and communications technology across all sectors, especially education. We stress that capacity is a major barrier to closing digital divides, and we recommend that capacity development, including for innovation, be emphasized to empower local experts and local communities to benefit fully from and contribute to information and communications technology applications for development. We recognize the potential to improve connectivity, especially in remote and rural areas, through universal service funds and publicly funded network infrastructure, among other tools, particularly in areas where market conditions make investment difficult.
• 37. We note the commitments made in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, and recognize that official development assistance and other concessional financial flows for information and communications technology can make significant contributions to development outcomes, in particular where they can reduce the risk of public and private investment, and increase the use of information and communications technology to strengthen good governance and tax collection.
• 38. We recognize the critical importance of private sector investment in information and communications technology infrastructure, content and services, and we encourage Governments to create legal and regulatory frameworks conducive to increased investment and innovation. We also recognize the importance of public-private partnerships, universal access strategies and other approaches to this end.
• 39. We encourage a prominent profile for information and communications technologies in the new Technology Facilitation Mechanism established in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, and consideration of how it can contribute to implementation of the World Summit on the Information Society action lines.
• 40. We note with concern the challenges in implementing the Digital Solidarity Fund, which was welcomed in the Tunis Agenda as an innovative financial mechanism of a voluntary nature. We call for an ongoing evaluation of innovative financing options in the annual review of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society.

Full text of the resolution

• 7. We recognize the existence of the digital divide and the challenges that this poses for many countries, which are forced to choose between many competing objectives in their development planning and in demands for development funds whilst having limited resources.
• 8. We recognize the scale of the problem in bridging the digital divide, which will require adequate and sustainable investments in ICT infrastructure and services, and capacity building, and transfer of technology over many years to come.
• 9. We call upon the international community to promote the transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms, including ICTs, to adopt policies and programmes with a view to assisting developing countries to take advantage of technology in their pursuit of development through, inter alia, technical cooperation and the building of scientific and technological capacity in our efforts to bridge the digital and development divide.
• 13. In the past, financing of ICT infrastructure in most developing countries has been based on public investment. Lately, a significant influx of investment has taken place where private-sector participation has been encouraged, based on a sound regulatory framework, and where public policies aimed at bridging the digital divide have been implemented. 
• 14. We are greatly encouraged by the fact that advances in communication technology, and high-speed data networks are continuously increasing the possibilities for developing countries, and countries with economies in transition, to participate in the global market for ICT-enabled services on the basis of their comparative advantage. These emerging opportunities provide a powerful commercial basis for ICT infrastructural investment in these countries. Therefore, governments should take action, in the framework of national development policies, in order to support an enabling and competitive environment for the necessary investment in ICT infrastructure and for the development of new services. At the same time, countries should pursue policies and measures that would not discourage, impede or prevent the continued participation of these countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services. 
• 15. We take note that the challenges for expanding the scope of useful accessible information content in the developing world are numerous; in particular, the issue of financing for various forms of content and applications requires new attention, as this area has often been overlooked by the focus on ICT infrastructure. 
• 16. We recognize that attracting investment in ICTs has depended crucially upon an enabling environment, including good governance at all levels, and a supportive, transparent and pro-competitive policy and regulatory framework, reflecting national realities. 
• 17. We endeavour to engage in a proactive dialogue on matters related to corporate social responsibility and good corporate governance of transnational corporations and their contribution to the economic and social development of developing countries in our efforts to bridge the digital divide.
• 18. We underline that market forces alone cannot guarantee the full participation of developing countries in the global market for ICT-enabled services. Therefore, we encourage the strengthening of international cooperation and solidarity aimed at enabling all countries, especially those referred to in paragraph 16 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles, to develop ICT infrastructure and ICT-enabled services that are viable and competitive at national and international levels.
• 19. We recognize that, in addition to the public sector, financing of ICT infrastructure by the private sector has come to play an important role in many countries and that domestic financing is being augmented by North-South flows and South-South cooperation.
• 20. We recognize that, as a result of the growing impact of sustainable private-sector investment in infrastructure, multilateral and bilateral public donors are redirecting public resources to other development objectives, including Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and related programmes, policy reforms and mainstreaming of ICTs and capacity development. We encourage all governments to give appropriate priority to ICTs, including traditional ICTs such as broadcast radio and television, in their national development strategies. We also encourage multilateral institutions as well as bilateral public donors to consider also providing more financial support for regional and large-scale national ICT infrastructure projects and related capacity development. They should consider aligning their aid and partnership strategies with the priorities set by developing countries and countries with economies in transition in their national development strategies including their poverty reduction strategies.
• 21. We recognize that public finance plays a crucial role in providing ICT access and services to rural areas and disadvantaged populations including those in Small Island Developing States and Landlocked Developing Countries.
• 22. We note that ICT-related capacity-building needs represent a high priority in all developing countries and the current financing levels have not been adequate to meet the needs, although there are many different funding mechanisms supporting ICTs for development.
• 26. We acknowledge the following prerequisites for equitable and universal accessibility to, and better utilization of, financial mechanisms:
  • Creating policy and regulatory incentives aimed at universal access and the attraction of private-sector investment.
  • Identification and acknowledgement of the key role of ICTs in national development strategies, and their elaboration, when appropriate, in conjunction with e-strategies.
  • Developing institutional and implementation capacity to support the use of national universal service/access funds, and further study of these mechanisms and those aiming to mobilize domestic resources.
  • Encouraging the development of locally relevant information, applications and services that will benefit developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
  • Supporting the “scaling-up” of successful ICT-based pilot programmes.
  • Supporting the use of ICTs in government as a priority and crucial target area for ICT-based development interventions.
  • Building human resource and institutional capacity (knowledge) at every level for achieving Information Society objectives, especially in the public sector.
  • Encouraging business-sector entities to help jump-start wider demand for ICT services by supporting creative industries, local producers of cultural content and applications as well as small businesses.
  • Strengthening capacities to enhance the potential of securitized funds and utilizing them effectively.
• 27. We recommend improvements and innovations in existing financing mechanisms, including:
  • reducing international Internet costs charged by backbone providers, supporting, inter alia, the creation and development of regional ICT backbones and Internet Exchange Points to reduce interconnection cost and broaden network access;
  • encouraging ITU to continue the study of the question of International Internet Connectivity (IIC) as an urgent matter to develop appropriate Recommendations.
  • Coordinating programmes among governments and major financial players to mitigate investment risks and transaction costs for operators entering less attractive rural and low-income market segments.
  • Helping to accelerate the development of domestic financial instruments, including by supporting local microfinance instruments, ICT business incubators, public credit instruments, reverse auction mechanisms, networking initiatives based on local communities, digital solidarity and other innovations. 
  • Improving the ability to access financing facilities with a view to accelerating the pace of financing of ICT infrastructure and services, including the promotion of North-South flows as well as North-South and South-South cooperation.
  • Multilateral, regional and bilateral development organizations should consider the utility of creating a virtual forum for the sharing of information by all stakeholders on potential projects, on sources of financing and on institutional financial mechanisms. 
  • Enabling developing countries to be increasingly able to generate funds for ICTs and to develop financial instruments, including trust funds and seed capital adapted to their economies.
  • Urging all countries to make concrete efforts to fulfil their commitments under the Monterrey Consensus.
  • Multilateral, regional and bilateral development organizations should consider cooperating to enhance their capacity to provide rapid response with a view to supporting developing countries that request assistance with respect to ICT policies;
  • Encouraging increased voluntary contributions. 
  • Making, as appropriate, effective use of debt relief mechanisms as outlined in the Geneva Plan of Action, including inter alia debt cancellation and debt swapping, that may be used for financing ICT for development projects, including those within the framework of Poverty Reduction Strategies.
• 28. We welcome the Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF) established in Geneva as an innovative financial mechanism of a voluntary nature open to interested stakeholders with the objective of transforming the digital divide into digital opportunities for the developing world by focusing mainly on specific and urgent needs at the local level and seeking new voluntary sources of “solidarity” finance. The DSF will complement existing mechanisms for funding the Information Society, which should continue to be fully utilized to fund the growth of new ICT infrastructure and services.
• 49. We reaffirm our commitment to turning the digital divide into digital opportunity, and we commit to ensuring harmonious and equitable development for all. We commit to foster and provide guidance on development areas in the broader Internet governance arrangements, and to include, amongst other issues, international interconnection costs, capacity building and technology/know-how transfer. We encourage the realization of multilingualism in the Internet development environment, and we support the development of software that renders itself easily to localization, and enables users to choose appropriate solutions from different software models including open-source, free and proprietary software.
• 50. We acknowledge that there are concerns, particularly amongst developing countries, that the charges for international Internet connectivity should be better balanced to enhance access. We therefore call for the development of strategies for increasing affordable global connectivity, thereby facilitating improved and equitable access for all, by:
  • Promoting Internet transit and interconnection costs that are commercially negotiated in a competitive environment and that should be oriented towards objective, transparent and non-discriminatory parameters, taking into account ongoing work on this subject.
  • Setting up regional high-speed Internet backbone networks and the creation of national, sub-regional and regional Internet Exchange Points (IXPs).
  • Recommending donor programmes and developmental financing mechanisms to consider the need to provide funding for initiatives that advance connectivity, IXPs and local content for developing countries.
  • Encouraging ITU to continue the study of the question of International Internet Connectivity (IIC) as a matter of urgency, and to periodically provide output for consideration and possible implementation. We also encourage other relevant institutions to address this issue.
  • Promoting the development and growth of low-cost terminal equipment, such as individual and collective user devices, especially for use in developing countries. 
  • Encouraging Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other parties in the commercial negotiations to adopt practices towards attainment of fair and balanced interconnectivity costs. 
  • Encouraging relevant parties to commercially negotiate reduced interconnection costs for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), taking into account the special constraints of LDCs.
• 51. We encourage governments and other stakeholders, through partnerships where appropriate, to promote ICT education and training in developing countries, by establishing national strategies for ICT integration in education and workforce development and dedicating appropriate resources. Furthermore, international cooperation would be extended, on a voluntary basis, for capacity building in areas relevant to Internet governance. This may include, in particular, building centres of expertise and other institutions to facilitate know-how transfer and exchange of best practices, in order to enhance the participation of developing countries and all stakeholders in Internet governance mechanisms.
• 53. We commit to working earnestly towards multilingualization of the Internet, as part of a multilateral, transparent and democratic process, involving governments and all stakeholders, in their respective roles. In this context, we also support local content development, translation and adaptation, digital archives, and diverse forms of digital and traditional media, and recognize that these activities can also strengthen local and indigenous communities. We would therefore underline the need to:
  • Advance the process for the introduction of multilingualism in a number of areas including domain names, e-mail addresses and keyword look-up.
  • Implement programmes that allow for the presence of multilingual domain names and content on the Internet and the use of various software models in order to fight against the linguistic digital divide and to ensure the participation of all in the emerging new society.
  • Strengthen cooperation between relevant bodies for the further development of technical standards and to foster their global deployment.
• 54. We recognize that an enabling environment, at national and international levels, supportive of foreign direct investment, transfer of technology, and international cooperation, particularly in the areas of finance, debt and trade, is essential for the development of the Information Society, including for the development and diffusion of the Internet and its optimal use. In particular, the roles of the private sector and civil society as the drivers of innovation and private investment in the development of the Internet are critical. Value is added at the edges of the network in both developed and developing countries when the international and domestic policy environment encourages investment and innovation.
• 86. We support regional and international integration efforts aimed at building a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, and we reiterate that strong cooperation within and among regions is indispensable to support knowledge-sharing. Regional cooperation should contribute to national capacity building and to the development of regional implementation strategies. 
• 87. We affirm that the exchange of views and sharing of effective practices and resources is essential to implementing the outcomes of WSIS at the regional and international levels. To this end, efforts should be made to provide and share, among all stakeholders, knowledge and know-how, related to the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of e-strategies and policies, as appropriate. We recognize as fundamental elements to bridge the digital divide in developing countries, in a sustainable way, poverty reduction, enhanced national capacity building and the promotion of national technological development.
• 90. We reaffirm our commitment to providing equitable access to information and knowledge for all, recognizing the role of ICTs for economic growth and development. We are committed to working towards achieving the indicative targets, set out in the Geneva Plan of Action, that serve as global references for improving connectivity and universal, ubiquitous, equitable, non-discriminatory and affordable access to, and use of, ICTs, considering different national circumstances, to be achieved by 2015, and to using ICTs, as a tool to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, by:
  • mainstreaming and aligning national e-strategies, across local, national, and regional action plans, as appropriate and in accordance with local and national development priorities, with in-built time-bound measures. 
  • developing and implementing enabling policies that reflect national realities and that promote a supportive international environment, foreign direct investment as well as the mobilization of domestic resources, in order to promote and foster entrepreneurship, particularly Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMMEs), taking into account the relevant market and cultural contexts. These policies should be reflected in a transparent, equitable regulatory framework to create a competitive environment to support these goals and strengthen economic growth. 
  • building ICT capacity for all and confidence in the use of ICTs by all – including youth, older persons, women, indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, and remote and rural communities – through the improvement and delivery of relevant education and training programmes and systems including lifelong and distance learning. 
  • implementing effective training and education, particularly in ICT science and technology, that motivates and promotes participation and active involvement of girls and women in the decision-making process of building the Information Society. 
  • paying special attention to the formulation of universal design concepts and the use of assistive technologies that promote access for all persons, including those with disabilities. 
  • promoting public policies aimed at providing affordable access at all levels, including community-level, to hardware as well as software and connectivity through an increasingly converging technological environment, capacity building and local content.
  • improving access to the world’s health knowledge and telemedicine services, in particular in areas such as global cooperation in emergency response, access to and networking among health professionals to help improve quality of life and environmental conditions. 
  • building ICT capacities to improve access and use of postal networks and services. 
  • using ICTs to improve access to agricultural knowledge, combat poverty, and support production of and access to locally relevant agriculture-related content. 
  • developing and implementing e-government applications based on open standards in order to enhance the growth and interoperability of e-government systems, at all levels, thereby furthering access to government information and services, and contributing to building ICT networks and developing services that are available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any device. 
  • supporting educational, scientific, and cultural institutions, including libraries, archives and museums, in their role of developing, providing equitable, open and affordable access to, and preserving diverse and varied content, including in digital form, to support informal and formal education, research and innovation; and in particular supporting libraries in their public-service role of providing free and equitable access to information and of improving ICT literacy and community connectivity, particularly in underserved communities. 
  • enhancing the capacity of communities in all regions to develop content in local and/or indigenous languages. 
  • strengthening the creation of quality e-content, on national, regional and international levels.
  • promoting the use of traditional and new media in order to foster universal access to information, culture and knowledge for all people, especially vulnerable populations and populations in developing countries and using, inter alia, radio and television as educational and learning tools. 
  • reaffirming the independence, pluralism and diversity of media, and freedom of information including through, as appropriate, the development of domestic legislation, we reiterate our call for the responsible use and treatment of information by the media in accordance with the highest ethical and professional standards. We reaffirm the necessity of reducing international imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical resources and the development of human skills. These reaffirmations are made with reference to Geneva Declaration of Principles paragraphs 55 to 59.
  • strongly encouraging ICT enterprises and entrepreneurs to develop and use environment-friendly production processes in order to minimize the negative impacts of the use and manufacture of ICTs and disposal of ICT waste on people and the environment. In this context, it is important to give particular attention to the specific needs of the developing countries.
  • incorporating regulatory, self-regulatory, and other effective policies and frameworks to protect children and young people from abuse and exploitation through ICTs into national plans of action and e-strategies. 
  • promoting the development of advanced research networks, at national, regional and international levels, in order to improve collaboration in science, technology and higher education.
  • promoting voluntary service, at the community level, to help maximize the developmental impact of ICTs. 
  • promoting the use of ICTs to enhance flexible ways of working, including teleworking, leading to greater productivity and job creation.
• 107. International and regional organizations should assess and report regularly on universal accessibility of nations to ICTs, with the aim of creating equitable opportunities for the growth of ICT sectors of developing countries.
• 113. Appropriate indicators and benchmarking, including community connectivity indicators, should clarify the magnitude of the digital divide, in both its domestic and international dimensions, and keep it under regular assessment, and track global progress in the use of ICTs to achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.
• 114. The development of ICT indicators is important for measuring the digital divide. We note the launch, in June 2004, of the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, and its efforts:
  • to develop a common set of core ICT indicators; to increase the availability of internationally comparable ICT statistics as well as to establish a mutually agreed framework for their elaboration, for further consideration and decision by the UN Statistical Commission. 
  • to promote capacity building in developing countries for monitoring the Information Society. 
  • to assess the current and potential impact of ICTs on development and poverty reduction.
  • to develop specific gender-disaggregated indicators to measure the digital divide in its various dimensions.
• 115. We also note the launch of the ICT Opportunity Index and the Digital Opportunity Index, which will build upon the common set of core ICT indicators as they were defined within the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development. 
• 116. We stress that all indices and indicators must take into account different levels of development and national circumstances.
• 117. The further development of these indicators should be undertaken in a collaborative, cost-effective and non-duplicative fashion.
• 118. We invite the international community to strengthen the statistical capacity of developing countries by giving appropriate support at national and regional levels.
• 119. We commit ourselves to review and follow up progress in bridging the digital divide, taking into account the different levels of development among nations, so as to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, assessing the effectiveness of investment and international cooperation efforts in building the Information Society, identifying gaps as well as deficits in investment and devising strategies to address them.

Full text of the Agenda

• 2. We reaffirm our desire and commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, international law and multilateralism, and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, so that people everywhere can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge, to achieve their full potential and to attain the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.
• 10. We recognize that access to information and sharing and creation of knowledge contributes significantly to strengthening economic, social and cultural development, thus helping all countries to reach the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals. This process can be enhanced by removing barriers to universal, ubiquitous, equitable and affordable access to information. We underline the importance of removing barriers to bridging the digital divide, particularly those that hinder the full achievement of the economic, social and cultural development of countries and the welfare of their people, in particular, in developing countries.
• 14. We also recognize that in addition to building ICT infrastructure, there should be adequate emphasis on developing human capacity and creating ICT applications and digital content in local language, where appropriate, so as to ensure a comprehensive approach to building a global Information Society.
• 15. Recognizing the principles of universal and non-discriminatory access to ICTs for all nations, the need to take into account the level of social and economic development of each country, and respecting the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society, we underscore that ICTs are effective tools to promote peace, security and stability, to enhance democracy, social cohesion, good governance and the rule of law, at national, regional and international levels. ICTs can be used to promote economic growth and enterprise development. Infrastructure development, human capacity building, information security and network security are critical to achieve these goals. We further recognize the need to effectively confront challenges and threats resulting from use of ICTs for purposes that are inconsistent with objectives of maintaining international stability and security and may adversely affect the integrity of the infrastructure within States, to the detriment of their security. It is necessary to prevent the abuse of information resources and technologies for criminal and terrorist purposes, while respecting human rights.
• 16. We further commit ourselves to evaluate and follow up progress in bridging the digital divide, taking into account different levels of development, so as to reach internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, and to assess the effectiveness of investment and international cooperation efforts in building the Information Society. 
• 18. We shall strive unremittingly, therefore, to promote universal, ubiquitous, equitable and affordable access to ICTs, including universal design and assistive technologies, for all people, especially those with disabilities, everywhere, to ensure that the benefits are more evenly distributed between and within societies, and to bridge the digital divide in order to create digital opportunities for all and benefit from the potential offered by ICTs for development.
• 19. The international community should take necessary measures to ensure that all countries of the world have equitable and affordable access to ICTs, so that their benefits in the fields of socio-economic development and bridging the digital divide are truly inclusive.
• 20. To that end, we shall pay particular attention to the special needs of marginalized and vulnerable groups of society including migrants, internally displaced persons and refugees, unemployed and underprivileged people, minorities and nomadic people, older persons and persons with disabilities.
• 21. To that end, we shall pay special attention to the particular needs of people of developing countries, countries with economies in transition, Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries, Highly Indebted Poor Countries, countries and territories under occupation, and countries recovering from conflict or natural disasters.
• 22. In the evolution of the Information Society, particular attention must be given to the special situation of indigenous peoples, as well as to the preservation of their heritage and their cultural legacy.
• 23. We recognize that a gender divide exists as part of the digital divide in society and we reaffirm our commitment to women’s empowerment and to a gender equality perspective, so that we can overcome this divide. We further acknowledge that the full participation of women in the Information Society is necessary to ensure the inclusiveness and respect for human rights within the Information Society. We encourage all stakeholders to support women’s participation in decision-making processes and to contribute to shaping all spheres of the Information Society at international, regional and national levels.
• 25. We reaffirm our commitment to empowering young people as key contributors to building an inclusive Information Society. We will actively engage youth in innovative ICT-based development programmes and widen opportunities for youth to be involved in e-strategy processes. 
• 26. We recognize the importance of creative content and applications to overcome the digital divide and to contribute to the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.
• 27. We recognize that equitable and sustainable access to information requires the implementation of strategies for the long-term preservation of the digital information that is being created.
• 28. We reaffirm our desire to build ICT networks and develop applications, in partnership with the private sector, based on open or interoperable standards that are affordable and accessible to all, available anywhere and anytime, to anyone and on any device, leading to a ubiquitous network.
• 31. We commit ourselves to work together towards the implementation of the Digital Solidarity Agenda, as agreed in paragraph 27 of the Geneva Plan of Action. The full and quick implementation of that agenda, observing good governance at all levels, requires in particular a timely, effective, comprehensive and durable solution to the debt problems of developing countries where appropriate, a universal, rule-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system, that can also stimulate development worldwide, benefiting countries at all stages of development, as well as, to seek and effectively implement concrete international approaches and mechanisms to increase international cooperation and assistance to bridge the digital divide. 
• 32. We further commit ourselves to promote the inclusion of all peoples in the Information Society through the development and use of local and/or indigenous languages in ICTs. We will continue our efforts to protect and promote cultural diversity, as well as cultural identities, within the Information Society.

Full text of the Commitment

Full text of the Plan of Action

Full text of the Declaration

• Reaffirming also that Internet governance, including the process towards enhanced cooperation and the convening of the Internet Governance Forum, should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva and Tunis,
• Recalling the efforts undertaken by the host countries in organizing the meetings of the Internet Governance Forum, held in Athens in 2006, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2007, in Hyderabad, India, in 2008, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, in 2009, in Vilnius in 2010, in Nairobi in 2011, in Baku in 2012, in Bali, Indonesia, in 2013, in Istanbul, Türkiye, in 2014, in João Pessoa, Brazil, in 2015, in Guadalajara, Mexico, in 2016, in Geneva, in 2017, in Paris in 2018, in Berlin in 2019, in Katowice, Poland, in 2021 and the meeting held in Addis Ababa in 2022, and recalling also the meeting convened virtually by the Secretary-General in 2020,
• Recalling also the convening of the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy Issues Pertaining to the Internet, based on the proposal by the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development regarding the structure and composition of the Working Group, as requested by the General Assembly in its resolution 70/125 of 16 December 2015 and endorsed by the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 2017/21, and taking note of its work,
• Reaffirming the value and principles of multi-stakeholder cooperation and engagement that have characterized the World Summit on the Information Society process since its inception, and recognizing that the effective participation, partnership and cooperation of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, the technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders, within their respective roles and responsibilities, especially with balanced representation from developing countries, have been and continue to be vital in developing the information society,
• […]
• 26. Acknowledges the extension of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum through 2025, as set out in the outcome document of the high-level meeting of the General Assembly on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society;
• 27. Recognizes the importance of the Internet Governance Forum and its mandate as a forum for multi-stakeholder dialogue on various matters, as reflected in paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society, including discussion of public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance, and requests the Secretary-General to continue to submit, as part of his annual reporting on the progress made in the implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society at the regional and international levels, information on the progress made in the implementation of the recommendations contained in the report of the Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum, in particular those on enhancing the participation of developing countries. 
• 28. Stresses the need for the enhanced participation of Governments and stakeholders from all developing countries, in particular the least developed countries, in all meetings of the Internet Governance Forum, and in this regard invites Member States, as well as other relevant stakeholders, to support the participation of Governments and all other stakeholders from developing countries in the Forum itself, as well as in the preparatory meetings;
• 29. Notes the work of the Working Group on Enhanced Cooperation, established by the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development as requested by the General Assembly in its resolution 70/125, to develop recommendations on how to further implement enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda, and also notes that the Working Group ensured the full involvement of Governments and other relevant stakeholders, in particular from developing countries, taking into account all their diverse views and expertise;
• 30. Also notes that the Working Group held five meetings between September 2016 and January 2018 at which it discussed inputs from Member States and other stakeholders, as stipulated by the General Assembly in its resolution 70/125;
• 31. Recalls the report of the Chair of the Working Group, which includes references to the full texts of all proposals and contributions, and expresses its gratitude to the Chair and all participants who submitted inputs and contributed to the work of the Working Group;
• 32. Welcomes the good progress made by the Working Group in many areas and the fact that consensus seemed to emerge on some issues, while significant divergence of views in a number of other issues persisted, and in that regard regrets that the Working Group could not find agreement on recommendations on how to further implement enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda;
• 33. Recognizes the importance of enhanced cooperation in the future, to enable Governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, and notes the need for continued dialogue and work on the implementation of enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda;
• 34. Encourages the use of and engagement with forums and expertise available within relevant United Nations bodies, such as the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, by all relevant stakeholders to promote global digital cooperation;
• 49. Takes note of the recommendations of the Secretary-General, in his report entitled “Our Common Agenda” to improve digital cooperation, with a view to bridging digital divides and accelerating the positive contribution that digital technologies can play in society, including towards achieving the 2030 Agenda;
• 50. Looks forward to the development of a global digital compact to strengthen digital cooperation through an open and inclusive process, taking into account the work being done in the United Nations and in relevant processes and forums, and takes note of the role of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology in supporting this effort;

Full text of the resolution

Note: The UN General Assembly has been adopting resolutions on ICT for (sustainable) development on an almost yearly basis since 2002.

• 93. It is time to protect the online space and strengthen its governance. I would urge the Internet Governance Forum to adapt, innovate and reform to support effective governance of the digital commons and keep pace with rapid, real- world developments. Furthermore, building on the recommendations of the road map for digital cooperation (see A/74/821), the United Nations, Governments, the private sector and civil society could come together as a multi-stakeholder digital technology track in preparation for a Summit of the Future to agree on a Global Digital Compact. This would outline shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all. Complex digital issues that could be addressed may include: reaffirming the fundamental commitment to connecting the unconnected; avoiding fragmentation of the Internet; providing people with options as to how their data is used; application of human rights online; and promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content. More broadly, the Compact could also promote regulation of artificial intelligence to ensure that this is aligned with shared global values.

Full text of the report

E. Global digital cooperation

Recommendations 5A and 5B (global digital cooperatioon)

• 66. To address gaps in global digital cooperation, the Panel suggested three potential models: a strengthened and enhanced Internet Governance Forum Plus, a distributed co-governance architecture and a digital commons architecture.
• 67. The existing digital cooperation architecture has become highly complex and diffused but not necessarily effective, and global discussions and processes are often not inclusive enough. This situation is exacerbated by the lack of a common entry point into the global digital architecture, which makes it especially hard for developing countries, small and medium-sized enterprises, marginalized groups and other stakeholders with limited budgets and expertise to make their voices heard.
• 68. Discussions among relevant stakeholders on the Panel’s three proposed models are ongoing, given the complexity and significance of the issues and the need to ensure a comprehensive representation of global voices. While there appears to be momentum in support of the Internet Governance Forum Plus model, some have highlighted the need to continue examining the other two architectures, including how various features may complement that model. Member States are considering working with a multi-stakeholder task force to pilot the distributed co-governance model at the national or regional levels.

IV. Concluding observations and way forward

Global digital cooperation

• 93. While discussions on the different digital architecture models proposed by the Panel are ongoing among stakeholders, the following ideas have emerged with a view to making the Internet Governance Forum more responsive and relevant to current digital issues. These include:
  • (a) Creating a strategic and empowered multi-stakeholder high-level body, building on the experience of the existing multi-stakeholder advisory group, which would address urgent issues, coordinate follow-up action on Forum discussions and relay proposed policy approaches and recommendations from the Forum to the appropriate normative and decision-making forums;
  • (b) Having a more focused agenda for the Forum based on a limited number of strategic policy issues;
  • (c) Establishing a high-level segment and ministerial or parliamentarian tracks, ensuring more actionable outcomes;
  • (d) Forging stronger links among the global Forum and its regional, national, subregional and youth initiatives;
  • (e) Better integrating programme and intersessional policy development work to support other priority areas outlined in the present report;
  • (f) Addressing the long-term sustainability of the Forum and the resources necessary for increased participation, through an innovative and viable fundraising strategy, as promoted by the round table;
  • (g) Enhancing the visibility of the Forum, including through a stronger corporate identity and improved reporting to other United Nations entities.
• 94. While consultations on digital architecture models will continue in the coming months, I support these measures to enhance the Forum and intend to implement them as appropriate.

Full text of the Roadmap

4. Mechanisms for global digital cooperation

No single approach to digital cooperation can address the diverse spectrum of issues raised in this report – and as technologies evolve, so will the issues, and the most effective ways to cooperate. We should approach digital cooperation using all available tools, making dynamic choices about the best approach based on specific circumstances. In some cases, cooperation may be initiated and led by the private sector or civil society, and in some cases by governments or international organisations.

Most current mechanisms of digital cooperation are primarily local, national or regional. However, digital interdependence also necessitates that we strengthen global digital cooperation mechanisms to address challenges and provide opportunities for all.  

This chapter identifies gaps and challenges in current arrangements for global digital cooperation and summarises the functions any future cooperation architecture could perform and what principles could underpin them. It then outlines three possible options for digital cooperation architectures and concludes with a discussion of the role the United Nations can play. There was not unanimity of opinion among the Panel members about the shape, function and operations of these different models. Instead, they are presented as useful alternatives to explore in the spirit of digital cooperation and as an input for the broad consultations we call for in Recommendation 5A.

Ultimately, success of any proposed mechanisms and architecture will depend on the spirit in which they are developed and implemented. All governments, the private sector and civil society organisations need to recognise how much they stand to gain from a spirit of collaboration to drive progress toward the achievement of the SDGs and to raise the costs of using digital technologies irresponsibly. The alternative is further erosion of the trust and stability we need to build an inclusive and prosperous digital future.

4.1 Challenges and gaps 

The international community is not starting from scratch. It can build on established mechanisms for digital cooperation involving governments, technical bodies, civil society and other organisations. Some are based in national and international law, others in “soft law” – norms, guidelines, codes of conduct and other self-regulatory measures adopted by business and tech communities. Some are loosely organised, others highly institutionalised. Some focus on setting agendas and standards, others on monitoring and coordination. Many could evolve to become better fit for purpose.

The need for better digital cooperation is not so much with managing the technical nuts and bolts of how technologies function, as mechanisms here are generally well-established, but with the unprecedented economic, societal and ethical challenges they cause. How to tell, in context, when conversations on social media cross the line into inciting violence? How to limit the use of cyber weapons possessed not only by states but non-state actors and individuals? How to adapt trade systems designed for a different era to the newly emerging forms of online commerce? 

The 2003 and 2005 World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) established the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) as a platform for multi-stakeholder dialogue. Global, national and regional IGF meetings have contributed to many important digital debates. But the IGF, in its current form, has limitations in addressing challenges that are now emerging from new digital technologies.

The need for strengthened cooperation mechanisms has been raised many times in recent years by broad initiatives – such as the NetMundial Conference, the Global Commission on Internet Governance and Web Foundation’s Contract for the Web – and more narrowly focused efforts such as the Broadband Commission, the Alliance for Affordable Internet, the Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network, the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace, the Charter of Trust, Smart Africa, and the International Panel on AI recently announced by Canada and France.

In our consultations, we heard a great deal of dissatisfaction with existing digital cooperation arrangements: a desire for more tangible outcomes, more active participation by governments and the private sector, more inclusive processes and better follow-up. Overall, systems need to become more holistic, multi-disciplinary, multi-stakeholder, agile and able to convert rhetoric into practice. We have identified six main gaps:

First, despite their growing impact on society, digital technology and digital cooperation issues remain relatively low on many national, regional and global political agendas. Only recently have forums such as the G20 started regularly to address the digital economy. In 2018, the UN Secretary-General for the first time delivered an opening statement in person at the IGF in Paris.

Second, digital cooperation arrangements such as technical bodies and standard-setting organisations are often not inclusive enough of small and developing countries, indigenous communities, women, young and elderly people and those with disabilities. Even if they are invited to the table, such groups may lack the capacity to participate effectively and meaningfully.  

Third, there is considerable overlap among the large number of mechanisms covering digital policy issues. As a result, the digital cooperation architecture has become highly complex but not necessarily effective. There is no simple entry point. This makes it especially hard for small enterprises, marginalised groups, developing countries and other stakeholders with limited budgets and expertise to make their voices heard.

Fourth, digital technologies increasingly cut across areas in which policies are shaped by separate institutions. For example, one body may look at data issues from the perspective of standardisation, while another considers trade, and still another regulates to protect human rights. Many international organisations are trying to adjust their traditional policy work to reflect the realities of the digital transformation, but do not yet have enough expertise and experience to have well-defined roles in addressing new digital issues. At a minimum there needs to be better communication across different bodies to shape awareness. Ideally, effective cooperation should create synergies. 

Fifth, there is a lack of reliable data, metrics and evidence on which to base practical policy interventions. For example, the annual cost of cybercrime to the global economy is variously estimated at anything from $600 billion to $6 trillion. Estimates of the value of the AI market in 2025 range from $60 billion to $17 trillion. The problem is most acute in developing countries, where resources to collect evidence are scarce and data collection is generally uneven. Establishing a knowledge repository on digital policy, with definitions of terms and concepts, would also increase clarity in policy discussions and support consistency of measurement of digital inclusion, as we have noted in our Recommendation 1D.

Sixth, lack of trust among governments, civil society and the private sector – and sometimes a lack of humility and understanding of different perspectives – can make it more difficult to establish the collaborative multi-stakeholder approach needed to develop effective cooperation mechanisms. 

Inter-governmental work must be balanced with work involving broader stakeholders. Multi-stakeholder and multilateral approaches can and do co-exist. The challenge is to evolve ways of using each to reinforce the effectiveness of the other. 

Values and principles 

As noted in the discussion of values in Chapter 1, we believe global digital cooperation should be: inclusive; respectful; human-centred; conducive to human flourishing; transparent; collaborative; accessible; sustainable and harmonious. Shared values become even more important during periods of rapid change, limited information and unpredictability, as with current discussions of cooperation relating to artificial intelligence. 

It would be useful for the private sector, communities and governments to conduct digital cooperation initiatives by explicitly defining the values and principles that guide them. The aim is to align stakeholders around a common vision, maximise the beneficial impacts and minimise the risk of misuse and unintended consequences. 

Alongside these shared values, we believe it is useful to highlight operational principles as a reference point for the future evolution of digital cooperation mechanisms. The principles we propose for global digital cooperation mechanisms include that they should: be easy to engage in, open and transparent; inclusive and accountable to all stakeholders; consult and debate as locally as possible; encourage innovation of both technologies and better mechanisms for cooperating; and, seek to maximise the global public interest. These are set forth in more detail in Annex VI, based on the experience of internet governance and technical coordination bodies – such as the WSIS process, UNESCO and the NetMundial conference. 

Defining values and principles is only the first step: we must operationalise them in practice in the design and development of digital technology and digital cooperation mechanisms. Where the reach of hard governance is limited or ambiguous – for example, at the stage of innovation or when the long-term impact of technologies is hard to predict – values-based cooperation approaches can play a vital role. 

We should look for opportunities to operationalise values and principles at each step in the design and development of new technologies, as well as new policy practices. For example, educational institutions could encourage software developers, business executives and engineers to integrate values and principles in their work and use professional codes of conduct akin to the medical profession’s Hippocratic Oath. Businesses can integrate values into workflows, use values-based measures to assess risk and institute a suitable incentive structure for staff to follow shared values. Self-assessments and third-party audits can also help institutionalise a business culture based on shared values. 

4.2 Three possible architectures for global digital cooperation

The Panel had many discussions about possible practical next steps to improve the architecture of global digital cooperation and the merits of proposing new mechanisms or updating existing ones. Some suggested that many cooperation challenges could be best addressed by strengthening implementation capacities of current agencies and mandates. 

While no single vision emerged, there was broad agreement that improved cooperation is needed, that such cooperation will need to take multiple diverse forms, and that governments, the private sector and civil society will need to find new ways to work together to steer an effective path between extremes of over-regulation and complete laissez-faire. Based on our consultations, the Panel felt that presenting options for digital cooperation architectures would best contribute to the discourse on global digital cooperation. 

Annex VI sets out functions that a digital cooperation architecture could be designed to improve. These include generating political will, ensuring the active and meaningful participation of all stakeholders, monitoring developments and identifying trends, creating shared understanding and purpose, preventing and resolving disputes, building consensus and following up on agreements. 

Below three possible models are proposed that could address some of these functions. The first enhances and extends the multi-stakeholder IGF. The second is a distributed architecture which builds on existing mechanisms. The third envisions a ‘commons’ approach with loose coordination by the UN. All have benefits and drawbacks. They are put forward here to provide concrete starting points for the further discussion and broad consultation which we recommend the UN Secretary-General initiate in our Recommendation 5A. 

A note on inclusive representation: All three models highlighted below would need to take special steps to ensure that they are broadly representative and develop specific mechanisms to ensure equitable participation of developing countries, women and other traditionally marginalised groups who have often been denied a voice.

The three potential models share common elements, such as multi-stakeholder participation, dedicated trust funds to enhance inclusivity, reducing policy inflation by consolidating discussions across for a, and a light coordination and convening role for the UN. The values in Chapter 1 and principles and functions in Annex VI provide shared design elements that further emphasise inclusivity and multi-stakeholder participation. 

Equally, there are differences in emphasis and approach. The COGOV, for example, foresees a larger role for new networks of experts and multi-stakeholder governance; the Digital Commons Architecture presumes more of a focus on iterative learning of governance through practice in both multilateral and multi-stakeholder tracks; and the IGF Plus adds functionalities to an existing multi-stakeholder forum with a UN mandate. 

The common design elements across the models could be flexibly brought together once the broad thrust of a new digital cooperation architecture has been defined. As suggested in Recommendation 5A, a common starting point could be a Global Commitment for Digital Cooperation based on shared values and principles.   

4.3 The role of the UN 

The UN’s three foundational pillars – peace and security, human rights and development – position it well to help spotlight issues emerging in the digital age and advocate on behalf of humanity’s best interests. In our consultations, we heard that despite its well-known weaknesses, the UN retains a unique role and convening power to bring stakeholders together to create the norms and frameworks and assist in developing the capacity we need to ensure a safe and equitable digital future for all people.  

Digital technologies are increasingly impacting the work of the UN in three ways: changing the political, social and economic environment in the ways this report has discussed; providing new tools for its core mandates; and creating new policy issues. 

UN entities have begun to embrace the digital transformation and are revamping programmes and launching initiatives to apply digital technology to further their missions. Some UN agencies – such as UNICEF, UNESCO, the World Food Programme (WFP) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) – have made a priority of exploring how the digital transformation can provide them with new approaches to achieve their mandates. The Task Force on Digital Financing of the SDGs, for example, will explore how digital technologies can be leveraged to finance the SDGs.²¹²

When digital issues often do not fit neatly within the traditional mandates of UN agencies, some have sought to expand their mandates, causing overlaps and friction. This duplication also causes confusion for external partners and stakeholders, who find it difficult to discern among the many fora, events and initiatives hosted by various parts of the UN on science, technology and innovation issues and policy setting. Some UN entities have responded to converging mandates by launching cross-cutting initiatives. For example, in 2010 the ITU and UNESCO established the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development; in 2016 the ITU, UN Women, the International Trade Centre (ITC), the GSM Association (GSMA), UNESCO and the United Nations University set up the EQUALS partnership to tackle the digital gender gap.

UN entities have also tended to go about digital issues in their own way, often without sharing information, at times duplicating each other’s work, and not reflecting on whether the systems they are building might scale to other UN entities. UN agencies can do much more to pool their human and computing capacities and develop shared tools and common standards – for example, through joint procurement of cloud computing, to reduce price and increase interoperability, and promoting open and interoperable standards for data produced and used by the UN.

The UN has begun to engage the private sector and tech community much more directly. For example, Tech Against Terrorism, a public/private partnership launched in April 2017 by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, aims to support the technology industry to develop more effective and responsible approaches to tackling terrorists’ use of the internet, while respecting human rights. However, working with stakeholders such as the private sector and civil society is still not part of the DNA of many UN agencies. More can be done to partner with other stakeholders effectively and consistently.

Created by the innovation units of several UN agencies in 2015, the UN Innovation Network is working on sharing best practices and recommending harmonisation of policies which may help reduce fragmentation across the UN system. The UN’s highest-level coordination body, the Chief Executives Board for Coordination, is trying to encourage more system-wide coordination through initiatives such as the UN Data Innovation Lab and UN data privacy principles. The High-level Committee on Programmes could also have a role to enable more knowledge sharing, efficiencies of scale and scaling up of successful practices and initiatives across the UN system.

The development of the UN Secretary-General’s Strategy on New Technologies, issued in September 2018, has helped identify points of overlap and convergence, and UN agencies meet regularly to track progress.The strategy notes that the Secretary-General may consider appointing a “Tech Envoy” following the work of this Panel.  

The UN can play a key role in enhancing digital cooperation by developing greater organisational and human capacity on digital governance issues and improving its ability to respond to member states’ need for policy advice and capacity development.

How can the UN add value in the digital transformation?

As a convener – The AI for Global Good Summit, the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development, ITU’s Global Symposium for Regulators, the WSIS Forum, the Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science, Technology and Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals (STI Forum).

Providing a space for debating values and norms – the IGF, the Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, Special Rapporteurs on the Right to Privacy and on the promotion and protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, UNESCO’s Artificial Intelligence with Human Values for Sustainable Development initiative, UNICEF’s efforts around children’s online safety.

Standard setting – ITU’s Telecommunication Standardization Sector, the UN Statistical Commission and its Global Working Group on Big Data for Official Statistics, WHO guidelines on digital health interventions, the Humanitarian Data Exchange – an open platform and standard for sharing data across crises and organisations. 

Multi-stakeholder or bilateral initiatives on specific issues – EQUALS: The Global Partnership for Gender Equality in the Digital Age, the Emergency Telecommunications Cluster hosted by WFP, the UN Global Compact’s Breakthrough Innovation for the SDGs Action Platform, the Famine Action Mechanism hosted by the World Bank and the UN in partnership with industry.  

Developing the capacity of member states – UNDP’s Accelerator Labs, the Technology Facilitation Mechanism, UN Global Pulse Labs, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s trainings, the Digital Blue Helmets initiative, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime’s Global Programme on Cybercrime.

Ranking, mapping and measuring – the annual E-Government Surveyproduced by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research’s Cyber Policy Portal, an online reference tool that maps the cybersecurity and cybersecurity-related policy landscape, ITU’s Measuring the Information Society report and Global Cybersecurity Index.

Arbitration and dispute-resolution – The World Intellectual Property Organization’s Internet Domain Name Process, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

Recommendations

Global digital cooperation

5A: We recommend that, as a matter of urgency, the UN Secretary-General facilitate an agile and open consultation process to develop updated mechanisms for global digital cooperation, with the options discussed in Chapter 4 as a starting point. We suggest an initial goal of marking the UN’s 75th anniversary in 2020 with a “Global Commitment for Digital Cooperation” to enshrine shared values, principles, understandings and objectives for an improved global digital cooperation architecture. As part of this process, we understand that the UN Secretary-General may appoint a Technology Envoy.

5B: We support a multi-stakeholder “systems” approach for cooperation and regulation that is adaptive, agile, inclusive and fit for purpose for the fast-changing digital age. 

Enhancing digital cooperation will require both reinvigorating existing multilateral partnerships and potentially the creation of new mechanisms that involve stakeholders from business, academia, civil society and technical organisations. We should approach questions of governance based on their specific circumstances and choosing among all available tools.

Where possible we can make existing inter-governmental forums and mechanisms fit for the digital age rather than rush to create new mechanisms, though this may involve difficult judgement calls: for example, while the WTO remains a major forum to address issues raised by the rapid growth in cross-border e-commerce, it is now over two decades since it was last able to broker an agreement on the subject. 

Given the speed of change, soft governance mechanisms – values and principles, standards and certification processes – should not wait for agreement on binding solutions. Soft governance mechanisms are also best suited to the multi-stakeholder approach demanded by the digital age: a fact-based, participative process of deliberation and design, including governments, private sector, civil society, diverse users and policy-makers.

The aim of the holistic “systems” approach we recommended is to bring together government bodies such as competition authorities and consumer protection agencies with the private sector, citizens and civil society to enable them to be more agile in responding to issues and evaluating trade-offs as they emerge. Any new governance approaches in digital cooperation should also, wherever possible, look for ways – such as pilot zones, regulatory sandboxes or trial periods – to test efficacy and develop necessary procedures and technology before being more widely applied.

We envisage that the process of developing a “Global Commitment for Digital Cooperation” would be inspired by the “World We Want” process, which helped formulate the SDGs. Participants would include governments, the private sector from technology and other industries, SMEs and entrepreneurs, civil society, international organisations including standards and professional organisations, academic scholars and other experts, and government representatives from varied departments at regional, national, municipal and community levels. Multi-stakeholder consultation in each member state and region would allow ideas to bubble up from the bottom. 

The consultations on an updated global digital cooperation architecture could define upfront the criteria to be met by the governance mechanisms to be proposed, such as funding models, modes of operation and means for serving the functions explored in this report. 

More broadly, if appointed, a UN Tech Envoy could identify over-the-horizon concerns that need improved cooperation or governance; provide light-touch coordination of multi-stakeholder actors to address shared concerns; reinforce principles and norms developed in forums with relevant mandates; and work with UN member states, civil society and businesses to support compliance with agreed norms. 

The Envoy’s mandate could also include coordinating the digital technology-related efforts of UN entities; improving communication and collaboration among technology experts within the UN; and advising the UN Secretary-General on new technology issues. Finally, the Envoy could promote partnerships to build and maintain international digital common resources that could be used to help achieve the SDGs.

Full text of the report

• 3. We reaffirm, moreover, the value and principles of multi-stakeholder cooperation and engagement that have characterized the World Summit on the Information Society process since its inception, recognizing that effective participation, partnership and cooperation of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, the technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders, within their respective roles and responsibilities, especially with balanced representation from developing countries, has been and continues to be vital in developing the information society.
• 8. We reaffirm that Internet governance should continue to follow the provisions set forth in the outcomes of the summits held in Geneva and Tunis.

4. Internet governance

• 55. We reaffirm paragraph 55 of the Tunis Agenda, and in this regard we recognize that the existing arrangements have worked effectively to make the Internet the highly robust, dynamic and geographically diverse medium that it is today, with the private sector taking the lead in day-to-day operations and with innovation and value creation at the edges. However, almost 4 billion people, representing  approximately  two  thirds  of  the  people  residing  in  developing countries, remain offline.
• 56. We recognize that there are many cross-cutting international public policy issues that require attention and have not been adequately addressed.
• 57. We take note of paragraph 29 of the Tunis Agenda, and recognize that the management of the Internet as a global facility includes multilateral, transparent, democratic and multi-stakeholder processes, with the full involvement of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders in accordance with their respective roles and responsibilities.
• 58. We reiterate the working definition of Internet governance, set out in paragraph 34 of the Tunis Agenda, as the development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.
• 59. We reaffirm the principle agreed in the Geneva Declaration of Principles that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations, within their respective roles and responsibilities, as set out in paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda.
• 60. We take note of the hosting by the Government of Brazil of the NETMundial Global Multi-stakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, in São Paulo, on 23 and 24 April 2014.
• 61. We recognize that there is a need to promote greater participation and engagement in the Internet governance discussions of Governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, the technical and academic communities and all other relevant stakeholders from developing countries, particularly African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States and middle-income countries, as well as countries in situations of conflict, post-conflict countries and countries affected by natural disasters. We call for strengthened, stable, transparent and voluntary funding mechanisms to this end.
• 62. We note the important regulatory and legislative processes in some Member States on the open Internet in the context of the information society and the underlying drivers for it, and call for further information-sharing at the international level on the opportunities and challenges.
• 63. We acknowledge the role of the Internet Governance Forum as a multi-stakeholder platform for discussion of Internet governance issues. We support the recommendations in the report of the Working Group on Improvements to the Internet Governance Forum of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, which the General Assembly took note of in its resolution 68/198 of 20 December 2013, and we call for their accelerated implementation. We extend for another 10 years the existing mandate of the Internet Governance Forum as set out in paragraphs 72 to 78 of the Tunis Agenda. We recognize that during that period, the  Forum should continue to show progress on working modalities and the participation of relevant stakeholders from developing countries. We call upon the Commission, within its regular reporting, to give due consideration to fulfilment of the recommendations in the report of its Working Group.

4.1. Enhanced cooperation

• 64. We acknowledge that various initiatives have been implemented and some progress has been made in relation to the process towards enhanced cooperation detailed in paragraphs 69 to 71 of the Tunis Agenda.
• 65. We note, however, the divergent views held by Member States with respect to the process towards implementation of enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda. We call for continued dialogue and work on the implementation of enhanced cooperation. We accordingly request the Chair of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, through the Economic and Social Council, to establish a working group to develop recommendations on how to further implement enhanced cooperation as envisioned in the Tunis Agenda, taking into consideration the work that has been done on this matter thus far. The group, which shall be constituted no later than July 2016, will decide at the outset on its methods of work, including modalities, and will ensure the full involvement of all relevant stakeholders, taking into account all their diverse views and expertise. The group will submit a report to the Commission on Science and Technology for Development at its twenty-first session for inclusion in the annual report of the Commission to the Council. The report will also serve as an input to the regular reporting of the Secretary-General on implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society.

Full text of the resolution

• 29. We reaffirm the principles enunciated in the Geneva phase of the WSIS, in December 2003, that the Internet has evolved into a global facility available to the public and its governance should constitute a core issue of the Information Society agenda. The international management of the Internet should be multilateral, transparent and democratic, with the full involvement of governments, the private sector, civil society and international organizations. It should ensure an equitable distribution of resources, facilitate access for all and ensure a stable and secure functioning of the Internet, taking into account multilingualism.
• 30. We acknowledge that the Internet, a central element of the infrastructure of the Information Society, has evolved from a research and academic facility into a global facility available to the public.
• 31. We recognize that Internet governance, carried out according to the Geneva principles, is an essential element for a people-centred, inclusive, development-oriented and non-discriminatory Information Society. Furthermore, we commit ourselves to the stability and security of the Internet as a global facility and to ensuring the requisite legitimacy of its governance, based on the full participation of all stakeholders, from both developed and developing countries, within their respective roles and responsibilities.
• 32. We thank the UN Secretary-General for establishing the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG). We commend the chairman, members and secretariat for their work and for their report.
• 33. We take note of the WGIG’s report that has endeavoured to develop a working definition of Internet governance. It has helped identify a number of public policy issues that are relevant to Internet governance. The report has also enhanced our understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of governments, intergovernmental and international organizations and other forums as well as the private sector and civil society from both developing and developed countries.
• 34. A working definition of Internet governance is the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.
• 35. We reaffirm that the management of the Internet encompasses both technical and public policy issues and should involve all stakeholders and relevant intergovernmental and international organizations. In this respect it is recognized that:
  • a. Policy authority for Internet-related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States. They have rights and responsibilities for international Internet-related public policy issues.
  • b. The private sector has had, and should continue to have, an important role in the development of the Internet, both in the technical and economic fields.
  • c. Civil society has also played an important role on Internet matters, especially at community level, and should continue to play such a role.
  • d. Intergovernmental organizations have had, and should continue to have, a facilitating role in the coordination of Internet-related public policy issues.
  • e. International organizations have also had and should continue to have an important role in the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant policies.
• 36. We recognize the valuable contribution by the academic and technical communities within those stakeholder groups mentioned in paragraph 35 to the evolution, functioning and development of the Internet.
• 37. We seek to improve the coordination of the activities of international and intergovernmental organizations and other institutions concerned with Internet governance and the exchange of information among themselves. A multi-stakeholder approach should be adopted, as far as possible, at all levels.
• 38. We call for the reinforcement of specialized regional Internet resource management institutions to guarantee the national interest and rights of countries in that particular region to manage their own Internet resources, while maintaining global coordination in this area.
• 52. In order to ensure effective participation in global Internet governance, we urge international organizations, including intergovernmental organizations, where relevant, to ensure that all stakeholders, particularly from developing countries, have the opportunity to participate in policy decision-making relating to Internet governance, and to promote and facilitate such participation.
• 55. We recognize that the existing arrangements for Internet governance have worked effectively to make the Internet the highly robust, dynamic and geographically diverse medium that it is today, with the private sector taking the lead in day-to-day operations, and with innovation and value creation at the edges.
• 56. The Internet remains a highly dynamic medium and therefore any framework and mechanisms designed to deal with Internet governance should be inclusive and responsive to the exponential growth and fast evolution of the Internet as a common platform for the development of multiple applications.
• 57. The security and stability of the Internet must be maintained.
• 58. We recognize that Internet governance includes more than Internet naming and addressing. It also includes other significant public policy issues such as, inter alia, critical Internet resources, the security and safety of the Internet, and developmental aspects and issues pertaining to the use of the Internet.
• 59. We recognize that Internet governance includes social, economic and technical issues including affordability, reliability and quality of service.
• 60. We further recognize that there are many cross-cutting international public policy issues that require attention and are not adequately addressed by the current mechanisms.
• 61. We are convinced that there is a need to initiate, and reinforce, as appropriate, a transparent, democratic, and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations, in their respective roles. This process could envisage creation of a suitable framework or mechanisms, where justified, thus spurring the ongoing and active evolution of the current arrangements in order to synergize the efforts in this regard.
• 62. We emphasize that any Internet governance approach should be inclusive and responsive and should continue to promote an enabling environment for innovation, competition and investment.
• 63. Countries should not be involved in decisions regarding another country’s country-code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD). Their legitimate interests, as expressed and defined by each country, in diverse ways, regarding decisions affecting their ccTLDs, need to be respected, upheld and addressed via a flexible and improved framework and mechanisms.
• 64. We recognize the need for further development of, and strengthened cooperation among, stakeholders for public policies for generic Top-Level Domain names (gTLDs).
• 65. We underline the need to maximize the participation of developing countries in decisions regarding Internet governance, which should reflect their interests, as well as in development and capacity building.
• 66. In view of the continuing internationalization of the Internet and the principle of universality, we agree to implement the Geneva Principles regarding Internet governance.
• 67. We agree, inter alia, to invite the UN Secretary-General to convene a new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue.
• 68. We recognize that all governments should have an equal role and responsibility for international Internet governance and for ensuring the stability, security and continuity of the Internet. We also recognize the need for development of public policy by governments in consultation with all stakeholders.
• 69. We further recognize the need for enhanced cooperation in the future, to enable governments, on an equal footing, to carry out their roles and responsibilities, in international public policy issues pertaining to the Internet, but not in the day-to-day technical and operational matters, that do not impact on international public policy issues.
• 70. Using relevant international organizations, such cooperation should include the development of globally-applicable principles on public policy issues associated with the coordination and management of critical Internet resources. In this regard, we call upon the organizations responsible for essential tasks associated with the Internet to contribute to creating an environment that facilitates this development of public policy principles.
• 71. The process towards enhanced cooperation, to be started by the UN Secretary-General, involving all relevant organizations by the end of the first quarter of 2006, will involve all stakeholders in their respective roles, will proceed as quickly as possible consistent with legal process, and will be responsive to innovation. Relevant organizations should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders, proceeding as quickly as possible and responsive to innovation. The same relevant organizations shall be requested to provide annual performance reports.
• 72. We ask the UN Secretary-General, in an open and inclusive process, to convene, by the second quarter of 2006, a meeting of the new forum for multi-stakeholder policy dialogue—called the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). The mandate of the Forum is to:
  • a. Discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet.
  • b. Facilitate discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing body.
  • c. Interface with appropriate intergovernmental organizations and other institutions on matters under their purview.
  • d. Facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, and in this regard make full use of the expertise of the academic, scientific and technical communities.
  • e. Advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and affordability of the Internet in the developing world.
  • f. Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries.
  • g. Identify emerging issues, bring them to the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public, and, where appropriate, make recommendations.
  • h. Contribute to capacity building for Internet governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise.
  • i. Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance processes.
  • j. Discuss, inter alia, issues relating to critical Internet resources.
  • k. Help to find solutions to the issues arising from the use and misuse of the Internet, of particular concern to everyday users.
  • l. Publish its proceedings.
• 73. The Internet Governance Forum, in its working and function, will be multilateral, multi-stakeholder, democratic and transparent. To that end, the proposed IGF could:
  • a. Build on the existing structures of Internet governance, with special emphasis on the complementarity between all stakeholders involved in this process – governments, business entities, civil society and intergovernmental organizations.
  • b. Have a lightweight and decentralized structure that would be subject to periodic review.
  • c. Meet periodically, as required. IGF meetings, in principle, may be held in parallel with major relevant UN conferences, inter alia, to use logistical support.
• 74. We encourage the UN Secretary-General to examine a range of options for the convening of the Forum, taking into consideration the proven competencies of all stakeholders in Internet governance and the need to ensure their full involvement.
• 75. The UN Secretary-General would report to UN Member States periodically on the operation of the Forum.
• 76. We ask the UN Secretary-General to examine the desirability of the continuation of the Forum, in formal consultation with Forum participants, within five years of its creation, and to make recommendations to the UN Membership in this regard.
• 77. The IGF would have no oversight function and would not replace existing arrangements, mechanisms, institutions or organizations, but would involve them and take advantage of their expertise. It would be constituted as a neutral, non-duplicative and non-binding process. It would have no involvement in day-to-day or technical operations of the Internet.
• 78. The UN Secretary-General should extend invitations to all stakeholders and relevant parties to participate at the inaugural meeting of the IGF, taking into consideration balanced geographical representation. The UN Secretary-General should also:
  • a. draw upon any appropriate resources from all interested stakeholders, including the proven expertise of ITU, as demonstrated during the WSIS process; and
  • b. establish an effective and cost-efficient bureau to support the IGF, ensuring multi-stakeholder participation.
• 79. Diverse matters relating to Internet governance would continue to be addressed in other relevant fora.
• 80. We encourage the development of multi-stakeholder processes at the national, regional and international levels to discuss and collaborate on the expansion and diffusion of the Internet as a means to support development efforts to achieve internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals.
• 81. We reaffirm our commitment to the full implementation of the Geneva Principles.
• 82. We welcome the generous offer of the Government of Greece to host the first meeting of the IGF in Athens no later than 2006 and we call upon the UN Secretary-General to extend invitations to all stakeholders and relevant parties to participate at the inaugural meeting of the IGF. 

Full text of the Agenda

• 7. We reaffirm the commitments made in Geneva and build on them in Tunis by focusing on financial mechanisms for bridging the digital divide, on Internet governance and related issues, as well as on follow-up and implementation of the Geneva and Tunis decisions, as referenced in the Tunis Agenda for the Information Society.
• 8. While reaffirming the important roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders as outlined in paragraph 3 of the Geneva Plan of Action, we acknowledge the key role and responsibilities of governments in the WSIS process.

Full text of the Commitment

Full text of the Plan of Action

Full text of the Declaration

• Taking note of the Digital Economy Report 2021 of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, which examines the role of cross-border data flows for development in maximizing equitable development gains, while minimizing risks and impacts of a potential fragmentation in the digital space, and recognizing the need to continue discussions on the connection between data and sustainable development, including data governance, while taking into account the multiple dimensions of data,
• 10. Also notes that the digital economy is an important and growing part of the global economy and that connectivity is correlated with increases in gross domestic product, recognizes the critical importance of expanding the participation of all countries, in particular developing countries, in the digital economy, and further notes that the Commission on Science and Technology for Development could explore the connection between data and sustainable development;
• 14. Looks forward to the holding of the third meeting of the Working Group on Measuring E-commerce and the Digital Economy, on 28 and 29 November 2022, and the sixth session of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts on E-commerce and the Digital Economy, from 10 to 12 May 2023, which will focus on how to make data work for the 2030 Agenda;
• 40. Also recognizes the importance of the free flow of information and knowledge, and the need to reduce disparities in information flows at all levels, as the amount of information distributed worldwide grows and the role of communication becomes all the more important, and acknowledges that the mainstreaming of information and communications technologies in school curricula, open access to data, the fostering of competition, the creation of transparent, predictable, independent and non-discriminatory regulatory and legal systems, proportionate taxation and licensing fees, access to finance, the facilitation of public – private partnerships, multi-stakeholder cooperation, national and regional broadband strategies, efficient allocation of the radio frequency spectrum, infrastructure-sharing models, community-based approaches and public access facilities have in many countries facilitated significant gains in connectivity and sustainable development;

Full text of the resolution

Note: The UN General Assembly has been adopting resolutions on ICT for (sustainable) development on an almost yearly basis since 2002.

• 35. In 2023, we will commemorate the seventy fifth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and 30 years since the adoption of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action on human rights. As this milestone nears, the time has come to take stock, rejuvenate our shared values and update our thinking on human rights. Consideration should, for instance, be given to updating or clarifying our application of human rights frameworks and standards to address frontier issues and prevent harms in the digital or technology spaces, including in relation to freedom of speech, hate speech and harassment, privacy, the “right to be forgotten” and neuro-technology. 
• 93. […] Furthermore, building on the recommendations of the road map for digital cooperation (see A/74/821), the United Nations, Governments, the private sector and civil society could come together as a multi-stakeholder digital technology track in preparation for a Summit of the Future to agree on a Global Digital Compact. This would outline shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all. Complex digital issues that could be addressed may include: reaffirming the fundamental commitment to connecting the unconnected; avoiding fragmentation of the Internet; providing people with options as to how their data is used; application of human rights online; and promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content. More broadly, the Compact could also promote regulation of artificial intelligence to ensure that this is aligned with shared global values.

Full text of the report

II. Introduction

• 9. As more people are brought online, new vulnerabilities arise. According to estimates, the potential cost of worldwide data breaches will be more than $5 trillion by 2024. The use of the Internet and social media in the context of elections, as both enablers of participation and tools for spreading disinformation and hate speech, raise complex issues.

C. Human rights and human agency

Recommendations 3A and 3B (digital human rights)

Data protection and privacy

• 43. Data protection has failed to keep up with advances in hacking and espionage. In 2019, more than 7,000 data breaches were recorded, exposing more than 15 billion records. 
• 44. Effective personal data protection and the protection of the right to privacy in line with internationally agreed standards are imperative. Human rights-based domestic laws and practices for the protection of data privacy, including enforcement mechanisms such as access to judicial review, or fully independent and well-resourced data protection authorities, are needed to address the use of data by private companies or Governments. 
• 45. The importance of protecting the right to privacy in the digital space and to take clear actions to do so is fundamental for private sector actors. More systemically, the current financing model for social media platforms effectively encourages the collection of personal data for commercial purposes, so that content and advertising can be more effectively tailored to individuals’ consumption patterns. Changes to this model will need to be considered in order to reverse the trend.

Digital identity

• 46. For over 1 billion individuals worldwide, their lack of recognized identification bars them from having access to basic goods and services. A “good” digital identity that preserves people’s privacy and control over their information can empower them to gain access to these much-needed services. Initiatives such as Identification for Development and the United Nations Legal Identity Task Force can help countries to realize the transformative potential of digital identification systems. 
• 47. It is nonetheless problematic that some digital identity programmes have been designed outside the frameworks of privacy and data protection. If digital identity is to become a trusted force for good and used for everyone, it has to be built upon a foundation of user agency and choice, informed consent, recognition of multiple forms of identity, space for anonymity and respect for privacy, ensuring that there is transparency when an individual’s data are used by government and other entities. 
• 48. The adoption of safeguards related to digital identity is critical for Governments and the United Nations as they strive to realize its full utility and potential while building trust in its use. This includes, for instance, efforts such as decentralized data storage, identification and authentication, encrypted communications and considering the incorporation of “privacy by design” principles. 

Surveillance technologies, including facial recognition

• 49. Researchers have observed that surveillance technologies have, in many situations, allowed for serious breaches of privacy, by Governments, individuals and the private sector. Surveillance technologies, where used in accordance with applicable international human rights law, can be effective law enforcement tools. However, there are reports of targeted communications surveillance and facial recognition software that could result in human rights violations and lead to arbitrary arrests or detentions and violation of the right to peaceful protest. These technologies may also misidentify certain minority groups and cement existing social biases, leading to situations in which marginalized people and members of minority communities may be more likely to be identified as the wrong gender or be discriminated against, for instance, in being denied loans. 
• 50. It is critical that legislation and safeguards are in place to protect people from unlawful or unnecessary surveillance, including any arbitrary surveillance that may be carried out by State actors in cyberspace, as well as in the physical world. Any such policies have to be fully in line with countries’ human rights obligations. This is relevant also for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic: a careful and considered approach is required to ensure that responses are aligned with human rights obligations. 

IV. Concluding observations and way forward

Digital human rights

• […] 87. I also call upon Member States to place human rights at the centre of regulatory frameworks and legislation on the development and use of digital technologies. In a similar vein, I call upon technology leaders urgently and publicly to acknowledge the importance of protecting the right to privacy and other human rights in the digital space and take clear, company-specific actions to do so.

Full text of the Roadmap

2. Leaving no one behind

2.1. Creating an inclusive digital economy

Harnessing data and digital public goods for development

The immense power and value of data in the modern economy can and must be harnessed to meet the SDGs, but this will require new models of collaboration.

The Panel discussed potential pooling of data in areas such as health, agriculture and the environment to enable scientists and thought leaders to use data and artificial intelligence to better understand issues and find new ways to make progress on the SDGs. Such data commons would require criteria for establishing relevance to the SDGs, standards for interoperability, rules on access and safeguards to ensure privacy and security.

We also need to generate more data relevant to the SDGs. In a world which has seen exponential growth of data in recent years, many people remain invisible. For example, the 2018 UN SDG Report notes that only 73 percent of children under the age of 5 have had their births registered. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated in 2014 that two-thirds of deaths are not registered. Only 11 countries in sub-Saharan Africa have data on poverty from surveys conducted after 2015. Most countries do not collect sex-disaggregated data on internet access.   

Anonymised data – information that is rendered anonymous in such a way that the data subject is not or no longer identifiable – about progress toward the SDGs is generally less sensitive and controversial than the use of personal data of the kind companies such as Facebook, Twitter or Google may collect to drive their business models, or facial and gait data that could be used for surveillance. However, personal data can also serve development goals, if handled with proper oversight to ensure its security and privacy. 

For example, individual health data is extremely sensitive – but many people’s health data, taken together, can allow researchers to map disease outbreaks, compare the effectiveness of treatments and improve understanding of conditions. Aggregated data from individual patient cases was crucial to containing the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. Private and public sector healthcare providers around the world are now using various forms of electronic medical records. These help individual patients by making it easier to personalise health services, but the public health benefits require these records to be interoperable.  

There is scope to launch collaborative projects to test the interoperability of data, standards and safeguards across the globe. The World Health Assembly’s consideration of a global strategy for digital health in 2020 presents an opportunity to launch such projects, which could initially be aimed at global health challenges such as Alzheimer’s and hypertension.

Improved digital cooperation on a data-driven approach to public health has the potential to lower costs, build new partnerships among hospitals, technology companies, insurance providers and research institutes and support the shift from treating diseases to improving wellness. Appropriate safeguards are needed to ensure the focus remains on improving health care outcomes. With testing, experience and necessary protective measures as well as guidelines for the responsible use of data, similar cooperation could emerge in many other fields related to the SDGs, from education to urban planning to agriculture. […]

2.3. Regional and global economic policy cooperation

[…] It has likewise proved difficult so far to establish international standards or rules for the exchange of data. Trade rules were developed for goods and services that are produced and then consumed. By contrast, data which is “produced” by individuals and devices is not “consumed”, but rather can be used repeatedly, and gains value when combined with other data. 

Some argue that restrictions on data flows should be treated like any other trade barrier and generally minimised. However, views differ sharply, and decisions on national legislation are complicated by concerns about privacy and security – discussed in the next chapter. Countries that require companies to store and process data within their national borders argue that it promotes local innovation and investment in technology infrastructure and makes it easier to tax global corporations. Others argue against such approaches on the basis that they are protectionist or represent an effort to obtain access to the data. 

3. Individuals, societies and digital technologies

3.1. Human rights and human agency

The right to privacy

The right to privacy has become particularly contentious as digital technologies have given governments and private companies vast new possibilities for surveillance, tracking and monitoring, some of which are invasive of privacy. As with so many areas of digital technology, there needs to be a society-wide conversation, based on informed consent, about the boundaries and norms for such uses of digital technology and AI. Surveillance, tracking or monitoring by governments or businesses should not violate international human rights law.

It is helpful to articulate what we mean by “privacy” and “security”. We define “privacy” as being about an individual’s right to decide who is allowed to see and use their personal information. We define “security” as being about protecting data, on servers and in communication via digital networks.

Notions and expectations of privacy also differ across cultures and societies. How should an individual’s right to privacy be balanced against the interest of businesses in accessing data to improve services and government interest in accessing data for legitimate public purposes related to law enforcement and national security?

Societies around the world debate these questions heatedly when hard cases come to light, such as Apple’s 2016 refusal of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)’s request to assist in unlocking an iPhone of the suspect in a shooting case. Different governments are taking different approaches: some are forcing technology companies to provide technical means of access, sometimes referred to as “backdoors”, so the state can access personal data.

Complications arise when data is located in another country: in 2013, Microsoft refused an FBI request to provide a suspect’s emails that were stored on a server in Ireland. The United States of America (USA) has since passed a law obliging American companies to comply with warrants to provide data of American citizens even if it is stored abroad. It enables other governments to separately negotiate agreements to access their citizens’ data stored by American companies in the USA.

There currently seems to be little alternative to handling cross-border law enforcement requests through a complex and slow-moving patchwork of bilateral agreements – the attitudes of people and governments around the world differ widely, and the decision-making role of global technology companies is evolving. Nonetheless, it is possible that regional and multilateral arrangements could develop over time.

For individuals, what companies can do with their personal data is not just a question of legality but practical understanding – to manage permissions for every single organisation we interact with would be incredibly time consuming and confusing. How to give people greater meaningful control over their personal data is an important question for digital cooperation.

Alongside the right to privacy is the important question of who realises the economic value that can be derived from personal data. Consumers typically have little awareness of how their personal information is sold or otherwise used to generate economic benefit.

There are emerging ideas to make data transactions more explicit and share the value extracted from personal data with the individuals who provide it. These could include business models which give users greater privacy by default: promising examples include the web browser Brave and the search engine DuckDuckGo. They could include new legal structures: the UK and India are among countries exploring the idea of a third-party ‘data fiduciary’ who users can authorise to manage their personal data on their behalf.

3.2. Trust and social cohesion

[…] Violations of privacy and security are undermining people’s trust in governments and companies. Trust between states is challenged by new ways to conduct espionage, manipulate public opinion and infiltrate critical infrastructure. While academia has traditionally nurtured international cooperation in artificial intelligence, governments are incentivised to secrecy by awareness that future breakthroughs could dramatically shift the balance of power.

Recommendations

An inclusive digital economy and society

1B. We recommend that a broad, multi-stakeholder alliance, involving the UN, create a platform for sharing digital public goods, engaging talent and pooling data sets, in a manner that respects privacy, in areas related to attaining the SDGs.

[…] The specific decisions needed to promote inclusivity and minimise risks will depend on local and national conditions. They should consider four main factors.

First, the broader national policy and regulatory frameworks should make it easy to create, run and grow small businesses. These frameworks should ensure that digital service providers – including e-commerce and inclusive finance platforms – support the growth of local enterprises. This requires enabling policies on investment and innovation, and structural policies to ensure fair competition, privacy rights, consumer protection and a sustainable tax base. Efforts to agree regional or global standards in these areas are welcome. […] Fourth, respect for human rights – including privacy – is fundamental. Panel members had divergent views on digital ID systems in particular: they have immense potential to improve delivery of social services, especially for people who currently lack legal identity, but they are also vulnerable to abuse. As digital ID becomes more prevalent, we must emphasise principles for its fair and effective use. […]

Human rights and human agency

[…] Consensus is also emerging that more needs to be done to safeguard the human right to privacy: individuals often have little or no meaningful understanding of the implications of providing their personal data in return for digital services. We believe companies, governments and civil society should agree to clear and transparent standards that will enable greater interoperability of data in ways that protect privacy while enabling data to flow for commercial, research and government purposes, and supporting innovation to achieve the SDGs. Such standards should prevent data collection going beyond intended use, limit re-identification of individuals via datasets, and give individuals meaningful control over how their personal data is shared. […]

Full text of the report

1. Information and communication technology for development

1.2. Enabling environment

• 29. We recognize the importance of the free flow of information and knowledge, as the amount of information distributed worldwide grows and the role of communication becomes all the more important. We acknowledge that the mainstreaming of information and communications technologies in school curricula, open access to data, the fostering of competition, the creation of transparent, predictable, independent and non-discriminatory regulatory and legal systems, proportionate taxation and licensing fees, access to finance, facilitation of public- private partnerships, multi-stakeholder cooperation, national and regional broadband strategies, efficient allocation of the radio frequency spectrum, infrastructure- sharing models, community-based approaches and public access facilities have in many countries facilitated significant gains in connectivity and sustainable development.

2. Human rights in the information society

• 46. We recall General Assembly resolution 69/166 and, in this context, emphasize that no person shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, consistent with countries’ obligations under international human rights law. Accordingly, we call upon all States to review their procedures, practices and legislation regarding the surveillance of communications, as well as their interception and collection of personal data, including mass surveillance, with a view to upholding the right to privacy as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights for States that are party to the Covenant, by ensuring the full and effective implementation of all their obligations under international human rights law.

Full text of the resolution

• 39. We seek to build confidence and security in the use of ICTs by strengthening the trust framework. We reaffirm the necessity to further promote, develop and implement in cooperation with all stakeholders a global culture of cybersecurity, as outlined in UNGA Resolution 57/239 and other relevant regional frameworks. This culture requires national action and increased international cooperation to strengthen security while enhancing the protection of personal information, privacy and data. Continued development of the culture of cybersecurity should enhance access and trade and must take into account the level of social and economic development of each country and respect the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society.
• 42. We reaffirm our commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge. We affirm that measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Declaration of Principles.
• 46. We call upon all stakeholders to ensure respect for privacy and the protection of personal information and data, whether via adoption of legislation, the implementation of collaborative frameworks, best practices and self-regulatory and technological measures by business and users. We encourage all stakeholders, in particular governments, to reaffirm the right of individuals to access information according to the Geneva Declaration of Principles and other mutually agreed relevant international instruments, and to coordinate internationally as appropriate.
• 93. We seek to digitize our historical data and cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations. We encourage effective information management policies in the public and private sectors, including the use of standards-based digital archiving and innovative solutions to overcome technological obsolescence, as a means to ensure the long-term preservation of, and continued access to, information.

Full text of the Agenda

• n/a

Full text of the Commitment

C5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs

12. Confidence and security are among the main pillars of the Information Society.

• a. Promote cooperation among the governments at the United Nations and with all stakeholders at other appropriate fora to enhance user confidence, build trust, and protect both data and network integrity; consider existing and potential threats to ICTs; and address other information security and network security issues.
• c. Governments, and other stakeholders, should actively promote user education and awareness about online privacy and the means of protecting privacy.
• f. Further strengthen the trust and security framework with complementary and mutually reinforcing initiatives in the fields of security in the use of ICTs, with initiatives or guidelines with respect to rights to privacy, data and consumer protection.

C6. Enabling environment

13. To maximize the social, economic and environmental benefits of the Information Society, governments need to create a trustworthy, transparent and non-discriminatory legal, regulatory and policy environment. Actions include:

• i. Governments and stakeholders should actively promote user education and awareness about online privacy and the means of protecting privacy.

C7. ICT applications: benefits in all aspects of life

18. E-health

• d. Promote the development of international standards for the exchange of health data, taking due account of privacy concerns.

C10. Ethical dimensons of the Information Society

25. The Information Society should be subject to universally held values and promote the common good and to prevent abusive uses of ICTs.

• c. All actors in the Information Society should promote the common good, protect privacy and personal data and take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against abusive uses of ICTs such as illegal and other acts motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, hatred, violence, all forms of child abuse, including paedophilia and child pornography, and trafficking in, and exploitation of, human beings.

Full text of the Plan of Action

B. An Information Society for All: Key Principles

5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs

• 35. Strengthening the trust framework, including information security and network security, authentication, privacy and consumer protection, is a prerequisite for the development of the Information Society and for building confidence among users of ICTs. A global culture of cyber-security needs to be promoted, developed and implemented in cooperation with all stakeholders and international expert bodies. These efforts should be supported by increased international cooperation. Within this global culture of cyber-security, it is important to enhance security and to ensure the protection of data and privacy, while enhancing access and trade. In addition, it must take into account the level of social and economic development of each country and respect the development-oriented aspects of the Information Society.

10. Ethical dimensions of the Information Society

• 58. The use of ICTs and content creation should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms of others, including personal privacy, and the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion in conformity with relevant international instruments.

Full text of the Declaration

• Recalling the vision of a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented information society, where everyone can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge, enabling individuals, communities and peoples to achieve their full potential in promoting their sustainable development and improving their q uality of life, premised on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and respecting fully and upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
• Reaffirming that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, and emphasizing that progress towards the vision of the World Summit on the Information Society should be considered not only as a function of economic development and the spreading of information and communications technologies but also as a function of progress with respect to the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Full text of the resolution

Note: The UN General Assembly has been adopting resolutions on ICT for (sustainable) development on an almost yearly basis since 2002.

• 35. In 2023, we will commemorate the seventy fifth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and 30 years since the adoption of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action on human rights. As this milestone nears, the time has come to take stock, rejuvenate our shared values and update our thinking on human rights. Consideration should, for instance, be given to updating or clarifying our application of human rights frameworks and standards to address frontier issues and prevent harms in the digital or technology spaces, including in relation to freedom of speech, hate speech and harassment, privacy, the “right to be forgotten” and neuro-technology. 
• 93. […] Furthermore, building on the recommendations of the road map for digital cooperation (see A/74/821), the United Nations, Governments, the private sector and civil society could come together as a multi-stakeholder digital technology track in preparation for a Summit of the Future to agree on a Global Digital Compact. This would outline shared principles for an open, free and secure digital future for all. Complex digital issues that could be addressed may include: reaffirming the fundamental commitment to connecting the unconnected; avoiding fragmentation of the Internet; providing people with options as to how their data is used; application of human rights online; and promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content. More broadly, the Compact could also promote regulation of artificial intelligence to ensure that this is aligned with shared global values.

Full text of the report

C. Human rights and human agency

• 38. Digital technologies provide new means to advocate, defend and exercise human rights, but they can also be used to suppress, limit and violate human rights. As the Panel noted, existing human rights treaties were signed in a pre-digital era. In today’s world, where online violations can lead to offline abuses, the Internet cannot be an ungoverned or ungovernable space – human rights exist online as they do offline and have to be respected in full (see A/70/174). 
• 39. Effective due diligence is required to ensure that technology products, policies, practices and terms of service comply with human rights principles and standards. To that end, the Secretary-General, in his call to action for human rights, addresses new frontiers of technology and human rights, emphasizing that new technologies are too often used for surveillance, repression, censorship and online harassment, especially of vulnerable people and human rights defenders, and calling for these technologies to be used to provide new means to advocate, defend and exercise rights. Greater efforts are needed to develop further guidance on how human rights standards apply in the digital age, including through the Human Rights Council, and to build upon work by the special procedures and treaty bodies, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and diverse stakeholders.
• 40. There remains a need to address possible protection gaps created by constantly evolving digital technologies. In that regard, the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide a useful tool.
• 41. Blanket Internet shutdowns and generic blocking and filtering of services are considered by United Nations human rights mechanisms to be in violation of international human rights law. In addition to appropriate law enforcement, other means need to be found through consultation between Governments, industry and civil society, in accordance with international human rights law, including to deal with the spread of disinformation and, in particular, harmful, life-threatening content while avoiding disruptive blanket Internet shutdowns. 
• 42. Of particular concern are the areas outlined below, in which technologies can be, and increasingly are, used to violate and erode human rights, deepen inequalities and exacerbate existing discrimination, especially of people who are already vulnerable or left behind.

Data protection and privacy

• 43. Data protection has failed to keep up with advances in hacking and espionage. In 2019, more than 7,000 data breaches were recorded, exposing more than 15 billion records. 
• 44. Effective personal data protection and the protection of the right to privacy in line with internationally agreed standards are imperative. Human rights-based domestic laws and practices for the protection of data privacy, including enforcement mechanisms such as access to judicial review, or fully independent and well-resourced data protection authorities, are needed to address the use of data by private companies or Governments. 
• 45. The importance of protecting the right to privacy in the digital space and to take clear actions to do so is fundamental for private sector actors. More systemically, the current financing model for social media platforms effectively encourages the collection of personal data for commercial purposes, so that content and advertising can be more effectively tailored to individuals’ consumption patterns. Changes to this model will need to be considered in order to reverse the trend.

Digital identity

• 46. For over 1 billion individuals worldwide, their lack of recognized identification bars them from having access to basic goods and services. A “good” digital identity that preserves people’s privacy and control over their information can empower them to gain access to these much-needed services. Initiatives such as Identification for Development and the United Nations Legal Identity Task Force can help countries to realize the transformative potential of digital identification systems. 
• 47. It is nonetheless problematic that some digital identity programmes have been designed outside the frameworks of privacy and data protection. If digital identity is to become a trusted force for good and used for everyone, it has to be built upon a foundation of user agency and choice, informed consent, recognition of multiple forms of identity, space for anonymity and respect for privacy, ensuring that there is transparency when an individual’s data are used by government and other entities. 
• 48. The adoption of safeguards related to digital identity is critical for Governments and the United Nations as they strive to realize its full utility and potential while building trust in its use. This includes, for instance, efforts such as decentralized data storage, identification and authentication, encrypted communications and considering the incorporation of “privacy by design” principles. 

Surveillance technologies, including facial recognition

• 49. Researchers have observed that surveillance technologies have, in many situations, allowed for serious breaches of privacy, by Governments, individuals and the private sector. Surveillance technologies, where used in accordance with applicable international human rights law, can be effective law enforcement tools. However, there are reports of targeted communications surveillance and facial recognition software that could result in human rights violations and lead to arbitrary arrests or detentions and violation of the right to peaceful protest. These technologies may also misidentify certain minority groups and cement existing social biases, leading to situations in which marginalized people and members of minority communities may be more likely to be identified as the wrong gender or be discriminated against, for instance, in being denied loans. 
• 50. It is critical that legislation and safeguards are in place to protect people from unlawful or unnecessary surveillance, including any arbitrary surveillance that may be carried out by State actors in cyberspace, as well as in the physical world. Any such policies have to be fully in line with countries’ human rights obligations. This is relevant also for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic: a careful and considered approach is required to ensure that responses are aligned with human rights obligations. 

Online harassment and violence and the need for content governance

• 51. In 2018, it was reported that women and girls were 27 times more likely to be harassed online than men. In addition to the impacts on health and dignity, the threat of online abuse is leading many women to “log off” of social media, perpetuating and entrenching inequalities in the space. They are joined by human rights defenders, environmental defenders, journalists, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, young people, religious groups and civil society organizers in facing persistent harassment and violence online, including death threats, threats of sexual and gender-based violence and defamation and disinformation campaigns. Harassment and hate speech online can lead to physical violence offline. Increased digitalization owing to the current global health crisis has increased such threats. 
• 52. The Internet has to provide a safe space for information-sharing, education, expression, mobilization and participation. Addressing the legitimate concerns underlying the need for encryption without undermining legitimate law enforcement objectives is possible, along with human rights-based laws and approaches to address illegal and harmful online content. Member States and businesses, including cross-industry initiatives, should advocate transparent and accountable content governance frameworks that protect freedom of expression, avoid incentives for overly restrictive moderation practices and protect the most vulnerable. 

IV. Concluding observations and way forward

Digital human rights

• 86. To address the challenges and opportunities of protecting and advancing human rights, human dignity and human agency in a digitally interdependent age, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights will develop system-wide guidance on human rights due diligence and impact assessments in the use of new technologies, including through engagement with civil society, external experts and those most vulnerable and affected.
• 87. I also call upon Member States to place human rights at the centre of regulatory frameworks and legislation on the development and use of digital technologies. In a similar vein, I call upon technology leaders urgently and publicly to acknowledge the importance of protecting the right to privacy and other human rights in the digital space and take clear, company-specific actions to do so.

Full text of the Roadmap

3. Individuals, societies and digital technologies

The ultimate purpose of digital technology should always be to improve human welfare. Beyond the socio-economic aspects discussed in the previous chapter, digital technologies have proved that they can connect individuals across cultural and geographic barriers, increasing understanding and potentially helping societies to become more peaceful and cohesive. 

However, this is only part of the story. There are also many examples of digital technologies being used to violate rights, undermine privacy, polarise societies and incite violence. 

The questions raised are new, complex and pressing. What are the responsibilities of social media companies, governments and individual users? Who is accountable when data can move across the world in an instant? How can varied stakeholders, in nations with diverse cultural and historical traditions, cooperate to ensure that digital technologies do not weaken human rights but strengthen them? 

3.1. Human rights and human agency

Many of the most important documents that codify human rights were written before the age of digital interdependence. They include the Universal Declaration on Human Rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women; and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 

The rights these treaties and conventions codify apply in full in the digital age – and often with fresh urgency. 

Digital technologies are widely used to advocate for, defend and exercise human rights – but also to violate them. Social media, for example, has provided powerful new ways to exercise the rights to free expression and association, and to document rights violations. It is also used to violate rights by spreading lies that incite hatred and foment violence, often at terrible speed and with the cloak of anonymity. 

The most outrageous cases make the headlines. The live streaming of mass shootings in New Zealand. Incitement of violence against an ethnic minority in Myanmar. The #gamergate scandal, in which women working in video games were threatened with rape. The suicides of a British teenager who had viewed self-harm content on social media and an Indian man bullied after posting videos of himself dressed as a woman.

But these are manifestations of a problem that runs wide and deep: one survey of UK adult internet users found that 40 percent of 16-24 year-olds have reported some form of harmful online content, with examples ranging from racism to harassment and child abuse. Children are at particular risk: almost a third of under-18s report having recently been exposed to “violent or hateful contact or behaviour online”. Elderly people are also more prone to online fraud and misinformation. 

Governments have increasingly sought to cut off social media in febrile situations – such as after a terrorist attack – when the risks of rapidly spreading misinformation are especially high. But denying access to the internet can also be part of a sustained government policy that itself violates citizens’ rights, including by depriving people of access to information. Across the globe, governments directed 188 separate internet shutdowns in 2018, up from 108 in 2017.

Protecting human rights in the digital age

Universal human rights apply equally online as offline – freedom of expression and assembly, for example, are no less important in cyberspace than in the town square. That said, in many cases it is far from obvious how human rights laws and treaties drafted in a pre-digital era should be applied in the digital age.

There is an urgent need to examine how time-honoured human rights frameworks and conventions – and the obligations that flow from those commitments – can guide actions and policies relating to digital cooperation and digital technology. The Panel’s Recommendation 3A urges the UN Secretary-General to begin a process that invites views from all stakeholders on how human rights can be meaningfully applied to ensure that no gaps in protection are caused by new and emerging digital technologies. 

Such a process could draw inspiration from many recent national and global efforts to apply human rights for the digital age. Illustrative examples include: 

• India’s Supreme Court has issued a judgement defining what the right to privacy means in the digital context.
• Nigeria’s draft Digital Rights and Freedom Bill tries to apply international human rights law to national digital realities.
• The Global Compact and UNICEF have developed guidance on how businesses should approach children’s rights in the digital age.
• UNESCO has used its Rights, Openness, Access and Multi-stakeholder governance (ROAM) framework to discuss AI’s implications for rights including freedom of expression, privacy, equality and participation in public life.
• The Council of Europe has developed recommendations and guidelines, and the European Court of Human Rights has produced case law, interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights in the digital realm.

We must collectively ensure that advances in technology are not used to erode human rights or avoid accountability. Human rights defenders should not be targeted for their use of digital media. International mechanisms for human rights reporting by states should better incorporate the digital dimension.

In the digital age, the role of the private sector in human rights is becoming increasingly pronounced. As digital technologies and digital services reach scale so quickly, decisions taken by private companies are increasingly affecting millions of people across national borders. 

The roles of government and business are described in the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Though not binding, they were unanimously endorsed by the Human Rights Council and the UN General Assembly. They affirm that while states have the duty to protect rights and provide remedies, businesses also have a responsibility to respect human rights, evaluate risk and assess the human rights impact of their actions.

There is now a critical need for clearer guidance about what should be expected on human rights from private companies as they develop and deploy digital technologies. The need is especially pressing for social media companies, which is why our Recommendation 3B calls for them to put in place procedures, staff and better ways of working with civil society and human rights defenders to prevent or quickly redress violations.

We heard from one interviewee that companies can struggle to understand local context quickly enough to respond effectively in fast-developing conflict situations and may welcome UN or other expert insight in helping them assess concerns being raised by local actors. One potential venue for information sharing is the UN Forum on Business and Human Rights, through which the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva hosts regular discussions among the private sector and civil society.

Civil society organisations would like to go beyond information sharing and use such forums to identify patterns of violations and hold the private sector to account. Governments also are becoming less willing to accept a hands-off regulatory approach: in the UK, for example, legislators are exploring how existing legal principles such as “duty of care” could be applied to social media firms.

As any new technology is developed, we should ask how it might inadvertently create new ways of violating rights – especially of people who are already often marginalised or discriminated against. Women, for example, experience higher levels of online harassment than men. The development of personal care robots is raising questions about the rights of elderly people to dignity, privacy and agency.

The rights of children need especially acute attention. Children go online at ever younger ages, and under-18s make up one-third of all internet users. They are most vulnerable to online bullying and sexual exploitation. Digital technologies should promote the best interests of children and respect their agency to articulate their needs, in accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. 

Online services and apps used by children should be subject to strict design and data consent standards. Notable examples include the American Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule of 2013 and the draft Age Appropriate Design Code announced by the UK Information Commissioner in 2019, which defines standards for apps, games and many other digital services even if they are not intended for children.

Human dignity, agency and choice

We are delegating more and more decisions to intelligent systems, from how to get to work to what to eat for dinner.

This can improve our lives, by freeing up time for activities we find more important. But it is also forcing us to rethink our understandings of human dignity and agency, as algorithms are increasingly sophisticated at manipulating our choices – for example, to keep our attention glued to a screen.

It is also becoming apparent that ‘intelligent’ systems can reinforce discrimination. Many algorithms have been shown to reflect the biases of their creators. This is just one reason why employment in the technology sector needs to be more diverse – as noted in Recommendation 1C, which calls for improving gender equality. Gaps in the data on which algorithms are trained can likewise automate existing patterns of discrimination, as machine learning systems are only as good as the data that is fed to them. 

Often the discrimination is too subtle to notice, but the real-life consequences can be profound when AI systems are used to make decisions such as who is eligible for home loans or public services such as health care. The harm caused can be complicated to redress. A growing number of initiatives, such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)’s Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, are seeking to define how developers of artificial intelligence should address these and similar problems.

Other initiatives are looking at questions of human responsibility and legal accountability – a complex and rapidly-changing area.  Legal systems assume that decisions can be traced back to people. Autonomous intelligent systems raise the danger that humans could evade responsibility for decisions made or actions taken by technology they designed, trained, adapted or deployed. In any given case, legal liability might ultimately rest with the people who developed the technology, the people who chose the data on which to train the technology, and/or the people who chose to deploy the technology in a given situation. 

These questions come into sharpest focus with lethal autonomous weapons systems – machines that can autonomously select targets and kill. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called for a ban on machines with the power and discretion to take lives without human involvement, a position which this Panel supports.

The Panel supports, as stated in Recommendation 3C, the emerging global consensus that autonomous intelligent systems be designed so that their decisions can be explained, and humans remain accountable. These systems demand the highest standards of ethics and engineering. They should be used with extreme caution to make decisions affecting people’s social or economic opportunities or rights, and individuals should have meaningful opportunity to appeal. Life and death decisions should not be delegated to machines.

Recommendations

Human rights and human agency

3A: Given that human rights apply fully in the digital world, we urge the UN Secretary-General to institute an agencies-wide review of how existing international human rights accords and standards apply to new and emerging digital technologies. Civil society, governments, the private sector and the public should be invited to submit their views on how to apply existing human rights instruments in the digital age in a proactive and transparent process. 

3B: In the face of growing threats to human rights and safety, including those of children, we call on social media enterprises to work with governments, international and local civil society organisations and human rights experts around the world to fully understand and respond to concerns about existing or potential human rights violations.

3C: We believe that autonomous intelligent systems should be designed in ways that enable their decisions to be explained and humans to be accountable for their use. Audits and certification schemes should monitor compliance of AI systems with engineering and ethical standards, which should be developed using multi-stakeholder and multilateral approaches. Life and death decisions should not be delegated to machines. We call for enhanced digital cooperation with multiple stakeholders to think through the design and application of these standards and principles such as transparency and non-bias in autonomous intelligent systems in different social settings. 

As discussed in Chapter 3, while human rights apply online as well as offline, technology presents challenges that were not foreseen when many foundational human rights accords were created. National laws and regulations must prevent advances in technology being used to erode human rights or avoid accountability. We need to cooperate to ensure that digital technologies advance the inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of every human. 

Applying human rights in the digital age requires better coordination and communication between governments, technology companies, civil society and other stakeholders. Companies have often reacted slowly and inadequately to learning that their technologies are being deployed in ways that undermine human rights. We need more forward-looking efforts to identify and mitigate risks in advance: companies should consult with governments, civil society and academia to assess the potential human rights impact of the digital technologies they are developing. From risk assessment to ongoing due diligence and responsiveness to sudden events, it should be clarified what society can reasonably expect from each stakeholder, including technology firms. 

In some areas there is consensus that much more needs to be done – notably, companies providing social media services need to do more to prevent the dissemination of hatred and incitement of violence, and companies providing online services and apps used by children need to do more to ensure appropriate design and meaningful data consent.

Consensus is also emerging that more needs to be done to safeguard the human right to privacy: individuals often have little or no meaningful understanding of the implications of providing their personal data in return for digital services. We believe companies, governments and civil society should agree to clear and transparent standards that will enable greater interoperability of data in ways that protect privacy while enabling data to flow for commercial, research and government purposes, and supporting innovation to achieve the SDGs. Such standards should prevent data collection going beyond intended use, limit re-identification of individuals via datasets, and give individuals meaningful control over how their personal data is shared. 

We also emphasise our belief that autonomous intelligent systems should be designed in ways that enable their decisions to be explained and humans to be held to account for their use. Audits and certification schemes should monitor compliance of AI systems with engineering and ethical standards. Humans should never delegate life and death decisions to machines.

Full text of the report

2. Human rights in the information society

• 41. We reaffirm the commitment set out in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and the Tunis Commitment to the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of the World Conference on Human Rights. We also reaffirm that democracy, sustainable development and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as good governance at all levels, are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. We resolve to strengthen respect for the rule of law in international, as in national, affairs.
• 42. We recognize that human rights have been central to the vision of the World Summit on the Information Society and that information and communications technologies have shown their potential to strengthen the exercise of human rights, enabling access to information, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association.
• 43. We reaffirm, moreover, as an essential foundation of the information society and as recognized in Human Rights Council resolution 26/13 of 26 June 2014 and General Assembly resolution 69/166 of 18 December 2014, that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online.
• 44. We note with concern, however, that there are serious threats to freedom of expression and plurality of information, and we call for the protection of journalists, media workers and civil society space. We call upon States to take all appropriate measures necessary to ensure the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the right to peaceful assembly and association and the right not to be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, in accordance with their human rights obligations.
• 45. We reaffirm our commitment to article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in which it is stated that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and that this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. We also recall the commitments made under article 19 by States that are party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We underscore the need to respect the independence of media. We believe that communication is a fundamental social process, a basic human need and the foundation of all social organization, and is therefore central to the information society. Everyone, everywhere should have the opportunity to participate, and no one should be excluded from the benefits that the information society offers.
• 46. We recall General Assembly resolution 69/166 and, in this context, emphasize that no person shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, consistent with countries’ obligations under international human rights law. Accordingly, we call upon all States to review their procedures, practices and legislation regarding the surveillance of communications, as well as their interception and collection of personal data, including mass surveillance, with a view to upholding the right to privacy as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights for States that are party to the Covenant, by ensuring the full and effective implementation of all their obligations under international human rights law.
• 47. We reaffirm our commitment to the provisions in article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his or her personality is possible and that, in the exercise of his or her rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. In this way, we shall promote an information society in which human dignity is respected.

Full text of the resolution

• 42. We reaffirm our commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information, in particular, for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge. We affirm that measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must protect and respect the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Declaration of Principles.
• 43. We reiterate our commitments to the positive uses of the Internet and other ICTs and to take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against abusive uses of ICTs as mentioned under the Ethical Dimensions of the Information Society of the Geneva Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action.
• 44. We also underline the importance of countering terrorism in all its forms and manifestations on the Internet, while respecting human rights and in compliance with other obligations under international law, as outlined in UNGA A/60/L.1 with reference to Article 85 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome.
• […]
• 46. We call upon all stakeholders to ensure respect for privacy and the protection of personal information and data, whether via adoption of legislation, the implementation of collaborative frameworks, best practices and self-regulatory and technological measures by business and users. We encourage all stakeholders, in particular governments, to reaffirm the right of individuals to access information according to the Geneva Declaration of Principles and other mutually agreed relevant international instruments, and to coordinate internationally as appropriate.
• […]
• 90. We reaffirm our commitment to providing equitable access to information and knowledge for all, recognizing the role of ICTs for economic growth and development. We are committed to working towards achieving the indicative targets, set out in the Geneva Plan of Action, that serve as global references for improving connectivity and universal, ubiquitous, equitable, non-discriminatory and affordable access to, and use of, ICTs, considering different national circumstances, to be achieved by 2015, and to using ICTs, as a tool to achieve the internationally agreed development goals and objectives, including the Millennium Development Goals, by:
  • […] o. reaffirming the independence, pluralism and diversity of media, and freedom of information including through, as appropriate, the development of domestic legislation, we reiterate our call for the responsible use and treatment of information by the media in accordance with the highest ethical and professional standards. We reaffirm the necessity of reducing international imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical resources and the development of human skills. These reaffirmations are made with reference to Geneva Declaration of Principles paragraphs 55 to 59. […]

Full text of the Agenda

• 3. We reaffirm the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vienna Declaration. We also reaffirm that democracy, sustainable development, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as good governance at all levels are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. We further resolve to strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs.
• 4. We reaffirm paragraphs 4, 5 and 55 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles. We recognize that freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas, and knowledge, are essential for the Information Society and beneficial to development.

Full text of the Commitment

C9. Media

24. The media — in their various forms and with a diversity of ownership—as an actor, have an essential role in the development of the Information Society and are recognized as an important contributor to freedom of expression and plurality of information.

• a. Encourage the media – print and broadcast as well as new media – to continue to play an important role in the Information Society.
• b. Encourage the development of domestic legislation that guarantees the independence and plurality of the media.
• c. Take appropriate measures – consistent with freedom of expression – to combat illegal and harmful content in media content.
• d. Encourage media professionals in developed countries to establish partnerships and networks with the media in developing ones, especially in the field of training.
• e. Promote balanced and diverse portrayals of women and men by the media.
• f. Reduce international imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical resources and the development of human skills, taking full advantage of ICT tools in this regard.
• g. Encourage traditional media to bridge the knowledge divide and to facilitate the flow of cultural content, particularly in rural areas.

C10. Ethical dimensions of the information society

25. The Information Society should be subject to universally held values and promote the common good and to prevent abusive uses of ICTs.
    • a. Take steps to promote respect for peace and to uphold the fundamental values of freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, shared responsibility, and respect for nature.
    • b. All stakeholders should increase their awareness of the ethical dimension of their use of ICTs.
    • c. All actors in the Information Society should promote the common good, protect privacy and personal data and take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against abusive uses of ICTs such as illegal and other acts motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, hatred, violence, all forms of child abuse, including paedophilia and child pornography, and trafficking in, and exploitation of, human beings.
    • d. Invite relevant stakeholders, especially the academia, to continue research on ethical dimensions of ICTs.

Full text of the Plan of Action

A. Our Common Vision of the Information Society

3. We reaffirm the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, as enshrined in the Vienna Declaration. We also reaffirm that democracy, sustainable development, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as good governance at all levels are interdependent and mutually reinforcing. We further resolve to strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs.

4. We reaffirm, as an essential foundation of the Information Society, and as outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; that this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Communication is a fundamental social process, a basic human need and the foundation of all social organization. It is central to the Information Society. Everyone, everywhere should have the
opportunity to participate and no one should be excluded from the benefits the Information Society offers.

5. We further reaffirm our commitment to the provisions of Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of their personality is possible, and that, in the exercise of their rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. In this way, we shall promote an Information Society where human dignity is respected.

11. We are committed to realizing our common vision of the Information Society for ourselves and for future generations. We recognize that young people are the future workforce and leading creators and earliest adopters of ICTs. They must therefore be empowered as learners, developers, contributors, entrepreneurs and decision-makers. We must focus especially on young people who have not yet been able to benefit fully from the opportunities provided by ICTs. We are also committed to ensuring that the development of ICT applications and operation of services respects the rights of children as well as their protection and well-being.

18. Nothing in this Declaration shall be construed as impairing, contradicting, restricting or derogating from the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, any other international instrument or national laws adopted in furtherance of these instruments.

10. Ethical dimensions of the Information Society

56. The Information Society should respect peace and uphold the fundamental values of freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, shared responsibility, and respect for nature.
57. We acknowledge the importance of ethics for the Information Society, which should foster justice, and the dignity and worth of the human person. The widest possible protection should be accorded to the family and to enable it to play its crucial role in society.
58. The use of ICTs and content creation should respect human rights and fundamental freedoms of others, including personal privacy, and the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion in conformity with relevant international instruments.
59. All actors in the Information Society should take appropriate actions and preventive measures, as determined by law, against abusive uses of ICTs, such as illegal and other acts motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance, hatred, violence, all forms of child abuse, including paedophilia and child pornography, and trafficking in, and exploitation of, human beings.

Full text of the Declaration