Uncategorized

Summary

This discussion focused on the role of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in advancing ICT infrastructure development, particularly in the context of WSIS Action Line C2. The session brought together experts from academia, government regulators, industry, and international organizations to explore how AI can bridge digital divides and enhance connectivity planning.

Archana Gulati from ITU-D opened by emphasizing AI’s potential to accelerate reliable and inclusive ICT infrastructure development, particularly for underserved communities. She highlighted AI’s capabilities in smart infrastructure planning, operational cost reduction, and network optimization while stressing the need for ethical and equitable implementation frameworks. Renata Figueiredo from Brazil’s telecommunications regulator Anatel shared her country’s approach to AI governance, including regulatory impact assessments and partnerships with academic institutions to ensure responsible AI deployment in telecom services.

Industry representative Gonzalo Suardiaz from Ericsson addressed a critical challenge in AI implementation: the “garbage in, garbage out” problem, where poor data quality leads to unreliable results. He outlined strategies for ensuring data quality in connectivity planning platforms, including standardization, governance frameworks, and validation through machine learning. Sandor Farkas from ITU demonstrated practical AI applications in infrastructure mapping, specifically using computer vision to detect cell towers in satellite imagery for coverage analysis.

From an academic perspective, Aleksandra Jastrzebska warned against over-reliance on AI tools, citing research showing cognitive decline when students depend too heavily on AI for thinking tasks. She emphasized that AI should challenge rather than replace human minds. Joshua Ku from GitHub concluded by advocating for open-source approaches to AI development, explaining how the ITU has embraced open-source practices to accelerate innovation through community collaboration. The discussion reinforced that while AI offers powerful tools for infrastructure development, success requires clean data, ethical frameworks, human oversight, and collaborative partnerships across sectors.

Keypoints

## Overall Purpose/Goal

This discussion was a panel session focused on the role of emerging technologies and artificial intelligence in advancing Action Line C2 within the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) framework. The session aimed to explore how AI can be leveraged to develop reliable, inclusive, and sustainable ICT infrastructure, particularly for underserved and remote communities, while addressing associated challenges and best practices.

## Major Discussion Points

– **AI as an Infrastructure Planning Tool**: Multiple speakers emphasized AI’s potential to optimize ICT infrastructure deployment through smart planning, analyzing geospatial and demographic data, enabling dynamic spectrum allocation, and facilitating predictive maintenance. The ITU’s Connectivity Planning Platform (CPP) was highlighted as a practical example of AI-driven infrastructure planning.

– **Data Quality and the “Garbage In, Garbage Out” Problem**: A significant focus was placed on the critical importance of clean, standardized, and well-governed data for AI systems. Speakers discussed the need for data standards, governance frameworks, validation mechanisms, and crowdsourcing feedback to ensure AI tools provide accurate and reliable results for infrastructure planning.

– **Ethical AI Implementation and Regulatory Frameworks**: The discussion covered the necessity of inclusive policy frameworks to ensure ethical and equitable AI deployment. Brazil’s regulatory approach through Anatel was presented as a case study, emphasizing transparency, privacy protection, cybersecurity, and alignment with international standards like UNESCO’s AI ethics recommendations.

– **Open Source as a Catalyst for Innovation**: The session explored how open source development can accelerate AI and infrastructure solutions by leveraging global developer communities. GitHub’s collaboration with ITU was presented as an example of how organizations can embrace open source while maintaining security and managing community contributions.

– **Academic Perspectives on AI Limitations**: A critical examination of AI’s impact on learning and research was presented, highlighting concerns about “cognitive debt” when humans over-rely on AI tools. This included examples of AI-generated academic papers and emphasized that AI should augment rather than replace human thinking and decision-making.

## Overall Tone

The discussion maintained a professional and collaborative tone throughout, with speakers presenting both opportunities and challenges in a balanced manner. The tone was optimistic about AI’s potential while remaining realistic about implementation challenges. There was a strong emphasis on inclusivity, ethical considerations, and the importance of human-centered approaches. The session fostered knowledge-sharing among diverse stakeholders (government, academia, industry, and international organizations) and maintained a forward-looking perspective focused on practical solutions and partnerships.

Speakers

– **Archana G. Gulati**: Speaking on behalf of Dr. Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, Director of the Telecommunications Development Bureau at ITU-D

– **Gonzalo Suardiaz**: Program manager within digital inclusion and digital education at Ericsson, working on the Connect2Learn program and connectivity planning platform (CPP), 17 years experience in mobile networks from 2G to 5G

– **Renata Figueiredo Santoyo**: Regulation expert in international affairs at Anatel (Brazilian telecommunications regulator)

– **Sandor Farkas**: Expert on geospatial artificial intelligence at ITU, specializing in AI tools for ICT infrastructure mapping

– **Aleksandra Jastrzebska**: Junior mapping expert at ITU, recent graduate from Universitat Jaume I, academic perspective on AI and emerging technologies, researcher in generative AI for map generation

– **Joshua Ku**: Senior solution architect at GitHub, expert on open source software development and community management

**Additional speakers:**

– **Walid Mahmoudli**: Head of FNS (Future Networks and Spectrum Division) within BDT – mentioned as participating remotely but connection could not be established

# Report: AI and Emerging Technologies in ICT Infrastructure Development – WSIS Action Line C2 Panel Discussion

## Executive Summary

This panel discussion examined the role of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in advancing ICT infrastructure development under WSIS Action Line C2. The session brought together experts from ITU-D, industry, national regulators, and the open-source community to explore AI’s potential in bridging digital divides while addressing implementation challenges including data quality, ethical deployment, and human oversight requirements.

A planned remote presentation by Walid Mahmoudli from ITU-D’s Future Networks and Spectrum Division could not proceed due to technical connectivity issues. The session was moderated by Gonzalo Suardiaz from Ericsson, who also presented industry perspectives alongside his moderating role.

## Opening Framework: AI as Infrastructure Bridge

**Archana G. Gulati**, representing Dr. Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava from ITU-D, opened the discussion by positioning AI as a transformative tool for ICT infrastructure development. She emphasized that “AI should be a bridge, not a barrier, to inclusive digital infrastructure,” establishing the session’s focus on equitable technology deployment.

Gulati outlined AI’s applications across the infrastructure lifecycle, including smart site selection for mobile towers, dynamic spectrum allocation, predictive maintenance, and real-time network monitoring. She highlighted AI’s potential to reduce operational costs while enhancing network efficiency, making infrastructure deployment more economically viable in underserved areas.

The ITU-D representative stressed that AI deployment must be “rights-based, secure and human-centric with multi-stakeholder engagement.” She emphasized the need for inclusive policy frameworks to ensure ethical AI use and address concerns about algorithmic bias and transparency. Gulati concluded by highlighting the importance of human capacity-building and AI literacy for public authorities.

## Industry Perspective: Data Quality as Foundation

**Gonzalo Suardiaz** from Ericsson, serving as both moderator and industry representative, emphasized the critical importance of data quality in AI implementation. Drawing from his 17 years of experience in mobile networks from 2G to 5G, he introduced the “garbage in, garbage out” (GIGO) principle as fundamental to AI success.

“No matter how good your algorithms, no matter how good your tools or your models are, you will get bad results if the input data is bad,” Suardiaz stated, identifying data quality as the primary challenge in AI deployment for infrastructure planning.

He outlined Ericsson’s approach through their Connect2Learn programme and connectivity planning platform (CPP), emphasizing the need for data standards and schemas across all infrastructure data types. Suardiaz described how AI can be used to validate data quality by cross-referencing different datasets and identifying inconsistencies, while stressing the importance of robust data governance frameworks.

The Ericsson representative concluded that multi-stakeholder collaboration is essential for making AI meaningful beyond being merely a powerful tool.

## Regulatory Approach: Brazil’s AI Governance Framework

**Renata Figueiredo Santoyo** from Brazil’s telecommunications regulator Anatel presented the country’s approach to AI governance in telecommunications. She outlined Brazil’s regulatory impact assessment process for AI in telecom services, emphasizing alignment with UNESCO’s AI ethics recommendations and the recent BRICS declaration on AI governance.

Santoyo discussed how AI and 5G technologies increase network complexity and associated cybersecurity risks, requiring adaptive regulatory frameworks. She highlighted Anatel’s partnership with ITA university to examine AI’s impact on telecom regulation, cybersecurity, and consumer rights.

The Brazilian regulator emphasized that strong partnerships between regulators, academia, and the private sector are essential for responsible AI deployment while maintaining consumer protection and service quality standards.

## Technical Implementation: AI in Infrastructure Mapping

**Sandor Farkas**, ITU’s expert on geospatial artificial intelligence, demonstrated practical AI applications in ICT infrastructure mapping. His presentation focused on using YOLO11 object detection to identify cell towers in satellite imagery for coverage analysis and infrastructure planning.

Farkas explained the technical challenges of AI model training, including dataset preparation, labeling, and validation using precision and recall metrics. He discussed the trade-offs involved in balancing these metrics, noting that accepting false positives that can be post-validated may be preferable to missing actual infrastructure.

The ITU expert described ongoing work to extend AI object detection datasets and develop tools for smooth data pipeline implementation, emphasizing the iterative nature of AI development and the need for continuous improvement.

## Academic Perspective: Human-AI Interaction Concerns

**Aleksandra Jastrzebska**, a junior mapping expert at ITU, raised important concerns about AI’s impact on human cognitive development. She introduced the concept of “cognitive debt,” referencing MIT research that showed reduced memory retention when students relied heavily on ChatGPT compared to traditional learning methods.

Jastrzebska warned about AI-generated academic content potentially compromising scientific integrity without proper human oversight. She emphasized that “AI is calculating, not thinking – it processes data through mathematical operations rather than genuine understanding.”

Her key message was that “AI doesn’t need to replace our minds. It should challenge them,” advocating for humans to think “with and help of AI, but not letting it think for us.” This perspective on maintaining human intellectual agency resonated throughout the session.

## Open Source Innovation: Collaborative Development

**Joshua Ku** from GitHub concluded the panel by demonstrating how open-source approaches can accelerate AI and infrastructure solutions. He presented statistics showing 150 million developers contributing over 1 billion contributions annually to open-source projects.

Ku highlighted that even major technology companies like Google make their core products (such as Chrome) fully open source, challenging assumptions about competitive advantage and demonstrating how openness can accelerate innovation.

The GitHub representative discussed ITU’s partnership with GitHub to open-source software tools, outlining best practices including proper licensing, code preparation, security scanning, and community management. He emphasized how open-source communities can extend software capabilities beyond original visions through collective innovation.

## Key Themes and Consensus

Several important themes emerged from the discussion:

**Human-Centric AI**: All speakers agreed that AI should augment rather than replace human decision-making, requiring proper oversight and ethical frameworks.

**Data Quality Imperative**: Speakers consistently emphasized that high-quality, well-governed data is essential for effective AI systems.

**Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration**: Strong agreement emerged on the necessity of partnerships across government, academia, private sector, and civil society.

**Practical Implementation Focus**: The discussion balanced AI potential with realistic assessment of implementation challenges and prerequisites.

## Practical Applications Highlighted

The session featured several concrete AI applications:

– **Connectivity Planning Platform**: Ericsson’s AI-driven platform for connectivity planning, with MVP presentation scheduled for the GIGA Connectivity Forum and general availability planned for June 2026

– **Infrastructure Detection**: ITU’s use of YOLO11 for cell tower identification in satellite imagery

– **Regulatory Assessment**: Brazil’s systematic approach to AI impact assessment in telecommunications

– **Open Source Tools**: ITU-GitHub collaboration for developing and sharing infrastructure planning tools

## Conclusion

The panel discussion demonstrated a balanced understanding of AI’s role in ICT infrastructure development, combining technological optimism with practical wisdom about implementation challenges. The strong emphasis on data quality, human oversight, and multi-stakeholder collaboration provides a foundation for responsible AI deployment in infrastructure development.

The session successfully addressed WSIS Action Line C2 objectives by exploring how AI can accelerate progress toward universal connectivity while ensuring that technology serves human development goals. The integration of perspectives from international organizations, regulators, industry, and open-source communities created a comprehensive examination of both opportunities and challenges in AI-driven infrastructure development.

Most importantly, the discussion established that successful AI implementation requires not just technical excellence but also ethical frameworks, quality data governance, and collaborative partnerships to ensure AI serves as a bridge to inclusive digital infrastructure.

Archana G. Gulati: Distinguished guests, esteemed colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of Dr. Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, Director of the Telecommunications Development Bureau, it is my pleasure to address you and to set the scene for this important discussion. As you know, AI is a tool with the potential to accelerate the development of reliable, inclusive and sustainable ICT infrastructure. At ITU-D, we are especially excited about its potential to help deliver meaningful connectivity, especially in underserved and remote communities. We believe that AI can be used to support the implementation of the Kigali Action Plan and BDT strategic priority to bridge the digital infrastructure gap. AI enables smart infrastructure planning by analyzing geospatial, demographic and economic data so that we can optimize where and how to deploy connectivity solutions. AI can also help us to reduce operational costs and enhance network efficiency in both urban and rural settings through predictive analysis and automation. And AI can facilitate real-time monitoring and maintenance, increasing infrastructure resilience and service continuity in disaster-prone or hard-to-reach areas. We also believe that AI has a key role to play in network rollout planning. For example, by enabling smarter site selection for mobile towers or fiber routes, AI will facilitate dynamic spectrum allocation to increase capacity where it is most needed, and also energy-efficient network management. That is particularly important both for environmental, sustainability and rural power-constrained deployments. That is why we are keen to apply AI in various ITU-supported initiatives in partnerships with member states and private sector players, including pilot projects and toolkits. Ladies and gentlemen, while AI is a powerful tool indeed, we also need inclusive policy frameworks to ensure that its use is both ethical and equitable. Key considerations include bias and transparency in AI algorithms, as well as data governance and privacy, especially for vulnerable populations. It is also important to give due consideration to workforce deployment to ensure that those working for public authorities are AI literate. Above all, AI deployment must be rights-based, secure and human-centric, with policies shaped through multi-stakeholder engagement. In the same spirit, we must ensure that the adoption of AI in infrastructure does not leave anyone behind. That requires strong partnerships and human capacity-building efforts. This will include the ITU Academy platform, which promotes the sharing of information and education in an affordable manner, as well as partnerships with governments to define national digital strategies and with the private sector to co-develop tools and models. It is also essential to include academia and civil society in assessing impact and ensuring inclusivity. So, BDT encourages open innovation systems and collaborative platforms for knowledge-sharing and capacity-building. AI should be a bridge, not a barrier, to inclusive digital infrastructure. And once again, I would like to reiterate that we must ensure that no one is left behind in the next wave of digital transformation. Thank you. With these words, I hand over back to you.

Gonzalo Suardiaz: Thank you so much, Archana, for those opening remarks, and a warm welcome, everyone, to this session on the role of emerging technologies and artificial intelligence on advancing the goals of Action Line C2 within WISIS. So today, we have a great panel of experts here. As Archana mentioned, we have people representing academia, we have people representing the ITU, people representing the government, regulator, and the open source community, and even myself representing the industry sector. Our first panelist today is participating remotely. Let’s hope that we can establish a connection with him and that there are no technical issues. And I’m pleased to introduce Mr. Walid Mahmoudli, who is the head of FNS, which is the Future Networks and Spectrum Division within BDT. So let’s try to establish a connection with Walid, see if that works. All right, it seems that we have no Walid online. We can try to see if we can establish the connection within a few minutes. But then we can then present the first speaker here in the room, who is Renata Figueiredo, coming all the way from Brazil. Renata is a regulation expert in international affairs. She works at Anatel, who is the regulator in Brazil, and she’s going to give us some perspectives about how is the Brazilian government doing in terms of Action Line C2. So over to you, Renata.

Renata Figueiredo Santoyo: Thank you. Good morning, everyone. It’s a true honor to join the WSIS Action Line C2 session and share the perspectives of the Brazilian telecommunication regulator, Anatel. Well, my name is Renata, as I was presented, and I’m grateful for this space that values diverse voices, including women in tech and policymaking. Information and communication infrastructure is much more than cables, antennas, and data centers. It’s about enabling people to connect, learn, work, and participate in the economy. Innovation technologies and AI offer powerful tools to advance this goal, but they also pose real challenges in ethic, equity, and security. As regulators, our mission is to ensure that innovation delivers inclusive and secure connectivity for all. Let’s start with artificial intelligence. Anatel is conducting a regulatory impact assessment to establish clear guidelines for the ethical and responsible use for AI in telecom services. This includes managing risks related to how we use data and collect it, process it, and use it for decision-making. We are aligned with international standards, such as UNESCO’s recommendation on AI ethics and I2 guidelines. Public consultation is underway to help us balance innovation with transparency, privacy, and accountability. We know regulation can happen in isolation. That’s why Anatel signed a term of decentralized execution, that’s called TED, with ITA, ITA. That’s one of Brazil’s leading engineering institutions, a huge university in Brazil. This partnership is a cornerstone of our approach to AI and emerging technologies in telecom. Together with ITA researchers, we are examining the many dimensions where AI is transforming telecom regulation, quality of services, how AI can improve, but also potentially compromise reliability and fairness, cyber security, how to identify and mitigate new attack surface created by a driven network, consumer rights, ensuring transparency and avoiding discriminatory or opaque algorithmic decisions, platform oversight, addressing converging markets and ensuring fair competition and accountability for services that deliver telecom-like functions. Spectrum managing, exploring how AI can optimize the spectrum used while ensuring equitable access. This academic collaboration is not theoretical, it’s producing real research that will shape our regulatory framework in the coming years. At the same time, our second strategic priority is expanding 5G with inclusion in mind. Brazil’s roadmap includes annual update to our structural plan of network, revising spectrum managing rules and pushing open run and spectrum sharing. We are simplifying local license process and supporting smaller providers to make deployment cheaper and faster. Our universal service fund, FUST, is being used to connect to schools and remote towns. For us, 5G isn’t just about speed or latency, it’s about affordable, reliable connectivity that reaches every part of our country. Talking also about cybersecurity, AI, 5G and hyper-connected services increase complexity and with it, risks. Anatel is reviewing its cybersecurity regulation for telecom. We are working with the world’s top telecom networks to ensure strong, clear standards as these technologies evolve. We are actively studying and adapting lessons from other regions, South Korea’s National Coordination Centers, the EU’s NIS2 Directive, China’s Data Security Framework, and the US supply chain security initiatives. Data security isn’t a nice-to-have, it’s the foundation of trust, and trust is the true currency of the digital economy. I would like to emphasize, good regulation depends on evidence and partnership. Our work with ITA is just one example of how regulators can collaborate with academia to anticipate challenges and design better rules. We believe emerging technologies like AI can either defend inequality and risks or help us build a safer, fairer, more connected world. The difference lies in one of our choices, in how seriously we take this debate today. I would just, because we just had a BRICS leader’s declaration two days ago, so I would just add a little bit about this. It’s not really regulators, it’s more like Brazil’s government, but I would just like to emphasize that 6th of July in Rio, as part of this commitment, Brazil also aligns with broader global self-priorities, calling for inclusive AI governance, that Brazil as government, believe AI development must respect digital sovereignty, promote fair and open access and technologies, and ensure that no country is left behind. That means supporting data governance framework that protects privacy while enabling equitable, innovative, encouraging open science and open source moderns and fostering international cooperation to reduce technological gaps and empower local talent. That’s how we can turn AI into a truly global public good. Just a parenthesis, because I think it’s very good news, very fair news. So here’s my invitation, let’s work together across borders, sectors and disciplines to make emerging technologies serve the public good. Thank you for the opportunity to share Anatel’s perspective. I look forward to learning a lot with all my colleagues here and collaborate to advance inclusive, secure and resilient digital infrastructure for all. Thank you.

Gonzalo Suardiaz: Obrigado, Renata. Thank you so much. So next in turn is actually myself. I’m here not only as a moderator today, but also as a panelist. So my name is Gonzalo Suardias. I work at Ericsson, a telecom operator. I’ve been doing that for the last 17 years. So I’ve been working in different parts of mobile networks from 2G to 5G. And as of today, I’m a program manager within digital inclusion and in particular digital education. So as part of our program, Connect2Learn, we’ve been working a lot with the ITU, especially on a platform which is called the CPP, the connectivity planning platform. You will hear a little bit more about it in a few minutes. And I think some of the other panelists may refer to it. But what we’re trying to achieve with this platform is to allow different types of stakeholders to take better, more informed decisions about their connectivity and infrastructure planning. So how we do this is by feeding a lot of data into that particular platform. The data is, of course, about the locations of the points of interest that we’re trying to connect, POIs as we call them. But then there’s as well a bunch of data about elevation or terrain. So geospatial data, for instance. There’s data about fiber infrastructure, about mobile network infrastructure. Where are the closest radio sites to those points of interest? How high are those towers? Is there a line of sight? This kind of stuff, right? Then we also have population density data. We have cost data for the models, et cetera. So the idea is that then investors or connectivity planners, regulators, governments, administrations, GIGA people. So I guess many of you are familiar with the GIGA initiative, which aims to connect all the schools of the world to the Internet by 2030. It’s a joint initiative of ITU and UNICEF. So, of course, GIGA will be one of the use cases for the CPP. So we currently have an MVP available. We’ll actually present it during the GIGA Connectivity Forum in a couple of days. And then there will be a first version available by October this year and a general availability version by June 2026. But what I’m here to talk about today, rather than CPP, is about one of the major risks that we have identified when we’ve been planning and designing for the CPP. And I think it’s a general problem that applies to generative AI and that applies to AI or to any data science topic in general, which is GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out. I think many of you are familiar with the term. But basically, GIGO, what it means is that if you feed bad data into a system, you will get bad results. That’s it. No matter how good your algorithms, no matter how good your tools or your models are, you will get bad results if the input data is bad. So this has huge implications for us. Of course, we don’t want to be creating a platform that then gives the user wrong perspectives or makes the user take the wrong connectivity alternative. For instance, connecting a school or a point of interest with, I don’t know, satellite if fiber is closer or mobile networks might be a more sustainable or better way, more efficient to connect the school. So what are we doing today to fight GIGO and to avoid it as much as we can? Well, the first point, of course, is it’s about data standards and data schemas. So, for example, for fiber, there are available already some very good open standards to define fiber data. But we need the same for all type of data, right? For points of interest, let’s say schools, metadata, where are they located? Not only the latitudes and the longitude, the geocoordinates, but also how big are the schools, what needs do they have, what sort of facilities are available there. Same applies to coverage data, mobile coverage. Same applies to backhaul data or cost data, demand, et cetera. Any type of data that we input into the platform needs to be properly schemed and standardized. And by that, we’re reducing the risk of having wrong data. The other part, of course, is about data is creating and maintaining a very serious governance framework, right? Data is a life and data changes all the time, right? We need to keep track who owns the data, who has changed it and when and how, right? So those are also super important aspects. The next one would be to interconnect different data sets. So, for example, we have access to coverage data from operators on the ground, but we also have data sets from open cell ID, for instance. And we can triangulate those and realize when there are mismatches. When one of the data says, here, there’s great coverage, but according to this other data set, there’s no mobile network infrastructure in this area. So how could that happen? So probably one of the two data sets is wrong. So then it allows us to investigate and deep dive a little bit into that. Then the next point, and I think my colleague here, Sander, will touch on that briefly during his presentation, but it’s using AI and machine learning to validate the data. So, for example, if you have two data sets, one is about school geolocations, the other one is about geospatial data, and then you realize that the school coordinates fall, I don’t know, on a lake, well, then you know there’s something wrong. Assuming that the geospatial data is right, which most likely it is, then the coordinates that you have received from the school, they’re wrong, right? And we’ve seen that. We’ve been receiving sometimes geo-coordinates from governments and not all the data is 100% accurate. So that would be one way to validate the data. The other one could be, for instance, using satellite imagery and school metadata. The data is saying that there’s a school with over 500 students and then from the satellite image we see that there’s like no rooftop on that particular area, then we also can imagine that there’s something fishy about that information, so we can act accordingly. The last idea about Fighting Ego is of course embedding crowdsourcing as much as possible, a feedback mechanism which could be crowdsourced via a mobile app or service or even via the CPP tool itself, right, allowing the user to provide feedback as it goes, because the ground truth is what the user knows at the end, right, like this school was there but now it’s closed for whatever reason, or the tool says that here there’s great 4G coverage but in reality it’s not, it’s actually poor coverage, so then we can also correct that. So that’s a little bit what I wanted to touch on today. In summary, we believe that GIGO, garbage in, garbage out, it’s a risk to almost every digital tool that is available today, so be mindful of it, and the bottom line is that we need clean, trusted and transparent data to ensure that connectivity planning is inclusive and is efficient. So that’s it for my end, and I will be handing over now to Mr Sandor Farkas who works at the ITU and he’s an expert on geospatial artificial intelligence and he’s going to be mentioning a few AI tools for ICT infrastructure mapping, so over to you Sandor. Thank you Gonzalo.

Sandor Farkas: Good morning everyone. Today I’m going to talk about object detection using AI. For constant coverage analysis, information is needed about cell towers’ location in a country. Often this information is missing. AI computer vision can be used for finding objects and satellite images. The goal is to create a vector layer with cell towers for further analysis and to support decision making. We use YOLO11 from Ultralytics. This is an open source Python module based on PyTorch. It can be used with Azure Compute Instance and offline machine also. Using oriented bounding box, there’s less distracting background around target objects when digitizing our objects. It has also pre-trained models on satellite images which is useful for us, unfortunately not with our target objects. Here you see the basic workflow for AI object detection consisting of two parts, training a model and using a trained model. If you already have your trained model for your target objects, then you can just skip the first part and go for using a trained model for detection. If you don’t have a classified model for your target objects, you have to create one. Training a model is practically teaching machine learning algorithm how to recognize What? What is that? Sorry for that. Okay, just for me. Training a model is practically teaching machine learning algorithm how to recognize target objects on images. Before training, you need to prepare the data set. That is acquire images with your target objects and labeling images. This is the process of digitization and classification of your target object on your images. Okay. We used four classes in this research. Two types of cell towers and their shadows to improve our findings. To run a model training, the data set has to be split to train, test and validation sets. During the learning process, train and test data are used for calculating the weights for the target objects. In the final step, the models make predictions on the validation data set using the weights generated in the previous set. As a final result, you get the trained model. With the trained model, also metrics and visual outcomes are generated. Here you see F1 confidence curve. I have to explain it a bit. Precision and recall are two key metrics used to validate classification models in machine learning. Precision quantifies the true positives among all positive predictions, assessing the model’s ability to avoid false positives. On the other hand, recall calculates the true positives among all actual positives, assessing the model’s ability to take all instances of a class. F1 score shows these two metrics in one as a harmonic mean of the two. The higher the value, the better the model. Here you see confusion metrics, showing counts for true positives, true negatives, false positives, false negatives for each class. This version of confusion metrics, normalized version, shows the values in proportions rather than counts. This format makes it easier to compare performance across classes. These metrics are loss results during the training. This is a precision confidence curve at different thresholds. This is a recall curve for the same. These two curves show together. The closer the curve to the top right corner, the better the model is. But there is a trade-off between these two, precision and recall. You have to decide which one is more important in your use case. I think in this model we have to focus on recall because in the end we will get a vector layer with cell towers. If the precision is bad and we will get lots of false positives, then we can do some post-validation on that data. But we don’t know anything about false negatives that the model didn’t recognize as target. These two mosaics show labels. and the predicted bounding boxes. As an important measure, intersection over union quantifies the proportion of predicted bounding box and ground truth bounding box. Very important to evaluate accuracy in object localization. You can use fine-tuning parameters called hyperparameters tuning to improve your model. That is not just a one-time configuration but an iterative process optimizing your model’s metrics. This is our to-do list in this research. We have to extend our dataset in numbers and to a wide variety of cell towers to improve our recall. We want to develop useful tools for smooth data pipeline. And of course, we want to try it and use it on new datasets.

Gonzalo Suardiaz: Thank you. Thank you very much, Sandor. Next presentation is going to be made by Aleksandra, who is a junior mapping expert at ITU. She is actually working also with the connectivity planning platform that I mentioned during my presentation. And Aleksandra is going to give us a perspective on AI and emerging technologies from the academic world. So the floor is yours, Aleksandra.

Aleksandra Jastrzebska: Thank you so much, Gonzalo. So good morning, everyone. I’m Aleksandra Jastrzemska, a recent graduate from Universitat Jaume I. And I’m thrilled to bring an academic perspective to this incredibly timely topic. How we use AI in industry or infrastructure but as well also in how we learn, how we teach, and how we think. So let me start with a question. What happens when AI thinks for us? A recent MIT study explored how students use chat GPT to write essays. It turned out that the more they rely on it, the less they remembered. So they cited less, they took less ownership of their text, and they reported weaker learning outcomes. In fact, the study used functional MRI scans to show something even more striking. The reduced activity, which is marked in blue, was observed in chat GPT users, while increased activity, which was marked in red, appeared in brain regions associated with memory and critical thinking. So basically the cognitive shortcut is what the research called cognitive debt. And like financial debt, it actually accumulates in a silent way. So we offload thinking to the machine, and in doing so, we actually weaken our own mental muscles. So as the slide shows, when participants wrote with AI, their brains literally went quiet. And this is a reminder for us that the cost of convenience is really striking. So what happens when researchers start relying on AI tools too heavily? Let me show you a few examples. This paper looks perfectly legitimate. It was published on Science Direct. The topic is about lithium batteries, and the formatting is flawless. But when we take a closer look, the introduction starts with, Certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic, which I think it sounds familiar to several of us. And here’s another one. In a paper summarizing a study on radiology cases, the conclusion states, I’m sorry, but I don’t have access to real-time information or patient-specific data, as I am an AI language model. Well, that’s not just about science. It’s a direct copy-paste from a large language model. And of course, after all, both papers were retracted. But the fact that actually they passed peer review, and they were published at all, reveals a deeper concern. Because when academia starts to rely too heavily on AI-generated content, without the proper editing, it’s not just that error might slip through. It actually can become a part of the scientific record. So we all know that we are in the middle of an AI hype. It’s literally everywhere. And however, here are the real numbers. According to the Stanford AI Index, the AI papers now represent over 40% of all computer science research worldwide. And that’s nearly a quarter of a million of publications in just one year. And yet, despite that massive output, many people still don’t understand how AI actually works. So even something like recognizing a handwritten digit can seem like magic. So let me walk you through a simple example using artificial neural networks. One of the most fundamental classes of machine learning algorithm. And this example is based on MNIST dataset, which stands for Modified National Institute of Standards and Technology. And it’s been a classical training ground. This flows starts from the simple live view, how AI actually sees. It processed the pixel intensity values, flattens them into a vector, and then multiplies them by a set of weights. And it’s just matrix and vector multiplication. So something intuitive to the majority of humans, but yet it’s very logical. So what lies behind AI, it’s not a mystery. It’s just mathematics. And these weights, they aren’t programmed. They’re learned from the data through training. And that means that AI is not thinking, and it’s just calculating. So last but not least, I would like to share a bit about my personal research. It’s rooted in the generative AI, the models that generate new images. And in my case, those images are maps. And in this slide, you can see in an example that links OpenStreetMap, one of the most widely used open sourcing mapping platform, with the text prompt. And these prompts request a generation of maps that mimics the characteristic of the particular region, such as residential areas or coastal zones. And these models are powerful. But yet, they’re as good as the data which we provide and the human choices which are behind them. So basically, what we prioritize, what we filter, and how we evaluate the outcomes. So with this being said, I want to conclude that AI doesn’t need to replace our minds. It should challenge them. And as people from academia, our role is to make sure that in every context, from satellite imagery to schools’ essays, we are thinking with and help of AI, but not letting it think for us. And thank you so much for your time. I hope that this talk reminds you to use large language models wisely and to never stop using your own brain in the process.

Gonzalo Suardiaz: Thank you so much, Alexander. That was super interesting. All right. Last but not least, we have… Yeah, you also need… Here you go. So here on my right-hand side, we have Joshua Ku, coming all the way from the US. He’s a senior solution architect at GitHub. And Joshua is going to give us some hints about the why and how of open sourcing. So over to you, Joshua.

Joshua Ku: Great. Thank you very much. It’s been a privilege and an honor to be able to present among you guys. So I’m going to be talking about the why and the how of open sourcing, and also highlighting the journey that I’ve had working with the ITU in open sourcing some of their software. So the first question we want to answer is, why open source? What is the point of open sourcing, and why should the ITU, and also the rest of the UN in general, should be adopting open source? There’s a lot of challenges in software development today. There’s a lot of technological challenges, and velocity is always the huge one. In terms of getting skills and resources in headcount, that’s always the struggle in today’s world. Finding enough developers to work on technology to help build new features. So open source is one of the ways that we can answer this problem. Within GitHub alone, last year, we had over 150 million developers contribute to open source projects. Open source projects are designed as projects that are open to the public and can be edited by anybody in the public. Among the 150 million developers, we had over 1 billion contributions to open source projects last year alone. And that number is growing year over year. So that’s really exciting to see that developers around the world are embracing open source and contributing. soon, and thank you for joining us today. We’re going to talk about the world of open source. We’re going to talk about the world of open source. And there are a few key things that are contributing to it. And that is helping a lot of key technologies that power the world today to move faster. So you may be wondering, open source, is this just for developers? Or are companies actually contributing to open source as well? Who is keeping this community alive? Well, companies in the world are all active contributors and one of the largest contributors to open source. You look at there’s Google, there’s Microsoft, there’s Amazon, and even Huawei. And these are companies that power the fundamental things that we do in our lives. Google has a huge search base. Their search engine is large, but they also have one of the most popular web browsers in the world. And that web browser, Google Chrome, is fully open source. And that is powering a lot of the development today. Microsoft, Amazon, all have key open source technologies that their own technologies rely on. Without open source, these tech companies can’t move as forward and as quickly as they can today. So in learning more about why and the power of open source, let me talk to you about the journey that the ITU has taken this past year in embracing open source and what are the steps they had to do to get there. First of all, we had to look at licensing. Within the open source community, there’s a lot of things about licensing to ensure that software can be presented correctly. So we had to look at all of the pros and cons and the restrictions of licenses to see how can open source contribute, but also to make sure that all of the software that we write as the ITU can be related and sent out to other people and how other people can also build upon our technologies to build other solutions. It’s really amazing to see all the different solutions that can be made, and we want to make sure that everything is open source downstream as well. Second of all, we took a look at how to prepare our code. Preparing our code is very important. It’s not as simple as just copying and pasting your code and just dumping it on the internet. We had to go through all of the ITU source code to make sure that we strip out anything that contained potentially sensitive information. We had to delete anything that had secrets in it, but also we had to make sure that what we’re presenting is readable by other people. A lot of times when you build internal code bases, it’s just technical jargon and things that only you in the company would know about. When you’re in the open source community, you need to make sure that everything you put out there is readable by anybody who’s joining, because they don’t have the context of your company. We had to look into that, how to simplify a lot of the text to make it very readable and accessible for all. Lastly, we had to prepare a repository. We had to create a repository in GitHub and also create ways to allow developers to access it, to view it, and make a very readable interface for all users. Of course, open sourcing technology is only half the battle. The next part of it is how to maintain that and how to build velocity over that. One of the most important aspects of open sourcing technology is, as I mentioned, a lot of people can look at it. When there’s a lot of people that can look at it, there are things that might make your software very dangerous as well. One of the aspects we had to take care of is ensuring that our code base was as secure as possible. We had to look at our supply chain and looking at all of the other open source dependencies we depended on to make sure that none of them were vulnerable to any sort of attacks, so that our software would also be secure as well. We also had to look at our code scanning as well. As developers are writing code, it is known that developers are human and we do make mistakes. When we make mistakes, that introduces vulnerabilities that bad actors can come in and take over and exploit our application. We had to look at ways on how to secure our open source software, how to make sure that there are no vulnerabilities in there that bad actors can use to exploit. After we’ve secured our code base, then we had to start looking at managing community contributions. This is going to be really important because if we want to draw more developers to help contribute to the ITU’s projects, we have to make sure that people know where to go. We were working together to devise ways of issues so that we can document what are the next feature requests, what are some issues with the software today that we would like developers to help contribute to. By allowing tags like good first issue, this allows brand new developers to take a look at the ITU’s projects and also see what are some of the ways they can contribute without having to go through the code base and learn that on their own. We provide a very curated way for new developers to come in to take a look at the ITU’s projects and also see where can they contribute very quickly and add value to the project. We also are working on building out a roadmap so that when users come to the ITU’s projects, they can see what is the vision of the ITU, what are the next steps for these technologies and where do we want to bring them. That allows developers to also have their own ideas of what can they contribute to the ITU’s projects as well. You’re very surprised at a lot of open source technologies today, how we had a set vision in the very beginning, we laid out our roadmap, but then our open source developers saw potential in how to apply these technologies in other aspects as well. They’re able to contribute and expand the software to do more than what we originally imagined. This is the dream that we’re building here at the ITU. We want to see how we can use these technologies today to accomplish the vision we have, but also to inspire the next generation of developers to see what they can use our technologies to solve other problems as well. Thank you very much for listening and I hope that this really inspires you on open source and to see how within the technology that we’re doing today, how we can empower that with open source technology and how we can propel that forward.

Gonzalo Suardiaz: Thank you so much, Joshua. I think we have a couple of minutes before we close up the session to allow some Q&A from the audience, so maybe we can get support from the facilitators if there are any questions. Or questions from any of the panelists to the other presenters. It seems that we were super clear, there are no questions. Before closing, I wrote down a few takeaways and notes as you guys were presenting. Just to close this session, things that I take with me at least is that AI is an enabler, definitely not a replacement for human decision maker. Thank you, Alexandra, for the quote, AI is not thinking, it’s calculating. I like that one. I also like what Archana mentioned about AI being a bridge and not a barrier. I also think that partnerships are essential. AI is very powerful, but multi-stakeholder collaboration is what really makes it meaningful. Open source is a great example of that. But we have the public and the private sector represented as well. And that collaboration is also quite important to achieve the goals of Action Line C2. We also saw how AI-driven planning can unlock financing by giving governments data-backed infrastructure investment plans. And I think that CPP is a really good use case of that. We also talked about the need for clean, trusted and transparent data as a foundation for everything we’re trying to build. People come first, then it’s processes and governance, and then it’s technology. But I think this was a very interesting session, so I would like to thank each and one of you, Alexandra, Sandor, Renata and Joshua. Thank you for your presentations today. And thank you very much to all of you in the audience and to everyone who followed online. It’s been a pleasure, and if you want to connect after the session, it will be a pleasure to have a chat about this topic. So thanks again, and we’ll be in touch. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you.

Agreement points

AI as an enabler requiring human oversight and collaboration

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Arguments

AI deployment must be rights-based, secure and human-centric with multi-stakeholder engagement

Multi-stakeholder collaboration makes AI meaningful beyond just being a powerful tool

AI is calculating, not thinking – it processes data through mathematical operations rather than genuine understanding

Summary

All speakers agree that AI should augment rather than replace human decision-making, requiring proper human oversight, collaboration, and ethical frameworks to be truly effective.

Topics

Human rights | Development | Sociocultural

Importance of partnerships and multi-stakeholder collaboration

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Renata Figueiredo Santoyo
– Joshua Ku

Arguments

Human capacity-building efforts and workforce AI literacy are crucial for public authorities

Multi-stakeholder collaboration makes AI meaningful beyond just being a powerful tool

Strong partnerships between regulators, academia, and private sector are essential for responsible AI deployment

Open source allows developers to expand software beyond original vision and solve additional problems

Summary

There is strong consensus that effective AI deployment and infrastructure development requires collaboration across sectors, including government, academia, private sector, and civil society.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Data quality and governance as fundamental requirements

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Arguments

Inclusive policy frameworks are needed to ensure AI use is ethical and equitable, addressing bias and transparency in algorithms

Garbage in, garbage out (GIGO) is a major risk where bad input data leads to bad results regardless of algorithm quality

Generative AI models can create maps from text prompts, but quality depends on input data and human oversight

Summary

Speakers unanimously emphasize that high-quality, well-governed data is essential for effective AI systems, with proper frameworks needed to ensure ethical and accurate outcomes.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Infrastructure

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the critical need for comprehensive regulatory frameworks that ensure AI deployment is ethical, transparent, and aligned with international standards and human rights principles.

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Renata Figueiredo Santoyo

Arguments

Inclusive policy frameworks are needed to ensure AI use is ethical and equitable, addressing bias and transparency in algorithms

Brazil’s Anatel is conducting regulatory impact assessments for AI in telecom services, aligned with UNESCO recommendations

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Both speakers focus on the technical aspects of AI implementation, emphasizing the importance of proper data validation, quality control, and systematic approaches to AI model development.

Speakers

– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Sandor Farkas

Arguments

AI and machine learning can be used to validate data by cross-referencing different datasets and identifying inconsistencies

AI model training requires proper dataset preparation, labeling, and validation using metrics like precision and recall

Topics

Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers recognize that emerging technologies create new security challenges that require updated frameworks and systematic approaches to risk management.

Speakers

– Renata Figueiredo Santoyo
– Joshua Ku

Arguments

Cybersecurity regulation must evolve as AI and 5G increase network complexity and risks

Successful open sourcing requires proper licensing, code preparation, security scanning, and community management

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected consensus

Academic integrity and AI over-reliance concerns

Speakers

– Aleksandra Jastrzebska
– Archana G. Gulati

Arguments

Over-reliance on AI tools like ChatGPT reduces student memory retention and critical thinking abilities

Human capacity-building efforts and workforce AI literacy are crucial for public authorities

Explanation

While coming from different perspectives (academic research vs. policy implementation), both speakers converge on the concern that AI should enhance rather than replace human cognitive abilities, emphasizing the need for proper education and capacity building.

Topics

Sociocultural | Development

Open source as solution to resource constraints

Speakers

– Joshua Ku
– Archana G. Gulati

Arguments

Open source enables faster software development with 150 million developers contributing over 1 billion contributions annually

Human capacity-building efforts and workforce AI literacy are crucial for public authorities

Explanation

The GitHub representative’s emphasis on open source community contributions aligns unexpectedly well with the ITU’s focus on capacity building and inclusive development, suggesting open source as a mechanism for addressing resource and skill gaps.

Topics

Development | Economic

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrate strong consensus on key principles: AI as an enabler requiring human oversight, the critical importance of multi-stakeholder partnerships, the fundamental need for data quality and governance, and the requirement for ethical frameworks in AI deployment.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with complementary perspectives rather than conflicting viewpoints. This strong alignment suggests a mature understanding of AI’s role in infrastructure development and creates a solid foundation for collaborative action on WSIS Action Line C2 goals. The consensus spans technical, regulatory, and social dimensions, indicating comprehensive agreement on both challenges and solutions.

Different viewpoints

Approach to AI validation and quality control

Speakers

– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Arguments

AI and machine learning can be used to validate data by cross-referencing different datasets and identifying inconsistencies

AI-generated academic content without proper editing can compromise scientific integrity and research quality

Summary

Gonzalo advocates for using AI to validate and improve data quality through cross-referencing datasets, while Aleksandra warns about AI-generated content compromising quality without proper human oversight and editing

Topics

Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory | Sociocultural

Role of AI in human cognitive processes

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Arguments

AI enables smart infrastructure planning through geospatial, demographic and economic data analysis to optimize connectivity deployment

Over-reliance on AI tools like ChatGPT reduces student memory retention and critical thinking abilities

Summary

Archana emphasizes AI as an enabler for smart planning and optimization, while Aleksandra warns about cognitive dependency and the need to maintain human thinking capabilities

Topics

Infrastructure | Development | Sociocultural

Unexpected differences

Fundamental nature and capabilities of AI

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Arguments

AI deployment must be rights-based, secure and human-centric with multi-stakeholder engagement

AI is calculating, not thinking – it processes data through mathematical operations rather than genuine understanding

Explanation

While both speakers advocate for human-centric approaches, they have fundamentally different views on AI’s nature – Archana discusses AI in terms that suggest more sophisticated capabilities requiring rights-based frameworks, while Aleksandra emphasizes that AI is purely mathematical calculation without genuine understanding

Topics

Human rights | Legal and regulatory | Sociocultural

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers show relatively low levels of direct disagreement, with most differences being in emphasis and approach rather than fundamental opposition. The main areas of disagreement center around the role of AI in validation processes, the balance between AI capabilities and human oversight, and the fundamental nature of AI systems.

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. The speakers generally align on the importance of responsible AI deployment, data quality, and human-centric approaches, but differ in their specific methodologies and philosophical perspectives on AI’s role and nature. These disagreements are constructive and reflect different professional perspectives rather than fundamental conflicts, suggesting a healthy diversity of approaches within a shared commitment to responsible AI development.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the critical need for comprehensive regulatory frameworks that ensure AI deployment is ethical, transparent, and aligned with international standards and human rights principles.

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– Renata Figueiredo Santoyo

Arguments

Inclusive policy frameworks are needed to ensure AI use is ethical and equitable, addressing bias and transparency in algorithms

Brazil’s Anatel is conducting regulatory impact assessments for AI in telecom services, aligned with UNESCO recommendations

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Both speakers focus on the technical aspects of AI implementation, emphasizing the importance of proper data validation, quality control, and systematic approaches to AI model development.

Speakers

– Gonzalo Suardiaz
– Sandor Farkas

Arguments

AI and machine learning can be used to validate data by cross-referencing different datasets and identifying inconsistencies

AI model training requires proper dataset preparation, labeling, and validation using metrics like precision and recall

Topics

Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers recognize that emerging technologies create new security challenges that require updated frameworks and systematic approaches to risk management.

Speakers

– Renata Figueiredo Santoyo
– Joshua Ku

Arguments

Cybersecurity regulation must evolve as AI and 5G increase network complexity and risks

Successful open sourcing requires proper licensing, code preparation, security scanning, and community management

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory

Key takeaways

AI serves as an enabler and bridge for ICT infrastructure development, not a replacement for human decision-making

Data quality is fundamental – ‘garbage in, garbage out’ principle means poor input data leads to poor results regardless of algorithm sophistication

Multi-stakeholder partnerships between government, academia, private sector, and open source communities are essential for meaningful AI implementation

Inclusive policy frameworks must ensure AI deployment is ethical, equitable, rights-based, and human-centric

AI can optimize infrastructure planning through geospatial analysis, predictive maintenance, and smart resource allocation

Open source development accelerates innovation with 150 million developers contributing globally

Academic institutions must balance AI tool usage with maintaining critical thinking and learning outcomes

Regulatory frameworks need continuous evolution to address cybersecurity risks and ensure transparency in AI-driven telecom services

Clean, trusted, and transparent data with proper governance frameworks forms the foundation for effective AI applications

AI-driven planning can unlock financing by providing governments with data-backed infrastructure investment plans

Resolutions and action items

ITU-D to continue applying AI in various supported initiatives through partnerships with member states and private sector

Brazil’s Anatel conducting ongoing regulatory impact assessment for AI in telecom services with public consultation

ITU partnership with GitHub to open source software tools and create accessible repositories for developer contributions

Connectivity Planning Platform (CPP) development with MVP presentation at GIGA Connectivity Forum and general availability by June 2026

Extension of AI object detection datasets and development of tools for smooth data pipeline implementation

Continued collaboration between Brazil’s Anatel and ITA university to examine AI’s impact on telecom regulation

Unresolved issues

Technical connection issues preventing remote participation of Walid Mahmoudli from ITU’s Future Networks and Spectrum Division

Need for comprehensive data standards and schemas across all types of infrastructure data beyond fiber

Balancing AI innovation with transparency, privacy, and accountability requirements

Addressing the trade-off between precision and recall in AI model performance for infrastructure mapping

Managing the risk of cognitive debt from over-reliance on AI tools in academic and professional settings

Ensuring AI deployment doesn’t leave anyone behind in digital transformation

Developing effective crowdsourcing mechanisms for data validation and feedback

Suggested compromises

Focus on recall over precision in AI models for infrastructure detection, accepting false positives that can be post-validated rather than missing actual infrastructure

Implement iterative hyperparameter tuning to optimize AI model metrics rather than seeking perfect initial results

Use AI as a thinking aid rather than replacement, maintaining human oversight and critical evaluation

Adopt open innovation systems and collaborative platforms for knowledge-sharing while maintaining security standards

Balance innovation velocity with proper security scanning and vulnerability management in open source development

AI should be a bridge, not a barrier, to inclusive digital infrastructure. And once again, I would like to reiterate that we must ensure that no one is left behind in the next wave of digital transformation.

Speaker

Archana G. Gulati

Reason

This comment reframes AI from a purely technical tool to a social equity instrument, establishing the ethical foundation for the entire discussion. It introduces the critical tension between technological advancement and inclusivity that runs throughout the session.

Impact

This opening statement set the tone for the entire discussion, with subsequent speakers consistently returning to themes of inclusivity, ethics, and ensuring technology serves all populations. It established the framework that AI deployment must be measured not just by technical success but by its impact on digital equity.

GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out… No matter how good your algorithms, no matter how good your tools or your models are, you will get bad results if the input data is bad.

Speaker

Gonzalo Suardiaz

Reason

This comment cuts through AI hype to identify a fundamental, practical challenge that undermines all AI applications. It shifts focus from algorithmic sophistication to data quality as the critical success factor.

Impact

This observation fundamentally shifted the discussion from celebrating AI capabilities to examining its limitations and prerequisites. It introduced a sobering reality check that influenced subsequent speakers to address data governance, validation, and the practical challenges of implementation.

What happens when AI thinks for us? A recent MIT study explored how students use chat GPT to write essays. It turned out that the more they rely on it, the less they remembered… The cognitive shortcut is what the research called cognitive debt.

Speaker

Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Reason

This comment introduces the profound concept of ‘cognitive debt’ – a hidden cost of AI adoption that parallels financial debt. It challenges the assumption that AI assistance is purely beneficial and reveals unintended consequences on human cognitive development.

Impact

This insight dramatically deepened the discussion by introducing neurological evidence of AI’s impact on human cognition. It moved the conversation beyond technical implementation to examine fundamental questions about human-AI interaction and long-term societal implications, adding a crucial dimension about preserving human intellectual capacity.

AI doesn’t need to replace our minds. It should challenge them… we are thinking with and help of AI, but not letting it think for us.

Speaker

Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Reason

This comment provides a philosophical framework for healthy human-AI collaboration, distinguishing between AI as a cognitive enhancer versus a cognitive replacement. It offers a practical principle for maintaining human agency in an AI-driven world.

Impact

This statement provided a synthesizing principle that tied together various concerns raised throughout the session. It offered a constructive path forward that acknowledges AI’s power while preserving human intellectual sovereignty, influencing the moderator’s final takeaways about AI being an enabler, not a replacement.

AI is not thinking, it’s calculating.

Speaker

Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Reason

This succinct statement demystifies AI by clearly delineating what AI actually does versus human perception of its capabilities. It cuts through anthropomorphic language that often obscures AI’s true nature as mathematical computation.

Impact

This clarification was so impactful that the moderator specifically highlighted it in his closing remarks. It provided a grounding reality check that helped participants and audience maintain appropriate expectations and understanding of AI capabilities throughout the discussion.

Without open source, these tech companies can’t move as forward and as quickly as they can today… Google Chrome, is fully open source. And that is powering a lot of the development today.

Speaker

Joshua Ku

Reason

This comment reveals the counterintuitive reality that even the world’s largest tech companies depend on collaborative, open development models. It challenges assumptions about competitive advantage and demonstrates how openness accelerates rather than hinders innovation.

Impact

This insight reframed open source from a nice-to-have community initiative to a fundamental requirement for technological progress. It strengthened the argument for the ITU’s open source initiatives and demonstrated how collaboration, rather than competition, drives the most significant technological advances.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by establishing multiple critical frameworks: ethical (AI as bridge vs. barrier), practical (GIGO and data quality), cognitive (thinking with vs. letting AI think for us), and collaborative (open source as essential infrastructure). The comments created a sophisticated dialogue that moved beyond technical implementation to examine deeper questions about human-AI interaction, societal impact, and sustainable development approaches. The discussion evolved from initial optimism about AI’s potential to a more nuanced understanding of its challenges, prerequisites, and proper role in human society. The interplay between these insights created a comprehensive examination that balanced technological enthusiasm with practical wisdom and ethical considerations.

How can we ensure that AI algorithms used in telecommunications are free from bias and maintain transparency, especially when serving vulnerable populations?

Speaker

Archana G. Gulati

Explanation

This is crucial for ensuring ethical and equitable AI deployment in ICT infrastructure, particularly for underserved communities

What specific data governance and privacy frameworks are needed when AI is applied to telecommunications infrastructure in vulnerable populations?

Speaker

Archana G. Gulati

Explanation

Essential for protecting privacy rights while enabling AI-driven connectivity solutions in underserved areas

How can we ensure workforce deployment and AI literacy among public authorities working with AI-enabled telecommunications systems?

Speaker

Archana G. Gulati

Explanation

Critical for effective implementation and governance of AI tools in public sector telecommunications planning

How can we develop comprehensive data standards and schemas for all types of infrastructure data (points of interest, coverage data, backhaul data, cost data) to prevent GIGO issues?

Speaker

Gonzalo Suardiaz

Explanation

Essential for ensuring accurate connectivity planning and avoiding wrong infrastructure investment decisions

What governance frameworks are needed to track data ownership, changes, and version control in dynamic infrastructure datasets?

Speaker

Gonzalo Suardiaz

Explanation

Critical for maintaining data quality and accountability in AI-driven infrastructure planning platforms

How can we effectively triangulate and validate data from multiple sources to identify and correct inconsistencies?

Speaker

Gonzalo Suardiaz

Explanation

Important for ensuring reliability of infrastructure planning decisions based on multiple data sources

How can we extend datasets to include a wider variety of cell tower types and improve recall in AI object detection models?

Speaker

Sandor Farkas

Explanation

Necessary to improve the accuracy and coverage of AI-based cell tower detection for infrastructure mapping

What tools need to be developed for a smooth data pipeline in AI-based infrastructure object detection?

Speaker

Sandor Farkas

Explanation

Essential for operationalizing AI object detection for practical infrastructure planning applications

How can we balance precision and recall in AI object detection models for infrastructure mapping, and what are the trade-offs?

Speaker

Sandor Farkas

Explanation

Critical for optimizing AI model performance based on specific use case requirements in infrastructure detection

What are the long-term cognitive effects of over-reliance on AI tools in academic and professional research?

Speaker

Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Explanation

Important for understanding how AI dependency might affect critical thinking and learning outcomes in research and education

How can we develop better quality control mechanisms to prevent AI-generated content from entering the scientific record without proper human oversight?

Speaker

Aleksandra Jastrzebska

Explanation

Essential for maintaining the integrity of scientific research and preventing contamination of academic literature with unedited AI content

What are the best practices for maintaining and building velocity in open source projects after initial release?

Speaker

Joshua Ku

Explanation

Critical for ensuring long-term sustainability and community engagement in open source infrastructure projects

How can organizations effectively manage community contributions and create accessible entry points for new developers in open source projects?

Speaker

Joshua Ku

Explanation

Important for building and maintaining active developer communities around open source infrastructure tools

Summary

This discussion was a WSIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe focused on evaluating the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) action lines after 20 years of implementation. The session was organized as a working lunch with multiple tables, each led by UN action line facilitators from organizations like WHO, FAO, UNESCO, and ITU, covering areas such as e-health, e-agriculture, e-learning, and e-government.

The discussion was structured around three main questions examined in 20-minute blocks. First, participants assessed how the WSIS action lines have evolved with technology and stood the test of time. There was broad consensus that the action lines remain relevant due to their technology-neutral design, allowing them to adapt to emerging technologies like AI and blockchain without requiring complete reformulation. However, participants noted the need to address new challenges such as digital divides, cybersecurity, and ethical considerations around AI implementation.

The second discussion focused on achievements and challenges of the action lines. Key achievements included bringing UN agencies together for collaborative implementation, expanding global connectivity, and establishing frameworks like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Participants highlighted significant progress in areas like digital government portals, with over 150 cities globally now having municipal digital services. However, persistent challenges were identified, including the digital divide, lack of digital skills, infrastructure gaps, and the need for better measurement frameworks to assess meaningful access rather than just connectivity statistics.

The final discussion examined the vision for action lines beyond 2025. Participants emphasized the need for better implementation rather than creating new action lines, focusing on accountability, reporting mechanisms, and ensuring inclusive participation from grassroots communities. There was strong emphasis on youth involvement, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and the importance of digital literacy and ethical technology use. The session concluded with calls for enhanced cooperation, improved communication about the action lines, and the development of comprehensive measurement frameworks that capture social outcomes rather than just technical indicators.

Keypoints

## Overall Purpose/Goal

This was a WSIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe focused on reviewing and evaluating the WSIS (World Summit on the Information Society) action lines after 20 years of implementation. The session aimed to gather stakeholder input on the performance of various action lines (e-health, e-agriculture, e-government, capacity building, etc.) and generate actionable recommendations for beyond 2025, culminating in a call to action for upcoming UN General Assembly discussions.

## Major Discussion Points

– **Evolution and Relevance of Action Lines**: Participants discussed how the WSIS action lines have stood the test of time since 2003/2005, with general consensus that they remain relevant due to their technology-neutral design. However, there’s need for updates to address emerging technologies like AI, cybersecurity concerns, and new digital divides while maintaining their foundational principles.

– **Achievements and Persistent Challenges**: Major achievements included increased global connectivity, development of digital government portals, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and the creation of frameworks like the Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Key challenges identified were the persistent digital divide, lack of meaningful access, insufficient digital literacy (especially among vulnerable populations), and gaps in implementation at national/regional levels.

– **Measurement and Accountability Gaps**: A recurring theme was the difficulty in measuring the real-world impact of action lines beyond basic connectivity metrics. Participants called for better reporting mechanisms, clearer targets, and frameworks that capture social outcomes rather than just technical infrastructure deployment.

– **Future Vision and Implementation**: For post-2025, participants emphasized the need for enhanced international cooperation while allowing for tailored local solutions. Key priorities included digital inclusion, youth engagement, ethical AI governance, environmental sustainability, and stronger integration with other UN frameworks like the SDGs and Global Digital Compact.

– **Multi-stakeholder Inclusion and Communication**: Strong emphasis on improving awareness and understanding of action lines at grassroots levels, better communication strategies, and ensuring meaningful participation of underrepresented groups including youth, women, rural communities, and persons with disabilities in digital transformation processes.

## Overall Tone

The discussion maintained a constructive and collaborative tone throughout. It began with technical assessments and evolved into more passionate advocacy for inclusion and ethical considerations. The atmosphere was professional yet energetic, with participants from diverse backgrounds (UN agencies, academia, civil society, private sector, and notably many young people) contributing actively. The tone became increasingly forward-looking and action-oriented as the session progressed, culminating in enthusiastic calls for enhanced cooperation and concrete implementation strategies.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Gitanjali Sah** – Event organizer, has capacity building responsibilities, works with UNBESA, involved in organizing WSIS process since 2009

– **Derrick Muneene** – Overall moderator, works for World Health Organization (WHO), facilitator for e-health action line, developing global strategy on digital health

– **Susan Teltscher** – Multiple speaking instances, works with ITU, involved in enabling environment discussions

– **Davide Storti** – UNESCO representative, facilitates multiple action lines (6 action lines including access to information, learning, science, media, ethics, cultural diversity)

– **Denis Suzar** – Table facilitator, discussed e-government and related action lines

– **Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1** – Facilitator for E-Agriculture Action Line C7, discussed farmers and agricultural digital solutions

– **Table 5** – Speaker representing capacity building discussions, mentioned youth perspectives and gender equality

– **Table 6** – Speaker discussing WSIS process alignment with SDGs and Global Digital Compact

– **Audience** – Multiple audience members including students, researchers, and professionals from various organizations

**Additional speakers:**

– **Dennis** – Table facilitator (mentioned as “Dennis working” and later as facilitator)

– **Carla** – ITU representative, table facilitator

– **Cheryl Miller** – Vice President for Digital Policy from the U.S. Council of Nationals, affiliate to International Digital Forum

– **American University of Beirut representative** – Founder of United Engineering Initiative, works between Faculty of Health Sciences and Engineering Faculty on public health solutions

– **Chinese student** – College student discussing AI usage and accessibility challenges in China

– **Youth representatives** – Multiple young participants discussing digital ethics, AI impact, and neurological differences in children

– **UNHCR representative** – Discussed refugee-related digital challenges

– **Human rights representative** – Mentioned Geneva Declaration and human rights aspects of digital society

# WSIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe: Discussion Report

## Executive Summary

The WSIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe was organized as a working lunch session to evaluate the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) action lines after two decades of implementation. The multi-stakeholder dialogue brought together UN agency representatives, civil society members, academics, private sector participants, and youth to assess the performance and future direction of digital governance frameworks.

Organized by Gitanjali Sah and moderated by Derek Muneene from the World Health Organisation, the session employed a structured discussion format with participants at different thematic tables, each facilitated by UN action line coordinators from organizations including WHO, FAO, UNESCO, and ITU.

## Session Structure and Methodology

The discussion was organized around three sequential question blocks, each with 11 minutes for table discussions followed by 9 minutes for table reports:

1. **Evolution Assessment**: How have WSIS action lines evolved with technology and stood the test of time?

2. **Achievement Evaluation**: What are the main achievements and challenges of action line implementation?

3. **Future Visioning**: What should be the vision for action lines beyond 2025, and are new action lines needed?

Table facilitators included:

– Angelique Uwimana (e-agriculture, Action Line C7)

– Davide Storti (UNESCO)

– Susan Teltscher (ITU)

– Derek Muneene (WHO, e-health)

## Key Discussion Findings

### Question 1: Evolution and Technological Adaptation

#### Technology-Neutral Framework Strength

Multiple table reports emphasized that WSIS action lines have successfully adapted to technological changes due to their technology-neutral design. As one table reported, “action lines are technology-neutral and flexible, making them adaptable to new technologies like AI.”

Davide Storti noted that action lines have “stood the test of time and remain relevant despite technological changes,” while another table highlighted that “digital transformation has become a path that different stakeholders are moving forward on.”

#### Need for Updated Terminology

Derek Muneene identified that “action lines need to be updated in nomenclature, such as moving from ‘e-health’ to ‘digital health'” to reflect current usage patterns. This sentiment was echoed across tables, with participants noting that while core principles remain sound, language needs refreshing.

### Question 2: Achievements and Challenges

#### Major Achievements

Table reports identified several key accomplishments:

**Multi-stakeholder Collaboration**: The multi-stakeholder model and Internet Governance Forum were consistently cited as major achievements bringing diverse voices together.

**Institutional Cooperation**: UN agencies have successfully collaborated through action lines, as demonstrated in initiatives like One Health.

**Innovation Support**: Action lines have enabled cutting-edge innovation across sectors, including AI and geospatial data applications in agriculture.

**Regulatory Development**: Regulatory expertise has improved at national, regional, and international levels.

#### Persistent Challenges

**Digital Divides**: Multiple tables reported that digital divides and lack of digital skills remain major barriers despite progress.

**Implementation Gaps**: There is a significant lack of understanding of action lines at grassroots level, requiring better communication strategies.

**Measurement Limitations**: Current measurement frameworks focus too heavily on connectivity indicators rather than meaningful outcomes.

**Communication and Awareness**: A fundamental challenge identified was that many stakeholders are simply unaware of the action lines and their potential applications.

### Question 3: Future Vision Beyond 2025

#### Framework Continuity Over New Creation

A strong consensus emerged that existing action lines should be enhanced rather than replaced. Table reports consistently indicated no need for new action lines, but emphasized making existing ones more agile and future-proof.

The focus should be on intersectional inclusion and strengthening multi-stakeholder participation within current frameworks.

#### Integration with Other Frameworks

Tables emphasized the need for greater alignment with other international frameworks like the SDGs and Global Digital Compact, while ensuring that international cooperation allows for tailor-made solutions meeting specific country needs.

## Youth Perspectives and Digital Ethics

### Critical Youth Insights

A particularly powerful contribution came from a college student who observed: “Like 90% of us use AI daily, but like a few of us get the chance to reflect what they actually did to us, and what they mean to us. Like to some degree, it kind of feel like AI is kind of manipulate our life instead of we use AI as a tool.”

This highlighted a critical gap between technology adoption and critical understanding, even among digital natives.

### Digital Literacy Needs

Participants emphasized the need to teach digital ethics and cybersecurity from early school grades, recognizing that technical skills alone are insufficient without critical thinking capabilities.

Gitanjali Sah noted that “youth perspective is missing from action lines and needs to be integrated,” highlighting a significant gap in current frameworks.

## Key Themes Across Discussions

### Communication and Cooperation

Derek Muneene identified cooperation and communication as essential themes across all discussions. Multiple participants noted that while frameworks exist, there are significant gaps in awareness and understanding at implementation levels.

One participant highlighted: “There is always a moment to re-communicate something back to the world… There is no other way. So it’s there, but people don’t know about it.”

### Measurement and Accountability

The need for better measurement frameworks was consistently raised. As one participant noted: “What are the ways that we can measure it? If we do that, I think it’s annual. Based on that, we could have had an understanding 10 years ago that we didn’t have anywhere.”

There was strong agreement that measurement should focus on meaningful outcomes rather than just technical metrics, with better reporting and accountability mechanisms at national and regional levels.

### Capacity Building

Capacity building was identified as a cross-cutting theme requiring harmonized reporting mechanisms across all action lines rather than being confined to specific frameworks.

## Action Items and Next Steps

### Immediate Actions

**Documentation**: Digitize all handwritten notes and content generated during the discussion.

**Policy Integration**: Use recommendations to inform member states in ministries of health for WHO’s global strategy on digital health development.

**UN Engagement**: Take insights to the UN General Assembly for discussion of calls to action.

**WSIS Forum Integration**: Incorporate outcomes into the WSIS Forum outcome document and chair’s summary.

**Database Utilization**: Promote better use of the existing WSIS stocktaking database created in 2004.

### Implementation Priorities

**Enhanced Communication**: Develop better strategies to raise awareness about action lines at grassroots level.

**Youth Integration**: Integrate youth perspectives into action line implementation across all areas.

**Measurement Improvement**: Strengthen measurement frameworks focusing on meaningful outcomes.

**Stakeholder Inclusion**: Ensure vulnerable groups and rural communities are included in digital transformation processes.

## Unresolved Challenges

Several critical issues require continued attention:

– How to effectively measure meaningful outcomes rather than just connectivity indicators

– Balancing global frameworks with local implementation needs

– Addressing the communication gap between high-level policy and grassroots understanding

– Ensuring ethical AI development and data governance

– Determining optimal institutional coordination mechanisms

## Conclusion

The WSIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe revealed strong consensus that existing action lines remain relevant and should be enhanced rather than replaced. The technology-neutral design that has enabled adaptation over 20 years was consistently praised as a foundational strength.

The key challenges identified center on implementation rather than framework design: better communication, enhanced measurement, improved inclusion (particularly of youth voices), and stronger accountability mechanisms. The session emphasized that success should be measured by meaningful impact for all stakeholders rather than technical achievements alone.

Moving forward, the focus should be on making existing frameworks more responsive and inclusive while addressing the critical gaps in awareness, measurement, and implementation that currently limit their effectiveness. The youth perspectives shared during the discussion provide both urgency and direction for ensuring digital governance frameworks serve current and future generations effectively.

Gitanjali Sah: Hello, ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon. We’re about to start with our VISIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe on the VISIS Action Lines. Please take your seats. We are providing some snacks. Hello, everyone, and welcome to the VISIS Plus 20 Knowledge Cafe on the VISIS Action Lines. Please take your seats. We have WHO here in table one. We have FAO in table two. We have Carla from, you go there, Denise, that one. That one. Yes. Let me go to vegetarian. This is WHO. FAO. Thank you. Dessa, you and Dessa, e-government. Capacity building. Capacity building. And e-learning. Hi. Sure, please take one of them. Anyone. Hi, please sit in any of these. Yeah, we already have. So, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. This is a working knowledge cafe. It’s about the WSIS action lines. And we really want to finish the knowledge cafe with a call for action. This will be led by the UN action line facilitators. So ITU leads a few action lines, Derek from WHO leads e-health, I have capacity building, I have UNBESA. So we have UN action line facilitators who are going to lead you through this session. Derek is going to be the overall moderator. So Derek, I hand over to you to explain how it is going to run. And what is it that we want out of this session?

Derrick Muneene: All right, thank you so much, Gitanjali. My name is Derek Munene. I am trying to get to the front. Okay. I’m sorry, I’m going to have to speak in the middle. I wasn’t able to go to the front. But let me welcome everybody. My name is Derek Munene. I work for the World Health Organization, WHO. We are facilitators for the action line. Action line on e-health. Okay. That’s the action line that will facilitate us. And let me take advantage to just ask some more people to join our table here in front where we’re dealing with e-health. As Gitanjali mentioned, we have a moment in time where we can share knowledge in terms of the past performance of the different action lines. So this afternoon, this working lunch is really dedicated towards generating your insights in terms of the performance of the various action lines. And also looking forward, you know, to beyond 2025. And so we’ll be having three blocks of discussions, three blocks with three questions. and each table has a facilitator that will be reporting back from each of the groups. So just keep in mind that there’ll be three blocks of conversations based on three questions. And each of the tables has a facilitator that will guide the conversation based on the questions. And at the end of each of the three blocks, I will ask each table to come to the front or to the center, as I’m doing, to give a report out of the insights generated by each of the tables, okay? Keep in mind that the focus is really, welcome, one of the facilitators is just walking in. So the focus of the conversation is really to, you know, get your input on the performance of the action lines. I hope you’re all familiar with the action lines of WSIS, isn’t it? The different action lines from e-business, e-agriculture, e-health, and et cetera, okay? And using this time to make a reflection. At the end, as Gitanjali mentioned, we’d like to get a call to action. As you know, UNGA is coming. This year has been a year of review of WSIS for the past 20 years. At WHO, we’ve done extensive work to get the input from our stakeholders over the past 20 years. And so I’m actually quite excited to be participating with you. And we’ll be using the recommendations beyond UNGA for our sector. We’ll be taking these to inform our member states in the ministries of health. So we do have a global strategy on digital health being developed. And so each of the sectors, I’m just giving a use case on how we’re using our own results from here. So at WHO with our e-health action line, from here we get to UNGA, where our call to action will be discussed. At WHO from UNGA, next year we’ll be working with our member states to include some of the recommendations in the global strategy on digital health. And that’s just one practical use case. on how we’re taking this conversation. So hopefully you can also have similar discussions in terms of how the next step will look like, you know, different action lines. Okay, having set the scene, then I’ll maybe proceed further to just ask the different facilitators in the tables. I just want to make sure that the facilitators are here. I saw Dennis working just now. Could I ask Dennis to be upstanding? I’ll just read out the names of the table facilitators to make sure that each table has a facilitator. All right, so Dennis, I saw you working just now. I’m here. Are you here? Do you want to just stand up so that we’ll have a bit… Sorry, Dennis was on my left side. All right, then Angelique Fowle. All right, that’s Angelique from Fowle. Then we have David Stotti from UNESCO. Thank you. So I’ll be there. He’s behind me. All right, everybody’s behind me, right? All right, thanks. We actually met on Sunday, right? Could you just remain standing, please? Just remain standing. All right, all right. Then we have Carla, ITU. Okay, to my right. All right, did I miss out any of the facilitators? Okay, whilst they’re standing, so I’m just going to ask, so this will be eHealth. Do you mind to capture that table? Then I’ll cover the table. Do I have a facilitator here? All right. May I request, Gitanjali, your guidance? We need one more facilitator for that table there. Okay, okay. All right, all right. Thanks. All right. Or as I’m facilitating, eHealth is over here. Do you mind to facilitate the eHealth one? Yes. All right. Okay. Yes, that one. All right. At the beginning, we… All right. C6 over there. Thanks so much. Okay. Now that we have facilitators at each table, we’ll kick off. with the first conversation point. Each block, once again, will be 20 minutes. So of three questions, 20 minutes. Of that 20 minutes, 11 minutes is for the group discussion, and then nine minutes is for the group presentation. Just keep in mind, 20 minutes at the block of question, as when Switzerland. So this would be prompt to precision as Swiss timing. All right, Gitanjali, did I miss out anything before we start the group discussion that you’d like to emphasize? All right. All right, so perfect. Thank you very much. So colleagues, let’s maybe begin with the first point of discussion. All right, so what we’ll be discussing now is really looking at the evolution of the action lines. So question number one, I would ask each group to discuss the WSIS action lines, how they have stood the test of time, and how they have evolved with technology. So discuss the WSIS action lines, their evolution, and how technology has influenced the implementation. That’s the first point of discussion. And so we would maybe ask that we commence the conversation by table. You have 11 minutes of discussion, and then nine minutes of presentation. We’ll ask the facilitators to guide the distillation of this particular question. So once again, what you’re discussing is the evolution of the action lines, and the interplay of this evolution with technology. OK, all right. So please take action. And we’ll see you in about 11 minutes when we call the different groups to report out. All right, thank you so much.

Audience: You can, like, agree to go around at any time. But I understand. Just so we know who we are. Yeah. We’re going to start? OK. Go ahead. So I’m going to sit by the side. Just name and organization. I didn’t share mine. And I’m the American University of Beirut. I’m the founder of the United Engineering Initiative, which is an initiative between the Faculty of Health Sciences and the Engineering Faculty, and we work on developing solutions for public health. So Cheryl Miller, and I’m Vice President for Digital Policy from the U.S. Council of Nationals. We’re the affiliate to the International Digital Forum. Yeah, it just added me. It’s okay. It was last minute. It’s okay, it’s okay. If I understand correctly, there aren’t any SSACs in place today. Not necessarily SSACs, but in general. So in 2003 and 2005, there were two summits. And then there are 11 active ones that came out of this. And my major is horticulture, and I study how I can adjust to the influence of the technology, that’s why I degree. That’s what’s happening in Dublin, called the Horticulture Research Center. And I’m just interested in how it will be used. Yeah, I guess I’ll suggest you, I mean, there are different sectors, so e-government, UNDESA, e-business, UNICAT, e-learning unit, e-health, WHO, e-employment, ILO, e-environment, WMO, e-educator, SAO, e-science unit. We have a really great number of e-services that we have access to, and we have government, so it’s really nice. So the first precedent that I want to open up is how they’ve done this all the time. I don’t know anything. For example, yesterday, they put out a really interesting thing, it’s called diversity of information, and there’s a number of ways to rank there. So just the percentage is 16 billion years ago. And that is now, as we’ve done it, a week ago. So from 15% to 68%. So it’s always interesting, because I know we don’t have everything that is available, but that shows that we have diversity of information. And at the time when these are agreed, there were no sustainable development goals. So that’s something, at that time we had millennium goals, something to keep in mind. And what can we do to make sure that these are still relevant? That’s the question to us. I think I’ll go first. So in my view, absolutely, the SDGs are still relevant. They’ve been around for many years. They’re very much under test of time. As you just said, the SDGs, I love that we use low and maximum line, very similar to the objectives and goals in the SDGs. What about the SDGs perspective? So there is something that’s called the target. That’s involved in facilitating and identifying. However, in this API, I believe we need the data, how we can find progress in our API. So at the moment, I think it’s possible that we should address any sort of really interesting technologies. There is a future. So how do you think it will be important? I would personally argue that it will be important by taking down and expanding our supply. What are the ways that we can measure it? If we do that, I think it’s annual. Based on that, we could have had an understanding 10 years ago that we didn’t have anywhere. So keeping in mind the technical aspects, how many core types of data, how many core are you using? 79% of the data. As I say, there’s new UN bodies. UNHCR has a role in that. There are some ways of how we can actually see all of that. Importantly, you know, we have that strength. Just to tell you quickly, if you get to know my role within facilitation, what’s the biggest challenge for the UN refugees? Well, many of us have spent a fair amount of time, for five years, six, five years, actually. They’ve been around for 30 years. They do couches. So, I think, no changes to their own lives in terms of what they think that they are. I think, maybe, that’s not always too obvious later. Even then, all of us, if I should go back to any of them, actually, I don’t think it’s too obvious. And I think they’ve spent a fair amount of time in the United States as well. And I think that this would be a discussion, perhaps, of seeing if there is a need for an upgrade or an upgrade, what we’ve been hearing from many stakeholders that, you know, maybe, we could be a little bit excessive. I think we’re not scared of that. I trust people better. And we’ll see how the review will go. But, at least, from the perspective of the UN, it’s a very good idea. So, I think that’s all we have to say. Everyone will see. Ten years ago, we had the same situation. We adopted the table, and it was kind of unsettling. However, if you read the description of the description of e-learning, it’s because a lot of them, for each extra month, they were able to spend that time, which, unfortunately, they could not really know. After ten years, still, they didn’t know. Still, then, they didn’t know that. All they could take, all of them, were verified. So, as a student, what do you think? So, I’m basically in the scientific area, so I think now we are using AI for biological biology. If you have heard of gene editing, we might use AI to predict some of the elements that we can use in this system to modify the system for animals or organisms, like yeast. But I think it’s not enough data for this analysis. So, we need to still do those lab works to verify it. So, I think AI could improve this, maybe other interferences. Also, AI using in China, because I’m from China, we need to use BPS to use AI. So, AI is not that much affordable for our students because of the price. We have some other AIs, mainly China, but it’s also kind of targeted for vendoring. So, I think that’s also a good point. Thank you. What are your thoughts? It’s more on AI. We should have few gaps and many gaps, but I think it’s also the opening for AI so much. It was very interesting. So, access to this digital access has its risks. This access is mandated by different APIs. So, languages that are used, literacy, the capacity of the generation, and especially maybe the digital literacy of older population. Young people are now very well-versed in digital health and the older population. We live in a world where increasingly older population have this kind of needs. I think that’s a great question, and that’s a great focus, but did you also want to comment on that? I would like to talk about a project that we have developed regarding neurophysiological aids for African-Polish children once. The children, the project that we have developed, we have children of Leo who are neurophysiologically impaired, and that we are speaking only about in this project, I mean only about the ones who are not intellectual. I think it’s another need. So, we have to consider that a study has said that now there are two out of them, which is actually, maybe you can give some examples, but I have another question. If these children did not exist, and this is very high, wouldn’t we consider that this is a similar development? It’s not a handicap, but we consider it a handicap. It’s another problem. It’s a handicap. It’s not a handicap. But we are considering it. I would like to make a quick reminder, you have three minutes, three minutes to consolidate the insights before we start the report out. They are running out of time. We have to take them. It’s another insight. There is no AI. There is no data governance. How can we also continue with them without data governance? Because a lot of them can ask for a necromarital test. Why are the others not writing? Just because they are not comfortable with it. So they are changing education sometimes, and it’s also important to keep us safe. And they can be a leader in this solution. Thank you so much. I know that you joined us a little bit. Did you want to tell us who you are? The first question we’re looking at is action lines and how they’ve been set. One minute, one minute, one minute to go. Do you have any thoughts on how we can achieve better quality buildings? I think what you said resonates, and I feel like the action lines versus the issues you’re mentioning, is not only a question of capacity, but also the ethical aspect. I mean, being AI, we don’t want to go on the ethical dimension. It feels like it’s a process of time. And then, of course, if the times have changed, action lines are still relevant. I think that’s what we need to do.

Derrick Muneene: All right. Thanks, everybody. Quick announcements. If you could ensure that everything that will be reported out is documented so that we don’t lose track of the intelligence that’s been captured. Let’s have a nine minutes discussion on the question in front of us and as you are standing, shall I ask you to go first or to appoint whoever needs to go first?

Davide Storti: But first if there’s a volunteer to want to summarize. But anyway, so thank you. So we’ve been discussing quickly some action lines which are pertaining to UNESCO’s mandate as facilitators, which are many, which are access to information, learning, science, media, ethics, cultural diversity, etc. So we had a few comments which are, let’s say, first of all, action lines need probably to be more better explained, probably probably not well understood, at least this was the comment. Flexibility of action lines as we’ve seen as a strength, making them easy to be transposed, but at the same time the lack of measurable targets is also giving us time to assess the progress and see where are we at now, so also to respond to the question of technology. And action lines should also be linked to concrete reality, to concrete things, so also to have them, to see them in action maybe. There were also, we saw that during the 20 years, we saw the emergence of new divides which are also impacting the way action lines are implemented. We mentioned some of these divides like affordability of devices or maybe the emergence of new needs like media literacy, information literacy, et cetera. So the technology has blurred also some edges and this was a comment made, for example, in the sense of the need to have old categories involved in the actual implementation, such as, for example, media and journalists that are not seen as present enough or not present in the WSIS process. And the technology evolution has made some blurring between professional journalism and what is a citizen of people use of media and social media. So these are all new challenges that are actually impacting the way we look at election lines. And I think some of these comments may be also a point for reflection as we go on.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. A big hand for that. Okay. That was a test run. So a minute and a half for everybody. That was a test run. So a minute and a half. And thanks for that, Rich. So Ma’am, you have a minute and a half.

Susan Teltscher: Thank you. I’ll take a minute. So we talked about C6, which is an enabling environment. And the general sensation was that there’s no need for complete reformulation of the action line because since it’s tech neutral, that is good. We do need to add a new dimensions. So how to make the action line future proof. And one word that came up was agility because technology is moving so fast that we need to be able to agile. What came up as well is that although the language is good, the implementation is lacking. So that is what we need to focus on. So obviously training, awareness raising in communities as was indeed initially defined in the action line. But what came up as well was accountability. We need to focus on better. reporting by countries on better reporting back on how the action line is being implemented because that’s how we’ll get there. Thank you. All right. Thanks for your time. A big hand for that. Over here. A minute and a half, ma’am. Well, a nice segue to what Sophie was mentioning. I think three points more or less that emerged from our discussion is, A, the action line is very broad enough so that the general principles are still applicable and valid as of today. But there is a need to integrate the action line with some issues such as cybersecurity, AI, and emerging technologies. So there is really a need to have a special emphasis on that front because, of course, capacity development and digital skills come with safety at the core, at the centre of the overall discussion. There is a need also to strengthen measurements. So we are measuring quite a lot the action line through reporting, under-reporting from all of us, I think. But there needs to be a measurement more at the national – so this is why I was referring to Sophie’s discussion – and regional level. And there are already mechanisms such as the IGF that can really strengthen and improve that level of measurement. And I would say a great example and a great, I think, addition that is something that is missing as of today is youth. So it’s the perspective of youth. So integrating young people and young perspectives in every action line. I feel that it is not – we think, sorry – but this is not there yet. And this is why we have three amazing representatives here from 18, if I can say, 18 years old and above, that are really taking the necessary steps on the ground to actually improve the young perspective into the capacity development field. So a big thanks.

Derrick Muneene: And keep those notes handy over here, a minute and a half. Just a minute. Okay, thank you so much. We are here as the E-Agriculture Action Line C7.

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: So for us, we started with a positive response, yes. With a big, big yes. And then we discussed on how normally, not only in this action line, but also in general, these have been stood as a time of involvement of this one. And then we give example of how the UN agencies have been working together to successfully implement this one. And then we give some example, or like One Health whereby FRO, WHO, and more other UN agents have been put together to implement this initiative. But also to set this digital system that is supporting to connect this one. Again, we mentioned that this is supported, started by supporting MDGs and now SDGs. But as we are having now more development goals on the climate actions, there is a need of adapting the action line to this need, taking into consideration the experience when in 2015, SDG was approved, whereby we have been adapted with this to respond to the SDG need. And again, we mentioned the collaboration of E-Agriculture Guide that was supporting the country to develop the participatory strategies, which is normally a positive solution. But of course, with this involvement, we mentioned the AI and the more other emerging. and technologies that bring opportunities, but also some risk that need this action plan, action lines to be aligned with the, so that they can also respond to the risk, including like data and more others that could bring some mistakes in terms of taking action. We also mentioned as the last, the overlap that are among these action lines that need to be also discussed and see how they can maybe well interconnected and respond to each other. Thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. A big hand. Okay. Lastly, but by all means, not the least, please digitize the contents. If you’ve written by hand, please digitize them so that we can receive them. Thank you.

Susan Teltscher: Thank you so much. I think the short answer to the question, whether or not the action lines and have they stood the test of time, the group believe the answer is yes. Although we noted back in 2000, one example, there were almost no schools that were connected. And now we’re sort of heading into a new phase where we’re really looking at AI. We talked about the WSIS targets and the fact that we need to understand a little bit more about how we can actually really measure the action lines moving forward. We also discussed whether or not we need to update or add something. For example, now we’re just having more discussions on gender and other items that perhaps the action lines don’t cover. Also talked about the action lines and whether or not we can really measure their impact on digital health since this round table was focused more on health. So I thought that was a good question that was left there. And then we mentioned there’s a real challenge in terms of linking the action lines to real life on the ground situations and case studies. As we move forward, things are constantly changing within our own environments, just across regions and local communities. So how are we able to really take the action lines and link it to those real case studies as we move forward? Thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Give a big hands in. Thank you very much. I’ll specifically be a bit biased on this table since I’m moderating. One of the things that we’ll be calling for enhancements is the whole idea. So our action line began as e-health and that organization will move to digital health. And so one of the things that we would want to adjust is a nomenclature. And that’s the thing that we’ve discussed with ITU. So our member states are no longer talking about e-health, but they’re talking about digital health. So that’s one item that we’ll be adding to the notes. All right. Thank you so much. Oh my goodness. My goodness. Yes. Okay.

Denis Suzar: Let me also summarize what we just discussed. First of all, we also agree with Cheryl. I think this is action lines stood its presence for the last 20 years. When the WSIS action lines, we noted that were adopted 20 years ago, that they were specifically technology nonspecific. So they were not, they didn’t include any specific technology at that time. So we briefly discussed, for example, now we have AI and then 10 years ago we had blockchain, but we could put AI under capacity building or under C5 security or under infrastructure. So we don’t need to update action lines. So this is our strong message from the table. We also mentioned that we need to give more attention to digital device still exists. So that was one other message, but strong messages not to change the WSIS action lines, but maybe improve them with some new players today in the field. For example, UNHCR, they could be given maybe more role in one of the WSIS action lines. some description of the business action lines could be further elaborated to include the new issues, but the action lines should stay as they are. If I missed anything?

Derrick Muneene: All right, a big hand for that. Thanks, Dennis. All right, thank you so much for this conversation. And once again, please do digitize the content you’ve generated. We’ll go to the second question, if we could ask the team to give us a second question. So in the second round of conversations, what we’ll be asking you to actually focus on is the main achievements and challenges of the WSIS action lines. 11 minutes of discussions and nine minutes of report out. Okay, all the best. So the action lines, once again, the action lines that you’ve been looking at, for example, the e-education. So the action lines that you’ve been reviewing, the discussion point now is the main achievements of those action lines. And at the same time, the challenges that have been documented or witnessed. Okay, 11 minutes for discussion, and then we’ll come back for a nine-minute presentation. and there is a system of TDRs and data brought.

Audience: So it’s been there since 2000. In a way, it has 15,000 in the world. It’s good and best practice. I hear a lot of people say, there’s not a lot of data about people on the ground. There are 15,000 people on the ground. They can talk about the odds and everything else on the wall. And a part of that database can be used by anyone. Not only as the data, but actually as a tool to collect. I hear the question. You said in 2004. Is it updated? OK. I think it’s mostly a nice thing. This is the work that I’m still taking. I’m getting my ideas online. So I think then one challenge is how? I’ve been working with WHO 10 years ago on a joint database. Then we worked with FAO. Then we had GCOA, the Global Coalition on Aging, with whom we also worked on a database, Healthy Aging, Using Digits. So it’s about partners outside recognizing database, using it, collecting it, and bringing it back to me. Again, that’s something that we can all do. But again, we are going back to the challenges. And the challenges are, are these terms? Are they too complex for people who actually go and delve into it and understand? That is quite fine. But I think we need to kind of re-communicate. I really love that idea of the table saying that, this is actually my concern. I’m not submitting it well enough. These kinds of offerings are very confusing. But going back to this, we’ve seen some good examples of national and regional IGFs. So you go with your national IGF, you go to your regional IGF, you bring all these things to the global IGF. Maybe these discussions on implementation and intersectionality are happening at the global IGF. But also, you know, I have some people from the national and regional business cattle bank, where they are actually discussing it even more. But about, you know, something like, physically we are all now using technology for everything. But at the same time, it’s creating addictions now. For me, that’s a big challenge, like addictions. And with the AI now, I think we are thinking less. So, and then you mentioned AI. This is the biggest challenge. Is it required, ethical, design, engineering, and SQL? And then there are two points, you know, people who are using it in terms of communication. I think major, you know, 2015, I think everyone mentioned all those huge campaigns, communicating on that. Maybe, you know, there is always a moment to re-communicate something back to the world. I just spoke to a person from the human rights and she was saying that, you know, first sentence of the Geneva Declaration discusses the importance of human rights. And she’s then, you know, then the idea is to go and tell everyone that the Vicious Summit actually discusses, you know, deals, you know, the topic of human rights as part of the French society. There is no other way. So it’s there, but people don’t know about it. The only people who are really, you know, looking into this is, and in human rights, actually, it’s like, maybe, you know, really going back. It’s a stakeholder, it could be necessarily national or regional, it could be by topic, by action, why? And I think this is something that’s great. That’s a good starting point. Skills. Of course, it’s not enough. Sorry, no, no. I thought you could have said it very well. Like race, like, again, achievements. It might sound controversial, but Victoria was one of the therapists, and I found it, like, I’m looking into it. Before I was in this, like, I was at a global level, but I’m at a country level now, here. Like, there are so many global initiatives, like, I don’t know about in the country, and I find a lot of them are sort of, like, slow to evolve. Like, with W2, we do a lot of innovations, and a lot of, like, traction, and so on. But I feel like it’s difficult to be calm on the Vicious track. We have a problem with this, so… Few minutes, two minutes to wrap up. I don’t know how it’s organised now, probably it’s by problems, and maybe now with all these AI whatever, like AI agents can organise, but I find that like when I was in the country I wanted like, I have problems that I have pressure to solve, and I was told by professors at the university that you know where you can learn to do it, and like the UN agency was like, oh we’re programmed for the next two years, so you have it included in your act, and your country co-operation strategy will help you in the next two years. Thank you for that. In 2003, not all the countries had portals. What exactly were the major achievements? I think all 193 national portals in 2018 or 2019, but today if you look at the most populous cities in each country, out of 193 cities, only around 100 cities also have a city portal, because there are still some cities, most populous cities in the country around the world, do not have a city portal. And I think it doesn’t come out of the region, one of the contributions of the white democratization movement. Price war. Bigger business drastically. What else? I would just say, it’s your first time as president of the United Nations, I saw the challenges, you know, I was included in the government. Price war. Everybody’s been over everything. I see we have a new technology, and everywhere it’s been that way. Big change. And sometimes we have new technology. And quite right. 10 years ago, it was fine. What would you guys think, with respect to IT? I mean, ITU’s done a lot, and partners, too. So we’ve got to add to that. We’re at the top of the number. We’ve got to get involved. I mean, there’s so much conversation going on.

Derrick Muneene: So much conversation is going on. If I could ask everybody to come back to the main floor. Keep the conversations noted as we discuss as a group. Okay, okay. Encouraging everybody to just pause for a moment. Thank you so much for all the energy. We do have to progress. And so let’s have people to the report out on the question. So we’ll start with this table here and we’ll go in reverse. Shall we?

Susan Teltscher: Well, I always like to end on a positive note. So we started with the challenges first. And so one of the things we discussed was the lack of understanding of the national and regional level for the action lines and how we sort of tackle that moving forward. It was mentioned that actually, how many people by show of hands have gone into the database that was created 2004 on the stock taking report? Okay, only ITU staff. So in 2004, our table learned that there was a stock taking report. This report is continuously updated and it focuses on different joint projects and has a lot of information. And so I think that as a community, this is something, this is a resource that maybe we haven’t been using that we need to refocus on. It was also mentioned that having partners outside of the ITU that can help to use this database and spread the information could perhaps help that national regional issue that we think that we’re seeing. Also, we asked, are the terms too difficult? One of the other tables raised the issue of communication. And so perhaps we need to take a few steps back and think about re-communicating. We have good examples of local and regional IGFs and there is talk about, well, should we do something locally and regionally that’s similar with a specific focus on the action lines. Need to flip things over to being. more problem-based and looking, as countries see their problems, being able to focus on that and find the information to help them solve their specific problems rather than having just a broad bit of information. And then the achievements. The first question was an achievement. We’ve agreed they’ve stood the test of time, so that clearly is an achievement. We’re all still here, right? There was a discussion about, is the GDC an achievement of WSIS? Just all the discussions that have led up to where we are with that. And then partners to connect all the efforts that have gone into that program with respect to expanding connectivity and the support behind that. So thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Great. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. A minute and a half. Okay. Thank you so much.

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: Here, we’re discussing about the farmers, because when we talk about agriculture mainly, we are focusing to the farmers. And from the beginning of this action line, normally the farmers are the people whom we are thinking as if they could not know how to write, how to read. So engaging them in this digital era could be somehow difficult. So the action line was even focusing to promote how this solution could be also engaged. But along this journey, we have achieved a lot, because from this basic use of application of ICT in agricultural sector, we have gone beyond and even enabling cutting edge innovation, covering AI, geospatial data, and also automated agriculture with even digital public good. Having this also agricultural community practices that I mentioned, initiative like Digital Village Initiative and Global Network for Digital Agricultural Innovation Hub demonstrated that if we can develop solutions with these farmers at the center, we bring something that they need, and then they start to jump in and use them. in impactful, in the impact, it bring impact and then it engage them in using these at the centers. We are talking about also the guide that I mentioned before. And so far over that countries are having these agriculture strategies which I’m not going to continue because I mentioned this before. We also among this achievement, we have been part of as a file have been part of Digital Public Good Alliance. Now we are promoting open source, open tool and open data including AI models whereby we develop 15 new digital public good that eight are now certified but also some are also on the way. And for this I can mention two that have been win as a prize of champion award in WSIS last year and also this year. One is data service portfolio that we’re discussing on this table but also another one on food losses. As challenges, let me go jump immediately to the challenge. Well, of course, even though this implemented we still have some data divide remaining as a major barrier including the lacking of digital skills, connectivity, affordability and access to this solution that we are talking about but also as AI and big data is gaining power it is a need of ethical guidance, data governance and sustainability framework. Thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. A big hand for that. Okay. A minute and a half, please. Okay.

Susan Teltscher: Yeah, so, well, unfortunately we focused a lot about the challenges and not really about the achievement but let’s start from the positive just to have a different perspective. So the… Achievement, we can say that digital transformation is now a path that different stakeholders are actually moving forward and that we can say that in any case collaboration overall you know has improved generally speaking. Achievements are quite a lot, the digital divide is still there and the lack of IT skills of digital skills is still especially again looking more at the young people now is still a major problem in many countries. We are also looking at infrastructure because it seems that again and that goes a bit with another point which is digital inclusion. So infrastructure is the fact that connectivity still has not reached the you know many basically underserved you know communities and that goes a bit that you know in this overall digital transformation digital inclusion still remains as a big barrier. We know that many vulnerable groups are still left behind and I think that then you know that again is still a challenge. And then the last point which I think that is also very important to highlight is the need of having a meaningful access and responsible use of ICTs again because this is the lack of having also relevant content translated into national you know local languages is also you know a barrier that again that the actual line is still needs to face and focus. Thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Right thank you so much, a big hand. And Dennis I wanted to make sure I don’t forget. Okay a minute and a half ma’am. Absolutely thank you very much with great respect to the

Susan Teltscher: breadth of the question. We have also started with a lot of the challenges that tables before have already mentioned including the digital divide and remaining challenges not only in connectivity but also in in terms of meaningful access and also these sort of social outcomes that can be achieved through the current limited infrastructures. Let me come back to you. consult my notes quickly so that I am relevant to the discussion. We have also mentioned the pace of innovation as one of the remaining challenges, particularly when it comes to the governance efforts, as well as concerns around addiction or dependency. Oftentimes, also, this is what we’re seeing in our work at UNDP, where local communities are often getting standards or infrastructures prescribed and have concerns about retaining their own agency. In terms of the achievements that we have mentioned, indeed, as was already said, the sustained efforts and attentions to this topic can be noted among the achievements of this agenda. However, we also noted some of the promising domain applications in this area, including, for example, digital government portals for cities and municipal governments that are active in over 150 cities globally. Big achievements have also been made in terms of affordability of connectivity and technologies, as well as the availability of information and participating in the information economy, which is something that we highlighted as well as important. Thank you so much.

Derrick Muneene: Big hand for the team. All right. Yes, a minute and a half, sir.

Denis Suzar: I thought you would forget us. So, thanks. So, yeah, we also have identified a number of challenges, but we also have some achievements, which is good. So, one of the achievements, I’m very happy to hear that, is that the national alliance, at least the good thing is bringing the UN together. So, that’s an achievement, I should say. So, it’s a good way to see how the UN was brought into all these dimensions that this framework brings us. But that’s also evolved over time with, of course, other introduction of new agencies, the UN Women, for example, was a site. etc. But of course, we also mentioned the problems linked to all these things, which is networking, which is the reporting, the ownership, targets, etc. So that’s a challenge. Other achievement which was mentioned is coming from the youth, it’s networking. So bringing the youth together, it is an achievement actually. This was shared at the table, giving the opportunity to share. So uniting the youth on these issues, I think this was important. And lastly, the IGF was mentioned as one of the biggest achievements as a multi-stakeholder process, free non-decision making platform, bringing international and national dimensions, and the values of WSIS are integrated in the IGF, of course. So that’s an achievement which was mentioned. Among the challenges, there may be a more clear link between actual lines and other frameworks of the UN like the SDGs. And now, of course, the GDC was mentioned as still remaining challenges. So there’s work to be done there. And echoing the other tables as well, digital inclusion. So hear everyone’s voices. There was a strong call for increasing inclusion. Do not let anyone out. Bring more attention on vulnerable groups and also from rural areas. And this was another, we discussed before about the divides, etc. So there are still challenges linked with infrastructure, accessibility for the ability of devices. But a strong call for increasing multi-stakeholderism.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. A big hand. Okay. Lastly, by all means,

Susan Teltscher: is not the least. I tried to get somebody else to report out but they voluntarily told me. So we also focused on the challenges but also the achievements and the multi-stakeholder model. We saw it that although great advances have been made, it’s still something that we need to do a lot of work on. We saw some examples of success of the multi-stakeholder model. The IGF was mentioned but also our global symposium for regulators of ITU where we see a greater involvement of all kinds of stakeholders. What was also mentioned is that we do see new risks and the potential for harm. So we need global partnerships and collaboration. We’ve seen that regulatory expertise on national but also regional and international level has improved. But given these new risks and potential for harm, we need to keep on working on that expertise on the knowledge. So the capacity building, knowledge exchange and data is key. And last but not least, before I forget, the multi-stakeholderism also needs to be inclusive geographically because especially on AI we still see a divide there. And if emerging economies are not at the table, their needs will not be known and AI will just continue to develop without taking into consideration those needs. All right. Big hand. Thank you so much.

Derrick Muneene: All right. Final and last conversation. Question number three. You have looked at the status of the action lines. You have looked at the achievements and challenges. What we’re now dealing with is looking at the future. And so we would be now taking this as the last round of conversations. Keep in mind, after this, we’ll be then asking for wrap-up thoughts from the facilitators after this round and a call to action. And so what you’ll be discussing is really looking at beyond 2025. So we’re at the 20-year reflection now. And so the question really is looking at the vision of action lines beyond 2025. So this year is a year of stock taking, 20 years into the action lines. And so what you’ll be discussing is what should be the vision beyond 2025. And then adding to this question is whether we should have some new action lines and what measurement frameworks should be put in place. Okay, so last question. And as we are looking at this as the last question, please, we’ll be asking the facilitators also to also get ready to condense the conversation on the table across the three questions. So we do that at the same time. So we deal with this question, but also reflect about everything that you’ve heard today. And then we’re going to go to action. Okay, so 11 minutes of discussion. Nine minutes of reflections. And then we’ll have another good discussion. Okay, we’ll start right now.

Audience: Those are all connectivity indicators coming from IQ, that number of really connected to internet. Because we use a lot of money. Under the SDG indication, what is going to be indicated is the number of connections to internet. So there are 4 million indicated, but only 6.6% Yes, there are a lot of different budgets. For example, eBay is good, I think. So we have people from eBay, like Russia, for example. Yeah, but there are a lot of people who use it. Yeah, for the visitation, for visitation. Expensive. Exactly, yeah. Just take care of the corporate. Yeah, yeah. But for visitation… Let’s go the other way. Let’s take eGovernment. What is the indicator? And we don’t even indicate it. And what I was telling you is that you have to respond to some indicators. So what will we offer? It depends on the profession. I think the best thing to do is to go and check it out. So, you know, each of all the facilitators, one together with their own peers, looking at the guidance of the facilitators on what these indicators could be. So, one new action site will be down in the village. So building all of these established action sites, there is an issue of what sorts of companies are in the village of the clients, to the accountability of digitization. It seems to be missing from the actions. It’s not just agriculture. Correct me if I’m wrong. Will you open the ethical dimension? Which one? Which one? The ethical dimensions of the information. Maybe you can do that. have seen. I’m saying that a lot of things have been discussed. So, of course, as we move on and things change politically, economically, technologically, maybe we can rethink certain things. But I think the action lines that we are are probably covering now. What does it mean, even if they are covered? Are we really taking action? That’s it. Any other issue with law is there. I think what we could do here, I would rather like to talk about measuring and understanding. Action is also taken. Who is measuring that? Often we are lacking capacity to do both things. I’m always for that thing of rather take action than report on action. Rather take two actions, then take one action, and secondly report on that action. Because this is the world that actually we are in. There’s a lack of reporting. We can talk about connecting hospitals. How meaningful is this? Is the learning improved because the schools are connected? Is the health care service better? Is there a way to measure this? I think that as they are, this is my issue, because this is how I see it. For the action lines to be adopted in two years, heads of states, prime ministers, and all stakeholders get together. This is why it was called TAP. This event, although it has services in its name, the services event is formal. Discussions on how the outcomes of summits are being implemented. Maybe UNGA can change this. I don’t know. Until the 2000s, UNGA can present suggestions based on all those examples. And in the past, if you understand, summits were very rare. Summits are the highest body of events, super rare. Now, these days, a lot of summits are happening. Every year, there’s a summit. This is great. Do we need a summit? We don’t. We shouldn’t ask them to prepare a summit. I see. That’s exactly how I see it. There are all kinds of different frameworks. You can see what’s up. To replace something that was not already there. It was there. The action lines are there. Did it suggest giving some additional guidance on how… One minute. Checkpoint. Two minutes checkpoints Like, you know, there’ll be something about, like, taking it as being an integrated approach, like something very integrated in our public policy. Thank you. Point about trust infrastructure.

Derrick Muneene: All right. All right. Lots of energy in the room, great conversations, but we do have to move on. Thank you so much once again for the intelligence being being gathered. Again, just to remind everybody to digitize the knowledge that is being created. We’ll go into the discussion again, a minute and a half for facilitators. We’ll start from the middle now. And so we’ll start with this table.

Table 5: I knew that. Even a tuning was like this when I was not prepared. OK, just as a summary. Well, the main point is that we don’t think that the action line needs to be changed. Maybe the text can be should be a little bit slightly revised. to get in long, let’s say, negotiation processes, is the way maybe that we implement the actual action line and the way how we measure the progress of the action line that needs to integrate and embed major perspectives, such as, again, youth. We also, again, spoke a bit about gender equality that is, again, mentioned maybe somewhere in the text, but it’s not in the reporting. We are not, let’s say, emphasizing it. And that may be mainly looking more at the national regional perspective, again, because at the action line level every year we are reporting, but again, this is not really reflected at the national regional level, again, using the tools that we have already mentioned over the past hour. And that goes in this implementation phase, that goes a bit in the fact that we looking a little bit ahead, we need to work more on the promotion of the action line, because it’s true that when we look at the local context against subnational context, the action lines are not very well known. And in the implementation, if we want the action line very well known, we need to team up with the local, again, authorities and especially NGOs in case, again, the government is not present. So thank you very much.

Derrick Muneene: You can end. Good points there, all right. OK, again.

Table 6: Yes, so we started by sort of emphasizing that the visas process should be or should sort of be broadly aware and aligned with many of the other processes, including the SDGs and the GDC, the Global Digital Compact. For those unfamiliar, though I doubt there would be any in this room. Yes, so alignment is needed. And sort of we then discussed some of the matrices that already exist in this process and emphasized how, though there is over 200 of them, only a minimum is actually focused on connectivity. a lot of them are focused on connectivity per se, so material concerns as opposed to some of the more broader social outcomes we’ve been talking about today, which is something that should be reflected. To address this, we talked about the various approaches that we think might currently be missing, including how to capture skills, for example, trying to look at maybe the number of graduates or other measurements that might be captured in other platforms, let’s say, including the ITU yearly measurements or the UNDP Digital Development Compass. And we talked about the Visas Forum upcoming in July, 2026 as a good opportunity to sort of propose some of these indices and do further work on measurement and evaluation. Have you begun? Okay, we have a volunteer, right? Okay. You need to hit the add button. Oh, no, I’ll be very quick. So we also agreed that there’s no need to create new action lines, but then we need to basically think about or elaborate on some of the new risks that have emerged, which include, for example, cybersecurity, information integrity, and it came up, so I’m not going to list everything, but I think AI and existing digital divides came up very strongly because now with the AI, it’s just a gap is becoming further and further. We have involvement of community as an important piece in building trust with different stakeholders. So that really went into the point around multi-stakeholderism and yeah, digital rights, digital literacy also being very important for folks to be able to navigate, translating the action lines into national, regional levels and how they’re implemented. So there’s no need. again, to have new action lines, but to make them agile and future-proof, and also focus on implementation, which includes better reporting back from countries. And that’s the accountability piece, which we found very important. And looking forward, I mean, beyond 2025, we really, I think we agreed on the keyword, which is intersectional inclusion, which is both in making sure intersectionality of digital aspects, you know, that digital really affects everything we have, the agricultural health, but also all sort, you know, dimensions of our lives. But also that means we need all stakeholders at the table. So again, back to multi-stakeholderism. Thank you.

Davide Storti: So, yeah, so we discussed about, of course, new technologies. This was a big topic here. I think, of course, AI, emerging technologies, nobody knew 20 years ago what was going to be there. So we had the discussion on how these should be, or how could, should be integrated in the new ways, or not. Also making a comment about the fact that the action lines maybe are a bit broad, and that’s problematic for, again, for measurement. So I think, again, here we have discussed the need to maybe expand the implementation. So at implementation level of the action lines to make sure these are measurable, we mentioned in particular issues linked to environmental issues, climate change, youth, and the need to maybe perhaps establish some targets or give… some periods for reporting. So to be a little bit more concrete in terms of measurement of the progress. And the other question which came on was the, would be great, it was said at the table to maybe make sure that UN, all these UN frameworks that come together in a more holistic way so that there is more coherence maybe in the implementation process of law.

Derrick Muneene: All right, a big hand there. Okay, over here, a minute and a half. It’s now on.

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: Okay, thank you. On the vision, as far as we are, we eager to increase the load of this action line to the transforming agri-food system through inclusive, ethical, and sustainable data agriculture or data innovation. And then the use of technologies such as AI, big data and geo-special and data public good would be enhanced. Again, we have to develop a comprehensive taxonomy and a shared framework for innovation in data agriculture so that we can understand who is having what to ensure this scalability but also sustainability and even avoiding duplication of the efforts. We are now focusing in the investment of early stage data innovation so that we can increase this ideation and also the prototype that need to be connected to what we are calling, what we mentioned as the open data, open source, and the open model. And within our discussion, we’re also mentioning the promotion of public money and the public code with my colleague who is part of developers, software engineer, because he was mentioning the fact that if we are engaging the private sector in… development of a solution it have to be also at the end being also accessible in open, in the open model. The last one in the vision was the build ecosystem that is supporting the local digital innovation ecosystem and all of these have to be to serve as part of what we have normally as in the framework of inclusivity, human-centered and sustainable model. In terms of if we may have to have a new action line we are thinking of aligning and interlink existing one to better reflect emerging priorities. Here we can give example of agriculture and the capacity building that have some interconnectivity but also an example for C7 on e-government and C11 on intergovernmental cooperation that could also be have some kind of linkage but also we discussed on having one that could also talk about the decentralization of power destroying monopoly. Maybe you understand that more than me and again we have mentioned how we may have to clarify these action lines more so that how we we can clarify how the leading institution are working with the other key actors in this in the same area. In terms of measurement framework we mentioned having this in four pillars access and infrastructure for tracking the local connectivity availability of data solution and data public good adoption and use for measuring uptake and data tools by the farmers and segregated by gender and age of course and youth and then impact and the outcome for assessing productivity gain market access and resilience. improvement in our sector, but also governance and ecosystem for evaluating national strategies, partnership and innovation hubs. Thank you. Okay, thank you so much.

Derrick Muneene: Lastly, but by all means, not the least.

Susan Teltscher: Thank you. So vision for the WSIS action lines beyond 2025, should there be new action lines, and what would a measurement framework look like? We think there’s big potential for the next phase, we need to mobilize capacity to solve concrete problems, need to organize initiatives via data spaces and create new AI solutions to move faster. We think we need a bigger exchange of both expertise and financial support, and under financial support, there’s two buckets, new resources, and then also rebalancing the current financial resources that we have. With respect to new action lines, we had a conversation via yes and via no. So yes, maybe new action lines for AI potential, and we discussed whether or not accountability going down that thread would be the focus, or does the current action line that covers ethical dimensions of information society already cover that? We just started the discussion, no specific answer there. We mentioned we need greater global cooperation. Under the no line for action lines, we think the action lines are probably covering the subject matter, but the question is, are we really taking action? The bigger question is measuring, who’s measuring and what are we measuring? With respect to, for example, connectivity, how meaningful is it? With respect to healthcare, are we making healthcare better? Then we asked a really big question, get ready, we said, do we need another summit? Do we need another summit with the highest level of UN officials on this, given the high level of importance? We talked about the role of the Global Digital Compact, the fact that it reflects current day issues and enhances the current framework, discuss an integrated approach and the need for trust infrastructure, and I think our table just wanted to end by thanking all the ITU staff for bringing us all together. We really valued the conversation, and special shout out to the youth who are in the room as well, and as well as our table. We really appreciate your contribution.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I think we’ve covered all the tables. Now we sort of like, would like to gracefully get to the later part of this conversation. I’ll be inviting the facilitators to stand with me momentarily, but just checking everything that you’ve heard across the six tables. I would like to just pause a little bit to get any reflections that came out of these conversations that you’d want to bring to the table. So this is a moment where we have any synthesis conversations, any reflections from what has been discussed. And once again, you have the digital, the emails to send your digital content right in front there. Okay. It’s an open conversation. And then after this, I’ll just ask the facilitators to just say a few points that came as a result of facilitating the three questions. So point A, any conversations that are pending that came to your mind as we discussed throughout the three questions. Would anybody want to kick off? Okay. This is actually Mike, by the way,

Susan Teltscher: I’ve been handing over. Do you want to try that? Does it work? Hello? Oh, I didn’t even know there was one here. I’m sorry. So I think one theme that I heard throughout all the tables was definitely the need for cooperation. And as we raise and we talk about all of these challenges, I don’t necessarily think that any one group can fix any of this alone. And so I would say, number one, cooperation, and then number two, communication, making sure that we’re on the same page and making sure that we’re working together as we try to tackle things and achieve all the answers to the questions.

Derrick Muneene: Good point. Cooperation, right? That’s a good point. Okay. Communication. Anybody else? Do you want to expand on that? Yeah. And one thing that’s common

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: to us all, whether obvious or not completely obvious, is that aspect of inclusion. So as regulations are being made and, of course, we talked about enabling environment, we realized that those at the grassroots, who are recipients eventually of these regulations, are mostly not involved at the table. So we need to find a way to ensure that they are part of decision making. Yeah, thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Very good point. All right. Over here is a mic. No? It’s all ours.

Table 5: So I think one of the points that, again, it came across all the discussions is what we know, but capacity building and capacity development is cross-cutting. And I think that is just the way. And I feel that we are all doing a lot here in the room. It’s just a way of really reporting in a very harmonized way, again, using the tools that we have available. And that would really show a bit better, in a better way, the progress. And, of course, inclusion coming, again, back to the youth perspective, which I think was mentioned already several times. Thank you very much.

Derrick Muneene: I like the point on awareness, actually. Yes, good point. I like the question of awareness that you raised. We actually did have a good discussion, just as we were standing there, in terms of awareness of the action lines, who’s doing what. We also heard about the database that not many of us have actually used that. So that feeds into the communication dimension. All right, over here.

Davide Storti: Yes, thank you. Let me draw attention, maybe for something beyond 2025, for future, to speak about a new generation that’s coming. the most important, what we have now, because looking for migrants, I could see it’s gadget generation. Maybe next step will be digital generation, if you have something inside and so on, but we should draw attention what our people, our young people will do with these new possibilities. They shouldn’t forget how think themselves without some support from that. We should skill them for that. Other point is, what we will do if it switch off of energy? No one provide explanation what we will do. We should prepare them to not to forget how to think themselves and work themselves. This is my understanding for that that I share with you my difficulty. All right, good points, good points. Thank you very much. I think we need more organization in terms of awareness. We need more organizations to target the school level actually. If we need the world to be more digital in ethics way, then we have to start from the schools. And I think we don’t target this level of environment. We don’t look at the school’s level from very early grades in order to change the future in more digital and more, I know they know digital more than what we know in fact, but not in ethical way. So we need to teach them how to be in ethical way in using, and in a safe mode also, in using the cybersecurity issues and the AI in a proper way. That’s what I’m looking for. Thank you. Right. Thank you so much. There’s some applause coming for you. All right, maybe because it’s connected to this one. Maybe we need less Digitalization, so let me bring it like to this. It’s about human bias Learning really at school What kind of relations do it’s important also racial relations and connections to nature so therefore you have the grounding for respecting nature and

Derrick Muneene: Acting sustainable sustainable. So maybe this is more important than digitalization because the digitalization comes So, yeah, okay. Good points again. Thank you so much. Yes The light I

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: Think is great that we are growing through this conversation and the fact that we have all over the world voices together around the table Well, it seems to me that we are moving to a new phase of the digital transformation With a big potential with also some important risks and these a talk today was important for us to assess Do you have the right kind of guidelines? Action lines. Do you have the right kind of global governance structures? well We will never have the perfect solution, but we have something we can build on We just concluded this in our discussion I will underline particularly the recently adopted global digital compact, which is the the last effort of updating action lines and governance but the idea like really to underline is that We are in a phase where we need on one hand much higher Cooperation international cooperation, but on the other hand to allow tailor-made solutions Meeting the needs of each country and of each region and these two things are not in contradiction. We need both international cooperation, but also tailor-made solutions. This is the idea I’d like to underline. Thank you.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much. Okay, big hands, big hands. All right, over here.

Audience: Okay, I would like to say something as a young people, from my own perspective, like now I’m currently a college student, and like 90% of us use AI daily, but like a few of us get the chance to reflect what they actually did to us, and what they mean to us. Like to some degree, it kind of feel like AI is kind of manipulate our life instead of we use AI as a tool. So I think it’s a great chance for us to be here and to listen to all this session and evolving this kind of discussion and really reflect on what’s AI’s relationship with us. Yeah. A few more hands and I’ll be preparing Gitanjali to prepare for the final remarks as we are getting this conversation to a standstill. Yes, oh, you have a mic. Yes, just following to what we just heard, I’m very happy to be here because I represent the children rights and the youth rights. So it’s very important to have this connection with a digital environment, working on a government base and also on the international organization, developing a project about the population of children and youth who are the most representative of the digital world, because they are going to this world. I’m speaking about the neurological difference, the children and youth. They are the ones who are more behind the screen. and understanding also how it works, and they are maybe tomorrow the leaders of this change, because they are the ones who are really willing to develop it and to enter into this world. Thank you very much.

Derrick Muneene: Thank you so much for those comments. Two more hands.

Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1: Good afternoon, very nice conversations. I’m very happy to see that there are more conversations about sustainability and building capacity for the environment in conversations and forums that is focused on digital and global as it concerns tech. My recommendation is the winners or champions from the high-level prizes, some of the solutions should be put in a repository where others can go to and take learnings, because those solutions to me look very interesting. So something that we can take as use cases for our classes as teachers or working with young people. That is my recommendation as we go forward.

Derrick Muneene: All right, I don’t see any more hands, and I just want to check with the facilitators. Let’s have the facilitators stand, actually, so we can applause them, we can appreciate them. All right. Okay. So thank you so much. Okay, we have one. Thank you. All right.

Gitanjali Sah: Thank you so much. Thank you so much. And I think we should have a group photo after Gitanjali finishes, right? All right. So Gitanjali, you’ll be helping us to start the conversation. Thank you so much, Derek. A huge round of applause for Derek. Thank you. Really, as the organizer of this event, and as a person who, with my other colleagues, the UN, like Denise, Derek, who have been putting this whole WSIS process together, it’s a pride moment for us because when we look around the table, you know, when we started the WSIS Forum in 2009, We did not have so many women in the room. We did not have so many young people in the room. We did not have so many civil society actors, private sector actors, especially people, engineers who are developing applications. So we really feel proud that the momentum has been really strong for the WSIS process. And today, when I look around the room, I really see new faces. So it’s really about evolution. It’s not the same old people who have been following the process since 2003, but really new faces. Of course, we need people like Professor Minkade to guide us through the process. It’s also a lot of institutional memory because it keeps us grounded on why we started it. We started it because we wanted to bring technology to the people. This was the core of the WSIS process, that how are all the voices, communities included to bring technology to the people and how can people benefit from technology? So thank you so much. All these outcomes are gonna be part of our outcome document, and we are going to put it also in the chair’s summary. And just to let you know that the action lines that we spoke about today, they actually set up the WSIS forum. We used to have something called the cluster of WSIS related events, which was rebranded into the WSIS forum in 2009. So the forum has a huge importance in implementing the WSIS action lines, taking stock of it, and also to plan a vision on how together we are going to implement these. So WSIS forum has a very important part in the future of WSIS, in the vision of WSIS. So Derek, one call for action from your side, what you thought that this, and of course Davide, our very close partner from UNESCO, he has been implementing what, seven action lines? Six action lines, six action lines. So thank you so much, Davide. Derek, one call for action. My call to action is collaboration and focus on digital public infrastructure for the sustainability of digital transformation in health. Thank you very much. And see you tomorrow at the same time in this room to talk about multi-stakeholderism. All right, thanks, everybody. We’ll now get a photo over there. So maybe a selfie. Also for those of you who will be there at six, we will have a yoga session by the Indian Mission. Please join us in the open space for the yoga session.

Agreement points

WSIS Action Lines have stood the test of time and remain relevant

Speakers

– Davide Storti
– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

Action lines have stood the test of time and remain relevant despite technological changes

Action lines are technology-neutral and flexible, making them adaptable to new technologies like AI

Digital transformation has become a path that different stakeholders are moving forward on

Action lines successfully supported MDGs and now SDGs, demonstrating adaptability

Summary

Multiple speakers agreed that the WSIS action lines have proven their durability and continued relevance over 20 years, with their technology-neutral design allowing adaptation to new technologies while maintaining core principles

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

No need for completely new action lines, but existing ones need improvement

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

No need for new action lines but existing ones should be made more agile and future-proof

Focus should be on intersectional inclusion and multi-stakeholderism

Need for comprehensive taxonomy and shared frameworks for innovation in digital agriculture

Summary

Speakers consensus was that rather than creating new action lines, the focus should be on making existing ones more responsive, agile, and inclusive while improving implementation frameworks

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Digital divides and inclusion challenges persist as major barriers

Speakers

– Susan Teltscher
– Davide Storti
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

Digital divides and lack of digital skills remain major barriers despite progress

There’s a lack of understanding of action lines at grassroots level requiring better communication

UN agencies have successfully collaborated through action lines, as seen in One Health initiatives

Summary

Multiple speakers identified persistent digital divides, lack of digital skills, and insufficient grassroots understanding as ongoing challenges that need addressing through better communication and collaboration

Topics

Development | Human rights

Need for better measurement frameworks and accountability mechanisms

Speakers

– Susan Teltscher
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1
– Table 5

Arguments

Better reporting and accountability mechanisms are needed at national and regional levels

Measurement frameworks should focus on meaningful outcomes rather than just connectivity indicators

Need for comprehensive taxonomy and shared frameworks for innovation in digital agriculture

Capacity building is cross-cutting and needs harmonized reporting mechanisms

Summary

Speakers agreed that current measurement approaches are inadequate and need to focus on meaningful outcomes rather than technical metrics, with better reporting and accountability at national/regional levels

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Youth perspectives need stronger integration in digital governance

Speakers

– Gitanjali Sah
– Audience
– Susan Teltscher

Arguments

Youth perspective is missing from action lines and needs to be integrated

Young people use AI daily but lack reflection on its impact on their lives

Need to teach digital ethics and cybersecurity from early school grades

Focus should be on intersectional inclusion and multi-stakeholderism

Summary

There was strong agreement that youth voices are underrepresented in digital governance and that young people need better support for ethical technology use and digital literacy education

Topics

Human rights | Development

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the success of multi-stakeholder approaches and improvements in regulatory capacity, while acknowledging ongoing challenges in governance structures

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher

Arguments

The multi-stakeholder model and IGF are major achievements bringing diverse voices together

Regulatory expertise has improved at national, regional, and international levels

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Both speakers recognized that while action lines remain fundamentally sound, they need updating in terminology and approach to reflect current technological capabilities and usage patterns

Speakers

– Derrick Muneene
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

Action lines need to be updated in nomenclature, such as moving from ‘e-health’ to ‘digital health’

Action lines have enabled cutting-edge innovation in agriculture, including AI and geospatial data

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both emphasized the need to balance global cooperation with local adaptation, ensuring international frameworks support rather than constrain country-specific solutions

Speakers

– Table 6
– Davide Storti

Arguments

International cooperation must allow for tailor-made solutions meeting specific country needs

Need for greater global cooperation and alignment with other frameworks like SDGs and GDC

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected consensus

Technology-neutral approach as a strength rather than limitation

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher
– Davide Storti

Arguments

Action lines are technology-neutral and flexible, making them adaptable to new technologies like AI

Digital transformation has become a path that different stakeholders are moving forward on

Action lines have stood the test of time and remain relevant despite technological changes

Explanation

Unexpectedly, speakers viewed the broad, technology-neutral nature of action lines as a strength rather than a weakness, arguing it allows for adaptation to emerging technologies without requiring fundamental framework changes

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Strong agreement on not creating new action lines despite technological evolution

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

No need for new action lines but existing ones should be made more agile and future-proof

Better reporting and accountability mechanisms are needed at national and regional levels

Action lines successfully supported MDGs and now SDGs, demonstrating adaptability

Explanation

Despite significant technological changes over 20 years, there was unexpected consensus that the existing framework is sufficient and that efforts should focus on implementation rather than structural changes

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Youth digital literacy concerns transcending generational assumptions

Speakers

– Audience
– Gitanjali Sah

Arguments

Young people use AI daily but lack reflection on its impact on their lives

Need to teach digital ethics and cybersecurity from early school grades

Youth perspective is missing from action lines and needs to be integrated

Explanation

Unexpectedly, both young participants and organizers agreed that despite being digital natives, young people need more guidance on ethical technology use and critical reflection on digital impacts

Topics

Human rights | Sociocultural

Overall assessment

Summary

Strong consensus emerged around the continued relevance of WSIS action lines, the need for better implementation rather than structural changes, persistent digital divide challenges, and the importance of youth inclusion in digital governance

Consensus level

High level of consensus with significant implications for WSIS future direction – speakers agreed on maintaining existing framework while focusing on improved implementation, measurement, and inclusion mechanisms. This suggests a mature understanding of the framework’s strengths and a practical approach to addressing current challenges through enhanced execution rather than fundamental restructuring.

Different viewpoints

Whether new action lines are needed or existing ones should be modified

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher
– Derrick Muneene

Arguments

No need for new action lines but existing ones should be made more agile and future-proof

Focus should be on intersectional inclusion and multi-stakeholderism

Action lines need to be updated in nomenclature, such as moving from ‘e-health’ to ‘digital health’

Summary

Denis Suzar strongly argued against creating new action lines, advocating for keeping existing framework unchanged but improving implementation. Susan Teltscher focused on enhancing inclusivity and stakeholder participation within current framework. Derrick Muneene specifically called for updating terminology and nomenclature to reflect current usage.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Approach to measuring action line effectiveness

Speakers

– Susan Teltscher
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

Measurement frameworks should focus on meaningful outcomes rather than just connectivity indicators

Need for comprehensive taxonomy and shared frameworks for innovation in digital agriculture

Summary

Teltscher emphasized moving beyond technical connectivity metrics to broader social outcomes across all action lines. Uwimana focused specifically on developing standardized frameworks for agricultural innovation measurement. Different sectoral priorities led to different measurement approaches.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Unexpected differences

Role of AI and emerging technologies in action lines

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Audience

Arguments

Action lines are technology-neutral and flexible, making them adaptable to new technologies like AI

Young people use AI daily but lack reflection on its impact on their lives

Explanation

Unexpectedly, while Denis Suzar viewed AI as easily accommodated within existing technology-neutral frameworks, audience members (particularly youth) expressed concerns about AI’s manipulative potential and lack of ethical reflection. This revealed a generational divide on AI integration approaches that wasn’t anticipated in policy discussions.

Topics

Human rights | Sociocultural

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed remarkable consensus on core principles – action lines remain relevant, digital inclusion is essential, and cooperation is needed. Main disagreements centered on implementation approaches rather than fundamental goals.

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. Most conflicts were about methods and emphasis rather than fundamental opposition. The strongest disagreement was on whether to modify action lines (terminology updates vs. keeping unchanged), but even this was relatively minor. The unexpected youth perspective on AI ethics suggests potential future disagreements as generational views on technology governance may diverge from current policy approaches.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the success of multi-stakeholder approaches and improvements in regulatory capacity, while acknowledging ongoing challenges in governance structures

Speakers

– Denis Suzar
– Susan Teltscher

Arguments

The multi-stakeholder model and IGF are major achievements bringing diverse voices together

Regulatory expertise has improved at national, regional, and international levels

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Both speakers recognized that while action lines remain fundamentally sound, they need updating in terminology and approach to reflect current technological capabilities and usage patterns

Speakers

– Derrick Muneene
– Angelique Uwimana – Moderator Table 1

Arguments

Action lines need to be updated in nomenclature, such as moving from ‘e-health’ to ‘digital health’

Action lines have enabled cutting-edge innovation in agriculture, including AI and geospatial data

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both emphasized the need to balance global cooperation with local adaptation, ensuring international frameworks support rather than constrain country-specific solutions

Speakers

– Table 6
– Davide Storti

Arguments

International cooperation must allow for tailor-made solutions meeting specific country needs

Need for greater global cooperation and alignment with other frameworks like SDGs and GDC

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Key takeaways

WSIS Action Lines have successfully stood the test of time over 20 years and remain relevant due to their technology-neutral and flexible design

The multi-stakeholder model and Internet Governance Forum (IGF) are considered major achievements of the WSIS process

Digital divides and lack of digital skills remain persistent challenges despite technological progress

There is no need for new action lines, but existing ones should be made more agile, future-proof, and better implemented

Better communication, reporting, and accountability mechanisms are needed at national and regional levels

Youth perspectives and digital ethics education need to be better integrated into the action lines framework

Cooperation and collaboration are essential for addressing digital transformation challenges

Action lines should focus on intersectional inclusion and meaningful access rather than just connectivity metrics

The nomenclature of some action lines needs updating (e.g., from ‘e-health’ to ‘digital health’)

International cooperation must allow for tailor-made solutions that meet specific country and regional needs

Resolutions and action items

Digitize all handwritten notes and content generated during the discussion for documentation

Use recommendations from this session to inform member states in ministries of health for WHO’s global strategy on digital health

Take insights to the UN General Assembly (UNGA) for discussion of calls to action

Incorporate outcomes into the WSIS Forum outcome document and chair’s summary

Focus on digital public infrastructure for sustainability of digital transformation in health

Promote better use of the existing WSIS stocktaking database created in 2004

Strengthen measurement frameworks at national and regional levels using existing mechanisms like IGF

Integrate youth perspectives into every action line implementation

Unresolved issues

How to effectively measure meaningful outcomes rather than just connectivity indicators

Whether accountability should be a new action line or is already covered under existing ethical dimensions

How to better communicate and raise awareness about action lines at grassroots level

Whether another high-level UN summit is needed given the importance of digital issues

How to address the overlap between different action lines and better interconnect them

How to ensure vulnerable groups and rural communities are not left behind in digital transformation

How to balance AI development with ethical considerations and data governance

How to make action lines more problem-based rather than broadly informational

Suggested compromises

Rather than creating new action lines, enhance existing ones with new dimensions like cybersecurity, AI, and emerging technologies

Maintain technology-neutral language in action lines while improving implementation guidance

Use existing frameworks like national and regional IGFs to strengthen action line implementation rather than creating new mechanisms

Align WSIS action lines with other UN frameworks (SDGs, Global Digital Compact) without complete reformulation

Focus on both international cooperation and tailor-made local solutions simultaneously

Combine global reporting with strengthened national and regional measurement mechanisms

Integrate new stakeholders like UNHCR into existing action lines rather than restructuring the entire framework

I would personally argue that it will be important by taking down and expanding our supply. What are the ways that we can measure it? If we do that, I think it’s annual. Based on that, we could have had an understanding 10 years ago that we didn’t have anywhere.

Speaker

Audience member (unidentified)

Reason

This comment introduced a critical perspective on measurement and evaluation of WSIS action lines, highlighting the gap between having frameworks and actually measuring their effectiveness. It challenged the group to think beyond theoretical frameworks to practical implementation metrics.

Impact

This comment shifted the discussion toward concrete measurement challenges and sparked conversations about accountability and reporting mechanisms. Multiple tables later picked up on the theme of needing better measurement frameworks and indicators.

I think major, you know, 2015, I think everyone mentioned all those huge campaigns, communicating on that. Maybe, you know, there is always a moment to re-communicate something back to the world… There is no other way. So it’s there, but people don’t know about it.

Speaker

Audience member (unidentified)

Reason

This insight identified a fundamental problem with the WSIS process – lack of awareness and communication about the action lines themselves. It highlighted the disconnect between high-level policy frameworks and ground-level understanding.

Impact

This observation became a recurring theme throughout the discussion, with multiple tables later emphasizing the need for better communication, awareness-raising, and making action lines more accessible to national and regional stakeholders.

Rather take action than report on action. Rather take two actions, then take one action, and secondly report on that action. Because this is the world that actually we are in. There’s a lack of reporting.

Speaker

Audience member (unidentified)

Reason

This comment challenged the balance between implementation and reporting, suggesting that too much focus on documentation might be hindering actual progress. It introduced a provocative perspective on bureaucratic processes versus real-world impact.

Impact

This comment reframed the discussion around priorities and effectiveness, leading to deeper conversations about meaningful implementation versus administrative compliance. It influenced later discussions about accountability and practical outcomes.

Do we need a summit? We don’t. We shouldn’t ask them to prepare a summit… There are all kinds of different frameworks. You can see what’s up. To replace something that was not already there.

Speaker

Audience member (unidentified)

Reason

This was a bold challenge to the entire summit structure and proliferation of frameworks, questioning whether more high-level meetings are the solution or part of the problem. It introduced critical thinking about institutional effectiveness.

Impact

This comment sparked debate about the value of existing processes and whether new frameworks (like the Global Digital Compact) were necessary or duplicative. It led to discussions about streamlining rather than expanding institutional mechanisms.

Like 90% of us use AI daily, but like a few of us get the chance to reflect what they actually did to us, and what they mean to us. Like to some degree, it kind of feel like AI is kind of manipulate our life instead of we use AI as a tool.

Speaker

Young participant (college student)

Reason

This comment provided a powerful generational perspective on AI adoption, highlighting the gap between usage and understanding. It introduced the concept of AI manipulation versus empowerment from a user’s lived experience.

Impact

This youth voice shifted the conversation toward more human-centered concerns about technology adoption and the need for digital literacy and ethical frameworks. It reinforced discussions about inclusion and the importance of involving young people in policy discussions.

We are in a phase where we need on one hand much higher cooperation international cooperation, but on the other hand to allow tailor-made solutions meeting the needs of each country and of each region and these two things are not in contradiction.

Speaker

Angelique Uwimana

Reason

This comment elegantly resolved a tension that had been implicit throughout the discussion – the balance between global frameworks and local implementation. It reframed what seemed like competing priorities as complementary approaches.

Impact

This synthesis helped participants see how global action lines could coexist with localized solutions, influencing the final discussions about flexibility and adaptation of frameworks rather than wholesale replacement.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by introducing critical tensions and perspectives that moved the conversation beyond surface-level assessments. The measurement and communication challenges raised early in the discussion became central themes that influenced all subsequent conversations. The youth perspective on AI provided authentic user experience that grounded abstract policy discussions in real-world impact. The challenge to institutional proliferation forced participants to think critically about effectiveness versus activity. Together, these comments created a more nuanced dialogue that balanced appreciation for existing frameworks with honest assessment of implementation gaps, ultimately leading to more actionable recommendations focused on communication, inclusion, and practical implementation rather than structural overhaul.

How can we better measure the meaningful impact of action lines beyond connectivity metrics?

Speaker

Multiple participants across tables

Explanation

Participants noted that current measurements focus heavily on connectivity rather than social outcomes like improved healthcare or education quality

How can action lines be better communicated and made known at national and regional levels?

Speaker

Multiple participants and facilitators

Explanation

There was widespread concern that action lines are not well understood or known outside of global forums, limiting their implementation

Should there be a new action line specifically focused on AI and emerging technologies?

Speaker

Various table discussions

Explanation

Participants debated whether AI requires its own action line or can be integrated into existing ones, given its transformative impact

How can we better integrate ethical dimensions and data governance into action line implementation?

Speaker

Multiple participants

Explanation

Concerns were raised about AI ethics, data governance, and the need for responsible technology use

What role should the WSIS stocktaking database play and how can it be better utilized?

Speaker

Susan Teltscher and table participants

Explanation

It was revealed that a database exists since 2004 but is underutilized, raising questions about its potential value

How can we better measure digital skills and capacity building outcomes?

Speaker

Table discussions

Explanation

Participants noted the need for better indicators to measure skills development and capacity building progress

Should there be another high-level summit on WSIS given the importance of digital transformation?

Speaker

Table participants

Explanation

One table raised the question of whether current governance structures are sufficient or if a new summit is needed

How can action lines better address digital inclusion for vulnerable groups and rural communities?

Speaker

Multiple participants across tables

Explanation

Digital divides and exclusion of vulnerable populations were identified as ongoing challenges requiring attention

How can we better align WSIS action lines with other UN frameworks like SDGs and the Global Digital Compact?

Speaker

Multiple participants

Explanation

Participants noted the need for better coherence and integration between different international frameworks

What measurement framework should be established for action lines beyond 2025?

Speaker

Derek Muneene and table discussions

Explanation

This was posed as one of the three main discussion questions, seeking concrete proposals for future evaluation

How can youth perspectives be better integrated into all action lines?

Speaker

Multiple participants

Explanation

Youth inclusion was identified as missing from current action line implementation and reporting

How can we address technology addiction and dependency issues in digital transformation?

Speaker

Table participants

Explanation

Concerns were raised about negative impacts of technology use, particularly among young people

Summary

This discussion focused on the development and implementation of Digital Product Passports (DPPs) and Digital Product Information Systems as tools to enable circular economy and environmental sustainability. Fabienne Pierre from ITU presented the technical framework, explaining that DPPs are structured collections of product-specific data conveyed through unique identifiers like QR codes, containing information about materials, design, maintenance instructions, and environmental impact throughout a product’s lifecycle. The initiative involves collaboration between ITU, ETSI, UNEP, and the One Planet Network to create global standards that will initially be implemented in Europe but will affect supply chains worldwide.

The panel discussion, moderated by Yolanda Martinez from the World Bank, featured representatives from various organizations sharing their implementation strategies. Francesca Cenni from the Basel Convention Secretariat described a pilot project in Uruguay testing DPPs for hazardous waste lead-acid batteries to improve traceability and support Extended Producer Responsibility schemes. Maria Teresa Pisani from UNECE outlined their work on traceability and transparency standards, including Recommendation 49 on supply chain interoperability and the UN Transparency Protocol. Hoda Shakra from Egypt’s Ministry of Communications presented their national progress, including new safety standards, digital platforms for risk-based inspection, and plans to integrate DPPs into e-waste management systems and circular economy policies.

Thomas Ebert from the European Commission explained that Europe’s DPP system will become mandatory for batteries in 2027, expanding to other product groups like textiles and steel, emphasizing the importance of open standards and interoperability. The discussion highlighted the need for global coordination, pilot testing across diverse sectors, and the development of both technical infrastructure and supportive policies to enable widespread adoption of digital product information systems.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Digital Product Passport (DPP) Framework Development**: The discussion centers on ITU’s collaboration with ETSI and other organizations to develop global standards for digital product passports – structured collections of product-specific data accessible through unique identifiers like QR codes. These passports will contain information about materials, design, maintenance, repair instructions, and environmental impact to support circular economy initiatives.

– **Multi-Stakeholder Implementation and Pilot Projects**: Various organizations are conducting concrete pilot projects to test DPP frameworks, including the Basel Convention’s work on waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay, UNECE’s textile industry traceability initiatives, and the EU’s Surpass 2 project covering multiple product categories like tires and washing machines.

– **Global Coordination and Standardization Challenges**: The need for harmonized international standards and interoperability across different digital product information systems is emphasized, with discussions about data categories, accessibility, technology openness, and preventing vendor lock-in while ensuring global supply chain compatibility.

– **National Implementation Strategies**: Country-level adoption approaches are shared, particularly Egypt’s progress in establishing DPP-enabling infrastructure through new standards (ES2501), digital platforms for risk-based inspection, and integration with e-waste management and circular economy policies.

– **Technical and Policy Integration**: The importance of separating technical DPP system requirements (standards and interoperability) from product-specific data requirements, while ensuring alignment between circular economy policies and digital infrastructure development across different government ministries and stakeholders.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aims to promote global collaboration in developing a unified framework for digital product information systems that will support circular economy initiatives, enhance product traceability, and enable informed decision-making by consumers, manufacturers, and regulators across international supply chains.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintains a collaborative and optimistic tone throughout, with speakers demonstrating enthusiasm for cross-organizational cooperation and knowledge sharing. The tone is professional and forward-looking, with participants actively offering concrete examples of their work and expressing genuine interest in coordinating efforts. There’s a sense of urgency balanced with pragmatic acknowledgment of the complexity involved in global standardization, and the moderator successfully maintains momentum while encouraging practical next steps and continued collaboration.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Fabienne Pierre**: Provided presentation on digital product information systems and digital product passports; works with ITU (International Telecommunication Union)

– **Yolanda Martinez**: Panel discussion moderator; represents the World Bank

– **Francesca Cenni**: Represents the Basel Convention Secretariat (Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat); works on hazardous waste management and e-waste regulations

– **Maria Teresa Pisani**: In charge of the trade facilitation section at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), based in Geneva; works on building fair and sustainable trade systems

– **Hoda Shakra**: Expert for industry and external relations at Ministry of Communications and Information Technology in Egypt; also works as advisor for E-waste management for Ministry of Environment in Egypt; co-rapporteur for Q75 at ITU-T

– **Thomas Ebert**: Policy analyst in the DigiConnect initiative from the European Commission; comes from the German Environment Agency and is seconded to the Commission; works on bridging digital and environmental worlds

**Additional speakers:**

– **Bilel**: Deputy Director (mentioned as having given an earlier speech about collaboration, but did not speak in this transcript)

– **Reyna** (likely Reyna Ubeda): From ITU, mentioned at the end for closing remarks but did not speak in this transcript portion

# Digital Product Passports for Circular Economy: Discussion Report

## Executive Summary

This discussion focused on the development and implementation of Digital Product Passports (DPPs) and Digital Product Information Systems as tools for enabling circular economy practices and environmental sustainability. The session featured a technical presentation by Fabienne Pierre from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), followed by a panel discussion moderated by Yolanda Martinez from the World Bank. Panelists included representatives from the Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), Egypt’s Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, and the European Commission.

The discussion highlighted ongoing efforts across multiple organizations to develop interoperable, standardized digital product passport systems through pilot implementations across various sectors and regions. Speakers shared their organizations’ approaches to technical requirements, implementation strategies, and environmental objectives.

## ITU’s Global Framework Initiative

Fabienne Pierre presented the ITU’s comprehensive approach to developing digital product passports, describing them as “structured collections of product-specific data conveyed through unique identifiers” such as QR codes. These passports contain information about materials, design, maintenance instructions, repair guidance, and environmental impact throughout a product’s lifecycle. The framework has been developed through collaboration between ITU, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the One Planet Network.

The ITU has established two key standards (L1070 and L1071) for digital product passports, focusing on ICT sector opportunities and sustainability information. Pierre emphasized that the framework requires agreed data categories, accessibility, interoperability, comparability, traceability, and technology openness across sectors. She noted that different stakeholders may require different levels of information access – consumers might receive environmental impact information while manufacturers could access more detailed technical data.

The global consultation process began with Latin America, with a consultation held in Brasilia involving 20 countries with participation from Ministry of Environment, Ministry of ICT, regulation, academia, and private sector representatives. Future consultations are planned for Africa, followed by Asia-Pacific and Europe. Pierre extended an invitation for participation, stating “this initiative is open to all.”

## Panel Discussion

### Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat

Francesca Cenni, representing the Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat, explained that her organization serves three conventions: Basel (hazardous waste), Stockholm (persistent organic pollutants), and Rotterdam (chemical trade). She described a pilot project testing digital product passports for waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay, aimed at linking information about these hazardous products to importers who will take responsibility for their take-back and collection.

Cenni emphasized the connection between digital product passports and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, providing a detailed example of how a TV retailer would handle product take-back responsibilities. She also mentioned the organization’s involvement with the Partnership for Action on Challenges Relating to e-waste (PACE2) and referenced ITU standards L1070 and L1071.

### UNECE’s Interoperability Focus

Maria Teresa Pisani, in charge of the trade facilitation section at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and representing the UN Center for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business, outlined UNECE’s focus on enabling interoperability of information exchange systems. She distinguished between traceability and transparency, explaining that while substantial data exists along value chains, “their availability is silenced.”

UNECE has adopted Recommendation 49 on transparency at scale and is developing the UN Transparency Protocol as an interoperability standard. This work is conducted through a joint technical committee with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to map global digital passport initiatives. Pisani mentioned practical pilots including collaboration with the World Bank for the cotton sector in Uzbekistan, with an estimated timeline from the third quarter of 2025 to the second quarter of 2026.

### Egypt’s National Implementation Strategy

Hoda Shakra, expert for industry and external relations in Egypt’s Ministry of Communication and Information Technology and advisor for e-waste management for the Ministry of Environment, presented Egypt’s comprehensive national approach. She also serves as co-rapporteur for Q75 at ITU-T. Egypt has issued ministerial decree ES2501 for electrical and electronic devices based on international benchmark IEC 62368.

Egypt’s implementation strategy includes multiple initiatives: a COICA-funded digital platforms project starting from mid-2025 and lasting until the end of 2029, an e-manufacturing pilot with RFID integration, and work with GS1 Egypt on platforms MyGS1EG and OneTrace. Shakra explained that Egypt is developing a circular economy policy covering eight sectors, including ICT, and plans to embed Digital Product Information systems as part of the national strategy.

### European Commission’s Regulatory Approach

Thomas Ebert, from the German Environment Agency and seconded to the European Commission’s DigiConnect, explained that Europe’s digital product passport system will become mandatory through the Eco-Design for Sustainable Product Regulation. Implementation begins with batteries over two kilowatt hours in 2027 and will expand to other product groups including textiles and steel.

Ebert emphasized the importance of open standards and interoperability to prevent vendor lock-in, working with SENSENELEC as the European Standardization Organizations. The European Commission operates the Surpass 2 project, which includes 13 pilots across different product groups such as tires and washing machines, investigating how digital product passports can enable circular business models.

## Implementation Strategies and Coordination

### Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration

The discussion revealed extensive collaboration across international organizations. ITU participates in the Impact Initiative Digitalization for Circular Economy launched by One Planet Network and UNEP. The World Bank’s role, as articulated by moderator Yolanda Martinez, involves supporting efforts through financing projects and standardization that informs operational design with countries.

### Technical Standards and Interoperability

All speakers emphasized the importance of interoperability and standardization, though they proposed different approaches. ITU focuses on developing standards through collaboration with ETSI and creating a global framework through regional consultations. UNECE emphasizes the UN Transparency Protocol and joint work with ISO. The European Commission stresses open standards while implementing mandatory systems through regulation.

### Pilot Projects and Testing

Multiple organizations are conducting pilot projects to test digital product passport implementations:

– Basel Convention’s hazardous waste batteries pilot in Uruguay

– UNECE’s cotton sector pilot in Uzbekistan with the World Bank

– European Commission’s Surpass 2 project with 13 different product group pilots

– Egypt’s e-manufacturing pilot with RFID integration

## Moderator’s Guidance and Future Directions

Yolanda Martinez from the World Bank emphasized the importance of piloting and iteration, suggesting that organizations leverage open source approaches and GovStack initiatives to accelerate adoption, particularly for Global South countries. She encouraged active sharing of progress rather than waiting for formal reporting opportunities.

The discussion identified several immediate next steps:

– Continuing global consultations with upcoming phases targeting Africa, then Asia-Pacific and Europe

– Advancing pilot projects across different sectors and regions

– Integrating DPI systems into e-waste management technical regulations and Extended Producer Responsibility frameworks

– Promoting the framework in high-level political forums including the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA)

## Conclusion

The discussion demonstrated ongoing collaborative efforts to develop global digital product passport systems that support circular economy objectives. Multiple organizations are pursuing parallel approaches to technical standards, pilot implementations, and policy integration. The emphasis on pilot projects, iterative development, and knowledge sharing provides a foundation for advancing digital product passport systems globally while addressing challenges of interoperability, implementation costs, and diverse stakeholder needs.

Success will depend on continued coordination across organizations, effective alignment of different technical approaches, and sustained commitment to inclusive development that enables participation from countries at various development levels.

Fabienne Pierre: Allow me to provide you a brief presentation on what we are doing on this digital product information system. So, what are digital product passports? Digital product passports are, according to ITU definition, a structured collection of product-specific data conveyed through a unique identifier. Right now, ITU, in collaboration with ETSI, ETSI is the European Telecommunications Standardization Institute, has developed two standards. One standard is on the opportunities of the digital product passport for the ICT sector, and the second one is on the information and sustainability on circularity. It provides a structured collection of information items organized to represent circularity and environmental sustainability information in accordance with relevant standards of ICT products of various actors during the lifespan, up to the recycling. Which are the beneficiary users? It facilitates the activities of product operators, for example, from manufacturers, buyers, owners, repairers, re-manufacturers, recyclers, national authorities, and auditors. It could also empower consumers with relevant information, because the idea is that when this is enforced, you can have, through an identifier, QR code information about the system. But it might vary to which one is the one that is using this information. If it’s a consumer, maybe you will not have all the details, but you will have the environmental impact that it has. If you are a manufacturer, maybe you will not have all the products, because also how we ensure this competitiveness between one manufacturer and the others, and what are you using? It is a very sensitive topic that they are discussing right now, and this discussion has started in Europe as part of their regulation. What is the information that it will contain? Well, it will contain relevant useful information on materials, design, use, maintenance and repair instructions, ways to recover and disassemble components and recycle them, equipment life. It will include also specification, programming, firmware and software. It will have special attention and needs to be done on raw materials, scarce, critical and secondary, adverse social and environmental risk due to the presence of hazardous substances. And you will hear a bit more about this because we have a colleague from the Basel Convention, the secretariat, that will explain a bit more about this and the importance. Our manufacturers provide monitoring, facilitating procurement proceedings, reverse logistic and facilitate extended producer responsibility. I’m not going to go in details what is inside of each of the standards. I invite you to take a look because of lack of time, I want to win a few minutes for the panel. But what is the desirable principles? The desirable principles is that the digital product passport can be usefulness, accuracy, inclusivity, transparent, accountable, that is also standardized and information privacy and information protection. Then we have the other standards, L1071, that also contains information on what the European Union digital product passport is and also the UNDP business-to-business data model and propose the data model for the ICT sector. The ongoing work that we are working is also how the digital product passport will look for the consumer and also for the reverse value chain. For example, for the refurbishment, how it will look, what kind of information they will need. So, this information will be in this standard to provide this guidance to the consumer and also the refurbishers. Now, we have talked, I think since we started with the speech from the Deputy Director Bilel, on the importance of collaboration. ITU, it’s part on the initiative, Impact Initiative Digitalization for Circular Economy that was launched by One Planet Network and UNEP. And there are several partners that are part of this initiative. And the mission is to facilitate the trajectory of digital transformation so that it accelerates and scales environmental and socially inclusive circular economy. There are multiple digital product information systems and we need to simplify for harmonizing information. So, there is a need for agreed data categories and subcategories, accessibility, interoperability, comparability, traceability and technology openness. As you can see here, there are several partners that are from different sectors mandate because the digital product passport is not going to be just for one specific sector. The idea it will be for textile, for construction, also for ICT. ICT, according to the European Commission, it will be the last one to do because of their difficulty that it is. I’m sorry if I’m talking too fast. But I’m trying to gain some time. So, how it will be developed? Co-development, building on existing standards, because one of the principles of this initiative is also to work together, but also on what we are already doing. Build consensus and do also pilot. Dr. Cristina Cardenas, Dr. Laura Cyron, Mr. Jean-Manuel Canet, Ms. Cristina Cardenas, Dr. What does that mean? What does that mean for the regulation? What does that mean? Which ministries is involved? Should be all ministries involved? So this part of awareness was part of the consultation because they know very little. And the purpose of this framework is that the discussion is not only in Europe. The purpose of this framework and this collaboration is that it’s global, it’s inclusive, that we can have the inputs from different stakeholders from the region because we need something that everyone can use. Because once the regulation is implemented in Europe, it will affect Latin America, it will affect Asia, it will affect Africa. So phase two, that is right now, we are going to start with some pilot testing and there is the draft of the framework, moving from technical to political conversation to get buy-in. So yesterday we had the first consultation of the framework in Latin America. There was the presence of 20 countries in Brasilia where they discussed, they learned the first time about this framework and they were from different sectors, from the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of ICT, regulation, academia, private sector. So these consultations were done by One Planet Network and UNEP in collaboration with all the members of this initiative. And I cannot tell you I will not tell you what are the results because I haven’t received the news, but we will keep you posted. This first consultation will help us to set up the basis for the next regions. The next region will be Africa, then we are thinking about Asia and the Pacific and doing that one also for Europe. Phase 23 is the launch and promote adoption used on a voluntary basis by member states and stakeholders. It will be promoted in high-level political forums like UNEA, the High-Level Political Forum, UNGA, etc. The framework components, it will have categories and subcategories, governance, technical components, main functionalities, list of standards, incentives, and capacity. So, it will have some pilot projects. We will have, for example, in textile, test the framework in dual condition data categories, estimate the cost also for the implementation in the Global South, inform the development of national instruments, and the estimated timeline is the third quarter of 2025 to the second quarter of 2026. So, we are calling for participation because this initiative is open to all. So, you can be engaging as ambassadors of this topic, providing feedback and technical input to the categories that are being selected. And please contact me. At the end of the presentation, you will have my contacts, so to stay in touch and discuss about this. So, why is also important the collaboration with other entities? And in this case, I’m representing ITU. And for us, we have a standard on the development that will be that the framework that they are developing, that is developing as open consultation, will be standardized in ITU. And this new work item was opened in June. It will have, the framework is sector agnostic, but this work will have a focus on the ICT sector. And so I invite you all to participate not only on the development of the framework, but also in the standard development, because this one will focus more on the ICT sector. So what are the potential global benefits? They can be linked and provide information on compliance with regulations and standards that can be digital verified. It benefits all stakeholders, reduce the burdens of making informed decisions to optimize and assess the sustainability of products. Discussion, consensus, standardization, and legislative processes can enable agreements to develop concrete and specific specification, including mandatory and voluntary values for countries. So right now we are discussing about this topic. So I invite you to start the discussion, to spread in the world, because I guess maybe not all of you have known about the digital product passport and what this will entail for the products. So thank you so much. And now I will give the floor. So this is very fast, you see. We are going to give the floor to our panel discussion. Allow me to introduce you, Ms. Yolanda Martinez. We’ll have, that is our moderator of the panel discussion on developing a global DPIs framework. Yolanda, the floor is yours, from the World Bank, sorry.

Yolanda Martinez: Thank you. This has been a very enlightening discussion and I very much congratulate ITU and all the partners in putting this effort together. And to follow on the previous panelists, I would like to use this segment to… I would like to invite ideas and very concrete proposals coming from the different speakers since they represent different organizations on how we can collectively promote the active participation in the co-design of the framework and I very much like the piloting phase, right? The best way to really make something use is when you iterate the approaches and I think having as active partner the World Bank, we can really support that because that’s what we do. We finance projects that are implemented in countries and standardization efforts inform how we design our operations with the countries and we’re very much looking forward to join this effort. So, I would like to start this conversation by introducing, giving the floor to each of the panelists. I will kindly ask everyone to introduce themselves, which organization they represent and how from the organization that they are coming from, they are envisioning to promote and support this effort. So, let me start with Francesca Ceni, she’s next to me and she represents the Basel Convention Secretariat. Over to you, Francesca.

Francesca Cenni: Thank you. Thank you for having invited me for this session. So, today I represent the Basel Convention Secretariat, but my entity joined other secretariats and now we are called also the Basel Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat. No, it’s fine. But it’s important to say that we serve three conventions and one is the Basel Convention is on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous and other wastes and the promotion of their good management and e-waste are included. The other conventions are on POPs, Persistent Organic Pollutants, the Stockholm Convention, the Rotterdam Convention is on trade of certain chemicals where the countries are. provide import responses, if they want to import or not, certain chemicals. And it is a pleasure to be here because it’s a long time we cooperate with the study group FIME and we have cooperated in the development of the L1070 to include information on hazardous chemicals and waste in the digital product passport and in the systems. So we have listed all the information that would be good for us to be there, so that when the producers, the users find this information, they see that this product is actually, when its waste is under the Basel Convention, it should be labeled with certain code and if it contains POPs, it is included, so it should be handled in a very, very specific way. And then we have moved forward because actually the ITU moved forward and included a lot of more information on reparability, on products that can be recycled and you can imagine this is very important in the management of e-waste because in fact the digital product passport was thought as a tool to bridge the gap when in a circular economy context, it is necessary to make a decision how, what can I recycle of this product when it becomes waste, what can I repair, where I find the the manual or very, very simple questions, but many stakeholders need these answers. And so this tool is there to answer the questions of many, many stakeholders at the same time. And so we also, in the Basel Convention, the parties decided to start a partnership on e-waste which is called Partnership for Action on Challenges Relating to e-waste, PACE2, and in the context of the work of this partnership, which is a public-private platform to resolve e-waste issues under the Basel Convention. We have thought to start a pilot to see if we could link the digital product passport or the digital information system on products to EPRs, to extend the producer responsibilities schemes. I don’t know if you know what they are, this very strange name, but in two words, the producers, the importers of an ICT product, take the responsibility of collecting it or taking it back when it becomes a waste. So it is like when you buy a TV, you can give it back to your retailers, to the shop where you have bought it. This is, in very few words, the scheme that supports the fact that the entity that sold you the product is now taking responsibility for the waste. And we are testing the passport for waste lead-acid batteries. Waste lead-acid batteries or lead-acid batteries are in cars, EVs, and in any types of cars and many servers and other products. These are very, very hazardous products. So we thought, perhaps you can try to link the information on these batteries to the importers, to those who then will take responsibility for their take-back, for their collection. And therefore, we will know, for example, the year of production, the producer, the original manufacturer of the battery. And we will know, for example, if BMW or another brand of car has imported that battery in a car or in a server, another entity, and they will have their responsibility to take it back and they will find information. Many stakeholders will find information on who’s responsible for that battery, where it should go, where it should be collected. And this is because we are looking for a tool to control the illegal traffic and the incorrect management of these batteries, because these are extremely polluting and hazardous for people who are working with them. This project is being tested in Uruguay, and so we are going through the first phases. We are now collecting the stakeholder list, trying to see if the producers would like to give the information to the government, and if the importers… would be happy to be in this pilot testing. So we are going through the first phases of the project of the pilot. And we hope in next sessions, we’ll give you more information on how it was, the difficulties, the steps that we had to take, the technologies used. And because of time, I don’t add more details, but there are lots of questions and lots of pilot testing involved.

Yolanda Martinez: No, but I think this is great. Thank you. Because that responds the question very precisely, you know, give concrete actions on how to invite others. And I think maybe a suggestion for the colleagues that is running this effort is that as pilots start to happen, I think we don’t need to wait until the next panel to know what is the progress, but proactively really share, you know, the use cases, who are the stakeholders, what is the stage of the pilot, some other countries that are thinking on moving forward, have a very concrete reference to look at. So congratulations on that. And now I would like to give the floor to Maria Teresa Pisani, my understanding that she’s remotely and she’s representing UNECE. So over to you, Teresa. And same question, like from the organization that you represent, what are the key actions that you can take to move forward the adoption of the framework?

Maria Teresa Pisani: Thank you very much, Yolanda, for the kind introduction. So I’m Maria Teresa Pisani. I’m in charge of the trade facilitation section at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, based in Geneva, here at Palais des Nations. And sorry not to be able to join you in person this afternoon for the session. And I would like to thank Ms. Reyna Ubeda from ITU. Thank you for the invitation to UNEC to contribute to this panel discussion. As mentioned, it will be about sharing the perspectives of UNEC, what it has been done so far, how our work is contributing to the standardization for digital passport, and also how we plan to join forces with all the organizations under this initiative to coordinate and to align. No one can really do it alone. Everybody, I would say, has specific expertise and mandates, so very important initiatives like this one that bring us together and support coordination and alignment. So very briefly, what do we do at UNEC in the trade facilitation section? We help member states, countries, really to build a fair and sustainable trade system. This is the core of our mandate, and a big part of this mandate is really about making sure that reliable sustainability information can travel with the products from the raw material to the consumer. So from the cotton field throughout the processing of a T-shirt to the branding and retailing of this T-shirt on market and the purchase of consumers, so really to make sure that the consumer can make an informed choice. Now we do that through a platform. We develop norms and standards at UNEC, and this work is particularly in the context of a work of an intergovernmental party, which is the UN Center for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business, that does practical digital tools. Now, our work on sustainable trade and digital governance actually directly support this process and the global digital compact by offering tools that are very practical for advancing the traceability and transparency of value chains and interoperability of systems that allow the sharing of data all along the value chain for that traceability and transparency. Let me take a step back and clarify what do we mean by traceability and transparency. Traceability is really about knowing where the products come from and how they are made, whether these are in compliance with environmental, social, good governance requirements for the product. So, whether they are made without hazardous chemicals, whether they are made of leather that is not originating from deforested areas, for instance. And this is really traceability, really the foundation of trust in global markets. Transparency is when relevant information is made available to all actors that operate along the value chain in an harmonized way, but also to consumers and regulators. And this is really both elements. The traceability and transparency are critical to fight misleading claims, what is usually called the greenwashing, if you like. So, to ensure that we have reliable sustainability claims that support climate goals, that meet regulatory requirements, and also ensure access to markets, provide the right incentives to those operators along the value chains that do things right, that make the investment and the effort to, you know, undertake the sustainability journey and to comply with regulations and standards on this sustainability. We want to make sure that they are incentivized and they are rewarded for the effort they are making. So that’s why traceability, transparency are fundamental and are so important. We have been extensively working on this at UNEC with a toolbox that has policy recommendations and standards to enable traceability and transparency. We have started with the textile industry and we are moving gradually to a framework and an approach that is cross-industry, that is covering other critical sectors for the green and digital transition, like the minerals, the agri-food, but really to come up with information exchange standards and supporting instruments that are as much as possible sector agnostic and then with extensions that are sector specific. Now, let me share that just last week our intergovernmental body has adopted an important policy recommendation, is recommendation 49 on transparency at scale and for fostering sustainability in supply chains. And this recommendation has been focusing on another very important aspect. Great to have the traceability, great to have the transparency. A lot of data are available along the value chain. The problem is that their availability is silenced. So very important to work on interoperability of information exchange systems to ensure that actors along the value chain speak a common language and their information systems can connect and are interoperable. So that the data stay where they belong and we work on the exchange of this data through the interoperability of information exchange systems. So this is really what Recommendation 49 is about, is about enabling interoperability of information exchange systems for collection and sharing of data that will inform digital passports for products placed on market. So what Recommendation 49 aims at is really to establish trust in supply chain data, is really to reduce cost and complexity for supply chain actors, because all this has a cost, has complexity, so very important to work on principles and measures that can cut on this cost and complexity, especially for SMEs, especially for actors in emerging economies. And the aim is really to draw a vision where sustainable behaviour can become the norm. So the Recommendation, and you’re invited to have a look at this document that is available and happy to share with the participants, provides these high-level principles, provides a set of policy measures, but also provide, you know, the building blocks and the elements that supporting instruments need to, let’s say, consider and have, like architecture concepts, interoperability, requirements, aspects related to trust and conformity, to security and confidentiality, the business incentives and then the governance aspects. So this is for Recommendation 49, very briefly. UNEC is also working on supporting instruments to the implementation of this recommendation that is called the UN Transparency Protocol. This is an interoperability standards that has technical requirements and will have a component industry agnostic and components that are industry specific and there we are working on industry and business associations, multi-stakeholders to develop this industry extensions for textiles, for batteries, for agri-food products. Important to mention the collaboration with the ISO because ISO-UNEC have a joint technical committee for the standardization of electronic data exchange and under this committee a joint working group is looking at mapping out all the initiatives for digital passports that are let’s say emerging globally. EU is very advanced is a jurisdiction which is quite advanced because there is a normative mandatory regulation that will introduce digital passports for products placed on markets in the EU for specific product categories but China, Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, United States and many other jurisdictions are working on this. So very important to map out these initiatives to identify common principles and to work on a framework that can ensure really alignment and interoperability. So this work that UNEC-UNCFACT is doing with ISO goes exactly in that direction. As final comments really we look very much forward to coordinating with all various UN organizations like ITU, UNEP. the UNIDO, World Bank here, and we have done quite some pilots as part of the previous work also with the World Bank on traceability and transparency with specific use cases for the cotton sector, for instance, in Uzbekistan. And really, we support and have the ambition of a UN-led initiative that works on standardization for digital product passports. Because the inclusivity and ensuring…

Yolanda Martinez: Sorry, Maria, just to, because we have two more people now, and I want to be respectful of the other colleagues for their intervention. Absolutely,

Maria Teresa Pisani: apologies. And just to finish, just to ensure that, you know, we have an inclusive initiative that brings on the table emerging economies and small actors as important contributors for this global framework. Thank you for allowing me some extra time. And over to you, Yolanda. Thank you so much.

Yolanda Martinez: No, thank you so much, Maria. And I think you also share a very important element that is key in terms of pilots, no? So together with Eurowide, the one that you’re working in textile, I think diversity of use cases, it’s relevant in this exercise and important to properly communicate the progress of each. And also looking for synergies to other initiatives like the DPI, say words, to really leverage the maturity of the countries. Eurowide has 100% of digital government services online, so that really facilitates any piloted initiative related to interoperability and traceability. So congrats on that. And now I would like to give the floor to Hoda Shakra, and she’s from the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology in Egypt. So very happy to have a government. and Representative, joining the discussion. And same questions in terms of what actions is Egypt taking in the process of exploring the adoption of this framework. Over to you.

Hoda Shakra: Thank you for allowing us this opportunity to be part of this session. I am Engineer Hoda Chakra. I am representing the government of Egypt. I am working as an expert for industry and external relation in Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. As well, I am working as an advisor for E-waste management for Ministry of Environment in Egypt. And I am co-rapporteur for Q75 at ITUT. OK, for the question, allow me to highlight the efforts of Egypt related to digital product information system. Egypt has been making progress in establishing enabling system for DBIs in alignment with the digital transformation strategy, while Egypt does not have yet a fully centralized or unified DBI system like those being developed in some European countries and East Asian countries. But there are several relevant initiatives and sectors are actively working toward this goal. For example, when it comes to standardization, on February 2025, the Minister of Trade and Industry issued ministerial decree to enforce the new Egyptian standard ES2501, which applies to electrical and electronic devices up to 600 volts with a six month transitional period. This standard is based on the international benchmark IEC 62368, which cover audio, video, ICT, and office equipment. This standard provides a uniform foundation for product safety labeling, helping integrate digital safety data into DBI system. Also, adoption of international standards also support compliance with. Eco-Design Policies, Product Durability and Standards, and Sustainable Trade Practices Key Components of Environmental Governance. When it comes to infrastructure and platform, the Egyptian General Organization for Export and Import Control, DOIC, started the implementation of a COICA-funded project on establishment of digital platforms for risk-based inspection and tracking for facilitating trade in Egypt. The project implementation started from the middle of 2025 and will last until the end of 2029. Through multiple components, including building and operating the digital system for the risk-based inspection system for non-food industrial goods, building and operating the digital information management system for all DOIC laboratories, in addition to building and operating the digital tracking and tracing system, and establishing the digital passport system for industrial products in the local market. Also, we have GS1 Egypt, which is part of the international GS1 group, operates national platforms like MyGS1EG, OneTrace, and both of them support the global identifiers essential for DPI and trade compliance. For pilot project, also we have e-manufacturing pilot, which is supported by the Ministry of Scientific Research. The e-manufacturing project integrates ERP systems with RFID to enable real-time data collection and decision-making on production line, and we have also Seiko technology, which is a leading Egyptian manufacturer of electronics, including mobile phones, tablets, and smart devices. Based in Upper Egypt, the company incorporates digital identifiers such as serial numbers and the globally recognized product code, laying the ground for seamless integration with DPI. This is what is in the ground and the different enable tools that can enable the adoption of DBI in Egypt and allow me to conclude my intervention by what’s next. What can be done by the Egyptian government to have a full adoption of DBI. We’re currently in Egypt as we are presented with a strategic and timely opportunity to integrate the DBI system into national environmental and digital information efforts where the country undertakes the development of new technical regulation policies and the management information system for the ICT sector and electronic waste. So there is a significant potential to embed DBI as a foundational component where Ministry of Environment is in the process of drafting the technical regulation for e-waste management and ICT-related waste stream and this provides an ideal policy window to encourage and incentivize private sector adoption of DBI system by recognizing them as tool for traceability, compliance and environmental responsibility. As well, Ministry of Environment will start in a few months in developing a management information system to track product flows and manage e-waste data and DBI can serve as a digital backbone for this system. Linking DBI with MIS ensures real-time product level visibility, improves data accuracy and enhances traceability of products from importation to end-of-life handling. As well, the government of Egypt is currently in the process of developing an EPR framework for electronic products and for sure, as you all know, we already adopted the EPR for one single The last point also, Egypt currently is working on the development of the circular economy policy for Egypt and it includes eight sectors and one of these sectors is the ICT sector and also it will be very good to include TPI, to embed it as part of the national strategy and the circular economy policy to enable better material tracking, reuse potential and eco-design incentives. Thank you.

Yolanda Martinez: Thank you so much for sharing your progress and I have the opportunity to know Egypt digital agenda very well as early adopter of the GovStack initiative so I think I’m so happy that you are currently working not only on the policy part but really on the information system that is going to be needed to measure this effort end-to-end. So a kind invitation and encouragement to leverage open source as much as possible so other countries can really use your effort and thinking in the global south, no, accelerate the adoption of these platforms that can really make actionable the policy and the framework being created. So congratulations on that and very much looking forward and I think a very natural synergy can be done with OSPO’s initiatives in UN to help you document all the source code in GitHub shared with other countries to scale this effort. So thank you for what you kindly share. Last but not least, we have Thomas Eber, he’s a policy analyst in the DigiConnect initiative from the European Commission and he’s also accompanying us virtually. So over to you, Thomas.

Thomas Ebert: Yes, thanks for the kind introduction and thanks for allowing me to speak at this wonderful panel. I come from the German Environment Agency and I’m now seconded to the Commission to DigiConnect, so actually really bridging the digital and the environmental world. And I think this is something which is very much needed and this is something where the DPP really can make a big difference. So we call it DPP in Europe, as already has been announced, Digital Product Passport. It was introduced in the Eco-Design for Sustainable Product Regulation, which was adopted last year. And it is a tool to really bind information digital to a product in the physical world to allow a circular economy to happen. Because a lot of circular economy use cases depend on information actually about the product. So when you want to reuse the product or repair the product, you need to have information about what is the state of health of the battery I want to buy, what is the manual, how to repair the product. So a lot of information is needed in that context. And in Europe, the first passports will be mandatory for big batteries, so meaning car batteries, like over two kilowatt hours, so not the starter batteries, lead-ion batteries. As of 2027, data will apply to different other products groups like textiles, iron and steel, and many more progressively over time. But to follow these discussions, I think it’s very helpful to separate two different discussion streams. On the one hand side, what is required for the technical DPP system? So what norms and standards do I have to use to exchange the information? And then on the other hand side, what data needs to be in a digital product passport for a specific product group, like batteries or t-shirts? or whatever. So with respect to the first one, there’s a lot of standardization work already going on in Europe. We have SENSENELEC as the European Standardization Organizations who work on standards to build the DPP system, as we say it. And for us, it’s very important to stress that it needs to be based on openness and transparency and really to ensure the interoperability, also other speakers have mentioned already, and especially also to prevent a vendor lock-in to a single company, a single provider of a specific solution, to ensure that the systems are future-proof and open. And in that regard, we also targeted the standardization bodies and told them, look what’s on international level, on ISO level happening, because for us, it’s clear that the supply chains are global and we need to link to the global supply chains. And when I heard the example of Francesca talking about the EPR schemes, so this makes me very optimistic, because when we discuss DPPs, it starts with some information which is linked to a product, but this can only be the start for transition to a circular economy. There needs to be a lot of services built around that. And actually, I’m happy to follow up with you, Francesca, on this, because we’re discussing the same, how can we link digital product passports to the EPR schemes to really make progress on that side as well. But first, we need to start small with the DPP to set up this exchange tool for information between companies and administrations to really make the progress. And as a last thought on that, for us also, especially in DigiConnect, it’s very important that these systems work in a B2B setting, so that they enable really the circular business models that we need, so that they might allow product as a service business models to really make progress in that sense. And for this, we also have the Surpass 2 project you might have heard about. This is a project piloting digital product passports. They have 13 different pilots for different product groups like tires, washing machines, and there we specifically task them to really investigate what’s in for circular economy if you have a DPP for that product group. How can you support circular economy in that sense? And with this, I think I’m a bit short on time and happy to discuss further if you want.

Yolanda Martinez: Thank you so much. And you mentioned two elements that I think also help us recap this conversation, which is the digital technology stack that is needed to enable the different use cases, and then the policy side, and the importance of making sure that there is the right energy when circular economy policies are being developed with the digital agenda authority that is running the basic technology stack that is agnostic to any use case, right? Identity, interoperability is the same if you’re doing a digital product passport than a verifiable credential to identify SMEs or a passport of a driver license, right? It’s a digital service on its own that is needed to enable extended producer responsibility, trustability, et cetera. So, I’m very much looking forward to the work that is being done and especially to see that what everyone is expressing generates more ideas to collaborate. So, I think the message is clear, no? Piloting a quick iteration on what the outcome of those pilots are, diversifying the different use cases from batteries to textiles to many others, and sharing how all this progress is taking place. So, with this, thank you so much for the invitation to moderate this segment, and over to Reyna for closing remarks.

Agreement points

Need for interoperability and standardization across digital product passport systems

Speakers

– Fabienne Pierre
– Maria Teresa Pisani
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

The framework requires agreed data categories, accessibility, interoperability, comparability, traceability, and technology openness across multiple sectors

UNECE focuses on enabling interoperability of information exchange systems so actors along value chains can speak a common language

Digital product passports must be based on openness, transparency, and interoperability to prevent vendor lock-in and ensure future-proof systems

Summary

All speakers emphasized the critical importance of interoperability and standardization to ensure different digital product passport systems can communicate effectively and prevent fragmentation across sectors and jurisdictions

Topics

Digital standards | Data governance | Telecommunications infrastructure

Importance of pilot projects for testing and iterating digital product passport frameworks

Speakers

– Francesca Cenni
– Maria Teresa Pisani
– Hoda Shakra
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

Basel Convention is testing digital product passports for waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay to link information with extended producer responsibility schemes

UNECE has conducted pilots on traceability and transparency with the World Bank for the cotton sector in Uzbekistan

Egypt has multiple initiatives including COICA-funded digital platforms project, e-manufacturing pilot with RFID integration, and Seiko technology implementation

European Commission runs the Surpass 2 project with 13 pilots for different product groups to investigate circular economy benefits

Summary

All speakers demonstrated commitment to practical implementation through pilot projects across different sectors and regions, recognizing the value of testing frameworks in real-world scenarios before full-scale deployment

Topics

Digital business models | Sustainable development | Capacity development

Integration of digital product passports with circular economy and environmental policies

Speakers

– Fabienne Pierre
– Francesca Cenni
– Maria Teresa Pisani
– Hoda Shakra
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

ITU participates in the Impact Initiative Digitalization for Circular Economy launched by One Planet Network and UNEP with multiple partners from different sectors

Basel Convention aims to bridge the gap in circular economy by providing information for recycling, repair, and waste management decisions

The framework supports traceability from raw materials to consumers, helping fight greenwashing and ensure reliable sustainability claims

Egypt is integrating DPI systems into e-waste management technical regulations, extended producer responsibility frameworks, and circular economy policy development

Digital product passports enable circular business models and product-as-a-service approaches by providing necessary product information

Summary

All speakers recognized digital product passports as essential tools for enabling circular economy practices, supporting environmental sustainability, and facilitating better waste management and recycling decisions

Topics

Sustainable development | E-waste | Digital business models

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for global coordination and mapping of digital product passport initiatives across different regions and jurisdictions to ensure alignment and avoid fragmentation

Speakers

– Fabienne Pierre
– Maria Teresa Pisani

Arguments

The framework development involves global consultations starting with Latin America, followed by Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Europe

UNECE works with ISO through a joint technical committee to map global digital passport initiatives and ensure alignment across jurisdictions

Topics

Digital standards | Interdisciplinary approaches | Capacity development

Both speakers highlighted the specific integration of digital product passports with extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes as a practical approach to waste management and environmental compliance

Speakers

– Francesca Cenni
– Hoda Shakra

Arguments

Basel Convention is testing digital product passports for waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay to link information with extended producer responsibility schemes

Egypt is integrating DPI systems into e-waste management technical regulations, extended producer responsibility frameworks, and circular economy policy development

Topics

E-waste | Sustainable development | Consumer protection

Both speakers demonstrated government-level commitment to implementing digital product passport systems through formal regulatory frameworks and standards, showing policy-level support for the initiative

Speakers

– Hoda Shakra
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

Egypt has issued ministerial decree ES2501 for electrical and electronic devices based on international benchmark IEC 62368

European Commission has introduced mandatory digital product passports through the Eco-Design for Sustainable Product Regulation, starting with batteries in 2027

Topics

Digital standards | Consumer protection | Sustainable development

Unexpected consensus

Cross-sector application of digital product passports beyond ICT

Speakers

– Fabienne Pierre
– Maria Teresa Pisani
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

ITU participates in the Impact Initiative Digitalization for Circular Economy launched by One Planet Network and UNEP with multiple partners from different sectors

UNECE works with ISO through a joint technical committee to map global digital passport initiatives and ensure alignment across jurisdictions

European Commission runs the Surpass 2 project with 13 pilots for different product groups to investigate circular economy benefits

Explanation

Despite ITU’s primary focus on ICT, there was unexpected consensus that digital product passports should be sector-agnostic and applicable across textiles, construction, batteries, and other industries, showing remarkable alignment on cross-sector standardization

Topics

Digital standards | Sustainable development | Interdisciplinary approaches

Immediate practical implementation readiness across different development levels

Speakers

– Francesca Cenni
– Hoda Shakra
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

Basel Convention is testing digital product passports for waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay to link information with extended producer responsibility schemes

Egypt has multiple initiatives including COICA-funded digital platforms project, e-manufacturing pilot with RFID integration, and Seiko technology implementation

European Commission runs the Surpass 2 project with 13 pilots for different product groups to investigate circular economy benefits

Explanation

Unexpectedly, countries and organizations at different development stages (Uruguay, Egypt, European Union) all demonstrated readiness to implement pilot projects simultaneously, suggesting the framework’s adaptability across different economic and technological contexts

Topics

Capacity development | Digital access | Sustainable development

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated remarkable consensus on the need for interoperable, standardized digital product passport systems that support circular economy goals through practical pilot implementations across multiple sectors and regions

Consensus level

High level of consensus with strong alignment on technical requirements, implementation approaches, and environmental objectives. This consensus suggests strong potential for successful global coordination and adoption of digital product passport frameworks, with the main challenge being coordination rather than fundamental disagreements on approach or objectives

Different viewpoints

Unexpected differences

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed remarkable consensus among speakers with no direct disagreements identified. All participants shared common goals around developing interoperable digital product passport systems that support circular economy and sustainability objectives.

Disagreement level

Very low disagreement level. The speakers demonstrated strong alignment on fundamental principles and objectives, with differences mainly in implementation approaches and regional/organizational priorities rather than conflicting viewpoints. This high level of consensus suggests favorable conditions for collaborative development of the global digital product passport framework, though coordination challenges may arise from the diversity of approaches being pursued simultaneously across different organizations and regions.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for global coordination and mapping of digital product passport initiatives across different regions and jurisdictions to ensure alignment and avoid fragmentation

Speakers

– Fabienne Pierre
– Maria Teresa Pisani

Arguments

The framework development involves global consultations starting with Latin America, followed by Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Europe

UNECE works with ISO through a joint technical committee to map global digital passport initiatives and ensure alignment across jurisdictions

Topics

Digital standards | Interdisciplinary approaches | Capacity development

Both speakers highlighted the specific integration of digital product passports with extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes as a practical approach to waste management and environmental compliance

Speakers

– Francesca Cenni
– Hoda Shakra

Arguments

Basel Convention is testing digital product passports for waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay to link information with extended producer responsibility schemes

Egypt is integrating DPI systems into e-waste management technical regulations, extended producer responsibility frameworks, and circular economy policy development

Topics

E-waste | Sustainable development | Consumer protection

Both speakers demonstrated government-level commitment to implementing digital product passport systems through formal regulatory frameworks and standards, showing policy-level support for the initiative

Speakers

– Hoda Shakra
– Thomas Ebert

Arguments

Egypt has issued ministerial decree ES2501 for electrical and electronic devices based on international benchmark IEC 62368

European Commission has introduced mandatory digital product passports through the Eco-Design for Sustainable Product Regulation, starting with batteries in 2027

Topics

Digital standards | Consumer protection | Sustainable development

Key takeaways

Digital Product Passports (DPPs) are emerging as a critical tool for enabling circular economy by providing structured product information through unique identifiers accessible to various stakeholders throughout product lifecycles

Global standardization and interoperability are essential – multiple organizations (ITU, UNECE, European Commission, Basel Convention) are developing complementary standards and frameworks that must work together

Pilot projects are crucial for framework development and testing – current pilots include waste lead-acid batteries in Uruguay, textile traceability, e-manufacturing in Egypt, and 13 European pilots across different product categories

The framework must be sector-agnostic but with sector-specific extensions, starting with batteries, textiles, and ICT products, with different information levels for different user types (consumers vs. manufacturers)

Integration with existing environmental policies is key – DPPs should be embedded in e-waste management regulations, extended producer responsibility schemes, and circular economy policies

Global South participation is essential for inclusive development – consultations are being conducted across regions (Latin America, Africa, Asia-Pacific) to ensure the framework works globally

Technical infrastructure must be based on open standards to prevent vendor lock-in and ensure future-proof, interoperable systems that can connect across global supply chains

Resolutions and action items

Continue global consultations with next phases targeting Africa, then Asia-Pacific and Europe following the Latin America consultation in Brasilia

Develop and test pilot projects across different sectors and regions, with timeline for textile pilot estimated from Q3 2025 to Q2 2026

Standardize the global framework through ITU with focus on ICT sector, with new work item opened in June

Egypt to integrate DPI systems into upcoming e-waste management technical regulations and extended producer responsibility framework development

Share pilot project progress and use cases proactively rather than waiting for next panel discussions

Promote framework adoption in high-level political forums like UNEA, High-Level Political Forum, and UNGA

Encourage participation from stakeholders as ambassadors, providing feedback and technical input to category selection

Leverage open source approaches and document source code in GitHub for global south countries to accelerate adoption

Unresolved issues

How to balance information transparency with competitive sensitivity between manufacturers – what information should be shared and what should remain proprietary

Specific governance structures and mechanisms for the global framework implementation and oversight

Cost implications and funding mechanisms for implementation, particularly for Global South countries and SMEs

Technical details of how different national and regional systems will achieve interoperability in practice

Specific timelines for mandatory implementation across different regions and product categories beyond Europe’s 2027 battery requirement

How to ensure data privacy and security while maintaining transparency and accessibility requirements

Mechanisms for ensuring compliance and enforcement of digital product passport requirements globally

Suggested compromises

Differentiated information access levels based on user type – consumers receive environmental impact information while manufacturers get more detailed technical data, balancing transparency with competitive concerns

Voluntary adoption phase before mandatory implementation to allow stakeholders to adapt and provide feedback

Sector-agnostic framework with sector-specific extensions to balance standardization with industry-specific needs

Phased implementation starting with specific product categories (batteries, textiles) before expanding to more complex sectors like ICT

Building on existing standards and systems rather than creating entirely new frameworks to reduce implementation burden and leverage current investments

But it might vary to which one is the one that is using this information. If it’s a consumer, maybe you will not have all the details, but you will have the environmental impact that it has. If you are a manufacturer, maybe you will not have all the products, because also how we ensure this competitiveness between one manufacturer and the others, and what are you using? It is a very sensitive topic that they are discussing right now.

Speaker

Fabienne Pierre

Reason

This comment introduces a critical tension in digital product passport implementation – the balance between transparency and competitive advantage. It highlights that information access must be tiered based on user roles and raises fundamental questions about what information should be public versus proprietary.

Impact

This comment established a foundational challenge that influenced the entire discussion. It set the stage for subsequent speakers to address how their organizations handle information sensitivity and stakeholder access, making it a recurring theme throughout the panel.

We are testing the passport for waste lead-acid batteries… These are very, very hazardous products. So we thought, perhaps you can try to link the information on these batteries to the importers, to those who then will take responsibility for their take-back, for their collection… This is because we are looking for a tool to control the illegal traffic and the incorrect management of these batteries.

Speaker

Francesca Cenni

Reason

This comment transforms the abstract concept of digital product passports into a concrete solution for a critical environmental and safety problem. It demonstrates how DPPs can address illegal trafficking and hazardous waste management, moving beyond theoretical benefits to practical implementation.

Impact

This concrete example energized the discussion and provided a tangible reference point for other speakers. It shifted the conversation from theoretical frameworks to real-world applications, with subsequent speakers referencing pilots and practical implementations in their own contexts.

Great to have the traceability, great to have the transparency. A lot of data are available along the value chain. The problem is that their availability is silenced. So very important to work on interoperability of information exchange systems to ensure that actors along the value chain speak a common language.

Speaker

Maria Teresa Pisani

Reason

This comment identifies a crucial gap between having data and being able to use it effectively. It reframes the challenge from data collection to data communication and interoperability, highlighting that technical standards are as important as the information itself.

Impact

This insight shifted the technical focus of the discussion toward interoperability standards and common languages. It influenced subsequent speakers to address how their systems would connect with others, making interoperability a central theme in the remaining presentations.

Egypt currently is working on the development of the circular economy policy for Egypt and it includes eight sectors and one of these sectors is the ICT sector and also it will be very good to include TPI, to embed it as part of the national strategy and the circular economy policy.

Speaker

Hoda Shakra

Reason

This comment demonstrates how developing countries can integrate DPPs into broader policy frameworks rather than treating them as standalone initiatives. It shows strategic thinking about embedding digital tools within existing policy development processes.

Impact

This comment provided a model for policy integration that other developing countries could follow. It shifted the discussion toward how DPPs can be embedded in national strategies rather than implemented as separate projects, influencing the moderator’s closing remarks about aligning digital and circular economy policies.

I think it’s very helpful to separate two different discussion streams. On the one hand side, what is required for the technical DPP system? So what norms and standards do I have to use to exchange the information? And then on the other hand side, what data needs to be in a digital product passport for a specific product group.

Speaker

Thomas Ebert

Reason

This comment provides crucial analytical clarity by separating technical infrastructure from content requirements. It helps organize the complex DPP discussion into manageable components and clarifies why different stakeholders might have different priorities.

Impact

This conceptual framework helped structure the remaining discussion and the moderator’s synthesis. It provided a clear way to think about the different aspects of DPP implementation and influenced how the moderator summarized the key themes in her closing remarks.

So, I think the message is clear, no? Piloting a quick iteration on what the outcome of those pilots are, diversifying the different use cases from batteries to textiles to many others, and sharing how all this progress is taking place.

Speaker

Yolanda Martinez

Reason

This synthesis comment captures the emergent consensus from the discussion – that progress requires diverse, iterative pilots with active knowledge sharing. It transforms individual organizational efforts into a collective learning approach.

Impact

This comment crystallized the discussion’s main actionable outcome and provided a clear path forward for collaboration. It unified the various organizational perspectives into a shared methodology for advancing DPP implementation globally.

Overall assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by progressively building from conceptual challenges to practical solutions. Fabienne’s opening comment about information sensitivity established the complexity of the challenge, while Francesca’s concrete pilot example demonstrated feasibility. Maria Teresa’s interoperability insight shifted focus to technical integration, Hoda’s policy integration approach showed strategic implementation, and Thomas’s analytical framework provided conceptual clarity. Finally, Yolanda’s synthesis unified these perspectives into a collaborative action plan. Together, these comments transformed what could have been a series of organizational presentations into a dynamic conversation about practical implementation challenges and solutions, culminating in a clear methodology for moving forward through diverse, iterative pilots with active knowledge sharing.

What are the results from the first consultation of the framework in Latin America held in Brasilia with 20 countries?

Speaker

Fabienne Pierre

Explanation

Fabienne mentioned they cannot share the results yet as they haven’t received the news, but this information is needed to inform the next regional consultations and framework development

How to ensure competitiveness between manufacturers while sharing sensitive product information in digital product passports?

Speaker

Fabienne Pierre

Explanation

This was identified as a very sensitive topic currently being discussed, particularly regarding what information different stakeholders should have access to

What does the digital product passport regulation mean for different ministries and which ministries should be involved?

Speaker

Fabienne Pierre

Explanation

This was mentioned as part of awareness discussions during consultations, as many stakeholders know very little about the implications

How to estimate the cost of implementation in the Global South?

Speaker

Fabienne Pierre

Explanation

This is part of the pilot project objectives to inform the development of national instruments and ensure accessibility for developing countries

What are the difficulties, steps, and technologies used in the Uruguay pilot project for waste lead-acid batteries?

Speaker

Francesca Cenni

Explanation

Francesca mentioned they hope to provide more details on the pilot testing process, challenges faced, and technical implementation in future sessions

How can digital product passports be effectively linked to Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes?

Speaker

Francesca Cenni and Thomas Ebert

Explanation

Both speakers mentioned this connection as important for circular economy implementation, with Thomas expressing interest in following up on this topic

How to reduce cost and complexity of digital product passport implementation, especially for SMEs and actors in emerging economies?

Speaker

Maria Teresa Pisani

Explanation

This was identified as crucial for ensuring inclusive adoption and making sustainable behavior the norm globally

How to leverage open source solutions for digital product passport information systems to enable knowledge sharing between countries?

Speaker

Yolanda Martinez

Explanation

Suggested as a way to help other countries, particularly in the Global South, accelerate adoption by using Egypt’s development efforts

What circular economy use cases can be supported by digital product passports for different product groups?

Speaker

Thomas Ebert

Explanation

This is being investigated through the Surpass 2 project with 13 different pilots to understand how DPPs can enable circular business models

How to ensure interoperability between different digital product passport initiatives globally while preventing vendor lock-in?

Speaker

Thomas Ebert and Maria Teresa Pisani

Explanation

Critical for ensuring systems are future-proof, open, and can work across global supply chains with different jurisdictions developing their own approaches

Summary

This transcript captures the third day of the WSIS Plus 20 High Level Event, focusing on inaugural leaders’ talks about forging partnerships to advance digital development. The session began with highlights from day one, showcasing the progress made since the World Summit on the Information Society launched 20 years ago, when only 16% of the world’s population was online compared to 68% today. Ambassador Rob, President of ECOSOC, delivered a special address emphasizing the need to link digital strategies with UN Sustainable Development Goals, warning that the digital divide will widen without deliberate action to ensure no one is left behind. He stressed the importance of solidarity and coherent governance to ensure AI and emerging technologies benefit all rather than reinforcing global inequalities.

The panel discussion featured ministers and officials from various countries sharing their national digital transformation experiences. Minister Russell from Andorra highlighted their comprehensive fiber-optic deployment and citizen-centered digital administration strategy for 2030. Minister Muchanga from Mozambique emphasized how dramatically the digital landscape has changed since 2003, noting that digital services have become essential for daily life and stressing the urgency of connecting rural populations. Brazil’s telecommunications agency representative discussed their efforts to achieve digital equality, including expanding fiber networks to 75% of municipalities and implementing programs that convert regulatory fines into concrete connectivity projects for vulnerable communities.

Tunisia’s representative acknowledged challenges in digital transformation, particularly resistance to change among government employees and project governance issues, while highlighting their support for startups through procurement processes and incentive programs. UN Under-Secretary-General Gill emphasized the role of multistakeholder cooperation in addressing global digital challenges, noting that the Global Digital Compact centers inclusive digital economy as a priority and calling for updated ways of working together across stakeholders and borders. The Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization’s representative identified fragmentation as a major challenge in the digital development ecosystem, advocating for coherent national strategies that international agencies can support rather than operating in silos. The discussion concluded with consensus that partnerships and coordinated approaches are essential for building stable, digitally-enabled societies that serve all communities effectively.

Keypoints

**Major Discussion Points:**

– **Digital divide and connectivity challenges**: Multiple speakers emphasized the persistent gap between connected and unconnected populations, particularly in rural and vulnerable communities. The discussion highlighted how 68% of the world’s population is now online (up from 16% twenty years ago), but significant inequalities remain that require urgent attention.

– **National digital transformation strategies**: Ministers and officials shared their countries’ approaches to digitalization, including Andorra’s 2030 strategy focused on citizen-centered digital administration, Mozambique’s efforts to build climate-resilient infrastructure, and Brazil’s spectrum auction model that converts revenue into investment commitments for rural connectivity.

– **Multistakeholder partnerships and governance**: Speakers stressed the need for coherent collaboration across governments, private sector, academia, and civil society to avoid fragmented approaches. The importance of updating governance frameworks and creating “coherent governance and rule of law” for emerging technologies was emphasized.

– **Beyond connectivity to meaningful access**: The discussion evolved from basic internet access to ensuring people have digital skills, affordable devices, and can meaningfully participate in an increasingly digitalized economy. Brazil’s focus on digital citizenship training and Tunisia’s startup incentives exemplified this broader approach.

– **AI and emerging technologies for development**: The conversation addressed both opportunities and risks of AI, emphasizing the need for “AI for Good” while acknowledging potential harms like misinformation and reinforced inequalities. The Global Digital Compact was highlighted as providing direction for leveraging digital public infrastructure.

**Overall Purpose:**

The discussion aimed to assess progress on digital development goals 20 years after the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), share best practices for digital transformation, and forge partnerships to advance digital-for-development initiatives beyond 2025.

**Overall Tone:**

The tone was collaborative and forward-looking, with speakers sharing both achievements and ongoing challenges in a constructive manner. There was a sense of urgency about addressing digital divides, but also optimism about technological opportunities. The discussion maintained a diplomatic, professional atmosphere throughout, with speakers building on each other’s points rather than expressing disagreement.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire** – Commissioner, National Telecom Agency, Brazil

– **Americo Muchanga** – His Excellency, Professor, Minister of Communication and Digital Transformation, Mozambique

– **Marc Rossell** – His Excellency, Minister of Civil Service and Digital Transformation, Andorra

– **Bernadette Lewis** – Secretary General, Commonwealth Telecommunication Organization

– **Amandeep Singh Gill** – Undersecretary General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies

– **Kamel Saadoui** – Engineer, President, Instance National D.E. Telecommunications, Tunisia

– **Robert Rae** – His Excellency Ambassador, President of ECOSOC

– **Amrita Choudhury** – His Excellency Professor, Moderator for the inaugural leaders talks

– **Participant** – Announcer/Host (introduced the event and participants)

**Additional speakers:**

None identified – all speakers mentioned in the transcript were included in the provided speakers names list.

# WSIS Plus 20 High Level Event: Inaugural Leaders’ Talks on Digital Development Partnerships

## Executive Summary

The WSIS Plus 20 High Level Event featured a panel discussion on foraging partnerships for advancing the digital for development landscape, moderated by Amrita Choudhury. The session brought together ministers, regulators, and international officials to discuss progress and challenges in digital development twenty years after the World Summit on the Information Society. Speakers highlighted significant global connectivity growth while emphasizing persistent challenges in bridging digital divides and ensuring inclusive digital transformation.

## Opening Framework

Ambassador Robert Rae, President of ECOSOC, delivered opening remarks establishing the strategic context for digital development partnerships. Rae emphasized the critical need to “link up the strategies that we develop for digital technologies and for artificial intelligence and for quantum” with the fundamental purposes of the United Nations. He positioned the Sustainable Development Goals as representing “common decency of humanity” rather than ideological projects.

Rae warned that “the digital divide will widen unless real steps are taken to bring people together and share technology globally.” He provided nuanced perspective on artificial intelligence, acknowledging its benefits while noting that “AI can be bad when it spreads lies, when it spreads propaganda, when it undermines trust and undermines integrity, when it undermines genuine access to technology and reinforces the inequalities of the world.”

## National Digital Transformation Experiences

### Andorra’s Comprehensive Strategy

Minister Marc Rossell, speaking in French, outlined Andorra’s systematic approach to digital transformation centered on their national digitalization strategy 2030. The country has prioritized comprehensive fiber-optic deployment and citizen-centered digital administration. Rossell identified cybersecurity as a “top priority when supporting companies in digital transformation” and highlighted initiatives including content-filtering SIM cards for protecting minors and digital well-being programs.

### Mozambique’s Evolution

Minister Americo Muchanga provided historical perspective on the transformation of digital needs since the original WSIS summit. “When we met here back in 2003… the issues that were concerning us back then, they are completely different from what we see today,” Muchanga observed. He noted that “when we talk about Information Society today, we mean things that people wouldn’t live without them,” emphasizing how digital services have evolved from optional to essential.

Muchanga stressed that “connectivity remains fundamental challenge with need for affordable services and resilient infrastructure,” particularly highlighting the importance of climate-resilient infrastructure development for countries facing environmental vulnerabilities.

### Brazil’s Regulatory Innovation

Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire from Brazil’s National Telecommunication Agency presented innovative regulatory approaches to addressing digital inequality. Brazil has achieved 75% fiber coverage across municipalities and implemented the “Obligation to Do” regulatory tool, which converts financial fines into concrete infrastructure investment commitments for vulnerable communities.

Freire provided compelling insight into the social dimensions of connectivity: “when we connect these communities, we are not only just building infrastructure, we are building something deeper. We are building belonging for black communities. We are building belonging for indigenous peoples… We are restoring their dignity.”

The Brazilian approach includes the Sustainable Amazon program and a 5G spectrum auction where 90% of revenue was directed toward investment commitments in underserved areas rather than government coffers. Freire identified digital skills training as essential, noting that “lack of digital literacy is main barrier to internet adoption” based on Brazilian surveys.

### Tunisia’s Governance Challenges

Kamel Saadoui from Tunisia’s telecommunications authority acknowledged significant challenges in digital transformation, particularly “resistance to change among government employees” and project governance issues. Tunisia has implemented solutions including startup incentive programs and e-procurement processes designed to overcome internal resistance while supporting private sector innovation.

Saadoui highlighted complexities in project governance, noting challenges in “determining whether initiatives are technology or sector-specific issues,” which affects implementation speed and coordination across government services.

## International Cooperation Perspectives

### UN Global Digital Cooperation

Under-Secretary-General Amandeep Singh Gill emphasized that “multistakeholder cooperation essential for addressing global challenges and bridging digital divide through cross-border and cross-stakeholder collaboration.” Gill introduced the important distinction that “before the digital divide, there is the development divide,” challenging participants to consider how countries can “leapfrog there with constraints on energy, on education, financing.”

The Global Digital Compact was highlighted as providing direction for leveraging digital public infrastructure. Gill identified key investment areas including digital public infrastructure, data and AI capacity, talent development, and public sector institutional capacity, while acknowledging the challenge of prioritizing limited resources given significant per capita spending gaps between developed and developing countries.

### Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation’s Systems Analysis

Bernadette Lewis provided critical analysis of coordination challenges, identifying that “the digital for development ecosystem, it suffers from fragmentation. There are many initiatives, but they bear no relevance or synergies with other initiatives that are happening.”

Lewis advocated for establishing “mechanisms at the national level whereby all organizations could participate and anchor their work to national priorities,” emphasizing the need to avoid duplicated activities and ensure coordinated progression rather than scattered approaches.

## Key Themes and Challenges

### Infrastructure and Connectivity

Multiple speakers emphasized digital infrastructure development as fundamental for digital transformation. The discussion revealed consensus around the importance of robust digital infrastructure, particularly fiber-optic networks, while acknowledging varying national contexts and implementation approaches.

### Cybersecurity Integration

Speakers demonstrated alignment on cybersecurity as integral to digital transformation strategies, with recognition that security considerations must be embedded throughout digital development processes rather than treated as afterthoughts.

### Skills and Capacity Building

The discussion highlighted that infrastructure alone is insufficient for meaningful digital inclusion. Speakers emphasized the importance of digital skills training and capacity building, with recognition that technological access must be accompanied by capability development.

### Governance and Coordination

The session revealed significant challenges in coordinating digital development efforts, both within countries and internationally. The fragmentation of initiatives and need for better coordination mechanisms emerged as critical issues requiring systematic attention.

## Session Conclusion

Moderator Amrita Choudhury concluded the session by noting the time constraints and announcing that a summary session would be held “Friday, 11th July at 3 p.m.” The session ended with a group photo opportunity for participants.

The discussion demonstrated both significant progress in global digital development and persistent challenges in ensuring inclusive digital transformation. While connectivity has expanded dramatically since the original WSIS summit, speakers consistently emphasized that meaningful digital inclusion requires comprehensive approaches addressing infrastructure, skills, governance, and social equity considerations.

The session highlighted the evolution from basic connectivity concerns to complex challenges of digital governance, cybersecurity, and social inclusion, while emphasizing the continued importance of international cooperation and partnership in addressing these multifaceted challenges.

Participant: H.E. Prof. Amrita Choudhury, H.E. Dr. Bosun Tijani, Mr. Valeriu Zgonea, Ms. Bernadette Lewis Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the third day of the WSIS plus 20 high level event. We’ve gathered here for the inauguration of the leaders talks where you will hear ministers, head of regulatory bodies, senior UN officials, technical community, academia, talking about their experiences in implementing digital and the vision of WSIS beyond 2025. So we’d like to request you to please take your seats. We have a very interesting special address from also the president of ECOSOC who has joined us here today. So colleagues, please do take your seats and we will begin with the video highlights of day one, which you can enjoy once the video plays. Thank you so much. Please take your seats and welcome everybody. Good morning. Welcome to the inaugural session of the WSIS plus 20 high level event. Welcome to the inaugural session of the WSIS plus 20 high level event 2025. Swiss Alphorns, once critical for long distance communication, were a fitting way to communicate the start of this high level event. It’s been two decades since the World Summit on the Information Society launched, redefining the way we think about building for a digital future. As the WSIS process marks 20 years, there’s recognition that the forum plays an integral part, now a leading annual platform with more than 50,000 participants. The WSIS plus 20 high level event 2025 is getting underway here in Geneva, and it’s going to start by reflecting on all that’s been achieved in digital development in the last 20 years, and the life changing impact that’s had on people. Co-hosted by ITU and the Swiss Confederation, and co-organized by ITU, UNESCO, UNDP and UNCTAD, ITU’s Secretary General took to the stage at the opening ceremony to praise the groundwork laid to strengthen digital cooperation. 20 years ago, just 1 billion people, 16% of the world’s population, was online. Today, that figure stands at 68%, and that progress stems from the WSIS vision of an open and inclusive information society that drives digital development for all. Next, the handing over of a gavel marked a change of WSIS chair, moving this year from Switzerland to South Africa. It’s a very proud moment for South Africa and for my country, and we’re very grateful to the ITU for making sure that this opportunity is granted to South Africa, and it just also shows the stature of our country in shaping and influencing discussions in global platforms around digitization, connectivity, and closing the digital divide. Then time to celebrate the highly regarded 19 WSIS Prize winners, one in each of the Action Line categories, plus a special recognition. This year’s projects praised for their innovation and positive change across areas such as cyber security and e-government. This winner is recognized for a project helping young people in Indonesia. We’ve seen great improvement in their well-being and their self-confidence when they use these platforms to speak out about specific issues in their communities, and not only that, using their voices to engage stakeholders, including policy makers. And a project to benefit health provision in Zanzibar. All patients will have real-time information on the treatment they get on any healthy facility in Zanzibar, where it will now ease up their health provision and also keep track and record of the healthy data for easy health provision in future visits. Throughout the day, sessions took place to discuss a variety of topics. In this room, youth speakers from all corners of the globe shared their thoughts. One describing a digital tool to enhance the right of access to land information in Vietnam. We conduct the annual evaluation of whether the government publicized the land information and whether it’s accessible to the citizens. So in the project, we engage also different groups, for example, the people from ethnic minorities, the people in remote regions, youth and people with disability in assessing as well. Whilst others spoke about accessibility issues. Every community in Ghana has access to 5G network. Even the cities do not have access to 5G. And recently we have like Starlink, but it’s just the selected few that can afford these services. So if we want to include all these people, we need to first make this infrastructure as less and affordable for all before we can even build more innovative solutions and encourage young people to also create technological solutions to solve these local problems. The day began with a plea to turn the digital divides into digital opportunities. And there’s been a wealth of knowledge sharing around topics such as health, inclusivity and e-learning. Join us tomorrow to continue the conversation on day two of WSIS plus 20 high level event 2025. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. What a wonderful vibe. What a wonderful highlight of what happened on day one. You will be able to see these highlights online. We have daily highlights summarizing what’s happening at the WSIS plus 20 higher level event. Of course, it’s not possible without your energy, without your contributions and without your vision of what you want WSIS to be like. So thank you so much for being here. And without any further delay, I would like to invite the moderator for our inaugural leaders talks, Mrs. Amrita Choudhury, to please lead you and to moderate our first inaugural leaders talks, which comprises of high level delegates from different stakeholder communities. Amrita, the floor is yours.

Amrita Choudhury: Good morning, everyone. I hope I’m audible to all of you. And thank you for coming in the morning for this session, which is the first leaders talk. And we would be discussing on foraging partnerships for the purpose of advancing the digital for development landscape. And today we have a distinguished high level panelists who will help us explore how digital technologies, multistakeholder and multistake sectoral partnerships, innovative measures are helping to advance economic developments of our society at large. We have with us a special guest, His Excellency Ambassador Rob, who is the president of ECASOC. And then we have His Excellency, Mr. Mark Russell, Minister of Civil Service and Digital Transformation, Andorra. We have His Excellency, Professor Emerico Muchanga, Minister of Communication and Digital Transformation, Mozambique. We have Mr. Alexandre Reis Sequeira Freire, Commissioner, National Telecom Agency, Brazil. We have Engineer Kamal Sadaoui, President, Instance National D.E. Telecommunications, Tunisia. Mr. Amandeep Singh Gill, Undersecretary General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies. Ms. Bernadette Lewis, Secretary General, Commonwealth Telecommunication Organization. May I please request all the esteemed guests to be here at the stage. And I would also request each of them to keep to the three minutes time because we have back to back sessions. Thank you so much. And since we have a very packed schedule, I would request Ambassador Reis to actually give his special address to us. And I think he would like to go to the podium and speak. Thank you.

Robert Rae: Thank you very much, Excellencies and participants, ladies and gentlemen. It’s a great honor to be able to speak to you briefly this morning. Let me assure you that I will be brief, although it’s very dangerous to put a microphone in front of a former politician at any time of the day, particularly at this time. But it’s a great honor to be here. I just really wanted to make a few key points as we undertake this summit and continue on our path of figuring out where we’re going and what needs to be done. The first thing is that we need to link up the strategies that we develop for digital technologies and for artificial intelligence and for quantum. We need to link them up with the purpose of the United Nations, the purpose that we are all undertaking together, and for us to understand that the Sustainable Development Goals are not some sort of ideological project, but they’re really just a common decency of humanity. And when we look at the objectives of the STGs to end hunger and poverty, to improve health, to provide access to education, to ensure that we build a world that is peaceful and that is sustainable, these are projects we can all understand and appreciate. But in order to achieve them, we have to take advantage of the tremendous breakthroughs in technology which have been taking place. The second thing is we have to reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that with this new technology, no one falls behind. And we’ve been hearing from the video on the first day, and I think it will be a common theme in our discussions, right now there is a digital divide. And the digital divide will widen unless we take real steps to bring people together and to share. And that’s going to require decisions by governments to do just that. We’ve already seen some important signs. The World Bank, together with the Development Bank of Africa, working hard at ensuring that there is much broader access to the Internet and that we are going to be seeing breakthroughs there. But we also have to make sure that the tools that we’re developing are ones that are widely shared throughout the world and not just confined to the richest countries, not just confined to those that are already furthest ahead. I’m proud that my own government in Canada has taken steps together with the British Agency for Development to establish a $100 million fund, which we are sharing with developing countries through our IDRC. And we’re trying to create centers of excellence in developing countries so that the breakthroughs that take place in technology, the breakthroughs in discovery, and the breakthroughs in application are not confined to any one geographical area, but actually come together. And my last point is two words. The first word is solidarity. Our solidarity is being tested. It’s being tested by those who say that the world is all about me first or my country first. And that’s fine to say me first and my country first, but you can’t stop there. We have to understand the solidarity, the obligations we have to one another, and how if we all pursue me first, then the global commons will not get the attention that it really needs and deserves. And my second word is coherence connected to governance. We do have a job to do to create coherent governance and the rule of law that applies to these technologies as they must apply and have applied to every technology in the past. No great technological breakthrough happens without disruption. And it’s the responsibility of the rule of law and good governance, both nationally, locally, and internationally, to ensure that what takes place benefits all and does not harm everyone. The title of the part of our conference these days is AI for Good. But we have to understand as well that AI can be bad when it spreads lies, when it spreads propaganda, when it undermines trust and undermines integrity, when it undermines genuine access to technology and reinforces the inequalities of the world. And so these are the challenges that we face. I think I’m just under three minutes. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be with you this morning. Good luck to everyone.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you so much, Ambassador. Please be seated. And I’ll go next to Minister and a question for you, Minister Russell. And please wear your headsets. He would be speaking in French. My question is, as Indora embarks on the ambitious digital transformation journey aligned with the European values, could you share with us the key priorities and guiding principles behind your national digitalisation strategy 2030?

Marc Rossell: Thank you very much for the question. First of all, I’d like to say that Indora is at the heart of the Pyrenees and has been involved in this digital transformation for several years. First, we need to focus on connectivity. Indora is a very connected country. We deployed, more than 10 years ago, all the fiber-optic systems that benefit, of course, all citizens and companies in Indora. And now we are increasing, of course, the flows and, of course, the capacity and coverage in Indora. Apart from this part of connectivity, which is very important to establish and highlight the citizens and companies of Indora, we have established a national strategy with ambitious goals for 2030. These goals, of course, allow for a digital administration by focusing on citizenship at the centre. So we want a much more efficient, centralised administration with interconnected tools. So we have an interconnection bus to avoid, for example, bringing different documents to the administration several times. Apart from the focus on administration, we also have the whole project at the level of companies. We have a digitalisation programme for companies and we provide assistance to these companies to try to increase their services at the national level. In no case do we want to leave any company behind. And so this programme obviously allows us to move forward together in this digital transformation. Obviously, cybersecurity aspects are top of the agenda and it is important to support these companies in this area. Apart from the technological part, we obviously give a lot of importance to the digital well-being of citizens. And we are working with the International Telecommunications Union on the protection of minors. We have a SIM card, for example, dedicated to the protection of minors, where impure content is not visible if you have this card. So, of course, this whole strategy goes forward and we have greatly increased the digital transformation of our country. Digital transformation is not just a strategic choice for us, it is a vital necessity for our sustainable development, social cohesion and competitiveness. It is important to highlight the interconnection we have with different countries, with France, Spain and the countries around the world, to try to highlight and move forward together on this digital transformation.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you, thank you for this opportunity to implement these policies at the national level. Again, this is very short, but we are limited. I’ll now move to you, Minister Muchanga. We are talking about the WSIS plus 20 review. So my question to you is, how can we ensure that this process continues to remain relevant, agile, aligned with the evolving global priorities? And from your perspective, what are the reforms, updates or new areas that need to be addressed?

Americo Muchanga: Thank you so much. I want to remind everyone that when we met here back in 2003, and we were talking about World Summit for Information Society, the issues that were concerning us back then, they are completely different from what we see today. Back then, by talking about Information Society, we meant that we wanted everyone to be connected to Internet, so that they could surf on Google and get some information, perhaps get some knowledge of the vast amount of data that was being poured on platforms like Google. At that time, most of the people, they could find their way using a printed map. They would think about going to the shop to buy some goods and would think about going to the restaurant or hiring, going to a tax ring in order to take a tax. The world has changed a lot since then, today. When we talk about Information Society today, we mean things that people wouldn’t live without them. And today, when everyone thinks about navigating, you always think that, okay, I need to go to Google Maps to be able to navigate from one point to another one. When he thinks about buying things, he thinks about an electronic shop. Even when he thinks about getting food, he thinks about going to the Internet, selecting what he wants to want, and getting it delivered. So, we today have to think, how do we make sure that our nations, they benefit, I mean, they live in such a society. So, the issues of connecting everyone today, it means the only way to make sure that everyone has equal access to the vast amount of knowledge and opportunities that are available today. So, there is a sense of urgency in making sure that we cannot leave anyone behind. Because the challenges of connectivity, they are still there, everywhere in the world. Mozambique being one of them, we still have a lot of challenges in terms of connecting people that live in the rural areas in particular, giving them the amount of bandwidth that they require in order to be able to surf and land and have their own life in that digital space. We need to make sure that the services are affordable and that they have devices, I mean, to be able to use the service. Mozambique being a country that is affected by climate change, we need to make sure that we build infrastructure that is resilient, I mean, for climate change. So, all those challenges, they need to be tackled because only then we can really have a society that benefits from all the development, all the knowledge and opportunities that we have. If we don’t change our shape, I mean, today, the West is much more relevant than back then. Because back then, the economy was not totally digitalized, but today the economy is completely digitalized. So, we need to work together. There are a lot of leaders here. We need to make sure that we reshape our vision in terms of digital economy, digital transformation, and make sure that everything happens in a secure environment. So, the issue of cybersecurity is very important. With that, I pause here and I thank you very much.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you so much, Minister. And thank you for discussing that there is a holistic approach needed and everyone should have equal access to everything. With that, I would move to Mr. Freira, and I believe he would want to speak from the podium. The question is, what is the National Telecommunication Agency doing to ensure affordable access to information, communication technology, especially in rural areas, and vulnerable communities to promote security and environmental sustainability, and to reduce the digital inequalities in Brazil?

Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire: Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much. In Brazil, we are working hard to make internet access more equal and affordable for everyone, especially for those in remote and vulnerable situations. Today, over 75% of our municipalities are connected by fiber optic networks, reaching near 95% of our population. We also have 4G coverage in our municipalities, all of them, and 70% of rural villages that are not even official city centers. That said, we know these numbers don’t tell the whole history. Many people remain excluded from digital life, not only because of the infrastructure, but because of the deep inequalities. That’s why ANATEL Brazil’s National Telecommunication Agency is taking actions to change this reality. We are expanding telecom networks to rural and remote areas, and at the same time, promoting digital skills training so people can use the internet safely and meaningfully. In 2023, for example, national surveys showed that the main reason why many Brazilians still don’t use the internet is the lack of digital skills. So, we are offering programs that teach safe internet use, digital citizenship, and how to protect oneself online. One of our most important tools for that is how we design spectrum auctions. In our 5G auction, 90% of the revenue was transformed into investment commitments. A key initiative from that is the Sustainable Integrate Amazon program. This program is building over 12,000 kilometers of high-capacity, low-latency fiber optic network, many of them under rivers, linked towns across the Amazon and the connected public institutions. We are also studying how to expand this network for the neighboring Amazonian countries, creating a route from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Another important approach we use is called Obligation to Do, a regulatory tool that replaces financial fines with concrete actions. In 2024, for example, alone, more than $7 million was invested in connecting remote areas, including indigenous lands, quilombola communities, schools with 4G and fiber optic infrastructure. One project also provides training in digital rights, citizenship, human rights, and, of course, human vulnerable situations and refugees, helping them enter the job market with confidence. Because when we connect these communities, we are not only just building infrastructure, we are building something deeper. We are building belonging for black communities. We are building belonging for indigenous peoples. We are building belonging to abandoned children and for human survivors of violence. We are restoring their dignity, and, of course, above all, we are helping the right to the future and the right to learn, to speak, to dream, and to thrive. This is our mission, and we believe that together we can achieve more. Thank you very much.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you so much, sir. Ambassador has to leave. Thank you so much, Ambassador, for being here. And with that, I’ll come to you, Mr. Segalli. Where we have…

Kamel Saadoui: Thank you. So, in Tunisia, we have a digital transformation plan like every other country. And the plan is very ambitious. We did well in some aspects, but not much in some other aspects due to some obstacles. The main obstacle we faced is resistance to change when we come to government services. By government employees, they are sticking to the old processes and they’re not comfortable with the re-engineering of processes needed for the digital transformation. The other aspect is project governance. Because when you talk about transforming e-health, for example, is it a technology issue or is it a health issue? Because of the governance issue, some of the projects did not go as much as we wanted, as fast as we wanted. Being aware of the gap between e-government employees and the private sector and also the younger generation, the startup generation. Being aware of that, the government decided to take two major measures. One of them is to give more incentives to startups to lead the transformation plan by two measures specifically. One of them, the e-procurement process, opened the procurement process to startups so they can innovate and can adopt their innovation. Some of them even developed AI applications and blockchain. We invited them to showcase them. The other aspect is the Startup Act itself. We have a Startup Act and it’s giving incentives to startups. We’re moving to another Startup Act 2.0, which gives more incentives and opens the market further. We have also one of the things that one of the startups became a unicorn. It’s called Nstudy, working in AI applied to biotechnology and was acquired by a big name like Biontech. It became some kind of pride for the new generation. Thank you.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you so much, Eng. Kamel Saadoui. You have been well within time. Thank you for that. That gives us some more time. My question to you is, Mr. Gill, as we navigate this rapidly evolving digital landscape, what role do you see for multistakeholder cooperation in addressing global challenges such as bridging the digital divide or ensuring inclusivity in technological advancement? I believe you want to speak from the podium.

Amandeep Singh Gill: Thank you very much, Amrita, for giving me the opportunity to stretch my legs a bit. The organizers of this panel have put the accent on partnerships on digital for development. Your question invites us to think about connecting the dots, about collaboration, not only collaboration across borders but across stakeholders. That’s the strength of the WSIS vision. Last year, the world came together to adopt the Global Digital Compact, which in a way centers the inclusive digital economy as the priority item on the international agenda. There are the enduring paths of progress on connectivity, on content, on multilingual, multicultural representation of content from more than 20 years ago. But as Professor Mochanga reminded us, the world was different at that time. Less than a billion people on the net. There was no misinformation, disinformation, no AI, no big data, only in very esoteric communities. But today, the digital economy is front and center. It’s the fastest-growing component of the global GDP. And there are tremendous leapfrogging opportunities. Before the digital divide, there is the development divide. And how do we leapfrog there with constraints on energy, on education, financing? We just had the financing for development conference in Seville. So, digital and emerging technologies provide us the opportunity. But what to prioritize? Look at global IT spend of 5 to 6 trillion per year. Developing countries cannot afford to spend $175 to $100 per capita, which the developed countries are spending. So, they need to leverage. And what are the leveraging opportunities? So, again, the GDC, the Global Digital Compact, provides us that direction, the investments in digital public infrastructure, digital ID, payments layer, data exchange, use cases on top of that, the investments in data and AI capacity to innovate and create value for the future, investment in talent, investment in public sector capacity, institutional capacity, which is lagging behind the pace of tech developments. So, to close, we have to update our vision. We’ve done that. We have to update our objectives. We’ve done that. Now, we need to update our ways of working together. Back to the topic of this panel, partnerships, partnerships across stakeholder, across countries, but within countries, with the private sector, with academia, with civil society and within regions so that we have more interoperability in digital public infrastructure and we have more scale for entrepreneurs when it comes to opportunities within the digital economy. And we at the Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies in the UN, working with our colleagues from the ITU, UNDP and other entities across the UN system, stand ready to support these partnerships. Thank you.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you so much, sir. Actually, for talking about the development divide, which is also important and most of the panelists have been speaking from the developing countries’ perspective. And Ms. Lewis, my question to you is, what do you see as the major challenge for advancing the digital for development landscape and what measures would be taken to overcome it?

Bernadette Lewis: Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization, it is the oldest intergovernmental organization of the Commonwealth dedicated to technology networks. And we recognize that the digital for development ecosystem, it suffers from fragmentation. There are many initiatives, but they bear no relevance or synergies with other initiatives that are happening. And largely because developmental agencies at the international level and governments and other organizations at the national level, they operate in silos without a comprehensive or cohesive strategy or plans. And advancing the digital for development landscape, as we’ve heard before, it demands coherent, multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral approaches. Unfortunately, a lot of these organizations and developmental agencies, they have different mandates. They have different ways of funding. They have many, many disparities. And there is a need to anchor these or establish mechanisms at the national level whereby all organizations could participate and anchor their work to national priorities and national plans. So, this is going to help avoid duplicated activities, scattershot approaches, gaps, and over-provision in one area, in other areas. And so, it’s very important for countries to have their plan, to have their vision, to have their roadmap for what they are doing. And then the international development agencies and other organizations can plug into that. And that ensures that there is a progression and not a scattershot of activities. And with that, I will stop there. Thank you. Thank you so much, ma’am. Thank you for finishing well within time.

Amrita Choudhury: And thank you to all the esteemed speakers to share how partnerships, et cetera, are very important and has given us results, but we need to work more, which is also one of the wishes, action line one, I would say. And we would have a summary, final summary of today’s discussion shared on Friday, 11th July at 3 p.m. So, we would like to have you there for this. And I think to summarize, if we want our communities to be uplifted and to build a good and stable society, we need to use digital technologies in the way which we started using from the business action lines. And with this, may I request all of you for a photograph here? Thank you so much, everyone. And could you have a round of applause for our panelists?

Agreement points

Digital infrastructure development is fundamental for digital transformation

Speakers

– Marc Rossell
– Americo Muchanga
– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire

Arguments

Andorra focuses on connectivity through fiber-optic deployment and national digitalization strategy 2030 with citizen-centered digital administration

Connectivity remains fundamental challenge with need for affordable services and resilient infrastructure

Brazil expands telecom networks to rural areas with 75% fiber coverage and focuses on digital skills training to address inequality

Summary

All three speakers emphasize that robust digital infrastructure, particularly fiber-optic networks, is essential for successful digital transformation and connecting citizens to digital services

Topics

Infrastructure | Development

Cybersecurity is a critical priority in digital transformation

Speakers

– Marc Rossell
– Americo Muchanga
– Robert Rae

Arguments

Cybersecurity aspects are top priority when supporting companies in digital transformation

Digital transformation must happen in secure environment with cybersecurity as important consideration

AI can be beneficial but also harmful when spreading misinformation and undermining trust, requiring rule of law and good governance

Summary

Speakers agree that cybersecurity must be a top priority and integral part of any digital transformation strategy to ensure safe and secure digital environments

Topics

Cybersecurity | Development

Digital skills and capacity building are essential for meaningful digital inclusion

Speakers

– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire
– Amandeep Singh Gill

Arguments

Digital skills training essential as lack of digital literacy is main barrier to internet adoption in Brazil

Investment in talent and public sector institutional capacity needed to keep pace with technological developments

Summary

Both speakers recognize that infrastructure alone is insufficient and that digital skills training and capacity building are crucial for effective digital participation

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Multistakeholder cooperation is essential for effective digital development

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Bernadette Lewis

Arguments

Multistakeholder cooperation essential for addressing global challenges and bridging digital divide through cross-border and cross-stakeholder collaboration

Digital for development ecosystem suffers from fragmentation and requires coherent multi-stakeholder approaches anchored to national priorities

Summary

Both speakers emphasize that effective digital development requires coordinated multistakeholder approaches rather than fragmented, siloed efforts

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Similar viewpoints

All three speakers share concern about digital inequality and the need for concrete actions to ensure no one is left behind in digital transformation, particularly focusing on rural and underserved communities

Speakers

– Robert Rae
– Americo Muchanga
– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire

Arguments

Digital divide will widen unless real steps are taken to bring people together and share technology globally

Connectivity remains fundamental challenge with need for affordable services and resilient infrastructure

Brazil expands telecom networks to rural areas with 75% fiber coverage and focuses on digital skills training to address inequality

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognize that WSIS needs to evolve and adapt to current realities where digital services have become essential for economic participation and daily life

Speakers

– Americo Muchanga
– Amandeep Singh Gill

Arguments

WSIS process must adapt from basic information access to addressing today’s digitalized economy and essential digital services

Need to update ways of working together through partnerships across stakeholders, countries, and regions for better interoperability

Topics

Development | Economic

Both speakers identify governance and coordination challenges as major obstacles to effective digital transformation, emphasizing the need for better organizational structures and clearer mandates

Speakers

– Kamel Saadoui
– Bernadette Lewis

Arguments

Project governance challenges arise when determining whether initiatives are technology or sector-specific issues

Development agencies operate in silos without comprehensive strategy, requiring mechanisms to anchor work to national priorities

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected consensus

Climate resilience in digital infrastructure

Speakers

– Americo Muchanga

Arguments

Climate-resilient infrastructure needed in developing countries like Mozambique to ensure sustainable connectivity

Explanation

While only explicitly mentioned by one speaker, the integration of climate considerations into digital infrastructure planning represents an unexpected but important consensus area that bridges environmental and digital development concerns

Topics

Infrastructure | Development

Protection of minors in digital spaces

Speakers

– Marc Rossell

Arguments

Digital well-being of citizens important with focus on protection of minors through specialized services

Explanation

The specific focus on protecting minors through specialized digital services like content-filtering SIM cards represents an unexpected area of detailed policy implementation that goes beyond general digital inclusion discussions

Topics

Human rights | Cybersecurity

Overall assessment

Summary

Speakers demonstrated strong consensus on fundamental principles including the importance of digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, multistakeholder cooperation, and addressing digital inequality. There was particular alignment on the need for coordinated approaches rather than fragmented efforts, and recognition that digital transformation requires both technical infrastructure and human capacity building.

Consensus level

High level of consensus on core principles with speakers from different regions and sectors sharing similar priorities. This suggests strong foundation for collaborative action on digital development, though implementation approaches may vary by national context. The consensus implies that WSIS framework remains relevant but needs updating to address current digital economy realities.

Different viewpoints

Approach to overcoming digital transformation resistance

Speakers

– Kamel Saadoui
– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire

Arguments

Tunisia implements digital transformation plan with startup incentives and e-procurement processes to overcome government resistance to change

Brazil expands telecom networks to rural areas with 75% fiber coverage and focuses on digital skills training to address inequality

Summary

Saadoui focuses on addressing internal government resistance through startup involvement and procurement reform, while Freire emphasizes infrastructure expansion and skills training as primary solutions to digital exclusion

Topics

Development | Economic

Primary barriers to digital inclusion

Speakers

– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire
– Americo Muchanga

Arguments

Digital skills training essential as lack of digital literacy is main barrier to internet adoption in Brazil

Connectivity remains fundamental challenge with need for affordable services and resilient infrastructure

Summary

Freire identifies digital skills as the main barrier based on Brazilian surveys, while Muchanga emphasizes connectivity and infrastructure as fundamental challenges, particularly for rural areas in developing countries

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Unexpected differences

Role of government versus private sector in digital transformation

Speakers

– Kamel Saadoui
– Marc Rossell

Arguments

Tunisia implements digital transformation plan with startup incentives and e-procurement processes to overcome government resistance to change

Andorra focuses on connectivity through fiber-optic deployment and national digitalization strategy 2030 with citizen-centered digital administration

Explanation

Unexpectedly, Saadoui acknowledges government resistance as a major obstacle and turns to startups to lead transformation, while Rossell presents a more government-led approach with centralized digital administration. This reveals different philosophies about government capacity in digital transformation

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion shows relatively low levels of direct disagreement, with most speakers focusing on different aspects of digital development rather than contradicting each other. Main areas of difference include approaches to overcoming barriers (skills vs infrastructure vs governance), implementation strategies (government-led vs startup-driven), and coordination mechanisms (international vs national focus).

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. The speakers generally share common goals of digital inclusion and development but emphasize different pathways and priorities based on their national contexts and institutional perspectives. This suggests a healthy diversity of approaches rather than fundamental conflicts, which could be beneficial for comprehensive digital development strategies that incorporate multiple complementary approaches.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

All three speakers share concern about digital inequality and the need for concrete actions to ensure no one is left behind in digital transformation, particularly focusing on rural and underserved communities

Speakers

– Robert Rae
– Americo Muchanga
– Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire

Arguments

Digital divide will widen unless real steps are taken to bring people together and share technology globally

Connectivity remains fundamental challenge with need for affordable services and resilient infrastructure

Brazil expands telecom networks to rural areas with 75% fiber coverage and focuses on digital skills training to address inequality

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognize that WSIS needs to evolve and adapt to current realities where digital services have become essential for economic participation and daily life

Speakers

– Americo Muchanga
– Amandeep Singh Gill

Arguments

WSIS process must adapt from basic information access to addressing today’s digitalized economy and essential digital services

Need to update ways of working together through partnerships across stakeholders, countries, and regions for better interoperability

Topics

Development | Economic

Both speakers identify governance and coordination challenges as major obstacles to effective digital transformation, emphasizing the need for better organizational structures and clearer mandates

Speakers

– Kamel Saadoui
– Bernadette Lewis

Arguments

Project governance challenges arise when determining whether initiatives are technology or sector-specific issues

Development agencies operate in silos without comprehensive strategy, requiring mechanisms to anchor work to national priorities

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Key takeaways

Digital transformation has evolved from basic internet access to essential services that people cannot live without – from navigation to shopping to food delivery

The digital divide will widen unless concrete steps are taken to ensure technology sharing and equal access globally

Multistakeholder cooperation and partnerships across borders, sectors, and stakeholders are essential for addressing digital development challenges

Digital for development ecosystem suffers from fragmentation with organizations operating in silos without comprehensive strategies

National digitalization strategies must be citizen-centered and focus on connectivity, digital skills training, and cybersecurity

Infrastructure development must be climate-resilient and affordable, particularly for rural and vulnerable communities

The Global Digital Compact has established inclusive digital economy as a priority with focus on digital public infrastructure investments

AI and emerging technologies require proper governance and rule of law to ensure benefits for all while preventing harm from misinformation

Digital skills training is crucial as lack of digital literacy remains a main barrier to internet adoption

WSIS process must continuously adapt and update its vision, objectives, and working methods to remain relevant

Resolutions and action items

Final summary of the day’s discussion to be shared on Friday, July 11th at 3 p.m.

Countries need to establish mechanisms at national level for organizations to anchor their work to national priorities and plans

Development agencies should plug into national plans and visions to avoid duplicated activities and ensure progression

Need to update ways of working together through partnerships across stakeholders, countries, and regions for better interoperability

Investment priorities identified: digital public infrastructure, data and AI capacity, talent development, and public sector institutional capacity

Unresolved issues

How to effectively overcome government employee resistance to digital transformation processes

Project governance challenges in determining whether initiatives are technology-specific or sector-specific issues

Specific mechanisms for coordinating fragmented development initiatives at international and national levels

How developing countries can prioritize limited resources given the $5-6 trillion global IT spend and per capita spending gaps

Balancing AI benefits while preventing harm from misinformation and ensuring equitable access

Ensuring climate-resilient infrastructure development in vulnerable regions

Addressing affordability challenges for digital services and devices in rural and remote areas

Suggested compromises

Using ‘Obligation to Do’ regulatory tool that replaces financial fines with concrete infrastructure investment actions

Leveraging spectrum auction revenues (90% in Brazil’s 5G auction) for investment commitments in underserved areas

Opening e-procurement processes to startups to drive innovation while providing them market access

Creating startup incentive programs (like Tunisia’s Startup Act 2.0) to bridge gap between government and private sector innovation

Establishing international cooperation funds (like Canada’s $100 million fund) to create centers of excellence in developing countries

Developing regional approaches for digital public infrastructure interoperability to provide scale for entrepreneurs

We need to link up the strategies that we develop for digital technologies and for artificial intelligence and for quantum. We need to link them up with the purpose of the United Nations… and for us to understand that the Sustainable Development Goals are not some sort of ideological project, but they’re really just a common decency of humanity.

Speaker

Robert Rae (ECOSOC President)

Reason

This comment reframes the entire digital transformation discussion by connecting technological advancement to fundamental human values and UN purposes. It challenges the notion that SDGs are merely political constructs and positions them as basic human decency, providing moral grounding for digital initiatives.

Impact

This opening statement set the philosophical foundation for the entire discussion, establishing that technology should serve humanity’s basic needs. It influenced subsequent speakers to consistently reference inclusivity, equity, and leaving no one behind as core principles rather than afterthoughts.

AI can be bad when it spreads lies, when it spreads propaganda, when it undermines trust and undermines integrity, when it undermines genuine access to technology and reinforces the inequalities of the world.

Speaker

Robert Rae (ECOSOC President)

Reason

This comment introduces critical nuance to the ‘AI for Good’ narrative by acknowledging technology’s potential for harm. It’s particularly insightful because it connects technological risks to broader societal issues like inequality and democratic governance.

Impact

This balanced perspective on AI influenced the discussion’s tone, making it more realistic and comprehensive. It prompted other speakers to address challenges and obstacles rather than presenting purely optimistic views of digital transformation.

When we talk about Information Society today, we mean things that people wouldn’t live without them… So, we today have to think, how do we make sure that our nations, they benefit, I mean, they live in such a society. So, there is a sense of urgency in making sure that we cannot leave anyone behind.

Speaker

Americo Muchanga (Minister, Mozambique)

Reason

This comment provides a powerful historical perspective, contrasting the optional nature of internet access in 2003 with today’s essential digital services. It transforms the discussion from technical connectivity to existential necessity, emphasizing the urgency of digital inclusion.

Impact

This historical framing shifted the conversation from incremental improvement to urgent necessity. It influenced subsequent speakers to emphasize the critical nature of their digital initiatives and the consequences of digital exclusion, particularly for vulnerable communities.

Before the digital divide, there is the development divide. And how do we leapfrog there with constraints on energy, on education, financing?

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill (UN Under-Secretary-General)

Reason

This comment introduces a crucial conceptual distinction that challenges the focus on digital solutions alone. It suggests that digital divides are symptoms of deeper developmental inequalities, requiring more fundamental approaches to development challenges.

Impact

This reframing elevated the discussion beyond technical solutions to address root causes of inequality. It connected digital transformation to broader development challenges, influencing the conversation to consider holistic approaches rather than technology-first solutions.

Because when we connect these communities, we are not only just building infrastructure, we are building something deeper. We are building belonging for black communities. We are building belonging for indigenous peoples… We are restoring their dignity.

Speaker

Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire (Brazil’s National Telecommunication Agency)

Reason

This comment transforms the technical discussion of connectivity into a profound statement about human dignity and social justice. It connects infrastructure development to identity, belonging, and restoration of dignity for marginalized communities.

Impact

This emotional and philosophical depth added a human dimension to technical discussions. It influenced the overall tone by demonstrating how digital initiatives can address historical injustices and social exclusion, moving beyond mere service delivery to social transformation.

The digital for development ecosystem, it suffers from fragmentation. There are many initiatives, but they bear no relevance or synergies with other initiatives that are happening… there is a need to anchor these or establish mechanisms at the national level whereby all organizations could participate and anchor their work to national priorities.

Speaker

Bernadette Lewis (Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization)

Reason

This comment identifies a systemic problem in the development sector – the lack of coordination and coherence among various initiatives. It provides a structural critique that goes beyond individual project success to examine the effectiveness of the entire ecosystem.

Impact

This systems-level analysis shifted the discussion toward governance and coordination challenges. It influenced the conversation to consider not just what digital initiatives to implement, but how to organize and coordinate them effectively for maximum impact.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by elevating it from a technical conference about digital tools to a comprehensive dialogue about human development, social justice, and systemic change. Robert Rae’s opening philosophical framework established moral grounding that influenced all subsequent speakers to address equity and inclusion. Muchanga’s historical perspective created urgency around digital inclusion, while Gill’s distinction between digital and development divides provided analytical depth. Freire’s emphasis on dignity and belonging added emotional resonance, and Lewis’s critique of fragmentation introduced systems thinking. Together, these comments transformed what could have been a routine policy discussion into a nuanced exploration of how digital transformation can serve fundamental human needs while addressing structural inequalities. The speakers consistently built upon these foundational insights, creating a coherent narrative about the need for inclusive, coordinated, and dignity-centered approaches to digital development.

How to create coherent governance and rule of law that applies to digital technologies to ensure benefits for all and prevent harm

Speaker

Robert Rae (Ambassador, President of ECOSOC)

Explanation

This is crucial for managing technological disruption and ensuring AI and other technologies serve humanity rather than spread misinformation or reinforce inequalities

How to establish mechanisms at the national level for all organizations to participate and anchor their work to national priorities

Speaker

Bernadette Lewis (Secretary General, Commonwealth Telecommunication Organization)

Explanation

This addresses the fragmentation in digital for development initiatives and would help avoid duplicated activities and ensure coherent approaches

How to expand fiber optic networks to neighboring Amazonian countries to create connectivity from Atlantic to Pacific

Speaker

Alexandre Reis Siqueira Freire (Commissioner, National Telecom Agency, Brazil)

Explanation

This represents a significant regional infrastructure project that could enhance connectivity across South America

How to address project governance issues in digital transformation, particularly determining whether projects like e-health are technology or sector-specific issues

Speaker

Kamel Saadoui (President, Instance National D.E. Telecommunications, Tunisia)

Explanation

This governance challenge affects the speed and success of digital transformation projects across government services

How to prioritize digital investments in developing countries given constraints on energy, education, and financing

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill (Undersecretary General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies)

Explanation

Developing countries cannot afford the same per capita IT spending as developed countries, so strategic prioritization and leveraging opportunities are essential

How to overcome resistance to change among government employees in digital transformation initiatives

Speaker

Kamel Saadoui (President, Instance National D.E. Telecommunications, Tunisia)

Explanation

Employee resistance to process re-engineering is a major obstacle to successful digital transformation in government services

How to build climate-resilient digital infrastructure in countries affected by climate change

Speaker

Americo Muchanga (Minister of Communication and Digital Transformation, Mozambique)

Explanation

Climate change poses significant challenges to digital infrastructure sustainability, particularly in vulnerable countries like Mozambique

Summary

This discussion was a panel session on advancing human-centered, inclusive, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems, held as part of the WSIS High-Level Meeting’s Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event. The panel brought together experts from various organizations including IFAD, ITU, the Digital Public Goods Alliance, and Amini to discuss digital agriculture challenges and solutions.

Brenda Mulele Gunde from IFAD emphasized the importance of human-centered design in ICT4D projects, noting that local context matters significantly when implementing digital solutions for smallholder farmers across 50 countries. She highlighted the challenge of moving beyond pilot projects to achieve scalable solutions, stressing the need for inclusive approaches that intentionally address women and youth access to technology, as well as the importance of building national capacity and monitoring for impact rather than just adoption.

Aminata Amadou Garba from ITU addressed connectivity challenges, revealing that about one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity rates of urban areas. She advocated for integrated policy frameworks, open data initiatives, and practical training for smallholder farmers to bridge the digital divide.

Ricardo Miron Torres discussed digital public goods (DPGs) as open-source building blocks for creating adaptable agricultural solutions, emphasizing their role in democratizing access to technology and building sustainable digital public infrastructure. Clinton Oduor from Amini highlighted how AI and Earth observation can provide crucial environmental data for Africa’s agricultural sector, while identifying key barriers including connectivity issues, funding challenges, and regulatory ambiguity.

The session concluded with calls for increased investment in data infrastructure, capacity development, and intentional collaborative design focused on public good to ensure digital agriculture serves the 80% of food produced by smallholder farmers globally.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Human-centered and context-specific digital agriculture solutions**: Panelists emphasized that technology must be designed with local contexts in mind, addressing the specific needs of smallholder farmers rather than implementing generic solutions. This includes understanding cultural dynamics, gender access issues, and ensuring solutions add real value to farming communities.

– **Infrastructure and connectivity challenges**: A persistent barrier to digital agriculture adoption is the lack of reliable, affordable internet connectivity in rural areas. Statistics show that only about one-third of people in least developed countries are connected, with rural areas having significantly lower connectivity rates than urban areas.

– **Digital Public Goods (DPGs) and open-source solutions**: The discussion highlighted the importance of open-source technologies, open data, and digital public infrastructure as foundational building blocks for scalable and sustainable digital agriculture solutions that can be adapted across different contexts without vendor lock-in.

– **Youth as agents of change and innovation**: Young people were identified as crucial catalysts for digital agriculture adoption, both as technology adopters who can bridge the gap with older farmers and as entrepreneurs developing innovative solutions. However, they face barriers including funding challenges and regulatory ambiguity.

– **Data accessibility and AI applications**: The critical need for accessible, quality data to power AI-driven agricultural solutions was emphasized, particularly using satellite imagery and Earth observation data to provide farmers with insights about their land, weather patterns, and crop conditions over time.

## Overall Purpose:

This was a WSIS (World Summit on the Information Society) side event focused on advancing human-centered, inclusive, development-oriented, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems. The discussion aimed to share lessons learned from implementing ICT4D projects in agriculture and explore how digital technologies can better serve smallholder farmers globally.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented tone throughout. Panelists were pragmatic about challenges while remaining optimistic about potential solutions. The atmosphere was one of shared expertise and mutual learning, with speakers building on each other’s points and emphasizing the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration. The tone remained consistently focused on practical implementation and real-world impact rather than theoretical discussions.

Speakers

– **Paul Spiesberger**: Moderator from NGO ICT4D.at (Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement)

– **Brenda Mulele Gunde**: Global Lead for ICT for Development at IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development), a specialized UN agency focusing on investments and partnerships for rural development and agricultural sector advancement

– **Aminata Amadou Garba**: Works at ITU with background in ICT infrastructure and policy

– **Ricardo Miron Torres**: Works with Digital Public Goods Alliance (DPGA), expertise in digital public goods and digital public infrastructure

– **Clinton Oduor**: Head of Data Science at Amini, working on Africa’s environmental data infrastructure using AI and Earth observation

– **Henry van Burgsteden**: Representative from FAO Office of Innovation (speaking on behalf of Director Vincent Martin)

– **Jimson Olufuye**: IT specialist based in Abuja, Nigeria (audience member who asked questions)

– **Audience**: Various audience members who participated in Q&A

Additional speakers:

– **Kathleen**: Engineer who participated in the Q&A session

# Comprehensive Report: Advancing Human-Centred, Inclusive, and Sustainable Digital Solutions for Transforming Agri-Food Systems

## Executive Summary

This report presents a detailed analysis of a panel discussion held as part of the WSIS High-Level Meeting’s Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event on the second day of the conference. The 45-minute session brought together leading experts from international development organisations, UN agencies, and technology companies to examine the challenges and opportunities in implementing digital agriculture solutions for smallholder farmers globally. The discussion, moderated by Paul Spiesberger from ICT4D.at (Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement), featured comprehensive insights on human-centred design, connectivity challenges, digital public goods, and the critical role of youth in agricultural transformation.

The panel maintained a professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented tone throughout, with speakers demonstrating remarkable consensus on fundamental challenges whilst offering complementary perspectives on implementation approaches. Each panelist was allocated approximately 7 minutes for their presentation, followed by audience questions from online participants including Jimson Olufuye (IT specialist from Nigeria) and Kathleen (engineer). The session concluded with one-sentence recommendations from each panelist.

## Key Participants and Their Perspectives

### Brenda Mulele Gunde – IFAD Global Lead for ICT4D

Brenda Mulele Gunde provided extensive insights from IFAD’s experience implementing ICT4D projects across 50 countries, emphasising the critical importance of human-centred design in digital agriculture initiatives. Her contributions focused on the practical realities of working with smallholder farmers and the systemic barriers that prevent successful scaling of digital solutions.

Gunde highlighted that local context matters significantly when implementing digitalisation for agriculture, noting that different countries have varying priorities and challenges. She stressed that solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add genuine value, rather than implementing technology for its own sake. A particularly striking observation concerned gender dynamics in technology access: “When it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband.”

Her analysis of pilot projects proved particularly thought-provoking: “We talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale.” She argued that the pathway to scaling must be clear from the start, before beginning pilot implementation.

Gunde provided specific examples from IFAD’s work, including a Rwanda dairy value chain project and the use of soil sensors for pH levels and irrigation. She emphasised the transformative potential of youth in digital agriculture, noting that young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions whilst providing extension advisory services as entrepreneurs. Her final recommendation emphasised that “80% of the food is produced by smallholder farmers, so we need to make sure that digital agriculture enables them to commercialise and increase their income.”

### Aminata Amadou Garba – ITU Infrastructure and Policy Expert

Aminata Amadou Garba addressed the fundamental connectivity challenges that underpin digital agriculture implementation, providing crucial statistics that frame the scope of the digital divide. Her presentation revealed that approximately one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas experiencing connectivity rates that are half those of urban areas.

Garba advocated for integrated policy frameworks and emphasised that private sector telecommunications providers require financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations. She highlighted the existence of universal access funds that often remain undeployed due to implementation challenges, representing a significant missed opportunity for rural connectivity improvement.

Her approach to addressing digital agriculture challenges emphasised the need for open data initiatives and practical training for smallholder farmers. Garba argued that open data and open APIs are essential to enable local innovators to contextualise solutions for their specific environments. She also stressed that capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits.

### Ricardo Miron Torres – Digital Public Goods Alliance

Ricardo Miron Torres brought a unique perspective on digital public goods (DPGs) as foundational building blocks for sustainable agricultural solutions. His contributions focused on the technical and philosophical distinctions between merely open-source solutions and true digital public goods that can democratise access to technology.

Torres explained that digital public goods are designed with human-centred principles and can be adapted to local contexts, enabling reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel. He made an important technical distinction: “The difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability… if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of.”

Torres mentioned the “Reboot the Earth” community launched by DPGA and FAO, and suggested practical solutions such as using SMS services to deliver AI-powered solutions in low connectivity areas. His vision for digital agriculture emphasised that digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups, moving beyond reliance on large corporations to create more distributed innovation networks.

### Clinton Oduor – Amini Head of Data Science

Clinton Oduor provided crucial insights into the data infrastructure challenges facing African agriculture, combining technical expertise in AI and Earth observation with practical experience in environmental data systems. His contributions highlighted the paradox that Africa holds approximately 65% of the world’s uncultivated arable land whilst being the most data-scarce continent globally.

Oduor emphasised that investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions. He argued that AI and Earth observation solutions must provide visibility into what’s happening on farms to enable informed decision-making, but noted that the fundamental challenge is the lack of accessible, quality data to power such systems.

His analysis identified three primary barriers to digital agriculture implementation: connectivity issues requiring reliable, affordable, high-bandwidth connections; funding challenges particularly affecting youth-led startups that don’t fit current venture capital investment models; and regulatory ambiguity around data privacy and cross-border data sharing.

Oduor also provided important insights into youth innovation, noting that young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations. He mentioned his involvement with TinyML4D Kenya and emphasised the need for better funding mechanisms for youth-led agricultural technology innovations.

### Henry van Burgsteden – Speaking for FAO Director Vincent Martin

Henry van Burgsteden delivered closing remarks on behalf of Vincent Martin, FAO Director, who experienced technical difficulties connecting to the session. His brief contribution highlighted FAO’s practical achievements, including their Digital Services Portfolio and FLAB app winning WSIS Champions Awards.

Van Burgsteden noted that FAO has supported 15 digital initiatives toward digital public goods certification, with eight already certified. He emphasised FAO’s commitment to developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation.

## Major Thematic Areas and Key Insights

### Human-Centred Design and Local Context

The panel demonstrated strong consensus on the fundamental importance of human-centred design in digital agriculture implementation. All speakers agreed that local context matters significantly when implementing digitalisation for agriculture, as different countries have different priorities and challenges. This consensus emerged from practical experience across multiple contexts, with speakers emphasising that solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add genuine value rather than implementing technology for its own sake.

### Infrastructure and Connectivity Challenges

Connectivity emerged as a fundamental barrier to inclusive digital agriculture, with speakers providing complementary perspectives on the scope and nature of these challenges. The discussion revealed that one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity rates of urban areas. Speakers agreed that connectivity must be reliable, affordable, and high-quality to be effective, requiring policy frameworks and financial incentives for private sector telecommunications providers.

### Digital Public Goods and Open-Source Solutions

The discussion revealed strong support for digital public goods and open-source approaches, with important technical nuances about privacy design, open standards, and interoperability best practices. Multiple speakers supported the principle that open data and open APIs are needed to enable local innovators to contextualise solutions, emphasising data accessibility as critical for innovation.

### Youth as Agents of Change and Innovation

The panel demonstrated unanimous recognition of youth as crucial agents of change in digital agriculture. Speakers emphasised youth as both technology adoption facilitators who can bridge gaps between advanced solutions and traditional farming practices, and as innovators and entrepreneurs facing systemic barriers including funding challenges where youth-led startups don’t fit current venture capital investment models.

### Data Accessibility and AI Applications

Data accessibility emerged as a critical foundation for digital agriculture innovation, with all speakers acknowledging its importance. The discussion highlighted that Africa holds 65% of uncultivated arable land whilst being the most data-scarce continent, emphasising that investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions.

## Audience Questions and Responses

### Universal Access Fund Deployment

Jimson Olufuye, an IT specialist from Nigeria, raised an important question about universal access funds that have been “sitting unused in banks for years” in African countries. This highlighted a critical policy and implementation gap where available funding mechanisms remain underutilised due to bureaucratic and implementation barriers.

### Low-Cost Sensor Technology

Kathleen, an engineer, asked about wireless sensory nodes costing around one cent distributed via planes or drones. The panel acknowledged the potential of low-cost sensor solutions whilst emphasising the need for context-sensitive data collection mechanisms that farmers can actually use and maintain.

## Final Recommendations from Panelists

Each panelist provided a one-sentence final recommendation:

– **Brenda Mulele Gunde**: Emphasised that 80% of food is produced by smallholder farmers, so digital agriculture must enable them to commercialise and increase their income.

– **Aminata Amadou Garba**: Stressed the need for continued investment in connectivity infrastructure and capacity development.

– **Ricardo Miron Torres**: Advocated for building sustainable digital public infrastructure through collaborative partnerships.

– **Clinton Oduor**: Highlighted the importance of addressing data infrastructure gaps before implementing advanced AI solutions.

– **Henry van Burgsteden**: Reinforced FAO’s commitment to supporting digital public goods certification and inclusive innovation roadmaps.

## Conclusion

The panel discussion revealed a sophisticated understanding of digital agriculture challenges and opportunities, with speakers demonstrating remarkable consensus on fundamental issues whilst offering complementary approaches to implementation. The high level of agreement on core challenges – including connectivity barriers, the need for human-centred design, data accessibility requirements, and youth engagement importance – suggests strong potential for coordinated action across different sectors and stakeholder groups.

Key insights about gender barriers in technology access, the limitations of pilot projects that fail to scale, technical distinctions between open-source and digital public goods, and Africa’s data paradox provided crucial context for understanding implementation challenges. The panel’s emphasis on building sustainable digital public infrastructure, supporting youth innovation, ensuring inclusive access, and monitoring for real impact provides a comprehensive framework for advancing human-centred, inclusive, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems.

The discussion contributes to a growing understanding that digital agriculture success depends not just on technology deployment but on building ecosystems that support local innovation, ensure equitable access, and create sustainable pathways for smallholder farmer prosperity. This holistic approach offers promising directions for achieving the transformative potential of digital agriculture whilst ensuring that solutions serve the smallholder farmers who produce the majority of the world’s food.

Paul Spiesberger: Welcome and bienvenue on the second day of the WSIS High-Level Meeting. My name is Paul Spiesberger. I have the pleasure and the honor today of moderating this wonderful panel. I am from the NGO called ICT4D.at, so we are the Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement. You are hopefully here for the WSIS Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event with the title Advancing Human-Centered, Inclusive, Development-Orientated and Sustainable Digital Solutions for Transforming Agri-Food Systems. When I went through the list of panelists, I was quite impressed with the background and if I would not try to summarize their impressive backgrounds, I would definitely not do justice to their CVs, so I rather take the 45 minutes to give them the stage to share their expertise with us, which I think is much more interesting than me now reading out a lot of CV data. But you can trust me, they have a lot to share and I’m very happy to be the moderator today. So I kindly maybe ask you when I give you the floor to speak to also very briefly introduce yourself and maybe with one or two sentences share with us what you’re currently burning for while you’re sitting here and what is the most important thing you currently think should be shared with the WSIS Forum and everyone here. And with that, I would also like to welcome everyone online, hello. If you have any questions, I hope we will have some time at the end, please share them also in the chat and also within here I would like to then hopefully at the end invite you to participate in it. So, with no further ado, I would like to hand over to our online participant, Dr. Martin from the FAO, to give us some opening remarks, and if the technicians are working, we should hear and see him hopefully soon. Mr. Martin, can you hear us, are you online? Hello, this is Henry here from FAO, our director is still connecting, so he should be online any minute now. Apologies for the delay. No worries, but I would then propose to move forward, because otherwise we run out of time, or should we quickly? No, we don’t wait. All right, well then, I would then propose to start with our first speaker in the panel, and when Dr. Martin comes online, he can then share his opening remarks. If this is okay. Angelique, the boss, is okay? Good, I got to go. All right, so, our first speaker, Brenda, is, I have to rephrase the question a little bit, because we were supposed to have a speaker before, but the FAO Office of Innovation, one second, so, Brenda comes from the FAO Office, and the focus on innovation, and on how human-centered and inclusive approach has extended digital tools to even the most remote farming communities. In this context, could you share with us the key lessons IFAD has learned from implementing ICT4D projects that could help shape the future digital agriculture strategies and approaches to flourish? You’ve got seven minutes in total.

Brenda Mulele Gunde: Thank you so much. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Brenda Mulele Gunde. I’m a Global Lead for ICT for Development for IFAD. It’s a specialized agency under the United Nations where we look at investments and partnerships with public sector but also private sector to support road development but also looking at the advancement of the agricultural sector. So going to the question that you’ve asked for, human-centered design is a critical element of some of the projects that we implement, especially when it comes to digitalization for agriculture. We work with different contexts and different countries, 50 countries around the globe, meaning that those 50 countries also have different contexts, they have different, you know, priorities, they have different challenges that they’re dealing with. Although challenges sometimes might be similar, one country over another because maybe they share a border or they share trade, but local context matters when it comes to digitalization and innovation. Because technologies can be developed and designed for the greater masses, but when it comes to adoption and working with rural smallholder farmers, we really have to look at the context to make sure that one, the solution can be adopted, can be adopted by the smallholder farmers, it makes sense to the smallholder farmers. Secondly, it also adds value because if you’re looking at only ensuring that we implement technology for the sake of it, because we have the investments, we have the financing, we have the partnership, it may be those elephants that we see technologies that are there, you know, they work two, three years and then they don’t work anymore. The other aspect is that we talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale. So, at the same time, pilots are also important because pilots help us to understand in terms of what are some of the local challenges that you need to deal with, what are some of the things that you need to ensure that as you go to scale, you have addressed those elements. So, it’s a double-edged sword, but it’s actually important. Pilots are essential, but the pathway to scaling up has to be clear from the start, before you start the pilot. How are you going to scale the innovation so that you reach more masses? The other part that we have talked about also, as I talk about pilot, we’ve done a lot of AI-based pilots, both from operations, but also in terms of our internal systems. What we have seen so far is that they have to be inclusive. They have to address also the needs of other beneficiaries, and they have to be intentional because it’s not often that we see women and youth being able to access technologies. When it comes to working in the field, you find that most of the countries that I’ve been to, the bigger number of farmers are actually women. They’re the ones who go into the field. They’re the ones who are also working on nutrition. But when it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband. If the husband doesn’t leave the phone, if extending extension advisory, nobody also has it. All those dynamics that we’re dealing with are part of human-centered designing. Then we’re looking at national capacity. Why are we talking about national capacity? As IFAD, we work in the public sector. We provide investments to governments, meaning that we also need to look at scalability and sustainability of these solutions. Solutions are designed by the private sector. Most of the private sector are the ones that innovate and develop these solutions. When it comes to implementation, we implement through public Sector. So we also need to ensure that public sector systems are strengthened. in a way that builds capacity over project management units so that can be abled to be implemented. And also looking into greater issues, the policy environment, enabling the environment for implementation. The last one is about monitoring for impact. It is easy to monitor for adoption. Looking at how many farmers have access, but what is the impact? is a critical element when it comes to development of solutions. So how is that farmer data available for private sector and public sector? And that data is available to be used for innovation. The last part is on youth. I think youth as agents of change. We’ve seen a lot of solutions, especially in agriculture, that are meant to support farmers. But when it comes to adoption and helping farmers to adapt, it’s the young people that, because they understand technology quickly, they’re able to work with the older generation farmers to explain the technology. And they’re also willing to do this as an entrepreneurship. So meaning that, for example, extension advisory, I’ve seen that in the daily value chain, where young people are providing, for example, extension advisory to farmers. And then they’re also supporting farmers to be able to adopt technology. So all these elements have to work in unison, designing for the user, but also, at the same time, driving for sustainability and scalability. Thanks.

Paul Spiesberger: Thank you, Brenda. I very much appreciate the demand-driven approach you take and really listen first to the user when you actually start working for them. And with that, I would like to ask a question to Aminata. In the same context, based on your experience at ITU and your background in ICT infrastructure and policy, how can we address the persistent challenge of connectivity, affordability, and digital literacy to ensure that inclusive digital agriculture becomes a reality, especially for smallholder farmers in underserved regions? The floor is yours.

Aminata Amadou Garba: Thank you. So maybe quickly, I will tackle the aspect of connectivity and then a little bit of technology in agriculture. If we look at the statistics now, the latest statistics by ITU related to connectivity, we have about one third of the population which is unconnected, about 30%. But when we go down to the least developed countries, you actually have about one-third that is connected. No,w when we look at the difference between the urban and rural areas, you have twice as many people connected if you are in an urban area, than if you are in rural. So what that tells us is that who is in rural areas are small farmers, and most of these people are not connected. Not even ¼ of them, and when they are connected, they do have the necessary skill to use that technology and advance their daily activity. which can be developed in order to improve the efficiency of the agricultural system and then to allow more people to have access to those technologies. One important point is if we look at the least developed countries, agriculture is the first priority economic sector because it is the sector, most of them, if not all of them. And yet, this gap between connectivity and skills is preventing the achievement of the potential of agriculture in these countries. And i think the solutions are there, there have been many solution that have been created by third parties. For example, that will provide the solution and then provide E agriculture as a service. In that case, they may not be adapted, they may not be scalable for what needs to be done. And therefore, I think one key, and I will jump maybe a little bit to the second part of the question, is that the need to have a framework, a strategy, and a policy framework, sectoral one, which is integrated within the national framework and the national policy, and looking into what are the impacts of the technology. How can we integrate technology? And the other solution, I think, is that most of the e-agricultural solutions are based on data. Today, when we look at it, they are based on AI, and data is key to have those solutions adapted. And data yet is not available, and Brenda just mentioned it. The lack of data sometimes, or the non-accessibility, not necessarily the lack of data, but the non-accessibility of data for the innovator, the local innovator or the new innovator who need to contextualize the solution, I think is key. And a solution will be having those open data, open API, which strategies but also policies which will enable this to be a reality. And focusing on local innovation, focusing on this training on the ground, a really small scale, we don’t need to have a degree in engineering to apply agricultural solution, but this practical training on the ground for those smallholder farmers, I think is important. So I think I will stay here and maybe I’ll complete this later. All right, thank you very much.

Paul Spiesberger: With this, I would like to go to our next speaker. Ricardo, how can digital public goods or short DPGs be leveraged to ensure equitable access to digital architecture tools for smallholder farmers, especially in rural areas where persistent challenges such as limited connectivity, low digital literacy and affordability of technologies continue to hinder inclusive development?

Ricardo Miron Torres: Thanks, Paul. And good afternoon, everyone. Maybe I’ll start by explaining what are digital public goods to begin with. These are open source technologies that are designed with certain principles in mind. And it’s not only software, but as Aminat already mentioned, data, content and other critical technology pieces used to build the digital infrastructure. And at the heart of global development is, of course, the backbone of our food systems. So we must ensure that these food systems are not left behind in the digitization of the world. And DPGs could serve as these building blocks to create solutions that are adaptable and adaptable, especially in local context, as Brenda already mentioned, being designed with human centers is a very important aspect of it. And also, just to maybe put what’s the difference between DPGs, open source and public interest technology, is that DPGs are designed for simplicity and could be implemented with this local context in mind, which is very important. And for example, alongside FAO, the DPGA launched Reboot the Earth, which is a community of innovators that helped the development of climate and agriculture solutions. And one of the projects that came out and one of the things that I learned was the access to information was a critical need for small farmers and agriculture. So using open satellite images and data, as long as other software technologies like AI, one of the solutions that was developed was this specific AI model that helped farmers do precision agriculture based on the specific needs of the land and the region they were working in. And this was only possible thanks to these open technologies, but adapted and delivered through an SMS services, which is critical for those low connectivity areas you were talking about. So adapting these solutions and make them reusable across different places is very important, not to reinvent the wheel, but to tailor those. And for this being open source is very important because that means that the developers and the communities building these solutions have access to adapt these technologies and they do not have to start from scratch. Because as we know, Both funding and time is very limited for these very critical issues. And then it’s not only about the accessibility, but also about democratizing the access to them. So the difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability. And also something very important, that’s platform independence and forgive me if I get a little bit too technical here, but the solution could be open source or the data could be open source. But if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being a vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of. And one example of this could be Google Maps. Google Maps is a very useful tool. I use it to get here today. But let’s say that a small farmer needs information about a specific area where they work on. They would probably not be able to use Google Maps because the incentives on how that data was collected on gather are for financial purposes. So there’s not enough data in rural areas, for example, in many countries. And this is why relying on certain services needs to be done on open data and be made available as digital public goods. And then the other part of the conversation is the sustainability of these digital solutions that Brenda was also alluding to with these pilots. And this is also why we need to build digital public infrastructure. But I’ll leave that maybe for the second part of this. So especially when considering the long term vision of building resilient digital ecosystems, and more specifically in the agriculture sector, how can these DPI and DPG serve? as foundational enablers for innovation, public-private collaboration and sustainable service delivery, especially in regions, again, where infrastructure and institutional capacity building challenges remain substantial. Sorry, I talked a little bit about these building blocks, which are the technologies, the digital public goods, and in order to implement a long-term vision for a resilient digital agricultural infrastructure, this needs to be a long-term vision. And this is some of the terms that we hear around DPGs and DPI. And while DPGs are the building blocks, DPI is more of an approach on how you implement this technology and the governance mechanisms and the security mechanisms for this. And one of the key aspects of this is that it’s public, so it needs to be for the public benefit. Some of the foundational layers are things like digital identity, digital payments, data exchange. And we know that for small farmers, having access to a formal identity and financial services is critical for the development and success that they would have. So having a verifiable and accessible digital correlation could enable things like opening bank accounts, having microloans or just receiving direct compensation for the products and services that they produce. And this is not only about the government taking all of the action on building these infrastructure layers. It’s providing the infrastructure, so also there could be public and private partnerships, for example, which would enable local ecosystem, local players and startups to also act and access these markets because it lowers the barrier. So in a way that not only big corporations are the ones that are available to access to these digital infrastructure layers. And of course, one of the best ways to build this digital public infrastructure for agriculture is through open source and digital public goods, not only because of the benefits of cost or licensing, but also because a matter of sovereignty and having ownership not only by the government, but by the society and people that use and benefit these solutions. And that’s why I think it’s very important that these solutions are accessible, but also governed in a way where it’s collaborative. And that’s also managed in a sustainable way in a long term plan.

Paul Spiesberger: Wonderful, I’m really pleased that Aminata before shared with us that the ITU doesn’t just stop by connecting people, but she’s going much further by building up skills, but also with the policymaking and also with this focus on this open data, open source and so on. And I think there’s a lot of synergies with Ricardo just shared with us that with the focus on partnerships, private sector, but also like UN bodies and also the community, which I see the open source movement a lot involved as well, play a pivotal role in e-agriculture. And I think with this, we come to you, Clinton. Your work at Amini leverages AI and Earth observation to address environmental challenges. In what ways can youth-led startups like yours contribute more effectively to building climate resilient and data-driven agri-food systems in Africa and beyond, while advancing human-centered, inclusive, development-orientated and sustainable digital solutions for agri-food systems?

Clinton Oduor: Thank you. I hope you can all hear me. So my name is Clinton Oduor. I’m the head of data science at Atamini. So Atamini, we are building Africa’s environmental data infrastructure, of course, starting with Africa, but with a goal of spreading all across the global south. So the platform is a data platform that aggregates environmental data from multiple sources, be it satellite imagery to track like how the earth is changing over time. And that can mean like how farmlands are changing over time. So the good thing about earth observation and satellites specifically is that we have settlers that have been orbiting the earth for the past like 30 years. So beyond just like having a state of what’s happening in our farmland or the current state, we can also get an understanding of what has been happening on those particular farms, let’s say over the last 30 years. And that can be really important because like they can be used to make like some informed decision. So if you look generally at Africa currently, Africa holds about 65% thereabouts of the world’s uncultivated area that can be cultivated. But again, it’s the most data-scarce continent in the world, meaning that we don’t have visibility of what’s happening, for example, for the farmlands. So it’s still more than 60% of the farms there are also smallholder farmers. So we need to have like some sort of visibility of what’s happening in the farms. What are they doing? Like what are the dangers that might be forecasted? For example, are the farms experiencing things such as water stress? Are they experiencing like infestation by pests and diseases and things of the sort? So if we have this visibility, if we have this information, it’s going to unlock like quite a lot of opportunities. The first one Of course, the farmers will have the necessary information at hand to make decisions during the planting of the crops. So there’s quite a lot of opportunities that can emerge when we have like a visibility in the entire agri-food system. And I think AI and Earth Observation is one of the few technologies that provides us that platform, yeah.

Paul Spiesberger: So you talked about the positive aspects, but drawing from your experience with Armenian grassroots communities like TinyML and Kenya, what are the most pressuring barriers for young innovators such as you are facing in scaling digital agriculture solutions in rural areas and what support ecosystems are needed to overcome them?

Clinton Oduor: Yeah, I think most of these challenges already been talked about by my colleagues. And of course, like the main one is around digital infrastructure and connectivity to be specific. We can’t talk about digital agriculture when we cannot connect to the farmers themselves or the people who need that information. And as my colleague said here that, for example, in the developing world, the trends usually shift from a third to two thirds who lack the connectivity. So I think that’s something that needs to be addressed. And when we say connectivity, it’s not just connectivity on internet for the sake of, but it needs to be number one, reliable. It needs to be affordable and it also need to be high bandwidth so that it can open more opportunities to other farmers themselves. So of course, the second one is what many startups or around the Global South Asia Affairs around funding. I think the youth-grown innovation that’s coming around food agri-tech companies that are emerging, most of them are usually not yet fit to the current VC bucket of companies to invest in. So we should also see how we can elevate that. or find like other funding mechanisms to make sure that these innovations are seen from the ideation stage to the implementation stage. Because like a quite a lot of them are usually like a very promising but they never go beyond the ideation stage. And of course the last one is around the ambiguity around regulation and policy. So they quite a lot of disconnect between like what young people perceive to as regulation. So for example, most young people usually think that our regulation is there maybe not to make like innovation go forward but most of the time that’s surely not the case. So we also need to build like some capacity around like the importance of regulation and this include like things such as data privacy. For example, if you collect like a satellite data of a particular farm and you have that information for the past 30 years, what does that mean at a privacy point of view? It could also be something like the regulations around how we transfer our shared data between like our boundaries which is still like a very huge problem today. Yeah, thank you. Wonderful.

Paul Spiesberger: Thank you very much. I very much like that your startup is not only predicting the future with the weather forecast but you do AI time traveling back around 30 years. It’s pretty impressive. With this, we have some time left around 10 minutes to open the floor. And as you can see, we have here a quite distinguished panel of experts and I hope you have some questions for them and we have a debate. So we have two first questions here, please.

Jimson Olufuye: Yeah, it’s excellent panel we have here. Very interesting topic. My name is Jim Sindulfuye. I’m an IT specialist based in Abuja, Nigeria. Listening carefully to Brenda, Renata. and Ricardo and everybody, Clinton as well. I want to find out, you may emphasize inclusivity, okay? So how do you ensure that all stakeholders are inclusive, are included in the project? Okay, we have some methodology like sandboxes, maybe regulatory, operational, hybrid. Have you considered any of these around this because you emphasize inclusivity a lot. And then Aminata, like the productivity is very important. Okay, so how do we get people to have access? Because you need to know, how do you emphasize the issue for the capacity development, how do we get capacity? We’ve been talking about this for so long, and Ricardo talking about data. How do you get the data? It was mentioned that there was no, we can’t even get data. Can universal cyber provision fund help in this way? Because as an African, I’m concerned, how do we bridge the gap and fast track productivity? Thank you.

Brenda Mulele Gunde: Okay, let me start addressing the issue of inclusivity. I think when I was talking about inclusivity, it’s not just about that women, youth access the technologies. You’ve talked about how do we get all the other stakeholders involved? I think as the way we implement our projects, when it comes to the actual deployment of these solutions, before you even talk about, let’s go to the field and start collecting farmer data, registering farmers and getting this solution, it’s about bringing the rest of the other value chain actors on the same table. I’ll give an example, we’re doing a project in Rwanda. It’s for the daily value chain, it’s for milk production. So we’re looking at milk production, you’re looking at from the production from the farmer to the off taking. So you have a producer and a processor on the other side. and the actors in between. The actors that are collecting the milk, there are people that are actually selling the milk, there are actors that are looking at the quality of milk, then you’ve got government. So all these players have to be on the same table, understand what do we mean when you say we are digitizing the value chain across. What is the role each of these players are going to play? If there’s going to be farmer data, who is managing this data? Who is collecting this data? How is it going to be available? So all those questions are being asked through what we call ourselves, we call this startup project. So every point before it starts, we sit on the table and narrate all these issues so that you’re able to address them. And that’s how you get all the actors included. So that way you’re not just dealing with the women and youth inclusivity, but you’re also dealing with the actors ecosystem inclusivity. I hope that answers your question.

Aminata Amadou Garba: Let me maybe jump in related to the accessibility, the connectivity, how do we get people connected? As you mentioned, yes, I agree with you having the universal access can help. But we have seen that there has been an issue a little bit with the universal access in a lot of African countries where this fund has been sitting for years in the bank, but it has not been deployed. And when you look at the market of the telecommunication, the service providers are private sector. So they put the infrastructure in place, they put a lot of money to get that infrastructure in place, and they want to return to investments. So I take it as example, I’m from Niger, is a very vast country. And in the big North, you have to go thousands of kilometers to go and connect to those places. And yet you have a very few people in those regions. So if I am a private sector, I will just say, well, financially, it doesn’t make sense for me to go. I cannot put that much money and then not get enough people connected. That is when policies come.

Audience: Hello, my name is Kathleen. I’m an engineer. First of all, before giving my question, I want to congratulate you on how you described the problems and solutions that you came up with, because being an engineer, I do not speak diplomacy. In most of the panels, I struggle to understand something or where they are going, what they’re doing. Okay. Okay. Okay. Now I forgot my question. Okay. There are some technical solutions where they use some sensory nodes, a wireless sensory node that costs one cent or something like that. And I’m curious, and they use a plane to distribute the nodes. And I think that can be adapted with some drones, which are more cost effective. My question is, if you have any idea if in these communities, such a solution has been approached? Only one person, please answer. We don’t have time.

Aminata Amadou Garba: Okay, let me try to respond. I think for the soil sensors, I know soil sensors where we, on a horticulture project, where we use soil sensors to check the pH levels of the soil, but also to help farmers on precision mechanism for them to know when do they irrigate, how much do they irrigate. And these are, like you said, they’re low costs, but also at the same time, they have to be applied within the context that farmers can be able to use them. But they’re also some, they’re low cost, but they’re not…they don’t have data collection mechanisms.

Paul Spiesberger: Thank you, thank you very much. I have to be very strict. I would like to ask Henry for his closing remarks, if he’s still online and can hear us.

Henry van Burgsteden: Thank you very much. Yes, I’m here. Dear colleagues, partners and friends, on behalf of Vincent Martin, the Director of the FOWL Office of Innovation, I would like to sincerely thank you for attending this side event on the WSIS Action Line C7 e-Agriculture as part of the WSIS Plus20 Forum. Today, we reflected on two decades of progress and look forward to shaping a more inclusive, sustainable digital future for agri-food systems. Over the last 20 years, under FAO’s leadership and with strong partnerships, this action line has evolved from promoting basic ICTs to enabling cutting-edge innovations, for example, AI, geospatial tools, automated agriculture and digital public goods. These have empowered smallholder farmers, youth and rural communities globally. Initiatives like the e-Agriculture Community of Practice, the Digital Villages Initiative and the Global Network of Digital Agriculture Innovation Hubs show the power of human-centered digital ecosystems to drive food security, climate resilience and rural development. FAO, in partnership with ITU, also developed the e-Agriculture Strategy Guide, now used by 18 countries to shape their national digital agriculture strategies. ensuring local ownership and advancing climate smart agriculture. Together, FVO and ITU have also published the Agriculture in Action series, one on AI, another one on drones, blockchain, and more, providing practical guidance and policy support for digital innovation. But despite the progress, challenges persist. We heard many of the challenges today during the panel discussion. Limited infrastructure, connectivity, and digital literacy are still hindering access, especially in rural areas. And this is where digital public infrastructure and digital public goods play a critical role. FVO has already supported 15 digital initiatives towards DPG certification, with eight certified, including the Digital Services Portfolio, recognized last year during the WSIS 2024 Champions Award. And in 2025, we’re very happy that the FVO food loss app, shortly called FLAB, earned the same honor, highlighting innovation that drives sustainability and informed decision making. And a recent FAO DPI webinar emphasized that digital transformation must go beyond just technology, ensuring inclusion, equity, and alignment with those most at risk of being left behind. In that spirit, we are now developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation. And this roadmap aims to foster inclusive, scalable, interoperable, and context-sensitive digital ecosystems that support a sustainable transformation of agri-food systems. As we move forward, digital agriculture must align with broader development goals and the 2030 agenda. But that requires strong governance, inclusive policies, and multi-stakeholder partnerships. with people at the center. This session provided reflections but also calls for the continuation of co-creation and action for a future where digital agriculture is not only smart but is inclusive, affordable and sustainable. Thank you very much.

Paul Spiesberger: Thank you very much from the Senior Innovation Office of the FAO. With this we are one minute over but I thought of giving the panel one last time to say one sentence they would like to tell to the WSIS community of the future and how to move forward and how agriculture plays a role in the future of WSIS. We start with you. One sentence.

Clinton Oduor: Okay so my one sentence will be I think we need to invest in data and creating like a visibility into like the general like agri-food ecosystems. We talk about a lot of AI but there won’t be any AI without data so we really need to invest in data first. Thank you.

Brenda Mulele Gunde: Yeah my one sentence is the food that we eat is produced by 80% of smallholder farmers so our solutions need to address the needs of smallholder farmers to move them from just feeding themselves but also that they can be able to commercialize and increase their income.

Aminata Amadou Garba: I think my sentence will be to emphasize capacity developments for the smallholder farmers and then the community at large so that the digital will be used to improve the socio-economic benefits.

Ricardo Miron Torres: I think the path to equitable and resilient digital agriculture is not about technology it’s actually about intentional design collaboration and being just committed to the public good.

Paul Spiesberger: All right thank you very much. I’d like to take the opportunity to also thank our tech team. They did a wonderful job. and thank everyone who participated online and please join me with a round of applause for our panel and everyone else participated. Thank you. We would like to take a group vote if we can do that. Where should we should we place here? Do we still have time or do people want to move in? Did we still have time for group vote? Okay. Could you all line up in the in the front of the screen so we take a quick picture? Thank you very much. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Agreement points

Local context and human-centered design are essential for successful digital agriculture implementation

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

Local context matters when implementing digitalization for agriculture, as different countries have different priorities and challenges

Solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add value, not just implement technology for the sake of it

Digital public goods are designed with human-centered principles and can be adapted to local contexts

Summary

Both speakers emphasize that digital solutions must be designed with local context in mind and centered around human needs rather than technology-first approaches. They agree that successful implementation requires understanding specific local challenges and ensuring solutions add real value to users.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Human rights

Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

Farmer data availability for both private and public sectors is critical for innovation

Open data and open APIs are needed to enable local innovators to contextualize solutions

Investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions

Africa holds 65% of uncultivated land but is the most data-scarce continent

Summary

All three speakers identify data access as a fundamental challenge. They agree that without accessible, open data, innovation in digital agriculture cannot progress effectively, and that data infrastructure must be prioritized before implementing advanced technologies like AI.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Infrastructure | Development

Connectivity and digital infrastructure are primary barriers to inclusive digital agriculture

Speakers

– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

One-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity of urban areas

Digital infrastructure and connectivity are the main barriers, requiring reliable, affordable, and high-bandwidth connections

Summary

Both speakers identify connectivity as the fundamental challenge preventing inclusive digital agriculture, particularly in rural areas where most smallholder farmers are located. They agree that connectivity must be reliable, affordable, and high-quality to be effective.

Topics

Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure | Development

Scaling digital solutions from pilot to implementation requires intentional planning and clear pathways

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

Pilots are important but often get stuck without clear pathways to scaling from the start

Digital public goods enable reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel

Summary

Both speakers recognize that while pilot projects are valuable for testing solutions, they often fail to scale without proper planning. They agree that scalability must be considered from the beginning and that reusable, adaptable solutions are key to avoiding repeated failures.

Topics

Development | Economic | Infrastructure

Youth play a crucial role as agents of change and innovation in digital agriculture

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

Young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions

Youth can provide extension advisory services as entrepreneurs, bridging the technology gap

Youth-led startups face funding challenges as they don’t fit current VC investment models

Summary

Both speakers recognize youth as essential drivers of digital agriculture adoption and innovation. They agree that young people can bridge the technology gap between advanced solutions and traditional farming practices, while also identifying funding challenges that prevent youth-led innovations from scaling.

Topics

Development | Economic | Capacity development

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize that gender equity and inclusivity in technology access requires intentional design and capacity building, recognizing that women farmers are often excluded despite being primary agricultural workers.

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba

Arguments

Women farmers often cannot access technology despite being the majority of farmers in many countries

Technology access must be intentional about including women and youth, not just assume they will benefit

Capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits

Topics

Human rights | Gender rights online | Development

Both speakers emphasize that successful digital agriculture requires intentional approaches that consider broader implications including governance, collaboration, and regulatory frameworks rather than focusing solely on technology.

Speakers

– Ricardo Miron Torres
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

The path to equitable digital agriculture requires intentional design, collaboration, and commitment to public good

Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Both speakers advocate for comprehensive multi-stakeholder approaches that bring together all relevant actors – from value chain participants to public-private partnerships – to ensure successful implementation and sustainability of digital solutions.

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

All value chain actors must be brought together before deploying solutions to understand roles and data management

Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | Economic

Unexpected consensus

The critical importance of monitoring impact rather than just adoption metrics

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Henry van Burgsteden

Arguments

Monitoring for impact rather than just adoption is critical for development solutions

FAO has supported 15 digital initiatives toward digital public goods certification with eight already certified

Explanation

While one might expect focus on adoption rates and technology deployment, there was unexpected consensus on the need to measure actual impact and outcomes. This represents a mature understanding that technology deployment alone doesn’t guarantee development success.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory

The need for regulatory frameworks and policy support rather than viewing regulation as hindrance

Speakers

– Clinton Oduor
– Aminata Amadou Garba

Arguments

Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations

Private sector telecommunications providers need financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations

Explanation

Unexpectedly, both speakers advocated for stronger regulatory frameworks and policy support rather than viewing regulation as a barrier to innovation. This shows recognition that appropriate governance is essential for sustainable digital agriculture development.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Infrastructure | Development

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated strong consensus on fundamental challenges and approaches to digital agriculture, including the critical importance of human-centered design, data accessibility, connectivity infrastructure, intentional inclusivity, and multi-stakeholder collaboration. There was notable agreement on the need for sustainable scaling approaches and the recognition of youth as key agents of change.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with complementary expertise. The speakers approached digital agriculture from different angles (development finance, telecommunications policy, digital public goods, and youth innovation) but arrived at remarkably similar conclusions about core challenges and solutions. This consensus suggests a mature understanding of digital agriculture challenges and indicates strong potential for coordinated action across different sectors and stakeholder groups.

Different viewpoints

Role of private sector vs public sector in digital infrastructure deployment

Speakers

– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

Private sector telecommunications providers need financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations

Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups

Summary

Aminata emphasizes the challenges of relying on private sector for connectivity, noting that telecom providers need return on investment and won’t serve unprofitable remote areas without policy support. Ricardo advocates for public-private partnerships through digital public infrastructure that enables broader participation beyond just big corporations.

Topics

Infrastructure | Economic | Development

Approach to technology implementation – pilots vs systematic infrastructure

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

Pilots are important but often get stuck without clear pathways to scaling from the start

Digital public goods enable reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel

Summary

Brenda sees pilots as necessary but problematic double-edged swords that often fail to scale, requiring clear scaling pathways from the start. Ricardo advocates for building reusable digital public goods infrastructure that can be adapted across contexts without starting from scratch each time.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Digital standards

Unexpected differences

Youth role in technology adoption vs innovation funding

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

Young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions

Youth-led startups face funding challenges as they don’t fit current VC investment models

Explanation

While both speakers recognize youth as important agents of change, they focus on different aspects of the challenge. Brenda sees youth primarily as technology adoption facilitators and entrepreneurs within existing systems, while Clinton identifies systemic funding barriers that prevent youth-led innovations from scaling. This represents different perspectives on whether the solution is better youth integration or structural funding reform.

Topics

Economic | Digital business models | Development

Overall assessment

Summary

The panel showed remarkable consensus on core challenges (connectivity, inclusivity, local context) but differed on implementation approaches and systemic solutions. Main disagreements centered on public vs private sector roles, pilot-based vs infrastructure-based approaches, and whether to focus on adaptation of existing solutions or building new foundational systems.

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level with high strategic implications. While speakers agreed on problems and goals, their different approaches to solutions reflect fundamental differences in development philosophy – whether to work within existing systems through pilots and partnerships, or to build new foundational digital public infrastructure. These disagreements are constructive and complementary rather than conflicting, suggesting multiple valid pathways toward the same objectives.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize that gender equity and inclusivity in technology access requires intentional design and capacity building, recognizing that women farmers are often excluded despite being primary agricultural workers.

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba

Arguments

Women farmers often cannot access technology despite being the majority of farmers in many countries

Technology access must be intentional about including women and youth, not just assume they will benefit

Capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits

Topics

Human rights | Gender rights online | Development

Both speakers emphasize that successful digital agriculture requires intentional approaches that consider broader implications including governance, collaboration, and regulatory frameworks rather than focusing solely on technology.

Speakers

– Ricardo Miron Torres
– Clinton Oduor

Arguments

The path to equitable digital agriculture requires intentional design, collaboration, and commitment to public good

Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Both speakers advocate for comprehensive multi-stakeholder approaches that bring together all relevant actors – from value chain participants to public-private partnerships – to ensure successful implementation and sustainability of digital solutions.

Speakers

– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres

Arguments

All value chain actors must be brought together before deploying solutions to understand roles and data management

Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | Economic

Key takeaways

Digital agriculture solutions must be human-centered and adapted to local contexts, as different countries have varying priorities and challenges

Connectivity remains a major barrier with one-third of the global population unconnected, and rural areas having half the connectivity of urban areas

Inclusivity requires intentional design to ensure women and youth access technology, despite women being the majority of farmers in many countries

Pilots are essential but often fail to scale without clear pathways established from the start

Data availability and open data policies are critical foundations for AI and digital agriculture innovation

Multi-stakeholder collaboration involving all value chain actors is necessary before deploying digital solutions

Youth serve as agents of change who can bridge technology gaps and provide entrepreneurial extension services

Digital public goods and infrastructure enable reusable, scalable solutions without vendor lock-in

Monitoring must focus on impact rather than just adoption rates to ensure meaningful development outcomes

80% of food is produced by smallholder farmers, so solutions must address their needs to enable commercialization and income growth

Resolutions and action items

FAO is developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation

Need to invest in data creation and visibility into agri-food ecosystems as a foundation for AI solutions

Emphasis on capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities to improve socio-economic benefits

Continue co-creation and action for inclusive, affordable, and sustainable digital agriculture aligned with 2030 agenda goals

Unresolved issues

How to effectively deploy universal access funds that often remain unused in African countries

Funding mechanisms for youth-led startups that don’t fit current VC investment models

Regulatory ambiguity and policy frameworks around data privacy and cross-border data sharing

Technical implementation of low-cost sensor solutions and their practical application in rural contexts

Bridging the gap between private sector infrastructure investment incentives and rural connectivity needs

Ensuring long-term sustainability of digital solutions beyond pilot phases

Suggested compromises

Public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups while leveraging private sector infrastructure

Using SMS services to deliver AI-powered solutions in low connectivity areas as an intermediate solution

Combining open source technologies with proprietary platforms where necessary, while maintaining core openness principles

Balancing data openness with privacy concerns through proper governance frameworks

Utilizing youth as intermediaries to help older farmers adopt technology while creating entrepreneurial opportunities

We talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale. So, at the same time, pilots are also important because pilots help us to understand in terms of what are some of the local challenges that you need to deal with… the pathway to scaling up has to be clear from the start, before you start the pilot.

Speaker

Brenda Mulele Gunde

Reason

This comment addresses a critical paradox in development work – the necessity of pilots versus the challenge of scaling. It challenges the conventional wisdom that pilots are inherently good by highlighting their potential to become dead ends, while simultaneously acknowledging their value for understanding local contexts.

Impact

This insight reframed the discussion from simply implementing technology solutions to thinking strategically about scalability from the outset. It influenced subsequent speakers to consider sustainability and long-term vision in their responses, particularly Ricardo’s emphasis on building digital public infrastructure rather than just individual solutions.

When it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband. If the husband doesn’t leave the phone, if extending extension advisory, nobody also has it. All those dynamics that we’re dealing with are part of human-centered designing.

Speaker

Brenda Mulele Gunde

Reason

This comment provides a stark, concrete illustration of how gender dynamics create barriers to technology access in rural communities. It moves beyond abstract discussions of ‘inclusivity’ to reveal the specific household-level power structures that undermine digital agriculture initiatives.

Impact

This observation grounded the entire panel’s discussion in real-world social dynamics, making subsequent speakers more conscious of addressing practical barriers rather than just technical solutions. It reinforced the human-centered design theme throughout the remaining presentations.

The difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability… if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being a vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of.

Speaker

Ricardo Miron Torres

Reason

This comment introduces crucial technical nuance by distinguishing between merely being ‘open source’ and being truly accessible as digital public goods. It highlights often-overlooked issues of vendor lock-in and hidden dependencies that can undermine the sustainability of digital solutions.

Impact

This technical insight elevated the discussion from general advocacy for open solutions to a more sophisticated understanding of digital infrastructure requirements. It connected to Brenda’s earlier point about sustainability and influenced the conversation toward thinking about long-term digital ecosystem building rather than individual applications.

Africa holds about 65% thereabouts of the world’s uncultivated area that can be cultivated. But again, it’s the most data-scarce continent in the world, meaning that we don’t have visibility of what’s happening, for example, for the farmlands.

Speaker

Clinton Oduor

Reason

This comment presents a striking paradox – the continent with the greatest agricultural potential has the least data about its agricultural systems. It reframes the discussion from technology implementation to fundamental data infrastructure needs.

Impact

This observation shifted the conversation toward data as a foundational requirement rather than an afterthought. It reinforced the earlier themes about building infrastructure first and influenced the final recommendations where Clinton emphasized ‘we really need to invest in data first’ and other panelists echoed the importance of data visibility and access.

Most young people usually think that our regulation is there maybe not to make like innovation go forward but most of the time that’s surely not the case. So we also need to build like some capacity around like the importance of regulation and this include like things such as data privacy.

Speaker

Clinton Oduor

Reason

This comment reveals a critical disconnect between young innovators and regulatory frameworks, suggesting that the problem isn’t just regulation itself but a lack of understanding about its purpose and importance. It challenges the common narrative that regulation simply hinders innovation.

Impact

This insight introduced a new dimension to the discussion about barriers to innovation, moving beyond infrastructure and funding to include regulatory literacy. It suggested that capacity building needs to work in both directions – not just helping regulators understand innovation, but helping innovators understand regulation.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by moving it beyond surface-level technology advocacy to address deeper systemic challenges. Brenda’s insights about pilot scalability and gender dynamics established a foundation of practical realism that influenced all subsequent speakers to ground their technical solutions in social and operational realities. Ricardo’s technical distinctions about digital public goods elevated the conversation’s sophistication, while Clinton’s observations about Africa’s data paradox and regulatory disconnects provided crucial context about implementation challenges. Together, these comments created a progression from identifying problems (gender barriers, pilot limitations) to understanding technical requirements (true openness, interoperability) to recognizing foundational needs (data infrastructure, regulatory literacy). The discussion evolved from individual technology solutions toward systemic thinking about digital ecosystems, ultimately culminating in the panelists’ final recommendations that emphasized data investment, smallholder farmer focus, capacity development, and intentional public-good design.

How can we ensure that all stakeholders are inclusive in digital agriculture projects, and what methodologies like sandboxes (regulatory, operational, hybrid) can be considered?

Speaker

Jimson Olufuye

Explanation

This question addresses the critical need for comprehensive stakeholder engagement in digital agriculture initiatives, seeking specific methodological approaches to ensure true inclusivity beyond just end-users.

How do we get people to have access to digital agriculture technologies and emphasize capacity development to bridge the gap and fast-track productivity?

Speaker

Jimson Olufuye

Explanation

This question focuses on the practical implementation challenges of scaling digital agriculture solutions, particularly in developing countries where capacity building remains a persistent challenge.

How do we obtain and access data for digital agriculture solutions, and can universal cyber provision funds help in this regard?

Speaker

Jimson Olufuye

Explanation

This addresses the fundamental challenge of data availability and accessibility for digital agriculture innovations, exploring potential funding mechanisms to support data infrastructure development.

Have wireless sensory nodes (costing around one cent) distributed via planes or drones been approached as solutions in rural communities?

Speaker

Kathleen (engineer)

Explanation

This technical question explores cost-effective sensor deployment methods for precision agriculture, which could significantly reduce implementation costs in resource-constrained environments.

How can the universal access funds that have been sitting unused in banks for years in African countries be effectively deployed for connectivity?

Speaker

Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response

Explanation

This highlights a critical policy and implementation gap where available funding mechanisms are not being utilized effectively to address connectivity challenges.

How can we address the financial viability challenges for private sector telecommunications providers to extend services to sparsely populated rural areas?

Speaker

Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response

Explanation

This addresses the market failure in telecommunications infrastructure deployment in rural areas where return on investment is insufficient for private sector participation.

How can we develop context-sensitive data collection mechanisms for low-cost agricultural sensors that farmers can actually use?

Speaker

Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response

Explanation

This addresses the gap between available low-cost sensor technology and practical implementation that considers farmer capabilities and local contexts.

How can we move beyond pilots to achieve scalable implementation of digital agriculture solutions?

Speaker

Brenda Mulele Gunde

Explanation

This addresses the critical challenge of scaling successful pilot projects, which is essential for achieving widespread impact in digital agriculture initiatives.

How can we ensure that women and youth have equal access to agricultural technologies despite existing social and economic barriers?

Speaker

Brenda Mulele Gunde

Explanation

This addresses persistent gender and age-based digital divides in agricultural technology access, which is crucial for inclusive development.

How can we develop sustainable funding mechanisms for youth-led agri-tech startups that don’t fit traditional VC investment criteria?

Speaker

Clinton Oduor

Explanation

This addresses the funding gap for innovative agricultural technology solutions developed by young entrepreneurs in the Global South.

How can we address regulatory ambiguity and build capacity around the importance of regulation, including data privacy concerns for agricultural data?

Speaker

Clinton Oduor

Explanation

This addresses the need for clearer regulatory frameworks and better understanding of regulatory importance among young innovators in the agricultural technology space.

Summary

This discussion focused on digital solutions for sustainability, examining both the environmental impact of the ICT sector and its potential role in climate action and biodiversity protection. The session was part of the AI for Good Summit and brought together experts from ITU, UNEP, UNCTAD, World Bank, and various industry representatives to address standardization, measurement, and implementation of sustainable digital technologies.

The conversation began with ITU’s strategic priorities of universal connectivity and sustainable digital transformation, emphasizing the need for technical standards to provide common measurement foundations and enable global scaling of sustainability innovations. Participants highlighted that the ICT sector currently accounts for 2-4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, comparable to the aviation sector, with projections showing a 50% increase in CO2 emissions within the next five years. This presents particular challenges for developing countries in Latin America and Africa, which face the dual burden of being furthest behind in digital adoption while being most impacted by climate change.

A significant portion of the discussion centered on the development of standardized methodologies for measuring ICT’s environmental footprint, including the ITU-T L.1472 standard and a pilot project to create a global database for emission and energy consumption data. The importance of harmonized data collection across different regions and ICT sectors was emphasized, with experts noting the need for capacity building among regulators who often lack basic knowledge of emission reporting frameworks.

The session also explored how ICT can enable climate action in other sectors, with examples including early warning systems for floods and droughts, applications for farmers to select drought-resistant seeds, and IoT sensors for Amazon biodiversity monitoring. Speakers emphasized that successful implementation requires not just connectivity and infrastructure, but also comprehensive digital public infrastructure including ID systems and mobile money platforms.

The discussion concluded with insights on smart cities’ digital transformation toward net zero goals, highlighting ten practical guidelines for cities to leverage ICT for energy efficiency, renewable energy integration, and citizen behavior change. Overall, the session underscored the critical need for international cooperation, standardization, and capacity building to harness digital technologies for environmental sustainability while minimizing their own ecological footprint.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Standardization and Measurement of ICT Environmental Impact**: The discussion emphasized the critical need for standardized methodologies to measure and report the ICT sector’s environmental footprint, including greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption, and water usage. ITU’s development of standards like L.1472 and L.1410 was highlighted as essential for creating consistent, comparable data across companies and countries.

– **Digital Solutions for Climate Action and Sustainability**: Participants explored how ICT technologies can be leveraged as tools for environmental protection and climate mitigation in other sectors. Examples included early warning systems for floods and droughts, apps for farmers to select drought-resistant seeds, and IoT sensors for biodiversity monitoring in the Amazon.

– **Capacity Building and Implementation Challenges**: The conversation addressed significant gaps in knowledge and capacity, particularly among regulators and developing countries. Speakers noted that many ICT regulators lack awareness of basic concepts like scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, highlighting the need for training programs and simplified guidance.

– **Global Collaboration and Partnership**: The importance of international cooperation was emphasized throughout, with ITU working alongside UNEP, UNCTAD, World Bank, and other organizations. The discussion stressed that partnerships are essential for scaling digital product information systems and ensuring standards are implemented effectively across regions.

– **Smart Cities and Net Zero Transformation**: The session covered how cities can achieve carbon neutrality through digital transformation, presenting 10 practical guidelines including embracing comprehensive digital strategies, utilizing ICT for energy efficiency, promoting circular economy practices, and encouraging behavioral change through digital tools.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to explore the dual role of ICT in environmental sustainability – both addressing the sector’s own environmental impact and harnessing digital technologies as solutions for broader climate action. The session sought to present ITU’s standardization work, showcase practical implementations, and foster collaboration among international organizations, governments, and industry stakeholders.

## Overall Tone:

The tone was professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented throughout the discussion. Speakers maintained an urgent but optimistic approach, acknowledging significant challenges while emphasizing concrete progress and opportunities. The atmosphere was highly technical yet accessible, with participants demonstrating strong commitment to international cooperation. The tone remained consistently constructive, with speakers building upon each other’s points and highlighting successful partnerships and initiatives.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Reyna Ubeda** – Works for ITU standardization sector, session moderator

– **Bilel Jamoussi** – Deputy Director of TSV (ITU)

– **Fabienne Pierre** – UNEP, Coordinator of the Green Growth Knowledge Partnership

– **Luis Adrian Salazar** – Professor at Latin University of Costa Rica, panel moderator

– **Laura Cyron** – Economy Affairs Office of UNCTAD

– **Jean-Manuel Canet** – Vice-chair of ITU-T Study Group 5 on Environment and Circular Economy, works at Orange

– **Rosendo Manas** – Co-founder of Resilio

– **Rosie McDonald** – Climate change officer of TDB-ITU (Development Bureau)

– **Sara Ballan** – Senior digital development specialist at the World Bank, leads Green Digital Business Line

– **Hiroshi Yamamoto** – Director and head of the standardization office at Nippon Telegraph and Telecom Corporation (NTT Inc.)

– **Cristina Cardenas** – Works at Coursera, leads government opportunities

– **Leonidas Anthopoulos** – Professor of e-business at the University of Thessaly in Greece, expert in smart cities and digital governance

– **Participant** – Works on Paris Agreement carbon mechanism and AI developments at UNFCCC

**Additional speakers:**

None identified beyond the provided speakers names list.

# Digital Solutions for Sustainability: Standardisation, Measurement, and Implementation

## Executive Summary

This session at the AI for Good Summit brought together international experts from ITU, UNEP, UNCTAD, World Bank, and industry representatives to examine digital technologies’ dual role in environmental sustainability. The discussion was structured as two fireside chats addressing both the ICT sector’s environmental footprint and its potential for enabling climate solutions.

The conversation highlighted a critical shift in global climate policy, with digital technologies emerging as a recognised issue at COP28 and COP29. While the ICT sector accounts for 2-4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it offers significant opportunities for environmental solutions. Central themes included the urgent need for standardised measurement frameworks, capacity building challenges particularly in developing countries, and the gap between technical standards and political implementation.

Technical difficulties and time constraints affected the session flow, with some speakers experiencing connection issues and abbreviated presentations due to scheduling limitations.

## Opening Framework and Strategic Context

**Reyna Ubeda** from ITU’s standardisation sector introduced the session’s dual focus on digital solutions for sustainability while acknowledging the sector’s environmental impact. She outlined the structure as two fireside chats: first examining the ICT sector’s environmental footprint, then exploring ICT-enabled climate solutions.

**Bilel Jamoussi**, Deputy Director of TSV at ITU, emphasized ITU’s strategic priorities of universal connectivity and sustainable digital transformation. He noted a significant shift in climate discourse: “before COP28, I don’t think digital was one of the topics on the agenda of negotiators,” highlighting how rapidly digital technologies have gained recognition in international climate policy.

Jamoussi stressed that technical standards provide essential foundations for climate action by enabling stakeholders to “compare Apple to Apple” across companies and countries, though he departed partway through the session.

## First Fireside Chat: ICT Environmental Footprint

Moderated by **Luis Adrian Salazar**, Professor at Latin University of Costa Rica and former government minister, this segment focused on measuring and addressing the ICT sector’s environmental impact.

Salazar opened by noting the challenge of operating “in two worlds – the environmental world and the digital world” and emphasized the need to move beyond strategy proliferation: “stop to release strategies… We have a strategy for AI. We have a strategy for 5G. We have a strategy for the strategy, and it’s very confused for the different layers of the governments to implement solution.”

**Laura Cyron** from UNCTAD provided key statistics, noting that ICT’s current 2-4% share of global greenhouse gas emissions is projected to increase by 50% within five years. She emphasized that developing countries in Latin America and Africa face dual challenges: needing digital infrastructure for development while being disproportionately affected by climate change.

**Jean-Manuel Canet**, Vice-chair of ITU-T Study Group 5 from Orange, detailed the sector’s ambitious targets, including 45% greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2030 compared to 2020 levels. He highlighted key standards development including L.1472 for measuring CO2 footprints and L.1410 for assessing biodiversity impacts, providing frameworks for consistent industry measurement.

**Rosendo Manas**, co-founder of Resilio, presented a pilot project testing data collection frameworks with common definitions across ICT sectors and regions. The initiative aims to create a global database for emission and energy consumption data, addressing practical implementation challenges. He specifically invited collaboration: “if you want to participate in this pilot, please contact us.”

**Rosie McDonald**, Climate Change Officer of ITU’s Development Bureau, highlighted significant capacity gaps among regulators. Survey results showed many ICT regulators lack familiarity with basic emission scope reporting frameworks, creating barriers to effective environmental governance. She outlined efforts to address these gaps through regulator training programmes and e-learning courses.

## Second Fireside Chat: ICT-Enabled Climate Solutions

Moderated by **Cristina Cardenas** from Coursera, this segment explored how digital technologies can enable climate action across sectors.

**Sara Ballan**, Senior Digital Development Specialist at the World Bank, highlighted investments in solar-powered connectivity solutions that address both digital inclusion and environmental sustainability. She provided examples of ICT-enabled climate solutions including early warning systems, mobile applications for drought-resistant seed selection, and IoT sensors for Amazon biodiversity monitoring.

Ballan emphasized that successful implementation requires comprehensive digital public infrastructure, including national ID systems, mobile money platforms, and reliable connectivity – recognizing that individual applications cannot succeed without supporting ecosystem infrastructure.

**Hiroshi Yamamoto**, Director at NTT’s Standardisation Office, introduced perspectives on distributed data centre architecture connected by high-quality, low-energy optical networks. This approach could potentially reduce energy consumption while creating opportunities for developing countries to participate more fully in the digital economy.

## Technical Difficulties and Session Constraints

The session experienced several challenges that affected content delivery:

– **Leonidas Anthopoulos**, Professor at University of Thessaly specializing in smart cities, experienced significant connection problems. While he mentioned having “10 guidelines” for cities pursuing net zero objectives through digital transformation, technical difficulties prevented full presentation of this content.

– **Fabienne Pierre** from UNEP was introduced to discuss digital product information systems, but her introduction was cut off mid-sentence and she did not complete her presentation.

– Time constraints led to abbreviated discussions and limited the depth of technical exchanges.

## Key Areas of Consensus

Despite session limitations, several areas of strong agreement emerged:

**Standardisation as Foundation**: Participants agreed that standardised methodologies are crucial for consistent, comparable measurements of ICT environmental impact across companies and countries.

**Capacity Building Imperative**: All speakers emphasized extensive capacity building needs, particularly for developing countries and government officials lacking technical expertise in environmental measurement.

**Dual Role Recognition**: Universal acknowledgement that while ICT has environmental costs, it offers significant opportunities for climate action across various sectors.

**Partnership Necessity**: Consistent emphasis on collaborative partnerships across organisations, regions, and sectors for effective environmental governance.

## Implementation Challenges

Several critical challenges were identified:

**Political Translation Gap**: Salazar emphasized the fundamental challenge: “how can we convince the President, the Prime Minister, to be the leader in the digital strategy and the environmental strategy.” This highlighted the gap between technical capabilities and political implementation.

**Fragmented Approaches**: The tendency to develop separate strategies for different technologies instead of integrated approaches creates implementation confusion across government layers.

**Measurement versus Action**: Tension between focusing on standardised data collection versus prioritizing implementation of existing frameworks.

**Scaling Beyond Pilots**: Moving from successful pilot projects to global implementation, particularly in resource-constrained developing countries.

## Immediate Next Steps

The discussion identified several concrete action items:

– Continued testing of the proposed data collection framework through Resilio’s pilot project, with open invitation for participation

– Implementation of regulator training programmes and e-learning courses to address capacity gaps

– Development of extended greenhouse gas emission trajectories for the ICT sector to 2035-2040

– Increased participation from Latin America and Africa in standardisation efforts

## Conclusion

This session revealed both the urgency and complexity of addressing digital technologies’ environmental role. While there was consensus on the need for standardised measurement and capacity building, significant challenges remain in translating technical solutions into political action.

The emergence of digital technologies in international climate policy represents a significant opportunity, but realising this potential requires addressing the political and implementation dimensions beyond technical standards. As Salazar noted, success depends on securing high-level political leadership for integrated digital-environmental strategies rather than fragmented approaches.

The session demonstrated that while technical solutions are necessary, they are insufficient alone. The path forward requires continued collaboration to ensure digital technologies contribute positively to environmental objectives while minimising their ecological footprint, with particular attention to inclusive implementation across diverse global contexts.

Reyna Ubeda: Good afternoon, everyone. Many thanks for being here. Welcome to our sessions on digital solutions for sustainability. Recording in progress. Sorry, now we start again. Good morning, everyone. My name is Reyna Ubeda. I work for the ITU for the standardization sector. Welcome to our session on digital solutions for sustainability, ICT’s role in GHG reduction and biodiversity protection, and also from data to impact, digital product information system, and the importance of traceability for global environmental governance. To start this session, I would like to give the floor to Mr. Bilel Jamoussi, Deputy Director of TSV. Bilel, you have the floor.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Reyna. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the session. It’s really a pleasure to have you as part of the AI for Good Summit with us this week. The ITU has two strategic priorities, universal connectivity and sustainable digital transformation. These are the two strategic priorities agreed at our plenipotentiary conference in 22 in Bucharest. And so everything we work on is really guided by those two principles of universal connectivity and digital transformation that is sustainable, especially now that all industries are transforming and leveraging digital technologies. And this highlights the importance of a sustainable future for the digital tech industry, but also that this industry can be a powerful force for climate action. Technical standards are essential tools for action because they give us a common foundation to measure things. So we can compare Apple to Apple. They help us bring key innovation to global scale. When we uncover new opportunities to improve sustainability, standards can provide blueprints for everyone to benefit. Energy efficiency, for example, is fundamental to the cost efficiency and the climate action commitments of the digital tech industry. It’s also an area where digital technology companies are gaining new revenue from innovations improving energy efficiency in other industries. The optimizations, for example, through use of AI as one of the technologies, can help other industries reduce their energy use. And that’s why companies invest in the ITU standardization work. Our standards for sustainable power feeding and smart energy control help us optimize efficiency and make better use of renewable energies. Our standards provide climate impact metrics and measurements, methods to keep us on the right track. And very importantly, our standards are the result of collaboration and consensus decisions. They are voluntary commitments to new ways of working together. Standards help technologies to speak the same language, but they also support clear communication among companies, business… Hello, how are you? Good. Who was that? So our green digital action activities also work in service of this communication. And that’s why these activities engage so many partners. How many of you were in COP29? Right. Okay. So as part of these activities at the UN Climate Change Conference, digital tech companies have highlighted their commitment to greater transparency on climate impacts. And I’m glad to say that we are achieving strong progress. Before COP28, I don’t think digital was one of the topics on the agenda of negotiators. So we started this in COP28 in Dubai, COP29 with the declaration in Azerbaijan, in Baku, and we have a plan in working with Brazil for COP30. ITU members are working on standards for a new database on emission energy consumption. And I’m looking at my colleague here from BDT, Rosie, who is leading some of this effort for… We are launching a project to test the feasibility of the proposed data collection framework. We all need to agree on how we are going to collect the data. We will present this project today, as well as other key ITU standards for climate action. Our United for Smart Sustainable Cities initiative is also launching two new reports this week. This initiative includes 17 UN agencies that have been working on smart sustainable cities for a number of years based on an ITU standard for key performance indicators for smart sustainable cities. Methodologies to assess net zero progress in cities and guidelines for cities to achieve net zero through digital transformation. In the following session, we will look at how ITU standards are supporting the creation of sustainability passports for digital products with the aim of delivering data essential to circular economy. These standards are being developed in collaboration with ETSI. We have an amazing partnership with ETSI. We develop together and we publish together most of the standards in this area as technically aligned deliverables. And this work forms part of a broader global framework for digital product information systems developed jointly with One Planet Network, UNEP, the Wuppertal Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and other partners. So partnership is a key in order for us to really work together and pool all of our resources and efforts towards achieving concrete outcomes. All of you, whether in government, industry, academia or civil society, can drive ITU standards work with your collaboration and consensus decisions. I welcome you all to join us. I thank our organizing partner today, One Planet Network, UNEP and UNCTAD. And I thank our expert speakers and everyone joining us for your contributions to this important discussion. And I’m looking forward to learning more about your latest thinking and priorities and how ITU could best support you. Thank you.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you, Mr. Jamoussi. Now I would like to give the floor to Dr. Fabienne Pierre from UNEP. Fabienne, you have the floor.

Fabienne Pierre: Thank you very much and thank you for this opportunity. So indeed, I work for UNEP. I am the coordinator of the Green Growth Knowledge Partnership. and well, before I say a few words about this and about the importance of the topics that will be discussed today during the session, I just want to say that indeed, I fully agree with what you just said and how important it is to harness the power of digital technologies to achieve sustainability and circular economy, but also how important it is to make sure that such technologies are part of the sustainability transition. And so in GGKP, which is a global initiative that is led by UNEP together with the World Bank, I know we have the World Bank today, UNIDO, the OECD and Global Green Growth Institute in Korea, our very objective as a partnership is indeed to leverage knowledge partnerships and digital technologies to facilitate the sharing, the flowing and the application of green and circular economy solutions. And we very much focus on actionable knowledge, knowledge from experience, knowledge for action that can guide stakeholders within value chains and high impact sectors, including the ICT sector into adopting a new standards and policies and norms and practices that support the transition to sustainability. So this is a very important topic for us and in the work that we are doing because we want to also contribute in the dissemination and making sure that those standards and norms and best practices actually reach the right stakeholders within value chains in a way that meets their needs and specific context. That’s a challenge that we’re facing to all of us have experienced that, that we are overwhelmed with the amount of information available out there. And at the same time, it’s difficult to navigate this ocean of information. How digital technologies can help us, including AI, help us access and channel and access this knowledge in a much more effective manner. And this is true for a. The product information is one of the topics for discussion today and indeed you said it also, digital technologies are reshaping industries today and we have tools that enable unprecedented data integration and innovation. So indeed digital product information systems that includes things like digital product passports are emerging as transformative tools to increase transparency and accelerate the transition to a circular and sustainable economy. Indeed those systems are meant to facilitate the sharing of standardized product data along the life cycle of products and include environmental performance but also resource composition and other relevant information that will impact potential end-of-life options. So digital product information systems are all about transparency, efficiency but also recyclability of products and informed choices and that’s what we want to highlight is how those instruments can empower consumers also in making informed decisions. And so how can we look at digital product information systems also as an essential tool for transparency within value chains that also informed consumption with detailed information about the products that we are purchasing and consuming from origin to end of life. In fact scaling, so there are many initiatives at the moment at country level, in regions working on different sectoral digital systems. So again such as digital product passports and they are focusing on specific areas or products like batteries or plastics, textiles, electronics. But how do we scale up those information systems and those initiatives? It really requires, as you mentioned, partnerships, coherence, coordination, harmonization. And so the question is how can we work together to ensure that such systems and initiatives talk to each other and how do we help them continue developing in a way that allows information and data to flow in an effective, accessible and verifiable manner within and across industries. So indeed UNEP and the One Planet Network is working in very close partnership with ITU and UNCTAD, the Consumer Information Program of the One Planet Network and many other strategic partners to develop a global framework for digital product information systems which is, as was highlighted, fundamental to harmonize and bring those initiatives and practices together, address the challenge of fragmented approaches and

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much Fabienne. I am going to leave you in good hands with my colleague Reyna, who is the counselor for our Study Group 5. As you can imagine, we have many parallel sessions and I would like for you to excuse me and I’ll leave you in good hands

Reyna Ubeda: with Reyna. Thank you. Thank you, Bilel. Okay, thank you so much Fabienne for your words. Now allow us to start with the first fireside chat, exploring the environmental footprint of the ICT sector from standardized measurement to transition plans. And I would like to give the floor to Prof. Luis Adrián Salazar from the Latin University of Costa Rica that will be the moderator of this session. Thank you very much and good afternoon. We

Luis Adrian Salazar: have two challenges. The first of all is to talk about the environmental and digital world. And the second is to use extremely effective the 25 minutes that we have with four excellent panelists. So for that, all that I want to say is that this panel have a big goal and needs to try to give one idea in order to improve all that the people are doing to understand that we are living in the virtual world. However, it makes sense while we have a planet because we don’t have a planet and we lost all that we have in the environmental access, we’re going to fail. So my idea is to have two minutes in the and Dr. Laura Cyron. We are going to start with the first question and then to try to make a wrap-up with one idea. And after that we define ten questions with Reyna, we start to work in order to make two resume questions. I would like to present my panel. Laura Cyron from Economy Affairs Office of UNTAC, thank you very much. Jean-Manuel Canet is the vice-chair of ITU-T Study Group 5. Then Rosendo Manas, where is Rosendo? Rosendo is over there. He is co-founder of Resilio. Rosie McDonald, climate change officer of TDB-ITU. So thank you very much to all of you. The first question is how can standardization methodologies and harmonized data disclosure practice support more consistent, transparent and comparable measure of the ICT sector’s environmental footprint across companies and countries, covering the full life cycle, including scope-three emissions? Just one comment in this question. When we talk about countries, I will want to emphasize about how can we include countries in LATAM and Africa, because in some countries, like Europe, it is easier to be involved with the digital world and environmental in the same page. So I would like to include LATAM and Africa in your answer. Please, Laura.

Laura Cyron: It’s a small question with minor, well, very sub points. OK, so thank you very much, first of all, for having me. I am coming from this perspective a bit with the question of how does this problem fit into the question of trade and development, basically. So standardization, of course, is a very essential role in this case, because we in our work very much look for evidence-based policymaking approaches. And for that, we need data. And as we know very well that the ICT sector, and especially the measurement of its footprint, is something that is still well fragmented, to say the least, in the case of how we measure this. And therefore, of course, this implies that there is a lack of reliable and standardized data that we can use for the policy guidance that we try to offer to countries, particularly in developing countries that tend to be also somewhat further behind in measuring their ICT sector. In this context, just to maybe give a bit of context, so we think or estimate that the ICT sector emissions currently are somewhere between 2 and 4 percent of global GHG emissions, which is apparently close to the aviation sector, so quite sizable already. But this is somewhat outdated data. The International Energy Agency anticipates that within the next five years, the CO2 emissions of the ICT sector will rise by at least 50% after having already grown around 60% within the previous five years. And that, of course, is a significant concern, especially for developing countries, because in our work at UNCTAD, we quite often face this dual reality of digitalization, which will be a very helpful tool to make things more efficient for economic growth, but also in terms of climate solutions. At the same time, we are very keenly aware of the fact that the developing countries are the furthest behind and most impacted by climate change and environmental pressures, so that they are the ones that face this dual issue of a double burden, where they cannot harness digital technologies yet to the extent necessary. And that is, well, first of all, of course, one of the reasons why we very strongly support initiatives like the ITU-TL 1472, because this will bring more standardization to this area in terms of measuring the CO2 footprint. But what we also look at quite keenly in our work is sort of the more holistic lifecycle approach. So we are also quite concerned in the case of water use for the ICT sector and the impacts of biodiversity. But for that, of course, ITU also already has an approach, which is quite good in terms of L1410. So that is quite encouraging. And what is initially quite encouraging, I think, in the work today that we’re seeing is the growing awareness of this issue, so that the Global Digital Compact, for instance, has recognized the fact that we need more measurement and awareness of the ICT sector impact, as well as the recent intergovernmental group that we had at UNCTAD. And then I think just two days ago, the BRICS very keenly also emphasized the importance that we figure out what the AI governance will bring in positives, as well as in its environmental impact. So thank you very much.

Jean-Manuel Canet: Thank you, Laura. Jean-Manuel, please, the floor is yours. Thanks very much. Thanks very much for having me this afternoon. Very pleased to be here. representing the study group five, which is the lead study group on environment, climate, biodiversity, water topics. And so maybe to answer first to your question, we, so we, we develop standards and we develop standards cooperatively, and this is done with the participation of experts from all the regions. And we have seen in the past years, a strong participation, for instance, from LATAM, from Africa region, we have a lot of participation of experts coming from member states, from, let’s say, the industry, from academia. And this is very important for us because they bring a lot. And also in the study group five, we have the chance, the opportunity to have regional groups. And through these regional groups, the different members contributed, they coordinate, they give more strength to the effort. So this is very important. So that was to answer your first aspect of question. And then to continue, and thank you so much for mentioning all the standards that we have been developing. I can say first that it’s important to set a goal. And we did that. And we did that in cooperation with the International Energy Agency and with the so-called science-based target initiative. We set the goal for the ICT sector to reduce its GHG emissions by 45% in 2030 compared to 2020. We know some of the actors in the ICT sector are doing well, like telecom operators, because they are using much more renewable energy to power their networks in many regions of the world. And their emissions are decreasing. We know there are some challenges, of course, corresponding to the development of artificial intelligence in particular. And to address that, we collectively, the study group has decided to develop some new trajectories up to 2035-2040. We invite all of you to contribute to this work and to contribute to the trajectories. In terms of GHG emissions, we also have development of standards regarding the impact of the RCT sector on biodiversity, for instance. Water is another important topic that we are going to look at regarding the impact of artificial intelligence. As you mentioned, we have developed a standard to look at all the key indicators that should be collected in order to have the nice view, the full view on the RCT sector, GHG emissions, energy footprint at worldwide level, at national level. And for this, a pilot is going to start and I will let colleagues explain further about that. Thank you so much. Thank you very much, Rosendo.

Rosendo Manas: Thank you, Jean-Manuel. It’s quite easy when someone introduces the work you’re doing right now. So exactly, we’re launching this pilot project. It is very simple. We have this database that we’re creating and the question is how or what should be included, what definition should be in it, because we can all say people should report on the carbon emissions, but what exactly should be inside, specifically so that everyone has the same language, same words, same wording, and knows exactly what to do, what to report on. And it’s really that common language that we’re trying to figure out in this project, this pilot project, as to later have those figures, that information, which will help all the sector guides and go through those towards that direction of the emissions. One of the key aspects that was mentioned before of this pilot project is that not only we’re looking at different sectors within the ICT, so looking at telecom operators, data central operators, as well as manufacturers from ICT, but also looking at that regional level, making sure that we have actors from all the different regions within the world, Spain, Europe, Africa, North America, Asia, and all the other different regions, basically. So to be able to, at the end, say we’ve actually covered all the scope. We have all the insights from all those different organizations and companies and that will help us create that standard, reinforce that LW1472, which we believe is key in order to help the whole sector, ICT sector, reduce those emissions. And yeah, lastly, we are inviting you all to help you contribute on our work. If you’re interested in what we’re doing, please come after the talk, reach us, talk to us. If you’re interested, happy to have this conversation, explain you in detail what we’re trying to do. We believe this is super important for everyone, for all the ICT sector. So really keen to help you on that.

Luis Adrian Salazar: Thank you, Rosendo. Rosie? Great.

Rosie McDonald: Thank you very much for having me here as well today. So I’m also a colleague in ITU and I’m in the Development Bureau. So we do a lot of work, particularly with countries and to complement the work going on within the Standardization Bureau and the database development. We’ve also been working with a group of experts from different countries to try and harmonize and sensitize different regulators specifically to start collecting this data. We saw that as a big gap when we start collecting data. A lot of regulations are not in place. A lot of ICT regulators don’t really collect environmental data. So we see this as a big opportunity to really help start collecting data to establish what indicators there are based on a first set, based on the standard, based on a report that we do, an annual green digital companies report, where we also collect data from 200 companies. So we know what data currently exists publicly. So we’re really trying to build capacity at the country level. And yeah, we have within that group quite a lot of experts from different regions, but we do see that as a gap currently. And there’s a couple of countries who are leading data collection efforts and, for example, the French regulator and the Norway regulator have been starting this work. So we’re really trying to feed in from their experience to really improve data collection globally and see how we can better populate this database over the next coming years. Thank you.

Luis Adrian Salazar: Thank you very much. We are going to make the second question. However, I will give you time to make a final reflection. I think that we have been talking about that. If we don’t have measures, we don’t have data, it is very difficult to have information, and the most difficult is to take decisions for public policy. I was Minister of Technology of Telecommunication in Costa Rica, and I know the difficulties that represent when you try to coordinate public policy in different areas. So, if we are talking about e-waste, GHG, water consumption, it is very difficult to put all of the people in the same line. But the most important and the most difficult thing is how can we convince the President, the Prime Minister, to be the leader in the digital strategy and the environmental strategy. So, in this line, I would like for you to make a final reflection about what you recommend. How can we implement some method to translate from the technical words to the political action, in order to measure but to make a call to action and replicate along the word. Please, Laura, it is your turn.

Laura Cyron: That is a good question. Well, as I said before, one of the main issues often missing, especially in an area that is evolving that fast, is data for background. But then at the same time, what we see a lot in our work is also just a lot of capacity building about the different technologies and why we are now all of a sudden talking about digitalization, but also the impact on the environment. So, I think that is something that you need to enforce, well, not enforce, but bring about a lot more, is that there is more capacity building about how quickly technology evolves and what the impact on the environment is, especially, for example, in resource-rich countries where there is a lot of mining effects, for example. Thank you.

Jean-Manuel Canet: Thank you so much. I believe that it is important to provide some examples showing that it is already existing. You mentioned, Rosy, the example of France. France is collecting data and it is working for several years. Other countries have started to show the example, to explain how to proceed in a relatively simple manner, to provide some clear guidance, simplified guidance, I would say, and then to delegate the effort. Because, of course, we need people to help us doing this effort in every country. So, some training would Dr. Bilel Jamoussi, Dr. Laura Cyron, Mr. Jean-Manuel Canet, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Ms. Cristina Cardenas,

Participant: Dr. Rosie McDonald, Mr. Hiroshi Yamamoto, Ms. Cristina Cardenas, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Ms. Cristina Cardenas, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald,

Rosie McDonald: Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Dr. Rosie McDonald, And yeah, with the capacity building as well, I think that’s a really important aspect. We put out a survey to really try and understand what the knowledge of different regulators, for example, were on emission scope-free reporting, and a lot of them weren’t aware of the simple terms with scope 1, 2, 3 emissions, so I think that is a big gap, and it’s something we’re trying to improve and increase, and we have a new project at least, which is focusing on and piloting in a couple of countries in Asia-Pacific and Africa, and has a global component where we’ll do an e-learning course to really try and at least sensitize and improve that basic knowledge in terms of what the standards are, what the different landscape is to help collect, so yeah, I agree very much with what the colleagues have said. Thank you.

Luis Adrian Salazar: Thank you very much. I hope to accomplish with the time, Reyna, and thank you for my panel, because we practice to speak extremely fast, so this awake all of us. Just a little observation. I want to remark in the global awareness and the useful of a standard, and the action of ITU making more standard and replicate more standard is incredible, and just one recommendation is for the countries is stop to release strategies, and what mean that? We have a strategy for AI. We have a strategy for 5G. We have a strategy for the strategy, and it’s very confused for the different layers of the governments to implement solution for the different. Thank you very much for the opportunity, and please, an applause for all of my panelists. Thank you.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you so much, Luis. Thank you for doing well with the time. It’s very much appreciated. But just wanted to add a bit of what this session, because I know it was just 20 minutes of discussion and we cannot talk about everything. But one, what is important is that standards, they should be implemented. And once they are implemented, we can know where is good, where is not good, what can be changed, what works for this country, what works for others. And for that, we need implementing partners. For example, our collaboration with UNTAC, with One Planet Network, with the World Bank, or with other organizations that are working on environment, this is very important. So, when you think about standards, don’t think, oh, they are written on stone, there’s no change. No. Standards are written by people in a nice venue, but then you need to implement it. Then you need to see how we can make it easier also for the regulators, for the other stakeholders, because sometimes they are technical. So, we need also this part on the raising awareness, the campaigns, the trainings that you are working on, and also for the governments. Don’t be afraid about the results. There are no bad results. There is just results that are giving an opportunity to improve. So, now, let’s go to the next session. Fireside Chat 2, Enabling ICT-Based Solutions for Climate Action. And I would like to give the floor to Cristina Cardenas. First, we learn about the impact of ICT, the GHG emission of ICT, and now how ICT can help other sectors to reduce their GHG emission. Cristina,

Cristina Cardenas: the floor is yours. Yeah, thank you. I hope I can be as fast as the panel before was. Well, good afternoon. I’m Cristina Cardenas. I’m in charge of leading all the opportunities that we have with Coursera in different governments. And I see the good part of technology. I always see how technology can impact and need no one behind in terms of education. But this time, we are going to talk about the other side of technology, but also how technology be a solution also for improving the conditions of the environment. So, we are going to talk about two main things here, how we measure and report the environment impact of the ICT, and the new digital tools that can help and protect the environment. And we have experts. I will also give some instructions of our panel, which is like two to three minutes to present what are they doing, the field of work. I know it’s very brief time, but we also rehearsed before. And also, we are going We are going to have two questions that we want to solve in each one. So I will start with Sara Valen, a senior digital development specialist at the World Bank where she collaborates with Green Digital Business Line and Sara supports countries in expanding digital access through sustainability investment and promotes the use of technology for green solutions. I know that you are going to talk about your experience, the perspective that you have on how innovation can drive environmental impact, so the floor is yours, Sara.

Sara Ballan: Thank you so much. Can you hear me? Great. So good afternoon, everyone. My name is Sara Valen and I work at the World Bank in the digital vertical. I actually work with Yolanda over here, so it’s great to have a colleague. I lead what we call the Green Digital Business Line and my role is twofold. As you mentioned, I work together with our country clients on greening the digital investments themselves. So we don’t measure as much as ITU, but we try to actually work with the clients when they invest in digital infrastructure to also reduce the footprint. And then I work with countries on how to leverage digital technologies for various green applications, including biodiversity, climate resilience and so forth. To give you an example, we do it for many different purposes because climate change is an issue, but we also do it very much for digital inclusion. So, for example, we invest in last mile connectivity solutions and there we also invest in solar. That’s good because it reduces the footprint of telecom infrastructure, but it’s even better because it reduces the cost of the connectivity. Diesel is super expensive. Others have mentioned orange. You have to have a car to drive it. So if we use solar, we do two things at once.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you. Very fast. Into two minutes. And Sarah, can I ask you one of the questions? What are examples from the World Bank on ICT is used for climate action?

Sara Ballan: Yeah, no, good question. So I used to live in Kenya and Nairobi where I live, there are lots of floods and it creates lots of problems. In other parts of the countries, they have droughts and the farmers have to migrate because of droughts. So I have bank colleagues working on early warning systems using digital solutions. I have other bank colleagues working on apps for farmers to pick drought resistant seeds or apps that help farmers reduce the footprint of their production. So those are very practical examples together with our sectoral colleagues. So we support those, but we also work on the digital infrastructure that enable these. Another example is from Brazil. There we are working in the Amazonian region with different solutions that link to biodiversity with the Amazon IoT sensors. So very important work there. But without connectivity or data centers and so forth, there are no of these applications. So we also have investments in that kind of digital infrastructure. And the role of our teams are to link those investments in good ways to really accelerate these applications. Thank you.

Reyna Ubeda: My brother-in-law is doing that in Africa. I’m very used to that. So what type of enablers are necessary to scale these? You mentioned connectivity, you mentioned infrastructure, but what else?

Sara Ballan: Yeah. No, it’s a great question. So let me give you another example. So in Ethiopia, they also have droughts and they also have floods. And in Ethiopia, they have emergency cash transfers when that happens. So there we also invest in connectivity, data centers and so forth. But we also invest in digital public infrastructure. So ID systems, mobile money, so we can actually find the right people, get the money to them. So if we don’t have that full ecosystem, then we don’t get the applications and the impact.

Reyna Ubeda: Okay. Thank you so much. It seems very similar. What am I doing? It’s not only deploying the solution, but also a companion and guide the ones who are implemented. Thank you so much, Sara. Hiroshi? Yeah, we are neighbors now. He’s the director and head of the standardization office at Nippon Telegraph and Telecom Corporation where he leads global efforts in telecommunication standardization. He has a distinguished career in research and development, and he has represent entity in major international standard settings organizations. Today, he’s going to talk about what is he doing related to Redis Center. Thank you.

Hiroshi Yamamoto: Thank you. And I appreciate him giving me these precious opportunities. My name is Hiroshi Yamamoto from NTT Inc. Let me introduce NTT, recently has changed corporation name, NTT Inc. So our corporation name changed. And let me introduce my views from industry perspectives. The biggest entity groups started our business. We are the world’s third-largest data center providers, and recently widespread AI, such as MLMs, consumes considerable energy, an unexpectedly large size of energy required and it indicates our social responsibility also getting bigger, getting larger at the same time. So we expect ITU and these very strong partners to discuss practical measures to reduce reduce energy consumption in such a very big data center age. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. So can you talk us more about the solutions that you are implementing in there? Okay, thank you very much. As I mentioned before, now we are facing the limit of size of a single data center due to landscape and the power source limit our data center expansions from industry perspective. So we assume in the near future data center needs to be more distributed, distributed shape. In the past 10 years, most efficient investment is consolidation, consolidation in developed countries data center, but we think distributed data center requires also we need to invest developing country and need to connect these data centers at the very, very high quality and with very low energy efficiency. From technology perspective, we entity group now tackling to enable more optical technologies using end-to-end optical technologies into data center connections, even more user side we are trying. And furthermore, we are trying to, it’s very challenging, but we are trying to change current computing system into optical based, not electric, but optical computing systems that can reduce energy consumption considerably, we expect. But it’s currently R&D phase, but such kind of a combination of practical measures and this cutting edge technology can solve our problem, greenhouse gas problems we expect. Thank you very much.

Reyna Ubeda: Yeah, thank you. So we can keep generating more data. He will help us to reduce the impact on generating that data. Thank you so much. And well, I think I will continue with Carlos Riz. No. No. No. No. Okay. I will continue with Leonidas. Good evening, everybody. Can you hear me? I’m remote.

Participant: Oh, okay. That’s what I was trying to say to you. I’m going to introduce myself and I think I’m not going to be able to answer the questions that Carlos got because I’m from a different area. My name is Kim Barris. I’m leading the development of the Paris Agreement carbon mechanism and all the developments on AI and the UNFCCC. And I was trying to catch the topic. And more or less what I can say, and it’s nice to have entity here because I had several conversations with colleagues from entity. One of the things that I see in the area of data centers, I cannot measure everything. I have to focus on one area, is to establish a methodology that the ones that are doing a good job, they can create carbon emission reductions and sell these to the ones that are not doing a good job. This is an option, these methodologies. For that, we need to measure. That is clear. The other thing that I can say, because these are my areas of work, is what we are doing to accelerate climate action. UNFCCC is a political institution. We don’t implement anything, which means that if I tell you that I’m going to do natural whatever, it’s not true. But what we are doing is to, through a project that is named AI Diplomacy, we are trying to accelerate the knowledge of the negotiators in every topic. It means you have this massive delegations with 400 people that we see in COPS where they are super prepared with consultants and so on. And then you have some countries that they come there with three people, two people, and they have to catch up everything that is in several areas. That is almost impossible. Our objective is to use AI, one, to train new delegators. Second, to make easy for delegations to understand where the topics that are interesting to that nation are evolving. This is our proposal for this year. We are talking with government of Brazil in some aspects of that. They are really very interested in add technology and AI to the COP. It’s time. We are only three, four years late. That is quite good for UNFCCC. And that is our two places where we can help to reduce emissions. Okay, accelerating is not a direct exercise, of course, but I think AI diplomacy can have a good opportunity to accelerate climate action because if countries understand what they are debating, but it seems normal, but it’s not normal in many little countries, then they will be able to take action and take decisions instead of simply stopping the negotiations. Okay, thank you.

Reyna Ubeda: Yeah, well, and my question, it was not there, but based on what you mentioned and what was mentioned in the previous conversation, it is very hard to find the champions in the countries that are using what here is produced as standards. So you say that you also work in the diplomacy to reach that goal. So what do you think are the most successful or what are the conditions that a country needs to have of the people that need to be in those roles to make it happen? Because here are many who want that their standards that they create in the data that they are using are implemented. What are the main characteristics? Dr. Luis Adrián Salazar, Dr. Rosendo Manas, Dr. Rosie McDonald, Mr. Jean-Manuel Canet,

Participant: I don’t know, somebody’s putting data centers in the ocean and that is not a good idea. I think we need to measure that. It means there is no measures. That is a problem. We don’t know which actions are going to produce effect. And this is what we need to start to establish. I cannot answer the question who is doing well or not because it’s not my area. What I can say is that we need data, we need measures, and standards. OK, when you say standards, private runaway, OK? They, if they are on top, yes, they like standards because it’s making them, the competition easier. But if you are trying to create something, it’s, or you are in a developing country, I think the standard is difficult to achieve, OK? That’s why I think trying to establish baselines that indicate when you are working well or not, it’s, you know, by terabyte or by whatever measure you want to use, that can help at least to see how far are you from the optimization. And then try to find a win-win. If you spend less electricity, if you reduce waste, if you reduce heat, and you can sell that as in the carbon markets, maybe that also can be something interesting for these people to, because they need to do better, that’s clear, is what she was saying. It’s not about decision, it’s they have an opportunity.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you so much. So we have Prof. Leonidas online.

Leonidas Anthopoulos: Unfortunately, remotely. Good afternoon from Greece.

Reyna Ubeda: He is a professor of e-business at the University of Thessaly in Greece. He is leading experts in smart cities and digital governance, having led transforming projects such as Smart Cities of Trikala. He will share insights on two key deliverables that he was developed as part of his contribution to the Working Group 4 of the United Smart and Sustainable Cities Initiative. So thank you so much, Professor, for joining us remotely. So the floor is yours.

Leonidas Anthopoulos: First of all, it’s my pleasure to be with you. I would like to thank you for inviting me and take place in this very interesting and very valuable meeting. As my colleague mentioned, I am a full professor at the University of Thessaly. I’ve been working with a smart city domain since its appearance back in 2000. And I’ve been working with the ITU during the last, I think, 12 years in several, serving several roles like a rapporteur for Study Group 20, rapporteur for Study Group 5, part of the United for Smart and Sustainable Cities in two working groups. And this really makes me happy and makes me feel that I contribute somehow around all these challenges that the globe has to deal with. Indeed, these two deliverables were part of this very interesting thematic group about digital transformation for people-oriented cities. I was leading the Working Group 4 and these two deliverables actually address. Very interesting, very important aspects about cities. As the titles try to mention, the first one deals with a methodology to assess net zero progress. I will try to present them in brief later. And we also try to provide cities with useful guidelines about how they can achieve net zero objectives, how they can transform to net zero cities with the use of digital technologies. Once again, thank you for inviting me to this session. Thank you, Professor. So can you give us a practical guidance and how can we provide the cities on their digital transformation to achieve carbon net zero that you just mentioned? I could do my best to present in brief the summary of the second report about the guidelines, which actually contain information about this question that you asked me. In the context of achieving carbon net zero and creating people-centered cities, city digital transformation plays a vital role. This is why this report is very important. Cities are enabled to leverage technology and address pressing environmental challenges and optimize resource management. With digital transformation, cities can unlock new opportunities for sustainability, innovation and citizen engagement. This report actually tries to show how can cities accelerate their transition to net zero with specific guidelines about ICT to enhance city service and building sufficiency. ICT, green ICT for city economic growth and ICT to transform citizen behavior. The practical guidelines that you asked me about. can be enumerated as 10. The first one has to do with how can cities embrace digital transformation. This can happen with a comprehensive digital strategy, with the adoption of interoperable platforms for data sharing and management, with the preservation of security, flexibility, data, and technological sovereignty, and with urban operation digitization. Second, with the utilization of ICT for energy efficiency and carbon neutrality, like the integration of ICT in the energy sector, ICT for energy and resource optimization, and tracing with the ICT recycling and reuse, and carbon management digital tools integration. The third direction has to do with harnessing renewable energy sources in conjunction with the ICT networks. Fourth direction, promotion of efficient mobility with the use of the ICT for active mobility, for micromobility, EV and EV sharing. The fifth measure has to do with the adoption of circular economy practices, where the ICT are integrated in the circular economy principles. The sixth direction, encouraging carbon-related behavioral change, which has been highlighted with all the experts that participate in the working group. This can happen via leveraging ICT-enabled ICT-based economic growth to promote upskilling and behavioral change that reduce carbon impact, and with digital tools adoption that can engage communities and businesses around carbon neutrality efforts. The seventh measure, how can cities assure city-level capabilities and competencies? This can happen with organizational technical design and monitoring capabilities, and with innovation centers that incubate Sustainable Technologies. Eight, promote environmental-friendly behavior with campaigns, interventions that label positive action and with the definition of socially desirable outcomes. Nine, with coordinated efforts and inclusive policies led by government agencies. And ten, strengthen cooperation across government levels to achieve shared net zero objectives and meet the evolving carbon neutrality goals. I hope I provided answer to this question.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you so much, professor, for your participation. Thank you. Well, I think that because we are very much in time, I want to introduce Jean-Manuel Canet, Vice Chair of ITUT, Study Group 5 on Environment and Circular Economy. He will talk today about the work of the International Telecommunication Unit Study of the Group 5 on Environment and Climate. And he will also may add some points about what are they doing in Orange. OK, I understand for time reason,

Jean-Manuel Canet: I will keep it very short. So just to say that in complement to what I mentioned earlier in the first panel, it’s very important to be able to assess the positive impact in a robust manner of using ICT solutions. I can only agree with what you said earlier is very important. So the Study Group 5 has developed a methodology, a standard, L.1480, that provides a sound method to assess the actual impact of using a service. And we have recently published a new version, which is providing detailed examples, worked examples. So there is one example related to teleworking, and it shows how teleworking can help reduce GAG emissions because it cuts some travels under some specific conditions. The other example is on optimization of wind farms. And this also shows how, well, thanks to an ICT solution, we do have some benefits. And so it’s very important to be able to give some. and I think this is it, to keep it short.

Reyna Ubeda: Okay, perfect. Thank you. Well, I will ask you only one question. Why do you think it’s important to measure all this impact and bring these digital solutions? You mentioned the examples that can be…

Jean-Manuel Canet: Yeah, because we know the food, the ICT sector has its own footprint and it’s important to be able to assess, to measure the benefits that we can bring, because I believe that more and more in the coming years, these topics will be more and more looked at, because we are already facing extreme events, biodiversity loss and so on, so I do believe that in the future, these topics, they will become more and more important and so strategically for the ICT sector, it’s very important to be able to give some proofs of the benefits that it can bring.

Reyna Ubeda: Thank you so much. Well, we conclude this panel and we invite the second chat. Thank you. I think it will be… The AI, sorry. I have ITU in my, no, no, it will be, it will be nice because I know that follow COP, it’s super difficult, all the negotiations, and not even for COP, also for other assemblies, I don’t know, the assembly from ITU, for example, because they are very small delegations, or also for standards, you know, that we have 10 questions in a study group five, so how you follow all the 10 questions. So, it’s very nice, it will be nice to learn more about this tool. Thank you so much for presenting it.

Agreement points

Standardization is essential for measuring and comparing ICT environmental impact

Speakers

– Bilel Jamoussi
– Laura Cyron
– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Rosendo Manas
– Rosie McDonald

Arguments

Technical standards are essential tools for action because they give us a common foundation to measure things. So we can compare Apple to Apple

Standardization is essential for evidence-based policymaking and reliable data collection

Standards L1472 and L1410 provide frameworks for measuring CO2 footprint and biodiversity impacts

Pilot project is testing feasibility of proposed data collection framework with common definitions

Harmonizing data collection efforts globally through regulator sensitization and training

Summary

All speakers agree that standardized methodologies and frameworks are crucial for creating consistent, comparable measurements of ICT environmental impact across companies and countries

Topics

Infrastructure | Development

Partnership and collaboration are essential for scaling environmental solutions

Speakers

– Bilel Jamoussi
– Fabienne Pierre
– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Reyna Ubeda

Arguments

Standards help technologies speak the same language and support clear communication among stakeholders

Global framework for digital product information systems requires partnerships and harmonization across initiatives

Regional participation from LATAM and Africa is crucial for global standardization efforts

Standards must be implemented and tested to identify what works in different contexts

Summary

Speakers consistently emphasize that effective environmental governance requires collaborative partnerships across organizations, regions, and sectors to achieve harmonization and implementation

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

ICT can provide positive environmental solutions while having its own environmental footprint

Speakers

– Bilel Jamoussi
– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Sara Ballan
– Hiroshi Yamamoto
– Cristina Cardenas

Arguments

Digital technologies can be a powerful force for climate action through technical standards

Standard L.1480 provides methodology to assess positive impact of ICT solutions like teleworking

Early warning systems and farmer apps demonstrate practical climate applications of ICT

Distributed data centers with optical technologies can reduce energy consumption considerably

Technology can have dual impact – both positive environmental solutions and negative environmental effects

Summary

All speakers acknowledge that while ICT has environmental costs, it also offers significant opportunities for climate action and environmental solutions across various sectors

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Capacity building and training are critical for implementation

Speakers

– Laura Cyron
– Rosie McDonald
– Luis Adrian Salazar
– Participant

Arguments

Standardization is essential for evidence-based policymaking and reliable data collection

Capacity building needed for regulators who lack basic knowledge of emission scope reporting

Need to translate technical standards into political action and presidential leadership

AI diplomacy can accelerate climate action by training negotiators and improving understanding

Summary

Speakers agree that successful implementation requires extensive capacity building, training, and knowledge transfer, particularly for developing countries and government officials

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Similar viewpoints

These ITU representatives share a coordinated approach to developing and implementing standardized measurement frameworks for ICT environmental impact, working across different bureaus but toward common goals

Speakers

– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Rosendo Manas
– Rosie McDonald

Arguments

ITU developed goal for ICT sector to reduce GHG emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2020

Pilot project is testing feasibility of proposed data collection framework with common definitions

Harmonizing data collection efforts globally through regulator sensitization and training

Topics

Infrastructure | Development

Both speakers emphasize that comprehensive digital infrastructure ecosystems are necessary for effective climate solutions, whether at national or city levels

Speakers

– Sara Ballan
– Leonidas Anthopoulos

Arguments

Digital public infrastructure including ID systems and mobile money enables climate response programs

Cities can achieve net zero through comprehensive digital strategies and interoperable platforms

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognize the critical gap between technical solutions and political implementation, emphasizing the need for better communication and training for decision-makers

Speakers

– Luis Adrian Salazar
– Participant

Arguments

Need to translate technical standards into political action and presidential leadership

AI diplomacy can accelerate climate action by training negotiators and improving understanding

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Unexpected consensus

Developing countries as key stakeholders rather than just beneficiaries

Speakers

– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Laura Cyron
– Luis Adrian Salazar

Arguments

Regional participation from LATAM and Africa is crucial for global standardization efforts

Standardization is essential for evidence-based policymaking and reliable data collection

Need to translate technical standards into political action and presidential leadership

Explanation

Unexpectedly, there was strong consensus that developing countries should be active participants in creating standards and solutions, not just recipients. This represents a shift from traditional development approaches toward more inclusive governance models

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Economic incentives as drivers for environmental performance

Speakers

– Sara Ballan
– Participant
– Hiroshi Yamamoto

Arguments

World Bank invests in solar-powered connectivity solutions that reduce costs and environmental footprint

Carbon markets and win-win solutions can incentivize better environmental performance

Distributed data centers with optical technologies can reduce energy consumption considerably

Explanation

There was unexpected alignment on using economic incentives and cost savings as primary drivers for environmental improvements, rather than relying solely on regulatory compliance or moral imperatives

Topics

Economic | Development

Overall assessment

Summary

Strong consensus emerged around the need for standardized measurement frameworks, collaborative partnerships, and capacity building for environmental governance in the ICT sector. Speakers agreed that ICT has both environmental costs and solution potential, requiring balanced approaches.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with complementary rather than conflicting viewpoints. The implications suggest a mature, coordinated approach to ICT environmental governance is emerging, with clear roles for different stakeholders and recognition that technical solutions must be paired with political and economic incentives for successful implementation.

Different viewpoints

Standards implementation approach for developing countries

Speakers

– Participant
– Jean-Manuel Canet

Arguments

Carbon markets and win-win solutions can incentivize better environmental performance

Standards L1472 and L1410 provide frameworks for measuring CO2 footprint and biodiversity impacts

Summary

The Participant argues that standards can be difficult for developing countries to achieve and suggests market-based incentives, while Canet emphasizes the importance of standardized frameworks with regional participation

Topics

Development | Economic

Focus on measurement versus implementation

Speakers

– Laura Cyron
– Luis Adrian Salazar

Arguments

Standardization is essential for evidence-based policymaking and reliable data collection

Countries should stop releasing multiple strategies and focus on integrated implementation

Summary

Cyron emphasizes the need for more standardized data collection and measurement, while Salazar argues countries should stop creating strategies and focus on actual implementation

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected differences

Role of standards in developing countries

Speakers

– Participant
– Jean-Manuel Canet

Arguments

Carbon markets and win-win solutions can incentivize better environmental performance

Regional participation from LATAM and Africa is crucial for global standardization efforts

Explanation

Unexpected disagreement emerged where the Participant suggested standards might be problematic for developing countries (‘if you are in a developing country, I think the standard is difficult to achieve’), while Canet emphasized strong participation from these regions in standards development. This reveals tension between inclusive standards development and practical implementation challenges

Topics

Development | Economic

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed relatively low levels of direct disagreement, with most speakers aligned on the importance of measuring ICT environmental impact and using digital solutions for climate action. Main disagreements centered on implementation approaches and the role of standards versus market mechanisms

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. The implications suggest that while there is broad consensus on goals, there are important nuances in how to achieve them, particularly regarding developing country participation and the balance between standardization and practical implementation. This could affect the effectiveness of global initiatives if not properly addressed through inclusive dialogue and flexible implementation approaches

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

These ITU representatives share a coordinated approach to developing and implementing standardized measurement frameworks for ICT environmental impact, working across different bureaus but toward common goals

Speakers

– Jean-Manuel Canet
– Rosendo Manas
– Rosie McDonald

Arguments

ITU developed goal for ICT sector to reduce GHG emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2020

Pilot project is testing feasibility of proposed data collection framework with common definitions

Harmonizing data collection efforts globally through regulator sensitization and training

Topics

Infrastructure | Development

Both speakers emphasize that comprehensive digital infrastructure ecosystems are necessary for effective climate solutions, whether at national or city levels

Speakers

– Sara Ballan
– Leonidas Anthopoulos

Arguments

Digital public infrastructure including ID systems and mobile money enables climate response programs

Cities can achieve net zero through comprehensive digital strategies and interoperable platforms

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognize the critical gap between technical solutions and political implementation, emphasizing the need for better communication and training for decision-makers

Speakers

– Luis Adrian Salazar
– Participant

Arguments

Need to translate technical standards into political action and presidential leadership

AI diplomacy can accelerate climate action by training negotiators and improving understanding

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Key takeaways

Digital technologies can serve dual roles as both contributors to environmental challenges (2-4% of global GHG emissions) and powerful solutions for climate action across sectors

Standardization and harmonized data collection are essential for measuring ICT environmental impact and enabling evidence-based policymaking, particularly through ITU standards like L1472 and L1410

The ICT sector must reduce GHG emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2020 levels, requiring coordinated global efforts and standardized measurement frameworks

Digital product information systems and sustainability passports are critical tools for enabling circular economy and transparency in global value chains

Capacity building is urgently needed, especially for developing countries and regulators who lack basic knowledge of emission scope reporting and environmental data collection

Smart cities can achieve net zero through comprehensive digital strategies, ICT-enabled energy optimization, and behavioral change programs supported by digital tools

Successful implementation requires translating technical standards into political action, with presidential/prime ministerial leadership and integrated rather than fragmented policy approaches

Partnership and collaboration across organizations (ITU, UNEP, World Bank, UNCTAD) is essential for scaling digital solutions and harmonizing global frameworks

Resolutions and action items

Launch pilot project to test feasibility of proposed data collection framework with common definitions across ICT sectors and regions

Develop new GHG emission trajectories for ICT sector extending to 2035-2040 to address AI and emerging technology challenges

Implement capacity building programs including e-learning courses to sensitize regulators on emission scope reporting and environmental data collection

Continue development of global framework for digital product information systems in collaboration with One Planet Network, UNEP, and other partners

Expand regional participation from LATAM and Africa in standardization efforts through Study Group 5 working groups

Pilot AI diplomacy project to train climate negotiators and improve understanding of technical topics for developing country delegations

Test and implement ITU standards L1472 and L1410 for measuring CO2 footprint and biodiversity impacts across different country contexts

Develop carbon market methodologies to incentivize better environmental performance in data center operations

Unresolved issues

How to effectively translate technical standards into political action and secure presidential/prime ministerial leadership for integrated digital-environmental strategies

Addressing the challenge of fragmented policy approaches where countries have separate strategies for AI, 5G, and other technologies instead of integrated approaches

Scaling digital solutions beyond pilot projects to achieve global implementation, particularly in resource-constrained developing countries

Balancing the growing energy demands of AI and data centers with sustainability goals and emission reduction targets

Ensuring that digital product information systems and sustainability passports can interoperate across different regional and sectoral initiatives

Determining optimal approaches for distributed data center architecture to reduce energy consumption while maintaining service quality

Establishing baseline measurements for countries and organizations that currently lack environmental data collection capabilities

Suggested compromises

Focus on win-win solutions where environmental improvements (reduced electricity use, waste reduction, heat reduction) can be monetized through carbon markets to incentivize adoption

Implement simplified guidance and training programs to make technical standards more accessible to regulators and policymakers with limited technical background

Use solar-powered connectivity solutions that simultaneously address digital inclusion goals and environmental sustainability by reducing costs and emissions

Develop flexible standards that can be adapted to different country contexts and capacity levels rather than one-size-fits-all approaches

Combine practical immediate measures (like energy efficiency improvements) with longer-term R&D investments (like optical computing systems) to address both short and long-term sustainability goals

Establish regional coordination mechanisms to balance global standardization needs with local implementation realities and capacity constraints

Before COP28, I don’t think digital was one of the topics on the agenda of negotiators. So we started this in COP28 in Dubai, COP29 with the declaration in Azerbaijan, in Baku, and we have a plan in working with Brazil for COP30.