Workshop 4: NRI-Assembly: How can the national and regional IGFs contribute to the implementation of the UN Global Digital Compact?

Summary

This discussion focused on how National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives (NRIs) can contribute to implementing the UN Global Digital Compact (GDC), which was adopted in September as part of the Pact for the Future. The session brought together representatives from the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies and the IGF Secretariat to explore practical mechanisms for translating global commitments into local action.

Chengetai Masango from the IGF Secretariat emphasized that NRIs are uniquely positioned to localize global principles due to their proximity to local realities and multi-stakeholder approach. He outlined three key areas where NRIs can contribute: localizing global principles through inclusive dialogue, driving capacity building to address regional digital divides, and channeling grassroots perspectives into global policy discussions. Isabel De Sola from the UN presented the bureaucratic framework for GDC implementation, including a tracking portal for internal UN monitoring and a proposed public-facing implementation map where stakeholders can register their contributions.

Several challenges emerged during the discussion, including concerns about volunteer workload and the risk of turning collaborative efforts into compliance exercises. Participants emphasized the need for coordination and guidance to ensure NRI outcomes reach appropriate policy desks, while avoiding duplication with existing initiatives like the WSIS stocktaking platform. Questions were raised about accessibility for non-UN agencies and the importance of multilingual approaches to ensure global participation.

The session concluded with draft messages emphasizing that NRIs should act as catalysts for change by adapting global principles to local contexts, serving as feedback loops for communities, and utilizing available digital tools for collaboration. The discussion highlighted the critical role of NRIs in bridging the gap between global digital governance commitments and local implementation realities.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Introduction of New NRIs and Community Building**: The session welcomed new National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives (NRIs), specifically highlighting Joshua Alinho from the Basque community who is working to establish an NRI for the Basque linguistic and cultural community across different governmental administrations.

– **Global Digital Compact Implementation Framework**: Isabel De Sola presented the UN’s systematic approach to implementing the Global Digital Compact, including a tracking portal with KPIs and milestones, and a proposed implementation map that would allow stakeholders to register their contributions and make global initiatives visible at local levels.

– **NRI Role as Local Catalysts and Feedback Loops**: Chengetai Masango emphasized how NRIs can serve as essential bridges between global policy and local implementation by contextualizing global principles, building local capacity, addressing regional digital divides, and channeling grassroots perspectives back to global forums.

– **Practical Challenges and Resource Concerns**: Participants raised concerns about the volunteer nature of NRI work, potential compliance burdens, accessibility of tools beyond UN agencies, and the risk of duplicating existing reporting mechanisms while ensuring meaningful stakeholder engagement.

– **Coordination and Data Collection Strategies**: Discussion focused on how to effectively collect and utilize data from NRIs, including the need for structured templates, targeted questions rather than generic requests, and coordination between various existing platforms (WSIS, Partner2Connect, etc.) to avoid fragmentation.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to explore practical mechanisms for National and Regional Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) to contribute to implementing the UN Global Digital Compact at local, national, and global levels. The session sought to generate actionable recommendations and messaging for how the 176 NRIs worldwide can translate global digital governance commitments into meaningful local action while feeding grassroots insights back into global policy processes.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a collaborative and constructive tone throughout, characterized by genuine engagement between UN officials and NRI representatives. It began with an informative and somewhat formal presentation style but evolved into an interactive brainstorming session with practical, sometimes critical questions about implementation challenges. The tone remained professional yet candid, with participants expressing both enthusiasm for the opportunities and realistic concerns about resource constraints and bureaucratic complexity. The session concluded on a positive note with commitment to ongoing collaboration and refinement of the proposed mechanisms.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Moderator (Sumeya)** – Remote moderator with YouThink

– **Vlad Ivanets** – Session moderator and message drafter

– **Sandra Hoferichter** – NRI community representative, session organizer

– **Speaker (Joshua Alinho)** – Manager of .eus top-level domain for the Basque linguistic and cultural community, working to establish NRI for the Basque community

– **Mark Carvell** – Main session moderator, workshop facilitator

– **Chengetai Masango** – Head of office for the UN Secretariat for the IGF

– **Isabel De Sola** – Head of the coordination team in the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies, based in Geneva

– **Giacomo Mazzone** – EuroDIG board member and expert for the Italian IGF

– **Peter Koch** – Head of the Secretariat of the German IGF, works for DENIC

– **Octavian Shofransky** – Digital Governance Advisor at the Council of Europe

– **Audience** – Multiple unidentified audience members who asked questions or made comments

**Additional speakers:**

– **Tatiana Tropina** – Member of the Dutch NLIGF and EuroDIG, representing dynamic coalitions

– **Paul Blaker** – Representative of the UK government

# Comprehensive Report: National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives’ Role in Global Digital Compact Implementation

## Executive Summary

This session brought together representatives from the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies, the IGF Secretariat, and National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives (NRIs) to explore practical mechanisms for implementing the UN Global Digital Compact (GDC) at local, national, and global levels. The discussion focused on how NRIs can contribute to GDC implementation while addressing practical challenges around resources, coordination, and accessibility of implementation tools.

The session featured presentations on the UN’s systematic approach to GDC implementation and the IGF Secretariat’s vision for NRI contributions, followed by substantive discussion about practical implementation challenges. Key outcomes included draft messages positioning NRIs as catalysts for local implementation and feedback providers to global processes, alongside concrete next steps for developing implementation tools and coordination mechanisms.

## Session Context and New NRI Introductions

The discussion was moderated by Mark Carvell, with Vlad Ivanets serving as session moderator and message drafter, and Sandra Hoferichter representing the NRI community as session organiser. Sandra welcomed efforts to form new NRIs and offered assistance to those interested in establishing initiatives.

A significant portion of the session opening was dedicated to Joshua Alinho’s presentation about establishing an NRI for the Basque linguistic and cultural community. Joshua, who manages the .eus domain, explained the unique challenge of creating an NRI for a community distributed across different governmental administrations – the Basque provinces in Spain, the Basque department in France, and Navarre. He outlined how this distributed governmental structure creates both opportunities and challenges for internet governance coordination across the Basque cultural and linguistic community.

Sandra emphasized the IGF Secretariat’s support for such initiatives and encouraged others interested in forming NRIs to reach out for assistance and guidance through the established processes.

## Global Digital Compact Implementation Framework

### UN Systematic Approach

Isabel De Sola from the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies presented the comprehensive framework for GDC implementation, explaining that the Compact forms part of the broader Pact for the Future. She outlined the UN’s systematic approach involving steering committee structures with working groups designed to ensure tracking and accountability.

Isabel described two distinct systems: an internal UN tracking portal with detailed KPIs and milestones for monitoring progress across UN agencies and member states, which she characterized as following a “Soviet-style planning” approach with comprehensive measurement and reporting requirements. More importantly for external stakeholders, she presented plans for a public-facing GDC implementation map that would allow non-UN actors to register their contributions to GDC objectives.

The implementation map is intended to serve multiple functions: enabling stakeholders to showcase their work, identifying trends and gaps in implementation, and connecting local initiatives with existing UN programmes. Isabel emphasized that this tool would be accessible to stakeholders for direct use, addressing potential concerns about bureaucratic barriers.

### Timeline and Development Process

Isabel provided specific timeline details: a functional version of the implementation map should be available by the WSIS high-level forum in July, with full operational capacity by the WSIS review in December. She announced that focus groups would begin the following week to stress-test the concept and ensure the tool meets stakeholder needs.

## IGF Secretariat Vision for NRI Contributions

Chengetai Masango from the IGF Secretariat outlined how NRIs can contribute to GDC implementation, emphasizing their role in localizing global principles within unique cultural, economic, and regulatory environments. He highlighted NRIs’ capacity to foster inclusive dialogue bringing together diverse local stakeholders, including marginalized communities whose voices might not reach global forums.

Chengetai emphasized NRIs’ potential for driving capacity building programmes to address regional digital divides and their unique position to channel local insights, innovations, and concerns into global policy discussions. He noted that the 176 NRIs worldwide represent a significant network for translating global commitments into local action while providing feedback on implementation gaps and opportunities.

The IGF Secretariat’s perspective positioned NRIs as both implementers and active contributors to policy development through their feedback and reporting functions, creating dynamic connections between local communities and global governance processes.

## Discussion and Stakeholder Concerns

### Resource Constraints and Volunteer Sustainability

Peter Koch from the German IGF Secretariat raised concerns about the sustainability of increased expectations on volunteer-driven NRIs. He warned against transforming collaborative dialogue into compliance exercises, noting that most NRIs operate on volunteer time with limited resources. Koch questioned whether KPI-focused approaches might create inappropriate burdens on community-driven initiatives.

Chengetai acknowledged these concerns while pointing to existing support mechanisms, including small grants programmes for NRIs in developing economies. However, the fundamental challenge of managing increased expectations for volunteer organizations remained a key discussion point.

### Accessibility and Implementation Tools

Giacomo Mazzone, representing EuroDIG and the Italian IGF, raised questions about accessibility of implementation tools for non-UN agencies. He expressed concern about whether stakeholders would need to navigate UN bureaucracy to participate in implementation tracking, which could create barriers for grassroots organizations.

Giacomo also provided feedback about the GDC endorsement process, noting that organizations that endorsed the GDC haven’t received follow-up information about implementation opportunities. He advocated for more targeted, specific questions to NRIs rather than generic requests for input, arguing that focused inquiries would yield more relevant responses.

Isabel acknowledged these accessibility concerns and emphasized efforts to make tools genuinely stakeholder-friendly rather than institutionally focused.

### Coordination and Duplication Concerns

Paul Blaker from the UK government raised questions about coordination between multiple similar initiatives, specifically asking about paragraph 71 of the GDC and how to avoid asking stakeholders to provide data to numerous separate platforms. He warned that duplication could lead to suboptimal outcomes for all initiatives.

Isabel acknowledged these concerns and outlined efforts to create integration between existing databases like the WSIS stocktaking platform and Partner2Connect initiatives to reduce duplicate data entry requirements.

### Policy Impact and Feedback Loops

Tatiana Tropina, representing the Dutch NLIGF and EuroDIG, identified the challenge of ensuring that local and regional outcomes reach appropriate policy desks and influence global discussions. She highlighted the gap between local action and global policy impact that has faced the IGF since its inception.

This concern prompted discussion about the need for structured coordination to ensure NRI outcomes are properly channeled into policy processes, extending beyond data collection to meaningful connections between grassroots insights and policy development.

### Regional Organization Integration

Octavian Shofransky from the Council of Europe emphasized the importance of integrating regional organizations into GDC implementation efforts. He highlighted that regional bodies bring significant experience and resources that could enhance implementation while avoiding duplication of efforts.

### Multilingual Accessibility

Mark Carvell raised questions about ensuring multilingual accessibility for implementation tools and platforms, addressing potential English-language bias in data collection that could limit global participation and skew results toward English-speaking communities.

## Draft Messages and Outcomes

Vlad Ivanets presented three draft messages developed from the session discussion:

1. **NRIs as Catalysts**: NRIs should act as catalysts for change by adapting global principles to local contexts, ensuring that implementation reflects community needs and cultural specificities.

2. **Feedback Loop Function**: NRIs should serve as feedback loops providing publicly available reports and capacity building that channel local insights into global policy discussions.

3. **Digital Tool Utilization**: NRIs should utilize available digital tools and platforms for collaboration and visibility, contributing to global coordination while maintaining local autonomy.

Sandra Hoferichter outlined the process for refining and finalizing session messages, including incorporation of feedback from the discussion and preparation for dissemination at the global IGF and other policy forums.

## Concrete Next Steps

### Immediate Development Activities

Focus groups on the GDC implementation map were scheduled to begin the following week to stress-test the concept and ensure stakeholder utility. This represents a concrete step toward operationalizing the frameworks discussed.

### IGF Integration

The IGF Secretariat committed to compiling input from all work streams on how they can contribute to GDC implementation for inclusion in the annual report, ensuring coherent messaging across IGF activities.

### Template and Guidance Development

Participants identified the need for templates and guidelines to help NRIs structure their contributions and ensure consistent messaging while respecting NRI autonomy.

### Message Refinement Process

Sandra clarified that the draft messages would be refined after the workshop, incorporating feedback from the discussion and preparing them for broader dissemination through IGF channels and policy forums.

## Ongoing Challenges and Considerations

The discussion revealed several ongoing challenges requiring continued attention:

**Accessibility Implementation**: Ensuring implementation tools remain accessible to non-UN agencies without creating bureaucratic barriers represents a fundamental design challenge that could determine stakeholder engagement success.

**Resource Sustainability**: Balancing accountability requirements with the volunteer-driven nature of NRI work remains a critical challenge for sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement.

**Coordination Complexity**: Managing coordination between multiple platforms, processes, and stakeholder groups while maintaining coherent, accessible participation systems requires ongoing attention.

**Timeline Integration**: Completing the implementation map by December while integrating with WSIS review requirements represents practical coordination challenges requiring resolution.

**Multilingual Implementation**: Ensuring multilingual accessibility of tools and platforms to avoid English-language bias requires concrete solutions for equitable global participation.

## Conclusion

This session provided a practical foundation for understanding how NRIs can contribute to GDC implementation while addressing real-world challenges around resources, coordination, and accessibility. The combination of strategic presentations and substantive stakeholder feedback created a realistic assessment of both opportunities and constraints in translating global digital governance commitments into local action.

The session’s value lay in its honest exploration of implementation challenges alongside concrete proposals for moving forward. The willingness of participants to address practical constraints while maintaining commitment to multi-stakeholder approaches provides a solid foundation for developing effective coordination mechanisms.

The draft messages and next steps emerging from the session reflect a balanced approach that recognizes NRIs’ unique value as both local implementers and global feedback providers, while acknowledging the need for sustainable, accessible mechanisms that support rather than burden volunteer-driven initiatives. The focus groups and template development activities represent concrete steps toward operationalizing these concepts in ways that serve both local communities and global coordination needs.

Moderator: We will be starting. Thank you very much. Good morning, my name is Sumeya. I’m with YouThink and I will be the remote moderator online. I will just read the session rules and then I will give the floor to Vlad. So please enter with your full name if you’re online. To ask a question, raise hand using the Zoom function. You will be unmuted when the floor is given to you. When speaking, switch on the video, state your name and affiliation. Do not share links to the Zoom meetings, not even with your colleagues. Thank you very much.

Vlad Ivanets: Vlad, the floor is yours. Yeah, thank you. Hello everyone, my name is Vlad Ivanets. I’m one of the moderator for this session, but today I will mostly draft the messages of the session. And the main moderator will be Mark Carvell. And also we have the intervention of Sandra. So we can start the session. And please, Sandra, you can give your open remarks.

Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you. Thank you, Vlad. Thank you, Mark, first of all, for organizing the session and for the speaker to be here in person, that’s much appreciated. And also for everyone who is in the room. You know that usually we made a NRI assembly in the pre-events part, but since one of the workshops this year was so topical to the NRIs discussion, we thought let’s not duplicate discussions and let’s use our tight schedule that we all have this year with the IGF and the EuroDIG so close. Let’s use that wisely and make one of the workshops just the NRI. But we would like to continue with one tradition, at least to welcome new NRIs or NRIs that are just in formation. And I’m very happy to welcome in our group, Yuzo Valino from the Basque region. He is here and maybe Yuzo. Joshua, you would like to say a few words to where you are at the moment so that people have a face to you. Thank you. Thank you, Sandra.

Speaker: Good morning, everyone. I’m Joshua Alinho from the Basque community. As Sandra said, I’m the manager of .eus, which is the top-level domain for the Basque linguistic and cultural community online. We are trying to establish the NRI for the Basque community. Right now, we are in conversations with the Basque government. For us, having an NRI created for the Basque community will be interesting because the Basque community is distributed in different governmental administrations, so we are trying to figure that out. We’ll let you know if it’s a success or not. Thank you.

Sandra Hoferichter: Thank you very much, Joshua. I’m sorry if I pronounced your name not rightly. But let me ask, is there any other NRI information in the room that are not yet well-known to this community? Is there anyone else who is considering setting up an NRI? I’m asking because we would, of course, be happy to help, assist, to get in contact with you. Then, just raise your hand if this is the case. No, it seems not. But I would like to invite you, if you hear from any initiative that is about thinking, forming an NRI, please ask them to reach out to us, apart from reaching out, of course, to the global IGF. But we would really like to get engaged with you, to assist, to make you public to the community, and basically collaborate with you and help wherever we can. Sometimes it’s just us answering questions. I had a call with Joshua, and we also discussed some first things. And now we are discussing this very timely topic of the follow-up on the Global Digital Compact. Our session organizing team has prepared guiding questions and has invited some speakers. And without further ado, I hand over to a session moderator, which is Mark Carvell. Mark, the floor is yours.

Mark Carvell: Thank you very much, Sandra, and welcome everybody to this workshop on Global Digital Compact implementation. Everybody in the room and also online, we hope very much to have a very interactive brainstorming workshop here with the aim of focusing on practical ways in which we can contribute to the Global Digital Compact process. Just a quick reminder, the Global Digital Compact was agreed by the UN member states in September last year as part of the Pact for the Future. It included objectives on bridging digital divides, expanding the digital economy inclusion, fostering a safe, secure and inclusive digital space that upholds human rights, interoperable data governance and AI governance for humanity’s benefit. This workshop takes forward previous UADIC discussions about UN processes, digital cooperation, and last year in Vilnius on the Global Digital Compact, we had messages agreed there to support the aims of the compact and a commitment to consider how the national and regional IGFs can contribute to the implementation of its commitments, commitments to action agreed by the member states. So this session… This workshop invites NRIs and their stakeholder constituents across Europe and beyond to explore practical mechanisms for translating the commitments in the Compact into national and regional action, to share best practice and identify opportunities for improving cooperation amongst the NRI community across the world. What are there, about 170 NRIs? 175, is it? So we’ve got two important experts right at the heart of this GDC process to help us and set the scene and comment on our objectives. We have Isabel De Sola, head of the coordination team in the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies, you’re based in Geneva, and Chengetai Masango, head of office for the UN Secretariat for the IGF, who I’m sure many of us know well from all the previous IGF processes and events. So we’ll invite them to speak first of all, and then we’ll open the floor for an interactive discussion that aims really to generate messages from this workshop with recommendations to implement in practical ways the Global Digital Compact. So we have one guiding question, I don’t know if it’s, well I’ll read it so it goes on the screen. The question is, in what specific ways can the NRIs collaborate to support and assist the implementation of the Global Digital Compact at the national and global levels? So that’s our guiding question, our focus for this workshop. So without further ado, I’ll turn to Isabel De Sola, or Chengetai, sorry. Chengetai, okay. Okay, to Chengetai first of all, to present some opening remarks.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you. Thank you, Chengetai. Okay, good morning, everybody. Today, I’ll just give my take on the discussion which represents a critical intersection in our journey towards a better digital future for the role of national, regional, and youth internet governance forums. In bringing this ambitious vision of the UN Global Digital Compact to life, the Global Digital Compact states to foster an open, free, secure, and human-centric digital world. The GDC vision requires robust mechanisms for implementation at all levels, and this is where the unique strengths of the NRIs as dynamic local, national, and regional multi-stakeholder initiatives becomes indispensable. Before we delve into the role of the NRIs, let’s briefly recall what the UN Global Digital Compact sets out to achieve. It is a comprehensive framework aiming to ensure that digital technologies benefit all of humanity. Key objectives include closing digital divides and connecting the unconnected, a foundational step for equitable participation in the digital age. It also champions promoting an internet that is open, free, secure, rights-based, and inclusive, fostering trust and security. in the digital space, for example, by addressing online harms and promoting data protection. Furthermore, it emphasizes ensuring that digital technologies, including rapidly advancing fields like artificial intelligence, are governed in a way that respects human rights, promotes sustainable development, and mitigates potential risks. Critically, the Compact reaffirms the importance of the multi-stakeholder approach to digital governance, a principle that lies at the very heart of the IGF and the national regional initiatives, recognizing that collaborative efforts are essential for effective digital governance. National and regional internet governance forums are not just smaller versions of the global IGF. They are vibrant bottom-up platforms that bring together diverse stakeholders, governments, the private sector, civil society, and the technical community, and academia within specific geographical contexts. Their power lies in the proximity to local realities and their ability to convene these varied voices to discuss and address internet governance issues that directly impact their communities. NRIs understand the nuances of their local digital landscapes and specific cultural contexts, the economic conditions, the existing infrastructure, and the unique regulatory environments. They are acutely aware of the specific challenges their populations face, from the digital literacy gaps in one region to cybersecurity threats targeting local businesses in another, and the unique opportunities that are available. This grassroots connection and the inherent multi-stakeholder DNA and their agility makes them uniquely positioned to translate global commitments into tangible local actions and impact, ensuring that global policies are not just adopted but adapted and owned locally. So how can local and regional multi-stakeholder initiatives specifically contribute to implementing the Global Digital Compact? I see several key areas building on their inherent strengths. First, localizing global principles and fostering inclusive dialogue. NRIs can take the broad objectives of the Digital Compact, such as promoting digital trust or ensuring human rights online, and contextualize them. For example, one NRI in a developing region might focus on how to build trust in digital financial services, while another might tackle complex issues around AI ethics in local governance. They can host inclusive dialogues that ensure all voices, especially those marginalized and underrepresented groups such as indigenous communities, persons with disabilities, rural populations, are heard in the discussion about how the Compact should be implemented locally. This directly supports the Compact’s aim to leave no one behind and ensure that local needs shape local solutions. Second, by driving capacity building and addressing regional digital divides, NRIs are ideal platforms for raising awareness about the Compact and building the capacity of local stakeholders to engage with its provisions. This could involve organizing workshops for local journalists on combating disinformation, training small and medium enterprises on data protection principles aligned with the Compact, or developing digital literacy programs for seniors or youth. They can identify specific regional digital divides and and in access to affordable broadband skills to navigate the digital world safely or the availability of locally relevant content and facilitate collaborative multi-stakeholder efforts to develop and implement targeted solutions, thereby directly contributing directly to the compact’s goal of universal connectivity and digital inclusion. Thirdly, channeling grassroots perspectives and innovative solutions into global policy. At the IGF, we say that wisdom can come from any place, any corner. The insights, challenges, best practices and innovative solutions identified at the local and regional level are invaluable. NRIs can act as crucial feedback loops, systematically collecting and challenging these on-the-ground realities and diverse regional perspectives into the global IGF and other fora. This could be through dedicated NRI reports, active participation of NRI representatives in the global discussions or showcasing local success stories. This ensures that the ongoing evolution and implementation of the digital compact remains grounded in the lived experiences of people worldwide and benefits from the diverse innovations emerging from different regions. We are fortunate to now have 176 NRIs covering all the main regions of the world and the majority of the countries. So, in conclusion, national and regional IGF. IGFs are not just participants in the global governance ecosystem, they are essential enablers and catalysts for change. Their ability to foster local dialogue, build capacity, innovate and connect grassroots realities with global policy makes them vital partners in realizing the ambitious goals of the UN Global Compact. We at the IGF are therefore committed in strengthening and supporting NRIs, empowering them to play their full part in shaping the digital future that is truly open, inclusive and beneficial to all. And thank you, I was one minute over but you’ll forgive me.

Mark Carvell: We forgive you Chengetai, especially after such an impressive overview of how NRIs can contribute and you made so many important points about localizing global perspectives and contextualizing commitments in the compact with regard to local conditions, local regulatory environments and so on. And ensuring marginalized and under-representative communities are involved in this process. And ensuring that local solutions are developed in such a way that fits those and serves the best interests of those communities. And ensuring grassroots perspectives, I think these were all very valid, important points. Okay, I’ll turn now to Isabel to follow up as our guest speaker from Ireland.

Isabel De Sola: Thank you so much Mark and Vlad and for the wonderful invitation to be here. This is my first EuroDIG, so it’s very exciting to come. I had heard quite a lot about you from Chengetai since 2018, and it’s wonderful to come and listen to the different regional accents that there are across the IGF network. Each time I come, I learn more. I want to congratulate Chengetai and ask you to please send me your statement in writing because I couldn’t agree more. Chengetai and I have had a couple of brainstorms about this very question. How can we get the NRIs more involved in GDC implementation? And I think all of those answers, we couldn’t agree with them more. Now I come as a voice after Chengetai’s high flying and philosophical reflection, I come as the voice of the bureaucracy, so you’ll forgive me. I represent a small office that has the task of taking forward implementation of the Global Digital Compact together with our co-chairs at the ITU. And what I’d like to do in the minutes that I’ve been given is tell you a little bit about how the Secretary General, Oded, and the ITU have been working to set up a process for implementation of the GDC. And then I’d like to show you a couple of concrete ways that we hope that this process could collaborate and benefit and listen to and capture information from the grassroots level and the NRIs. So on the screen, you see the scene on the eve of the approval of the Pact for the Future. And it’s critical, I think, as the WSIS review progresses to remember that the GDC is part of this broader umbrella called the Pact for the Future that was carefully crafted and corresponds to a political agenda that was born in New York. And so if we’re speaking about accents, sometimes the GDC has a New York style accent. It’s part of a big umbrella that has six pillars, and those six pillars are meant to drag multilateralism, the UN, into the future. There’s a pillar on youth, on climate change, on reforming financial architectures, on peace and security, on digital technologies, and I’m forgetting one, development of course, and the idea of the pact was to update all of these pillars and to find a way for them to be more interlocking or to connect across their silos so that they would reflect on the ways that each of these issues has an impact on the others. So if we go to the next slide, I’ll show you where the bureaucracy begins. So the SG, I think on the day after that the pact was approved, called into being a steering committee for implementation of the pact. So the UN architecture moved very quickly from supporting the dialogue and the negotiation to figuring out how we would deliver on this promise of an interlocking political agenda. And the SG called into question a steering committee and the steering committee broke up into working groups, one for each pillar of the pact, and the working groups would have the task of giving momentum, pushing forward, tracking, and raising awareness for each of the pillars of the pact. So there’s one working group called digital technologies and it’s focused on chapter three of the pact, which is about science, technology, and innovation, and the annex, one of two annexes of the pact, which is the GDC. And it is ODET and the ITU that co-chair this working group and today it has 35 member agencies that have signed up to be a part of it. And I must admit that it is a little bit Soviet-style planning and I say that in the halls of the Council of Europe where there’s great appreciation, I think, for Soviet-style planning. But we’ve started out looking from the center of the UN and if you show the next slide, Vlad, what we’ve been working on is a very actually quite rigorous tracking system that takes all of the paragraphs of the pact and assigns responsibility for either tracking, supporting, or leading on their delivery. And this has been a seven-month process of internal planning and I’d like to use two important words, so rigor and accountability. What you see on the screen is an online portal that was created by the SG’s office and where all of the entire UN system has been asked to contribute very specifically what are you doing for each of these paragraphs. If we go to the next slide, I’d be happy to share these slides afterwards, we’ve been asked to articulate milestones and key performance indicators and we’ve been asked to step forward as agencies or office and say I am responsible for these specific things. I find that exciting and this is the excel nerd in me because in a context, a very difficult context for multilateralism, what we’re doing here is holding ourselves accountable. The UN as everyone knows has evolved over the years, we’re currently facing a very difficult financial panorama and in that same context, we’re also holding ourselves to the highest standards of accountability after delivering this agenda. I think it’s also helpful in the sense that it integrates what already exists, so member states have been very clear during the negotiation of the GDC and also at the recent CSTD meeting that GDC implementation needs to build on those projects, programs and initiatives that already exist. So this tracking portal invites these existing projects, for example the IGF dynamic coalitions as well to to become visible and to be part of this movement of accountability and rigor. So let me go through a couple more slides of how I think that, how I would like to invite us to collaborate together. So paragraph 71 of the GDC mandated a GDC implementation map to come into being. And the map is going in the same trend I think of rigor and accountability and visibility for what we’re doing. There have been long conversations in the working group on digital technologies about how this map should look. We’ve developed some concepts and what you see on the screen is a mock-up of how it could look. The map will have a couple of functionalities and I’ll show them to you very quickly. So we can go to the next slide. First is it’s a place where stakeholders could register their contributions. So Chengetai spoke about local initiatives that have translated global objectives into the reality on the ground. All of those contributions that are already happening and initiatives around the world, this map should be, as paragraph 71 says, should reflect those contributions. So we’re hoping that by opening the map up to the use of stakeholders, those who would like to make themselves visible or to share information on what they’re doing could use this very simple portal and show us what you’ve got. So next slide. In the future, if we have enough data points, what we’d like to do is be able to make trends visible across the implementation of the GDC. For example, here you see data that we’ve pulled from a few publicly available sources on Finland. We pulled sources from the WSIS stock taking platform, from the UN Global Compact, from partner. to connect from an international aid tracker at the OECD. And we mapped for Finland 20 contributions that are happening across stakeholders across the five GDC objectives. And we hope that if the tool has sufficiently high level of quality data and quantity data, that it could be a useful way for stakeholders to find patterns or to find gaps. And next slide. I think there’s just two more slides. A critical piece of the map is a compendium of what’s already out there. So we know that there are plethora of UN initiatives that correspond to different pillars of the GDC. It’s just that they’re not all in the same place. So some are at the ITU, some are at UNESCO, some are happening in DESA. And one of the functionalities of the map is to be able to search UN existing mechanisms or to find them easily by GDC pillar. Forgive the graphics, this is a rough mock-up. But on the next slide, you could see an example of how it would work for GDC Action 11, which is on connectivity, on closing digital device. It’s the first pillar of the GDC. And underneath that, we would list a dozen or however many UN initiatives exist that support this GDC action with the objective of making it easy for stakeholders who are looking for this information to be able to connect with or find the right UN door to knock on. And I think one more slide and then I’m done. No, okay, so if we go back there, if we go back to the map, the actual map one, two more down, one idea that we’d like to conduct focus groups on, and I’d be very. grateful of your feedback is, is this useful? So we have done a mock up of what the map could be like, and it will only be helpful, I think it will only be very useful if we can in fact connect with stakeholders on the ground and turn it over to them and say, input your initiatives. Would you like to make yourself visible? Here’s a way to make yourself visible. But we want to do so in making sure that it is actually what stakeholders would like to have as a tool. I think the NRIs are a natural ally for us to stress test our concept. So to red team what you’re seeing here on the screen. And if we proceed with this project, to raise awareness about its existence and turn it over to your stakeholders on the ground. So data is only as helpful as the quality and quantity. I think if we have a database that is not useful, it will not have a lot of data points and therefore it will not be a very helpful map. We know that some maps are hanging on walls and they’re very beautiful. They’re maps made for cartographers. We would like to have a map that’s made for the navigators. And I very much welcome your perspectives on this. For the moment, it’s a small team of ODET, UNCTAD and UNIDO that are developing the mock-up and it’s in an early phase. So your input is actually most valuable at this early stage. And yes, thank you very much.

Mark Carvell: Thank you, Isabel. Thank you, Isabel, for firstly helping us to navigate the bureaucracy of implementation so effectively and in a very positive way, I think. And secondly for running through the design of the of the tools that, first of all, the tracking portal. I don’t know, is that open for people to see now, the tracking portal? No, so just quickly, the tracking portal from the SG’s office is not open, it’s an internal tracking tool, but he is giving regular progress reports on it to the member states. Okay, well, it’d be good to see those progress reports and the implementation map. When do you think that will become operational? I mean, I see that as the opportunity for NRIs to contribute to populating it with the data that you say is so important for it to succeed. So when do you think it’ll be

Isabel De Sola: operational? Yes, forgive me, those are critical questions that I should have included in my presentation. We’ve been working on the concept since the summer of last year, and we would like to reveal an operational or functional version that stakeholders can begin populating by the WSIS review. And in a sense, we see this tool, if it’s designed correctly, as one possible way for the GDC architecture and the WSIS mechanisms to work together. And the idea would be if it’s stress tested and red teamed and stakeholders are happy with this and member states are happy with this, that we could complete a zero version by the WSIS high level forum in July, and a functional open to the public version by the time of the WSIS review. Thanks very much. So by the time of the WSIS review means… December.

Mark Carvell: December, yes. That’s when the high level meeting takes place in the General Assembly. All right, thanks very much. So we’ve… We’ve had a lot of very useful information in these two opening presentations and descriptions of how the NRIs can be proactive in disseminating, ensuring there’s awareness amongst stakeholder communities of this process and how to contribute to it, and also describing how the GDC process can constructively be disseminated down to the local community level in so many ways, as Chengetai in particular described. So let’s now discuss this with an eye to our guiding question on specific actions. So I invite stakeholders in the room and those online, I see we have a number of people online, to indicate if they would like to comment, ask questions and share vision really on how NRIs can engage in the kind of ways that have been described, the specific mechanics, if you like, of engagement and what you think might be the barriers, the challenges that NRIs can overcome. So I open the floor to anybody who wants to kick off brainstorming on that. Does anybody want to volunteer to start? I see a hand at the back, and please introduce yourself and describe who you’re accredited to, and then I’m grateful to hear your points. Okay, I see a hand at the back there. Thank you.

Giacomo Mazzone: I guess it’s me, then Giacomo. I’m a EuroDIG member of the board and also an expert for the Italian IGF. It’s very interesting the mechanism that is put in place by the audit, but I think that we need to see how it could be made accessible to non-UN agencies, because if we have to go through UN agencies to show up what happens on the field, this would be an obstacle that will make this tool less useful. And also, the other question is, there was a mechanism that was launched by the audit that was the endorsement of the process that has been launched for the implementation of GDC, but until now, for instance, we endorsed Eurovision in this, but until now, we have not seen any feedback on that. So, if you don’t give the feedback to the people, then the people is not motivated to continue to interact. And the third point is that, in my opinion, would be the best way to use this tool would be to make questions, to address specific questions through IGF to NRIs network on points on which you would like to have an assessment. Let’s say, you want to see how is the implementation of, I don’t know, the availability of access to good quality network, broadband network, and then you have to make a specific request asking the example of community network existing everywhere. And this is a point on which NRIs can be very valuable because they can provide you a feedback from the field. If you make a very generic question, then the people, you can receive a lot of inputs that probably are not relevant and are not streamlined. So if this can be organized would be more efficient. Thank you

Mark Carvell: Okay, thanks very much Giacomo. Actually, I think there were three questions there. Perhaps we’ll take them one by one. So shall I turn to Isabel first of all? About accessibility beyond non-UN agencies first of all and then then where do things stand with the endorsement process? That’s the second point and then

Isabel De Sola: questions and so on. With particular reference to community networks as one example. Okay, Isabel. Yes. Yes. Thank you for those questions Let me start with the first one on endorsement I let me have a look into it to make sure you receive some feedback and in December We published a list and thanked all of the endorsers of the GDC online and the Secretary General gave an update on that specific point as a not verbal to missions in New York with the full list of the endorsers But it’s not enough We haven’t had a town hall with the endorsers in the month since so I your point is well taken Actually, the endorsement data is part of the mock-up of the implementation map So the whole point of the implementation map is a tool that is not Owned by the UN but is actually turned over to the stakeholders So the UN can have a Soviet style planning tool with our portal and our KPIs but the GDC says Have a map that helps the navigators Not only the cartographers know something for the stakeholders That they can use it that they can find each other that they could learn about Initiatives in a similar field or find contacts or potential partners funders Um, we’ve gotten a little excited about what this map could but first and foremost it’s meant to be for the stakeholders. Your point is well taken about directing questions to the NRI and I’ll reflect on that more. We wanted the map to be a volunteer experience, so if civil society or foundations, think tanks on the ground would like to input their data, they could find it online, they wouldn’t have to go through any hoops or agencies and they could in a simple fashion find which of the GDC objectives or all of the GDC objectives they want to be visible about. However it’s true that it probably won’t be so easy and we need to reflect on a better data collection strategy that could include for example specific questions or specific partnerships perhaps with NRIs that could hold our hand as we try to reach the grassroots level. I think one aspect that I very much liked about Chengetai’s remarks is that tension between translating global into local reality and local initiatives impacting on the global discourse and so from our perch, our New York or Geneva perch, we don’t have the network and the skill set to translate our request for data into the right questions or into the right words for the local level. It may even be the case for example that the map is in English and how will that limit some of the data that we find. So this is a learning process and I appreciate your questions because they help us in our effort to stress test the concept.

Mark Carvell: Thank you Isabel. That multilingual approach I think is another important aspect to take into account in ensuring the success of this process. across the world. That’s very important. Chengetai, did you want to add anything on those points? No. Okay. Right. Okay. Yes, indeed. Okay. I see Peter Koch wants to signal he wants to make from German IGF. I think he’s over there in the room. Okay. Thank you, Peter. Please go

Peter Koch : ahead. Yeah, thanks very much, Mark. My name is Peter Koch. I work for DINIC, but I’m speaking in my capacity of head of the Secretariat of the German IGF. First of all, thanks for the presentation. I think it’s very good to have a concrete suggestion on the table to what could be contributed by the NRIs. This is my first encounter to this, so if I’ve missed any previous opportunities, I apologize for my confusion here. In maybe following up on what Giacomo said, and red teaming, you mentioned red teaming. I’m putting my paranoid hat on here. So KPIs, I understand data is very important to gather an understanding of where are we and who is where and so on and so forth. However, there is this precondition that many of us, if not all of us, very much run on volunteer time and engagement of people from various parts of the community and various stakeholders. This is, of course, not an agreed upon statement. I’m making this up as I learn about this and putting myself in the role of trying to explain this to my steering committee or the community, for example. I think it would be helpful if we could get a bit more information and appreciate that that is not happening right now in here. What an NRI would buy into or would subscribe to in terms of doing work and how these filling out the forums and talking about the KPIs would maybe influence rather than reflect work that is done on the local level. So as a red teamer, I would say the risk here is that we are moving a dialogue and a communications exercise, excuse me, communications and cooperations exercise very much into a compliance exercise. And that is a threat model that I think should be avoided. Thank you very much for that. We have a concrete suggestion on the table.

Mark Carvell: Thank you. Thank you, Peter. So a point there about compliance and workload and so on. Isabel, do you want to change it? We’ve had this talk throughout the existence of the NRIs and the IGF is that, yes, we do recognize that it is mostly a volunteer effort.

Chengetai Masango: And when we do ask the NRIs to give input, it does put a lot on the workload, but it’s also an opportunity for you to influence and to take part in these initiatives. So maybe not all of them may be worth it, but those that are worth it, I think it is worth it. And this is what people have been asking for in any case, that their voice be heard, that they be given a chance for input, and that it should not just be through people, not any disrespect to them, but not be through just delegates in New York because they are removed from the local circumstance. So, yes, it’s a balance, yeah, yeah.

Isabel De Sola: No, I think that as well, that’s a that’s a concern on the resources. So there were no new resources for GDC implementation, and that was also part of the negotiation over paragraph 71 is. So we have a new agenda with these ambitious objectives, but we have no new resources to really track it and monitor it. And in that or to assist at the local level for different organizations or resident coordinators to roll it out. So what you see in this mock up is a compromise in a sense. It’s what we can do with some of the resources that we have at this moment. And I think your point about does this slip into compliance is very well taken. So it’s something that we would need to work into the into design, that this is about information sharing rather than necessarily measurement or benchmarking, comparing between different countries or between different types of stakeholders. That’s not that’s not in the spirit of paragraph 71. And, you know, what could go wrong should be a separate chapter in our concept note. One question that we’ve been grappling with in that category of what could go wrong is that in order to overcome the resources question, advisors to the project from Salesforce, from Microsoft, from TCS, from the technology companies that have this experience, they’ve encouraged us to use AI to create web crawlers to look into the Internet and bring back publicly available information, which makes a lot of sense. So there are some very good databases that could feed into. to this portal already and save people a lot of time. On the other hand, we would then face the problem of data in general on the internet, which is mostly in English and which is mostly about a certain subset of the world, no? So we would perhaps inadvertently recreate some of the biases that already exist and information gaps that already exist. So in the category of what could go wrong, by trying to be resources efficient, we may have the problem again. Chengetai and I have only very, and I think with other, with the leadership panel of the IGF, we have explored the idea of working with and through the NRIs. I take away your question of what could be done to assist or reinforce NRIs that would like to participate in this exercise so that it’s not an additional burden to them.

Chengetai Masango: Yes, and sorry, just finally, we have at the IGF, started I think maybe 10 years ago, the small grants program where we do give small grants to NRIs from developing and transitional economies. So it may not help Germany, but we do try and help the less fortunate with these small grants, which will mean a lot and they will be able to carry out some of this. And of course, this depends on funding, but the more funds we have, the more funds that we can give out these small grants. Thank you very much.

Mark Carvell: The thought I had all along was that a number of NRIs, not all, but a number of NRIs do have active engagement with governments, with their local national governments. And that kind of interaction provides… I think the opportunity for NRIs, individual national ITFs and regional ones to say to your governments, look you signed up to this commitment in the compact but you haven’t done anything yet. So not going through the portal and so on but just through that interaction there’s an opportunity for the NRIs I think to push the momentum and ensure the momentum is sustained on implementation of those commitments set out, Member States signed up to. I think there was one more question or two questions over there. We’ve got three. Time is tight but okay we’ll try and get through the three of them. Be brief and please say who you are. Thank you. So we’ll start. I think there was a hand raised at the back then we’ll come over here. There was a hand at the back, wasn’t there? Yeah, okay. And then we’ll come

Octavian Shofransky: over here. Thank you. My name is Octavian Shofransky. I’m a Digital Governance Advisor at the Council of Europe in this house and indeed a very useful presentation because the whole, I guess, global community in this field is looking forward to the implementation of GDC. We at the Council of Europe take the Global Digital Compact as a very important reference for our own digital agenda because we have a number of activities dealing with the digital governance. We have already an experience in reporting to the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN, so I imagine that this exercise somehow also fits on that experience and from your presentation I understand that the main data that will be fed into the central hub for analysis will be the KPIs and the milestones and they will also produce the maps. and the resulting reports. So it will be very important for us to work together to develop those or identify those KPIs and milestones and they should be very properly, you know, identified in a smart manner. So that’s mainly a statement. I suppose that you also, in addition to NRIs, rely on the important regional organization, the Council of Europe having 46 member states, is an important regional organization. Thank you. Thank you very much. Let’s take all these final questions in a bunch and then ask Chengetai and Isabel to comment in closing remarks. So I’ll go to Valt next.

Mark Carvell: Thank you. Thank you, Mark.

Audience: Tatiana Tropina, I’m a member of the Dutch NLIGF and of EuroDIG and, of course, the IGF, but I’m also representing dynamic coalitions. I’m very happy to see that it was mentioned that they should be known better. I think I’m going to try and tie the two together. If we talk about the success of internet governance, we mentioned the IGF, but also now 176 national regional IGFs, we have 32 dynamic coalitions and other intersessional work and they’re all producing some sort of outcomes. So the question is, how do we make sure that these outcomes land on the right desks? And I think that that is the main challenge the IGF has faced from the very beginning. So in my opinion, and also addressing Peter’s concern, we do need some coordination and guidance on this because at the local level, regional level, all sorts of initiatives happen, but we need to learn what they are. And that guidance could come with presenting one or two questions when you write reports. For example, how do you… assisted global digital compacts work and make sure that the message lands right. So that’s the sort of question that the IGF Secretariat could coordinate on, but it’s something that we need in order to participate in the right way. And at the same time, it means that the messages that NRIs or intersessional work produces has the sort of wording in it that would trigger the desks, so to say, where the messages have to land. And I think if we work on that together as NRIs, as dynamic coalitions, so that we have the same wording in our yearly reports or other reports we produce, then everybody would become the better for it. And the IGF and all its subsidiary organizations would become more relevant to policymakers, to industry, et cetera. So let’s work on that together and make sure that we can deliver the right messages and that we know what messages you need, because that is something we are somewhere in the dark of sometimes. And that’s where we need help and assistance. Thank you.

Mark Carvell: Okay, thank you, Wout. I’ll turn to Paul next. Thank you.

Audience: Yeah, my name is Paul Blaker. I speak for the UK government. And thank you very much for the presentations. They’ve been really interesting. I guess I’ve got two questions. The first is a little bit technical, I’m afraid. But paragraph 71 of the GDC asked for the implementation map to be reflected in the Secretary-General’s report on the WSIS review. If the portal is not going to be sort of completed until December, how will that be handled in terms of the WSIS review? Is there another implementation map that I’ve missed or some other way of handling that requirement? So just a technical question. And then the second question is, how do you make sure that the WSIS review is reflected in the GDC report? And I’m not sure if that’s a good way to put it. The second question, I guess, is how is it possible to avoid duplication with existing maps and other initiatives like this? So you mentioned the ITU manages the WSIS stock-taking database. There is the Partner2Connect initiative. I think DESA has a Connect STI portal as well. Is there a danger that if we’re asking stakeholders to provide data to lots of separate initiatives, then none of them will be optimal? And how can you avoid fragmentation of efforts like that and make sure things are joined up? Thanks. Thank you, thank you, Paul. So I think we have those questions now.

Mark Carvell: Milestones, KPIs, coordination and guidance on NRI and DC outcomes. Paul’s technical question on implementation timeline and then fragmentation risk. That’s a lot, but off you go. Those are all very good questions and also with very good inputs. Are these my final statements, by the way?

Chengetai Masango: Yes, okay. And one thing I wanted to mention is that for the IDF, for our annual report, we have asked all our work streams to give us input on how each individual stream, whether it be dynamic coalitions, the policy networks, et cetera, can contribute to the GDC. And we’re gonna be compiling those. We should also make, and thank you very much, Walt, we should also make it also clear in what they think that the secretariat can do to help with that. And your comment on the templates and the guidelines is well taken and well noted. And we’ll see if we can do something like that. we need a structured way for the data to come in. Otherwise it’ll just be garbage in, garbage out. So yeah, we have to do that. So thank you for that. And yes, that’s all my comments, so please.

Isabel De Sola: Yes, I wanna thank Octavio for reminding us that there’s a universe outside of the UN, of regional bodies, of mini laterals that we should connect better with. I think I would look forward to a partnership with the Council of Europe to explore how we could capture information on everything that’s being done from this house in implementation of the SDGs and the GDC agenda. So luckily some of that path has already been traced by, or how you say in English, some of that path has already been laid out for us in the WSIS Review 2015, which linked up WSIS action lines with the SDGs. And then the GDC did something slightly lighter, which was to connect objectives to SDGs. So we have a good basis to build on to avoid what Paul was referring to, which is duplication or multiple requests for information. So let me speak to that point, and then I’ll answer your technical question. There are excellent sources of data already out in the world that relate to GDC implementation, they’re just not all in the same place. The GDC has five pillars. In the case, for example, of pillar two, the digital economy, there’s actually very little data on how any of those objectives are being implemented. There’s perhaps some knowledge, thanks to UNCTAD and WTO, on e-commerce. But according to UNCTAD and UNIDO, who have studied this question, there isn’t a good source of information. on initiatives across the world, or even just from the UN of what’s happening in that pillar. A similar thing happens in different sections of Pillar 3, which is about, on the one hand, internet governance, but on the other hand, new human rights challenges that are actually quite new, and therefore not a lot of data has been collected on what’s going on out there, to take an example on misinformation, on combating misinformation. We know that there are many efforts, both at the UN, at the regional level and grassroots local level, but if you wanted to find them, you might have to spend a lot of time looking for them. So, the idea of the map, and coming back to the notion that we could harness technical tools such as AI to pull in some of the data without necessarily asking stakeholders, again, to repeat that, at least for the case of UN sources, where participants have agreed that their data be public, which is the case for the UN Global Compact, the Partner to Connect database, the WSIS stock-taking platform, and a handful of others. There’s also some small quick fixes, for example, the WSIS stock-taking platform and Partner to Connect, you check a little toggle, and if you input it here, it appears in the other one. So, could we do something similar? And we’ve approached both of those databases to ask for their consideration of that possibility. Another possibility is to build directly on the WSIS stock-taking platform, so to take what exists there and use it as sort of one of the columns for this slightly broader website, in a sense. So, those are considerations that are definitely being discussed. amongst the UN agencies. And from ODET’s perspective, and I think UNCTAD and UNIDO, who are part of this little subcommittee, we really believe that it is possible to link the WSIS architectures to the GDC mechanisms. It’s a matter of will. It’s a matter of figuring out how to do those toggles, and it’s not impossible to do it. Now, paragraph 71, sometimes in the heat of the moment in the negotiations, solutions are found that then create problems. So the paragraph 71 says, attach the GDC implementation map to the WSIS progress report as an annex. And what we learned shortly after the summit is that an annex to the WSIS progress report can be of a certain length according to internal rules and budget restrictions. So it’s actually quite a short length. So for the written portion of this task of attaching to the WSIS progress report a description of the WSIS of the GDC map, we have a certain word limitation. We thought, and this is part of our REDD teaming, we thought that to reflect properly contributions from across stakeholder groups and from around the world, that the written piece would perhaps be limiting. It’s actually just a handful of pages, what can be annexed. So if we wanted to take from the Council of Europe and from the Italian NRI and the German NRI or all kinds of different stakeholders in the written portion, we wouldn’t be able to do justice to the initiatives, which is where this idea was born to have something that can live online. And I wanted to close by saying that we’re going to be inviting to focus groups to continue discussion on the GDC implementation map and to continue emerging these questions, to see if we can collaboratively find answers to those questions that that satisfy the stakeholders to ensure that this map serves the navigators. I will make sure to pass on the information for the invitation. They should begin next week, focus groups, to work out some of the questions and ensure we’ve built this in a collaborative fashion. If the deadlines of the ECHO-SOC are well understood by the team, we have until December to deliver on both of these pieces. And I look forward very much to engaging and hearing more from all of you in the months between now and then. Thank you.

Mark Carvell: Thank you very much, Isabel. And obviously, there’s a lot of work going on by your team to try and get all these opportunities and mechanisms to converge in a very positive way. And perhaps I expect by the time of the IGF next month, your considerations will have been moved forward to some conclusions. And we in EURiDIG certainly look forward to receiving an update on the progress. So, okay, we have to finish there, except we have one step to take. And Vlad has been working hard to pull everything together into EURiDIG messaging, which he’s going to share with us now. And then we’ll have to finish.

Vlad Ivanets: Over to you. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Mark and everyone. Yeah, I will try not to take long. And also I try to keep the messages concise, but same time really broad to cover everything and try to include the most important steps that can be undertaken by the NRIs to implement the Global Digital Compact objectives, but also they can contribute between each other. So I will read them out loud now. And if there is no objections, then these messages will be taken further as a consensus between us. So the first one. NRIs should act as key enablers and catalysts for change in local digital spaces by adapting global principles and encouraging open discussion among local stakeholders. This can be achieved by channeling grassroots perspectives and innovations into global policies while contextualizing the global commitments in the unique cultural contexts, economic conditions, and regulatory environments. The second one, NRIs should act as feedback loops for local communities, providing the outcomes of their work in the form of publicly available reports. NRIs can drive capacity building and address national or regional digital issues through events such as workshops and targeted programs with special attention to vulnerable groups. Third one, NRIs could make use of the digital tools available such as the UN Tracking Portal and other digital platforms to navigate the critical milestones and KPIs, collaborate and contribute at regional and global levels. NRIs should try to become visible by getting involved and by contributing to the existing broad maps. So thank you everyone for the very productive session. If there is a strict objection, we have the hand raised. Yes, I think that it’s missing the point that has been mentioned by many through the IGF Secretariat. That’s important that there is a coordination point. This cannot be only one too many interactions. Yeah. Sorry, I didn’t realize that there was a feedback loop on the messages. But if I may, the NRIs, so the UN Tracking Portal is an internal tool. Yeah. But the invitation is to collaborate on a few. What is the future public facing GDC implementation map if the NRIs are interested in participating? Yeah, I mean, we still can make some adjustments to the messages. So just because we are running out of time. We can do it after. Yeah, maybe we can do it after the workshop, after closing the workshop. If you have any comments or if you want to elaborate on the messages a bit. So please feel free to approach to us and for collaboratively on the final messages. Yeah.

Sandra Hoferichter: Okay. Just to explain the process a little bit. So Vlad has taken these two comments. I think they are very valuable comments. And the Org team has time to include those comments and finalize the messages in plain English and so on and so forth. But the question here to the audience was really if there has someone from objections to the points that were raised. Fair points will be included. It’s just running out of time and doing it all live. It’s a bit tricky, but this will be taken into consideration. But honestly, the question was main objections. If not, then these will be the messages that we then share at the global IGF and at other policymaking forums.

Mark Carvell: Okay, Sandra, thanks very much for that final point of clarification about our process. So I think we are we’ve just gone over time. But so I hope that hasn’t caused any inconvenience for people here. So I just want to thank Isabel and Jangertai for joining us here to providing so much key information to explain the progress with the implementation phase of the Global Digital Compact and how it fits with the agenda coming up, both in the UN and the IGF next month in Lillestrom. It’s all been very helpful. very useful and thanks very much for being so responsive to some very focused questions and comments from stakeholders participating here and representatives of individual NRIs. It’s all been very much appreciated. Many thanks again to everybody. So I’ll stop there and thank you very much. Enjoy your lunch break or whatever you’re doing next. Thank you.

Agreement points

NRIs as essential enablers for translating global commitments into local action

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Isabel De Sola
– Mark Carvell
– Vlad Ivanets

Arguments

NRIs as essential enablers and catalysts for change in translating global commitments into local action

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Workshop objectives on Global Digital Compact implementation

Draft messages emphasizing NRIs as catalysts for local adaptation of global principles

Summary

All speakers agreed that NRIs play a crucial role in bridging the gap between global digital governance commitments and local implementation, serving as catalysts for change at the community level.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Importance of multi-stakeholder approach and inclusive dialogue

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Mark Carvell
– Vlad Ivanets

Arguments

Comprehensive framework for digital technologies benefiting humanity

Localizing global principles and fostering inclusive dialogue at community level

Workshop objectives on Global Digital Compact implementation

Draft messages emphasizing NRIs as catalysts for local adaptation of global principles

Summary

Speakers consistently emphasized the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches and ensuring inclusive dialogue that brings together diverse voices, especially marginalized communities.

Topics

Development | Human rights | Sociocultural

Need for capacity building and addressing digital divides

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Mark Carvell
– Vlad Ivanets

Arguments

Building capacity and addressing regional digital divides through targeted programs

Workshop objectives on Global Digital Compact implementation

NRIs as feedback loops providing publicly available reports and capacity building

Summary

There was strong agreement on the need for NRIs to drive capacity building initiatives and address digital divides through targeted programs, with special attention to vulnerable groups.

Topics

Development | Human rights | Sociocultural

Resource constraints and volunteer sustainability challenges

Speakers

– Peter Koch
– Chengetai Masango
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Resource constraints and workload concerns for volunteer-driven NRIs

Small grants program support for NRIs in developing economies

Balancing resource efficiency with avoiding bias in data collection methods

Summary

All speakers acknowledged the significant challenge of resource constraints facing volunteer-driven NRIs and the need to balance additional workload with meaningful participation opportunities.

Topics

Development | Economic

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the critical importance of creating mechanisms to channel local insights and innovations into global policy discussions, with Isabel’s implementation map serving as a concrete tool for Chengetai’s vision of grassroots input.

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Channeling grassroots perspectives into global policy discussions

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

These speakers shared concerns about the practical implementation challenges, emphasizing the need for more structured, targeted approaches rather than generic requests that could burden volunteer organizations.

Speakers

– Giacomo Mazzone
– Peter Koch
– Audience

Arguments

Need for specific targeted questions rather than generic requests to NRIs

Risk of shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise with volunteer-based organizations

Need for structured coordination and guidance on NRI outcomes and messaging

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Both recognized the challenge of creating efficient data collection systems while avoiding duplication with existing platforms and ensuring comprehensive, unbiased coverage.

Speakers

– Isabel De Sola
– Audience

Arguments

Balancing resource efficiency with avoiding bias in data collection methods

Avoiding duplication with existing databases and mapping initiatives

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Unexpected consensus

Acknowledgment of bureaucratic challenges and ‘Soviet-style planning’

Speakers

– Isabel De Sola
– Peter Koch

Arguments

Internal tracking portal with rigorous KPIs and accountability mechanisms

Risk of shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise with volunteer-based organizations

Explanation

Unexpectedly, Isabel from the UN bureaucracy openly acknowledged the ‘Soviet-style planning’ nature of their approach, while Peter’s concerns about compliance exercises aligned with this recognition, creating an unusual moment of bureaucratic self-awareness and stakeholder validation.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Importance of feedback mechanisms for stakeholder engagement

Speakers

– Giacomo Mazzone
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Importance of feedback mechanisms to maintain stakeholder engagement

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Explanation

Despite Giacomo’s criticism of lack of feedback on endorsements, Isabel showed genuine receptiveness to this concern and commitment to improving feedback mechanisms, demonstrating unexpected openness to criticism from the UN side.

Topics

Development

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed strong consensus on the fundamental role of NRIs in GDC implementation, the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches, capacity building needs, and resource constraints. There was also agreement on the need for better coordination mechanisms and tools to facilitate stakeholder contributions.

Consensus level

High level of consensus on strategic objectives and challenges, with constructive disagreement on implementation methods. The consensus suggests a mature understanding of both opportunities and constraints in digital governance implementation, with implications for creating more effective, sustainable mechanisms for translating global commitments into local action.

Different viewpoints

Data collection approach and stakeholder burden

Speakers

– Peter Koch
– Isabel De Sola
– Chengetai Masango

Arguments

Risk of shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise with volunteer-based organizations

Resource constraints and workload concerns for volunteer-driven NRIs

Internal tracking portal with rigorous KPIs and accountability mechanisms

Small grants program support for NRIs in developing economies

Summary

Peter Koch expressed strong concerns about the KPI-focused approach creating compliance burdens on volunteer-driven NRIs, while Isabel and Chengetai defended the need for rigorous tracking and accountability, with Chengetai acknowledging the volunteer burden but emphasizing the opportunity for influence.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Accessibility of implementation tools for non-UN agencies

Speakers

– Giacomo Mazzone
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Accessibility barriers for non-UN agencies in contributing to implementation tools

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Summary

Giacomo raised concerns about whether non-UN agencies could directly access implementation mechanisms without going through UN agencies, while Isabel emphasized that the implementation map is designed to be turned over to stakeholders for direct use.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development

Data collection methodology – generic vs. targeted approaches

Speakers

– Giacomo Mazzone
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Need for specific targeted questions rather than generic requests to NRIs

Map functionality for registering contributions and identifying trends and gaps

Summary

Giacomo advocated for specific, targeted questions to NRIs to get relevant streamlined inputs, while Isabel presented a more open volunteer-based approach where stakeholders could input data across broad GDC objectives.

Topics

Development | Infrastructure

Unexpected differences

Volunteer sustainability vs. accountability requirements

Speakers

– Peter Koch
– Isabel De Sola
– Chengetai Masango

Arguments

Risk of shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise with volunteer-based organizations

Internal tracking portal with rigorous KPIs and accountability mechanisms

Small grants program support for NRIs in developing economies

Explanation

This disagreement was unexpected because it revealed a fundamental tension between the UN’s need for accountability and measurement versus the grassroots nature of NRIs. Peter’s strong pushback against compliance-oriented approaches highlighted a potential conflict between institutional requirements and community-driven governance that wasn’t anticipated in the session design.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Technical implementation timeline conflicts

Speakers

– Audience
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Timeline challenges for WSIS review integration and implementation map completion

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Explanation

The technical question about paragraph 71 requirements and WSIS review timing revealed unexpected implementation challenges that hadn’t been fully resolved, suggesting potential coordination issues between different UN processes and timelines.

Topics

Legal and regulatory

Overall assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement centered around data collection methodology, stakeholder accessibility, resource burden on volunteers, and the balance between accountability and community-driven approaches.

Disagreement level

Moderate disagreement with significant implications. While speakers shared common goals of GDC implementation and NRI engagement, they had substantively different views on implementation mechanisms. The disagreements reveal potential barriers to successful implementation, particularly around volunteer sustainability and the risk of bureaucratizing grassroots initiatives. These disagreements could impact the effectiveness of the proposed tools and the willingness of NRIs to participate in the implementation process.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the critical importance of creating mechanisms to channel local insights and innovations into global policy discussions, with Isabel’s implementation map serving as a concrete tool for Chengetai’s vision of grassroots input.

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Isabel De Sola

Arguments

Channeling grassroots perspectives into global policy discussions

GDC implementation map as public-facing tool for stakeholder contributions

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

These speakers shared concerns about the practical implementation challenges, emphasizing the need for more structured, targeted approaches rather than generic requests that could burden volunteer organizations.

Speakers

– Giacomo Mazzone
– Peter Koch
– Audience

Arguments

Need for specific targeted questions rather than generic requests to NRIs

Risk of shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise with volunteer-based organizations

Need for structured coordination and guidance on NRI outcomes and messaging

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Both recognized the challenge of creating efficient data collection systems while avoiding duplication with existing platforms and ensuring comprehensive, unbiased coverage.

Speakers

– Isabel De Sola
– Audience

Arguments

Balancing resource efficiency with avoiding bias in data collection methods

Avoiding duplication with existing databases and mapping initiatives

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Key takeaways

NRIs should serve as key enablers and catalysts for translating Global Digital Compact commitments into local action by contextualizing global principles within unique cultural, economic, and regulatory environments

The UN has established a comprehensive implementation architecture including internal tracking portals with KPIs and a public-facing GDC implementation map for stakeholder contributions

NRIs can contribute through three main mechanisms: localizing global principles and fostering inclusive dialogue, driving capacity building and addressing digital divides, and channeling grassroots perspectives into global policy discussions

The GDC implementation map will serve as a tool for stakeholders to register contributions, identify trends and gaps, and find existing UN initiatives, with operational version planned by WSIS review in December

Successful implementation requires balancing resource constraints of volunteer-driven NRIs with the need for structured data collection and coordination

Integration with existing databases and platforms (WSIS stock-taking, Partner2Connect) is essential to avoid duplication and fragmentation of efforts

Resolutions and action items

Focus groups on GDC implementation map to begin the following week to stress-test the concept and ensure stakeholder utility

IGF Secretariat to compile input from all work streams on how they can contribute to GDC implementation for the annual report

Development of templates and guidelines for NRIs to structure their contributions and ensure consistent messaging

Exploration of partnerships with regional organizations like Council of Europe to capture broader implementation efforts

Refinement of session messages by organizing team to incorporate feedback and finalize for dissemination at global IGF and policy forums

Investigation into feedback mechanisms for GDC endorsement process to maintain stakeholder engagement

Unresolved issues

How to make implementation tools accessible to non-UN agencies without creating bureaucratic barriers

Timeline challenges for completing the implementation map by December while integrating with WSIS review requirements

Resource allocation and support mechanisms for volunteer-driven NRIs to participate meaningfully without creating compliance burden

Multilingual accessibility of tools and platforms to avoid English-language bias in data collection

Specific coordination mechanisms between NRIs, dynamic coalitions, and other IGF work streams to ensure coherent messaging

Balance between using AI-powered data collection for efficiency versus avoiding existing biases in internet-available information

Suggested compromises

Using AI web crawlers to populate databases with publicly available information while supplementing with targeted stakeholder input to address bias concerns

Creating toggle systems between existing databases (WSIS stock-taking, Partner2Connect) to reduce duplicate data entry requirements

Developing the implementation map as an online tool to overcome word limitations in written annexes to WSIS progress reports

Focusing on information sharing rather than measurement or benchmarking to avoid shifting from dialogue to compliance exercise

Providing small grants program support for NRIs in developing economies while expecting voluntary participation from others

Building directly on existing WSIS stock-taking platform as foundation for broader GDC implementation mapping

I think that we need to see how it could be made accessible to non-UN agencies, because if we have to go through UN agencies to show up what happens on the field, this would be an obstacle that will make this tool less useful… the best way to use this tool would be to make questions, to address specific questions through IGF to NRIs network on points on which you would like to have an assessment.

Speaker

Giacomo Mazzone

Reason

This comment was insightful because it identified a fundamental structural barrier in the proposed implementation system – the potential gatekeeping role of UN agencies that could prevent grassroots input. It also proposed a concrete solution: targeted, specific questions rather than generic data collection.

Impact

This comment shifted the discussion from theoretical implementation to practical accessibility concerns. It prompted Isabel to acknowledge the need for better data collection strategies and led to a deeper exploration of how to make the system truly stakeholder-friendly rather than bureaucratic.

I’m putting my paranoid hat on here… the risk here is that we are moving a dialogue and a communications exercise… very much into a compliance exercise. And that is a threat model that I think should be avoided.

Speaker

Peter Koch

Reason

This was a crucial intervention that identified a fundamental tension between accountability/measurement and the voluntary, collaborative nature of NRI work. It highlighted the risk of transforming organic multi-stakeholder dialogue into bureaucratic compliance reporting.

Impact

This comment forced both presenters to directly address the resource burden and compliance concerns. It led to important clarifications about the voluntary nature of participation and prompted discussion about how to design systems that support rather than burden volunteer-driven initiatives.

So the question is, how do we make sure that these outcomes land on the right desks? And I think that that is the main challenge the IGF has faced from the very beginning… we need some coordination and guidance on this because at the local level, regional level, all sorts of initiatives happen, but we need to learn what they are.

Speaker

Tatiana Tropina

Reason

This comment identified the core systemic challenge that has plagued internet governance for years – the gap between local action and global policy influence. It connected the GDC implementation discussion to broader questions about the effectiveness of multi-stakeholder governance.

Impact

This comment broadened the scope from technical implementation details to fundamental questions about coordination and impact. It led to concrete suggestions about standardized reporting templates and coordinated messaging, influencing the final workshop messages about NRIs acting as ‘feedback loops.’

Is there a danger that if we’re asking stakeholders to provide data to lots of separate initiatives, then none of them will be optimal? And how can you avoid fragmentation of efforts like that and make sure things are joined up?

Speaker

Paul Blaker

Reason

This comment highlighted a critical systems-level problem – the proliferation of similar data collection initiatives that could lead to stakeholder fatigue and suboptimal outcomes. It demonstrated sophisticated understanding of how bureaucratic multiplication can undermine policy objectives.

Impact

This question prompted Isabel to provide detailed explanations about efforts to integrate existing databases and avoid duplication. It shifted the conversation toward practical solutions like data toggles between platforms and building on existing WSIS infrastructure rather than creating entirely new systems.

We would perhaps inadvertently recreate some of the biases that already exist and information gaps that already exist. So in the category of what could go wrong, by trying to be resources efficient, we may have the problem again.

Speaker

Isabel De Sola

Reason

This was a remarkably candid acknowledgment of how technical solutions (AI web crawlers) could perpetuate existing inequalities and biases. It showed sophisticated awareness of how efficiency measures can conflict with equity objectives.

Impact

This honest reflection elevated the discussion beyond technical implementation to questions of digital equity and representation. It reinforced the importance of NRI involvement as a counterbalance to automated data collection that might miss marginalized voices and non-English content.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by transforming it from a presentation of top-down implementation mechanisms into a genuine dialogue about the tensions between global coordination and local autonomy. The comments collectively identified three critical challenges: accessibility barriers, the risk of bureaucratization, and systemic fragmentation. They forced the UN representatives to move beyond their prepared presentations to address fundamental design questions about power, participation, and effectiveness. The discussion evolved from ‘how to implement’ to ‘how to implement while preserving the collaborative, voluntary nature of internet governance.’ This shift was crucial because it ensured that the final workshop messages reflected not just technical coordination needs, but also the values and practical constraints of the NRI community. The comments created a more nuanced understanding of implementation that balanced accountability with accessibility, efficiency with equity, and global coordination with local autonomy.

How can the GDC implementation process be made accessible to non-UN agencies without requiring them to go through UN agencies?

Speaker

Giacomo Mazzone

Explanation

This addresses a potential barrier that could make the implementation tools less useful if stakeholders must navigate through UN bureaucracy to participate

What feedback has been provided to organizations that endorsed the GDC process?

Speaker

Giacomo Mazzone

Explanation

Lack of feedback to endorsers could demotivate continued participation and engagement in the process

How can specific, targeted questions be addressed to NRIs rather than generic requests for input?

Speaker

Giacomo Mazzone

Explanation

More focused questions would yield more relevant and streamlined responses from NRIs, making the data collection more efficient

What safeguards exist to prevent the GDC implementation from becoming a compliance exercise rather than a collaborative dialogue?

Speaker

Peter Koch

Explanation

This addresses concerns about maintaining the volunteer-driven, collaborative nature of NRI work while participating in formal UN processes

How will the workload and resource burden on volunteer-driven NRIs be managed?

Speaker

Peter Koch

Explanation

Most NRIs operate on volunteer time, so understanding the resource implications is crucial for sustainable participation

When will the UN Tracking Portal become publicly accessible?

Speaker

Mark Carvell

Explanation

Transparency in tracking implementation progress would help stakeholders understand and contribute to the process

How can multilingual accessibility be ensured for the implementation map and related tools?

Speaker

Mark Carvell

Explanation

Language barriers could limit global participation and data quality if tools are only available in English

How can coordination and guidance be provided to ensure NRI and Dynamic Coalition outcomes reach the right policy desks?

Speaker

Tatiana Tropina

Explanation

This addresses the long-standing challenge of ensuring IGF outcomes have policy impact and relevance

How will the GDC implementation map be reflected in the Secretary-General’s WSIS review report given timeline constraints?

Speaker

Paul Blaker

Explanation

There appears to be a timing mismatch between when the map will be ready and when it needs to be included in official reports

How can duplication with existing databases and mapping initiatives be avoided?

Speaker

Paul Blaker

Explanation

Multiple similar initiatives could fragment efforts and burden stakeholders with redundant data requests

How can regional organizations like the Council of Europe be better integrated into the GDC implementation process?

Speaker

Octavian Shofransky

Explanation

Regional bodies have significant experience and resources that could enhance implementation efforts

What specific KPIs and milestones should be developed for effective GDC tracking?

Speaker

Octavian Shofransky

Explanation

Proper identification of smart KPIs and milestones is crucial for meaningful progress measurement

How can AI-powered data collection avoid recreating existing biases and information gaps?

Speaker

Isabel De Sola

Explanation

Using AI for web crawling could inadvertently perpetuate existing biases in online information, particularly language and geographic biases

What coordination mechanisms are needed between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat for structured data collection?

Speaker

Chengetai Masango

Explanation

Structured approaches are needed to ensure quality data collection and avoid ‘garbage in, garbage out’ scenarios