Workshop 5: Bridging Digital Inequalities and Challenges in Multicultural Societies

Summary

This EuroDIG session focused on bridging digital inequalities and challenges in multicultural societies, featuring three expert presentations on different approaches to digital inclusion. The discussion was moderated by Pilar Rodriguez from the Internet Governance Forum in Spain, with speakers presenting both online and in-person.

Edan Ring from the Israel Internet Association presented a comprehensive case study of digital inclusion efforts in Israel’s fragmented but hyper-connected society. He outlined a three-tiered model for assessing digital gaps: inequitable access to infrastructure, disparities in digital skills and literacy, and differences in meaningful outcomes from digital connectivity. Ring highlighted three key demographic groups facing distinct challenges: Arab citizens with mobile-centric usage but limited economic impact, ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities with restricted platform access due to religious constraints, and senior citizens with high connectivity needs but low digital literacy. The Israeli approach emphasizes multi-stakeholder collaboration and community empowerment, giving marginalized groups agency in planning processes rather than simply designing solutions for them.

Egle Celiesiene from Lithuania’s Research Council presented six real-life initiatives addressing digital and social inequalities in intergenerational contexts. These ranged from Roma integration campaigns using public media to reduce stereotypes, to career academies helping vulnerable populations including Ukrainian refugees find employment, to intergenerational projects connecting children and seniors through cultural storytelling and digital tools. Her examples demonstrated how combining practical skills training with cultural understanding and community engagement can effectively bridge divides.

Dr. Ebba Ossiannilsson shared insights from a successful Erasmus Plus project called “Digital Inclusion for All Learners,” which developed comprehensive training programs for educators. The project emphasized universal design principles, quality frameworks for online education, and the importance of changing assessment methods to truly achieve digital transformation. The initiative reached hundreds of teachers through Lithuania’s national skills program and created freely available resources based on European Commission frameworks.

The session concluded with three key messages: global and social gaps create disparities in internet access particularly affecting peripheral areas and different societal groups; diversity leads to unequal usage patterns affecting digital literacy and vulnerability to online harms; and addressing these divides requires multi-stakeholder collaboration, leadership, and well-designed projects engaging governments, civil society, academia, and technology companies to create actionable strategies for a more inclusive digital future.

Keypoints

## Overall Purpose/Goal

This session aimed to explore challenges, implications, and solutions to digital inequalities in multicultural societies. The discussion brought together experts from different countries to share case studies, best practices, and actionable strategies for bridging digital divides across diverse demographic groups.

## Major Discussion Points

– **Multi-tiered Digital Divide Framework**: The speakers outlined a three-level model of digital inequality: (1) inequitable access to basic infrastructure and devices, (2) disparities in digital skills and literacy, and (3) unequal outcomes in areas like education, employment, and civic participation. This framework helps assess and quantify digital gaps across different community groups.

– **Community-Specific Approaches to Digital Inclusion**: Each presenter emphasized the need for tailored strategies that address the unique needs of specific demographic groups, such as Arab citizens, ultra-Orthodox communities, seniors, Roma populations, and Ukrainian refugees. The discussion highlighted that one-size-fits-all solutions are ineffective for addressing diverse cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic barriers.

– **Participatory and Multi-stakeholder Engagement**: A key theme was the importance of working “with communities, not just for them” by empowering local leaders and giving marginalized groups agency in planning and implementation processes. The speakers advocated for collaboration between governments, civil society, academia, and tech companies to create sustainable solutions.

– **Beyond Connectivity to Meaningful Use**: The discussion emphasized that simply providing internet access is insufficient. True digital inclusion requires focusing on digital safety, literacy, media literacy (especially regarding misinformation), and the ability to use digital tools effectively for personal and community development.

– **Quality and Holistic Approaches in Digital Education**: The speakers stressed the need for comprehensive quality frameworks in digital education that consider leadership, pedagogy, assessment methods, and support systems. They highlighted that successful digital transformation requires ecosystem-wide changes rather than isolated interventions.

## Overall Tone

The discussion maintained a professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented tone throughout. Speakers were respectful and supportive of each other’s presentations, building upon shared themes while contributing unique perspectives from their respective contexts. The tone was optimistic yet realistic about challenges, with participants actively engaging in constructive dialogue about practical solutions and best practices. The session concluded on a positive note with clear, actionable takeaways and appreciation for the collaborative exchange of ideas.

Speakers

– **Pilar Rodriguez** – Moderator from the Internet Governance Forum in Spain

– **Moderator (Daniel Michels)** – Remote/online moderator for the session

– **Edan Ring** – From the Israel Internet Association (ISOC-IL), presenting on digital inclusion in Israel

– **Egle Celiesiene** – From the Research Council of Lithuania, presenting real-life use cases addressing digital inequalities

– **Ebba Ossiannilsson** – Dr., from the International Council for Open and Distance Education, independent consultant and researcher, quality reviewer, professor in open education and innovation learning

– **Marilia Maciel** – Director for Digital Trade and Economic Security at Diplo, develops research on disinformation

– **Audience** – General audience member asking questions

Additional speakers:

– **Jacques** – Session rapporteur who summarized the key messages at the end of the session

# Bridging Digital Inequalities and Challenges in Multicultural Societies: A EuroDIG Session Report

## Introduction and Session Overview

This EuroDIG session examined digital inequalities in multicultural societies, focusing on practical solutions and evidence-based approaches to digital inclusion. Moderated by Pilar Rodriguez from the Internet Governance Forum in Spain, with remote moderation support from Daniel Michels, the session featured three presentations followed by discussion and audience questions.

The session aimed to move beyond theoretical discussions to examine real-world case studies and actionable frameworks for addressing digital exclusion across diverse demographic groups. The discussion maintained a collaborative tone throughout, with speakers contributing perspectives from their respective national and organizational contexts.

## Key Presentations

### Israel’s Multi-Stakeholder Approach to Digital Inclusion

Edan Ring from the Israel Internet Association (ISOC-IL) presented digital inclusion efforts in Israel’s diverse society. He described a three-tiered framework used by ISOC-IL for understanding digital inequalities: first, inequitable access to basic infrastructure and devices; second, disparities in digital skills and literacy; and third, differences in meaningful outcomes from digital connectivity in areas such as education, employment, and civic participation.

Ring highlighted three key demographic groups facing distinct challenges in Israeli society. Arab citizens demonstrate high mobile connectivity rates but experience limited economic impact from their digital engagement, facing challenges with Hebrew-language digital services and economic barriers. The ultra-Orthodox Jewish community presents unique challenges related to religious restrictions on certain digital platforms and content. Senior citizens show high connectivity needs but persistently low digital literacy levels.

The Israeli approach emphasizes multi-stakeholder collaboration involving government agencies, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and technology companies. Ring stressed the importance of community empowerment and giving marginalized groups agency in planning processes rather than simply designing solutions for them.

Regarding disinformation challenges, Ring explained that in Israel’s context, traditional regulatory approaches face limitations due to political constraints. Instead, the focus has shifted to empowering users, media organizations, and civil society as defense mechanisms against misinformation.

### Lithuania’s Community-Centered Integration Initiatives

Egle Celiesiene from the Research Council of Lithuania presented six initiatives demonstrating approaches to addressing digital and social inequalities through intergenerational and multicultural programming. Her presentation emphasized connecting multiple initiatives rather than seeking single solutions to complex social problems.

The initiatives included Roma integration campaigns using public media to reduce stereotypes, career academies helping vulnerable populations including Ukrainian refugees find employment through digital skills training, and intergenerational projects connecting children and seniors through cultural storytelling and digital tools.

Celiesiene’s approach recognized that there is no single solution, but rather many connected actions that together move toward inclusion. Her examples demonstrated how combining practical skills training with cultural understanding and community engagement can effectively bridge divides.

### Educational Innovation and Quality Frameworks

Dr. Ebba Ossiannilsson shared insights from the Erasmus Plus project “Digital Inclusion for All Learners,” which developed training programs for educators across multiple European contexts. Her presentation focused on quality frameworks and systematic approaches to digital transformation in educational settings.

The project emphasized universal design principles, recognizing that inclusive digital education must be accessible to learners with diverse needs from the outset rather than through retrofitted accommodations. Ossiannilsson stressed that quality frameworks for online education must address multiple dimensions: leadership understanding, pedagogical approaches, assessment methods, and support systems.

The initiative reached hundreds of teachers through Lithuania’s national skills program and created freely available resources based on European Commission frameworks, including DigComp. These resources were designed to be adaptable across different cultural and institutional contexts while maintaining quality standards.

## Areas of Agreement

The speakers demonstrated consensus on several key principles:

**Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration**: All speakers emphasized that addressing digital inequalities requires coordinated efforts from multiple stakeholders including governments, civil society, academia, technology companies, and communities themselves.

**Comprehensive Approaches**: Speakers agreed that digital inclusion requires multi-faceted approaches rather than single solutions, emphasizing the need for connected actions and holistic frameworks.

**Community Empowerment**: All speakers emphasized the importance of empowering communities and involving them directly in planning and implementation processes rather than simply providing solutions for them.

## Audience Discussion

An audience member asked a critical question about whether digital inclusion efforts are actually making measurable progress, noting that similar discussions occur at every Internet Governance Forum yet systemic inequalities persist. This prompted reflection on how to measure meaningful progress in digital inclusion work.

Marilia Maciel asked about approaches to disinformation, particularly regarding regulatory versus non-regulatory strategies. Ring responded by explaining Israel’s specific context where regulatory approaches face political constraints, leading to focus on empowering civil society and users instead.

## Rapporteur’s Key Messages

Jacques, serving as rapporteur, summarized three key messages from the session:

1. **Global and social gaps create disparities in internet access** particularly affecting peripheral areas and different societal groups

2. **Diversity leads to unequal usage patterns** affecting digital literacy and vulnerability to online harms

3. **Addressing these divides requires multi-stakeholder collaboration, leadership, and well-designed projects** engaging governments, civil society, academia, and technology companies to create actionable strategies for a more inclusive digital future

## Practical Outcomes

The session concluded with commitments for continued work. Jacques committed to making draft messages available within approximately two weeks for participant review. Speakers committed to continued dissemination of their project results and ongoing implementation of funded initiatives.

The discussion generated practical recommendations including adopting comprehensive frameworks that address access, skills, and outcomes simultaneously; prioritizing community empowerment in planning processes; and developing multi-stakeholder collaboration mechanisms that maintain community voice and agency.

## Conclusion

This session demonstrated both progress in understanding digital inclusion challenges and the significant work that remains. The consensus among speakers on fundamental principles—multi-stakeholder collaboration, community empowerment, and holistic approaches—provides a foundation for future work, while highlighting the need for continued attention to measuring effectiveness and scaling successful interventions across different contexts.

Pilar Rodriguez: Okay, well, we’re going to start now. So thank you all for coming to this session on bridging digital inequalities and challenges in multicultural societies. And first things first, I’m going to hand over to our online moderator so that he can explain to you the rules for this session.

Moderator: For the people on Zoom, my name is Daniel Michels, and I’ll be the remote moderating on this session. More information about the session and speakers is available on the Eurodig wiki. We encourage you to raise your hand if you would like to present a question. But if you’d like me to ask the question for you, please write Q in front of the question. Also for the session rules, please enter your full name on the chat on Zoom. To ask a question, raise hand using the Zoom function. You’ll be unmuted when the floor is given to you. And when speaking, switch on the video, state your name and affiliation, and do not share links to the Zoom meetings, not even with your own colleagues.

Pilar Rodriguez: Pilar Rodriguez Well, thanks. So my name is Pilar Rodriguez, I’m going to be your moderator for this session. I’m from the Internet Governance Forum in Spain. And first things first, I would like to thank our IGF sponsors, Telefónica, Google, TikTok, as well as Digitales and A-Digital for their support in bringing the Spanish IGF to Eurodig, as well as JAX for being our rapporteur for this session. So joining me here on this panel, we have three experts, Aaron Ring, here on my right from the Israel Internet Association, Egil Selyasin, sorry if I mispronounce your name, from the Research Council of Lithuania, and Dr. Ebba Ossiannilsson from the International Council for Open and Distance Education, both of them will be joining us online. They’re already inside the Zoom session. So in this session, we will be exploring the challenges, implications, and solutions to digital inequalities in our multicultural society. And in order to do so, I will first give the floor to Edan to introduce the Israeli study case. So the floor is yours. Thank you very much, Pilar.

Edan Ring: I’m very happy and honored to be here in this forum to present our work on digital inclusion in Israel. First, I would like to say a few words about the Israel Internet Association, which is also the Israeli chapter of Internet Society. And it has a few multiple activities and roles. We are an independent nonprofit organization established in 1994 to promote internet access and integration across Israel by convening diverse stakeholders and fostering collaborative action. We work to ensure that the Israel internet remains a reliable, secure, independent, and competitive space that serves the interests of users and the wider public and all groups in Israel, of course. We also manage Israel’s country code top level domain, the registry.il and Nekudah Israel IDN registry, and the Israel Internet Exchange. And since 1995, we are the Israeli chapter of the Global Internet Society, and we represent the country in international bodies like RIPE, NCC, ICANN, and Center. Our core mission includes promoting fairness and equal access to digital resources. We advocate for digital literacy and digital inclusion and strive to make essential public information accessible to digitally underserved population, marginalized populations, which I will talk about here soon. Through programs and educational initiatives, ISOCHIL helps broaden public understanding of the internet’s educational and economic potential. while advancing digital trust, safety and everyday resilience against online threats and dangers. In the field of online safety and security, I would like to elaborate about what I didn’t just a second I forgot to share the slides just a second sorry it is okay so the first function I want to elaborate about is the internet safety hotline we operate in Israel for more than a decade now which is the most veteran hotline dedicated to online harms in Israel which provides Israel users tools information and support to prevent and respond to one wide range of online harms and our internet safety hotline responds to hundreds of monthly reports from diverse social media and internet users from all groups and is recognized as a trusted partner and reporter for leading tech platforms including social media leading social media global companies like Meta, TikTok and Google, hosting services and URL shorteners and in this function we report and escalate harmful abusive or illegal content and activities for users to zip to various platforms acting as a first responder in Israel digital spaces when addressing security and safety and diversity of Israeli digital space it’s important first to understand the Israeli demographic and social landscape which is fragmented and but also hyper-connected society we have a cultural and multilingual and marked by significant social and political ongoing political tensions and conflicts which also have their implications on digital landscape. Despite this complexity it is also one of the most digitally connected societies in the world with very high rates of social media usage and penetration and growing cyber threats like we heard about in many workshops here yesterday before us but also very low digital literacy rates especially among minority groups and no formal regulation and state regulation or supervision of social media platforms like you do have here in Europe which makes these challenges even greater. The Israeli population includes, like you can see here, secular and conservative Jews, Muslim, a very big Arab Muslim Christian Jews, a minority and very large immigrant groups. Each has distinct languages, cultures and socio-economic conditions and needs and these differences also manifest in digital access, digital capabilities and the overall impact of the Internet on daily life and with the rapid spread of AI technologies and applications we all already know, like in many countries also in Israel, these disparities are only deepening with penetration of AI and becoming more and more complicated. So I would like to elaborate about our approach to promoting digital inclusion and dealing, bridging the digital divide inside Israel which is first of all inclusive and participatory. Our ISOC-IL model for digital inclusion embraces a multi-stakeholder approach to promoting digital rights, inclusion, connectivity As a civil society organization, we work with state institutions, with academia, with tech platforms, but also we work to elevate and integrate voices and agency of community, of diverse groups, and of users to impact these strategies and programs, especially marginalized groups. And we do this through civil society partnerships, academic research, and bottom-up community-driven initiatives. The first thing, which is actually the base for our advocacy framework, is a three-tiered model that assesses and quantifies digital gaps across diverse groups. First level is inequitable access, basic access to digital infrastructure and devices, actually connectivity, electricity, and smartphones for computers. That is not equal across the country. Second level digital divide is inequality in digital skills, literacy, capacities, affecting the ability of different groups to navigate online platforms, analyze information, and use digital tools effectively. And the third level digital divide are disparities in outcomes, in the impact and effect of digital connectivity and the meaning of connection to the Internet, such as education, employment, health care, access, civic participation, and of course digital rights and safety that result from unequal digital capabilities and access. This will give a short snapshot of three main groups inside Israeli demographics and society that have very distinct Internet usage capabilities and connections. We mainly focus on these three groups in our activities. The first is the Arab citizens, the Arab society in Israel, 20% of the population, sometimes even more. It is a very mobile internet, mobile-centric usage groups with a lot of also internal gaps inside the group. Not all of Arab citizens and Arab society in Israel have the same usage patterns, but they do have very high usage of social media, of mobile internet media, and a lack of meaningful connection, a lack of economic development and impact as a result of their internet usage, which is more oriented to social and recreational usages, especially in the periphery of Arab society inside Israel, which can be the Bedouin Arab villages, unrecognized villages in the south, in the Negev, or other more non-urban spaces. The second group, which is a very largely, very fast-growing group inside Israeli society and very unique to Israel, is the ultra-Orthodox Jewish Haredi groups and communities, which has a very insular ecosystem of information, of communication and digital uses. Today, it’s almost about to be around 10% of Israeli society. It is strongly influenced by very centralized leadership, religious leadership. It has very low trust in mainstream media and low trust in technology at large for ideological and for religious reasons, but also a surprisingly quite high level of internet connectivity in specific services and specific specific platforms that are suited to the ultra-Orthodox community, which is a bit like sometimes some researches compared to Amish communities in North America or other religious groups. They are constrained to more kosher, closed platforms, websites, and applications. And they have, of course, very, very low level literacy rates, low level capacities, and so on. And the third group, which I think is very similar in many countries across the world maybe, and for sure across the Mediterranean, across Europe, is senior citizens that we look at over the age of 65, which usually in Israel have high connectivity and high need for digital services, but relatively low literacy and capacity, especially when it comes to security and online safety. They face cognitive, physical, and emotional barriers across different internal groups in this age group, especially in the wake of traumatic events such as COVID pandemic and other attacks and other crises. So our engagement, reaching the last part of my presentation, our model of engagement to address these diverse needs, we combine rigorous research and digital mapping with direct civic engagement and field activities. We work alongside local leaders, authorities, and civil society organizations to co-create together with the groups and experts from the groups targeted strategies that respond to specific community vulnerabilities and needs. We try to empower groups and give them a seat at the table, you could say, as part of the planning process. and engagement. And beyond access, we also try to focus on a meaningful use and meaningful, not only connectivity, but also safety and literacy. Access alone is not enough. We emphasize meaningful connectivity, which includes digital safety, literacy, and the ability to use digital tools and platforms effectively for personal and group development. And we think that these are essential components of broader societal resilience in an age of AI and misinformation. And what we offer together with groups coming from the field is a holistic response to digital threats that requires coordinated action from a wide range of stakeholders and fields, from public education and fact-checking networks and infrastructures, to funding for research and local projects, to international cooperation on digital rights and equity that is suited specifically for the needs of each group separately. We think there is no one silver bullet that addresses the diverse needs and goals of digital inclusion. One small, to finish off my presentation, one small example is our latest project that you can also read about in a publication I can give away here. It’s called Disinformation Resilience Israel, which is a new project funded by the EU, executed by ISOC-IL since the middle of last year. It aims to strengthen Israeli society’s resilience to disinformation and influence operations by focusing on the vulnerabilities and needs of minority communities within Israeli society and the Israeli media ecosystem. And our first step to constructing this project was mapping key groups and stakeholders inside the ecosystem and formulating tailored recommendations for each group. And you can see that This project has four main pillars. One is public education and media literacy that is specific to each group. The other is training and empowering journalists and fact-checking networks, fostering innovation and researches. And just to finish my last slide with the four main key takeaways or best practices that sum up this presentation, one is from connectivity to literacy and safety, don’t stop at connectivity. The second is a multi-stakeholder approach to building societal resilience. The third is research-based community-specific capacity building, combined research and engagement. And the last, and I think the most important, is empowering communities, giving them the agency and the voice to be part of the planning process and part of the whole approach to tackling these challenges. Thank you very much. Thank you. And you can read about these projects here afterwards if you want.

Pilar Rodriguez: I have some. Thank you so much, Edan, for sharing with us the Israeli case. If someone from the audience would like to make any comments or questions on Edan’s presentation, now is the time, or you can also do it later after all our speakers have presented. So I’m not sure if there’s any comments online. I don’t see anyone in the room. So we will move on to Egle, who will introduce six real life use cases addressing digital and societal inequalities in intergenerational context. So Egle, whenever you’re ready. Yeah. So hello.

Egle Celiesiene: Oh, I heard echo. I’m sorry. Can you hear me clearly? Yes, we can hear you. Okay, perfect. So I’m very excited to be here. And today I will share six short real-life cases about how communities, organizations, and institutions try to reduce digital and social inequalities. So all the cases are connected to multicultural and intergenerational settings. But before I begin, I would like to ask you a question, all of you. So in your view, what are the biggest inequalities or challenges in multicultural society? And I would like to ask you to open Slido, put the number, you can see it in a slide, and you will find the same number in chat in a few minutes. And please answer the question. And you can answer any time during the presentation. At the end, we will look at your answers together. So I would like to begin with very well-known society, Roma integration through media. And this campaign, this is one of the campaign, so-called Know So You Don’t Fear. It was created to help people to see and understand Roma culture in a positive and respectful way. It started in Klaipeda and expanded in many cities in Lithuania. 500 video screens in public transport showed short clips featuring Roma individuals and their everyday lives. Also, all this campaign included different events with Roma musicians and dancers performed, and Roma leaders shared their history and stories. One of them said, Roma are a unique people, who kept our language and tradition, but not by writing, but by telling stories from one generation to next. The campaign was needed, according to surveys, 58% of people say they would want to a Roma person as a neighbor, but most of them never met a Roma person. This initiative used cultural invisibility to reduce fear and change old stereotypes. Another initiative, second initiative, would be about vulnerable people, need people, not in education, employment and training. So these people, this campaign included 240 participants, including Ukrainian refugees. And during the Successful Career Academy, we got a chance to join job skill training, career guidance and mentoring. The results, 96 participants found a job, returned to education or started their own small business. This case shows how important it is to combine practical skills and personal support to help people move forward. And here in the picture, you may see a few mentors from the program, and I’m very happy that this program was implemented by Lietuvos Laikou Fondas, Lithuanian Children’s Fund, and the director and founder of this fund is together with us online, and I hope she will be able to say hello for us afterwards. One of other cases, it would be Atras.eu. This first case is about building connection through culture, storytelling and digital tools. This initiative is about interactive tourism. It was created by children from the rural day center in a little city of Kshtadvarys, this day center called Novininkai. Together with partners, with seniors, children from home cares, artists and teachers, we created really exciting initiative and we work together to create a map, cultural guide and a game based on legends and stories told by seniors. This initiative brings together different generations and different life experiences. Many children involved come from migrant backgrounds or live in a state care. They learn about region’s history while seniors share memories and artists help turn it into interactive tools. So this is a very unique initiative, I think not only in Lithuania but in other countries as well and it shows how inclusive tours and digital creativity can support multicultural and intergenerational cooperation. Now, like Edan talked about seniors’ involvement, so this is one of initiatives going on in Lithuania where seniors are involved in digital literacy. So this is about older adults and digital literacy and the project called Let’s Overcome Digital Barriers Together and over 400 seniors participated in a group, sessions and they learn how to use online banking, register to healthcare and communicate on social media. The project provided new laptops and special tools for better learning. Importantly, what is important that young volunteers were trained to help seniors. They work together during classes and also organize public events. This helps older people feel more confident and less afraid using technology in daily life and I’m very happy that this project is still ongoing and I hope it will continue in the future as well. One of our initiatives is about about Annalind Foundation Network. So, this case is a part of international network working across 42 countries in the Europe Mediterranean region. In Lithuania, there are more than 90 organizations who took part in this project and promote intercultural dialogue, interracial and youth education through media and art. The focus is teachers and school staff and you may see in the picture teachers, our lecturers and teachers after two weeks ago, we very recently implemented one of the trainings and the result was astonishing. So, it’s a good example how culture, education and cooperation can help reduce prejudices and support inclusion. National Education Research Program implemented by Research Council of Lithuania. So, this is national program, it’s the sum really quite big, it’s 15.2 million euros and this funds is invested in 28 projects in seven different Lithuanian universities. The topics, all the universities, all 28 researchers are quite different and the topics include digital education, teacher training, motivation, inclusion, assessment. Each team includes scientists, PhD students and also teacher practices from schools. The connection and this show how connection between research and practice helps to improve the education system and in real and a magnificent way. So, this is the last slide and before I close, I would like to stop and to share answers. I hope you managed to answer. So, I will stop the answers. And I hope we will be able to share Okay, so what we found, what is the answer? So what is the biggest inequalities of challenges in multicultural society? So what we can see digital services often ignore cultural differences. So our answer is about using digital services that are never one highlight economical statute in private family and general economical levels. Tech is expensive. Some people don’t have a same chance to learn language barriers. So thank you for all the answers. And I think I was I was very happy to have opportunity to share real practice example. And I hope to connect and to meet you all in the near future to implement even more project and excited ideas.

Pilar Rodriguez: So thank you. If you have any question, I’m open. Thank you, Egle. So actually, if anyone from the room would like to elaborate on one of the answers that they provided to the Slido, you’re welcome to do so now, or maybe after our next speaker has spoken. Nothing. No one online wants to do it. OK, so now we will move on to Dr. Ewa that I see is already online. So maybe you would like to share with us this last presentation for this panel.

Ebba Ossiannilsson: I think you can see my slides yes we can see them and we can hear you well yeah very good so thank you very much and thank you so much for for the invitation to take part in this very important and nice conference during those days so I have been asked to present a very successful Erasmus plus project which we have had for two years a small-scale project together with Egle which I’ve just heard speaking because she was the project partner and also her colleagues at Lithuanian College of Democracy in Vilnius Lithuania and I was the coordinator for this project and I’m an independent consultant and researcher and quality reviewer and also in the board for ICDE which is the International Council for Open and Distance Education and I’m a professor in open education and innovation learning so I will speak briefly on about this project it ended last year actually in February 2024 but still we are doing a lot of disseminations and also during the project we did a lot of disseminations at different kind of conferences so this is the web page for our project digital inclusion for all learners DI for all and here at this web page is still up and running and we have also all our results which you can find here on our web page and that is free for you so what was the objectives for this project it was to improve the key competencies skills and learning performance of young people in schools by promoting quality improvements innovation excellence at educational levels and involving digital inclusiveness and also to improve the competencies of teachers and educators and other staff in schools to promote digital inclusion and tackle misinformation to education and training. So we had a quite a wide target group. It was students, it was the school staff, it was schools as such, it was other educational providers, it was public bodies. And what is very important also, we had a possibility to be part of the Vigotas Magnus University in Lithuania with their national skills programme. Sorry, I was a bit ahead of my own slides. So those were the activities and I started already to say about this national life skills programme in Lithuania. And with that, that was a great success because we reached a lot of teachers in Lithuania mainly. So we did a training for trainers and that was part of this national life skills programme and I will tell you more about what was the content of that and what it included. We did develop guides for educators with including materials from intellectual outputs of the project and those are available, as I said, on the web page. And we also did study some best practices and case studies. We had an online contest for students. We did a lot of disseminations. Mainly in Europe, because that is the case with European projects, but also actually international and those were held online. And then we had a multiplier events where we met teachers. So I will now briefly go through quite quickly what digital inclusion for all learners, what the course, which we developed, what the content was. And we had seminars. I think it was more or less 14 days. So we had webinars and we had the possibilities to discuss with teachers and to have also two broad international speakers. So first of all, we built our course on the STDs, of course, STD4, but also all the others, because they will, STD4 will lead to achieve and have an impact on the others. We also focus on the future of education, a new social contract. We also focus on open education, why that is important, to expand access to education to everyone, not leaving anyone behind. And for that, you need to do a lot of things. And those were some of them. So we built the courses on open education and on the open principles. We also built a course on the Erasmus Plus prioritised areas about active citizenship, which is the overall goal, and also about green sustainability, inclusion and diversity, about digital transformation. So what I’m showing you now is the content of the course. So we had one session for each of those topics, which I briefly will go through. We talked about the digital competence framework for citizens, which now is available in many languages. And we have the five areas about digital content creation, safety, problem solving, communication and collaboration, and information data and data literacy. The DigComp is also further developed to schools. Maybe you have a sequel across this one. DigComp Edu, it built on DigComp, as I said, those five areas, but it also takes the educational side for both the teachers on the left-hand side and to the right-hand side for the students. We also talked about the selfie, the selfie for teachers and the selfie for schools. That is also important to mention, all the sources we have used in this course are free and you can use them free and they are open with open access. So this is the selfie for the school. And you see already 39,723 schools are involved with some 5 million users and 86 countries and it is translated into 41 languages. So it’s easy to use this one and many of the sources we have used are from the European Commission because there’s no need to actually develop and reinvent the wheel all the time. It’s better to use and adapt and to translate and to contextualize what is already done, especially those sources from the European Commission, which are made by research. We also use the intercom framework, which is about resources, ideas and opportunities and how that can come into action. We also use the self-evaluation tools about my digital skills. It’s an online survey, which is also again built on the comp and the five areas, but it’s also built on the skills, knowledge and attitudes. So you get a lot of questions about those five areas and this is what, when I did it, the result you get immediately when you have filled in the evaluation. You get like a traffic light. If you are green, you are quite good. And if you have some yellow points, you can improve your digital competencies. And if you are red, you may need to do something about it if you really would like to. increase your digital competences. This is also translated into more languages which I talked about for the selfie, very many languages so you can do it in your own language. We also had one session about universal design because that is needed to really be inclusive and to scale up education and to be sustainable. So with universal design which can fit not just everybody but can fit people for their needs. Some of us learn better with media, some of us learn better with reading, some of us learn better with images or listening to things so we need to have a variety of media as well and it can be both diverse but also inclusive. We also use the mandala form where you could self-assess yourself about your attitudes, skills and knowledge both before you go through a model and afterwards and that is also built on traffic light as you see where are you at for example with attitudes with this yellow one you maybe have to think about your attitudes about digital competences or digital inclusion. So it’s again an image where you can see the results immediately yourself. We had the one session about quality and this is a report I did I was research leader for by ICDE. So we talked a lot actually about quality and what is quality in online and open education around the globe and we with this research we surveyed over 40 plus quality models around the globe both if they were more norm-based or if they were more process-based so we talked a lot about quality and those are some criteria. for quality in open online and scalable and sustainable inclusive education. They need to be multifaceted, they need to be dynamic, they need to be mainstreamed, they need to be representative, multifunctional. We also talked about this opening up education from joint research centre by the European Commission which have a quality model on 10 dimensions for open education. There are four, transversal, strategy, leadership, quality and technology and then there are six core dimensions about content, pedagogy, recognition, collaboration, research and access and with this is you see the ecosystem of open education and also the holistic perspective because for example leadership, what kind of leadership do you have for open education that will pave the way for what kind of content you are using, how you access and how you assess learning and how you collaborate and how you recognise and what kind of pedagogy you have. So all those are interrelated to each other. Of course there are some more quality issues in dimension, for example you need to increase flexibility in learning approaches, a strong focus on student engagement and satisfaction, about learning analytics, about changing methods for assessments. I used to say that as long as you’re not changing the method of assessment nothing will be changed or transformed for the digital inclusiveness and to digital transformation in education. This is really crucial and not at least with the AI area we are living in right now, you really need to change the way of assessments. So that is important and then there are growing demands for recognition of courses and work-based learning and we all have in mind the consequences of Covid-19. And those people who were quite vulnerable, they were even more vulnerable when everything went online. And if you don’t know how to do online education for diversity, inclusion and equity and not at least for well-being and care, which are new quality parameters, not at least in COVID-19. There are also some additional factors which we discussed during this course about commitment, engagement, ethics, equity, inclusion, as I mentioned, satisfaction, social, emotional dimensions, sustainability. Just to mention some. And for that, there is a need for both for policy and planning and human resources and internal engagement, design and development, prioritize. And that is why we had this wide target group for our project, not just teachers, but also administrators and also leaders and school managers. So to conclude about the quality area, it is important to develop a cultural quality and leading with strategy, hands, soul, ethics, actions and mind. And about to communicate the quality strategy you have so it is understood at all levels and about leadership, involvement and ownership. We talked a lot about emotional literacy. And of course, during the project, we talked also about the pros and cons of AI. Quite recently, we have put everything together, the project is over, but we are on our way to get it published in an article in the scientific journal. So we have also now published. published but collected all the results from our survey we did with the people who took part in this course and this is just a slide how to show you see again some of the topics we had for the course and how familiar the respondents were about those topics and how they apply this knowledge in practice. So with that I will stop and I think you get some overview of what we did for this European project Digital Inclusion for All.

Pilar Rodriguez: Thank you Ebba so much for sharing with us this really interesting project. Now I’d like to ask people in the room to share their views on what our speakers have shared with us or if you want to take your own chance with commenting on how to bridge these digital inequalities and challenges now is your chance to speak. Well thank you very much all the speakers for

Audience: wonderful presentations. A question to Eva and you look to me as somebody as myself of a certain age which has seen it all for quite some time. Now in your particular your view if you think that things have gotten better in the last time because it seems to me that this is a an evergreen every IGF you’re talking about the same and it is we are hearing about very good projects and so on but overall have things gotten better or is it just some kind of just fighting windmills. Eva if you want take the question I think was pretty much directed at you. Was it to me?

Ebba Ossiannilsson: Yes, yes it was. Yes, yes of course a lot of things has happened of course and of course a lot of things are getting better but first of all it depends what we mean by better. That is important of course and that was also very much discussed in this during this course. I will say it is a question of leadership very much. Leaders who understand this digital transformation and what it brings for the individuals and for the planet. They are the winners and then with that they are have possibilities to improve and that was also very much shown during the COVID-19 pandemic period because leaders who understood what it really meant to go online and to opening up education and to really take the learners perspectives, personalized learning. They did it pretty well. Those who just put everything online what they already have in the classroom they fail a lot and those students, those learners, those staff really really suffered, really suffered. So again it depends what you mean by quality but I think this is really as a quality reviewer this is really really on my heart of a discussion because I always used to say as I was briefly presented you need to have this ecosystem and a holistic perspective because then you have better chances to improve. If you just for example look at teacher training and nothing else. I mean teacher training is important but if you don’t like look at the infrastructure. the services, the support you have for teachers and staff. A lot of things will fall in between the shares. So the ecosystem and the holistic system is important and those teachers, trainers, admin staff, leaders who understand that they will both survive but they will also succeed. And I would also like to stress that it is not just one person’s responsibility and that was what I had on my slide. You need to look at this with your hand, by attitude, by action, by strategies, by mindset, attitudes. So everything goes together. That maybe was a long answer but that is my view. Thank you so much Ava.

Pilar Rodriguez: Yes, we have another question in the room. Please go ahead.

Marilia Maciel: Thank you. My name is Marilia Maciel. I am Director for Digital Trade and Economic Security at Diplo and I also develop research on disinformation. So my question is to the colleague from ISOC. I don’t know if you looked at disinformation. You presented us with a very comprehensive and interesting panorama of the situation and it seemed to me that you focused quite a bit on media literacy which is one of the tools that we have in our hands to combat disinformation but at the same time there’s quite an importance to focus on actions from regulators or self-regulation that aims to attack the problem at the source and reduce the exposure in the environment. I was just wondering how are you dealing because in societies that are challenging, polarized, it’s usually the moment in which disinformation takes off and if you have an approach like other countries have to try to separate foreign sources of disinformation, domestic disinformation, how are you dealing with this situation? If you could share some views from your research or personal perspectives. Thank you.

Edan Ring: Well, thank you very much. I think This is a very, very timely question and very relevant, and this is something that we have been dealing with intensively in the last few months. First of all, we come from a very conflicted or polarized situation, like you said, and one of the problems we have is that there is no motivation or insensitivity for policymakers and for regulators to regulate and to somehow control social media. So this is not a tool right now we can even use or address. We know our government and our parliament is not willing to regulate social media, and we try to find solutions that don’t come from regulation or don’t come from self-regulation of platforms, because we are also not only a conflict zone, but also quite marginalized on the edge of Europe, very small language, very small market. So also for platforms, there aren’t a lot of incentives to moderate or self-regulate. The other thing you talked about is trying to understand sources of disinformation and influence, which usually try to disguise themselves as internal sources, and we have a lot of foreign interference that is trying to polarize and that is trying to escalate internal discourse and internal conflict, disguising themselves as internal actors, and I think authorities and civil society and researchers We have a very hard job at looking at the sources and trying to separate local or foreign interference. This is some of the biggest challenges. That’s why we think going, first of all, to the users as a first line of defense, you could say, or a second line of defense, is very, very important. It doesn’t really matter if the source is external or internal. The users, the civilians, they have to have some kind of capacity to deal with it. And the other thing we do, which I think is very important and useful, is try to empower media, local media and journalism, which also needs a lot of help in our country and is also under very political pressures and financial pressures, like in many other conflicted countries, and civil society. So I think together, these three actors, the media, the civil society, and users themselves, have to develop some kind of mechanism to defend themselves, to fact check, and to use verified sources. That’s another thing we’re trying to push for. And before we talk about regulation or moderation by platforms, establishing and enforcing certified, verified sources of information, it could be state information or academic information or journalism, but also that will be available for all groups. It has to be available in Arabic, it has to be available maybe in Russian, for the Russian immigrant community, it has to be available also in ultra-Orthodox communities. I hope, and I’ll be glad to elaborate afterwards.

Pilar Rodriguez: Thank you for your question. Thank you. So we have one minute left. I would like our speakers to have one closing statement, short, maybe like a tweet statement. And Egle, maybe we can start with you.

Egle Celiesiene: Yes, thank you. So my statement would be that there is no one solution, but many connected action that together move us closer to inclusion. So it would be about connection people and different initiatives, which were presented during our presentation. So thank you for the opportunity one more time.

Pilar Rodriguez: Thank you, Egle. And Ebba?

Ebba Ossiannilsson: Yes, my statement for this topic will be about, first of all, the topic of inclusion and sustainability and scalability. And you need to have all those three hand in hand. And you need also to develop a culture of care, curiosity, and challenges. So the cultural aspect is very important.

Pilar Rodriguez: Thank you. Thank you so much. And last but not least, Erin? So my message will be work with communities, not just for them. I think it’s very important to empower local leaders, influencers, and organizations to give them voice and agency in the process of digital inclusion through participatory planning and implementation. That’s a tweet, I hope. That’s a perfect tweet, all three of you.

Moderator: So now I would like to give the floor to Jacques Rapporteur so that he can share the messages for this session. Thank you for well moderating and thank you for the floor. I will continue and try to share my screen. Here we go. So I was listening, carefully listening in and came up with the following three proposals for messages. So first, I read it aloud for those who are, who cannot read it. Global and social gaps lead to disparities in internet access, especially in geographically isolated peripheral areas, as E.G. highlighted in the ISOC-IL report, but also amongst different groups in society, including differences between generations. Then we are moving away from geographical and the infrastructure aspect to a more content oriented diversity. And well, just a question, is that okay for the moment? We will have, we can just discuss it once we are through all three paragraphs. So the second would be diversity and unequal opportunities lead to differences in internet usage patterns, affecting digital literacy skills and the capacity to effective online engagement in imminent areas like retrieving information, public and private digital services from social media to online banking, as well as education in general. Factors of age, gender, culture and others also lead to increased vulnerability of specific groups to online harms such as phishing, misinformation, cyberbullying. And then the third paragraph will be about possible moving, move forward. These divides require actionable strategies and policies for a more diverse, inclusive and equitable digital future. So this end leadership. multi-stakeholder collaboration and focused, well-thought-through projects are essential, including engaging governments, civil society, academia and tech companies. Now that we have the full picture, first, are we okay with the structure? So we see as main points infrastructure, so access, then second what’s on it, and third, what can we do? And then any addenda except that there is a blank too much, which I will correct immediately. Oh, if anyone would like to add anything to the messages, if you feel like there was a key point that is missing, you can speak now or forever hold your peace. I would like just to thank you because it was impressive how after a quite diverse presentation, you pointed out very important topics from the background to what we can do and how to move forward. Thank you for summarizing and highlighting the most important messages, which we shared today. Thank you, it was brilliant. Thank you for these flowers.

Edan Ring: Thank you, Jacques, and thank you, Pilar, for moderating and managing the whole session. And it is not speak up now or remain silent forever, because this is not the case.

Pilar Rodriguez: You will, if I’m well informed, have the opportunity to still comment on the draft messages in the coming days. So they will become available, if I’m well informed, in about two weeks time and may then be shared with you. with whoever pressure groups and or targets according to the third paragraph. You may see fit. Perfect. Thank you so much, Jacques and all of our speakers for sharing your insights and for all of you for being here. And I would like to give back the floor to our remote moderator for the closing remarks. Well, thank you, everybody, for being here in this session. And the next session will be in Generative AI and Freedom of Expression, Mutual Reinforcement or Force Exclusion at 1430. We look forward to seeing you back then. More information, EuroDIG Wiki. Thank you very much. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Agreement points

Multi-stakeholder collaboration is essential for addressing digital inequalities

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Egle Celiesiene
– Ebba Ossiannilsson
– Audience

Arguments

Multi-stakeholder approach focusing on Arab citizens, ultra-Orthodox communities, and senior citizens in Israel

Six real-life cases including Roma integration, refugee support, and intergenerational cultural projects

Digital inclusion course targeting teachers, students, and educational providers with practical tools

Multi-stakeholder collaboration essential for actionable strategies and policies

Summary

All speakers emphasized that addressing digital inequalities requires coordinated efforts from multiple stakeholders including governments, civil society, academia, tech companies, and communities themselves. Each presented examples of successful multi-stakeholder initiatives.

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Human rights

No single solution exists for digital inclusion challenges

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Egle Celiesiene
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Three-tiered model for assessing digital gaps: access, skills, and outcomes disparities

Connecting people and initiatives rather than seeking single solutions

Ecosystem approach requiring leadership understanding of digital transformation

Summary

All speakers agreed that digital inclusion requires comprehensive, multi-faceted approaches rather than single solutions. They emphasized the need for connected actions, holistic frameworks, and ecosystem thinking.

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Community empowerment and participatory approaches are crucial

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Egle Celiesiene
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Working with communities rather than for them through participatory planning

Six real-life cases including Roma integration, refugee support, and intergenerational cultural projects

Digital inclusion course targeting teachers, students, and educational providers with practical tools

Summary

All speakers emphasized the importance of empowering communities and involving them directly in planning and implementation processes rather than simply providing solutions for them.

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Human rights

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for comprehensive frameworks that go beyond basic access to include skills, outcomes, and systemic approaches. They both stressed that connectivity alone is insufficient without addressing literacy, safety, and meaningful use.

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Three-tiered model for assessing digital gaps: access, skills, and outcomes disparities

Ecosystem approach requiring leadership understanding of digital transformation

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognized the complexity of addressing disinformation in polarized societies and the challenges of distinguishing between foreign and domestic sources. They agreed on the importance of empowering multiple actors including users, media, and civil society.

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Marilia Maciel

Arguments

Need to empower users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms against misinformation

Separation of foreign vs domestic disinformation sources in polarized societies

Topics

Cybersecurity | Human rights | Sociocultural

Both speakers emphasized the importance of recognizing and addressing cultural differences and diverse needs in digital services and education. They both advocated for inclusive design approaches that accommodate different learning styles and cultural contexts.

Speakers

– Egle Celiesiene
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Digital services often ignore cultural differences and economic barriers affect access

Universal design principles needed for inclusive and scalable education

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Human rights

Unexpected consensus

Leadership and cultural change as prerequisites for digital transformation

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Working with communities rather than for them through participatory planning

Cultural quality development involving strategy, ethics, and leadership at all levels

Explanation

While coming from different contexts (conflict resolution/safety vs. education), both speakers unexpectedly converged on the critical importance of leadership mindset and cultural transformation. This suggests that technical solutions alone are insufficient without fundamental changes in how organizations and societies approach digital inclusion.

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Assessment and evaluation methods need fundamental change

Speakers

– Ebba Ossiannilsson
– Edan Ring

Arguments

Importance of changing assessment methods for true digital transformation in education

Three-tiered model for assessing digital gaps: access, skills, and outcomes disparities

Explanation

Both speakers, from different domains, emphasized that traditional measurement and assessment approaches are inadequate. This unexpected consensus suggests a broader recognition that digital transformation requires new evaluation frameworks across multiple sectors.

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated strong consensus on the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration, community empowerment, holistic approaches, and the recognition that digital inequalities require comprehensive rather than single-solution strategies. There was particular agreement on the importance of cultural sensitivity and participatory planning.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with complementary perspectives. The speakers approached digital inequalities from different contexts (conflict/safety, community development, education) but arrived at remarkably similar conclusions about the need for systemic, participatory, and culturally-sensitive approaches. This strong consensus suggests these principles are fundamental to addressing digital inequalities across diverse contexts and reinforces the validity of multi-stakeholder, community-centered approaches to digital inclusion.

Different viewpoints

Regulatory vs. non-regulatory approaches to addressing disinformation

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Marilia Maciel

Arguments

Need to empower users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms against misinformation

Separation of foreign vs domestic disinformation sources in polarized societies

Summary

Maciel advocated for regulatory approaches and self-regulation to attack disinformation at its source, while Ring emphasized that in Israel’s context, regulation is not viable due to lack of government motivation, requiring focus on empowering users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms instead

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Unexpected differences

Role of regulation in addressing digital challenges

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Marilia Maciel

Arguments

Need to empower users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms against misinformation

Separation of foreign vs domestic disinformation sources in polarized societies

Explanation

This disagreement was unexpected because both speakers work in digital governance and safety, yet they had fundamentally different views on regulatory solutions. Ring’s position that regulation is not viable in Israel’s context contrasted sharply with Maciel’s emphasis on regulatory and self-regulatory approaches, revealing how local political contexts can lead to divergent strategies even among experts in the same field

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory

Overall assessment

Summary

The session showed relatively low levels of direct disagreement, with most differences being methodological rather than fundamental. The main disagreement centered on regulatory approaches to disinformation, while speakers generally agreed on core principles of inclusion, multi-stakeholder engagement, and community empowerment

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. The disagreements that existed were constructive and reflected different contextual approaches rather than fundamental philosophical differences. This suggests a mature field where practitioners adapt similar principles to different contexts, which is positive for developing flexible, context-sensitive solutions to digital inequalities

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for comprehensive frameworks that go beyond basic access to include skills, outcomes, and systemic approaches. They both stressed that connectivity alone is insufficient without addressing literacy, safety, and meaningful use.

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Three-tiered model for assessing digital gaps: access, skills, and outcomes disparities

Ecosystem approach requiring leadership understanding of digital transformation

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Infrastructure

Both speakers recognized the complexity of addressing disinformation in polarized societies and the challenges of distinguishing between foreign and domestic sources. They agreed on the importance of empowering multiple actors including users, media, and civil society.

Speakers

– Edan Ring
– Marilia Maciel

Arguments

Need to empower users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms against misinformation

Separation of foreign vs domestic disinformation sources in polarized societies

Topics

Cybersecurity | Human rights | Sociocultural

Both speakers emphasized the importance of recognizing and addressing cultural differences and diverse needs in digital services and education. They both advocated for inclusive design approaches that accommodate different learning styles and cultural contexts.

Speakers

– Egle Celiesiene
– Ebba Ossiannilsson

Arguments

Digital services often ignore cultural differences and economic barriers affect access

Universal design principles needed for inclusive and scalable education

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Human rights

Key takeaways

Digital inequalities require a three-tiered approach addressing access, skills, and outcomes disparities across different communities

Community-specific solutions are more effective than one-size-fits-all approaches, with tailored strategies for different cultural, religious, and age groups

Multi-stakeholder collaboration involving governments, civil society, academia, and tech companies is essential for addressing digital divides

Leadership understanding of digital transformation is crucial – leaders who grasp the holistic ecosystem approach succeed while those who don’t fail

Empowerment through participatory planning works better than top-down solutions – working ‘with communities, not just for them’

Quality in digital education requires changing assessment methods and adopting universal design principles for true inclusivity

In polarized societies, empowering users, media, and civil society as defense mechanisms is more viable than relying solely on regulation

Cultural aspects and intergenerational cooperation are vital components of successful digital inclusion initiatives

Resolutions and action items

Draft messages from the session will be made available in approximately two weeks for participant review and comment

Continued dissemination of the Digital Inclusion for All Learners project results through scientific publication

Ongoing implementation of the Disinformation Resilience Israel project with EU funding

Expansion of successful programs like the Lithuanian National Life Skills Programme and career academy initiatives

Unresolved issues

How to effectively separate foreign versus domestic sources of disinformation in polarized societies

Lack of regulatory frameworks for social media platforms in some regions, particularly smaller markets

Whether overall progress in digital inclusion is actually being made or if efforts are just ‘fighting windmills’

How to scale successful local initiatives to broader national or international levels

Addressing the challenge that digital services often ignore cultural differences and economic barriers

Suggested compromises

Focus on empowering users, media, and civil society rather than waiting for government regulation in contexts where regulatory solutions are not feasible

Combine research-based approaches with direct community engagement to balance academic rigor with practical implementation

Use existing free resources and frameworks (like European Commission tools) rather than reinventing solutions, while adapting them to local contexts

Develop ecosystem approaches that address multiple factors simultaneously rather than focusing on single solutions

Don’t stop at connectivity… empowering communities, giving them the agency and the voice to be part of the planning process and part of the whole approach to tackling these challenges.

Speaker

Edan Ring

Reason

This comment challenges the conventional approach to digital inclusion that focuses primarily on infrastructure and access. It introduces a paradigm shift from a top-down to a bottom-up approach, emphasizing community agency and participatory planning. This is particularly insightful because it recognizes that meaningful digital inclusion requires more than technical solutions—it requires cultural sensitivity and community ownership.

Impact

This comment established a foundational framework for the entire discussion, moving beyond technical solutions to emphasize human-centered approaches. It influenced subsequent speakers to focus on community engagement and participatory methods in their own presentations.

Work with communities, not just for them… it’s very important to empower local leaders, influencers, and organizations to give them voice and agency in the process of digital inclusion through participatory planning and implementation.

Speaker

Edan Ring

Reason

This closing statement crystallizes a fundamental shift in thinking about digital inclusion work. The distinction between working ‘with’ versus ‘for’ communities represents a critical insight about power dynamics and effectiveness in social intervention programs. It challenges paternalistic approaches common in development and inclusion initiatives.

Impact

As a closing statement, this comment served as a memorable takeaway that synthesized the session’s key learning. It provided a clear actionable principle that participants could apply in their own work, effectively anchoring the discussion’s main message.

Have things gotten better or is it just some kind of just fighting windmills… it seems to me that this is an evergreen every IGF you’re talking about the same.

Speaker

Audience member

Reason

This comment introduced critical skepticism about the effectiveness of digital inclusion efforts, challenging the implicit assumption that projects and initiatives are making meaningful progress. It forced speakers to confront the possibility that despite numerous well-intentioned programs, systemic inequalities persist. This meta-question about the field’s effectiveness was particularly thought-provoking.

Impact

This question shifted the discussion from presenting solutions to critically evaluating their effectiveness. It prompted Ebba to provide a nuanced response about leadership and systemic approaches, deepening the conversation beyond project descriptions to fundamental questions about impact and sustainability.

It depends what we mean by better… it is a question of leadership very much. Leaders who understand this digital transformation and what it brings for the individuals and for the planet. They are the winners… you need to have this ecosystem and a holistic perspective.

Speaker

Ebba Ossiannilsson

Reason

This response reframes the effectiveness question by introducing the critical role of leadership and systems thinking. Rather than defending existing approaches, it acknowledges complexity while identifying leadership as a key variable in success. The ecosystem perspective adds analytical depth by suggesting that isolated interventions are insufficient.

Impact

This comment elevated the discussion from tactical project implementation to strategic systems thinking. It introduced the concept that success depends not just on program design but on leadership quality and holistic approaches, adding a layer of complexity to how participants might evaluate and design future initiatives.

In societies that are challenging, polarized, it’s usually the moment in which disinformation takes off… how are you dealing with this situation?

Speaker

Marilia Maciel

Reason

This comment connected digital inclusion challenges to broader societal issues of polarization and disinformation, introducing a security and governance dimension that hadn’t been explicitly addressed. It highlighted how digital inequalities intersect with information warfare and social stability, adding geopolitical complexity to the discussion.

Impact

This question broadened the scope of the discussion beyond traditional digital divide issues to include information security and social cohesion. It prompted Edan to discuss the limitations of regulatory approaches and the need for multi-actor defense strategies, introducing new complexity about the relationship between inclusion and security.

There is no one solution, but many connected action that together move us closer to inclusion.

Speaker

Egle Celiesiene

Reason

This insight challenges the tendency to seek silver bullet solutions to complex social problems. It emphasizes the interconnected nature of digital inclusion challenges and the need for coordinated, multi-faceted approaches. This systems thinking perspective is particularly valuable in a field often dominated by single-intervention approaches.

Impact

This comment reinforced the session’s emerging theme about complexity and systems approaches. It validated the diverse case studies presented and provided a conceptual framework for understanding how different initiatives can work together synergistically.

Overall assessment

The key comments fundamentally shifted the discussion from a project showcase format to a critical examination of approaches and effectiveness in digital inclusion work. The audience member’s skeptical question about whether progress is real served as a crucial turning point, forcing speakers to move beyond describing their work to defending and contextualizing it within broader systemic challenges. Edan Ring’s emphasis on community agency and participatory approaches provided a unifying framework that elevated the conversation from technical solutions to human-centered design principles. The introduction of disinformation and polarization concerns by Marilia Maciel added important complexity by connecting digital inclusion to broader societal stability issues. Overall, these interventions transformed what could have been a series of disconnected case studies into a coherent exploration of fundamental principles, systemic challenges, and the need for more sophisticated, community-driven approaches to digital inclusion.

How to separate foreign sources of disinformation from domestic disinformation in polarized societies

Speaker

Marilia Maciel

Explanation

This is crucial for developing targeted responses to disinformation campaigns and understanding the different motivations and methods behind foreign interference versus domestic misinformation

How to establish and enforce certified, verified sources of information that are accessible to all cultural and linguistic groups

Speaker

Edan Ring

Explanation

This addresses the challenge of providing trustworthy information sources in multiple languages (Arabic, Russian, Hebrew) and formats suitable for different communities including ultra-Orthodox groups

Whether digital inclusion initiatives are actually making measurable progress over time or just addressing the same recurring problems

Speaker

Unnamed audience member

Explanation

This fundamental question challenges whether current approaches to digital inclusion are effective or if new strategies are needed to achieve real progress

How to develop regulatory approaches for social media in conflict zones where governments are unwilling to regulate

Speaker

Implied by Edan Ring’s response

Explanation

This explores alternative governance mechanisms when traditional regulatory approaches are not available or politically feasible

How to measure and define ‘better’ outcomes in digital inclusion initiatives

Speaker

Ebba Ossiannilsson

Explanation

This addresses the need for clear metrics and definitions to evaluate the success of digital inclusion programs and policies

How to scale successful local digital inclusion projects to broader national or international contexts

Speaker

Implied from multiple presentations

Explanation

This examines how to replicate and adapt successful community-based initiatives across different cultural and geographical contexts