How to enhance participation and cooperation of CSOs in/with multistakeholder IG forums | IGF 2023 Open Forum #96
Event report
Speakers
- Marlena Wisniak, Senior Advisor, Digital Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit ‎Law Stichting
- Peter Marien, Teamleader Digital Governance, European Commission
- Tereza Horejsova, Outreach Manager, Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, IGF MAG Member
- Viktor Kapiyo, Member of the Board of Trustees, Kenya ICT Action Network
Moderators
- Pavlina Ittelson, Executive Director, Diplo US
- Shita Laksmi, DiploFoundation
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Pavlina Ittelson, Executive Director, Diplo US
The European Commission has launched a new initiative called Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE), led by the Diplo Foundation and funded by the European Commission. This project aims to enhance civil society participation in international Internet governance (IG) processes, with a particular focus on the Global South. The goal is to address the challenges faced in IG, including the fragmentation of forums, lack of capacity and understanding of human rights impacts, and the requirements of technological development. The initiative seeks to promote a more inclusive approach to Internet governance by involving civil society in a multi-stakeholder manner, allowing for the inclusion of diverse perspectives. By doing so, it can bring attention to issues such as women's rights, language and culture aspects, and the rights of indigenous groups, which are currently underrepresented in Internet governance forums. The lack of diversity and inclusion within specialist standardization bodies is also highlighted as a concern. Efforts should be made to address these disparities and ensure that a wider range of perspectives are considered in decision-making processes. Capacity building, grassroots participation, and engagement guidance are identified as key areas requiring attention for civil society organizations to effectively contribute to IG processes and advocate for their interests. Partnerships between civil society organizations from the Global North and Global South are encouraged to facilitate knowledge sharing and collaboration for a more equitable and effective approach to Internet governance. Trivial technical solutions are seen as potential remedies for scalability issues within IG, such as replacing challenging anti-bot measures to improve accessibility and user experience. Opportunities for public engagement are found in the environmental sector and youth rights, where public involvement can contribute to progress. While collective input from civil society organizations is valuable, it is important to strike a balance between collective action and the preservation of diverse opinions and perspectives. Ensuring that diverse voices are included is essential for effective decision-making processes. Collaboration between organizations and network building can greatly benefit civil society by amplifying their impact and creating a stronger collective voice. Navigating participation procedures in various international bodies remains a challenge for civil society, but strategic engagement in specific forums can help achieve their goals. Long-term involvement and understanding trends are considered crucial for success. In conclusion, the CADE project aims to empower civil society and promote their active participation in international Internet governance. Addressing the challenges of fragmentation, capacity building, diversity, and inclusion is crucial to achieving a more inclusive and effective approach to Internet governance. Through partnerships, collaboration, and strategic engagement, civil society can play a significant role in shaping the Internet's future.
Viktor Kapiyo, Member of the Board of Trustees, Kenya ICT Action Network
Civil society organizations from the Global South face various challenges in their work. One major challenge is the difficulty in accessing global processes due to financial barriers. These organizations often lack the necessary resources to participate in international meetings and forums, limiting their ability to have their voices heard on important issues. Additionally, the limited internet reach in the Global South further exacerbates this problem, hindering their ability to engage in online discussions and access relevant information. Furthermore, there are only a few organizations in the region that focus on internet governance, isolating the voices of civil society in these discussions.
However, there is a positive sentiment towards the need for awareness and capacity building among more people in the Global South. The Kenya School of Internet Governance has played a critical role in this regard, having trained nearly 5,000 individuals on internet governance in just six years. The idea is to make internet governance conversations accessible to everyone, acknowledging that anyone with an email is a stakeholder. This approach recognises the unique contexts of local organizations and aims to amplify their voices in global discussions.
Collaborative approaches and coalition-building are also considered crucial in the field of digital rights. By forming partnerships and working together, organizations can address the lack of linkages that previously existed across various digital rights organizations. This collaboration allows for collective problem-solving, knowledge exchange, capacity building, and resource leveraging. By combining the competencies of different organizations, particularly in terms of physical presence and understanding local dynamics, their collective impact is strengthened.
Additionally, partnering with organizations from the Global North can benefit those in the Global South. Global North organizations often have established relationships with policymakers and a better understanding of local dynamics, which facilitates the presentation of views by Global South organizations. Such partnerships also lead to capacity building and knowledge exchange. Global North organizations possess technical resources, such as ICT skills, which Global South organizations can leverage to enhance their work.
Funders also play a crucial role in strengthening civil society organizations. However, disjointed and fragmented funding can create problems for these organizations. Global South organizations often find themselves competing for the same funds to address similar problems, hindering collaboration. Moreover, funders' goals do not always align with the specific needs of organizations in the Global South. Therefore, it is essential for funders to coordinate their goals and understand the dynamics of Global South organizations to provide effective support.
Building good relationships with legislators and demonstrating expertise is crucial for civil society organizations when trying to influence legislation. It is important to establish these relationships before submitting views and demonstrate the potential value that the organization can bring to the legislative process.
Working collaboratively with other civil society organizations and presenting a united front can add weight to arguments. This approach demonstrates strength in numbers and increases the impact of advocacy efforts.
Finally, being prepared for potential counterarguments and understanding the local context are crucial for civil society organizations. By being well-prepared, organizations can effectively respond to opposing arguments and address the specific concerns and needs of their local communities.
In conclusion, civil society organizations from the Global South face various challenges, including limited access to global processes, internet reach, and organizational capacity. However, there is a positive sentiment towards the need for awareness, capacity building, and collaboration. Partnering with organizations from the Global North, coordinating funders' goals, building relationships with legislators, working collaboratively, and being prepared are essential strategies for strengthening civil society organizations and making a meaningful impact.
Marlena Wisniak, Senior Advisor, Digital Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit ‎Law Stichting
Stakeholder engagement is considered a vital component of policymaking at all levels. It emphasises the need for collaboration, iteration, and inclusivity, ensuring that stakeholders' voices are heard and that they have influence over the decision-making process. However, there is a clear power imbalance between stakeholders, hindering inclusivity in policymaking. This asymmetry of power is evident in the unequal playing field between civil society, the private sector, and states, as well as regional disparities and safety issues that impede activist participation.
To address these challenges, transparency in stakeholder engagement is essential, ensuring public visibility of participation mechanisms and discussion outcomes. Proper resourcing, including financial contributions and trainings, is crucial for effective multi-stakeholder participation, particularly for marginalized groups and non-digital rights organizations.
Participation in standardization processes, especially in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), is complex due to its technical nature. Civil society's limited representation in standardization bodies, with a disproportionate focus on digital rights organizations and AI expertise, hinders diversity and inclusivity in these processes.
Global North organizations can learn from global majority-based organizations to incorporate diverse perspectives. However, stakeholder engagement faces resistance in many countries outside the United States and Europe, requiring innovative advocacy strategies.
International governance mechanisms may have limited influence in the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) but greatly impact national regulations within the global majority. UNESCO guidelines and recommendations from entities like the United Nations (UN) shape national regulations, though enforcement can sometimes become problematic.
The diversity of civil society and the global majority, including different languages and cultural norms, should be considered in policymaking and stakeholder engagement processes.
In the context of internet governance, there is a need for more inclusive perspectives. Incorporating learnings from initiatives like the Digital Services Act (DSA) Human Rights Alliance is important in shaping international internet governance.
While inclusive informal networks exist, coordination among these networks proves challenging, impacting effective stakeholder engagement and collaboration.
Privileged and well-networked organizations have the advantage of exposure and influence, creating an unequal platform for stakeholder engagement. This inequality must be addressed to achieve inclusivity.
Organizations need to take responsibility for bringing in new voices and perspectives, such as offering panel spots to others or having someone accompany them to ensure representation.
Understanding the UN advocacy process is challenging, even with dedicated UN advocacy officers, hindering effective stakeholder engagement in international policymaking.
In conclusion, stakeholder engagement is crucial for effective policymaking, necessitating the addressing of power imbalances, promoting transparency and accountability, providing resources and training, and embracing inclusivity. Considerations include international governance mechanisms, language and cultural diversity, and coordination within informal networks. Call for organizations to bring in new voices persists, while understanding the UN advocacy process is crucial to effective stakeholder engagement.
Jovan Kurbalija, Executive Director, DiploFoundation
The analysis of the speakers' statements reveals several noteworthy points regarding the impact of triviality on people's participation in large systems. One speaker highlights the influence of navigation experience in UN corridors on individuals' sense of belonging and their feeling of being part of the process. The speaker suggests that this experience can shape people's participation in the system, implying that a positive and inclusive navigation experience can enhance engagement.
Another significant concern raised by the speakers is the accessibility of documents from various international bodies such as the UN, EU, and others. It is argued that the lack of interactivity in PDF formats can hinder the accessibility of these documents. The speakers suggest that the static nature of PDF formats may limit the ability of individuals to engage with the content effectively, potentially excluding certain groups from participating fully.
Furthermore, the design of UN Secretary General policy briefs is highlighted as not being online-friendly. It is suggested that the current design may pose challenges for users trying to access and engage with the content online. This aspect negatively affects the user experience and may impede people's ability to participate in policy development processes.
The sentiment among the speakers towards the current state of information accessibility in policy development processes is largely negative. The mention of the European AI Act exemplifies this sentiment, as its complex display hinders consultation, potentially limiting effective engagement. However, there is a positive aspect as well. The analysis reveals an acknowledgement of the importance of encouraging alternative thinking and creativity in the current world context. This suggests that fostering diverse perspectives and innovative approaches can contribute to more inclusive and effective policy development.
In conclusion, the analysis highlights the importance of considering the impact of triviality on people's participation in large systems. It emphasizes the need for a positive and inclusive navigation experience in institutional settings such as the UN. Additionally, it underscores the significance of improving the accessibility of documents from international bodies, including the design of policy briefs. The sentiment of connectivity and engagement in policy development processes is largely negative, but there is a recognition of the value of alternative thinking and creativity. These insights provide valuable considerations for policymakers and institutions aiming to enhance public participation and effective governance.
Peter Marien, Teamleader Digital Governance, European Commission
The need for strong participation of civil society in global digital governance is emphasised as a positive argument in the context of the EU. The EU strongly advocates for civil society involvement as it believes that without it, societies tend to drift off in directions that are not aligned with a human-centric model. Similarly, advocating for multi-stakeholder level discussions is seen as positive and necessary. It is argued that certain discussions should not be limited to intergovernmental talks alone.
However, there is a negative aspect to consider as well - the lack of knowledge and capacity within civil society organisations. It is observed that civil society faces challenges internally within the European Commission, and there is a general lack of know-how when it comes to global digital governance. This lack of expertise and capacity hinder the effective participation of civil society in shaping digital governance policies.
The importance of inclusion of the Global South in digital dialogue is seen as a positive argument. It is noted that there is currently a gap in participation from the Global South in global digital governance. An initiative led by the DiploFoundation known as the Civil Society Alliances for Digital Empowerment (CADE) project is mentioned as being instrumental in addressing this gap.
Furthermore, it is highlighted that more capacity and resources are needed for civil society to participate meaningfully in internet governance discussions. The fast-paced nature of the internet scene and the increased global attention to these issues, particularly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, create a demand for civil society to possess not just the know-how, but also the necessary resources for participation.
Peter Marien, a supporter of civil society's meaningful participation in internet governance discussions, emphasises the importance of investment in capacity building and resource allocation. He argues that adopting new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), requires resources for meaningful participation, especially since AI has become a fundamental topic in internet governance.
Initiating consultation processes with the general public is seen as beneficial and positive. Notably, a Nobel laureate journalist actively interviewed a random selection of individuals, which had a significant impact. Extensive consultation processes, which sometimes receive thousands to tens of thousands of inputs from society and are sometimes even analysed by AI, occur in EU legislation processes.
Additionally, it is argued that consultation processes should also involve non-experts, as citizens, despite lacking expertise, can have a notable impact. This underlines the value of diverse perspectives and the democratization of public engagement.
In terms of diplomacy and communication, it is acknowledged by Peter Marien that sensitivity should be maintained when dealing with such matters. This implies that diplomatic interactions require a tactful approach to foster constructive dialogue.
Peter recommends seeking dialogue and creating a trusted relationship with the involved government when it comes to government relations and policy-making. He refers to experiences in other countries, like Kenya, where open dialogue has been beneficial.
Finally, it is suggested that reaching out through other organizations that may have better access to open dialogue can be fruitful. By collaborating with strategic alliances and other organizations, civil society can effectively enter the conversation and contribute to the discourse on internet governance.
In conclusion, the expanded summary highlights the need for strong civil society participation, the importance of multi-stakeholder discussions, the lack of knowledge and capacity within civil society, the inclusion of the Global South, the necessity for increased capacity and resources, Peter Marien's support for investment in capacity building, the benefits of initiating consultation processes with the public including non-experts, the importance of maintaining sensitivity in diplomacy and communication, the significance of building a trusted relationship with the government, and the suggestion of reaching out through other organizations for open dialogue. These various aspects contribute to shaping effective global digital governance and promoting a human-centric model. The summary aims to be an accurate reflection of the main analysis text.
Tereza Horejsova, Outreach Manager, Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, IGF MAG Member
The arguments and stances presented emphasize the importance of civil society in policy processes. Civil society organizations are viewed as crucial actors in policy development, as they often prioritize the interests of individuals. They provide multiple perspectives and efficient coordination mechanisms, enabling policy processes to benefit from a wide range of viewpoints.
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is highlighted as a significant platform for civil society to engage with others and influence relevant issues. Traditionally, the IGF has been dominated by civil society participation, and it offers a safe space for civil society to have a say in the governance of the internet.
Moreover, the contribution of all stakeholders, including the private sector and civil society, is considered vital for the development of digital policy. It is argued that it would be absurd to discuss digital policy without consulting these stakeholders, as their involvement ensures a more inclusive and comprehensive approach.
The Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFC) is recognized for acknowledging the importance of multi-stakeholder cooperation in capacity building related to cyber security. The GFC serves as a platform for actors involved in cyber security to come together and work collaboratively towards building expertise in this field.
Despite these positive aspects, there are concerns about the effectiveness of consulting civil society organizations in a superficial or "tick-the-box" approach. Civil society organizations have varied agendas and objectives, making it challenging to consult them effectively. Some policy fora are criticized for conducting pro-forma consultations that do not necessarily lead to meaningful outcomes. This lack of sufficient coordination of priorities among donors is seen as a barrier to the effective involvement of civil society organizations in policy forums.
On a different note, Tereza Horejsova's perspective is highlighted, as she believes in the importance of introducing new and inexperienced voices in panels. She encourages experimenting with panel compositions to achieve fresh perspectives and downplays the risks associated with having first-time panelists. This approach fosters inclusivity and contributes to reducing gender inequalities and promoting diversity in panel discussions.
In summary, the arguments and stances presented emphasize the crucial role that civil society organizations play in policy processes. They bring valuable inputs, diverse perspectives, and efficient coordination mechanisms. The Internet Governance Forum and the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise are identified as important platforms for civil society to engage in relevant discussions. However, there are concerns about the superficiality of consultations and the lack of sufficient coordination among donors. Additionally, Tereza Horejsova's perspective highlights the need for inclusivity and fresh perspectives in panel compositions. These observations underscore the significance of multi-stakeholder cooperation and the active involvement of civil society in policy development processes.
Audience
Technical standards bodies can be complex and overwhelming, making it challenging for new participants to navigate and contribute effectively. These bodies consist of numerous working and study groups within each organization, leading to a fragmented landscape. It can be difficult for newcomers to determine which meetings to attend and how to make meaningful contributions. The dominance of the United States and Europe in these bodies further complicates the situation, potentially marginalising participants from other regions around the world.
However, there are strategies and structures that can support and facilitate smoother participation. One such approach is the provision of engagement strategies and support, such as financial assistance and assistance with visa processes. For instance, Article 19's Global Digital Program offers support structures that take care of finances and visa processes for participants. They also provide one-on-one mentorship to help participants understand complex concepts and bounce ideas off after meetings. This support helps participants overcome logistical barriers and align the priorities of civil society organisations with the needs and objectives of technical standards bodies.
Cooperation and collaboration between the Global North and Global South in technical standards bodies should embrace an inclusive approach and avoid a white-saviorist mentality. There is much to learn from the Global South, and creative advocacy strategies can flourish outside of the US and Europe. By embracing a collaborative approach that respects the knowledge and expertise of all regions, technical standards bodies can become more equitable and representative.
International governance mechanisms have a significant impact on national regulation, particularly in the global majority. Entities like UNESCO recommendations can disproportionately influence national regulatory frameworks, potentially shaping policies that may not be in the best interests of countries in the global majority. Therefore, it is important for these governance mechanisms to involve a diverse range of voices and perspectives to ensure fair and inclusive decision-making processes.
It is crucial to acknowledge that civil society and the global majority are not monoliths. There is significant diversity within regions, and even within a single country like India, there are multiple languages and perspectives. Recognising this diversity strengthens the ability to address inequalities and promote inclusivity within technical standards bodies.
Capacity building is a process that takes time and cannot be achieved in a day. This is particularly evident in areas like climate change, where developing the necessary expertise and infrastructure to meet the goals outlined in global agreements like the Paris Agreement is a long-term endeavour. Recognising the gradual nature of capacity building is crucial to avoid unrealistic expectations and foster sustainable progress.
Citizen participation at the local level plays a crucial role in addressing global issues. As demonstrated during the Paris Agreement process, citizen assemblies can provide valuable input and insights. Encouraging citizen participation in different parts of the world can foster capacity building and contribute to global efforts to address pressing challenges.
Institutional capacity building is vital for civil societies. By strengthening their institutional structures, civil society organisations can better engage with governments and stakeholders to influence policy making. For example, the pending implementation of India's Personal Data Protection Act and Digital India Act highlights the need for a strong front when dealing with governments. These regulations will impact the digital activities of 1.4 billion people, emphasising the importance of civil society organisations advocating for their interests.
When engaging with governments and policymakers, alternative methods of engagement beyond traditional consultation processes should be explored. Consultation processes prior to the introduction of a bill in India, for example, have proven to be more fruitful in generating meaningful engagement. Finding ways to engage directly with parliamentarians and government officials can lead to more effective and impactful involvement.
While common input by civil society organisations can be valuable, it is important to strike a balance between shared perspectives and maintaining a variety of opinions and perspectives. Overlooking the diversity of opinions within civil society organisations can limit the range of perspectives presented and potentially hinder inclusive decision-making processes.
Collaboration between donors is crucial for promoting synergies and avoiding duplication of efforts. Donors such as the European Union and the State Department are often working on similar projects but may not be collaborating effectively. Encouraging collaboration among donors can lead to more efficient and coordinated support for initiatives and maximise impact.
Creating a wider network of civil society organisations can foster sharing and collaboration. This approach allows organisations to build upon each other's work, share resources, and learn from one another's experiences. By creating a supportive network, civil society organisations can collectively address challenges and contribute to social progress.
Rules for interaction in vast spaces, such as international forums and technical standards bodies, need to be shared and clarified to facilitate effective engagement. Currently, the lack of definitive rules and different interaction styles across spaces can hinder meaningful communication and collaboration. Workshops to brief participants on interaction techniques and establish common ground for engagement are proposed as a possible solution.
In conclusion, navigating and contributing to technical standards bodies can be challenging due to their complex nature. However, supporting engagement strategies, fostering collaboration, and promoting inclusivity are essential for facilitating participation and ensuring the effective functioning of these bodies. Empowering civil society organisations, embracing diverse perspectives, and building strong institutional capacity are key components of this process. By working together, stakeholders can foster meaningful dialogue, create impactful policies, and drive positive change towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.
Speakers
A
Audience
Speech speed
177 words per minute
Speech length
1349 words
Speech time
458 secs
JK
Jovan Kurbalija
Speech speed
175 words per minute
Speech length
861 words
Speech time
296 secs
MW
Marlena Wisniak
Speech speed
166 words per minute
Speech length
2422 words
Speech time
877 secs
PI
Pavlina Ittelson
Speech speed
160 words per minute
Speech length
2986 words
Speech time
1118 secs
PM
Peter Marien
Speech speed
182 words per minute
Speech length
2373 words
Speech time
784 secs
TH
Tereza Horejsova
Speech speed
156 words per minute
Speech length
1318 words
Speech time
508 secs
VK
Viktor Kapiyo
Speech speed
187 words per minute
Speech length
2540 words
Speech time
813 secs
Related event
