Jointly Share the Responsibilities in the Digital Era | IGF 2023 Open Forum #22
Table of contents
Disclaimer: It should be noted that the reporting, analysis and chatbot answers are generated automatically by DiploGPT from the official UN transcripts and, in case of just-in-time reporting, the audiovisual recordings on UN Web TV. The accuracy and completeness of the resources and results can therefore not be guaranteed.
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Full session report
Ren Xianliang
Digital technology is having a significant impact on traditional industries, with the process of digitisation, networking, and intelligence gaining momentum. This transformation is driven by the increasing adoption of digital platforms and the exponential growth of cross-border data flows. Traditional industries are undergoing a digital revolution as they strive to operate more efficiently and effectively.
The importance of digital governance as a global issue is also acknowledged. Digital governance refers to the set of rules, policies, and frameworks that guide the use and regulation of digital technologies. While the need for effective digital governance is recognised, there is currently uneven development of digital governance capabilities among countries. Some countries are better equipped than others to address the challenges and risks associated with the digital age. Additionally, there is growing competition in the digital governance model as countries vie to establish themselves as leaders in this field.
Universal connectivity is identified as a vital goal that needs to be achieved. Despite progress in expanding internet access, around 3 billion people worldwide remain unconnected. The argument is that every person should have safe and affordable access to the internet by 2030. This highlights the need to bridge the digital divide and ensure equal opportunities for individuals, regardless of their geographic location or socio-economic status.
Furthermore, there is a call for more global cooperation and unity in digital governance. The rapid pace of technological advancement and the associated risks and challenges necessitate collaboration between nations. Countries must work together and share responsibilities to effectively address the challenges of the digital age. The World Internet Conference (WIC) is committed to building bridges and promoting closer and pragmatic global cooperation in digital governance.
In conclusion, digital technology is transforming traditional industries through increased digitisation, networking, and intelligence. Digital governance is recognised as an important global issue, although there is a need for more consistent and inclusive development of digital governance capabilities worldwide. Achieving universal connectivity, ensuring internet access for all, is a crucial goal for achieving digital inclusivity. Finally, global cooperation and unity in digital governance are essential for effectively addressing the risks and challenges of the digital age.
Xuanxin Zhang
The analysis highlights the increasing importance of digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors as crucial topics in today’s digital era. This recognition indicates the growing significance of effectively governing and managing these areas to harness their potential for digital productivity. The positive sentiment surrounding this argument suggests an optimistic view of the opportunities that the digital era presents.
One of the key recommendations derived from the analysis is the need to enhance mutual trust through dialogues and exchanges to mitigate digital security risks. The supporting facts emphasise that global security threats are becoming more permanent, posing significant challenges. Moreover, the rapid development of new technologies and applications has introduced new risks to digital security. To address this issue, it is proposed that think tanks should innovate and establish platforms to facilitate cross-disciplinary and cross-field cooperation. This collaborative approach is seen as essential to effectively prevent and manage digital security threats.
Another important aspect highlighted in the analysis is the significance of a sound digital governance ecosystem in promoting digital innovation and development. The supporting facts underline the basic guarantee that such an ecosystem provides in fostering an environment conducive to digital advancement. The positive sentiment associated with this argument suggests an acknowledgement of the critical role of digital governance in driving progress in the digital realm.
Furthermore, the analysis recommends guiding multiple parties to actively participate in building a sound digital governance ecosystem. By engaging and involving various stakeholders, a comprehensive and inclusive approach to digital governance can be achieved. This broad participation ensures that the system takes into account diverse perspectives and interests, leading to more effective and balanced governance practices.
Lastly, the analysis asserts the importance of promoting cooperation on digital governance to improve the global digital governance system. Openness and cooperation are cited as critical principles for building a community with a shared future in cyberspace. This recommendation recognises the interconnected nature of the digital world and the need for collaboration between nations and organisations to address global challenges in digital governance. By fostering a cooperative and inclusive environment, the global digital governance system can be strengthened and more effectively address the diverse needs and interests of all stakeholders.
To summarise, the analysis highlights the growing importance of digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors as crucial topics in the digital era. The need for enhancing mutual trust to mitigate digital security risks, building a sound digital governance ecosystem to promote innovation and development, and promoting cooperation on digital governance to improve the global system are key takeaways from the analysis. By addressing these issues and implementing the recommended actions, it is possible to unlock the immense potential of digital technologies and strive towards a more secure and inclusive digital future.
Qi
The development of the information technology revolution and the digital economy is significantly changing the way production and life function across the globe. This transformation has had a far-reaching impact on societies and economies, as it leverages the power and potential of the internet. With a positive sentiment, this argument highlights how the internet has transformed production and life.
China, in particular, has demonstrated its commitment to promoting internet development and governance. This dedication has led to notable progress in relevant undertakings within the country. Furthermore, hundreds of millions of people in China have experienced a greater sense of gain by sharing in the achievements of internet development. The sentiment here is positive, showcasing the positive outcomes resulting from China’s approach to cyberspace.
However, it is important to recognize that global challenges persist in the digital landscape. Unbalanced development, unsound regulation, and unreasonable order are some of the problems that persist globally. Although this stance assumes a neutral sentiment, it emphasizes the need for enhanced digital governance as a global concern.
Unity and cooperation are highlighted as the effective approach towards addressing the risks and challenges present in cyberspace. With positive sentiment, it is emphasized that all parties must work together to keep pace with the evolving trends of the times, seize historical opportunities presented by the information revolution, and tackle the potential risks and challenges in the digital realm. The conclusion drawn here is that unity and cooperation are key to ensuring robust digital governance.
In conclusion, the development of the information technology revolution and the digital economy holds immense transformative power over production and life. China’s commitment to internet development and governance has yielded positive outcomes for its people. However, global challenges such as unbalanced development and unsound regulation persist, making enhanced digital governance a pressing global concern. Through unity and cooperation, the risks and challenges present in cyberspace can be effectively addressed.
Wolfgang Kleinwächter
The analysis delves into the topic of internet governance, exploring various perspectives and arguments related to the issue. The first viewpoint asserts that the internet is not merely a technical problem but rather a political problem with a technical component. This perspective suggests that the political implications of the internet cannot be ignored and should be taken into consideration when formulating policies and regulations.
The second viewpoint emphasises the importance of adopting the Mighty Stakeholder Approach to internet governance. This approach argues that the internet cannot be effectively managed by a single group alone. Instead, it advocates for collaboration and input from various stakeholders, including governments, businesses, civil society, and users. The argument is based on the idea that a diverse range of perspectives and expertise is necessary to address the complex challenges of internet governance. A concrete example of this approach is seen in the World Summit, where arguments were based on how policymaking can be innovated, leading to the development of the Mighty Stakeholder Approach.
The analysis also highlights the existence of different layers within the internet and their potential for different forms of governance. These layers include an evolution layer and a use layer, each with its respective governance strategies. Additionally, the analysis points out that there are 193 different national jurisdictions, further underscoring the need for different layers of governance to cater to the diverse legal frameworks and regulatory systems across different countries. This observation suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach to internet governance may not be effective.
Another concern raised in the analysis is the risk of internet fragmentation. It notes that some governments might seek to bring the 193 jurisdictions to the ground layer of the internet, which could result in the fragmentation of the internet. This potential fragmentation is seen as a negative consequence, as it could impede cross-border communication and the free flow of information.
The analysis expresses support for the Global Digital Compact as a means to foster global consensus on internet governance. The Global Digital Compact is seen as an opportunity to bring diverse groups together and find common ground to address the challenges of internet governance effectively.
Lastly, the analysis highlights the importance of maintaining an open, secure, and inclusive internet. It asserts that the internet is as essential as air, highlighting that no state has its own separate air. Efforts should be made to keep the internet open and accessible to all, while also ensuring security and inclusivity. The analogy of clean air and pollution-free environment further reinforces the need to protect the internet from harmful practices that could compromise its integrity.
In conclusion, this analysis offers a multifaceted exploration of internet governance, presenting different viewpoints and arguments. It underscores the political and technical nature of the internet, emphasizes the need for collaboration among stakeholders, considers the various layers of the internet and the potential risks of fragmentation, supports the Global Digital Compact as a means of achieving consensus, and underscores the importance of an open, secure, and inclusive internet.
Audience
The audience member, who has already visited the place twice, expresses a strong positive stance towards a location with water settings and canals. They are greatly impressed with the overall water setting and specifically mention their enjoyment in walking around the canals. They are so enamored with the place that they express a strong desire to return at the end of the month, indicating their intention to revisit. This positive sentiment is evident throughout their argument, reflecting their enthusiasm for the place.
The supporting facts provided further demonstrate the audience member’s positive impression. They mention their desire to come back, indicating a high level of satisfaction with their previous visits. Additionally, they express enjoyment in walking around the canals, suggesting that the ambiance and beauty of these water features greatly enhance their experience.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the audience member’s positive impression aligns with the theme of good health and well-being, as indicated by the related Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of “3. Good Health and Well-being”. This suggests that the water setting and canals contribute positively to the audience member’s personal well-being and overall satisfaction during their visits.
In conclusion, the audience member’s enthusiasm and positive stance towards a place with water settings and canals are clearly evident. Their desire to revisit, expressed satisfaction with previous visits, and enjoyment of walking around the canals all contribute to their positive sentiment. This finding is consistent with the related SDG of good health and well-being, highlighting the beneficial impact that such features can have on individuals.
Juni Murai
Juni Murai highlights the importance of a user-centric perspective in internet governance. While the internet initially originated from the supply side, it has now reached every corner of the world, impacting numerous industries and people’s lives. As a result, it is crucial to prioritize the needs and preferences of users when formulating internet governance policies. This approach ensures that regulations and services align with users’ requirements and expectations. Incorporating the input and feedback of users, governance leaders, and commercial entities is necessary to address emerging issues effectively.
The second key point raised by Juni Murai focuses on the complex advancements in internet technology architecture. From IP to web, cloud computing, social networking, the Internet of Things (IoT), and artificial intelligence (AI), the internet has rapidly evolved. This progression has increased complexity, making it challenging for policymakers and industry leaders to comprehend these intricate technologies. Thus, continuous education and awareness among stakeholders are crucial in keeping up with the evolving landscape. This understanding enables the development of effective policies that support innovation and foster a secure and inclusive digital environment.
Cybersecurity takes center stage as the third key point in Juni Murai’s argument. The emergence of new technologies brings the potential for misuse and various cyber threats. Collaborative efforts among different entities are essential to combat cyber abuses and promote responsible and ethical technology use. Investment in robust cybersecurity measures, such as encryption and threat detection systems, is crucial. By prioritizing cybersecurity, stakeholders can protect sensitive data, prevent unauthorized access, and maintain trust in the digital realm.
Juni Murai’s emphasis on collaboration expands beyond understanding new technologies to discussing their implications. Recognizing the need for a platform that brings together stakeholders from various sectors, opportunities for dialogue and knowledge-sharing are essential. Global discussions enable participants to better comprehend the technological landscapes across different regions. These conversations facilitate the exchange of insights, ideas, and best practices among policymakers, industry representatives, academics, and users. This leads to a comprehensive understanding and effective governance of new technologies.
In conclusion, Juni Murai underscores the importance of a user-centric approach in internet governance. The rapid advancements in internet technology architecture present challenges for policymakers in comprehending and regulating these complex systems. Furthermore, the potential misuse of new technologies highlights the criticality of robust cybersecurity measures. Collaborative efforts, partnerships, and global discussions are key drivers in promoting a better understanding of technological advancements and their implications. Working together, stakeholders can navigate the evolving digital landscape to ensure a secure, inclusive, and beneficial internet for all.
Luca Belli
The BRICS nations, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, have been collaborating on shared challenges in digital policies and internal governance. Since 2014, they have established a working group on the security of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to exchange best practices. The group aims to enhance the security of digital infrastructure and ensure responsible data usage. Joint commitments to global norms of cybersecurity and data protection have also been defined by the BRICS nations. These commitments reflect their dedication to secure digital development and adherence to global standards.
The BRICS nations have launched an initiative to improve cooperation in the supply chain, specifically in the digital era. By pooling their resources and expertise, they aim to create a more efficient and secure supply chain system that can better adapt to the challenges of the digital economy.
The enhanced cooperation process within the BRICS framework can potentially serve as a model for global digital governance. Their successful collaboration on cybersecurity regulations and the development of a framework for consumer protection in e-commerce demonstrate their shared commitment to addressing cyber threats and creating a safe digital marketplace.
Additionally, the BRICS nations prioritize maintaining digital sovereignty while securely transferring data. Each member country has their own system to define the extent to which data can be exported or transferred, emphasizing their commitment to protect national interests and assert control over their digital domains.
In conclusion, the BRICS nations have made significant progress in fostering joint understanding and addressing shared challenges in digital policies and internal governance. Through their working group, joint commitments, and enhanced cooperation in the supply chain, they demonstrate a commitment to promoting secure and responsible digital practices. This collaboration can serve as a model for global digital governance, while their focus on maintaining digital sovereignty highlights the importance of national control in data transfer.
Dai Lina
The development of AI governance rules is becoming increasingly fragmented, leading to a widening digital divide. This fragmentation is primarily driven by the competition among major countries, which has resulted in a deficit in national mutual trust. Unilateralism, statism, and protectionism are also impacting the formulation of AI rules.
One significant issue is the absence of many developing countries in AI governance discussions and decision-making. This exclusion exacerbates the digital divide among nations since these countries have no say in shaping AI’s rules and regulations. The lack of representation from developing countries raises concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of AI governance.
To address these challenges, it is important to promote international cooperation and adopt a human-centered approach to AI governance. This can be achieved by establishing a specialized agency under the US framework to govern AI. Such an agency could serve as a platform for fostering dialogue and cooperation among all countries, including both developed and developing nations.
Additionally, ensuring the safety, reliability, and controllability of AI is crucial. Amidst rapid advancements in AI technologies, it is paramount to build trust in these systems and have the ability to control their actions. This can help mitigate potential risks and ensure AI is used for the greater good of humanity. A human-centered approach should be advocated to align AI with ethical principles and respect human rights.
In conclusion, there is a need for more collaboration and inclusivity in the governance of AI. By promoting international cooperation and adopting a human-centered approach, the global community can work together to address the challenges posed by fragmented AI governance. This will ultimately lead to a more equitable and sustainable development of AI technologies for the benefit of all.
Shi Peixi
Different initiatives and efforts are being taken by states and enterprises to address the issue of global commons in the digital domain. However, the heavy intervention of leading states in the digital domain is resulting in tensions and divisions, leading to digital fragmentation. This fragmentation is evident in various aspects of the digital landscape, including telecommunications service providers, applications, application stores, undersea cable constructions, cloud services, mobile phone operating systems, 5G technology, the supply chain of chips, and the listing of tech companies on the market and capital flow related to new technologies.
In response to this critical situation, it is crucial to find measures that can prevent further fragmentation and division. New and innovative approaches to global digital governance need to be developed. These approaches should aim to regulate and manage the digital domain while fostering cooperation and collaboration among different stakeholders.
One notable discussion on this topic took place between the Secretary General of WIC, Mr. Ren, and other relevant stakeholders. During this discussion, Mr. Ren highlighted the importance of implementing new measures for global digital governance. It is essential to explore alternative methods and approaches that can effectively address the current challenges and ensure a more inclusive and cooperative digital environment.
The analysis suggests that the issue of digital fragmentation and division requires immediate attention, as it has significant implications for various sectors and stakeholders. By implementing new measures and adopting innovative approaches to global digital governance, it is possible to navigate these challenges effectively.
Overall, the summary highlights the existence of tensions and divisions in the digital domain due to the heavy intervention of leading states. It emphasizes the need for urgent measures to prevent further fragmentation and division. The discussion involving the Secretary General of WIC, Mr. Ren, reflects the growing recognition of the importance of finding new approaches for global digital governance. Moving forward, it is essential to foster cooperation and collaboration to address these challenges and ensure a more harmonized and inclusive digital landscape.
Vanny
The development of the internet was driven by a multi-stakeholder approach, which fostered collaboration and consensus-based decision making. This approach, characterised by the involvement and participation of various stakeholders, has proved to be effective in addressing the myriad challenges associated with internet governance. The Internet Governance Forum, established after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005, plays a crucial role in facilitating dialogue and cooperation among these stakeholders.
The success of the internet is evident in the multitude of applications and services that have flourished over time. Unlike in Western countries, where individuals had the financial means to afford high-speed internet at high prices, users in some regions faced affordability issues. Consequently, alternative methods of providing internet services were developed to ensure accessibility for all. These efforts have resulted in the widespread availability of the internet and have contributed to its overall success.
It is important to distinguish between digital governance and internet governance as separate issues. Digital governance encompasses strategies to mitigate the use and risks associated with various technologies, applications, and services, including artificial intelligence. On the other hand, internet governance addresses how the internet is governed and managed. While these topics may intersect, they should not be used interchangeably, as they pertain to distinct areas of concern.
The multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance has proven effective in resolving various issues that have arisen. Despite sometimes requiring more time, this collaborative approach has consistently delivered solutions and ensured the involvement of diverse perspectives. The multi-stakeholder process allows for the inclusion of various stakeholders, such as governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical experts, fostering transparency and accountability.
It is essential for individuals to be well-informed about the internet and its functioning to make informed decisions based on facts. People often make decisions based on their opinions or assumptions about how the internet should function. Therefore, promoting education and awareness about the internet is crucial to facilitate better decision-making processes.
In conclusion, the development of the internet has been driven by a multi-stakeholder approach, which has been effective in addressing challenges related to internet governance. The success of the internet can be attributed to the multitude of applications and services that have emerged over time. Digital governance should not be confused with internet governance, as they pertain to different aspects. The multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance has proven to be effective, despite occasional delays. Finally, promoting internet literacy and awareness is vital for making informed decisions based on factual understanding.
Moderator
The Digital Governance Forum, hosted by the Cyberspace Administration of China and the Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies, aims to promote digital governance and cooperation in the digital era. The forum invites participants from around the world, including governments, international organizations, enterprises, industry organizations, and think tanks. It will discuss topics such as the impact of internet innovations on digital governance, digital governance capacity building, and the need for a sound digital governance ecosystem involving multiple parties.
China is committed to promoting internet development and governance. They advocate for a people-centered approach to digital governance, with a focus on inclusiveness and shared benefits. China plans to apply the internet to areas such as education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation, and proposes to improve digitally-enabled services and enhance digital literacy and skills. They also uphold principles of open and cooperative cybersecurity, being ready to cooperate in combating cyberterrorism and crimes while respecting the rights of all countries to choose their own network development and governance model.
The forum emphasizes the importance of exploring ways to strengthen digital governance and international cooperation. China recognizes the historical development opportunities brought by the trend of digitalization in the digital era and emphasizes the need to seize these opportunities to unleash the potential of digital productivity. However, the rapid development of new technologies and applications also brings new risks in terms of digital security.
The forum also highlights the importance of promoting openness, cooperation, and gender equality in digital governance. It emphasizes the need to ensure safe and affordable internet access for all by 2030, as there are still 3 billion people in the world who are unconnected. The role of ICANN in maintaining the technical underpinnings of the internet is also recognized as important.
The distinction between internet governance and digital governance is discussed in the forum. Digital governance refers to the use and risks of specific technologies, applications, and services, while internet governance is concerned with the maintenance of the internet’s technical infrastructure. The forum emphasizes the need to differentiate between these two terms and raise awareness at various platforms.
The forum showcases successful enhanced cooperation in digital governance among BRICS countries, highlighting the CyberBRICS project conducted by the Center for Technology and Society at FGV Law School. This project focuses on mapping digital policies in these countries and will shift its focus to AI supply chain and interoperability frameworks in the next phase.
In conclusion, the Digital Governance Forum hosted by China aims to promote digital governance and cooperation in the digital era. It emphasizes inclusive and people-centered digital governance, the importance of a sound digital governance ecosystem involving multiple parties, and the challenges and opportunities brought by internet innovations and digital security risks. The forum also highlights the distinction between internet governance and digital governance, the need for policy innovations, and global discussions to address the complexities of digital governance. It showcases successful enhanced cooperation in digital governance among BRICS countries and the importance of mapping digital policies. The forum provides a platform for dialogue and collaboration to strengthen digital governance and foster international cooperation.
Session transcript
Moderator:
. This is the first forum hosted by the bureau of international cooperation of cyberspace administration of China and Chinese academy of cyberspace studies. The theme of this forum is jointly share the responsibilities in the digital era and promote digital governance and cooperation. Taking this as a starting point, I would like to invite the government, international organization, enterprise, industry organization and think tank worldwide to hold dialogues on the two topics. First, the impact of Internet innovations on digital governance. Second, the approach of digital governance capacity building. In this forum, we will explore the ways to promote the global digital governance cooperation and comprehensively strengthen the digital governance capacity building. More important, we would like to continue to build a sound digital governance ecosystem. Now, let’s start the forum. First, let us welcome the director of the bureau of international cooperation of cyberspace administration of China, organizer of this forum to deliver an opening speech. Thank you, Miss Qi.
Qi:
Minister Ren, distinguished guests, dear friends, good afternoon. I’m very pleased to meet all of you in Kyoto. On behalf of the bureau of international cooperation administration of China, I would like to extend a warm welcome and heartfelt appreciation to all guests, both present and online. Today, the development of information technology revolution and the digital economy is transforming the way of production and life, exerting far-reaching influence over social and economic development of states, global governance system and human rights, and the development of emerging technologies by artificial intelligence also poses a new problem of governance to all countries. Problems with the Internet such as unbalanced development, unsound regulation, unreasonable order still exist across the globe. And enhancing digital governance has increasingly become a matter of interest to all countries, as well as an important topic for discussion. Against this backdrop, it is necessary and relevant for us to have an in-depth discussion on this important topic. Since China gained full-featured access to the Internet, it has always been committed to promoting Internet development and governance. Historical progress in relevant undertakings has been made in China. Hundreds of millions of Chinese people have a greater sense of gain from sharing the achievements of Internet development. Last year, China released the white paper entitled, Jointly Build a Community with a Shared Future in Cyberspace. This paper introduces China’s vision of Internet development and governance, shares its achievements in promoting the building of a community with a shared future in cyberspace, outlines the prospects for international cooperation, and expresses China’s sincere desire to strengthen Internet development and governance cooperation in cyberspace. We are ready to work with all parties to keep pace with the trends of the times, seize the historical opportunities of information revolution, and tackle the risks and challenges in cyberspace, making the Internet deliver more benefits to mankind. With this in mind, I wish to propose efforts in three areas. First, we need to follow a people-centered approach with a focus on inclusiveness and shared benefits. Focusing on people is the purpose of digital governance. We need to put people first, making positive efforts to apply Internet to education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation, improve digitally-enabled service, and enhance digital literacy and skills of different groups. We are willing to work with the international community to increase support and assistance to vulnerable groups, promote science and technology for good, bridge the digital divide, and facilitate the effective implementation of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Second, we need to promote security and stability and maintain good order. Security and stability is the cornerstone for digital governance. We uphold the philosophy of open and cooperative cybersecurity, uphold respect for cyber sovereignty, and respect for the rights of all countries to choose their own path of network development and governance model, as well as to equally participate in international governance in cyberspace. We are ready to deepen exchange and cooperation with other countries in cyberspace, cooperating to combat cyber terrorism and crimes, and jointly safeguarding peace, security, and stability in cyberspace. Third, we need to stay united and work together for shared governance. Unity and cooperation is the effective way for digital governance. Practices have proved that anyone attempting to form exclusive blocs will only impede digital governance. To improve digital governance, we must uphold multilateral participation and multi-party participation so as to foster an enabling environment for digital economic development. We should liberate the role of the United Nations as the main channel in international cyberspace governance and give play to the role of governments, international organizations, internet companies, technical communities, social organizations, and individual citizens to jointly study and formulate norms for cyberspace governance that reflect the interests and concerns of all parties in a more balanced way, making the governance system more just and equitable. Ladies and gentlemen, IGF is the important platform under the United Nations. We are willing to join hands with all parties on the basis of mutual respect and trust to solve difficult issues, strengthen areas of weakness, and improve rules of governance concerning digital governance, constantly developing governance landscape featuring multilateral participation and multi-party participation, and jointly build a community with a shared future in cyberspace. Thank you for your attention, and I wish the forum a full success. Thank you.
Moderator:
Thank you very much, Ms. Qi, for the relevant and approach of China. Next, we have Mr. Xuanxin Zhang, Vice President of Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies to deliver the speech.
Xuanxin Zhang:
Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, hello everyone. On behalf of Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies, I would like to extend warm congratulations on the holding of the Open Forum of Internet Governance Forum, and a sincere welcome to all the guests. At present, the innovation of the internet, big data, cloud computing, AI, and other digital technologies are accelerating. The intelligent industry and the digital economy are booming. All these have greatly changed the global allocation of the factors and resources. Industrial development models and people’s lifestyles. At the same time, the digital divide is becoming more and more pronounced. Cybersecurity and data security risks are increasingly penetrating. And the global digital government, governors, is still facing problems, such as unbalanced foundation, imperfect system, and fragmented roles. In this context, it is of great significance for us to explore ways to strengthen digital governance and international cooperation. It is a shared aspiration of all countries to build and maintain a peaceful, secure, open, cooperative, and orderly cyberspace. Building a community with a shared future in cyberspace has increasingly become the broader consensus of the international community. Now, from the perspective of Think Tank, I would like to share with you some observations and reflections on how to promote capacity building and international cooperation on digital governance. First of all, seize the opportunity. in the digital era to unleash the potential of digital productivity. Nowadays, the trend of digitalization has brought historical development opportunities, but it is also accompanied by risks and challenges. Digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors have become important topics. I think TEC should actively carry out research to explore how to adapt to the development trend in the digital era, reserve space for technical innovation and development on the premise of ensuring security, optimize the digital development environment, so as to further tap the potential of digital technology in facilitating to achieve the sustainable development goals and enable people around the world to share the fruits of digital development. Second, enhance mutual trust through dialogues and exchanges to prevent digital security risks. At present, global security threats are becoming increasingly permanent, and the rapid development of new technologies and applications has brought new risks. The importance and urgency of building a solid bottom line and regulating development has become more permanent in the face of these new issues and challenges. I think TEC should play a bridging role in strengthening dialogues, exchange, research, and discussion, so as to enhance strategic mutual trust in cyberspace. I think TEC should innovate to build platforms for cross-disciplinary, cross-field cooperation. and the cross-national exchange and cooperation and actively offer advice and suggestion for preventing digital security risks and improving the system of digital governance rules. Third, guide multiple parties to actively participate in building a sound digital governance ecosystem. A sound digital governance ecosystem is the basic guarantee for promoting the digital innovation and development. Facing the rapid iteration of digital technologies and complex issues in digital governance, we need to adhere to mutual, natural and mutual party participation. The parties in digital governance include the government, international organizations, enterprises, social organizations, etc. All parties should play their respective roles, cooperate with each other and stress exchanges. Think tanks should be open-minded with a strong sense of responsibility and should, through dialogue, communication, general research and other means, build consensus, resolve misunderstandings and differences, and jointly contribute to the building of the global digital governance ecosystem. Last but not least, promote cooperation on digital governance to improve the global digital governance system. Promoting openness and cooperation is an important principle for building a community with a shared future in cyberspace. Think tanks should promote win-win cooperation and contribute wisdom to the development of the digital technology and the formulation of the governance role. We are much willing to cooperate with research institutions, universities, think tanks, enterprises, and international organizations from all countries in the field of the Internet, jointly study digital development and governance issues, and jointly contribute to the development of the Internet. Chinese President Xi Jinping called on the international community, faced with the opportunities and challenges brought by digitalization, to jointly build a cyberspace that is fairer and more equitable, more open and inclusive, safer and more stable, and more vibrant. Let us work together to find solutions to the challenges of digital governance, promote the building of a closer community with a shared future in cyberspace, and jointly create a better future for mankind. Finally, I wish this forum a complete success. Thank you.
Moderator:
Thank you, Mr. Chen, for your wonderful speech. Next, let’s have the second session of special guest speech. Mr. Ren Xianliang, the Secretary General of World Internet Conference and the President of China Federation of Internet Societies, to express his insights, please.
Ren Xianliang:
today. His undergoing major changes on scene in a century. The pace of digitization, networking and intelligence is accelerating. The way we produce live and go…. govern is also undergoing profound changes. Driven by digital technology, the digital transformation of traditional industries is accelerating. The cross-border data flows are growing exponentially, and the digital platforms are accelerating their global expansion. In the promotion of digital technology, the transformation of traditional industry digitalization is accelerating. The cross-border data flows are growing exponentially, and the digital platforms are accelerating their global expansion. The importance of digital governance is increasing. At the same time, unilateralism and protectivism continue to rise. The global digital governance pool is constantly increasing. The development of digital governance in various countries is uneven and increasing. The competition in the digital governance model is increasing. Digital governance has become an increasingly important global issue. At the same time, unilateralism and protectionism are on the rise. The global digital governance deficit is widening. The uneven development of digital governance capabilities among countries is becoming more evident. The World Internet Conference is committed to promoting the co-construction of the Internet space and common destiny. We are committed to the sharing of ideas, and actively explore the good digital governance ecology of government, enterprises, academia, and industry organizations. With the goal of jointly building a community with a shared future in cyberspace, the WIC will adhere to the concept of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits, and actively explore ways to create a digital governance ecosystem with the participation of government departments, enterprises, academia, and industry organizations. In order to build a community of shared future, in order to build a community of shared responsibilities and common interests in the field of digital governance, and make digital technology deliver greater benefits to mankind, I would like to propose the following. Digital governance should be more precise and efficient. Digital technology provides new ideas, new methods, and new means to solve various governance problems. First, digital governance should be more precise and efficient. Digital technology provides new ideas, methods, and means to solve governance problems. Second, digital governance should be more precise and efficient. We should leverage the positive side of the digital technology while using technology to govern technology and constantly improve the ability of efficient governance based on digital For many years, the World Internet Conference has been organizing forums around cutting-edge technology, presenting leading technological achievements, demonstrating practical cases, holding forums, competitions, and other activities to provide a good platform for the transition of cutting-edge technology in the field of the Internet to national governance. Digital governance should be more inclusive and comprehensive. Second, digital governance should be more inclusive. There are still 3 billion people in the world who are unconnected, a large proportion of whom are women, elderly and rural population. Digital governance should avoid further widening the digital divide and prevent vulnerable groups from being further marginalized. The World Internet Assembly is willing to work together with the United Nations to ensure the safety of everyone by 2030. The WIC stands ready to make concerted efforts with all parties to achieve UN targets for the universal connectivity. Every person should have safe and affordable access to the Internet by 2030. Third, digital governance should adhere to women’s cooperation. Unity is strength, division is weakness. In the face of risks and challenges, we should stay in the same boat and share responsibilities in the digital age. We should engage in dialogues and exchanges to address issues such as cross-border data flows, platform governance, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity. The WIC will do our best to build bridges to promote closer and pragmatic global cooperation on digital governance. Ladies and gentlemen, every year the WIC will host the WUZHEN Summit in Zhejiang, China. This year marks the 10th year of the WUZHEN Summit, which will take place from November 8th to 10th. I’d like to take this opportunity to invite you all to attend the WUZHEN Summit in the beautiful water town of WUZHEN to strengthen dialogues and exchanges. pragmatic cooperation and build a better digital future together. Thank you.
Moderator:
Thank you very much Mr. Ren for the important words. Now let’s start the third session of keynote speech. We have consulted different experts and scholars and various institutions in advance to determine these two topics. Please remind you that each speaker can have six minutes. Let’s move on to the first topic, the impacts of Internet innovation on digital governance. First of all, let me introduce the father of Internet in Japan, Professor Juni Murai of Keio University. Please. Okay, thank you very much for the introduction and
Juni Murai:
it’s an honor to be here to discuss with you about the subject and also I’d like to welcome to Kyoto, Japan on behalf of the Japanese side of the host and also you know I’d like to mention that I’m a frequent U-Chain Summit participant and I’ve been missing to visit there during the COVID-19 but unfortunately I have a conflict schedule so in that sense then it’s very nice to be here to talk with you. The subject of this one about the impact on the Internet innovation in the digital governance, then I’d like to mention the three points from my experience of the long-term participants of the development of the Internet. The first one is Ms. Chi was mentioned about the you know kind of user human being based governance type of thinking. Remember the when we started the developing the Internet then it’s always started from the supply side of the Internet services, right, so you know that’s been very successfully done. for the first two decades or something of the internet but now internet is outreaching to most of the people and the most of the region and the most of the industries therefore it’s always important to view from the user side and then they find out the issues and the sharing the issue with the governance leaders and then the users and the industries and the commercial entities so that’s a big change after the two or three decades of a development of the internet so the user point of view that’s the first point I’d like to mention the second point I’d like to mention is architectural advancement about the technology so the internet started of course with a you know kind of IP and the digital package switching network but then they know introducing the web and then in the cloud and the social network and the IOT with a sensory information to be exchanged over the internet and then AI with a lot of data generated from mainly from a social network but also from the sensors and digital image data and etc so there was advancement after that advancement actually of the technology is creating the very much a complex requirement to the government governance of the internet as well and the one of the issue I see these days is that the policy leaders to understand those technological architecture getting harder and harder so that’s a very natural thing right because the technology architecture getting very much a complex and advanced way so the what’s gonna be the solution then it’s a really the all the stakeholder working together and they’re listening to each other, and there should be the place to discuss about what is a new technology, what is the impact, and from the different standpoint to discuss. That’s probably one of the way to be described that the multi-stakeholder approach as well. And then the global discussion is gonna be also very important because of the technology is gonna be different in various part of the world. And so I see the photonic network type of a thing, quantum computations gonna be one, and also the non-terrestrial, the space infrastructure type of a discussion really happening in this year. And so those are the new area to discuss globally about the future of the internet governance as well. And so the third one, third point is about the cybersecurity thing. So the advancement of those leading technologies and the changing of technology, but the good technology can be used in a proper way or by use. But there’s always abusers of the new convenience technology, right? That’s very natural in a sense. And so the cybersecurity approach is jointly working toward the abuse of the new technology as well. So it’s also a very important point that the abuse, I mean, working together against the abusers, right? That’s the cybersecurity, very natural. But also the working together for the proper use and the ethical use of the technology together. It’s gonna be very important way about thinking about the governance for the innovation and the future together. So those are the three points I wanted to mention regarding this topics. Thank you very much.
Moderator:
Thank you very much, Professor Murai for your wonderful sharing. Now I give the floor to Vanny Valkovsky, Vice President for UN Engagement from ICANN, please.
Vanny:
Thank you, thank you very much. Thanks to the organizers for putting this session together. We are hearing a lot about what’s happening around the world in the field of internet innovations and digital governance. And of course, one of the fundamental principles of the internet since its inception was the way it was developed and the way the decisions have been taken to shape the internet trajectory have resulted from a multi-stakeholder approach of collaborative and bottom-up consensus-based decision making as opposed to other types of governance. We are at the Internet Governance Forum which was created after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005. And those of us who have been there, I’m one of them. We remember that in the beginning of this whole process, people were thinking that the multi-stakeholder model or internet governance is only about ICANN. 20 years later, we see that almost no one is talking anymore about ICANN because there are so many different applications and services that are on the internet that people don’t even know that we exist. And I say that’s a good thing because that means we are doing a good job. Because if the internet is not working and it’s ICANN’s fault, everybody will know about us. But the reality is that all these innovations became possible because exactly of the open architecture, open standards, open way of developing the internet. We have seen, I can give an example, with one of the services that have been kind of developed in the testbed for the last 20 years, Enum, E-N-U-M. Nobody has heard about it, by the way, which is not a surprise because it’s been tested for the last 20 years and nothing happened. But everything else that relates to domain names, IP addresses, protocol parameters that actually is functioning and is being used widely has proven to be working. So this model that was built in the beginning has turned out to be actually a successful one even though people like Vint Cerf who is at the IGF and has been speaking and will continue to speak in the next couple of days never imagined that the internet will become what it is. And that’s why some of the architecture may not be necessarily reflecting the. the growth of the Internet. However, companies, innovators, people around the world have shown that there is always a way to create something that will use the infrastructure, that will use the TCP IP, and will make possible new services. I mean, I come originally from Bulgaria, so I can share the fact that it used to be a very poor country following the communism. And our Internet users didn’t have money to pay for high speed at high prices, unlike the people in the Western countries. So we created different ways of providing the Internet services, which were low price, high speed, and this was going against everything that you have read in the manuals of how to provide Internet services. But going back to the issue and the topic, you know, which is the impact of Internet innovation on digital governance, there is also another important point, which is there is a trend where digital governance is used interchangeably with Internet governance. And including at the UN, where I spent most of my time talking to diplomats and UN officials, there is a lack of understanding that these are two different issues. So Internet governance and digital governance are not the same, although sometimes you may see them confused by member states or people who are not familiar with that. And I think it’s important to know that there is a difference between those two, because that will reflect in the possible approaches of issues dealing with innovation. So digital governance is usually, this refers to approaches necessary to mitigate the use and risk of technologies, applications, services, things like artificial intelligence. And these are usually technologies that are distinct, typically distinct from the Internet. So because of the focus of, because of its focus on specific issues affecting everyday online users’ habits, for example, broader than the Internet or its technical layer alone, digital governance is comparable to public health challenges. So we are trying to make a difference between those and we are raising awareness at the UN level and other places where we speak because we believe that it’s important for the users and the policy makers and the technical community and also, you know, civil society, businesses, et cetera, all the stakeholders who are engaged in the IGF and in the development of the Internet to know that actually there is a big difference between Internet governance and digital governance and we shouldn’t confuse them. The Internet governance has shown that the multi-stakeholder approach is working. Whenever there is an issue that needs to be addressed, it has been addressed with, I mean, sometimes it takes more time than people would really want to, but there hasn’t been a problem that has been developed on the Internet that was not solved using the multi-stakeholder approach. And therefore, we are big proponents not only of the Internet governance forum, obviously ICANN is very supportive. We do participate wherever we are invited, which goes into our mission because we can’t really go and discuss issues that are not related to the technical underpinnings of the Internet. But when there are issues touching on those on ICANN’s mission, we are happy to participate and to provide technical neutral information about how the Internet functions and what we do. And we have found times and again through the last, I would say, 10 or so years after the WSIS plus 10 review, which was in 2015 at the United Nations, that the more we talk to every stakeholder, the better it becomes because there is more knowledge that we share and more facts. And then people take decisions based on those facts, not based on their opinions about how the Internet is functioning or should be functioning. So I would finish with that. I’m happy that we have also among us, and he will speak in a little bit, Wolfgang Kleinwachter, who is one of the pioneers of the Internet governance model. And if I’m not mistaken, you are also a member of the WGIC, Wolfgang? Yes, the working group on Internet governance, which actually defined what Internet governance is. So maybe at some point there will be a need for another working group to define what digital governance is, so that there is no confusion between those two. Thank you.
Moderator:
Thanks to Mr. Markowski for the interesting insights. Next, I would like to invite Mr. Shi Peixi, professor and director from Global Internet Studies Center in Communication University of China, to speak. Thank you.
Shi Peixi:
Thank you very much, and my topic is global digital governance, moving into the direction of global commons or to the direction of digital fragmentation. So there is a question mark here. So it is somehow beyond the internet governance, but it’s similar somehow to cyber security governance. So I treated cyber security governance and digital governance in a rather similar way. My idea is that after being blessed by the internet and the associated innovations for decades, two basic directions of global digital governance can be observed, identified. I treated it in a very similar way. So the first direction is rather, I treat it rather positively. It’s rather bright, and it can be called a direction or approach towards global commons. And the other direction is a rather negative one. It is a direction towards digital fragmentation or a kind of division of the global digital ecosystems. And this is rather a simplified way of making distinctions. And I introduced the first direction, the direction towards digital commons. So in spite of the fact, as I observed, that the international community, it’s very difficult for the international community. to replicate or repeat the successes in climate change and to repeat the success in nuclear weapons and the success in the governance also of the sea in spite of the failure, for example, to reach a Biden treaty in cyber governance and digital governance due to different reasons. That the digital issues can be so complicated, it can be so comprehensive, it can be so mighty dimensional and it can be so interwoven. In spite of the failures to have such a treaty or in Wolfgang’s words, to have a Q2 protocol perhaps in the cyber area if we consider where this conversation happens. So in spite of this, there have been many positive efforts, initiatives that are rather prominent. They are from states, they are from enterprises, they are also from the internet pioneers. For example, if we move beyond the ICANN model, ICANN model I think represented by the multi-stakeholder approach can be said to be something towards global commons, which is very successful and intriguing. In addition to that, in 2014 Brazil, where Luca is from, has this Net Mundial initiative and also 2017 Microsoft has this Digital Geneva Convention, though Microsoft now didn’t talk about this much after it was proposed in 2017, but it is a very brave attempt or effort. In 2018, I think the French President Macron proposed the Paris call for trust and security. In 2019, the Global Commission on Stability of Cyberspace put forward these eight norms. Same year, internet pioneer Tim Lee launched a contract for the web and in 2020 China put forward a global initiative on data security. And ongoing now at the United Nations, these discussions around the global digital compact. So these initiatives and efforts are designed both for the like-minded countries or stakeholders and the not like-minded stakeholders. So it is rather inclusive. It is meant for inclusion, not for exclusion. So it is intended for finding solutions. In this sense, I think these are the initiatives that are moving towards a direction of a global commons. However, there are some other negative trends that can be described as a direction towards digital fragmentation and division. And some leading states are intervening very heavily with the digital domain and creating tensions and divisions in terms of, for example, telecommunications service providers, in terms of applications, in terms of application stores, in terms of undersea cable constructions, and in terms of cloud services and mobile phone operation systems, and also in terms of 5G, supply chain of chips, and in terms of where tech companies can be listed on the market, and most recently, in terms of the capital flow about new technologies. So these are the rather negative trends, as I have observed. Therefore, I believe now is a very critical moment to find measures to avoid such digital fragmentation and to avoid the digital divisions by having new, innovative approaches of global digital governance. I think our Secretary General of WIC, Mr. Ren, talked about these new measures in this aspect. I’ll stop here. Thank you very much.
Moderator:
Thank you. Thank you, Professor Xu, for your relevant remarks. Let’s move on to the second topic, the approach of digital governance capacity building and the international. cooperation. First of all, let us welcome Professor Wolfgang Klamm-Wachter, professor from the University of Aarhus, for the speech.
Wolfgang Kleinwächter:
Thank you, thank you very much and indeed 25 years ago the internet was seen as a technical problem with some political implications, but today the internet is a political problem with a technical component. This is a big difference. 25 years ago when the World Summit started its deliberations, so I had the honor to work with Madame Hu, the president of the Internet Society of China, in the working group on internet governance, as many have said, and our task was to define what internet governance is, because a lot of people had different ideas what it is. And when we had the first meeting with Kofi Annan, who was the Secretary General of the United Nations in 2003, so he said, he argued that the internet is a technology innovation, a technical innovation, but what we need now are policy innovations. So that means you cannot handle, treat, govern the internet as any other thing. So that’s a technical innovation and we have to innovate policymaking. And all the debates in the working group on internet governance, which led to the Tunis agenda in 2005, were driven by how we can innovate policymaking. And the result is the mighty stakeholder approach, because the argument was the internet is too big, it cannot be managed by one group alone. That’s not a question of leadership, who leads it, but the internet needs collaboration from all sides. So, and I think this is really, was the starting point for what we see now, penetrates a lot of areas which are related. to the internet. So there is no definition exactly what the mighty stakeholder approach is. So different people have different ideas but the basic concept behind this is you have to involve the affected and concerned people in policy development. So the three elements of the definition was number one, mighty stakeholder. Number two, it has to be based on shared principles norms and decision-making procedures. What Madame Xi has said, you know, shared responsibility. So the concept of sharing was the second key element. And the third element is also important because we differentiated between the evolution of the internet and the use of the internet. So when many talked about the internet governance and digital governance, so I would disagree because this is really, you know, fighting with words or playing with words. So the understanding of the two terms, evolution and use of the internet, reflects that the internet is a layered system. And of different layers you can have different governments. More round layer, we have this one world, one internet concept. So we are using all the same protocols, you know, the DNS, the TCP, IP protocol, the IP address system, BGP, HTTPS, and this enables that everybody can communicate with everybody. So this is what Jan said, you know, the people-centered approach so that everybody can enjoy this right to communicate. So on the application layer, so that’s different. So this is the use of the internet. And here we have the reality that we have one world but 193 different national jurisdictions. So, and this, the two layers are interlinked. But, you know, the the visionaries of the internet in the 90s had probably the idea that the one world, one internet will go also to the application layer. So, but this is certainly unrealistic because we have 193 sovereign states. which they have their own national policy. The risk, what I see now, is that probably some governments say, we could bring the 193 jurisdictions also to the ground layer. And this would be the internet fragmentation. Because so far, the internet is not fragmented. The internet works, thanks to ICANN. And when Veni said, it’s good that nobody may have any more questions ICANN. So because they are doing the job, whether it was a pandemic or a war or other crisis, so people could send emails. They could go to websites. And this is like the air we need in our own environment. Internet is like air. There is no Chinese air. There is no American air. There is no Russian air or German air. So we have polluted air or clean air. And what we have to do in the community is to keep the internet air clean, to keep out, to avoid pollution. And so far, I think the Global Digital Compact, which is now, as Patrick has outlined, the most relevant political initiative on the table, would be a good opportunity to bring different groups together and to find a global consensus for the next 10 years. So there will never be a solution forever. So Bill Clinton, the former president of the United States, has once argued internet governance is like stumbling forward. We are moving from one step to the next step to the next step. But as long as it’s forward and as long everybody is included and it’s based on what you have said, your people-centered, human rights-centered, and based on a secure internet, and which is open for all, inclusive, then we are in the right direction. And so we have differences in the world. We live in a multipolar world. We know that others are different. But we have to learn to accept this. Thank you very much.
Moderator:
Thank you, Professor Kleinwachter for this wonderful sharing. Now, let’s welcome the speech of Mr. Luca Belli, director of CyberBRICS from Brazil. Please.
Luca Belli:
Thank you very much. And I first would like to start thanking the organizers for having put together this excellent session. Very interesting speeches so far. I would like to contribute a little bit with. some ideas that we have developed over the past years within the CyberBRICS project, which is a specific research project we have at the Center for Technology and Society at FGV Law School that I direct. And the ideas that we have been developed over the past five years of mapping are precisely trying to understand to what extent this grouping that in over the past weeks has gained, again, a lot of prominence due to the expansion. To what extent this grouping has been discussing, sharing good practices as information about digital policies and internal governance over the past years. So I’m bringing some of the elements here of the research that we have been conducting. First of all, for those who do not know, FGV is a very relevant academic institution in Brazil. It’s currently the third most relevant think tank in the world out of more than 11,000. The CyberBRICS project and all the information I’m going to share are all available in open access, including the recording of many interesting lectures and events on this website, cyberbrics.info. And this is the team. I think I’m particularly proud of this because it’s not only the only research project dedicated to mapping BRICS digital policies in the world. It’s also the only one that does it with people from the BRICS. So we have a very good project with 65% of the project members that are female. So it’s also quite a relevant gender balance dimension. It’s a very heterogeneous community. So although we are housing a law school, not everyone is a lawyer. We have also economists, data scientists, sociologists, et cetera. The three main pillars of the project are, first, analyzing the existing policies. Second, identifying good practices. And ideally, propose effective solutions so that this grouping could foster joint understanding of shared challenges. Some of the research products we elaborate look like this. This is a mapping of all data protection frameworks in the BRICS. We have this kind of tools. We also develop, of course, classic research outputs like this book, where we have mapped the cybersecurity regulations of the BRICS countries. An interesting part of this book, in the introduction of the book and also in other papers, we stress that, actually, when you start analyzing digital policies in the BRICS, you end up understanding that it’s a very telling example of enhanced cooperation. So Professor Wolfgang was mentioning that the IGF is a result of the WSIS. And another result of WSIS was the creation of this process of enhanced cooperation that, unfortunately, has never been put into practice by the UN for lack of consensus on what it is. But the BRICS offer a very good example of how this could look in practice. The fact that they have, since 2014, for instance, created a working group on the security of ICTs to share best practices and information on how they approach the cybersecurity. They even define joint commitments, for instance, to advocate for global norms on cybersecurity and data protection. There are other initiatives. These have an explicit commitment from the declaration of the ICT ministers, where they explicitly commit to enhance cooperation in digital governance. There are concrete initiatives, like the BRICS framework on consumer protection in e-commerce, the BRICS initiative on enhancing cooperation in the supply chain. So there are very good elements that we can assess as successful enhanced cooperation in the grouping. There’s also an interesting article we published last year that will also be the introduction of our upcoming book on data architectures in the BRICS, where we explicitly map the BRICS. the frameworks, the BRICS framework of data governance, and to what extent they are already quite compatible, actually. And so what we demonstrate is that there are already very, there is already a shared principle base of data protection principles in all the frameworks, very similar sets of rights and obligations, and also that each of the BRICS has created its own system to define to what extent data can be exported or transferred. They all want to transfer data, but they want to do it securely and to retain some sort of digital sovereignty on them. And that is also another work stream on which we have an upcoming book on digital sovereignty in the BRICS that demonstrate there are a lot of different nuances of this concept, and very different from what we could have in the Western countries usually in terms of thinking. To conclude, this is a preview of what will be the next phase of the project that will be dedicated to mapping AI supply chain and interoperability frameworks in the BRICS. This actually was published in the one, a very good book that was really prepared by the Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies and launched this year, well, published first last year and launched this year. I actually, my colleagues told me that I’ve just received the hard copies in my office in Rio this morning. And the last, the final thought that I want to share, that I think, I believe that if we want to work together for a community with a shared future in cyberspace, the first step is to understand which kind of regulatory frameworks, approaches, governance mechanism we already have. And so our small contribution to this effort is precisely to start to map and understand how these enhanced cooperation processes already work and to what extent they could be replicated and even scaled. Thank you very much for your attention.
Moderator:
Thank you, Mr. Bailey, for the relevant story of CyberBRICS. Now, let’s welcome Ms. Dai Lina, Deputy Director of the Journalism Institute of Shanghai Academy of Social Science. Please.
Dai Lina:
Good afternoon, distinguished guests. It’s a great honor for me to have the opportunity to give a short speech in this panel. Since yesterday, there has been a lot of discussion about artificial intelligence. Today, I would like to talk about AI. AI is a new technology that has been developed in the United States and around the world. AI is a new technology that has been developed in the United States and around the world. like to say a little more about international cooperation on AI governance. In recent years, both nation states, non-nation state actors, and the international organizations have all paid great attention to the issue of AI governance and have competed to take action. Unified system of governance rules and a global level governance mechanism have yet to be found. It is important to be aware of two concerning trends in international AI governance. One is that there is a growing trend of fragmentation in the development of AI governance rules. The competition among big countries have led to a further deficit in national mutual trust. And the ideas of unilateralism, statism, and protectionism have led a profound impact on the formulation of AI rules. The other one is that the digital governance divide is widening. There are lots of developing countries being notably absent and voiceless in AI governance. At the same time, some developing countries are coalescing to shape the development ecosystem of AI and exercising dominance in rule setting. Based on the above, there are two critical passes to an effective breakthrough in the current international process of AI governance. Firstly, we should especially promote the establishment of a specialized agency for the governance of AI under the framework of the United States. Last but not least, since AI poses different stress to countries with different levels of technology, it is important to strengthen dialogue and cooperation among all countries. We would better to advocate for human-centered and AI-for-good approach and ensure the safety, reliability, controllability of AI so that we can empower the global sustainable development and enhancing the well-being of all humankind. That’s all. Thank you for your attention.
Moderator:
Thank you, Mr. Dai. Thank you very much for your kind contribution. Due to the time limitation, we have to conclude this forum, but we hope to have more in-depth exchanges and discussions also in the future. You are welcome to share your views and stories with us when convenient. Once again, we thank all guests and friends for your wisdom and efforts to contribute to this open forum. We also would like to thank the secretary of IGF for providing us with an important dialogue platform. The open forum is concluded here. Thank you.
Audience:
I was there already twice, so that means I know the place, I’m so impressed by the water setting, and so I have a chance to walk around the canals, and so I would love to come back by the end of the month. Okay. Thank you very much.
Speakers
Audience
Speech speed
203 words per minute
Speech length
54 words
Speech time
16 secs
Arguments
The audience member is impressed with the water setting and canals
Supporting facts:
- The audience member was there already twice
- The audience member would like to return at the end of the month
Topics: water setting, canals
Report
The audience member, who has already visited the place twice, expresses a strong positive stance towards a location with water settings and canals. They are greatly impressed with the overall water setting and specifically mention their enjoyment in walking around the canals.
They are so enamored with the place that they express a strong desire to return at the end of the month, indicating their intention to revisit. This positive sentiment is evident throughout their argument, reflecting their enthusiasm for the place.
The supporting facts provided further demonstrate the audience member’s positive impression. They mention their desire to come back, indicating a high level of satisfaction with their previous visits. Additionally, they express enjoyment in walking around the canals, suggesting that the ambiance and beauty of these water features greatly enhance their experience.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the audience member’s positive impression aligns with the theme of good health and well-being, as indicated by the related Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of “3. Good Health and Well-being”. This suggests that the water setting and canals contribute positively to the audience member’s personal well-being and overall satisfaction during their visits.
In conclusion, the audience member’s enthusiasm and positive stance towards a place with water settings and canals are clearly evident. Their desire to revisit, expressed satisfaction with previous visits, and enjoyment of walking around the canals all contribute to their positive sentiment.
This finding is consistent with the related SDG of good health and well-being, highlighting the beneficial impact that such features can have on individuals.
Dai Lina
Speech speed
124 words per minute
Speech length
408 words
Speech time
197 secs
Arguments
AI governance is fragmented with a widening digital divide
Supporting facts:
- There is a growing trend of fragmentation in the development of AI governance rules
- The competition among big countries have led to a further deficit in national mutual trust
- Unilateralism, statism, and protectionism impact the formulation of AI rules
- There are lots of developing countries being notably absent in AI governance
Topics: Artificial Intelligence, Governance, Digital Divide
Report
The development of AI governance rules is becoming increasingly fragmented, leading to a widening digital divide. This fragmentation is primarily driven by the competition among major countries, which has resulted in a deficit in national mutual trust. Unilateralism, statism, and protectionism are also impacting the formulation of AI rules.
One significant issue is the absence of many developing countries in AI governance discussions and decision-making. This exclusion exacerbates the digital divide among nations since these countries have no say in shaping AI’s rules and regulations. The lack of representation from developing countries raises concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of AI governance.
To address these challenges, it is important to promote international cooperation and adopt a human-centered approach to AI governance. This can be achieved by establishing a specialized agency under the US framework to govern AI. Such an agency could serve as a platform for fostering dialogue and cooperation among all countries, including both developed and developing nations.
Additionally, ensuring the safety, reliability, and controllability of AI is crucial. Amidst rapid advancements in AI technologies, it is paramount to build trust in these systems and have the ability to control their actions. This can help mitigate potential risks and ensure AI is used for the greater good of humanity.
A human-centered approach should be advocated to align AI with ethical principles and respect human rights. In conclusion, there is a need for more collaboration and inclusivity in the governance of AI. By promoting international cooperation and adopting a human-centered approach, the global community can work together to address the challenges posed by fragmented AI governance.
This will ultimately lead to a more equitable and sustainable development of AI technologies for the benefit of all.
Juni Murai
Speech speed
129 words per minute
Speech length
782 words
Speech time
363 secs
Arguments
The first keypoint of Juni Murai focuses on viewing internet governance from a user-centric perspective.
Supporting facts:
- Internet started from the supply side however, it has outreached most regions, people, and industries, hence necessity of user-centric view.
- Sharing of issues with governance leaders, users, and commercial entities becoming more prominent.
Topics: Internet Governance, User Experience
The second keypoint of Juni Murai discusses about the complex advancements in internet technology architecture and its understanding.
Supporting facts:
- Advancements from IP to web, then cloud, social network, IOT, and AI.
- Increased complexity making it harder for policy leaders to understand.
Topics: Internet Technology, Advancements, Complexity
The third keypoint by Juni Murai centers on the importance of cybersecurity.
Supporting facts:
- Potential for new technologies to be abused.
- Joint efforts needed to work against abuses and for the proper and ethical use of technology.
Topics: Cybersecurity, Internet Abuse
Report
Juni Murai highlights the importance of a user-centric perspective in internet governance. While the internet initially originated from the supply side, it has now reached every corner of the world, impacting numerous industries and people’s lives. As a result, it is crucial to prioritize the needs and preferences of users when formulating internet governance policies.
This approach ensures that regulations and services align with users’ requirements and expectations. Incorporating the input and feedback of users, governance leaders, and commercial entities is necessary to address emerging issues effectively. The second key point raised by Juni Murai focuses on the complex advancements in internet technology architecture.
From IP to web, cloud computing, social networking, the Internet of Things (IoT), and artificial intelligence (AI), the internet has rapidly evolved. This progression has increased complexity, making it challenging for policymakers and industry leaders to comprehend these intricate technologies.
Thus, continuous education and awareness among stakeholders are crucial in keeping up with the evolving landscape. This understanding enables the development of effective policies that support innovation and foster a secure and inclusive digital environment. Cybersecurity takes center stage as the third key point in Juni Murai’s argument.
The emergence of new technologies brings the potential for misuse and various cyber threats. Collaborative efforts among different entities are essential to combat cyber abuses and promote responsible and ethical technology use. Investment in robust cybersecurity measures, such as encryption and threat detection systems, is crucial.
By prioritizing cybersecurity, stakeholders can protect sensitive data, prevent unauthorized access, and maintain trust in the digital realm. Juni Murai’s emphasis on collaboration expands beyond understanding new technologies to discussing their implications. Recognizing the need for a platform that brings together stakeholders from various sectors, opportunities for dialogue and knowledge-sharing are essential.
Global discussions enable participants to better comprehend the technological landscapes across different regions. These conversations facilitate the exchange of insights, ideas, and best practices among policymakers, industry representatives, academics, and users. This leads to a comprehensive understanding and effective governance of new technologies.
In conclusion, Juni Murai underscores the importance of a user-centric approach in internet governance. The rapid advancements in internet technology architecture present challenges for policymakers in comprehending and regulating these complex systems. Furthermore, the potential misuse of new technologies highlights the criticality of robust cybersecurity measures.
Collaborative efforts, partnerships, and global discussions are key drivers in promoting a better understanding of technological advancements and their implications. Working together, stakeholders can navigate the evolving digital landscape to ensure a secure, inclusive, and beneficial internet for all.
Luca Belli
Speech speed
169 words per minute
Speech length
1098 words
Speech time
389 secs
Arguments
BRICS nations have started to foster joint understanding to deal with shared challenges in digital policies and internal governance.
Supporting facts:
- Since 2014, BRICS have created a working group on security of ICTs to share best practices
- BRICS has defined joint commitments to global norms on cybersecurity and data protection
- BRICS has created an initiative to enhance cooperation in supply chain
Topics: BRICS, Digital Policies, Internal Governance
BRICS nations are focusing on retaining digital sovereignty while securely transferring data.
Supporting facts:
- BRICS nations have systems to define to what extent data can be exported or transferred
- Each BRICS nation wants to maintain digital sovereignty while transferring data
Topics: BRICS, Digital Sovereignty, Data Transfer
Report
The BRICS nations, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, have been collaborating on shared challenges in digital policies and internal governance. Since 2014, they have established a working group on the security of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to exchange best practices.
The group aims to enhance the security of digital infrastructure and ensure responsible data usage. Joint commitments to global norms of cybersecurity and data protection have also been defined by the BRICS nations. These commitments reflect their dedication to secure digital development and adherence to global standards.
The BRICS nations have launched an initiative to improve cooperation in the supply chain, specifically in the digital era. By pooling their resources and expertise, they aim to create a more efficient and secure supply chain system that can better adapt to the challenges of the digital economy.
The enhanced cooperation process within the BRICS framework can potentially serve as a model for global digital governance. Their successful collaboration on cybersecurity regulations and the development of a framework for consumer protection in e-commerce demonstrate their shared commitment to addressing cyber threats and creating a safe digital marketplace.
Additionally, the BRICS nations prioritize maintaining digital sovereignty while securely transferring data. Each member country has their own system to define the extent to which data can be exported or transferred, emphasizing their commitment to protect national interests and assert control over their digital domains.
In conclusion, the BRICS nations have made significant progress in fostering joint understanding and addressing shared challenges in digital policies and internal governance. Through their working group, joint commitments, and enhanced cooperation in the supply chain, they demonstrate a commitment to promoting secure and responsible digital practices.
This collaboration can serve as a model for global digital governance, while their focus on maintaining digital sovereignty highlights the importance of national control in data transfer.
Moderator
Speech speed
121 words per minute
Speech length
653 words
Speech time
323 secs
Arguments
The theme of the forum is ‘jointly share the responsibilities in the digital era and promote digital governance and cooperation’
Supporting facts:
- This is the first forum hosted by the bureau of international cooperation of cyberspace administration of China and Chinese academy of cyberspace studies.
- The forum invites government, international organization, enterprise, industry organization and think tank worldwide to hold dialogues.
Topics: Digital Governance, Digital Era, Internet Innovations, Global Cooperation
China is committed to promoting Internet development and governance
Supporting facts:
- China gained full-featured access to the Internet
- China released the white paper entitled Jointly Build a Community with a Shared Future in Cyberspace
Topics: Internet Development, Digital Governance
China advocates a people-centered approach in digital governance focusing on inclusiveness and shared benefits
Supporting facts:
- China plans to apply the Internet to education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation
- China proposes to improve digitally-enabled services and enhance digital literacy and skills
Topics: Digital Governance, Inclusiveness, Shared Benefits
China upholds the philosophy of open and cooperative cybersecurity
Supporting facts:
- China is ready to cooperate to combat cyber terrorism and crimes
- China respects the rights of all countries to choose their own path of network development and governance model
Topics: Cybersecurity, Cyber sovereignty
Innovation of internet, big data, cloud computing, AI, and other digital technologies are accelerating
Supporting facts:
- The intelligent industry and the digital economy are booming
Topics: Innovation, Internet, Big Data, Cloud Computing, AI
The digital divide is becoming more and more pronounced
Supporting facts:
- Cybersecurity and data security risks are increasingly penetrating
Topics: Digital divide, Cybersecurity, Data security
Importance of exploring ways to strengthen digital governance and international cooperation
Supporting facts:
- It is a shared aspiration of all countries to build and maintain a peaceful, secure, open, cooperative, and orderly cyberspace
Topics: Digital governance, International cooperation
Importance of seizing the opportunity in the digital era to unleash the potential of digital productivity
Supporting facts:
- Nowadays, the trend of digitalization has brought historical development opportunities
Topics: Digital era, Digital productivity, Digital technology governors, Data governors, Digital platform governors
Emerging digital security risks due to rapid development of new technologies and applications
Supporting facts:
- At present, global security threats are becoming increasingly permanent, and the rapid development of new technologies and applications has brought new risks
Topics: Digital security risks, New technologies and applications
Need to build a sound digital governance ecosystem involving multiple parties
Supporting facts:
- A sound digital governance ecosystem is the basic guarantee for promoting the digital innovation and development
Topics: Digital governance, Ecosystem, Multiple parties
Promoting openness and cooperation is an important principle for building a community with a shared future in cyberspace
Supporting facts:
- Think tanks should promote win-win cooperation and contribute wisdom to the development of the digital technology and the formulation of the governance role
Topics: Openness, Cooperation, Shared future in cyberspace
The pace of digitization, networking and intelligence is accelerating, with traditional industries undergoing digital transformations
Supporting facts:
- The cross-border data flows are growing exponentially, and the digital platforms are accelerating their global expansion
Topics: Digital Transformation, Networking, Traditional Industries, Digital Technology
The importance of digital governance is increasing
Supporting facts:
- The global digital governance deficit is widening. The uneven development of digital governance capabilities among countries is becoming more evident.
Topics: Digital Governance, Unilateralism, Protectionism
Digital governance should be more precise and efficient
Topics: Digital Governance, Governance Efficiency
Digital governance should be more inclusive
Supporting facts:
- There are still 3 billion people in the world who are unconnected, a large proportion of whom are women, elderly and rural population. Digital governance should avoid further widening the digital divide and prevent vulnerable groups from being further marginalized.
Topics: Digital Governance, Inclusion, Digital Divide
Digital governance should adhere to women’s cooperation
Topics: Gender Equality, Digital Governance
Every person should have safe and affordable access to the Internet by 2030
Topics: Internet Access, Digital Inequality
Importance of user-oriented view on internet governance
Supporting facts:
- When internet development started, it was supply side oriented.
- As internet reaches most people, regions and industries, it’s crucial to view governance from user’s perspective.
Topics: Internet governance, User-oriented view
Advancement in tech architecture adds complexity to internet governance
Supporting facts:
- Internet started with basic IP and digital packet switching, evolved to web, cloud, and AI.
- Policy leaders find it hard to understand advanced tech architecture, hence multi-stakeholder approach is necessary.
Topics: Internet governance, Tech architecture
Cybersecurity measures needed against abuse of technology
Supporting facts:
- Advancement in technology, though beneficial, comes with potential for misuse.
- It’s important to work together to protect against abusers.
- Cybersecurity efforts also need to ensure ethical and proper use of tech.
Topics: Cybersecurity, Tech abuse
The inception of the internet depended on multi-stakeholder and bottom-up consensus decision making
Supporting facts:
- This model has proven successful for the internet as it stands today.
- The process initially was influenced by the multi-stakeholder model or internet governance considering ICANN.
Topics: Internet inception, multi-stakeholder approach, collaborative decision making
There hasn’t been a problem that has developed on the Internet that was not solved using the multi-stakeholder approach
Supporting facts:
Topics: multi-stakeholder approach, Internet problems
Open architecture, open standards, and open development of the internet has led to widespread innovation
Supporting facts:
- Bulgaria, in times of poverty, developed cost-effective methods for providing internet services, defying traditional principles.
Topics: Internet innovations, Open standards
Observation of two basic directions of global digital governance
Supporting facts:
- In spite of the failures to have a treaty in cyber governance and digital governance, there have been many positive initiatives
- The global digital commons direction of governance is inclusive and intended for finding solutions
- The digital fragmentation direction, however, includes heavy intervention and creates tensions and divisions in various tech sectors
Topics: Global Digital Governance, Cybersecurity Governance, Digital Commons, Digital Fragmentation
The internet has shifted from being a technical problem to a political problem
Supporting facts:
- 25 years ago the internet was seen as a technical problem with some political implications
- Today the internet is a political problem with a technical component
Topics: Internet Governance, Technical Innovation, Policy Innovation
The internet requires innovative policymaking
Supporting facts:
- Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary General, stated the need for policy innovations for the internet
- The debates in the working group on internet governance were driven by how to innovate policymaking
- The Global Digital Compact could potentially be a key initiative for forming a global consensus for the next decade
Topics: Internet Policymaking, World Summit, Tunis Agenda, Global Digital Compact
Mighty stakeholder approach and shared responsibility are key to internet governance
Supporting facts:
- The result of the internet governance debates was the Mighty stakeholder approach
- The concept of ‘sharing’ was identified as the second key element
Topics: Mighty Stakeholder Approach, Internet Governance, Shared Responsibility
Fragmentation of the internet is a potential risk
Supporting facts:
- The potential risk is governments trying to apply their individual jurisdictions to the base layer of the internet
- This could lead to internet fragmentation
Topics: Internet Fragmentation, National Jurisdictions, One World, One Internet Concept
The Center for Technology and Society at FGV Law School has developed a research project called CyberBRICS.
Supporting facts:
- CyberBRICS is a project dedicated to mapping BRICS digital policies
- The team is made up of 65% female project members from the BRICS countries
- They have created a mapping of all data protection frameworks in the BRICS
Topics: research, BRICS, digital policies
BRICS countries have shown successful enhanced cooperation practices in digital governance.
Supporting facts:
- The BRICS created a working group on the security of ICTs in 2014
- There are joint commitments to advocate for global norms on cybersecurity and data protection
- The BRICS has established frameworks for data protection and digital sovereignty
Topics: BRICS, digital governance, enhanced cooperation
Report
The Digital Governance Forum, hosted by the Cyberspace Administration of China and the Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies, aims to promote digital governance and cooperation in the digital era. The forum invites participants from around the world, including governments, international organizations, enterprises, industry organizations, and think tanks.
It will discuss topics such as the impact of internet innovations on digital governance, digital governance capacity building, and the need for a sound digital governance ecosystem involving multiple parties. China is committed to promoting internet development and governance. They advocate for a people-centered approach to digital governance, with a focus on inclusiveness and shared benefits.
China plans to apply the internet to areas such as education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation, and proposes to improve digitally-enabled services and enhance digital literacy and skills. They also uphold principles of open and cooperative cybersecurity, being ready to cooperate in combating cyberterrorism and crimes while respecting the rights of all countries to choose their own network development and governance model.
The forum emphasizes the importance of exploring ways to strengthen digital governance and international cooperation. China recognizes the historical development opportunities brought by the trend of digitalization in the digital era and emphasizes the need to seize these opportunities to unleash the potential of digital productivity.
However, the rapid development of new technologies and applications also brings new risks in terms of digital security. The forum also highlights the importance of promoting openness, cooperation, and gender equality in digital governance. It emphasizes the need to ensure safe and affordable internet access for all by 2030, as there are still 3 billion people in the world who are unconnected.
The role of ICANN in maintaining the technical underpinnings of the internet is also recognized as important. The distinction between internet governance and digital governance is discussed in the forum. Digital governance refers to the use and risks of specific technologies, applications, and services, while internet governance is concerned with the maintenance of the internet’s technical infrastructure.
The forum emphasizes the need to differentiate between these two terms and raise awareness at various platforms. The forum showcases successful enhanced cooperation in digital governance among BRICS countries, highlighting the CyberBRICS project conducted by the Center for Technology and Society at FGV Law School.
This project focuses on mapping digital policies in these countries and will shift its focus to AI supply chain and interoperability frameworks in the next phase. In conclusion, the Digital Governance Forum hosted by China aims to promote digital governance and cooperation in the digital era.
It emphasizes inclusive and people-centered digital governance, the importance of a sound digital governance ecosystem involving multiple parties, and the challenges and opportunities brought by internet innovations and digital security risks. The forum also highlights the distinction between internet governance and digital governance, the need for policy innovations, and global discussions to address the complexities of digital governance.
It showcases successful enhanced cooperation in digital governance among BRICS countries and the importance of mapping digital policies. The forum provides a platform for dialogue and collaboration to strengthen digital governance and foster international cooperation.
Qi
Speech speed
128 words per minute
Speech length
782 words
Speech time
365 secs
Arguments
Internet has transformed the way of production and life, exerting far-reaching influence over societies and economies
Supporting facts:
- The development of information technology revolution and the digital economy is transforming the way of production and life
Topics: Internet innovations, Digital governance, Information technology revolution, Digital Economy, Global governance system
Enhanced digital governance is a global concern
Supporting facts:
- Problems with the Internet such as unbalanced development, unsound regulation, unreasonable order still exist across the globe
Topics: Digital governance, global challenges
Report
The development of the information technology revolution and the digital economy is significantly changing the way production and life function across the globe. This transformation has had a far-reaching impact on societies and economies, as it leverages the power and potential of the internet.
With a positive sentiment, this argument highlights how the internet has transformed production and life. China, in particular, has demonstrated its commitment to promoting internet development and governance. This dedication has led to notable progress in relevant undertakings within the country.
Furthermore, hundreds of millions of people in China have experienced a greater sense of gain by sharing in the achievements of internet development. The sentiment here is positive, showcasing the positive outcomes resulting from China’s approach to cyberspace. However, it is important to recognize that global challenges persist in the digital landscape.
Unbalanced development, unsound regulation, and unreasonable order are some of the problems that persist globally. Although this stance assumes a neutral sentiment, it emphasizes the need for enhanced digital governance as a global concern. Unity and cooperation are highlighted as the effective approach towards addressing the risks and challenges present in cyberspace.
With positive sentiment, it is emphasized that all parties must work together to keep pace with the evolving trends of the times, seize historical opportunities presented by the information revolution, and tackle the potential risks and challenges in the digital realm.
The conclusion drawn here is that unity and cooperation are key to ensuring robust digital governance. In conclusion, the development of the information technology revolution and the digital economy holds immense transformative power over production and life. China’s commitment to internet development and governance has yielded positive outcomes for its people.
However, global challenges such as unbalanced development and unsound regulation persist, making enhanced digital governance a pressing global concern. Through unity and cooperation, the risks and challenges present in cyberspace can be effectively addressed.
Ren Xianliang
Speech speed
102 words per minute
Speech length
776 words
Speech time
455 secs
Arguments
Digital technology is transforming traditional industries
Supporting facts:
- The pace of digitization, networking and intelligence is accelerating.
- The cross-border data flows are growing exponentially, and the digital platforms are accelerating their global expansion.
Topics: Digital Transformation, Traditional Industries
Digital governance has become an important global issue
Supporting facts:
- The importance of digital governance is increasing.
- There is uneven development of digital governance capabilities among countries.
- Competition in the digital governance model is increasing.
Topics: Digital Governance, Global Issue
Report
Digital technology is having a significant impact on traditional industries, with the process of digitisation, networking, and intelligence gaining momentum. This transformation is driven by the increasing adoption of digital platforms and the exponential growth of cross-border data flows. Traditional industries are undergoing a digital revolution as they strive to operate more efficiently and effectively.
The importance of digital governance as a global issue is also acknowledged. Digital governance refers to the set of rules, policies, and frameworks that guide the use and regulation of digital technologies. While the need for effective digital governance is recognised, there is currently uneven development of digital governance capabilities among countries.
Some countries are better equipped than others to address the challenges and risks associated with the digital age. Additionally, there is growing competition in the digital governance model as countries vie to establish themselves as leaders in this field. Universal connectivity is identified as a vital goal that needs to be achieved.
Despite progress in expanding internet access, around 3 billion people worldwide remain unconnected. The argument is that every person should have safe and affordable access to the internet by 2030. This highlights the need to bridge the digital divide and ensure equal opportunities for individuals, regardless of their geographic location or socio-economic status.
Furthermore, there is a call for more global cooperation and unity in digital governance. The rapid pace of technological advancement and the associated risks and challenges necessitate collaboration between nations. Countries must work together and share responsibilities to effectively address the challenges of the digital age.
The World Internet Conference (WIC) is committed to building bridges and promoting closer and pragmatic global cooperation in digital governance. In conclusion, digital technology is transforming traditional industries through increased digitisation, networking, and intelligence. Digital governance is recognised as an important global issue, although there is a need for more consistent and inclusive development of digital governance capabilities worldwide.
Achieving universal connectivity, ensuring internet access for all, is a crucial goal for achieving digital inclusivity. Finally, global cooperation and unity in digital governance are essential for effectively addressing the risks and challenges of the digital age.
Shi Peixi
Speech speed
135 words per minute
Speech length
777 words
Speech time
346 secs
Arguments
Two basic directions of global digital governance are Global commons and Digital Fragmentation.
Supporting facts:
- Different initiatives and efforts are being taken from states and enterprises for Global commons.
- Leading states are intervening heavily with the digital domain causing tensions and divisions leading to Digital Fragmentation.
- Tensions and divisions are visible in telecommunications service providers, applications, application stores, undersea cable constructions, cloud services, mobile phone operation systems, 5G, supply chain of chips, tech companies listing on market and capital flow about new technologies.
Topics: Global Digital Governance, Cybersecurity governance, Internet Governance
Report
Different initiatives and efforts are being taken by states and enterprises to address the issue of global commons in the digital domain. However, the heavy intervention of leading states in the digital domain is resulting in tensions and divisions, leading to digital fragmentation.
This fragmentation is evident in various aspects of the digital landscape, including telecommunications service providers, applications, application stores, undersea cable constructions, cloud services, mobile phone operating systems, 5G technology, the supply chain of chips, and the listing of tech companies on the market and capital flow related to new technologies.
In response to this critical situation, it is crucial to find measures that can prevent further fragmentation and division. New and innovative approaches to global digital governance need to be developed. These approaches should aim to regulate and manage the digital domain while fostering cooperation and collaboration among different stakeholders.
One notable discussion on this topic took place between the Secretary General of WIC, Mr. Ren, and other relevant stakeholders. During this discussion, Mr. Ren highlighted the importance of implementing new measures for global digital governance. It is essential to explore alternative methods and approaches that can effectively address the current challenges and ensure a more inclusive and cooperative digital environment.
The analysis suggests that the issue of digital fragmentation and division requires immediate attention, as it has significant implications for various sectors and stakeholders. By implementing new measures and adopting innovative approaches to global digital governance, it is possible to navigate these challenges effectively.
Overall, the summary highlights the existence of tensions and divisions in the digital domain due to the heavy intervention of leading states. It emphasizes the need for urgent measures to prevent further fragmentation and division. The discussion involving the Secretary General of WIC, Mr.
Ren, reflects the growing recognition of the importance of finding new approaches for global digital governance. Moving forward, it is essential to foster cooperation and collaboration to address these challenges and ensure a more harmonized and inclusive digital landscape.
Vanny
Speech speed
164 words per minute
Speech length
1202 words
Speech time
439 secs
Arguments
The internet was developed from a multi-stakeholder approach of collaborative and bottom-up consensus-based decision making
Supporting facts:
- Internet Governance Forum was created after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005
Topics: Internet Development, Multi-stakeholder Approach
The success of the internet is evident in the multitude of applications and services that have developed over time
Supporting facts:
- Internet users didn’t have money to pay for high speed at high prices, unlike the people in the Western countries, so different ways of providing the Internet services were created.
Topics: Internet Success, Internet Services, Internet Applications
The multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance is effective, despite sometimes requiring more time
Supporting facts:
- There has not been an issue that has been developed on the Internet that was not solved using the multi-stakeholder approach
Topics: Internet Governance, Multi-stakeholder Approach
Report
The development of the internet was driven by a multi-stakeholder approach, which fostered collaboration and consensus-based decision making. This approach, characterised by the involvement and participation of various stakeholders, has proved to be effective in addressing the myriad challenges associated with internet governance.
The Internet Governance Forum, established after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005, plays a crucial role in facilitating dialogue and cooperation among these stakeholders. The success of the internet is evident in the multitude of applications and services that have flourished over time.
Unlike in Western countries, where individuals had the financial means to afford high-speed internet at high prices, users in some regions faced affordability issues. Consequently, alternative methods of providing internet services were developed to ensure accessibility for all. These efforts have resulted in the widespread availability of the internet and have contributed to its overall success.
It is important to distinguish between digital governance and internet governance as separate issues. Digital governance encompasses strategies to mitigate the use and risks associated with various technologies, applications, and services, including artificial intelligence. On the other hand, internet governance addresses how the internet is governed and managed.
While these topics may intersect, they should not be used interchangeably, as they pertain to distinct areas of concern. The multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance has proven effective in resolving various issues that have arisen. Despite sometimes requiring more time, this collaborative approach has consistently delivered solutions and ensured the involvement of diverse perspectives.
The multi-stakeholder process allows for the inclusion of various stakeholders, such as governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical experts, fostering transparency and accountability. It is essential for individuals to be well-informed about the internet and its functioning to make informed decisions based on facts.
People often make decisions based on their opinions or assumptions about how the internet should function. Therefore, promoting education and awareness about the internet is crucial to facilitate better decision-making processes. In conclusion, the development of the internet has been driven by a multi-stakeholder approach, which has been effective in addressing challenges related to internet governance.
The success of the internet can be attributed to the multitude of applications and services that have emerged over time. Digital governance should not be confused with internet governance, as they pertain to different aspects. The multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance has proven to be effective, despite occasional delays.
Finally, promoting internet literacy and awareness is vital for making informed decisions based on factual understanding.
Wolfgang Kleinwächter
Speech speed
148 words per minute
Speech length
975 words
Speech time
395 secs
Arguments
Internet is a political problem with a technical component
Supporting facts:
- 25 years ago, the internet was seen as a technical problem with some political implications
Topics: Internet Governance, Policy Making, Technical Innovation
Internet cannot be managed by one group alone
Supporting facts:
- Arguments during the World Summit were based on how policymaking can be innovated
- The result is the Mighty Stakeholder Approach
Topics: Internet Governance, Mighty Stakeholder Approach
Different layers of the internet can have different governance
Supporting facts:
- The internet has an evolution and a use layer
- Each layer can have different governance
- There are 193 different national jurisdictions
Topics: Internet Layer System, Internet Governance
Fragmentation of the internet is a risk
Supporting facts:
- Some governments might want to bring 193 jurisdictions to the ground layer of the internet
- That would lead to fragmentation of the internet
Topics: Internet Fragmentation, National Jurisdictions
Report
The analysis delves into the topic of internet governance, exploring various perspectives and arguments related to the issue. The first viewpoint asserts that the internet is not merely a technical problem but rather a political problem with a technical component.
This perspective suggests that the political implications of the internet cannot be ignored and should be taken into consideration when formulating policies and regulations. The second viewpoint emphasises the importance of adopting the Mighty Stakeholder Approach to internet governance. This approach argues that the internet cannot be effectively managed by a single group alone.
Instead, it advocates for collaboration and input from various stakeholders, including governments, businesses, civil society, and users. The argument is based on the idea that a diverse range of perspectives and expertise is necessary to address the complex challenges of internet governance.
A concrete example of this approach is seen in the World Summit, where arguments were based on how policymaking can be innovated, leading to the development of the Mighty Stakeholder Approach. The analysis also highlights the existence of different layers within the internet and their potential for different forms of governance.
These layers include an evolution layer and a use layer, each with its respective governance strategies. Additionally, the analysis points out that there are 193 different national jurisdictions, further underscoring the need for different layers of governance to cater to the diverse legal frameworks and regulatory systems across different countries.
This observation suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach to internet governance may not be effective. Another concern raised in the analysis is the risk of internet fragmentation. It notes that some governments might seek to bring the 193 jurisdictions to the ground layer of the internet, which could result in the fragmentation of the internet.
This potential fragmentation is seen as a negative consequence, as it could impede cross-border communication and the free flow of information. The analysis expresses support for the Global Digital Compact as a means to foster global consensus on internet governance.
The Global Digital Compact is seen as an opportunity to bring diverse groups together and find common ground to address the challenges of internet governance effectively. Lastly, the analysis highlights the importance of maintaining an open, secure, and inclusive internet.
It asserts that the internet is as essential as air, highlighting that no state has its own separate air. Efforts should be made to keep the internet open and accessible to all, while also ensuring security and inclusivity. The analogy of clean air and pollution-free environment further reinforces the need to protect the internet from harmful practices that could compromise its integrity.
In conclusion, this analysis offers a multifaceted exploration of internet governance, presenting different viewpoints and arguments. It underscores the political and technical nature of the internet, emphasizes the need for collaboration among stakeholders, considers the various layers of the internet and the potential risks of fragmentation, supports the Global Digital Compact as a means of achieving consensus, and underscores the importance of an open, secure, and inclusive internet.
Xuanxin Zhang
Speech speed
117 words per minute
Speech length
842 words
Speech time
431 secs
Arguments
Seize the digital era opportunity to unleash the potential of digital productivity
Supporting facts:
- Digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors have become important topics.
Topics: Digital Technology, Data Governance, Security
Guide multiple parties to actively participate in building a sound digital governance ecosystem
Supporting facts:
- A sound digital governance ecosystem is the basic guarantee for promoting the digital innovation and development.
Topics: Digital Governance, Innovation and Development
Report
The analysis highlights the increasing importance of digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors as crucial topics in today’s digital era. This recognition indicates the growing significance of effectively governing and managing these areas to harness their potential for digital productivity.
The positive sentiment surrounding this argument suggests an optimistic view of the opportunities that the digital era presents. One of the key recommendations derived from the analysis is the need to enhance mutual trust through dialogues and exchanges to mitigate digital security risks.
The supporting facts emphasise that global security threats are becoming more permanent, posing significant challenges. Moreover, the rapid development of new technologies and applications has introduced new risks to digital security. To address this issue, it is proposed that think tanks should innovate and establish platforms to facilitate cross-disciplinary and cross-field cooperation.
This collaborative approach is seen as essential to effectively prevent and manage digital security threats. Another important aspect highlighted in the analysis is the significance of a sound digital governance ecosystem in promoting digital innovation and development. The supporting facts underline the basic guarantee that such an ecosystem provides in fostering an environment conducive to digital advancement.
The positive sentiment associated with this argument suggests an acknowledgement of the critical role of digital governance in driving progress in the digital realm. Furthermore, the analysis recommends guiding multiple parties to actively participate in building a sound digital governance ecosystem.
By engaging and involving various stakeholders, a comprehensive and inclusive approach to digital governance can be achieved. This broad participation ensures that the system takes into account diverse perspectives and interests, leading to more effective and balanced governance practices. Lastly, the analysis asserts the importance of promoting cooperation on digital governance to improve the global digital governance system.
Openness and cooperation are cited as critical principles for building a community with a shared future in cyberspace. This recommendation recognises the interconnected nature of the digital world and the need for collaboration between nations and organisations to address global challenges in digital governance.
By fostering a cooperative and inclusive environment, the global digital governance system can be strengthened and more effectively address the diverse needs and interests of all stakeholders. To summarise, the analysis highlights the growing importance of digital technology governors, data governors, and digital platform governors as crucial topics in the digital era.
The need for enhancing mutual trust to mitigate digital security risks, building a sound digital governance ecosystem to promote innovation and development, and promoting cooperation on digital governance to improve the global system are key takeaways from the analysis. By addressing these issues and implementing the recommended actions, it is possible to unlock the immense potential of digital technologies and strive towards a more secure and inclusive digital future.