Main Session on Sustainability & Environment | IGF 2023

Dulce Soares

The analysis of the given statements highlights several key points and perspectives on various topics. Firstly, it is revealed that Timor-Leste faces limitations in its internet infrastructure and usage. The average download speed is low, ranging from 4 to 4.5 MB per second, and access to high-speed internet is limited in rural areas. Furthermore, only 49.6% of the population uses the internet, primarily for work and social media purposes. This situation indicates a significant gap in internet accessibility and connectivity in the country.

Climate change is identified as a pressing challenge for Timor-Leste. The country has been affected by global climate events such as the El Niño crisis in 2015 and the occurrence of the La Niña event in 2020. These events demonstrate the vulnerability of Timor-Leste to the impact of climate change and the need for effective strategies and actions to mitigate its effects.

In terms of investments in technology for climate change adaptation and resilience, it is observed that these projects tend to be expensive and highly technical, often requiring fly-in-fly-out technicians. Unfortunately, these investments do not always drive growth or long-term development. This finding suggests that there may be a lack of consideration for sustainable and inclusive approaches in climate change adaptation initiatives in Timor-Leste.

On a positive note, the private sector is highlighted as having the potential to contribute to climate change mitigation. By collaborating with grassroots organizations and implementing sustainable technology solutions, the private sector can play an effective role in addressing climate change challenges. For instance, Simili, a company mentioned in one statement, is involved in initiatives such as creating alert systems for local communities to manage water resources and practice better environmental practices. This example exemplifies how collaboration and the implementation of sustainable technology solutions can yield positive outcomes in addressing climate change.

The importance of collaboration and inclusion of diverse voices in internet governance and the sustainable digital society is emphasized. Dulce Soares, who has been working on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) for over a decade, advocates for integrating more voices from different sectors. This approach encourages a broader and more inclusive perspective in decision-making processes related to internet governance and sustainability.

The structuralist business model in our digital society is criticized for its negative environmental impact. Without substantial changes to this model, it will be difficult to balance the beneficial use of digital technology with its environmental consequences. This observation highlights the need for a more sustainable and responsible approach to digitalization and technological advancement.

From a developing country perspective, there is a focus on learning from best practices in digitalization. By integrating technology with existing best practices, it becomes possible to harness the benefits of digitalization and drive positive change, particularly in areas such as education and capacity building. Additionally, it is argued that promoting user understanding of technology before its deployment is crucial. This approach ensures that individuals can fully comprehend and effectively utilize technological solutions.

Finally, the importance of creating a more inclusive environment among sustainability actors is recognized. Encouraging collaborations between businesses, private sectors, government, and international agencies can foster more effective and holistic approaches to sustainable development. Such collaborations can leverage the strengths and resources of different sectors to address sustainability challenges more comprehensively.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the limitations in internet infrastructure and usage in Timor-Leste, as well as the significant challenges posed by climate change. It underscores the need for investment in sustainable and inclusive technology solutions, collaboration among different sectors, and the promotion of user understanding. These findings provide valuable insights into various aspects of internet governance, environmental sustainability, and technological advancement, and underscore the importance of addressing these issues collectively to foster a more inclusive and sustainable society.

Audience

The analysis consists of multiple arguments and stances presented by different speakers, all discussing topics related to sustainable digitisation and environmental protection. One recurring theme throughout the analysis is the importance of international cooperation for sustainable digitisation. Hanna Bause, representing the Dutch Initiative for Sustainable Digitisation, emphasises the need for global cooperation in this regard. The argument made here is that without international collaboration, achieving sustainable digitisation becomes more challenging.

Another significant point raised in the analysis is the lack of developing standards for sustainability in the global digital system. One speaker questions the present status of these standards and argues that there should be more focus on developing them. The supporting facts for this argument are not explicitly mentioned, but the speaker’s stance suggests that there is a gap in the development of sustainability standards in the digital system.

Standards, however, are not entirely overlooked. Another argument presented is that standards for sustainable infrastructure and the integration of microgrids into larger grids are being developed. These standards aim to create more sustainable infrastructure overall. The argument made here is that standards, when developed for global use, can lead to regulation.

The importance of adopting sustainable standards for accelerating the transition towards sustainable digitisation is another key point in the analysis. The argument presented is that by embracing sustainable standards, the shift towards sustainable digitisation can be expedited. However, no supporting facts are provided for this particular argument.

The need for a standard to measure the carbon footprint of small organisations is also highlighted. The analysis points out that while over 90% of enterprises globally are small or medium-sized, contributing more than 50% of global GDP, there are currently no frameworks for these organisations to participate in the carbon economy. The argument made is that a standard to measure their carbon footprint is necessary.

In addition to the above, the analysis touches on the potential collaboration between organisations working on AI and environmental protection. One speaker expresses an interest in seeing cooperation between Axel’s organisation, which utilises AI for environmental protection, and the AI research centre in Congo, Brazzaville, which aims to mitigate the effects of climate change. The argument suggested is that collaboration between these entities can lead to the effective implementation of AI and emerging technologies to address climate change.

The connection between internet governance and environmental policymaking is another topic of discussion. Chris, one of the speakers, suggests that the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and other internet governance structures should connect more with environmental policymaking. The argument made is that a stronger connection between these domains can lead to better environmental policies for the digital sector.

Sustainable living and education on sustainability are also addressed in the analysis. Limited sustainable living options in cities are noted, suggesting the need for more sustainable alternatives in urban contexts. Additionally, the importance of education on sustainability is emphasised. One speaker highlights the United Nations Staff Systems College, where they attended training on the sustainability of lifestyles.

The conclusion drawn from the analysis is that international cooperation is vital for sustainable digitisation. Developing standards and regulations for sustainability in the global digital system is necessary, and the adoption of sustainable standards can accelerate the transition towards sustainable digitisation. The analysis also highlights the need for standards to measure the carbon footprint of small organisations and the potential for collaboration between AI organisations and research centres. Additionally, the connection between internet governance and environmental policymaking is emphasised, as well as the importance of sustainable technology and standardisation. The analysis concludes by suggesting the need for collective data collection and sharing, as well as the proposal for a platform for information sharing. Finally, the role of industry players in internet governance and the significance of guidelines for appropriate actions are highlighted, along with the necessity for more sustainable living options and education on sustainability.

Kemely Camacho

During the discussion, speakers addressed the intersection of digital technology, the environment, and society. They emphasised the importance of integrating respect for cosmovision into technology development. They mentioned that technology produced for or by white men, known as Okama Sway, should be approached with caution, while technology produced by the air, known as Kama Sway, should be considered. This perspective seeks to acknowledge and incorporate diverse cultural and environmental knowledge in the digital world.

The speakers also highlighted the feminist movement’s emphasis on care for people, collective wellbeing, and the planet when using technology. They argued that digital technology should not only benefit individuals but also contribute to the greater good of society. The social solidarity economic movement stressed responsible consumption and balance in technology usage, advocating for a more sustainable and equitable approach.

Regarding the relationship between digital technology and the environment, the speakers asserted that harm to the environment should be minimized. They emphasized the need for responsible consumption and production in digital technologies to align with the goal of sustainable development. They also called for digital technologies to support community organization and citizen participation, encouraging technology to be a tool for collective action and social progress.

The speakers further emphasized the importance of connecting with other social movements, particularly environmental movements. They argued that collaboration and joint proposals are crucial to addressing the complex challenges our world faces. They highlighted the potential for digital technology to support and strengthen environmental movements, underscoring the need for interaction between digital rights movements and environmental movements.

The speakers also emphasized the need for increased integration, understanding, and dissemination of information about the impact of the digital society on the environment. They stressed that all relevant stakeholders, including different generations and movements, should be included in these discussions to ensure a holistic approach to addressing the challenges. The speakers also suggested establishing a common platform to enhance understanding and raise awareness about the issues at hand.

Finally, speakers advocated for a shift in practices within the digital society to achieve a balance between utility and destruction. They argued for less connectivity for those who are already well-connected and more connectivity for those who are not connected, thereby reducing inequalities and promoting a fairer digital society.

In conclusion, the discussion highlighted the need for a sustainable approach to digital technology, one that integrates respect for various perspectives, prioritizes care for people and the planet, and promotes social solidarity. The integration of environmental and social movements, collaboration between stakeholders, and the dissemination of information were identified as key strategies for achieving these goals. Furthermore, a balanced approach to connectivity and responsible consumption and production in the digital space were proposed as crucial elements in creating a sustainable and equitable digital society.

Maike Lukien

The analysis explores arguments and stances regarding the importance of standards and sustainability. One key argument states that standards developed for global use are not limited to any jurisdiction. This highlights the need for uniform international standards. Regarding sustainability, it is noted that many standards are created specifically to promote sustainable infrastructure, considering environmental and social responsibility.

Another argument emphasizes the need for adopting standards to measure the carbon footprint of small organizations. With over 90% of enterprises globally being small or medium-sized and contributing significantly to the global GDP, measuring and reducing their carbon footprint is crucial for sustainability.

The European product tagging initiative is highlighted as an important argument. This initiative will have a global impact and enable individuals and organizations to make informed choices by “voting with their wallets.” Implementing product tagging allows consumers to support sustainable practices and responsible consumption and production.

The analysis also underscores the importance of policymakers having up-to-date information for evidence-based decisions. Technological advancements and industry growth often outpace policy and regulation development. Policymakers need to stay informed to ensure relevant and effective policies.

Additionally, rapid technological development, especially in the nuclear industry, requires policymakers to reassess and update strategies. Small modular reactors hold potential for clean energy in remote communities, and regulations must keep up with these advancements.

Collaboration and cooperation across jurisdictions, sectors, and civil society are vital for achieving a sustainable biosphere. The analysis emphasizes the need for multidimensional collaboration, as discussed during a sustainability panel. Tackling complex issues requires partnerships and collective efforts.

Accountability frameworks are also highlighted as necessary. Certain large companies lack adequate accountability frameworks, suggesting the need for guidelines and mechanisms for responsible practices.

The analysis also stresses the importance of measuring impact, being accountable, and revising decisions. Ongoing evaluation and improvement are needed to achieve sustainability goals.

Addressing sustainability is a complex problem amid competing interests and urgent issues. Balancing economic, social, and environmental considerations and finding solutions pose challenges.

Lastly, inclusivity is emphasized in relation to sustainability. It is argued that sustainability should be integrated into every project, ensuring no individual or group is left behind.

In conclusion, the analysis presents various arguments and stances on the significance of standards and sustainability. It highlights the need for globally applicable standards, sustainable infrastructure, and measuring carbon footprint. It emphasizes the European product tagging initiative, up-to-date decision-making information, and adaptive policies. Collaboration, accountability, impact measurement, and inclusivity are crucial for achieving sustainability. The analysis recognizes the complexities involved and the importance of comprehensive and inclusive approaches to attain sustainability.

Axel Klahake

The discussion raised important points surrounding the relationship between sustainability communities and digital communities. A key observation was the divide that exists between these two groups, with sustainability communities focusing on environmental issues and climate action, while digital communities prioritize technological advancements and digital systems. The discussion highlighted the need for increased collaboration and understanding between these communities to effectively address sustainability challenges. Cross-sector and cross-industry efforts were identified as crucial for shaping the digital sustainability agenda, with initiatives like the Coalition for Digital Environmental Sustainability (CODES) bringing together environmental agencies to discuss digital issues. Collaboration between organizations such as GIZ, the World Bank, and ITU in developing standards for green data centers demonstrated the importance of joint efforts in driving sustainable practices. The need for specific guidelines and binding regulations in the industry was emphasized, and the initiative on standards for green data centers, developed in partnership with the World Bank and ITU, was seen as a positive step forward. It was also highlighted that greening the digital industry should go beyond individual components to encompass the entire value chain, considering sustainability throughout the lifecycle of digital products and services. Leveraging digital technologies to support economic transformations towards a carbon-free economy was viewed as a positive development, with examples such as GIZ’s Fair Forward initiative promoting AI applications in climate change adaptation. The discussion underlined the importance of bringing communities closer together through forums and intensifying discussions to foster collaboration and mutual understanding. Defining standards, clarifying responsibilities, and monitoring the implementation of sustainable practices, with the involvement of various stakeholders, particularly consumers, were seen as essential. The urgency of taking action for climate protection was consistently emphasized, with a call for immediate action and the realization that climate protection should not be treated as a luxury. Collaboration and partnership were identified as crucial in advancing AI applications for climate change adaptation, with Axel Klahake expressing openness to collaboration and highlighting the potential for exchanging experiences and results in driving further initiatives. The discussion also stressed the need for simplified and clearer communication for decision-makers, as the complexity of sustainability and digital policy issues makes it difficult for them to make informed decisions. Recognizing major trends and their implications, such as changing data center locations and providing internet access to the global population, were highlighted as pivotal for advancing digital sustainability. In conclusion, the discussion highlighted the importance of collaboration, concrete standards and regulations, and greening the entire value chain in promoting digital sustainability. Leveraging digital technologies for a carbon-free economy, bringing communities closer together, and clearly defining responsibilities and standards were deemed crucial. Urgent action for climate protection, collaboration and partnership, simplified communication for decision-makers, and a focus on understanding major trends were seen as vital in advancing digital sustainability.

David Souter

The analysis highlights the urgent need for stronger dialogue between experts in the digital and environmental fields in order to effectively address the complex impact of digitalisation on the environment. It emphasises that digital policies that are not environmentally sustainable will not be sustainable in any terms. It is crucial to maximise the contribution of digitalisation to mitigating environmental harm and reducing the environmental footprint of the digital sector.

One key aspect that is highlighted is the development of a circular digital economy. This approach would require fewer scarce resources, less energy consumption, and the extension of the life of digital devices, while also promoting recycling and reuse. All stakeholders, including governments, businesses, and citizens, have responsibilities in transitioning to a circular digital economy.

The analysis also stresses the importance of considering environmental factors in the development of standards and design. Standard-setting bodies and businesses should integrate these factors in order to reduce the use of energy and scarce resources. Additionally, there is a need for transparent and genuine reporting of businesses’ environmental impacts, with an emphasis on avoiding greenwashing and conducting independent evaluation and analysis.

Furthermore, consistent standards of measurement for the digital environmental interface are necessary to better understand the exact impact of technology on the environment. Inconsistent measurement standards limit the comprehension of environmental impacts from the digital society.

Policies in the digital sector and environmental context should not only consider ideal circumstances but also real circumstances, which are often far from ideal. Discourse and decision-making should take into account the challenges and constraints faced in practical situations, in order to develop effective and realistic policies.

Government structures of regulation and incentives for environmental responsibility are critical. It is vital for governments to establish strong regulatory frameworks and provide incentives to drive environmental responsibility. Similarly, businesses need to develop and promote environmentally friendly products and services, aligning with the principles of sustainability.

Citizens need access to information that enables them to make environmentally responsible choices. It is important for individuals to be aware of the environmental impact of their actions and consumption patterns. Environmental education and awareness are key to fostering behavioral change and promoting sustainable practices.

Notably, there is a need for an ethos of environmental responsibility across the digital sector. All actors and stakeholders in the digital industry should embrace sustainability as a core value and integrate it into their operations and decision-making processes.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the critical importance of bridging the gap between the digital and environmental sectors. Collaboration, dialogue, and a holistic approach are necessary to effectively address the complex environmental challenges posed by digitalisation. Transitioning towards a circular digital economy, integrating environmental factors into standards and design, fostering transparency and accountability, advocating for strong regulatory frameworks and incentives, and promoting citizen awareness and education are essential for achieving a sustainable and environmentally responsible digital future.

Moderator

During the discussion, the speakers focused on the complex relationship between the digital society and the environment. One of the key points raised was the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was noted that due to lockdowns and economic shutdowns, there was a significant drop in CO2 emissions, which was seen as a positive outcome. However, there was also a surge in internet usage mainly driven by remote work, online shopping, and other digital activities. This raised concerns about the carbon emissions from increased internet usage.

Several speakers highlighted the potential of digital transformation and technology in addressing climate change. It was acknowledged that digital technologies have the potential to mitigate environmental damage by streamlining operations and improving efficiency. Furthermore, it was suggested that digital innovation and technology standards could play a crucial role in developing climate change solutions.

The importance of standards in the technical side was emphasised by one of the speakers. They highlighted the role of organisations such as IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) in setting technology standards and promoting ethical practices, particularly in relation to artificial intelligence (AI) and environmental impact. The need for achieving sustainability goals was also stressed, with speakers discussing the importance of addressing global warming, achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions, and adopting a circular economy approach.

The digital divide and limited internet access in certain regions, such as Timor-Leste, were identified as significant challenges. It was noted that in Timor-Leste, internet speeds were very low and broadband access in rural areas was limited. This highlighted the need for addressing the digital divide and improving internet infrastructure to ensure equitable access to digital technologies.

The role of the private sector in environmental sustainability was discussed, with examples given of collaborations between the private sector and grassroots organisations. These collaborations focused on validating environmental conservation efforts and developing systems to better manage resources and the environment. It was acknowledged that the private sector can play a crucial role in driving sustainable practices and supporting environmental initiatives.

The importance of knowledge sharing and collaboration among different sectors and movements was emphasised. Speakers highlighted the need for inclusive participation and the involvement of communities, particularly those affected by digital technologies and environmental issues. The importance of sharing successes, failures, and solutions for collective learning was emphasised.

The discussions also raised concerns about the negative impacts of digital technologies. It was noted that indigenous women expressed concerns about the waste produced by digital devices installed in their territories and the potential for surveillance and monitoring of their activities. The need to consider data ownership and the rights of indigenous communities was highlighted.

The discussions also touched on the need for accountability, regulations, and policies that consider the environmental impact of digital technologies. It was noted that current regulations and policies do not adequately address the relation between ICT services and the environment. The importance of information accessibility for policymakers was highlighted, as well as the need for communicating the latest information to policymakers to make informed decisions.

In conclusion, the speakers emphasised the need for a holistic approach to address the challenges posed by the digital society and the environment. This requires collaboration among different stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, grassroots organisations, and communities. The importance of setting standards, policy-making, knowledge sharing, and inclusivity were key themes throughout the discussions. It was acknowledged that while digital technologies have the potential to drive positive change, their environmental impact needs to be carefully managed to ensure a sustainable and equitable future.

Mactar Seck

The use of digital technology has both positive and negative impacts on the environment, making it essential to incorporate it into national digital policies. According to studies, digital technology contributes between 1 to 5 percent to greenhouse gas emissions and consumes 5 to 10 percent of energy. However, there is potential for digital technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2030.

Regulatory changes are necessary in the ICT sector to consider the environmental impact. This change would involve addressing the need for a unified approach that includes the impact on the environment. No specific supporting facts were provided in this regard.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) supports African countries in integrating climate change issues into their national digital policies. UNECA supports the development of climate information systems and early warning systems in several African countries. Additionally, UNECA organises annual hackathons for young innovators to develop innovations on climate change adaptation. The positive sentiment towards UNECA’s efforts indicates that these initiatives have been effective in encouraging African countries to incorporate climate change issues into their national digital policies.

Unfortunately, there is a misunderstanding among decision-makers regarding the connection between digital technology and its environmental impact. No specific supporting facts were provided to justify this argument, but it suggests a need for better education and awareness among decision-makers to bridge this gap in understanding.

To ensure the development of effective national digital strategies, it is crucial to involve all stakeholders from different sectors. This approach would ensure that the strategies are comprehensive and inclusive of diverse perspectives and expertise.

Digital technology has the potential to mitigate the impacts of climate change through the creation of effective early warning systems, climate information systems, and applications. Several African countries have already benefited from these systems and applications, demonstrating their effectiveness in addressing climate change challenges.

The need for standardized features in digital technology to mitigate the impact of climate change is emphasized. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is mentioned as a support mechanism for countries in developing their climate change policies. However, specific standards for digital technology are not provided.

International cooperation is essential in facilitating the development of standards for digital technology. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) provides a partnership for ICT to support this collaboration. Private sector involvement is also considered crucial in driving the development of these standards.

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is recognized as a suitable platform for discussions on standards for the integration of digital technology and climate change. The positive sentiment suggests that the IGF is gaining traction and credibility as a forum for these discussions.

In conclusion, despite the positive impact digital technology can have on mitigating climate change challenges, a comprehensive and inclusive approach is required to ensure that digital policies at the national level consider the environmental impact. This would entail regulatory changes, stakeholder engagement, and the integration of standardized features. The involvement of international cooperation, the private sector, and platforms like the IGF can further support the development of effective strategies.

Moderator:
And I wonder if I can get started, is everything ready to go? In any case, good morning and welcome everyone to the main session on sustainability and environment at the IGF 2023 in Kyoto. Sustainability really is now one of the top priorities in every global agenda across all levels from all government, industry and individual level. Like my organization, oh, I forgot to introduce myself. I am Edmond Chung from DotAsia and also currently serving on the ICANN board. So one of the backgrounds in the last few years is that in 2020 when the pandemic hit, the world really witnessed a very significant drop in CO2 emissions on record. And that’s primarily due to lockdowns and economic shutdowns. But alongside that, there was a huge surge in internet usage from Zoom meetings to grocery shopping online and the attention to the carbon emissions from the internet itself kind of grew. But since last year, the lockdowns eased and the carbon emission actually bounced back very strongly to all time highs. But the internet itself, of course, is ever more inseparable and the sustainability of the infrastructure itself becomes an important question. And that’s what this session is going to explore. But what is the appropriate narrative to raise awareness and what are the actions to be taken? Certainly it’s not about using less of the internet, right? Using shorter emails or watching shorter videos really doesn’t quite make sense. And on the flip side also, these digital transformation and digital technologies have great potential in helping address climate change, helping address the issues. And perhaps the question is how we can do more and waste less. A key to both mitigating the damaging and the damage and unlocking the potential probably lies in better understanding complex and sometimes counterintuitive relationships between the use of these technologies and their impact on the environment. Many different organizations are working on the topic at .Asia. We have just launched an initiative which is called EcoInternet.Asia here in Kyoto. We’ve launched it and it is an effort together with APNIC and with the support from HBS and APNIC Foundation, we’ve launched this index earlier this week here looking at measuring the eco-friendliness of internet infrastructures across different jurisdictions. Please check it out at EcoInternet.Asia or come to our booth with the big tiger at the IGF Village. Wearing my other hat actually, the ICANN board. You can also see that ICANN is working on this and you can see it from the CEO goals that have been set forward for 2024, goal 8 especially calls for the development of a comprehensive approach for developing and implementing an environmental sustainability strategy for ICANN. Here at IGF, of course the work and the outputs of the policy network on environment and digitalization and then the subsequent work of the dynamic coalition on environment laid the foundation for strengthening links with the UN’s ongoing work in the SDGs which is what this session we’ll be building on. Joining me on this panel are distinguished leaders in the area including David Suter, an international ICT and development expert, often working with the APC, Mike Lukin at IEEE, chair of the Planet Positive 2030 initiative and a long-time advocate for sustainable development, Xochitl Suarez, a civil engineer and a water sector leader at Simile Tech Company in Timor-Leste, Kemely Camacho, Cooperative Sulabatsu and has worked for 25 years in the development of feminist social solidarity economic alternatives in the context of digital society, Makter Sek, chief of section innovation and technology at the UN Economic Commission for Africa and Axel Klakerhe from director economic and social development digitalization with GIZ. Without further ado, David, please tell us your work and observation about the paradigm gap between the digital and environment policymaking. David, over to you.

David Souter:
Thank you very much for the introduction and my apologies for coming in slightly late to the meeting. I had to rush from another commitment. I got the record about five to six minutes and that’s what we should all be speaking for. That was what we were told yesterday. In his speech on Monday, the Prime Minister of the host country said artificial intelligence was poised to change the history of mankind and that’s also true, of course, of climate change. So what we do in relation to both of these things is crucial to our future and I think we need to think about their relationship with one another. So I’ll start with the fundamental problem, which is that there just isn’t enough dialogue or understanding between the digital and environmental communities of experts, communities of practice. Not enough discussion in environmental fora like IPCC of the impact digital technologies will have, but also not enough understanding in digital spaces like this of the environmental context and how it’s going to affect the decisions we should make. So I’ll start by saying three things. Digital policies that aren’t environmentally sustainable won’t be sustainable in any other terms either. So we should be aiming for what I’ll call an inclusive and environmentally sustainable digital society and achieving that’s not simple and it’s certainly not guaranteed. If we’re to achieve it, obviously we have to maximise the contribution digitalisation makes to mitigating environmental harms in other sectors, but we also need to minimise the environmental footprint of the digital sector itself. It’s not a trade-off. Both of these are fundamental and equally important. I’m going to suggest five reasons why they’re difficult and then five policy approaches. I’ll try to do this quickly, clearly. It’s difficult because it’s complex and it’s much misunderstood. So sustainability is not just about the environment. It’s about the interface between economic prosperity, social welfare and environmental viability and these often throw up different priorities. And environmental impacts from the digital society aren’t just concerned with climate change. There is at least three critical problems. So as well as energy consumption and climate, there’s unsustainable exploitation of scarce minerals and other resources and there’s growing volumes of e-waste with little recycling, much dumping in developing countries. Then impacts are diverse, some positive, some negative, all difficult to measure. So we need to consider not just direct impacts from the way we make and use digital resources, but indirect impacts arising from new types of activity like e-commerce and the rebound effects that arise when efficiency improvements increase consumption. And societal impacts, like the changes in the way we live and work and play. And these impacts differ greatly between countries. So many of the benefits of digitalisation are being experienced in richer countries, more of the environmental burdens are being felt in lower income countries, particularly with scarce resources and e-waste. These impacts are certain to grow with AI and the Internet of Things, some good potentially, some bad, all affecting those three critical areas of resource depletion, energy consumption and waste. So any framework for the governance of AI, for instance, should have environmental sustainability at its heart. Now I said I promised sort of five suggestions for improving governance, so let me make those now. So the first is to build much stronger dialogue between fora such as this and those concerned with the environment. There’s a tendency in fora like this to promise digital solutions that look good to digital insiders but haven’t been tested out on those they’re meant to help. And we need to listen more in fora like this to environmental experts and those dealing with environmental challenges on the ground. And I’d actually like to see a main session here at the IGF that listens to speakers from environmental agencies talking about their priorities before considering what digitalisation has to offer. And my second proposal is to build environmental sustainability into digital policy-making at global, regional and national levels. UNCTAD is looking at how to make e-commerce more inclusive and environmentally sustainable in its next digital economy report. Other international organisations could do the same in their sectors, and governments should audit their digital strategies in pursuit of green goals as well as digital goals. My third proposal is about a circular digital economy, so one that requires fewer scarce resources and less energy consumption, that extends the life of digital devices and data centres, makes them more adaptable, encourages recycling and reuse, reduces waste. And there are responsibilities here for all stakeholders, so governments creating regulatory frameworks and introducing incentives, technologists and businesses designing things in ways that are environmentally responsible, citizens adopting more sustainable consumption. That’s why I tend to call this optimising rather than maximising digitalisation. And I’d recommend those who might want to follow this to look at the digital reset report, which was recently submitted to the European Commission. Fourth point is to do with standards. Standard-setting bodies should include environmental factors in the development of standards. For example, reducing use of energy and scarce resources. And businesses should do the same when designing applications, networks and services. My last point would be to do with monitoring. What’s happening? What’s beneficial? What’s not? So that we have an evidence base to build the inclusive and environmentally sustainable digital society I mentioned. For businesses, I think that means being honest and transparent about their impacts with no more greenwashing. But it also requires much more independent evaluation and analysis, which can and should be multi-stakeholder, can and should involve United Nations and other international agencies, and must cover all countries, not just those in which it’s easy to measure things. So those would be my five proposals, and I hope five minutes.

Maike Lukien:
Thank you, David. And those are really important, I guess, suggestions, and especially about the session here at IGF. And one of them is about standards. And so next, we go to Mike, which will take us through a little bit more on what’s happening at the technical side with the standards. Okay, yes, thank you. Thank you very much. It’s fascinating to be here and a great honor. Let me introduce IEEE with a couple of words. It’s the largest technical professional association with some 420,000 members around the globe in 190 countries. We are well known for many things, and one of them is 2,000 standards. And if you happen to use Wi-Fi, you’re using an IEEE standard, 802.11. As part of its activities a couple of years back, the IEEE Standard Association launched an initiative looking at ethics and AI. That’s not exactly what we’re talking about today, but I thought I’d draw your attention to this document called Ethically Aligned Design, which is, I think, the first time that a technical association looked at ethics and standards. It’s available for download for you. In early last year, we started a new initiative called Planet Positive 2030 with the goal to arrive at pragmatic recommendations to achieve planet positivity. We’re using a multi-stakeholder consensus-based backcasting process with, at this point, around 180 people involved from around the globe, I think 29 countries, if I recall correctly. The first draft compendium, Strong Sustainability by Design, is available for download as well. Then following that, across the organization, another initiative was formed, a SusTech initiative, to further dig into the recommendations from the Planet Positive initiative to arrive at some identification of potential gaps in standards, technology gaps, road-mapping gaps, et cetera. I’m pointing this out because this is an invitation to participate. Let me go then further on to our context. Safeguarding and, more so, achieving a truly long-term, sustainable planetary biosphere, that’s really what this is all about. We have a biosphere that sustains life of all forms 100 years from now, 2,000 years from now, 100,000 years from now. This is a big, shiny North Star that we are aiming for one way or another, maybe slowly, but that’s what we like to see. What do we need to do in order to get there? We need to address global warming, or people call it climate change. That means achieving net zero GHG emissions, and furthermore, reduction of the greenhouse gases that are currently, essentially, imbalancing the composition of our atmosphere. We need to get close to pre-industrial levels. That’s the climate change agenda. Then we have the UN SDG agenda, we do need to achieve the SDGs. Then, harking back to David’s comment, we do need a circular economy because we are resource-bound, and we do need to address the waste that we are producing and leaving around. Ultimately, that means that every widget we build or use needs to be able to be de-manufactured, and if necessary, take the materials down to the molecular level so that new widgets can be built from those materials. I like the term de-manufacturing. We manufacture and we de-manufacture. The fourth point here is the regeneration of ecosystems. We have done a lot of damage, we have to undo this damage. That doesn’t necessarily mean that they will be exactly the same way they used to be, but they have to be healthy ecosystems. Essential to achieving this goal is looking at energy, and that was mentioned by both David and Edmund already. Accessible, clean, sustainable energy is the linchpin to address this problem, or this complex set of problems. That means electrification of industry, different sectors, potentially the use of hydrogen, but ultimately we need accessible, clean energy. We can solve the water problem with energy. Once we have clean water, we can produce food, and so on and so on. This is a global problem, but ultimately we need contextual solutions. One size does not fit all. In some areas we can use geothermal for energy production, clean energy production. In other areas we cannot. That leads me to knowledge sharing. Once we have solutions, solutions and best practices and failures need to be shared so others can learn from it. Ultimately we need what I would like to call a digital knowledge commons that very quickly shares knowledge to other communities to be able to apply it. The fourth point is standards work. Standards have been mentioned. Standards are essential for interoperability. I like to call it standards started out with describing how something works, then led to interoperability, then led to include safety, and today we need to include sustainability consideration in the development of standards. That means environmental pollution, emissions, demanufacturing, etc., including social implications of the use of whatever we are working on in terms of a standard. We could also call that regenerative design or design for strong sustainability from the beginning, from the outset. It also requires system thinking. As I just pointed out, these various aspects to a standard, that’s really holistic and system thinking. What comes next is maybe the most important part, and that relates to where we are here at IGF, is accountability. We need to have metrics, we need to measure, we have to have the data collection, we have to agree on what the data collection is, we need to agree on how we model, we need to be able to audit, we need to be able to validate, etc. And so, that’s where I think this multi-stakeholder environment is absolutely essential to come to agreement on how we move forward on these facets to address this big, complex problem set. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you, Mike. And thank you for bringing up the AI and ethics. Actually, I also participate at the IEEE and one of those standards. And I think Anxar is here somewhere in the audience. But one of the topics that segues into the next speaker, Dulce, is about knowledge sharing. And Dulce, please tell us a little bit more about the underground work on this topic.

Dulce Soares:
Thank you, Edmund. Thank you for having me. As introduced before, I represented a local technical company called Simili based in Timor-Leste. And I’m actually wondering, who are here know where exactly Timor-Leste is? Okay. Only a few. So as I noticed, there’s almost none of Timor-Leste representative here in such an amazing networking event. And I reckon I’m the only one here, and thanks to the APNIC EC Asia that giving me the opportunity to share the knowledge on the ground. So yeah, before I start my session, I would like to briefly introduce a bit about Timor-Leste. Where is Timor-Leste? What are the situation there? In order for the audience to understand the context of my speech today. Timor-Leste is a Southeast Asian country, a small state island situated between Indonesia and Australia, with a population of 1.36 million people. Well, we are relatively small, however our history is quite complex. We have over 400 years of colonialism, and that would mean the process of development take long to come to this stage today. So we only gained our independence in 2002, which is 21 years ago. While we are starting to rebuild our nation, other emerging countries are already moving advanced with the technology and all other things to build the country. So with that, I would like to share a bit of the internet context, or internet situation in Timor-Leste. How does it look like in Timor-Leste? So in Timor-Leste, basically the internet is very low speed. The average download of the internet itself is only around 4 to 4.5 megabytes per second. That’s very low compared to other countries. We have limited infrastructure, including access to high-speed broadband in rural areas. It hinders widespread internet adoption. We also only have 49.6% of the total population using internet. Timor-Leste relies on the mobile connectivity and expensive satellite connection. We have the plan already, the government already have the plan for high-speed internet through submarine fiber optic connections. We’re not sure when it’s going to happen. But in terms of the usage of the internet, mostly around the work, email for work, and then the community focus more on the social media usage. That’s the most popular one. They serve as important communication channels and source of information. So moving on to the topic today about the environment and sustainability, I’d like to focus on the work that I’ve been doing on the ground, more around the water supply, water resource management, and then climate change issue, and how these are linked with the importance of the digital or technology intervention in the context of Timor-Leste situation. When considering the process of rebuilding the nation in the water sector, the initial emphasis was focusing on the water supply infrastructure, major investment on water supply infrastructure. However, in 2015, Timor-Leste got hit by the global crisis, El Niño, and that brought water resource management to the forefront, because there is lack of water resource management in Timor-Leste, and basically all the investments are focusing on the water supply itself. And then in 2020, La Niña happened, so that brings back the importance of the water supply. And how do we think, what are we going to do in order to integrate the water resource management and water supply system itself? I also would like to share a bit of some of the challenges that happened in Timor-Leste around the environment or the climate change issue itself. Most of the time, large and unsustainable investment into technology that only lasted as long as the project life cycle. International agencies provide costly and unsustainable project-based support, and these investments were often expensive and highly technical. That involved fly-in, fly-out technicians, which are often unaffordable by governments. And this technology, especially within the context of the water sector, seemed to keep communities and governments in the same place, meaning they did not foster growth of the further development. At the same time, investment in climate change adaptation and resilience programs often do not foster data sharing and collaboration, as they are focused only on the project-specific activities and outcomes. Now, with the limited resources that we have, international agencies disjointed and project-bound investments as well as unsustainable technology that hinder the growth of the development of the life cycle, this recreating the wheel of the response initiative only focused on the project base itself. So this is where the private sector comes in. Private sector comes in because there is slow process in the government in terms of waiting for the budget allocation, waiting for the intervention of the political intervention, and hardly people involve a private sector in terms of the situation like this. And similarly, as a tech company, we come up with the technology innovation where we collaborated with the local grassroots organization. These local grassroots organization, mainly they’re focusing on the water and land conservation, where similarly the private sector tried to collaborate in order to validate the work that this local grassroots organization has been put over 20 years. The idea is if we can validate the efforts that they do, this could be information that influence the government in terms of the policy decision-making. Some of the examples that we do in practice is when we’re collaborating with the local grassroots organization, the technology that we have, somehow we created the alert system where we inform the focal point of the local grassroots organization to receive the alert system through SMS and email, and then they will then train the community in order to understand when the alert comes, what are these message means, and what are they going to do in terms to respond for the environmental issue. Taking a little example, for example, there is an alert about the water level indicator. If the water level in the tank, after three consecutive days, there is overflowing of the water, the community will receive the alert system, and what they will do is better manage their water system. What they’re going to do is whether allocate the time management for it or find alternative options in order to cater the wastage of water to some other purpose. On the other hand, for information about the weather, normally in Timor-Leste, people cut and burn the soil because they think during the dry season, they will prepare to plant for the rainy season to come, and that actually affecting the climate, the environment itself. With the alert system that we inform to the community, that will help them to understand what sort of action, what sort of behavioral change that they could take in order to change the way they practice usually, and then better manage their environment as well as their water system. I guess I’ll stop here, and then I’ll wait for the later session. Thank you.

Moderator:
Actually, I think you hit on a very interesting point. It’s the sustainability of sustainability projects, and in Timor-Leste, actually, DotAsia has been supporting a project there, and my team was flying there. It’s a beautiful country, so welcome to Timor-Leste as well. The discussion about the sustainability broadening to other aspects of sustainability is really what Kemli, our next speaker, will talk about. Kemli, please.

Kemely Camacho:
Thank you very much for everybody. Thank you for the invitation to share table with all these amazing people and with you also. I’m going to read because we have only six minutes. I would like to contribute to the discussions with some of the reflection about the use of digital technologies for sustainable environment. We have developed with organizations from the three social movements where we, as Sulabhatsu Cooperative, participate, the indigenous women movement, the feminist movement, and the social solidarity economy movement. Because of the time restriction, I had to select one or two of their proposals, demands, or call for action. Cosmovision, or worldview, is going to be the word to identify the proposals from the indigenous women movement. In relationship with digital technologies for sustainable environment, they would like to position the following concerns. Who is going to take in charge the waste produced by these devices installed around their territories? Our Cosmovision, they said, is not connected with this material, this waste produced by Okama Sway, which is how they call the technology produced for or by white men, or the technology not produced by the air, they call it Kama Sway. How is it guaranteed that these devices for sustainable development or for monitoring climate, etc., are not surveilling our daily life if they are related to our natural resources, which are totally part of our practices, sacred places, and others? If they are collecting data from our territories and in our Cosmovision, we can’t separate body, water, and land. These data are our property. We claim ownership. They are talking about our lives. Care is going to be the word to identify the proposals from the feminist movements. In the discussion, they said, care for each person, for the collectives, and planetary care must be in the center of data processes and devices that are being used for environmental sustainability. Digital technologies working for climate change, natural resources, and sustainability must be contextualized. Data model must be correlated with power relationship, land distribution, economic dynamics, citizen participation, women action, etc. We as women and as communities demand for participating in the digital technology for sustainable environment, climate change, natural resources management process that are going to be developed in our context since the beginning, developing collective data models, designing technology solutions together, ideating processes to integrate care as an axe of the digital environment solutions. Solidarity is going to be the word to characterize the social solidarity economic movement proposal and they have said, the possibility for humanity to survive is with solidarity. Digital technology can contribute or destroy the possibility for humanity to live in the planet. We claim for a responsible consumption of digital technology in a special for rich countries, big enterprises, and well-connected population. Digital technology for sustainable environment must be developed and used in the right measure, in the exact balance between usefulness and negative impact, and that is only possible if solidarity is in the center of development. Digital technologies for sustainable environment must not only be data-driven, there is a need to understand them also as technology to organize communities in risk and strengthening citizen participation. With collecting data about climate change, natural resources management, and other, it must be mandatory to strengthening citizen participation and organization. Then from the social movements where we as Sulawesi participate, we would like to ask for an urgent call to integrate respect for cosmovision or worldview, the focus on care, and the prioritization for solidarity as principles to develop digital technology for a sustainable world.

Moderator:
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I think it’s really interesting that actually as all the speakers seem to have touched on changing attitudes and changing behavior from some of the, not only the actors, but the users is a really interesting dimension. So next we go to Makto Sek from the UN Economic Commission for Africa, maybe talk to us a little bit more about how this topic is being discussed there.

Mactar Seck:
Thank you very much. Thank you and good morning, everyone. Thank you for inviting UNECA to be part of this important topic. As you know, the discussion about digital technology and climate change become very important at this stage. Why? Because digital technology has a positive and negative environment effect, and we need to take into consideration this concern in our digital policy. And in general, when we define this national digital policy, the issue of climate change is not very well highlighted in this policy. Why at UNECA in the implementation of the African Digital Transformation Strategy, we support African countries to put the issue of climate change in the national digital policy. Why do we do that? Because when we look at the statistics, when we have the statistics, digital technology contributes 1 to 5 percent to the green gas emission, and to the energy consumption is between 5 and 10 percent, it’s a lot. However, according to several studies, this digital technology can reduce this green gas emission to 20 percent by 2030. Why is it important to take this into consideration? In Africa, what are the key challenges we are facing to take into consideration this dichotomy of digital technology and climate change? We have several challenges. First, at the regulatory side. When we go to the regulatory ICT, we didn’t have really this relation between ICT, service, and impact on the environment. We need to look at this at the regulatory side. And there is also a misunderstanding of several decision-makers on the linkage between digital technology and the impact of the environment. So the rapid advance of the technology can contribute to this misunderstanding because we need to build the capacity to know exactly what are the impact of this new emerging technology like artificial intelligence, blockchain, on the energy sector, on the environment sector, and to overcome with some solution. The other issue also, we need to develop this digital policy by involving all the stakeholders. We can’t develop now a national digital strategy on digital technology without involving the environment sector, without involving the energy sector. We need to involve them and do not work in silo to develop this national digital strategy, which is very important. Now let me go through some initiatives we have at UNECA to leveraging digital technology for climate change adaptation. First, at the policy level, when we support, when we develop national policy, we have an important component on the environment and climate change to promote the contribution of ICT to this environmental sector. Second, on regulatory side also, we support African countries to change the narrative on the new regulation, to have a new regulation including this environment and climate change issue. Yes, we have several awareness initiatives. We organize every year what one colleague, ACATON, on leveraging digital technology for climate change adaptation. This ACATON, we select several young innovators across the continent. They come up for one week to develop key innovation on the climate change, and after that we see how we can build some application around this innovation on climate change adaptation. From this, we support African countries to develop several climate information systems. Some countries also benefit from ECA support to develop some early warning systems. She highlighted some in this country. I think it is something also similar in Africa also. We support a lot of countries to develop this early warning system and climate information system, and this has a positive impact now in the environment sector in the continent. Another issue also, it is when we talk about climate information system, we should have a history on the climate information. Now we are developing one application starting the history of all information regarding climate since 1990, since 1990-20. And also we have another big, very important project now. We are working with DRC to develop a centre of excellence on battery mineral. Also on credit carbon, we support some African countries to fast-track the credit carbon register. We also have another important project. We work on developing online platform, because this online platform can also mitigate the issue of climate adaptation, the smart city also, also some application to reduce the energy consumption. Is that also part of UN’s ECA? Yes. At UN ECA we have established a centre of excellence on digital ID, digital trade and digital economy. As the centre of excellence is to support African countries to use digital technology for achieving sustainable development and the achievement of the Agenda 26-3 of African Union. But we focus on all activity related to this digital technology, we work with digital technology climate, digital technology health, also digital technology, digital economy, digital trade and digital ID also. Platform digital ID will help also to mitigate this environment. So in capacity building we need to use this emerging technology to mitigate this climate change adaptation, while we are supporting, we already established a centre of, an African research centre in Congo on artificial intelligence, and one of the objectives of the mission is to focus on how to use artificial intelligence to mitigate the climate change adaptation.

Moderator:
Thank you, that’s, thank you Mactor, I think it’s a, you know, the topic about not being in silos and bridging that gap between the sustainability side and the digital side is very important, and that I think next we go to Axel Klarachke, sorry I stumbled on your name earlier, but Axel, please tell us more about the work at GIZ.

Axel Klahake:
Yes, thank you very much, I also feel very much honoured and privileged to be here now and to have the opportunity to share a few thoughts. You were just saying that there is still this divide between the sustainability communities and the digital communities, I would say that this is also our observation, that there is much room for bringing these two spheres much closer together, probably on all levels. If you look at the global level, we still see that those communities discussing climate change issues are still a bit separated from us discussing here the architecture of the global digital systems. I think there is a few initiatives though that try to cross that bridge already, I just want to refer to what ITU for example is championing now also for the upcoming COP28, this green digital action track, which I think is a very valuable initiative and I can only congratulate ITU really for this leadership and this initiative. There is also another initiative that has not been mentioned here, but because David was also saying maybe it would be good to invite for the next IGF some leaders from environmental agencies, there is already under the umbrella of the United Nations an initiative called CODES, Coalition for Digital Environmental Sustainability, where there is indeed national environmental agencies and other really very prominent actors from the environment sphere discussing digital issues. So I think there is now some more initiative crossing those bridges, but I think even here in the context of the IGF I would also love to see really more pure climate people maybe and more pure environmental people to tell us actually what they need from us and vice versa. I think this is maybe also my first message I would want to get across, so we need more cross-sector, cross-industry artists that help us really to shape that agenda properly. I think I would also want to agree on what the colleagues have just said on the necessity for more concrete standards. I think what we sometimes shy away from in this debate, that sooner or later we must move from this general conceptual discussion and pilot projects to more binding regulation and to more clear standards the industry would have to follow. I think to me this is very important that we support this idea. I know it’s in the global context always a dream. We don’t have a global regulator doing this for us, but I think really making sure that we talk about the same things, the same standards and the same terminology is extremely important. As he has said, we are from our very nature, we are more an agency that implements projects in individual countries on certain topics, but we have also now recently pretty much engaged in contributing to that discussion, so we had an initiative with the World Bank and ITU on standards for green data centres. I think that is a very useful exercise, so we were sitting together with experts on how we can shape that so the result is a practitioner’s guide for green data centre that has been launched recently in Nairobi on the occasion of the Africa Climate Summit, and I think it was very welcome. That was my impression, and I think really towards this direction I would very much want us to invest more. We have also tried to instill in the GovStack initiative, I think most of you are probably aware of this, that is meant to contribute to this DPI-DPG agenda in a very practical way, also to instill elements contributing hopefully to environmental sound rules for procurement for e-waste. I think those are really, I think more those concretisation what I think are currently really necessary and we would probably want to see more of. I think that there is big potential, I think I was probably without saying. And then in the complexity of the discussion, and this is also probably true for the discussion today, we have some people talking more about the greening of the digital industry, very much important, green data centre I think is just an example, but this should probably also be expanded to develop tools and instruments for the management of the entire value chains of the digital industry, so that would be I think also a good idea to develop it in this direction. And on the other hand, we have also people discussing more the potential and how we can unlock the full potential of the Internet, of digital technologies and tools to support the necessary transformation of the economies towards really a carbon-free economy and really for the end target really to cool down the planet actually. Here of course we also have lots of individual examples, but I think what we might want to add to that in the nearer future again is also maybe a place where we can have that proper exchange of knowledge and really draw proper conclusion that we could all subscribe to. So we have brought forward an initiative that is called Fair Forward, I just wanted to refer to this because also we have through this gained some experience on how we can support partner countries in the global south, we mostly operate in Africa, also in India with this initiative on AI in the realm of climate change adaptation. I think what we have done there looks very promising, we have very interesting examples, so working on watershed management for example, so this is pretty close to what has been introduced here already, so where we work with communities on using the results of AI and working with AI on shaping management strategies for natural resources. We have in East Africa and Kenya initiatives through this Fair Forward initiative on AI on promoting climate adaptation prone activities in the agriculture sector. So what I’m trying to say is there is I think already a good amount of projects and I think our next step should probably be really to draw the conclusions from this and then to push this agenda forward. So my overall message, I think this discussion is extremely important, we are very much committed to contribute to that on those various levels, the global scale, the regional initiatives like in Africa, UNECA or African Union, I think they really have a very important role plus on the national level, but I think what we still have to improve is this cross-sectoral nature and really how to cross that bridge, I think this is still something where we have room for improvement. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you Axel and the theme seems to be really crossing that bridge and I would like to open now to the floor, so please come to the mic and for any questions, I see already a question so I don’t need my first question, so let’s go to the floor first.

Audience:
Thank you so much. Yeah, microphone is working. Thank you all for your very valuable contributions. My name is Hanna Bause, I’m the Secretary of the Dutch Initiative for Sustainable Digitization. I think you cannot emphasize enough international cooperation on this topic and in that context I have a question, especially for Micah, since you were talking about standards, indeed we already have standards for interoperability, safety, but where do we stand today internationally to develop standards for sustainability in our digital system? Thank you so much.

Moderator:
Micah, I guess it’s for you, but I guess others. I think David and Axel might add to it as well, please mic first.

Maike Lukien:
So from the IEEE point of view, standards are developed for global use, they are not limited to any jurisdiction and adaptation of course is the question of whether companies or governments adopt various standards and ultimately it can lead to regulation. Standards are developed at many different levels, so for example there might be a standard on how to integrate microgrids into the larger grids today, there are standards on energy efficient wireless systems, etc. There’s a long list of many detailed standards essentially to have more sustainable infrastructure. Not necessarily referred to as sustainable, it’s referred to as more efficient, etc. Am I getting to your question?

Audience:
Yeah, so thank you for your answer. I think that’s very helpful, but as already said, I think the necessity for the adoption of those standards is crucial to accelerate the sustainable digitization transition we have to make in order to contribute to preventing the climate crisis to get worse.

Maike Lukien:
So there’s work just starting on trying to work towards a standard of measuring the carbon footprint of a small organization, like a farm, a small company. Think of the fact that over 90% of enterprises are small or medium-sized enterprises around the globe, but they bring in over 50% of the GDP around the globe. So we don’t have frameworks for these companies to participate in the quote-unquote carbon economy, carbon credits, etc. So we do need those standards as well, so that these small companies can ultimately participate in a sustainable value chain, sustainable supply chain, that will allow us to practice sustainable procurement. I’m firmly convinced that if we can get to sustainable procurement, we can solve a large part of our problems. And I think the European suggestion of product tagging, which is really the digital product passport that’s committed to but not quite designed yet, is a huge step forward in what Axel was referring to, a global initiative, because it will have global impact like GDPR had, to get us towards being able to essentially vote with our wallets, individually, governments, companies, etc. So I think your question is 100% at the core of the matter. Thank you so much.

Audience:
Just a final remark. I would really love to stay in touch and strengthen our cooperation. So I’ll send you a LinkedIn invitation. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. Adding to that, I guess, enforcement is a big word, right? But implementation of the standards is really the key. And I think both David and Axel talked about furthering this discussion. And I guess IGF is one of those forums that can have this multi-stakeholder discussion, so that implementation of these standards could actually be carried out. I wonder if David or others want to add to it. As David is asking, I, again, invite the audience to come to the mic for the next question. David, please.

David Souter:
Yeah. I mean, I think a phrase which I’ve heard a number of times here and which is becoming more current is responsible innovation. And that’s… That’s something that incorporates standards bodies very importantly, but also encompasses a wider frame of reference. So it’s about the innovation frameworks that take place in academia. It’s about how businesses develop their applications, products, goods, services, and so on. And if you have that kind of concept of an environmentally responsible innovation, you’re unlikely to have innovations such as Bitcoin, which are developed in a way which is not environmentally sustainable, and therefore not economically sustainable either. And the other thing I’d say is that I reiterate the point Mikey made about standards of measurement, that we need consistent standards by which we are measuring all of the things that are happening here at this digital environmental interface. We don’t have those at the moment.

Moderator:
It’s like a common language that we can talk about things as well. Mector, I think you want to add.

Mactar Seck:
Thank you very much. Before I leave, I think you touched on one important point, the issue of the standard. I think it’s a feature on what we are doing now in the digital technology to mitigate this impact of climate change. At the UN level, we already have this United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. To support all countries to develop their policy strategy on climate change, energy. But we need to add this missing piece on the standard. And I think it is a work we can look at at the international level. We have this ITU partnership for ICT. I think it is something we can rise and to see how we can develop standards, as well as we need to have all this private sector to come on board to develop this standard. Because it’s an issue of interoperability become crucial. And IGF is a good forum, platform, to start this discussion on the standard on digital technology and climate change. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. So we go to the line. And I also see a hand up in the Zoom room. But please, go ahead first. Yes.

Audience:
We received a very good question online, so I’ll quickly read it out for you. It was questioned by Izumi Okutani. And she asked, what can we each do to strengthen the collaboration between the environmental sector and the Internet sector? And Megan Richard added to that. And maybe at a personal level, as well. And also, I think that’s mainly aimed at AXL to reply to. OK.

Axel Klahake:
This is a very good question, but it’s also a very broad question, isn’t it? I think what we are doing is already towards this idea. I believe very much in a forum like this one. And I think we really need to bring the communities closer together. I think this is something we have already, I think all of us expressed in the first round, so that we really have to intensify those discussions. And then I think we really have to look deeper into the linkages between those two spheres. This is the technology, the standards, and many other things, the side of the consumers. We have only very briefly touched on the responsibility of consumers. So it has really different levels that lead also the involvement of different actors, and again, also different forms of regulation. And at the end of the day, I really do believe this is not only a matter of talking and bringing people together. It’s also a matter of defining standards, clear responsibilities, monitoring, and really a very responsible follow-up, because the discussion, I think, it’s not a luxury discussion we are having. I even feel very much a sense of urgency, looking in this broader context of where we are in terms of climate protection, and really this acceleration of the current situation, plus negotiations that are not so easy internationally. I would very much admire and very much love this digital community really taking this issue up more prominently and more proactively. So that is something I think I would want to come up with as an answer.

Moderator:
Thank you. And, Kemli, you wanted to add to that?

Kemely Camacho:
Yes, just wanted to complement a little bit on that. I think it’s crucial to connect with other social movements, and especially with environmental movements that they have already a long path in the negotiation about good practices, standards, and others. And in my experience, at least in Central America, it had been very difficult until this moment to really connect and to really have an interaction between environmental movements and digital right movements and digital environment and all of that until now. And I think we need to do the effort to really work together on that. And sometimes the environmental movement doesn’t understand very well our concerns, and we also are sometimes trying to do this path alone while there are other movements that have already advanced the discussions. And we always claim for the connection between movements and develop real interaction and try to build together proposals for the decision-making, but also for the communities. One movement that I always put as an example is the organic agriculture movement, who really have developed some practices that I think it’s important to take a look and have this example for the issues that we are working on. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. And I see a hand up, and so I’ll go there first and then come to you, Chris. Derejé, please go ahead.

Audience:
Yeah, my question is to Axel. So I thank you very much, Axel, that you have the initiative to liberate the potential of AI for environmental protection and management, and as you stated, you have got really different projects on this initiative. So as Magda tried to state, UNEKA is also supporting the establishment of the first AI research center in Congo, Brazzaville, which could have an impact in just mitigating the environment or the climate change. So is there any proper channels that we could leverage so that there would be really a kind of liaise between your organization and the research center we established for further implementing those AI and emerging technologies for climate change? Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. Are you pointing this to a particular center that you would like to ask, or is it – Axel, you want to ask?

Axel Klahake:
I think I have, you know, read your question now in a way that you would want us to explore possibilities for collaboration, and I can just answer that we are more than ready to look into that. I think all of those initiatives can only be successful if we really think it as partnerships, as something we do not just as one, you know, separate institution or organization, and the other institution is also doing something. I was already trying to say that I really think in this discussion of AI application in climate change protection, I do believe there is a need to exchange more on experiences, on results, and how we really want to push this agenda further. So just contact me, and then I will connect you to our teams and our experts, and we are more than ready to discuss.

Moderator:
Thank you. Chris? Yeah. Thank you very much, Edmund.

Audience:
Chris Buckridge. I’m a technical community representative on the IGF MAG, and for full disclosure, I was involved in organizing this session, so I want to thank all of the speakers for their participation. It’s been a really interesting discussion so far. I want to change hats slightly, though, to make a comment and to ask a question, and I think the comment relates to some of the questions we’ve already had about the role of the IGF and internet governance structures and what they can do to connect more with the environmental policymaking and discussion. I wanted to shift the focus a bit to the national and regional initiatives, so thinking in terms of the IGF as a broader ecosystem, which also includes regional and national IGFs, of which there are many, as we’ve heard. So I’ve been involved quite heavily in EuroDIG, and I know there’s been a number of sessions and workshops at that European IGF level on this topic over the last few years. I know APR IGF has also had a number of sessions, and I’m sure there are others in other parts of the world that I’m less aware of. But I think that’s a really useful opportunity to connect, and this is kind of in relation to what Dulce and Kenley were saying, at the more local level, and with those sort of smaller grassroots organisations and private sector organisations that are doing that work, and maybe you’re not going to come along to a big annual IGF event, but might be able to connect with the local communities that are involved in internet governance. So having that connection at that level is really important. In terms of the question, I wanted to build a little on the workshop at this year’s EuroDIG and give a very brief report there, because the topic we were looking at was in relation to do policymakers actually have the level of understanding that they need to be making policy with an environmental concern but towards the digital sector. I think Moctar, who unfortunately had to leave, but made that comment about the confusion that sometimes might exist around the link between ICTs and digital activities and environmental impact. And so in EuroDIG we were looking at a number, we were looking at AI, certainly, and I know OECD presented there, they’ve also done some work, I think that probably complements the work that IEEE has done. We were looking at data centres and streaming, and that’s certainly a very big discussion in Europe at the moment, the link between data centres and increased sort of data throughput and what that means for energy usage, whether there is a sort of direct linkage or whether the linkage is a little bit more complicated. And then also looking very briefly at the quantum internet and how that might impact. So I guess the question I wanted to throw open is, do you, on the panel, see a need for better information for policymakers in relation to environmental impact, and can the IGF, both at the global level but also the sort of more regional and national level, help to foster that? Thanks.

Maike Lukien:
So policymakers, same as us, can never have too much information to base evidence-based decisions on. The other thing that I’d like to point out is, whatever was true 10 years ago is not necessarily the best solution today. So one of the things that we have to deal with in terms of informing policymakers is really to keep people up to date of what today’s ultimate or close to best solutions are. And we have to be willing to re-examine this in a year or two or three, depending on what is going on. And as far as I’m concerned, development of regulation and development of policy is far too slow. Like, it doesn’t keep up what is happening in the industry, what’s happening in technology. In 2007-8, we had dire predictions about how much power ICT would use. Now ICT power use or electricity use has gone up, but certainly not in the way it was predicted way back then. If you look at the nuclear industry, the big strides are being made with small modular reactors that could potentially solve certainly the issue with providing remote communities with clean energy. And like I can go into a big long debate about that, truly exponential strides have been made. And so policy has to be, or policymakers really have to be kept up to date. We actually need a better way to do that. I mean, there’s one, I typically, USA is doing it for the Congress once a year, and sometimes in between. But I think the channels need to be opened up much more. Thank you.

Moderator:
And I think David wants to add, and I’ll add myself to responding.

David Souter:
To firstly reinforce Chris’s point about the NRIs, the UK IGF had a major focus a couple of years ago on environmental issues, which was introduced through a keynote from an advisor to the IPCC, which focused around circular economy issues and so forth. I think there is a scope there. My disappointment with that is that so few people actually take part ultimately in that sort of forum, and it needs to reach out further. On the broader policy issues, I think a lot of discussion around this tends to focus on what can happen in ideal circumstances if the best technologies can be used with the right policy commitments. But actually what matters is what will happen in real circumstances, which are never close to ideal. And so there’s a lot of aspiration for what might be achieved. It needs a healthier dose of realism. And I think a lot of policymakers’ perceptions in the digital sector of what is happening in the environmental context are often outdated, and vice versa. So that’s an important reason for bridging it. CODIS, which Axel mentioned, is I think an important UN initiative in this context. And again, I think the European academic network that built the digital reset initiative is also an important one to look at. Thank you.

Moderator:
I’ll add a little bit and pass to you, Kim Lee. I guess that’s really the—yeah, I see two persons on the mic as well. Just quickly, that’s why we published the EcoInternet Index, and to add to that discussion, we need information. We need to know whether certain ways of measuring the impact is an appropriate way to measure the impact balancing between digital transformation and the, I guess, the digital carbon footprint. So Kim Lee, and then I will go to the two questions.

Dulce Soares:
Very quickly, we think at the local IGF, it’s really, really a need to integrate other voices from other movements to discuss the Internet governance and to discuss these key problems. I have been working on IGF, in the local IGF, I don’t know, for, I don’t know, 10, 12 years, I don’t know, and in the regional one also. And we always try to integrate more voices from other sectors. I think this discussion is not only our discussion. I think we really need to integrate other actors in the discussion, environmental movement, the indigenous movement. They have to be here discussing with us, and that has to begin first in the local IGFs. Then this discussion has to be open, has to be, has to integrate other actors and other voices. This is one thing. I have to say something, because the time is about to finish, and I don’t want to leave this issue. While we have a structuralist business model in the base of our digital society, it’s going to be very difficult to really take a balance in the use of the digital technology between the usefulness and the bad impact on the environment. I wanted to say that, and we had some discussion in this IGF about the structuralist business model in the base. the digital society, and then this is one of the discussions we have had inside the indigenous movement, feminist movement, and social economy movement, yes, while we have this model, and then there is a need to create other business models, and to develop other business models with other references, to really have the possibility to use technology and without such a big impacting environment, and I wanted to say that also.

Moderator:
Thank you. So I’ll go to the ones in the mic first, and I don’t know if Izumi, Okutani, you want to add as well. I’m not sure whether chat or keynote was first, but I’ll go with the keynote, and then Jasmine, and then see if Izumi would want to add, and then we’ll come to, please respond, and then also include your closing remarks, looking at the time as well, so chat please.

Audience:
Thank you. My name is Chat Garcia-Ramelo from APC. So yesterday we had a lightning talk, and we had two people from our network to speak of how, what they’re doing in relation to e-waste, and one of the things that came out, so one from India and the other from the Gambia, and these are organizations that are trying to contribute so that the impact of e-waste is diminished, at least in their communities, and this is really looking at what, for example, what David was talking about, we produced through the network a toolkit on circular economy, working with different organizations or members of the network, and I think this is, I raised this, so one of the points that came up there is that we know that 2.6 billion need to be connected, and 2.6 billion means more gadgets and more resources, so I just wanted to, and that sort of struck me, struck us in the sense that we, there are many different things we can do, and I do think that perhaps one thing that we are able to do is to really maybe highlight more the stuff that works now, and I, to David’s point about it cannot be, you know, it has to be pragmatic or realistic, so things, there are things I think that we can do now and that works now that might have much more impact, and I do think that’s maybe something we can contribute, we can do together, and look at what it is that really works, where we can, you know, collaborate on. Thank you. Thank you, Chad. Kino. Hello. My name is Kino. I’m Vice President of Internet Association Japan. My comment question is about the standard, which I completely concurred importance for in this context. That said, I heard the comments from a couple of speakers earlier that the, with respect to the sustainability and the digitalization, there is a room for two separate domains to converge together, come together, to understand each other. So my comment and the question is that before getting on the actual standardization to be developed, I do see the necessity of developing a practice, how the digital technology will contribute to accelerating the environmental protection and also sustainability. So question to the panel is that do you also see the similar necessity on opportunity to work on the practice development before taking on the initiative on the standards for this matter? Thank you, Kino. I’ll go to Jasmine, and then I’ll go online to Izumi, and then we’ll start from Dolce over for the response and closing remarks. Jasmine. Thank you, Edmund. So this is Jasmine. I’m from technical community and youth from Hong Kong. So I focus more on data collection and center and standards as well. I’m really fond of the idea of system mapping and also seeing the gap of more mapping. So my observation and also my question will be, because we are all like from different regions, we have our own standards and the way we collect data. But the thing is, like when we come on this platform, we need to have, I just feel like we need to have more visualization or really a same centralized platform or database that we could see how we each other reckon on, how we could collectively see the impact that we’re making at the same time. So I just wonder, like, how do you see your role in your circle of influence or circle of concern that you, you know, like measuring data of a technology with its environmental impact? Because I really want to tackle the gap about the roadmap and also the things that we’ve been talking, you know, for a while. So I feel like I see the need of accelerating the discussion and also like the way we share and collect data, share information together as a group. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. And Izumi, did you want to, are you able to unmute and add? Izumi? Is it that you need to, I don’t know, the administrator, please unmute Izumi Okutani so she can speak. If not.

Audience:
Thank you. This is Izumi Okutani and sorry, it took a bit of time for unmuting. Very interesting discussion. And I especially like the point about having some platform for information sharing between different players. And I think in the earlier context, there was more focus on providing information for policymakers. And I would like to add that in addition to that, putting more focus on industry players, what can each of these businesses and internet communities can take actions can also be helpful, not just for policymakers. And in that context, I think having some, like in addition to regulations, I think having some milestones and guidelines on what actions that each industry players can take can be really helpful. So in order to do that, national and regional IGF, I think would certainly be helpful as a place where these players can actually come to obtain information. But I think there needs to be more additional efforts to be put into so that the discussions and information sharing doesn’t just stop at the IGF forum, but it actually reaches the businesses and the technical community as well.

Moderator:
Thank you, Izumi. And one last intervention. Very short, please.

Audience:
Thank you. Given that this is the last one, I’ll make it very brief. My name is Elaine. I’m based in Singapore. I participate in this as an individual today. And as a citizen of the global, around the world, I’d like to make a few points. First of all, we live in a city where there are very few choices and of sustainable living options and all. And second is about education. Now, I attended the United Nations Staff Systems College on sustainability of lifestyles and also digital for sustainability. What I’m trying to call upon is whether we could have policymaker to provide more incentive and education for citizens, because that’s the fundamental of all the people, the population that will embrace that, the way they consume and commute and many more. So thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. Now, I’ll go to Dulce and across to David for your closing remarks. Yeah, please.

Dulce Soares:
I guess my closing remark. As you can hear, probably I’m the one who’s last talking here because I’m coming from all the way from a country, in the developing country, when everybody talking about AI, high technology, policymakers, we’re just talking about digitalization. And when we talk about digitalization back in our country, our focus is more looking at the best practices that are available in the country. And what can we learn from the best practice itself? How do we integrate technology with the best practice that are already available in our country? And then how do we educate our people by providing capacity building, regardless what sort of technology that we have, but how to make sure that the technology that we deploy within the country should or must ensure that the understanding of the user of the technology itself. And on the other hand, I also would like to sort of provide sort of like a comment around maybe in this sort of platform, IGF can help to influence a more inclusive environment among sustainability actors by encouraging, as Azumi mentioned before, like more business people, private sectors, government and international agency collaboration, so we can hear many aspects from different sectors that can provide their inputs around the technology and the Internet, the environment itself. Thank you. I think that’s for me.

Axel Klahake:
Axel, please. Yeah, thank you. There were so many complex questions, so I will probably not answer those now in one minute. I think what I found very obvious in the discussion now, I think when we want to explain that complex issue better to decision makers, I think we have to make it simpler and clearer in terms of priorities. I do believe that this is really something most likely we want to do next, really clearly making the point for, I don’t know, ten points of action or maybe even less, so that really the decision makers can understand what is actually urgently needed. Sometimes we tend in the discussion to add again a new layer of complexity, and for a decision maker, it’s not so easy to disentangle that and to really derive a conclusion that are relevant to their sphere of action. I think that is something I do believe we should work on, making things clearer, also making sure that we all have in mind the same big trends. I think also the trends have been mentioned. So what is coming up in the next ten years? We have heard about still the 30% of the world population being unsafe, not having access. So this is going to change, again, with dramatic consequences for the environment. So we also have currently only a lower percentage of data centers being located in the global south. Again, this is going to change with massive implications in terms of sustainability, and so forth and so on. So this is, I think, just a few examples of what we should follow up on. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you, Axel. Thank you.

Maike Lukien:
Well, thank you. So this was a very interesting panel. I mean, I’ve learned a lot, and it has been a lot of fun. So a little bit of a takeaway. So as we kind of move forward and build and implement a pathway to a sustainable planetary biosphere, and I’ll stick to the term because it’s much more than just the environment, we do need, and we have talked about this, multidimensional collaboration and cooperation across jurisdictions, sectors, civil society. All are essential so that we can agree on accountability frameworks. We don’t even have that for large companies yet today. We need to measure and be accountable and be ready to revise decisions. We need to measure impact, be accountable, and be ready to revise. We also have at our hands what I would like to call a wicked problem, or maybe more than one. It’s very complex, and we have to deal with competing interests, or actually competing needs at the same time. The urgency of today’s problems versus the urgency of tomorrow’s problems. And so this is one of the big items that will require fora like this to debate how we can keep the balance, how we can address those needs. And then I’d like to say that as we move forward and build a sustainability culture, that we take into account for every project, everything we do, what we need to do in terms of sustainability. And we cannot leave anybody behind. And I’d like to say failure is truly not an option.

Moderator:
Certainly not. Please.

Kemely Camacho:
Thank you very much for all the interventions. I think it’s really, really valuable, all the discussion here. We talk about four steps. The first step is integrate more people in the discussion, more movements, more thoughts, more generation, et cetera, in this discussion. The second one, understand better. We think this complex problem, we need to understand better what is happening. The idea about this common platform is very interesting, but another possibility to understand better what is happening, how it’s happening, who is producing all the situations. I think we are beginning with that, to be honest. The third point is disseminate and create movements around what is happening in the digital society with environment. And we prefer to talk about the digital society and environment, not the digital technologies. And the fourth one is change practices. We really think we need to change practices. We need to really put on the agenda the right measure. I don’t know if the translation is good in Spanish. We talk about la justa medida, which is the fair measure between the utility and the destruction. I began to work in all of that 25 years ago, I remember. And 25 years ago, I claimed and worked hard for connectivity, for connection to everybody. And now, 25 years later, I claim for less connectivity for the very well-connected and more connectivity for the ones not connected. Then I think that changed a lot the perspective of the digital society. Thank you.

Moderator:
Thank you. David, please.

David Souter:
Okay, so one of the problems here is that for every individual actor in an environmental context, every individual actor thinks that their own actions make only a marginal impact on overall environmental outcomes. And so they’re not really that important. And that’s a reason why the governance structures around this are critical. So government structures of regulation and to create incentives for environmental responsibility. The ways in which businesses develop products and services and standards are developed and so forth. The way in which citizens can, the kind of information around the overall environmental context that is available to citizens and the information that they can take to make environmentally responsible choices as consumers. So all of those things, I think, what I would sum up as saying, we need an ethos of environmental responsibility across the digital sector. So the decision makers at all levels in government, business, standard setting bodies, data centers, and so forth, are taking into account the environmental impacts of what they do.

Moderator:
Thank you, David. And I’ve run totally over time, but I think there’s a clear consensus that this is a journey. And there is willingness to continue this dialogue. And there is this gap between, this gap that while citizens may not be able to make a big impact, I think it’s still important for each citizen to work on it. And the other thing is, there’s a clear direction, action point as well, is for this community to go back to your NRIs, the National and Regional Internet Governance Forums, and bring those stakeholders that matter, bring the governments, bring the ministers, the right ministers, bring the industry to talk about this issue. And I expect everyone to go back to your national and regional initiatives and do that. And then next year, to come back at this main session and tell us about what further actions we can take on this very important matter that we cannot fail to accomplish. Thank you, everyone. And please join me in a round of applause to the panel. Thank you.