20 Years of implementation of WSIS and the vision beyond 2025

Summary

This session focused on the WSIS+20 review process and the future of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) beyond 2025. Participants discussed the achievements and challenges of WSIS implementation over the past 20 years, as well as plans for the upcoming review. The ITU highlighted its contributions, including initiatives like GIGA and the WSIS Forum. Civil society representatives emphasized the importance of digital inclusion and addressing exclusion. Regional perspectives were shared, with Asia-Pacific noting progress in ICT infrastructure but ongoing challenges with the digital divide.

The private sector, represented by ICC, stressed the need for enabling policy environments to stimulate investment. Several speakers, including from Australia and Switzerland, emphasized the importance of maintaining a multi-stakeholder approach in the review process. The UK highlighted how the WSIS action lines remain relevant by focusing on social impacts rather than specific technologies. Participants also discussed the relationship between WSIS and the Global Digital Compact (GDC), with some calling for integration to avoid fragmentation.

Key themes emerged around updating action lines to align with SDGs, addressing new technological challenges like AI, and ensuring meaningful connectivity for underserved populations. The importance of libraries as access points was raised, as was the potential of national and regional IGF initiatives to provide ground-level insights. Overall, there was a strong emphasis on inclusive participation and the need to gather diverse stakeholder input to shape the future vision of WSIS beyond 2025.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– Reviewing the achievements and challenges of the WSIS process over the past 20 years

– Aligning the WSIS action lines with the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Digital Compact

– Addressing remaining digital divides and ensuring inclusive connectivity

– Updating the WSIS framework to address emerging technologies and issues

– Strengthening multi-stakeholder cooperation in the WSIS review process

The overall purpose of the discussion was to gather stakeholder input on the ITU’s work for the upcoming WSIS+20 review, including reflections on progress made, remaining challenges, and ideas for the future vision of WSIS beyond 2025.

The tone of the discussion was generally collaborative and forward-looking. Speakers highlighted achievements while also emphasizing the need to address persistent gaps and emerging challenges. There was a shared sense of commitment to the WSIS process and multi-stakeholder cooperation, with calls to ensure the review process itself is inclusive of diverse perspectives.

Speakers

– Cynthia Lesufi: Chairperson of the cancer ICU cancer working group on versus an SDGs, from South Africa

– Gitanjali Sah: From ITU

– Osama Manzar: From Digital Empowerment Foundation, India

– Mina Seonmin Jun: Vice chair for the Council Working Group on WSIS and SDG, from Republic of Korea

– Maria Fernanda Garza: From ICC (International Chamber of Commerce)

– Ian Sheldon: From Australia

– Thomas Schneider: Ambassador from Switzerland

– Paul Blaker: From Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, UK

Additional speakers:

– Renata Toya: Vice chair, from Brazil

– Baratang Miya: From Girl Hype Women Who Code, South Africa

– Kosi Senua: From Ministry of Economy and Finance, Benin

– Damilare Oyedeli: From Library Aid Africa

– Valeria Betancourt: From Association for Progressive Communications

– Lilian Chamorro: From Colnado NGO and IGF Latin America, Colombia

WSIS+20 Review Process and Future Vision

The session, co-hosted by South Africa and ITU, focused on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) +20 review process and the future of WSIS beyond 2025. Participants from various sectors and regions discussed the achievements and challenges of WSIS implementation over the past 20 years, as well as plans for the upcoming review.

ITU’s Role and Call for Inputs

Cynthia Lesufi from ITU opened the session by explaining the ITU’s call for inputs on the WSIS+20 review. The deadline for submissions is 31 January 2025, with objectives including assessing progress, identifying challenges, and proposing future actions. Gitanjali Sah, representing ITU, highlighted its role as the leading UN agency for ICTs and facilitator of key WSIS action lines. Sah noted ITU’s contributions through initiatives like GIGA and Equals, the WSIS Stocktaking Database, and its role in convening multi-stakeholder platforms such as the WSIS Forum.

Multi-stakeholder Approach and Alignment with SDGs

A key theme throughout the discussion was the importance of maintaining a multi-stakeholder approach in the WSIS process. Paul Blaker from the UK emphasised that this approach has been crucial for WSIS success. Several speakers stressed the need to update the WSIS action lines to align with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and address new technological challenges like artificial intelligence and social media impacts.

Regional Perspectives and Challenges

The discussion included diverse regional perspectives on WSIS implementation. Mina Seonmin Jun, representing the Asia-Pacific region, noted significant progress in ICT infrastructure but acknowledged ongoing challenges with the digital divide. Ian Sheldon shared that Australia is taking a grassroots multi-stakeholder approach to the WSIS+20 review, leveraging national and regional Internet Governance Forum (IGF) initiatives. Renata from Brazil highlighted their focus on community networks and digital inclusion.

Civil Society and Private Sector Contributions

Osama Manzar from the Digital Empowerment Foundation emphasised the importance of addressing digital exclusion and the rights of the unconnected, sharing examples of their work in India. Maria Fernanda Garza from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) stressed the need for enabling policy environments to stimulate investment and highlighted the business sector’s role in expanding connectivity.

Integration of WSIS and Global Digital Compact

Discussion emerged around the relationship between WSIS and the Global Digital Compact (GDC), scheduled for review in 2027. While some participants called for integrating the WSIS framework and GDC under WSIS mechanisms, others expressed concern about potential fragmentation in the UN system.

Addressing Inclusivity and Specific Populations

Baratang Miya from Girl Hype Women Who Code called for clear objectives for women and girls in the review process, suggesting that current language is often too broad. An audience member highlighted the role of libraries as key partners in achieving a digital future, emphasizing the potential of existing community resources in advancing WSIS goals.

Next Steps and Action Items

1. Stakeholders encouraged to contribute to ITU’s call for inputs and WSIS Forum inputs.

2. Exploration of ways to integrate the WSIS framework and GDC under existing WSIS mechanisms.

3. Consideration of creating an action line specifically focused on gender issues.

4. Leveraging national and regional IGF initiatives to gather local perspectives.

5. Using the WSIS Forum next year as a catalyst to bring together various processes and visions, as proposed by Thomas Schneider.

6. Revising the matrix of the action plan, as suggested by an audience member.

Unresolved Issues and Future Considerations

1. Specific metrics or indicators for countries to evaluate their WSIS implementation progress.

2. A detailed plan for integrating WSIS and GDC processes.

3. Concrete steps to address digital exclusion and rights of the unconnected.

4. A framework for leveraging libraries as key partners in the digital future.

5. A mechanism to support and incubate young innovators and startups emerging from WSIS-related initiatives.

In conclusion, the session provided a comprehensive overview of the current state of WSIS implementation and set the stage for the upcoming WSIS+20 review. The discussion highlighted the ongoing commitment to multi-stakeholder cooperation and the need to address both persistent gaps and emerging challenges in the digital landscape.

Cynthia Lesufi: Did you hear that? Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Hi everyone. Is it on? Can you hear me? Hello everyone. Hello. Hello. We’re about to start. I hope I’m audible. Everyone can hear me. Okay. Welcome to our session. And I’m going to move around because we’re sitting here and I’ll be, I’ll be, you’ll be looking at my back. So it’s better if I move around so that you’re all able to see me. And those who are online are also able to see me. Let me first start by introducing myself. My name is Cynthia. I’m from South Africa. I’m the chairperson of the cancer ICU cancer working group on versus an SDGs. And I’m really honored to be a moderator of today’s session. I also want to take this opportunity to welcome all of you. And I also want to thank the ICU as a call call host of this session. Really, we appreciate South Africa. And I thought also I must also do some sort of an introduction of this session in as far as the objectives of it are concerned. Today’s session aims to gather your opinions as key stakeholders on the ITU’s work during the OASAS Plus 20 review. We will also discuss key topics, including the achievement, the challenges since the Geneva plan of action and how the OASAS process aligns with the 2030 agenda and the future direction of OASAS beyond. Additionally, we’ll also highlight the significant contribution that has been made by the ITU to date, which is quite important. And we will also look at what is it and emphasise the importance of engaging diverse stakeholders to ensure that we have a comprehensive and inclusive review of OASAS process and its vision for the future beyond 2025. I will also want to introduce our panellists. We have a number of panellists in here today, and we are joined by the vice chairs of the Council Working Group, the two vice chairs, Ms. Mina Jun and Ms. Renata Toya from Brazil and from Korea. We are also joined by Gitanjali from the ITU, and we are also joined by Ambassador Schneider. Where is he? He’s supposed to be here, but he’s not here. And we are also joined by my friend, Paul Baker from the United Kingdom. And we also join here by Ian Sheldon. Is he here? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. And we are again joined by Ms. Maria Gaza from the ICC. Is he in the room? I can’t see her. And finally, we are joined by Mr. Osama from the Empowerment Foundation. So before we can dive into our session, ladies and gentlemen, I want us to keep this in mind. I want us to be open and free and discuss so that we are able to share and learn from each other. But most importantly, we collaborate in moving forward with regards to the issue of the review process. And with this, I would want to hand over to our first speaker, which is Ms. Gitanjali from the ITU.

Gitanjali Sah: Thank you. Thank you, Cynthia. Perhaps we could start with you explaining the ITU’s call for input, the origins of it, and the timeline, and then I can take it over from there. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: I’m gonna do this sitting down. Ladies and gentlemen, those who are in the room and those who are joining us online, I just want us to recall Council Resolution 1332, which was adopted by the Council of October 2024. And in that Council resolution, what was agreed upon was that the ITU needed to issue a call so that you can share your views on the work of the ITU in the OASIS Plus 20 review, including ideas relating to the review of the OASIS action lines. And in that resolution, we also adopted a timeline. And in that timeline, we highlighted the activities that will actually move us forward in as far as the call for inputs on the Wessels Plus 20 review is concerned. And the first activity on the timeline is the online form that was launched in date by the ITU, together with myself as a council chair. That happened in August, 2024. And the deadline for the submission on that call is on the 31st of January, 2025. And following that, as I’ve said, we also had a council working group on Wessels and SDG, which is the first meeting, the first physical meeting that we’ve had in October, 2024. And following that, we’re gonna have in February, 2025, an ITU council working group and SDG second physical meeting. And that will then be followed by a side event during the Wessels Plus 20 high level event in 2025. And that is going to happen between the 7th and 11th of July, 2025. And now I want to hand over to Gitanjali to take us through the presentation. Thanks. I apologize. I thought we are done. Yes, now, I think on this slide, we have the outline of the call, which is divided into four main themes. The first theme is on the implementation of the Wessels process. And it includes a number of activities, or I would say questions in it. And they range from what are the main achievement of the implementation of Wessels process in the past 20 years? What are the ITU main contributions towards the implementation of WSIS process in 20 years? And also, what are the challenges that remain in the implementation of WSIS process? And the next, I would say, thematic area is the WSIS action lines themselves. And with regard to this one, the question there is, which specific action lines have had the most significant impact and why? And also, we do have a question under that which says that, how can the alignment between the WSIS action lines and the SDG be strengthened towards the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development? And we do have another thematic area in terms of the call, which is on the WSIS action lines for advancing SDGs. And under that thematic area, we have a question which says, how can the alignment between the WSIS action lines and SDG be strengthened towards achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development? And lastly, we do have a thematic area on the future vision and the WSIS beyond 2025, which has three questions in it. And one of the questions says, how can the implementation of WSIS process and the pact of the future and its global digital compact be aligned to achieve the shared goals? And what are the key emerging trends and topics to be conceded by the ITU in the WSIS plus 20 review and future vision beyond 2025? Now this is the real time to hand over to Gita.

Gitanjali Sah: Thank you. So thank you very much. The presentation has disappeared from the screen. So if I could ask the technical colleagues to put it back. So while they’re doing that, could you put it back while they’re doing that? So basically my slides were, Cynthia requested me to to take you through what ITU has done in these 20 years. So I know that we have to prepare a report which will be available online very soon. So I presented this in my previous session, so I wouldn’t go through this. These were just the milestones and the joint preparatory process, which we spoke about in the previous session. So we won’t go through it again, but, and these are also available online. So what have we achieved? ITU’s mandate is absolutely clear. We have, through our governing bodies, we have our plenipotentiary resolution 140, we have our council resolutions, we have our council working group, we have a WSIS task force internally. So our structure and governing body is absolutely clear and our membership is absolutely clear with what we should do. It’s the lead UN agency for ICTs, those of you who don’t know, and our main facilitating role is with the WSIS action lines on C2, ICT infrastructure, C4, capacity building, C5, cybersecurity, and C6, enabling policy environments. Apologies for the small font, but the key partnerships I want to highlight through the implementation of not only these action lines, but all the 11 action lines is, of course, the GIGA initiatives with ITU and UNICEF, where we are connecting every school worldwide, that’s the goal, equals global partnership, and our secretary general, of course, also mentioned like a relaunch and reinvigoration of the equals global partnership. We work closely with UN Women, GSMA, ITC on the equals. The connect to recover, which was very important during COVID, so post-COVID, enhancing ICT infrastructure resilience post-COVID, so ITU stood up. after COVID with the Connect2Recover program, the Digital Transformation Centers Initiative that ITU does with Cisco, AI for Global Good Summit, ITU and 40 UN partners partnering with tech leaders and the UN to harness AI for health, climate change, disaster management, and so on. The Partner to Connect Digital Coalition, most of you know about the pledges there, the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development, ITU and UNESCO co-chair, the Child Online Protection activities that we have with many countries here and many multi stakeholders who are present. Of course, the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development, so we often forget about that one, but that’s a very important activity that the statistics divisions of our respective organizations do to measure the impact. Now, for us as ITU, some of the key contributions of WSIS have been the WSIS Forum, a multi-stakeholder platform for convening everyone, the IGF, where we are here today. We can see the impact of the IGF growing, the multi-stakeholder communities coming in, the WSIS Stock Taking Database, which is our database of more than 13,000 projects that we have with us, and innovative challenges like the Hackathons, the WSIS Prizes, and all of that that we have been doing. Getting the UN together under one umbrella, UN in Action, you heard us yesterday, so many of us spoke about that as also one of the successes. Some examples of collaborative projects that ITU has been doing, Smart Villages, Smart Islands with local governments and private sectors, Be Healthy, Be Mobile with WHO, cybersecurity initiatives with so many countries, and Digital Skills for Job campaign with ILO. So I just, I mean, we cannot talk about 20 years in this short time, but just to give you a glimpse of all these activities, our report will be available very soon.

Cynthia Lesufi: as well. Back to you Cynthia. Thank you, thank you Kit and Charlie for this elaborate presentation on what is it that the ITU has been doing for the past 20 years and the partnership that you’ve also highlighted on your presentation. Let me first start by giving the floor to Mr. Osama Manza, the representative of the civil society and we all know how the civil society is playing a critical role in implementing WSIS plus 20 at the grassroots level but we know that you are doing that in partnering together with the ITU and I also want to believe that WSIS is a success story because of the strong support that we get from the civil society. Please share with us your vision or that of the civil society with regard to the WSIS for the past 20 years and beyond. Thank you. Thank you Cynthia and thank you

Osama Manzar: for bringing me in because I have to also get out by 12.30 to catch the flight. So I am Osama Manza from Digital Empowerment Foundation based out of India but I also represent especially APC because I am a member of APC and also have been on their board for six years. I just want to give one example. In 2003 when I joined WSIS in Geneva, we were one person organization, Digital Empowerment Foundation. Today we are 400 people organization and we have 2,000 digital access points in India and we claim on data 35 million people digitally empowered on data. So trying to give that small little example that what process oriented impact can create not only our organization civil society but also a larger scale impact on ground. which information society, the phrase that is meant for, that everybody should be part of the information society. The most grassroots people, the disabled people, the indigenous communities, the people who are far away without being connectivity even till date, are the examples that we have been able to create. The two more examples I would like to create is that how the payment system for the masses have reached to the village level because of the digital inclusion. How the community networks, which is the people-oriented last mile access, have reached in the hands of the people. So even though ITU is a union of all the telcos and many of those organizations, but imagine the same has enabled not so named or institutionalized small little organization doing last mile access to bring in people into the society, both technologically and also in terms of capacity building. Just to put in two, three processes because APC have been part of the whole process for the last 20 years and we have been a participant from the civil society organization. There are two big example that I can also add into the process is that National Digital Literacy Mission in India was created by civil society to make the whole country digitally literate. All because of this WSIS impact. We also liberalized the licensing of the Internet service provider that nobody needs a license to buy an Internet and to sell the Internet. That’s also completely liberalized because of this civil society role to play that access must be affordable, and access must be practical to the local people in an entrepreneurial manner. I will end by saying that there are three learnings that we have learned in the last 20-25 years. That while we always talk the WSIS process about digital inclusion, creating information society, but it is also time that there is something that happens because of digital exclusion. The difference between the phrase, when you say digital inclusion, you always say that we have included 100 today, then 200, then it’s progressive. And you feel happy that we have achieved a lot. But when the people who are left over by not being connected are being totally excluded, their rights are excluded, their opportunities are excluded, then it’s a negative impact that we are leaving behind. Because everybody, the rules and regulations and the legislations are becoming digital must. Because of digital must, if I don’t have access, I cannot have my ration, I cannot have my biometric, I cannot have my identity, I cannot have my access to entitlements. And that is something the process needs to work on in the next 20 years, is that how do we take into consideration the process in such a way that nobody is left behind, but even if somebody is left behind, they are not excluded from the framework of being included into the digital pervasiveness. And because there is a huge example, for example, in India, even after 25 years, we have 48% people without connectivity. That’s a large number. Besides, out of those 50% who are connected, a large number are facing misinformation, digital narratives, how do we take care of that, are the things that we need to take into consideration in the WSIS process. Thank you very much.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you. Thank you, Osama, for sharing such a beautiful story, but however, we also appreciate the learnings that you are also sharing with us, and I think this was going to help a great deal going forward. Let me take this opportunity to give the floor to my vice chair, who is about to leave, but she really wants to speak before she leaves. Amina, please, you can take the floor.

Mina Seonmin Jun: Thank you, Cynthia. I hope you can hear me well. I will try to be still. I realize if I move around, my sound is breaking. I’m Amina from the Republic of Korea, and I’m representing our region here as a vice chair for the Council Working Group on WSIS and SDG. In Asia-Pacific, we have 39 countries. I briefly mentioned this morning, we have diverse countries geographically and culturally. We have the most advanced countries in ICT-wise, and then the least developed countries, and then landlocked countries, and then small island countries as well, so it really makes us difficult to meet all the regions’ needs from our population, but I would say over the past 20 years, our region has made a significant development and progress in advancing the WSIS outcomes. This was possible because we work together with all the nations, and then ITU, and then other WSIS facilitators, and then all the stakeholders as well. So firstly, I would like to say that in ICT infrastructure, the Asia-Pacific region has shown tremendous growth. So the region led the world in mobile cellular subscriptions, so like Japan, China, Korea, we have achieved mobile penetration rates exceeding 100%, but at the same time, the countries such as Bhutan, Myanmar, and Laos have made significant progress in expanding mobile connectivity and improving access to ICT. So in addition, in 2024, 62% of the region’s population has access to 5G mobile networks. Secondly, efforts to promote digital inclusion and capacity building has been a core focus in our region. ICT-related projects were implemented across the region to bridge the digital divide, and programs aimed at improving digital literacy have empowered marginalized groups, including women, youth, and persons with disabilities. Thirdly, the Asia-Pacific region has been the foremost of adopting emerging technologies. Countries have embraced smart city initiatives and integrated technologies such as AI, IoT, and big data to enhance urban sustainability and improve citizens’ quality of life. However, we still face significant challenges for our region. According to ITU data, the percentage of individuals using the Internet in this region increased from 48% in 2019 to 66% in 2024. But this is still below the global average, and this means approximately one-third of the population in our region is still unconnected. So the digital divide is particularly also evident between the urban and rural areas. Internet usage in urban areas is 83%, but in rural areas it’s just 49%. So this makes a significant urban and rural gap of like 34% of points. But the positive side, our youth Internet adoption stands out as a bright spot. So around 81% of individuals aged 15 to 24 use the Internet, which is 15% higher than the overall regional average of 66%. So this highlights the potential for youth to drive the digital transformation and connectivity in our region. In summary, the Asia-Pacific region, through the combined efforts of member states and ITU and others, all stakeholders have made significant strides in achieving these action lines and encourage our regions to do it. continuously and then I want to emphasize the importance to share our experience with our reasons and then word. So briefly say that Korea has released our 20 years of research experiment last year as a whole report, but I encourage our recent countries to do the same things to share our motives and experience to let the world know. So this was my brief explanation.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you. Thank you very much Mina for sharing again how is your region achieving the sustainable development goals through the action lines that are ITU based you know and also for highlighting the challenges which are still ahead of us and for also encouraging everyone to keep on sharing the achievements so that we can learn and build the future of tomorrow. I now want to give the

Maria Fernanda Garza: floor to ICC. Thank you very much. Is it okay the mic? Perfect. ICC is institutional representative of more than 45 million companies located in over 170 countries and through a unique mix of advocacy solutions and standard settings we promote international trade responsible business conduct and a global approach to regulation. Our members include many of the world’s leading companies but as you can imagine the majority of them are SMEs and business associations and local chambers of commerce. ICC was the local point for the WSIS process that started in Geneva over 20 years ago and since then the business has continued to stay engaged through ICC business action to support the information society initiative on the WSIS follow-up work streams. processes at the WSIS Forum year by year to take stock of the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines and chart the path together with partners from all stakeholders. Twenty years ago, the WSIS process envisioned the development of a global people-centered information society, one where everyone can truly benefit from the enormous opportunities that the Internet, the information and communication technologies, and the digital transformation has to offer. And this was a vision not only for the governance of the Internet, but for harnessing its unique potential for inclusive and sustainable growth, helping populations everywhere develop and thrive. WSIS also made clear that we have a shared responsibility in sharing this inclusive information society, jointly cooperating across all stakeholders’ groups to find minimum solutions to common challenges. And we have come a long way since 2003, but our greater challenge still remains. We still have over two billion people that are unconnected, and we all know that it takes more than just access to the Internet connection to fully benefit from the opportunities of digitalization. And we also know that governments alone cannot meet the investment needs and implementation challenges of expanding meaningful connectivity, and that the private sector has been a pioneer and a partner in bridging this gap. So to continue an upscale business investment, we need enabling policy. We need a policy environment. And the WSIS Plus 20 process can help… can help in clarifying what is that environment and how it looks like. But it’s important that policymakers understand how the private sector makes the investment decisions, as well as how political and regulatory decisions impact the technical functioning of the infrastructure or service. Ultimately, an enabling environment is one that stimulates the necessary investment in a way that results in sustainable facility or service over time. And that means a few things must be in place. A stable legal and regulatory environment, open markets and free flow of data across borders, a holistic whole-of-government approach to policymaking, and finally, but probably the most important, a multi-stakeholder partnership. Close cooperation with businesses and other stakeholders is beneficial to ensure that implemented policies pave the way for them to maximize opportunities while addressing issues that are relevant locally and respecting the local culture and the social norms. An enabling environment facilitates public-private partnerships in implementation of projects, but it also considers the views of those that are required to implement the policies from the first moments of the policy creation. At ICC, we work with both the public and the private sector to co-create such enabling environments, ensure a strong and meaningful business contribution to multi-stakeholder dialogues, and promote open and inclusive digital cooperation for the people, for the planet. and for prosperity. And this is why we participate year after year in the WSIS Forum, organized by ITU and its partners, and why we have joined the ITU as a member of the ITU Telecommunication Development Sector. With its long history in contributing to the WSIS process, its technical expertise and convening power, the ITU is well positioned to assess and to understand how the global policy landscape looks like, and foster collaborative approaches among governments, industry, and other stakeholders to leverage the WSIS Plus20 review towards building enabling policy and regulatory environments that are holistic, interoperable, and drive investment and innovation in the digital economy. We count on the ITU to advance multi-stakeholder dialogue by engaging governments, business, civil society, technical, and academic communities to ensure that the WSIS Plus20 outcomes reflect diverse perspectives and actionable recommendations. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you so much, Maria, for sharing the perspective of the private sector towards this Plus20 process. And we also, I think, for me, listening to what you’re saying, what I’m really getting out of this is the co-creation of the enabling environments, which is quite key for us as policy makers to consider when we develop the policies. I would now want to give the floor to Ian from Australia. And Ian, I want you to share with us Australia’s approach to the WSIS Plus20 review process and your plans for it. responding to the ITU call through WSIS Council Working Group and to the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines. Thank you.

Ian Sheldon: Thank you, Cynthia. Thank you for having an distinguished panel. I wanted to say, over the last 20 years, WSIS’s 11 Action Lines have supported the Internet to become a remarkable success story and demonstrated that when all stakeholders work together, we can harness the full potential of technology such as the Internet. And I did want to make a point to say that the Internet we’re all here today at is a great example of fostering the opportunities for the multistakeholder community, bringing together policymakers, industry, academia, civil society, and the technical community to come together and discuss key issues of importance. The IGF has led to the creation of 90 national regional initiatives and has given a voice to individuals and groups across the world, shaping local solutions and new opportunities, and has also sparked a lot of key vital initiatives such as the growth of IXPs, community networks, and has fostered the next generation of leaders. So from our perspective, fostering innovation is at the core of WSIS. We see the WSIS Plus 20 review as an opportunity to continue building on this spirit of multistakeholder collaboration and set out an ambitious positive agenda to ensure that all countries and citizens continue to benefit from this digital world. It’s with this core multistakeholder approach that I wanted to take a little bit of time to talk about how Australia is preparing for the WSIS Plus 20 review, see multistakeholderism as vital and a core component. to the WSIS’s success over the last few decades and will carry us through many more years to come. And it’s the multi-stakeholder engagement which needs to be baked into the heart of the review process. So in Australia, we’re taking a truly grassroots approach to our multi-stakeholder preparations and bringing together all parts of our community to work alongside policy makers as we prepare to engage in this review process. We can truly leverage the expertise of those who live and breathe the entire digital landscape. And we can ensure that we continue to make sure our negotiating points are well-informed. So Australia’s approach to the WSIS Plus 20 is based on six key steps. Evaluating WSIS so far, identifying gaps in future opportunities, considering the evidence, analyzing options and solutions, consulting and building in that feedback, and then finally working through to agree on common ground ahead of the WSIS Plus 20 resolution. This will be guided by a number of core principles which we believe are key to building trust from the multi-stakeholder community. That is, of course, being truly multi-stakeholder in the way we engage, openness and transparency, listening to and building on the perspectives and voices of all, making sure that what we do is holistic and evidence-based, and we do continue to take a long-term view to these priorities. We are quite keen to ensure that all countries also get a real opportunity to take part in these discussions. we know that these processes will be quite complicated with many moving parts. And so we’re very keen to reach out and work across the region as well as globally to work together on navigating this complexity. And we are quite keen to continue to, I guess, show how multi-stakeholders have worked for us and continue to demonstrate how it will continue to be of benefit to many other countries as we navigate this complex world. I might pause there as far as Australia’s preparations go, but I’m sure there’ll be plenty of questions in due course.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you. Thank you so much, Ian, for being so elaborative in terms of Australia’s approach and sharing Australia’s successes in terms of the WSIS and the IGF frameworks, and for also volunteering, you know, putting forward your intention to partner and to share what Australia has learned and what Australia is actually intending to do going forward. Can I now take this opportunity to give the floor to Ambassador Schneider from Switzerland to really share with us Switzerland’s view. And in doing that, we also want to recognize the fact that Switzerland has been an ITU partner since the Geneva Plan of Action in designing the WSIS process. So, Ambassador, can you kindly share with us the summary of the WSIS High Level Event of 2024 in your intervention, and also provide with us the vision that that summary is actually highlighting. And yes, thanks.

Thomas Schneider: Yes. Does it work? Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you very much. I’ve already spoken quite a number of times here. I think we should give voices. We should walk the talk and should give voices to others. I will try to be brief. Chitangeli has already mentioned earlier this morning that the Chairman’s Summary is available on the website. It’s easy to read. I think we can only encourage you to quickly go through it on the ITU’s website. It is basically looking back at what has been achieved, identifying some gaps, some shortcomings. What I would like to use one or two minutes of my intervention now is actually to try and trigger a common understanding, not just the WSIS process per se, but also the particular function of the WSIS forum, the high-level event next year should be, because some people, there is some uncertainty. Can you hear me? Some people are not really sure about what the different elements of this process is. Let me just share with you our understanding and I hope that that helps. And then, of course, let’s see to what extent you agree. But in our view, the annual WSIS forum’s main role is to look at the action lines of the Geneva phase, but actually also at the Tunis agenda and the agreements of the second phase and to see to what extent we have achieved these goals and to what extent there are gaps that need to be filled. And actually, if you look at the action lines, some of them are substantive, but others are rather more process-orientated, where probably it is obvious that there is no end to this. For instance, if you look at the first action line, it is about the role of governments. and all stakeholders in the promotion of ICTs for development. And this is something that never ends. We have to continuously discuss the role of all stakeholders in using digital tools to achieve the SDGs. So, for instance, this is of a different nature than, for instance, Action Line 3, access to information and knowledge. But also, there’s never an end because we have new tools, we have platforms, we have social media that can help us give access to information and knowledge, but they can also, let’s say, give us access to disinformation and other kinds of data. So, I think, in our view, the WSIS Forum should be used to look back and see what have we achieved of these goals, how are we supposed to understand them now, what are the gaps, like we have done last year to some extent, but I think that there’s more to come. But, and I think this is the difference now that we have the GDC, the GDC has already done, to some extent, this analysis, not necessarily through going through the action lines one by one, but through identifying gaps in the sense that what are new issues that we need to tackle. The WSIS Forum is also one opportunity to take the GDC into the analysis to see, okay, if we look at the gaps, what are the gaps that are already identified, or the emerging issues that are already identified by the GDC, and knowing that the GDC will not have a huge structure to implement it, make proposals on how these goals and visions identified by the GDC can be integrated in the implementation structure of the WSIS. I think this is something that, in our view, would be a very useful value added that the WSIS High Level Forum can create, of course, together with other important events and structures like the CSDDs. Yeah, trying to bring together a lot of things already in April, so we can build also on in July, we can also build on what is what is produced in April. But I think, yeah, we do not, we don’t have the resources for huge exercise on agreeing on new principles and new action lines. We have the substance, the action lines are there, the GDC vision is there. If we can use the WSIS Forum to see, OK, what have we achieved? What are the gaps? How do we prepare the discussions for the overall review at the end of next year? What could be a concrete structure? How do we need to cooperate among the stakeholders? So this is actually again, action line one, which is one of the most important for us. How do we cooperate? What is the structure? What is our vision on cooperation in order to implement the outstanding WSIS or the never ending WSIS action lines and goals of the Tunisia Agenda and the GDC? For us, this is really the core that we use the processes next year to bring everything together and not to create more new, diverse tracks that we all struggle with to somehow know what is going on. How does this all play together? I think the WSIS Forum next year could really be a catalyst in trying to bring all of this together. Looking back, looking at what we’ve achieved, what are the gaps, which gaps and visions have already identified in the new text and how do we bring all of this together? That would be, let’s say, the plea from our side on how to best use the processes next year. Thank you very much.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you, Ambassador, for sharing with us your views in terms of how we can approach the WSIS high level event next year in relation to what is contained in the GDC. We really thank you for that. you take this opportunity to give the floor to Paul from the United Kingdom. But maybe before you take the floor, Paul, I want to say that we acknowledge the key role that you’ve been playing since WSIS plus 10. But not only that, but also for your involvement in the WSIS process of the ITU, but also for your involvement in the CSTD. Can you kindly share with us your experience and the UK approach in responding to the Cancer Awakening Group’s call and the overall review process? Thank you.

Paul Blaker: Thank you. Can you hear me? Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you for that introduction. My name is Paul Blaker. I represent the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology in the UK. And the UK has been a very strong supporter of the WSIS process and we will continue to be so. I’d like quickly to thank South Africa and the ITU for organising this great session and thank Cynthia in particular for the leadership that she’s bringing to the Council Working Group at the ITU and for the initiative of this consultation. I think the consultation will be a really critical opportunity to gather views and ideas on the implementation of the WSIS action lines and how we can ensure they are fit for the future. And I hope that all members of the IGF community will take a look at it and make a contribution into that process. I think it is worth looking back briefly at just how much we have achieved through the WSIS process over the last 20 years. Only 17% of people had access to the internet in 2005. I think now the figure is 67% and we’ve seen new applications, new services. transforming all of our societies. And that progress has only been possible because of the multi-stakeholder approach, which is at the beating heart of the whole of the WSIS process. And we see the WSIS plus 20 as an opportunity to renew and strengthen our commitment to cooperation and partnership between governments, the private sector, the civil society, the technical community. And it’s vital that that review process is itself a multi-stakeholder process and all communities have the opportunity to contribute. Because there is so much more to do. One third of the world’s population is still offline and that must be an urgent priority to connect the unconnected. And we face new opportunities and new challenges. At the WSIS 20 years ago, no one was focusing on the impact of social media, the impact of AI, virtual reality, other technologies. Issues such as the gender digital divide, the environmental impact of ICTs, human rights and other issues were not featuring as strongly as perhaps they should today. And I think we have to make sure that the WSIS review process makes sure WSIS is up to date and is fit for the future. We think that one of the great strengths of the action lines is the way that they do not focus on individual technologies. I think if they did, they would very quickly be out of date. But instead they focus on the social, economic, cultural impacts of those technologies. And that is why they are still so relevant today. So when we think about AI, for example, we need to think about it in terms of capacity building. in terms of applications, linguistic and cultural diversity, ethical issues. All of these aspects are there in the action lines. I think those action lines give us a comprehensive and a durable framework. And what we need to do in the WSIS review is make sure we are using them to address the new issues that we face. I think one final point. I think we should recognize as well the great support that we have had from all of the action line facilitators throughout this process in facilitating and supporting the development of so many outstanding partnerships. And I really hope that during the WSIS review process, all the action line facilitators will bring their expertise and their experience to the table. It’s also very good to see other agencies involved. So I’m very, very pleased that UNOHCHR is playing a very strong role, including this IGF. UN Women, for example, I think UN Women did not exist at the time of the WSIS. And we really need to hear those voices as part of the process. This ITU consultation is a really good example of the kind of preparatory discussions we should be having as we prepare for the WSIS process. And I hope that we can continue to build on this collaboration and this partnership. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you so much, Paul, for sharing with us UK’s perspective on the WSIS plus 20 process. We really appreciate it. Can I now give the floor to my vice chair, saving the best for last. Can you, Renata, share with us the perspective of your region and what are the plans going forward in relation to the WSIS process? Thanks. Thank you.

Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Cintia. We believe that, okay, with this plus 20, we need to update action lines, be aligned with SDGs, we have a very few time to do a lot of work, we have a huge ecosystem to deal with, but we think we need to pay attention to different levels of needs. When you’re talking about gaps, for example, we have a lot of different regional challenges, and I think it was very interesting when Zoma said about the network communities, because in our perspective, we have this kind of basic needs already. So we think that like SDG 4, when we talk about education, action lines, when we talk about capacity building, they’re very, very important to talk about meaningful connectivity, to teach to very unserviced people and indigenous people, and people that have never had contact with internet. That’s one kind of challenge we have. I can talk some examples in Brazil, for example, like community networks that we are incentivizing a lot. We are doing a very big work on this. And also we have a lot of organizations doing work in Amazonia, talking to people that have no idea what internet is. So we think that’s a kind of challenge. And we have already this kind of challenge for the future, and talking about beyond 2025. And on the other hand, we have some challenges, they’re like global challenges, when you talk about new and emerging technologies like AI, quantum computing, or IoT, things like that, that we need to, we are in a different kind of perspective, and we need to have a multistakeholder environment to discuss together. I think it’s impossible just one part decide or have a vision about these because they are very huge challenge and i don’t think so not even know how to deal with it so we need to be together and it’s a. We’re talking about experts people that are very familiar with this kind of environment. So in this in this in this in this size we can talk about cyber security it’s very important and the ethics would be very important because we really need to talk about this to not leave the technology just. Not leaders to a democratic environment so i think these are very important issues that we need to think about for the future so that’s it thank you very much.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you very much for sharing with us the brazil’s perspective into how we need to look at the versus plus to interview and for highlighting something that i keep on hearing of you know not only focusing on one technology i’m here i had you talking about it even in the previous session there was a mention of that from one of the panelist which is quite interesting to hear. I now want to because now we have heard from all our speakers i want to open the floor for your comments as the participants in the room and i’ll also give an opportunity for those who are joining us online to also share their views on what they have had to date coming from our our speakers. I now open the floor anyone who wants to take the floor and share their views or or have questions in okay i give the.

Audience: Thank you cynthia my name is barata mia i am from south africa. I represent Girl Hype Women who quote and we work a lot with women in the digital space. I literally had this meeting saved as the first meeting on my agenda because I wanted to come here and say I would prefer if WSIS could be clear when they do the WSIS 20 plus 20 review about what is it they want to achieve for women and girls because sometimes it’s so broad. Things we talk about equity, digital, what we should be specifically using and the word gender is very broad. I think we should say for women and girls this is what’s going to happen and that’s what I would like to see when the review happens. Thank you Baratang. ITU wants to respond to that. Thank you so much for bringing this up. Just to update you that during the summit of the future there were many meetings held by UN women that ITU supported where there was this call that the same call that gender should be better highlighted in the next review process and WSIS vision of WSIS beyond 2025 and there was this strong call from several participants to have an action line on gender which is of course we don’t this decision will be only taken in the general assembly but what we can do is to already start working on a framework you know together just highlighting exactly what you’re saying that what do we want to see if there was an action line on gender perhaps we could already start working with UN women and ITU and other agencies involved just to provide a framework that you know the action line on gender could have these kind of aspects so we’ll be very looking forward to working with you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you Kijanthali and I see Renata. Um, is there anyone? Okay. Yes, I see the gentleman over there. Yes. Good morning, everyone.

Audience: I’m Kosi. I’m a Senua. I come from Benin. I’m from Ministry of Economy and Finance in Benin. We’re talking about Global Digital Compact today. I want to know if next year we’ll continue to talk about WSIS reviews again. What will be the challenge for each country to know is I’m doing well or not in WSIS review or I’m doing well or not in GDP process? What will be the challenge? Thank you for the question. Is there any member of the panelist who wants to answer that question? Who wants to attempt to answer that question? Okay, ITU. Sorry, I was a bit distracted with Australia that time. What’s the question? Sorry. Do you mind to repeat your question again? Okay, I’m Kosi. I’m a Senua from Benin. We are talking about Digital Global Compact now. I want to know if next year we’ll talk about WSIS reviews again. For me as Ministry, may I evaluate WSIS review process or GDP process?

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you for that question.

Gitanjali Sah: Well, we are reviewing the WSIS process and, you know, GDC, I believe, has its own process. You know, I think it has this two-year assessment of someone who’s more knowledgeable. So Canada is nodding. So the WSIS has a UN resolution, which says that the process should be reviewed. And in 2025, there would be a new vision, you know, basically for WSIS beyond 2025. So we are all working in a joint preparatory process, ITU, UNESCO, UNDP, UNDESA, the CSTD, which we presented to basically gather multi-stakeholder views on the vision of WSIS beyond 2025. So to answer your question, the two processes are a bit different in the UN system. The WSIS process will be reviewed in 2025. And the GDC has this two-year thing. Maybe, Dave, do you want to add something to that? Because I’m not very knowledgeable on the GDC.

Ian Sheldon: Sure. Sorry. Just a quick answer on that one is in the GDC itself, it describes that there’ll be a high-level event in 2027, which is the review of the GDC itself. So there are obligations around the implementation, but the actual review of the GDC itself isn’t scheduled until ANGA 82, which is in 2027.

Cynthia Lesufi: I see. Okay, Paul, can I just give a question?

Audience: Thank you so much. My name is Damilare Oyedeli. I work with Library Aid Africa. Thank you so much for your presentation. Very clear and good one. So my comments I have is how as we progress from here, okay, what are the pathways to leveraging libraries? Libraries as key partners and access point towards achieving digital future. Because leveraging libraries assisting staff and infrastructure and also upscaling library infrastructure as we progress. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you for the question. ITU, perhaps you want to take this one in terms of how do we, can we incorporate the issues that they are raising? Because I think this is about maybe the responding to the call for years.

Gitanjali Sah: So you’re raising a very important point. And if you look at the document, the WSIS outcome document that Paul is carrying, libraries have been given a very important status. And one of the targets of WSIS was actually to connect libraries. And UNESCO, ITU and a couple of other UN agencies who are part of the partnership on measuring ICT for development, they will be looking at this aspect of connect libraries. Like what have we achieved? UNESCO definitely takes the lead on this. And you must bring this up into the formal process by inputting into the ITU’s call for inputs and to the WSIS forum inputs, so that we can take it in formally as your suggestion into the process. So this is an opportunity that all stakeholders have to contribute to these consultations so that we can take in your views seriously and build on them. So please do fill into the process and put this important point across. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you, Keechan. Tell me, maybe before I give Paul, let me. Let me give you the.

Audience: Thank you very much, Valeria Betancourt from the Association for Progressive Communication. Just a very brief expression of support today. proposals of our integration of the WSIS and the GDC. I think I want to react to one of the questions that came from the floor in relation to the additional burden and confusion that having two separate processes could create. As we know, monitoring the implementation and assessing the contribution to the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines is already a capacity and resource demanding and intensive. If we are adding another framework, another framework that runs in parallel to a framework that is still completely relevant, as the panel has pointed out, we are going to, as I was saying, add an additional burden to an area that is already a stress in terms of not only keeping up to date, but addressing the persistent challenges that we have. So I just wanted to say that I think it would be very important for the different stakeholders to get together and support this idea and explore the most effective ways to integrate the WSIS framework and the GDC under the WSIS mechanisms and structures, including the review and monitoring and follow-up process and mechanisms.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you for sharing your perspective. Paul, you can take the floor.

Paul Blaker: Yeah, thank you. Just a couple of comments on the questions. I think this issue of the relationship between the GDC and the WSIS process is very important. There is a risk that we will see greater fragmentation in the UN system, a complicated picture that’s more difficult for member states and other stakeholders to navigate. It’s so important that we use our resources effectively. So, I hope that the WSIS process will also help us to make sure that the two complement one another, that they promote cooperation between agencies and clarity around the roles of different parts of the UN system. And we should be building that into our preparation for the action line for the review of WSIS. And then finally, the point about libraries, I remember in WSIS plus 10, libraries were a major point of discussion. They made a really big contribution to WSIS plus 10. There was a recognition that libraries provide a critical community level resource for so many people. And we really need to make sure that we are making the most of the contribution they make and the potential they make in these areas. And I hope that that will be a big part of the WSIS plus 20 as well.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you, Paul. Anyone wanting to take the floor?

Audience: Thank you. I’m Lilian Chamorro from Colombia, from my NGO called Colnado and also from the IGF process that is the IGF from Latin America. I just want to say that I think it’s an opportunity to have also other spaces where we can speak and review also the GDC and also the WSIS like the NRIs. The NRIs for me are spaces where you can find the people working in the countries, working in specific thematics like the youth that are working in the topics that the young people is interested. And the regional spaces like the IGF and others, where we can see, I think we can see faster. what is happening in the floor, what is happening in the countries, what is happening in the region. Then I think more than other things, the NRIs are an opportunity that we have to follow up the WUCs to give ground to that process, because sometimes the WUCs, sometimes that kind of process are so high and are difficult to follow. As we said, we don’t know, okay, where we are from Colombia, where we are from, I don’t know, Namibia, where we are from there. But in the NRIs, we can see what is happening in our countries, what is happening in our floor, and how it is connected with the world agendas. Then I would like to consider that opportunity that we have with the NRIs. Okay. Thank you for sharing Colombia’s perspective on this, and I think the ITU, we have noted this. Anyone asking for the floor? Do we have anyone online? I don’t see… Okay. Thank you for giving me the floor. I think the matrix of the action plan needs to be revised and adapted, because if we see maybe some same SDCs already need also to revise, and what I suggest, we need to work deeply in the matrix of the action plan. Thank you.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you for sharing your perspective with us in terms of what is it that needs to happen. I don’t see any other person asking. Okay.

Audience: Thank you for giving me a floor again. I just want to have a question also, try to mobilize collective intelligence. I remember that Jitendraji spoke about incubator ideas, GDC or WSIS incubator. I think that was a great idea. Do you know, is there anything already existing that we can pull them together or any suggestions to implement these kind of ideas? And we need innovations.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you. Thank you. I’ll give the floor to Kishanthal.

Gitanjali Sah: Yes, we have been trying to get, you know, investors and supporters, UN agencies to kind of, so we’ve been to kind of, you know, take these young innovators under their wing. So we did get some UN agencies who gave them internships and, you know, sort of involved them in the work, the work that they’re already doing. But there are so many more like, at least from our hackathons every year, we did one on indigenous languages, we did one on healthy aging for older persons, such brilliant applications were developed by these young people all over the world. But we really are still missing that hub, you know, where we can get all these young innovators together and kind of incubate them, provide, there is one in Geneva, in the University of Geneva with Professor Francois Gray, we are trying to also try to do something. But we, if you all have any ideas, we really need you to step up and take these young startups or innovators under your wing. So really, this would be something great and it’s missing currently.

Cynthia Lesufi: Thank you, Kishanthal. Any other questions? I see no one asking for the floor, so this should bring us to the end of our session. And I really want to take this opportunity to thank all the participants, including the speakers. And thank you again, and looking forward to seeing you at our future session. Thank you very much. Okay, and can we do a group photo, please? Okay, and can we do a group photo, please? Okay, and can we do a group photo, please?

Agreement Points

Importance of multi-stakeholder approach

speakers

Paul Blaker

Maria Fernanda Garza

Ian Sheldon

Gitanjali Sah

arguments

Multi-stakeholder approach crucial for WSIS success

Need enabling policy environment to stimulate private investment

Australia taking grassroots multi-stakeholder approach to WSIS+20

ITU convening multi-stakeholder platforms like WSIS Forum

summary

Multiple speakers emphasized the critical role of multi-stakeholder collaboration in the success of the WSIS process and its future development.

Need to address new technological challenges

speakers

Paul Blaker

Speaker 1

arguments

Focus on new issues like AI, social media impacts

Need to update action lines and align with SDGs

summary

Speakers agreed on the necessity to update the WSIS process to address emerging technological issues and align with current development goals.

Similar Viewpoints

Both emphasize the importance of leveraging community-level resources and organizations to drive digital empowerment and access.

speakers

Osama Manzar

Audience

arguments

Civil society organizations driving grassroots digital empowerment

Leverage libraries as key partners for digital future

Both suggest integrating various digital development frameworks and using existing mechanisms to prepare for the WSIS review process.

speakers

Thomas Schneider

Audience

arguments

Use WSIS Forum to analyze gaps and prepare for overall review

Integrate WSIS framework and GDC under WSIS mechanisms

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of addressing digital exclusion

speakers

Osama Manzar

Maria Fernanda Garza

Mina Seonmin Jun

arguments

Address digital exclusion and rights of unconnected

Business sector key partner in expanding connectivity

Asia-Pacific made significant progress but challenges remain

explanation

Despite representing different stakeholder groups (civil society, private sector, and government), these speakers all emphasized the critical importance of addressing digital exclusion and expanding connectivity.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement include the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration, the need to address new technological challenges, and the critical importance of expanding connectivity and addressing digital exclusion.

Consensus level

There appears to be a high level of consensus on these key issues across different stakeholder groups. This suggests a strong foundation for future collaboration in the WSIS process, but also highlights the complexity of addressing persistent challenges in digital development.

Different Viewpoints

Integration of WSIS and GDC frameworks

speakers

Paul Blaker

Audience

arguments

There is a risk that we will see greater fragmentation in the UN system, a complicated picture that’s more difficult for member states and other stakeholders to navigate.

Integrate WSIS framework and GDC under WSIS mechanisms

summary

While Paul Blaker expressed concern about potential fragmentation in the UN system due to multiple frameworks, an audience member argued for integrating the WSIS framework and GDC under WSIS mechanisms to reduce complexity and resource burden.

Unexpected Differences

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement were relatively minor and focused on the approach to integrating different frameworks and processes related to digital development.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers was low. Most speakers presented complementary perspectives on the WSIS process and its future. The implications of this low level of disagreement suggest a generally unified vision for the future of WSIS, but with some differing opinions on implementation details.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agreed on the importance of multi-stakeholder involvement in the WSIS process, but they emphasized different aspects: Paul Blaker focused on the overall approach, Gitanjali Sah highlighted ITU’s role in convening platforms, and Maria Fernanda Garza stressed the need for an enabling environment for private sector investment.

speakers

Paul Blaker

Gitanjali Sah

Maria Fernanda Garza

arguments

Multi-stakeholder approach crucial for WSIS success

ITU convening multi-stakeholder platforms like WSIS Forum

Need enabling policy environment to stimulate private investment

Similar Viewpoints

Both emphasize the importance of leveraging community-level resources and organizations to drive digital empowerment and access.

speakers

Osama Manzar

Audience

arguments

Civil society organizations driving grassroots digital empowerment

Leverage libraries as key partners for digital future

Both suggest integrating various digital development frameworks and using existing mechanisms to prepare for the WSIS review process.

speakers

Thomas Schneider

Audience

arguments

Use WSIS Forum to analyze gaps and prepare for overall review

Integrate WSIS framework and GDC under WSIS mechanisms

Key Takeaways

The multi-stakeholder approach has been crucial to WSIS success over the past 20 years and should continue

There is a need to update WSIS action lines and align them with SDGs for the future

The WSIS+20 review process should integrate with the Global Digital Compact to avoid fragmentation

Regional perspectives and challenges vary, highlighting the need for tailored approaches

Civil society and private sector contributions are vital for expanding connectivity and digital inclusion

New challenges like AI, social media impacts, and digital exclusion need to be addressed

Resolutions and Action Items

ITU to conduct a call for inputs on WSIS+20 review, with deadline of January 31, 2025

Stakeholders encouraged to contribute to ITU’s call for inputs and WSIS Forum inputs

Explore ways to integrate WSIS framework and GDC under existing WSIS mechanisms

Consider creating an action line specifically focused on gender issues

Leverage national and regional IGF initiatives (NRIs) to gather local perspectives

Unresolved Issues

Specific metrics or indicators for countries to evaluate their WSIS implementation progress

Detailed plan for integrating WSIS and GDC processes

Concrete steps to address digital exclusion and rights of the unconnected

Framework for leveraging libraries as key partners in digital future

Mechanism to support and incubate young innovators and startups emerging from WSIS-related initiatives

Suggested Compromises

Use WSIS Forum to analyze both WSIS action line progress and new GDC priorities

Balance focus between basic connectivity needs and emerging technology challenges

Combine regional approaches with global frameworks to address varied challenges

We still have over two billion people that are unconnected, and we all know that it takes more than just access to the Internet connection to fully benefit from the opportunities of digitalization.

speaker

Maria Fernanda Garza

reason

This comment highlights a critical ongoing challenge in digital inclusion and expands the discussion beyond just connectivity to meaningful access.

impact

It shifted the conversation to focus on the quality and impact of connectivity, not just its presence.

There are three learnings that we have learned in the last 20-25 years. That while we always talk the WSIS process about digital inclusion, creating information society, but it is also time that there is something that happens because of digital exclusion.

speaker

Osama Manzar

reason

This insight introduces a new perspective by highlighting the negative consequences of digital exclusion, not just the benefits of inclusion.

impact

It deepened the discussion by prompting consideration of the unintended consequences and ethical implications of digital transformation.

I think we have to make sure that the WSIS review process makes sure WSIS is up to date and is fit for the future. We think that one of the great strengths of the action lines is the way that they do not focus on individual technologies.

speaker

Paul Blaker

reason

This comment provides a strategic perspective on how to approach the WSIS review, emphasizing adaptability and broad applicability.

impact

It guided the discussion towards considering how to make the WSIS process more future-proof and relevant across evolving technologies.

I would prefer if WSIS could be clear when they do the WSIS 20 plus 20 review about what is it they want to achieve for women and girls because sometimes it’s so broad.

speaker

Barata Mia

reason

This comment brings attention to the need for specific, actionable goals for gender equality in digital spaces.

impact

It prompted a response from ITU about potentially creating a dedicated action line on gender, showing how audience input can influence policy directions.

I think it would be very important for the different stakeholders to get together and support this idea and explore the most effective ways to integrate the WSIS framework and the GDC under the WSIS mechanisms and structures, including the review and monitoring and follow-up process and mechanisms.

speaker

Valeria Betancourt

reason

This comment addresses the potential confusion and inefficiency of having parallel processes (WSIS and GDC) and proposes integration.

impact

It sparked discussion about how to streamline and integrate different global digital initiatives for more effective implementation and monitoring.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by broadening its scope beyond technical aspects of connectivity to include social impact, gender equality, and policy integration. They highlighted the need for the WSIS process to be more specific in its goals, particularly regarding underserved populations, while remaining adaptable to future technological changes. The discussion evolved from a review of past achievements to a forward-looking conversation about making digital inclusion efforts more targeted, integrated, and effective in addressing both opportunities and challenges of the digital age.

How can the WSIS Plus 20 review process clearly define specific goals and outcomes for women and girls?

speaker

Baratang Miya

explanation

The speaker emphasized the need for WSIS to be more specific about its objectives for women and girls, rather than using broad terms like ‘equity’ or ‘gender’.

How can countries evaluate their progress in both the WSIS review process and the Global Digital Compact (GDC) process?

speaker

Kosi Senua

explanation

The speaker asked about the challenges for countries in assessing their performance in both processes, highlighting the need for clear evaluation metrics.

What are the pathways to leveraging libraries as key partners and access points towards achieving a digital future?

speaker

Damilare Oyedeli

explanation

The speaker highlighted the potential role of libraries in achieving digital goals and asked how to better incorporate them into the process.

How can the WSIS and GDC processes be integrated to avoid additional burdens and confusion?

speaker

Valeria Betancourt

explanation

The speaker expressed concern about the potential confusion and resource demands of having two separate processes and suggested exploring ways to integrate them.

How can National and Regional IGF Initiatives (NRIs) be better utilized to follow up on WSIS and GDC processes at local and regional levels?

speaker

Lilian Chamorro

explanation

The speaker suggested that NRIs could provide valuable insights into local and regional progress on WSIS and GDC goals.

How can the matrix of the WSIS action plan be revised and adapted to align with current needs and SDGs?

speaker

Unnamed participant

explanation

The speaker suggested that the action plan matrix needs to be updated to reflect current realities and align with SDGs.

How can a WSIS/GDC incubator for young innovators be implemented?

speaker

Unnamed participant

explanation

The speaker asked about existing initiatives or suggestions for implementing an incubator for young innovators in the WSIS/GDC context.