Day 0 Event #119 Roam X Driving WSIS Implementation and Digital Cooperation

Summary

This discussion focused on the ROAMX framework, UNESCO’s Internet Universality Indicators that measure progress on World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) commitments and digital development goals. The ROAMX acronym stands for Rights, Openness, Accessibility, Multi-stakeholder participation, and cross-cutting issues like gender equality and sustainability. Dr. Tawfik Jelassi from UNESCO opened by explaining that while digital technologies evolve rapidly, 2.6 billion people remain offline, with significant disparities between high and low-income countries.

The framework has been implemented in over 40 countries since 2018, with second-generation indicators launched in 2024 that include new dimensions like AI governance and environmental impact. Brazil pioneered the framework’s implementation and recently completed assessment using the revised indicators, revealing both progress in digital public services and persistent inequalities, particularly affecting women and rural populations. Fiji piloted a new capacity-building workshop approach that revealed significant gaps in inter-governmental coordination, even after extensive consultation processes during strategy development.

Speakers emphasized that ROAMX serves not just as an assessment tool but as a comprehensive framework for the entire policy lifecycle, from planning to monitoring and evaluation. The discussion highlighted persistent challenges including data gaps, particularly around gender-disaggregated information, and the need for meaningful connectivity rather than basic access. Participants stressed the importance of multi-stakeholder engagement and the framework’s potential to support national and regional Internet Governance Forums. The session concluded with calls for broader adoption of ROAMX as a strategic tool for inclusive digital transformation that leaves no one behind.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **ROAMX Framework Overview and Evolution**: The discussion centered on UNESCO’s ROAMX (Rights, Openness, Accessibility, Multi-stakeholder participation, and cross-cutting issues) framework for measuring digital development and WSIS implementation. Speakers highlighted the launch of second-generation indicators in 2024, which include new dimensions like AI governance, environmental impact, and meaningful connectivity.

– **Country Implementation Experiences**: Detailed presentations of ROAMX applications in Brazil (as the first pilot country implementing revised indicators) and Fiji (featuring a new capacity-building workshop approach). Brazil’s assessment revealed advances in digital public services but persistent inequalities, while Fiji’s experience demonstrated gaps in inter-governmental coordination despite consultation efforts.

– **Data Gaps and Gender Digital Divide**: Multiple speakers emphasized the critical lack of disaggregated data, particularly sex-disaggregated data, which hampers effective assessment of digital inclusion. The persistent gender digital divide was highlighted as a key challenge, with women underrepresented not just as users but as creators, decision-makers, and leaders in technology sectors.

– **ROAMX as a Multi-Purpose Tool**: The framework’s versatility was emphasized – it serves not only for periodic national assessments but also as a planning tool for strategy development, implementation monitoring, and evaluation. Speakers noted its potential to connect with national and regional Internet Governance Forums and support evidence-based policymaking.

– **Integration with WSIS Plus 20 and Global Digital Cooperation**: The discussion positioned ROAMX as a strategic tool for measuring progress on WSIS commitments and supporting the upcoming WSIS Plus 20 review, emphasizing its role in ensuring digital transformation remains human-centered and rights-based.

## Overall Purpose:

The session aimed to demonstrate how UNESCO’s ROAMX framework can drive WSIS implementation and digital cooperation by providing concrete examples of country applications, showcasing the framework’s evolution with second-generation indicators, and positioning it as a key measurement tool for the WSIS Plus 20 review process.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a consistently professional and collaborative tone throughout. It was informative and forward-looking, with speakers sharing practical experiences and lessons learned. The tone was optimistic about the framework’s potential while being realistic about persistent challenges like data gaps and digital divides. There was a strong emphasis on multi-stakeholder collaboration and inclusive approaches, reflecting the participatory nature of both the ROAMX framework and the broader Internet governance community.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Tatevik Grigoryan** – Session moderator, UNESCO staff member working on the ROMEX initiative

– **Tawfik Jelassi** – Assistant Director General of UNESCO for Communication and Information, delivered keynote remarks

– **Fabio Senne** – Project Coordinator at the Regional Centre of Studies on Information and Communication Technologies (CETIC.br), UNESCO Category 2 Institute; involved in initial IUI framework development and Brazil’s pilot assessments

– **Davide Storti** – Program Specialist at UNESCO for Digital Policies and Transformation, coordinates UNESCO’s WSIS-related activities (participated online)

– **Dorcas Muthoni** – Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Open World, a specialist computer software company established in Kenya; works on gender digital divide and women in technology leadership (participated online)

– **Guy Berger** – Described as “the father of the ROMEX” and regional ROMEX indicators; audience member who provided commentary

– **Chris Buckridge** – Independent consultant, analyst, and commentator in Internet governance and digital policy space; worked for over two decades with regional Internet registrars including APNIC; current MAG (Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group) member

– **Anriette Esterhuysen** – Human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa; former chair of the multi-stakeholder advisory group of the IGF; former executive director of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC); involved in ROMEX development and implementation

**Additional speakers:**

– **Camilla Gonzalez** – UNESCO colleague working on the ROMEX initiative (participated online, mentioned but did not speak in the transcript)

# UNESCO ROMEX Framework: Driving WSIS Implementation and Digital Cooperation – Discussion Summary

## Introduction and Session Context

This early morning “day zero” session at IGF 2025 examined UNESCO’s ROMEX framework and its role in driving WSIS implementation and digital cooperation. The hybrid online and in-person discussion, moderated by Tatevik Grigoryan from UNESCO, brought together international experts to share implementation experiences and explore the framework’s potential applications.

After resolving initial technical difficulties with headset channels, the session proceeded with presentations from UNESCO officials and implementers from Brazil, Fiji, and Kenya, followed by commentary from Internet governance experts.

The ROMEX acronym represents five core dimensions: Rights, Openness, Accessibility, Multi-stakeholder participation, and cross-cutting issues (the X) including gender equality and sustainability. Since its launch in 2018, the framework has been implemented in over 40 countries, with second-generation indicators introduced in 2024.

## Opening Keynote: Technology and Digital Divides

Dr. Tawfik Jelassi, UNESCO’s Assistant Director General for Communication and Information, opened by quoting historian Melvin Kranzberg: “technology is neither good nor bad, nor is it neutral.” He emphasized that technology’s impact depends fundamentally on human choices, values, and system design.

Jelassi highlighted persistent global digital inequalities, noting that 2.6 billion people remain offline worldwide. The disparities are stark: while 93% of populations in high-income countries use the internet, only 27% in low-income countries have access. He positioned ROMEX as a strategic tool for evidence-based policymaking that has already demonstrated concrete policy outcomes across its 40+ country implementations.

## Framework Evolution and Applications

Davide Storti, UNESCO’s Programme Specialist for Digital Policies and Transformation, explained that ROMEX serves as a translation mechanism, converting WSIS ideals into measurable outcomes while providing a common language for diverse stakeholders in digital governance.

The second-generation indicators launched in 2024 incorporate new dimensions including artificial intelligence governance and environmental impact assessment. Storti emphasized that ROMEX’s value extends beyond periodic assessments to support the entire policy lifecycle, from strategy development through implementation monitoring and evaluation.

## Country Implementation Experiences

### Brazil: Comprehensive Assessment and Findings

Fabio Senne from CETIC.br detailed Brazil’s experience as both the original pilot country in 2018 and the first to implement second-generation indicators. Brazil’s assessment revealed significant advances in digital public services, with the gov.br platform now offering 4,500 services to 160 million users.

However, the assessment also uncovered persistent inequalities. Disaggregated data revealed that black women showed substantially lower levels of meaningful connectivity compared to other demographic groups, highlighting intersections of racial and gender inequalities in digital access.

Senne emphasized the critical importance of multi-stakeholder engagement, which improved data quality by accessing information from civil society and private sector sources that government data alone could not provide. The assessment also revealed coordination challenges within government structures, with participation remaining fragmented across different departments despite Brazil’s established multi-stakeholder frameworks.

Brazil committed to completing multi-stakeholder validation of their revised assessment and launching the final report by September-October.

### Fiji: Capacity Building and Coordination Gaps

Anriette Esterhuysen, a human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa, shared insights from Fiji’s implementation using a new capacity-building workshop approach. The most striking finding was a significant gap in inter-governmental coordination: despite an extensive eight-month consultation process during development of Fiji’s national digital strategy, two-thirds of government departments were unaware of the strategy’s existence.

This discovery highlighted a critical disconnect between policy development processes and actual implementation awareness across government structures. Esterhuysen noted that while the strategy development had involved extensive consultation, the reality of cross-government awareness was far more limited than anticipated.

The Fiji experience demonstrated ROMEX’s potential beyond assessment, with Esterhuysen observing that the framework “works extremely well in assessing a strategy” and “could work as well as a planning tool” throughout the full policy lifecycle.

### Kenya: Gender Digital Divides and Data Gaps

Dorcas Muthoni, founder and CEO of Open World in Kenya, highlighted the persistent gender digital divide and critical lack of sex-disaggregated data across multiple dimensions of digital participation. This data gap makes it difficult to assess true gender disparities in technology adoption, usage patterns, and particularly leadership roles within the technology sector.

Muthoni emphasized challenges women face in progressing to technology leadership positions, describing “lonely career journeys” with limited role models and support systems. This leadership gap means women’s perspectives are underrepresented in technology design, policy development, and strategic decision-making processes.

## Expert Commentary and Framework Applications

### Multi-stakeholder Engagement and Data-Driven Governance

Chris Buckridge, an independent consultant and Internet governance expert, articulated the relationship between inclusive and evidence-based approaches: “data-driven, it cannot be comprehensive unless it’s inclusive… But at the same time, inclusive governance can’t be effective, can’t be practical unless it is data-driven.”

Buckridge highlighted ROMEX’s potential to foster sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement and complement national and regional Internet governance initiatives, including his experience with EuroDIG events.

### Digital Literacy and Rights Education

Esterhuysen emphasized limitations of current digital literacy approaches, noting that many programs are “vendor-driven or device-focused” and fail to address broader digital citizenship complexities. She advocated for comprehensive approaches connecting rights education and civic education with technical skills development.

Esterhuysen also noted communication challenges with terms like “Internet Governance Forum,” observing that people find the concept difficult to understand and don’t grasp that it involves all aspects of digital cooperation, not just narrow technical governance.

### Foundational Principles and Emerging Technologies

Guy Berger, introduced by Tatevik as “the father of the European Union and the regional ROMEX indicators,” emphasized that “Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services.” This perspective suggests foundational digital governance principles remain relevant as technologies evolve.

A brief exchange between Berger and Esterhuysen revealed different perspectives on terminology, with Esterhuysen suggesting “Internet universality” might not be “future-proof” while acknowledging that people readily understand the underlying ROMEX principles.

## Persistent Challenges and Gaps

### Data and Coordination Issues

The discussion consistently highlighted the lack of comprehensive sex-disaggregated data across countries, making it difficult to assess and address gender digital divides. Coordination challenges within government structures emerged as a common theme, even in countries with established consultation mechanisms.

### Environmental and Emerging Technology Governance

Senne briefly noted that environmental issues like energy consumption and electronic waste are “largely overlooked” in current digital policies. The integration of AI governance into the second-generation indicators reflects growing recognition of the need to address emerging technologies within existing frameworks.

## Integration with WSIS Plus 20 and Global Digital Cooperation

Storti positioned ROMEX as a strategic tool for the upcoming WSIS Plus 20 review process, emphasizing its role in translating WSIS ideals into measurable outcomes. The framework’s comprehensive coverage of WSIS commitments and demonstrated implementation across multiple countries provides concrete evidence for assessing global progress on information society development goals.

## Key Recommendations and Next Steps

The session concluded with several concrete recommendations:

– UNESCO called on governments, regulators, civil society, and stakeholders to embrace ROMEX as a strategic tool for digital transformation

– Participants encouraged national and regional Internet Governance Forums to explore using the ROMEX framework for their initiatives

– Speakers emphasized the importance of addressing data gaps by turning them into policy recommendations

– The discussion highlighted potential for developing collaboration between ROMEX assessments and existing national/regional initiatives

## Conclusion

The discussion demonstrated strong consensus among diverse stakeholders about ROMEX’s practical value while identifying important areas for continued development. The framework’s evolution from a periodic assessment tool to a comprehensive policy lifecycle instrument reflects its adaptability and growing recognition across different contexts.

The combination of theoretical framework and practical implementation experiences from Brazil, Fiji, and Kenya provided concrete evidence of both the framework’s utility and persistent challenges in digital governance. The session successfully moved beyond simple advocacy to critical examination of how comprehensive frameworks can be more effectively integrated into digital policy development and implementation processes.

Tatevik Grigoryan: … We should go there. No, I’m not connected. Okay. Let’s just… I’ll just… If you have a question… If you have a question… It’s 20, okay. Can you send it to me, you don’t have it. You don’t have, do you have? You want to send it to me now. Apparently they can hear. Okay, my colleague sent me the link and apparently they can hear me now. Good morning everyone, online and here in the room, thank you so much for joining. You need to put a headset to be able to… follow us. Please everyone could you could you use the headset otherwise you won’t be able to hear us and those in the room you should select channel number five. Apologies to the colleagues online we’ll wait for the for the audience here to put on their headset. Okay so it’s channel number five so thank you so much again for joining us early in the morning online and here in the room. We’re very pleased to host you in this session focusing on the role of Romex and we’ll go on telling you a bit more what Romex stands for and its role in measuring the WSIS implementation the action lines ahead of the WSIS plus 20 review. I’m very pleased to introduce you an excellent lineup of speakers here with me and we’re joined today in the panel by Dr. Tawfik Jelassi the assistant director general of UNESCO for communication and information will deliver opening remark the keynote and I think without any further ado I’ll give the floor to Dr. Jelassi and then we’ll go into the discussion and I’ll introduce my panel. Thank you so much ADG for being here and please we very much look forward to your keynote remarks. Thank you.

Tawfik Jelassi: Thank you very much Tawfik, the panelists, participants, friends and colleagues. I’m very pleased to join you for this session on Romex driving WSIS implementation and digital cooperation. I would like to thank IGF for their support to UNESCO and for providing this opportunity for us to have an exchange on this topic. I’m also grateful to our speakers and Chris, who will be shortly introduced by the moderator. Their expertise and commitment have been instrumental in advancing the UNESCO work on Internet universality. As the WSIS Plus 20 review is underway, we are reminded that digital technologies are evolving faster than the frameworks that are designed to govern them. And yet 2.6 billion people remain offline as of today, most of them in the least developed regions. In low-income countries, only 27% of the population uses the Internet, compared to 93% in high-income countries. The cost of access, the lack of infrastructure, the entrenched inequalities, including gender gaps, continue to hinder digital inclusion. UNESCO has been advocating for a rights-based, human-centered and inclusive vision for the digital age. This framework gives emphasis to openness, accessibility, multi-stakeholder governance and capacity building. To ensure that this vision is not only aspirational but actionable, we need the right tools to identify gaps, guide reforms and measure progress. And this is where the ROM-X framework comes in. Since its initial launch back in 2018, and with the second-generation indicators which we released last year, the ROM-X has become a strategic enabler for national digital assessments. It supports evidence-based policymaking by helping countries assess their digital needs. The Digital Ecosystems Through the Lens of the ROMAX Principles Those who are not familiar with it, let me briefly remind you the elements of the ROMAX are standing for Human Rights, O for Openness, A for Accessibility and M for Multi-Stakeholder Participation and the X refers to cross-cutting issues such as sustainability, gender equality and online safety The revised indicators include new dimensions such as AI governance, environmental impact, privacy and meaningful connectivity aligning the framework with the global milestones such as the Net Mondial Plus 10 and the Global Digital Compact So far, more than 40 countries have applied the ROMAX framework In Argentina, as an example, the National Digital Assessment informed a legislation to reform data protection laws In Paraguay, the National Statistics Office began collecting disaggregated digital data A ROMAX capacity building workshop took place in Fiji earlier this year and has inspired digital policy planning involving national stakeholders Countries like Brazil and Uzbekistan have begun the pilot implementation of our second-generation indicators These outcomes are not isolated They reflect a growing recognition that data-driven inclusive governance is critical for the digital age However, the digital divide continues to persist especially for women and girls who remain underrepresented online and in digital policy making The revised ROMAX indicators These measures maintain a strong emphasis on gender inclusion, digital literacy, affordability, cultural norms, and safety concerns. This brings me to our call to action. We urge governments, regulators, civil society, and all stakeholders to embrace the ROM-X as a strategic tool to drive digital transformation. It offers a robust, adaptable, and forward-looking methodology to monitor WSIS implementation, align with STG targets, and ensure a digital development that is transparent, equitable, and accountable. As the historian Melvin Kranzberg reminded us, technology is neither good nor bad, nor is it neutral. The impact of technology is shaped by human intent, by the choices we make, the values that we want to protect, and the systems we design. Let’s develop, use, and govern technology in ways that promote shared progress. Let’s put people, rights, and equity at the center of our digital future. We believe that with the ROM-X, we have the means to achieve that. Thank you for your attention.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thank you so much, ADG, and thank you for setting the stage and giving a comprehensive overview of what ROM-X stands for, and giving a few examples of how we demonstrated its value and power. And now I’ll go, and thank you so much again for being here. I know you won’t be able to stay until the end, but we very much appreciate and value your presence. As you gave the overview of the ROM-X, just to also mention that in addition to demonstrating the value of ROM-X and showcasing a few examples, including how it has been introduced now in Brazil and Uzbekistan, the revised indicators, the session will also focus on demonstrating… on integrating the relevance of ROMEX in a framework in assessing the progress on WSIS commitments and the SDGs. And I’ll go forward and introduce my speakers in the speaking order, but not in the sitting order. Fabio Sene, who is a project coordinator at the Regional Centre of Studies on Information and Communication Technologies. CETIC.br, which is also a UNESCO Category 2 Institute. Fabio has been involved in, of course, the initial IUI framework development. Brazil was the one who piloted the first assessment and the first one to pilot the new revised indicators, which we launched in 2024, last year at the IGF. I have Anriette Esterhuysen, who is a human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa. She’s a pioneer in using everyone knows ideas in Internet and communication technologies. She’s a former chair of the multi-stakeholder advisory group of the IGF. She used to be the executive director of the Association for Progressive Communications, and she still continues work with the APC and with many other entities, including with UNESCO. She’s been instrumental in both development of the initial indicators, the revision, and also the implementation of the workshop in Fiji. Online, we are joined by Dorca Smutoni, who is the founder and chief executive officer of Open World, a specialist computer software company she established in Kenya when she was only 24 years old. And finally, I have Chris Buckridge to my right, who is an independent consultant, analyst, and commentator in the Internet governance and digital policy space. He worked for more than two decades with regional Internet registrars, starting with APNIC. He’s a current MAG member, and he has many other, has had and has many other roles, which I would like to invite him to share with us. I will not read out, and I am joined also online by two of my colleagues, Davide Storti, a program specialist at UNESCO for Digital Policies and Transformation. Davide is coordinating our activities related to WSIS, and I am also joined by my colleague Camilla Gonzalez, who also works on Romex initiative. Thank you again. I would like to start by giving the floor to my colleague Davide Storti, who would just give a little bit more overview on this interaction of Romex and WSIS, and how the idea came about using the Romex to measure the WSIS implementation. Please, Davide.

Davide Storti: Good morning, everyone. Thank you, Tawfik. Yes, so as Elie Jelassi has mentioned, the technology goes super fast, and UNESCO has highlighted already a number of occasions of different shifts that happened in technology and in society. Therefore, when considering the WSIS as a process and the action lines that are leading down the foundational aspiration of the WSIS process, like access, inclusion, rights, the Romex indicators translate these ideals into measurable outcomes. The connection between the WSIS plus 20 and the different challenges brought up by these shifts through the lenses of the IUI indicators are the possibility of measuring the advancement of these technologies, Artificial Intelligence, the impact of digitalization, the status of indicators like gender equality or rights online of population, and also have a measurement of data protection, trust in the media, and misinformation, for example. So this framework may actually help or support the measurement of how WSIS plus 20, the WSIS framework, which is based on principles, how this evolves, how this is anchored to the reality, by allowing to catalyze some evidence-based results and also collaboration among the different stakeholders of the WSIS process. It provides, I should say, a common language for different stakeholders, a country-to-country reporting, also analysis, also a way of comparison to highlight the different position of evolutions. As was mentioned, a lot of, a big chunk of population is not online yet, so there are different aspects to be taken into account, and also give inputs to dialogues like the IGF through national and regional analysis of the progress and give some sort of diagnostic for guiding different investments by country or different needs assessment, and also needs in terms of policies and regulations, etc. So in the different action lines of the WSIS, the ROMEX provides some grounds for tracking participatory and transparent digital policymaking, for example, or how to examine the connectivity and how affordability comes through and how digital skills come through, or maybe giving some granular ways to measure online safety, data protection, a strategy for even cyber security, etc. So there is an opportunity to have a framework which has already some measurement, which has already been applied in different countries, and the new revision also helps us to be more precise in this kind of measurement. So if used properly and I think the panel today will give a different point of view on this matter. I think the enabling of national-level evidence of the raw mix applied to different countries may give a better view of what is the global impact of the WSIS framework overall and also guide through the review, also the findings of the indicators in different countries that may provide also some grounds for the review itself and for the future of the WSIS as the review will come up with that. So I think I look forward for this discussion and I invite all the IGF stakeholders to consider the IUI framework as one significant basis for the process of the WSIS as it comes forward. Thank you.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thank you so much, Davide, for your excellent intervention and for your call to indeed adopt, also approach raw mix under this lens. And I think before I give the floor to Fabio who will now focus on the application of raw mix and give a few examples and show us the first impressive findings of the implementation of the revised indicators, which looks like this. And Fabio, bravo indeed that you had such already progress since the launch of the indicators. I wanted to acknowledge the presence of Guy Berger, who is sitting in the audience, who is the father of the European Union. and the regional ROMEX indicators. Thank you so much, Guy, for being here and I hope we can hear from you afterwards. But now, Fabio, please just tell us a bit more about the ROMEX in Brazil and the new application and how do you think it was effective, the new revised indicators and how were they perhaps a bit different from the first experience. Thank you.

Fabio Senne: Okay, so thank you very much, Tawfik. Thank you. I acknowledge all the speakers and panelists. It’s a very pleasure to be here. And setic.br and nick.br and cgi.br is in the very beginning of the process of the ROMEX, also the creation of the framework and also the implementation. As you said, Brazil was the first country to pilot this framework back in 2018. And now we accepted the challenge that Mr. Jelassi presented us back in December in the past IGF to renew the data collection on Brazil on the new second generation version of indicators. And we accepted this challenge and concluded the data collection phase of the project. I will bring here some initial results. But, of course, it will go through a multi-stakeholder validation and we don’t have the full report yet. But I’ll bring to you a few main results. Just to mention, as I said, that Brazil was involved in the discussion of the framework along with lots of consultations on the multi-stakeholder community. And back in 2019, we launched the first assessment report of the country in the area. IGF 2019 in Berlin and then along this process we also supported other countries especially Latin American countries to also implement this methodology so we had lots of exchange during this period and from 2023 to 2024 we also supported UNESCO in the revision of the indicators the five years revision that was expected to be concluded by UNESCO and now we are presenting we are implementing the the next version here just to to highlight a few a few preliminary findings of the discussions first of all if you take the case of Brazil and this is important to say that in our case CETIC.br and NIC.br are responsible for data collection and to deal with the technical team that are collecting all the indicators from from multiple sources but we have a multi-stakeholder advisory committee with the CGI.br which is helping us and supporting us as advising the whole process we have a first meeting of CGI.br that validated the start of the the process and and now after the data collection we will have validation from from the CGI.br but if you take a few advancements and challenges that we have so far so in the past year years Brazil has seen an intensification in public institutional debate on platform regulation and information integrity as as David mentioned here is an also a WSIS plus 20 topic and driven by the growing impact of disinformation, hate speech and how this affects the democratic processes. And discussion has focused on the responsibility of digital platforms in moderating harmful content and protecting users’ rights, especially in the light of judicial interventions that took care in the country, especially in the electoral bodies. However, we don’t have yet, there is a lack of consensus on how to approve a specific legislation in the topic and the debate is still fragmented in different political interests. And while there is a legal framework in place in the country, anchored by the Marco Civil, the Internet and the LGPD, which is our local GDPR, the enforcement of this process is still uneven and there are still critical gaps persistent. If you take the openness dimension, it’s very interesting because over this past five years, we have huge advances in the provision of digital public services and also with this dimension of DPIs. So, for instance, we have the platform gov.br in Brazil, nowadays offers 4,500 services online with more than 160 million users. And these initiatives supported administrative processes and increased access to public information in a more participatory government. However, these gains are not equally distributed, so there is still significant inequalities in access to these digital online services, especially among populations with low digital literacy, limited connectivity or disabilities. So, there are usability… and Tawfik Jelassi, Anriette Esterhuysen, Alexandre Barbosa, Dorcas Muthoni and significant investments in bridging coverage gaps in the country in this period. However, and also the concept of universal and meaningful connectivity has entered in the national policy conversation and debate and being addressed in several strategic plans that are under discussion. But there is a growing recognition that we have challenges. Connectivity remains unevenly distributed with rural access and lower-income groups, especially low-income classes, facing disadvantages. Gender and racial disparities are also relevant. We show in the report, for instance, that black women present lower levels of meaningful connectivity over time and those are exacerbated by digital skill gaps and mobile-only access to this strata of the population. So there is a need for equity-driven strategies that address these overlapping dimensions. In the case of multi-stakeholder participation, Brazil has a legal and institutional architecture that provides a solid foundation for multi-stakeholder participation through the Marco Civil da Internet and the institutional role of CGI.br, which embodies the principles of collaborative democracy. This is a model of democratic and transparency governance. This model is internationally recognized and has supported inclusive dialogues such as the Brazilian IGF that is coordinated by CGI.br. However, if we take broader digital policies, multi-stakeholder participation remains inconsistent. In many ministries and regulatory environments, the inclusion of stakeholders is still fragmented in terms of participation. And finally, to conclude, if we take the cross-cutting issues, one of the new indicators that was included in the framework is related to AI development and governance. So, you can say that Brazil advanced in AI governance in the past few years with the launch of the National Artificial Intelligence Strategy and the National AI Plan. However, the governance framework for AI is still in progress with a national law under discussion in Congress. And crucial aspects such as transparency, risk assessment and rights-based safeguards are still unsolved. And also multi-stakeholder engagement when it comes to AI. And if you take one new indicator that is environmental issues, this is one that we saw largely overlooked in digital policies so far. So, there are still issues such as energy consumption, e-waste and emissions that are not yet well integrated into the governance framework. So, this is a challenge that we identified by having this new indicator proposed. So, just these few overall remarks. Just to say that we are now presenting here these preliminary results. We will enter now in the phases of validation in our multi-stakeholder discussion and plan to, by September, October, launch the final report. So that’s it. And you can later discuss more on the implications of this. Thank you very much.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much, Fabio, for presenting the findings. And it’s very interesting to observe both the progress and also the issues that persist. And it’s also interesting to see the application of these newly introduced indicators. I look forward to reading the report. I would like to now give the floor to Anriette. And Anriette, I would like you to please focus on Fiji. This year, for the first time ever, we introduced, piloted a new intervention in the margins of the Romex framework. Following the assessment, we piloted this capacity building workshop to support the multi-stakeholder advisory board, but also the global, not global, but the stakeholder’s wider community in Fiji to implement the recommendations focusing on basically digital policy making, policy implementation, capacity building, and having Romex assessment as basis and evidence for that. Anriette, would you please focus on that?

Anriette Esterhuysen: Thank you, Tatjavik. Well, yes, it was a really interesting experience. So what we did was that Fiji, a relatively small country, had recently approved a national digital strategy. And they’d completed a national assessment using the Romex framework. So we tried to bring these together. I mean in the first thing I mean your question that you had in the script was you know What do you and I want to stress? I mean, I’m glad you’re not asking me all the questions because I prefer ad-libbing But there was one question that you asked me which I think is important, which is How what what should countries do To When they’re implementing digital strategies at a high level, what should they do? And I really think The answer for us was clearly consultation Collaboration and connections and what was I think the most powerful learning of this workshop? Which was a policy implementation workshop how you can use the Romex framework to support implementation of the national digital strategy was that Even after about an eight-month period of the people developing the national digital strategy Believing that they’ve consulted thoroughly two-thirds of the government departments And we must have had about eight different ministries did not know about the national digital strategy so there was this disconnect between the people who developed the strategy who were convinced that their consultation process was perfect and The people in the government departments who have to implement this that the strategy who’d never heard of it And I think that’s one thing you can never Underestimate the complexity of different parts of government. We’re not even talking about multi-stakeholder collaboration here. We’re talking about intergovernmental Collaboration about the complexity in them actually working together Collaborating understanding who’s doing what and how they can make the connections between the different issues and I think for us as The team coming from UNESCO and people who’ve been involved in the Fiji national assessment I think we had a really powerful discovery and that is that the Romex framework is not just suited to Assessing a national internet environment. It actually works extremely well in assessing a strategy and before it’s being implemented it could work as well as a planning tool and assessing a design of a strategy or design of implementation and and Equally at the level of monitoring and evaluation so in fact what we found is that the Romex framework is suited to the full lifecycle of policy development and implementation from design to monitoring learning and evaluation and I think sometimes we forget people always talk about the Indicators, but they forget that the indicators actually are there to help you answer the primary modality of the framework, which are questions. And I’m going to give you an example. So, for example, in Theme F of the framework on social, economic and cultural rights, which is in Category R, the rights, the R of the R-O-A-M-X, the first question is, does the national strategy for digital development address economic, social and cultural aspects of digital rights? And then there are indicators. One of the indicators is evidence of inclusion. Now, you can apply this question as easily to a policy instrument as you can apply it to the national Internet context. And I think that’s what we found extremely useful. And I think we also learned that in spite of their best efforts to develop this national digital strategy, it tended to be very sort of supply driven. It focused a lot on infrastructure, on planning. It did not focus on rights at all. It overlooked rights. It might have had an emphasis on data protection, but I think aside from that, there wasn’t very much. It didn’t explicitly address multi-stakeholder, even though it used the term multi-stakeholder. Openness was treated in a very narrow way. And when it comes to gender, there was virtually no content on gender, some emphasis on girls and capacity building for women and girls. So I think that was the other learning, that even though people who develop these digital strategies are doing it to the best of their ability and they try and be as inclusive as possible, they tend to overlook R-O-M-A-M-X. And I think that’s the other thing that we found. There was a complementarity. There was a lens that was provided by the Romex framework, which really filled the gaps and connected the dots. You know Romex actually started at a conference called Connecting the Dots. And I think it still plays that role to connect the dots between initiatives aimed at building digital literacy, building access to infrastructure. And then I think, Tadej, the final thing I can share, and maybe we can come back to it, although our time is not that much left, is that what we found is that whereas the R-O-M-X and the principles endure, I think I think they’re very future-proof. The concept of Internet universality was not future-proof. In fact, people don’t really understand, because they do have Internet access. They might not have meaningful Internet access, or they might not have equal Internet access, but I think people found that concept of Internet universality difficult to relate to. But they did not find the principles of rights, openness, accessibility, multi-stakeholder, and the issues covered under cross-cutting difficult to relate to. They even found the concept of an Internet governance forum difficult to understand. We tried to propose the idea of a national Internet governance forum as a way of building more collaboration around the implementation of the national digital strategy, but when they hear the words Internet governance forum, it doesn’t convey to them the idea that it is a forum that actually involves all aspects of digital cooperation and governance. To me, that was a real revelation. Very useful, and I personally think that we have adaptability and utility in the Romex framework and principles that we’re only just beginning to discover.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much, Anriette, for these insights. Actually, I know we’re behind the time, and I know you need to leave early, so I hope Chris and Dorcas Muthoni Online will forgive me if I ask you a follow-up question, mindful that you also need to leave early. Speaking of adaptability and looking ahead to WSIS plus 20 and the GDC, could you elaborate on the idea of how Romex can help ensure that the next phase of the global digital cooperation is more inclusive and grounded in human rights and equity, especially in the global south?

Anriette Esterhuysen: I think in a way I’ve answered that already. I think we need to use the framework not just to do these periodic national assessments. I think that’s very powerful. It works very well in a country like Brazil, where you do have an institution like NIC.br, like CETIC, you have the CGI, the Brazil Internet Steering Group, because you can come back and you can reflect and you can fill gaps. But I think it also works well as a planning tool and assessing strategies and the implementation of those strategies, and I think it can also be used at a monitoring and evaluation.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much Anriette, I would now turn on our next speaker who is onlline Dr. Dorcas Muthoni, I would like to invite you to speak about your experience as you had a direct impact on digital transformation in Africa through your work. So would you please highlight some of the biggest implementation challenges that you had in turning these policies and strategies, since we’ve been also talking about the strategies, into results on the ground?

Dorcas Muthoni: Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for that question, and also the opportunity to just contribute to this panel. I just want to speak around specifically, you know, digital transformation across gender spaces or the gender digital divide, as well as the small business sectors. that I’ve worked on a lot in the recent past. And let me just say that one of the areas that we have found very, very challenging is just, for example, coming to gender, we want to assess and find out, you know, is there any sex desegregated data that’s available for us to do the analysis in terms of how to understand, you know, how is the penetration, for example, how is access, how are social norms affecting, you know, adoption and inclusivity in terms of digital transformation and what are the disparities in terms of technology adoption. And the truth of the matter is, there’s hardly any data. This is very challenging because then it means that this is one area that we are not really proactive in assessing. And I think now this would again also really impact national strategies. When you go to small businesses, there’s a lot of uptake of technology, especially mobile-driven access, which tends to have a very strong social aspect. But we want to assess productive use of this internet to impact these businesses. And what you find is that you then struggle to find, you know, data that you can rely on. And so what I find really outstanding about this ROMEX framework is that I think if we encourage a lot more national assessments, but also apart from national assessments, sometimes can, you know, take time because, you know, you need to convince policy makers you may not have a well-housed, you know, government department that’s keen on pursuing this kind of research, you know, based on other priority. Encourage other stakeholders to really take up these and. and help us access data that can allow us to have some baselines, some, you know, points of reflection and also encourage people to use that to take on certain actions that begin to change the trajectory because I know we are all very excited about many emerging technologies but what you find is that there’s a lot of people who only hear but they cannot really be part of the productive elements of how these technologies help and I think particularly when it comes to the gender digital divide one of the things we found very challenging is how do we get women in leadership because we want women to come in as users, we want them to embrace technology but when they’re in the technical areas how do we encourage them to go all the way up into leadership roles, into, you know, policy and decision-making roles and how do we support, with reference to data again, how do we support them first to that level because then they form the role models that will inspire other young generations and for some reason you find that a lot of women who succeed then want to go back and do something because they have had very lonely career journey so that’s one of the things that we have found lack of really data that allows us to assess from these kind of perspectives is really one of the biggest gaps. Then when we think about ROMEX, we’re working on something in one of my organizations called AFJ where we really support women growing the technology field and pursuing their careers and we’re very interested in, you know, gender equality and we want to see, you know, the women, you know, take these opportunities and so I found that the ROMEX framework is really a good element. I would really love to, you know, hear more about non-government implementations of assessments or processes because this is very, very, very interesting to my organization in the sense that, you know, we are working on, you know, some, you know, monitoring and evaluation and learning framework on some women in a leadership program and we want to find out, you know, how can we use these kinds of frameworks that have been, you know, worked on from different parts of the world and with a lot of, you know, research into it and we see how this can inform part of the initiatives that we take. And the other thing that’s important, again, there’s been a very big growth in terms of, you know, interest in entrepreneurship. A lot of startups, you know, all over the continent, a lot of, you know, developers going into this space, a lot of interest even from, you know, right from the university people wanting to get into this space. And I think the question is, again, we need to find out how is this actually impacting the growth of really productive technologies that are locally responsive in our continent. And I think this is one of the things that would need to assess and if we have, you know, a reference, a baseline, then this would really be adequate to help people who take initiatives to, you know, support the reduction of the digital divide, whether it’s gender or generally the participation from a highly productive level in terms of software development, whether it’s in open source communities or otherwise, the growth of high-scaling startups in the continent. This could actually, you know, help inform governments who maybe take the initiative to take on these kinds of assessments, but also researchers who just want to establish, you know, what’s going on from different parts of the economy, you know, across the continent. These are some of the comments that I will be able to share at this point and I’m happy to stay and take any questions that come through later.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much for your valuable inputs, Dorcas. And indeed, you mentioned data gaps, which is a major issue across all the countries where we’ve implemented the RoMEx. And what we tend to do is turn these gaps into policy recommendations and indeed encourage the data gathering and also its availability. And I’m very actually pleased that Kenya was one of the first countries, along with Brazil as well, to implement the RoMEx indicators and also to do the first follow-up assessment to measure the progress they’ve made. Now I’d like to give the floor to Chris and ask you, Chris, to please speak. You have a really long-standing engagement with the internet government processes. Based on your experience, could you please elaborate on how do you see RoMEx contributing to more concrete, measurable follow-up on WSIS commitments? Thank you.

Chris Buckridge: Thank you, Tawfik, very much for having me here. I feel quite an expert, really, in comparison to many of my other speakers here today who’ve been far more involved in development of the RoMEx principles, in implementation of the assessments. My own experience of it has been a little bit more piecemeal, sort of watching and observing the development of this, dipping in occasionally in events such as this. And most recently that was in an event at EuroDIG, which is the European Dialogue on Internet Governance, one of the national and regional initiatives in the internet governance space. It’s very fitting in ways that this first session we have today of the IGF 2025, even if it’s perhaps meant a few less people in the room, it’s a good opportunity and time for us to consider the Romex principles, consider this project and how it fits into the broader Internet governance space because I think it is a really important practical development here. And I’m going back to some comments or a phrase that Mr. Jelassi used in his comments at the beginning, data-driven inclusive governance. I think this year, as we’re heading into the WSIS plus 20 years, we’re very focused on how Internet governance, how digital governance is evolving. That idea of data-driven inclusive governance is really important because those two concepts are very mutually supporting of each other. Data-driven, it cannot be comprehensive unless it’s inclusive, unless it’s drawing in all aspects of the community. But at the same time, inclusive governance can’t be effective, can’t be practical unless it is data-driven, unless it’s grounded in the kind of practical knowledge and awareness that a Romex assessment can provide. So I think Romex principles, as we look to the evolution of Internet governance, as we look to making practical output-focused implementations of Internet governance, this is a really important example that can be leveraged and can be developed and utilized by the whole community. I think in that sense, what I would see as an important discussion in the context of the Internet Governance Forum, in the context of its wider network of NRIs, International and Regional Initiatives is how that can all work together, how it can be complementary. I think the examples that Fabio spoke of in Brazil are really important, that sort of utilisation of NIC.br, CGI.br as a multi-stakeholder element of the assessment process. The Romex assessment process always includes that multi-stakeholder advisory committee and many countries won’t have that situation that Brazil very luckily had of having a pre-existing institution that could serve that function. But I think that in itself is a real opportunity because we can see there are two possibilities here. There is the possibility of a Romex assessment being initiated and actually using or working closely with an existing national or regional initiative to provide and foster that multi-stakeholder input. But on the other hand, if there is not a pre-existing national or regional initiative, a Romex assessment and its multi-stakeholder advisory committee could be a really useful catalyst for developing that kind of sustainable, ongoing multi-stakeholder engagement by the community. And that’s going back to a bit what Anriette was saying. Both Romex assessment can be a one-off or can be a recurring tool, but it can also be a method for generating and fostering sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement in these digital governance processes, in these digital governance understanding and development. So I think the opportunities for complementarity between Romex and everything else that is developing and going on in the Internet governance space is really important. And I think it’s one reason why it’s so good to be talking about it here at the Internet Governance Forum.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much, Chris, and thank you so much for pointing out to collaboration and work with national and regional initiatives, IGFs. We indeed call on the national and regional initiatives and we stand ready to work with them to advance and to unroll the assessments. of Romex at their local context. I think, mindful of time, I wanted now to open the floor to the audience, both online and in the room. If you have any questions to any of the panelists, any reactions or feedback, I would be very interested to hear from Guy Berger, as the father of the Romex, as I mentioned. I would be delighted if you could start the interventions from the audience, please. You have to go to the mic.

Guy Berger: Thank you. Hello? Yes, we can hear you. We can hear you, it’s okay. Yes. Thank you so much for the presentation, and wonderful to see this system evolving and being the subject of a panel like this. So, it just struck me that for some people, in the dazzle of AI, they may think that the term Internet universality is quaint and old-fashioned, but actually, of course, we would not have AI, we would not have data in AI if we did not have connectivity. And the important thing, I think, about this term Internet universality is that it sensitizes us, as was said, that many people don’t have connectivity, and that impoverishes everybody. But second of all, that connectivity is about not just people having access to content and services, but people having access to produce content and services. And so, if we really want to see a world with many more alternatives to the big digital… players, if we want to see much more content in local languages, then we’ve got to put this emphasis on internet universality because it is the foundation for everything else that’s happening in the digital world. And so I think that this tool, these internet universality indicators, RoamX, is a really valuable way for a country to take stock of where the gaps are in terms of actually enabling their society as a whole to have equitable opportunities to become producers and creators in the digital economy and to contribute to the global tech stack. And at the moment, we don’t have that. We’ve got too many big dominant players and much too little participation reflecting the ground-up possibilities that humanity could have from these technologies. So I really commend these indicators as a way to produce an evidence base for progress that can really unleash a lot more participation. Because if we don’t have universality of the internet, all this other stuff is just going to be of limited benefit. Thank you.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thank you so much, Guy. Etienne, would you like to react, please?

Tawfik Jelassi: Yes, I would like to follow up on what Guy Berger just said. Guy just mentioned the importance of having digital infrastructure and connectivity in order to create content and services. And I would like to add a third pillar, if I may, which is the digital literacy, which is the capacity building and the capacity development for people to leverage the digital infrastructure towards creating content and services. I think these are three what I would call critical success factors to ensure this internet universality and meaningful connectivity. and here I want to refer to an international conference that UNESCO organized a couple of weeks ago which is on capacity building in the fields of AI and digital transformation for the public sector. So again the emphasis on the capacity building because our studies, our surveys show that in order to bridge the gap we need really to have this wide capacity building, digital literacy in this new digital age and AI era. Otherwise people cannot be, we cannot have this inclusive information society or this inclusivity that was mentioned earlier. So I think the digital skills and capacity building is a third key pillar. I wanted to add what Guy rightly said. Thank you.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much ADG. Anriette, did you want to react or do we take questions?

Anriette Esterhuysen: If there’s another question I’d rather take the other question. Otherwise I’ll react.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Are there any questions in the audience? No? Any questions online? I don’t see any. Anriette, you can go ahead please.

Anriette Esterhuysen: So my reaction then is really just, I think Guy, the concept of internet universality is just, as I said, I think digital inclusion is a more meaningful concept for people. I think internet universality is just harder for people to relate to. So that’s just a reflection but I agree with everything else you’ve said. And then in response to what Taufik said about digital literacy, I think the capacity development is absolutely essential. But I think here the Romex framework is actually quite useful to assess how digital literacy programs are designed, developed and implemented. Because so many digital literacy programs are vendor driven or actually just teach people how to use their devices. They’re not linked with rights education, citizen civic education as it’s called, it’s not really enabling people to fully understand the complexity of the social media environment. And I think even just using the ROMEX frameworks, diversity, gender issues, to assess a digital literacy program is going to produce a digital literacy program. So you’re absolutely right, but we have to also be realistic about the fact that so many digital literacy programs are themselves not connecting the dots.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Good. Thanks so much, Anriette. Are there any further comments or questions, whether online or in the room? I don’t see any, so thank you so much. I would then now like to give one minute to each panelist to give their final reflections, anything you wanted to say. We’ll start from Fabio, please, Fabio.

Fabio Senne: Thank you, Tawfik. Well, no, just to stress a few more practical results that we can see in this process. I think one of them is that multistakeholder engagement is not good in terms of the process itself, but also in terms of the quality of the data you can gather. So this is something very interesting that we saw in this last implementation of the model. Many sources of information coming from the civil society, from the private sector that are more or less hidden in official documentation. So this is very key for the process. And a second thing that was already mentioned is the need for data disaggregation and to really understand the topic. So, for instance, in gendered gaps in Brazil, if you take just the main picture of access, basic access, you don’t see. huge gaps in terms of access. But when it goes to meaningful connectivity in a deeper analysis, you can see very huge gaps. So breaking the data indicators into more disaggregation, I think this is something that ROMACS indicators can do for really not just giving a ranking or who is better and which country is better, but also to give a roadmap for action. I think this is the main characteristics of ROMACS indicators. Thank you.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much Fabio and thank you for pointing out the issue of the ranking. I think what countries have been valuing a lot is that ROMACS indeed doesn’t do any ranking or comparison and it’s a fully voluntary assessment aimed at guiding and helping the country. So this is something very important to point out which has been appreciated by all the stakeholders. Chris, would you like to go next?

Chris Buckridge: Sure, thank you Tawfik. I’ll be brief here. I know we’re wrapping up. I’ll use my time just to agree very strongly with Guy’s point about the link between internet universality and so much else of our digital society. I think that’s a very live and active discussion at the moment as we’re looking at the Internet Governance Forum. As Anriette said, an Internet Governance Forum doesn’t necessarily capture for many people the full breadth of what our digital society now means, but I think the ROMACS framework does a really good job of highlighting and reinforcing how interlinked and interreliant all of these aspects are. So really important.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much. Dorcas, would you like to have a concluding one-minute remarks?

Dorcas Muthoni: Thank you. Yeah, I would just like to say that. I agree with the input that disaggregated data that allows us to pick up different perspectives. For example, gender equality across different areas of assessment would be really important because without that kind of information then initiatives will tend to be a bit general and that could actually continue to then encourage persistence for example in the gender digital divide which really even as we were starting the forum we it was very clear that this is seen to be one of the areas that we persistently struggle with across the board and I think for me I look at it not just from usage and adoption and access but also ability for women to participate in the production and creation of technologies and be decision makers and policy makers this again is one of the other things that we need to look at because then it informs how much we will inspire other generations to come into these areas because it’s a big gap we struggle you know in terms of being the only one in the room or no woman in the room when it comes to a lot of these opportunities so that’s very important and the other thing I could say is that the sustainability you know when we get this moving how well will we be able to sustain and I think that’s the purpose of having regular assessment is also very important because then we know what we have achieved are we keeping up or are we retarding or you know what’s going on this is really important because we cannot move this world backwards we are only going forward so if we get to know what’s happening today and the actions that are being taken in terms of the policy interventions then we can see the effectiveness of policy so that’s my input I’m trying to connect thank you.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thank you so much Dorcas and also very much for pointing out the gender digital divide which is one of the key issues that we’re also trying to address and close this gap of course with support and collaboration for with all actors. Ariette.

Anriette Esterhuysen: Thanks Tativic. I mean I started off by saying that effective implementation of a national digital transformation strategy needs consultation and collaboration and connecting or connections and I think that for me is this Anriette Esterhuysen, Anriette Esterhuysen, Alexandre Barbosa, Dorcas Muthoni we are going to have more impact and it will be more inclusive. I’m also very excited by the idea of the national and regional IGFs beginning to explore how they can use the Internet Universality ROAMx framework.

Tatevik Grigoryan: Thanks so much, Anriette. Thank you so much to all the panelists. Before I give the floor to ADG Jelassi for closing the session I wanted to thank each one of you, Dorcas Online, David and Camilla Online, Fabio, Chris and Anriette and Guy for your valuable contributions. I don’t cease to learn every time we have a discussion around ROAMx. I am really excited to see the report on Brazil. Thank you so much for your long-standing support to ROAMx and thank you so much for all the wonderful ideas and calls which we will take forward and take into stock for consideration and action when we carry forward with the ROAMx implementation. Thank you so much again. And ADG, would you like to give concluding remarks to close the session?

Tawfik Jelassi: Thank you, Tatevika. I’ll be very brief. First of all, I would like to thank all the participants online but also in the room who came here for this relatively early morning session on day zero of the IGF. Clearly, you have shown commitment, engagement and interest in the subject matter we focused on during this session. I would like to thank also the panelists for sharing with us their expert insights but also the practical country experiences. Tawfik Jelassi, Anriette Esterhuysen, Alexandre Barbosa, Dorcas Muthoni I think ultimately, as many of the speakers, including Guy Berger’s remarks, it’s all about digital inclusion, and in the United Nations we have an expression that we use quite often, digital inclusion has to leave no one behind. This is very important, it’s at the heart of the Rome Acts, and it’s along these three pillars which I mentioned, and were mentioned obviously by the speakers, digital connectivity, digital literacy skills, and digital services and content. Stay tuned, if you would like to take this discussion further, feel free to contact us at UNESCO, or one of the panelists featured in this session, and enjoy IGF for the days ahead.

Anriette Esterhuysen: Thanks ADG.

Agreement points

ROMEX framework provides comprehensive assessment methodology for digital development

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Davide Storti
– Fabio Senne
– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Chris Buckridge
– Tatevik Grigoryan

Arguments

ROMEX stands for Rights, Openness, Accessibility, Multi-stakeholder participation, with X representing cross-cutting issues like sustainability and gender equality

ROMEX serves as a strategic enabler for national digital assessments and evidence-based policymaking

ROMEX translates WSIS ideals into measurable outcomes and provides common language for stakeholders

ROMEX framework works effectively throughout the full lifecycle of policy development, from design to monitoring and evaluation

Data-driven inclusive governance requires both comprehensive data and inclusive participation to be effective

ROMEX serves as a framework for assessing progress on WSIS commitments and SDGs through evidence-based policy making

Summary

All speakers agree that ROMEX provides a valuable, comprehensive framework for assessing digital development that encompasses rights, openness, accessibility, and multi-stakeholder participation while serving multiple purposes from assessment to policy planning

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights

Multi-stakeholder engagement is essential for effective digital governance and policy implementation

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Fabio Senne
– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Chris Buckridge
– Tatevik Grigoryan

Arguments

The framework has been applied in over 40 countries with concrete policy outcomes

Multi-stakeholder engagement improves data quality by accessing information from civil society and private sector sources

Fiji’s capacity building workshop revealed that government departments were unaware of their own national digital strategy despite consultation efforts

ROMEX can foster sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement and complement national/regional internet governance initiatives

ROMEX capacity building workshops support multi-stakeholder advisory boards and wider stakeholder communities in policy implementation

Summary

Speakers consistently emphasize that meaningful multi-stakeholder participation is crucial for successful digital policy development and implementation, with ROMEX serving as a tool to facilitate this engagement

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Persistent digital divides require targeted interventions, especially for marginalized groups

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Fabio Senne
– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Dorcas Muthoni

Arguments

2.6 billion people remain offline globally, with only 27% of low-income country populations using internet compared to 93% in high-income countries

Gender and racial disparities persist, with black women in Brazil showing lower levels of meaningful connectivity

ROMEX provides a lens that fills gaps in digital strategies, which often overlook rights, gender, and multi-stakeholder approaches

Lack of sex-disaggregated data makes it difficult to assess gender digital divide and technology adoption disparities

Summary

All speakers acknowledge that significant digital inequalities persist, particularly affecting women, racial minorities, and people in low-income regions, requiring evidence-based approaches to address these gaps

Topics

Development | Human rights | Gender rights online | Digital access

Digital literacy and capacity building are fundamental requirements for meaningful digital participation

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Guy Berger

Arguments

Digital literacy and capacity building are critical success factors alongside infrastructure and connectivity

Digital literacy programs need to connect rights education and civic education, not just device usage training

Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services

Summary

Speakers agree that technical access alone is insufficient and that comprehensive digital literacy, including rights awareness and civic education, is essential for people to meaningfully participate in digital society

Topics

Development | Sociocultural | Online education | Human rights

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the critical importance of comprehensive, disaggregated data collection that includes multiple stakeholder perspectives to understand and address digital inequalities effectively

Speakers

– Fabio Senne
– Dorcas Muthoni

Arguments

Multi-stakeholder engagement improves data quality by accessing information from civil society and private sector sources

Lack of sex-disaggregated data makes it difficult to assess gender digital divide and technology adoption disparities

Topics

Development | Human rights | Gender rights online

Both speakers view ROMEX as a comprehensive tool that can support various stages of policy work while emphasizing the interconnected nature of data-driven and inclusive approaches to governance

Speakers

– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Chris Buckridge

Arguments

ROMEX framework works effectively throughout the full lifecycle of policy development, from design to monitoring and evaluation

Data-driven inclusive governance requires both comprehensive data and inclusive participation to be effective

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers emphasize that internet universality and meaningful connectivity require more than just technical infrastructure – they need comprehensive capacity building to enable people to be both consumers and creators in the digital economy

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Guy Berger

Arguments

Digital literacy and capacity building are critical success factors alongside infrastructure and connectivity

Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Sociocultural

Unexpected consensus

ROMEX as a policy planning and evaluation tool beyond assessment

Speakers

– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Chris Buckridge
– Tatevik Grigoryan

Arguments

The framework can assess policy instruments and national digital strategies, not just internet environments

ROMEX can foster sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement and complement national/regional internet governance initiatives

ROMEX capacity building workshops support multi-stakeholder advisory boards and wider stakeholder communities in policy implementation

Explanation

While ROMEX was originally conceived as an assessment framework, speakers discovered unexpected consensus around its utility as a comprehensive policy tool that can be used for planning, strategy evaluation, and ongoing governance processes, expanding its application beyond periodic assessments

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

The concept of ‘Internet universality’ may be outdated while ROMEX principles remain relevant

Speakers

– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Guy Berger

Arguments

ROMEX provides a lens that fills gaps in digital strategies, which often overlook rights, gender, and multi-stakeholder approaches

Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services

Explanation

There was unexpected consensus that while the term ‘Internet universality’ may be difficult for people to relate to in the AI era, the underlying ROMEX principles remain highly relevant and future-proof, suggesting a need to evolve terminology while maintaining core concepts

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated remarkably high consensus across all major aspects of ROMEX implementation and digital governance. Key areas of agreement include: the comprehensive value of the ROMEX framework for digital assessment and policy work; the critical importance of multi-stakeholder engagement; the persistence of digital divides requiring targeted interventions; and the need for holistic approaches to digital literacy and capacity building.

Consensus level

Very high consensus with no significant disagreements identified. The speakers built upon each other’s points constructively, with practical implementers (Brazil, Fiji, Kenya) validating the theoretical framework presented by UNESCO officials. This strong consensus suggests ROMEX has achieved broad acceptance among diverse stakeholders and demonstrates its practical utility across different contexts. The implications are positive for ROMEX’s continued development and adoption, as the framework appears to have successfully bridged the gap between academic theory and practical implementation needs.

Different viewpoints

Terminology preference for Internet Universality vs Digital Inclusion

Speakers

– Guy Berger
– Anriette Esterhuysen

Arguments

Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services

Digital literacy programs need to connect rights education and civic education, not just device usage training

Summary

Guy Berger defended the continued relevance of ‘Internet universality’ as a foundational concept, while Anriette Esterhuysen suggested that ‘digital inclusion’ is a more meaningful and relatable concept for people to understand

Topics

Development | Sociocultural

Unexpected differences

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed remarkable consensus among speakers with only minor terminological preferences and approaches to implementation differing

Disagreement level

Very low level of disagreement. The speakers were largely aligned on the value and importance of the ROMEX framework, the challenges of digital divides, and the need for inclusive digital governance. The only notable disagreement was a terminological preference between ‘Internet universality’ and ‘digital inclusion,’ which does not affect the substantive policy recommendations. This high level of consensus suggests strong foundational agreement on the framework’s value and approach, which bodes well for its continued development and implementation.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the critical importance of comprehensive, disaggregated data collection that includes multiple stakeholder perspectives to understand and address digital inequalities effectively

Speakers

– Fabio Senne
– Dorcas Muthoni

Arguments

Multi-stakeholder engagement improves data quality by accessing information from civil society and private sector sources

Lack of sex-disaggregated data makes it difficult to assess gender digital divide and technology adoption disparities

Topics

Development | Human rights | Gender rights online

Both speakers view ROMEX as a comprehensive tool that can support various stages of policy work while emphasizing the interconnected nature of data-driven and inclusive approaches to governance

Speakers

– Anriette Esterhuysen
– Chris Buckridge

Arguments

ROMEX framework works effectively throughout the full lifecycle of policy development, from design to monitoring and evaluation

Data-driven inclusive governance requires both comprehensive data and inclusive participation to be effective

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Both speakers emphasize that internet universality and meaningful connectivity require more than just technical infrastructure – they need comprehensive capacity building to enable people to be both consumers and creators in the digital economy

Speakers

– Tawfik Jelassi
– Guy Berger

Arguments

Digital literacy and capacity building are critical success factors alongside infrastructure and connectivity

Internet universality remains foundational for AI and digital technologies, enabling people to both access and produce content and services

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Sociocultural

Key takeaways

ROMEX framework (Rights, Openness, Accessibility, Multi-stakeholder participation, plus cross-cutting issues) serves as an effective tool for measuring WSIS implementation and guiding evidence-based digital policymaking

The framework has demonstrated practical value across over 40 countries, with concrete policy outcomes including legislative reforms and improved data collection practices

ROMEX works throughout the full policy lifecycle – from design and planning to implementation, monitoring, and evaluation – not just as a one-time assessment tool

Digital divides persist globally with 2.6 billion people offline, and significant inequalities exist even within countries that have made digital progress, particularly affecting women, racial minorities, and rural populations

Multi-stakeholder engagement is essential for both effective policy implementation and quality data collection, but coordination challenges exist even within government departments

Data disaggregation is crucial for understanding true digital inequalities – surface-level access statistics can mask deeper connectivity and usage gaps

Internet universality remains foundational for emerging technologies like AI, requiring not just access but the ability for people to produce and create digital content and services

Digital literacy programs need comprehensive approaches that include rights education and civic engagement, not just technical device training

Resolutions and action items

UNESCO calls on governments, regulators, civil society, and stakeholders to embrace ROMEX as a strategic tool for digital transformation

Brazil will complete multi-stakeholder validation of their revised ROMEX assessment and launch the final report by September-October

Encourage national and regional Internet Governance Forums to explore using the ROMEX framework for their initiatives

Promote non-governmental implementations of ROMEX assessments to support broader stakeholder engagement

Address data gaps by turning them into policy recommendations and encouraging improved data gathering and availability

Develop collaboration between ROMEX assessments and existing national/regional initiatives to foster sustainable multi-stakeholder engagement

Unresolved issues

Lack of comprehensive sex-disaggregated data across countries makes it difficult to properly assess and address gender digital divides

Environmental impact indicators are largely overlooked in digital policies and governance frameworks

AI governance frameworks remain incomplete in many countries, with crucial aspects like transparency and rights-based safeguards still unresolved

Multi-stakeholder participation remains inconsistent across different government ministries and regulatory environments

The concept of ‘Internet Governance Forum’ is poorly understood by many stakeholders, limiting engagement in digital cooperation processes

Sustainability of ROMEX implementation and regular assessments requires ongoing commitment and resources

Digital literacy programs often remain vendor-driven or device-focused rather than comprehensive rights-based approaches

Suggested compromises

Use ‘digital inclusion’ terminology instead of ‘Internet universality’ as it is more relatable and meaningful to stakeholders

Leverage ROMEX assessments as catalysts for creating multi-stakeholder advisory committees in countries lacking existing institutions

Combine ROMEX framework with national digital strategy development to ensure comprehensive coverage of rights, openness, accessibility, and multi-stakeholder principles

Encourage both governmental and non-governmental implementations of ROMEX to broaden participation and impact

Technology is neither good nor bad, nor is it neutral. The impact of technology is shaped by human intent, by the choices we make, the values that we want to protect, and the systems we design.

Speaker

Tawfik Jelassi

Reason

This quote from historian Melvin Kranzberg reframes the entire discussion by challenging the common assumption that technology is neutral. It emphasizes human agency and responsibility in shaping digital outcomes, which directly supports the need for frameworks like ROMEX that embed human rights and values into digital governance.

Impact

This philosophical foundation set the tone for the entire session, establishing that digital transformation requires intentional, values-based approaches rather than purely technical solutions. It provided the conceptual framework that justified all subsequent discussions about ROMEX as a tool for ensuring technology serves human development.

Even after about an eight-month period of the people developing the national digital strategy believing that they’ve consulted thoroughly, two-thirds of the government departments… did not know about the national digital strategy

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Reason

This revelation from the Fiji workshop exposed a critical gap between policy development and implementation that goes beyond technical issues to fundamental governance challenges. It highlighted how even well-intentioned consultation processes can fail dramatically.

Impact

This comment shifted the discussion from celebrating ROMEX assessments to acknowledging the complex realities of policy implementation. It led to deeper exploration of how ROMEX could serve not just as an assessment tool but as a bridge between strategy development and actual implementation, emphasizing the need for sustained multi-stakeholder engagement.

The ROMEX framework is not just suited to assessing a national internet environment. It actually works extremely well in assessing a strategy… it could work as well as a planning tool… suited to the full lifecycle of policy development and implementation from design to monitoring learning and evaluation

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Reason

This insight expanded the conceptual boundaries of ROMEX beyond its original assessment function, revealing its potential as a comprehensive policy tool. It demonstrated how frameworks can evolve beyond their initial design to serve broader purposes.

Impact

This comment fundamentally reframed how participants viewed ROMEX’s utility, moving from seeing it as a periodic assessment tool to understanding it as an integrated policy lifecycle instrument. It opened new avenues for discussion about practical applications and sparked interest from other speakers about implementation possibilities.

The concept of Internet universality was not future-proof… people found that concept of Internet universality difficult to relate to. But they did not find the principles of rights, openness, accessibility, multi-stakeholder, and the issues covered under cross-cutting difficult to relate to

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Reason

This observation challenged a core UNESCO concept while validating the ROMEX framework itself. It provided crucial feedback about how terminology and framing affect stakeholder engagement and understanding.

Impact

This comment created a moment of tension in the discussion, as it directly challenged UNESCO’s foundational concept. It prompted Guy Berger to defend the importance of ‘Internet universality’ and led to a nuanced exchange about terminology versus substance, ultimately enriching the conversation about effective communication of digital inclusion concepts.

There’s hardly any data… This is very challenging because then it means that this is one area that we are not really proactive in assessing… When you go to small businesses… you then struggle to find data that you can rely on

Speaker

Dorcas Muthoni

Reason

This comment highlighted a fundamental challenge that undermines evidence-based policymaking – the absence of disaggregated data, particularly for gender and small business impacts. It connected the technical framework discussion to real-world implementation barriers.

Impact

This intervention grounded the theoretical discussion in practical realities, leading other speakers to emphasize the importance of data disaggregation. It reinforced the value proposition of ROMEX by highlighting how it can identify and address critical data gaps that policymakers might otherwise overlook.

Data-driven inclusive governance… those two concepts are very mutually supporting of each other. Data-driven, it cannot be comprehensive unless it’s inclusive… But at the same time, inclusive governance can’t be effective, can’t be practical unless it is data-driven

Speaker

Chris Buckridge

Reason

This comment articulated a sophisticated understanding of the symbiotic relationship between evidence-based policy and participatory governance, showing how ROMEX addresses both dimensions simultaneously.

Impact

This insight helped synthesize earlier discussions about multi-stakeholder engagement and evidence-based policy, providing a theoretical framework that connected various speakers’ practical experiences. It elevated the conversation by showing how ROMEX addresses fundamental governance challenges rather than just technical assessment needs.

Overall assessment

These key comments transformed what could have been a routine presentation of ROMEX achievements into a sophisticated exploration of digital governance challenges and solutions. The discussion evolved from initial technical presentations to deeper questions about policy implementation, stakeholder engagement, and the relationship between assessment frameworks and real-world change. Anriette Esterhuysen’s insights particularly drove this evolution, challenging assumptions and expanding the conceptual scope of ROMEX’s utility. The interplay between theoretical frameworks (Jelassi’s technology neutrality quote) and practical realities (Muthoni’s data gaps, Esterhuysen’s Fiji experience) created a rich dialogue that demonstrated both the potential and limitations of current approaches to digital governance. The session successfully moved beyond advocacy for ROMEX to critical examination of how such frameworks can be more effectively integrated into the full spectrum of digital policy development and implementation.

How can non-government implementations of ROMEX assessments be conducted and what frameworks exist for this?

Speaker

Dorcas Muthoni

Explanation

She expressed interest in using ROMEX frameworks for monitoring and evaluation in her organization’s women in leadership program, indicating a need for guidance on non-governmental applications

How can National and Regional Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) integrate and utilize the ROMEX framework?

Speaker

Chris Buckridge and Anriette Esterhuysen

Explanation

Both speakers highlighted the potential for collaboration between ROMEX assessments and existing NRIs, with Anriette expressing excitement about NRIs exploring how to use the framework

How can the concept of ‘Internet Governance Forum’ be better communicated to convey its broader scope of digital cooperation and governance?

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Explanation

She noted that people found the term difficult to understand and didn’t grasp that it involves all aspects of digital cooperation, not just narrow internet governance

How can environmental sustainability indicators be better integrated into digital governance frameworks?

Speaker

Fabio Senne

Explanation

He identified that environmental issues like energy consumption, e-waste and emissions are largely overlooked in digital policies and need better integration

What strategies can address the persistent gender digital divide, particularly in leadership and decision-making roles in technology?

Speaker

Dorcas Muthoni

Explanation

She highlighted the challenge of supporting women to reach leadership positions in technology and the lack of data to assess progress in this area

How can disaggregated data collection be improved to better understand digital inequalities across different demographic groups?

Speaker

Fabio Senne and Dorcas Muthoni

Explanation

Both speakers emphasized the critical need for better disaggregated data to understand gaps in meaningful connectivity, particularly for marginalized groups like black women in Brazil

How can ROMEX be used as a planning and monitoring tool throughout the full lifecycle of policy development, not just for assessment?

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Explanation

She discovered that ROMEX could work as a planning tool and for monitoring/evaluation, suggesting this application needs further exploration and development

How can multi-stakeholder participation be made more consistent across different government ministries and regulatory environments?

Speaker

Fabio Senne

Explanation

He noted that while Brazil has good multi-stakeholder frameworks, participation remains fragmented across different government departments

How can digital literacy programs be redesigned to connect rights education, civic education, and understanding of complex digital environments?

Speaker

Anriette Esterhuysen

Explanation

She pointed out that many digital literacy programs are vendor-driven or device-focused and don’t address the broader complexity of digital citizenship