Day 0 Event #248 No One Left Behind Digital Inclusion As a Human Right in the Global Digital Age

Summary

This discussion at the Internet Governance Forum focused on digital inclusion and addressing the global digital divide through international collaboration between policymakers, researchers, and industry experts. The panel explored how to ensure no one is left behind as society becomes increasingly digital, examining barriers to meaningful connectivity beyond basic internet coverage.

Norwegian Minister Osmund Grever-Alqvist emphasized that while 92% of the planet has internet coverage, one-third of the population remains offline due to barriers including infrastructure gaps, affordability issues, and digital illiteracy. He highlighted the importance of digital public infrastructure and open-source solutions in fostering inclusive development. Malin Rygg from Norway’s accessibility authority presented a framework addressing three core dimensions: connectivity, accessibility, and digital skills, noting that 1.3 billion people worldwide live with disabilities and require inclusive design from the outset.

Maja Brynteson discussed the “Nordic and Baltic paradox,” where highly digitalized societies risk deepening inequality as digital participation becomes essential for daily life. She identified vulnerable groups including older adults, people with disabilities, immigrants, and rural communities, emphasizing that digital exclusion is multidimensional and context-specific. Irene Mbari-Kirika from Kenya showcased African innovation in assistive technology, highlighting the continent’s mobile-first approach and the development of Kenya’s ICT accessibility standard.

The panelists agreed that digital inclusion must be framed as a human rights issue, requiring comprehensive legislation, technical standards, and enforcement mechanisms. They stressed the need for universal design principles, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and capacity building in developing countries. The discussion concluded that without closing digital gaps, societies face increased inequality and exclusion from essential services, education, and economic opportunities.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **The Digital Divide Paradox**: Despite high digitalization rates in Nordic/Baltic countries (92% global internet coverage), one-third of the global population remains offline, with meaningful connectivity being the key challenge rather than just coverage access

– **Digital Inclusion as a Human Rights Issue**: The discussion emphasized framing digital access not as a convenience or consumer choice, but as fundamental to human rights including education, employment, healthcare, and democratic participation

– **Multi-dimensional Barriers to Digital Inclusion**: Participants identified interconnected obstacles including connectivity issues, accessibility challenges, digital skills gaps, and the need for inclusive design from the start rather than retrofitting solutions

– **Global South Innovation and Standards**: Strong emphasis on Africa and developing countries as creators and innovators rather than just consumers of technology, with Kenya’s ICT accessibility standard highlighted as a model for global adoption

– **Policy and Regulatory Frameworks**: Discussion of effective strategies including legislation with clear obligations and deadlines, technical standards alignment across countries, and the need for enforcement mechanisms to drive meaningful change

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to foster international collaboration on digital inclusion by bringing together policymakers, researchers, and industry experts to explore practical solutions for closing the digital divide. The goal was to share successful examples from different regions (Nordic countries and Global South) and generate actionable insights for ensuring no one is left behind in an increasingly digital world.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a consistently constructive and collaborative tone throughout. It began with formal presentations but evolved into an engaged, solution-oriented dialogue. The tone was notably inclusive and respectful, with speakers building on each other’s points rather than debating. There was a sense of urgency about addressing digital exclusion, balanced with optimism about innovative solutions and international cooperation. The conversation remained professional yet passionate, reflecting the speakers’ genuine commitment to digital inclusion as both a practical necessity and moral imperative.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Fredrik Matheson** – Moderator of the session

– **Asmund Grover Aukrust** – Norwegian Minister of International Development, responsible for international development in countries outside the OSCE, Middle East and Afghanistan, and Norwegian humanitarian efforts

– **Inmaculada Porrero** – Senior expert on disability at the European Commission, leading work on the rights of people with disabilities with a focus on accessibility and assistive technologies since 1991

– **Yu Ping Chan** – Senior program officer in the Office of the Secretary General’s Envoy on Technology at the United Nations, coordinates work on follow-up of the Secretary General’s roadmap for digital cooperation and digital-related aspects of the Common Agenda Report

– **Dan Sjoblom** – Director General of the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority, appointed by the Swedish government in 2017, previously chairperson of BEREC (Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications)

– **Irene Mbari-Kirika** – Founder and executive director of Enable, recognized dynamic global strategic leader and executive level innovator bringing assistive technologies and key legislation to Kenya for making digital accessible for all

– **Malin Rygg** – Head of Norway’s accessibility watchdog, the authority for universal design of ICT, working to transform it into a data-driven powerhouse

– **Maja Brynteson** – Research fellow at Nordregio, background in sustainable development and management studies

**Additional speakers:**

None identified – all speakers in the transcript were included in the provided speakers names list.

# Comprehensive Report: Digital Inclusion and the Global Digital Divide – Internet Governance Forum Discussion

## Executive Summary

This Internet Governance Forum panel brought together international policymakers, researchers, and industry experts to address the critical challenge of digital inclusion in an increasingly connected world. Moderated by Fredrik Matheson, the discussion featured Norwegian Minister of International Development Asmund Grover Aukrust, European Commission disability expert Inmaculada Porrero (joining via Zoom), UN Development Program officer Yu Ping Chan, Swedish telecommunications regulator Dan Sjoblom, Kenyan accessibility advocate Irene Mbari-Kirika, Norwegian accessibility authority head Malin Rygg, and Nordregio researcher Maja Brynteson.

The panel explored how despite 92% global internet coverage, one-third of the world’s population remains offline, highlighting that meaningful connectivity extends far beyond basic infrastructure access. The discussion evolved from formal presentations into an engaged dialogue that reframed digital inclusion from a service delivery issue to a fundamental human rights imperative with significant economic implications. Key themes included the shift from “digital divide” to “meaningful connectivity,” the importance of designing accessibility from the start, and the potential for Global South innovation to lead global solutions.

## The Digital Divide Paradox: From Coverage to Meaningful Connectivity

### Global Connectivity Challenges

Minister Asmund Grover Aukrust opened by presenting a stark reality: whilst 92% of the planet has internet coverage, approximately one-third of the global population remains offline. This disconnect reveals that meaningful connectivity involves complex barriers beyond infrastructure gaps, including affordability, digital literacy, lack of relevant local content, and accessibility issues.

The minister emphasized that digital inclusion fundamentally concerns human rights—access to information, freedom of expression, education, and democratic participation. He highlighted the importance of digital public infrastructure and open-source solutions, noting that such approaches encourage competition, foster innovation, and generate spillover effects across society. Norway’s “Alt-in” system for government-to-people interaction exemplifies how countries can build inclusive digital infrastructure.

### The Nordic-Baltic Paradox

Maja Brynteson from Nordregio introduced the “Nordic-Baltic paradox”—the phenomenon where highly digitalised societies can paradoxically deepen digital divides as they advance. As societies become more digital, expectations rise and analogue alternatives disappear, potentially leaving behind those who cannot keep pace with technological change.

Brynteson’s research identifies digital exclusion as multidimensional and context-specific, often affecting overlapping vulnerable groups. She outlined two primary categories of barriers: access barriers (infrastructure and device affordability) and capability barriers (digital skills, literacy, and trust issues). Vulnerable groups include older adults, people with disabilities, immigrants, rural communities, and low-income populations, though specific challenges vary considerably by context.

Importantly, Brynteson emphasized that “not everyone can or wants to be digital,” arguing that maintaining analogue services and alternative options remains essential even in highly digitalised societies.

## Digital Inclusion as a Human Rights Imperative

### Fundamental Rights Framework

Multiple speakers converged on framing digital inclusion as a fundamental human rights issue. Malin Rygg from Norway’s accessibility authority emphasized that digital services are now inextricably linked to basic rights including education, employment, healthcare, and democratic participation. She presented a comprehensive framework addressing three core dimensions: connectivity (infrastructure and devices), accessibility (universal design and standards), and digital skills (literacy and confidence).

Rygg noted that 1.3 billion people worldwide live with disabilities, representing one in six of the global population, and require inclusive design from the outset rather than retrofitted solutions. She challenged paternalistic language often used in inclusion conversations, arguing that talking about “including” vulnerable groups can be condescending—excluded populations want to contribute rather than simply be included.

Yu Ping Chan from the UN Development Program reinforced this rights-based framing, connecting digital access to broader development goals. She warned that the future AI revolution could exacerbate existing inequalities, with projections suggesting only 10% of AI’s global economic value will accrue to Global South countries except China.

## Global South Innovation and Leadership

### African Innovation in Accessibility

Irene Mbari-Kirika, founder of Enable in Kenya, presented a compelling case for African leadership in accessibility innovation. She challenged the conventional narrative of Africa as merely a consumer of technology: “Africa must not only be a consumer, we must be a creator, a manufacturer and a global supplier of accessible technologies, designed and built on the continent by Africans for the world.”

Mbari-Kirika highlighted Kenya’s groundbreaking ICT Accessibility Act, which institutionalises digital inclusion and aligns with comprehensive accessibility standards. She emphasized the economic dimensions of accessibility, noting that the global assistive technology market is projected to reach $32 billion by 2030. With 15% of the global population living with disabilities, this represents significant untapped market potential.

She provided specific examples of African innovation, including SignVerse, which demonstrates how the continent’s mobile-first approach offers unique opportunities for inclusive design. However, she identified specific needs for African innovators including support for data sets, design, packaging, and bringing products to market.

### Reframing the Inclusion Narrative

Mbari-Kirika offered a powerful reframing: “Digital inclusion is not about making room at the table. It is about building a table where everyone has a seat and a voice.” This perspective shifts the conversation from viewing excluded groups as beneficiaries of assistance to recognising them as contributors with untapped potential, emphasizing empowerment and participation rather than charity or accommodation.

## Regulatory Frameworks and Implementation Strategies

### European Approach to Accessibility Legislation

Inmaculada Porrero from the European Commission outlined the European strategy for building comprehensive accessibility frameworks through three key components: building stakeholder awareness, creating specific policies with clear obligations and deadlines, and utilizing existing international standards like WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) and EN 301549 rather than starting from scratch.

The European model emphasizes legislation with clear enforcement mechanisms combined with technical standards. Porrero noted this approach provides certainty for businesses whilst ensuring meaningful progress on accessibility, applying to both public and private sectors for comprehensive coverage.

However, Porrero identified a critical challenge: the lack of accessibility knowledge among ICT professionals. She emphasized the need to integrate accessibility requirements into university curricula and professional development programs, noting that many developers, designers, and decision-makers remain unaware of accessibility requirements and legislation.

### International Coordination and Standards

Dan Sjoblom from the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority emphasized the importance of international coordination, expressing hope for extending European accessibility standards globally through UN systems. He highlighted Sweden’s work through the IPRES program (formerly SPIDER) with 25 sub-Saharan countries, demonstrating practical approaches to international cooperation.

Sjoblom noted that the cross-cutting nature of digital policies requires collaboration across government ministries and sectors, making coordination particularly challenging but essential. He emphasized the crucial role of trusted community institutions—libraries, civil society organizations, and municipal citizen services—in reaching populations that might otherwise be left behind.

## Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Economic Dimensions

### Whole-of-Society Approaches

Yu Ping Chan emphasized the need for comprehensive collaboration involving government, private sector, and civil society organizations. This “whole-of-society approach” recognizes that no single actor can address digital inclusion challenges alone, with each stakeholder bringing unique capabilities and reaching different populations.

The discussion revealed significant challenges in engaging the private sector development community, which often lacks awareness of accessibility requirements. Speakers identified the need for comprehensive education and training programs targeting developers, designers, and product managers globally.

### Economic Benefits and Business Case

Multiple speakers emphasized significant economic opportunities presented by digital accessibility. Mbari-Kirika noted that digital accessibility “is not a sentimental issue, it is a sound investment and a strategic opportunity for growth and innovation.” The business case extends beyond disability-specific markets, as universal design principles benefit broader user bases and accessible products often perform better in challenging conditions.

Minister Grover Aukrust connected digital inclusion to broader development goals, warning that failure to close digital gaps will increase inequality and prevent achievement of employment, education, and development objectives.

## Implementation Challenges and Practical Solutions

### Knowledge and Capacity Gaps

The discussion identified persistent challenges requiring ongoing attention. A fundamental issue is the lack of accessibility knowledge among ICT professionals worldwide. Despite existing legislation and standards, many developers and decision-makers remain unaware of accessibility requirements.

This knowledge gap is compounded by the rapid pace of technological change. Minister Grover Aukrust specifically asked how policy can change as fast as digitalisation is moving forward, highlighting this as a critical challenge for effective governance.

### Innovative Approaches and Adaptive Design

The discussion highlighted innovative approaches to accessibility challenges. Fredrik Matheson shared examples of adaptive technology design, including “The Continent” newspaper’s WhatsApp and email delivery system, which demonstrates how services can be designed to work across different technological capabilities and preferences.

He also provided a practical example of systemic complexity through his daughter’s experience applying for a police certificate, illustrating how even simple processes can create barriers when not designed inclusively.

## Key Insights and Future Directions

### Fundamental Reframing Achieved

The discussion achieved a fundamental reframing of digital inclusion from a charity or service delivery issue to a human rights imperative with significant economic implications. The shift toward viewing excluded populations as contributors rather than beneficiaries represents a particularly important evolution, emphasizing empowerment and participation rather than accommodation.

### Design from the Start

A critical consensus emerged around the importance of designing accessibility from the beginning rather than retrofitting solutions. This “universal design” approach benefits everyone while avoiding the higher costs and limited effectiveness of after-the-fact accessibility improvements.

### Mobile-First and Leapfrogging Opportunities

The discussion highlighted how regions like Africa can leapfrog traditional development approaches by building accessibility into their digital infrastructure from the beginning. The continent’s mobile-first approach offers unique opportunities for inclusive design that could benefit global accessibility efforts.

## Unresolved Questions and Future Research Needs

Several critical questions remain unresolved, particularly around implementation and scaling of successful approaches. How can effective local innovations be scaled to broader implementation? How can the global community of ICT professionals be effectively reached and trained on accessibility requirements?

The challenge of keeping policy frameworks current with rapidly evolving technology requires ongoing attention. Traditional policy development processes may be too slow to keep pace with technological change, suggesting the need for more adaptive governance approaches.

The lack of shared understanding of digital inclusion across regions creates challenges for measuring progress and evaluating interventions. Developing common metrics and evaluation frameworks could help coordinate efforts and identify effective approaches.

## Conclusion

This Internet Governance Forum discussion demonstrated both the complexity of digital inclusion challenges and the potential for coordinated global action. The high level of consensus on fundamental principles—particularly the human rights framing and the economic benefits of inclusion—provides a strong foundation for future action.

The emphasis on comprehensive, multi-stakeholder approaches recognizes the complexity of the challenges while pointing toward practical solutions. Perhaps most importantly, the discussion challenged paternalistic approaches to inclusion, emphasizing instead the need to build new systems that harness everyone’s potential.

The shift from talking about “digital divides” to “meaningful connectivity” represents more than semantic change—it reflects a deeper understanding that access alone is insufficient. True digital inclusion requires addressing multiple, intersecting barriers while recognizing the agency and potential contributions of all users.

The unresolved questions identified provide a clear agenda for future research and action, requiring sustained commitment from multiple stakeholders, innovative approaches to governance and coordination, and continued emphasis on the human rights and economic imperatives that drive the digital inclusion agenda.

Fredrik Matheson: Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us here in the room via Zoom and via YouTube. For those in the room, I want to remind you that you’ll need to put on your headsets to be able to hear. It needs to be on channel one, and the receiver needs to be on the table. It needs to be in line of sight of the transmitter. This is what enables us to have a quiet conference here. Very excited. So in this session, we want to open up a truly international conversation about digital inclusion. So we’ve brought together voices from different parts of the world. We have policymakers, we have researchers, and we have industry experts. And together, we are going to explore how we can tackle the digital divide in very real and practical ways. One of the things we’re going to be talking about today is what does it take to make sure that no one is left behind in the digital world. As our world becomes more closely enmeshed with the digital, how do we make sure that no one is left behind, no matter their background or where they live? We’re going to be hearing examples of what works well from the Nordic region and from the global south. And we hope that this discussion will spark new ideas and shared learnings along the way. We have some questions about what does digital exclusion really mean today? Why does it persist? And most importantly, what can we do to close the gap and make digital inclusion real? If you’re on Zoom, make sure to share your questions via the chat and we’ll do our best to bring them to the stage. There are also microphones here on the side for people who are in us here with the room. So I’m going to briefly introduce everyone. My name is Frederick Matheson. I’m moderating here today. Then we have Osmund Grever-Alqvist, who is the Norwegian Minister of International Development, who is responsible for international development in countries outside the OSCE, Middle East and Afghanistan. He’s also responsible for Norwegian humanitarian efforts. Joining us via Zoom is Ima, who is a senior expert on disability at the European Commission. She’s been leading work on the rights of people with disabilities with a focus on accessibility and assistive technologies since 1991. So if you’ve heard of the European Accessibility Act, we have much to thank her for there. With us, we also have Yu-Ping Chan, who is the senior program officer in the Office of the Secretary General’s Envoy on Technology at the United Nations. She coordinates the team’s work on follow-up of the Secretary General’s roadmap for digital cooperation and digital-related aspects of the Common Agenda Report, in particular, the Global Digital Compact, the GDC. With us, we also have Dan Sjöblom, who is the Director General of the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority. He was appointed by the Swedish government to that role in 2017. Previously, he was the chairperson of BEREC, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications. communication. And I’m super excited to have Irene Mbadi-Kirika with us today, the founder and executive director of Enable, who is a recognized dynamic global strategic leader and executive level innovator who is bringing assistive technologies and key legislation to her native Kenya on making digital accessible for all. Later on, you should check out her website. There’s a film on how the entire project came to be. You will not leave untouched by that film. It’s fantastic. Also super excited to be here on stage with Malin Idig, who is the head of Norway’s accessibility watchdog, so the authority for universal design of ICT. She has been working to transform it into a data-driven powerhouse. So here in Norway, public entities have to register a web accessibility statement, which has had a tremendous impact on making sure everyone actually follows the rules that have been in place for so long. Very, very happy about that. And also joining us is Maja Brintesson, who is a research fellow at Lore de Regio. She has a background in sustainable development and background in management studies. And we’re going to be hearing a keynote from her shortly on digital divides and more. So super excited by that. But first up, I will explain how the format’s going to be. We’re going to have four keynotes. We’re going to have the minister on stage in a moment. After the keynotes are done, everyone’s going to be back on the panel, and I’ll be back up here on stage for a panel discussion, about 30 minutes. We are going to be super strict with the schedule, so anyone who speaks for too long will be stopped. And remember to post your questions on Zoom or in the mics here, and we’ll do our best to bring that to the panel. So minister, I would then like to… invite you up on stage. Let’s have a big round of applause.

Asmund Grover Aukrust: Great, dear friends, from the Norwegian side, we are very proud and honored to welcome you here and to host this very important conference. And also for me personally, as representative for this county in the Norwegian Parliament, I can also say welcome to Lillestrøm and we are very honored to have you here. But most importantly, I have very much looked forward for this debate that our conversation that we will have today and I look forward also to listening to your comments and questions later on. Because despite great progress, and even though 92% of our planet now has internet coverage, one third of our population is still offline. The biggest challenge is therefore not coverage, we have to talk about meaningful connectivity. We need measures that addresses both coverage and usage barriers, such as infrastructure gaps, and policy and regularity, uncertainty, inequalities, limited affordability of devices and services, and digital illiteracy. Meaningful connectivity is a particular challenge in low income countries. Even where coverage exists, barriers remain. Intersectional inequalities across gender, race, age, disability status and rural communities. In addition to this, limited affordability of devices and services, lack of education. and local content and local languages continue to hinder widespread internet usage. Concerns about online health, safety, security and trust may also prevent further adaptation of digital services. Not to mention the risk and harm that can occur online, especially for women and children. Meaningful connectivity is about basic human rights, including the right of information and freedom of expression. I would like to highlight the importance of digital public infrastructure. It encourages competition and fosters innovation and fiscal resilience, and it can generate spillover effects across society, institutions, markets and businesses. Safe DPI can shape systems, public trust and reduce digital gaps and promote inclusive economic and social development for all. DPI is therefore a priority for Norwegian development cooperation. Finally, let me also highlight the importance of open source digital solutions, including open source DPI, like Norway’s Alt-in for government to people and businesses interaction. Digital ID is another essential part of DPI. It opened up for a wide range of government services for citizens and businesses and protect the users. Norway supports digital ID solutions developed in India that is now being rolling out in 26 countries. Now I look forward to listening to the rest of the debate and to. to listening and learning from all of you. Thank you so much.

Malin Rygg: So the digital everyday life is here for most of us. We use technology for big and small tasks alike. At work, in our free time, for school, entertainment, and staying connected with others. The digital solutions that have emerged this last years has given us opportunities that we could only have dreamed of for 20 years ago. But is everyone able to keep up? I’m Malin Rigg, and I’m delighted to be here and to gather with all of you to have this discussion on this important topic. The authority that I head has the obligation and mandate under Norwegian law to help remove digital barriers and prevent new ones for being created. And yet we see many people that are still being digitally excluded. So who are they? Why are they being excluded? And what should we actually do about this? As mentioned, there are 8.2 billion people in the world. Technology is evolving fast, and digital services have become the norm. But this acceleration, as it continues, also accelerates the risk of deepening inequality. Digital inclusion is essential for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Because without education, decent work, sustainable infrastructure, or equal access to health care, not all can participate. So it all depends on a meaningful digital participation in this age. So, it was mentioned 2.6 billion people are still offline, according to the UNDP. And digital exclusion reinforces social exclusion. It reinforces it in education, employment, but also for democratic participation and freedom of speech. The digital divide is no longer just about access, it is fundamentally about human rights. So did you know that 1.3 billion people worldwide live with a disability? That is one in six of us. It’s a diverse group that includes people with physical, cognitive and sensory impairments or other health conditions. We all bring unique skills, perspectives and contributions to society, but that is only if society is designed to include all of us. And that is why accessibility is foundational to human dignity, opportunity and equality. Ensuring accessibility means building systems that uphold rights and empower all people to participate fully in the digital world. Rights, access and inclusion are interconnected. And to achieve true digital inclusion, we must therefore act along these three core dimensions. Connectivity, building and maintaining infrastructure that ensures everyone has affordable and reliable access to the internet. Accessibility, designing services that are usable by everyone, regardless of ability, language, literacy and trust. And digital skills, enabling people to confidently and safely participate, from using basic tools to navigating complex digital systems. So there’s a gap and that is a gap we have to mind, because the distance between those who are digitally included and those who are not is growing. And we need a framework to help us bridge it. To close this gap, we must work on two levels, the individuals and the societal. And I like to point to this as the gap model that provides a structured way of thinking about this. It shows how we can lower expectations on the societal level and at the same time give individuals that can’t reach the help and support they need. On the connectivity part, from societal level, we can work on infrastructure, broadband, mobile networks and assistive tech compatibility, for instance. For the individual, we can ensure that everyone has a device, that it’s affordable and that they also have the subscriptions and anything that they need to connect. On the accessibility, from the societal level, we can work on universal design, inclusive standards and regulatory frameworks, as the EU has been doing with their directives in recent years. On the individual side, we can help with assistive technologies, adaptable user interfaces, glasses, screen readers and so forth. When we talk about digital skills, from the societal level, we can work on competence among developers, designers, leaders, teachers and so forth. And from the individual side, we can work on digital literacy, user confidence and lifelong learning. This shows that exclusion is not only about physical access, it can also be about lacking tools, trust, usability or the know-how to engage meaningfully. Exclusion must be designed, taught and built into systems, not left to chance. Earlier this month, I attended the Inclusive Africa Conference 2025 in Nairobi. It offered a fresh and important perspective for me and reminded us that the Global South doesn’t need to simply try to catch up, but they can leapfrog ahead and learn from our mistakes. In Kenya, the norm is mobile first, and with a young population, 70% under the age of 30, there are possibilities, but also difficulties that are different from ours. But what stood out is their commitment to standards from the start, enabling accessibility and inclusive innovation from day one. Where we in the north have been kind of stumbling through in the last 20 years, with a design now fixed later, the south can choose to build better from the beginning. Our context may differ, but the goal is shared, digital participation for all. And again, the core elements remain connectivity, accessibility, and digital skills. Before I close, we live in different parts of the world, but we are working toward the same future, a future where everyone, regardless of ability or background, can belong, contribute, and thrive in the digital world. I’m truly grateful to take part in this panel alongside such knowledgeable and committed voices, and to share our experience as part of a shared global effort. So let’s build this future together. Thank you.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you, Malin. Now we are going to welcome Maja Brintesop from Nordregio up on stage. As soon as we get the presentation up.

Maja Brynteson: All right, I have a presentation. I don’t know if it’s… It should be coming. It should be here soon. But in the meanwhile I can just start by presenting myself. As Fredrik has said, my name is Maja Brynsson and I work at Nordejo, which is a research institute based in Stockholm. And we are focusing on regional planning and development. And I will be speaking about the state of digital inclusion in the Nordic and Baltic countries. Over the past few years, Nordejo has led and contributed to several research projects focused on digital inclusion. And in this presentation I will share key insights and findings from that work. So let’s start with why digital inclusion is still an important topic in the Nordic and Baltic region. We often refer to the Nordic and Baltic paradox here to argue for the importance of digital inclusion. And I will try to explain what we mean with this paradox. The Nordic and Baltic countries are among the most highly digitalized countries in Europe. For example, according to the latest Digital Economy and Society Index, Kjellfors DC, Finland, Denmark and Sweden are among the top performers in Europe when it comes to basic digital skills among citizens. And the picture is also positive with respect to government services, with high rates of e-government usage, as well as digital public services for citizens, which are high in Finland and all of the Baltic countries. But as the Nordic and Baltic region becomes increasingly digitalized, Digital tools and skills are now essential for participating in everyday life, and the expectations placed on individuals continue to rise. There is a growing reliance on having digital tools and skills for being an active member of society. We are also seeing an increased use of electronic IDs for secure access and authentication. In some countries, you need an EID to do everything from checking your health records and managing your bank account, to booking a doctor’s appointment, to even booking your apartment building’s laundry room. We are also seeing that digital communication and online platforms have become the norm, shaping how we work, learn and stay informed. But there are still significant disparities in both access and ability. Broadband coverage remains uneven, especially in some of the rural and remote areas in this region. And there are also varying levels of digital skills, both among and within different population groups. And these gaps continue to challenge inclusive digital participation. So it is important to recognize that not everyone is equally included in these digital societies. Certain population groups have been identified as being at risk of digital exclusion. And this slide provides a closer look at the various groups identified as at risk of digital exclusion. And at Nordregio, we have looked more closely at older adults, people with disabilities, immigrants, people with low or no education, rural communities, young people and people with low income. Now it is important to say that not everyone is equally included in these digital societies. And this slide provides a closer look at the various groups identified as at risk of digital everyone in these groups struggle with digitalization. Many are doing just fine. But overall, these are the groups that research consistently identifies as being more vulnerable to digital exclusion. And at NordicU we often describe digital exclusion as being multidimensional and context-specific. And what do we mean with this? By multidimensional we mean that people often become at risk when several factors overlap. For example, an older adult living in a rural area with limited income is likely to face more barriers than someone of the same age that is affluent and living in a well-connected urban area. And by context-specific we mean that different groups face different challenges in different parts of digital life. Some may struggle with access and usage of EIDs due to lack of devices or broadband. While others may find digital platforms difficult to navigate due to language or accessibility issues. So while the Nordic and Baltic countries are at the digital frontier in many areas, we see that a share of the population remains at risk of digital exclusion. So here is the Nordic and Baltic paradox. The more digital our societies become, the greater the risk of deepening the digital divide. And we’re seeing this divide emerge along familiar lines. Age, geography, disability, language and socioeconomic status. These gaps matter and they create significant consequences. So the consequences of this digital divide are profound and far-reaching. And they include, for example, not getting access to important information, missed job and education opportunities, barriers to civic engagement and democratic participation, limited access to health care, and other essential services, challenges in performing economic activities and increased risk of social isolation. So digital exclusion doesn’t just reflect existing inequalities, it can actually deepen them. So in our research, we have looked at what the most common barriers in the Nordic and Baltic countries are for digital inclusion. And you can see them here. And when we talk about digital inclusion, we usually divide them into two main categories. First, we have access barriers. These are about having the physical means to participate in digital life, like access to a stable internet connection or owning a digital device, such as a smartphone or computer. Second, we have capability barriers. And these relate to the skills and confidence needed to use digital tools. And this includes digital skills, but also literacy and language, and a lack of domain knowledge, and even a lack of trust, a feeling of security or willingness. And both types of barriers can prevent people from fully participating in our digital societies. And often, they overlap. So where do we stand today? What is the status of digital inclusion in the Nordic and Baltic region? This region is perceived as digitally advanced countries, and in many ways, that’s true. But the picture is more complex. We are leading in some areas, but we are lagging behind in others. And in our research, we can see that one key challenge is that there’s no shared understanding of what digital inclusion actually means across the region. This makes it harder to coordinate efforts and measure progress consistently, especially when we may not be talking about the same things. We also see that some groups remain at risk of exclusion, whether due to limited access, lack of digital skills, or insufficient support. Another issue that we see is the lack of user involvement in the design of digital solutions. Too often, services are built without input from the people who are most affected, those who are already at risk of being left out. So while we have made great strides, there is still important work to be done to ensure that digital inclusion is a reality for everyone in this region. So how do we move forward? To reach the digital divide in the Nordic and Baltic region, we need a lot of things. For example, we need more targeted policies, we need inclusive design, and we need expanded support systems that meet people where they are. On this note, key enablers of digital inclusion already exist in our communities. Libraries, civil society organizations, and municipal citizen services all play a vital role in reaching those who might otherwise be left behind. These actors often provide not just access, but also guidance, training, and human support. But these actors also need a mandate and support to work with these questions. Lastly, it is important to remember that not everyone can or wants to be digital. Maintaining analog services and alternative options is essential to ensure that everyone, regardless of their digital ability or willingness, can access the services they need and be a part of our societies. On that note, I end my presentation. Thank you so much for your time and attention. If you have any questions or would like to learn more about our work in Nordic, please don’t hesitate to reach out.

Fredrik Matheson: The final keynote, Irene, please join us on stage, and everyone, you absolutely have to check out the website, because when I was doing research for this panel and looking at the state of accessibility in Kenya, just fantastic efforts done, so I’m really looking forward to your keynote.

Irene Mbari-Kirika: Good afternoon, everyone. All protocol observed. So it’s with great honor that I stand before you at the Internet Governance Forum, a platform that champions open dialogue, shared responsibility and collective progress in our digital age. My name is Irene Barikirika, and I’m the founder and executive director of Enable, a nonprofit organization that’s based in Kenya with a mission to empower African youth with disabilities through technology. So for the last 15 years, we’ve been championing digital accessibility to ensure that persons with disabilities are not left out. At Enable, we believe in a future where no one is left behind in this digital revolution. Our assistive technology labs are located at at least eight schools for the blind in Kenya, provide blind and visually impaired students with essential digital skills to help them navigate the world independently. Using the power of collaboration in advancing accessibility, Enable hosts the Inclusive Africa Conference each year, bringing together local, regional, international stakeholders to co-create solutions for digital inclusion for persons with disabilities. One of the conference’s most significant outcomes has been the development of Kenya’s ICT accessibility standard, which is very important to note. It’s for products and services, and it’s the only one in Africa so far. But we do have plans. We are currently working with other African countries to scale these standards across the continent to accelerate Africa’s progress towards a more inclusive digital future. Last week, we received a powerful affirmation of our work when we were named to the Forbes 100 accessibility list. This global recognition celebrates the world’s most impactful organizations and innovations, driving progress in accessibility and disability inclusion. It validates our unwavering belief that persons with disabilities deserve dignity, opportunity, and full participation in the digital age. Ladies and gentlemen, according to the GSMA Mobile Accessibility Sub-Saharan Africa 2024 report, Africa is a mobile-fast economy. It’s a mobile-fast continent with smartphone penetration of about 52%, and it’s projected to go up to about 81% by 2030. The World Bank also estimates that Africa’s population will reach approximately 1.7 billion by 2030, with 70% of this population made up of young people between the ages of 15 to 24. This will make Africa the youngest continent in the world, and it is a well-established fact that global corporations must establish a strong presence in Africa or risk falling behind in the race for future growth and innovation. In Africa, we are already seeing the Gen Z awakening, where digital tools are driving civic participation, creativity, and most importantly, holding institutions and individuals accountable. These young people are our future, a generation of digital natives poised to shape the world. Yet among them, there are millions of brilliant, creative and determined youth with disabilities who risk being left behind, not due to a lack of talent or ambition, but because we have failed to design new technologies with their needs in mind. We must prepare African youth not for yesterday’s roles, but for the opportunities and demands of tomorrow. In today’s world, AI literacy is essential at every level, a critical tool to transforming the digital divide into a powerful economic opportunity for the next generation, especially for our young people. The global assistive technology market is projected to reach 32 billion by 2030. Africa must not only be a consumer, we must be a creator, a manufacturer and a global supplier of accessible technologies, designed and built on the continent by Africans for the world. Digital accessibility therefore is not a sentimental issue, it is a sound investment and a strategic opportunity for growth and innovation. African governments, including Kenya, have introduced tax incentives to support the development of digital solutions for the export market. Combined with rising literacy rates, increasing internet access and deeper hunger for success, this positions Africa as the next continent from which the world can innovate and where the next wave of digital breakthroughs will be born. Ladies and gentlemen, the journey towards mainstreaming digital accessibility for persons with disability in Africa is already underway. A case in point in my own home country, Kenya, which recently passed the landmark law for persons with disability. Accessibility Act of 2025. This law institutionalizes digital inclusion, aligning with the ICT accessibility standard and setting a strong example for the continent, meaning that compliance now is not an option, which is great for persons with disabilities to be included. Our vision for digital accessibility in Africa will require the expertise, knowledge and resources of everyone gathered here at this forum. The recently concluded 6th Inclusive Africa Conference has launched a series of year-round working groups aimed at sustaining momentum and driving measurable progress ahead of the seventh edition of next year of Inclusive Africa Conference. These groups present a valuable opportunity for individuals and organizations to connect with an established platform, contribute your expertise, resources and innovation to advance digital accessibility across Africa. I warmly invite all of you to join these working groups and actively shape a more inclusive and accessible future for everyone. May this year’s Internet Governance Forum be remembered as the moment when the global digital community came together to decisively champion digital inclusion for all. One second. And to advocate for a universal standard for digital accessibility, one that applies equally to developing countries as it does to the rest of the world. I keep saying that my mobile phone doesn’t change if I go to Africa or I come to Norway or I live in Washington, D.C. It’s the same mobile phone. So digital accessibility standards, we should be able to follow digital accessibility standards across from continent to continent and country to country. As I conclude, digital inclusion is not about making room at the table. It is about building a table where everyone has a seat and a voice. Thank you.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you, Irene, that was wonderful. All Protocol Observed is also the publisher of a newspaper called The Continent that some of you might be getting via email. I love how the ways of building digital technology have been super clever because they have a WhatsApp channel and an email delivery so you get a PDF so you don’t have to consume valuable network capacity. It’s such a brilliant way of shaping the products for local conditions and is super useful for reference later on also. So thank you everyone on Zoom. Remember to ask us questions. We’re going to have a little session now and then we’re going to open up the floor afterwards. So first I’m going to ask our Minister of International Development, Osmond Grever-Alqvist, what do you see as being the most persistent emerging barriers to digitalization? And not only that, what does regulation and how does standardization play books in guaranteeing universal accessibility and inclusive design help?

Asmund Grover Aukrust: Well, thank you for very good speeches that we just heard and I learned a lot from listening to my colleagues up here at the scene. Well I think digitalization creates so many possibilities. It creates so many possibilities for inclusion. As you finished up with, it’s the same mobile phone you can use in Kenya or in Sudan or in Washington D.C. or here at Lilleström. So, I mean, it really creates so many possibilities for inclusion. However, there is also a danger that this will create more inequality, because there will be a bigger division among those inside of the digital world and those outside. So, therefore, I think it’s very important that we are so vocal about this, and this should be a very important part of the discussion. We learned through the other speeches here, I mean, who are the groups that might be the most vulnerable. It could be elderly people, people with disabilities, people living in rural areas, people with lack of education that might be more vulnerable. And, of course, there will be different solutions and different ways to tackle these challenges. But I think, of course, the government has a really important role here, and a really important role of having universal designs and to reach out to its whole population. I know that when we’re talking about disabilities, I know that from the Norwegian side, we have been working together with Kenya in a way to have what we call the Global Disability Innovation Hub in Nairobi, which has created fantastic results. But as I started off with, I think the most important one is that we try to seek the barriers. And this is also, of course, a discussion that we need to have all the time, because the digital solutions, they are changing all the time. And therefore, we also need to change the policy as fast as the digitalization is moving forward.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you. question from Ima who is joining us via zoom. Let’s just make sure all the technology is With us. There you are. Very good so we have a question for you Ima and that is what strategies for regulation and Enforcement have proven effective in promoting digital inclusion across Europe and also What lessons should we take forward as digital policy evolves?

Inmaculada Porrero: Okay, so I mean building building up an agenda for the Accessibility it takes it takes really time and it takes times to prepare the field to Gain knowledge first about what are we talking about? It is not evident for people from this field to know. What do we mean by? digital inclusion and digital Accessibility I think it is What’s based on what we did in Europe? There was a need to have first that building up to identify the stakeholders to raise awareness to better understand The field but then once is done. I think we need to concretize what we mean by digital Accessibility and digital inclusion and the way of concretizing is to have specific policies that address the matters Policies that are reflected in general digital policies so that the general documents reflect well the Commitment and the right to be included in In the digital world by persons with disabilities in the digital development and to do that You need a specific and concrete actions on accessibility at the end What really worked in Europe and I think made really the change is The legislation to have clear legislation with Obligations for the private and the public sector to ensure that certain products, services, infrastructures that are going to be used and are used by people includes also, they comply with accessibility requirements so that persons with disabilities can use them and can access them on equal basis with others. Then, together with the legislation, we also need to have clear technical standards. And the strategy that we have used is really not to start from scratch. I think there is a lot already in this round table, these presentations that we just saw have illustrated this. There is already a lot being done. So should a country wish to advance on this matter and to improve the situation, I would say, look around. We did the same at the time that we were preparing our flagship legislation, the European Accessibility Act, and our standards include mandate EN 301549 resulting from mandate 376 at the time. I’m talking about 2005. We look around and we saw what countries that were more advanced on accessibility at the time were doing. In particular, we partnered with the US Access Board to have standards that were coherent. I’m really happy that now in different parts of the world, like Canada or Australia, the European standard is being used. And also, as Irini was reflecting, also this standard has been at the basis of the developments in Africa and in particular in Kenya. So I would say have clear objectives and put policies that raise awareness, that address and clarify what needs to be done, but then put it in legislation with clear deadlines, clear obligations, and clear enforcement. enforcement mechanism and use technical standards or technical specifications or regulations in order to say what exactly needs to be done. If all this goes hand in hand, we have a bigger chance to achieve the objective of digital inclusion. Thank you.

Fredrik Matheson: Very good. Thank you very much. Next up, we have a question for you, Pink, but I think you might have to hop over to the next chair so we can get you in front of the mic. I’m sorry. I should have told you that earlier. Sorry. I need to make sure we’re accessible and that everyone can hear us. This is Morton. So my question here is, in your work, you’ve emphasized the importance of a holistic multi-stakeholder collaboration involving governments, the private sector, and civil society, the three Ps, really, to tackle the complex and interconnected nature of digital divides. In practice, what does effective collaboration look like, and what are the biggest barriers that we need to overcome to make this work?

Yu Ping Chan: Thank you so much, Frederic. You’d mentioned, actually, part of the work that I’ve done at the United Nations, where I used to be in the Office of the Tech Envoy, and now from the United Nations Development Program, that question that you asked in terms of what have we seen that works and what are the barriers that we see in countries is particularly important, particularly profound. I want to really emphasize the point that Irene had raised, where we’re really looking at challenges that the whole world faces. So for instance, Maya had spoken about the challenges in the Nordic and the Baltic regions. Immaculata had just talked about the European challenges. But think how much more profound the challenges are in the global South and the global majority in developing countries itself, where they don’t have the legislature, the infrastructure, the skills, the capacity, and a lot of these public services that are present in richer, industrialized, and developed countries. And those are the challenges that we as UNDP, serving in 170 countries… and territories around the world have to contend with when we try our best to support the national governments and the developing countries that we work with. So for instance, when we talk about digital inclusion and we talk about inequalities, it’s not just those inequalities within societies and within groups as well. It’s also the divides that exist between countries. And that’s particularly important if we are gathering together as a global community, talking about digital issues and digital cooperation. So for instance, as we talk about the opportunity that AI brings, we also have to recognize that the future AI revolution could also exacerbate already existing inequalities. When for instance, it’s projected that only 10% of the global economic value generated by AI in 2030 will accrue to the global South countries, except for China. When you consider the fact that right now, over 95% of top AI talent is concentrated in only six research universities in the US and China, you think about the fact that perhaps the global opportunity that is posed by AI will fundamentally leave behind many of these developing countries and widen the inaccessibility and the exclusion that they actually currently actually address and feel when it comes to issues such as accessibility, affordability, connectivity, and so forth. So that is a fundamental concern from the perspective of the UNDP and what we would think is a fundamental barrier to considering the question of digital inclusion. And then when you come to the practical level, for instance, right, you also have techno-fragmentation. So the minister emphasized the importance of the role of government, but it’s actually a role of government that needs to be holistic and comprehensive. It can’t be individual tech solutions that are designed by one ministry for a particular case for a particular situation at a time. What we need to think about are digital foundations that cut across the entirety of government, that are interoperable. This is where, for instance, the minister’s emphasis on digital public infrastructure is something that the United Nations Development Programme also focuses on, that we’re creating these digital frameworks that, like the roads, the railway systems, that allow the burgeoning of a society and economy must also undergird the entirety of delivery of public services in a country. So that kind of inclusion needs to be intentional from the start. Then also, for instance, Frederick, you had mentioned the importance of all of society, the different Ps that you mentioned. So indeed we need a whole-of-society approach, where it’s the private sector also working with government, with a people-centered focus, to ensure this type of delivery. So these are all important aspects where we as UNDP really think that we need to have a more comprehensive, holistic approach to supporting national governments, both in developed countries, but particularly for developing countries as well. The last point I want to underscore is really the importance of local ecosystems. We need to build capacity in developing countries to, exactly as Irene said, be co-creators in this digital and AI future. And that requires skills, investments, global capacity building and upskilling, and as well as additional resources that are put into these types of efforts around the world.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you. Thank you very much. We’re going to head on next to Dan Hjörblom, Director General of the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority. And my question for you is, what policy levers are most effective to reach underserved populations? And what can regulators do to drive this kind of equitable access without stifling innovation? And this is something I see in my neighborhood where we have kids come over and they need Wi-Fi because they have old phones, but they don’t have a subscription. Their parents can’t afford to have a subscription for each of their kids. And then they’ve come up with this hack where they call via Snapchat or FaceTime. FaceTime doesn’t work because there’s no ID connected to it. So there’s sort of these workarounds. But my question is more, what about like at the policy level? What can we do?

Dan Sjoblom: Yes. Thank you for that question. I’d like to say, I think, three things. How we have addressed some of those things in my authority and things. we do. First, I’d like to say just that being a telecom regulator has changed dramatically over the last years. I think anyone who works in that business in the room will recognize that we are drifting from telecoms into ICT and into digital, and it’s a whole new environment and a much, much more complex one where also from a government standpoint, it’s getting more and more difficult because these policies are cross-cutting in a way that we haven’t seen before. So a lot of collaboration needed at local, national and international levels, which makes me happy to be here today. Now on connectivity, which is the first step, everyone needs to be connected. We have had for a long time a policy where we want to establish stable market conditions for private entrepreneurs to build out connectivity, both fixed and mobile, and that has taken us very far. We have now, I think, above 98% connectivity. People can connect to high-speed internet, over 98% of everyone in the country. But that is just the first step, and we want to get to 100%, so there’s also a subsidy program which we are running with the aim of getting everyone up to be able to connect. But as we’ve heard other speakers in this panel mentioning, we see that with the 98% able to connect, there’s a much lower percentage of actually connecting. And why is that, and how do you address that? We heard the currently weaker groups. We also heard, I think, good comments about this is an ongoing development, so those who are in the weaker groups today, or not in the weak groups today, may well find themselves in weak groups tomorrow and AI is of course a very big challenge for anyone to become connected and work with. So we have developed or we have a program which is called Digital Today at the regulator in Sweden which we are very happy and proud about. It works with other government services, it works with municipalities, it works with academia, but most importantly it works with civic society which I think is really the key message here. Because when you find those who can connect but have chosen for various reasons not to connect, it often links to feeling unsafe on the internet. It’s a dangerous place, online safety is not where it should be and cyber security is, I think we’re all working very hard on cyber security but it’s not getting easier to keep up with those who are trying to defraud us of our funds or create problems of many kinds on the internet. And we have come I think to the stage where many of us don’t pick up the phone if we don’t see that the caller is somebody you know and that’s very different from 20 years ago when you of course never knew who called when you used to pick up the phone. But working with the trusted institution like libraries were mentioned earlier but also working with the civic societies associations that are there for these weaker groups is a very powerful means. So we have in this digital today program we have close to 400 of those organizations that come together and we create platform material that can be used by everyone and we go out and we meet people with their trusted representatives, and that’s very powerful. And the last thing I wanted to mention, coming back to international collaboration, is that we are very proud as well to have been, for over now seven years, in a program called IPRES today, it used to be called SPIDER, where we collaborate with 25 sub-Saharan national countries, and we run peer-to-peer learning and sharing development issues projects. I think they are presented out here in the stands, so anyone interested in the IPRES program run by the regulator, us, and the Stockholm University, please go out and have a chat with them, and there are many good stories from that, and experiences. Thank you.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you very much. Irene, okay, so now I’m super excited. So we’ve seen how local and community-driven innovation can make a real difference. One thing is the practical application of it, but then also there’s the next-level effects that can come from it. So from your experience, what are some promising examples of such solutions, and how can we build them in a sustainable way, so it’s not just a one-off, it’s something that can really run over time?

Irene Mbari-Kirika: Thank you for that question. So first off, I’ll say that at Inclusive Africa, as part of Enable, what we did is we realised that Africans are coming up with solutions, assistive technologies, accessibility solutions, but they have no way of pushing these products out to market or promoting them for more people to use. So at the conference, we started something we call the AT Village, and AT stands for assistive technology. And really what happens every year is we do a call for proposals where people submit are the innovations they’ve developed. And most of the time we get about almost 100 innovations from various African countries. And like this year, I think we had about 15 being showcased. And the whole idea is to make sure we showcase these innovations at Inclusive Africa and online so that the innovators can get the support they need. So a good example, you’ll find the person who came up with the idea for the innovation may just be a developer who has maybe a sibling or a cousin who has a disability. And they were trying to figure out, how do we make this happen? And I’m going to speak an example of one product called SignVerse. SignVerse, it was due to lack of communication between the innovator and a friend who was deaf. And because of lack of sign language interpreters, he was like, how can we come up with a solution? And they came up with an AI-based solution to help at least bridge the gap. Because we all know sign language interpreters are very critical, but that model is not scalable. And if you think about Africa, most countries, and just starting with Kenya alone, there are different versions of sign language depending on what your tribe is, what your dialect is, whether you speak English, whether you speak French, Portuguese, and all that. So by the time you have all those sign language interpreters lined up for you, it becomes very complex and very expensive. But this young man developed a product that now it works for Kenya, for the Kenyan market. And now what he’s doing, he’s using AI. In Rwanda and other countries, trying to see what can I do to make sure that my solution for sign language interpretation can be used in various African countries. Because of the difference in sign language, he’s trying to gather a lot of data to be able to at least come up with a good solution. And currently it’s working. Of course he has challenges. Data sets are a big challenge. And that’s where we come in. How do we help African innovators meet their needs? Some of them are just developers with great ideas and it ends there. and they’ll develop a great product. They need to take this product to market. How do we help them design, package, and bring this product to market? How do we help with financing? So those are some of the issues I believe we can help and we can support the African community and African innovators when it comes to really helping bridge this digital divide. Thank you.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you. I’m so glad to hear he’s also traveling around to figure out what are the local dialects and flavors of it. Every time I pick up my phone, which was made by somebody in California, the software, I have to contend with all sorts of cultural issues. Like, no, you don’t write that way. Yes, I do. That’s how it works in our language. And that kind of thing is just incredibly important to tackle from the start. Okay, Malin, a question for you. So digital inclusion as a human rights issue, how should we understand that? And why do you think it’s critical to frame it in that way in today’s digital landscape? Like inclusion is important, then you frame it as human rights. That’s really interesting. What’s the effect?

Malin Rygg: Well, I think one of the big, or what we’ve seen the last years is that before we talked about digital services and we talk about people like they’re consumers of digital services and they can maybe opt out or if they can’t use them, we’re gonna train them and give them digital skills so they can use them. But at the moment, you see digital services so intertwined with education, with work, with just being able to express yourself in a debate or in newspapers. So by kind of dividing this into connectivity and digital skills, I think we are also losing one part in the middle, which is what Yuping was talking about, how are these services made? A lot of them have just grown from tech companies. from public entities that are making, you know, trying to solve their problem. But when the effect is that you actually, you educate through them, you make it, you know, you have to use them in the workplace, you have to use them to do anything, analog services might be off the table. We see that very clearly in Norway, that if you are actually digitally excluded, for instance, if you have a disability, although you might be digitally very skilled, but the service just doesn’t work for you, or if you don’t have the ID, for instance, that you can use, you actually are in some areas so excluded that you are not able to participate at all. And we did a report with the authority for a survey of a digital education in the primary school in Norway, where we see that, you know, children with dyslexia or visual impairment, they are sometimes actually so digitally excluded that they don’t have the equal right to education that other children have. And that is in a very digital society as ours. So that is why we have to kind of change the mindset, not just talking about digital services being offered to the public, but you actually have to talk about this as one of the key components that you have to have in place for people to participate in all kinds of life. And just to add, it was very interesting, Jyping, with your perspective of, you know, we are also actually excluding parts of the global population, not only the individuals in each country. So thank you for that. It’s very interesting.

Fredrik Matheson: There is a really neat thing in Norway when your kid is getting ready to go to high school. You as a parent will want to check out the different study offerings and, you know, what can they do. And the thing I absolutely love about it is that the agency that handles all the information has translated it to pretty much every language spoken in Norway. So not just the official languages. So if you only speak Filipino, like some of the parents at our school, and you want your kid to study design, you can actually go and check out the curriculum at quite a detailed level. And that kind of inclusivity, so it’s not just the individual who is able to access some system, but it’s also their parents, people around them, ability to frame and anchor those things. There are so many incredibly important parts of this, and for those of you living in Norway who have kids, the sort of rite of passage, I will jokingly say, is getting your EID, because that enables you to actually do stuff. So we have a mobile payment app here, and the kids are like, when can I start using it? Because before that everything is impossible, because nobody will take cash, so you just have to have it. And that’s a very good framing, I think, to use human rights, because then you have individuals who are not, they’re not old enough to be able to drive or vote, but they still have these rights that need to be met by the systems that we have. And I think human rights is a much stronger way of framing it, as opposed to, oh it’s convenient that you could, you know, buy a ticket for the bus when you’re a kid. All of that. Which leads us to Maja, loved your presentation, and you showed us some of the groups that were at risk of exclusion. So are there any particular groups you would like to highlight? Because we see that, you know, the Nordics and Baltics, we can call ourselves front-runner countries, but in many ways it means we’re lifting up to a level where a lot of people are potentially being left behind. What are your thoughts on that? Yeah, exactly, I agree

Maja Brynteson: with that. And so across the Nordic and Baltic countries, there are three groups who everyone is talking about, and it’s older adults, it’s people with disabilities, and immigrants. And then in some countries, such as in Sweden and also Norway, I think it is. we do talk more about the rural communities because we have this connectivity issue that maybe Denmark doesn’t have because it’s a much smaller country compared to Sweden and Norway. And so we see that there are these groups that we and other research consistently identify as being more vulnerable and as I said not everyone in these groups are actually at risk. Many are very very digitally capable. But I think what we need to talk about as well is that these groups they often face similar challenges. So whether you’re an immigrant with lack of domain knowledge that’s also true for some youths that we see they also lack this domain knowledge. So even though there are different groups there are similar challenges across these groups. And some of the countries especially in the Nordics they have stopped actually talking about target groups. They talk more about like the common barriers common solutions approach that we need to identify the most common barriers and then implement solutions that cut across all of these population groups. And I think that’s going to be interesting to follow the next five or ten years how that will work out.

Fredrik Matheson: Fantastic. The necessity of understanding systems in society that are highly digital is something which is very very complicated. So I remember I studied in Finland and all I had to do was call an office on the phone. My boss said call this number you’ll get a national ID. And like a day later I had a national ID. I didn’t have to do anything. The same when I studied in Singapore I just met up. Of course there was somebody to help out do this stamp here look here sign that boom everything works right. It’s fantastic. We have some of the same things in Norway but when you don’t fit in that system. good luck, because then nothing works. You can’t get a phone, so any idea about connectivity, you’re not, nobody’s going to be able to call you, any other sort of rights things or logging into a public website, good luck with that. None of that works anymore. And even if you do have these things, just yesterday, so my oldest daughter is an athletics coach for kids this summer. It’s her first job, she’s 16, and of course Norway is a very well regulated society, so there has to be a so-called police certificate of conduct that can be applied for by the sports group at the athletics team. And to do this, she has to go to a website, she has to sign up with her national ID number, she has to use her bank ID, she has to sign different things, and of course the digital public infrastructure is in many ways very helpful, because it’s all digital. But then there’s something inside that process that required my signature, like a photo of my signature, where me as a designer developing these kinds of services thinking, what’s happening here? But then I look over at her and she’s just completely confused by what are these alien concepts that I’m referring to, because I can sort of see the invisible rules behind all of this. This needs to happen, this needs to be approved, this is going to be the flow. Whereas the screen design is not appropriate for it, there’s not enough supporting information, and many times you can go through the flow and you’ll get it to work, just like you’ll be able to book a plane ticket, but you don’t come out with any understanding of the overall system, it doesn’t upskill. And this is a really important thing in the digital playbook here for inclusion, that the fact that we need to upskill and help people understand. And this is one thing I always find to be lacking, that it goes back to legislation. The legislation has typically not been written to be usable, so there are some experiments with that in Norway now to make them more usable. But these are the things I worry a lot about, because society being so digital means that also people who are… They are connected, they have phones, they have enough money to have a subscription with enough data, and they are fully able to use the devices in all sorts of ways. But then conceptually, they will struggle to understand, how do I apply these different rules? And that’s just like the really skilled ones. Then we have everyone else. So a question for you as a group is, if we don’t close these digital gaps now, what kind of long-term consequences are we facing socially, economically, imagine politically? Any takers?

Malin Rygg: Well, I just want to, because your story just reminds me of a very important point that I didn’t say before, but that is that when we talk about these groups that are vulnerable, and we are talking about like including them, it’s very paternalistic kind of viewpoint, kind of talking, we are all in this bubble and we can include more people and they are just sitting out there and it’s just like faceless groups. These are people that are young people, they are people able to work, they are also older people that all have potentials, all have things to, they just want to do their, you know, everyday life. It’s not like they’re useless and just needs to be included so that, you know, more are included. These are people that are needed in society as your 16-year-old daughter. So I think it’s very important that we kind of really shift the focus, you know, although inclusion is a good term, it mustn’t kind of cloud the point that people just want to contribute and be a part of society and we want them to contribute. These are very important contributions. As Irene was saying about innovation in Africa, we want them to innovate, you know, for the whole international community. So we have to make. more of an effort to make that happen, not just go along and then just say okay and maybe we could include some more. We actually have to kind of see that this

Irene Mbari-Kirika: is the potential going forward. Thank you and just to add to what Malini is talking about, if you think about it for me it’s more of a business, if you think about your business, it’s more of a business benefit. Think about it this way, 15% of the global population lives with some form of disability, 15 to 20 percent depending on where you are and today I’ll name one industry, financial services is the most difficult, the most, the one that truly leaves person with disabilities behind and I’ll give an example. Most people, let me talk about Africa and even the US, what happens is if your banking products are not accessible, online banking or on mobile money applications and stuff like that, if someone is blind and they’re not able to access that product using their assistive technology, they have to get their friend or their neighbor or somebody to transact for them and really when we talk about safety and security in the whole financial process, that goes out the door but also just the independence and dignity that someone has. So what we are saying is it’s important we invest in that space because if you make your digital products accessible, if it’s in financial services, you will have more people with disabilities using your products independently. So focusing on the needs of the users, not what we perceive it to be, really designing and building products with users with disabilities. Get them to be part of the process from the beginning till the end. I always say you cannot go ahead and manufacture a shoe for someone and sell it in the market if someone, no human being has ever tried that shoe. So if you have people with disabilities testing the product and giving feedback, by the time you’re done with that product a lot of people with various abilities will be able to use it because you’ve taken care of some of the most difficult challenges they may be able to experience. So I’m saying this to say that we need to think of it as a business benefit and a way to capture that 15% of the market share that no one has tapped into. Thank you.

Asmund Grover Aukrust: Thank you, and an excellent question. And I think, I mean, the main answer for what you’re asking, if we’re not able to close the digital gap, is that we will have increased inequality. And the consequences will be very dramatic, I mean, both for each individual, but also for our society, because we will not reach our other goals in society concerning employment, education, and so on. If people are not able to fill out an application for getting to school, I think in Norway, if 15 years old, they are not filling out their application, I mean, the system will bring them back in. But for higher education, or for employment, or also to register for paying taxes and so on, or creating your own businesses, I mean, you are on your own. And so I think it’s extremely important, especially when it’s talking about digitalization, that we have this principle of leaving no one behind. And now we are talking about, this is from a Norwegian perspective, but in other countries, I mean, the inclusion is even more dramatic concerning the access to, I mean, just think about access to electricity. In so many countries, you don’t have electricity, it’s almost impossible to be digital without electricity. So therefore, digitalization should be very much higher also on the development agenda. And therefore, it’s important for me to be here and also to be listening to this discussion, because the digital solution… are creating so many possibilities, but it might also create so many problems if you’re not dealing with this in the right way and also with the principle of leaving no one behind.

Yu Ping Chan: Just to say again that I, from the United Nations Development Programme, we fully subscribe to what the minister has just said. Digitalization and digital transformation is truly part of development. If we see the potential of digital and AI, we need to recognize its potential to be an accelerator of development and achievement of the SDGs itself. And this fundamentally means that we have to look to what it means for developing countries. I particularly like this human rights framing around digital inclusion, because if you think about other parts of human rights, the right to information, the right to education, the right to employment in some cases, the right to the highest level of physical and mental health, all of this is inextricably tied up to digital technologies these days, right? And so perhaps it was COVID that brought that realization home to everyone, how intrinsic the need is to have these types of digital services and platforms and how it’s fundamental to these achievement of these basic rights. So the more we understand the way in which our lives are now tied up with this particular device that we use all the time, the more we’ll anticipate the need for governments, all of sector and all of these different stakeholders that are present here today to be part of that conversation around how we actualize a more meaningful digital society for everyone. And that is something that it’s not just a challenge for Norway and Europe, but also for the rest of the world and the international community that we function in.

Fredrik Matheson: Don?

Dan Sjoblom: Yes, no, I fully subscribe to what everyone has said. I just wanted to make maybe one comment and one little hopeful thought. First comment, I think we need to realize that we are in the beginning of a digitalization. This is not something which will be done in a few years time. And I think this has to remain high on the agenda. And I think we have come to the stage where we have realization that this is cross-cutting. It affects every minister’s portfolio, which is very clear back home. I mean, I report to one of the ministers, but everyone has digital in his or her portfolio. And then the importance of standard has been mentioned. And I think that’s something we need to continue to have very high up on the agenda. I think we have, within Europe, we have the accessibility directive, as was mentioned earlier on. We have the work on the digital wallet, which is ongoing. And I’m just hoping that those can, within the UN system and globally, be reached out so that we can see a future where we have universal design, which is really universal, or global at least. It’s not so hopeful maybe today with the global situation being what it is, but we have to keep working on it.

Fredrik Matheson: So a fun fact about Norway is that in the 1960s, there was very limited connectivity. It was difficult to have enough budgets to actually roll out telecommunications. And one of the impacts was, number one, when a village was connected, that was a huge celebration because finally there was a phone. And if you were a doctor, you could get one extra upstairs. It was very hard to get hold of. But there was a thing happening among the telcos, which is that companies would be acquired for their phone lines. So if you had a company in Oslo, for example, and it had like 40 lines going in, then a company might buy you and then take 30 of them and then sell you again, because that would be a way to get more connectivity. And it seems impossible to understand, but this is how they would optimize for business at the time. The same in the Philippines where I grew up. The big parole for all the politicians was water, power, and phone. That was the big thing. Now, I work in an energy company, and the energy future is changing with solar and wind. And one thing I’m very excited to see that I think will be happening in many places is that power can become… available, and then computing can become available, and then telecommunications can become available in ways that might seem unfamiliar to people in Scandinavia, in the Nordics, in the Baltics, in the Global North, and that there could be completely different ways of doing this where we can learn how these technologies can be made accessible. But I keep coming back to one really important point which is hard to solve. This is actually to get people who, like me, develop digital systems to, number one, know what accessibility is and be familiar with the WCAG or EN 301549 standards. This is surprisingly difficult for those people because I think, as some of the other panels today and throughout the week will point to, much of the private sector development of technology happens in a context where people are completely unaware of legislation even existing, like the idea that there should be a requirement. So this, I think, might have a point on how we can get even more developers, designers, product managers, technologists to take this very seriously. From what I understand, in the Irish version of accessibility rules, it’s a corporate law, so if you don’t follow it, you go to jail. Maybe. Any more comments? We just have to unmute you.

Inmaculada Porrero: Okay, sorry, I’m muted now. So let me tell you, first of all, that the line is not very good in terms of hearing what you were saying, so I hope that what I’m going to tell you really fits into the precise moment of the discussion. But before doing that, and I understood you were asking me how can we reach the knowledge gap, I would like to say that I fully agree with the fact that digital inclusion, accessibility as a precondition for digital inclusion for persons with disabilities should be in all digital developments that are going to be used by people because otherwise, de facto, we are excluding persons with disabilities. And it is not only about having a specific policy setting what the accessibility requirements are but really to mainstream also these requirements in other policies, whether we are talking about procurement, issues have been mentioned here about funds, development funds, well also internal funds. Also when we talk about imports, imports in our all different countries, conditions should be set to ensure that we have a common level playing field so that companies inside our countries that have to comply with accessibility requirements, compete on equal conditions with those that are maybe coming from countries for which they have no requirements but they want to enter countries in which they have requirements. So it’s really important in that context to set coherent requirements across the globe. We said technology is global and this is really essential. Now, we have now, I mean, we have seen an important evolution in the field of accessibility. While several years ago a lot of work was happening, what is accessibility? How do you define, how it relates to the products, how it relates to the services? Now that is pretty clear. We have accessibility requirements for different types of components of digital elements, whether it is the website, the user interfaces, the content, requirements are clear and those requirements are going to be usable also in new digital products and services because they all would have a user interface. interface, maybe a different user interface, but from a functional point of view those requirements would be there. Now, what is the problem now? The problem now is, I would say, or the challenge now is to have that knowledge that there is available about what is accessibility translated into laws and into policies that are enforceable and that are checkable so that it is possible to see whether the products and the services and the infrastructures comply with those requirements. That’s one thing. The other challenge that we have is indeed having the persons, the experts, the engineers, the manufacturers, the service providers, competent on accessibility so that they really have the capacity to implement to that end. I mean, we are undertaking a big effort in Europe to train, to provide training, to raise awareness, but at the end of the day, in order to have this sustainable, we need to turn out to those institutions which are providing training in digital technologies, in ICT. If those institutions, whether it’s university, technical high schools, professional organisations, would not embrace accessibility as part of their curriculum, as part of their efforts to train and upgrade the knowledge and bring competencies to the professionals in the field, it will be very difficult to implement accessibility. And I know it’s a challenge on one hand because you are facing the freedom of universities, for example, to decide what curriculum they have. But there should be something that needs to be done, that can be done, by authorities in order to make sure that the new generations of professionals are equipped with accessibility knowledge and skills and competencies. and that current professionals can upgrade their knowledge in order to be able to deliver on accessibility as it is required. So I hope I have addressed the point that you were concerned with.

Fredrik Matheson: Thank you so much. Thank you. We are at the end of our keynotes and panels and discussions. I’m hugely grateful to the panel. A few things that you should all go off and read is the digital inclusion playbook from cover to cover, essentially, from the UNDP. You should also go and check out the Kenya standard for accessibility. Because just as Ima was talking about, the fact that we can have standards that are conformant with each other, that are in sync with each other, makes sense. Because once you know how to do things in one place, you’ll know how to make it work in other countries as well. And also, this connection of innovation and insight from across the world is incredibly exciting. Because accessibility and inclusiveness is something we need to do globally. So we need to be set up for that. And everyone who works on software, owns, or funds, or helps make software and digital services happen need to take this to heart. Because we are, in many ways, reshaping society. So let’s not do it inclusively. Let’s have a big round of applause for our panel. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Agreement points

Digital inclusion is a fundamental human rights issue

Speakers

– Asmund Grover Aukrust
– Malin Rygg
– Yu Ping Chan

Arguments

Meaningful connectivity is about basic human rights, including the right of information and freedom of expression

Digital exclusion reinforces social exclusion. It reinforces it in education, employment, but also for democratic participation and freedom of speech

If you think about other parts of human rights, the right to information, the right to education, the right to employment in some cases, the right to the highest level of physical and mental health, all of this is inextricably tied up to digital technologies these days

Summary

All three speakers frame digital inclusion not as a convenience or service issue, but as a fundamental human rights matter that affects access to information, freedom of expression, education, employment, and democratic participation.

Topics

Human rights | Development

Multi-stakeholder collaboration is essential for effective digital inclusion

Speakers

– Yu Ping Chan
– Dan Sjoblom
– Asmund Grover Aukrust

Arguments

We need a whole-of-society approach, where it’s the private sector also working with government, with a people-centered focus, to ensure this type of delivery

Libraries, civil society organizations, and municipal citizen services all play a vital role in reaching those who might otherwise be left behind

Digital public infrastructure encourages competition and fosters innovation and fiscal resilience, and it can generate spillover effects across society, institutions, markets and businesses

Summary

Speakers agree that addressing digital inclusion requires coordinated efforts across government, private sector, and civil society organizations, with each playing crucial complementary roles.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Failure to address digital divides will increase inequality and have severe societal consequences

Speakers

– Asmund Grover Aukrust
– Maja Brynteson
– Yu Ping Chan

Arguments

If people are not able to fill out an application for getting to school, or for higher education, or for employment, or also to register for paying taxes and so on, or creating your own businesses, I mean, you are on your own

Digital exclusion doesn’t just reflect existing inequalities, it can actually deepen them

The future AI revolution could exacerbate already existing inequalities

Summary

All speakers warn that unaddressed digital divides will not only perpetuate but actively worsen existing inequalities, creating cascading effects across education, employment, and social participation.

Topics

Development | Economic | Human rights

Standards and regulatory frameworks are crucial for ensuring accessibility

Speakers

– Inmaculada Porrero
– Irene Mbari-Kirika
– Dan Sjoblom

Arguments

What really worked in Europe is legislation with clear obligations, clear deadlines, and clear enforcement mechanisms, combined with technical standards like EN 301549

Kenya recently passed the landmark law for persons with disability Accessibility Act of 2025. This law institutionalizes digital inclusion, aligning with the ICT accessibility standard

The importance of standard has been mentioned. And I think that’s something we need to continue to have very high up on the agenda

Summary

Speakers agree that clear legal frameworks combined with technical standards are essential for making real progress on digital accessibility and inclusion.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Rights of persons with disabilities

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the significant size of the disability community globally and the importance of designing accessible systems from the start rather than retrofitting, viewing this as both a rights issue and business opportunity.

Speakers

– Malin Rygg
– Irene Mbari-Kirika

Arguments

1.3 billion people worldwide live with a disability. That is one in six of us

15% of the global population lives with some form of disability

Topics

Rights of persons with disabilities | Economic

Both speakers recognize that digital exclusion operates at multiple levels – within societies affecting vulnerable groups, and between countries creating global inequalities that could be exacerbated by emerging technologies like AI.

Speakers

– Maja Brynteson
– Yu Ping Chan

Arguments

Digital exclusion is multidimensional and context-specific, affecting vulnerable groups like elderly, disabled, immigrants, rural communities, and low-income populations

Global inequalities exist between countries, with only 10% of AI economic value projected to accrue to Global South countries except China

Topics

Development | Economic

Both speakers see the Global South, particularly Africa, as having the opportunity to build better, more inclusive digital systems from the ground up rather than retrofitting accessibility later, with local innovation being key to this process.

Speakers

– Malin Rygg
– Irene Mbari-Kirika

Arguments

Africa can leapfrog ahead by learning from others’ mistakes and building accessibility standards from day one

African innovators are developing assistive technologies but need support for market access, financing, and scaling solutions

Topics

Development | Innovation and Local Solutions

Unexpected consensus

Business and economic benefits of accessibility

Speakers

– Irene Mbari-Kirika
– Asmund Grover Aukrust
– Yu Ping Chan

Arguments

The global assistive technology market is projected to reach 32 billion by 2030. Africa must not only be a consumer, we must be a creator, a manufacturer and a global supplier of accessible technologies

Digital public infrastructure encourages competition and fosters innovation and fiscal resilience, and it can generate spillover effects across society, institutions, markets and businesses

If we see the potential of digital and AI, we need to recognize its potential to be an accelerator of development and achievement of the SDGs itself

Explanation

Unexpectedly, speakers from different sectors (advocacy, government, UN) all emphasized the economic and business case for digital inclusion, moving beyond just moral or rights-based arguments to highlight market opportunities and economic development benefits.

Topics

Economic | Development

Need for analog alternatives and choice

Speakers

– Maja Brynteson
– Dan Sjoblom

Arguments

Not everyone can or wants to be digital. Maintaining analog services and alternative options is essential to ensure that everyone, regardless of their digital ability or willingness, can access the services they need

Working with trusted representatives and peer-to-peer learning programs can effectively address digital exclusion

Explanation

Surprisingly, even in a discussion focused on digital inclusion, there was consensus that maintaining non-digital alternatives is essential, recognizing that full digitalization may not be appropriate or desired for everyone.

Topics

Development | Human rights

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated remarkably high consensus across multiple dimensions of digital inclusion, agreeing on its status as a human rights issue, the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration, the importance of regulatory frameworks and standards, and the severe consequences of inaction. They also shared views on the economic opportunities presented by accessibility and the need to maintain alternatives for those who cannot or choose not to engage digitally.

Consensus level

Very high consensus with strong alignment on fundamental principles and approaches. This level of agreement across speakers from different sectors (government, UN, academia, advocacy, regulation) suggests a mature understanding of digital inclusion challenges and broad support for comprehensive, rights-based solutions. The consensus implies strong potential for coordinated global action on digital inclusion policies and initiatives.

Different viewpoints

Approach to supporting vulnerable populations – targeted vs. universal design

Speakers

– Maja Brynteson
– Malin Rygg

Arguments

Digital exclusion is multidimensional and context-specific, affecting vulnerable groups like elderly, disabled, immigrants, rural communities, and low-income populations

Digital services are now intertwined with basic rights like education, work, and civic participation, making exclusion a rights violation

Summary

Maja advocates for identifying specific vulnerable groups and their particular challenges, while Malin emphasizes moving away from targeting specific groups toward universal human rights-based approaches that benefit everyone

Topics

Human rights | Development

Role of analog alternatives in digital societies

Speakers

– Maja Brynteson
– Malin Rygg

Arguments

Maintaining analog services and alternative options is essential for those who cannot or choose not to be digital

Digital services are now intertwined with basic rights like education, work, and civic participation, making exclusion a rights violation

Summary

Maja argues for maintaining analog alternatives for those who cannot or choose not to be digital, while Malin’s framing suggests digital access is so fundamental to rights that analog alternatives may be insufficient

Topics

Human rights | Development

Unexpected differences

Framing of inclusion – paternalistic vs. empowerment approach

Speakers

– Malin Rygg
– Other speakers

Arguments

Digital services are now intertwined with basic rights like education, work, and civic participation, making exclusion a rights violation

Various arguments about including vulnerable groups

Explanation

Malin unexpectedly challenged the entire framing used by other speakers, arguing that talking about ‘including’ vulnerable groups is paternalistic and that the focus should be on people wanting to contribute rather than needing to be included

Topics

Human rights | Development

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed remarkable consensus on core issues with only subtle disagreements on approaches and framing. Main areas of difference were around targeting specific groups vs. universal approaches, maintaining analog alternatives vs. digital-first strategies, and gradual vs. immediate implementation of universal standards.

Disagreement level

Low level of disagreement with high consensus on fundamental goals. The disagreements were primarily methodological rather than philosophical, suggesting strong potential for collaborative solutions. The unexpected challenge to paternalistic framing was constructive and helped refine the discussion toward more empowering approaches.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the significant size of the disability community globally and the importance of designing accessible systems from the start rather than retrofitting, viewing this as both a rights issue and business opportunity.

Speakers

– Malin Rygg
– Irene Mbari-Kirika

Arguments

1.3 billion people worldwide live with a disability. That is one in six of us

15% of the global population lives with some form of disability

Topics

Rights of persons with disabilities | Economic

Both speakers recognize that digital exclusion operates at multiple levels – within societies affecting vulnerable groups, and between countries creating global inequalities that could be exacerbated by emerging technologies like AI.

Speakers

– Maja Brynteson
– Yu Ping Chan

Arguments

Digital exclusion is multidimensional and context-specific, affecting vulnerable groups like elderly, disabled, immigrants, rural communities, and low-income populations

Global inequalities exist between countries, with only 10% of AI economic value projected to accrue to Global South countries except China

Topics

Development | Economic

Both speakers see the Global South, particularly Africa, as having the opportunity to build better, more inclusive digital systems from the ground up rather than retrofitting accessibility later, with local innovation being key to this process.

Speakers

– Malin Rygg
– Irene Mbari-Kirika

Arguments

Africa can leapfrog ahead by learning from others’ mistakes and building accessibility standards from day one

African innovators are developing assistive technologies but need support for market access, financing, and scaling solutions

Topics

Development | Innovation and Local Solutions

Key takeaways

Digital inclusion must be framed as a human rights issue rather than just a convenience or service delivery matter, as digital services are now essential for education, employment, healthcare, and civic participation

The ‘Nordic-Baltic paradox’ demonstrates that even highly digitalized societies can deepen digital divides as expectations rise and analog alternatives disappear

Meaningful connectivity goes beyond infrastructure coverage to address usage barriers including affordability, digital literacy, trust, safety, and accessibility

Digital exclusion is multidimensional and context-specific, often affecting overlapping vulnerable groups including elderly, disabled, immigrants, rural communities, and low-income populations

Effective digital inclusion requires a three-dimensional approach: connectivity (infrastructure and devices), accessibility (universal design and standards), and digital skills (literacy and confidence)

Clear legislation with enforcement mechanisms, combined with technical standards and multi-stakeholder collaboration, is essential for sustainable progress

Local innovation and community-driven solutions, particularly from the Global South, can leapfrog traditional development approaches and create scalable accessibility solutions

Digital accessibility represents significant untapped economic potential, with 15% of the global population living with disabilities representing an underserved market

The private sector development community often lacks awareness of accessibility requirements and legislation, creating a critical knowledge gap that must be addressed through education and training

Resolutions and action items

Participants were invited to join year-round working groups launched by the Inclusive Africa Conference to sustain momentum and drive measurable progress

UNDP’s digital inclusion playbook and Kenya’s ICT accessibility standard were recommended as resources for global implementation

Need to integrate accessibility training into university curricula and professional development programs for ICT professionals

Recommendation to mainstream accessibility requirements across all digital policies including procurement, funding, and import regulations

Call for universal digital accessibility standards that apply equally across developing and developed countries

Emphasis on building local capacity and ecosystems in developing countries for co-creating digital and AI solutions

Unresolved issues

How to effectively reach and train the global community of developers, designers, and product managers who remain unaware of accessibility requirements and legislation

Balancing the push toward digitalization with maintaining analog services for those who cannot or choose not to be digital

Addressing the fundamental inequality between countries in AI development and economic benefits, with 95% of top AI talent concentrated in six universities in the US and China

Resolving the tension between university academic freedom and the need to mandate accessibility education in ICT curricula

How to scale successful local innovations and community-driven solutions to broader regional or global implementation

Managing the cross-cutting nature of digital policies across multiple government ministries and sectors

Addressing the challenge that digital exclusion often reinforces existing social inequalities rather than solving them

Suggested compromises

Adopting a ‘common barriers, common solutions’ approach that addresses shared challenges across different vulnerable groups rather than targeting specific populations

Using existing international standards (like WCAG and EN 301549) as building blocks rather than creating entirely new frameworks from scratch

Implementing a gap model that works simultaneously at societal level (infrastructure, standards, regulations) and individual level (devices, assistive technologies, skills training)

Maintaining both digital-first approaches for efficiency while preserving analog alternatives for inclusion

Leveraging trusted community institutions like libraries and civic organizations as intermediaries to reach digitally excluded populations

Focusing on digital public infrastructure that can serve as a foundation for multiple services rather than creating isolated solutions

The more digital our societies become, the greater the risk of deepening the digital divide… So here is the Nordic and Baltic paradox. The more digital our societies become, the greater the risk of deepening the digital divide.

Speaker

Maja Brynteson

Reason

This comment reframes the conventional narrative about digital progress. Instead of viewing digitalization as inherently positive, it highlights how advancement can paradoxically increase exclusion. This challenges the assumption that technological progress automatically benefits everyone equally.

Impact

This concept became a central theme that other speakers referenced throughout the discussion. It shifted the conversation from celebrating digital achievements to critically examining their unintended consequences, leading to deeper analysis of who gets left behind in highly digitalized societies.

Digital accessibility therefore is not a sentimental issue, it is a sound investment and a strategic opportunity for growth and innovation… Africa must not only be a consumer, we must be a creator, a manufacturer and a global supplier of accessible technologies, designed and built on the continent by Africans for the world.

Speaker

Irene Mbari-Kirika

Reason

This comment powerfully reframes accessibility from charity to economic opportunity, challenging paternalistic approaches to development. It positions Africa not as a recipient of solutions but as an innovator and global supplier, fundamentally shifting the power dynamic in the conversation.

Impact

This perspective influenced subsequent speakers to move away from ‘helping’ language toward recognizing untapped potential and market opportunities. It elevated the discussion from inclusion as moral imperative to inclusion as economic necessity and competitive advantage.

Digital inclusion is not about making room at the table. It is about building a table where everyone has a seat and a voice.

Speaker

Irene Mbari-Kirika

Reason

This metaphor fundamentally challenges the traditional inclusion paradigm. Rather than asking existing systems to accommodate more people, it calls for redesigning systems from the ground up to be inherently inclusive.

Impact

This comment crystallized a key tension in the discussion and influenced other speakers to critique paternalistic approaches. Malin Rygg later echoed this sentiment, noting how inclusion language can be ‘paternalistic’ and emphasizing that excluded groups want to contribute, not just be included.

By multidimensional we mean that people often become at risk when several factors overlap. For example, an older adult living in a rural area with limited income is likely to face more barriers than someone of the same age that is affluent and living in a well-connected urban area.

Speaker

Maja Brynteson

Reason

This introduces the crucial concept of intersectionality to digital exclusion, moving beyond single-factor analysis to understand how multiple disadvantages compound. This adds sophisticated nuance to understanding exclusion patterns.

Impact

This framework helped other speakers move beyond simple categorizations of ‘at-risk groups’ to understand the complex, overlapping nature of digital barriers. It influenced the discussion toward more nuanced policy solutions that address multiple factors simultaneously.

When for instance, it’s projected that only 10% of the global economic value generated by AI in 2030 will accrue to the global South countries, except for China… you think about the fact that perhaps the global opportunity that is posed by AI will fundamentally leave behind many of these developing countries

Speaker

Yu Ping Chan

Reason

This comment introduces hard data about global inequality in AI benefits, shifting the discussion from individual-level exclusion to systemic global exclusion. It highlights how current trajectories will entrench rather than reduce global digital divides.

Impact

This broadened the scope of the discussion from national digital inclusion policies to global structural inequalities. It added urgency to the conversation by showing how emerging technologies like AI could dramatically worsen existing divides if not addressed proactively.

It’s very paternalistic kind of viewpoint… These are people that are young people, they are people able to work… These are very important contributions… We actually have to kind of see that this is the potential going forward.

Speaker

Malin Rygg

Reason

This comment directly challenges the framing used throughout the discussion, calling out the paternalistic language of ‘inclusion’ and reframing excluded groups as contributors rather than beneficiaries. It’s a meta-critique of how the conversation itself was being conducted.

Impact

This self-reflective moment caused the discussion to become more conscious of its own language and assumptions. It reinforced Irene’s earlier point about building new tables rather than making room at existing ones, and influenced speakers to emphasize contribution and potential rather than need and vulnerability.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally transformed what could have been a conventional discussion about digital inclusion policies into a more sophisticated examination of power dynamics, economic opportunities, and systemic inequalities. The ‘Nordic paradox’ concept established that progress itself can create exclusion, while Irene’s economic framing and table-building metaphor challenged charity-based approaches. The intersectionality framework added analytical depth, and Yu Ping’s global inequality data expanded the scope beyond national boundaries. Malin’s critique of paternalistic language created a moment of self-reflection that elevated the entire discussion. Together, these comments shifted the conversation from ‘how do we help the excluded’ to ‘how do we redesign systems to harness everyone’s potential’ – a fundamental reframing that made the discussion more empowering and strategically focused.

How can we ensure that digital solutions change policy as fast as digitalization is moving forward?

Speaker

Asmund Grover Aukrust

Explanation

The minister emphasized that digital solutions are changing constantly, requiring policy frameworks to adapt at the same pace to remain effective

How can we help African innovators with data sets, design, packaging, and bringing products to market?

Speaker

Irene Mbari-Kirika

Explanation

She identified specific gaps in supporting African developers who create great accessibility solutions but lack resources for market entry and scaling

How can we scale Kenya’s ICT accessibility standard across other African countries?

Speaker

Irene Mbari-Kirika

Explanation

She mentioned current work to expand Kenya’s accessibility standards to other African countries, which requires further development and coordination

How can we address the projected inequality where only 10% of AI’s global economic value will accrue to Global South countries (except China)?

Speaker

Yu Ping Chan

Explanation

This represents a critical challenge for ensuring AI development doesn’t exacerbate existing digital divides between developed and developing nations

How can we build local ecosystems and capacity in developing countries to be co-creators in the digital and AI future?

Speaker

Yu Ping Chan

Explanation

This addresses the need for developing countries to move beyond being consumers to becoming creators and manufacturers of digital solutions

How can we integrate accessibility requirements into university curricula and professional training programs?

Speaker

Inmaculada Porrero

Explanation

She identified the challenge of ensuring new generations of ICT professionals are equipped with accessibility knowledge and skills from the start

How can we create coherent accessibility requirements across the globe to ensure fair competition?

Speaker

Inmaculada Porrero

Explanation

This addresses the need for international coordination to prevent unfair competition between companies with different accessibility compliance requirements

How can we develop a shared understanding of what digital inclusion means across the Nordic and Baltic region?

Speaker

Maja Brynteson

Explanation

She identified this as a key challenge that makes it harder to coordinate efforts and measure progress consistently across the region

How effective will the common barriers, common solutions approach be compared to targeting specific groups?

Speaker

Maja Brynteson

Explanation

Some Nordic countries have shifted from targeting specific vulnerable groups to addressing common barriers, and the effectiveness of this approach needs evaluation

How can we better involve users in the design of digital solutions, especially those at risk of exclusion?

Speaker

Maja Brynteson

Explanation

She identified lack of user involvement as a key issue, particularly for those most affected by potential exclusion

How can we make legislation more usable and understandable for citizens?

Speaker

Fredrik Matheson

Explanation

He mentioned experiments in Norway to make legislation more usable, recognizing that complex legal frameworks create barriers to understanding digital systems

How can we reach universal design standards that are truly global rather than regional?

Speaker

Dan Sjoblom

Explanation

He expressed hope for extending European accessibility standards globally through UN systems to achieve truly universal design