Taking Stock

Summary

This transcript captures the “Taking Stock” session from the 20th Internet Governance Forum (IGF) held in Norway in 2025, where participants reflected on the event’s successes and areas for improvement. The session was chaired by Carol Roach from the Bahamas, Ole Martinsen from Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Vint Cerf participating online as Chair of the Leadership Panel. The organizers began by thanking the Norwegian hosts, MAG members, interpreters, technical staff, and all participants for making the event successful.

Multiple speakers praised the accessibility efforts, technical organization, and the meaningful multi-stakeholder dialogue that characterized the forum. Youth participants particularly emphasized the importance of authentic youth engagement beyond tokenistic participation, with several speakers calling for youth to be recognized as a standalone stakeholder group and for structural changes to ensure meaningful inclusion. Participants from the Global South highlighted ongoing challenges with digital divides, connectivity issues, and the need for more support to bring unconnected populations online.

Several technical and organizational suggestions emerged, including better integration of Dynamic Coalitions into the program structure, improved name tag systems for networking, more closed-door sessions for sensitive discussions, and earlier confirmation of registrations. Speakers emphasized the value of National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives (NRIs) and called for their greater representation in opening ceremonies. The accessibility community requested more disability perspectives in sessions and better accommodation for persons with disabilities.

Funding challenges were frequently mentioned, particularly affecting youth and Global South participants, though Norway’s visa facilitation efforts were widely praised. The session concluded with appreciation for the forum’s role in fostering global internet governance discussions and hopes for its continuation beyond the upcoming WSIS+20 review.

Keypoints

**Overall Purpose/Goal:**

This was a “Taking Stock” session at the conclusion of the 20th Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meeting in Norway. The purpose was to gather feedback from participants about what worked well, what didn’t work well, and what should be improved or maintained for future IGF meetings. The session served as a reflective evaluation and listening exercise for organizers to collect input for planning future events.

**Major Discussion Points:**

– **Youth Participation and Meaningful Engagement**: Multiple speakers emphasized the need for more authentic youth involvement beyond tokenistic participation. Key concerns included the lack of youth representation on leadership panels, the need for youth to be recognized as a standalone stakeholder group, funding barriers for young participants from developing countries, and the importance of treating youth as capable contributors rather than just capacity-building recipients.

– **Accessibility and Inclusion for Persons with Disabilities**: Several participants highlighted both successes and ongoing challenges in making IGF accessible. While praising Norway’s accessibility efforts, speakers called for better integration of disability perspectives in sessions, more opportunities for questions and contributions, and continued focus on digital accessibility as a core IGF priority.

– **Global South Representation and Digital Divide**: Participants from developing countries emphasized the persistent digital divide, with over 2 billion people still unconnected to the internet. Concerns were raised about visa difficulties, funding barriers, the need for more technical capacity building, and ensuring that discussions of advanced topics like AI governance don’t overshadow basic connectivity needs in developing regions.

– **Dynamic Coalitions and Multi-stakeholder Structure**: There were calls to better integrate Dynamic Coalitions into the main IGF program, including suggestions for representation in the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG). Speakers praised the collaborative work of Dynamic Coalitions and emphasized their role as core examples of multi-stakeholder participation.

– **Technical Community Participation**: A notable observation was made about the lack of software engineers and technical builders at IGF, despite the forum discussing technologies they create. There was a call to incentivize more participation from product managers, engineers, and technical implementers to provide practical insights on what’s possible and feasible.

**Overall Tone:**

The discussion maintained a constructive and appreciative tone throughout, with participants consistently thanking the Norwegian hosts and organizers for their excellent work. While many critical points and suggestions for improvement were raised, they were delivered in a spirit of collaboration and genuine desire to strengthen the IGF process. The tone was particularly passionate when discussing youth participation and inclusion issues, but remained respectful and solution-oriented. First-time participants expressed enthusiasm and gratitude, while veteran attendees showed continued commitment to the forum’s mission.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Chengetai Masango** – Session moderator/facilitator

– **Carol Roach** – Under-Secretary, Ministry for Grand Bahama, Bahamas (previously Ministry of Economic Affairs)

– **Ole Martin Martisen** – Policy Director of the Digitalization and Emerging Technologies Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway

– **Vint Cerf** – Chair of the Leadership Panel (participating online)

– **Online Audience** – Various remote participants from Ghana Hub and other locations

– **Audience** – Multiple in-person participants (this represents various individual speakers who took the microphone)

**Additional speakers:**

– **Frances** – Member of YouthDig, the European Youth IGF

– **Wouter Natus** – Representative of the Dynamic Coalition on Internet Standards, Security and Safety

– **Ole Jacobson** – Editor and publisher of the Internet Protocol Journal

– **Sarah Kekele-Akuno** – Member of ISOC Ghana and Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability, person with visual impairment

– **Bruna Santos** – Member of the Civil Society Stakeholder Group

– **Jun Baek** – Co-founder of Youth for Privacy advocacy organization

– **Jolenta Rosa Fanuy** – Fellow from the Dynamic Coalition of Accessibility and Disability, from Cameroon

– **Jenna Fung** – Eight-time IGF attendee, youth advocate

– **Torsten Claus** – Political scientist and child rights researcher, Digital Opportunities Foundation, Berlin

– **Kunle Olorundare** – President of Internet Society Nigeria chapter, Civil Society representative

– **Abdu Foppa** – Internet Society Cameroon chapter member

– **Vinicius Fortuna** – Software engineer at Jigsaw (part of Google)

– **Vivek Silwal** – Youth IGF Nepal representative

– **Sarai Tevita** – Participant from Samoa, Pacific region

– **Educator Umar Khan** – Practicing lawyer at Peshawar High Court, Pakistan, digital rights advocate

– **Representative from Chad** – IGF Central Africa representative

– **Aisha** – High court lawyer and human rights defender from Pakistan

– **Nigel Casimir** – Caribbean Telecommunications Union representative

– **Jasmine** – Participant from Hong Kong

– **Sadiq Chasirwal** – Internet Society Youth Ambassador from Nepal

– **Dominique** – First-time IGF participant

– **Asim Adil** – Digitalization consultant, German Development Corporation

# Taking Stock Session: 20th Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2025 – Report

## Executive Summary

The “Taking Stock” session at the 20th Internet Governance Forum held in Norway in 2025 served as a feedback gathering exercise, bringing together stakeholders to reflect on the forum’s successes and identify areas for improvement. Moderated by Chengetai Masango and chaired by Carol Roach (Undersecretary of the Ministry for Grand Bahama, Bahamas), Ole Martin Martisen from Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Vint Cerf participating online as Chair of the Leadership Panel, the session focused on collecting participant experiences and suggestions.

The discussion covered appreciation for Norway’s hosting, challenges in youth and accessibility inclusion, Global South participation barriers, and suggestions for structural improvements. Participants provided both positive feedback on technical organization and critical observations about meaningful inclusion across stakeholder groups.

## Session Setup and Introductions

Chengetai Masango opened the session by expressing gratitude to Norwegian counterparts, MAG members, interpreters, scribes, and the technical team (Medved) for their collaboration. He noted this was the second-to-last session and invited feedback on the forum’s organization and content.

Ole Martin Martisen, representing the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, acknowledged the honor of hosting what he described as “a true multi-stakeholder forum” and emphasized Norway’s commitment to facilitating open dialogue among diverse stakeholders.

Vint Cerf, participating online as Chair of the Leadership Panel, provided historical context by noting Norway’s early role in internet development: “Norway was actually connected to the ARPANET in 1973, and I want to acknowledge Paul Spilling, Ingvar Lund, Rolf Nordhagen, and Dag Belsnes for their early work in connecting Norway to the internet.” He also mentioned the 20th anniversary MAG and its composition.

Carol Roach from the Bahamas emphasized that “the community and participants themselves were what made the IGF valuable,” setting a collaborative tone for the feedback session.

## Appreciation for Host Country and Organization

Multiple speakers praised Norway’s hosting and technical organization. The Ghana Hub participants, joining remotely, specifically appreciated the accessibility of meetings through Zoom and published transcripts, which enabled meaningful virtual participation.

Kunle Olorundare, President of the Internet Society Nigeria chapter, acknowledged Norway’s visa facilitation efforts, which enabled broader participation from Global South countries. Several other speakers echoed appreciation for the smooth technical operations and logistical support.

## Youth Participation Challenges and Proposals

### Current Barriers and Critiques

Youth participation emerged as a significant discussion topic. Frances from YouthDig described positive examples of youth engagement through European Youth IGF initiatives, highlighting meaningful background preparation and youth-led policy solutions.

However, Jenna Fung, an eight-time IGF attendee and youth advocate, provided pointed criticism: “This year, multi-stakeholderism has taken centre stage. It’s been powerful to watch diverse actors rally behind this ideology, advocating for systemic change in a world long dominated by bilateral power structure. Yet if you haven’t used your institutional, generational, financial, or positional privilege, access, and influence to structurally include youth, even just within the IG ecosystem itself, then that frankly is a missed opportunity and a shame.”

### Structural Reform Suggestions

Jasmine from Hong Kong proposed concrete changes, suggesting that youth should be recognized as a standalone stakeholder group rather than being subsumed under other categories. She argued for youth representation on the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) with actual decision-making power.

Jun Baek, co-founder of Youth for Privacy, highlighted funding barriers affecting youth from various regions, noting that current funding structures may exclude youth participants who face economic barriers regardless of their geographic location. He also requested the possibility of closed sessions under Chatham House rules for sensitive topics where participants could express personal opinions without public attribution.

Vivek Silwal from Youth IGF Nepal connected youth participation to broader development concerns, noting: “While we are sitting in this room discussing about making how internet better for tomorrow, there’s still more than 2 billion people who are not connected to the internet… So while we are moving forward with the discussion of AI governance, platform governance… I think it is still intact to bring digital divide in the decades to come, how to connect the unconnected.”

## Accessibility and Inclusion for Persons with Disabilities

Sarah Kekele-Akuno, a member of ISOC Ghana and the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability who has visual impairment, praised accessibility efforts but noted that many sessions still lack disability perspectives and don’t provide adequate opportunities for contributions from persons with disabilities.

Jolenta Rosa Fanuy, a fellow from the Dynamic Coalition of Accessibility and Disability from Cameroon, reinforced the need for consistent disability representation across all sessions rather than isolated accessibility efforts.

Participants noted practical accessibility improvements, including bathroom accessibility enhancements, while also identifying ongoing challenges. The absence of physical name tags, while potentially motivated by sustainability concerns (as mentioned by Bruna Santos), created barriers for newcomer networking and identification.

## Global South Representation and Participation Barriers

### Connectivity and Development Priorities

Participants from developing countries emphasized the persistent digital divide and its implications for internet governance discussions. The representative from Chad, speaking for IGF Central Africa, reframed internet governance as a social justice issue: “The digital world should not be a factor of domination. This should be a tool for social justice. I really think that Africa is ready now. We are ready to play our part. We have a shared responsibility and we are willing to play our part.”

### Practical Barriers

Abdu Foppa from the Internet Society Cameroon chapter identified practical barriers affecting Global South participation, particularly the lengthy registration validation process that takes over two months. This delay creates difficulties for participants seeking funding and travel arrangements.

Several speakers noted that participants from middle-income countries often fall through funding gaps, being excluded from Global South support programs while lacking the resources of developed countries.

## Technical Community Participation

Vinicius Fortuna, a software engineer at Jigsaw (part of Google), made an observation about participant composition: “But as a software engineer, I was kind of surprised to not see other engineers here. You see a lot of lawyers and policy people. Where are the product managers, where are the engineers? Those are the people that build the technologies that we are all talking about here, right?”

This comment identified a gap in multi-stakeholder representation—the limited presence of technical practitioners who actually build the technologies being discussed in policy forums.

## Dynamic Coalitions and Multi-stakeholder Structure

Wouter Natus, representing the Dynamic Coalition on Internet Standards, Security and Safety, described the value of Dynamic Coalitions: “I think that the Dynamic Coalitions are at the core of what multi-stakeholder is. Everybody can contribute, everybody can come up with ideas and bring them forward… we have impact and that impact would make the impact of the IGF bigger if we are better integrated into the programme.”

He also reported on specific work, including research on “socio-economic implications of post-quantum encryption.” Natus suggested that better integration into the main program structure would enhance both Dynamic Coalition impact and overall IGF effectiveness.

Nigel Casimir from the Caribbean Telecommunications Union reinforced the value of Dynamic Coalitions, particularly highlighting the Dynamic Coalition on Small Island Developing States (SIDS) as valuable for cooperation among small island states.

## Session Format and Logistical Feedback

### Time and Format Improvements

Multiple speakers identified session format improvements needed to enhance participation quality. Open Forums were specifically mentioned as needing more time for engaging both on-site and online participants effectively.

High-level sessions were praised for maintaining multi-stakeholder representation, with speakers emphasizing the importance of not excluding any stakeholder group from these discussions.

### National and Regional IGF Initiatives (NRIs)

Several speakers emphasized the value of National and Regional Internet Governance Initiatives and called for their greater representation in opening ceremonies. The suggestion was made that NRI representatives should have speaking opportunities during opening ceremonies to showcase local-level work.

## Remote Participation and Technical Issues

Online participants from the Ghana Hub appreciated the accessibility of virtual participation through Zoom and published transcripts. However, they also requested opportunities for remote participants to attend in person for better understanding and networking.

Some technical issues were noted during the session itself, with remote participants experiencing connectivity challenges that affected their ability to participate fully in the discussion.

## Future Considerations

Vint Cerf raised a question about the future frequency of IGF meetings, asking whether two meetings per year might be feasible given the successful organization of IGF 2025. This suggestion reflected both the success of the current meeting and growing demand for internet governance dialogue.

The question of IGF continuity post-WSIS+20 review was mentioned as an ongoing concern, with speakers emphasizing the continued need for multi-stakeholder internet governance dialogue.

## Key Themes and Takeaways

The session revealed several recurring themes:

**Inclusion Challenges**: Multiple speakers from different stakeholder groups (youth, persons with disabilities, Global South, technical community) identified barriers to meaningful participation that go beyond basic access to substantive engagement.

**Structural Suggestions**: Various proposals emerged for improving IGF structure, including youth representation on MAG, better Dynamic Coalition integration, and enhanced support mechanisms for underrepresented groups.

**Operational Successes**: Participants widely praised the technical organization, accessibility efforts, and Norway’s hosting, while identifying specific areas for improvement in session formats and logistics.

**Multi-stakeholder Implementation**: The discussion highlighted ongoing challenges in translating multi-stakeholder principles into practice, with speakers calling for more authentic inclusion across all stakeholder groups.

The session demonstrated the IGF community’s commitment to continuous improvement through constructive feedback and collaborative problem-solving, while identifying concrete areas where structural and operational enhancements could strengthen the forum’s effectiveness and inclusivity.

Chengetai Masango: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Taking Stock session, which is the second last session of this wonderful IGF 2025 meeting in Norway, and I’m glad to see that many of you have stayed behind and are not enjoying the sun outside. The weather is wonderful today as well. As you know, this Taking Stock session is that we look back at what we did this year or this cycle, and also this week, and we take note of what worked well, what didn’t work so well as well, and things we may need to look into and things we definitely need to keep for our next IGF meeting, which I’m sure all of us believe will happen. First of all, let me just introduce our chairs. We have Ms. Carol Roach from the Bahamas, Under-Secretary, Ministry of Economic Affairs. Oh, it’s changed, yes, well, you can remind us, and then we also have Mr. Ole Martinsen, he’s the Policy Director of the Digitalization and Emerging Technologies Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and then online, of course, we have Vint Cerf, who is the Chair of the Leadership Panel. Just before I start, I think I need to get this out of the way first, is that I would really like to thank everybody that has been involved. It’s been a really great, smooth working relationship with our Norwegian counterparts, with the MAG, which is the 20th anniversary MAG as well, so we had MAG members who were in WGIG, MAG members who were last year as well, so we had a great mix of really dedicated people coming together to make this event really a great event, and I would also like to thank the interpreters, which are often overlooked, really great work. Thank you very much. And, of course, our scribes, the transcription service has been really excellent, and quite frankly, I also want to mention specifically Medved, we have never worked with such a great team, the technical side has been really smooth, and that is really much appreciated. So, with that, I’ll give the floor to Carol to say a few words, then Ole Martinsen, then Vint.

Carol Roach: So, Carol Roach, Undersecretary of the Ministry for Grand Bahama, I just made a move, so great, and I just want to add to what Shagata has said, everybody has worked hard to make this session good. Norway has been absolutely fabulous, as well as the MAG, we cannot forget the MAG, they really came through, they worked long, hard hours. I’m in a different time zone, and when I wake up in the morning, there’s like a hundred messages on the chat, so a round of applause for the MAG members, thank you very much. And, of course, the LP, and, of course, thank you to the participants for making this a very successful IGF forum. It’s not the end, it’s always just the beginning. Thank you, Ole.

Ole Martin Martisen: Okay, well, I want to thank everyone for coming here, for coming to the IGF, and coming to Norway, and being a part of this. It’s a great pleasure to hosting you all, hosting the IGF. It’s a special thing to be a host for the IGF, because you’re not hosting an event, you’re not showcasing, you’re, of course, you’re hosting the IGF, but also trying to create a space or a venue where people can meet, and people can have good conversation and good real dialogue together, and that’s what we’ve been trying to do here. I hope we have the role as hosts that somehow contributed to it. And the second thing I also wanted to say before we look back on the week, it’s been an honor to host a true multi-stakeholder forum like this, or maybe the true multi-stakeholder forum, and especially with everything that’s going on outside in the world, outside of this venue, because we really believe that these forums and these spaces, they matter, it’s important, it’s meaningful, and it’s important to look forward, as we have been doing this week, and it’s important to look back and learn, but we think also that, or I think, believe that it’s also important to take the time to appreciate where we are right now and what we’re doing, because this is meaningful and important and quite beautiful what we’re doing here. So thanks to everyone.

Chengetai Masango: Vint, over to you.

Vint Cerf: Well, thank you so much. I’m sorry that I’m not there in person. I gather everyone has had quite a good time in Norway. Speaking of which, I want to remind all of you that the Norwegians had a very key role to play in the pre-internet period in 1973, while some of us were working on the ARPANET. The Norwegian Defense Research Establishment housed one of the first nodes of the ARPANET outside of the United States at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment, and I’m just thinking about my colleagues of that time from Norway, Paul Spilling, Ingvar Lund, Rolf Nordhagen, and Dag Belsnes. What would they think, some of them have passed, and what would they think about the IGF 2025 in Norway? What a spectacular evolution this has been. Maybe revolution is the right word. I just want to observe two things. First of all, that the organization of this meeting, credit to that goes to many, but especially the Secretariat for the Norwegian Establishment that put all this together. Their accessibility efforts were super appreciated by the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. Of course, the participants are what make this meeting so valuable and so memorable, particularly the participants from the leadership panel, the MAG, and all of the other NRIs and interested parties who are here. This was a spectacularly good IGF organized in record time, which leads me to wonder whether we should do two of these a year now. I’ll leave that for you to consider for a moment, and then let’s come back now to our stocktaking.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you very much, and yes, I just realized that I forgot. Yes, we do really have to thank the community and the participants. You are what makes the IGF what it is. Thank you. So for this stocktaking session, we are basically in a listening mode. We may respond to one or two, but basically we’re taking notes, and we’re going to go back and see how we can implement, keep, improve, et cetera, what you tell us. So we have a number of microphones, I think two. We’re waiting for the lights to come on, I guess. We have one there, and we should have another one right there. Yes, so if you want to make an intervention, please stand behind any of those mics, and then we will alternate between the two, and please don’t feel shy, and please keep your interventions to two minutes, and then I do know that some people may speak faster or slower than others. We’ll make a slight adjustment, but please, around two minutes, we’ll be, well, let’s keep to two minutes and we’ll see how we go from there. And can you please identify yourself and state your stakeholder group, it’ll be interesting to know if this is your first time, if it is your first time please let us know what you think as well, I’ll give you extra seconds for that but please carry on. So we’ll start from this end.

Audience: Hi my name is Frances and I’m part of YouthDig, the European Youth IGF and seeing as we’re taking stock today I just wanted to say that I think initiatives like YouthDig is something that works really well in the precursor to IGF, it means that the kind of engagement young people can have is so much more meaningful because we understand the background, we’ve formulated messages that come, that are youth-led and youth-driven and bottom-up so that we’re developing these issues that are pertinent to us so that when we come to something like the IGF we already have these opinions formed, ideas about possible policy solutions, where there’s a difference between regulation and freedom on the internet, so I would say that I’m grateful to YouthDig, I’m very glad that we also had the space today or this week to talk about these messages so that the youth dialogue has been incredibly meaningful at the IGF, so I would say moving forward this is my first IGF, hopefully I come to more but I would say that these initiatives are super important in maintaining a youth voice that is authentic, that is collaborative and that means that this kind of involvement actually matters and isn’t just a box ticking exercise. I would also say what was very important at this IGF was that we had a dialogue where questions were encouraged by anyone who was attending and I really appreciated it in panel discussions when it was reinforced that it’s anyone who’s listening who should contribute because we all have something to say and we all have different perspectives and whether we know the technical side or not whatever ideas might be or our questions or concerns they’re listened to and as part of the messages from the youth we particularly cared about content moderation, user controls and also digital literacy. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you very much.

Audience: Yes, thank you Chengetai. My name is Wouter Natus, I represent the Dynamic Coalition on Internet Standards, Security and Safety. We had the opportunity to present our new report on the socio-economic implications of post-quantum encryption. I think that is going to be the topic of 2026. I heard the questions about quantum computing pop up in different sessions. What we’ve identified is exactly what the implications are if we do not get this right before the so-called quantum day which is the day the first quantum computer actually works and we have a time frame now to make sure that we have the security that we need in place. It’s all in the report, you can find it on our website dcis3coalition.org or on the IGF website pretty soon at our DC page. The second comment I want to make is on the Dynamic Coalitions. I think we’ve started to organize ourselves in a far more structured way into clusters where we identify common topics and that is something that we can build on for 2026. I think that the Dynamic Coalitions are at the core of what multi-stakeholder is. Everybody can contribute, everybody can come up with ideas and bring them forward. Some do reports, others do meetings to explore future work but we have impact and that impact would make the impact of the IGF bigger if we are better integrated into the program. We have a suggestion that we’re working on is to have some sort of a representation in the MAG, not as a MAG member but on an equal level so that we can integrate the program better with what we are doing. I think that that’s what I want to say. I’ve got seven seconds, Ole Martin and all your team. I think you did a great, great job and I want to commend you for it. Thank you. Hello, my name is Ole Jacobson. I want to say to Vint that Ingvar and Paul would indeed be very proud if they were here. I worked for them from 1973 to all the way through 84. I went to high school here in Lillestrom. I’m the editor and publisher of the Internet Protocol Journal and I’ve been involved in internet technical stuff since those days and that first ARPANET connection in 1973 is what made it all possible for me so thank you very much. About this event, it’s all a bit bewildering to me. I haven’t been to one before but it’s certainly a good place to meet all kinds of very interesting people. Thank you. Hello, good afternoon. My name is Sarah Kekele-Akuno and I’m a person with visual impairment. I’m part of the ISOC Ghana and also a member of the Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability. I just want to suggest that most of the discussions that are going on, I’m not really seeing the disability perspectives to it because I’ve been to some of the sessions and sometimes I’m lost. If there can be a person with disability in most of the sessions so that our perspectives can be brought on board, then our voices can also be heard and also most of the sessions also do not have room for contributions and questions. So even if there is no disability perspective to it, maybe I would want to contribute or ask questions but then there is no room for that so I hope that the next IGF there’s going to be something done about that. Thank you. Please. Hi, I’m Bruna Santos. I’m a member of the Civil Society Stakeholder Group. I just wanted to start with a thank you, Chengetai, Carol, Ole, Martin, your whole team, the MAG, Leadership Panel. This was very well done. Thanks for bringing my childhood crush along to the IGF as well. Very happy I didn’t get my good picture but that was okay. It also takes a lot for the host country for taking all of the notes that MAG from last year passed along to you guys like things like bathroom accessibility and some of the points. We know we can never be perfect, right, because there is always going to be new demands and issues but I did want to commend you guys on that and just two comments about the event in itself. As much as I appreciate the sustainability tone, the name tags did were like made a, you know, they were lacking indeed. They are a good point for accessibility, for newcomers to know who they’re talking to and so on and even though many of us went creative and had them on the phones, it took us two to four days so that was one thing and the last point was about the high-level sessions. I think one of them maybe we still had the civil society perspective lacking on the session and I think this is the 20th anniversary of the IGF and we can no longer afford to leave any stakeholder outside or out of these discussions and so on but having said that, again, thanks a lot and congrats on the event. Thank you. Good afternoon. I wish to first thank you for a very wonderful organization and I wish to thank Anja who coordinates the NRIs, you know, for all the brilliant sessions we had. I want one suggestion, is that during the opening ceremony of the IGF, there was a lot of talk about the is that during the opening ceremony, the role of the NRIs within this multi-stakeholder process bottom top has been very important and we should try to get one of the leading NRIs to speak during the opening ceremony. A good example, it will have been good to have our Brazilian colleagues at the opening to share the perspectives of the great work NRIs are doing at local level. Thank you very much. Okay, thank you. Hello, my name is Jun Baek. I’m a co-founder of a youth privacy advocacy organization called Youth for Privacy and it’s my first time at the IGF. Three points. First, in terms of accessibility of the meetings, whether it be on Zoom or having transcripts published, I think that was really amazing and it allowed a lot of our participants, virtual participants also take part and on top of that, the accessibility of the panelists was also amazing. Everybody was willing to talk after the panels or during the panels. and take questions, and that kind of really encouraged dialogue and collaboration. But the third part, which is related to that, is that since a lot of these meetings are on record and published online, I was wondering if it would be possible to also accommodate some closed sessions, some like only in-person, only where Chatham House applies, where we could like fully talk about some of the topics that might be considered sensitive or express more personal opinions. So those kind of staff measurements of those kind of meetings would be appreciated. And I just also want to highlight the fact that as a young person, it’s very hard to find funding for attending IGF, and the funding always is an issue for international conferences. And I want to highlight Korean Internet and Security Agency that funded my trip to IGF. So that could be other funding sources, not only from the IGF, from the national governments to encourage young people like me and us to attend IGF in person. So above all, thank you very much for this first time in IGF, and I hope I’m not too spoiled because of the quality of the conference. I hope that the next year is also improved quality as well. So thank you very much. Thank you. Please. Hello, everyone. I’m called Jolenta Rosa Fanuy. I am a fellow from the Dynamic Coalition of Accessibility and Disability. This is my second year attending the IGF from Cameroon. I want to say that the sustainability of the accessibility of online tools and services and the empowerment of persons with disabilities still remains slow, and it’s still a serious challenge. While we plead on all stakeholders, the Internet system, to play their part, we also want to plead that the IGF continues to play its role in improving digital accessibility online for all persons with disabilities to remain inclusive. Thank you. Thank you very much. Please. My name is Jenna Fung, an eight-time attendees of the IGF. At this point, embarrassing to call myself a youth, but today I want to talk about youth participation. How many years have we been talking about it? Too many years. And yet here we are still framing youth engagement primarily around capacity building as if young people haven’t already proven their readiness to contribute meaningfully to policy advocacy at all. The truth is youth participation in Internet governance remain at best tokenistic and more often structurally excluded. Why? Hosting a youth submit filled with top-down speeches from leadership is not cross-generational dialogue. Calling for youth inclusion while never invite a single youth representative to speak on leadership panel is not genuine co-creation. Just because youth community aren’t institutionalized in the traditional model without titles like chairperson stamp on our name cards doesn’t mean we lack leadership. We lead differently, but we lead nonetheless. Have we not tried to claim our seat at the table? We have. We build initiative, create platforms, host discussion, and shape narrative for youth and for the broader IG community. Or to talk to the youth leaders in your own country, your own regions. We have done all this even while struggling with limited resources and support. And yet the system continue to set us up to fail much like how a forum when chronically underfunded is doomed to underperform by design. Youth have long been cast into the role of the inexperienced as perceived by many other stakeholders as lacking the skills, capacity, or knowledge to even be taken seriously. This perception alone has been enough to keep many of us on the sidelines. But to those in position of power with titles, platform funding, decision-making authorities, I urge you, do not let your privilege cloud your judgment. Do not deflect accountability by blaming youth for disengagement. Yes, we are digital natives. We didn’t witness the birth of the IGF. Many of us weren’t even born when the internet took its first steps. But that doesn’t make our voices any less valid than any other people in this room. This year, multi-stakeholderism has taken center stage. It’s been powerful to watch diverse actors rally behind this ideology, advocating for systemic change in a world long dominated by bilateral power structure. Yet if you haven’t used your institutional, generational, financial, or positional privilege, access, and influence to structurally include youth, even just within the IG ecosystem itself, then that frankly is a missed opportunity and a shame. Before I close, I would usually like to direct my thanks to all the senior leaders in the room. But today, I want to thank every young person who worked tirelessly, often invisibly, often unpaid, for all the work that they have done and continue to do. I’m sorry if my eight years of hard work didn’t move the system enough for you, but I believe in our next-gen leaders, Gen Z, Gen Alpha, even Gen Beta. If I ever make it to the seat at the center of this room, I won’t stay there. I will disassemble the stage and sit alongside each and every one of you because I believe in us and believe in what true multi-stakeholderism should look like. This is where my voice concludes. I will pass the baton of speaking through power to all the young leaders in the room. And we don’t have enough room, and I really hope that I’m really closing. You can send us a statement, and we’ll put it on the website. I say this not to dismiss the effort that we have made. But thank you for your statement.

Chengetai Masango: Please go ahead. And I’m sorry about that, but we have to be fair. If we give you four minutes, then we have to give everybody else four minutes, and then we’ll never end. Please.

Audience: Thanks for your time. Hello. My name is Torsten Claus. I’m a political scientist and child rights researcher affiliated with the Digital Opportunities Foundation based in Berlin, Germany. And firstly, I would like to thank Ole Martin and the whole government of Norway for hosting this well-done IGF. And also, I would like to thank all the people of Norway, which really welcomed us with open arms and warmly thanks a lot for that. Also, I would like to congratulate all the Dynamic Coalition, which is taking part in joint efforts for delivering four cluster sessions and one main session. I think that’s an approach to further develop, and I would like to echo what Wout said on that. Thirdly, I appreciate that we had a second time a high-level session on child rights on the main stage after the IGF in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia last year. I think that’s the place where child rights should take place. The issues around children and youth are too serious to discuss alone behind black curtains in a workshop. So I would encourage us all to make a tradition out of it and see also child rights next year on the main stage. And it could be also a way to support and promote the potential outcomes of the WSIS Plus 20 process, as described in the draft of the current element papers. I really appreciate how human rights and especially children’s rights are addressed already in this draft, but I would like to see that it’s not just around protection of children, but it’s also about provision and participation of children, as Jenna pointed out already. And so I would like to see the whole balance and the full set of child rights reflected in the elements paper. Thank you so much. All right, thank you very much. My name is Kunle Olorundare. I’m from the Civil Society and as a matter of fact I’m the President of Internet Society Nigeria chapter. First I want to congratulate Chingitae, Ola Martin and Carol for a good job well done. And let me start with the Shusho event. I think we had top-notch sessions, you know, going out, the cocktails and all of that. So I think we should give them a round of applause for that, you know. And, apart from that, I would just want to talk about maybe the tokenization with respect to one particular event. I discovered that a lot of us were very interested in visiting that particular site for, I think, the Internet, that university, so to say, but unfortunately some of us could not because we didn’t get a slot. So I think that is something to look at. And secondly, I really want to mention the issue of timing with respect to, let’s say, Open Forum. It seems as if we don’t really have enough time when it comes to Open Forum because, you know, we have to engage with people on site and people online. So there is not enough time to engage the people online. So I think that’s something to take a look at and probably review. Having said that, I think it’s been a wonderful idea and thank you for a good job. Well done. Thank you. Thank you very much. Flint, please. Oh, IGF Remote Hub, sorry. Can the remote hub online? I’ll just give it a six count and then we’ll go to the next one. And I stole that phrase from Lynn just to give attribution. Okay, please, next. I’m Abdu Foppa and I’m at the Internet Society Cameroon chapter. It’s the first time for me traveling to an IGF. Why am I taking the floor? Well, we’ve been very inspired by Vinton. We are actually publishing a history of the Internet in Cameroon and we’ve been inspired by your work for doing that. One regret I’d like to express when it comes to the organization of the event, it took over two months to validate my registration to the IGF. It would have been great to have an earlier confirmation. Maybe a committee could confirm earlier because when you don’t have the financing to attend the IGF, it’s very hard to get an invitation and then it’s, well, it’s difficult when it takes so long. I really hope you can take this into account and we would like to have a committee working on that specific question. As I said, it’s the first time I participate. I really hope to have other opportunities. This will allow me to bring this back to the Internet community in Cameroon, all those innovations and youth participation is really a key question. I really think youth should participate in this kind of event. And what we need is training. In our country, we have some youth who really want to participate, who want to know Internet governance but they need training for that. Thanks for this space for feedback. I really appreciate that. My name is Vinicius Fortuna and I’m a software engineer. I work on Internet access, resilience, and privacy at Jigsaw, which is part of Google. Hey, Vin. And I really appreciate IGF, it was my first IGF, and I have several ideas and got inspired and it’s not going to be my last one, so I’m coming back. But as a software engineer, I was kind of surprised to not see other engineers here. You see a lot of lawyers and policy people. Where are the product managers, where are the engineers? Those are the people that build the technologies that we are all talking about here, right? And we’re moving like ITF and ICANN, I didn’t see any other engineers. I think it’s really important to bring them to the table because they can give you insights on what is possible, what is not, and also come up with new ideas once they understand the real world problems. And I also know that engineers don’t really sometimes know about these issues or they don’t care, they’re focused on their problems. So we need to put incentives in places for both the individuals and the organizations to bring the builders to events like this. So that’s my feedback. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Shall we try the remote hub again? Just give it, oh, let me put it this way, we’ll try the remote hub after the next speaker. We’ll have the next speaker first and then we’ll come to the remote hub. So please.

Audience: Thank you. Hello and namaste everyone. This is Vivek Silwal from Youth IGF Nepal. I want to thank the IGF Secretariat and the government of Norway for the amazing discussions on how we can make the internet better tomorrow. I’m really motivated to see youth participation, organizing the session and being active in the discussions. But I have a concern from a global south perspective. You know, while we are sitting in this room discussing about making how internet better for tomorrow, there’s still more than 2 billion people who are not connected to the internet. You know, there was a period of digitalization, there was a period of pandemic where a certain digitalization happened. People needed to connect to the internet to access any service. But even during that time, we are not able to bring them on board. So there are some hindrance why we are not able to bring them with us in this room. There has been more diversity. So while we are moving forward with the discussion of AI governance, platform governance, we are moving forward with the WSIS principles. I think it is still intact to bring digital divide in the decades to come, how to connect the unconnected. You know, we are talking about connectivity, but is it really meaningful? What about the affordability? What about the rural connectivity? And what about, you know, reliability in the global south, in the developing nations? So this is my request to all of you. In the days to come, we need to have a platform on how we can bring those other people and have more field seats in the room. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango:

Audience: Please. Pacific greetings, talofa lava, I’m Sarai Tevita from Samoa and I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the opportunity and the travel support given and granted to me to attend this 20th annual IGF in leadership Norway. As a participant from the Pacific, from Samoa, the small island states, this support has been invaluable in enabling my physical presence and active participation like yesterday in this crucial global disclosure. Appreciated your Shantai, Carol, Ole Martin, Vinserve and everyone for this great opportunity. My taking steps for this global IGF as my first time participation is to continue or sustainably ensure the robust representation from the seats, from the Pacific, so that we can maximize these opportunities. It also is to highlight the unique challenges that we face as you know that the seats geographically, economically, digitally, that we are vulnerable. But being participated and attended this important event, it gives me another way or an opportunity to share when get back home that there is another world out here. We’re not isolated, we’re not you know left behind, we have to go with what is available but keep more advocating the opportunity from here. We’ve heard the best practices, keep showcasing those best practices and share with us and building more partnerships. Thank you for the opportunity that I managed to meet some incredible people that ISOC and the K-Diplo that we have projects they’re working with. So from the peak ISOC with the Pacific Island sector, very appreciated for the opportunity. Thank you. Hello, this is Educator Umar Khan from Pakistan, a practicing lawyer at Peshawar High Court and working for the digital rights in Pakistan. With the open mic, I would like to appreciate and thank Norway for the facilitation because at the last IGF, at the open mic, I raised some concern regarding the visa for the Europe because from the Pakistan or the Asia, it’s quite difficult to get visa. But just because of the great facilitation from the Norway, more than 15 of my friend have got visa and have made it to the Norway. So a big clap for the Norway for the facilitation to the young guys. And because for a country like Pakistan, where 64% of the population belong to the young persons, and I’m so grateful that more than 15 young guys from my province are here. When in 2019, I made it to the first IGF, I believe I was the first or the second one from my province to the IGF. So I’m so happy to be accompanied by 15 young guys from my province. Thank you, Norway. With this, I will also request the Secretariat to continue this wonderful forum of discussion regarding the internet because I believe this is to be the decision to be taken whether the IGF to be continued or not. When it was started in 2006, how many people were on internet? Now today in 2025, how many increase has been made on the internet usage? So I believe this forum is important. And to keep this digital globe safe and productive for everyone, I believe these discussions and this forum need to be continued. Thank you, Norway. See you next time in some other part of the globe. Thank you and see you next time. Thank you. Yes, please, go ahead. Hi, I’m from Chad. I represent IGF Central Africa and we have a contribution to make in IGF Central Africa’s name. Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests, distinguished delegates, dear partners from the internet governance community, we are now at the end of hard-working days. We have been very inspired and our delegation from Central Africa would really like to start by thanking all the stakeholders who have contributed to the success of this 20th IGF here in Oslo. We would like to start by thanking the Kingdom of Norway. Thank you for welcoming us and for warmly welcoming us here. Thank you to the United Nations. Thanks to the Secretariat and thank you to all partners, all organizations involved. We have academia involved and we have made this forum richer. I really think now that our competences have been strengthened. We have better digital services that are possible thanks to those discussions. We can now guarantee a certain transparency and what we need to do is to co-construct the next years forward. The digital world should not be a factor of domination. This should be a tool for social justice. I really think that Africa is ready now. We are ready to play our part. We all have a shared responsibility and we are willing to play our part. I am sure that we can make Internet a public good for the best of the people in the years to come. Thank you very much. Hello, everyone. I’m Aisha from Pakistan, a high court lawyer and a dedicated human rights defender advocating for women’s rights. I’m so happy to share that this is the first time IGF I’m attending. This platform has been an incredible source of global exposure and inspiration. For me, it’s more than an opportunity. It’s just been a beacon of hope for countless young women in Pakistan where such chances are rare. I’m committed to applying the insights I have gained here to empower more young women in my country working towards creating a safer and more inclusive digital space. After all, access to the Internet is a right that belongs to everyone. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Norway, and thank you, IGF. Goodbye, and see you next year. We’ll have the next speaker from the queue and then we’ll go to the IGF Ghana hub, so please. Good afternoon. I’m Nigel Casimir from the Caribbean Telecommunications Union. I didn’t actually plan to speak, but I was inspired by Sarai from the Pacific, and I think it made sense for me to endorse, number one, and thank the Secretariat for supporting our participation with travel support and so on, but also to identify the value, and this was said by a previous speaker, of the dynamic coalitions. There is the dynamic coalition on SIDS, and through that medium, we in the Caribbean have been cooperating and working with the Pacific and also Indian Ocean states to share experiences and build our capacity and our capabilities in terms of Internet governance. So, for the past two years, we’ve had a problem getting space at the IGF for the DC SIDS meeting, so I want to re-emphasize the value of the dynamic coalitions, the DC SIDS in particular, and would urge the Secretariat to continue supporting them. I was also very pleased to hear the leadership team supporting the value of the NRIs. I think through the NRIs and things like the DCS is where the rubber meets the road between policy and implementation, so that deserves the support. Thank you. Thank you very much, Nigel.

Online Audience: We’ll now go to the Ghana Hub. Please go ahead. It seems you’re muted. Thank you very much for this opportunity. And then I have this question, it is, how can internet governments better support digital health infrastructure and equitable access to telemedicine in developing countries, especially for rural and underserved communities? Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. You’re muted again. If you could unmute, please.

Online Audience: I’m very grateful for the opportunity given. This has been an impactful journey with the IGF from the 23rd. I have a suggestion to make. I would like to suggest that next time there will be open opportunities for us to come in person for better understanding of the various topics discussed. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Okay. Thank you. And can you please also send your comments in so that we have a clear record of them? Thank you. Thank you very much. And thank you very much for participating from Ghana. Thank you. This way. Okay. Thank you.

Audience: Hello. This is Jasmine from Hong Kong. I truly appreciate and thankful for having this platform here. And I think it’s truly bottom-up and multi-stakeholder driven. Because the music night and everything has come back and we have more toilets this year. It’s my first IGF here. And I just want to also echo to my colleague, Jenna, previously talking about the meaningful youth participation and its role in the strategic contributing to this IGF. So, on top of a request on considering youth on leadership panel, I have more ambitions for to really urge your consideration to include youth as a real, really a standalone stakeholder group on the map as well. Because if it’s a really as, you know, like multi-stakeholder group, right, then seeing those year youth have been putting effort on drifting their own grassroots community and et cetera, that should be a serious consideration and discussion ongoing. And another thing coming from global enough community, I noticed that there are needs from, you know, from needs from global stuff as well. But I just want to pin it out because most of the funding, maybe it’s controversial, but I noticed that most of the funding exclude youth from global enough. So, as person from that community, and you also know that even in global enough community, there are still poverty disparity as well. So, not everyone is rich enough and affordable to coming here. I myself this time, I self-fund myself to be here. And it’s actually a lot of financial barrier here, but I truly value my participation here. That’s why I make my effort here as well. Thank you very much for having me. Thank you. Hello, I’m the Executive Secretary for the Internet Governance Forum. And I would like to thank the United Nations, the Kingdom of Norway, and everyone who has participated into the success of this IGF. The electronic participation is today a silent crisis with environmental consequences and societal consequences. Durability on these strategies needs to lean on changing the behaviors, especially starting from education. We advocate for responsible waste management from the primary school. It is a strategic choice that we have to make in order to make an impact. So, we need to see this into young people’s mind in order to have a multiplying effect with their parents, their family, and to ensure durability. It is incredibly important to include digital governance in education. It will help bringing growth to the economy. Also, it will bring some improvement in health. And tomorrow starts today. Thank you. Thank you very much. The queues are now closed. So, you three are the last. No more people. I see we do have an online. We’ll go to the online after the next intervention here. Thank you. Hello, everyone. It’s me, Sadiq Chasirwal, Internet Society Youth Ambassador for this year. And I am coming from the Nepal. And this is my very first time attending IGF. Well, being in here, listening to all the session, talking about the AI, trust with the Internet, and representing Nepal is some sort. I find misfit to be here in this discussion. In Nepal, we still have half a population out of Internet. We are trying really hard to have a reliable Internet connectivity, trying best to have laws that is more respecting towards rights of the people, freedom of people, but government is working to make it more controlling. So, all this multi-stakeholderism and coming from the Nepal, I do find somehow we need to work really hard in a global south to make more open and transparent Internet. And for this opportunity, I would really like to thank all of you for this big platform. And as I said, this is my very first time attending any IGF in person. My expectations are already really high. The Norway government did a really good job. Thank you so much.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you. Okay, we really have to rush. So, online, quickly, we’ll just give it a shot. If it doesn’t work, we’ll leave it.

Audience: Okay, next, please. Dominique, as I mentioned, this is also my first IGF, and I want to also extend my thanks. This has been a fantastic week for meeting new people, hearing new voices, getting new perspectives. If I had one suggestion for what I hope would be my next IGF, if there was more support for serendipity, networking, if there was a suggestion maybe to get back physical badges, anything that can help meeting people you wouldn’t expect outside of the speakers. It’s easy to identify speakers because they’re on the panels, but there are so many great people around here that would be harder to detect outside of those formal occasions. That would be my request to the organizers. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Last speaker, point form as quickly as you can. I’m so sorry about that.

Audience: No worries. Thank you. Wow, what an eventful week. I’m really thankful, number one, to Mr. Vinton, TCPIP, and now IGF, and we all are benefited. On the other hand, I would be very thankful to the Norwegian government and the IGF organizers. It is such an information-loaded and overloaded platform, and I wish it will continue. It was fourth of mine with some gaps, and in the last I will just give my introduction. My name is Asim Adil, and I’m a digitalization consultant, especially in the area for digital for development, working for German Development Corporation. Thank you.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you very much. All right, thank you. We’ll go to the chairs quickly for any final words. Carol, no? No? Vint? Any final?

Vint Cerf: Sorry, I had to unmute. Well, I took copious notes. I hope everyone else did. This was a super useful discussion. Thank you so much. I’m looking forward, of course, to next year in the hope that WSIS plus 20 will tell us that we should continue our work.

Chengetai Masango: Thank you very much, Vint, and he speaks for us all. Thank you.

Agreement points

Appreciation for Norwegian hosting and IGF organization quality

Speakers

– Chengetai Masango
– Carol Roach
– Ole Martin Martisen
– Vint Cerf
– Audience

Arguments

Thanking Norwegian counterparts, MAG members, interpreters, scribes, and technical team for excellent collaboration and smooth operations

Appreciating the community and participants as what makes IGF valuable

Acknowledging the honor of hosting a true multi-stakeholder forum and creating meaningful dialogue space

Recognizing Norway’s historical role in internet development since 1973 ARPANET connection

Summary

Universal appreciation and gratitude expressed by all speakers for Norway’s exceptional hosting of IGF 2025, the quality of organization, and the collaborative efforts of all teams involved

Topics

Development | Capacity development

Youth participation needs structural improvement beyond tokenism

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Youth initiatives like YouthDIG provide meaningful background preparation and authentic youth-led policy solutions

Youth participation remains tokenistic and structurally excluded despite proven readiness to contribute meaningfully

Need for youth representation as standalone stakeholder group on MAG with real decision-making power

Funding barriers particularly affect youth from global south, requiring alternative funding sources

Summary

Multiple youth speakers agreed that current youth participation is insufficient and tokenistic, requiring structural changes including dedicated representation, better funding mechanisms, and recognition of youth as a legitimate stakeholder group

Topics

Human rights | Human rights principles

Accessibility improvements needed across multiple dimensions

Speakers

– Audience
– Online Audience

Arguments

Need for disability perspectives integrated into most sessions with dedicated representation

Accessibility efforts were appreciated but name tags were lacking, affecting newcomer networking

Physical accessibility improvements noted but room for questions and contributions still limited

Accessibility of meetings through Zoom and published transcripts enabled meaningful virtual participation

Summary

Speakers consistently identified accessibility as an area needing improvement, covering physical accessibility, disability representation, session participation opportunities, and virtual access mechanisms

Topics

Human rights | Rights of persons with disabilities

Dynamic Coalitions and NRIs need better integration and recognition

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Dynamic Coalitions organizing into structured clusters with common topics showing impact potential

Need better integration of Dynamic Coalitions into main program with MAG representation

NRIs deserve speaking opportunities during opening ceremonies to showcase local-level work

Dynamic Coalition on SIDS valuable for small island states cooperation but needs consistent meeting space

Summary

Multiple speakers agreed that Dynamic Coalitions and NRIs represent core multi-stakeholder participation but need better structural integration, representation, and recognition within IGF processes

Topics

Development | Capacity development

Similar viewpoints

Global South participants shared concerns about digital divide persistence and structural barriers that prevent meaningful participation from developing countries, emphasizing the disconnect between advanced policy discussions and basic connectivity needs

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Over 2 billion people still unconnected while discussing advanced governance topics

Need focus on meaningful connectivity, affordability, and rural access in developing nations

Registration validation process too lengthy, creating barriers for unfunded participants

Topics

Development | Digital access

Multiple speakers identified session format improvements needed to enhance participation quality, including better time allocation, inclusive representation, and appropriate confidentiality levels for different types of discussions

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Open Forums need more time for engaging both on-site and online participants

High-level sessions should maintain multi-stakeholder representation without excluding any group

Need for some closed sessions under Chatham House rules for sensitive topics

Topics

Development | Capacity development

Technical community representatives noted the absence of actual technology builders from policy discussions, emphasizing the need for structural incentives to bring engineers and product managers to IGF

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Lack of software engineers and product managers despite discussing technologies they build

Need incentives for organizations to bring technical builders to policy discussions

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Unexpected consensus

Historical appreciation for Norway’s internet development role

Speakers

– Vint Cerf
– Audience

Arguments

Recognizing Norway’s historical role in internet development since 1973 ARPANET connection

Explanation

Unexpected consensus emerged around Norway’s historical contribution to internet development, with both leadership and audience members acknowledging the country’s role since 1973, creating a meaningful connection between past and present internet governance

Topics

Infrastructure | Critical internet resources

Need for technical community integration in policy discussions

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Lack of software engineers and product managers despite discussing technologies they build

Need incentives for organizations to bring technical builders to policy discussions

Explanation

Unexpected consensus from a software engineer highlighting the absence of technical builders in policy discussions, which resonated with the broader community’s recognition that those who build the technologies should participate in governance discussions

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Overall assessment

Summary

Strong consensus emerged around appreciation for Norwegian hosting, need for improved youth participation, better accessibility measures, and enhanced integration of Dynamic Coalitions and NRIs. Speakers also agreed on addressing global south participation barriers and session format improvements.

Consensus level

High level of consensus on structural improvements needed for IGF, with broad agreement on inclusion, accessibility, and participation enhancement. The consensus suggests strong community alignment on making IGF more inclusive and effective, with implications for future IGF planning and governance structure reforms.

Different viewpoints

Approach to youth participation in IGF governance structures

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Youth participation remains tokenistic and structurally excluded despite proven readiness to contribute meaningfully

Need for youth representation as standalone stakeholder group on MAG with real decision-making power

Summary

While both speakers advocate for meaningful youth participation, one focuses on criticizing current tokenistic approaches and systemic exclusion, while another proposes specific structural changes like creating youth as a standalone stakeholder group on MAG

Topics

Human rights | Human rights principles

Priority focus between advanced governance topics versus basic connectivity

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Over 2 billion people still unconnected while discussing advanced governance topics

Lack of software engineers and product managers despite discussing technologies they build

Summary

One speaker emphasizes the disconnect between discussing advanced AI and platform governance while billions lack basic internet access, while another focuses on the need for technical professionals in policy discussions about existing technologies

Topics

Development | Digital access

Session transparency versus privacy for sensitive discussions

Speakers

– Audience
– Online Audience

Arguments

Need for some closed sessions under Chatham House rules for sensitive topics

Accessibility of meetings through Zoom and published transcripts enabled meaningful virtual participation

Summary

One speaker requests closed sessions for sensitive topics that participants might not feel comfortable discussing on record, while another appreciates the transparency and accessibility of recorded sessions that enable virtual participation

Topics

Human rights | Privacy and data protection

Unexpected differences

Name tags and sustainability versus accessibility needs

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Accessibility efforts were appreciated but name tags were lacking, affecting newcomer networking

Explanation

This represents an unexpected tension between sustainability goals (reducing physical materials) and accessibility needs (helping people identify each other for networking), showing how well-intentioned environmental policies can create unintended barriers

Topics

Human rights | Rights of persons with disabilities

Technical community absence from policy discussions

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Lack of software engineers and product managers despite discussing technologies they build

Explanation

This highlights an unexpected gap where the people who actually build the technologies being discussed in policy forums are largely absent, suggesting a disconnect between technical implementation and policy formation that wasn’t anticipated

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Overall assessment

Summary

The transcript reveals limited direct disagreements among speakers, with most conflicts being implicit tensions between different priorities and approaches rather than explicit disputes. Main areas include youth participation approaches, balancing advanced governance with basic connectivity needs, and transparency versus privacy in sessions.

Disagreement level

Low to moderate disagreement level. Most speakers were aligned on broad goals but differed on priorities, methods, and structural approaches. The disagreements are constructive and focused on improving IGF rather than fundamental opposition to its mission or values. This suggests a mature forum where participants share common objectives but bring different perspectives on implementation strategies.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Global South participants shared concerns about digital divide persistence and structural barriers that prevent meaningful participation from developing countries, emphasizing the disconnect between advanced policy discussions and basic connectivity needs

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Over 2 billion people still unconnected while discussing advanced governance topics

Need focus on meaningful connectivity, affordability, and rural access in developing nations

Registration validation process too lengthy, creating barriers for unfunded participants

Topics

Development | Digital access

Multiple speakers identified session format improvements needed to enhance participation quality, including better time allocation, inclusive representation, and appropriate confidentiality levels for different types of discussions

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Open Forums need more time for engaging both on-site and online participants

High-level sessions should maintain multi-stakeholder representation without excluding any group

Need for some closed sessions under Chatham House rules for sensitive topics

Topics

Development | Capacity development

Technical community representatives noted the absence of actual technology builders from policy discussions, emphasizing the need for structural incentives to bring engineers and product managers to IGF

Speakers

– Audience

Arguments

Lack of software engineers and product managers despite discussing technologies they build

Need incentives for organizations to bring technical builders to policy discussions

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Key takeaways

The 20th IGF in Norway was successfully organized with excellent technical support, accessibility features, and multi-stakeholder participation

Youth participation remains a critical challenge, with current engagement being largely tokenistic rather than meaningful integration into decision-making processes

Digital divide persists as a fundamental issue with over 2 billion people still unconnected while advanced governance topics are discussed

Accessibility and inclusion efforts have improved but require consistent disability representation across all sessions

Technical community (engineers, product managers) participation is notably lacking despite discussions focusing on technologies they build

Dynamic Coalitions and National/Regional IGF Initiatives (NRIs) need better integration into the main IGF program structure

Global South participants face significant barriers including lengthy visa processes, funding limitations, and registration delays

Remote participation capabilities have enhanced accessibility but in-person networking and serendipitous connections remain valuable

The multi-stakeholder model requires continuous reinforcement to prevent exclusion of any stakeholder group from high-level discussions

Resolutions and action items

Secretariat to take notes on all feedback provided during the taking stock session for implementation in future IGFs

Consider representation of Dynamic Coalitions in MAG structure for better program integration

Explore having NRI representatives speak during opening ceremonies to showcase local-level work

Investigate alternative funding sources beyond IGF for youth participation, particularly from national governments

Improve registration validation process timing to reduce barriers for unfunded participants

Consider physical name tags for better networking and accessibility in future events

Explore possibility of closed sessions under Chatham House rules for sensitive discussions

Unresolved issues

How to structurally integrate youth as a standalone stakeholder group rather than maintaining tokenistic participation

Addressing funding barriers for Global South participants, particularly youth from middle-income countries excluded from most funding programs

Balancing focus on advanced internet governance topics while addressing basic connectivity needs for 2+ billion unconnected people

Ensuring consistent disability representation across all sessions rather than isolated accessibility efforts

Attracting meaningful participation from technical community (engineers, product managers) to policy discussions

Determining optimal allocation of time for Open Forums to accommodate both in-person and online participants

Resolving space allocation challenges for Dynamic Coalition meetings

Whether IGF should continue post-WSIS+20 review

Suggested compromises

Provide Dynamic Coalitions with representation at MAG level without full membership status to improve program integration

Implement hybrid approach with both open recorded sessions and closed Chatham House rule sessions for sensitive topics

Create incentive structures for organizations to bring technical builders to policy discussions while maintaining multi-stakeholder balance

Develop tiered funding approach that includes middle-income country participants who are currently excluded from most support programs

Establish structured youth preparation programs like YouthDIG as precursors to meaningful IGF participation rather than standalone capacity building

Balance sustainability concerns with practical needs like physical name tags for networking and accessibility

This year, multi-stakeholderism has taken center stage. It’s been powerful to watch diverse actors rally behind this ideology, advocating for systemic change in a world long dominated by bilateral power structure. Yet if you haven’t used your institutional, generational, financial, or positional privilege, access, and influence to structurally include youth, even just within the IG ecosystem itself, then that frankly is a missed opportunity and a shame.

Speaker

Jenna Fung

Reason

This comment is deeply insightful because it exposes a fundamental contradiction within the IGF community – advocating for multi-stakeholderism globally while failing to implement it internally regarding youth participation. Fung challenges the audience to examine their own practices and privileges, moving beyond surface-level inclusion to structural change.

Impact

This comment created a pivotal moment in the discussion, shifting from general feedback to critical self-reflection. It inspired subsequent speakers like Jasmine from Hong Kong to echo similar concerns and make concrete suggestions for youth representation as a standalone stakeholder group. The comment elevated the conversation from operational feedback to examining the IGF’s foundational principles.

But as a software engineer, I was kind of surprised to not see other engineers here. You see a lot of lawyers and policy people. Where are the product managers, where are the engineers? Those are the people that build the technologies that we are all talking about here, right?

Speaker

Vinicius Fortuna

Reason

This observation is thought-provoking because it identifies a critical gap in multi-stakeholder representation – the absence of the actual builders of internet technology. It challenges the assumption that having diverse stakeholder groups automatically means having the right expertise in the room.

Impact

This comment introduced a new dimension to the discussion about representation, moving beyond traditional stakeholder categories to consider professional expertise. It highlighted that meaningful multi-stakeholderism requires not just diverse sectors but diverse skill sets and perspectives within those sectors.

While we are sitting in this room discussing about making how internet better for tomorrow, there’s still more than 2 billion people who are not connected to the internet… So while we are moving forward with the discussion of AI governance, platform governance, we are moving forward with the WSIS principles. I think it is still intact to bring digital divide in the decades to come, how to connect the unconnected.

Speaker

Vivek Silwal

Reason

This comment provides crucial perspective by highlighting the disconnect between advanced policy discussions and basic connectivity needs. It challenges the IGF community to maintain focus on fundamental access issues while pursuing cutting-edge governance topics.

Impact

This intervention grounded the discussion in global reality, reminding participants that technological advancement discussions must be balanced with addressing basic digital inequities. It reinforced themes raised by other Global South participants about the need for inclusive development approaches.

The digital world should not be a factor of domination. This should be a tool for social justice. I really think that Africa is ready now. We are ready to play our part. We have a shared responsibility and we are willing to play our part.

Speaker

Representative from Chad (IGF Central Africa)

Reason

This comment reframes internet governance from a technical/policy issue to a social justice imperative. It asserts agency and readiness from African perspectives, challenging any paternalistic approaches to global internet governance.

Impact

This statement reinforced the global dimension of the discussion and emphasized that internet governance must be viewed through an equity lens. It connected with other Global South voices to create a strong theme about inclusive participation and development.

I think that the Dynamic Coalitions are at the core of what multi-stakeholder is. Everybody can contribute, everybody can come up with ideas and bring them forward… we have impact and that impact would make the impact of the IGF bigger if we are better integrated into the program.

Speaker

Wouter Natus

Reason

This comment identifies Dynamic Coalitions as embodying the IGF’s core principles while pointing out structural barriers to their effectiveness. It suggests concrete improvements for enhancing multi-stakeholder participation through better integration.

Impact

This observation was echoed by later speakers like Nigel Casimir, creating momentum around the value of Dynamic Coalitions and the need for structural improvements. It shifted discussion toward concrete mechanisms for improving multi-stakeholder engagement.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by moving it beyond operational feedback to examine the IGF’s core principles and practices. Jenna Fung’s critique of youth exclusion created a watershed moment that elevated the entire conversation, inspiring multiple subsequent speakers to address representation issues. The comments collectively revealed tensions between the IGF’s aspirational multi-stakeholder ideals and its practical implementation, particularly regarding youth participation, technical expertise inclusion, and Global South perspectives. Rather than a typical feedback session, this became a critical examination of whether the IGF is living up to its foundational principles, with speakers building on each other’s insights to create a comprehensive critique and vision for improvement. The discussion evolved from thanking organizers to challenging the community to address structural inequities and representation gaps.

Should we do two IGF meetings per year now, given this was organized in record time?

Speaker

Vint Cerf

Explanation

This suggestion emerged from the observation that the IGF 2025 was successfully organized in record time, raising the possibility of increasing frequency of meetings

How can internet governance better support digital health infrastructure and equitable access to telemedicine in developing countries, especially for rural and underserved communities?

Speaker

Ghana Hub participant

Explanation

This question addresses a critical gap in healthcare access through digital means in underserved areas

How can we integrate Dynamic Coalitions better into the IGF program structure?

Speaker

Wouter Natus

Explanation

There’s a need to better integrate Dynamic Coalitions into the main program, with a suggestion for representation in the MAG to improve coordination

How can we ensure meaningful disability perspectives are included in all IGF sessions?

Speaker

Sarah Kekele-Akuno

Explanation

Many sessions lack disability perspectives and don’t provide adequate opportunities for contributions from persons with disabilities

How can we accommodate closed sessions or Chatham House rule sessions for sensitive topics?

Speaker

Jun Baek

Explanation

While transparency is valued, there’s a need for some private discussion spaces for sensitive topics or personal opinions

How can we structurally include youth as a standalone stakeholder group rather than just capacity building recipients?

Speaker

Jenna Fung and Jasmine from Hong Kong

Explanation

Youth participation remains tokenistic and there’s a need for genuine structural inclusion of youth voices in decision-making processes

How can we bring more engineers and technical builders to IGF discussions?

Speaker

Vinicius Fortuna

Explanation

There’s a lack of technical practitioners who actually build the technologies being discussed, which limits practical insights

How can we address the digital divide and connect the remaining 2+ billion unconnected people while advancing AI and platform governance?

Speaker

Vivek Silwal

Explanation

There’s a concern that advanced governance discussions are moving ahead while basic connectivity issues remain unresolved in the Global South

How can we improve the registration validation process to provide earlier confirmation for participants?

Speaker

Abdu Foppa

Explanation

The current process takes over two months for validation, creating difficulties for participants seeking funding and travel arrangements

How can we ensure continued robust representation from Pacific Small Island Developing States?

Speaker

Sarai Tevita

Explanation

There’s a need to sustainably maintain participation from geographically and economically vulnerable Pacific island states

How can funding opportunities be expanded to include youth from Global North communities who also face financial barriers?

Speaker

Jasmine from Hong Kong

Explanation

Current funding structures may exclude youth from Global North despite economic disparities within those communities