Leaders TalkX 4 - Information Without Barriers: Making Knowledge Accessible

Zerrouki argues that while connectivity opens the door to the digital world, it is skills, knowledge, trust, language, and digital literacy that determine whether citizens can genuinely benefit from that access. Simply being connected does not guarantee equal access to information or opportunity. The real differentiator is the capacity to navigate and use digital tools effectively and safely.

He posed a rhetorical question to the audience asking who among them lacked connectivity, noting that everyone was connected but not at the same level or with the same information . He concluded that connectivity opens the door, but skills, trust, and capacity building allow citizens to walk through it .

Algeria has adopted a multi-layered strategy that goes beyond infrastructure by investing heavily in human capital through skill centres spread across the country. The 7-to-77 programme is designed to cover all age groups, providing access to resources, tools, and safe learning environments for digital skills. This approach reflects a recognition that infrastructure alone cannot achieve meaningful digital inclusion.

Zerrouki noted that Algeria, as the largest country on the continent, has established skill centres countrywide where young people and others can learn about AI, cybersecurity, cloud computing, and related digital topics . He described the 777 programme (from 7 to 77 years old) as covering all generations, giving access to resources and information in a safe and trusted environment with computing capacity .

Zerrouki warns that the global AI landscape is currently dominated by a race between a small number of powerful nations, which risks marginalising the rest of the world. He asserts that every country has an equal right to computing capacity and access to AI technologies. This equitable access is essential to prevent a new form of digital divide centred on artificial intelligence.

He stated frankly that AI is currently a race between two nations leading the field, but that each and every country in the room has the right to the same computing capacity and access to information .

Zerrouki contends that trust is a foundational requirement for digital inclusion, and that a digital environment lacking security cannot be genuinely inclusive. Without cybersecurity protections, providing connectivity is insufficient because citizens cannot use information safely or effectively. Cybersecurity is therefore not merely a technical concern but a prerequisite for meaningful participation in the information society.

He stated that a digital space that is not trusted cannot be truly inclusive, and that if it cannot protect users, there is no need to give them connectivity as they cannot use information the right way . He also noted that Algeria adopted and announced its RGS cybersecurity strategy earlier in the year .

Albaour argues that ensuring equitable access to knowledge depends not primarily on technology but on how digital systems are governed. A citizen-centred digital ecosystem must be inclusive, trusted, and secure. This reframing shifts the focus from technical deployment to the governance structures that shape how technology serves people.

He stated that ensuring equitable access to knowledge is not only dependent on connectivity but is a governance issue, not a technological issue, and that success depends on building a digital ecosystem that is inclusive, trusted, secure, and centred on the citizen .

Albaour highlights that discussions about barriers to knowledge must include a focus on ethical and responsible AI. He positions responsible AI governance as a key priority alongside other digital governance concerns. Without ethical frameworks, AI risks exacerbating rather than reducing barriers to knowledge access.

He listed promoting responsible and ethical AI as one of his key priorities, noting that in discussions about barriers to knowledge, ethical and responsible AI must be addressed .

Albaour argues that digital sovereignty requires countries to build their own national digital capabilities rather than relying entirely on external providers. Securing critical infrastructure is essential to maintaining independence and resilience in the digital domain. This is presented as a key priority for equitable and trustworthy digital governance.

He identified protecting digital sovereignty as a key priority, stating that countries should develop national digital capabilities and secure critical infrastructure .

Albaour identifies data governance as a critical element that governments must address to ensure equitable digital public services. Without proper frameworks for managing data, digital services cannot be trusted or effectively delivered to citizens. Data governance is therefore a foundational pillar of inclusive digital transformation.

He listed data governance as one of his key priorities, stating that the government must work on data governance as part of building trusted digital infrastructure .

Watson Carazo argues that while connectivity is the foundation of digital inclusion, infrastructure deployment alone is insufficient to achieve genuine digital transformation. Regulation must also promote digital skills and ensure that new technologies are affordable and accessible to all. AI should serve to bridge the digital divide rather than widen it.

He stated that without strong telecommunication networks people cannot fully benefit from digital learning, online public services, or AI, but also emphasised that infrastructure alone is not enough and that digital transformation must reach everyone . He noted that SUTEL's Universal Access Fund has created programmes to bring internet access to communities with limited connectivity, including schools, libraries, and families .

Watson Carazo presents regulation as a positive enabler of investment and innovation rather than merely a constraint. Spectrum tenders and Universal Access Funds are highlighted as concrete instruments that can direct connectivity to the areas and communities that need it most. Costa Rica's experience with SUTEL demonstrates how these tools can be applied in practice.

He described SUTEL's belief that effective regulations encourage investment, support innovation, and expand connectivity, and noted that 5G and future mobile technologies will create new opportunities in healthcare, education, and business . He cited SUTEL's recent spectrum tender as an initiative designed to encourage investment, expand network coverage, and bring better connectivity to underserved areas , and referenced the Universal Access Fund as a mechanism for bringing internet access to communities, schools, libraries, and families .

Kadjidja acknowledges that Gabon has largely won the battle for connectivity, but argues that achieving high connectivity rates is only the first step. The real challenge now is transforming that connectivity into tangible value for citizens through usable, relevant, and locally adapted digital services. This requires addressing interoperability, digitisation of archives, and the availability of locally relevant content.

He stated that Gabon has won the battle for connectivity at 90%, but that transforming connectivity into use value for citizens is the current challenge, which presupposes solving problems of interoperability of applications, poor digitisation of national archives, and the availability of content adapted to local realities .

Kadjidja outlines Gabon's regulatory approach to extending connectivity to rural and underserved areas, which includes deploying Rural Star solutions and requiring operators to provide coverage. Infrastructure sharing among operators is promoted as a cost-effective way to expand reach. These measures are framed as part of a broader universal service strategy.

He described two regulatory levers: the deployment of Rural Star solutions to extend operators' networks within the framework of universal service, and the optimisation and sharing of passive infrastructure such as towers, fibres, and energy between different operators .

Kadjidja highlights Gabon's designation as the pilot country for the single African digital hub as a significant regional initiative. This hub is intended to reduce costs and expand access to digital resources for all populations without exclusion. It also aims to strengthen the flow of knowledge across borders within the African region.

He noted that in the regional context, Gabon has been designated as the pilot of the single African digital hub, an initiative that contributes to reducing costs, expanding access to all populations without exclusion, and strengthening the flow of knowledge across borders .

Andriamihaja points out that telecommunications operators, driven by commercial logic, concentrate their services in economically profitable urban and high-density areas. This leaves rural and landlocked zones structurally isolated from digital access. Addressing this bias is identified as a fundamental challenge for achieving genuine digital inclusion in Madagascar.

He noted that operators focus on economically profitable zones such as urban hubs and high-density areas, and acknowledged that while they cannot be blamed for this as they are there to develop too, this creates isolation for rural and landlocked zones .

Andriamihaja identifies a second dimension of the digital inclusion challenge in Madagascar: ensuring that people not only have access to information but also know how to use it beneficially. There is a category of people who do not use information at the same level or in ways that benefit society. Raising awareness about productive and beneficial use of information is therefore a priority.

He described the problem of certain categories of people not using information at the same level or beneficially for society, and noted that raising awareness so people can use information usefully is a current challenge in Madagascar . He also mentioned the Smart Fledge system as a measure to connect people in rural and keyboard areas .

Wijayasuriya draws a distinction between access to information and the embodiment of knowledge within a human being, arguing that the latter requires literacy. Even where internet connectivity exists, barriers such as digital literacy gaps and language diversity prevent people from converting information into genuine knowledge. This gap represents a persistent divide that connectivity alone cannot close.

He noted that successive technology revolutions have bridged access to information, but that the conversion of information to knowledge requires literacy, and that barriers including digital literacy and language restrictions remain even where internet access exists .

Wijayasuriya presents AI as a transformative tool that can sit between information and knowledge, enabling natural conversation, cultural nuance, and multilingual interaction in ways that previous technologies could not. However, he warns that if AI development is left entirely to market forces, it will naturally gravitate towards large-population languages and rich data sets, neglecting low-resource languages and marginalised communities. This dual nature of AI makes international governance essential.

He described AI as bringing the possibility of natural conversation, cultural nuance, context, and multilingual capability, calling this promise revolutionary . He warned that if left to market forces, AI would follow the largest population languages, neglect low-resource languages, and thrive on rich data sets from homogeneous and generally advantaged societies .

Wijayasuriya argues that AI integrated into digital public infrastructure can democratise access to services and information for diverse and vulnerable groups. By enabling conversational access to government information and language-neutral platforms, AI can serve farmers, children, and disabled persons in ways suited to their specific needs. This positions AI as a potential driver of human development rather than a divisive force.

He described Sri Lanka's approach of placing language neutrality and language neutralisation technologies at the level of digital public infrastructure as a horizontal layer usable by any service or institution . He gave examples including government information in conversational mode, a farmer accessing agriculture information, a child accessing a tutor, and a disabled person accessing information in whichever way suited them .

Wijayasuriya argues that countries must develop their own sovereign AI capabilities to avoid dependency on external actors for their most sensitive data and AI systems. Without sovereign capabilities, nations risk having their data and AI infrastructure controlled or potentially cut off by external parties. This is framed as essential for protecting privacy, policy autonomy, and national resilience.

He described Sri Lanka's challenge of establishing sovereign AI capabilities required to develop their own models without compromising privacy, policy autonomy, or national resilience, noting that no nation would be happy in a situation where their most sensitive data could be unplugged at any point in time .

Wijayasuriya advocates for embedding language neutrality technologies at the foundational layer of digital public infrastructure, making them available as a horizontal capability for any service or institution. This approach ensures that language inclusion is not an afterthought but a structural feature of the digital ecosystem. It enables both public and private sector services to reach users in their own languages.

He described Sri Lanka's approach of placing language neutrality and language neutralisation technologies at the level of digital public infrastructure as a horizontal layer usable by any service or institution in both the public and private sector .

Wijayasuriya calls on the international community to take deliberate action to ensure that low-resource languages and diverse community contexts are included in the global fabric of AI ecosystems. Without such intervention, market-driven AI development will systematically exclude minority and low-resource language communities. This is presented as a collective responsibility requiring international coordination.

He stated that what is needed as an international community is to make sure that every single language, however low the resource may be, and every single data set, community, and context is included in the global fabric of AI ecosystems .

Karagozoglu argues that traditional telecommunications regulation has focused too narrowly on supply-side metrics such as kilometres of fibre laid or satellites launched, which are no longer sufficient measures of success. The ultimate objective is meaningful inclusion, which requires measuring demand-side readiness and the rate of meaningful adoption. A citizen who can connect to 5G but cannot read the content or find relevant information in their language remains effectively excluded.

He stated that the era of focusing solely on supply-side metrics such as kilometres of fibre-optic cable laid or the number of low-Earth orbit satellites launched is no longer sufficient, and that infrastructure is the baseline but meaningful inclusion is the ultimate objective . He gave the example of a citizen capable of connecting to 5G but unable to read the content or find relevant information in their own language, meaning connectivity remains underutilised .

Karagozoglu proposes a structural redefinition of Universal Service Funds to extend their scope beyond physical infrastructure to include demand-side readiness. This means using fund capital to subsidise local digital literacy programmes, digitise local language resources, and support public access points where communities learn to navigate the digital economy safely. Digital literacy should be treated as essential public infrastructure on a par with physical connectivity.

He noted that historically universal service funds were designed strictly for physical infrastructure such as building towers in remote areas, and proposed expanding the definition to support demand-side readiness including subsidising local digital literacy programmes, funding digitisation of local language resources, and supporting public access points . He stated that digital literacy must be treated as essential public infrastructure .

Karagozoglu advocates for the use of regulatory sandboxes as flexible, controlled environments that lower barriers to entry for local innovators. These sandboxes would allow local tech entrepreneurs, NGOs, and content creators to develop hyper-localised applications such as AI-driven local language translation tools or voice-activated agricultural platforms without facing the heavy compliance burdens designed for large telecom companies. By stimulating local innovation, this approach can create online ecosystems that genuinely reflect community needs.

He described regulatory sandboxes as flexible, controlled regulatory environments that allow local tech entrepreneurs, NGOs, and content creators to develop hyper-localised applications such as AI-driven local language translation tools or voice-activated agricultural platforms without being burdened by heavy, costly compliance procedures built for giant telecom companies . He argued that lowering these barriers to entry for local innovators stimulates an online ecosystem that reflects the community's daily needs .

Karagozoglu proposes embedding social impact incentives directly into spectrum licensing and network deployment approval processes. This would shift the regulatory focus from purely technical oversight and geographic coverage maps to a holistic, human-centric approach that measures meaningful adoption. The true metric of successful regulation should be the rate at which citizens meaningfully adopt and benefit from digital services.

He proposed shifting towards co-regulation and multi-stakeholder partnerships when allocating spectrum or approving large-scale network deployments, embedding social impact incentives into licensing frameworks . He stated that the true metric of future successful regulation is no longer just geographic coverage maps but the rate of meaningful adoption .

Karagozoglu argues that regulation should act as an enabler of local content rather than a barrier to it. By creating supportive regulatory environments, governments can stimulate the development of applications and content that genuinely reflect the daily needs and languages of local communities. This is essential for ensuring that digital inclusion translates into real economic and social opportunity.

He stated that regulation should be an enabler of local content, not a barrier, and proposed regulatory sandboxes to allow local innovators to develop hyper-localised applications without being burdened by compliance frameworks designed for large telecoms .

Lindqvist argues that the WSIS+20 recognition of the technical community as a distinct stakeholder group is significant because it acknowledges a fundamental truth: the open, global, and interoperable internet requires continuous technical coordination and the work of communities that operate and evolve its core systems. Without this recognition, the technical expertise needed to maintain the internet's foundational systems risks being overlooked in policy discussions. This recognition provides an avenue for technical expertise to inform digital cooperation.

He stated that the recognition is very important because it acknowledges that the internet does not stay open and global and interoperable on its own, and that it depends on ongoing technical coordination and on the communities that operate, secure, and evolve the core systems that make up the internet . He noted that for ICANN, the opportunity is to contribute more fully to the next phase of digital cooperation from a role that is specific and well understood .

Lindqvist clarifies that ICANN's mandate is specifically focused on the stable and secure operation of the internet's unique identifier system, and does not extend to regulating content, platforms, or applications. He argues that recognition of the technical community provides an avenue for this specific expertise to inform policy discussions. It is important that technical coordination is not confused with political or regulatory issues.

He stated that ICANN does not regulate content or platforms or applications, and that its mission is to help ensure the stable and secure operation of the internet's unique identifier system . He noted that recognition of the technical community provides an avenue for that expertise in policy discussions without confusing technical coordination with political or regulatory issues .

Lindqvist presents Universal Acceptance as a concrete technical mechanism for removing barriers to participation in the internet for users of non-Latin scripts and diverse languages. If domain names and email addresses in a user's own language and script do not work correctly across internet applications, there is a technical gap that becomes a barrier to participation. Addressing this gap is a key contribution of the technical community to digital inclusion.

He described Universal Acceptance as ensuring that all valid domain names and email addresses work correctly across internet-related or enabled applications and systems, including those that use non-Latin scripts and characters . He framed the user question simply as whether they can use an email address or domain name in their own language and script and have it work when accessing a service, applying online, or communicating with others, noting that if the answer is no, there is a technical gap that becomes a barrier to participation .

Lindqvist emphasises that Universal Acceptance is not a challenge that can be resolved through policy declarations alone; it requires practical, coordinated action across a wide range of actors. Software developers, service providers, governments, businesses, and local communities all have roles to play, supported by awareness-raising, capacity building, and technical expertise. This multi-stakeholder approach is essential for translating policy ambition into technical reality.

He stated that Universal Acceptance cannot be solved by policy statements alone and requires actions by software developers, service providers, governments, businesses, and local communities, supported by awareness, capacity building, and technical experts .

Lindqvist affirms the IGF as a vital open forum where different stakeholders can collaborate on the technical and policy challenges of digital development. He links ICANN's continued contribution to the IGF with its support for multi-stakeholder collaboration. He also emphasises that digital development ultimately depends on maintaining an internet that is stable, secure, and globally interoperable.

He stated that the IGF is an important space for collaboration where different stakeholders can work together, and that ICANN's continued contribution to the IGF reflects its support for its role as an open forum . He noted that the upcoming PB26 will be an important moment to reinforce that digital development depends on an internet that remains stable, secure, and globally interoperable .

Harris frames the session's core purpose as examining what it will take to go beyond mere connectivity to achieve genuine participation in the information society. She identifies language, geography, and economic circumstances as the key barriers that must be overcome. This framing sets the agenda for the entire discussion.

She stated that the session would examine what it will take to move beyond connectivity alone to ensure that everyone can genuinely participate in the information society, regardless of language, geography, or economic circumstances .

Harris identifies a multi-dimensional agenda for digital inclusion that encompasses not only connectivity but also skills development, digital empowerment, cybersecurity, and AI readiness. By listing these together in her question to Algeria, she signals that genuine digital inclusion requires progress across all these dimensions simultaneously. This framing reflects a holistic understanding of what meaningful access entails.

In her question to Minister Zerrouki, she noted that Algeria has been working on connectivity, making knowledge accessible, skills and digital empowerment, cybersecurity, and AI readiness, and asked how countries can move from simple access to information towards real digital empowerment, inclusion, and opportunity for citizens .

Harris poses the challenge of balancing equitable access to knowledge and digital public services with the protection of digital sovereignty and trust. This question acknowledges that the expansion of AI and data-driven services creates both opportunities and risks for governments. It frames digital governance as requiring simultaneous attention to inclusion and sovereignty.

In her question to Libya, she asked how governments can ensure equitable access to knowledge and digital public services while safeguarding digital sovereignty, inclusion, and trust in an era where data and artificial intelligence are reshaping societies .

Harris frames the question of AI's role in terms of whether it will bridge or widen existing divides in access to information and knowledge. She challenges the panel to consider how AI can be directed towards equalisation rather than reinforcement of existing inequalities. This framing positions AI governance as central to the digital inclusion agenda.

In her question to Sri Lanka, she asked how we can ensure that AI provides a bridge for equalisation rather than reinforcing existing divides that are preventing societies from accessing information and knowledge .

Harris identifies regulation, universal access programmes, and 5G network deployment as the three key instruments that must be combined to extend the benefits of the digital and knowledge economy to rural and vulnerable populations. Her question to Costa Rica frames these as complementary tools rather than alternatives. She also highlights the specific challenge of high-capacity, low-latency connectivity demands created by AI.

In her question to Costa Rica, she noted that artificial intelligence is increasing the demand for high-capacity, low-latency connectivity, and asked how regulation, universal access programmes, and the deployment of 5G networks can help ensure that the opportunities of the digital and knowledge economy are accessible to everyone, particularly people in rural areas or vulnerable communities .

Harris identifies the gap between infrastructure expansion and meaningful digital inclusion, pointing to limited local content, low digital literacy, and lack of local languages online as persistent barriers. She frames this as a regulatory challenge, asking what measures are needed to address these demand-side barriers. This question connects the 2030 digital inclusion goals of ITU and other international organisations to concrete regulatory action.

She noted that ITU and other international organisations aim for meaningful digital inclusion by 2030, but that infrastructure expansion alone is not enough as many people remain excluded due to limited local content, low digital literacy, and lack of local languages online, and asked what regulatory measures are needed to ensure universal access to information and enable everyone to benefit from the internet's economic opportunities .

Harris highlights the significance of the WSIS Plus 20 outcome document's recognition of the technical community as a distinct stakeholder group, framing this as an opportunity for organisations like ICANN. By posing this question, she invites reflection on how this formal recognition can be translated into greater and more effective participation in digital governance. This connects the technical community's work to the broader WSIS framework.

She noted that the WSIS Plus 20 outcome document recognised the technical community as a distinct stakeholder group, and asked what opportunities for ICANN this recognition brings .