Redefining Digital Citizenship: From Internet Safety Rules to Empowered, Informed Citizens

Alik argues that the old access-based definition of digital citizenship is no longer sufficient. In the AI era, digital citizenship should include the ability to think critically, understand rights and responsibilities, and participate meaningfully and confidently in digital spaces.

He contrasts an earlier view in which digital citizenship was effectively equated with Internet access with the present reality that nearly 5.6 billion people are online, yet access alone does not guarantee meaningful participation . He then explicitly redefines digital citizenship as including critical thinking, navigating AI-enabled environments with confidence, understanding rights and responsibilities, and participating meaningfully in an increasingly digital society .

Alik presents digital citizenship as something that depends on a broader enabling ecosystem, not just individual effort. He stresses that institutions, governance, infrastructure, and collaboration across multiple stakeholder groups are all required for digital citizens to flourish.

He states that digital citizens do not emerge in isolation and instead depend on trusted institutions, effective governance, resilient infrastructure, and collaboration among governments, the private sector, civil society, and the technical community . He frames the panel itself as an exploration of these interdependent conditions for digital citizenship .

Dr. Hoda Baraka defines digital empowerment as both functional and normative. Citizens should not only be able to access and use technology, but do so safely, ethically, productively, and inclusively, especially in light of AI.

She says that in Egypt a digitally empowered citizen is someone who can access, understand, use, create, and benefit from digital technologies . She adds that this definition must now include doing so in a safe, ethical, productive, and inclusive manner, emphasising that ethics has become increasingly important with the spread of applied artificial intelligence .

Dr. Hoda Baraka argues that digital citizenship requires sustained capacity building across all age groups and social segments. Egypt’s approach spans infrastructure, literacy, formal education, workforce preparation, public sector training, safety education, and inclusion of persons with disabilities.

She explains that Egypt’s approach includes digital access and inclusion through the Digital Egypt programme and digital government services as part of the broader digital transformation agenda . She then details digital literacy programmes, school-level initiatives such as Digital Egypt Marvel Schools and the Digital Egypt Cubs Initiative, and further training for university students, graduates, and public servants so that all groups can use AI and advanced technologies . She also describes a digital citizenship and internet safety initiative covering children, women, adults, parents, and educators, and notes a dedicated centre to ensure persons with disabilities are included and empowered through AI-enabled tools .

Dr. Hoda Baraka treats online safety as integral to digital citizenship rather than an optional add-on. She argues that people must understand both how to use technology and how to protect themselves and others from the risks associated with AI and digital platforms.

She says that once digital tools are placed in the hands of children, students, graduates, and others, people must also be prepared for the challenges that come with them . She specifically lists misinformation, deepfakes, and threats to private data as major risks linked to AI use, and explains that Egypt’s digital citizenship and internet safety initiative is designed to help different community groups protect themselves and their children from such threats .

Dr. Hoda Baraka argues that policy documents alone are insufficient for responsible AI governance. National frameworks must be complemented by practical understanding, localisation of global models, and the operational capacity to apply governance tools in real settings.

She notes that countries can create policies, ethical charters, governance frameworks, guidelines for developers and deployers, and even procurement guidelines for public institutions buying AI systems . However, she insists this is not enough because institutions and developers must understand pre-deployment and post-deployment processes and be able to adapt international frameworks to local priorities . She also situates this within a broader need for both national and global AI governance, especially for Global South countries seeking more equitable access to AI resources and tools .

Dr. Hoda Baraka argues that responsible AI principles only become meaningful when they can be tested and verified in practice. She presents Egypt’s AI audit lab and related sandbox exploration as a way to translate ethics and governance principles into usable implementation tools.

She says that principles such as bias mitigation, fairness, accountability, transparency, openness, interoperability, and explainability are already well established in OECD and UNESCO guidance . She then explains that Egypt is establishing an AI Audit Lab with support from UNDP, GSMA, GIZ, and WebSphere, and is running workshops to understand how to build a sandbox-like mechanism that local programmers, developers, and SMEs can use to test and improve responsible AI systems . She frames this as a move from foundational and academic work towards implementation and real-world applicability .

Dr. Abeer Shakweer argues that digital citizenship should not be framed mainly around fear and avoidance. Instead, people should gain the capacities, critical thinking, and confidence to participate safely and responsibly in a digital environment shaped by AI.

She says the needed shift is from simply combating misinformation to strengthening information integrity by empowering citizens and equipping them with capacities, skills, and critical thinking to navigate the digital world and make informed decisions . She concludes that digital citizenship is not only about teaching people what to fear online, but about giving them the skills to engage safely and responsibly with the digital world .

Dr. Abeer Shakweer presents information integrity as something that needs practical tools and structured training. Her approach combines ecosystem assessment, targeted resources for high-impact groups, and broader AI and digital capacity building across society and government.

She describes a comprehensive UNDP programme in Egypt built on three pillars, beginning with work on misinformation and disinformation supported by an assessment of the information ecosystem . Based on that assessment, a bilingual Arabic-English toolkit was developed for youth and journalists, identified as especially in creating and sharing information online, and more than 120 young people and 25 trainers for journalists were trained on it . She adds that the programme also includes innovation work on AI for identifying or restricting false information, alongside capacity building for the general public, youth, and government officials across digital transformation, future intelligence, and digital public infrastructure programmes .

Dr. Abeer Shakweer argues for a broader, more systemic response to misinformation. Rather than focusing only on reactive debunking, institutions should strengthen people’s ability to access trustworthy information and make informed decisions through critical thinking.

She explicitly states that the biggest shift needed is to move from simply combating misinformation to strengthening information integrity . She explains that this means going beyond detection and instead empowering citizens with skills and critical thinking, while also recognising that trustworthy information is central to inclusive governance and sustainable development .

Dr. Abeer Shakweer argues that successful digital transformation depends on institutional preparedness as much as on technology itself. Organisations need structured assessments, clear implementation roadmaps, and the internal capacity to learn, adapt, and collaborate over time.

She states that building a trusted digital ecosystem requires investing in institutional readiness assessment as much as in technology development, and explains that UNDP uses digital and AI readiness tools to help organisations assess where they stand and build roadmaps for action . She gives examples from Egypt, including readiness assessment work with the Ministry of Justice and the National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority, followed by recommendations on investment priorities and coordination needs . She also links this to capacity building for government officials, citing recent training on practical and responsible AI with Egyptian institutions and regional programmes with the GSMA for policymakers from Egypt, Africa, and the Arab region .

Dr. Chafic Chaya argues that digital citizenship cannot be reduced to personal responsibility online. People can only participate as digital citizens if they also have dependable, secure, and resilient infrastructure that makes participation possible.

He says digital citizenship is often framed around individual behaviour such as staying safe online, protecting data, and avoiding misinformation, but argues that this is not enough . He stresses that all of this depends on the internet as the core enabling engine, warning that even the best AI platform is useless without connectivity . He adds that a digital citizen needs resilient connectivity, reliable platforms, and safe and secure networks in order to participate online .

Dr. Chafic Chaya links user trust directly to the quality and reliability of technical systems. If digital platforms are insecure or connectivity fails, people lose confidence and stop using those services.

He gives a simple everyday example: if an online platform is not secure, he would stop using it and lose trust in it . He also notes that if people do not have connectivity, they are effectively offline, which prevents digital participation and undermines the value of digital citizenship . He further points to the Global South, where access is expanding quickly but resilience and capacity building are not keeping pace, creating an ongoing gap .

Nicholas Field argues that young people are already acting as digital intermediaries in households and communities, but their role is undervalued. He suggests governments should intentionally engage them using the platforms and communication channels they actually follow.

He cites DataSphere Initiative research with the Omidyar Network and UNICEF, including youth labs and consultations on data governance, EdTech, and FinTech, and says the message from young people was that they are ready and want to be engaged . He adds that young people are often excluded or treated as an afterthought despite commonly helping older family members adopt technology through intergenerational support . He also argues that governments need to communicate through the channels young people use, such as influencers, YouTube, and podcasts, rather than relying only on traditional media .

Nicholas Field argues that youth-focused AI education will fail if adults and institutions remain unprepared. Teachers, universities, and policymakers also need training so they can set realistic parameters for responsible AI use and support younger users properly.

He asks how teachers can realistically teach AI if they do not understand it themselves and praises initiatives aimed at preparing educators and institutions . He supports this by referring to a recent DataSphere training in Barcelona for university professors on digital government and AI, where participants reported that universities still lack general policy guidance on AI and do not know how to engage with it effectively . He concludes that adults must define the parameters for AI use in educational and personal settings rather than placing all responsibility on young people .

Nicholas Field defines sandboxes as focused experimental environments designed to test solutions over a set period. He argues that they help build trust because they allow stakeholders to try out innovations safely before broader deployment.

He explains that DataSphere has mapped around 16 DPI-related sandboxes worldwide and defines sandboxes as technical infrastructures with specific learning goals and timeframes, intended to solve concrete problems rather than run indefinitely . He says they are fundamentally about building trust between regulators, the private sector, and citizens, while enabling safe experimentation in agile settings . He illustrates this with the French identity sandbox that evolved towards the EU digital ID wallet, and the GovStack interoperability sandbox, which allows testing of documents, identity, consent, registers, messaging, and workflow with synthetic data before rollout .

Nicholas Field argues that sandboxes should include independent scrutiny and transparent reporting. Without oversight from civil society or academia, sandbox processes risk becoming closed public-private exercises whose claims cannot be independently verified.

After describing sandbox models, he argues that civil society and academia need to play a role because sandbox results should be reported on rather than inside a black box . He explicitly warns against a situation where only governments and private companies announce that a sandbox worked well, and calls for neutral third-party actors to assess and report the outcomes, with interested citizen groups involved early as stakeholders .

Krisstina Rao argues that governments should build shared digital infrastructure components instead of separate systems for each department. This common approach is more efficient, less costly, and more user-friendly for citizens.

She explains that many governments still build separate digital systems for tax, transport, and other departments, which creates duplication and expense . She defines DPI as common horizontal infrastructure, giving examples such as one ID used across services, shared payment services, and consent-driven data exchange across government systems .

Krisstina Rao argues that inclusion is not separate from effectiveness in DPI; it is a precondition for success. If significant parts of the population cannot or do not use the system, governments will face duplicated costs and weak impact.

She says governments increasingly recognise that DPI will not be successful unless everyone is using it . She explains that if states must fund both digital systems and analogue services because adoption is incomplete, this becomes very expensive, so building for anything less than broad inclusion undermines the rationale for building at all .

Krisstina Rao argues that safe and inclusive DPI requires early and deliberate multi-stakeholder collaboration. Governments need outside expertise and representation from affected groups to ensure infrastructure design accounts for inclusion, safety, and accountability from the beginning.

She says governments are realising that infrastructure development is more complex than digitising a single vertical service and that they need partnerships not only with private actors but also with stakeholders who can push for inclusion, safety, and accountability . She adds that this has created urgency around who is brought into the room, how early they are included, and how the design process is structured . She further cites examples such as Brazil’s PIX forum and Ethiopia’s work with UNHCR to ensure its ID system was accessible to refugees, and notes that some collaboration formats work better than others .

Her Excellency Lara Al-Khateeb argues that awareness efforts are more effective when they are designed for specific audiences rather than the public in general. She stresses the need for simple, accessible communication formats so that different groups can understand both digital opportunities and risks.

She says awareness is very important and calls for online materials in easy-to-understand language, including formats such as videos and audio, so people can understand both the benefits and challenges of technology . She adds that Jordan tailors awareness campaigns to different categories of citizens, specifically naming children, women, businesses, and SMEs .

Her Excellency Lara Al-Khateeb argues that regulation should directly support safer digital spaces through protections for children, personal data, and system security. At the same time, she emphasises that regulations must be grounded in what can actually be implemented in practice.

She gives the example of chairing a committee on child protection online, beginning by consulting telecom operators about the technologies they already have and then speaking with international platforms to understand how any regulation can be applied on the ground . She also says data protection must remain central and that regulators must work closely with cybersecurity agencies to ensure technological advances include the necessary security protections .

Her Excellency Lara Al-Khateeb argues that regulators must avoid rigid rules that quickly become outdated. Instead, they should use adaptive regulation, learn from other countries, and consult stakeholders to ensure regulations are both relevant and practical.

She says that because technology and AI are developing rapidly, regulation must be flexible and able to adapt to future technological advances . She explains that Jordan relies on benchmarking and studying how other governments have regulated similar issues, especially as a country that often follows rather than leads on emerging technologies . She also stresses transparent consultation processes in which draft regulations are published and stakeholders are given time to comment so that theory can be aligned with real-world applicability .