WSIS Action Line C7 E-environment

Summary

This discussion was a side event focused on Action Line C7 on the environment as part of the WSIS Plus 20 High-Level Forum, examining the intersection of digital technologies and environmental sustainability over the past 20 years and future priorities. The session was moderated by David Jensen from the UN Environment Program and structured around four main components: reflecting on past achievements, examining current regional and country perspectives, identifying future directions, and developing strategic priorities for input into the WSIS Plus 20 process.

Dr. Archana Gulati from ITU outlined the three core goals of Action Line C7 established in 2003: using ICT for environmental protection, supporting sustainable production and disposal of ICT hardware, and establishing ICT-based disaster risk reduction systems. She highlighted significant progress including AI-powered forecasting, satellite early warning systems, and the integration of digital technologies into global environmental agreements, while acknowledging challenges like rapidly growing e-waste streams.

The discussion featured several practical examples of digital environmental applications. Thomas Ebert from the European Commission presented the EU’s digital product passport initiative, which will require data carriers for products to enable circular economy practices by 2027, starting with batteries. Anita Batamuliza from Rwanda discussed the implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility for e-waste management, highlighting challenges including limited capacity, enforcement issues, and inadequate data collection. Dr. George Ah-Thew from SADC described successful regional cooperation in developing National Emergency Telecommunications Plans, with five member states already implementing the model framework following devastating cyclones.

Future priorities identified by the panelists included addressing critical raw materials consumption, improving e-waste management and EPR implementation, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector, expanding early warning systems, and enhancing capacity building. The discussion concluded with audience input emphasizing the need for AI integration in waste mapping, responsible technology consumption, stronger governance frameworks, and inclusive community participation in developing environmental digital solutions.

Keypoints

## Overall Purpose/Goal

This was a side event for the WSIS+20 High-Level Forum focused on Action Line C7 on e-Environment. The session aimed to: 1) reflect on 20 years of achievements in connecting digital technologies with environmental action, 2) examine current regional and national implementations, 3) identify future priorities for digital-environment integration, and 4) develop concrete input for the WSIS+20 elements note.

## Major Discussion Points

– **Digital Product Passports as Circular Economy Enablers**: The European Commission’s development of digital product passports (DPPs) to link physical products with digital information, supporting circular economy use cases like repair, resale, and recycling. Starting with batteries in 2027, this system will eventually expand across most sectors in the EU to track materials and enable sustainable consumption.

– **E-waste Management and Extended Producer Responsibility**: Challenges in implementing e-waste regulations, particularly in developing countries like Rwanda, including lack of financing mechanisms, limited technical capacity, poor data collection, and enforcement difficulties. Despite having regulatory frameworks since 2018, actual implementation remains problematic with increasing e-waste generation.

– **Emergency Telecommunications and Early Warning Systems**: SADC’s successful development of model National Emergency Telecommunications Plans (NETP) following disasters like Tropical Cyclone Idai, with five member states already implementing the framework. The focus includes cell broadcast SMS systems, harmonized emergency frequencies, and integration with the UN’s Early Warning for All initiative.

– **Critical Raw Materials and Environmental Impact of ICT**: Growing concerns about material consumption for digital infrastructure (especially with 2.6 billion people still unconnected), greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector (now equivalent to airline industry), and the challenge of recycling only 25% of the 62 million tons of annual e-waste in documented ways.

– **Governance and Implementation Challenges**: Common barriers across all initiatives including unclear policy frameworks, capacity building needs, data gaps, enforcement difficulties, and the need for stronger committed leadership. Questions arose about regulatory responsibility for ICT’s environmental impact and the importance of inclusive civil society participation.

## Overall Tone

The discussion maintained a professional, collaborative tone throughout, with speakers sharing both achievements and challenges openly. While there was optimism about technological solutions and some success stories (particularly SADC’s emergency telecommunications progress), the tone became more urgent when discussing implementation gaps, governance challenges, and the scale of environmental problems. The session concluded with a sense of collective responsibility and commitment to advancing these priorities in the WSIS+20 framework.

Speakers

– **David Jensen** – Moderator, UN Environment Program

– **Archana G. Gulati** – Deputy Director of the Telecommunications Development Bureau at the ITU

– **Thomas Ebert** – Second national expert from the German Environment Agency, working on digital product passports at the European Commission

– **Anita Batamuliza** – National Government Representative on Extended Producer Responsibility with the Rwanda Utilities Regulatory Authority

– **George Ah-Thew** – Senior Program Officer, Directorate of Infrastructure, ICT Sector at the SADC Secretariat

– **Garam Bel** – ITU, Climate Change and Emergency Telecoms Division

– **Peiliang Shi** – World Meteorological Organization (WMO)

– **Audience** – Various participants including:

– Kwaku from Ghana

– Kimberly Camacho from Cooperativa Zulabatzu, Costa Rica

– Tim Unwin from the ICT4D collective

Additional speakers:

None identified beyond those in the speakers names list.

# WSIS Plus 20 High-Level Forum: Action Line C7 on e-Environment – Discussion Report

## Executive Summary

This side event at the WSIS Plus 20 High-Level Forum examined Action Line C7 on e-Environment, coordinated jointly by UNEP, WMO and the ITU. Moderated by David Jensen from the UN Environment Programme, the session brought together international experts to reflect on two decades of progress and identify future priorities for integrating digital technologies with environmental action.

The discussion revealed both significant achievements and persistent challenges in leveraging ICTs for environmental protection. Digital technologies have evolved from optional tools to essential enablers of environmental action, but fundamental implementation gaps remain across regulatory frameworks, capacity building, and governance structures. The session concluded with ten priority areas for the WSIS Plus 20 process, emphasizing strengthened implementation mechanisms and attention to emerging challenges such as critical raw materials consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector itself.

## Historical Context and Evolution of Action Line C7

Dr. Archana Gulati from the ITU’s Telecommunications Development Bureau provided an overview of Action Line C7’s evolution since 2003. She outlined three core goals that remain relevant: utilizing ICT for environmental protection and sustainable resource management, supporting sustainable production and consumption patterns for ICT hardware, and establishing robust ICT-based disaster risk reduction systems.

The transformation over two decades has been remarkable. Digital technologies have progressed from supplementary tools to essential enablers of environmental action, with integration into major global environmental agreements spanning climate action to biodiversity conservation. AI-powered forecasting systems, satellite-based early warning networks, and sophisticated environmental monitoring platforms demonstrate the maturation of digital environmental applications.

However, this progress has created new challenges. The rapid expansion of digital infrastructure has generated unprecedented e-waste streams, while the ICT sector’s greenhouse gas emissions have grown substantially, raising questions about the environmental impact of digital transformation itself.

## Regional Perspectives and Implementation Experiences

### European Union: Digital Product Passports Initiative

Thomas Ebert, a second national expert from the German Environment Agency working at the European Commission, presented the EU’s digital product passport framework. This initiative represents a systematic approach to enabling circular economy practices through digital information systems, developed under the SURPASS 2 project within the Digital Europe program.

Digital product passports will link physical products to comprehensive digital information across 13 different categories, enabling repair services, resale markets, and recycling processes. Implementation begins in 2027 for batteries before expanding to other sectors. The framework addresses information asymmetry in circular economy systems by providing standardized digital information about products’ materials, components, and lifecycle data.

### Rwanda: Extended Producer Responsibility Challenges

Anita Batamuliza from the Rwanda Utilities Regulatory Authority, who chairs an East African collaboration working group, provided a candid assessment of e-waste management implementation in developing countries. Despite establishing e-waste regulations in 2018, Rwanda’s experience illustrates significant gaps between regulatory frameworks and effective implementation.

Primary challenges include inadequate financing mechanisms, limited technical capacity for enforcement and monitoring, insufficient infrastructure for collection and processing, and persistent informal sector activities. These barriers have resulted in poor compliance rates and continued growth in unmanaged e-waste streams, demonstrating that legislation alone is insufficient without institutional and financial infrastructure for implementation.

### SADC: Regional Cooperation in Emergency Telecommunications

Dr. George Ah-Thew from the SADC Secretariat presented a success story in regional cooperation for disaster response applications. Following Tropical Cyclone Idai in 2019, SADC developed the first regional model National Emergency Telecommunications Plan (NETP) under the Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan (RISDIP).

With 95.2% mobile penetration across the region, five member states have implemented the framework and five additional states are in development. The approach includes establishing national emergency telecommunications working groups, implementing cell broadcast SMS systems alongside traditional channels, and harmonizing emergency frequency allocations. This demonstrates the potential for coordinated approaches when supported by committed regional leadership and practical, adaptable frameworks.

### Global Meteorological Infrastructure

Peiliang Shi from the World Meteorological Organization highlighted the fundamental role of global integrated observing systems in environmental monitoring and forecasting. WMO is implementing the WMO Information System 2.0 with a unified data policy, targeting 90% completion by 2030.

This infrastructure enhancement will improve data sharing, forecasting accuracy, and integration with early warning systems. The organization collaborates with companies like Google and Microsoft on AI applications, providing the foundation for machine learning applications that offer transformative opportunities for enhanced environmental services and forecasting capabilities.

## Current Challenges and Implementation Barriers

### E-waste Management and Extended Producer Responsibility

Garam Bel from ITU’s Climate Change and Emergency Telecoms Division provided sobering statistics: countries with e-waste legislation achieve average collection rates of 25%, while those without approach zero percent. With global e-waste generation reaching significant levels and less than 25% formally recycled, the challenge is immense.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes face common implementation challenges including unclear policy frameworks, inadequate financing mechanisms, limited technical capacity, poor data collection systems, and enforcement difficulties. The experience from Rwanda and other developing countries demonstrates that EPR implementation requires comprehensive support systems beyond regulatory frameworks.

### Critical Raw Materials and Resource Constraints

A significant challenge emerged around critical raw materials consumption. Garam Bel highlighted the tension between universal connectivity goals and finite material resources, noting that 2.6 billion people remain unconnected while critical raw materials are finite resources comparable to coal in their scarcity.

Kimberly Camacho from Costa Rica responded with the insight that responsible consumption by already-connected populations must balance raw material needs for connecting others. This introduces questions of global equity and resource distribution that extend beyond technical implementation to fundamental sustainable development patterns.

### Governance and ICT Sector Emissions

Throughout the discussion, governance challenges emerged as a persistent theme. David Jensen identified common barriers including policy and legal frameworks, compliance mechanisms, capacity limitations, data gaps, and enforcement difficulties.

A significant governance question arose regarding regulatory responsibility for ICT sector greenhouse gas emissions. Garam Bel raised questions about whether telecommunications regulators or other authorities should oversee emissions from the ICT sector, highlighting institutional complexity and potential regulatory blind spots.

## Priority Areas and Future Directions

### Ten Key Priorities Identified

The session identified ten priority areas through speaker presentations and audience participation:

1. **Digital Product Passports**: Expanding the EU model to support global circular economy practices

2. **Early Warning for All**: Implementing the UN Secretary-General’s initiative with ITU’s role in Pillar 3 on warning dissemination and communication

3. **ICT Sector Emissions**: Addressing greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector with clarified regulatory responsibilities

4. **Enhanced EPR and E-waste Management**: Strengthening Extended Producer Responsibility schemes

5. **Critical Raw Materials**: Managing finite resources while pursuing universal connectivity

6. **Capacity Building**: Expanding technical and institutional capacity, particularly in developing countries

7. **AI Applications**: Implementing AI-aided mapping for waste management and environmental monitoring

8. **Responsible Consumption**: Promoting sustainable consumption patterns among connected populations

9. **Holistic Environmental Frameworks**: Starting with environmental systems rather than technology impacts

10. **Governance Enhancement**: Combining stronger institutional leadership with inclusive civil society participation and community-level engagement

### Emerging Technology Applications

The discussion highlighted significant potential for AI and machine learning in environmental applications. Kwaku from Ghana specifically inquired about AI-aided mapping for waste management systems, suggesting practical applications for developing countries. The integration of satellite systems, IoT sensors, AI, and geospatial mapping could create comprehensive disaster monitoring systems.

However, participants noted that the environmental impact of emerging technologies, including increased energy consumption from AI systems and data centers, must be carefully managed to avoid undermining sustainability objectives.

### Implementation and Community Engagement

Multiple participants emphasized the need for stronger institutional leadership combined with inclusive civil society participation. The challenge of last-mile uptake of environmental digital products and services at the community level represents a significant gap between developing sophisticated solutions and achieving actual community adoption and appropriate responses.

## Conclusion

This discussion of Action Line C7 revealed both significant progress over two decades and substantial remaining challenges. The evolution of digital technologies to essential enablers of environmental action represents a fundamental transformation, but persistent implementation gaps, governance challenges, and emerging concerns about digital technologies’ environmental impact require urgent attention.

The ten priority areas identified provide a roadmap for the WSIS Plus 20 framework, building on successful experiences like SADC’s regional cooperation and the EU’s digital product passport initiative. Success will depend on balancing technological advancement with environmental sustainability, ensuring equitable access to digital environmental solutions, and developing governance frameworks that combine institutional leadership with community participation. The session’s insights provide a valuable foundation for producing an input paper to the WSIS Plus 20 elements note.

David Jensen: on time. So I want to extend a warm welcome to everybody to this side event on the Action Line E7 on the environment. I’d like to also extend that welcome to those online. I hope everybody can hear me. So I’ll be your Humber moderator for today’s event. My name is David Jensen and I’m working with the UN Environment Program. Now I’m just gonna let the door close so everybody can hear me. We have a bit of a mission impossible ahead of us, but I guarantee you we will succeed. We have about 45 minutes to go through this agenda and we want to accomplish four things in this time period. First, we’re going to start with a bit of a reflection, the past achievements of the Action Line over the last 20 years. And then we’re going to go from the history to the present. We’re going to focus on some of the current achievements in different regions and different countries. Then we’re going to move into the future. What are the future directions and future priorities in terms of connecting digital and environment? And then finally, we’re going to have a strategic conversation trying to nail down priorities and trying to come up with an input paper to the WSIS plus 20 elements note, which is now circulating. So I’m hoping we can make this very concrete and actually have an output from this meeting. Now, given the fact that we’re under time pressure, I will introduce our panelists when they speak, not at the outset. So without further ado, let’s move into part one. And as I said, part one is really about reflecting on the past and the achievements, the major achievements of Action Line 7 on the environment. So it’s my pleasure to introduce now Dr. Achana Gulati, the Deputy Director of the Telecommunications Development Bureau at the ITU. You have five minutes to give us this historical overview. The floor is yours.

Archana G. Gulati: Thank you. Distinguished delegates, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of Dr. Cosmos Lakisan Zavazava, Director of the Telecommunication Development Bureau, it is my pleasure to address you. It is an honour indeed to join you for this important segment of the Action Line C7 on e-Environment and to say a few words about the achievements and the evolution of digital environmental action over the past 20 years of the WSIS process. Action Line C7 on e-Environment is coordinated jointly by UNEP, WMO and the ITU and it has been guided by three clear goals since its inception in 2003. First, to use and promote information and communication technology for environmental protection and sustainable use of natural resources. Second, to support the sustainable production and consumption and environmentally safe disposal and recycling of ICT hardware and third, to establish ICT based systems for disaster risk reduction, forecasting and monitoring. These goals remain remarkably relevant even today. In fact, they have become even more urgent in the light of accelerating climate and environmental crises that we face. So I am pleased to report that we have seen transformational progress over the past two decades. ICTs have moved from being optional tools to essential enablers of environmental action and for saving lives. Just to mention a few, we are now developing satellites capable of sending early warning alerts directly to mobile phones, AI models forecasting a variety of hazards and the Internet of Things networks that support many aspects of our daily lives. The integration of digital technologies into major global environmental agreements from climate to biodiversity is a clear testament of this evolution. At the same time, the environmental footprint of our digital world cannot be ignored. E-waste is one of the fastest growing waste streams globally with disproportionate impacts on least developed countries. ITU is addressing this challenge in collaboration with partners, in particular the UNITAR, through global standards, policy and regulatory support, and data-driven strategies that create a circular economy for electronics. Moreover, in today’s world of escalating climate-related disasters, digital resilience is critical. This is why the UN Secretary-General’s Early Warning for All initiative aims to ensure everyone is protected by an early warning system. ITU’s Telecom Development Bureau leads Pillar 3 on warning, dissemination and communication, ensuring alerts reach people at risk at the right time, so that concrete life-saving actions can take place before a disaster strikes. In the Telecommunication Development Bureau, we are proud to work across both environmental sustainability and disaster resilience, supporting countries in deploying digital technologies that safeguard both the people as well as the planet. From national emergency telecommunication plans to green digital strategies, our goal is to build a more connected, resilient and sustainable world. Today’s session is both a celebration of progress and a call to continued action. Let’s keep building on the vision of the C7 Action Line on e-environment and ensure that digital technologies remain a force of sustainability, equity and resilience in the decades ahead. Thank you. Over to you, Nitin.

David Jensen: Thank you so much, Dr. Salathi. There’s no audio. Part two, where we begin to look at, thank you, where we begin to look at country and regional perspectives, some of the lessons learned and some of the innovations. And we’re going to start looking at the work, some of the interesting work of the European Commission. We have online Thomas Ebert, who is working on digital product passports. I think these are one of the most fundamental digital technology enablers for circularity. And we’re going to listen to Thomas to give us an update on what’s happening in the EU level with respect to digital product passports, some of the progress, some of the challenges. Thomas, over to you, please.

Thomas Ebert: Yes. Thank you for the invitation. And thank you for giving me the presence to talk at this important event today. Actually, I’m a second national expert coming from the German Environment Agency. And this is just to emphasize the link between the digital product passport, what I’m working here in the Commission, and environment, because we clearly see, as you just said in your introduction, a strong link between DPPs and circular economy. In the Environment Agency, I was working on product policy, so designing requirements for products. And together with a colleague who was more working on the waste stream, we were discussing how can we make circular economy really happen. And we realized that there’s a lot of problems with generating the information and transporting them along the value chain of the products. So to link the information to the product gives a lot of use cases and benefits for the circular economy. For example, when you want to resell an electronic vehicle, you need to have information about the state of health of the battery, because that determines the value of the product. Or for example, when you want to repair a product, you need to understand how can you open and dismantle the product to exchange parts? How can you do the repair? So there are a lot of circular economy-based use cases, which need information about that product. And if you make that link from this physical product to the digital information, that’s really supporting these use cases. And we were very happy to see that in 2020, this was also recognized in the Circular Economy Action Plan, which first mentioned digital product passports here in Europe. And it was further spelled out in 2022, when the EcoDesign for Sustainable Product Regulation had been adopted to spell out a bit more the details on the digital product passport. This is a framework regulation, so it doesn’t introduce the digital products right away, but it just allows to set requirements on a product level. Because when you want to do it right, there are two work streams you have to distinguish. The one is the work stream on setting up the technical system, how to exchange information between stakeholders, how to link it to the product. That needs to be like overarching, that needs to be the same for all products. Because when you want to have a product passport for a battery, and later you have the product passport for the car, you need to link them. And also different actors need to be able to introduce their information. So this is work which is ongoing at the moment at European level, and especially also in standardization, where we have asked Sense Intellect to develop standards to produce the system based on openness, interoperability, transparency, and also to ensure that there’s no vendor lock-in on a specific provider. And then there’s a second discussion element, which is what data needs to be in the digital product passport. And that depends very much on the product. So when you think about electronic products, you might have more information on repair than, for example, for textiles. So this needs to be really spelled out on the individual product group level, where you need to look at the product, where you need to identify the environmental hotspots, and also understand the value chain around the product to make circularity happen in that stage. And because that is maybe a slow process, a rather slow process, we try to encourage everybody, especially companies, to look what’s in for you with a digital product passport. How could digital information link to a product help you to transition to circular business models to really push your company in that respect. And we see that the DPP, it can be the core, it can be the seed for a whole ecosystem of services growing around this. And that’s why also we have the Surpass 2 project running under the Digital Europe program, which tries to go into practice to build digital product passports in 13 different categories and to understand the value of these digital product passports for circular economy. And I hope we can discuss more later. I think my time is up now.

David Jensen: It’s basically a data carrier, which will contain all of this information, as you just talked about, but eventually the vision is that digital product passports will be required for every sector inside the European Union except agricultural and pharmaceuticals. Is that right?

Thomas Ebert: Well, it started with a few product groups. The first ones would have to have DPP is the big batteries or car batteries or stationary storage batteries, but it will be growing. And the recently adopted single market strategy also spelled out quite clearly that whenever we redo a regulation or come up with a new regulation, we need to see that if there’s digital information required, how to link that to the digital product passport. So it started all from circular economy. And that’s, I think, also the main driver. And we need to keep up with that. But it might grow in different directions also with regard to electronic reporting and different other use cases. But the core is circular economy and the core is a few products in eco design, but it will grow more and more in the next years, also even outside the box. But important is also to stress that it’s not just the mandatory part. It’s what you make out of it, how you make the transition to circular economy happen with that, too.

David Jensen: And 2027 is the is the core year, right? That’s where the regulation kicks in. It becomes a regulatory requirement. Is that correct?

Thomas Ebert: Yes, in 2027, batteries need to have a DPP. For other product groups like textiles and iron and steel, this is also envisioned, but a bit later in time. But 2027, the first DPPs will be operational.

David Jensen: Fantastic. Thank you so much. And we’ll come back to this as a fundamental core enabler of the circular economy throughout the discussion. I’d like to move on to Anita Hodari. She’s the National Government Representative on Extended Producing Responsibility with the Rwanda Utilities Regulatory Authority. And I think this is a nice transition because Extended Producer Responsibility was kind of the first, in a way, step to track and trace electronic products, and it’s kind of morphed into DPP. So let’s start with Anita or go back to Anita, and she can explain some of the experience from Rwanda on using EPR. Anita, the floor is yours.

Anita Batamuliza: Okay, thank you, Moderator, for allowing me to present the status of implementation of EPR in Rwanda. It is a project which is still ongoing, but I can give you a background so far. Since 2018, Rwanda, through the Regulatory Authority, has had a regulation governing E-Waste. However, the regulation framework has had neither a financing mechanism nor the full range of the decreased obligations for all players along the E-Waste value chain. This has therefore resulted in the regulations not being implemented nor enforced. So in 2022, ITU, together with UNEP, has been providing technical assistance to the Government of Rwanda, focusing on designing and implementing E-Waste. and Mr. Thomas Ebert, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Mr. Peiliang Shi, Mr. Thomas Ebert, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Mr. Thomas Ebert, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Mr. Garam Bel, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Ms. Anita Batamuliza, Ms. Anita Batamuliza We have a challenge of limited capacity, personal and technical, in terms of physical collection and treatment infrastructure, not even in Rwanda, but in many developing countries. We have also the challenge of enforcement, lack of enforcement. We have a challenge of entry formal sectors. For others, if you need more information, I’m lucky there is Garam, who is attending physically, he can give you more information about this project of IPERA implementation in Rwanda. Otherwise, in the region, we are lucky, we are collaborating with East African collaborations, where we share the experts and we share the status for each country in East Africa, and I’m a chairperson of that working group. We have a working group, seven, which deals with the US and the Green ICT. Thank you. For some reason, I can’t seem to remember to turn my microphone on. One follow-up question. You talked about poor data, but do you have any general trend lines? I mean, is the problem getting worse or is the problem improving based on some of the activities you’ve discussed? Based on, because we had a sort of like inventory survey in 2018, within five years, now it is worsening because it was increasing, obviously. And since then, we haven’t done any inventory survey, so there is that lack of data.

David Jensen: But despite our best efforts, it’s still a major problem, basically. The trend line is going up rather than down, so we still need it. It’s still an absolute priority to get under control. Thanks for that perspective, Anita. Let’s move now to the final speaker in this section, Dr. George Patrick Athieu, the Senior Program Officer, the Directorate of Infrastructure, ICT Sector at the SADC Secretariat for a Regional Perspective. Dr. George, the floor is yours.

George Ah-Thew: Thank you so much for the kind introduction, Mr. Jensen. A very good morning to everyone. It’s an absolute pleasure to be on the panel for WSIS Plus 20 High-Level Forum, representing the Southern African Developing Community. For those who have had the opportunity to visit SADC, our region is blessed with immense natural beauty, flora, fauna, wildlife and minerals, but it is the most disaster-prone region in Africa. When disasters strike, often local telecommunications systems get disrupted in the affected area and test the need for a national emergency telecommunications plan. Development of the SADC model NETP is one of the flagship projects stemming from the SADC Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan, in short, RISDIP. It has become the guiding strategic instrument for the region to enable member states to strengthen and enhance their emergency telecoms capabilities and preparedness, and it is assisting member states to easily develop their NETP to enable a more integrated and comprehensive disaster risk management framework in the region in all four phases of DRM, namely mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. Now, tropical cyclone Idai in 2019 was the last straw, as it was one of the worst to hit the SADC region. Thereafter, SADC Secretariat requested the assistance of the ITU, and the support came through the Office of the Head of Environment and Emergency Telecoms Division. Everybody knows Madame Vanessa Gray. And in 2022, ITU supported SADC to undertake the situation analysis to capture the state of play in terms of emergency telecoms ecosystem, including early warning system. And in 2023, we developed the SADC model NETP. SADC is the first mover on this. And I’m pleased to announce that five member states have already transposed the SADC model NETP, such as the Kingdom of Eswatini, Malawi, Namibia, United Republic of Tanzania, and Zimbabwe. Now, as we speak, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, and Zambia are also doing likewise. So member states have established their national emergency telecoms working groups to start the conversation on NETP. And that’s where the work begins. ITU BDT, under the leadership of Dr. Zava Zava, has provided support to most of these SADC member states. In 2020, we developed the SADC framework for harmonization of radio frequency spectrum for public protection and disaster relief, PPDR, that caters for narrowband, wideband, and broadband services in the region’s harmonized UHF band to bring about economies of scale interoperability and cross-border collaboration to respond to disasters. Now, in view of the high SADC mobile penetration rate of 95.2%, SADC is promoting the implementation of cell broadcast SMS, in addition to radio, TV, and other means of how to get to people, so that we reach 100% of our people. With the support of the ITU, SADC member states such as Botswana, Mauritius, and Seychelles are moving towards that direction of using cell broadcast SMS mobile early warning systems. Now, let me, despite of all this progress, allow me a few minutes just to talk about some of the challenges the region is facing. One, establishment of clear policy and legal framework to designate the National Regulatory Authority, the NRA, as the champion to lead on implementing emergency telecoms. Two, access to a central depository of high-resolution vulnerability maps from various entities within the country with the ability to overlay maps to be shared by the NRA and telcos for contingency planning of critical infrastructure. Three, SADC plans to use mobile phone data and satellite real-time data images for various geospatial mapping for visualization of disasters to enable well-informed decisions and enhance planning and also for before and after views. Four, development and enforcement of regulations for early warning alert dissemination and a designation of a national and centralized alert abrogator to receive all the types of alerts using the ITU common alerting protocol and then send them to different alerting disseminations. Five, we plan to harmonize three-digit shortcode for toll-free emergency services such as pandemics and disasters to promote public safety response. And last but not the least, practice makes perfect. As member states establish their NETPs, simulation exercises, CMEX, tabletop exercises, TTXs at national and regional levels are important and they can enforce the competencies of member states on emergency services. The progress of SADC member states have made thus far is good and it has all of these dependent on some other entities such as the WMO on additional CAP training. GSME, UNDRR, the World Food Program and ETC. We look forward to strengthening these relationships and linkages and support to ensure SADC is prepared in terms of emergency telecoms before the next disaster. One life lost is too many. I thank you for the opportunity to say a few words on behalf of SADC, which consists of 16 member states, four island states, six completely landlocked states, and six coastal states. Thank you so much, Mr. Jensen.

David Jensen: Thank you very much, Dr. Arthew. That’s a good news story. Fantastic. It’s great to have a positive example of one of the action line goals going forward in such a dramatic and positive way. But of course, as you talked about, and I found that interesting, a lot of the challenges are actually very similar to some of the challenges we heard in the EPR case, policy and legal framework, compliance, capacity, data, enforcement, very, very common set of challenges across these two examples. So that’s sort of part two of our panel where we sort of dived very quickly into a couple of examples at the regional level, the national level of the action line goals. We’re going to shift now to part three, where we’re going to focus on the future. What are the future priorities for bringing together digital and environment? And how can we begin to place those priorities within the WSIS plus 20 implementation framework and the global digital compact implementation framework? And to do us, to lead us in this third part, we’re going to turn now to my colleague, Dr. Garam Bell. He’s also with the ITU, the Climate Change and Emergency Telecoms Division. And Garam’s going to talk a little bit about his experience on e-waste, on greening, ICT, on circular economy, and what do the future priorities hold for this space? Garam, the floor is yours.

Garam Bel: Yeah, thank you very much. David. So I think this is a very fast moving complex space right now when we look at circular economy and when we look at climate change and we look at those in the context of digitalization. Maybe there’s one sort of main premise behind everything that we are consuming when it comes to products and services, and that’s the material consumption, what’s in those products. So we’ve already heard from speakers about digital product passports, which are obviously looking at one side of the story, which is that side of the story, but others as well, tracking where those materials are going, making sure that we have some kind of also understanding of what sort of supply and continuity there is around those materials. So going forward, I would like to put one clear sort of objective or proposal from my side as somebody who’s worked in this space for a while now is critical raw materials. That is a very important area. We understand, I think, estimates from ITU around 2.6 billion people are currently unconnected to the internet. So what’s the material requirement to achieve that goal? Yeah. So, I mean, there are some big questions out there. And then when we look at the sort of waste side, we have the physical or the tangible waste, which is the electronic waste that’s generated. So we’re currently generating around 62 million tons of e-waste per year, and we’re only recycling less than a quarter of that in a formally documented way. So that also means that whatever we’re sort of consuming or putting into products when we manufacture them, we’re not necessarily getting much of that back in terms of the critical raw materials. And those critical raw materials are are finite. It’s like coal, basically. So we have to sort of look at this side of the story as well, I think, going forward here. And then, yeah, I’m mentioning here the e-waste part, the physical, tangible waste. That’s obviously a big issue to address as well. So Anita from Rwanda mentioned some examples there. We have policy frameworks, extended producer responsibility. We have countries that have legislation in place, but we don’t see so much implementation. She mentioned financing issues. Financial mechanisms are needed for this type of waste because it’s a special waste stream. We cannot rely on local authorities, municipalities that maybe are collecting things like cardboard or aluminium cans from our households to also collect e-waste. This is a real challenge. So the financing side behind it. We see that countries that have legislation in place have, on average, a collection rate of 25 percent for e-waste. Those countries without any legislation, it’s close to zero percent. So the effect of legislation, having a level playing field for all is essential. So I’ve talked about critical raw materials. I’ve talked about e-waste and now I will finish by talking about greenhouse gas emissions. This is another core area that I think is worth considering as we look forward in the WSIS process. We understand, according to estimates, that this sector is now generating basically the same as the airline sector when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. I’d like to also touch on a point that George mentioned, the previous speaker, when talking about emergency telecommunications and that lack of understanding maybe of who is regulating that issue. It’s the same here. Who is regulating the greenhouse gas emissions coming from this sector? Is it the telecom regulators or is it somebody else? and others. What’s the scope here? So there is some really big, challenging policy questions, but also some big, challenging data questions across these topics. So just to wrap up, critical raw materials, electronic waste, and greenhouse gas emissions, some really, really hot topics looking forward. Thank you.

David Jensen: For some reason, I can’t remember to do the bush the button, but that’s okay. On the greenhouse gas emissions, I think that really speaks also to the increasing use of artificial intelligence and the massive increase in emissions coming out of data centers from that huge demand. And so, as you say, the question of who regulates that is an interesting one. Let’s move to the final speaker now in this particular section. We’re going to hand it over to our colleague from WMO to talk a little bit more about the early warning work and the future priorities for early warning for all initiative. So please, the floor is yours.

Peiliang Shi: Thank you, David. Good morning, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. The World Meteorological Organization recognized the pivotal role of information and communication technologies in achieving sustainable development for all. WMO’s core mandate is to develop and implement globally coordinated systems for Earth system observation, including weather, climate, and water. Our global integrated observing systems and global information systems are fundamental infrastructure for providing accurate and timely information vital for the informed decision-making across all sectors. A critical aspect of our work directly aligned with the WSIS goals is the early warning systems. We are committed to ensure those life-saving systems are in place globally, and key focuses Minister of Environment and Food Peace Democracy and Finnish Governing Minister for 2021 and years under the cap and hold government. I am very pleased to participate in this conference and our meeting will take place on the 30th anniversary of the WMO and the WMO plays a crucial role in data and information management ensuring the quality, accessibility and effective use of Earth system data for the benefit of all nations. As a typical example in this area, the WMO Information System 2.0 provides an advanced framework to enhance the sharing and accessibility of weather, climate and water data among WMO members. It provides a modern, flexible and powerful platform for data sharing in the new century and it supports our WMO’s unified data policy. Looking back over the years, our experience highlights the critical need for skilled ICT professionals within the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services to fully harness the potential of those technologies. Addressing this technological gap is essential for effective implementation. Looking ahead, particularly in line with the summit of the future, we see great potential in regional and sub-regional collaboration. We’ve heard a very exciting story from Sadek. and colleagues a few minutes ago. So we also see new technologies like AI, machine learning, cloud computing and open source approach offer transformative opportunities for enhanced services. Ongoing migration to the new WMO information system targeting a 90% completion by the year 2030 will be a key enabler. So let’s work together, continue work together to leveraging the power of digital technology to build a more resilient, sustainable and informed future for all. Thank you.

David Jensen: Thank you so much. It’s a perfect wrap up now. So we’re going to open it up to part four where we talk to the audience, the members of the participation in the group and online as well. We’ve heard now I’d say six priorities going forward that should be addressed as part of the WSIS Action Line plus 20 process and GDC. We’ve heard about the digital product passport. We’ve heard about early warning for all, the need to address greenhouse gas emissions in the ITC sector, the need for more emphasis on EPR and e-waste and a fundamental need to start looking at material consumption and critical raw materials. And then finally, underpinning all of that would be much more emphasis on capacity building. And what’s interesting, of course, is that all of those actually fit very nicely into the existing Action Line. So it’s really about sort of interpreting the Action Line and prioritizing what has to happen in the coming years. But what’s missing? I want to turn it down to the audience. What’s missing from these six priorities? What have you not heard we should be looking at in terms of the Action Line going forward? What are the burning issues that are in your minds that we should be writing down and putting into the input process for what’s called the Action Line? What’s it called? The executive note? There’s an executive note that’s being developed right now for the Action Line. and we’re putting an input on environment. So we would like to know from you what’s missing from our list. Please introduce yourself and then be succinct.

Audience: My regards to the speakers. My name is Kwaku from Ghana. I am very interested in Anita’s case study. I want to find out if there are plans to incorporate AI-aided mapping into the waste management ecosystem to aid efficiency in tackling waste management. That is a gap that we need to fill and I’ll be interested in the case studies that other countries like developing countries like Ghana can benchmark. Thank you very much.

David Jensen: How do we look at the enabling applications of AI as well as the impact of AI? Either Anita or Thomas, do you guys have any experience in using AI for mapping waste or looking at using AI for global e-waste modeling? Maybe I’ll let Anita go as well.

Thomas Ebert: From my side, it’s a very new area and it’s not something that we have worked on in ITU. I will be completely honest.

David Jensen: Sorry, Anita, do you have any reflections on that question?

Anita Batamuliza: Sorry, Jensen, where I am is sort of like, too much sound, I didn’t hear very well the question.

David Jensen: Sure.

Anita Batamuliza: But as long as Garam is there, then you can ask me.

David Jensen: The question was just, do you have experience in using AI to map e-waste or to use AI for tracking and tracing e-waste or conducting inventories? Not yet, but it could be a priority to look at going forward.

Anita Batamuliza: Yes.

David Jensen: Thank you so much. And of course, WMO is using AI in terms of a lot of its systems, and this is a major priority for you. Do you want to just mention anything about your AI applications with respect to early warning for all or the work that you’re working on in forecasting?

Peiliang Shi: Very briefly, yes, WMO has just developed its roadmap to integrate AI into its forecasting system development strategy. And in addition to that, we are also working with the big tech like Google and Microsoft. We know that they are using AI to analyze pictures before and after a disaster event. I think the same sort of technology could apply to e-waste monitoring as well, I guess. So I see a lot of opportunities there, and we are just starting to explore.

David Jensen: Thank you.

Audience: Thank you, Kimberly Camacho, Cooperativa Zulabatzu, Costa Rica. I was doing a sign to turn on the telephone, not raising my hand, but I will take the opportunity. It’s just a very, very small comment in relation to the raw material required to connect everybody that you mentioned, yes. We always think… I think that it doesn’t have, maybe it’s a controversial issue, but when we talk about connecting everybody at the material that we need for this connection, it doesn’t have to be accompanied by responsible consumption of technology for the ones that are already connected, yes, and reducing the consumption of technology, then we can really balance the raw material needed to connect the others with the responsible consumption from us, from the ones who are very much connected. Then it has to be accompanied by something like that, yes, and not just create more possibility to connection, which is good, but also to reduce the consumption of the others, then just an observation.

David Jensen: No, that’s a great point. We’ve got three minutes left, and I want to make sure that everybody’s ideas are reflected. If there’s no other hands to go up, I have one question to the audience.

Audience: Very briefly, Tim Unwin from the ICT4D collective. Much of the discussion and rhetoric is around the impact that technologies have. I’d just like to encourage us to think more the other way around and to begin with environment, because we don’t really have an existing systematic holistic framework. We’ve been developing one that, David, I think we spoke in 2021 about it, but that addresses all the aspects around lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and biosphere. If we begin there and actually look at how digital technologies are being used to destroy that environment and begin with that kind of approach, I think we would get some very, very different conclusions that might actually enable us to have a better human engagement in nature in the future. I’m very happy to talk further.

David Jensen: See, I pressed it this time and it went off. It doesn’t like me. It’s a question of governance. And oh, there’s a hand. Sorry. Go ahead.

Audience: This is a very late question. I wanted to send the question to the WMO. It’s very interesting that we’re having more sessions at tech for circular economy in the environment. Please keep it up and increase slots for conversations about the realities from global South countries. Thank you.

David Jensen: Thank you so much. The final question is really about governance. And I would really wanted to have a brainstorm around what kind of governance frameworks are needed to actually monitor the new WSIS process going forward, the WSIS plus 20. What governance, let’s say, challenges face the previous one and how can those be corrected in the future one is the final question. We’ve got a minute left. If anybody wants to come up with anything about governance, that would be great. There’s a hand with a speaker who had their hand up. Sorry. Is it George? Yes. Yes. Moderator.

George Ah-Thew: Just wanted to come in very quickly on something that perhaps as a new forward looking technology, we mentioned earlier Google Maps. You know, when you go to Google, you have a layer for wildfires. With the advent of satellite and internet of things, we could have sensors for floods, for example, across Africa. I know ITU did a project in 2017. They put two sensors in Zambia. If you could have a layer for different types of disasters, we put them on maps because geospatial mapping is important, but also include navigation. In our vehicles, in our phones, as we move around, we could navigate through those disasters. I think in terms of using a combination of AI technology, there’s a new satellite system that was launched in March called Firesat. All those technologies bledded up together with geospatial capabilities. That is a tool we really need. I just wanted to bring that to the table, to the fore, so you could consider that in your paper. Thank you.

David Jensen: I know we don’t have much time. No, I appreciate that. Thank you very much. It’s a very valid point. Great point. It’s also about combining the technologies and looking, thinking about not just the environmental side, but also the social, economic, political side of these different applications. Does anybody want to do a closing remark on government?

Audience: Stronger committed leadership. This is in general so important, it needs driving forward. I’m very much a bottom-up person, but it’s strange for me to say it, but I think if we’re going to make an impact, we have to have a team. You’ve been great, but a team really, really driving this with all the key players, and this is the future. It’s the most important session, I think.

David Jensen: Mark, closing remarks on governance?

Audience: Strong and really inclusive civil society participation with the representation of communities.

David Jensen: Last week, all the population have heard that it would be in five years that the temperature will increase very much in Europe, for example, but in the rest of the world. And they are really waiting for answers, what they can do, also the basic population. and the rest of the population, they’re waiting for answers. Yeah, this whole question of last mile uptake, I think it’s a big one, right? We develop all these products and services and they’re great in theory, but the last mile uptake is a real challenge, as you say, at the community level. So they need to be at the table giving feedback on what these products and services are and if they’ll actually use them, if they’ll trust them, and what are the suitable responses. I think with that, we have concluded our discussion. We have 10 points now where we will document these into this input paper to WSIS plus 20 and we will do our best to lobby to ensure that they are reflected in the elements paper that the co-chairs are now drafting. So I thank you very much for your participation. I thank you for the exchange and I wish you a fantastic AI for Good. Let’s keep the environmental flag waving high. Recording stopped.

Agreement points

ICTs have evolved from optional tools to essential enablers for environmental action and disaster response

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– George Ah-Thew
– Peiliang Shi

Arguments

ICTs have transformed from optional tools to essential enablers of environmental action over 20 years

SADC developed the first regional model National Emergency Telecommunications Plan (NETP) following tropical cyclone Idai in 2019

WMO’s global integrated observing systems provide fundamental infrastructure for accurate and timely information for decision-making

Summary

All speakers agree that digital technologies have become fundamental infrastructure for environmental protection and disaster response, moving beyond being merely optional tools to essential systems for saving lives and protecting the environment

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure

Early warning systems and emergency telecommunications are critical for disaster preparedness and response

Speakers

– Archana G. Gulati
– George Ah-Thew
– Peiliang Shi

Arguments

Early Warning for All initiative aims to ensure everyone is protected by early warning systems with ITU leading communication dissemination

Cell broadcast SMS is being promoted alongside radio and TV to reach 100% of population for early warnings

AI and machine learning offer transformative opportunities for enhanced environmental services and forecasting

Summary

There is strong consensus that early warning systems are essential for protecting lives, with agreement on using multiple communication channels including mobile technologies and AI to reach all populations before disasters strike

Topics

Infrastructure | Development | Telecommunications infrastructure

Regulatory frameworks and legislation are essential but insufficient without proper implementation mechanisms

Speakers

– Thomas Ebert
– Anita Batamuliza
– Garam Bel
– David Jensen

Arguments

The EU framework regulation allows setting requirements on product level, with technical system development and product-specific data requirements as two key work streams

Rwanda’s 2018 e-waste regulation lacked financing mechanisms and full obligations, resulting in poor implementation and enforcement

Countries with e-waste legislation achieve 25% collection rates versus near-zero for countries without legislation

Policy and legal frameworks, compliance, capacity, data, and enforcement represent common challenges across environmental ICT applications

Summary

All speakers acknowledge that while regulatory frameworks are necessary, they must be accompanied by proper financing mechanisms, enforcement capabilities, and implementation support to be effective

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | E-waste

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the importance of tracking and tracing products throughout their lifecycle to enable circular economy practices and address the massive scale of e-waste generation

Speakers

– Thomas Ebert
– Garam Bel

Arguments

Digital product passports link physical products to digital information, enabling circular economy use cases like reselling, repair, and recycling

Currently generating 62 million tons of e-waste annually with less than 25% formally recycled

Topics

Development | E-waste | Sustainable development

Both speakers highlight the particular challenges faced by developing countries in e-waste management, including capacity limitations and the need for proper regulatory frameworks

Speakers

– Anita Batamuliza
– Garam Bel

Arguments

Limited capacity, infrastructure, and informal sectors pose major challenges to e-waste management in developing countries

Countries with e-waste legislation achieve 25% collection rates versus near-zero for countries without legislation

Topics

Development | E-waste | Capacity development

Both speakers emphasize the importance of regional collaboration and the transformative potential of new technologies like AI for improving environmental and disaster response services

Speakers

– George Ah-Thew
– Peiliang Shi

Arguments

Five SADC member states have transposed the model NETP with five more in progress, establishing national emergency telecoms working groups

AI and machine learning offer transformative opportunities for enhanced environmental services and forecasting

Topics

Infrastructure | Development | Digital standards

Unexpected consensus

Governance and regulatory responsibility for ICT environmental impacts

Speakers

– Garam Bel
– George Ah-Thew
– Audience

Arguments

Greenhouse gas emissions from ICT sector now equal airline sector emissions, raising questions about regulatory responsibility

Five SADC member states have transposed the model NETP with five more in progress, establishing national emergency telecoms working groups

Stronger committed leadership and inclusive civil society participation with community representation are needed

Explanation

There was unexpected consensus around the governance challenges in environmental ICT, with speakers from different backgrounds agreeing that unclear regulatory responsibilities and the need for stronger leadership represent fundamental barriers to progress

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | Capacity development

The need to balance technological expansion with responsible consumption

Speakers

– Garam Bel
– Audience

Arguments

Critical raw materials represent a key challenge with 2.6 billion people still unconnected and finite material resources

Responsible consumption of technology by connected populations should balance raw material needs for connecting others

Explanation

Unexpected consensus emerged around the tension between expanding digital access and managing finite resources, with both technical experts and civil society recognizing the need for balanced approaches to technology consumption

Topics

Development | Sustainable development | Digital access

Overall assessment

Summary

Strong consensus exists around the fundamental importance of ICTs for environmental action, the necessity of regulatory frameworks, and the critical role of early warning systems. Speakers also agreed on common implementation challenges including capacity, financing, and enforcement.

Consensus level

High level of consensus on core principles and challenges, with implications that the WSIS Action Line C7 framework remains relevant but requires strengthened implementation mechanisms, better governance structures, and more attention to emerging issues like AI applications and responsible consumption patterns.

Different viewpoints

Approach to environmental ICT analysis – technology impact vs environmental framework first

Speakers

– Tim Unwin (Audience)
– Other speakers

Arguments

Beginning with environmental framework rather than technology impact could yield better human-nature engagement outcomes

Much of the discussion and rhetoric is around the impact that technologies have

Summary

Tim Unwin advocates for starting with a holistic environmental framework (lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere, biosphere) rather than focusing on technology impacts, suggesting this could lead to better conclusions about human-nature engagement. This contrasts with the general approach of other speakers who focused on how technologies impact the environment.

Topics

Development | Sustainable development | Interdisciplinary approaches

Unexpected differences

Regulatory responsibility for ICT sector greenhouse gas emissions

Speakers

– Garam Bel
– George Ah-Thew

Arguments

Greenhouse gas emissions from ICT sector now equal airline sector emissions, raising questions about regulatory responsibility

Establishment of clear policy and legal framework to designate the National Regulatory Authority, the NRA, as the champion to lead on implementing emergency telecoms

Explanation

While George Ah-Thew advocates for clear designation of National Regulatory Authorities as champions for telecommunications-related environmental issues, Garam Bel raises fundamental questions about who should regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector, suggesting uncertainty about regulatory responsibility. This represents an unexpected area where there’s no clear consensus on governance structures.

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Development | Sustainable development

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion showed remarkably high consensus among speakers on most issues, with only minor disagreements on approach and methodology rather than fundamental goals. The main areas of disagreement were: 1) Whether to start with environmental frameworks or technology impacts, 2) How to balance material consumption for connectivity, and 3) Uncertainty about regulatory responsibility for ICT emissions.

Disagreement level

Low level of disagreement with high implications – while speakers largely agreed on problems and goals, the few disagreements that existed were fundamental to implementation approaches. The lack of clear consensus on regulatory frameworks for ICT emissions and the methodological approach to environmental ICT analysis could significantly impact the effectiveness of Action Line C7 implementation going forward.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers emphasize the importance of tracking and tracing products throughout their lifecycle to enable circular economy practices and address the massive scale of e-waste generation

Speakers

– Thomas Ebert
– Garam Bel

Arguments

Digital product passports link physical products to digital information, enabling circular economy use cases like reselling, repair, and recycling

Currently generating 62 million tons of e-waste annually with less than 25% formally recycled

Topics

Development | E-waste | Sustainable development

Both speakers highlight the particular challenges faced by developing countries in e-waste management, including capacity limitations and the need for proper regulatory frameworks

Speakers

– Anita Batamuliza
– Garam Bel

Arguments

Limited capacity, infrastructure, and informal sectors pose major challenges to e-waste management in developing countries

Countries with e-waste legislation achieve 25% collection rates versus near-zero for countries without legislation

Topics

Development | E-waste | Capacity development

Both speakers emphasize the importance of regional collaboration and the transformative potential of new technologies like AI for improving environmental and disaster response services

Speakers

– George Ah-Thew
– Peiliang Shi

Arguments

Five SADC member states have transposed the model NETP with five more in progress, establishing national emergency telecoms working groups

AI and machine learning offer transformative opportunities for enhanced environmental services and forecasting

Topics

Infrastructure | Development | Digital standards

Key takeaways

Six future priorities were identified for WSIS Action Line C7 plus 20: digital product passports, early warning for all, addressing greenhouse gas emissions in ICT sector, enhanced EPR and e-waste management, focus on material consumption and critical raw materials, and increased capacity building

Digital technologies have evolved from optional tools to essential enablers of environmental action over the past 20 years, now integrated into major global environmental agreements

Digital product passports will become mandatory in the EU starting 2027 for batteries, expanding to other sectors as a key circular economy enabler

E-waste management faces common challenges across regions: policy frameworks, financing mechanisms, capacity limitations, data gaps, and enforcement issues

SADC’s regional model National Emergency Telecommunications Plan represents successful regional cooperation, with 5 member states already implementing and 5 more in progress

Critical raw materials present a fundamental challenge with 2.6 billion people still unconnected and finite material resources available

ICT sector greenhouse gas emissions now equal airline sector emissions, raising important questions about regulatory responsibility

AI and emerging technologies offer transformative opportunities for environmental monitoring, forecasting, and waste management

Resolutions and action items

Document the 10 identified priority points into an input paper for WSIS plus 20 process

Lobby to ensure environmental priorities are reflected in the elements paper being drafted by co-chairs

Continue regional collaboration through East African working groups on e-waste and Green ICT

Complete WMO Information System 2.0 migration targeting 90% completion by 2030

Implement cell broadcast SMS systems in SADC member states for early warning dissemination

Explore AI applications for e-waste mapping and tracking systems

Strengthen partnerships between WMO, ITU, UNEP and other organizations for early warning systems

Unresolved issues

Who should regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector – telecom regulators or other authorities

How to address the material requirements for connecting 2.6 billion unconnected people while managing finite critical raw materials

Lack of systematic holistic framework beginning with environmental perspective rather than technology impact

Limited data availability for tracking e-waste trends and inventory management in developing countries

Financing mechanisms for e-waste management in countries with legislation but poor implementation

Last mile uptake challenges for environmental ICT products and services at community level

How to balance raw material needs for connectivity expansion with responsible consumption by already connected populations

Suggested compromises

Balance raw material consumption by promoting responsible technology consumption among connected populations while expanding connectivity to unconnected areas

Combine bottom-up community participation with strong committed leadership to drive environmental ICT initiatives forward

Integrate AI applications for environmental monitoring while addressing the increased emissions from AI and data centers

Develop governance frameworks that include both strong institutional leadership and inclusive civil society participation with community representation

We understand, I think, estimates from ITU around 2.6 billion people are currently unconnected to the internet. So what’s the material requirement to achieve that goal? […] And those critical raw materials are finite. It’s like coal, basically.

Speaker

Garam Bel

Reason

This comment reframes the digital divide discussion by introducing the concept of material scarcity as a fundamental constraint. Rather than viewing connectivity as simply a matter of infrastructure deployment, Bel highlights the finite nature of critical raw materials needed for digital devices, creating a tension between universal connectivity goals and environmental sustainability.

Impact

This comment immediately prompted audience member Kimberly Camacho to respond with the crucial insight about balancing connectivity expansion with responsible consumption by those already connected. It shifted the discussion from a purely technical implementation focus to a more holistic view of resource constraints and equity in digital access.

It doesn’t have to be accompanied by responsible consumption of technology for the ones that are already connected, yes, and reducing the consumption of technology, then we can really balance the raw material needed to connect the others with the responsible consumption from us.

Speaker

Kimberly Camacho

Reason

This comment introduces a critical equity dimension to the sustainability discussion. It challenges the assumption that we can simply expand connectivity without addressing overconsumption in developed regions, proposing a redistribution approach to resource allocation that balances global connectivity goals with environmental limits.

Impact

This intervention deepened the conversation by introducing questions of global equity and consumption patterns. It moved the discussion beyond technical solutions to address fundamental questions about resource distribution and consumption justice in the digital transition.

Who is regulating the greenhouse gas emissions coming from this sector? Is it the telecom regulators or is it somebody else? […] So there is some really big, challenging policy questions, but also some big, challenging data questions across these topics.

Speaker

Garam Bel

Reason

This comment exposes a critical governance gap in environmental regulation of the ICT sector. By questioning regulatory authority over greenhouse gas emissions, Bel highlights the institutional complexity and potential regulatory blind spots in addressing the environmental impact of digital technologies, particularly relevant given the rapid growth of AI and data centers.

Impact

This comment set up the final discussion segment on governance challenges and prompted David Jensen’s closing question about governance frameworks. It shifted attention from technical solutions to institutional and regulatory challenges, highlighting the need for clearer accountability structures.

Much of the discussion and rhetoric is around the impact that technologies have. I’d just like to encourage us to think more the other way around and to begin with environment, because we don’t really have an existing systematic holistic framework […] that addresses all the aspects around lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and biosphere.

Speaker

Tim Unwin

Reason

This comment fundamentally challenges the framing of the entire discussion by proposing to invert the analytical approach – starting with environmental systems rather than technological capabilities. It suggests that the current technology-first approach may be missing critical environmental impacts and interactions.

Impact

While made near the end of the session, this comment introduced a paradigm shift that could reframe future discussions. It challenged participants to reconsider their analytical framework and suggested that beginning with environmental systems might reveal different conclusions about technology’s role.

Countries that have legislation in place have, on average, a collection rate of 25 percent for e-waste. Those countries without any legislation, it’s close to zero percent. So the effect of legislation, having a level playing field for all is essential.

Speaker

Garam Bel

Reason

This comment provides concrete evidence for the critical importance of regulatory frameworks in environmental outcomes. The stark statistical contrast (25% vs. near 0%) demonstrates that policy frameworks are not just helpful but essential for meaningful environmental action in the digital sector.

Impact

This data point reinforced the governance theme that emerged throughout the discussion and provided empirical support for the importance of regulatory frameworks. It connected the technical discussions about e-waste management to broader questions about policy effectiveness and implementation.

Overall assessment

These key comments collectively transformed what could have been a technical discussion about digital environmental solutions into a more complex examination of systemic challenges. The progression from Garam Bel’s material scarcity insight to Kimberly Camacho’s equity response established a critical tension between universal connectivity goals and environmental limits. The governance questions raised by multiple speakers, particularly around regulatory authority and institutional frameworks, highlighted that technical solutions alone are insufficient without appropriate institutional structures. Tim Unwin’s paradigm challenge near the end suggested that even the fundamental framing of technology-environment relationships may need reconsideration. Together, these interventions elevated the discussion from implementation details to fundamental questions about resource allocation, global equity, regulatory governance, and analytical frameworks – creating a more nuanced and challenging conversation about the future of digital environmental action.

Are there plans to incorporate AI-aided mapping into the waste management ecosystem to aid efficiency in tackling waste management?

Speaker

Kwaku from Ghana

Explanation

This addresses a gap in current e-waste management systems and could provide benchmarking opportunities for developing countries like Ghana

What kind of governance frameworks are needed to monitor the new WSIS process going forward, and how can governance challenges from the previous process be corrected?

Speaker

David Jensen (moderator)

Explanation

This is critical for ensuring effective implementation and oversight of the WSIS plus 20 framework

Who is regulating the greenhouse gas emissions coming from the ICT sector – telecom regulators or someone else, and what’s the scope?

Speaker

Garam Bel

Explanation

There are challenging policy and regulatory questions about jurisdiction and responsibility for ICT sector emissions

What is the material requirement to achieve the goal of connecting 2.6 billion currently unconnected people to the internet?

Speaker

Garam Bel

Explanation

Understanding material consumption is essential for sustainable digital inclusion planning

How can we develop a systematic holistic framework that begins with environment (lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere, biosphere) and examines how digital technologies impact environmental destruction?

Speaker

Tim Unwin from ICT4D collective

Explanation

Current approaches focus on technology impacts rather than starting with environmental systems, which could lead to different and better conclusions

How can we combine technologies like satellite systems, IoT sensors, AI, and geospatial mapping to create comprehensive disaster monitoring and navigation systems?

Speaker

George Ah-Thew

Explanation

Integration of multiple technologies could provide real-time disaster information and navigation capabilities for better emergency response

How can responsible consumption of technology by those already connected be balanced with the raw material needs for connecting the unconnected?

Speaker

Kimberly Camacho from Costa Rica

Explanation

This addresses the sustainability challenge of digital inclusion while managing resource consumption

How can we ensure stronger committed leadership and inclusive civil society participation with community representation in environmental ICT initiatives?

Speaker

Multiple audience members

Explanation

Governance and participation gaps need to be addressed for effective implementation and community uptake

How can we improve last-mile uptake of environmental digital products and services at the community level?

Speaker

David Jensen (summarizing audience concern)

Explanation

There’s a gap between developing products/services and actual community adoption, trust, and appropriate responses