Summary

This discussion was a session of WSIS (World Summit on the Information Society) Action Line facilitators reporting on their achievements and progress over the past 20 years since the summit’s establishment in 2003-2005. The session served as the foundational element of the WSIS Forum, where UN agencies responsible for implementing different action lines presented their roadmaps and future plans beyond 2025. Deputy Secretary General Thomas Lamanauskas opened by emphasizing how WSIS has evolved from serving 800 million connected people in 2003 to 5.5 billion today, representing growth from 12.5% to two-thirds of the global population.

Each action line facilitator reported on significant developments in their respective areas. UNESCO’s Davide Storti highlighted progress in access to information laws, which expanded from 14 countries in the 1990s to 139 countries currently, while also addressing the evolution from information scarcity to attention scarcity in the digital age. ITU’s representatives discussed capacity building challenges, emphasizing the need for more inclusive approaches targeting vulnerable communities and the importance of adapting to emerging technologies like AI. The cybersecurity action line reported dramatic increases in threats, with cybercrime costs rising from $400 billion to $8-11 trillion, though noting improved national preparedness with more countries developing cybersecurity strategies.

Health digitalization saw tremendous acceleration, particularly during COVID-19, with WHO reporting successful implementations across regions from South Africa’s MomConnect to Estonia’s X-Road platform. Other action lines covered e-business, e-learning, e-science, e-employment, e-environment, e-governance, and ethics, all showing substantial evolution driven by technological advancement. A recurring theme across presentations was the need for better monitoring frameworks, more inclusive approaches, and adaptation to emerging technologies like artificial intelligence. The session concluded with acknowledgment that while significant progress has been made across all action lines, substantial work remains to address digital divides and ensure no one is left behind in the digital transformation.

Keypoints

Overall Purpose/Goal

This session was a formal reporting meeting of WSIS (World Summit on the Information Society) Action Line facilitators, held as part of the WSIS Forum’s 20-year review process. The purpose was for UN agencies implementing different WSIS Action Lines to report on their achievements over the past 20 years, discuss how their respective areas have evolved, identify current challenges, and present their vision beyond 2025. This session serves as foundational input for the WSIS Plus 20 review that will be conducted by the UN General Assembly.

Major Discussion Points

– Digital transformation achievements and challenges across sectors: Action Line facilitators reported significant progress in their respective areas – from 800 million to 5.5 billion people connected globally, expansion of access to information laws from 14 to 139 countries, and widespread adoption of digital technologies in health, education, governance, and other sectors. However, they also highlighted persistent challenges including the digital divide, cybersecurity threats (with cybercrime costs rising from $400 billion to $8-11 trillion), and the need for more inclusive approaches.

– Evolution from basic ICT implementation to advanced digital ecosystem governance: The discussion revealed how the focus has shifted from basic telecommunications regulation and infrastructure building in the early 2000s to addressing complex challenges like AI governance, digital ethics, cross-sectoral regulation, and emerging technologies. Regulators now serve as “digital ecosystem builders” rather than just telecom overseers.

– Need for improved monitoring, measurement, and data-driven approaches: Multiple facilitators emphasized the lack of concrete monitoring frameworks for evaluating Action Line achievements. There was recognition that while the WSIS targets exist, they are not well-aligned with individual Action Lines, making it difficult to provide concrete figures on progress. The Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development announced a mapping exercise to address this gap.

– Cross-cutting themes and multi-stakeholder collaboration: Facilitators consistently highlighted the interconnected nature of their work, with themes like capacity building, digital skills, cybersecurity, and ethics cutting across all Action Lines. There was emphasis on the continued importance of the multi-stakeholder approach and the need for enhanced collaboration between different sectors and stakeholders.

– Integration of emerging technologies and ethical considerations: The discussion extensively covered how AI, quantum computing, neurotechnology, and other emerging technologies are reshaping all Action Lines. There was particular focus on the need for ethical frameworks, anticipatory governance models, and adaptive regulatory approaches to keep pace with technological evolution while ensuring inclusive and rights-based digital transformation.

Overall Tone

The tone was formal and professional throughout, befitting an official UN reporting session. It was generally positive and constructive, with facilitators celebrating achievements while acknowledging ongoing challenges. The atmosphere was collaborative and forward-looking, with speakers expressing enthusiasm about continued partnership and the evolution of their work. There was a sense of urgency about addressing gaps in monitoring and measurement, and anticipation about the upcoming WSIS Plus 20 review process. The tone remained consistently diplomatic and solution-oriented, with no significant shifts during the conversation.

Speakers

Speakers from the provided list:

– Gitanjali Sah – Session moderator/facilitator for WSIS Action Line facilitators meeting

– Tomas Lamanauskas – Deputy Secretary General, ITU

– Davide Storti – UNESCO representative implementing multiple action lines (C3 Access to Information, C8 Cultural Diversity, C9 Media, C7 e-learning, C7 e-science)

– Carla Licciardello – ITU representative for Action Line C4 on capacity building and digital skills

– Preetam Maloor – ITU representative for Action Line C5 on cybersecurity

– Sofie Maddens – ITU representative coordinating Action Line C6 on enabling environment/regulation

– Derrick Muneene – World Health Organization, Head of capacity building and partnerships, focal point for Action Line C7 on eHealth/digital health

– Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth – UNCTAD representative, also representing Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) and Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development

– Radka Maxova – UPU (Universal Postal Union) representative for Action Line C7 on e-business

– Maria Prieto Berhouet – ILO (International Labour Organization) representative for Action Line C7 on e-employment

– Garam Bel – Representative for Action Line C7 on e-environment (environmental aspects)

– Tee Wee Ang – UNESCO representative for Action Line C10 on ethics

– Speaker – Representative for Action Line C7 on e-environment (disaster risk management aspects)

Additional speakers:

– Denise (full name not provided) – UN-DESA representative implementing Action Lines C1 (promotion of ICTs), C11 (international cooperation), and C7 (e-governance)

– Marielza (full name not provided) – Representative working on disaster risk management and climate change aspects of e-environment action line

WSIS Action Line Facilitators Meeting: 20-Year Progress Report

Executive Summary

This session served as the foundational reporting mechanism for the WSIS Forum’s 20-year review process, bringing together UN agency representatives to present progress on the eleven WSIS Action Lines. Moderated by Gitanjali Sah, the meeting provided individual agency reports on achievements and challenges over the past two decades, establishing the groundwork for the upcoming WSIS Plus 20 review by the UN General Assembly.

Deputy Secretary General Tomas Lamanauskas opened by highlighting the growth in global connectivity from 800 million connected people in 2003 to 5.5 billion today, representing an increase from 12.5% to two-thirds of the global population. He noted that WSIS has become the comprehensive digital development framework and the digital arm of the sustainable development agenda.

Individual Action Line Reports

Access to Information and Knowledge Development (C3)

UNESCO’s Davide Storti reported significant legislative progress in access to information, with laws expanding from 14 countries in the 1990s to 139 countries currently. He identified a fundamental shift from information scarcity in 2003-2005 to information abundance today, creating what he described as a move “from the focus from information to attention.” Storti highlighted the development of the diamond open access model as the latest evolution in scientific information access.

Capacity Building and Digital Skills (C4)

ITU’s Carla Licciardello emphasized that “traditional means on how we are delivering a capacity development program sometimes are really not working on the ground.” She stressed the need for innovative approaches that understand local community needs, particularly for vulnerable populations including youth, women, girls, people with disabilities, and older people. She noted the emergence of AI and advanced technologies has created additional complexity requiring different approaches to digital skills delivery.

Cybersecurity (C5)

Preetam Maloor presented data showing cyber attacks have increased 80% year-over-year, with global cybercrime costs rising from $400 billion to between $8-11 trillion over the 20-year period. However, he reported improvements in national preparedness: countries lacking national cybersecurity strategies decreased from 110 in 2017 to 67 by 2024, while those without national CERTs fell from 85 to 68 countries. He identified emerging challenges including AI-driven attacks and the need for post-quantum world preparation.

Enabling Environment and Regulation (C6)

ITU’s Sofie Maddens described the evolution from basic telecommunications regulation in the early 2000s to comprehensive digital ecosystem building today. She positioned regulators as “digital ecosystem builders” rather than traditional gatekeepers. Maddens noted that “COVID made digital transformation essential across all sectors” and advocated for data-driven regulation, regulatory sandboxes, and innovative approaches that accommodate rapid technological change.

Digital Health (C7 – eHealth)

WHO’s Derrick Muneene reported the evolution from basic data collection in 2005 to comprehensive AI and emerging technologies integration by 2018. He described successful digital health implementations across all WHO regions, from South Africa’s MomConnect programme to Estonia’s X-Road platform. The Global Initiative on Digital Health framework has emerged as a mechanism for inclusive contribution from all actors. Muneene suggested rebranding from “eHealth” to “digital health” to reflect the broader scope of current applications.

E-commerce and Digital Business (C7 – e-business)

The Universal Postal Union’s Radka Maxova highlighted that 71% of post offices worldwide now provide e-commerce services. This development has been particularly significant for enabling small businesses and women entrepreneurs in remote areas to access digital markets, demonstrating how traditional infrastructure can be repurposed for digital transformation.

Employment and Future of Work (C7 – e-employment)

ILO’s Maria Prieto Berhouet described the exponential acceleration of technology’s impact on employment over the past 20 years, affecting all job levels in both formal and informal economies. She noted that COVID-19 further accelerated digitalisation’s impact on employment. The ILO has introduced an observatory to measure AI and technology impacts on labour markets and adapt international labour standards accordingly.

Environmental Applications (C7 – e-environment)

Marielza focused on disaster risk management, noting that technologies have evolved from optional tools to essential enablers for disaster risk reduction over the past 20 years. The Early Warning for All initiative represents a global commitment with ITU leading communication and dissemination efforts.

Garam Bel addressed broader environmental challenges, highlighting electronic waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and critical raw materials as key concerns. She identified unclear regulatory responsibility for ICT sector greenhouse gas emissions, which are equivalent to those of the transportation sector.

E-governance (C7 – e-governance)

UN-DESA’s Dennis reported on the expansion of e-government survey methodology to 193 member states and cities, with partnerships expanding to multiple countries. The work has evolved to encompass broader digital governance challenges beyond simple service delivery.

Scientific Information and Research (C7 – e-science)

Davide Storti addressed the transformation of scientific information access and collaboration, emphasizing the need to ensure that every scientist in developing countries can contribute to and benefit from global scientific processes. He noted the development of remote research infrastructure and collaborative platforms has democratized access to scientific resources.

Digital Education (C7 – e-learning)

Storti reported major transformation in digital education since 2002, with widespread adoption of digital learning platforms and Open Educational Resources. However, he highlighted a concerning investment disparity, with $500 billion projected for AI development while only $100 billion is needed to close the global education financing gap. The integration of AI in education requires comprehensive policy guidance emphasizing ethical use and teacher training.

Ethics in the Information Society (C10)

UNESCO’s Tee Wee Ang argued that ethical considerations must keep pace with the rapidly changing digital landscape across all technology areas, including AI, neurotechnology, and quantum computing. She positioned ethics as a “foundational and cross-cutting pillar of digital transformation” and introduced the concept of “ethics as agile self-governance” that can complement formal legal and regulatory systems in real-time.

International Cooperation (C11)

Discussion of international cooperation was woven throughout the session, with references to maintaining the multi-stakeholder approach while integrating Global Digital Compact principles into the WSIS architecture. Stakeholder consultations have emphasized strengthening the Internet Governance Forum and continuing the WSIS Forum.

Key Themes and Challenges

Monitoring Framework Gaps

Gitanjali Sah noted that “currently there’s no real monitoring and assessment framework for the evaluation of action lines,” making it difficult to provide concrete figures on 20-year achievements. UNCTAD’s Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth announced that the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development is conducting a comprehensive mapping exercise for WSIS Plus 20 to address these monitoring gaps.

Evolution of Approaches

Multiple speakers noted the inadequacy of traditional approaches in their respective domains. Licciardello emphasized that traditional capacity development methods often don’t work on the ground, while Maddens highlighted the evolution from basic telecommunications regulation to comprehensive digital ecosystem building.

COVID-19 Impact

The pandemic emerged as a significant accelerator across multiple Action Lines, making digital transformation essential rather than optional across sectors and accelerating changes that might otherwise have evolved more gradually.

Technology Integration Challenges

The integration of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and other emerging technologies was identified as requiring new approaches across all Action Lines, with speakers noting these technologies demand different delivery methods and regulatory approaches than previous generations of digital tools.

Session Context and Next Steps

The session was conducted under the mandate of Para 109 of the Tunis Agenda and served as the foundation of the WSIS Forum, which evolved from a “cluster of WSIS-related events” to the current WSIS Forum format in 2009. The stock-taking platform now contains 15,000 examples and serves 2 million users.

The meeting concluded with preparations for dialogue with co-facilitators and a photography session, establishing the groundwork for the broader WSIS Plus 20 review process that will inform the UN General Assembly’s comprehensive assessment of the WSIS framework’s evolution and future direction.

This reporting session successfully documented the current state of WSIS Action Line implementation while identifying key areas requiring attention in the upcoming review process, particularly around monitoring frameworks and adaptation to emerging technological challenges.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you for being here with us. Your dedication towards the implementation of the WSIS Action Line is really showing that you are here to listen to the WSIS Action Line facilitators right after lunch, so thank you very much. So, ladies and gentlemen, this session of the WSIS Action Line facilitators actually was the foundation of the WSIS Forum because initially, before 2009, we had the cluster of WSIS-related events which was converted and rebranded into the WSIS Forum. Essentially, the reporting of the WSIS Action Lines, presenting their roadmaps and presenting their future plans of what they would be doing beyond that year. So, since it’s been 20 years, today in this session we are going to focus on what the WSIS Action Line facilitators have achieved in the 20 years, how the context of their Action Line has evolved, what were the challenges and what is the vision of their specific Action Line beyond 2025. So, the mandate that we have is in accordance to Para 109 of the Tunis Agenda, which mandates the WSIS Action Line facilitators to meet every year and to report and to form an action plan about their work. So, as you all know, we have a beautiful framework. We have different UN agencies, based on their mandate, that implement the different WSIS Action Lines and we have them here with us today. We also have our Deputy Secretary General, Mr. Thomas Lamanauskas, who has joined us to encourage the Action Line facilitators and to congratulate them for their good work. Thomas, the floor is yours.

Tomas Lamanauskas Thank you, thank you very much Gitanjali and thank everyone here. Of course, Action Line facilitators, but also everyone here in the audience. 2 p.m. on the last day of this very busy week, you know, so I still, of course, we still have to go today, but it’s really, you know, kudos to all of you to really bring in that energy for the whole week, bringing your ideas and bringing contributions to making digital development in the world really impactful. So, indeed, it’s an honor to welcome for me here also all the, you know, business action line facilitators here to report. I think I really like how you framed. So, for me, this is the session, no, because this is the origins of WSIS Forum. This is a session without which WSIS Forum couldn’t exist, no, because if we didn’t have that session, it wouldn’t be WSIS Forum. It would be just gathering on digital development. So, indeed, this, for me, super important session and it’s great to have you here. So, indeed, you know, just a bit of a context for, I mean, a lot of people here would know WSIS, but it’s always good to remind the context. Of course, in 2003 and then in 2005 framework, you know, WSIS was established as this really all-encompassing digital development framework for the world, you know, that includes all the governments, but also, importantly, includes all the stakeholders that deliver together, you know, private sector, together with the governments, of course, academia, civil society, technical community, and others. And, of course, since 2015, we made sure that WSIS basically became what they call digital arm of sustainable development agenda, because to really make sure that this broad agenda is implemented through the digital tools. So, WSIS actualized here, as we already said, is actually this operational backbone. This makes sure that we not just come once a year to the meeting, we actually deliver. And we deliver the change in connectivity, you know, and we’ve been quoting these numbers over this week. You know, in 2003, we had under 800 million people connected in 2005, around 1 billion, now 5.5 billion, you know. So, basically, from 12.5% to two-thirds of the population, good job, you know, but not enough, you know. And the same thing is, of course, in all the action line areas, and if we hear from our colleagues, through which that digital impact is really felt. So really, that is the mechanism for it, to turn these high-level commitments into a concrete action, and in different areas that I mentioned already. It’s also about that community to really making sure that we have reference points so we can share experiences. So this, for example, with this stock taking, plays an important role because it allows people, and now we have around 15,000 different examples here, how digital development can help with all these action lines. We have more than 2 million people signing up to that. So that indeed helps us all to understand how to make digital development from political statements into reality on the ground. And I kept quoting, kept saying today here this example of my feelings sitting there in that seat and watching the WSIS Prize winners coming on the stage in these short videos. That, for me, was that moment when what is this all about? About these digital identities in remote areas, about digital health in remote areas, about people using these tools for actually making the big change. So of course, it’s usually a crowd of our own role as an action line facility, and I hear from my colleagues as well. C2 on infrastructure, C4 on capacity building, C5 on cybersecurity, C6 on enabling environment. I think it’s very important as well to make sure that a lot of our action lines is infrastructure, so we build the roads. But those roads are not very useful if there’s no cars on them, and also if there’s no destinations to travel to, so I’m thinking those cities there. So it’s the same here, content, agriculture, health, government, decent work and decent jobs. All these areas are super important for that to really be happening. So I really hope that today’s meeting, again, will allow us to really take a stock of how far we’ve come, but also allow us to assess where now we need to be going, especially in the context of WSIS Plus 20 review that will happen in General Assembly. I think I’m very proud that WSIS Forum is the only… the process recognized in the J-modality solution for the WSIS review. So we need to deliver something here. They didn’t recognize us for recognition sake. They recognize us because they expect us to deliver some results and this session will be key for that. So then in December, in the United Nations General Assembly, we can really then put this all together and set the stage, a very strong stage, for the next stage of WSIS, the next stage of digital development for all. Thank you very much. I’m glad the great reporting, I should say, not a discussion, Angelina. You, please continue. Thank you very much.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much, Tomas, and thank you for setting the scene. I do see some action line facilitators. I know, was that you, Maria? Also there. Is anyone else in the audience, any action line facilitator? Okay, so Maria, we will take you in once a person finishes. You can take their seat and come here. Thank you so much. So as Tomas put the context out there, we are basically, this is the meeting where we hear from the action line facilitators. We want to hear from all of you, so we have a timer here for the speakers. Please do try to stick on time. I wanted to start with C1, but Dennis from UNDESA is not here with us yet, but when he joins, we will pose him a question. We can then move on to C2. Sophie is implementing the action line on. Okay, so C2 is not here as well. Okay, so we move on to access, which is Davide from UNESCO. So Davide, UNESCO has a huge job because you look at the entire knowledge society part of the versus, you know, and we often say that we have rebranded versus information and knowledge societies, not only information. So, can you share, Davide, what you have been doing in order to, how the action line on access has evolved in these 20 years?

Davide Storti Thank you, Gitanjali, and hello everybody. So, I mean, there’s so many things, I mean, it’s an action line which is wide, so I would like to focus maybe on the, telling about the evolution that, so the access to information in terms of legislation, what is this called, the access to information laws, I think we have seen during the period of the 20 years, an encouraging progress, and in, first of all, in the way that, how we managed to get member states to report on what is the progress on access to information laws, and also on the adoption of access to information law, which was, like, as little as 14 in 20, sorry, not in 20, in the 90s, let’s say, to 139 countries nowadays, so there is still a lot of work to do, but we can see there, which is, there is a huge progress. And this is also some, part of the work that we do for the WSIS, but it’s very much linked to the Sustainable Development Goals, because, why, because UNESCO is the Australian agency for the SDG 1610.2, and so we provide the strategic support to member states to be able to implement national decision reforms in order to implement access to information laws. And this is done also with the community, through the celebration of the Universal Access to Information Day, that it’s every year on the 28th of September, which is, enables not only the countries, but all the actors that I would like also to give a couple of words on the evolution of the way information is being accessed. So, this is tremendous changes in the last 20 years, of course, and then even the role of it, everyone has been changing. Let’s think about the libraries now, of course, the internet dimension, this is still evolving a lot. And so, we have, we had to rethink how the whole society actually use access information and how this is, how this is interacted. And also, there is the way how the information is accessed in terms of knowledge, and I would like to mention particularly the access to scientific information with the different open access models that through the years have been, let’s say, democratized, but they have seen a number of evolutions, the latest of one, it’s the diamond open access model that we discussed in this session this year, which needs, of course, a key engagement from all the stakeholders to make it possible. And so, we look forward to continuing to work with the entire community for that.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much, Davide. Action 9C4 on capacity building, Carla, ITU is leading this with many stakeholders involved, including several human agencies. Throughout the week, we heard capacity building, digital skills, so crucial, and especially with the evolution of technology, you know, you need to keep pace with it. So, of course, a lot has evolved, a lot of changes have happened since 2003 and 2005, so please share your views on that.

Carla Licciardello Hello? Yes, hello. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for this panel, sorry for being a bit late. I was a bit late, I was stuck in another meeting, but okay, so, well, what we have discussed over the past days, you know, in the, not only, of course, yesterday, sorry, Wednesday, as part of the WSIS Digital Skills Track, but also in the Knowledge Café, what we have realized is that if we look a little bit back, of course, 20 years ago, the main text and the main principles, of course, of the Action Line C4 are still valid, so we still need to continue on that route, though we need to put a little bit more emphasis on the way how we report, on the way how now we implement, so definitely over the past years we have achieved a lot, meaning in terms of more partnerships, more cross-cutting collaboration among the different, you know, areas and topics related to digital skills, you know, from cyber security, of course, to healthcare, you know, to education, but there is still a need to have a more inclusive approach, and in our discussions, the need to be youth-centric, to really look at the vulnerable communities, so women, girls, but also, of course, people with disabilities, older people, as came, you know, across the discussions many, many times. There is now, of course, with emerging technologies, of course, from AI, you know, to other type of technologies, there is a need to think a bit in a different way on how we deliver digital skills and capacity development programs. Sometimes when we look at the national and maybe local context, we need to see also, we need to think a bit out of the box, and that is something that also, you know, many stakeholders have realized over the past, let’s say, four days, and because, again, the traditional way, the traditional means on how we are delivering a capacity development program sometimes are really not working on the ground, and we really need to understand that. We really need to understand the national, you know, the local needs. will be able to then address the targeted digital skills that are useful for that community. So the overall, again, the overall assessment that we have seen is that we are in the good direction, though, as I was saying, we need different ways on how we report, and we need to capture that reporting starting from the community, because there might be a lot happening, but again, we are not really capturing at the actual line level. So I think that this is a bit of the, what I took from the different discussions, and yeah, I would be happy to elaborate more in the future. Thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you, Carla, and the other thing we also heard was that currently there’s no real monitoring and assessment framework for the evaluation of these action lines. So if someone was to tell us that what has capacity building achieved in these 20 years, we can’t really give concrete figures. So we do hope that the review this time will have a thought about that as well. Though we have the WSIS targets, but they are not aligned with each WSIS action lines, which would make our job easy to kind of, you know, get that data collected and to ensure that we have some monitoring frameworks. Thank you, Carla. I’ll move on to Pritam Action Line C5. It’s cybersecurity, and of course, Pritam, in this area, there’s been so much evolution. With the evolution of technologies, we heard so much about AI security as well. And as there is progress in technology, you have new challenges that come in this area. We also heard in some sessions that, you know, protecting children online, we did have those guidelines. Those should be updated and revised as well. So there is a lot that we started doing, a lot of good work, but I think there’s a lot more that we need to do to catch up with the changes in technology. Over to you.

Preetam Maloor Thanks, Gitanjali. You posed the question, you also answered it. In fact, I’m fine. But let me provide some stats to illustrate these points. So in 2005, it’s obvious the digital landscape was very different. The DSG also highlighted some of this, you know, only 1 billion people online. The cost of cybercrime to the global economy was around 400 billion, which is still a large number for that time. The threat vectors at that time, while they were sophisticated, is nothing compared to what we have today. You know, I have stats from 2024, because the current one we haven’t compiled. But anyway, I know, right now we have 5.6 billion people online. Cyber attacks have increased 80% year by year, which also seems like a conservative estimate. I think it’s more. The cost of cybercrime, you know, from 400 billion has increased 20 times to about 8 to 11 trillion dollars. An attack happens every 30 seconds, 39 seconds, somewhere on the web. You know, and clearly issues related to privacy, related to cyber security have intensified. There’s no doubt about that. And as Gitanjali just said, you know, many of these attacks include AI driven attacks. We also need to prepare for post quantum world. But the good news in the story is, you know, and the stats kind of show that, for example, placing a lot of emphasis on holistic resilience of infrastructure, because, you know, the resilience of physical infrastructure also includes now submarine cables, you know, satellite, terrestrial, along with cyber resilience. And then there are very impactful initiatives in each of these that seem to work. We also see Good morning. We are seeing accelerated efforts from member states in improving cyber security. You know, our global cyber security index numbers show that, just as a recent example, you know, in 2017, 110 countries lacked a national cyber security strategy, by 24, 67 countries were without one, which is still a big chunk. But, you know, it could have been worse. In 2017, 85 countries lacked a national CERT, a computer incident response team, and by 24, this number has reduced to 68. So also on child online protection that Gitanjali mentioned, you know, we have a global effort, we have guidelines, we have, you know, countries that are being assisted in developing a national cyber security strategy that has a child online protection component integral to it. So you know, there is a lot happening. So, you know, what does it tell us? Well, these numbers indicate that the risks are increasing in complexity, targets, technologies, you know, numbers also offer some hope. It shows that stakeholders are better organized and more resilient than they were in 2005. And we believe that the Action Line C5 framework that WSIS has provided has played a positive role in kind of bringing, you know, stakeholders together, forging multi-stakeholder partnerships that are helping this effort. And that’s what we’ve heard across the WSIS forum, including the AI for Good, you know, where we had an entire session on AI and trust yesterday. And it was all about, you know, what we can do. It wasn’t all doom and gloom. So I think, you know, I hope this message is conveyed to the WSIS Plus 20 review process, and the role of the WSIS framework and the Action Line C5 is reinforced. Thanks, Geetanjali.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you, Preetam. We’ll move on to Action Line C6. Sophie, ITU. coordinates this action line. And we had a regulators roundtable this year for the first time at their request. And I do see some regulators here. Thank you, ma’am, for joining us, the regulator of Georgia. So we have, you know, the main two points that came out of that, in my opinion, was one, there should be a lot of more this kind of stuff happening where they can learn from each other. Best practice sharing, and they can learn from each other because they are at various stages of development. Second one was that there are so many cross-sectoral regulators that have come up now, regulators for health, for education, for agriculture. How does the ICT regulator, you know, kind of converge all of that and work with all of them? Over to you, Sophie.

Sofie Maddens Thank you, Gitanjali. And indeed, it was very interesting to have the regulators roundtable and to have the preparation for our global symposium for regulators, which we have every year. And the regulators roundtable there this year, it will be in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from the 31st of August till the 3rd of September. So I hear Carla saying, I hear Pritam saying, for us as well, that inclusiveness, the holistic approach, the need for data and reporting came out in our action line as well. But let me rewind. If we go back to the early 2000s, it was just after the WTO reference paper and on basic telecoms. And we were really looking at principles to guide liberalization and regulation of telecoms and focusing on competitive markets, fair access, preventing anti-competitive practices, and of course, the establishment of the independent regulators who we brought together. Then in the mid 2000s, we were looking at broadband, we were looking at NGNs, we were looking at regulatory strategies like infrastructure sharing. Fast forward to the mid 2010s. There, we started looking at the, and that addresses the. Thank you. So, on the first point, the rise of the digital ecosystem, we were starting to see more and more money, e-education, e-health, e-agriculture. And so we started looking at collaborative regulation. And then, of course, came COVID in 2020. And digital was not just on the agenda, but became the agenda because without digital, health, education, agriculture, government could not work. And today, we’re at advanced regulatory frontiers. So, we’re looking at regulators as digital ecosystem builders, again, to come to your point, and get to Anjali. So, we need to address new challenges, emerging and fast-moving technologies, opportunities, new players. And there is that need for inclusive frameworks, but also for adaptability and flexibility while maintaining the sustainability and the confidence in the markets, because investors need to invest in these new technologies, and that needs that confidence in the markets and the tools and the regulatory tools. From some of the regulators, we heard about data-driven regulation, so data is key. But we also need innovative regulatory approaches. So, we heard about regulatory sandboxes as well, in which we experiment. One of the regulators said, we have data-driven regulations so that we can put that data out in the market before imposing regulations. So, I think that is what we’re hearing. So, in the action line, we focused in these 20 years on knowledge exchange, as you say, sharing best practices, knowledge exchange platforms like our Global Symposium for Regulators at this year’s 25th anniversary, sharing tools, research, data, analysis, our study groups, bringing that out by our members, for our members. We have the Data Hub, we have the ICT regulatory tracker, and what we call the G5 benchmark, the fifth generation of regulation, where it’s not just about… Remember I started with it was about telecoms. Now it’s not just about telecoms, it’s about digital. So the future is get our hands around these challenges, remain versatile, make sure we have the necessary resources to collect that data and to act upon that data, be inclusive and really work with a multi-stakeholder environment to get those solutions. Thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you, Sophie. I’ll move on to WHO, eHealth. So C7 ICT applications has several action lines together. And the way health is kind of encapsulated in the action lines is eHealth. And Derek keeps reminding us that we may have to rebrand and start calling it digital health because it’s much wider now. So Derek, of course, a lot has changed, especially since COVID as well. The health community understood the importance of digital. So what are your views, Derek,

Derrick Muneene and what’s the vision beyond 2025? Thank you so much, Gitanjali. Thank you so much, fellow panelists. Just to congratulate the ITU for really keeping us coordinated on the implementation of the action lines. So I’m Derek Munene from the World Health Organization. I’m head of capacity building and partnerships, but the focal point on the action line on C7 on eHealth together with the ITU. Just to maybe point out that we have seen tremendous progress amongst our member states and our partners in the inclusion of ICTs in health. And so the past 20 years has seen tremendous progress. And indeed, I’ll speak about how the future looks like. We actually began in 2005, shortly after the YCS framework was put in place, where our member state gave us the first mandate to coordinate the introduction of ICTs in health. We call that the eHealth resolution of 2005. And shortly after that, we saw tremendous uptake of digital solutions. By then, those digital eHealth solutions and the other presentations were involved mostly around the data collection, aggregation, reporting, you know, health events at high levels. And so we saw a lot of introduction, especially in the HIV, malaria, and TB space. This led to the notion of interoperability. So in 2013, our member states put together a framework called a Resolution on Data Standardization and Interoperability that we are also fast tracking with the ITU. And from 2013, we saw the evolution of ICTs, the evolution of technology, really take a heightened elevation. And so in 2018, our member states, recognizing the emergence of artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, put together a resolution on digital health, and that’s what Gitajat is talking about. And so with that resolution on digital health in 2018, we’ve been working with our member states to sort of like introduce emerging technologies into health. We are thankful for our member states that have really taken up, you know, digital health as a means to achieve universal health coverage and better health outcomes. Almost each region has examples. From South Africa, who I would actually point out, given that they’re taking the chair, MomConnect has been a great example. We had a winner at the WSIS prizes, you know, Zanzibar, on a DPI for health. In the Emerald Eastern Mediterranean region, I’ll give an example of Saudi Arabia that established virtual hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In the Western Pacific region, you know, Australia has continued to deploy patient-centric tools, the digital patient-facing record that enables patients to carry their own records. In the European region, Estonia, in the digital health platform, the X-Road, is a great example. In the, you know, region of the Americans, Brazil, with a digital health platform. And so there are many examples, these are just a few, but just to point out that looking at the future, we’re looking to working Tamanishi. I’m going to discuss a few points. It’s very important to understand that we’re working with our member states through a framework of putting place. It’s called the Global Initiative on Digital Health. It’s intended to really ensure that all actors contributing to this transformation agenda have an inclusive contribution, a meaningful contribution towards the transformation. AI for Health is a key area, together with the whole issue of digital public infrastructure for health, a subject that we’re involved with the ITU. I neglected to mention India’s work in telemedicine with Sanjini. That’s a great example from the Southeast Asia, the Blue Sea region. So I’m quite excited with the extension of the Global Strategy on Digital Health, which is a mechanism that we’re using to also first track our action line. So health and universal health coverage is key, is cost-cutting, and this action line will help us take us further. Thank you so much.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much, Derek. So I have IPU and UNCTAD for action line on e-business, and perhaps you could share your time, let’s just call it. Is this okay? Yes.

Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth No, actually, I would like to defer to UPU for reporting on the action line itself and put instead of that the hat of the CSTD and the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development if you don’t mind.

Gitanjali Sah So please do share your time, over to you.

Radka Maxova Thank you. Thank you so much, Gitanjali, for bringing us together. Good afternoon. So the UPU together with UNCTAD and the ITC, we have been focusing on facilitating the action line C7 on e-business. In the case of the UPU, our focus was really on trying to achieve the digital inclusion through the wide network of post offices, many of which are in remote areas and rural areas, especially in developing countries. And oftentimes, the post offices already serve as trusted anchor institutions in their And we are just now coming up with a flagship digital panorama report that was done through a survey and we received answers from more than 100 postal operators, so from more than 100 countries. And actually 71% of post offices worldwide are already providing some kind of e-commerce services to their communities, which means that, for instance, small businesses, MSMEs, women entrepreneurs, artisans can already benefit from this kind of service. And we had had a session earlier this week, together with ITC and UNCTAD, where we were sharing also some of the examples of how e-commerce action line is helping, especially, you know, small businesses, women entrepreneurs. In case of the UPU, we do recognize that there is a strong link with the capacity of, you know, those services being digitalized so that people can access them better. So our institution tries to provide technical support, advisory services, and different capacity building tools. We have notably two projects, one is connect.post, so the post offices can only do this type of work when they are properly digitalized. So our aim is to help with the digital transformation of countries so that they can enable post offices to serve better the communities. And our second big project is trade post, which is trying precisely to, you know, create that space for small entrepreneurs who are in remote areas to try to get online, try to discover new markets, doing export, import through various digital services that the post offices can offer. Thank you very much.

Gitanjali Sah Scarlett?

Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth I won’t do it in eight seconds, but if you will allow me 30, I think I can do it. So I would just like to say a few words on behalf of the Partnership on Measuring Affective Development because you have addressed the monitoring framework for the Action Lines and let everyone know that at the session, at this OASIS event, we announced a mapping exercise that we will be conducting. We did a similar exercise in the occasion of the OASIS Plus 10 review, where we looked at mapping targets and the available indicators on ICT for development. And we are going to be doing the same or similar exercise for OASIS Plus 20, except that this time we are also taking into account the outcomes of the GDC and try to improve the vision over how can we monitor the Action Lines, which we didn’t really talk about 10 years ago and a lot has happened since 10 years ago. And in that spirit, ONCTAD is also serving as secretariat to the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, which many of you know, is charged with the follow-up of implementation of OASIS outcomes. And just nine days ago, we published online a report that resorts from the consultation of implementation. So I invite you to visit the webpage of ONCTAD and look at this report. And I did print out a couple of copies there, but it’s a hefty report. In any case, chapter two of that report refers specifically to the different Action Lines under different themes and does conclude that much has changed as a result of the consultation, much has changed since 2005 in terms of the Action Lines and it is the perfect time. to think how to either reformulate or expand action lines. And we look forward to the results of the discussion at the end of this year. Thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you so much, Radka, and thank you so much, Scarlett, also for pointing out the work done by the partnership, which is really important work. It’s a group of statisticians who are looking at how we can measure the WSIS process better. And the Commission on Science and Technology for Development that meets annually to adopt a resolution on WSIS that goes to ECOSOC. So thank you so much for bringing those perspectives as well. I’ll now move on to Davide from UNESCO. He’s holding several hats today. Davide, if you can also talk to us about e-science and e-learning, two additional action lines that UNESCO implements.

Davide Storti Thank you. So let’s start with the e-learning. So much happened. I mean, I think it was major shift. We all know major shifts on integrating the digital technologies into education, including widespread option of digital learning platform, educational resources, and digital open schools. I just want to remind that the OER, the Open Educational Resources, was started in 2022. So really at the time of the WSIS. And allowed the more access to quality information, quality educational material, and also to the use of quality educational material adapted in terms of also localized material. And inclusivity and equity was also something which has changed a lot, making education system more inclusive and addressing the barriers faced by marginalized group. Also, of course, now we talk about the new things, which are the AI and emerging technologies. is in education, and UNESCO is providing policy guidance on AI in education, providing frameworks that emphasize the need for frameworks for ethical use of education, AI in education, teacher training and curricula, and how to prepare and learn from machine, human-machine interaction. And so these are some of the things, of the aspects, but I would like also to give a, provide a shift, because you spoke about information and knowledge, but now we see a shift also between the focus from information to attention, where information was a scarce resource in 2020, in 2003, 2005, and now we have an abundance of information. And what we have, actually, scarcity is in two, the attention, so there is quite a reflection on how to react to this unwanted, or consequences of adoption of technologies into the educational system. And lastly, I would like to mention the fact that although there is a, we know there is a projected investment in artificial intelligence of $500 billion, I think we have to mention that with another 100 billion would be needed to close the global financing gap for education, for maybe reaching the goals of SDG4. So there’s a matter of scale, which is important to note, in terms of the investment, which is. is being devoted to one or the other. This is, I mean, very summarized for education, but for learning. But on e-science, would you like me to go also from science? Let me take some notes, sorry. And so, e-science. So, e-science is reshaping the way scientific knowledge is created and applied through global connected research infrastructure, open access data, we mentioned data, digital collaboration platform, et cetera. And there is more attention now, maybe how to get every researcher to be able to access infrastructure. So, there was some attention also dedicated this morning there was a session on that, on the remote infrastructure access to make sure that every scientist in developing countries may contribute to the benefit of government scientific process. And again, there is a need for investment in digital infrastructure, capacity building and institutional support, which is essential to continue delivering on this action line. And I think, yeah, I may have made too much details. After that, I don’t know if I have more time or not.

Gitanjali Sah Yes, please, Davide, just to do justice to your action line on e-science.

Davide Storti No, I just mentioned that, again, we need to really realize, the message was that to realize the full potential of e-science, we need more investment in digital infrastructure. We need to coordinate the policy frameworks for the equitable access, ensuring responsible data and… Artificial Intelligence and bridging the digital divide in line with the action lines and SDGs. These action lines offer a pathway to promote scientific innovation, accelerating knowledge based solutions and strengthening science as a global public good. So that’s the message from the action line.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much Davide and thanks for covering both the action lines. So this year for the first time we also had a digital skills track that ITU did with ILO and thanks to ILO that it was really so vibrant the track we covered different aspects of digital skills and capacity building. So we merged the action lines of C4 and C7 e-employment together to be more impactful. So Maria, how has this action line evolved especially with the coming of AI and emerging technologies, the discussions that we hear nowadays and what is the future that you see of e-employment? Over to you.

Maria Prieto Berhouet Thank you Gitanjali. So e-employment or the impact of technology on employment in general has always always been very important over the past 100 years. So the introduction of electricity impacted the labour market incredibly and every change has impacted the labour market. Now the past 20 years we have seen an exponential growth in the evolution of employment and lately also with artificial intelligence. And it is important to mention here that all levels of The labor market are being influenced, be it low, high, middle level jobs, but also jobs in the formal and the informal economy, which is why the ILO has introduced recently an observatory to measure those impacts, to see where we’re going, and try to grasp through different types of information sources and how to respond to these issues through better capacity building. And indeed, we had a really nice collaboration with ITU on this issue on Wednesday, several sessions that dealt with digitalization, capacity building, and employment. And also, I wanted to mention, and it was mentioned earlier, also the impact that COVID had on sort of accelerating even more the impact of digitalization on employment. Now, the ILO is a normative organization that makes international labor standards to regulate employment. And so, one of the main challenges for the organization is how to adapt those to the current labor market, including platform work, and this is an ongoing discussion. When it comes to the action line itself, e-employment, we have a growing demand, and I’m sure the other action lines are experiencing a similar thing, from constituents asking for more support on the issue of digitalization in the future. and that one that we can do in close collaboration with the other action lines because we are definitely all extremely related. Thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you, Maria. We’ll now move on to the action line on e-environment. The action line is also divided into two components. One is a part that we do with a lot to do with WMO and ITU and the other part is a lot to do with UNEP and ITU. So, Marielza, I invite you to talk more about the work that you’re doing with disaster risk management and those climate change aspects. And, Garam, I invite you here. If you could join me, Garam, please. Marielza, you can start and if you could both share your time, please.

Speaker Okay, thank you very much, Gitanjali. So, as you know, this has three goals. One is on the environment. Two of them are on the environmental side and the third one is on using technologies for disaster risk reduction. So, I’m going to focus on the second one. And we see that over the past 20 years, we have seen an evolution of the use of technologies for disaster management. And we have seen how these technologies have shifted from being only optional tools to becoming essential enablers for life and for saving lives. So, under the umbrella of Action Line C7 on the Environment, we have focused on using these technologies for disaster risk reduction with the aim of building more resilient countries and more resilient communities, and ensuring, and the most important is to ensure that no one is left behind. So today, we have seen the evolution of technologies, and now we have seen how satellites are capable of sending early warning alerts directly to mobile phones without passing through the land networks. So this has been an evolution, and this is something that helps to bridge the digital gap and the digital connectivity, particularly in the most remote areas and with the most remote communities which are at risk. We also seen how artificial intelligence is being used in our daily life, and especially for disaster risk reduction, and the AI is helping to forecast a wide range of hazards and also to identify connectivity gaps. And they enhance to speed up the preparedness and also the response activities when a disaster strikes. But at the same time, we have also IoT networks that support real-time monitoring, and the monitoring and the data are essential for sending early warning alerts, analyzing the data, and to save lives of people. But one of the most important examples that we have seen recently is the launch of the early warning for all initiative that some of you have heard, or many of you have heard. And this is a global commitment to ensure that everyone is safe. We are still in the process of launching this early warning initiative. And ITU is the lead of the early warning dissemination and communication and we are working very closely with other UN entities to facilitate the implementation of this initiative. So we are still in the process of launching this early warning initiative. So we are still in the process of launching this early warning initiative worldwide. So we look forward to the future. Our challenge and opportunity is to continue building on this momentum that we have. The technology is there. But it’s not only about technology. We also need to see that we need to have regulatory frameworks to use technologies in the best way to save lives. So I’m sorry if this is a long introduction, but as most of the discussion has proved corny, we also have a topics for discussion, which includes the development of environmental technologies, technology technologies.

Garam Bel I would like to summarize some of the key areas. So we have electronic waste. We have greenhouse gas emissions. We have critical raw materials that we have in the technologies that we use today to power our devices. So these themes are themes that we have been focusing on, this action line has been focusing on from a regulatory standpoint, from a data standpoint, and also from a regulatory standpoint. I would like to refer back to what Sophie was talking about, the evolution of the environment, the evolution of the environment, and how that has evolved over the last 20, 30 years. And then I would like to refer back to what Sophie was talking about, the evolution of the environment and how that has evolved the regulatory space is greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from this sector equates are equivalent to those of the communications, sorry the transportation sector and there is a sort of unclarity there around who is actually regulating this space. So there’s a lot of important questions with this action line going forward. So back to you Gitanjali, thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much Gaurab. We also have Denise who I started with but you were not in the room. So Denise, UN-DESA implements three action lines in collaboration with different UN agencies co-isolating with many of us. Denise, action line C1, C11 and C7E governance, over to you.

Davide Storti Thank you so much and I apologize for being late. I was stuck in another meeting. For C7E I think I can start with that one. We publish UN survey every other year. We published the 2024 edition in September. We are working right now in preparation for the 2026 edition. We send a questionnaire to all 193 UN member states and the most populous city in each country. So the next survey will be available in 2026 where we look at the e-government development of 193 UN member states and the most populous city in each country. But we are also creating lots of partnerships with government and non-government entities on applying our methodology to several cities in a single country. So if any of the stakeholders here are interested in collaborating with UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs we are very much open to that. We did some partnership with Brazil, India, Greece and an application of our methodology is happening right now in the UK. Uzbekistan and a few other countries. So if you google for UN e-government survey you can see all our work in our e-government knowledge base. And very quickly about the other two action lines C1 promotion of ICTs and C11 international cooperation. As the secretariat for the 20-year review of the WSIS by the UN General Assembly. We organized two sessions here, one on WSIS and GDC and the other one was a contentious issue on enhanced cooperation. So I will just briefly summarize what we heard and first reinforcing the multi-stakeholder model. There was strong consensus to maintain and enhance the multi-stakeholder approach and I think the WSIS forum here was an excellent example of that for the co-facilitators which you will see hear from them after this meeting. And also integrating and implementing the GDC principles into the WSIS architecture. We have heard this again and again from many stakeholders. This is something I think you will also see in the Zero Draft. And strengthening the IGF and also continuation of the WSIS forum. These were the two elements that we heard. About the human rights language, there were a lot of inputs as well to make sure that we use the latest version in the Zero Draft. And other things included to have more inclusive transparent processes and I think UNRESA helped the co-facilitators to organize other virtual stakeholder consultations involving all stakeholders in coming months, in coming days actually after We got the feedback on the elements paper on 25th of July, there will be some further consultations. I stop here and give it back to you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much, Dennis. I know you’re very busy, so I’m glad you could make it. We also have Tee from UNESCO, who’s moderating, implementing the action line on ethics. Tee, so of course the ethical dimension is completely evolving and changing. We heard from most of the action line facilitators on this, but let’s hear from you as well. Over to you, UNESCO.

Tee Wee Ang Thank you so much. And actually, it’s actually quite fitting that we have the last one, because as you can hear, the rapid changing digital landscape over the last 20 years has an impact across all areas, and embedded within that are key ethical considerations that needs to be reflected upon and needs to be acted upon. And I think through this action line, we have been working very closely with a wide network of experts and UN partners and also other partners to make sure that ethical reflection keep pace with the challenges that we keep seeing emerging again and again. So, for example, we have been advancing with the work on ethics of artificial intelligence. We have been working very closely with member states to help them with the assessment, on the readiness assessment for adopting AI embedded within which is the fundamental ethical considerations that they need to take into account, helping them also with capacity building, with ethics, ethical impact assessment itself, and also we’ve created wide networks such as the AI ethics experts without borders. to help to provide concrete capacity building to member states. I think one of the key things that we also need to, through this action line, we’re also seeing that a lot of these ethical considerations are now tied very much to the ethical implications of the technology itself, but not only digital technology, but the digitalization of technology in areas which is not maybe conventionally conceived as digital, such as neurotechnology, such as quantum, which is more hardware related. But in neurotechnology, we’re also advancing on ethics of neurotechnology. In fact, member states at the end of the year will be adopting a set of recommendations on concrete policy recommendations in this area. But maybe what I want to say is that through this work, I think it will be very important to reaffirm that ethics must be a foundational and cross-cutting pillar of digital transformation, especially in the context of rapidly evolving and converging technologies such as AI, neurotechnology, and quantum computing. And lessons learned and moving forward is that we really need to mainstream ethics as a cross-cutting framing in the design, deployment, and regulation of digital tech, ensuring that it is embedded across the entire technology lifecycle. It’s not only at the beginning, but also when you are moving technology out of service. There are also ethical considerations there. We are going to have to continue promoting interdisciplinary and inclusive governance models that leverage anticipatory ethics. And this is very important because we talk about adaptive governance, but we also need to then build in anticipatory governance. And we need to also leverage public trust and stakeholder dialogue for sure. We need to also start to recognize that ethics as a form of agile self-governance that is capable of complementing formal legal and regulatory systems in real time.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you very much, Ti, and welcome to the Business Forum. I think it’s your first time here. We have actually even Radka joining us for the first time as a high-level track, as an Action Line Facilitator, Carla joining C4, and Ti with us for ethics. So our community is growing, so thank you very much. We’d like to end with Davide. Davide, real quickly, two minutes for your Action Line on C8, cultural diversity. It’s a very important one, so please go ahead.

Davide Storti That’s not to say that there are too many Action Lines, on the contrary, but just quickly, I think it’s worth mentioning that, of course, the huge impact of the evolution of digital technologies into culture, in terms of, of course, access, in terms of the production, in terms of the new form of expression, and so there is a lot of impact to mention there. And one significant thing is that there is, in 2025, the model 2025, which is a ministerial meeting, which is happening in 2023 as well, and it is, it was like 40 years that the Ministries of Culture didn’t bring together to discuss about this issue. So culture is indeed an important part of the WSIS. We had mainly a discussion this week about the multilingualism and the impact as well on that, for the representation of multilingual content in the world. And lastly, just a few seconds to mention, of course, we didn’t mention C9 media, the Action Line on media, and of course, There are major concerns, major evolution linked to the digital transformation of media, the expansions of internet, and we have reminded a few times during the week about the work, for example, for the digital platforms and the guidelines and the work, the importance of the work on safety of journalists and everything that goes around the media landscape to ensure media pluralism, independence, etc. And also, one other thing which is mentioned by these other colleagues is the information literacy, which is also taking into account the need for the public as producer and consumer of information to be adequately trained, conscious of the consequences of clicking for the internet. Lastly, I would like to end by mentioning the work that we’ve been doing all together in the last many years on the internet universality indicators that are a tool which is providing a way to assess and guide policies for rights-based open accessible multistakeholder internet governance, and this is one of the frameworks UNESCO is promoting as a possible tool for the wishes to come, to be able to measure also the progress to at least some of the action lines. Thank you.

Gitanjali Sah Thank you, Davide. Thank you to all the UN agencies present here today implementing the different action lines. We’ll do a very quick photograph and then we are going on to a very interesting dialogue with the co-facilitators, so please stay in the room while I invite everybody to take a quick photograph. Graham and Denise, please join us so that we can start with the dialogue. The very interesting dialogue we’ve been waiting for with the COFAGS and I can see them in the room Thank you for being here ambassadors

Agreement points

Need for inclusive approaches targeting vulnerable communities

Speakers

– Carla Licciardello
– Derrick Muneene
– Speaker

Arguments

Need for more inclusive approach focusing on youth, women, girls, people with disabilities, and older people

Global Initiative on Digital Health framework ensures inclusive contribution from all actors in health transformation agenda

Technologies evolved from optional tools to essential enablers for disaster risk reduction and saving lives over past 20 years

Summary

Multiple speakers emphasized the critical importance of ensuring digital transformation benefits all populations, particularly vulnerable groups including women, girls, people with disabilities, older people, and those in remote areas

Topics

Development | Human rights | Rights of persons with disabilities

Traditional approaches are insufficient for current digital challenges

Speakers

– Carla Licciardello
– Sofie Maddens
– Tee Wee Ang

Arguments

Traditional capacity development delivery methods often ineffective, requiring understanding of local community needs and out-of-the-box thinking

Need for data-driven regulation, regulatory sandboxes, and innovative approaches while maintaining market confidence for investment

Need for anticipatory governance models and ethics as agile self-governance complementing formal legal and regulatory systems

Summary

Speakers agreed that traditional methods of capacity building, regulation, and governance are no longer adequate for addressing current digital transformation challenges, requiring innovative and adaptive approaches

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Capacity development

COVID-19 accelerated digital transformation across all sectors

Speakers

– Sofie Maddens
– Maria Prieto Berhouet

Arguments

COVID made digital transformation essential across all sectors, requiring regulators to become digital ecosystem builders

COVID accelerated digitalization’s impact on employment, creating growing demand for support on digitalization issues

Summary

Both speakers identified COVID-19 as a critical turning point that accelerated digital transformation, making digital technologies essential rather than optional across health, education, employment, and other sectors

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Future of work

Need for better monitoring and measurement frameworks

Speakers

– Gitanjali Sah
– Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth

Arguments

Need for monitoring and assessment frameworks as currently no concrete figures exist to measure 20-year achievements of action lines

Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development conducting mapping exercise for WSIS Plus 20 to improve Action Line monitoring

Summary

Both speakers highlighted the critical gap in monitoring and assessment frameworks for WSIS Action Lines and the ongoing efforts to address this through comprehensive mapping exercises

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers expressed concern about the rapid advancement of AI and emerging technologies, emphasizing the need for balanced investment priorities and ethical frameworks that can keep pace with technological development

Speakers

– Davide Storti
– Tee Wee Ang

Arguments

Investment disparity exists with $500 billion projected for AI while only $100 billion needed to close global education financing gap

Ethical considerations must keep pace with rapidly changing digital landscape across all technology areas including AI, neurotechnology, and quantum computing

Topics

Development | Human rights | Online education

Both speakers acknowledged emerging technological challenges (AI-driven attacks, environmental impacts) while highlighting regulatory and governance gaps that need to be addressed

Speakers

– Preetam Maloor
– Garam Bel

Arguments

New threats include AI-driven attacks and need for post-quantum world preparation, but stakeholders are better organized and more resilient

Environmental challenges include electronic waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and critical raw materials with unclear regulatory responsibility

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory | E-waste

Both speakers emphasized the importance of maintaining and strengthening the multi-stakeholder approach that has been central to WSIS, while adapting it for future challenges

Speakers

– Tomas Lamanauskas
– Davide Storti

Arguments

Strong consensus to maintain multi-stakeholder approach and integrate Global Digital Compact principles into WSIS architecture

WSIS established as comprehensive digital development framework including all stakeholders and became digital arm of sustainable development agenda

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights principles

Unexpected consensus

Cross-sectoral collaboration necessity

Speakers

– Sofie Maddens
– Maria Prieto Berhouet
– Carla Licciardello

Arguments

Evolution from basic telecoms regulation in early 2000s to advanced regulatory frontiers addressing digital ecosystem building today

ILO introduced observatory to measure AI and technology impacts on labor market and adapt international labor standards

Emerging technologies like AI require different approaches to digital skills delivery and capacity development programs

Explanation

Unexpectedly, speakers from different technical domains (telecommunications regulation, labor standards, capacity building) all emphasized the need for cross-sectoral collaboration and ecosystem approaches, showing convergence across traditionally separate policy areas

Topics

Legal and regulatory | Future of work | Capacity development

Technology as essential infrastructure rather than optional tool

Speakers

– Speaker
– Derrick Muneene
– Sofie Maddens

Arguments

Technologies evolved from optional tools to essential enablers for disaster risk reduction and saving lives over past 20 years

Tremendous progress in ICT inclusion in health from basic data collection in 2005 to AI and emerging technologies integration by 2018

COVID made digital transformation essential across all sectors, requiring regulators to become digital ecosystem builders

Explanation

Speakers from diverse sectors (disaster management, health, telecommunications) unexpectedly converged on viewing digital technologies as essential infrastructure rather than supplementary tools, indicating a fundamental shift in how technology is perceived across domains

Topics

Development | Infrastructure | Critical infrastructure

Overall assessment

Summary

Strong consensus emerged around the need for inclusive approaches, innovative governance methods, better monitoring frameworks, and recognition of digital technologies as essential infrastructure. Speakers consistently emphasized the transformative impact of COVID-19 and the inadequacy of traditional approaches for current challenges.

Consensus level

High level of consensus with significant implications for WSIS Plus 20 review. The agreement suggests a mature understanding of digital transformation challenges and readiness for adaptive governance frameworks. The convergence across different technical domains indicates potential for more integrated policy approaches in the next phase of WSIS implementation.

Different viewpoints

Investment priorities between AI development and education funding

Speakers

– Davide Storti

Arguments

Investment disparity exists with $500 billion projected for AI while only $100 billion needed to close global education financing gap

Summary

Davide Storti highlighted a concerning disparity in global investment priorities, suggesting that the massive investment in AI ($500 billion) overshadows the relatively modest amount needed to close the global education financing gap ($100 billion). This represents an implicit critique of current funding allocation priorities.

Topics

Development | Economic | Online education

Unexpected differences

Regulatory responsibility for ICT sector environmental impact

Speakers

– Garam Bel

Arguments

Environmental challenges include electronic waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and critical raw materials with unclear regulatory responsibility

Explanation

Garam Bel raised an unexpected issue about the unclear regulatory responsibility for ICT sector greenhouse gas emissions, which are equivalent to those of the transportation sector. This highlights a significant gap in environmental governance that wasn’t addressed by other speakers, suggesting a lack of clarity about who should regulate this important environmental impact.

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | E-waste

Overall assessment

Summary

The session showed minimal direct disagreement as it was primarily a reporting format where Action Line facilitators presented their progress. The main areas of difference were around approaches to monitoring/assessment, inclusivity strategies, investment priorities, and regulatory clarity for environmental issues.

Disagreement level

Very low level of disagreement with high consensus on goals but some variation in implementation approaches. The collaborative nature of the WSIS framework and the reporting format minimized conflicts, though some underlying tensions emerged around resource allocation priorities and regulatory gaps. This suggests strong alignment on the overall WSIS vision but need for better coordination on specific implementation strategies and monitoring frameworks.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers expressed concern about the rapid advancement of AI and emerging technologies, emphasizing the need for balanced investment priorities and ethical frameworks that can keep pace with technological development

Speakers

– Davide Storti
– Tee Wee Ang

Arguments

Investment disparity exists with $500 billion projected for AI while only $100 billion needed to close global education financing gap

Ethical considerations must keep pace with rapidly changing digital landscape across all technology areas including AI, neurotechnology, and quantum computing

Topics

Development | Human rights | Online education

Both speakers acknowledged emerging technological challenges (AI-driven attacks, environmental impacts) while highlighting regulatory and governance gaps that need to be addressed

Speakers

– Preetam Maloor
– Garam Bel

Arguments

New threats include AI-driven attacks and need for post-quantum world preparation, but stakeholders are better organized and more resilient

Environmental challenges include electronic waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and critical raw materials with unclear regulatory responsibility

Topics

Cybersecurity | Legal and regulatory | E-waste

Both speakers emphasized the importance of maintaining and strengthening the multi-stakeholder approach that has been central to WSIS, while adapting it for future challenges

Speakers

– Tomas Lamanauskas
– Davide Storti

Arguments

Strong consensus to maintain multi-stakeholder approach and integrate Global Digital Compact principles into WSIS architecture

WSIS established as comprehensive digital development framework including all stakeholders and became digital arm of sustainable development agenda

Topics

Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights principles

Key takeaways

WSIS has achieved significant progress over 20 years, with global connectivity increasing from 800 million to 5.5 billion people (12.5% to two-thirds of population)

All WSIS Action Lines have evolved substantially, requiring adaptation to emerging technologies like AI, quantum computing, and neurotechnology

There is a critical need for monitoring and assessment frameworks as concrete measurement data for Action Line achievements is currently lacking

The multi-stakeholder approach remains fundamental and should be maintained while integrating Global Digital Compact principles into WSIS architecture

COVID-19 accelerated digital transformation across all sectors, making digital tools essential rather than optional

Ethics must be embedded as a cross-cutting foundational pillar across the entire technology lifecycle

Traditional approaches to capacity building and regulation need updating to address local needs and emerging challenges

Strong consensus exists for continuing the WSIS Forum and strengthening the Internet Governance Forum

Resolutions and action items

Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development will conduct a mapping exercise for WSIS Plus 20 to improve Action Line monitoring frameworks

UN-DESA will organize virtual stakeholder consultations involving all stakeholders following feedback on elements paper by July 25th

UNESCO member states will adopt recommendations on neurotechnology ethics by end of year

ITU will continue leading the Early Warning for All initiative for disaster risk reduction

WHO will extend the Global Strategy on Digital Health as mechanism for tracking Action Line progress

Action Line facilitators to continue annual reporting and action plan formation as mandated by Para 109 of Tunis Agenda

Unresolved issues

Lack of concrete monitoring and assessment frameworks for measuring 20-year achievements of Action Lines

No clear alignment between WSIS targets and individual WSIS Action Lines for data collection

Unclear regulatory responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions from ICT sector

Investment disparity with $500 billion projected for AI while only $100 billion needed for global education financing gap

Need to reformulate or expand Action Lines given significant changes since 2005

Challenge of adapting international labor standards to current digital labor market including platform work

How ICT regulators should converge and work with cross-sectoral regulators in health, education, and agriculture

Suggested compromises

Merging related Action Lines (C4 capacity building and C7 e-employment) for more impactful implementation

Rebranding terminology to reflect current realities (e.g., ‘digital health’ instead of ‘eHealth’, ‘information and knowledge societies’ instead of just ‘information societies’)

Using anticipatory governance models and ethics as agile self-governance to complement formal legal and regulatory systems

Implementing data-driven regulation with regulatory sandboxes for experimentation while maintaining market confidence

Focusing on inclusive approaches that prioritize vulnerable communities including women, girls, people with disabilities, and older people

We need different ways on how we report, and we need to capture that reporting starting from the community, because there might be a lot happening, but again, we are not really capturing at the actual line level.

Speaker

Carla Licciardello

Reason

This comment highlights a fundamental gap in the WSIS framework – the disconnect between grassroots digital development activities and formal reporting mechanisms. It challenges the current top-down approach to monitoring and suggests that valuable community-level innovations may be invisible to policymakers.

Impact

This observation was immediately reinforced by Gitanjali, who expanded on it by noting the lack of concrete monitoring frameworks for action lines. It shifted the discussion toward systemic evaluation challenges and was later referenced by Scarlett when announcing the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development’s mapping exercise.

There is now, of course, with emerging technologies, of course, from AI, you know, to other type of technologies, there is a need to think a bit in a different way on how we deliver digital skills and capacity development programs… the traditional means on how we are delivering a capacity development program sometimes are really not working on the ground.

Speaker

Carla Licciardello

Reason

This comment challenges the effectiveness of established capacity-building approaches in the face of rapidly evolving technology. It suggests that institutional inertia may be hindering effective digital skills development and calls for fundamental rethinking of delivery methods.

Impact

This insight established a theme that resonated throughout subsequent presentations, with multiple speakers acknowledging the need for adaptive, flexible approaches to their respective action lines in response to technological change.

We also see accelerated efforts from member states in improving cyber security… in 2017, 110 countries lacked a national cyber security strategy, by 24, 67 countries were without one… In 2017, 85 countries lacked a national CERT, and by 24, this number has reduced to 68.

Speaker

Preetam Maloor

Reason

This data-driven perspective provides concrete evidence of progress while simultaneously highlighting remaining gaps. It demonstrates how quantitative analysis can reveal both achievements and ongoing challenges, offering a nuanced view of global cybersecurity development.

Impact

This approach influenced subsequent speakers to provide more specific metrics and examples. It also reinforced the earlier discussion about the need for better monitoring frameworks by demonstrating how data can effectively track action line progress.

We’re looking at regulators as digital ecosystem builders… So, we need to address new challenges, emerging and fast-moving technologies, opportunities, new players. And there is that need for inclusive frameworks, but also for adaptability and flexibility while maintaining the sustainability and the confidence in the markets.

Speaker

Sofie Maddens

Reason

This comment reframes the role of regulators from traditional gatekeepers to active ecosystem architects. It introduces the complex balance between innovation facilitation and market stability, highlighting the evolution of regulatory thinking in the digital age.

Impact

This perspective on adaptive regulation influenced the discussion by introducing the concept of ‘regulatory sandboxes’ and data-driven regulation, showing how regulatory approaches themselves must evolve with technology.

There is a shift also between the focus from information to attention, where information was a scarce resource in 2020, in 2003, 2005, and now we have an abundance of information. And what we have, actually, scarcity is in two, the attention.

Speaker

Davide Storti

Reason

This observation identifies a fundamental paradigm shift in the information landscape that challenges core WSIS assumptions. It suggests that the original focus on information access may be less relevant than managing information overload and attention economics.

Impact

This insight recontextualized the entire discussion about information access and digital literacy, suggesting that WSIS frameworks may need fundamental reconceptualization rather than just updating.

Ethics must be a foundational and cross-cutting pillar of digital transformation… We need to also start to recognize that ethics as a form of agile self-governance that is capable of complementing formal legal and regulatory systems in real time.

Speaker

Tee Wee Ang

Reason

This comment positions ethics not as an add-on consideration but as fundamental infrastructure for digital transformation. The concept of ‘agile self-governance’ introduces a novel approach to managing rapidly evolving ethical challenges that formal systems cannot address quickly enough.

Impact

Coming at the end of the session, this comment provided a unifying framework that connected all the previous discussions about adaptation, monitoring, and governance challenges across different action lines.

Overall assessment

These key comments collectively shaped the discussion by revealing a fundamental tension between the original WSIS framework and current digital realities. The conversation evolved from celebrating 20 years of progress to acknowledging systemic challenges in monitoring, adaptation, and governance. The most impactful insights highlighted the need for more agile, community-centered, and ethically-grounded approaches to digital development. Rather than simply updating existing frameworks, the discussion suggested that WSIS may need fundamental reconceptualization to address attention economics, ecosystem thinking, and real-time ethical governance. The comments created a progression from identifying specific gaps to proposing new paradigms, ultimately framing the WSIS+20 review as an opportunity for transformative rather than incremental change.

How can we develop concrete monitoring and assessment frameworks for evaluating WSIS Action Lines achievements?

Speaker

Gitanjali Sah

Explanation

Currently there’s no real monitoring and assessment framework for the evaluation of action lines, making it impossible to provide concrete figures on achievements over 20 years

How can WSIS targets be better aligned with each WSIS Action Line for improved data collection?

Speaker

Gitanjali Sah

Explanation

Current WSIS targets are not aligned with individual action lines, which would make data collection and monitoring frameworks more effective

How should child online protection guidelines be updated and revised to address evolving technologies?

Speaker

Gitanjali Sah

Explanation

Existing guidelines need updating to keep pace with technological changes and new security challenges

How can ICT regulators effectively converge and work with cross-sectoral regulators (health, education, agriculture)?

Speaker

Gitanjali Sah

Explanation

There are now many cross-sectoral regulators and the challenge is how ICT regulators can coordinate and collaborate with all of them

How can we ensure more frequent knowledge exchange platforms and best practice sharing among regulators?

Speaker

Gitanjali Sah

Explanation

Regulators expressed need for more opportunities to learn from each other as they are at various stages of development

Should we rebrand ‘eHealth’ to ‘digital health’ to reflect the broader scope of current applications?

Speaker

Derek Muneene (referenced by Gitanjali Sah)

Explanation

The scope of health applications has expanded significantly beyond the original eHealth concept

How can we better capture and report capacity development activities happening at community level?

Speaker

Carla Licciardello

Explanation

There may be significant activity occurring that is not being captured at the action line level for reporting purposes

How can we develop different approaches for delivering digital skills programs that work effectively on the ground?

Speaker

Carla Licciardello

Explanation

Traditional methods of delivering capacity development programs are sometimes not working effectively and need innovation

How can we address the global financing gap for education while massive investments are being made in AI?

Speaker

Davide Storti

Explanation

There’s a scale issue with $500 billion projected investment in AI while only $100 billion more is needed to close the global education financing gap

How can we ensure equitable access to remote research infrastructure for scientists in developing countries?

Speaker

Davide Storti

Explanation

There’s a need to ensure every scientist in developing countries can contribute to and benefit from global scientific processes

How should WSIS Action Lines be reformulated or expanded given the significant changes since 2005?

Speaker

Scarlett Fondeur Gil de Barth

Explanation

A UNCTAD report concludes that much has changed since 2005 and it’s the perfect time to consider reformulating or expanding action lines

How can we develop anticipatory governance models that complement formal legal and regulatory systems in real-time?

Speaker

Tee Wee Ang

Explanation

There’s a need for agile self-governance approaches that can keep pace with rapidly evolving technologies like AI, neurotechnology, and quantum computing

How can ethics be mainstreamed as a cross-cutting framework across the entire technology lifecycle?

Speaker

Tee Wee Ang

Explanation

Ethics must be embedded not just at the beginning but throughout technology design, deployment, regulation, and even when moving technology out of service

Who should regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the ICT sector given the regulatory uncertainty?

Speaker

Garam Bel

Explanation

ICT sector emissions are equivalent to transportation sector emissions but there’s unclear responsibility for regulation in this space