IGF Daily Summary
for Monday, 23 June 2025
Dear readers, welcome to our daily report from Day 0 at IGF 2025.
The 20th Internet Governance Forum opened in Lillestrøm, Norway, with an ambitious agenda centred on ‘Building Digital Governance Together’.
Day 0 featured sessions spanning critical issues from AI governance and digital rights to cybersecurity and sustainable development. The discussions revealed both the promise and perils of our increasingly digital world, with participants grappling with fundamental questions about how to govern technologies that are evolving faster than our ability to regulate them. As one participant stated, ‘I feel like we’ve talked enough. I feel like we’ve had too many dialogues. I think it’s about time we act’.
Key themes emerged early: the urgent need to bridge persistent digital divides, the challenge of maintaining democratic values while combating disinformation, and the imperative to ensure AI development serves humanity rather than concentrating power. Participants from the Global South emphasised the need for more inclusive approaches that don’t perpetuate digital colonialism, while technical experts stressed the physical realities underlying our ‘cloud-based’ digital infrastructure.
As we stand at this 20-year milestone, with the IGF’s mandate up for renewal and the WSIS+20 review process underway, the stakes have never been higher for getting digital governance right.
What stood out to you in yesterday’s discussions?
Diplo reporting team
Key questions from Day 0
How can we ensure AI development serves humanity rather than concentrating power?
Participants grappled with the fundamental challenge that ‘50% of AI research is produced from the US and China’ and ‘80% of all VC funding for AI companies allocated to just these two countries’. Solutions focused on three pillars: ‘data sovereignty,’ ‘contextual innovation,’ and ‘peer-to-peer collaboration’. Norway’s ‘Tsetlin Machine’ approach was presented as a transparent, efficient alternative to opaque and energy-intensive large language models, reinforcing the value of human-understandable AI systems.
What does meaningful digital inclusion look like beyond connectivity?
Despite high global internet coverage, significant gaps remain. Participants noted that ‘there is still a third of the world offline’ and this is mostly a usage gap rather than a coverage issue. Meaningful inclusion requires addressing barriers including ‘infrastructure gaps, policy and regularity, uncertainty, inequalities, limited affordability of devices and services, and digital illiteracy’. The approach must work on three core dimensions: connectivity, accessibility, and digital skills, while maintaining analogue alternatives for those who cannot or choose not to be digital.
How can we combat misinformation while protecting freedom of expression?
The challenge intensified with AI capabilities, as ‘over a third of elections last year had major deepfake campaigns associated with them’. Solutions emphasised building resilience rather than reactive measures, including ‘pre-bunking’ strategies described as ‘the inoculation theory of trying to help societies and communities become more resilient to hate and lies’. However, participants stressed that ‘media and information literacy and AI literacy training is crucial, but it is not a standalone answer to mis- and disinformation problem’.
How can we achieve digital sustainability while meeting growing demand?
The ICT sector already accounts for ‘about 2 to 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions’, with data centre power consumption increasing sharply due to AI models. Science-based targets require cutting ‘absolute ICT emissions by 45 percent between 2020 and 2030, to stay at the one-and-a-half degree pathway’. Solutions include strategic data centre placement ‘next to surplus of renewable energy’ and heat reuse systems.
What role should the IGF play in the evolving digital governance landscape?
With the IGF’s mandate up for renewal and the WSIS+20 review underway, participants advocated for strengthening the forum’s role. Recommendations included permanent mandate renewal, appointing a director position for the IGF secretariat, and ensuring that ‘the financial stability and sustainability of the IGF is key’ through more innovative funding models. The IGF should serve as ‘the agenda setter’ and strengthen its ability to ‘actually take on controversial issues’.
Summary of discussions
Digital governance and cooperation
The opening day revealed significant momentum around the WSIS+20 review process and the Global Digital Compact (GDC) implementation. Civil society organisations have mobilised through coalitions like the Global Digital Rights Coalition for WSIS, emphasising three core priorities: promoting a human rights-based and people-centric approach to the WSIS review, advancing the multistakeholder approach in internet governance, and strengthening WSIS institutions like the IGF.
Participants identified gaps in the elements paper issued by co-facilitators, noting that ‘the multistakeholder governance model is a little bit missing in action’ and that ‘the language is not always consistent with international human rights law’ in areas including surveillance, censorship, and discrimination online.
The IGF’s future emerged as a central concern, with participants advocating for permanent mandate renewal and strengthened institutional capacity. Specific recommendations included ensuring the financial stability and sustainability of the IGF through more innovative funding models and adding a government track to the IGF annual meeting.
The implementation of the UNESCO’s ROAM-X framework was presented as ‘a strategic enabler for national digital assessments’ that ‘supports evidence-based policymaking by helping countries assess their digital needs’ with elements including ‘R standing for Human Rights, O for Openness, A for Accessibility and M for Multi-Stakeholder Participation and the X refers to cross-cutting issues such as sustainability, gender equality and online safety’.
Digital divides, inclusion, and capacity development
Despite global internet coverage reaching high levels, significant gaps remain in meaningful access. Participants noted that ‘2.6 billion people remain offline as of today, most of them in the least developed regions’ and ‘in low-income countries, only 27% of the population uses the internet, compared to 93% in high-income countries’.
Africa faces particular challenges, with participants noting that ‘38% of the African population only has access to the internet’ and a need for approximately ‘$100 billion in order for us to close the digital divide in the continent’. Gender inequalities persist, with participants highlighting that ‘189 million more men (are) online than women globally’.
The concept of meaningful connectivity was emphasised, with participants noting that ‘92% of the planet now has internet coverage’ yet ‘one third of the population is still offline’. Barriers include ‘infrastructure gaps, and policy and regularity, uncertainty, inequalities, limited affordability of devices and services, and digital illiteracy’.
Solutions emphasised that digital public infrastructure must ‘encourage competition and foster innovation and fiscal resilience’ while supporting open source solutions. The Nordic paradox was highlighted: ‘the more digital our societies become, the greater the risk of deepening the digital divide’.
AI technology and governance
AI dominated discussions, with participants grappling with both opportunities and risks. The concentration of AI development was a major concern, with participants noting that ‘50% of AI research is produced from the US and China’ and ‘80% of all VC [venture capital] funding for AI companies is allocated to just these two countries’.
Small states and startups face particular challenges in the AI landscape. The fundamental question posed was: ‘Are we sidelined or are we in fact standing at a unique point of opportunity?’ Solutions focused on three pillars: ‘data sovereignty,’ ‘contextual innovation,’ and ‘peer-to-peer collaboration.’
Bias and discrimination in AI systems emerged as critical concerns. Participants noted that ‘AI systems are not neutral and reproduce and amplify structural inequality,’ with face recognition technology initially working ‘really well at the beginning for white male faces, but not at all for black and female faces’ because ‘it was just trained on white male faces’.
The environmental impact of AI raised sustainability concerns, with calculations showing that ‘to generate one single image with a large language model, such as ChatGPT, uses the same amount of CO2 as charging your mobile phone up to 50%’ and ‘the global AI demand may be accountable in two years from now for a water withdrawal equal to six times (the annual water use) of the entire country of Denmark’.
Content governance and information integrity
The fight against misinformation and disinformation took centre stage, with participants noting that ‘disinformation is there in a broader mission of creating doubt, creating division in our society’ which ‘erodes, of course, the information integrity’ essential for democratic processes.
The challenge has intensified with AI capabilities. Research showed that ‘over a third of elections last year had these major deepfake campaigns associated with them’, with ‘133 and counting instances of these big deepfake campaigns, specifically around global elections’.
Platform policies and content moderation faced scrutiny, particularly regarding recent changes where companies ‘just shut down not just the third-party fact-checking with fact-checkers in the US, but also some of the policies that allow the minorities to have their voices heard’.
Solutions focused on building resilience rather than just reactive measures. The concept of ‘pre-bunking’ emerged as ‘the inoculation theory of trying to help societies and communities become more resilient to hate and lies’. However, participants stressed that ‘media and information literacy and AI literacy training is crucial, but it is not a standalone answer to mis- and disinformation problem’.
Digital infrastructure and services
Critical internet infrastructure vulnerabilities received significant attention, particularly regarding subsea cables that carry ‘over 99% of global intercontinental data’. While ‘approximately 70% of cable damage each year is caused by fishing and anchors,’ participants noted that ‘the growing intersection of geopolitical tensions, malicious cyber capabilities, and infrastructure fragility highlights a stark reality. The risks are no longer hypothetical. They’re here and they’re multiplying.’
Solutions emphasised redundancy and resilience through ‘multiple geographical diverse cables routes and alternative routes, including satellite backups and terrestrial connections’ and ‘building intelligence into our networks, so they can adapt in real-time’ using technologies like software-defined networking and AI analytics.
The session on preparing internet infrastructure highlighted the need for comprehensive approaches covering ‘connectivity, routing security, IPv6, IXPs [Internet eXchange Points], RPKI [Resource Public Key Infrastructure], collaborative policy framework, capacity building, all these issues that create a robust internet ecosystem’. Norway’s ambitious goals were showcased, with participants noting that ‘at least 100 megabit per second broadband coverage to 99.1% of households with gigabit coverage reaching 96.2%’.
Cybersecurity and cybercrime
Cybersecurity challenges intensified with ransomware attacks growing by ‘nearly 300% last year alone’. Microsoft tracks ‘over 600 million cyber attacks daily’ which breaks down to ‘somewhere around 415,000 attacks a minute’.
The fraud ecosystem presents massive challenges, with participants noting that ‘25% of the worldwide connected population’ have been victims of scams, yet ‘only 2.5% of those behind the scenes, those to fraudsters and the online scammers are actually prosecuted’ and ‘globally, only 4% are capable of getting a full refund’ from fraud.
Innovative solutions emerged, including Norway’s implementation of a digital anti-spoofing roaming shield that ‘entered into force 19 November 2024 as one of the first in the world’ making it so ‘no practical Norwegian mobile number can be spoofed from abroad’.
Human rights
Digital rights advocacy faced new challenges in an era of increasing surveillance and platform power concentration. The Pegasus Project revelations highlighted ongoing concerns, with the spyware targeting ‘at least 189 journalists, 85 human rights defenders, and over 600 politicians and government officials globally, including cabinet ministers and diplomats’.
Facial recognition technology (FRT) emerged as a particular concern, with civil society organisations developing 18 principles for police use, including the position that live FRT should be prohibited.
The intersection of human rights and AI development required urgent attention. Participants emphasised that ‘equality needs to be promoted in and through the use of AI and informed by the views of those impacted’ while ensuring access to remedies when discrimination occurs.
Sustainable development and environment
Environmental sustainability in the digital sector gained prominence, with participants noting that ‘the ICT sector alone already accounts for about 2 to 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions’. The challenge intensifies with AI development, as ‘data centres are particularly important in (…) this transformation.’
The concept of ‘net digital sustainability’ emerged, where digitalisation should not only reduce harm, but actively deliver net positive environmental and societal outcomes, redefining how we measure and how we manage a truly sustainable digital transformation.
Science-based targets require cutting ‘absolute ICT emissions by 45% between 2020 and 2030, to stay at the one-and-a-half degree pathway’. Solutions include strategic data centre placement, locating them next to a surplus of renewable energy.
SDGs in focus
Digital technologies emerged as both accelerators and potential barriers to achieving the SDGs. Participants explicitly noted that ‘Digital inclusion is essential for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals’ and that digital and AI have ‘potential to be an accelerator of development and achievement of the SDGs itself’.
The WSIS+20 review process specifically addresses SDG alignment, and countries like Tanzania shared their success of aligning their National Digital Strategic Framework to ‘SDGs number 1, number 8, number 9 and SDG number 11’. The Global Digital Compact’s Action 35E ‘focuses on strengthening information integrity to assess and thereby support efforts to ensure that the sustainable development goals are not impeded by mis- and disinformation’.
However, challenges remain significant. With billions still offline, participants emphasised that ‘we are keeping them out of the economy of the current times’. The digital economy’s potential was highlighted, with projections that ‘this digital economy can create 230 million jobs by 2030’ in Africa alone.
The ROAM-X framework was presented as helping ‘align with SDG targets, and ensure a digital development that is transparent, equitable, and accountable’.
The IGF we want
Permanent mandate renewal: Multiple participants suggested that the IGF mandate be renewed permanently rather than for limited periods, providing institutional stability and independence.
Enhanced financial sustainability: Recognition that ‘the financial stability and sustainability of the IGF is key’ with calls for ‘more innovative ideas to sort of guarantee or at least offer or put forward a sustainable model for funding and supporting the IGF’.
Communities of practice: A proposal for ‘communities of practice’ to ‘focus energy and effort from all parts of the community into problems that we know exist, challenges that we know are being articulated and digital gaps or digital divides that need to be closed and bridged’.
Enhanced infrastructure focus: A suggestion that ‘maybe we need to realise that to build trust in the internet services, we should have the infrastructure layer more into the debate, also in IGF forums, like we do today. But that has been somewhere missed in the past’.
Government track: A suggestion that a government track is embedded into the IGF (e.g. during the forum’s first day), as a way to bring more governments on board and also respond to calls for ‘enhanced cooperation’ to be operationalised.
Diplo/GIP at IGF2025
We are pleased to share that Diplo is partnering with the IGF Secretariat and the Government of Norway (as host country) to deliver AI-enabled, just-in-time reporting from the IGF 2025 meeting. Building on a decade of just-in-time IGF reporting, we will continue to provide timely and comprehensive coverage from the forum. Our reporting initiative will include session reports, an ‘Ask IGF 2025’ AI assistant, daily highlights, and more.
Diplo and the GIP are also organising and participating in various sessions. Yesterday, 23 June, Diplo’s Executive Director Jovan Kurbalija spoke at Day 0 event #79 WGIG+20: Glancing Backward and Looking Forward.
Jovan Kurbalija, Executive Director of Diplo, speaking at WGIG+20: Glancing Backward and Looking Forward
Today, 24 June, our experts will participate in Open Forum #33: Building an international AI cooperation ecosystem and Parliamentary session 5: Parliamentary exchange: Enhancing digital policy practices.
If you’re attending the IGF in Lillestrøm, make sure to drop by our Diplo and GIP booth, numbered 45. If you’re joining the IGF online, check out our space in the virtual village.
The CADE consortium, led by DiploFoundation, is also present in the IGF village, with booth numbered 57. Their virtual booth is available in the virtual village.
Do you like what you’re reading? Bookmark us at https://dig.watch/event/internet-governance-forum-2025 and tweet us @DigWatchWorld
Have you heard something new during the discussions, but we’ve missed it? Send us your suggestions at digitalwatch@diplomacy.edu.
