IGF2024

Summary

This open forum focused on Connect.post, a Universal Postal Union (UPU) project aimed at digitally connecting post offices worldwide to promote digital inclusion and sustainable development. The discussion explored how leveraging the postal network can bridge the digital divide, especially in rural and underserved areas. Experts highlighted that post offices, with their extensive reach, are well-positioned to provide digital access and services to communities.

Key points included the importance of sustainable connectivity solutions, the need for hybrid models of service delivery, and the role of post offices as community hubs for digital services. Participants emphasized the critical need for digital literacy training and cybersecurity measures to accompany connectivity efforts. The potential of emerging technologies like drones for postal delivery in rural areas was discussed, along with the importance of community-centered approaches for sustainable implementation.

Experts from various organizations, including the Caribbean Telecommunications Union, UNDP, Internet Society, and Organization of American States, shared insights on regional initiatives, challenges, and opportunities. They stressed the importance of partnerships between postal services, governments, and international organizations to achieve the project’s goals.

The discussion also touched on the potential for post offices to offer digital financial services and e-government services, further enhancing their role in digital inclusion. Participants agreed that while connectivity is crucial, it must be coupled with cybersecurity awareness and digital skills training to ensure truly inclusive digital transformation. The forum concluded by emphasizing the need for holistic approaches that consider both technological advancements and human factors in connecting post offices and communities.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– Leveraging postal infrastructure to bridge the digital divide and promote digital inclusion

– Cybersecurity implications of connecting postal networks and services

– The role of emerging technologies like drones in postal services

– The importance of digital literacy training and capacity building

– Potential for postal services to offer digital financial services

The overall purpose of the discussion was to explore how postal networks and infrastructure can be leveraged to promote digital inclusion and connectivity, especially in rural and underserved areas. The speakers discussed the Connect.post initiative by the Universal Postal Union, which aims to connect all post offices to the internet by 2030.

The tone of the discussion was collaborative and optimistic. Speakers from various organizations shared insights on how postal services can contribute to digital inclusion efforts. There was a sense of excitement about the potential of postal networks to bridge digital divides, tempered with awareness of challenges like cybersecurity risks. The tone remained consistent throughout, with participants building on each other’s ideas and highlighting opportunities for partnership and cooperation.

Speakers

– Tracy Hackshaw: Moderator, Head of the .POST team at UPU Postal Technology Center

– Nigel Cassimire: Deputy Secretary General of the Caribbean Telecommunications Union (CTU)

– Yu Ping Chan: Engagement at the Executive Office of the UNDP

– Kerry-Ann Barrett: Chief of Cyber Security at the Organization of American States (OAS)

– Rodney Taylor: Secretary General of the Caribbean Telecommunications Union (CTU)

– Kevin Hernandez: Digital Inclusion Expert at the Universal Postal Union (UPU)

Additional speakers:

– Dan York: Senior Advisor at the Internet Society

– Kerry-Ann Barrett: Chief of Cyber Security at the Organization of American States (OAS)

– Mayssam Sabra: Colleague of Tracy Hackshaw at UPU Postal Technology Center

Expanded Summary of Connect.POST Open Forum Discussion

Introduction

This open forum focused on Connect.post, a Universal Postal Union (UPU) initiative aimed at digitally connecting post offices worldwide to promote digital inclusion and sustainable development. Kevin Hernandez introduced the project, highlighting its goal to connect 50% of post offices by 2025 and 100% by 2030. The discussion explored how leveraging the postal network can bridge the digital divide, especially in rural and underserved areas. Experts from various organisations, including the Caribbean Telecommunications Union, UNDP, Internet Society, and Organization of American States, shared insights on regional initiatives, challenges, and opportunities.

Key Discussion Points

1. Leveraging Postal Infrastructure for Digital Inclusion

There was strong agreement among speakers that postal infrastructure can play a crucial role in promoting digital inclusion. Kevin Hernandez highlighted the extensive reach of postal networks in rural and underserved areas, making them well-positioned to provide public internet access and digital services. Yu Ping Chan emphasised how postal connectivity supports multi-channel government service delivery, referencing the Global Digital Compact signed at the UN in September. Nigel Cassimire discussed the potential for partnerships between telecom/ICT organisations and postal services to enable rural connectivity. Rodney Taylor elaborated on how postal infrastructure can be leveraged for e-government and digital financial services, citing the example of US visa applications being processed through post offices in Barbados.

2. Cybersecurity Considerations

As postal systems become more connected, cybersecurity emerged as a critical concern. Kerry-Ann Barrett pointed out that increased connectivity creates new vulnerabilities for postal systems, emphasising the need for cybersecurity awareness training for postal workers. Tracy Hackshaw shared that the UPU is establishing a global information sharing and analysis centre for postal cybersecurity to address these concerns. He also highlighted that the .post top-level domain is one of the most secure on the internet. There was consensus that cybersecurity measures must be coupled with efforts to improve efficiency and accessibility of postal services.

3. Digital Skills and Literacy

The importance of digital literacy training alongside connectivity initiatives was a recurring theme. Audience members and speakers alike stressed the need for community-centred models to build local digital skills and capacity. An audience member mentioned the digital literacy training being done by the Internet Society Foundation. Kevin Hernandez suggested that post offices could provide digital skills training in some contexts and proposed partnerships between post offices and libraries to support digital literacy efforts. This approach highlights the potential for post offices to serve as community hubs for digital services and education.

4. Emerging Technologies in Postal Services

The discussion touched on the role of emerging technologies in improving postal services. Kevin Hernandez mentioned a recent UPU survey on the use of emerging technologies by postal operators. Audience members mentioned the use of drones for postal deliveries in remote areas and the application of AI to optimise delivery routes. Kevin Hernandez noted that emerging technologies like drones may be more suitable for rural delivery than urban settings. Rodney Taylor emphasised that local postal knowledge remains crucial to support tech-enabled delivery in unplanned settlements, suggesting a hybrid approach that combines technological advancements with traditional expertise.

5. Sustainability and Long-term Viability

Nigel Cassimire raised an important point about the sustainability of digital inclusion initiatives, noting that many projects fail due to lack of ongoing support or associated activities. This sparked a conversation about the need for holistic approaches that consider both technological advancements and human factors in connecting post offices and communities.

6. Broader Context of Digital Transformation

Yu Ping Chan connected the discussion to larger global initiatives, referencing the World Summit for Information Society and emphasising the importance of capacity building and inclusive enabling environments. She also mentioned the UPU’s partnership with Egypt Post. Dan York shared information about the Internet Society’s work with community networks and their DIY community networks toolkit. Yu Ping Chan suggested using Raspberry Pi-enabled Wi-Fi networks for postal connectivity in some contexts.

Agreements and Disagreements

There was a high level of consensus among speakers on the key issues discussed. The main areas of agreement included the potential of postal infrastructure to promote digital inclusion, the importance of digital literacy training, the need to address cybersecurity concerns, and the role of emerging technologies in improving postal services.

Minor differences emerged in approaches to implementation, particularly regarding digital skills training. While Kevin Hernandez suggested post offices could provide such training, other speakers advocated for community-centred models to build local capacity. However, these differences were more about implementation strategies rather than fundamental disagreements.

Resolutions and Action Items

The UPU is taking concrete steps to address some of the challenges discussed:

1. Establishing a global information sharing and analysis centre for postal cybersecurity

2. Working on formulating an MOU with the International Federation of Library Associations to create ecosystems of digital inclusion

Unresolved Issues and Future Considerations

Several issues remain unresolved and warrant further exploration:

1. Ensuring long-term sustainability of community networks and digital inclusion initiatives

2. Balancing efficiency improvements through technology with cybersecurity concerns

3. Effectively implementing digital literacy programmes across diverse contexts and communities

4. Addressing the challenges of connecting rural and unplanned settlements, as discussed by Rodney Taylor

The discussion also raised potential areas for future development, including the integration of digital financial services and FinTech into postal services, and the exploration of synergies between postal and library digitisation efforts.

Conclusion

The Connect.POST Open Forum highlighted the significant potential of postal networks in promoting digital inclusion and bridging the digital divide. While challenges remain, particularly in terms of cybersecurity and sustainability, there is a clear path forward for leveraging postal infrastructure to improve digital access and services. The discussion emphasised the need for holistic approaches that consider technological advancements, human factors, and long-term sustainability in connecting post offices and communities worldwide. The Caribbean Telecommunications Union’s work with postal services, as mentioned by Rodney Taylor, provides a regional example of efforts to integrate postal networks into broader digital inclusion strategies.

Tracy Hackshaw: Good day and welcome to the Universal Postal Union’s Open Forum on Connect.post, digitally connecting through the postal network. Today we have a wonderful lineup of speakers. On my left is Mr. Nigel Casimir, Deputy Secretary General of the Caribbean Telecommunications Union. Right, two chairs away, or one chair away. And there’s Digital Inclusion Expert from the Universal Postal Union. Directly across from me to my right is Mr. Dan York, Senior Advisor at the Internet Society. And, oh, let me get Yu-Ping’s actual title. We have Yu-Ping from the UNDP and her title is… Engagement at the Executive Office of the UNDP. Online we have Ms. Kerry-Ann Barrett. I can’t see you online yet, so I hope I can see the Zoom room soon. Kerianne Barrett, Chief of Cyber Security at the Organization of American States. Is Kerianne online? Kerianne, if you’re there, can you just pop in and say hi? And, as well, we have Mr. Rodney Taylor, the Secretary General. We can see physically, well, see virtually. Yes, Kerianne says hello. And, Rodney, welcome. We’re seeing you. And he is the Secretary General of the Caribbean Telecommunications Union, based in Trinidad and Tobago, from the Caribbean. And we hope to hear some good stuff from Rodney today as we proceed with our open forum. So, without further ado, I’m going to hand the mic over to Mr. Hernandez from the UPU. who will introduce the session to us and give us a quick presentation on the topic at hand. Kevin, over to you.

Kevin Hernndez: Hello, everyone. Can you hear me? Okay. Sorry about that. So, hi, everyone. My name is Kevin Hernandez and I am a digital inclusion expert at the UPU and the focal point for the Connect.post project. So, if you have any questions about the project, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. So, Connect.post is a project led by the Universal Postal Union which aims to maximize the sustainable development contributions of the postal sector and to help foster more inclusive and sustainable digital transformations that leave no one behind. And among those contributions are bridging the digital divide and promoting social, economic, and digital inclusion. So, very briefly, I think it’s important to make a clarification about what we mean when we say bridging the digital divide and promoting digital inclusion. Because although these concepts are often used interchangeably, in reality, they actually mean two different things. So, when we mention bridging the digital divide, we are talking about gaps in digital access. On the other hand, when we speak about digital inclusion, we are referring to people’s abilities to fully participate in societies as they undergo a process of digitalization. And the important thing to note about these two concepts is that the digital divide can contribute to digital exclusion but does not automatically cause it. Instead, digital exclusion occurs when there is a digital divide present and opportunities and services can only be accessed digitally. In those situations, those without access or who lack digital skills end up being left out and are put at risk of falling behind. And we believe that a connected global postal infrastructure Our postal network is well-placed to help mitigate both of these risks. Sorry, I’m having issues with the clicker. Next slide, please, if you can control it. Okay. So, connecting a post office can contribute to bridging the digital divide. If we connect post offices in rural areas, we can then leverage that connectivity to provide access to the communities surrounding it. And there are different ways of doing this. For example, you can offer public access to digital equipment or provide access to the Internet at post offices, such as Zimpost and Zimbabwe is doing, and that’s the picture in this slide. They have connected over 200 post offices and then turned them into community information centers. Or post offices can even host a community network, meaning that post offices can become an Internet service provider for their surrounding communities. Now, moving on to digital inclusion. So, as I mentioned earlier, the digital divide does not automatically lead to digital exclusion. Instead, it’s a combination of the digital divide and when opportunities and services are only accessible through digital channels, that leads to digital exclusion. And unfortunately, this trend has become widespread across the world. For example, the 2023 UN World Public Sector Report found that too many countries and service providers were taking a digital-only approach, which was then resulting in the digital exclusion of marginalized groups. And this has led many governments to rethink this strategy. And they stressed, the report stressed that, a just and inclusive digital transformation that leaves no one behind includes hybrid models of service delivery, including blended or multi-channel service delivery. Some governments try to provide multi-channel service delivery by setting up in-person one-stop-shops or service centers, where people and businesses can access a wide range of digitally enabled services from a single location. But unfortunately, as an FAO report released earlier this year found, service centers are often few in number, and they tend to be concentrated in urban and densely populated areas. So then this means that they are not easily accessible for people in rural areas, who end up continuing to be at risk of exclusion and being left behind even when service centers are introduced. Meanwhile, the global postal network infrastructure is the most extensive and expansive retail service network in the world. There are over 650,000 post offices globally, and the majority of them are located in rural areas. So this gives posts an unprecedented reach in digitally underserved areas, and means that post offices tend to have a service outlet presence in places where other service providers and government actors struggle to reach. For this reason, post offices are very well placed to enable a more inclusive multi-channel service delivery. Anyway, I’ll continue with my presentation. without the next slide, please. Next one. Next one. There we go. So for this reason, post offices are very well placed to enable a more inclusive multi-channel service delivery. And this is not just a concept, but something that is already happening in several countries. So the graphic on this slide is from Poste Italiane, who have connected 7,000 post offices in rural areas to high-speed internet, and then leveraged that connectivity to transform their post offices into one-stop shops for digital government services. And this allows their rural residents to access digital government services across multiple channels, including the post office counter, through electronic kiosks, through advanced ATMs, through a call center, and through the web. And this makes these services more easily accessible to people in rural areas, where the post office is often the only public institution with a presence in those areas. And this is the kind of use of the postal infrastructure which we want to promote at Connect.Post. So in summary, the goal of Connect.Post is to connect all post offices in the world to the internet by 2030. And we have created a workflow to get there, and I don’t really have the time to get into that. But a key point to highlight for all you is that making this vision a reality requires collaboration with governments, international organizations, donors, the private sector, civil society, and, of course, designated postal operators. And we are currently working on building a coalition of actors to make this vision a reality. And we are very keen on building and exploring partnerships so that together we can help maximize the potential of the postal network to facilitate more inclusive digital transformations and to help bridge the digital divide and to promote economic, social, and digital inclusion. Thank you.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much, Kevin. for that brief but very enlightening introduction on Connect.Post and I hope everybody got a sense of what Connect.Post is all

Kevin Hernndez: and how we are to move forward with this project which really is ambitious in its scope trying to ensure that the postal community, the post offices

Tracy Hackshaw: and the stakeholders involved are connected via this network. The approach I’m going to take today is sort of a talk show format going to ask questions of our experts who are here with us today including our Kevin Hernandez who may be asked to answer some questions and I’m going to start with the CTU, the Caribbean Telecommunications Union because I’m Caribbean so I’m taking moderator’s privilege and putting them first. So probably we could start and let’s give the hybrid model a good try so let’s start with the online participants so we’ll have Rodney say a few words as to what’s happening but I think Nigel will give an introduction of the CTU’s overarching thinking but Rodney maybe given you’re the SG just say a few words about what’s happening.

Rodney Taylor: Sure, good morning or afternoon, good evening everyone and thanks for including us in this very important discussion. It’s good to be able to join you online. We have been, since 2023 we have signed an MOU, the CTU that is which we are a regional intergovernmental organization based in Trinidad and Tobago serving 20 member states. Most of them are independent territories or independent countries but some are British overseas territories and Dutch overseas territories as well and we have been advocating for that bridge between the Postal Service and the Ministries of Digital Transformation. In some cases the same ministers or same policymakers have responsibility for postal services. which, of course, is a form of communication and information technology or communication or digital transformation. And so for us, the link is very clear for the reasons outlined in the presentation, because the postal service can allow or facilitate the closure of the digital divide and ensure that there is no, or at least the risk for digital exclusion are minimized. So in practical terms, we signed an MOU in 2023 with the UPU, and that was intended to promote assessments of our postal services in the region, how ready they were for e-commerce, how connected they were under the Connect.Post initiative, the drive is to, of course, ensure that they have good and robust connectivity that they can then in turn service their communities. In addition to that, my own experience working with the government of Barbados was that we partnered in particular during COVID to allow the delivery of driver’s license so that we were able to stand up online renewal of driver’s licenses and they were able to, even though the offices were closed physically, the postal service stepped in to allow for a seamless online renewal and delivery of those driver’s license that then evolved to passports and other services now where physical credentials are needed. So it allows for seamless end-to-end e-commerce. So I’ll stop there for now. I know there are many other speakers, but for us, it is to ensure that policymakers get it. They understand that the postal service is more than the delivery of letters, and that is a very integral part of our digital transformation in efforts, especially if we want to be inclusive. Thank you.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much, S.G. Rodney-Taylor. So I’ll hand now to your colleague, Deputy Secretary-General Nigel Casimir, who will elaborate a little further about the CTU’s role in the project. and connectivity in general in the Caribbean region. So I’ll hand over to Nigel now. Nigel.

Nigel Cassimire: Thank you very much, Tracy. I think I would like to say that a partnership between the CTU, as Rodney has mentioned, our mandate basically is to develop ICT policy and regulation in the Caribbean. And say the postal service, there’s this legacy PTT type governance in government. So certainly there is a history of relationship between an organization like the CTU looking at telecom development and the postal service as well. So I think it was quite natural that we eventually got into an MOU arrangement. There was an encounter between CTU and the UPU at the ITU’s plenipotentiary conference, and it was subsequent to that that the MOU was signed. We realized that there were opportunities for working together. In the Caribbean, around the many countries of the Caribbean, we do have some hard to reach areas, some rural areas that the telecoms infrastructure has not really reached out to or managed to get to us yet. And as Kevin mentioned, and as Rodney mentioned, in terms of the Barbidas example, the post offices in those rural areas have been quite useful. The general concept of using remote hubs is something that has been applied in multiple countries of the Caribbean. But one big challenge is making them sustainable. Very often, in many cases, they’ve gone out and created hubs, built a nice new building and for one reason or the other, the equipment breaks down, they lose the staff and so on. There isn’t another activity associated with it to make the operation sustainable. So in cases where there are post offices close by maybe, or that could be upgraded, those are some of the examples that we are seeing. Another option that makes itself available to help make it sustainable is that in reaching out to rural areas for improvement connectivity and access to services, that this can often fall under the rubric of universal service initiatives. And there is funding available to get those things going and to keep them going. So the partnership with the postal, with the UPU and postal services generally in the islands is one that we are seeking to leverage better and utilize the available resources as well to make them sustainable. So I’ll stop here for now. Thank you. And just to finish off on the CTU input, is there anything else you would like to add, Rodney?

Rodney Taylor: Maybe how the existing projects have gone thus far. I’ve worked with you on it, I recall. We’ve worked with Barbados, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and we’re about to start working with Belize and Grenada. From your perspective, how have they gone so far in terms of driving this agenda forward? Well, thank you, Tracy. Well, the assessments that have been done have been very instrumental in informing policy as to what changes needed to be made to ensure that the postal services in the countries you mentioned are ready. So that work is ongoing. I think you also presented in the CTU-ICT Week in St. Kitts and Nevis on the benefits of this initiative. And subsequently, Grenada has made a request, and there’s a request in the works from St. Kitts and Nevis. So we look forward in helping those member states advance. Since then, we’ve also assisted the Caribbean Postal Union in the registration of a dot post domain for its operations so that it can benefit from the other service offerings under that dot post initiative. We’re advocating also for all of our member states to go ahead with the registration of the dot post domain for security purposes, for cybersecurity purposes, and also to benefit from the suite of services that are being offered by the ITU, by the UPU. So the work is ongoing. It’s not moving as quickly as we would like, but we will continue to push and advocate for resources to be allocated to ensure that the postal services form an integral part of the digital transformation strategy in our member states.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you. Thank you very much, SG Taylor, from the CTU, and Nigel as well. I’m now going to hand the mic over to Yuping from the UNDP. So Yuping, another partner of the UPU and now from the UN system, the UPU and the UNDP are already collaborating together on several initiatives, including connecting post offices. Now, what do you think will be the benefit of leveraging the postal network to promote digital inclusion and inclusive deployments of digital public infrastructure? Yuping?

Yu Ping Chan: Thank you so much, Tracy, and my thanks to the organizers for including UNDP and the UN system in general here. I think Kevin has already spoken to the core fundamentals of why the post really would be an instrumental tool in promoting global digital inclusion, right? The basic concept of connectivity and using the post as a means to have underserved communities that are in remote areas access the internet and have the opportunity to access online e-government services. you know, e-services, basic information, that’s at the core of the idea of bringing connectivity and then bridging digital divides. But I actually thought the element that Kevin had highlighted where we need to move beyond just connectivity, right? We need to look at hybrid models of delivery of government services. Is that sort of interesting nuance beyond just connectivity, which is what the UN has been talking about and digital inclusion, and really looking at this more interesting area where it’s not just about giving somebody broadband access or the ability to get online, but what more has to be done in remote places as well? Because as I think has been already said, there are places where it’s not that easy to bring in a satellite or fiber link and then say connectivity is gonna solve all these issues and that’s how you promote digital inclusion. Like, what more do you have to do to really reach, not even just the last mile, but the part beyond in these communities where it’s not possible at all? So for me, I think listening to Kevin’s presentation just now really illuminates how we have to go so much further than just what is already said at the UN when it comes to bridging digital divides and digital inclusion. And so when I think back to the Global Digital Compact, which was this agreement that was signed at the UN just this September, which is part of the Pact for the Future and promises to be sort of the next iteration of how we look at global digital cooperation, I’m struck by the fact that it doesn’t address some of these issues. And that in fact, if we go back to the origins of the IGF around the WSIS itself, the World Summit for Information Society, and go back to this concept around capacity building and inclusive enabling environments, that really goes to the heart of some of the broader issues and how we should be looking at digital transformation, not just assuming that it’s about connectivity or these types of things, but also going beyond to think of more innovative ways to conceptualize digital inclusion and making sure that everybody is not left behind. I’m also actually quite interested, and I will put this out to experts out there, whether, for instance, you would think that what we have right now around, let’s say, internet-in-a-box solutions or Raspberry Pi-enabled Wi-Fi networks might be another way of actually… equipping POST to be part of this important digital transformation. So again, going back to the question of it’s not just about broadband connectivity or bringing up fiber connection, are there innovative technical solutions that could also further this effort that we’re making to make sure that POST could be the center, the front line of reaching these underserved communities as well. It also would be remiss of me not to just also mention that from UNDP, we’ve worked with POST, as Tracy had mentioned, in a number of areas besides the UPU. So for instance, in Egypt, we’ve had a longstanding partnership with Egypt Post since 2005 to modernize the digital services and the postal system itself. We actually now have worked with Egypt Post to deliver 27 government services online. There’s a lot of budding digital products as well, but now I’m also thinking about whether that partnership could be taken a little bit further, used as a model elsewhere. I know it’s been recognized by the UPU as one of these consistent partnerships that’s delivered a lot, but really maybe we should think about this in other places as well. So just to end there, and to also see if perhaps any experts could address the question that I raised around new technologies that could potentially be used as part of Connect POST solutions as well. Thank you very much.

Tracy Hackshaw: And that’s a beautiful segue, Yupeng, into Mr. Dan Leok, who is the senior advisor at Internet Society. I know Dan for a long time, and Dan is extremely keen on the emerging technologies in this space. He’s been involved in community networks and now very keenly involved in the LEO thinking and how that can work in terms of connectivity for underserved regions. So Dan, let me pose this question to you. So given your experience in connecting public buildings and institutions and leveraging them as nodes for community networks, do you think there are any advantages to using these public buildings and institutions as nodes? For community networks, are there any unique opportunities in using POST offices?

Speaker: And of course, thread through there. the concept of L.E.U. and how that is now shifting, maybe shifting the playing field a bit in this discussion. And I’m looking forward to you paying with that. Thanks. So wait, Tracy, we only have how much for this session? We have 10 hours. Okay, you just added me a lot. So maybe let me back up, and for folks who aren’t aware, the Internet Society is a 30-year-old charitable organization. We’ve been around, and we have a vision that the Internet is for everyone. And that’s really our focus and our goal. We have about 132,000 individual members. I know Tracy is one of them. And we have 120-plus chapters out there, including you are in Trinidad and Tobago. And that’s where we know each other for so many years. We also, I know you were involved with our fellowship program and other pieces like that. And anybody here is welcome to go visit our booth. We have a whole bunch of information there. But to get there, we have a strategic goal for 2030 around the people everywhere will have access to affordable, reliable, resilient Internet. And this comes to what we’re talking about here. I have to say, honestly, and this is why I ask you why you invited me here on one level is because we have not done work yet with post offices. But it’s interesting because when we’ve dealt with a lot of other different kinds of anchor institutions. And so let me mention a couple of those. We’ve worked with, to date, around 85 different community networks spread out across the world. We’ve given over $3 million in grants out to these organizations through the Internet Society Foundation. We’re working with UNICEF and the ITU, the Giga Project, looking at how to go and connect schools, part of Partner to Connect and some pieces there. We also we came up last year with a community networks DIY do-it-yourself toolkit. You can find that online and walk through the steps there. And I’ll come back to that. Well, maybe I’ll go directly to you, Ping’s question. So often one of the challenges and you said it when you said about leo’s low earth orbit satellites we jump to the technology. But nigel’s point is really the key one we can go and drop in a technical solution that is great it would be awesome connectivity we can do that. I didn’t like it’ll be dead because either the people have left or the subscriptions run out or whatever else so really the biggest part is how do you have a sustainable. You know community network how do you have something there that has an econ that works and that also has this in reality i think this is where anchor institutions. Up with that because of the fact that that they do provide sometimes a stronger anchor in that kind of space. Again we haven’t worked with post offices but we have a lot. In armenia right now we’re currently in a program where we’re digitizing rural libraries and and and we’ve worked with library. This is an part of what’s interesting is as they start to develop it for patrons for people were there and coming in there people start to come in they get their wifi they get their access there then it starts to become more of a digital community center. People come in there and they do they’re having meetings they’re going in there to study they’re doing stuff like that and so it becomes this kind of home similarly in paraguay we’re working with a hospital. The went and and was adding connectivity and doing that in winnipeg up in in canada we were doing a project that was going and and taking a community center. And and giving it that connectivity it became a social hub it really brought people in in a way that was different in rwanda we did a school actually our chapter there help build a building. Would be able to go and help the school provide a computer lab and connectivity and pieces. What they found no of course was that then other people start to show up wifi and and they were able to go and work with that you know all of these i think are great examples of the kind of. What would also be would be part of that one key factor if you look at the mall. Yes yeah maybe we should swap my this one’s been in and out. So one key thing is that you know what we’ve seen in many places is. These anchor institutions in some way have a sense of resilience. That is stronger than other locations in some cases it may be that they’re economically sustainable that they’re perhaps funded by the government that they have some other elements around that. Often they’re they’re housed in a place that has additional electrical resilience might have generators might have solar panels might have something like that another just basic factor is that people know where it is. They know where the post offices they know where the hospital is they know where that is so they it’s a it’s a beacon where people can come there and be engaged with a digital life in some kind of way. So to all of those I think those are reasons why we found that that public institutions in particular are great places to to begin as a node or to be part of it they may not even be the center but they may be part of that. And providing that connectivity because people know where it is they can get there it’s maybe even a more rugged building in some form and they can do that so so that’s kind of where we see all of that going in there and I think we’d be delighted to talk to folks in post offices and other areas as well. As far as the technology Tracy has mentioned I we did do a project a couple years ago and we’re still monitoring all these low earth orbit satellites things like starlink one web pieces like that. I could go on for hours so you know you’d have to scope that to what you want me to say, but I would just say to you that they are another connectivity solution right. You know they’re they’re they’re great to give connectivity to especially rural and remote regions places that you can’t get to buy other mechanisms. and they can provide high-speed, low-latency connectivity. Still not as good as what you could get with like a direct fiber connection, but if you can’t get that, then they provide another alternative that’s there. We had a session earlier today talking about the policy and other issues around that, and there’s a bunch of them and some things, but they’re another tool in the toolbox that we have these days that are out there, and I’m glad to go into detail if you want on particular questions around that. Thanks for having me here. Thank you very much, Dan, and we really appreciate

Tracy Hackshaw: you being here. I know you were concerned about why we’re inviting Dan for this session. I think you’re seeing the benefit of it now, so that’s exciting. Maybe the post offices can become a new thrust in the internet society world. Why not? We’re happy to work with you. We’re here at the UPU. Give us a call. We’re right here. So we’ve said a few things about… Should I write you a letter? Sorry, I have to do it, Tracy. Yeah, no choice. Yes, postcard probably. So we’ve talked a bit about connectivity. We’ve talked about how to get to the last mile, different types of technology. We haven’t talked yet about securing that connectivity, ensuring that not just the physical layer is secure, but also transactions and how we communicate with stakeholders in both directions. It doesn’t make sense to just connect people, and there’s a risk in that connectivity. And how do we really treat with that? I have another colleague who I know quite well, which sounds like a lot of people I know very well on this open forum. It’s Kerri-Ann Barrett. She is also from the Caribbean, surprise, surprise, from Jamaica, but now she’s based at the Organization of American States, and she is the chief of the cybersecurity division there. So Kerri-Ann, I have a question for you. Maybe this is something that you can help us with. What are the cyber security implications of connecting postal infrastructure and how can countries best equip themselves to be more cyber resilient? Would you consider posts to be critical infrastructure for that matter? Over to you.

Kerry-Ann Barrett: Thanks for that and thanks to all the speakers who went before me. Thanks to the UPU for inviting OAS. It’s a critical discussion that’s happening and I think similar to the Internet Society, we haven’t had the opportunity to work with UPU as closely, but I think through this session we recognize that there’s a link that we can’t ignore and we will be working together going forward. I think the discussion so far have really laid the platform that as the postal system shifts towards automation and digitizing, doing all the e-commerce integrations, digital mail tracking, electronic payments, all these things to make more efficiency, unfortunately it usually means more vulnerability with this connection. It doesn’t mean that we should fear it or that the postal system should be worried in as much as to identify the risk and prepare itself for it as the question is about. Many of the countries are investing in smart postal infrastructure and in doing that and the connectivity just means that there are now more entry points for cyber attacks. If you think about what you are in the question to critical infrastructure, the more connected postal systems get, you’re now handling more sensitive data, including personal identifiable details. You now have more financial information and if compromised, it would lead to identity theft, financial loss, and in some rural areas where you are improving their connectivity and accessibility for the citizens, you’re also recognizing that the rural areas may not have the required staffing that’s needed on the technical side to do what’s required. So if you compare the postal system to other high profile examples, such as transportation or healthcare, I would probably say that a postal system in identifying whether or not it’s a critical infrastructure needs to start looking at one, the type of information and data and a criticality, if it is that the systems are stopped. In preparing for this, there was some thought about who’s impacted if the postal system goes down, and how does that actually affect society if the postal system goes down. And if you think about criticality, it’s as the postal system offers more and more services to people and citizens, especially in the rural areas, which we’ve spoken about so much in the session so far, you’d have to think the impact and the ability to be able to bounce back from such an attack and the agility that’s needed for that. Who will be targeted, if you think about it? A lot of the times we have the systems and that’s one thing, but we also have to think about the postal workers, recognizing that they are a key component to that value chain for offering the services. And oftentimes, if it is that you are doing more connectivity, it means that your postal workers as well would need to be focused on as a key entry point for cyber attacks. Phishing campaigns aimed at postal workers and customers could lead to unauthorized access to these data. How is this unique also to some of our countries that are similar to Latin America and the Caribbean in terms of them not being connected and some of the challenges? In looking at the solutions, Tracy, I’d probably say that we also have to take into account who we’re dealing with. As the postal systems across the globe start to connect and you compare it to some regions like Latin America and the Caribbean, there’s going to be varied levels of cybersecurity maturity. I’ve heard some of the examples already in this conversation in some more advanced countries, but we also have to take into account some of our countries who want already struggle with Internet connectivity, like our Pacific Islands, or some of our smaller Caribbean countries who may have emerging economies but lack the financial resources to put the cybersecurity infrastructure or talent to be able to secure the postal systems adequately. And then we also have to look at the more broad challenges of cooperation, which oftentimes cybersecurity requires. So to your last aspect of the question you asked me and just reflecting what are some of the solutions because it’s not a doomsday solution. I think the postal system has been robust for so many years and carried us through so many things. I think this other element of connectivity is just yet another challenge for them to overcome. And collaboration is going to be key, working with government to ensure that the postal operators have connections with cybersecurity firms that they understand the international landscape with other international organizations. We already have the UN as a part of this discussion. Also looking at how they would manage third-party risk. A lot of the postal workers and the postal systems work with other third-party vendors to be able to do their work. How you actually look at the reliability with the logistics for them and the technology that they’re employing to make sure that they are protected. And the last two critical things I would probably say is thinking about strategies, such as establishing for those who may not know an incident response team, which is really your firefighters when a cybersecurity incident happens, just to make sure that we start thinking about establishing those for the postal systems. The financial sector is a good example where they prioritize incident response teams and they have cross-network collaboration among themselves. And I think the postal system can start to think about it that way so they have shared resources. And the final recommendation I’d probably make to make yourselves more cyber resilient is cyber education. Our workers, as I pointed out, are critical entry points to the systems. They have the passwords, they log into the computers daily. How do we ensure that they recognize what is efficient attempt and how they handle data more broadly. And I’ll probably stop there. So at least we could continue the discussions. And I hope that some of these thoughts would be talked about throughout our session. Thanks, Tracy.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much, Kerianne from the OAS. I’m seeing a lot of comments coming in from Rodney in the chat, giving some information, some links. And just taking back to Kerianne’s point about cyber resilience. And the second last point you made about CSIRTs. I’m going to make a plug here for what we are doing at the UPU. We’re establishing an efficient sharing analysis center, an ISAC, which will be global for the postal sector. That’s currently underway. We’re in the last stages of our design. And we expect to have that up and running, if all goes well, next year in 2025. In addition to that, we’re also implementing secure.post platform, which would allow the postal, as you said, the postal employees, their stakeholders, to get, I would call user-friendly access to information, education, training, awareness, resources, generally about cybersecurity and how to become more cyber resilient. So I think from where we sit, we are trying to do the very best in ensuring that the sector becomes more resilient. And I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention, of course, the fact that we also run the .post top-level domain, which we’d like to think is one of the most secure, if not the most secure, top-level domain on the internet. And encourage all stakeholders who are interested in this sector to look into what that brings to the table, as well as the services we offer with that. So while I have just given a plug for ourselves, I’m going to pause now to open forum and ask the audience if there are any questions, any thoughts. I’m seeing two hands already going up. I would maybe pass the mic, is there the third mic, the third mic, mic number three, yes. And so I saw a gentleman in the red jacket first. Introduce yourself and let us know who you are.

Audience: Okay, hello, my name is Nicola Fiumarelli. You mentioned a lot about connectivity and inclusivity. For me, the postal services is a new topic. You also address about cybersecurity, but we are talking here about digital transformation as well. So I like to touch on the role of emerging technologies in the postal services. For example, in the UK, in the USA, they are using drones for postal deliveries in remote areas. In the US, it’s leveraging AI to optimize delivery routes. And countries like Rwanda, for example, have demonstrated drone efficiency in logistics. This technology not only improve accessibility, but also help reduce emissions, right, and enhance sustainability. So how can postal services in the Caribbean, right, adopt similar innovations to address infrastructure challenges while aligning to environmental sustainability goals? Thank you.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you. And the way I like to do things is not to do immediate answers. I’m going to ask Kevin, the UPU expert in the postal sector at our table today, to think about that for a second and to come up with an answer. There’s another question in the crowd, and I have my lovely Internet Society colleague, Alejandra, helping me here. Yes, please go ahead.

Audience: Hi, nice to meet you. I’m from the Internet Society Foundation. I just had a question. You mentioned that a lot of these post offices are rural, and Kevin mentioned emerging e-government services. So my question is, are there any plans or does this program include any kind of digital literacy training? for people. I know that we’re running, we currently have a chapter that’s doing training in rural areas so that people are able to use e-government services, but also thinking of it from, in terms of cyber security or cyber literacy, cyber security literacy.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you. And Nigel, did you have a question? I saw your hand go up. Yes, my hand did go up, but I think the question I had has come up. Excellent. Third question. Introduce yourself.

Audience: Okay, thank you so much. My name is Silekhoa from Lesotho. I’m the president of the intern society Lesotho. And I’m working as the system librarian. So I’m wondering if this concept go into the digitization of the library and bringing the library to the people, not people come to the library. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. So I think all three of the questions seem like we can start

Tracy Hackshaw: with a response from the UPU, but I’ll also ask other colleagues to be able to give some responses. No, but let’s start with our expert from the UPU, Kevin.

Kevin Hernndez: So thank you very much for the question about drones. I think, yes, 100%. I think with drones, especially, it’s a very particular case, because I think this also democratizes delivery to rural areas. Why am I saying that? It’s because when you’ve seen pilots for drone delivery, they’ve tended to be concentrated in rural areas, because this is something that’s very hard to make work even in urban areas. So I think it’s actually one of the rare emerging technologies that works better in rural areas than it does in urban areas for delivery. So I think there’s a lot to explore there. And also at the UPU, we’ve recently did a survey where we’ve asked all the, well, over 150 postal operators about their use of emerging technologies. and drones were one of them, but we asked about a very wide variety. There are even some using things like exoskeletons and other really out there emerging technologies. So there is actually a lot of use of emerging technologies by postal operators, but I haven’t done the analysis yet, so I can’t tell you which ones are the most used yet or not, but that will be coming out in the near future. And then there were two questions that kind of were about digital literacy programs. So the reason why I came back to this slide is because this is the kind of thing that happens in this setup. So it all depends. Everything is context-specific. So in some countries, you’ll have postal operators who will set up this kind of community center inside the post office, and that’s what you see here. And the postal operator will offer digital training to its citizens. But in other places, that might not work. In other places, I think you made a great plug when you were speaking about libraries. So actually, Maria was here earlier from the IFLA, so the International Federation of Library and Associations, and we’re actually at the moment trying to formulate a MOU to kind of determine whether there are any potential or there is any potential to create ecosystems of digital inclusion where maybe citizens go to the post office for one type of service and then maybe they go to the library for another type of service because although in this example, you know, in this context, this works very well, in other contexts, the post office might not be set up to offer the digital literacy training. We might be better off having the e-government services and these kind of transactional services happening in the post office and then maybe some more of the digital literacy-type programs that you were explaining happen in the library. But the thing that we find is that this sometimes happens, but it happens informally. And we’re trying to see if there is any potential to formalize these kind of relationships between post offices and libraries so that, you know, people can be sent from one to the other quite seamlessly instead of… You know in ad hoc fashion. Thank you.

Tracy Hackshaw: And I know you’ve done a lot of work with libraries. I don’t know if you want to pick up.

Speaker: Well yeah I mean it actually kind of speaks to the more that you know we we talked about the sustainability of of community networks and and part of it is the financial aspect right and we and that was the part I focused on in my earlier remarks but you really have a much broader sense which is that they need to be human sustainable as well that digital skills training that digital literacy that ability to know and do that is is so critical because otherwise you you don’t have a system that’s long-term sustainable. One of the things we found is that this community centered you know model that we’re talking about here and that we’ve been working on really is is the way to deploy this because it comes it’s bottom up it’s coming out of the community and and this is where I would say as you look at your systems what we found works is that when it’s really of the community and by the community then then the people are bought into it and working with it’s not imposed by some central entity it says you know wire up every you know put put this in every in every post office you know something but it’s more of you know the communities that are around that are are you know wanting to provide that build that connectivity they’re using the the post office or other entity as that hub and they’re working with it in that way but we found that when communities do that and build that they develop the expertise they develop the ability to create this and and that means that they’re much more invested in it they also have that that that human resilience the the capacity to understand what it is how it works they’re able to ensure that that it keeps on working you know through in the caribbean you know the next hurricane or whatever you know the recovery time there the ability to do that so that digital skills and building that human capacity is vital to have sustainable you know community-centered connectivity in so many different ways. Thank you very much. Yuping, I think you have some responses, but let me see if any of our colleagues online have a response.

Tracy Hackshaw: I see Karianne, her hand is physically up.

Kerry-Ann Barrett: Yeah, I think the questions are really good. And I think what’s important as we even look at the efficiency, anything that is an IoT, whether it be a drone or any other smart postal infrastructure that’s implemented, I think the last speaker in terms of highlighting the need to have the digital skills is critical. It’s just always to keep in mind that the more connected that they get, it’s another surface or another attack point in which a cyber criminal can enter. And even as we improve efficiency, I think it has to be coupled automatically with the necessary cyber security at a minimum awareness training for the users that are being given these tools to make it more efficient. The idea of digitizing and improving or closing the digital divide for many persons and making these services more accessible, it’s also informing the users of these services, recognizing that if they are more sensitive to some of the risks that could happen, they would be able to partner with their service providers in rural areas, et cetera, to be able to keep their data more secure and their information more secure. So I just wanted to highlight that it’s one of those things that has to be a coupled approach, making sure that you kind of think about all the risk factors at the same time and ensure that not just standards are implemented, but that persons have the ability to implement the standards.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much, Karyana. Just to remind everyone, Karyana is Chief of Cyber Security at the OAS. I forgot to introduce who I am. I’m Tracy Haksho. I’m with the UPU. I am the head of the dot post team along with my colleague on my right, Mason Sabra. We work at the Postal Technology Center and I see my bosses online. So that’s what reminded me that I have to say who I am. Is it still there? I don’t know. So let me just say who I am, just for the record. So we have about five minutes left, so let me do this. I’m going to ask SG Taylor to respond, if he has any response, and to give a closing comment, then come back to Yuping. Same thing, respond and a closing comment, and I see Nigel, who may want to give a response and closing comment, and then perhaps if there’s time, Dan and Kevin. So let’s go to SG Taylor first, and then response and closing comment, and we have less than five minutes left. Thank you. I like the question on the drones and so on, and it further highlights the need to partner

Rodney Taylor: with the Postal Service that understands, in particular, rural communities in developing countries. Some of these communities are unplanned settlements, so there isn’t a very neat addressing system. Very often the postman or postperson is the trusted person in the community, understands where people live and so on. So even for delivery by drones, this is something that may be best done through the postal network, if we’re talking about rural communities and unplanned settlements. The skills issue is a very big one as well, where those persons who are unskilled from a digital perspective are able to receive that handholding for the application of online services at the Postal Service, and this is something that’s being done in Barbados, for example, with the application for the US visa, which is 100% online. It cannot be done in person. So I want to, again, in closing, thank Tracy and UPU for the partnerships that we have established and for the work that is being done to bridge the divide between Postal Services and digital transformation strategies, and we think this is a winning strategy that will help us to ensure that persons are not left behind, in particular, rural and underserved communities.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much. Thank you, Ashutosh. And thank you as well for sparing your time. It’s early morning, I know, in the Caribbean. And for you to bless us with your presence. And of course, thanks to Nigel, who will give us comments in a bit from the CTU. I’ll hand over to the UPU. Sorry, the sign threw me off. To Youfington from the UNDP for her final comments and a response if she needed to.

Yu Ping Chan: Very quickly, I think I just really want to pick up on this point on skills and capacity building. That’s what we have as the number one priority from the program countries that UNDP works with. And it’s particularly important for these developed countries and underserved communities as well. So, again, as we talk about all these global solutions, connectivity and so on, as a lot of other colleagues have said, it’s really the ability to use these in a sustainable fashion. And that really starts with building that digital capacity right there. So just to reiterate, it was a really great conversation. I’d like to pick this up with a lot of colleagues around the table. And thank you so much for having us.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you. Thank you very much, Youfington. So there seems to be time for Nigel and Dan to give a few comments and maybe a last word from Kevin. So, Nigel. Yes, very quickly.

Nigel Cassimire: Thanks as well from me to UPU for the opportunity. The point I wanted to make, we haven’t had time to discuss it here, was what about financial services? Because, I mean, I certainly recall a thing called a postal order. So the post offices were part of the financial system. And what about the technology associated with financial services or FinTech thing? Is that part of the developments going forward as well?

Tracy Hackshaw: Thanks. And I see great minds thinking like Rodney just raised that in a chat. Exactly the same point. Yep. So we’ll let Kevin answer that question. Maybe Dan, last thoughts, last comments, and then we let Kevin wrap it up. I’ll just say thank you, Tracy, for putting this and Kevin for putting this whole panel together. And this was a very interesting conversation. I look forward to further conversations around this. I think I said plenty before, so I’ll leave it there. Thank you.

Kevin Hernndez: Thank you very much for that question, Nigel. Yes, digital financial services are definitely a part of it. I didn’t really have time to delve into it. I have a longer presentation, which speaks about the types of services that we target, and they tend to be e-government services, digital financial services, and e-commerce, but actually any digital service that can be offered through the postal infrastructure, I believe would be more inclusive due to what I was saying earlier about their presence in rural areas. But yes, I think you hit the nail on the head, and it’s, one, digital financial services are offered by many, many posts. I’m analyzing data right now that shows, like, think about almost 60% of postal operators deliver some type of digital financial service. So it’s something that we want to build on and help even more postal operators deliver.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you. Well, thank you very much. Kerrianne, any last thoughts?

Kerry-Ann Barrett: I think the only thing I would probably emphasize is for persons to recognize that digital resilience has to be coupled with cybersecurity, and I think those would be my last words.

Tracy Hackshaw: Thank you very much. So I’d like to thank all of our participants and all those who’ve joined us in the room today for a wonderful open forum. We did be crafted in the nick of time. So thank you to Kevin, to Dan, to Yuping, to Nigel, to Rodney, to Kerrianne, and Maysam in the room, and everybody online, and everybody in the room, thank you so much for your participation and engagement. Please contact us at upu.post and trust.post for more information, and of course at connect.post for the project title that we talked about today. Just pretty obvious, right? Connect.post. Thank you very much, and see you somewhere else somewhere soon. Kevin, you wanted to say something? Yeah, connect.post is also our URL, so you can just type that in your browser and you will find us. And that is the most brilliant thing I’ve heard so far. Thank you. Bye-bye. Have a good day. Thank you.

Agreement Points

Postal infrastructure can promote digital inclusion

Kevin Hernandez

Yu Ping Chan

Nigel Cassimire

Rodney Taylor

Postal network has extensive reach in rural and underserved areas

Connected post offices can provide public internet access and digital services

Postal connectivity supports multi-channel government service delivery

Partnerships between telecom/ICT organizations and postal services enable rural connectivity

Postal infrastructure can be leveraged for e-government and digital financial services

Speakers agreed that leveraging postal infrastructure can significantly promote digital inclusion, especially in rural and underserved areas, by providing internet access and digital services.

Digital literacy and skills training is crucial

Audience

Speaker

Kevin Hernandez

Digital literacy training is needed alongside connectivity initiatives

Community-centered models help build local digital skills and capacity

Post offices can provide digital skills training in some contexts

Partnerships between post offices and libraries could support digital literacy

There was consensus on the importance of digital literacy and skills training to accompany connectivity initiatives, with various approaches suggested including community-centered models and partnerships between post offices and libraries.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the importance of addressing cybersecurity concerns as postal systems become more connected, highlighting the need for awareness training and information sharing.

Kerry-Ann Barrett

Tracy Hackshaw

Increased connectivity creates new cybersecurity vulnerabilities for postal systems

Postal workers need cybersecurity awareness training

UPU is establishing a global information sharing and analysis center for postal cybersecurity

Unexpected Consensus

Emerging technologies in postal services

Audience

Kevin Hernandez

Rodney Taylor

Drones are being used for postal deliveries in remote areas

AI is being leveraged to optimize delivery routes

Emerging tech like drones may work better for rural delivery than urban

Local postal knowledge is still needed to support tech-enabled delivery in unplanned settlements

There was unexpected consensus on the potential of emerging technologies like drones and AI in postal services, particularly for rural areas. However, speakers also agreed on the continued importance of local knowledge, especially in unplanned settlements.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement were the potential of postal infrastructure to promote digital inclusion, the importance of digital literacy training, the need to address cybersecurity concerns, and the role of emerging technologies in improving postal services.

Consensus level

There was a high level of consensus among speakers on the key issues discussed. This strong agreement suggests a clear path forward for leveraging postal infrastructure to promote digital inclusion and improve services, while also highlighting the importance of addressing associated challenges such as cybersecurity and digital literacy.

Different Viewpoints

Approach to digital skills training

Kevin Hernandez

Speaker

Post offices can provide digital skills training in some contexts

Community-centered models help build local digital skills and capacity

Kevin Hernandez suggests post offices can provide digital skills training, while the unnamed Speaker advocates for community-centered models to build local capacity.

Unexpected Differences

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement were minor and centered around the specific approaches to implementing digital inclusion and skills training through postal infrastructure.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among speakers was relatively low. Most speakers generally agreed on the potential benefits of leveraging postal infrastructure for digital inclusion and service delivery. The differences in viewpoints were mainly about implementation strategies and areas of focus, rather than fundamental disagreements. This low level of disagreement suggests a general consensus on the importance of the topic and the potential of postal infrastructure in promoting digital inclusion, which could facilitate easier collaboration and policy-making in this area.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the importance of connecting postal infrastructure, but they emphasize different aspects: Kevin and Yu Ping focus on service delivery, while Kerry-Ann highlights the need for cybersecurity measures.

Kevin Hernandez

Yu Ping Chan

Kerry-Ann Barrett

Connected post offices can provide public internet access and digital services

Postal connectivity supports multi-channel government service delivery

Increased connectivity creates new cybersecurity vulnerabilities for postal systems

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the importance of addressing cybersecurity concerns as postal systems become more connected, highlighting the need for awareness training and information sharing.

Kerry-Ann Barrett

Tracy Hackshaw

Increased connectivity creates new cybersecurity vulnerabilities for postal systems

Postal workers need cybersecurity awareness training

UPU is establishing a global information sharing and analysis center for postal cybersecurity

Key Takeaways

The global postal network has extensive reach in rural and underserved areas, making it well-positioned to promote digital inclusion

Connected post offices can provide public internet access, digital services, and support multi-channel government service delivery

Partnerships between telecom/ICT organizations and postal services enable rural connectivity

Increased connectivity creates new cybersecurity vulnerabilities that must be addressed

Digital literacy training and skills development are crucial alongside connectivity initiatives

Emerging technologies like drones and AI are being explored for postal services, especially in rural areas

Resolutions and Action Items

UPU is establishing a global information sharing and analysis center for postal cybersecurity

UPU is implementing a secure.post platform to provide cybersecurity resources and training

UPU is working on formulating an MOU with the International Federation of Library Associations to create ecosystems of digital inclusion

Unresolved Issues

How to ensure long-term sustainability of community networks and digital inclusion initiatives

How to balance efficiency improvements through technology with cybersecurity concerns

How to effectively implement digital literacy programs across diverse contexts and communities

Suggested Compromises

Creating hybrid models of service delivery that combine digital and in-person options

Partnering post offices with libraries to provide complementary digital inclusion services

Leveraging local postal knowledge to support tech-enabled delivery in unplanned settlements

When we mention bridging the digital divide, we are talking about gaps in digital access. On the other hand, when we speak about digital inclusion, we are referring to people’s abilities to fully participate in societies as they undergo a process of digitalization.

speaker

Kevin Hernandez

reason

This comment provides an important distinction between two often conflated concepts, setting the stage for a more nuanced discussion.

impact

It framed the subsequent conversation around not just providing access, but ensuring meaningful participation in digital society.

Very often, in many cases, they’ve gone out and created hubs, built a nice new building and for one reason or the other, the equipment breaks down, they lose the staff and so on. There isn’t another activity associated with it to make the operation sustainable.

speaker

Nigel Cassimire

reason

This insight highlights a key challenge in digital inclusion efforts – sustainability beyond initial setup.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards considering long-term sustainability and the need for ongoing support and activities in digital hubs.

I’m struck by the fact that it doesn’t address some of these issues. And that in fact, if we go back to the origins of the IGF around the WSIS itself, the World Summit for Information Society, and go back to this concept around capacity building and inclusive enabling environments, that really goes to the heart of some of the broader issues and how we should be looking at digital transformation

speaker

Yu Ping Chan

reason

This comment broadens the scope of the discussion by connecting it to larger global initiatives and frameworks.

impact

It encouraged participants to think more holistically about digital inclusion, beyond just technical solutions.

Often one of the challenges and you said it when you said about leo’s low earth orbit satellites we jump to the technology. But nigel’s point is really the key one we can go and drop in a technical solution that is great it would be awesome connectivity we can do that. I didn’t like it’ll be dead because either the people have left or the subscriptions run out or whatever else so really the biggest part is how do you have a sustainable.

speaker

Dan York

reason

This comment challenges the tendency to focus solely on technological solutions, emphasizing the importance of sustainability and community engagement.

impact

It redirected the conversation towards considering the human and social aspects of digital inclusion initiatives.

Many of the countries are investing in smart postal infrastructure and in doing that and the connectivity just means that there are now more entry points for cyber attacks.

speaker

Kerry-Ann Barrett

reason

This comment introduces an important consideration about the security implications of increased connectivity.

impact

It broadened the discussion to include cybersecurity concerns, leading to a more comprehensive view of the challenges in digital transformation.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by expanding it beyond simple technological solutions for connectivity. They introduced important considerations about sustainability, meaningful participation, cybersecurity, and the need for holistic approaches to digital inclusion. The conversation evolved from a focus on bridging the digital divide to a more nuanced exploration of how to ensure long-term, secure, and meaningful digital inclusion across diverse communities.

Are there innovative technical solutions like internet-in-a-box or Raspberry Pi-enabled Wi-Fi networks that could be used to equip post offices for digital transformation?

speaker

Yu Ping Chan

explanation

This explores alternative technologies that could potentially be more accessible or cost-effective for implementing Connect.POST solutions, especially in underserved areas.

How can postal services in the Caribbean adopt innovations like drones and AI to address infrastructure challenges while aligning with environmental sustainability goals?

speaker

Nicola Fiumarelli (audience member)

explanation

This explores the potential for emerging technologies to improve postal services in specific regions while considering environmental impacts.

Are there plans to include digital literacy training as part of the Connect.POST program, particularly for e-government services and cybersecurity awareness?

speaker

Audience member from Internet Society Foundation

explanation

This addresses the need for education and training to accompany technological improvements, ensuring users can effectively and safely use new digital services.

How can the concept of digitizing libraries and bringing them to people be integrated with postal service digitization efforts?

speaker

Silekhoa from Lesotho (audience member)

explanation

This explores potential synergies between postal and library digitization efforts to improve access to information and services.

What about financial services and FinTech? Is that part of the developments going forward for postal services?

speaker

Nigel Cassimire

explanation

This explores the potential for postal services to expand into digital financial services, building on their historical role in financial transactions.

Summary

This discussion focused on developing a global, risk-adaptive AI governance framework. Participants from various organizations and regions shared insights on balancing innovation with responsible AI development. Key themes included the need for flexible, context-specific approaches to AI regulation and the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration.

Speakers highlighted ongoing efforts to create risk-based governance frameworks, such as the OECD’s AI classification system and the Council of Europe’s convention on AI. They emphasized the challenge of translating high-level principles into practical guidelines and standards. The discussion touched on regional differences in AI adoption and regulation, with examples from Europe, the MENA region, and the United States.

Participants agreed on the need for interoperability between different governance frameworks while allowing for cultural and contextual variations. They stressed the importance of ongoing dialogue and adaptation as AI technology evolves. The role of education in empowering users to make informed choices about AI was also discussed.

The conversation explored the complexities of defining and mitigating AI risks, with speakers noting the differences between advanced AI systems and everyday AI applications. The need for sector-specific assessments and tailored approaches was emphasized. Participants also discussed the challenges of developing technical standards for AI and the importance of regular review and revision of governance frameworks.

Overall, the discussion converged on the idea of creating adaptive frameworks that can evolve with technological advancements while maintaining core principles of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. The speakers agreed that ongoing international cooperation and knowledge-sharing are crucial for effective global AI governance.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The need for a risk-based, adaptive approach to AI governance that balances innovation with safety and rights protection

– The importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration and cultural context in developing AI governance frameworks

– The challenge of defining and assessing AI risks across different use cases and sectors

– The role of standards, education, and ongoing review processes in AI governance

– Balancing global interoperability with flexibility for local/regional differences

Overall purpose:

The goal was to examine various global initiatives on AI governance, identify commonalities, and explore how to develop a more interoperable, global approach to AI governance while accounting for different cultural and regional perspectives.

Tone:

The tone was collaborative and constructive throughout. Speakers shared insights from their diverse backgrounds in a spirit of mutual learning. There was general agreement on key principles, with nuanced discussion of implementation challenges. The tone remained optimistic about finding balanced solutions through ongoing dialogue and adaptive approaches.

Speakers

– Timea Suto: Moderator, Global Digital Policy Lead at the International Chamber of Commerce

– Lucia Russo: Artificial Intelligence Policy Analyst at the OECD

– Thomas Schneider: Vice Chair of the Council of Europe’s Committee on AI

– Sulafah Jabarty: CEO and Founder of Clear Vision, Chair of ICC Saudi Arabia’s Digital Economy Committee

– Noora Al-Thani: Vice Dean at the College of Computer and Information Sciences in King Saud University

– Paloma Villa Mateos: Head of Digital Public Policy at Telefonica

– Melinda Claybaugh: Director of Privacy Policy at Meta

Additional speakers:

– Amal Ahmed: Works in DGA (Digital Government Authority)

– Jacques Beglinger: Board member, EuroDIG

– Wouter Cobus: Dutch Government, Standardization Advisor

Expanded Summary of AI Governance Discussion

Introduction

This discussion, moderated by Timea Suto from the International Chamber of Commerce, focused on developing a global, risk-adaptive AI governance framework. Participants from various organisations and regions shared insights on balancing innovation with responsible AI development. The conversation explored key themes including the need for flexible, context-specific approaches to AI regulation and the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration.

Key Themes and Discussion Points

1. Risk-based Approaches to AI Governance

A central theme of the discussion was the need for risk-based, adaptive approaches to AI governance. Lucia Russo from the OECD emphasised the importance of flexible, context-based risk assessment, highlighting ongoing efforts to create risk-based governance frameworks, such as the OECD’s AI classification system. Thomas Schneider, Vice Chair of the Council of Europe’s Committee on AI, stressed the importance of cultural considerations in risk perception, noting that different societies may have varying tolerances for risk.

Paloma Villa Mateos from Telefonica highlighted the challenge of balancing innovation and regulation in risk frameworks. Melinda Claybaugh from Meta advocated for focusing on marginal risks specific to AI, suggesting that existing legal frameworks could be leveraged for AI governance.

2. Challenges in Operationalizing AI Governance Frameworks

Speakers discussed the difficulties of translating high-level principles into practical guidelines and standards. Lucia Russo pointed out the challenge of operationalising governance frameworks, while Thomas Schneider noted the tension between harmonisation and local/cultural adaptation. Paloma Villa Mateos highlighted the need to balance people’s rights and innovation in governance, while Melinda Claybaugh advocated for allowing sufficient time to properly define high-risk AI practices.

3. Cultural and Regional Perspectives on AI Governance

Regional perspectives were shared, with Sulafa Jabarty from ICC Saudi Arabia noting heavy investment in AI and digital transformation in the MENA region. Noora Al-Thani from King Saud University highlighted the key role universities play in AI governance and research, particularly in Saudi Arabia. Thomas Schneider emphasised the importance of considering cultural differences in risk perception and governance approaches.

4. Role of Education and Awareness in AI Governance

Sulafa Jabarty highlighted the crucial role of public awareness and education in enabling effective AI governance. Noora Al-Thani stressed the importance of universities in conducting AI research and contributing to governance discussions. Speakers agreed on the need for ongoing dialogue and education to adapt governance as AI evolves.

5. Importance of Multi-stakeholder Collaboration

There was broad consensus on the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration, including governments, private sector, academia, and civil society, in developing effective AI governance frameworks. Lucia Russo emphasised the role of global forums in facilitating multi-stakeholder and cross-cultural dialogue. Sulafa Jabarty advocated for developing harmonised global frameworks with local flexibility.

6. Role of Standards in AI Governance

During the Q&A session, the importance of standards in AI governance was discussed. Speakers highlighted the need for technical standards to support the implementation of governance frameworks and ensure interoperability. The discussion touched on the differences between internet governance and AI governance, noting that AI may require more proactive and comprehensive approaches.

Areas of Agreement

There was broad consensus among speakers on several key points:

1. The need for adaptive and flexible AI governance frameworks that can evolve with technological advancements while considering local contexts and cultural differences.

2. The importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration in developing effective AI governance frameworks.

3. The recognition that cultural differences play a significant role in risk perception and governance approaches.

4. The need for ongoing dialogue and adaptation as AI technology evolves.

5. The importance of education and awareness-building around AI risks and benefits.

Key Takeaways and Unresolved Issues

The discussion yielded several key takeaways:

1. The need for risk-based, adaptive approaches to AI governance that balance innovation with risk mitigation.

2. The importance of flexible frameworks that account for cultural differences and evolving technology.

3. The crucial role of multi-stakeholder collaboration and dialogue in developing effective, interoperable AI governance approaches.

4. The potential need for sector-specific and use case-specific governance rather than one-size-fits-all approaches.

5. The importance of standards in supporting the implementation of AI governance frameworks.

However, several issues remained unresolved:

1. How to specifically define and categorise high-risk AI applications.

2. How to balance regional approaches with the need for global interoperability.

3. How to operationalise risk-based frameworks in practice across different sectors.

4. How to address cultural differences in risk perception and tolerance while maintaining a coherent global approach.

Conclusion

The discussion highlighted the complex challenges involved in developing global AI governance frameworks. While there was broad agreement on the need for flexible, adaptive approaches that balance innovation with risk mitigation, the operationalisation of these principles remains a significant challenge. The conversation underscored the importance of ongoing multi-stakeholder dialogue, collaboration, and adaptability to address these challenges and develop effective, culturally sensitive AI governance frameworks.

Timea Suto: Global Risk Adaptive AI Governance Framework. I am very glad that you’ve decided to spend an hour and a half of your time with us this afternoon. My name is Timo Schütte, I am the Global Digital Policy Lead at the International Chamber of Commerce, and I will be moderating this session today. We have proposed this session for the agenda of the IGF, not because there are not enough conversations on AI, because there clearly are quite a few, but because we wanted to find a way to discuss, or take stock, rather, a little bit of all the various initiatives that are out there on AI governance and governance frameworks, and try and see if we can find some commonalities, or perhaps some ideas, through which we can look at AI governance from a truly global perspective, and push for a more interoperable outcome, or some sort of common approach on how we look at artificial intelligence governance. I’m not going to spend too much time introducing the landscape of AI, because we all have heard a lot about it, and I’m sure our speakers will talk a lot about it as well, but I will take a moment to just introduce the speakers that are going to be here with us today, trying to uncover some of these questions. In the order in which they will be speaking on the panel, I have Ms. Lucia Russo, who is Artificial Intelligence Policy Analyst at the OECD, Mr. Thomas Schneider, who is Vice Chair of the Council of Europe’s Committee on AI, Ms. Sulafa Jabarti, CEO and Founder of Clear Vision, and Chair of ICC Saudi Arabia’s Digital Economy Committee. I also have Ms. Noora Alkhani, who is Vice Dean at the College of Computer and Information Sciences in King Saudi University, and Ms. Paloma Villamateos, who is joining us online from Spain. Thank you, Paloma, for being with us, who is Head of Digital Public Policy at Telefonica, and Ms. Melinda Claybaugh, who is Director of Privacy Policy at TED. So to start off the roundtable, I am just going to ask our panelists to share a little bit about their experience in fostering trusted and responsible and inclusive AI, and share a few of the good practices or projects that they’re working on that incorporates a risk-based approach to AI governance framework. Why have we chosen to ask our panelists about a risk-based framework? It’s because we hear a lot when we look at the governance frameworks around the world that say, yes, our governance framework is risk-based. The approach to AI governance needs to be risk-based. So there seems to be agreement on that, but there’s little agreement on what it actually means. So that’s what we’re trying to figure out together in this session. So to first look at this, I’m going to turn to Lucia, and I hope that you can share a little bit of information on how the OECD is looking at facilitating cross-border collaboration on AI governance, and what are some of the key challenges and opportunities that operationalize or look at this risk-based approach?

Lucia Russo: First of all, let me thank you for organizing this very important session, and welcome all the other speakers and participants here. So I will talk a bit about the way the OECD is promoting interoperability in international AI governance, and I will mention a few examples of how we are putting this risk-based approach into practice. So just to start off, at the cornerstone of the work of the OECD is the OECD recommendation on artificial intelligence that was adopted in 2019 and recently revised to take stock of some technological and policy development, and notably advanced AI, advanced systems. And since then, our work has been really focusing on how to move from these high-level principles into practice. And when we talk about risk-based approach here, of course, we mean having a proportionate system of duties and obligation that is tailored to the level of risk that each and every AI system brings. And so already in 2022, the OECD has developed its own AI classification framework in the form of a scoring table that evaluates AI systems according to five different dimensions, people and planet, economic context, data and input, AI model and task and output. And I don’t want to go too much in detail here, but basically under each of these dimension, then there would be an evaluation of where, for instance, in the data and input, there are considerations related to privacy or copyright under the task and output on the autonomy level of a system. And then in the economic context, the business function of the system, which in turn, it’s basically telling us about the impact that this system may have on this business environment. And so this risk-based approach is what then we see also in a regulatory framework such as the EU AI Act that of course takes this risk-based approach and establishes stricter measures for systems that are deemed to bring, to have a highest risk for safety and fundamental rights in the EU. And we see this risk-based approach also emerging in other frameworks. For instance, the G7 Hiroshima process that was launched under the Japanese presidency in 2023, led to the adoption of a voluntary code of conduct for AI developers that also calls to develop and implement and disclose AI governance and risk management policies in line with the risk-based approach. And to build on this code of conduct, what we are currently working on at the OECD is supporting the G7, the Italian presidency in the development of a monitoring and reporting framework for these commitments, which means moving from this code of conduct that can be again, high level in a sense to what it means in practice for companies to adhere and to respect the commitments that are embedded in this code. And this is obviously to respond to the needs of transparency, accountability, but also it is I think a good example of how we go at a level up from the national borders to an international cooperation that really is across jurisdictions because it is developed by the G7, but of course is not limited to companies in G7 member countries, the adherence to this code of conduct. And lastly, I would just perhaps talk about another initiatives that we have at the OECD, the AI incident monitor, because again, when we talk about risks, what we need to take into account is also the evidence on which we build the frameworks and the objective of this monitoring reporting framework is also to understand where the actual harms materialize and so to have a better informed decision making when it comes to establish what are the high risk categories and how to regulate these categories. And so this is an online tool already and is also a reporting framework that is harmonized across different countries. I’ll stop here and happy to engage in the conversation later.

Timea Suto: Thank you so much, Lucia. Quite a lot going on at the OECD, but it’s not the only forum that does work. You mentioned also how the OECD’s work inspires work in the EU AI, how it inspires work at the G7. And I also want to ask Tomasz on how you are collaborating from your previous role as chair of the CHI and now as vice chair on some of these risk-based approaches into AI, both as you were negotiating the convention itself and now the risk-based impact measurement mechanism.

Thomas Schneider: Thank you very much. And actually, yeah, it’s good that somebody, one of the sessions actually tries to concentrate on the risk-based and what that actually means because we talk a lot about legal texts and we forget about the operation. operationalization of all of this. So before going into how the Council of Europe’s work fits into all of this, let me also again start with the allergy to engines, because there are many similarities. We have engines in machines that produce goods that are more or less big, more or less dangerous for the people. We have engines in cars, in airplanes, in tanks, in many other vehicles. It may be the same engines or similar engines. And they all have, of course, opportunities to produce something, but they also have risks. But we do not have one regulation for the engine. We have thousands of legal norms for the engines, but for the vehicle itself, for the drivers, for the infrastructure, liability rules for parts of a car or parts of an airplane, for the airplane company, for the one selling the tickets and so on, and we have thousands of technical norms and we have social cultural norms from culture to culture. There are different expectations on how to deal with risks. In some cultures, they expect the king or the president or the state to take care of your risk. In other cultures, you have more than expectation that people are capable of dealing with risks themselves. And you have everything in between. And basically the same logic applies to AI as well, because, again, the risks are very much context based in terms of where you apply a certain algorithm or a set of algorithm. And normally it’s not the algorithm itself. Algorithms are part of machines, of tools that we buy, like we have an engine as part of a car or part of an airplane. And and I think one is to look at the legal texts and the convergence and all the legal texts. As you say, they talk about risk based approach. They talk about impact. The Council of Europe Convention is built on a graduated and differentiated approach, which I think is a slightly more exact, because it’s not just vertical risk, high or low, but it’s also horizontal. It may be in different areas. The same thing may be different, although it’s the same algorithm, even if it’s in the health sector, you may have differences and so on. And for instance, the Convention of the Council of Europe, that is an open convention to all countries in the world. So it’s not an instrument for Europe. It just requires states to have mechanisms in place. So it’s a very general requirement to have functioning mechanisms in place. And it says what they should be able to deliver, i.e. identify risks with regard to human rights, democracy and rule of law, and that states have remedies in place in case risks become actually impacts and a mitigation plan and so on. It doesn’t go into further detail. This is where the second instrument comes in that the Council of Europe is currently working on, and this is done in cooperation with the technical standards bodies, with the OECD, with UNESCO, with hundreds of experts from civil society, academia and businesses. It’s a non-binding instrument on the contrary to the Convention. It’s a non-binding instrument on several levels. It’s a methodology for human rights, democracy and rule of law, risk and impact assessment tool. Also, the Level 2 document is a document of about 20 pages explaining, giving guidance what you should need, which is a context-based risk, initial risk analysis, stakeholder engagement in order to see whether your initial risk analysis goes in the right direction or whether you’re missing something, then it’s the actual risk analysis, which is a classical checklist question thing, then there’s a mitigation plan. So if you realize that risks become reality, how are you going to react? How are you protecting people? And then, of course, some logic about iteration, how you do this with technology that is evolving. And it’s building on the work of the technical standard institutions that are also participating, tries to make the link between the legal text, a legal norm and the technical norm, but also giving the flexibility to take into account social, cultural norms and expectations of how to deal with risk, which you may not be able to harmonize. You may be able to harmonize technical norms, but not social, cultural norms. And I think this is important. Just one final thing. And we see how difficult it is. The EU has given a mandate to send Senelec two years ago to develop technical norms, to operationalize and implement the AI Act. And both sides are still struggling to understand each other and to see whether they actually are able to come up with something. So this shows it’s just one example. I don’t blame them. It’s really a difficult, difficult issue. But how important it is that there is cooperation and the OECD is very helpful in bringing people together, the Council of Europe as well, standardization organizations and others. We need to build bridges between these technical bodies and the legal bodies and the cultural bodies in the end so that we understand how how to make this work as a whole and not just on paper, as a legal text or in a questionnaire for programmers. So this needs to fit together. And there’s a huge work ahead of us.

Timea Suto: Thank you, Thomas. That was a great intro to the work of the Council of Europe on this. And I want to keep focusing on this element of regional cultural differences and approaches to context. And as we move out from the OECD setting and the Council of Europe setting into the MENA region, and I want to turn to Sulafa next and ask, what are your insights working in a technology company in this region and maybe perhaps even further than Saudi Arabia in the entire MENA context? What are some of the views that you see on how AI technology works here and how are the risk based approaches on the table here? And also, what are some of the elements that we can maybe elevate into a more global approach?

Sulafah Jabarti: OK, so I guess we all agree that AI has been reshaping the economy and the society all over the world and based on such a globalized economy and a globalized area that we’re speaking about, which is AI, one of the most advanced technologies in the world. So globalization aspect here is much more wider than regular business and regular digital transformation aspects. And so speaking about what’s kind of unique or specific, if we want to go out, zoom out of this globalized space, I think the uniqueness of the MENA region led by countries like Saudi Arabia that are investing heavily in AI. So one of the very unique pointers in the MENA region is heavy investment and leadership in the digital transformation supported by government, supported by private sector, as an example, the Alat company that has been launched under the PIF recently with a capital more than one billion dollars. And that is a specified company just for investing in AI, deep technologies, manufacturing and localizing all of that out of here, making the best of the international minds, the international technologies and the investment environment here. Also, the investment in the sector, whether it’s a financial investment or investing the minds, the regulations, the government mindset, has actually gave us a result that we have reached number one this year in the United Nations indicator of digital government, where we stood six years back in number 52. And that just says how much investment is going on and the speed. And speed cannot be based only on financial investment. It is definitely a mandate collaboration between mindsets, government, private sector, academia, all together, based, of course, by a very strong economy. Second uniqueness aspect, in my opinion, is something everyone also, I guess, agrees upon is such a young, let’s say, generation and tech savvy youth, which makes the biggest amount of our population. So that also adds to the speed of imbedding these technologies. I mean, a lot of technologies are just imbedded and live before even we know about them. And I guess this is also part why regulations are very important. We need, when we speak about risk-based regulations, the advantage of that is that they are flexible, supposedly, and to meet this kind of different levels of maturity of these applications and these technologies. And that’s why flexibility is very much needed in this kind of regulations. Also, the adaptability to the kinds and the ongoing different risks and differentiation between the kinds of applications versus the kind of blanket regulations that are not definitely needed for these kinds of technologies. So if we consider back to the globalized framework, and I guess we all know that the European Union this year has activated their… landmark AI law, which is considered the leading global law and nothing met before this mature, based on the EU Act, AI Act 2021. And considering that kind of effort put in such a law, we speak today about localization. Basically we’re just speaking about, we don’t need, in technology we never believe in starting from scratch. You capitalize on what’s there, open source and other technologies where you can build on. It needs to be the same kind of mindset in terms of regulations. So what we need to do in MENA is that, okay, we take those frameworks and then just fill the gap, taking into consideration the unique, let’s say, socio-economics, cultural, technology, differentiation of aspects, which I don’t believe are going to be a lot, speaking in this kind of making, which is the AI, and then imbedding them. And I guess as we speak there’s a lot that has already been done in Saudi Arabia in terms of, and I speak about Saudi Arabia as leading in the region in this area. We have the Sadae, which is the authority for data and AI. They have launched a couple of frameworks in different areas, and I believe we can definitely match and fill the gap between what’s been done internationally and locally to move this faster. And so summing that up, I guess what we all agree, MENA and globally, is that this kind of risk-based framework supposedly gives a much wider space of flexibility and adaptation and inclusivity, supposedly, for everyone to make the best of what’s going on all around the world, and for us to be able to lead that ongoingly for sustainable

Timea Suto: framework adjustments. Thank you. Thank you very much, Latha. A lot to learn from. I’m always amazed every time you quote this number from 68 to number one in six years. I think this is an amazing feat, and I like how you put that into the context of what that requires. Of course, investment, collaboration with the various expert groups, but of course also the energy and the talent of young people, which brings me to Noura and to ask you what role do you see from your perspective? I’m sorry I messed up your title before, but your work at the University in the Information Technology Department, how do you see the role of universities in building this new generation of developers and tech works?

Noora Al-Thani: Hello. First of all, I’m just pleased to be among the distinguished speakers. As I want to start with, I would like to add, as Ms. Latha mentioned, Saudi Arabia and the MENA region is the leading. So according to Vision 2030, AI actually has a pivotal role at the core of Vision 2030, basically, because they want to diversify the economy, reduce dependency on and establish a kingdom as a global leader in technology and innovation. And Saudi Arabia actually spearheads that effort and aims to develop robust AI and generation AI ecosystem. As Ms. Latha mentioned, they published several frameworks. They published the framework in 2023, September, and again, they published the AI adoption framework in September 2024. And recently, they published in January 2024, the AI intelligence guidelines. So they are keeping up updated with all what’s coming within the technology and legalization. And in the latest publication, the AI, the artificial intelligence guidelines, Saudi ensured responsible use of AI and emphasizing data privacy and ethical standards, and tried to balance innovation with societal values, potential risks, and mitigation strategies. They talked about explicitly certification fraud as a risk, since, as you all know, AI now could produce human-like content. You could write, you could have essays, even detailed research, undermining all traditional educational and professional standards. Therefore, Saidiya also stated mitigation measures for assessment, education, and training explicitly here in Saudi Arabia. And in terms of AI adoption in higher education institutes, actually the adoption and management of new technology in higher education institutes can be complex due to their diverse constituents, including faculty, students, staff, each with different needs and priorities. But there is a paper that was published in September 2024. It is titled AI Governance in Higher Education, Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities. It was published in the journal Future Internet. This study examined how the prestigious universities in the United States are approaching the governance of artificial intelligence, particularly in response to the growing influence of generative AI in higher education. They reviewed AI governance policies and strategies in 14 prestigious universities. What we can see from this study is that universities started investing generously in AI governance. For example, you could see Massachusetts Institute of Technology developed a comprehensive framework for ethical AI governance and has invested $1 billion in AI initiatives. University of Utah launched a $100 million responsible AI initiative aimed at using AI to tackle societal issues while protecting civil rights. And Tsinghua University established the Institute for AI International Governance and the Center for AI Governance focusing on AI ethics, policy development, and international cooperation. And the University of Oxford launched the Oxford Martin AI Governance Initiative to understand and mitigate AI risks through research and collaboration. And also University of Birmingham’s Center for Artificial Intelligence and Government. And lastly, universities also recognized the importance of dialogue and take innovative steps to promote it. For instance, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign harnessed the power of social media and they created an online space discussion to discuss issues related to gen AI within the university community. So these universities are not only investing financially but developing comprehensive programs, research initiatives, and governance structures to address all these issues. And to go back to the MENA region, again I’ll go back to Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia, universities are focused on AI within, obviously, the vision 21st 30th. In KSU, we have established KSU Zakat Center and KSU Zakat Office. Both are concerned with AI. The KSU Zakat Center has educated its efforts to its numerous partnerships to localizing knowledge and technology within the field of AI, while the Zakat Office is concerned with developing AI research and applied programs that serve different academic and professional disciplines. And again, there’s KAUST. Also, they established the Center of Excellence for Generative AI, which is dedicated to placing Saudi Arabia at the forefront of AI research in the region and globally.

Timea Suto: Thank you very much, Nora. Quite a lot that universities are able to do, and I guess also when they’re able to do that, when they’re supported to do it. So again, I think what you’ve said fits very nicely in what the panel has said earlier already in how we make sure that expert communities that are either based in academic circles, in private sector circles, or government or international organizations manage to come together and build on each other’s knowledge to further this work. And that we need the expertise of all of them if we want to get the approach right. So in that vein, I also want to turn to Paloma online and ask where do you see the role of the private sector’s efforts in driving this responsible AI innovation by design? And what are the role of the policies that are necessary around this to help us make sure that private sector can do this?

Paloma Villa Mateos: Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Can you listen to me well? It’s okay? Okay, great. Well, thank you. Well, I do think that the magic word here is AI governance. And this applies for private and public sector. I do think that We need to be humble and have a substantial conversation between us, because otherwise we will not benefit from the AI. I think we have done a great job in the last decades in the different international organizations and also in the companies. And the question for us is, in the end, how to ensure AI that is developed responsibly while fostering innovation. And I do think that the AI governance from the company perspective lies in four interconnected pillars of AI governance, which are really important. The first one is principles and guidelines, mainly come from international organizations. Regulation is the second pillar, technical standard, and industry self-regulation. Most of them have been already mentioned, but I think it is important trying to get this interconnected proposal, starting from some principles to the more sophisticated development of AI. Regarding, for example, the principles and guidelines, I do believe that the OECD, Council of Europe, UNESCO, Hiroshima principles, executive order, all this going around the world is directly connected to what companies are doing. I think the development of what we have been doing in the last two decades has been going in parallel, and this is very good news. The principles are there when we talk about transparency, fairness, privacy, human rights, democracy, rural flow. We have been telephonic with many other companies, Microsoft, Meta. We have been working with the Council of Europe, with OECD on a daily basis. With UNESCO, we have signed. These principles are there, and I do think, this is my positive insight, that we are in the same role. The problem comes when, I think Thomas has said, when we come from the high-level principles to the earth. We don’t know how to apply all these principles. Now, for example, at the OECD and many other organisations, we are developing in a more sophisticated way things related to the AI, not only high-risk. I mean, the high-risk approach, everywhere the high-risk approach, there is no discussion about that. But we are now discussing more specific topics. For example, AI and intellectual property. And this is, again, the problem of how we make possible this interoperability of regimes in Europe with other regions, where the history of the juristical, the law tradition, is completely different. How we can find this common interplay? So, the second pillar is regulation. And I think that here, companies, in the case, for example, of Europe, where the AI is already in place, and based on the principle we have already discussed, I do think that companies are doing a great job, for example, signing the EU pact, which is really relevant for companies trying to voluntarily implement the ETAG before it is into force. And many companies are engaging in core commitment, in AI governance strategy, mapping the AI system, and developing AI literacy in the companies and outside the companies. These three core commitments of companies are relevant for what we are talking now. I mean, this collaboration between the institution, the public sector, and the companies are extremely relevant. The problem here in this second pillar in regulation is how we will implement regulation. Again, this is the problem. Maybe the problem is not the regulation itself, but all the standardisation, what it implies in high-risk systems. And sometimes there is a grey zone. Sometimes when we talk with companies, with institutions, the problem is that the discussion is not substantial. I mean, because we are trying to very quickly resolve the standardisation process, which is very difficult, and the technical details are really difficult. So when I start talking about being humble and having a substantive conversation between the public and private sector, because sometimes we have a legal instrument from the 20th century, but the technology is from the 21st century. This is a challenge, a challenge for the institution, but also for the companies, because we have to comply with this regulation when the legal framework is not fit for purpose. For the third pillar, which is the technical standard, I have to say that companies, Telefonica, many others, I’m talking about Telefonica, we are involved in the standardisation process, participating in all the conversations, also with the AI office, with the standardisation of code of practice. But we do have also international standards with ISO and NIS and so on. In the end, what we have, we are seeing also in the ITU, is a complex scenario with many standardisation processes going around. So here we have a lot of work ahead. But I have to say that this conversation is taking place also with the participation of companies. And the fourth pillar has to do with self-regulation. And here I have to say that the companies in the last decade, especially those who are using AI internally and offering the data service, we have put in place AI governance strategy with a very substantial model, scaling the process internally with the responsible within the companies, and also ways to identify the risks internally that are really in line with what you have already said. I think self-regulation is relevant because the technology goes very fast. We have seen that during the process of the AI Act. We started talking about AI. In the end, the global purpose AI was in the middle because the technology is faster than the legal framework. So I do think that self-regulation and responsible AI is critical here. And I stop here because I think we can go in depth later.

Timea Suto: Thank you. Thank you. So thank you very much for that, Paloma. And it’s quite a complex framework, as you said. I think one commonality out of all those four pillars is the collaboration between industry and regulators to make sure that we get the balance right, that we balance the innovation and the rapid development of technology with some of those commitments and goals that we want to address through risk management. So I want to stay with some of this idea, as I turn to Melinda, and we’ve heard a lot about safety risks of AI, and there’s been a number of global summits already on this issue. So I’m just wondering if you might want to draw out a few lessons learned there and see what we can do to maintain or get this balance in act right between innovation and investment risks, but also what is it that the private sector is already doing to help that balance? Over to you, Melinda.

Melinda Claybaugh: Great. Thank you so much. Just a little bit of context to explain Meta’s, to explain my company’s context and how we’re coming at the AI conversation. So we have two main buckets of AI products. So one is our generative AI products, which are in the app, in any app, in Facebook and Instagram and WhatsApp, you may have seen a Meta AI assistant. So it’s basically a chat bot powered by a large language model that you can interact with and ask it to do things and answer questions. Also, we have image generation tools, things like that, that help you create content online. The other bucket of our… AI products is a large language model called Lama that we have released several generations of. And it’s an open source model, which means we make it freely available to anyone to download. So it’s essentially giving away, you know, many, many millions of dollars of investments to entrepreneurs and developers who want to build on it for their own applications. I think that’s just important context to set for kind of how we come at the conversation as both a model provider and a gen AI system deployer. So at the model, let me start, at the gen AI system level, so our meta AI assistant, we assess risk in the way we would assess privacy risks in general. So we built our AI risk management program on top of our privacy risk management program. So it’s to say that any time a new feature or product or assistant is developed or improved in a certain way, it goes through a risk assessment and review process and mitigations are identified and applied. And there’s kind of a cycle of improvement in the same way as happens on the data privacy side. With respect to our large language model, their risks are assessed and mitigated at different points in the development of the model. So at the stage of the data collection, the pre-training stage, we’re identifying, you know, we’re actually going out of our way to not collect personal data, and then we’re identifying potential personal data, removing it, identifying, you know, data that may have copyright protections, you know, going through all of those risks at the pre-training stage, training the model once it’s trained, implementing certain red teaming, other, you know, safety testing and risk assessment and mitigation processes to make sure that the model we’re releasing is safe, and then we release it and developers can build on it. I think, you know, so in addition to those and kind of the product development process, we also, if you’ve mentioned, have signed up to multiple kind of international frameworks. So domestically, to start, in the U.S., we were an early adopter of the White House commitments, which are kind of high-level commitments to the safe deployment of advanced AI. And then we signed on to the sole frontier AI safety commitments. And so I think what we’re seeing is a really positive harmonization at around safety frameworks for advanced or frontier AI. I think that level of, and I think that will be furthered in addition by the development of the various AI safety institutes and how they are going to be working together to understand the science of risk identification, mitigation, evaluations, benchmarks, all of that. And so I think that those are really positive developments. I think where some of the challenges arise is in the more bread and butter AI. So not the kind of frontier AI, you know, safety stuff we’re talking about, but how is AI being applied in our everyday lives to maybe make decisions about us or offer us goods or services? And I think that’s where some of the stickiness comes up in terms of reaching consensus about what are the risks that we are trying to identify? What are the mitigations that should be applied? And is there a global view on that or should it be kind of nationally determined? Because there’s going to be differences in how different societies view different risks. So I think that’s a really interesting thing to keep in mind, the difference between kind of the very advanced AI safety concerns and then kind of the day-to-day bread and butter AI concerns. And just a few general thoughts on risk. So I think it’s really important to focus on the marginal risk we’re talking about, because I think we tend to come to this and think, oh, my God, AI is new and it’s different and it’s terrible. And, you know, in fact, we’ve been dealing with AI, classic AI, for a really long time. And I think what people get concerned about is this really advanced stuff that maybe we’ll lose control of, you know, people worry about, or maybe it’s doing things we don’t understand and all of that. And so I just, you know, we have a whole legal, we have many, many legal frameworks that already govern things like data privacy, that already govern things like kids’ safety online. And so we have a lot of mature frameworks to draw from. And I think from a company’s perspective, what is going to be really important is how these things are rationalized. And so I think there’s a risk of imposing in the lens of, you know, AI, imposing a whole new framework and regime on top of all of the ones we already have. And then how do those relate to one another? We’re seeing this to some extent in Europe, in the AI and privacy conversation, and how data can be used in AI or not. And how does the legal regime on data privacy intersect with AI? And that balance of innovation and privacy protection is really at a tension point, where we all recognize data is needed for AI advances, but of course, there’s limits around it. And I think the unique nature of large language models means that we may not be able to implement data subject rights or other things that arise in data privacy frameworks the way that we can in other types of data processing. So there’s a real life tension there that I think has to be grappled with. And then another, just two other points I want to make real quick is, I think it’s really important to focus on the use cases. So for us, as a large language model provider, and particularly as an open source LLM provider, we release our model, we do all the mitigations that we can, we release it, and we have no idea how it’s used. Anyone can build on it for any purpose, and it’s up to them to put into place the mitigations that are necessary for their particular use cases. And so I think it’s important to, I know the OECD is looking at the value chain and really breaking down what are the roles and responsibilities of the various actors in the AI value chain, and what is in their control to identify and mitigate. I think that’s a really important conversation, and again, the use case conversation, and then particularly looking at what are the laws we already have in place. We already have in place laws about discrimination in employment in most places. We already have in laws discrimination in housing services. So what is net new here that is already not covered, and can we cover those risks in existing frameworks, as opposed to new frameworks?

Timea Suto: Thanks. Thank you, Melinda, for that. I forgot to turn on the microphone. It’s been quite a rich first round around this table. We’ve heard a number of ideas coming out of the speakers here on what is it that we’re facing in terms of risk-based approach to AI? What are some of the elements that we can build on? So I want to focus on our second round of questions. I have the same question to all of you. And in addition to reacting to what you’ve heard from one another, is to just really share a little bit on how you think forums like where we are sitting today, and these global conversations at the IGF, and other global fora, can help bring what you’ve mentioned in your interventions into fruition for an actual global approach to the governance of AI in a way that, as most of you highlighted, it balances the rapid growth and allows the rapid growth of technology and innovation while making sure that some of the harms that we fear from are actually mitigated. So I don’t want to summarize what you’ve all said because it’s going to take too much time, but I hope we can take this one question and do a round-robin around the table and react to one another and bring out those elements that can actually help in global conversations. So Lucia, you spoke first. I’ll hand the microphone over to you.

Lucia Russo: Thank you, Tima. It’s truly fascinating to hear from such a diverse group of speakers. And I think, for me, what resonates the most with what we heard is, on one hand, this need for multi-stakeholder conversation and collaboration, the need also to have a contextual and cultural approach to this type of regulation, and also the need to think in practical terms of what it means to translate these principles into concrete requirements and along this risk spectrum. that we have advocated and so what I want to get at is that we see some sort of regulatory fragmentation and this is no news to anyone and we perhaps shouldn’t seek to have full harmonization because that’s maybe not achievable not even perhaps desirable because we have heard there are some cultural considerations to be made that local values or technological developments but even cultural and institutional history so I think the way we are approaching this issue at the OECD is really to have this multi stakeholder groups coming together and discussing so we have these expert groups overall we have a network of 600 experts that work with us and they are divided into expert groups that focus on specific topics and for instance one of them is working on a group which is called risks and accountability so it’s a group that’s the name that speaks for itself and it really is taking this approach of looking at the different risk management frameworks that have emerged so far and try and see where they share commonalities and where they differ and so the idea is to develop responsible business conduct for enterprises which is not yet another framework they have to comply with but more of a framework that would indicate to companies especially those operating trans-border when they comply with a given requirement what it means for instance in the EU what it means in terms of complying for in the US or in another jurisdiction so the idea is to really put this interoperability in practice meaning having a level of alignment or a level of understanding for operators of where these different requirements intersect and so this is the project that we are currently carrying out and we should have the due diligence guidance ready next year and perhaps the last point that I would like to add and Melinda hinted at that is that it’s a risk management framework that is not only looking at one specific actor in the chain but it looks at AI development and deployment across the value chain because of course it’s not only one part of the chain that is responsible but there are upstream and downstream operators that also have due diligence requirements to abide with and so that would go down to data to the very first investment and data labeling so it’s really a more holistic approach so yes I would say that the value of these conversations is really to bring together these perspectives and it’s the way to go there is no other alternative.

Timea Suto: Thank you Lucia. Same question to you Thomas. What is the role of the global community here?

Thomas Schneider: Yes, thank you. It’s actually interesting to see to what extent and I think the value of a forum like this is to hear from each other where we are and to what extent we are on the same page or going in the same direction, to what extent processes are converging, legal processes, standardization processes and also to what extent they may be not converging or they don’t have to converge and a fundamental question that hasn’t been raised here is actually who defines what a risk is and who defines what a high or a too high risk is and that largely diverges from country to country and not just with AI. Just to give you one example, in England in Liverpool you have the River Mercy and nobody would ever think of going in the river to swim. On the contrary, you have a metal fence that is from 1920 that tells you forbidden water, danger, beware. You have a second fence one meter ahead of it from the 1930s that says, oh danger, water, don’t go in, there may be ships and there’s even a third fence added in the 50s. In Switzerland, in Basel for instance, you have a river with cargo ships but thousands of people go swimming in the water, they go beneath bridges, they navigate between cargo ships and the ships between them because this is one of the greatest things to do in summer if you live in Basel and have no access to the sea. So if the government would decide to forbid swimming in the river because there are cargo ships and it may be dangerous, the people would just say no and this is just, and the UK and Switzerland is not like 5,000 or 10,000 or 20,000 kilometers apart, but just to say that while in an airline business where people are okay to trust experts because it exceeds their personal knowledge also in the airline business, people are willing to agree on internationally harmonized risk management because they want to be sure that the airplane lands safely because they can’t run it themselves. But the closer it gets to your own capabilities, to your life where you want to take a decision and that will also be the same with AI on the heart surgery operation. You may be happy that it’s clear what the red lines are, what the doctor can do, what the tools, what safety tests the tools need to pass, but when it’s about AI-generated content with your freedom of expression, expressing your cultural political views, you may not want some expert or I don’t know the government to tell you what is right or wrong, but you may want to decide it yourself. So I think this is something, there will be harmonization which is fine for people, people will want to have harmonization so that they don’t have to care, they can trust experts, but there will be areas where people want to be the master and use AI the way they want and discuss it with their neighbors what is right or wrong and not with any with the government or people from far away. So I think we will have to live with some kind of diversity in this

Timea Suto: field. Thank you Thomas. Sulafa, how do you see this?

Sulafah Jabarti: Well capitalizing on what they just said, which is I guess I can see how we’re all coming closer to the same area, which is I really liked what you said in terms of what we need to develop or not develop, because this area is actually re-qualifying the whole drive because it’s just okay we need to regulate this sector so let’s go and drive and do regulations every day and question everything and as she said this is a scary new thing and the idea is actually we really need to be very objective but also very connected to the technology itself and to the society itself. So I think Pamela or if I’m not mentioning the name right or wrong, but yeah she’s Paloma, she said something about that the speed of technology sometimes exceeds the speed of regulations and it’s not fair to like ask the businesses to slow down and just wait for regulations, which does happen sometimes. On the other side in a business world, as an example for the cyber security area, which is a very very highly regulated area and still part of this whole as they say crowd, a very small example and some of the applications we provide to some very highly regulated entities, we every now need to adjust the applications we provide with the regulations of cyber security, which are very highly adjusted in our country and so we ended up realizing that some entities because they’re just giving us the regulations and the updates just like they are and they want us to just you know adjust the application to it without actually having an eye for the business itself or the business owners themselves in the organization, we end up to a place where the authorized users can’t enter to the to the to the application and then we have to you know drive some concept into it and we actually bring our business culture, our business understanding to them and and this brings us back to why we need a multi-stakeholder governed frameworks because we need to bring the society in academics and technology people, business people all together and I guess if I want to sum that I think we need flexibility, coordination and awareness. Awareness is a very important part because to give people the right establishment and the right ground to be able to think with us on the same harmonized approach, we need to enable them first to know what they need to know and that also brings us back to exactly being very clever and actually inviting the right entities and the right stakeholders to participate in this. Some people are very closed in boxes of regulations, law or academia despite the other side which is the business itself. So no one should work on this in a closed box, they need to be very much attached with a lot embedded data, informatics, and this is what it’s all about. So we sometimes, I’m sure we all sometimes find people who are working on this who are very isolated from the core of itself and the spirit of this technology, AI, which is based on very live data and information flows. So I think what we need at the end, we all aim to reach a very robust, trusted, and adaptive framework that everyone can use all over the world.

Timea Suto: Thank you very much, Rafaq. Noura, how do you see this going for you?

Noora Al-Thani: Actually, I see the global forum as a very good place to get everyone thinking together. I would like to, I was noticing that like now AI is having, is actually getting everyone is afraid of what AI will do, how AI will develop, and I could see that because when I started AI, when I started studying, it was just I’m doing an AI algorithm or machine learning algorithm in one specific area and it will, for example, find a tumor. Now it’s a different thing. It’s a generalized model and what happens that creators of the AI really don’t know how the AI will respond because they teach the AI the learning model and then the AI will respond the way it responds. So regulating it, I see it’s important to regulate it from the beginning, from entering the data, from the early steps, because whenever the data is in, or whenever, like, anything is in is very difficult. For example, a cake, can you eat it? If you take the ingredients before mixing the ingredients, you could do that. But I would ask you to take this ingredient or whatever data after baking the cake, it’s kind of impossible. And that’s what happens. Whenever the risk comes, it will come anyway. So I do see why there is a great concern and I see some positive things have a great concern just to regulate it. But I see that it’s coming and it’s coming strongly because it is very beneficial and you can see the benefits of it day after day with healthcare, with every aspect. You can see that it’s very beneficial. Like last year, there’s a surgery that happened that there’s a blind girl that managed to be seen now because of an AI surgery. So there is huge benefits. The fear is, we could understand. But I think, like, and other than this also, the government should be very specific for each sector. It should be very different. We can’t have just one framework that governs everything. Every sector is completely different and has its own characteristics that we need to, other than society, other than the region. So I think we’re on the right track. We’re working and it’s a work in progress. And let’s hope for the best.

Timea Suto: Thank you. Step by step and no one-size-fits-all, I think.

Paloma Villa Mateos: Paloma. Yeah, thank you. So Thomas and also Zulafa have said something which is for me really relevant. I mean, the definition of high risk, no? I mean, if we think on Europe, on AIAC, in the end, what we have here is a regulation on high risk application, mostly. And here we are developing this standardization process. And the problem is how to go from the theory to the real world. And this is something more difficult than some of the policymakers thought it is. Last week, for example, we were in Brussels having some conversation with the AI office. So they have a mandate that in the next seven months they have to come with this code of practice. And they have thousands of people participating in this code of practice. And at the same time, we have responded to a public consultation, again, on the definition of some of the application on high risk and so on. So it’s more difficult than it is. And in the end, it is true that we as a company, we have to protect people’s rights, safety and so on. But we have also to protect in Europe innovation and also how to compete in the global economy. So this pattern is really difficult. And I do think that engaging with companies is really relevant because having this theoretical approach sometimes is against what we are trying to do. And in parallel, I have to say that companies, we are also learning how to provide or how to work with a responsible AI. GSMA, for example, you know GSMA, we are now working on a responsible AI maturity roadmap. So trying to provide a framework for companies to work in an AI governance strategy that from the beginning to the end, we are able to provide ethical AI system. So this is going hand by hand. And I think it is important, as I said, to combine and to balance people’s rights and innovation. This is something that is relevant and more relevant in the next year, where in Europe, for example, we will see this new code of practice, standardization and sense and elect. So it’s critical now in Europe to balance that because it could be a regulation that in other parts of the world are looking to. So it is important that we do it right. Thank you.

Melinda Claybaugh: I mostly echo what other people said, but just on the point about the EU AI Act, I think that it’s an interesting reflection of how unsettled things are. So with the code of practice in particular, there’s still live conversation and no consensus on what even is a prohibited practice or what is a high risk practice. And so you would think the prohibited practices would be fairly understood generally, but it’s not. And so I think just as we, I guess my recommendation for kind of convenings and global convenings is to take some time to do it right. Because I think what’s happening is that the EU AI Act was finalized in a frenzy around gen AI development and advanced gen AI development. And now they’re kind of having to figure out, oh, actually, what is prohibited and high risk? Meanwhile, the clock is ticking on compliance for all the companies. And so it’s really a difficult situation to be managing. So I think building more consensus around some of the risks and some of the high risks and what’s inbounds and out of bounds, recognizing, of course, there will be cultural differences. But taking some time to set that step right rather than rushing ahead as the technology is still advancing as well.

Timea Suto: Thank you so much, Belinda. So a lot to take away from the panel. We’ve discussed the importance of multi-stakeholder approach and a cross-cultural approach. The importance of bridging fragmentation in regulatory spaces and trying to build towards common principles, but not a one size fits all approach. To try and work together to define what high risk and low risk is. And also the value of conversations and the acknowledgement that it might not be the same across regions. To make sure that we are looking and are connected at the technology when we’re trying to pass regulations. Again, the value of multi-stakeholder approach here so that we don’t pass regulations that are actually restrictive to the benefits of a technology that we’re trying to regulate. To go step by step and make sure that we place the regulatory at the right moment. Not necessarily taking an approach that covers everything from one go. The role of standards. and balancing innovation and regulation with an approach to standards and industry initiatives. And then, of course, taking the time to do slides and allow time to tell us where actually the risks are and to look at that from also the user perspective, the way that the technology is being used in the field as opposed to where we think risks might be coming. So a lot coming out from the panel. We have about maybe 20 minutes, a little bit to turn to the audience, a little less than that, both online and here in the room. I understand Paloma will have to leave. So if there’s anything last second that you want to share before you have to move to the next meeting, please go ahead. Otherwise, we thank you very much for being here. If there are people in the room, the rest of the speakers or online, please, we’ll get you a microphone and then we’ll try to get your answer as well. You and then them. Thank you very much.

Audience: My name is Amal Ahmed. I’m currently working in DGA. I’m not asking a question. I’m just having an emphasis. First of all, welcome here in Saudi Arabia. It’s an honor to have you all here. And my experience is a total of three years. Two, I’ve spent in the private sector and one in the governmental sector in DGA. And I want to say that it’s really exciting working here. And I’ve seen how the government sector is working very closely with citizens to be human-centric. And I’ve realized a challenge that we are facing to enhance the practices of creating new products, which is the first one is how to actually adhere to the best practices that are available to doing what humans really need. Because the more we contact through the workshops the different stakeholders, we realize that some of the practices we’re doing, they’re not very fit. And on a product level, when it comes to, let’s say, creating some sort of a feature, going through the right process sometimes is not the very best option to it. So this is one of the things that I’ve seen. And it’s kind of like a balancing between the frameworks and the reality itself. My name is Jacques Beglinger. I’m from Switzerland. I’m here with the Eurotech, the European IGF, and with the Swiss IGF process, but also in the business ICC team. My question is following on what Thomas was saying on different perception, means different aversion to risk or embracing risks. And wouldn’t that call for governments and for business to engage much more in education and explaining as much as possible so that the users can make a free choice?

Timea Suto: Thomas, the question was addressed to you, I think. But all of you around the table, if you’d like to elaborate a little bit on how we educate around AI.

Thomas Schneider: Well, I do not necessarily think that it’s addressed to me. But of course, what I said before about people swimming in the river in Switzerland, they don’t want the government to forbid swimming in the river. They want the government to make sure that the water quality is okay, so there’s no damage. They want the government to make sure that everyone properly learns how to swim at school. And society teaches also foreigners and immigrants how to deal with water. And they also want the drivers of the cargo ships to know that, okay, I go on the left and the people are on the right, so I will not kill them. So education is key to freedom of choice. And to also make people adaptive to be able to assess the risks in a situation that may not be foreseen. Because you may set up rules, but reality may be not foreseen by the rules. And then what do you do? And the more people are able or the system or the society is able to deal with risks, also in unforeseen moments, and we will have them probably also with AI, then, of course, it’s easier for people to react.

Timea Suto: Thank you. Does anybody else want to react to what we’ve heard from the audience? Are there any other questions? The gentleman in the back there. Hello? Yeah. Okay, great.

Audience: Thank you. My name is Wouter Cobus. I’m with the Dutch Government and Standardization Advisor. I’m seeing a difference between the Internet, which we discussed at the IGF, and AI, where the Internet is confounded by standards, really based on standards. And in AI, we are now trying to develop new standards. And I can imagine that difference has also implications to how we govern it. So, what are your opinions about how this difference affects the governance model that we have to choose for AI compared to the Internet?

Timea Suto: Some question there about the role of standards and whether standards need to come before development or development needs to come before standards, if I understood the question correctly. Any other questions that we could maybe walk together? No? It’s quite unfortunate that Paloma had to leave because she always has a lot to say on standards, but perhaps others? Melinda, do you want to take that up?

Melinda Claybaugh: Actually, I’m not that close to the standards development work. In the U.S., I can say that the quote-unquote standards, I mean, not the ISO things, but the NIST is the primary soft standard body in the U.S., they’ve been focused primarily on risk management frameworks for Gen-AI. I think there’s a place for that because that is kind of a standardization of a process of how to assess and mitigate risks that you want to make standard across anyone developing and deploying AI. As for the technical standards, which I know are so important to the Internet, I actually don’t have a view on them. I defer to you if you’re saying it’s more challenging in the AI space.

Timea Suto: Johannes?

Thomas Schneider: Maybe just a quick reaction. The question is, what do you mean by standards on the Internet? I mean, of course, the TCPIP is there for a few decades, but the IETF is continuing to develop norms and standards. And also there, basically, it’s probably not fundamentally different because somebody proposes a standard, you test it, and like a running code and so on, and if nobody has a problem with the standard, then it may get de-standard, although you may have competing standards or a variety of standards, and you had this with television and previous, so you may have competing standards. And over time, maybe one of the standards or two will succeed in just being the most attractive, not necessarily the best, but the most attractive for businesses or whatever. So I don’t see a fundamental difference. But of course, it’s a difference between a standard for an infrastructure, if you take the Internet as an infrastructure, or service using an infrastructure. So of course, it’s also there, standards are case-sensitive. But I don’t see a fundamental difference in logic, because also there you just try and see what happens, and then you standardize as you go, more or less.

Timea Suto: Thank you, Johannes. Yes, just one thing, if I can add from my role as the moderator. We also need to make sure that as we develop standards, we are mindful of not fragmenting the space further. So that standard, the inter-appropriate approach that we want to take to regulation, to the actual use of technology, also that standards do not add to creating pockets of technology, that this technology works on this standard, and the other one works on that standard, and the two don’t talk to one another, because then we are actually fragmenting the opportunities that we can get out of the technology. That’s just two cents from me. But we have a question there.

Audience: When we talk about standards, we also need to bear in mind that standards are not carved in stone. So for me, and also from my experience in business, it’s okay to have standards, but they shouldn’t be too rigid to start with. But then there must be a serious review process, or at least the expectation that it’s going to be reviewed once that flaws are expected. So in that sense, what has been done at the Council of Europe, principle-based, is fine. Whether the AI Act went a little bit too far in this respect, and not enough expectation to be revised pretty soon, as we saw it with the GDPR, which was not revised so quickly, you might learn from it. But I think it’s fine. really essential that there is a perspective and certain know-how on the subject that there will be a revision.

Timea Suto: Thank you for that addition. I think we seem to have exhausted the questions from the audience. I hope not the audience itself. We have, yes, about five minutes to end our session. So I just want to turn back to the panelists here on the podium and ask, what is your main takeaway from the session? If it still had the character limitations that we have on social platforms to express our opinions, what would be your one sentence takeaway from this that we can put in the report about what we discussed today? I’m going to skip the speaking order and I’m going to start with Sulafa and just go around the people here.

Sulafah Jabarti: I think mostly it’s to make this sustainable. It’s actually the harmonization of the global framework that we’ve heard bits and pieces from different backgrounds, and we all, I guess, agree that as much as the process is flexible, inclusive, and as they say, connected to multi-stakeholders as well, and listening out to everyone, giving everyone the space to imbue their process, and I think that’s the way to actually make it faster and more convenient and more sustainable, let’s say, because at the end, this is an ongoing process. So as much as the flow is connected to multiple entities, as much as it’s sustainable and objective, if we may say, and considering all of the aspects together.

Melinda Claybaugh: Yeah, I echo that and I agree that finding the balance between what we agree on and then allowing for variability, so setting a floor and then you can add to it as needed for the use case, for the country, for the context that something is being deployed in, and so firming up the foundation and then whether looking to kind of sector-specific assessments beyond that, however that differential should be implemented is unclear yet, but like that super floor and then allow space to move around.

Timea Suto: Lucia?

Lucia Russo: Yeah, I think for me as well is this notion of having an adaptive framework, not having something set in stone that you can’t review and can’t reopen, especially in light of the speed of the technology and the length of the policymaking process, and so this notion of footer-proofing legislation or regulation in a way that is not set in stone or that you have processes to update your requirements, and also I think this really the need of what we call a risk-based, well, tailored approach to the use cases but to the sectors as well, and I think Melinda expressed it very well, this notion that we have advanced AI systems and then we have what we may call everyday AI, and also Nora was mentioning that transition from the narrow AI to now the large foundation model that can do much more, and so I think that is at the core of what we call risk-based approach, I mean to tailor the requirement that are imposed to really a careful consideration of what the impulse will be.

Noora Al-Thani: Hello, yes, I do agree with Lucia that it should be adapted, and especially since it’s a global, as also Melinda said, we should have a basic and then different differences, and I think all that could be done through dialogue, and again dialogue, and reiterative process of setting the standards on, and it should be like regularly and continuously, because things change, our beliefs or our point of view change with the changing world, so I think as I will actually emphasize whatever they said, and that’s how it is. Thank you, Thomas. Yes, thank you, I also think

Thomas Schneider: what a surprise that adaptive is the key word I think of this afternoon, and I think it is important that the framework is adaptive, but not necessarily, the goal should always be the same, to make sure that people are free, but people use their freedom with responsibilities, that there is protection, human rights, for democracy, for rule of law things, and also like clear rules for the industry, that they know what can they do, what can they not do, at least when a certain level of risk is reached, so the principles should be stable and reliable, but the way they are implemented, the way it’s made sure that people continue to be free, but safe to the extent that they want to be safe, need to be adaptive, and I think also, my country is not a member of the EU, but we are grateful to the EU that they dared to do something, of which we can all learn, and of course, a colleague from Telefonica is right, it’s not easy, but not doing anything and just letting everything go may not be the right thing too, so we watch closely what the EU is doing, what difficulties the member states have in implementing this in the local level and so on, and of course, yeah, they are the front runner, they have some advantages, but they also pay a price, but as long as we stay engaged and can learn from each other, I think it’s a mutual benefit. In my small country, we will try to achieve the same goals with something different, something more agile, something smaller, because also we have to, we don’t have the resources that the EU as a group of countries have, so as long as we can learn from each other, I think, yeah, we will go in the right direction if we share the basic fundamental principles of freedom and respect and autonomy and human rights and solidarity and so on.

Timea Suto: Thank you. So, we started from one word or one hyphenated word, risk-based, and then we added quite a couple to this, but I think Thomas is right, the end word that we seem to converge around is adaptability, an adaptive framework that moves with the times, that moves with the technology, that moves with the changes of our views and perspectives and the way that we, our culture develops with the technology together while making sure that we keep our eyes on the prize, keep our eyes on the right goals that we’ve set for ourselves in the beginning. To all the words that we’ve said today, I will just add two more, which is thank you. Thank you to all of you who have come and share your knowledge and expertise with us for the past hour and a half. Thank you to all who came to listen and contribute to the conversation. Thank you to those who joined us online. I know Paloma had to go, but the audience that is there still. I hope this was as useful for you as it was edifying for me, and hope to see you next year at the next IGF and see how we progress from adaptive to who knows what the next word be. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Agreement Points

Need for adaptive and flexible AI governance frameworks

Lucia Russo

Thomas Schneider

Sulafah Jabarty

Noora Al-Thani

Paloma Villa Mateos

Melinda Claybaugh

Need for flexible, context-based risk assessment

Tension between harmonization and local/cultural adaptation

Developing harmonized global frameworks with local flexibility

Promoting ongoing dialogue to adapt governance as AI evolves

Balancing innovation and regulation in risk frameworks

Allowing time to properly define high-risk AI practices

All speakers emphasized the importance of creating AI governance frameworks that are adaptive, flexible, and can evolve with technological advancements while considering local contexts and cultural differences.

Importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration

Lucia Russo

Sulafah Jabarty

Noora Al-Thani

Facilitating multi-stakeholder and cross-cultural dialogue

Need for multi-stakeholder collaboration in framework development

Universities playing key role in AI governance and research

These speakers stressed the need for collaboration among various stakeholders, including governments, private sector, academia, and civil society, in developing effective AI governance frameworks.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need to consider cultural differences in AI governance approaches while working towards globally harmonized frameworks.

Thomas Schneider

Sulafah Jabarty

Importance of cultural considerations in risk perception

Developing harmonized global frameworks with local flexibility

Both speakers highlighted the importance of balancing innovation with regulation, focusing on risks specific to AI rather than overregulating.

Paloma Villa Mateos

Melinda Claybaugh

Balancing innovation and regulation in risk frameworks

Focusing on marginal risks specific to AI

Unexpected Consensus

Role of universities in AI governance

Noora Al-Thani

Sulafah Jabarty

Universities playing key role in AI governance and research

Need for multi-stakeholder collaboration in framework development

While not typically emphasized in AI governance discussions, both speakers highlighted the crucial role of universities in shaping AI governance frameworks and conducting relevant research.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement included the need for adaptive and flexible AI governance frameworks, the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration, and the consideration of cultural differences in risk perception and governance approaches.

Consensus level

There was a high level of consensus among the speakers on the need for flexible and adaptive approaches to AI governance. This consensus suggests a growing recognition of the complexity of AI governance and the need for frameworks that can evolve with technological advancements and varying cultural contexts. The implications of this consensus could lead to more nuanced and context-sensitive approaches to AI governance on a global scale.

Different Viewpoints

Approach to risk assessment in AI governance

Lucia Russo

Thomas Schneider

Need for flexible, context-based risk assessment

Importance of cultural considerations in risk perception

While both speakers advocate for flexibility in risk assessment, Russo emphasizes a more technical, multi-dimensional approach, while Schneider highlights the importance of cultural factors in risk perception and tolerance.

Focus of AI investment and development

Sulafah Jabarty

Noora Al-Thani

Heavy investment in AI and digital transformation in MENA region

Universities playing key role in AI governance and research

Jabarti emphasizes government and private sector investment in AI, while Al-Thani focuses on the role of universities in AI governance and research.

Unexpected Differences

Role of existing legal frameworks in AI governance

Melinda Claybaugh

Other speakers

Focusing on marginal risks specific to AI

Claybaugh uniquely emphasizes the importance of leveraging existing legal frameworks for AI governance, while other speakers focus more on developing new AI-specific frameworks. This unexpected difference highlights the tension between adapting existing regulations and creating entirely new ones for AI.

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the specific approaches to implementing flexible AI governance frameworks, the role of cultural factors in risk assessment, and the balance between regional investment and global interoperability.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers is moderate. While there is general consensus on the need for adaptive and flexible AI governance, speakers differ in their emphasis on specific aspects and implementation strategies. These differences reflect the complex nature of AI governance and the need for continued dialogue and collaboration to develop effective global frameworks that can accommodate regional and cultural variations.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the need for flexible and adaptive AI governance frameworks, but they differ in their emphasis on specific aspects such as cultural considerations, sector-specific approaches, and the balance between innovation and regulation.

Lucia Russo

Thomas Schneider

Sulafah Jabarty

Noora Al-Thani

Paloma Villa Mateos

Melinda Claybaugh

Difficulty translating high-level principles into practice

Tension between harmonization and local/cultural adaptation

Need for multi-stakeholder collaboration in framework development

Importance of sector-specific governance approaches

Balancing innovation and regulation in risk frameworks

Allowing time to properly define high-risk AI practices

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need to consider cultural differences in AI governance approaches while working towards globally harmonized frameworks.

Thomas Schneider

Sulafah Jabarty

Importance of cultural considerations in risk perception

Developing harmonized global frameworks with local flexibility

Both speakers highlighted the importance of balancing innovation with regulation, focusing on risks specific to AI rather than overregulating.

Paloma Villa Mateos

Melinda Claybaugh

Balancing innovation and regulation in risk frameworks

Focusing on marginal risks specific to AI

Key Takeaways

There is broad agreement on the need for risk-based, adaptive approaches to AI governance that balance innovation with risk mitigation

Governance frameworks should be flexible enough to account for cultural differences and evolving technology while maintaining core principles

Multi-stakeholder collaboration and dialogue is crucial for developing effective, interoperable AI governance approaches

Sector-specific and use case-specific governance may be needed rather than one-size-fits-all approaches

Education and awareness-building around AI risks and benefits is important

Standardization efforts for AI should aim to promote interoperability while allowing for adaptation

Resolutions and Action Items

Continue multi-stakeholder dialogues and collaboration on AI governance at global forums

Work towards harmonized global frameworks that allow for regional/cultural flexibility

Develop adaptive governance mechanisms that can evolve with AI technology

Unresolved Issues

How to specifically define and categorize high-risk AI applications

How to balance regional approaches with the need for global interoperability

How to operationalize risk-based frameworks in practice across different sectors

How to address cultural differences in risk perception and tolerance

Suggested Compromises

Establish a common ‘floor’ of basic AI governance principles, with flexibility for regional/cultural adaptation beyond that

Focus on use case and sector-specific governance rather than blanket regulations

Allow for regular review and updating of AI governance frameworks as technology evolves

We have engines in machines that produce goods that are more or less big, more or less dangerous for the people. We have engines in cars, in airplanes, in tanks, in many other vehicles. It may be the same engines or similar engines. And they all have, of course, opportunities to produce something, but they also have risks. But we do not have one regulation for the engine.

speaker

Thomas Schneider

reason

This analogy provides a fresh perspective on AI regulation, highlighting the complexity and context-dependence of risk management.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards considering more nuanced, context-specific approaches to AI governance rather than one-size-fits-all solutions.

We need to be humble and have a substantial conversation between us, because otherwise we will not benefit from the AI.

speaker

Paloma Villa Mateos

reason

This comment emphasizes the importance of collaboration and open dialogue in AI governance.

impact

It reinforced the theme of multi-stakeholder cooperation and encouraged participants to consider how to foster more substantive conversations between different sectors.

I think it’s really important to focus on the marginal risk we’re talking about, because I think we tend to come to this and think, oh, my God, AI is new and it’s different and it’s terrible. And, you know, in fact, we’ve been dealing with AI, classic AI, for a really long time.

speaker

Melinda Claybaugh

reason

This comment provides a balanced perspective on AI risks, countering alarmist views and encouraging a more measured approach.

impact

It prompted a more nuanced discussion of AI risks and the need to build on existing regulatory frameworks rather than starting from scratch.

We need flexibility, coordination and awareness. Awareness is a very important part because to give people the right establishment and the right ground to be able to think with us on the same harmonized approach, we need to enable them first to know what they need to know

speaker

Sulafah Jabarty

reason

This comment highlights the importance of public education and awareness in AI governance.

impact

It broadened the discussion to include the role of public understanding and engagement in effective AI governance.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by moving it towards a more nuanced, context-specific, and collaborative approach to AI governance. They highlighted the complexity of AI regulation, the need for flexibility and adaptability in governance frameworks, the importance of building on existing regulatory structures, and the crucial role of public education and multi-stakeholder dialogue. The discussion evolved from considering broad regulatory approaches to exploring more specific challenges and opportunities in implementing effective AI governance across different cultural and regulatory contexts.

How can we define and reach consensus on what constitutes ‘high risk’ in AI applications across different cultural contexts?

speaker

Thomas Schneider, Sulafah Jabarty, Paloma Villa Mateos

explanation

Multiple speakers highlighted the challenge of defining high-risk AI applications, especially given cultural differences in risk perception. This is crucial for developing effective and culturally-sensitive AI governance frameworks.

How can we balance innovation and regulation in AI governance to ensure competitiveness while protecting rights and safety?

speaker

Paloma Villa Mateos

explanation

This balance is critical for developing AI governance that fosters innovation while addressing potential risks and harms.

How can we develop sector-specific AI governance approaches while maintaining a coherent overall framework?

speaker

Noora Al-Thani, Melinda Claybaugh

explanation

Speakers emphasized the need for tailored approaches to different sectors, while also maintaining some level of consistency across frameworks.

How can we ensure AI governance frameworks remain adaptive and flexible to keep pace with rapidly evolving technology?

speaker

Lucia Russo, Thomas Schneider

explanation

Given the fast pace of AI development, ensuring governance can adapt quickly is crucial for effective regulation.

What role should education play in preparing society to make informed choices about AI risks and benefits?

speaker

Jacques Beglinger (audience member)

explanation

Education was highlighted as a key factor in enabling people to assess and manage AI risks effectively.

How can we develop effective standards for AI that allow for innovation while ensuring interoperability and avoiding fragmentation?

speaker

Wouter Cobus (audience member), Timea Suto

explanation

The role of standards in AI governance was raised as an important area for further exploration, particularly in comparison to internet governance.

How can we operationalize risk-based approaches to AI governance in practice?

speaker

Timea Suto

explanation

While many frameworks claim to be risk-based, there’s a need to clarify what this means in practice and how to implement it effectively.

How can we ensure global interoperability in AI governance while respecting local cultural and regulatory differences?

speaker

Lucia Russo, Sulafah Jabarty

explanation

Balancing global consistency with local flexibility was identified as a key challenge in developing effective AI governance frameworks.

Summary

This panel discussion focused on addressing the gender gap in technology-related fields, particularly in network engineering and cybersecurity. Participants from various countries shared insights on challenges women face in tech and potential solutions. Key issues highlighted included cultural barriers, lack of role models, and workplace discrimination. The importance of education and early exposure to STEM fields for girls was emphasized, along with the need for mentorship programs and supportive policies.

Speakers stressed the significance of having women in decision-making roles when creating policies affecting them. They discussed the need for flexible work arrangements, childcare support, and addressing unconscious biases in the workplace. The concept of “diversity by design” was proposed, suggesting intentional inclusion of women in tech programs and initiatives.

The discussion touched on the varying contexts of women’s rights and opportunities across different countries, acknowledging that progress is uneven globally. Participants emphasized the role of both government policies and industry partnerships in promoting gender diversity in tech. Suggestions included offering incentives for companies employing women in tech roles, creating repositories of opportunities for women, and evaluating the success of existing programs.

The importance of male allies in supporting women’s advancement was noted. Speakers also highlighted the transformative potential of the internet in empowering women, especially those with limited mobility or in conservative societies. The discussion concluded with a call for systemic changes and continued advocacy to achieve gender equity in the tech industry.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The underrepresentation of women in tech fields, especially in leadership roles

– Cultural and societal barriers that prevent women from pursuing STEM careers

– The need for mentorship, role models, and support systems for women in tech

– Policy changes and initiatives needed to increase gender diversity in tech

– The importance of creating inclusive and equitable work environments for women

The overall purpose of the discussion was to examine the gender gap in technology fields, particularly in areas like cybersecurity and network engineering, and to explore ways to increase women’s participation and advancement in these areas. The panelists shared experiences and perspectives from different countries and contexts to highlight challenges and potential solutions.

The tone of the discussion was passionate and candid, with speakers openly sharing personal experiences and frustrations with gender inequality. There was a sense of urgency in addressing these issues, but also optimism about the potential for change. The tone became more action-oriented towards the end, with panelists proposing specific initiatives and policy recommendations.

Speakers

– Sonal Zaveri: Moderator

– Amrita Choudhury: Director of SIGCHIAU, Chair of Asia-Pacific Regional IGF, Chair of IGF Support Association, Chair of APRALO at ICANN, President of ISOC Delhi

– Joyce Chen: APANIC’s Senior Advisor for Strategic Engagement

– Arinola Akinyemi: CEO of Omar Ventures and Digisphere Limited

– Ekaterine Imedadze: Commissioner of Georgian National Communication Commission (ComCom)

– Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky: Technical support engineer at Dell Technologies

– Lima Madomi: Research and teaching assistant at the University of Geneva

Additional speakers:

– Gulalai Khan: Lecturer at LAMS university, teaches internet governance and tech policy

– Harisa Shahid: Associate Information Security Engineer at Strategic Systems International

– Audience members (unnamed)

Gender Gap in Technology: Challenges and Solutions

This panel discussion, moderated by Sonal Zaveri, brought together experts from various countries to address the persistent gender gap in technology-related fields, with a particular focus on network engineering and cybersecurity. Zaveri opened by highlighting stark statistics: women represent only 19% of entry-level positions and 10% of executive-level positions in tech.

Speakers and Their Contributions:

1. Joyce Chen (Taiwan): Emphasized the importance of role models and mentorship, introducing the concept of “diversity by design.” She highlighted the ITU Network of Women initiative and stressed the need for safety and personal security in creating inclusive environments.

2. Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky (Egypt): Discussed cultural barriers in conservative societies and the lack of female representation at tech events in Egypt. She introduced the Digital Egypt generations program and advocated for flexible work policies.

3. Arinola Akinyemi (Nigeria): Addressed workplace discrimination and harassment, proposing incentives for companies that employ and promote women in tech roles.

4. Amrita Choudhury (India): Focused on work-life balance challenges and the importance of women’s participation in policy-making.

5. Lima Madomi (Malaysia): Highlighted barriers to accessing education and opportunities in developing countries. She emphasized the need to evaluate the success metrics of programs supporting women in tech.

6. Ekaterine Imedadze (Georgia): Stressed the importance of targeted training programs and addressing the digital divide in developing countries.

Key Challenges:

1. Cultural and societal barriers, particularly in conservative countries

2. Lack of role models and mentorship

3. Work-life balance issues

4. Discrimination and harassment in the workplace

5. Limited access to education and opportunities

6. Digital divide in developing countries

Proposed Solutions and Strategies:

Education and Training:

– Specialized training programs for women in tech fields

– Digital literacy initiatives

– Leveraging online learning to overcome physical and cultural barriers

Workplace Policies:

– Flexible work arrangements and parental leave

– Creating inclusive work environments

– Addressing discrimination through targeted policies and training

Government and Industry Initiatives:

– Government-industry partnerships to drive change

– Incentives for diverse hiring practices

– Ensuring women’s participation in policy-making

– Promoting multidisciplinary expertise in tech fields

Empowering Women Through Technology:

– Using the internet as an educational tool

– Addressing the digital divide

– Supporting women-led online networks and communities

Challenges in Conservative Countries:

The discussion highlighted unique challenges faced by women in conservative societies, including internalized biases and societal pressures that shape women’s choices. An audience member from Afghanistan shared personal experiences, emphasizing the need for tailored solutions in different cultural contexts.

Government Policies and Industry Partnerships:

Speakers agreed on the importance of collaboration between government agencies and private sector companies. They emphasized the need for policies that address both personal empowerment and systemic barriers, recognizing the complexity of achieving gender equity in tech.

Call to Action:

Amrita Choudhury concluded with a powerful call for systemic changes and continued advocacy. The panel emphasized the importance of moving beyond equality to focus on equity, as highlighted by Arinola and reinforced by Sonal Zaveri.

The session ended with a photo opportunity, capturing the diverse group of experts who contributed to this important discussion. Rapporteurs Harisa and Gulalai were acknowledged for their role in documenting the session.

In conclusion, the panel recognized that addressing the gender gap in technology requires multifaceted approaches tailored to different cultural and regional contexts. The discussion underscored the need for ongoing efforts to empower women, create inclusive environments, and drive systemic change in the tech industry.

Sonal Zaveri: social norms that influence both the study and the career choices. The other problem is that there is a definite talent shortage in the workforce. And when women do make it to the tech workforce, and not all women who have studied in STEM make it to that tech workforce, there is a skewed representation with only 19 percent, 19 percent at entry-level positions and mid-level and only 10 percent in executive level positions. And these numbers become smaller if we look at some of the specializations. So the network engineering field, for example, the women in network engineering has increased from only 8 percent in 2014 to 14 percent in 2020. Fact number two, companies with diverse, gender diverse teams outperform by 15 percent when compared to those without gender diversity. And we have research that backs this up. So it’s not just about reducing the gender gap, but there are tangible economic benefits of being gender friendly. And it brings innovation, it brings creativity, and we are ensured that the diverse end-user demographics are considered in network solutions. Fact number three, I don’t want to confuse inclusion and gender. Gender itself is a very complex issue and it intersects with disability and other vulnerable groups. So we really need to move from tokenistic participation to more meaningful ones. And let’s never ever forget that gender rights are human rights and the internet empowers human rights. So unless we increase the supply and demand generation, to promote change and encourage a positive deviance in the industry, we need to address the male-dominated norms. Fact number four, women in the tech industry, including those in cyber security, DNS and network engineers, have shattered stereotypes in a male-dominated field. And testimony to that is this panel of extremely experienced women who are going to speak to us about some of the challenges that they have overcome and how they are transforming the industry. So I’m going to quickly introduce my esteemed panel, an all-woman panel. Amrita Choudhury, and she’s sitting here to the right of me. She’s an active member and contributor at national, regional and global internet governance platforms. I think everybody knows Amrita. She’s always being hailed as we walk down the corridors. She serves as the Director of SIGCHIAU, Chair of Asia-Pacific Regional IGF, Chair of IGF Support Association, Chair of APRALO at ICANN, and the President of ISOC Delhi. We have Joyce, who is online. And Joyce is APANIC’s Senior Advisor for Strategic Engagement. She’s responsible for managing key relationships with stakeholders such as governments, intergovernmental organizations and the wider Asia-Pacific internet community. May I add that the APANIC Foundation has worked extensively in gender empowerment. They also have a program called the SWITCH program, which provides a mentorship and capacity-building program for women engineers and lawyers across the… six economies of the Asia-Pacific. And as our hashtag goes, action not words, that’s what APNIC Foundation does. We have Arinola, who is online as well. Unfortunately she couldn’t make it to the IGF, but we welcome you online for this session. She is the CEO of Omar Ventures and Digisphere Limited, and she’s based in Nigeria. She’s a visionary entrepreneur and a seasoned tech leader with over 29 years of experience in the IT industry, driving digital inclusion, empowerment, and innovation, especially in Africa. We are very proud to also have Ekaterina Imidadze, and I hope I pronounced that correctly, and she’s the Commissioner of Georgia, Georgian National Communication Commission, called ComCom, and since March 2021. And she brings 13 years of professional experience in the telecom sector, including leadership roles in international companies. We have to the left of me, Noha. She is a technical support engineer, high-end storage, one Dell Technologies, and a very distinguished engineer in her own right. Online we have Lima Madoni. She’s the research and teaching assistant at the University of Geneva. Thank you very much, Lima, to have come online. A special thanks to Joyce, who is up, I think, in the middle of the night in Australia. And thank you, Arinola, for joining from Nigeria. So the way we are going to do this session is we are going to have a set of policy level questions, and we are going to learn from our esteemed panelists. I will be posing the question to three of the panelists, the second question again to the next three, and the third one will be open to all. And in between I will pause because we have two very special people here who is going to help us with the reportering. That’s Harisa over here to the left of me and Gulalai who is a lecturer at LAMS which is a renowned university and she teaches internet governance and tech policy. And Harisa is the Associate Information Security Engineer Strategic Systems International. So thank you very much for being present here today. So I’m going to start with a general question and this is going to be addressed to first Joyce, then Noha, and then Ekaterina. The first question is how can policymakers support initiatives that aim to increase gender diversity and inclusion in network management as well as operational and infrastructure development roles? So to you Joyce, from your experience, can you share why gender is important in the technical and operational roles and in infrastructure development? And how do you see that link between gender, human rights, and the technical standards that we produce? Also remembering that the technical operational roles is a bit of a boys club and so how can we include gender in these roles? Over to you Joyce.

Joyce Chen: Thanks very much Sonal and thank you so much for the very flattering introduction. I’m coming to you indeed from Australia. It’s quite late in the night but I’m very happy to be here with you even if it is from online. I think three major points that I wanted to bring up to respond to your question, the first one. I think first, of course, is to highlight the importance of supporting access to the internet. It seems sort of very obvious, the internet ultimately empowers people in many, many ways. So whether it’s upskilling, career development, supporting freedom of expression as a basic human right, everything. So first of all, it’s to talk about access. And freedom to access this thing that we call the internet. My second point is that policymakers can do more to promote role models. I think over the years, we’ve seen more women taking on STEM-related jobs, becoming network engineers or engineers in general, et cetera. But I think the reality remains that many, many women who are in these fields and who have worked many years to be in these fields still find themselves in support roles or service roles. They’re not in decision-making roles. And as you said, Sonal, it’s really hard to break into the boys’ club, particularly in technical fields. There are lots of reasons for it, whether it’s physical requirements, whether it’s just being plain excluded by colleagues, et cetera, there are many reasons why this is happening. It’s also not always a very welcoming environment, I think, for women, just because. It’s quite easy, I think, to say, well, okay, there are more women now at the table than before. Yes, thank you. But being inclusive does not necessarily predicate being included. They’re quite different, being inclusive versus actually being included. And I think that the boys’ club exists at every level of the hierarchy. So, my point is we need to do more to promote our role models, and what this means also is being confident to step up as a role model. When I question why there are not more women or many women in executive positions such as board members, the most common refrain or answer that I hear is, well, no woman applied, nobody nominated themselves for the role, and so they were all male. I think there already exists a problem of women not wanting to put themselves forward is the first thing, for various reasons, but also that even if there were such positions, it’s very hard for women to take them on board. My third point, and my last point for now, is that I think to be in policy and in decision-making roles, there needs to be more support for multidisciplinary expertise and skills. When we’re in internet governance spheres, we often talk about multi-stakeholderism, but I don’t think that we talk enough about multidisciplinary. Each stakeholder group is not meant to embody only a specific set of skills, so governments don’t just govern, the technical community doesn’t just tech, and it seems blatantly obvious, but sometimes, even when we are operating in a multi-stakeholder environment such as in the IGF, we still tend to pigeonhole ourselves, when I think we really should aim to reach across the aisles. Practicing multi-stakeholderism requires multidisciplinary skills, expertise, knowledge, and going back to your question, Sonal, the same is true that policymakers, I think, should require initiatives to be multidisciplinary by design. I’ll stop here, and I’ll leave the time for the others to respond as well.

Sonal Zaveri: Thanks a lot, Joyce. You’ve given us a lot of points to think about. I think about what you’ve said that, you know, what is the difference between inclusion and being included? There is a huge gap. There’s a gap in what women can do for themselves, but there is a lot that can be done also to create an enabling environment so that women can thrive for the various challenges that they face. So, I’m going to now turn to Noha on my left. Noha comes from Egypt and in your country, are there initiatives to encourage and build capacity and help women to build their careers and increase their skills, such as, you know, upgrading skills as the industry is evolving continuously? Over to you.

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky: Thank you, Sonal, and I wanted to echo everything that Joyce said. So, I thought that we in Egypt are in a very good shape when it comes to gender balance in tech until I was representing my company Dell at a very big tech event, the biggest one in Cairo. It’s called Cairo ICT, where each, like, tech company has a booth and has representatives, and all the representatives were men. So, I was, like, shocked. Why? Because these men, they talk to the decision-makers in companies and make deals with them. But I guess in Egypt we have many culture barriers we’re tackling that filter, like the filtration you mentioned at the beginning of your speech when you said, like, women tend to study humanitarian fields rather than studying tech or STEM fields. So, yeah, we were told that you’re smarter in history rather than math or science. STEM fields are very demanding, so you’ll not be able to balance home, and work. You will not be able to take managerial levels or tasks. So, yeah, we need more women to represent us, to be our role models. We tend to, like, be intimidated to talk about our achievements and what we did, and to even share our experience with other women. But I guess I work in a corporate, and we have, like, initiatives to include more women in managerial levels, and even mentor college students to join the STEM fields. These days, it’s not necessary to study tech, to come from a tech background, to work in You can still study at any time of your, like, career time, and join the tech field. I’ve seen women from a low background who are, like, programmers now, and they shifted to other career paths. So, in Egypt, we have, like, very good governmental initiative called the digital Egypt generations, where, like, they divided the age groups, so digital Egypt cubs, digital Egypt youth, digital Egypt pioneers, and they offer tech courses in different fields for the different age groups. They also offer mentorship, and soft skills courses, and they introduce freelancing to the trainees, and they aim to train thousands of citizens from the different age groups, and this contributed in a very good way in the job finding, because we have, like, many big tech companies investing in Egypt, because I believe we have a very good range of skill sets. So, yeah, it was a very good way to equip the different age groups with the needed digital skills. Back to you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you very much for that, Noho. And I guess in every country there are initiatives in order to encourage more women to enter the tech force. And Joyce was talking about role models. I guess you are one in Egypt yourself. I’m going to now move to Ekaterina. And from your perspective on regulatory strategies and advancing connectivity in diverse contexts, what is it that you feel is absolutely critical that we must do?

Ekaterine Imedadze: Thank you so much. It’s a pleasure being here. It’s a pleasure to discuss the topics related to gender equality and diversity for everybody in a quite broad context, I think, as you’ve opened this panel. And also, once I’ve mentioned that I hope very soon we will have time that there will not be need for women-specific or diversity-specific discussions, because it will become normal for everybody to be, the world to be balanced in that way. So to answer your question, I think that I will echo Joyce’s first topic. The most important, I believe, you would agree, for policymakers, for regulators, is ensuring the access and skills that are there. So there is no gap in providing digital infrastructure, digital enablers, devices. There is no gap. And there is no gap in skills of using those digital services. there should be similar opportunities for all the gender groups or diverse population groups. So this is first thing that we take care of, and in case of COMCOM, as we have, we are supporting infrastructural projects, for example in Georgia, which delivers the fiber optic to different regions of Georgia, and our supporting program is bringing the media literacy to the villages where the internet will be brought, and specific focus on top of the general trainings, there is specific gender-specific, and also for people with disabilities, there are specific trainings provided. It’s always needed, and you need to pay more, invest more resources. This is the first layer we need to do. Another layer, we think it’s important, is collaboration with different organizations, donor organizations, educational organizations, because if we speak about them, about them, the quality in the society, it starts from education. So different memorandums, or collaborations with universities, also with high schools, and where you can speak and encourage, just speak about telecommunications, digital, and tell them how important now, how big the area, where can they can grow up as an expert, and that there are equal opportunities, especially bringing role models, as it has been mentioned, and for example, if I can go and speak about what was the path for me, starting from some technology education, and still it was very difficult to get to the, to break this glass ceiling, as we call, right? Because, on the one hand side, in the universities you can find in Georgia almost 50-50 gender distribution between male and female. But somehow we see that around 20% on managerial position then. What happens in between from graduating university, why it is so difficult for women to speak about it, what were the barriers, what were the lessons learned. And I think that for the second question I will have more time to speak about the mentorship programs. And I try to be transparent. So I think that for women it’s also, especially on senior positions, it’s a special responsibility to be a role model or speak more about the challenges on your path or on your career path. And this is somehow we need to take this responsibility to be more vocal, more visible, and play somewhere mentors, somewhere mentees, being mentees or changing roles. So I think this kind of opportunities are also very important for us. So I would say that there is no one specific solution to this problem, but we need to act as diverse way as possible.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you. Thank you so much for sharing your experiences from Georgia. And what I took away from what you said was that you have to invest resources. And yes, you require financial resources, but human resources to go out there, to encourage, to talk about personal challenges. And so we have to make it more personal and to encourage women to not only get into STEM, but also to move into more decision-making roles. And absolutely, it’s a different way of trying to ensure that women enter the workforce. And we have to make it as personal as possible. So I’m going to pause here and come to Gulalai. Any comments or questions from the online community?

Audience: One question on Maureen asking for advice for completely inexperienced women if they want to move to network, you know, engineering. What’s the advice from all of you for them?

Sonal Zaveri: Okay. Please go ahead, Noa.

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky: Thank you for the question. So there are many basic courses to start with. They are offered by many big companies, big vendors. I don’t want to mention any, but you can just Google, like, basic network courses to, like, know what is an IP, what is routing, what is switching. And you can start by studying some certification. So you can add a value to your CV. And then you can go to the more technical or more deep levels of these. Like, in networking, there are many fields inside, but you need to start with the basics first.

Gulalai Khan: A comment from the fact that when women join, for example, when they become part of infrastructural projects, sometimes the work in odd hours is also an issue. And that is a barrier for a lot of women. A lot of women engineers, they are not able to, you know, leave, like, stay there at night. And even if they want to stay at night, the men on the field will tell them, it’s better you don’t stay there. So anybody who’s had that sort of an experience and…

Joyce Chen: Thanks very much for the question, Maureen. That’s a great question. And just to add on to what Noha said, each of the internet organizations, so whether it’s APNIC, where I come from, or ICANN, or the Internet Society, each of us all have different, very basic online courses that you can take to do with networking, to do with the DNS or the domain name system, to do with internet governance. So there’s a lot of very rich resources that you can tap on, all for free. You just need to sign up into our portals and basically you can do the course online. It’s not a big barrier. They’re all free, so you just do it in your own time. There are also certain workshops and training courses that each of our organizations regularly conduct, and oftentimes we also go to the countries themselves to train the local community. So there’s a lot of capacity building that is happening, especially when it comes to networking and basics for networking and networking 101, that sort of thing. And so I think, as Noha was saying, you start from the basics. There are a lot of free materials out there, and when you are in these courses, when you are in these capacity building initiatives, try your best to get to know the network. So, you know, make friends with your fellows who are there, make friends with the mentors who are there, and that’s how you build, basically, your own human network. It’s not just about learning the skills or learning the knowledge and applying it, but it’s also really making those human connections, because that’s where it really helps your career to grow. I also wanted to… touch on the point that Sonal was saying, which is that especially, I think, in the engineering field and network engineering space, the network operators, very often, there are a lot of men. When the men socialize, they have a very specific way of socializing, and sometimes it may not be so friendly for women to participate. And that was one of the reasons that I said that, you know, you can have a setup where it is inclusive. So yes, there are women around. But it doesn’t mean that the women are being included, because sometimes it really can be quite hard for us to be included, especially in social events, especially when we are trying to network. I would say the best way is to try and change cultural norms. Is it really necessary, for example, if we are going out on a social event, that everybody has to be heavily drinking? You know, that sort of thing happens a lot when it is an all-men kind of social event, and it might not be a very safe space for women. And so I think in this session, when we’re talking about how do we create a welcoming or inclusive environment for women, we also have to talk about safety, talk about personal security. I think these are things that people take for granted. They just do what they’ve always done. It’s a very generational habit. I think we can change that, you know, make it a more welcoming and safe environment for women to also operate in.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you for that, Joyce. I’m sorry, I have my back to the audience, but if I can take one question, if there’s anybody from the audience, if you could just put your hand up, and I’ll ask my colleagues to help me.

Audience: Thank you. Hello, good evening. My name is Atikullah. Can you hear me? My name is Atikullah. I came here from Kabul, Afghanistan. As the Internet become the powerful tools for empowering women globally and providing them different opportunities, so as the current government in Afghanistan is day by day limiting education for women and banning them from working in the organization, so is there any special program from APNIC Foundation or any other organization where the women can learn from Internet? Thank you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you for that suggestion, and I’m sure we’re going to take that up very seriously. We already have a program called Digital Leap, and we had a session at 11.30 today, and we also have a switch program, but thank you for that interjection. I’m going to move now to the second question. It’s also a policy-level question, but I want to go a little bit deeper in how do we address the gender gap in tech-related fields, so we are becoming a little more specific, such as cybersecurity, and how do we encourage more women to pursue careers in that field? Should you have incentives? How do we get them to sustain their education? How do we address some of their barriers? So I’m going to turn to Amrita, and from your experience, Amrita, what is it, what sort of policies do we need for education, capacity development in the industry in terms of employment, policy issues at the macro level, local level? Can you share anything from India?

Amrita Choudhury: Thanks. I hope I’m audible now. To begin with, I would say that when policies are being made in government, in business, women should be there in the table. That’s the first thing. It should not be someone else who’s making it on your behalf that patronizing attitude should not be there Especially if you want to make it work, for example, you know We’ve been talking about making it more welcoming for women to join and be there and grow up What about women who have to take? You know a leave go back for two three years and come back is industry or government welcoming them Do they get the similar kind of jobs which they left and went they don’t they’re left behind the question which comes is Why do women not go up? Sometimes they have to sacrifice for their families, but industry or governments are not so welcoming so do we have such processes or Or I would say areas where they can be upscaled and taken at the same level because normally if you go to industry and What you hear informally obviously of officially they can’t say is oh they you know, they went back earlier, you know It’s three years. They’ve lost a lot of time. Where is their colleagues move much up and then they can’t do that so what kind of You know processes are we having is it welcoming if that’s welcoming that it would encourage many more women who have perhaps Joined those industries to move up because they see some opportunity You know, that’s very important if I look at countries and I would only comment upon India there are various schemes If you look at the papers, there are various schemes, you know, it starts with stem cell Encouraging at the school level stem cell even in rural areas promoting women Young girls in stem cells upgrading their skills at the next level You also have programs for women scientists in exploratory research. So a very higher up even PhD candidates you have skilled development or even entrepreneurship You have banks giving loans to women to start businesses because that’s also empowerment It could be using tech related things. You have startups coming up where women are incentivized but how what are the challenges which comes you you know you may have schemes but how can you scale them up or make them work is something perhaps we need to do a bit more rethinking how they work how they do not work I think that’s something which is I feel it’s important the other question which was being discussed you know it was posted in this group was I think the question which was posed is she is new she wants to become more you know experienced in this thing how to leverage the network I think women can have to help other women at least some who have risen or have known because if you kind of help each other the entire community gets uplifted and I think many of them do mentorships informally also help networks help you can use tools like LinkedIn etc which I commented upon to help and I think if you can come to know of best practices of some policies which some countries or you know have kind of implemented sharing it within community at different countries helps to say to go to your come you in country you know authorities and say look this is the kind of thing it’s not criticizing but you’re saying that this could be made better and I think companies also have to stop the lip service and move ahead you know we say we want to encourage women but in our terms if a woman wants to go in for maternity leave for six months go ask their bosses what faces they make at least in South Asia I’ll leave it at that.

Sonal Zaveri: thanks Amrita for talking you know the reality that most women face in their biological role for their families and you know how women can have the power to empower others and I think that’s absolutely vital. I want to turn to Lima and Lima you can speak a great deal about conservative countries and how would you apply basic rights of women in such countries? For example we talk about education, we talk about mobility, what does it mean when we speak you know these words of empowerment, responsibility of the international community to address these issues? What comes to your mind? Over to you Lima.

Lima Madon: Thank you Sona. Listening to all of the women’s in this panel talking about their countries and the initiatives that they are having in terms of empowering women and in terms of helping them to develop more in engineering field makes me happy, really makes me happy, but at the same time it makes me sad to think about the women’s in my country who does not even have the basic rights to pursue their education and to finish school. After sixth standard they have to stay at home and they are not allowed to even pursue their further education. So when I think about empowerment for women, for me as a woman coming from a very conservative country, it is about until when I could access certain education or certain opportunities that are available or from a perspective of an Afghan woman, what type of opportunities are available for us and until when. It’s more about, for us it’s more about access because we don’t have at the first place access and after access I think for us it will come to be empowerment because we don’t even have the basic rights that a lot of women in the world might have. Women from certain developing countries, they have these rights much easier compared to women from Afghanistan, for example. I heard that in Georgia, the gender balance in universities are almost 50-50. That’s wonderful. That’s one of the best things I think I have heard for a very long time in terms of gender equality. But then I come back to Afghanistan and then I think about all of these things where it doesn’t even exist. When we are talking about all of these things, I think for Afghan women, it will be that Amrita mentioned that not a lot of women in certain parts of the world does not have the same rights. Even within Afghanistan, if we compare rural areas with urban areas, it’s still very different. The conservative culture of rural areas are much more severe or much more stronger compared to the urban areas. For example, I grew up in a city, in an urban area, and I had much more access to education for better opportunities compared to a woman that was from the same country and coming from a village. She might not even know there are certain areas in Afghanistan that they are not even aware that the internet exists or if the internet is something. A lot of women don’t even know how to use a phone or make a call. So when I think about it, to reach to the level of access so that then we could talk about empowerment. So that’s I think there’s a lot when I talk about these things about Afghanistan and countries like Afghanistan but I think I will leave it at this and back to you Sonal.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank You Lima and what you’ve mentioned is that we have to be contextual. It’s not the same everywhere. It’s not the same in each country also and you mentioned something very important is that it’s not that women can’t do it. Sometimes the environment is such that somebody is assuming, somebody is making the decision that you cannot achieve in these STEM fields, let alone education. So it’s somebody’s decision, mostly male, deciding what 50% of the population can or cannot do. So I’m now going to turn to Arinola and thank you for your patience being online. Arinola, you have a lot of experience working with youth and women and so how do we going to address the gender gap in tech related fields? What’s been your experience and what are some of the lessons that we can learn? Over to you.

Arinola Akinyemi: Okay, thank you Sonal. Hi everyone. I trust we are having a good time at the IGA. It’s an interesting question really for me because having worked in the STEM region, personally, I’m an engineer by profession. So being in the STEM industry, from my own personal experience, it started at a very tender age for me. Personally, I was fortunate like Lima was saying to have grown up in an urban area and I had what you call the support from home. My dad told me before I turned, while I was a toddler and he said, I think there was something coming up that I was not aware of. And I was like, okay, I’m not going to do this. I’m not going to do this. I’m not going to do this. And as Africans, generally, you have the tradition where you believe that, OK, this is a female thing, this is a male thing, that cultural thing. And he called me, and he said, don’t you ever tell yourself that, OK, you can be whatever you want to be, and you can do whatever you want to do. And that is where self-confidence, self-belief comes in for me. And that is meant to be applicable to all women, believing that we can do it. We’ve got the ability, and we’ve got the potential, and then we can move on. And that helped me in my daily life, and it helped me in my career, in my choice of career also. And I ended up studying Computer Electronics Engineering at the University. And interestingly, the percentage from gender is amazing, really, because at the time I was getting into the University, in my class, we were 31. It was 30 male and one female. At graduation, it was 20 male and one female. So that is something we need to get over, that gender negative stereotyping. I cannot do it. We need to help ourselves. That’s the best way to empower ourselves as women, and that’s the best way we can do it. And then another thing we could also look at is mentorship. We cannot take that away. Those of us who have been opportune to come out and privileged to be in the positions we find ourselves, maybe successful in your business, successful as a techie, go back and give back to the system. Hold somebody. Let that person know that, OK, there is support. There is guidance. This is the way to go. You can do it. and then we’ll see ourselves making it forth. Also, there’s also the need for ROS, because oftentimes, in my experience, having worked with youth and women, I have discovered that financial literacy and planning is also a major challenge that we have. Oftentimes, we cannot save, we don’t have the right budgeting skills, we cannot do the right investment. So these are areas wherein we need to help also as successful ones to mentor and to show this direction, because once you can do most of those things, you’ll find yourselves excelling in this, and then you find the gap being bridged, because the moment you have financial literacy and then you have the planning skills, the issue of not being involved will not be there. Also, you can also go into time management and prioritization. When you look at it, as women, we have certain roles that are meant for us. We take care of the kids, we take care of the home, and then how do you balance these two together? So the ability to be able to balance is where the success rate of bridging that gap will come. Because, okay, an example will be as a techie, for the male, they can go to work and come back at about 12, 1, midnight, nobody says anything, but as a woman, you’ll find it difficult to do that because you think of the kids. So how do you balance this? These are where policies needs to be made by the government that will encourage for women to be able to balance their work from home and then enjoy equal opportunities as a male counterpart. at will, equity, not equality now, but equity, because there’s a lot of difference between equality and equity. For me, I believe in equity rather than equality, because when you say equality means I would still be at a disadvantage. But when you say equity, that means you’re looking at where the disadvantage is currently for me, which is considering that I have a family life that I have to work with, and then the government should be able to enact laws that will make it possible for me to still do the same thing without necessarily jeopardizing my family life. For us in Nigeria, especially in Africa, ICT Alliance currently, where I sit as the vice chair for West Africa with a vision of the promise of the digital age for Africa, interestingly, it’s almost an all-female leadership. And that is where we are coming up with ideas for women to be able to take rules where policy decisions are being made, because our absence has contributed greatly to most of these laws being enacted without our imputes into them. Additionally, part of the steps that could be taken to mitigate this or to bridge this gap would also be addressing discrimination and harassment. A lot of us have experienced it. Well, it might not be intentional. It could be an unintended one. But oftentimes, we experience it where people make mockery of you. And then you have to dress like a male to look like, to fit in, in the techie world and all of that. But most importantly, In my experience, I think advocacy and awareness is very key to the success of bridging the gap. We need to empower and awaken the consciousness of the woman to know the importance of Internet access, how the Internet can empower them, and then how being in the STEM field is a possibility. When we advocate for these policies and initiatives, like currently in Nigeria, we have some initiatives that are going on, and the success rate is quite interesting. There’s the Women in Tech in Nigeria, where we offer a mentorship program to female and experienced professionals. The experienced professionals provide guidance. It’s a mentoring program. Currently, 80% of the mentees have reported improvement in their career prospects. That is the strength of mentoring. About 70% increase in confidence and self-esteem. Those are the things we should be looking at. I believe when we continue to do these things and work on these policies, we will eventually get to where we will sit and not be talking about equality, but we will be feeling like it’s a norm. Thank you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you very much. Women should be at the decision-making. Women should be there when policies are made for them. That point was also made by Amrita. You talked about many of the issues that we have been discussing here today, about social norms, cultural norms. I know Gulalai mentioned one of the problems about if you’re working late in infrastructure, what can you do? I’m sure there’s a lot you can do, but one has to put one’s head to it. Think about it as important and address some of those cultural and social norms. You can always shatter the glass ceiling I’m going to pause again and If there are any questions this time, I’m going to ask from the audience Behind me. All right. Thank you, please

Audience: Am I audible Okay. Thank you There were like very interconnected discussions about women empowerment especially what Amrita mentioned and what Leymah said about women in Afghanistan and You also pointed that it should be contextualized but now like that question is as Amrita said like women should be there to decide and in terms of like policymaking regulations these things As you also say that it depends on the cultures and the society so how it’s gonna happen especially for like women who Are not allowed to decide for themselves. So that is the biggest question and the second thing I’m gonna say is the it’s not a question, but share of my idea that empowerment of women starts within women especially in Societies like ours. I have experienced Living in Pakistan as a refugee back in 90s and also living in Afghanistan, which is my own country and seeing the culture of in India by visiting and as well as by watching their Bollywood movies so that women Most of the women they don’t believe in themselves that they are similar to women I mean as strong as women as capable as women and especially like for example, I will be giving a very stupid example that when they want a child, so the first person who wants a son is the mother herself. So the woman empowerment starts before a woman is born. So if mothers believe that they are stronger and if they got a daughter, the daughter would be the same as their sons, then I think the woman empowerment will start from there. Thank you very much.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you for that comment. We’ve got two hands up. Shall I come to Lima? Would you like to comment?

Lima Madon: Yes, thank you, Sona. The thing I wanted to mention was about Rayoob’s comment that he mentioned. It was about the fact that when a woman is pregnant and she’s having a child, she’s the first one that wants a son. I think in here, it’s the societal norms that making the woman sort of forced to want that. Because even coming from Afghanistan myself, in our society, it is a very big thing if a woman gives birth to a son because she is then valued much more and much larger compared to if she gives birth to a daughter, for example. So in that sense, it’s not the woman who decides. It’s the community and the society that, in a way, decide for her. And she has no other option to survive. It’s a way of survival for her and in a way of protection of her child because she wants her child to be protected. And she doesn’t want a daughter to have the same… sort of future that she had. That’s why she wants a son. Not because she doesn’t like a daughter, but because it’s the society, it’s the community that’s forcing her to have that. And coming back to the women empowering women, I think it’s a very important point. Mentorship from women and community, women-led communities and women, the communities that are made by women for women, the mentorship programs that are from women for women, these are very important for the empowerment of women and for development of women in any field, but especially in technology and STEM.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you, Lima. That was very passionate and coming from the heart. Joyce, you had your hand up, but may I request you to keep it to one minute because we still have one more question to go through.

Joyce Chen: Thank you. Thanks very much. And thanks also for the question. So I come from a very sort of more traditional patriarchal kind of family as well. And these are all lived experience. I genuinely believe there are not many women out there, even in that room, who have not come from such a background. I think it’s partly a generational problem. It’s also partly that progress is just very slow. And I would say from personal experience that one of the ways to counter cultural bias or discrimination is honestly to just fight through it. It’s a lot of fighting. It’s very tiring. It’s a lot of suffering as well. But I think that, as Lima said before, education is such an important thing because education enriches the mind. And when you know that there’s a bigger world, out there, there is something to fight for that is bigger than yourself and bigger than your personal circumstance. And I think coming back to internet governance, that is also the beauty of the internet. I mean, we talk a lot about the problems that come with the internet, a lot of internet evils that are happening and no doubt, but I think also we need to appreciate the beauty of which the internet is able to broaden people’s lives and experiences to live and learn things that are beyond your physical circumstance. And that’s one way I think for women to be able to break free and to join that fight. I have a comment that came after Lima, I think you were talking about experience in developing countries and how it is so difficult even to have basic fundamental rights. I wanted to follow on to say that unfortunately, even in the developed countries, what we used to think were fundamental women’s rights are very quickly getting eroded as well. So it is a fight that we keep fighting and we can’t take for granted that the rights that have been given to us will always be there for us and we have to keep fighting for it. And I think that that is the reality. Sorry Sonal, I think I took more than a minute.

Sonal Zaveri: Perfectly fine, I know that this is something that’s so personal to us that we cannot not respond. And I think Amrita also wants to have a quick word. And I will take it from Gayur’s question and I will flip it off.

Amrita Choudhury: In a repressed society where women have zero rights, for centuries she’s not allowed to think. How do you think that she will suddenly arise and come out? It’s very difficult. I would flip it, what are the men in that house doing to help her? Obviously Sonal, I think yesterday or day before Shared that you know the community can work work with others in that society religious people try to get in a bit of Education etc to move it, but I think it is not just the woman’s Duty to one day rise shine think I can make it because she will be repressed in those kind of places Some rise millions just perish But I think it’s the responsibility also of the family and especially men That’s why you know having many men in the in the room helps because it’s just not a woman’s issue. It’s everyone’s issue

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you for that it is everyone’s issue and gender is not just about women it’s about men and women and who holds the power and we have to recognize that and be very forthright about You know who is going to help whom not just women but men have to also take their share and acknowledge and step up I do want to talk And I’m going to come to the online community a bit later because I do want to get to the third question and then we’ll Open it up This is for everybody, but I want to look at it a bit way forward so What sort of government? Policies or industry partnerships, do you think that we need to have? networking leadership opportunities For professional women in the tech sector, and I’d like you to talk about say three main topics Three main ideas that you think from your position you think we have to do as we move forward So I’m going to ask a Katrina first, and I know she’s been wanting to share some of her experiences

Ekaterine Imedadze: Thank you Thank you, yeah, it’s okay. Thank you so much actually I Think I Think that today’s discussion is also I think something is wrong with my headset, but if you can hear me, that’s okay. Remove? Okay, now it’s better. So today’s discussion is also part of what I think we need to do, and we need to do more, because IGF is a global forum, and paying more and more attention to the topics that are discussed now is becoming, is still, it is, we need to retain as a very important agenda point on the global forums in the technology, in the world of technology. So if we speak about the mentorship, I think that the ladies have mentioned it, it’s absolutely vital, because role modeling and speaking about personal experiences, personal challenges, it’s only possible through this very intimate relationship that is possible through mentorship cycle, because in the technological trainings, for example, you can gain some very good technical expertise, but I personally, I think that it has been three cycles with IT network of women. I’m trying to be a mentor on different tracks, like policy track, cyber track, and this, and first it has started with the European region, but also there is an opportunity to work with women in different geographic areas. It’s tremendous experience, and you do not always feel like you are a mentor, you learn a lot as a mentee, as a female, about the culture, about the solutions, so I think that international organizations have this mandate, I think, and state and policies, state has very, best situated to collaborate with international organization and promote women in their organization to be part of this mentorship cycle. I’ve heard from different women that it’s even sometimes limited at workplaces to be part of some mentorship cycle. I think that we also on the senior positions, male and female, are responsible giving the opportunity to the younger women being mentees in this type of of them of platforms because there are several very important platforms available. I mentioned ITU, there are different international organizations like GIZ and I don’t want to give you more names because there are a lot and lot and coming more and more platforms. So I think that what as a policy makers and just employees at our workplaces and as managers and leaders, we need to take care of people who want to grow, who want to take part of this kind of opportunities and you’ve mentioned also key takeaways for a way forward. I think that three main topics, maybe it’s not everything is in our power to change but first as a citizens we need to fight for the equal rights at work in the workplaces, changing the laws and policies and regulations so as the citizens to fight for it, to have this child care, to have flexible hours for women. This is something still a challenge in my country where for example at the educational level it’s available but not at the workplace level. The flexible hours for women, child care and this kind of the opportunities. Also it’s very important on the educational level, I mean from kindergarten in the families, in houses, and our fathers and brothers and friends, male friends, they play a crucial role to give us some kind of this support and to grow up your child or support your sister in this career path. I think those are the most important takeaways way forward. Thank you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you very much. Absolutely very very important points that you said. It talks about personal, it also talks about what states can do, it acknowledges that women have challenges and you need to have policies to address that, such as child care, and you also mentioned very importantly what do international forums such as this, what are they going to do, how are they going to connect countries to be able to share among each other, you know, their experiences and to put this as a very important point on the agenda. I think far more can be done. I’m going to now turn to Noha.

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky: Thank you Sunal. So I believe the government role here is crucial. First things first, the law need to ensure the safety of women in the workplace and her right to report any gender-based violence in her workplace. Also her right to take a career break, take a child care break or maternity leave, and also her right to return back to work. And it’s also crucial for the government to partner with the industry and tech companies to provide women with the needed digital skills to join the tech scene and to offer mentorship opportunities or internships and also to like push or force for diversity and inclusion in these companies as a KPI. And last thing I guess this partnership between government and industry needs to promote more the remote jobs and flexible environments so women can feel more comfortable when they choose tech as their career path.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you very much and thank you for saying that you need to have KPIs. Make people accountable right not just talk but walk that talk. I’m going to go online three takeaways or a couple of important points that you’d like to say. May I go to Joyce?

Joyce Chen: Thanks very much Sonal and I think I just before we close also wanted to say how much I enjoyed the session honestly and I really enjoyed the radical candor I think that all of our speakers on this panel have have shown in this session. I think one thing that policymakers can consider to do is think about diversity by design. So we often hear the phrase security by design and etc and you know spinoffs of this race so why why not have diversity by design and I have a few examples. So the APNIC fellowship for example is mandated that we have 50% gender parity in the program for APNIC fellows. We have the Asia-Pacific Internet Governance Academy which is another you know is one of those internet school of internet governance that also has the same by design it has a gender parity mandatory that 50 percent of the participants in this academy who want to learn about internet governance have to be split gender. So I can see that there is a trend now in programs to basically build this in already when they are recruiting for fellows, when they are recruiting for participants and I think there are many arenas that are already tracking and monitoring that there is equal participation from women. So we can definitely do more in this area. Whether or not we’re going to pass a law to do this, I don’t think we need to, but I certainly think it’s the kind of best practice that we can try and adopt just by being conscious about the sort of diversity that we are tracking. Thanks very much.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you, Joyce. I like that diversity by design and some of the initiatives that are already in place to ensure that that happens. May I go to Arinola? A couple of takeaways, way forward.

Arinola Akinyemi: Okay, thank you. For me, coming from the business or the industry perspective as a businesswoman, I would advise like we do, what I do is we have what you call the unconscious bias training that is provided for all employees so that that way, because it’s only natural. Oh, she’s a girl. So why should I want to work with her? So we do that so that it gets you to let go of that inbuilt, you know, unconsciousness or conscious belief, and then you’ll be able to work together freely in a more amiable environment. Also, the synergy between the government and the industry is very key to this, because the government makes the policy while the industry income. Now the industry employs, so if the government, the synergy between the government and the industry is solid, you will find out that the government will probably provide incentives to companies like maybe tax incentives for employing females in tech, maybe. And then we in the, like for me in the industry, currently we have some ongoing researches that I encourage, you know, women in tech to come on board and be the lead researchers while I put the male, you know, under them so that it makes it look very interesting. And it’s something that we try to compare notes, those of us in the industry to be able to work together so that we can continue to build this career path for women. Thank you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you for that, Arinola. Very, very practical. We need to incentivize and that’s a partnership between government policy as well as industry. Absolutely critical to do so. So thank you for that. May I move to Lima?

Lima Madon: Yes, thank you. I think one of the most important things will be that there are multiple programs for women, but the success metrics of these programs are not as much evaluated. And some of these programs are having certain problems in terms of developing them and in terms of accessibility and other areas. So it’s very important to evaluate these programs and understand some of the problems that these programs might have and how to address those problems. So that will be one of the very important things. And I think the other important thing will be the flexible work policy. So, opportunities for women in terms of working from home, or parental leave, or some of these opportunities for women so that they could work, but also have the possibility of taking care of their families and staying with their children if needed. So, that could be also very important and it could encourage women in terms of working more and having more possibilities to be in STEM and these areas. Also one of the other important things, since being from this technology background and working in this industry, I think sometimes it’s very important to give some of the opportunity, to give some specific opportunities for women, because currently where I work, the number of women in comparison to men, it’s much lesser. Even though I work at Geneva University and it’s in Switzerland, it’s one of the universities that are promoting this thing to have more women, but the reason that we are not having a lot of women in STEM or in technology in general, especially even where I work, is because there isn’t a lot of flexibility offered for women and they are not well supported in a way. So, they work, but when we actually give opinions, they are not taken very seriously. So, to have a possibility to be considered equal or to have some sort of policies to give those opinions and be considered, I think that would be very important. Thank you.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you so much, Lima. You mentioned something very, very important. and that is that there has to be a system change. You can’t just expect women to, you know, I mean, yes, of course, you have to empower women, but you need a system change and consider all of this. And thank you so much for bringing up the evaluation point of view. I am an evaluator, so it was music to my ears to hear you say that we need to know what works, what doesn’t work, and that’s the only way we can improve and go forward. I’m going to come now to Amrita.

Amrita Choudhury: Thank you. So there could be many things at a macro level where we do not have so much of a hold, like for example, trying to ensure our regulators’ governments have women on board when they are discussing policies related to women or even commenting on it, but those are high-level things. Some actionable things, and APNIC Foundation may kill me for this, let me put it in their head, one is there are opportunities available. For example, Joyce was talking about the APNIC Foundation, APNIC’s scholarship, you know, fellowship opportunities, et cetera, or others also give opportunities. Why not create a repository where all these opportunities are listed, and we can all guide them to that, and possibly APNIC Foundation could lead on it. They may kill me now for this. Similarly, there are initiatives which are done. You were mentioning the switch initiative. Could the results or the impact those made on getting more women in tech, and how it helped the economies be published, which can be taken as case studies shared elsewhere, so that that can be an encouragement for governments, because you know, when they are evaluating things, results help. The other thing is, you know, perhaps we are discussing a lot of things. There could be a call for action which comes where we can draft something, you know, even a five points, we draft simple points. And APNIC Foundation could help it, they are in various countries and from that we take it to our respective countries and circulate it as a call for action. It doesn’t have to be very heavy-handed, it could be just five simple points that this is what we demand. I don’t know. Neeti, may kill me now.

Sonal Zaveri: Thank you very much for that. I think very, very practical. Action points, a call for action. In fact, even IGFs could do that, right? Have a gender stream which says this is what we must do. I think it has to be at that high-level advocacy as well as at the local level, whatever we can do.

Audience: And Sonal, there is a comment that probably we can ask the panelists on how to bring women into this technical community. For example, you talked about IGF and the ITU ones, so any suggestions on how they can be a part of it?

Sonal Zaveri: Who would like to take that? Amrita?

Amrita Choudhury: I think the question was not that, it was a statement on how to bring women in tech communities by panelists and what are the key steps. I think that’s what we’ve discussed. ITU has various initiatives for women in tech. You can look at it and that is why I said if there could be a repository where things could be linked, for example, ITU is doing something but it is linked in one site, it may help newcomers. It’s very difficult for people to navigate and that’s why I said make it simpler. And then once someone finds a path, they can do whatever they want. And about IGF, yes, IGF had a gender session earlier, gender and access. I was one of the co-moderators. Unfortunately, it was doing very well but then from the community, we needed volunteers for one year and there were no volunteers available. So that’s the hard reality. We talk about gender, we talk about many things but when it comes to rolling up the sleeves and working, it didn’t work. That time to bring mainstream gender into all the discussions.

Sonal Zaveri: Okay. All right. Some practical issues over there. Do we have any further comments online, Kulala? Okay. Anybody from the audience? I’m sorry, I’m just turning behind, but if there’s some comment, something that you want to question, anything from them? Okay. And maybe we can close the session. I think one of the very important points to take away is that there is a common thread in the stories that we’ve heard and in the experiences that we’ve learned from different continents. And they’ve come from Europe, come from Africa, they’ve come from Australia, they’ve come from Asia. And a number of them was talking about the personal, the mentorship, the power to empower, the role models, but also talked about, we need policies that address the challenges that women face. And so the concept that, Arunola, thank you so much for bringing that up, was about equality or equity. So when we talk about equality, gender equality, what does that mean? It’s formal equality. We assume that men and women are equal, but they’re not. And we know it. We have to speak about equity as the roadmap in order to achieve that equality. And that roadmap means we have to break the barriers. We have to look at the challenges. And we have to incentivize, whether we talk in the industry, whether we talk at the policy level, whether we talk at international spaces, local spaces and forums, we need to have those platforms where we continually advocate the personal as well as the systemic changes that have to come. We cannot be the only ones. shouting aloud for this change. We need everybody in the room to do so. And so we need men as allies, as believing that having women on board is good for them and for us and for society as a whole. And I really loved that, you know, thought that the internet opens up a whole new world for women. And when you think about the restricted lives that women lead, you know, the problems of mobility, you know, the restrictions and so many cultural norms that they have to face, the internet is really a wonderful world to experience, to learn and to grow and to be something more than where you are located anywhere in the world. In an urban area, in a rural area, in the remotest place of all, no matter who you are, there’s such a great promise that is there in the internet world. So with that, I’d like to thank all my speakers, the most wonderful role models. Every one of you have broken the glass ceiling. Thank you so much. Thank you so much to Gulalai. Thank you so much to Harisa of being present here today and helping us along. Thank you very much. Please don’t go away. We are going to take a photograph, so stay online. Keep the videos on.

Agreement Points

Importance of role models and mentorship

Joyce Chen

Ekaterine Imedadze

Arinola Akinyemi

Lima Madomi

Lack of role models and mentorship

Promoting role models and mentorship programs

Offering targeted training and skill development

Supporting women-led communities and networks

Multiple speakers emphasized the crucial role of female role models and mentorship programs in inspiring and supporting women to pursue and advance in tech careers.

Need for flexible work policies

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky

Lima Madomi

Providing flexible work policies

Evaluating and improving existing programs

Speakers agreed on the importance of implementing flexible work policies, including remote work options and parental leave, to attract and retain women in tech fields.

Addressing discrimination and creating inclusive environments

Arinola Akinyemi

Joyce Chen

Addressing discrimination and creating inclusive environments

Implementing diversity by design in programs and recruitment

Speakers concurred on the need to address discrimination and create inclusive work environments through policies, training programs, and diversity-focused recruitment processes.

Similar Viewpoints

These speakers shared the view that promoting multidisciplinary skills and digital literacy is crucial for empowering women in tech and creating more inclusive environments.

Joyce Chen

Ekaterine Imedadze

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky

Promoting multidisciplinary expertise and skills

Offering targeted training and skill development

Promoting digital literacy and skills development

Both speakers emphasized the importance of involving women in decision-making processes and creating incentives to promote gender diversity in tech industries.

Amrita Choudhury

Arinola Akinyemi

Ensuring women’s participation in policy-making

Providing incentives for companies employing women in tech

Unexpected Consensus

Leveraging internet for education and opportunities

Joyce Chen

Sonal Zaveri

Lima Madomi

Leveraging internet for education and opportunities

Using technology to overcome mobility restrictions

Supporting women-led communities and networks

There was an unexpected consensus on the transformative power of the internet in providing education and opportunities for women, particularly in overcoming physical and cultural barriers. This agreement spans across speakers from different regions and backgrounds.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement included the importance of role models and mentorship, the need for flexible work policies, addressing discrimination, promoting multidisciplinary skills, and leveraging technology for women’s empowerment.

Consensus level

There was a high level of consensus among the speakers on the key challenges faced by women in tech and the strategies needed to address them. This strong agreement implies a shared understanding of the issues and potential solutions, which could facilitate more coordinated and effective efforts to increase gender diversity in tech fields.

Different Viewpoints

Approach to addressing gender inequality

Joyce Chen

Lima Madomi

Promoting role models and mentorship programs

Limited access to education and opportunities

Joyce Chen emphasizes the importance of promoting role models and mentorship programs, while Lima Madon focuses on the more fundamental issue of limited access to education and opportunities in some countries.

Unexpected Differences

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the prioritization of different strategies to address gender inequality in tech, ranging from fundamental access issues to workplace policies and mentorship programs.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers is relatively low. Most speakers agree on the overall goal of increasing gender diversity in tech but propose different strategies based on their experiences and regional contexts. This diversity of perspectives enriches the discussion and highlights the need for multifaceted approaches to address the complex issue of gender inequality in the tech industry.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the need for supportive policies to increase women’s participation in tech, but they propose different approaches: flexible work policies, company incentives, and targeted training programs.

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky

Arinola Akinyemi

Ekaterine Imedadze

Providing flexible work policies

Providing incentives for companies employing women in tech

Offering targeted training and skill development

Similar Viewpoints

These speakers shared the view that promoting multidisciplinary skills and digital literacy is crucial for empowering women in tech and creating more inclusive environments.

Joyce Chen

Ekaterine Imedadze

Noha Ashraf Abdel Baky

Promoting multidisciplinary expertise and skills

Offering targeted training and skill development

Promoting digital literacy and skills development

Both speakers emphasized the importance of involving women in decision-making processes and creating incentives to promote gender diversity in tech industries.

Amrita Choudhury

Arinola Akinyemi

Ensuring women’s participation in policy-making

Providing incentives for companies employing women in tech

Key Takeaways

There are persistent cultural, social, and systemic barriers preventing women from entering and advancing in tech and STEM fields

Mentorship, role models, and women-led networks are crucial for supporting women in tech

Policies and initiatives need to address work-life balance issues and create more inclusive environments

Partnerships between government, industry, and international organizations are important for driving change

The internet and technology can be powerful tools for empowering women and providing new opportunities

Diversity and inclusion efforts need to go beyond tokenism to create meaningful change

Resolutions and Action Items

Create a repository of opportunities and initiatives for women in tech

Publish case studies and impact assessments of successful programs supporting women in tech

Draft a call to action with key demands to support women in tech

Promote ‘diversity by design’ in recruitment and programs

Evaluate existing programs supporting women in tech to identify areas for improvement

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively change deep-rooted cultural norms that discourage women from pursuing tech careers

How to increase women’s participation in high-level tech policy discussions

How to address the digital divide and ensure equal access to technology for women in developing countries

How to retain women in tech careers long-term and increase representation in leadership roles

Suggested Compromises

Focus on equity rather than strict equality to account for different challenges faced by women

Implement flexible work policies to help balance career and family responsibilities

Provide incentives for companies that employ and promote women in tech roles

Being inclusive does not necessarily predicate being included. They’re quite different, being inclusive versus actually being included.

speaker

Joyce Chen

reason

This comment highlights a crucial distinction between formal inclusion and meaningful participation, challenging surface-level approaches to diversity.

impact

It shifted the conversation to focus more on the quality of inclusion rather than just numerical representation, leading to discussion of workplace culture and barriers women face even when formally included.

We need to move from tokenistic participation to more meaningful ones. And let’s never ever forget that gender rights are human rights and the internet empowers human rights.

speaker

Sonal Zaveri

reason

This comment frames gender equality in tech as a human rights issue and emphasizes the internet’s role in empowerment, elevating the stakes of the discussion.

impact

It broadened the scope of the conversation from industry-specific concerns to wider societal implications, encouraging participants to consider the broader context of their work.

Empowerment of women starts within women especially in societies like ours. I have experienced living in Pakistan as a refugee back in 90s and also living in Afghanistan, which is my own country and seeing the culture of in India by visiting and as well as by watching their Bollywood movies so that women Most of the women they don’t believe in themselves that they are similar to women I mean as strong as women as capable as women

speaker

Audience member

reason

This comment brings in a perspective from a highly conservative society, highlighting internalized biases and the complexity of empowerment in different cultural contexts.

impact

It prompted a deeper discussion about the role of societal norms and self-belief in women’s empowerment, leading to reflections on how to address deeply ingrained cultural barriers.

I think in here, it’s the societal norms that making the woman sort of forced to want that. Because even coming from Afghanistan myself, in our society, it is a very big thing if a woman gives birth to a son because she is then valued much more and much larger compared to if she gives birth to a daughter, for example.

speaker

Lima Madomi

reason

This comment provides crucial context to the previous point, explaining how societal pressures shape women’s preferences and choices, even in deeply personal matters.

impact

It deepened the analysis of cultural barriers, leading to a more nuanced discussion of how to address gender inequality in highly traditional societies.

I think diversity by design. So we often hear the phrase security by design and etc and you know spinoffs of this race so why why not have diversity by design

speaker

Joyce Chen

reason

This comment introduces a novel approach to ensuring diversity, suggesting it should be built into systems and processes from the start rather than added as an afterthought.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards more proactive and systemic approaches to achieving gender diversity, inspiring ideas for concrete policy measures and organizational practices.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by moving it from surface-level observations about gender inequality in tech to a deeper, more nuanced exploration of cultural, societal, and systemic barriers. They challenged participants to think beyond simple numerical representation and consider the quality of inclusion, the role of internalized biases, and the need for proactive, systemic approaches to diversity. The discussion evolved from industry-specific concerns to broader considerations of human rights and societal change, emphasizing the complexity of the issue and the need for multifaceted solutions that address both personal empowerment and systemic barriers.

How can we create more welcoming and safe social environments for women in networking events and professional settings?

speaker

Joyce Chen

explanation

Joyce highlighted that even when women are included, they may not feel truly welcomed or safe in social settings dominated by men. This is important to address to improve women’s participation and advancement in tech fields.

What are effective ways to support women returning to tech careers after taking time off for family responsibilities?

speaker

Amrita Choudhury

explanation

Amrita noted that women often face challenges re-entering the workforce after taking career breaks. Finding solutions is crucial for retaining women in tech long-term.

How can we better evaluate and improve the effectiveness of existing programs aimed at supporting women in tech?

speaker

Lima Madomi

explanation

Lima emphasized the need to assess current initiatives and address their shortcomings. This is important for ensuring resources are used effectively to support women.

What incentives (e.g. tax breaks) could governments offer companies to encourage hiring and promoting women in tech roles?

speaker

Arinola Akinyemi

explanation

Arinola suggested government incentives could motivate companies to improve gender diversity. Exploring specific policy options is important for driving change.

How can we create a comprehensive repository of opportunities (scholarships, fellowships, etc.) for women in tech across different organizations?

speaker

Amrita Choudhury

explanation

Amrita proposed centralizing information on opportunities to make them more accessible. This could help more women find and take advantage of existing support programs.

What strategies can be used to encourage more women to apply for leadership and board positions in tech organizations?

speaker

Joyce Chen

explanation

Joyce noted that often few or no women apply for top positions. Understanding how to motivate more women to pursue these roles is crucial for improving representation at decision-making levels.

How can we better support and empower women in highly conservative societies to pursue education and careers in tech?

speaker

Lima Madomi

explanation

Lima highlighted the extreme challenges faced by women in some cultures. Finding ways to reach and support these women is essential for global gender equity in tech.

What are best practices for implementing ‘diversity by design’ in tech industry recruitment, events, and programs?

speaker

Joyce Chen

explanation

Joyce suggested intentionally designing for diversity from the start. Exploring how to effectively implement this approach across the industry could lead to systemic improvements.

Summary

This panel discussion focused on defining and addressing domain name system (DNS) abuse, exploring its impacts on consumers and brands. The panelists discussed the need for a broader definition of DNS abuse that goes beyond technical issues to include deceptive, malicious, or illegal activities. They shared examples of DNS abuse, including phishing scams, counterfeit product sales, and impersonation of legitimate businesses or individuals. The discussion highlighted how bad actors exploit domain names to create convincing fake websites that trick consumers into sharing personal information or making fraudulent transactions.

Panelists emphasized the challenges in quickly taking down abusive websites, noting that current processes can be slow and ineffective. They stressed the importance of having accurate “WHOIS” data to identify those behind abusive domains. The discussion touched on the role of registrars, registries, and ICANN in mitigating DNS abuse, with some panelists calling for stronger accountability measures. Participants also highlighted the need for consumer education and awareness to help people recognize potential scams.

The conversation explored how DNS abuse affects various sectors, including finance, pharmaceuticals, and e-commerce. Panelists shared experiences from different regions, including Egypt and Cameroon, demonstrating the global nature of the problem. The discussion also touched on emerging challenges, such as the use of AI and deepfakes in creating more sophisticated scams. Overall, the panel emphasized the need for collaboration between brands, governments, and internet governance bodies to combat DNS abuse effectively and protect consumers in the digital space.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– Defining DNS abuse more broadly to include deceptive, malicious, and illegal activities beyond just technical abuse

– Challenges in quickly taking down harmful websites and domain names due to limited enforcement mechanisms

– Sophisticated scams and fraud targeting consumers, including phishing, counterfeit goods, and impersonation

– Need for better tools and policies to identify bad actors and remove harmful content

– Balancing enforcement against abuse with protecting legitimate speech and websites

The overall purpose of the discussion was to highlight the growing problem of DNS abuse and harmful online activities, and to advocate for broader definitions and more effective enforcement mechanisms to protect consumers and brands.

The tone was generally serious and concerned about the issues being discussed, but also constructive in proposing solutions. There was a collaborative spirit among the panelists and audience in sharing experiences and ideas. The tone became slightly more urgent when discussing specific harmful examples, but remained professional throughout.

Speakers

– Alexis Crawford Douglas: Partner at K&L Gates law firm, intellectual property practice focused on combating cybersquatting, online infringement, and domain name system abuse

– Tara Harris: Group IP lead at Prosus, manages IP risk and protects/enforces IP assets globally, including online brand protection

– Daniel Zani: Global head of online brand protection at Avion, intellectual property lawyer, former FIFA IP team leader

– Sameh Salem: Executive director of emerging technology and security at Egyptian Computer Emergency Response Team, professor of cybersecurity at Helwan University

– Audience: Various audience members who asked questions or provided comments

Additional speakers:

– Keith Drazek: Representative from Verisign, registry operator for .com and .net

– Nick Wendman-Smith: General counsel for Nominet, the .UK CCTLD registry

– Andrew Campling: From 419 Consulting, DNS enthusiast

– Charles: Representative from .cm (Cameroon) ccTLD

– Thuy: Representative from .vn (Vietnam) domain

DNS Abuse: Evolving Threats and Challenges in the Digital Landscape

This panel discussion brought together experts to explore the complex issue of Domain Name System (DNS) abuse and its impact on consumers and brands in the digital space. The conversation highlighted the evolving nature of DNS abuse, challenges in combating it, and potential strategies for addressing these issues.

Defining and Understanding DNS Abuse

A central theme was the need to broaden the definition of DNS abuse beyond traditional technical issues. Alexis Crawford Douglas argued that ICANN’s narrow definition limits the ability to address a wider range of harmful activities. However, an audience member raised concerns about potential censorship, highlighting the delicate balance between consumer protection and freedom of expression online.

Types and Impact of DNS Abuse

The panelists shared various examples demonstrating the wide-ranging impact of DNS abuse:

1. Sophisticated Scams: Daniel Zani noted that scammers now use AI to create convincing fake websites within minutes, making detection challenging. He provided an example of a FIFA.gg domain used for fraudulent activities.

2. Counterfeit Products: Tara Harris highlighted the sale of counterfeit products online, including dangerous items like fake anti-choking devices.

3. Impersonation: Scams involving the impersonation of company executives for fraudulent investment schemes were discussed.

4. Fake Pharmacies: Dr. Sameh Salem pointed out the dangers of fake online pharmacies selling harmful counterfeit medicines.

5. Financial Fraud: Dr. Salem provided examples from Egypt, including a major online fraud operation linked to a mobile application and fake Apple stores.

Challenges in Combating DNS Abuse

Key challenges in effectively addressing DNS abuse include:

1. Speed of Response: Complex processes can delay takedowns of fraudulent websites.

2. Lack of Accurate Data: Tara Harris emphasized that insufficient WHOIS data hinders quick identification of bad actors.

3. Technological Sophistication: The use of AI and deepfakes in creating scams complicates detection.

4. Resource Disparities: Smaller companies often lack resources to combat DNS abuse effectively.

5. Mixed Alphabet Domains: Andrew Campling raised the issue of mixed alphabet domain names being used to create deceptive websites.

6. Privacy Concerns: Alexis Crawford Douglas noted the difficulty in proving phishing without compromising consumer privacy.

Strategies and Solutions

Proposed strategies for addressing DNS abuse include:

1. Proactive Monitoring: Tara Harris advocated for proactive domain monitoring and quicker takedown procedures, mentioning the concept of “fish kits” for detecting patterns of abuse.

2. Consumer Education: Dr. Salem stressed the importance of awareness campaigns.

3. Leveraging Technology: Using AI and emerging technologies to detect malicious activity more effectively.

4. Policy Changes: Keith Drazek highlighted recent ICANN policy changes giving registries and registrars an affirmative obligation to mitigate online harms.

5. Targeted Approaches: Nick Wendman-Smith cautioned against overly broad rules to avoid unintended consequences for legitimate websites.

6. Cross-Sector Collaboration: Dr. Salem suggested increased collaboration between brands, governments, and platforms.

7. Increased Friction: Andrew Campling proposed building more friction into the system for domains not linked to real persons or legal entities.

Regional Approaches

The discussion included insights on regional efforts to combat DNS abuse:

1. Egypt: Dr. Salem described efforts to combat online fraud, including arrests related to a mobile app scam and addressing fake Apple stores.

2. Cameroon: An audience member shared how the .cm ccTLD mitigates domain name misuse through strict registration policies and monitoring.

Unresolved Issues and Future Directions

Several issues remained unresolved:

1. Balancing broad definitions of abuse with protecting legitimate speech and content.

2. Establishing best practices for quickly identifying and taking down abusive sites across different TLDs and jurisdictions.

3. Effectively combating sophisticated scams using AI and deepfakes.

4. Addressing the lack of accurate WHOIS data while maintaining privacy protections.

5. Supporting smaller companies without trademark protection in combating abuse.

The panel concluded with a call for continued dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders to develop more effective strategies for combating DNS abuse. The complexity of the issue demands a nuanced approach that balances consumer protection, technological innovation, and the preservation of legitimate online activities.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: testing. Okay. Cool. Can we get started? All right. Hi, everyone, and welcome to domain name system abuse, defined and experienced. Today we’re going to be discussing the definition of domain name system abuse, and our panelists will share their experiences with these issues. Our discussion is going to be guided by hypothetical situations, loosely based on experiences we’ve faced in our daily work, but firmly grounded in the reality of the exploitation of consumers and brands that’s happening online. To give you an introduction to our panelists, we have to my right, Tara Harris, the group IP lead at process, where Tara spearheads the group’s IP strategy, manages IP risk, and in terms of IP, too many acronyms here, intellectual property risks and protects and enforces intellectual property assets across the globe, including managing the group’s online brand protection program. And process is part of NASPERS, a South African multinational global consumer internet group, and one of the largest technology investors in the world. Next to Tara, we have Daniel Zani, who is I’m skipping ahead, the global head of online brand protection at Avion. He’s a highly experienced intellectual property lawyer with bar qualifications in Germany and the United States, who spent over ten years at FIFA, where he led the intellectual property team and the online brand protection for the World Cup tournaments. Right now, Daniel is a partner at Avion, and he leads the Switzerland office, serving as global head of online brand protection there. And online, I think we have Dr. Sama Salem, somewhere maybe, hopefully, the executive director of emerging technology and security at the Egyptian computer emergency response team. and a professor of cybersecurity at the Faculty of Engineering at Helwan University in Egypt. And Dr. Sameh is passionate about fostering innovation while ensuring digital safety. I’m Alexis Crawford Douglas, a partner at the global law firm of K&L Gates, where my intellectual property practice includes helping clients combat cyber squatting, online infringement, and the domain name system abuse that we’re going to be talking about today. So I have firsthand experience with these issues, as do all of our panelists. But the reason that we’re here outside of our daily jobs is that three of us on this panel, myself, Tara, and Daniel are all members of the International Trademark Association, which is an association of brand owners and professionals dedicated to supporting trademarks at complementary intellectual property. And one of our missions as part of that organization is to identify trends and practices online that impact intellectual property holders and ultimately, really, everyday consumers. It’s not just about brands and making money. It’s about the people at the end of those experiences. And that’s a lot of what we’re going to talk about today. And to this end, Intel put together a definition of domain name system abuse that seeks to hold registrars, registry operators, and registrants all accountable for a wider range of harmful activity that’s making it, and also to make it easier for companies, governments, and consumers to stop this activity online. So we have, you know, some of the objectives here for this program, and we’ll go through the definitions very quickly, not to bore you, not to put you to sleep, but I think it’s important to talk through these definitions and show why it’s not enough and how the examples that we’re going to speak about really touch on why there needs to be more protection and policies in place. The slide clicker is not working. Can you just go to the next slide for me? The next one. Two more after that, I just kept talking through the slides. So keep going. Go ahead. This one right here. You can stop. Go back one more. Thanks. All right. So some of the common definitions of DNS abuse are, one of them is the EU Commission study that DNS abuse, domain name system abuse, is any activity that makes use of domain names or DNS protocol to carry out harmful or illegal activity, which can be a wide scope of activities, right? In contrast, ICANN and the new registry agreement that was amended this past summer narrowly defines DNS abuse as malware, botnets, phishing, farming, and spam, but when spam serves as a delivery mechanism for other forms of DNS abuse, these are very highly technical definitions and narrow definitions of what constitutes DNS abuse, and we’ll talk today about a broader definition. The other two, ICANN’s business constituency gave a somewhat broader definition that also included trademark or copyright infringement, fraudulent or deceptive practices, counterfeiting or otherwise engaging in activity contrary to applicable law. We’re going to take that and narrow it a little bit more because that’s broad, but I think if you can flip to the next slide, please. INTA adopted a resolution, a board resolution in 2023 to give a definition of domain name system abuse that is simpler and I think easier to understand, but also broad. It’s any activity that makes or intends to make use of domain names for the domain name system protocol or any digital identifiers that are in similar or informer function to domain names because now, you know, you know, everything is included, to carry out deceptive, malicious, or illegal activity. And these three types of activity is what we’re gonna talk about today in our examples. Bad behavior online, to put it simply. So why do we care about these definitions? There’s a lot of harmful behavior that’s happening online right now affecting the general public, and there are not mechanisms for stopping it, easy mechanisms for stopping it. I’m gonna kick it over to Daniel to talk about where we started with domain name systems abuse and kind of where we are now.

Speaker 1: Hey, thank you. So kind of old school domain name system abuse, probably a lot of you have heard the term of cybersquatting, in essence, registering a domain name that is linked to a brand where you’re the first one to do it, right? So you’re earlier than the brand could register it. Let’s say it’s a .com. And as an example, you have the .com, but then for a different TLD, the brand is registered by somebody else, normally with the goal to sell it back to the brand. Now, one could easily argue and say, well, what’s wrong about that, right? I’m just using the system. That’s what the system is. I am leveraging that fact, supply and demand. Of course, brands, on the other hand, that have trademarks, invested a lot of their brands in the good faith, might disagree. And if that was done for that specific purpose, so in bad faith, registering a domain, there are mechanisms like the UDRP to get the domain back by the brand owner. An example of what this is, for example, out of my practice. when I was at FIFA. FIFA started to do a lot in the gaming world, in the eSports world, and in the eSports world, a typical TLD that is used is .gg, which is the channel islands Guernsey and Jersey. Now .gg also stands for good game. It’s a term that’s used by gamers as, you know, wrapping each other up. So somebody had registered FIFA.gg. Now the FIFA eSports team wanted to use that domain. Don’t you want to buy this, etc. Then there was an exchange and the person that owned the domain, which was also not clear who it was, of course, because due to privacy it was not obvious, then said, well, we did some valuations and for 17 million dollars you can have this. That was not really what the company thought the value was and clearly higher than any out-of-pocket expense that the person ever ever paid. So, you know, an administrative procedure was started, an arbitration before the GG arbitrary commission, it’s actually one person in Guernsey that administers it, and in the end after the decision that was rendered the domain was signed over to FIFA. Now that is really not what we’re typically talking about today anymore when it’s about domain name abuse. These are things sometimes I think some brand owners may even say of the past because some brands don’t even really care about domain names that much anymore. A lot of people just go and search, right, like who plucks in a domain name. Often that doesn’t happen that much anymore. So brands are now more faced with situations where domain names that contain their brands are used for fraudulent activity, for scamming. scams, et cetera, that, in essence, don’t only affect them, but much more affect the consumers. But for consumers, it’s often very hard to go after something like that. If you’ve been scammed online and you go to your local police station, well, mostly good luck with that. Either they throw up their hands, they’re like, I don’t know what to do with this, or you file the report and it goes nowhere. But brand owners are in a position often to leverage their brand, their trademarks, and to file for, or to use the mechanisms available with the players in the field to get content taken down and whatnot, and thereby also help consumers being protected. And that was just, I mean, the start into it to say that I think the issues nowadays are much, much broader than what initially DNS abuse was conceived to be.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Thanks Daniel. And so now we’re going to go into some of those examples. It’s really hard to hear yourself while you’re talking. Some of these concrete examples that show what’s happening, the issues, and that there’s not simple ways to combat any of this. So one of the hypotheticals that we have come across in this last year based, and several of us on the team, I think, have dealt with this in different capacities. Let’s say there’s a domain name that was registered with a typo of a bank or other financial institution’s name. Too many letters, missing a letter, something a little bit off from the brand owner’s name. The bad actor sets up a website with the financial institution’s name and logo at the top. They show a login portal where you can put your account number and password. And the bad actor contacts people, acting as though they’re from the financial institution, points to that deceptive website that they were able to register, uses deep fakes to communicate with the target. And over months and weeks, a relationship of trust is formed and the consumer makes a money transfer to the wrong party without realizing it. If a follow-up call is requested to ensure the transfer is genuine, the call is accepted at a fraudulent call center, these are not made-up actions. These are things that we’ve all seen. And if cryptocurrency was used, trying to track that illegal transfer is completely impossible because someone’s own bank doesn’t know, you know, the money’s not traceable. The consumer tries to get their money back and then blames the trademark owner or the company, the brand owner for that loss and comes after them and is complaining about them. And so I think to ask our panelists to weigh in, how have you seen maybe examples similar to this and what have you done to stop it?

Tara Harris: Hi. Hi. Is this on? Oh. Hi. So one of the big issues we have is with one of our classified platforms. And so I’m sure many of you shop online and a lot of the platforms will offer delivery services. And so what we see sometimes is scammers going on and putting fake content on the platform and then using it to lure people in. And then they send them a branded page where they can insert their credit card information. And of course, there’s no product and the scammer now has the information. And this, of course, is very damaging. People don’t trust the platform, but also, more importantly, people are losing money. And as Alexis says, the police don’t always, there’s nothing really they can do. So as a brand owner, what do we try and do to try and help the consumers? We try our best to educate them. We warn them. We put various things on our website to say that you should only use our portals to speak to people. But of course, that doesn’t always work. We also spend a lot of money trying to. to conduct, you know, daily domain name monitoring to try and catch anybody that’s registering our brands in these websites, so in these domain names that we can try and forecast them as soon as content goes down. So that is some of the things that we see.

Speaker 1: Hello? Yes. So another example that we had quite a lot, especially in 2022 and in the buildup to the World Cup where there would be a lot of job postings online with the FIFA logo, with the logo of the World Cup offering positions, right? Often targeted at countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, where also a lot of the migrant workers that worked in Qatar came from, and soliciting applications for jobs that didn’t exist. These actors had nothing to do with the organization or with any recruitment agencies that were actually working for the company or for the World Cup. And that then not only solicited the information, but to progress the application to pay money. And, you know, one could say, and this goes back to, I think, something we heard during these days a lot, online literacy, right? You, especially if you’re kind of newer to the internet, you might think, oh, this is just the way it’s done, right? And you believe that, while others might say, well, who would really think it works that way? But a lot of people actually did send money. Often, these are not large amounts for somebody maybe in a Western country, but 100, $200 is a lot of money in Bangladesh, for example. Can be a year’s salary where people are desperate, like, oh. I’ll go work at the work and we dealt with this quite a lot and to I to take down the fraudulent sites as quickly as possible because the longer they’re online the more harmful they are and really the there that the main goal and driver was to make sure no people are harmed yes there’s a harm to the brand we get complaints about it but it doesn’t really affect the brand that much there’s no financial loss for the brand owner in a direct way but there’s definitely a financial loss to the consumer and that is also something that I think as a responsibility of especially big brands you have to take care of

Alexis Crawford Douglas: and I think one of the reasons that we need this broader definition to is to hold the registrars accountable so what do you do when there’s a website like that what what are the actions you said taking it down quickly how fast can it be taken down

Speaker 1: all that widely differs and we’re talking about domain name abuse right I mean a lot of this also happens on social media where typically it’s actually faster with a lot of platforms depends on the platform really but normally then you you have as a first option two options you go to the host that hosts the content on that website if it’s a compliant host and they know what they’re doing and they actually want to play by the rules you can be successful pretty quickly if you’re really lucky within hours such red card what content is taken down if you give it enough enough evidence etc or you go to the registrar which sometimes also compliant but then in some regions of this world they’re not really and you will fall on deaf ears and then it becomes really complicated

Tara Harris: yeah I agree I mean if it falls into a clear phishing attack if there’s a clear phish kit used if there’s a credit card and and you and you as an organizational brand owner have the mechanisms and the knowledge to understand that that is a phishing case you can go in and use sophisticated tools but these costs money and I think what is important is for smaller companies that do not have such a budget or do not necessarily even understand the need for these tools they will not know where to start so again I think trying to trying to explain often even when we get complaints the difference between a phishing attack person a simple infringement attack or for example the job scams which we see we get a lot of complaints where people have handed over very poor personal information, attended online CVs, sent money, sent credit card information. Again, it depends on where it is. Is it on a social media? Often they have three or four dimensional attacks. And so they get very sophisticated. And I think that’s the issue is trying to even, I mean, I’ve been doing this for so many years now and even still these cases that are coming. So is it worth spending the resources? Are they using our trademark? Is that something we can do? Is there a fish kit involved? But again, I think it comes down to having the expertise and skills in your team, the resources and the budgets to know which mechanisms to use.

Speaker 1: And maybe just to add to that, because Tara just said it, the sophistication of these scams has exploded. I mean, as I said, back in the day when there were scams, it was pretty easy to detect. Often the English on those websites was terrible. You know, like, OK, who drafted this? The links were all broken. If you clicked on something, it didn’t work. It was often, at least to the sophisticated eye, pretty obvious. Nowadays with AI, people create websites in minutes, put them up, they look perfect. Go down, next one is put up. And I mean, you gave me an example of fish kits. You just said fish kit. Maybe speak to that a little bit, because that’s really interesting. That’s something that’s rather new, but where whole solutions are offered.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Hang on. Before we do that, I do want to tie it back to the idea of how long it takes to get something taken down. So if you have the host who’s responsive and sees that there’s some infringement, but if there’s not copyright infringement, where there’s the US DMCA laws that require them to act quickly, if it’s just trademark infringement, just a brand name on there, the host might not act. And the registrar might not take it down, because they don’t know who’s behind it and the risk of taking it down. something down that’s actual real speech, they don’t want to have to make that decision. So then you go through the uniform domain name, the UDRP process, everybody knows, and that takes weeks, right? You finally get a complaint together. You have to hire a lawyer typically to put that together. It costs thousands of dollars. You have to file the fee, and then you have to wait, see if the other side responds, which they probably don’t because it’s bad behavior. They’re going to just put this up on another site. And then the website is still up there for weeks until you can get it taken down, and it’s continuing to harm people. People are continuing to put money in it or be deceived into thinking it’s a real site. And so I think that’s tying that back to why there needs to be that broader definition to put the onus on registrars and governments to make new policies to ensure that these kinds of activities can be stopped faster. And that’s what we’re talking about here with these examples. So I will let Dr. Salman, who’s I think online, chime in a little bit with his experience. And if we can take the PowerPoint slides down and then we can see him, that would be great. Hello. Hello. Good afternoon. We can hear you.

Sameh Salem: this panel, I would like to explore the Egypt efforts for especially financial proofs and the DNA’s abuse. Actually, we have several incidents happened in Egypt, especially related to the financial proofs. For example, in 2023, the authorities arrested 29 individuals, including 13 criminals involved in a major online fraud operation, linked to an app and a mobile application called HomePod. The group arrested and recruited over 20 victims, and getting around $180 million. The protesters were looking for a quick financial gain through the bank. Actually, they used some suspicious activities, including creation of fake wallets, illicit currency transfers. Unfortunately, they used mobile phones, computers, and group messaging tools to carry out their scams. Actually, the funds were funneled abroad and converted into unreasonable cryptocurrency. In this context, the victims cannot claim the financial institute. These are examples happening in Egypt. There is another example of incidents happening in Egypt. A number of patient scams were reported, where individuals sent fake bank messages through SMS messages. or emails that appear to be from a local bank asking the people to update their personal information and provide credit card details. This is another phishing scams already happening. Also, there is fake charity scams, especially in the month of Ramadan. So, in this context, there are, from my point of view, there are two roles. One for the consumer role, and the other for the government role. For the consumer roles, any consumer discovered or gets suspicious, we should report the incident to the responsible boss. This is for the consumer role. For the government role, actually, first, it comes to the government as a cyber incident or a complaint through the hotline or email for register on finance or financial. So, to address this, we did a response plan. First, we validate the complaint by confirming its domains and its relation to the financial institution. Actually, we use tools like QoS or RPRS to gather registrants or details. In some cases, if we could indicate the information, we submit a request to the uniform domain dispute resolution policy, UPRP, to reclaim the domain. host to shut down the received domain or blocking the domain IPs. Actually, we have a national project in Egypt. It’s called the IP Scanner. It scans the national IPs and any suspicious IPs already blocked. And also, if there is a social pages or accounts try to view the scans, it’s already blocked in coordination with the Facebook company. For the prevention plan, actually, we should have proactive monitoring. We scan the domain registration similar to a brand using online brand protection services. We are using anti-mutation tools like email filters, antivirus software, simplication tools, and simplication solutions for emails like DeMarco, STM, or BKM. This is really a simplication just to prevent spammers, phishers, and other unauthorized parts. Fourthly, we build consumer awareness through awareness campaigns, especially on social media, TV, and browser. So we educate the customers to recognize phishing and the virus and share the steps to verify phishing in financial institutions online. Also, we are trying to create a in-reach world. So we had the three roles, a plan for a sponsor plan, and provision plan, and the road to insurance. Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Thanks. Thank you, Dr. Sami. That’s very helpful. And I think it also brings up one of the key pieces that government and businesses share the tools. They have the same tools, right? The brand owners, the RDRS. You have to see who’s behind it, right? Who’s behind this bad activity? For government to take action, it’s also impossible for them after the who is information, you know, was taken down to get accurate who is data. So governments rely on that. Intellectual property owners rely on that all to protect consumers. So without that accurate information, it really limits the ability of anyone to figure out who’s behind these websites and get it stopped. I don’t know if the two of you have any more insight on that piece. Yeah.

Tara Harris: I think in the previous session also on DNS abuse, I think it may have been a Brazilian regulator. I joined a bit late. But he was also saying that, you know, not everyone needs to have that information, but at least the platforms do. And I think that should extend to DNS providers and registrars and registries as well. They should also have the right information. I don’t believe that it should necessarily be published. Of course, that would not be GDPR compliant. But I think that if there was at least some mechanism to have that in place, it would assist, especially when a crime is being committed. Because at the moment, it could be that Mickey Mouse from California owns the domain name. And then when you try and uncover the who is, that’s, of course, hidden. And then when you try and even look for where it’s hosted, that’s usually hidden as well behind CloudFare. And so you’re just hit with constant walls when you’re trying to enforce harmful content. And that can be very frustrating when you have customers that are very upset, that are hurt, that have lost money. Similarly, we have HR personnel who are being cloned. And so even our staff are upset. because their privacy is being invaded, people are pretending to be them. So I think, certainly from my side, it’s just, it feels sometimes like multiple walls that block you. And then the normal enforcement mechanisms, if the criminals know what they’re doing, are not always effective.

Speaker 1: You’re very right. And normally in these situations, especially with scams, phishing attacks, time is of the essence, right? I mean, the longer they’re perpetrated, the more, the bigger the harm is. And often it takes quite significant amounts of time to deal with it, to find the information, to get behind it, if you can at all, and then hope that the hosts or the registrars you’re dealing with are actually compliant and see what you’re seeing, right? Or have, sometimes it’s also an issue of internal education of the people dealing with these complaints. Investment by the companies in their workforce to deal because it’s not always that easy. And I understand also from their perspective, sometimes it’s borderline. Are you gonna make that call and take a whole website down that then there might be backlash from the other end, right? That you’re inhibiting speech. It’s not easy, of course. These are not easy questions often to deal with. But that’s why regulation or clearer rules are important to give guidelines on how to deal with such situations.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Is there anything? You know, open this up. We have one comment from the online participants. Keith Drasic from Verisign. He just added to the. So.

Audience: Thank you. Hi, everybody. My name is Keith Drazek. I’m with VeriSign, the registry operator for .com and .net. Thank you for having this session. It’s very important. I’ll just paraphrase in my comment is that under the ICANN’s new agreements with registries and registrars, a phish is a phish whether there’s IP infringement or not. And ICANN’s GTLD registries and registrars, and I’m drawing a distinction between GTLDs and CCTLDs that don’t have a contract with ICANN, but the GTLD registries and registrars do. And we, as contracted parties to ICANN, now have an affirmative obligation to mitigate these harms, these online harms, these DNS abuse definitions. Phishing is clearly one of them. And if there are registrars or registries in any region that are ignoring well-evidenced reports of phishing, they should be reported to ICANN because ICANN now has the tools to hold them to account. And they have said that if registrars continue to ignore well-evidenced reports of phishing, that they will take action and hold them to account, including deaccreditation. And that is an important tool now in ICANN’s toolbox that didn’t exist before Q1 of this year. So this is a really important conversation, but I wanted to note that ICANN now has the tools that they didn’t used to have. And we’re expecting ICANN to, you know, basically clean up the industry to the extent needed. Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Thank you. That’s helpful. I do think that sometimes proving that the phishing – oh, sorry. I do think that sometimes proving the phishing, that connection, you know, having to give personal information about the consumer you know is harmed, what do you do? You know, do you give that email where they said they lost $15,000 with their personal information in it to, you know, prove that? So I think that’s where it gets a little bit fuzzier. It would be easier if you could just say my brand name is on that. That’s not my site. Take it down. But I totally – that’s definitely an excellent point, and we have a question in the front. Hi. put the count of you.

Audience: So my name is Nick Wendman-Smith. I’m the general counsel for Nominet, which is the .UK CCTLD registry. I oversee all of our dispute resolution. I think we have quite a good system. I think it has a good reputation in general terms. And in fact, we do have quite a wide definition under our terms and conditions, which would include any sort of unlawful content. But I just want to sort of just explain, and since we’ve got the FIFA here, I’ll use a football example. So we once had a situation where there was a football manager, quite a famous one called Alex Ferguson managed United. He published his autobiography. I guess it was a ghosted autobiography. Anyway, he had the copyright in it and it was extensively reported when it was published and including on the BBC’s website. And he was pretty cross and he claimed this was an infringement of his copyright on the BBC. So I just want to say that if you extend, if you need to be quite careful about creating firm rules, because operators like to follow firm rules, but if you’re not too careful about widening the scope to, yeah, obviously clear scams would be within scope, but a sort of an arguable copyright infringement, the logical consequence if that was determined, and maybe it was copyright infringement, right? But the DNS level action in that situation would be quite a severe one in the sense that the whole of the BBC’s website and all of their employees’ email addresses would stop working. So I’m just sort of testing the tires in the nicest possible way. The industry generally, certainly the people who participate in these sorts of practices are very responsible, very responsive, have a very strong self-interest, I guess, in terms of the reputation of their own infrastructure and resources. But you just need to be quite careful about over-broad definitions is the point I wanted to make. Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: And thank you for having the session. It’s very interesting. Thank you.

Speaker 1: Maybe, Tim. Maybe if I may, on that point, and I think you may. make a very good point because as now being on the side of a service provider, right, we sometimes see where we get from brands, you know, lists of websites that in their minds are infringing. And if you took it just for bare value and you go after them, we would have at one point taken out a major Australian retailer or at least tried to. So, yes, there needs to be scrutiny and there needs to be. And it’s often a fine line. And I totally understand from a registry perspective, you know, you are not you can’t take the point of a court. You know, I mean, that’s that’s not what you’re supposed to do. And I totally get that.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Yeah, I think we have one question over here and then we’ll go back to the examples.

Audience: Hi, thank you, Andrew Campling, 419 Consulting and DNS enthusiast. Just a couple of quick points for the education absolutely helps pick up one of the points that was said by the panel. But when you’ve got mixed alphabets of say Latin and Cyrillic letters, even if you’re actively looking, it’s really difficult to spot it. So maybe we I can others need to think about whether we should not allow mixed alphabets in domain names. But then just two brief points. One is informational point, the speed of exploitation. And there’s research from early this year, which says that the sites are created and exploited within an hour. And if you don’t act within 24 hours, they’re no longer interested. They’ve stopped using them. They’re on to the next one. So it’s you have minutes before the exploits begin. It’s quite scary. And then the second one, which is building what’s been done already, let’s build some more friction into the system. So I know your customer is tremendously valuable here. If a domain isn’t linked to a real person or a legal entity. mark the reputation down on the threat feeds, then it’s hard to access the system for many internet users, then it becomes a lot less useful. So it raises good behavior. Those sites are more valuable and penalizes the registries, registrars that are allowing these bad practices. So, you know, build on the good practice of ICANN and Nominet and others, and make the bad actors less successful.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: You spoiled our punchline. I’m just kidding. The know your customer idea, I think we’ll get to that too, because I think that’s a good threshold.

Audience: Alexis, just if you allow me to answer one very important question he mentioned about the other languages, internationalized domain names, what we call sometimes. We were part from the beginning when they start, for example, some of this, and at the same time, I was part of the Arabic, for example, script, and we banned some characters, which sometimes looks a little bit different or similar to each other. I expect the other languages did something similar. For example, not allowed to say in French, the accent without something or something like this. So I think it’s, yes, it’s, but I agree with you. It needs more technical solutions. And to Nominet comment, if you allow me, I like that Tokyo cases runtime is one of the best, of course, in handling everything. So I know that many CCTLDs, INTA, for example, did something recently in the UAE, and the .ie now follows some kind of similar to UDRP to try to help these DNF abuses and so on. Just wanted to share this with you. Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Discussing the other day, the short form that .uk has, it’s much simpler and easier to get things taken down. So definitely a leader. And I think we were also discussing recently that the NAS2 regulations coming into force in the EU or being adopted will also have an impact on understanding who’s behind domain names and having more veracity behind who’s registering these and getting them stopped. With other examples, I think we were talking yesterday to just get back into the examples a little bit to keep hitting at, it’s not just phishing or financial fraud. We were talking about the products last night. And if you could just mention that, the average consumer being online, how does that work? this affect them too?

Tara Harris: Okay, about counterfeits, I recently got asked by one of our platforms, we have multiple platforms, we have B2C but we also have you know classifieds where we’ve got consumers, but on one of our platforms we got some really bad press on one of the journalistic shows saying that we’re the place for counterfeits and of course the business was very upset, they sort of trademark program a bit like the Amazon program, it’s only relevant to African trademarks being that that’s their market and it turned out that there was a anti-choking device that was being sold and it was a counterfeit and of course we did not know that and the consumer when they bought the product realized, but the good thing in this situation was it was on our platform so we could immediately ban the seller, take appropriate legal action, but what we were talking about is the example of this, whilst it is a small device, it’s an anti-choking device, this is not something you want a counterfeit and if this was being sold on domain names for example, this could be very dangerous and given that this counterfeit product in circulation, it’s obviously being sold in many places, so in my view that’s an example of quite a dangerous product, I mean people talk about, we’ve spoken about baby car seats, we’ve heard of baby formula and all sorts of things that could really have sort of life or death, could be really dangerous.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: And I think the hook there too is that it’s so many, we talked about it before with AI and I’ve seen this explode in the last year, like my desk has gotten a lot busier with these kinds of issues because it’s gotten a lot easier to put up websites that look like a real website selling this anti-choking device and people think this must be authentic, this must be real, let me go in here and put an order in and nothing ever comes or they get something that doesn’t work, so it’s so much easier to pretend to be real and Daniel touched on that earlier also. Daniel, I don’t know if you have more examples of those kinds of issues with domain names. I mean, what do you also, Tom?

Speaker 1: sometimes see where it’s also smaller companies, right? Where then it gets more difficult because they might not even have trademark protection. You know, they’re up and coming startups, but that get, you know, quite prominent or successful in their small area, in their region only, but haven’t even gotten to that point yet. And then if you don’t have a trademark, then it gets more difficult to take action. And I mean, we had a case with an asset manager that just never thought about it really. They didn’t need it. They were like, well, I only work in a small area, but somehow their site got cloned. Wasn’t a one-to-one, but their address was on there, their information. And instead of being able to buy whatever financial products they were offering, it related to crypto. And it just had wallet addresses. They were like, oh, you want to now invest with us here? Just send it to us. I mean, if you do that, your money’s gone. As simple as that, right? And in that situation, we were just lucky that the host that was hosting the site was very compliant and understood very quickly. Yeah, we see it. This is a scam, took it down, was over. But, you know, maybe the infringer there wasn’t even that smart because they used a compliant host. Often the infringers know what they’re doing. The scammers know that they go to hosts where it will take a while for things to disappear online. So, you know, it happens every day. And I think it, and it can happen to anyone. I mean, often the scams are so sophisticated that we might be duped.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Well, yeah, but I was also thinking about, some of the discussions we’ve had, and I’d welcome the audience’s participation in inclusion and digital literacy and more people getting online and having access to the internet and not understanding, you know, what’s real and what’s fake. You know, there’s these products. There’s also, you know, services, fake tech support, fake customer service attack. You know, attackers might impersonate the customer service portals of legitimate companies. You know, I’m not gonna name any because I don’t have any examples, but, you know, you think of the biggest tech companies you can think of and someone, you know, mistypes their name in and, you know, they have a fake chat service, fake phone numbers. Someone might contact these consumers thinking, you know, and they’re, you’re new to the internet. Think if you never, you know, saw this before and you’re like, oh, I know, I’ve heard of that big tech company. Maybe I’m online. This must be their tech support helping me with my new email account or something like that. And pretending to be these agents, the victims tricked into giving remote access on their device or paying for services that aren’t needed. You know, and malware, of course, is covered by the new definition. But, you know, there’s things that are not as bad as phishing or malware, still bad, and it’s still harming consumers. And so I guess, have you guys had, taking it from the counterfeit piece really to the services piece where it’s not as tangible, right, it’s not as here’s the evidence of this, you know, financial harm, but also hurts the brand owner who the customers now think, you know, this is a, what’s going on here, you know, they’ve taken my information. So Tara, can you weigh in?

Tara Harris: Yeah, I think one of the big ones, big problems we have at the moment, Daniel, Samantha, we’ve got two types of scams, investment scams and job scams. And job scams, I think really, you know, people talk about fundamental human rights and the right to work is one of them. And so people are desperate, right? And what happens is these scammers tend to advertise these remote jobs with our company, and they’re really, you know, targeting vulnerable people that are desperate, that are looking for money. And then they make them apply for the jobs, they get all their personal information. And, you know, I spoke to an external lawyer about this, and he said that some of his big clients, the person has been tricked and have actually gone on a plane. And so this almost becomes a sort of human trafficking issue. This has not happened to us. But you can see how easily this could happen. Someone who’s desperate, and so I’ve got this offer, and I’m getting some money, because they do start paying in the beginning, they only hook you in a little bit later. The other one is, of course, investment scams. And we’ve, we had, you know, whilst we were whilst we’re a public listed company, you know, you have to go to your broker and buy the stocks, we don’t sell them. And what we found were people were going offline, first of all, and going into retirement homes and other sort of places where very vulnerable people were, and then showing them all these ways that they can invest with us and then bringing them back to work. websites that either look like ours to try and get information to either get a hold of their own shares. So these are the kind of things we see where vulnerable people are targeted.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: That’s perfect. And I think developing those kinds of secure, standardized access mechanisms for entities like yours and others to get the information as to who’s behind this and how do we stop it, it needs to be more clear and it needs to be more accessible. Daniel, did you have more services? And I don’t wanna ignore people online if there’s anything going on.

Speaker 1: One final thing is that what we’ve seen quite a lot in the past is impersonation issues where CEOs of big companies, et cetera, their identities are stolen in that sense and used again for scams, mostly investment stuff. And it’s not about quenching criticism of a company often, they’re really used, the personas are used to drive certain behaviors from consumers that are harmful for them. And I think that’s quite a big topic at the moment with a lot of companies that impersonation has excelled but to be honest, mostly on social media, rather than from my experience, rather than websites, but it’s definitely a field that is being watched right now. And then you have the whole deepfake issue, that personas are created, interviews are being put out there on websites, et cetera, that are just made up.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: And the way that that ties back into, rather than moderating content, but tying back to that idea of being able to put up these websites at domain names that look legitimate, right? With the deepfakes or even, I’m thinking of websites that you can put up, technology that’s available now, you can put up websites that aren’t, that have photos on them or things like that that aren’t even copyright infringement, right? You can’t take it down through a host because the photo isn’t real, because AI made it and it was an amalgamation of numerous photos. And so, those kinds of issues that have just gotten more sophisticated and make it, really necessary for more policing and more effective, I think, abilities to take action online. I don’t know if Dr. Sameh, if you had any more examples or thoughts on what was being said here this afternoon. Is he unmuted? Oops, sorry. Technical issues. If anyone in the room has any examples of this or dealt with this in their own region, we’d really be interested in hearing about it because I think it’s not just a US or European issue. Hello?

Sameh Salem: Sorry, I’m just trying to say to stop what you are using me. We have similar issues. I agree with my colleagues about what was being said. The key concern, especially for fake stores, and showing scams, and impersonation, is, for example, for fake stores and counterfeit goods, actually, it damages the customer trust and compromises safety and undermines the business. So, actually, we should consider, again, as my colleague said, you have to enhance the consumer awareness. You have to increase the customer, the consumers, and the finders, and simply through official channels and avoiding unofficial marketplaces. Also, there is a need for cross-sector collaboration. We need to encourage that collaboration between brands and the governments and the platforms to lift and help against counterfeit activities. Actually, we… we need also to strengthen intellectual property laws. Actually, we have an issue in Egypt happened in July before. Actually, suddenly there are fake Apple stores in Egypt. So, the Apple Inc. filed a lawsuit against the stores in Egypt using its logo and selling counterfeit products. So, actually, in Egypt, they already have a legislation for that, for the intellectual property rights, law number 284 in 2002. So, actually, it is already protected. There are many stores already and we already did actions against the fake stores. Also, we have the same in Egypt for the pharma, for the medicines, especially for the fake medicines. Actually, there are some social media and Facebook accounts selling out-of-date medicines and fake medicines as well. But actually, we already, the government, again, the government did an announcement for establishing the Egypt-owned drug authority just to come at a good time to stop the cases of fake drugs in the country. So, the legal remorse already is necessary and the education and educate the consumers just to be clear about most of the scams. So, the ambition for the third one is the technology-driven solution. We have to leverage the blockchain and the R&D. especially as my colleagues said, the defect, we have to use new techniques and the AI just to discover any malicious activity. Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Thank you. I think those are excellent points. And the idea of the fake drugs brought me to another example, medicine. And we talked about this a lot in our committee as we were preparing for this presentation. There are people that are part of pharmaceutical companies and I’ve had issues on behalf of pharmaceutical companies where the website, again, looks like a good website and it’s selling steroids or drugs that are very harmful. And do you wait and do a fake purchase to see if it’s an actual site or do you just get it taken down? And these are regulated companies, right? The medicine, the pharmaceutical companies are regulated companies. They are worried about these products. They do not want consumers to be harmed. They don’t want people taking these. They want these down quickly. And so doing a whole UDRP proceeding again, which turned out to be the only option in one of our examples, it just, it takes a long time and someone could be hurt in the process. So I think that’s what all of the people’s go to, but I think another comment from the audience. Yeah.

Audience: Thank you. So thanks again, Keith Drezik with VeriSign. Again, I typed into chat, but I’ll just paraphrase. As we refer to domain names throughout this conversation, I think it’s really important to recognize the distinction between domains that have been registered with the purpose of and the exclusive use to perpetrate or propagate harm, right? DNS abuse, phishing, farming, malware, botnet command and control, whatever it may be. you know, in the instance where there’s a domain that is being registered and used exclusively for that purpose, then absolutely the registrar registry is in the most appropriate position to deal with that because you take the domain name down, everything associated with that domain name is, you know, being used or intentionally used for harm, then that’s appropriate. However, if you’re talking about a compromised website where a perfectly legitimate website has been hacked and malware is being distributed or a portion of that website is being used for phishing or for illegal activity, then the most appropriate actor in that case is the web host because they’re able to, in a very targeted way, deal with that bit of harm on the website or, you know, in that hosting platform. Whereas if you were to take the domain name down in that case, everything associated with that domain name would be negatively and disproportionately impacted. Email was an example that was used, right? You know, and so I think as we in the registry and registrar in the DNS space think about it, the distinction between a maliciously registered name or a name that’s been registered for exclusive malicious use versus the compromised website is just an important distinction and that really points you to who the most appropriate actor is when it comes to the mitigation. Thanks. Thank you. That’s an excellent point. So we’re heading up on time. I think we have one more. We can, yeah, go ahead, Charles. Is it okay? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to share the experience of the .cm ccTLD on those issues. We have included in our .cm charter some measures to mitigate the case of misuse of domain names. And when we are informed of an abusive use of domain name, and when we have enough evidence, we just suspend the name. And I think that it can be a very good way of dealing with this kind of problem. So thank you very much. DotCM is dotCameron. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: Thank you for that. Excellent. Well, now that we’re done on time, is there anybody else over here? Great. Oh, come on. Thank you. My name. Thank you. Can you hear me?

Audience: My name is Thuy. I’m from .vn. And I just thank you for giving the time. And I would like to have a question that for .vn, for example, for abuse domain name, we suspend and we can come to delete at the colleagues from Habitat there. But I would like to ask ICANN and Registry and Registrar like the very side. As you share, ICANN and Registry and Registrar apply the, how to say, many way to shut down the domain, but by our observation, there are still quite a lot website using in Vietnam that is a fake website. Even they fake even the governmental website. So can you have for us, in such situation, what the best method to shut them down? Thank you.

Alexis Crawford Douglas: I think you’re welcome. I don’t know if you guys wanna weigh in on that, but I think that’s the very issue here is what is the best way? Sorry, no, you’re just putting your headset on. What is the best way to shut down testing? a website that isn’t a .vm or a .country domain name. And that is what we were talking about here today is the .coms and the .sites, .everything else. I think it happens less on the country domain name issues. So the processes that we discussed is contacting the registrar, contacting the hosts or using a UDRP or other mechanism for transferring the domain names. I don’t know if you guys have more to add on that piece, but I know we’re coming up on time. So I think we’ll put our takeaways together, but thank you everyone for joining us and for this opportunity. Thank you.

Agreement Points

DNS abuse extends beyond traditional cybersquatting

Alexis Crawford Douglas

Tara Harris

Daniel Zani

DNS abuse extends beyond cybersquatting to fraudulent activities harming consumers

Job scams and investment scams target vulnerable populations

Sophisticated scams using AI and deepfakes are harder to detect

The speakers agree that DNS abuse has evolved to include a wide range of fraudulent activities that directly harm consumers, going beyond simple cybersquatting.

Current mechanisms for addressing DNS abuse are insufficient

Alexis Crawford Douglas

Tara Harris

Daniel Zani

ICANN’s narrow definition of DNS abuse limits ability to address broader harms

Difficulty in quickly taking down fraudulent websites due to complex processes

Need for clearer rules and guidelines on addressing DNS abuse

The speakers concur that existing mechanisms and definitions for addressing DNS abuse are inadequate to deal with the evolving nature and scope of the problem.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers highlight the dangers of counterfeit products sold online, emphasizing the safety risks these pose to consumers, particularly in critical areas like medicine and safety devices.

Tara Harris

Sameh Salem

Counterfeit products sold online pose safety risks to consumers

Fake online pharmacies selling harmful counterfeit medicines

These speakers agree on the need for advanced technological solutions and proactive measures to combat increasingly sophisticated forms of DNS abuse.

Tara Harris

Daniel Zani

Sameh Salem

Need for proactive domain monitoring and quick takedown procedures

Sophisticated scams using AI and deepfakes are harder to detect

Leveraging new technologies like AI to detect malicious activity

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of balancing abuse mitigation with legitimate use

Audience

Daniel Zani

Overly broad definitions of DNS abuse could lead to censorship of legitimate content

Need for clearer rules and guidelines on addressing DNS abuse

There was an unexpected consensus between an audience member and Speaker 1 on the need for careful consideration in defining and addressing DNS abuse to avoid unintended consequences for legitimate content and services.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement centered on the evolving nature of DNS abuse, the inadequacy of current mechanisms to address it, and the need for more sophisticated and proactive approaches to combat these issues.

Consensus level

There was a moderate to high level of consensus among the speakers on the core issues surrounding DNS abuse. This consensus suggests a growing recognition of the problem’s complexity and the need for collaborative, multi-stakeholder approaches to address it effectively. However, there were also nuanced differences in perspectives, particularly regarding the balance between combating abuse and protecting legitimate online activities.

Different Viewpoints

Definition and scope of DNS abuse

Alexis Crawford Douglas

Audience

ICANN’s narrow definition of DNS abuse limits ability to address broader harms

Overly broad definitions of DNS abuse could lead to censorship of legitimate content

While Alexis Crawford Douglas argues for a broader definition of DNS abuse to address a wider range of harmful activities, an audience member cautions that overly broad definitions could potentially lead to censorship of legitimate content.

Unexpected Differences

Balancing consumer protection and freedom of expression

Alexis Crawford Douglas

Audience

DNS abuse extends beyond cybersquatting to fraudulent activities harming consumers

Overly broad definitions of DNS abuse could lead to censorship of legitimate content

While the main focus of the discussion was on combating DNS abuse and protecting consumers, an unexpected point of contention arose regarding the potential impact on freedom of expression. This highlights the complex balance between consumer protection and preserving online freedoms.

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement centered around the definition and scope of DNS abuse, the speed and effectiveness of takedown procedures, and the balance between consumer protection and freedom of expression.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers was moderate. While there was general consensus on the need to address DNS abuse more effectively, there were significant differences in opinions on how to achieve this goal. These disagreements highlight the complexity of the issue and the need for careful consideration of various stakeholder perspectives in developing policies and strategies to combat DNS abuse.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the need for faster and more effective mechanisms to address DNS abuse, but they differ on the specific approaches. While some advocate for broader definitions and quicker takedown procedures, others emphasize the need for clearer guidelines and distinctions between different types of abuse.

Alexis Crawford Douglas

Tara Harris

Daniel Zani

Audience

Difficulty in quickly taking down fraudulent websites due to complex processes

Need for proactive domain monitoring and quick takedown procedures

Need for clearer rules and guidelines on addressing DNS abuse

Time is critical – exploitation of fraudulent sites happens within hours

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers highlight the dangers of counterfeit products sold online, emphasizing the safety risks these pose to consumers, particularly in critical areas like medicine and safety devices.

Tara Harris

Sameh Salem

Counterfeit products sold online pose safety risks to consumers

Fake online pharmacies selling harmful counterfeit medicines

These speakers agree on the need for advanced technological solutions and proactive measures to combat increasingly sophisticated forms of DNS abuse.

Tara Harris

Daniel Zani

Sameh Salem

Need for proactive domain monitoring and quick takedown procedures

Sophisticated scams using AI and deepfakes are harder to detect

Leveraging new technologies like AI to detect malicious activity

Key Takeaways

DNS abuse has expanded beyond cybersquatting to include sophisticated fraudulent activities that harm consumers

Current definitions and mechanisms for addressing DNS abuse are often too narrow or slow to effectively combat evolving threats

Fraudulent websites, counterfeit products, and scams targeting vulnerable populations are major forms of DNS abuse

Quickly identifying and taking down abusive sites is critical, but challenging due to complex processes and lack of accurate registrant data

Consumer education and awareness are important components in combating DNS abuse

New technologies like AI are being leveraged both by scammers and those fighting abuse

Resolutions and Action Items

ICANN now has tools to hold registrars accountable for ignoring well-evidenced reports of phishing

Some ccTLDs like .cm have implemented measures to quickly suspend abusive domain names

There is a need to strengthen intellectual property laws and increase cross-sector collaboration to combat counterfeit activities

Unresolved Issues

How to balance broad definitions of abuse with protecting legitimate speech and content

Best practices for quickly identifying and taking down abusive sites across different TLDs and jurisdictions

How to effectively combat sophisticated scams using AI and deepfakes

Addressing the lack of accurate WHOIS data while maintaining privacy protections

Suggested Compromises

Registrars and registries should have access to accurate registrant data, even if it’s not publicly available

Distinguish between maliciously registered domains and compromised legitimate websites when taking action

Balance consumer protection with the need for due process in domain takedowns

Nowadays with AI, people create websites in minutes, put them up, they look perfect. Go down, next one is put up.

speaker

Daniel Zani

reason

This comment highlights how AI has dramatically increased the sophistication and speed of online scams, making them much harder to detect and combat.

impact

It shifted the discussion to focus more on the technological challenges of combating modern DNS abuse, rather than just legal or policy approaches.

We have several incidents happened in Egypt, especially related to the financial proofs. For example, in 2023, the authorities arrested 29 individuals, including 13 criminals involved in a major online fraud operation, linked to an app and a mobile application called HomePod.

speaker

Dr. Sameh Salem

reason

This comment provided a concrete, real-world example of DNS abuse and its consequences, grounding the theoretical discussion in practical reality.

impact

It broadened the conversation to include perspectives from different regions and highlighted the global nature of the problem.

Under the ICANN’s new agreements with registries and registrars, a phish is a phish whether there’s IP infringement or not. And ICANN’s GTLD registries and registrars… now have an affirmative obligation to mitigate these harms, these online harms, these DNS abuse definitions.

speaker

Keith Drasek

reason

This comment introduced important information about recent policy changes that give ICANN more tools to combat DNS abuse.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards the role of policy and regulation in addressing DNS abuse, and highlighted the progress being made in this area.

I think we need to be quite careful about creating firm rules, because operators like to follow firm rules, but if you’re not too careful about widening the scope… the logical consequence if that was determined… would be quite a severe one in the sense that the whole of the BBC’s website and all of their employees’ email addresses would stop working.

speaker

Nick Wendman-Smith

reason

This comment raised an important counterpoint about the potential unintended consequences of overly broad definitions or rules for combating DNS abuse.

impact

It added nuance to the discussion and highlighted the complexity of balancing effective action against abuse with protecting legitimate online activity.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by broadening its scope from a focus on defining DNS abuse to exploring its practical impacts, technological challenges, policy responses, and potential pitfalls. They helped to create a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the complexities involved in combating DNS abuse effectively while minimizing unintended consequences.

How can the process of taking down harmful websites be expedited?

speaker

Alexis Crawford Douglas

explanation

The current process of taking down harmful websites can take weeks, allowing continued harm to consumers. A faster process is needed to mitigate damage.

How can smaller companies without large budgets effectively combat DNS abuse?

speaker

Tara Harris

explanation

Smaller companies often lack the resources and knowledge to use sophisticated tools for combating DNS abuse, leaving them vulnerable.

What mechanisms can be implemented to ensure accurate WHOIS data while maintaining GDPR compliance?

speaker

Tara Harris

explanation

Accurate WHOIS data is crucial for identifying bad actors, but privacy concerns under GDPR make this challenging.

How can mixed alphabet domain names (e.g., Latin and Cyrillic) be regulated to prevent deception?

speaker

Andrew Campling

explanation

Mixed alphabet domain names can be used to create deceptive websites that are difficult for users to identify as fraudulent.

What technology-driven solutions, such as blockchain and AI, can be leveraged to combat DNS abuse?

speaker

Sameh Salem

explanation

Emerging technologies may offer new ways to detect and prevent malicious online activities.

How can cross-sector collaboration between brands, governments, and platforms be encouraged to fight against counterfeit activities?

speaker

Sameh Salem

explanation

Collaboration across different sectors could lead to more effective strategies for combating DNS abuse and counterfeit activities.

What are the most effective methods for shutting down fake websites, especially those impersonating government sites?

speaker

Thuy (audience member)

explanation

There is a need for clear, effective processes to shut down fraudulent websites, particularly those impersonating official government sites.

Summary

This panel discussion focused on the challenges and opportunities of implementing Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and promoting universal acceptance to foster a more inclusive and multilingual internet. Experts from organizations like ICANN, UNESCO, and national telecommunications regulators shared insights on the progress made and obstacles faced in this area.

The panelists highlighted that while IDNs have been introduced over a decade ago, their adoption remains low at only 1.2% of global domain registrations. Key challenges include technical issues with universal acceptance across applications, lack of awareness among users and decision-makers, and the need for more robust policies and standards. The discussion emphasized that achieving true multilingual internet access requires coordinated efforts across stakeholders, including governments, businesses, and technical communities.

Several initiatives were discussed, such as ICANN’s work on universal acceptance, UNESCO’s promotion of digital inclusion, and national efforts to implement Arabic domain names. Panelists stressed the importance of raising awareness about IDNs and their benefits, particularly in preserving local languages and cultures online. They also noted the need for more empirical studies on the economic benefits of multilingual internet access to encourage adoption.

The experts agreed that while progress has been made, significant work remains to be done in areas like improving user experience, addressing security concerns, and ensuring consistent support across platforms and applications. The discussion concluded that achieving a truly multilingual and inclusive internet requires ongoing collaboration, technical innovation, and policy development at both national and international levels.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The importance of internationalized domain names (IDNs) and universal acceptance for digital inclusion and a multilingual internet

– Technical and awareness challenges hindering widespread adoption of IDNs

– The role of governments, regulators, and other stakeholders in promoting IDNs and universal acceptance

– The need for a holistic, global approach to creating a truly multilingual internet

– Efforts to increase awareness and technical readiness for IDNs and universal acceptance

The overall purpose of the discussion was to explore the current state of internationalized domain names and universal acceptance, including progress made, ongoing challenges, and potential solutions to create a more inclusive and multilingual internet.

The tone of the discussion was generally informative and collaborative, with panelists sharing insights from their various perspectives and experiences. There was a sense of both optimism about progress made and recognition of significant work still needed. The tone became slightly more urgent towards the end, with calls for greater prioritization and strategic planning around multilingual internet initiatives.

Speakers

– Moderator: Panel moderator

– Bhanu Neupane: Program manager for ICT and sciences and open access to scientific research at UNESCO

– Theresa Swinehart: Senior vice president global domains and strategy at ICANN

– Walter Wu: President of internet dot trademark organization limited, Universal acceptance ambassador

– Hesham M. AL-Hammad: Domain Names Director at the Communications, Space, and Technology Commission of Saudi Arabia

– Manal Ismail: Chief expert internet policies at the National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Egypt, Egyptian government representative in ICANN’s governmental advisory committee

– Sarmad Hussain: ICANN representative (specific role not mentioned)

Additional speakers:

– Fouad Bajwa: Audience member asking question (role/expertise not specified)

– Abdulmenem: Works for Telecom Regulator of Egypt

– Jamal Shaheen: Audience member asking questions (role/expertise not specified)

Expanded Summary: Panel Discussion on Internationalized Domain Names and Universal Acceptance

This panel discussion brought together experts from UNESCO, ICANN, and national telecommunications regulators to explore the challenges and opportunities surrounding Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and universal acceptance. The discussion aimed to address the current state of IDNs, progress made, ongoing challenges, and potential solutions to create a more inclusive and multilingual internet.

Importance of IDNs for Digital Inclusion

Panelists unanimously agreed on the crucial role of IDNs in fostering digital inclusion and preserving cultural diversity online. Bhanu Neupane from UNESCO emphasized that IDNs are essential for cultural diversity and digital inclusion. Manal Ismail stated that IDNs are vital for continued internet expansion and reaching the next billion users. Hesham M. AL-Hammad highlighted the importance of IDNs in preserving local languages and culture online, while Theresa Swinehart from ICANN noted that IDNs allow users to engage online in their own languages and scripts.

Current State and Challenges in IDN Adoption and Implementation

Despite their recognized importance, IDNs face several significant challenges:

1. Lack of awareness: Walter Wu pointed out the limited knowledge about IDN availability and benefits.

2. Technical issues: Sarmad Hussain highlighted problems with universal acceptance of IDNs across systems.

3. Script complexity: Hesham M. AL-Hammad discussed the challenges of managing variants in scripts like Arabic, where a single word can have multiple valid representations.

4. Low demand: Manal Ismail noted the slow uptake of IDNs in many regions.

5. Infrastructure readiness: Hesham M. AL-Hammad used an analogy to illustrate the complex interdependencies in implementing IDNs: “Sometimes we have the planes, but the airport is not ready. But still, this is a fact, and we need to work with it. So we need to work in parallel.”

Walter Wu provided specific insights into the Chinese market, noting that while IDNs have a 20% market share in China, challenges remain, such as the need for better email address support and improved user experiences.

Efforts to Promote IDNs and Universal Acceptance

Panelists shared various initiatives to promote IDNs and universal acceptance:

1. UNESCO’s efforts to advance digital inclusion and multilingualism.

2. ICANN programs to enable IDN awareness and universal acceptance, including Universal Acceptance Day, which involved over 80 events across 40 countries.

3. Saudi efforts to develop tools and applications for Arabic IDNs.

4. Chinese registrar community’s push for IDN usage and promotion.

Sarmad Hussain provided a technical explanation of how multilingual email addresses work, emphasizing the progress made in this area. He also noted growing awareness and adoption of IDNs and email addresses in local languages over time.

Role of Governments and Stakeholders

The discussion emphasized the critical role of governments and multi-stakeholder collaboration in promoting IDNs and universal acceptance:

1. Manal Ismail argued that governments should lead by example in promoting IDNs.

2. Hesham M. AL-Hammad stressed the need for collaboration between regulators, industry, and academia.

3. Bhanu Neupane highlighted the importance of including universal acceptance in national internet policies, noting that many governments still lack this context in their policies.

4. Sarmad Hussain advocated for a multi-stakeholder approach to address technical and policy issues.

Unresolved Issues and Future Directions

Several unresolved issues were identified:

1. Increasing demand and uptake of IDNs in many regions.

2. Addressing ongoing technical challenges with universal acceptance across systems.

3. Managing the complexity of script variants, particularly for languages like Arabic.

4. Lack of empirical studies on the economic benefits of a multilingual internet. Bhanu Neupane mentioned a single report suggesting $9 billion in potential economic benefits but emphasized the need for more substantiated research.

The panel suggested several action items:

1. UNESCO and ICANN partnering to prepare policy briefs for member states on universal acceptance.

2. Continuing efforts to raise awareness about IDNs through events like Universal Acceptance Day.

3. Working on improving technical solutions for IDN implementation and universal acceptance.

4. Encouraging governments to include universal acceptance in national internet policies.

5. Using IDNs as a criterion for measuring digital transformation readiness, as suggested by Hesham M. AL-Hammad.

An audience member raised a question about country codes in IDNs and how they are chosen, highlighting the need for awareness at different levels of implementation.

Conclusion

The panel discussion provided a comprehensive overview of the current state of IDNs and universal acceptance. While progress has been made, significant work remains to achieve a truly multilingual and inclusive internet. Manal Ismail’s statement, “We owe it to those who need it so we should continue pursuing this forward slowly but surely,” underscored the moral imperative and long-term commitment required. The discussion emphasized the need for ongoing collaboration, technical innovation, and policy development at both national and international levels to overcome the challenges and realize the full potential of IDNs.

Moderator: with another mic, I hope it’s better. OK, so language and inclusion. As many of you know, multilingual internet was one of the Tunis agenda items back in 2005. Language plays a crucial role in fostering cultural diversity and promoting digital inclusion. And to address language inclusion in the digital age, we should consider how individuals and communities can have equal opportunities to benefit from digital technologies, regardless of their language or how and where they access these technologies. Today’s panel will focus on domain names, which are crucial to the functioning of the internet. I’m joined by a panel of experts to discuss ongoing collaboration and efforts aimed at ensuring all domain names, including internationalized domain names and email addresses, are treated equally and can be used seamlessly across all internet-enabled applications, systems, and devices. We will also explore the roles of various stakeholders in advancing universal acceptance of domain names and promoting internationalized domain names to support a more inclusive and accessible internet. So let me take a couple of minutes to introduce our speakers. Here in the room, I’m joined by Hisham Al-Hammad, Domain Names Director at the Communications, Space, and Technology Commission of Saudi Arabia. CST is the organization that operates Saudi’s top level. domains ascii.sa and thearabic.saudia. Also in the room with me Teresa Swinehart, senior vice president global domains and strategy at ICANN and many of the key programs and initiatives we’re going to touch upon today actually are being you know run and spearheaded by Teresa’s team. Joining remotely we have Manal Ismail. Manal is chief expert internet policies at the National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Egypt. Manal is also the representative of the Egyptian government in the governmental advisory committee of ICANN. Also remotely we have Walter Wu, president of internet dot trademark organization limited. Walter is also a universal acceptance ambassador and joining shortly or maybe has joined already is Banu Nupayn, program manager for ICT and sciences and open access to scientific research at UNESCO, has been with UNESCO for over 23 years and brings significant experience. Experience with internet multilingualism and language related technologies and initiatives. So all right so I think Banu has already joined so let me let me start with Banu. Banu UNESCO plays an essential role in promoting digital inclusion. You yourself have been involved in many multilingualism and language-related initiatives. So maybe you can tell us a little more about those initiatives and how they contribute to the fulfillment of WSIS agenda and the sustainable development goals. Can we unmute Banu? Banu, are you able to speak? Banu, I think you can speak now.

Bhanu Neupane: Yes, can you hear me now? Yes, we can. Okay, sorry about that. It’s okay. Sorry, Chair, I think you’ll have to repeat your question one more time so that I can start from the beginning. Sorry about that. No, that’s fine. So it was about UNESCO’s role in promoting digital inclusion through the various initiatives you’ve been involved in. If you can tell us a little more about those initiatives and how they contribute to fulfillment of WSIS goals and agenda. Thank you so much, Chair. extremely pertinent question. As you know, UNESCO is an intergovernmental organization and we’ve been playing a very decisive role in advancing digital inclusion through targeted initiatives that align with the WSIS agenda and support the advancement of sustainable development goal as large. For WSIS, UNESCO leads Axellein C3, C8, and I think this session will pretty much fall in the bracket of C8, C9, and C10. And we are also responsible for the e-science component of C7, which is one of the ICT application for this one. For STG goal along the same line, we are working for STG4, STG9, and STG16, in which primarily looks at peace, justice, and strong institution. And access to information also falls within this particular STG. So that goal is pretty much advancing on something that we are working on, digital inclusion. One of the key focuses of UNESCO is universal access to information and knowledge. And this primarily ensures that digital transformation promotes equity, inclusion, and multilingualism. So these are the three areas that we are focusing on at. The commitment dates back to 2003 recommendation. There was a recommendation that member state had in fact agreed in 2003, just about the time when WSIS was also starting, when they thought about agreeing on a recommendation concerning the promotion and use of multilingualism and universal access to cyberspace, which emphasizes on importance of linguistic diversity. and inclusivity in the digital world. Quite interestingly, in 2023 UNESCO recognized something that I think this audience primarily understands and it co-opted universal acceptance

Moderator: as one of the pillars that it would accomplish

Bhanu Neupane: while implementing this recommendation. So since then, we are pretty much focusing on and working primarily with ICANN to see how the domain names can be internationalized and how universal acceptance can be brought to the doorstep of member state. How can they start making their internet universal acceptance ready? That’s one. The other thing that we are also working is building digital and media literate and where we are primarily taught empowering and enhancing the capacity of member state in understanding that the internet must be utilized in more than one languages. And we are in fact, we’re working on that. Of course, UNESCO is also in its cradle is the ethical AI and its inclusivity. This is where the recommendation of ethics for artificial intelligence comes to fore. We also have something that we are working and in advancing ICTs for education and primarily working in the area of open solution which sensor grosser we actually take on board three things that one talks about open educational resources. We also talk about openness of data. And now we have also started to talk about free and open source software and working more and more like in language technologies and trying to see that whether or not this language technologies will also. becomes a common fare to the member state and our stakeholders at large. And of course, we are also custodian of the 16.10.2, which primarily empowers member state to make information as the cradle on which development processes move forward. So I’ll stop there, and perhaps I’ll come back to these points in a bit. Over to you, Chair.

Moderator: Thank you. Thank you, Banu. That was very comprehensive. So let me move to Teresa. Teresa, ICANN community has introduced internationalized domain names at the top level of the root of the DNS more than a decade ago. So how do you think IDNs have helped foster a more inclusive digital landscape, and what are the key challenges that continue to hinder their spread?

Theresa Swinehart: Thanks, Pahir, and thanks for organizing the panel and for everybody who’s participating. As the IGF knows, for a truly connected world, you need to have a unified, interoperable, and a system that’s accessible to all. But as users of the internet, we all want to be able to engage and communicate in the languages that we speak, in the scripts that we use, and in the methodology that we want to use, the length of something, a domain name, right to the, or left to the dot, around all that. We want to do that in our day-to-day lives, and there’s no reason that we shouldn’t be able to do that while we’re online in the virtual world. Audio from the room is not clear, so let’s, maybe you can try this mic. Is that better? Yes, excellent, excellent. Oh, hold it like this, okay. We got it? Okay, excellent. By the end of this meeting, we’ll all be very trained in how to do this. So in this regard, ICANN has a role, we have a limited role within our mission with relation to internationalized domain names and tables and a lot of the work that is, no, not working. Thank you. Is that better? Is that working? Excellent. Okay. Okay. So where I was was that we have a limited mission and a responsibility around the space and we’re working with the community on it. But we also work with many of the partners and other entities on how to enable both awareness around internationalized domain names and universal acceptance and then those that play a role in enabling universal acceptance more generally. And many of you are in the room here as well and participating. So as you know, internationalized domain names are important in the way that we help make the Internet multilingual and inclusive. For those of you who are not familiar, it essentially means it enables somebody to use a domain name in the local language or script. For example, Arabic, Chinese, or Cyrillic. And with this introduction more than ten years ago, we’ve seen many, many language communities around the world coming online. Part of the challenge, though, is an awareness that they can communicate in their own language or in their own script. And so with that, we’re still in the early days of multilingual DNS and as you’ve noted, it’s been about a decade since IDN top-level domains were first introduced. Some of the challenges, though, that are existing around this is overcoming the geographic or linguistic barriers, the generation of local content, the enabling of technical skills and capacity development. These are all critical for enabling the usage around this and that in turn has an impact on economic growth, independence, and the minimizing of resilience on others. So a key goal in enabling this is actually what’s referred to as universal acceptance. That is the ability for the technology, the platform, to accept the script or the length of what is to the right or the left of the dot in the communication methodology. And it means that all Internet applications and systems treat all top-level domains in a consistent manner. This is essential for the continued expansion of the Internet and it provides a gateway to the next billion Internet users in a way that will make it more meaningful for them. But we’re not there yet and progress has been made, but there’s still gaps. For instance, testing shows that only about 11% of the top 1,000 global websites can accept international… email addresses and just 22.2% of email servers support them. So these challenges highlight the urgent need to look at how to address universal acceptance in the partnerships that we can enable with governments, businesses, any entity around that. All the actors developing applications and operating services online are encouraged to ensure their systems are updated to support all domain names and email addresses. And this alignment will not only promote a digital landscape that’s unified, but it will have a ripple effect on encouraging people to utilize local content and engage in their own languages. So within ICANN, as Bahair noted, we have a team that’s dedicated to identifying and making important software fixes to allow for universal acceptance. My colleagues online, Sarmad, Seda, Pitanan, are experts in this, and as we go into more detail, more than happy to engage in those conversations. As noted, we’re also working with the broader ICANN community to ensure awareness around this. And with that, we are now in our third year of, I believe it’s the third year, yes, of the Universal Acceptance Day, which is held on or around the 28th of March in both 2023 and 2024. And in this year, we had over 52 events in 47 countries. We will be hosting it again, but in partnership with our colleagues from UNESCO, which we’re looking forward to very much in 2025, and have already received many applications from interested parties to participate from around the world. So as we move closer to enabling the ability to engage in your own language, we’re also moving closer to opening up our next round of new top-level domains in 2026. This will be an important opportunity for universities, governments, businesses that wish to apply for a top-level domain in their own language or their own script to participate and to apply for that, and thus enabling even more inclusivity in the world. So with that, Bahar, I’ll turn it back over to you, but thanks for the opportunity.

Moderator: Thank you, Teresa. And on the UA Day, it may be worth noting that several UA Day events will be held in this region as well, including one in Saudi Arabia in partnership with the CST. So, okay, let’s move to Walter. I’ll come to you now with, you know, your significant experience with the implementation of IDNs, specifically the Chinese names. What do you see as the potential value of IDNs in promoting local businesses and communities? And if you can tell us more about this experience and the challenges you’ve encountered. I hope you can unmute yourself. Got it.

Walter Wu: Thank you. Actually, I’m very glad to got this opportunity to share kind of development status in China about the IDN market. And I will have a self-introduction before I at the very beginning for this part. Actually, I’m from a registry of Chinese IDN, Daoshanbiao, means trademark in Chinese. As a co-founder of the Daoshanbiao registry personally, I’m very grateful for the new GTLD program of ICANN, because it gave us an opportunity to do some innovative attempt for launching a dedicated TLD to trademark holders. Shangbiao is this Chinese character word, means trademark in English. Compared with the traditional TM or R mark, it creates the best awareness for the customer that is a trademark. So the key value for us to choose Shangbiao as the TLD name to operate is the trademark identify function of these two characters. Shangbiao not only permit the registration for registrar holding a trademark right, but Daoshanbiao registry verify the trademark right of registrar. And the registrar name has to match their trademark and brand name. This service focus on the Chinese-speaking region. It provides opportunity for brand owners to create an exact match domain name with their brand name and post the Chinese. And the second part, I will share some market status of Chinese overall internationalized domains. By the end of Q2, 2024, the number of overall ID and GTLD globally is around 408,000. The total number of Chinese IDN is 347,000. Chinese IDN gets the market share of 85% of the global IDN. .wangzhizaixian means web address, means online, shangcheng means shop, gongsi means company, shangbiao means trademark. And also, shouji means mobile phone, a top Chinese IDN TLD. Those six Chinese IDN TLD get around 64% of the global IDN market. And next part, I will talk about the value for IDN for the Chinese customer or the Chinese communities. The new GTLD program and overall IDN development give us the opportunity to implement a trust domain solution for end-users like enterprises and organizations. Most of the organizations use local Chinese name. In English IDN system, the registrant must use translation, abbreviation, pronunciation symbol, we call pin, that’s a kind of a symbol for pronounce the Chinese character. That actually makes the domain name are not easily remembered and recognized. It also easily generate efficient website since the domain name cannot easily be distinguished by the internet users. For brand owners in Chinese-speaking community, the domain name exactly same with the brand name in Chinese brings high value for online direct-to-customer marketing. Not only local brands need the IDN, actually the multinational, they also need the IDN in China. There are several examples for the Chinese IDN by the registered by the multinational, like Starbucks, actually they register their Chinese brand name, Starbucks, actually they register their Chinese brand name, and TESOL, and TESOL, they register Tiansuo, you know, dot trademark, they register Vantime names. Because in China, a lot of customers may not easily remember the English name. I don’t have the exact statistic, but I guess over 90% of Chinese consumers can now spell right for T-Salt or Starbucks. So a lot of multinationals will localize their brand when they enter China market. All of those companies have a Chinese local name. Before the Chinese IDM program launch, they can only use their English brand name and register their domains. Since the customer may not remember and spell right for the domain names, it will be a big challenge for those brand customers to launch their official website. And last, I will also share the kind of difficulty of IDM implementation in Chinese. Actually, overall speaking, lacking the overall awareness of IDM is the biggest challenge for the internationalized domain names. Without the awareness, because not a lot of registrants very actively use and promote that. Part of the reason is they met the UA challenges. Browsers is always the most important UA issue. Although in the last couple of years, the browser issue has been dramatically solved. But unfortunately, recently, we also meet another UA issue. Because Safari, after the iOS upgrade, they do not support the Chinese IDM right now. So it’s like always, we met all kinds of challenges about the UA. Beside the browsers, actually, search engine, EAI, and hyperlink for the social media is also the several key issues. So that’s a major difficulty that we face. think, you know, but in the ideal development in China. So thank you very much.

Moderator: Thank you, Walter. And perhaps we’ll come back to you in the next round of questions. Maybe you have some solutions to share as well. So let’s come back to the room. Hisham, so Saudi, of course, and Saudi Nick and the team at the CST, you’ve been in the forefront of advocating for the introduction of IDNs, specifically the Arabic domain names, and promoting their use in web, email, and various other applications. So could you tell us more about this journey, and what were the biggest challenges where you are now, and so on?

Hesham M. AL-Hammad: Thank you, Bahir, for inviting me to this session, and I am happy to be with the distinguished guests and speakers, and thank you for all to attending this session. As you mentioned, maybe Saudi, represented by Saudi and IC, started early to introduce the Arabic domain names. And the first start was in maybe 2004, with a cooperation with GCC, the Gulf country, and also with the Arabic League. And based on this, they developed a pilot project, and this pilot project is used to identify the aspects that need to be developed to be ready for the introduction of IDNs when it’s introduced by ICANN. The Saudi domain names and the Arabic IDN for Saudi domain launched on 2010, with all the thanks for ICANN for their support. And the first maybe domain, Arabic domain names was on the internet, was a Saudi domain name. After that, we start the journey to make sure that these domains will work as expected, and to avoid any challenges that can face the users, and even the registrants. One. One of the major challenges that faced us, maybe you know that the Arabic language is part of the Arabic script. And the Arabic scripts contain many languages. Even it’s used by more than 43 countries. And there is, in the shape of the letters of the Arabic, there is the shapes of the letter is the same between different languages. And even within the Arabic, there is also some kind of variance for the same letter. And this was like a very challenging thing. And we focus on the part related to the registry. We want to make the registration straightforward. We want to avoid any confusion that can occur based on registering specific domain names. So we focus on this kind of variance. And the variance, we can see it, for example, for the English. But it’s solved by protocol, in the protocol itself. Like, for example, Google, it has variance regarding the capital and small. But it’s solved by the protocol. But in Arabic, we have many problems with the variance. For example, if we get the two first words from our organization, which is in Arabic, Hayat al-Atsalat, Telecommunication Commission, this maybe, as a variance, it’s more than 2 million variance. This one, it’s having 2 million variance. And this should be considered. So what we did, and our valuable colleagues and pioneers, they start to develop algorithms which use something called master key. So we have one master key for all the variance. So we can, by registering one domain, we can block all the variance and enable the user to enable any variance for that. The master key even, this algorithm, also save our space, instead of registering the 2 million variance, to avoid anyone to register this domain and make it confusing for them. the users, it will be only using this master key. Again, we face also the problem. This 2 million variance is not based on the language itself. It’s not used, and it’s not practically used. For this, we go to another stage to build a filter. And this filter used to make it to have like four levels. The first level is the must to be allocated, and it’s for reachability. The second one is about desired variance. Then we have not desired variance, and the fourth category is blocked. And this minimize the number of variance by maybe 98%. For example, if we get the name like the holy city, Mecca and Mukarramah, for example, it’s around have more than 3,000 variance. Yes. No, maybe the zoom. For example, for Mecca and Mukarramah, this have maybe around 3,200 variance. The desired variance, it’s only four. So this was minimizing the number of variance that can be enabled. In this situation also, we provide for our registrant the ability to specify what is the desired variance, and they can register it. There is no need for register another domain. It’s considered as a variance, and it have the same specification and configuration that needed for the same domain. Before 2021. We were providing the registration directly. We have a direct registration without fees. After 2021, now we have our registrar. We transmit to the registered registrar model. So in this situation, also, we engage our registrar with us. Now we provide him with the ABI to define the variance, define the desired variance, and give him the ability to enable any variance to enable the Arabic domain. Also, we go a step further, and we work with the email. And we launch, maybe, in early stages, the RASIL, the first one of RASIL in the period between 2010, 2013. And this was launched before the standardization for the international or email address internationalization. And we implemented as, like, do a hack for the Outlook and some clients. And we success in this part. After introducing the AI, we also developed the second phase of RASIL. And we tested with the international emails provider, like Google and Microsoft. And it’s worked fine with success. And our implementation was to find what is the difficulties, what the challenges. It’s like a proof of concept to this part. Again, we face some challenges about the domain. We solve it by the variance. For example, we have the user part before the domain. Also, we’ll have the same situation with the variance. And it should be considered to avoid having the same shape for. for the username for different ASCII code. And this is also one of the challenges that we face. One of the initiatives, even before maybe the universal acceptance started, we also published some reports about the readiness of the browsers and other systems for IDNs. We published it on 2010 and also 2014. To make sure and to show the case that there is a problem with specific providers. This may be our journey, in short, on summary. Maybe the most, if you wanted to talk about it now, the challenges, or make it in the second. OK.

Moderator: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Hisham. This is obviously a very rich journey. And I’m sure lots of lessons learned. So we’ll come back to you to talk about not only the challenges, but maybe some, because you’ve also touched on some of the solutions that you have made to deal with some of the challenges in the applications, emails, and so on. So maybe we can talk further about that. So now I’d like to go to Manal. Manal, you’ve been part of this journey for a long time, since ICANN started working on policies to allow IDNs, CCLDs at the top level, process known as Fast Track and so on. Now, how do you, and then of course, you’re part of the government, part of the regulator in Egypt, who’s also the manager of Egypt’s IDN.Masr. So how do you think national regulators can help foster digital inclusion at the local level, particularly in the DNS area and in collaboration with other players in the ecosystem? So what role can regulators play in that regard? And if you also want to touch on universal acceptance, you can do that, or we can come to that later on. Manal, over to you.

Manal Ismail: Thank you. Behr, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Perfect. Thank you very much, Behr, for the opportunity. And thanks to Saudi Arabia for hosting this year’s IGF and availing remote participation. I’m sorry I was not able to join you in person, but thank you for the opportunity. Multilingual internet is crucial for digital inclusion, as has been mentioned already by other speakers. And a truly multilingual internet is essential for the continued expansion of the internet and the growing of the online population. And it is necessary to have a gate open for the next billion internet users to connect meaningfully to the internet. ICANN has already introduced more than 1,200 new GTLDs, 100 of which. our IDNs. We have around 60 IDN ccTLDs and we started to have mailboxes that are no longer just in ASCII and we have another round of new gTLDs also on its way. Yet the actual number of IDN registrations remains relatively low at 1.2 percent of the global domain name market and its uptake is very slow also and per the EURID IDN world report 2024 only three ccTLDs witnessed notable growth in their IDN registrations over the past year while the majority of ccTLDs experienced minimal or no growth at all with 19 ccTLDs reporting contraction in their total IDN registrations. So this makes universal acceptance a fundamental requirement for unleashing the full potential of IDNs and internationalized email addresses and providing a truly multilingual and digitally inclusive internet. Internet multilingualism is also of strategic importance to governments in accordance with their digital transformation plans and the promise to leave no one behind. They have a distinct role to play in that respect in order to reduce inequalities and bridge digital gaps. So universal acceptance would deploying it on a wide scale would surely benefit government efforts regarding digital transformation and digital and social inclusion where the pandemic here played a way served as a wake-up call to everyone that the internet is not luxury but a basic need. Also preserving culture and advancing digital identity through preserving local languages and encouraging their use on and off the internet equally. Ensuring that government online services reach citizens nationwide and in the official language of the country of course and stimulating the growth of the local IDN market and online multilingual content by increasing competition and innovation, increasing customer choice, availing internationalized email addresses which have been hindering the uptake of IDNs and this is also out of our experience in Egypt and driving the use of local IDNs and email addresses as opposed to Latin-based ones hosted off borders. This also helps increasing internet penetration and bridging the digital divide and promoting digital literacy and facilitating meaningful access to the internet and lastly acquiring future proof systems and applications and an analogy with IPv6 could be drawn here. To the second part of your question regarding government role or NTRA role in making government systems universal acceptance ready. So we are at NTRA working closely with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology being the technical arm of the government to ensure awareness of the issue and provide consultancy through subject matter experts. Establish pilots for proof-of-concept and stress testing. Assist in stocktaking of government’s current systems and applications to ensure they are UA ready. Take into consideration, of course, UA readiness of online government services. Include universal acceptance as a requirement in procurement processes, tenders and purchase orders. Assist in universal acceptance-wide deployment in cooperation with licensed operators, vendors and other stakeholders. Try also with the academic sector to add universal acceptance to the curricula of the relevant students. Collaborate on a regional level to drive adoption and universal acceptance readiness in cross-border platforms. So, there is so much to be done. I cannot claim we have achieved everything yet, but we have a long list of things to do. But again, it’s a win-win for all and I’ll leave this till later. Thank you, Beher. Back to you.

Moderator: Thank you, Manel. So, we’ve heard, I think, from everyone on the panel. So, maybe it’s time to pause and see if there are any questions from the floor, here in the room or online. Any questions? Fouad.

Audience: Hello, this is Fouad Bajwa. I have, you know, the IDN growth hasn’t been as expected and, you know, that’s been discussed. But at the same time, what steps need to be taken before the new round opens up? Because if you haven’t been successful, that successful as compared to the other, you know, English GTLDs. So, what do we need to do? What are the concrete steps that we need to take? And now that we are near the other round, the applicant support program is already open. There could be requests in that from the community as well. So, what are we going to improve going forward in terms of, you know, the adoption of IDNs? And within market competition, do we expect, you know, GTLDs to increase by a significant number? Or is the lack of confidence on, you know, all of those that the GTLDs have already issued? What are we foreseeing in the near future? Thank you.

Theresa Swinehart: Perhaps I could start and then ask my colleague, Sarmad, who’s online. So I think that there’s two aspects. One is awareness that it is possible to utilize one’s own script or have a different length or utilization to the right or the left of the dot. I recall being at some events where you discuss that and there’s awareness that you currently can do it to the left of the dot or to the right of the dot but not having the full experience of using something in a full experience. And I would equate it with the address on an envelope. I can write the address entirely in my language or I have to put some parts that are not in my language. So I think there’s a lot of awareness that needs to occur around that from an information aspect and what that could imply. But then I think that there’s also some very solid technical aspects that need to occur with trainings at universities and things. And that’s where I might ask my colleague, Sarmad, to share a little bit. If I may, Behar.

Moderator: Sarmad, could you try to unmute yourself?

Sarmad Hussain: Okay. Hi. Can you hear me? This is Sarmad. Yeah. Go ahead. Okay. So thank you, Behar, and hello, everyone. Just to follow up on what Teresa was saying, that, you know, of course, I think the start of the journey is with creating awareness. Many people around the world still do not know that these options exist in their own languages. And so making them aware of this is key. But then as a next step, when people become aware that they can actually have a domain name for their own business, for example, or an email address for their personal use in their own language and script, next step is for them to acquire that and use that. And we see, obviously, some challenges here which have been shared that, first of all, there is a registrant journey. Actually, as a registrant, you would want to be able to register the domain name of your choice in your local language, for example, and then not just register it, but take it further to host it and deploy it and have an email address against it. And what we see is that that is not always an easy set of steps. So the industry which is working with domain names, obviously, and the tools they’re using, sometimes there is a lack of capacity or lack of support which, I guess, needs to be addressed. In addition to that, even when somebody is able to get their domain name and email address functional, what we see is that some of the applications downstream, for example, social media, other application e-commerce websites, they are not also aware of domain names and email addresses in local languages. We see that with the work which is being done by community, by ICANN, by others, there is now a growing awareness. We see more and more not just awareness, but adoption of domain names in local languages and e-mail addresses in local languages over time. For example, many large e-mail providers, generally globally, also in different countries, are now at least allowing e-mail addresses in different local languages to be able to send and receive through their platforms. There is now also, I guess, more maturation in the browser technology to support domain names. So we see that the effort which the community has actually been putting in over last decade or so is bearing fruit. There is now growing support. We cannot say that we are there, but there is certainly a momentum building up and we are making our way there. We do need to keep working in this area. So back, we’re trying to, I guess, respond to Fawad’s question. We’re certainly well on our way. We see good support, but we need to keep working to create more awareness and more support. Thank you.

Moderator: Thanks so much. Manel.

Manal Ismail: Thank you, Behar. I fully agree with what Teresa and Sarmad already said. It’s surely an awareness thing and wide deployment of universal acceptance. With the awareness, it’s an interesting situation here with the universal acceptance that we need to convince both sides at the same time, the supply and the demand. So there is no appealing product in the market yet to attract demand, nor oppressing demand from the community to trigger supply. So ending up in a unique situation where we need to work on the awareness of both sides at the same time. Also, another challenge is the universal acceptance needs to be widely deployed before it bears its fruits. So there is no use in being UA ready alone. So we need to have concerted efforts to push for the wide deployment. Also, as Sarmad mentioned, some may… not even know that this option exists and this relates again to the awareness. So for users who don’t have a language barrier those are already online and they feel that everything is working fine. For those offline because of language barrier they are taking it for granted and not knowing that there is a solution to their problem. Also the business model may not seem very appealing or pressing at the moment but it’s definitely future proof and opens a new market. So again it’s a multi-stakeholder issue which has technical, strategic, commercial and cultural dimensions and needs the buy-in of everyone and collaborative efforts. Thank you Beher, back to you.

Moderator: Thank you, thank you Manal. And perhaps I’d like to go back to Walter because I mean we’re talking about challenges, we’re talking about awareness and Walter you mentioned that right now 85% of the IDN domains are Chinese so it seems to me that there is demand in China. At the same time you also spoke about some challenges so how do you see the scene in China in relation to challenges and at the same time opportunities? Yes, actually the Chinese IDN community especially the registrar side is currently trying to push the usage of IDN because we think that’s a key part of the increased awareness. Actually promotion of IDN needs to start from the registrar side, that’s that’s my personal opinion, because Internet users cannot get awareness of IDN only when they can see a lot of IDN domain names in daily life, like they can see the IDN domain names in the advertisement, in the enterprise brochure, in their service scene. That service means, for example, a restaurant. Inside of a restaurant, they can publish their IDN name of their restaurant, then every customer in the restaurant can see and get awareness of IDN. Actually, I think the whole industry in China, generally speaking, we all began to examine our promotion strategy. At the very beginning, when we launched the IDN, actually a lot of customers registered the IDN because of domain name investment or brand protection purpose. But now, we see more and more registrants realize the value of IDN. IDN is the most important tool for the direct-to-customer DTC marketing strategy, and it provides a direct link between brands and customers. Moreover, IDN can be a very important tool that can save their cost and enhance the efficiency for their online and offline promotion. For our own Daoshan Bell Registry, we are trying to penetrate to the different industries. We have a good connection with the trademark and brand industry. I think the major purpose for when we connect with the brand industry is we hope to create the motivation of the brand. brand customer. You know, we not only want the customer to register the IDN, but we need to proactively publish the IDN and use the IDN and provide more cases for the registrar. So I think only by more and more brand customers publishing their IDN, then the Internet user can see the real IDN case and gradually they can build the habit to use the IDN.

Walter Wu: So I think that’s what the Chinese community focus on. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Walter. Okay, Hisham, back to you now, because you also spoke to the challenges, but at the same time, Saudi NIC or CST, you’ve done significant efforts in developing tools, applications, and so on. So you kind of provided some of the ingredients of the supply side, but how about the demand side? Do you see demand coming from the local community? I’m talking about Arabic domain names in this case.

Hesham M. AL-Hammad: Thank you, Bahir, and thank you for all the colleagues. As you said that we build the demand, build the supply part, and we provided the things that can minimize the risks that can appear from issuing the Arabic domains. But still, the demand is very low, and I think there is something, first of all, we need to understand that DNS and domain names is part, it’s a component of the infrastructure, and changing in the infrastructure standardization, it’s something that needs time. So for example, even now that DNSSEC is produced maybe 1997, the adoption is still around 25%. to 30% even now after maybe more than 20 years. And there is a continuous improvement for the standardization for DNSSEC to avoid the complexity. The problem with the now we have for example for the IDNs we have a very good and very valuable efforts from the universal acceptance and we see now first we identify the problems we provide the solution there is a technical solution there from the universal acceptance that can solve all the levels that can affected by the domain names. But again still the user experience it’s still very difficult so if I register a domain in Arabic I need to have a hosting most of the hosting need me to add a bunny code not add it with the Arabic language so this is difficult for the registrant. Again if I have a variance I need to add each variance and enable it in the name server. If I want to send my domain name through one of the platforms like whatsapp if I send the email or the domain without adding the protocol it will not be identified as a URL but I need to add the protocol for example HTTP before the domain. When we when I add the HTTP this you have a problem for the bi-direction the HTTP is left to right and the Arabic is right to left so still the experience for the user is not giving the people the like incentive to go with the domain name. And as my colleague Walter from Chinese mentioned that even sometimes we have for For example, he mentioned that Safari, for example, it was Safari supporting the Chinese IDN. Then after the upgrade, the support is not more there. This also flabbing between the support. You can find, for example, a provider supporting the Arabic domain now. Then after a specific upgrade, it will not support it. So there is no stability in this situation. And this, I think, one of the difficulties that face the Arabic domain. Maybe the question from our colleague about the domain, and should we wait to solve the problems before we issue or open another round or this kind of discussion, maybe it’s the philosophy for the chicken before or the egg before. Sometimes we have the planes, but the airport is not ready. But still, this is a fact, and we need to work with it. So we need to work in parallel. We have efforts on the high level from universal acceptance point of view. We need to think about the platforms and how we make it ready and support these ideas. And I think we need to have a step more to think about the protocol itself. Can we have a solution from the protocol itself? I know that it’s very difficult, but we can have a solution. The DNS now is invented before maybe 40 years, and it’s based on the ASCII. Everything is based on the ASCII. Even the computers before using the ASCII, now it’s solved, and we use the Unicode by nature. What about the DNS? DNS was built before 30 years without any security measures, but now we have the DNSSEC. It’s built. The DNSSEC, it’s built but it’s not covering all the issues. We have the DOT, the DOH. Still, we are trying to solve all the problems. Why we not look on this part even from the protocol point of view? Let’s see what kind of solution we can have. We can, there is a lot of… like unlimited records, unlimited flags, that we can use it, reuse it, and see how we can solve the problem. Another levels that we can go, for example, the CDNs, the load balancers, the antiviruses, how they will deal with the other IDNs, and the reachability. For example, if I have a keyboard for Urdu language, and I want to write like Arabic domain with specific words that is in the shape is the same between the two languages, but it’s different in the ASCII code, we should have this kind of reachability. And I think we should solve it from the second level, and even from the top level. So again, I think we are doing, there is an effort, which is move on. And we appreciate the universal acceptance issue. And we have the universal acceptance day that started maybe two years ago. And we see the potential. One thing about the awareness, the difficulties in the awareness that even for the DNS itself, now the graduate people and students, even about the DNS, they don’t aware about it. All the people now and the graduate, they talk about AI. The infrastructure-related topics is not that important now in the university part. So we need to step in this part about the DNS, and also about the IDNs and other aspects regarding even the new GTLDs. Because I faced one of my colleagues, he was thinking that the new GTLD is fishing site. He only understand. only .com and also the two letters. When he see, for example, .services, he think that it’s not a correct domain name. Even, by the way, he’s a technical guy, but he’s not aware about this kind of domain name. So we have a gap in this part. And with collaboration, we can cover this gap. And thank you.

Moderator: Thank you. Thank you, Shem. So obviously, yeah, more awareness is needed. I think everyone agrees on this. Significant efforts are being done, yet more to be done. Now, are there any questions? Yeah, Abdulmenem. Yeah, thank you.

Audience: Thank you, Behr. Actually, I would like, this is Abdulmenem for the record, working for the Telecom Regulator of Egypt. Actually, I would like to add something to my colleague, my brother, Shem, said about the challenges in regards to the use of IDNs. There are, the first thing is that we don’t have many services built upon IDN. It’s one of the challenges. The other challenge that it is related to email addresses. Assume that I have my Arabic email address, and I send an email to Chinese email address. How could the other receiver be accurate that I am Abdulmenem? I am the correct guy who sent this email? We need to have a workaround about this. This fact will affect the use of email addresses that are using IDNs or AI mailboxes. This is the first point. Second point, it is just a comment rather than a question. Awareness is somehow is a public word. It’s an open word. There is awareness difference between the mail administrator inside your organization and there is another awareness for the software companies who make the software used by this organization. The difference is here. For the company who makes, the provider who makes this email software, he needs awareness from day one. But the other side who are consuming this software, whatever he is, entity or organization or person who uses this software, he needs to have release notes about that there is an update for the new version of this email software that supports AI and universal acceptance ready. At this time, me as email administrator, I will ask what is this email AI means? What is UA means? At this time, I could conduct awareness session for them. It is different. We need to go for both ways. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I want to get to your question. You asked the question at the beginning about the email and I want to check if Sarmad could answer this question. Can you repeat the question about the email and the identity behind the email?

Audience: I said that the source email address is Arabic email address, pure Arabic email address. And I sent an email to Chinese mail server who has Chinese email address. How could the receiver who owns this Chinese email address understand or be sure that I am the correct one, I am Abdulmanum who sent this email address? It’s one of the issues. Maybe the answer is that if you are Arabic, you assume that to send Arabic to other entity who are in Arabic, but it’s not the case. Maybe I am a businessman. I wanted to send emails to my organizer outside Chinese, something like this.

Moderator: Thank you. Thank you. Sarmad? Thank you. Can you unmute yourself .

Sarmad Hussain: The way I would understand the question and the possible answer is that, you know, we, in the virtual world we, you know, online world, we, our, I guess, experience is not very different from our real world. When we are talking or communicating in the real world, we are communicating in many different channels in many different languages so when I’m actually speaking to a friend of mine who is local I will talk to them in a local language. But when I’m talking to colleagues who are perhaps not local. I would choose to communicate in a language which we mutually understand. So that’s really what the real world experiences. And that’s, of course, what would be a online world experience as well right when I would want to communicate with my friends and we would see that also in social media. So, you know, it’s not that people write in local languages, because they are part of a community which actually understands that language. But when you’re communicating for example for business across languages different languages, then you choose to switch to a language which will communicate with somebody who doesn’t speak my local language but can understand English. I have a mailbox setup where I actually have an Arabic email address. I also have an ASCII or English email address. I can use the same mailbox to send send an email from either of those email addresses. And if I get a response back to any of those email addresses, it comes to the same one single mailbox. So I can have multiple email addresses all, for example, synchronized or, I guess, pointing to the same mailbox. And that allows me to switch to different languages with reasonable ease. That’s, for example, one solution. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Sarmad. We have another question here in the room. Thank you.

Audience: My name is Jamal Shaheen. Thank you very much for the presentations. That was very insightful. I have a few naive questions. Well, I hope they’re not too naive, but a couple of questions that I’d like to just address. I’m new to this field, so please bear with me. One of the questions that I wanted to address was, how will country codes, how will countries be identified in the different scripts? Will you go for two characters still? Or how will that actually sit? And how will you actually be able to distinguish between country websites and then other GTLDs? And how will that actually play out in the ICANN system? And then another thing that has been really enlightening from this conversation was, in previous discussions with technical community experts, I had the feeling that everything was sorted technically, that this was very easy. It’s just a question of rollout. That, yeah, no, it’s just we need people to be aware and then accept. And now, as I’m hearing the conversation go around here, this is more than there are big technical issues that we still need to address. And I’m trying to put into these stages of awareness, technical issues, policy issues, what are the priorities right now, and so on and so forth. That leads to a third question, sorry. In terms of public administrations and governments, is it just sufficient to mandate that IDNs are in any services that public administrations and governments offer that IDNs… IDNs should be the baseline, and then that’s the way we go. Then we have to have a standard that we have to agree to on the technical side. So I’m wondering which comes first. You talked about chickens and eggs. There’s a whole batch of chickens here, right? That’s the question, sorry.

Moderator: Thank you, Jamal. So there are three questions. The last one, I think I’m going to go to Hisham to answer about the governments and how they mandate use of IDNs. But before that, two questions. One about the country names in IDNs and how those names were kind of chosen. I can start and then Sarmad can continue, and then Sarmad can also tackle the second question about the technical issues, right? So back in the days when country names were introduced in IDNs, the ICANN community came together and agreed on a process of how to select or pick the country names. It’s based on the language scripts, how the country is being listed in the UN, different UN lists and so on. And one of the rules that was put in this process was that only countries with official languages that use scripts other than the Latin script can apply for getting or obtaining their IDN country name. So Arabic-speaking countries, they got their name in Arabic, Russian and so on, in Cyrillic and so on. So that is the first question. Now I’m going to hand it to Sarmad to correct me and then to add more. Thank you, Bar. Could you please also repeat the second question again, just to make sure that I answered it accurately? Yeah, I think the second question was that Jamal said that he thought, or he was under the impression, that technical issues pertaining to IDNs have been already sorted out. from what he’s hearing in this session, there seems to be some serious technical issues yet to be resolved.

Sarmad Hussain: Thank you, Bahar, this is Sharma. So just on the first question, so I think you provided good details. Basically, the criteria used for country codes is the two-letter code, which is available through ISO 3166 standard. And if a country or a territory wants to apply for internationalized domain name, country code, top-level domain, IDNCC, DLD, they can, if they already have an ISO 3166 code, and then for local language, as Bahar said, they could apply for any language, which is the administrative language of that particular country or territory in a script, which is used by the local community. And there is actually a process to apply for it. They can choose any string, some countries use a short name for the country, some could use, others have decided to use an abbreviation. So that is really up to the particular territory or country and their community to decide the particular string they would like. There’s a link in the chat. Please go there, and there are more details available. As far as the technical, I guess, ability or adoption of universal acceptance is concerned, Jamal, you’re actually quite right in assessing that we are well on our way as far as the journey is concerned, but we’re still certainly not at our destination. We are in the process of creating more awareness, creating more adoption, creating more technical solutions. We certainly already have available many solutions, but there’s more to do for all of us. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Sarman. And the third question was, is it enough or is it sufficient for the local government to mandate the use of IDNs and then, you know, everything will be fine, everyone will follow and use IDNs, or is it a little bit more complicated?

Hesham M. AL-Hammad: I think it will be complicated, yeah. But in general, I think going with the last solution always, I think it’s not a choice, especially that if the solution is not mature until now. But sometimes we have it like another, we have like a good experience. We try it this year with the DNSSEC, for example. We didn’t mandate the government. We do a cooperation with the digital government authority, DGA, and they have like a measurement every year. They measure the digital transformation readiness for the government entities. And they have some specific rules. This year, last year, we add two criteria, new criteria with the coordination with them. One is about IPv6 and one about DNSSEC. And we see the effect, but it’s not a must, but it’s like only measuring the maturity. If they didn’t do it, only their maturity will decrease, and you maybe attend before maybe a So, this kind of techniques, I think it’s more valuable, more than make it mandate. About the IDNs, I think we’re still very early in the stages to mandate something about the IDN, but we can promote it using some kind of this kind of criteria to make the accessibility for the user more solid. The point with the IDNs, for example, that it helps the people to identify if it is phishing or not. For example, we have like a national service which is called Absher.sa. It’s like a centralized identification provided by the Ministry of Interior. The Absher is spelling in English. It can vary. For example, you can add two E’s, one E, but in Arabic, it’s very clear. If we use Arabic, it will be more clear for the user that this really is Absher, not another site. So, from this point, we can achieve it. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Hisham. I see Manal’s hand is up. Manal, go ahead.

Manal Ismail: Thank you, Behar. I would like to start from the intervention from the floor. It’s very good to know you’re new to the topic. This is excellent. It means that we’re reaching beyond ourselves. So, it’s always good to know that we have people who are new to the topic. I think governments should lead by example. So, they should start promoting and using the IDNs and resolving universal acceptance issues. But still, I think we need to strategize the issue more. So, it’s not just that we need to implement or deploy. universal acceptance but rather we need to have multilingual internet and we need to have a holistic view of what we want to achieve and we have a global plan because it was very surprising to me to hear that with upgrades we lose the progress we’ve already done. So we need things to be prioritized, institutionalized and maintained so that we continue to progress and not go back. So I think this needs to be a global initiative to have a multilingual internet rather than just talk about the technical part of it. Again we will not know all the problems until we start using IDNs and universal acceptance extensively and like anything else I mean it can be as easy as enabling some libraries and doing the technical part but then it comes with a long list of other issues as Hisham mentioned, security, variants and the list goes on. So in terms of direct implementation it’s not that tough but as anything else it comes with a long list of challenges. The whole thing was built with ASCII in mind and what we’re trying to do now is work around that we need to institutionalize and have it transparent from the end user. So anyway we owe it to those who need it so we should continue pursuing this forward slowly but surely. Back to you Ben, sorry.

Moderator: Thank you Manal. I think we have like a couple of more minutes. Are there any questions or maybe if there are any closing remarks by any of the panelists. So I think from what I’m hearing, it’s a long journey and it’s been a long way. A lot has been achieved, more to be done. And I see Bhanu’s hand is up. Bhanu, I think you will have the final or the last comment.

Bhanu Neupane: Thank you very much, Bahar. Just a few very important thing that I want to raise here is, we are following and then tracking this recommendation that was agreed by the member state in 2003. And perhaps that was the first time ever an intergovernmental process had recognized the importance of multilingual IDNs and of course, the top level domain name. And internet were just starting at that time, like world had very few internet users. And now that has in fact become too large a number. But one of the things that we have identified is every four years, we go back and ask the government to report on this one. Most of the time that they say that, okay, we have allowed different languages to go in the internet, but they never talk about IDN or GTLD. So there is an extremely poor awareness on the part of the decision maker. And then we have also started to realize that many governments or most governments still do not have the context of universal acceptance recognized as part of their internet policy. So this is a major drawback for us to move forward. Perhaps there’ll be a time when reaching out to everyone using internet will become a mainstay for the government and perhaps it will be recognizing. exactly as the data breach that happened several years ago and the GDPR became a mainstream. But actually, something similar like that must come forward so that the government will say that unless a new, say, service provider or an internet regulation around the world are universal acceptance ready, they should be kind of like, something should be done on that one. Perhaps this wouldn’t be part of the global internet, you know, say fraternity in some sense. So I think that this is one thing that we have been very much observant about and we are now in a partner with ICANN to do exactly that. Primarily, three things that we want to do. One, that we are trying to prepare a policy brief targeting the member states around the world to bring their understanding of universal acceptance differently. There are not many examples that, okay, we have been asking them that, okay, make your internet multilingual. First, you know, they’ll say that what is the benefit for that? It’ll cost us a lot of money. And I think there is just one report, you know, that is out there which actually puts some figure that, okay, if you make the internet multilingual, there is $9 billion that you can get as part of, and you can, in fact, benefit, you know, or get a chunk of that resources. Those type of empirical studies, you know, we do not have. So I think, you know, we need, you know, many more of that. And as empirical evidence of the benefit of multilingualism in all sense of the word. The other thing is the technical capacities around the world is extremely poor. So I’ll just stop.

Moderator: Yeah, sorry, we’re running over time. And I’ve been informed that we need to wrap this up. I’d like to thank everyone for joining today, both here in Riyadh and remotely. And please join me in thanking our panelists for this very informative discussion. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you you you you

Agreement Points

Importance of IDNs for digital inclusion

speakers

Bhanu Neupane

Manal Ismail

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

Theresa Swinehart

arguments

IDNs crucial for fostering cultural diversity and digital inclusion

IDNs essential for continued internet expansion and reaching next billion users

IDNs help preserve local languages and culture online

IDNs allow users to engage online in their own languages and scripts

summary

Speakers agree that IDNs are crucial for digital inclusion, preserving cultural diversity, and expanding internet access to new users in their native languages.

Challenges in IDN adoption and implementation

speakers

Manal Ismail

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

Walter Wu

Sarmad Hussain

arguments

Low demand and slow uptake of IDNs in many regions

Complexity of variant management for scripts like Arabic

Lack of awareness about IDN availability and benefits

Technical issues with universal acceptance of IDNs across systems

summary

Speakers highlight various challenges in IDN adoption, including low demand, technical complexities, lack of awareness, and issues with universal acceptance.

Similar Viewpoints

These speakers emphasize the crucial role of governments and multi-stakeholder collaboration in promoting IDNs and universal acceptance through policy, leadership, and partnerships.

speakers

Manal Ismail

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

Bhanu Neupane

arguments

Governments should lead by example in promoting IDNs

Need for collaboration between regulators, industry and academia

Importance of including universal acceptance in national internet policies

Unexpected Consensus

Need for empirical evidence on IDN benefits

speakers

Bhanu Neupane

Walter Wu

arguments

Chinese registrar community pushing IDN usage and promotion

Importance of including universal acceptance in national internet policies

explanation

While not directly stated, both speakers indirectly point to the need for more concrete evidence of IDN benefits. Bhanu Neupane mentions the lack of empirical studies on the economic benefits of multilingual internet, while Walter Wu’s emphasis on Chinese registrars’ promotion efforts suggests a need for demonstrable benefits to drive adoption.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The speakers generally agree on the importance of IDNs for digital inclusion and cultural preservation, the challenges in IDN adoption and implementation, and the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration, especially government involvement, in promoting IDNs.

Consensus level

There is a high level of consensus on the fundamental importance and challenges of IDNs. This consensus implies a shared understanding of the issues, which could facilitate coordinated efforts to address challenges and promote IDN adoption. However, the diversity of specific challenges mentioned suggests that solutions may need to be tailored to different contexts and languages.

Different Viewpoints

Approach to promoting IDN adoption

speakers

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

Manal Ismail

arguments

IDNs help preserve local languages and culture online

Governments should lead by example in promoting IDNs

summary

While Hesham emphasizes technical solutions and collaboration with industry, Manal argues for a more proactive government-led approach to promoting IDNs.

Unexpected Differences

Perception of technical readiness for IDNs

speakers

Theresa Swinehart

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

arguments

ICANN programs to enable IDN awareness and universal acceptance

Complexity of variant management for scripts like Arabic

explanation

While Theresa’s argument suggests significant progress in IDN implementation, Hesham’s focus on the complexity of Arabic script variants reveals unexpected technical challenges that are still unresolved.

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the approach to promoting IDN adoption, the readiness of technical infrastructure, and the role of different stakeholders in advancing IDNs.

difference_level

The level of disagreement is moderate. While all speakers agree on the importance of IDNs for digital inclusion, they have different perspectives on implementation strategies and priorities. These differences could impact the coordination of efforts to promote IDN adoption and universal acceptance globally.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the importance of promoting IDN awareness and adoption, but they differ in their focus areas. Theresa emphasizes ICANN’s programs, Walter highlights industry efforts in China, while Sarmad points out the need to address technical challenges.

speakers

Theresa Swinehart

Walter Wu

Sarmad Hussain

arguments

ICANN programs to enable IDN awareness and universal acceptance

Chinese registrar community pushing IDN usage and promotion

Technical issues with universal acceptance of IDNs across systems

Similar Viewpoints

These speakers emphasize the crucial role of governments and multi-stakeholder collaboration in promoting IDNs and universal acceptance through policy, leadership, and partnerships.

speakers

Manal Ismail

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

Bhanu Neupane

arguments

Governments should lead by example in promoting IDNs

Need for collaboration between regulators, industry and academia

Importance of including universal acceptance in national internet policies

Key Takeaways

Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) are crucial for digital inclusion and fostering cultural diversity online

There are significant technical and awareness challenges hindering widespread IDN adoption

Multi-stakeholder collaboration is needed to promote IDNs and universal acceptance

Governments have an important role to play in leading IDN adoption and policy development

Progress has been made on IDNs but there is still a long way to go to achieve a truly multilingual internet

Resolutions and Action Items

UNESCO and ICANN to partner on preparing policy briefs for member states on universal acceptance

Continue efforts to raise awareness about IDNs through events like Universal Acceptance Day

Work on improving technical solutions for IDN implementation and universal acceptance

Encourage governments to include universal acceptance in national internet policies

Unresolved Issues

How to increase demand and uptake of IDNs in many regions

Addressing ongoing technical challenges with universal acceptance across systems

Managing the complexity of script variants, particularly for languages like Arabic

Lack of empirical studies on the economic benefits of multilingual internet

How to maintain progress on IDN support through software/system upgrades

Suggested Compromises

Using both IDN and ASCII domain names/email addresses to allow flexibility in communication

Implementing IDN support gradually through incentives rather than strict mandates

Focusing initial IDN promotion efforts on specific use cases like government services

We see that with the work which is being done by community, by ICANN, by others, there is now a growing awareness. We see more and more not just awareness, but adoption of domain names in local languages and e-mail addresses in local languages over time.

speaker

Sarmad Hussain

reason

This comment provides a balanced perspective on the progress of IDN adoption, acknowledging both achievements and ongoing challenges.

impact

It shifted the conversation from focusing solely on challenges to recognizing progress, while still maintaining a realistic view of the work ahead.

Sometimes we have the planes, but the airport is not ready. But still, this is a fact, and we need to work with it. So we need to work in parallel.

speaker

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

reason

This analogy effectively illustrates the complex interdependencies in implementing IDNs and the need for simultaneous progress on multiple fronts.

impact

It prompted a more nuanced discussion about the timing and coordination of various aspects of IDN implementation, rather than a simple linear approach.

We owe it to those who need it so we should continue pursuing this forward slowly but surely.

speaker

Manal Ismail

reason

This comment reframes the discussion in terms of ethical responsibility and long-term commitment, rather than just technical or business considerations.

impact

It added a moral dimension to the conversation and reinforced the importance of perseverance in the face of challenges.

Many governments or most governments still do not have the context of universal acceptance recognized as part of their internet policy. So this is a major drawback for us to move forward.

speaker

Bhanu Neupane

reason

This insight highlights a critical gap in policy-making that is hindering progress on IDN adoption.

impact

It shifted the focus of the discussion towards the role of government policy in promoting IDNs and universal acceptance, suggesting a new area for advocacy and action.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by broadening its scope from purely technical considerations to include policy, ethical, and strategic dimensions. They helped create a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities in IDN adoption, emphasizing the need for coordinated efforts across multiple stakeholders and a long-term commitment to progress. The discussion evolved from focusing on specific technical challenges to considering broader systemic issues and the importance of government involvement and policy changes.

What concrete steps need to be taken before the new round of gTLDs opens to improve IDN adoption?

speaker

Fouad Bajwa (audience member)

explanation

Important to address low IDN growth and ensure better success in the next round of gTLDs

How can we solve the problem of IDN support inconsistency across software updates?

speaker

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

explanation

Inconsistent support hinders user adoption and trust in IDNs

Can we develop solutions at the protocol level to address IDN challenges?

speaker

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

explanation

Fundamental protocol changes may be needed to fully support IDNs

How can we improve IDN support in CDNs, load balancers, and antiviruses?

speaker

Hesham M. AL-Hammad

explanation

These infrastructure components are critical for IDN functionality

How can we ensure secure identification of senders using IDN email addresses across different scripts?

speaker

Abdulmenem (audience member)

explanation

Important for trust and adoption of IDN email addresses in cross-cultural communication

How can we create more empirical studies on the economic benefits of multilingual internet?

speaker

Bhanu Neupane

explanation

Evidence needed to convince governments and stakeholders of IDN value

How can we improve technical capacities worldwide to support IDNs and universal acceptance?

speaker

Bhanu Neupane

explanation

Lack of technical capacity is hindering IDN adoption and implementation

Summary

This discussion focused on the African Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and digital initiatives across Africa. The African IGF 2024 was held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, with over 430 delegates from 43 member states discussing topics like artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and digital inclusion. Youth and parliamentarian tracks were highlighted as important components. Plans for the 2025 African IGF in Tanzania were announced.

Representatives from the African Union Commission and UN Economic Commission for Africa presented upcoming initiatives. These include the development of a continental AI strategy, revision of the Malabo Convention on cybersecurity, and efforts to expand digital infrastructure and skills across Africa. Particular emphasis was placed on bridging the digital divide in rural areas and empowering youth and women in the digital sphere.

Participants raised questions about strategies for rural connectivity, capacity building, and increasing ratification of the Malabo Convention. The need for greater inclusion of diverse stakeholders in policy development was stressed. Speakers acknowledged challenges but highlighted ongoing efforts to collaborate with various partners, including universities and the private sector, to advance Africa’s digital transformation.

The discussion concluded with calls for better storytelling to showcase Africa’s digital progress and more targeted initiatives for women in technology. Overall, the session demonstrated Africa’s commitment to leveraging digital technologies for development while addressing persistent challenges in connectivity and inclusion.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– Updates on recent and upcoming African IGF activities, including youth and parliamentary tracks

– New initiatives from the African Union Commission and UN Economic Commission for Africa, such as AI strategies, cybersecurity efforts, and digital inclusion programs

– Challenges in bridging the digital divide, especially for rural communities in Africa

– The need for capacity building, training, and empowering youth and women in digital technologies

– Improving storytelling and communication about Africa’s digital initiatives and successes

Overall purpose:

The purpose of this discussion was to provide updates on African digital initiatives, share plans for upcoming projects and strategies, and gather feedback from stakeholders on priorities and challenges in advancing digital development across Africa.

Overall tone:

The tone was largely informative and collaborative, with speakers sharing updates and plans in a positive manner. There was also an undercurrent of urgency around addressing challenges like the digital divide. The Q&A portion introduced a more critical tone as participants raised concerns and pushed for more concrete actions on issues like rural connectivity and women’s inclusion. Overall, the discussion maintained a constructive tone focused on working together to advance Africa’s digital future.

Speakers

– Adil Sulieman: African Union Commission representative, moderator

– Speaker 1: Provided report on African IGF

– Amina Ramalan: Youth representative, reported on Africa Youth IGF

– Speaker 2: Parliamentarian representative from Malawi

– Lilian Nalwoga: MAG chair

– Waleed Hamdi: Head of Information Society Division, African Union Commission

– Makhtar Sheikh: Representative from UN Economic Commission for Africa

Additional speakers:

– Jingbo Huang: Director of United Nations University Research Institute in Macau

– Wisdom Donkor: Executive Director for Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation

– Levy Syanseke: Leader of Internet Society Zambia chapter and youth IGF

– Abdi Jalil Bashar: Partnership advisor of National Cyber Security Agency in Chad, member of Economic Council of African Union

– Ahmed Farak: Chair of the North African IGF

– Martin: Representative from GFC Africa

– James: Representative from Zimbabwe

– Winnie Kamau: Association of Freelance Journalists

– Aicha Jeridi: Vice Chair of the North African IGF

Expanded Summary of African Internet Governance Forum Discussion

Introduction

This summary provides a comprehensive overview of a discussion focused on the African Internet Governance Forum (IGF) and digital initiatives across Africa. The session, moderated by Adil Sulieman from the African Union Commission, brought together representatives from various organisations and countries to discuss recent developments, upcoming initiatives, and persistent challenges in Africa’s digital landscape.

African IGF 2024 Outcomes

The African IGF 2024, held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, was reported as a success, with delegates from numerous member states participating. The forum covered a range of topics including artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and digital inclusion. Two key components of the event were highlighted:

1. Youth Track: Amina Ramalan, a youth representative, reported that the Africa Youth IGF focused on digital governance and emerging technologies, with over 100 participants on-site and 100 online. The main theme emphasized the importance of engaging young people in these discussions.

2. Parliamentarian Track: A representative from Malawi discussed how parliamentarians explored legislation and stakeholder collaboration related to internet governance.

The MAG chair also noted that a new charter was developed to guide the organisation of future African IGFs, demonstrating a commitment to improving the forum’s structure and effectiveness.

Upcoming Initiatives and Strategies

Representatives from the African Union Commission (AUC) and the UN Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) presented several upcoming initiatives:

1. Continental AI Strategy and African Digital Compact: Waleed Hamdi, Head of the Information Society Division at the AUC, announced the development of these comprehensive frameworks to guide Africa’s digital future.

2. PRIDA Phase 2: Set to launch in early 2025, this initiative will focus on internet governance across the continent.

3. Continental Cybersecurity Strategy: Hamdi reported that this strategy is under development and will be presented to AU organs for consideration in the second half of 2025.

4. Digital Strategy Support: Dr. Makhtar Sheikh from UNECA outlined plans to support 10 countries in developing their national digital technology strategies.

5. African Summit on AI: An event planned to take place in Mozambique before June 2025.

6. Global Digital Compact: Dr. Sheikh mentioned its adoption by the UN General Assembly in September 2024.

7. Continental CERT Initiative: Hamdi discussed plans for this cybersecurity measure.

8. Common Position on International Law in Cyberspace: Hamdi noted ongoing work in this area.

9. School Connectivity and Capacity Building: UNECA plans to connect schools and build capacity for 100,000 young students across 14 countries.

10. Digital ID Program: Ethiopia has registered 1 million people, with plans for 24 million next year.

11. STEAM Center in Rwanda and WSIS Plus 20 meeting in Benin: Both initiatives mentioned by Dr. Sheikh.

12. African Center of Cybersecurity in Togo: Plans for this center were discussed.

13. STI Forum: Planned for April in Uganda.

14. Data Governance Working Group: Plans to support six member states in building capacity on data governance.

These initiatives demonstrate a concerted effort to advance Africa’s digital transformation at both continental and national levels.

Challenges and Areas for Improvement

Throughout the discussion, several challenges and areas for improvement were identified:

1. Digital Divide: Audience members emphasized the need to address the digital divide in rural communities, calling for concrete strategies to bridge this gap. Dr. Sheikh noted that connectivity in Africa increased only 1% (from 37% to 38%) in the past year.

2. Capacity Building: Multiple speakers stressed the importance of capacity building for youth, women, and government officials in digital skills and technologies.

3. Malabo Convention: There were calls to revise the Malabo Convention on cybersecurity and increase ratifications among member states.

4. Communication and Storytelling: Winnie Kamau from the Association of Freelance Journalists highlighted the need for better storytelling to showcase Africa’s digital progress and IGF activities.

5. Women’s Inclusion: Aicha Jeridi, Vice Chair of the North African IGF, called for more targeted initiatives for women in technology. Dr. Sheikh mentioned that the digital gender gap has increased to 13.13 points.

6. Identity and Employment: Dr. Sheikh noted that 500 million people in Africa lack legal ID, and there’s a need to create 625 million jobs by 2030.

Collaboration and Support

The discussion emphasized the importance of collaboration and support in advancing Africa’s digital agenda, including invitations for collaboration from the United Nations University and requests for support for sub-regional IGF activities.

Agreements and Consensus

There was broad agreement on several key points, including the importance of capacity building, youth engagement, comprehensive digital strategies, and improved storytelling about IGF activities in Africa.

Conclusion and Next Steps

The discussion concluded with several key takeaways and action items, including Tanzania hosting the next African IGF and a call for new MAG members. While the discussion demonstrated Africa’s commitment to leveraging digital technologies for development, several issues remained unresolved, particularly strategies for effectively bridging the rural digital divide and increasing women’s participation in ICT and cybersecurity.

Adil Sulieman: Please put your earpieces, please. Good afternoon. We will start momentarily. We are just waiting for the panelists to come to the podium. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Adel Suleiman. I’m with the African Union Commission. It gives me great pleasure and privilege to be here with you, the African IJF 20, the IJF 2024, with the main theme of digital, leveraging digital for peace, development, and stability. So we are very happy and pleased to be with you here. This is our annual gathering as Africans. It’s like a family gathering. It’s a family gathering, and we really feel like this is a talk between brothers and sisters. And I think the objective of this open forum, the annual open forum, is to share what the African institutions are doing in terms of new initiatives, and to share some good news with you on the new initiative and project that are in Africa. And also, there will be some representatives from African institutions in this gathering that are also going to be sharing with us what they are doing. And we also want to have a dialogue. I think that also we want to listen from you, your challenges, and what you are doing in terms of some progress on your side, either on an individual basis or on an institutional basis. So basically, I think we stand here with mixed emotions. We have good news. I start with the good news. One of our colleagues who was predominant in this discussion, Dr. Nyambura, I’m glad to announce that now she is the minister in Kenya. So I think we are very proud and happy to have one of the family members to take this high position in their country. I think you have to look yourself as future, also, leaders in Africa, because it’s not far from you. So you can achieve everything that you want. The sad news that, of course, we lost Makan Faye. Makan has been instrumental with the African IGF, as well as with the global IGF. If you can stand up, we just observe a minute of silence. Thank you very much. So let me just walk through the program for today. We will have feedback on the African IGF. So it’s going to be presented by our colleagues. And we have two other tracks during the African IGF. We have the youth track and the parliamentarian track. So also, we are going to get some reporting on those. After that, we will hear from the MAC chair, and then a couple of African institutions, the African Union Commission and the UN Economic Commission for Africa. They’re going also to share with us their new initiative in 25 and moving forward. Without further ado, let me give the floor to Sorine to give a high-level report on the African IGF. Sorine, the floor is yours.

Speaker 1: Thank you, Adil, and good afternoon, everyone. I just want to give a brief background. And we have everybody’s, OK, all the focal points for different aspects of the African IGF. And they will provide a detailed background information. So for the African IGF that had just concluded from the 20 to the 22nd of November in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, we had over 430 delegates. All those delegates got the badges. And we had over 43 member states was represented. And more or less, we had the stakeholders, a diverse one, UN representative, academia, CISOs, parliamentarians, youth, and partner agencies, including research institutes, member states representing, and also private sector were present. Just to give you the demographic and gender balance, we had from the delegate that are present, we had 154 female and 276 male delegates were present during the forum. We started the African IGF first from the African School of Internet Governance, which was led by the APC. The focal point was UNRWA in Peace. They had one week long. The delegate that they covered in the AfRICC close to 55 participants, including the resource personnel, and also including parliamentarians for intergenerational dialogue. So we had, unlike any other days during the African IGF, this year we started quite late. So with the support of the MAG and the MAG chair, who will provide a detailed information on our process, we started quite late. But with the support of the host country, which is the Ethiopian government, we tried to buy in some of the time. As I said, we started with AfRICC. And that was from the 14th to the 19th of November. The topic that was covered or the practicum was around data governance and cross-data flow, which is on the implementation of the African Union Data Policy Framework. And also we had a parliamentarian session, which was facilitated by Celine. She is the focal point from IGF Secretariat. They had one full day parliamentarian track, which had three or four subtopics. And also they had parliamentarian session, included intergenerational dialogue with the youth. And on day zero also, we had a youth track or youth forum, which was a full day. The young lady, Aminata, and Mariam Jope, and Lilian, were the focal point. They will be talking about what the thematic area was, what was the message, and the call for action. We had also partners session. GFC is, I think, present. Martin Koyabe is there. They organized more or less three session. They hold the regional forum, GFC forum, on day zero. they had also a session on coordination committee across the partners and also implementation of the Togo cyber security session. Martin will be a good person to provide more detail. So on the main session of the African IGF, as I said, it was three days including day zero. We had across nine sub thematic areas, that is artificial intelligence and emerging technologies, cyber security and cybercrime, local content and multilingualism were there, technical and infrastructure and many other sessions including also technical infrastructure which was led by ICANN and ISOC sessions. I think we had also a plenary session where we tried to gather all the parallel workshop which were complete like 44 workshop that we hold, plenary sessions, one high-level session on the multi-stakeholder building our multi-stakeholder digital future for Africa, that is the main thematic area for the African IGF this year and we had a main session, one is on misinformation, disinformation in internet shutdown, the second one is around cybercrime and cyber security, the third one was advancing cyber security in digital economy, the last one was around e-government, this were the plenary session and during the high-level session we tried to revisit the global digital compacts in the WSIS annual review in the upcoming WSIS plus 20 review process that we’ll be holding. At the end we concluded our session on open mic which we heard from the community what went right, what went wrong and how we can improve the African IGF process and to make it an inclusive and more representative of the stakeholders and we had also closing ceremony which we announced the next year host for the African IGF, this time will be Tanzania has accepted and considering that the global IGF will be in June, the host government are thinking to hold it just before the global IGF but once the date is agreed with them will be communicated and the last session that I don’t want to forget is hosted by the global digital inclusion partnership, they had breakfast session to make sure that how the women initiative or initiative aim to bridge the digital gap to get their funding from existing funding agencies. So I think I will give back the mic to the moderator to give it to them.

Adil Sulieman: Thank you very much, I think let’s give her a round of applause. One key message is that the African IGF is going to be in Tanzania, most likely it’s going to be early in the year because the global IGF is going to be in June, so just to be ready for that so that we will attend and hopefully maybe we have some representative here will volunteer for the 2026. So I want to be with the presenter to be brief because I think the one of the essence of this session is to have dialogue. So we want to, if you could also take your indulgence that you park the question to the after we finish all the presentations. So I will give the floor now to the youth representative to just give us a briefing on what inspired in Addis Ababa when they met in the youth track. Amina, please go

Amina Ramalan: ahead. Good afternoon everyone, my name is Amina Ramalan. So the 2024 Africa Youth Internet Governance Forum held November 20th on day zero of the Africa IGF. The theme of the 2024 Africa Youth IGF was digital governance and emerging tech, amplifying youth voices in multi-stakeholder dialogue. So during the Africa Youth IGF we had over a hundred participants on site and we had about a hundred participants online from all over the world. We had four panel sessions and we had two workshops. The panel session covered the main theme of the Africa Youth IGF. We also spoke to the global digital compact, understanding its opportunities and perspectives of youth. We had a multi-stakeholder dialogue with policymakers. We had opportunities for engagement by our sponsors, by the stakeholders that were on our panel such as ICANN, UNECA, the Tony Blair Institute, GIZ. We also had a closing session by representatives from the UN IGF Secretariat. Some resolutions from the 2024 Africa Youth IGF include stakeholders committing to taking constructive criticism from the forum. Agreements were also made to increase youth participation and representation in the ecosystem. Governments through policymakers agreed to prioritize integrating digital literacy into academic curriculum. There was also a strong agreement by all participants for the need to develop Africa-specific solutions to Africa-specific problems such as in dealing with digital governance, agricultural health, education that includes integrating our local languages into AI and digital tools. Some of the key outcomes from the Africa Youth IGF include improving digital literacy among youth, advocating for representation of youth in the ecosystem, launching initiatives that will strengthen cross-border collaborations on digital rights. Stakeholders such as ICANN, UNECA also spoke to expanding their capacity building initiatives, prioritizing infrastructure development. There was also discussions on promoting lifelong learning and mentorship opportunities to foster youth leadership in Africa’s digital economy and there was also the consensus to strike a balance between digital innovation and human rights. Thank you. Thank you very much Amina. I

Adil Sulieman: think you did a wonderful job to summarize what inspired in Addis on the youth track. I hope that also the following presenters will also try to keep it short and precise. Let me take this opportunity to welcome Honourable Susan from Malawi to give us a briefing on what inspired during the Parliamentarian symposium. Honourable, please the floor is yours.

Speaker 2: Briefly, at the Africa IGF in November, we had a parliamentary track where we were giving out the issues that we have done so far in our countries, various countries. We had members of Parliament from different countries as well as members who represent Africa Parliamentary Network on Internet Governance. So we discussed issues whereby we spoke about issues of legislation. How can members of Parliament work together with other stakeholders to make sure that we work together. We shouldn’t leave anyone behind. We have to be working together as Africa. We have to, whatever issues we have, we need to put them together and so that we can face the challenges that we are facing as one continent. So it was a very good session and through that session we were able to come up with strategies, plans that can enable us Parliament to work on our duties. As you are aware, as members of Parliament we have a key role to play in our different countries. Coming up with legislation is not that easy so we want every stakeholder to work with us, to be with us and legislators should not be left behind but we have to work together so that we make sure that Africa is connected. Africa is one Africa we are doing the right things together. So as parliamentarians we assured everyone at that session that we are ready to work and we are ready to come up with legislation, maybe on the issues of AI as well on the AI frameworks and anything that will come up even if there will be issues of maybe some amendments to the laws that we already have in our countries. We are ready to to do that. In

Adil Sulieman: brief I think that’s what I can talk about. Thank you. I think we are stronger because we in the African IGF family we have the parliamentarians and we look forward to have other stakeholders like diplomats also so that the family can be also can grow and become more stronger. I think the parliamentarians since they joined in 2022 I think they they they had impact on the ground and we we’re really happy to have them along in this journey with us. Thank you very much. Let me now give the floor to the MAG chair Lilian just to give us a briefing on the MAG activities and what what they have done during last year. Thank you. And also part of this year.

Speaker 3: From the MAG I would like to thank my fellow MAG members and past members. Perhaps I would like to recognize the current. Yes send TiJaan you served last year, Aisha is around he’s currently joined this year. So these plus a number of our colleagues who are not in the room today were very helpful in the shaping of the program last year and this year. So part of our task force when we joined the MAG in towards end of 2002 was to revise the current charter and I would like to tell them inform the community that we have a new charter that guides the organizing and the convening of the Africa IGF. This charter started with a journey that was led by Dr. Makta Sek in Choto last year. It constituted a task force of 12 members and some of them are in the room. TiJaan I don’t see the rest Mama Mary and Harriet. It was led by Honorable Gavenger from the Gambia a Hodge a Hodge Honorable yes from the Gambia and they did quite a wonderful job in advising and guiding and revising so that the charter could fit within the current settings of the Africa IGF. The charter came live this year during the IGF in in Ethiopia last month so it is still very fresh and currently we’ll be opening up call to have new MAG members and this should come out towards the end of next month. I’m looking at Serena and Dr. Makta to be sure that this is going to happen because we realize that the IGF has to we have a very short time frame and again the current MAG I think is used to working under tight deadlines because we had a very short time frame this year to organize the Africa IGF and it was a good success so we believe that if we start as early as next year in constituting a new MAG then the community should be able to give be given time to organize around workshop submitting workshops give the MAG ample time to select the workshops and also have an agenda announced before probably we hear from Tanzania on the month or date they will host we should be able to have our program ready. So I think those are the updates we we have from the MAG so members just look out for that call inviting you to announcing the call for nominations for the MAG members and then we’ll take it on from there. Thank you.

Adil Sulieman: Thank you. Thank you very much Lillian. So you had the news there is a charter and there is an also MAG election so if you guys are interested please especially the youth please just be on the alert something is going to come up and then maybe you can put your name for the for this was some of this position even though they are voluntary but you know this is just to serve Africa and we we are really looking for the youth and their spirit and their you know hard work so that they can make a difference. Thank you very much to the panel. Thank you. Please give them round of applause. Let me ask Mr. Walid Hamdi and Dr. Maktar Sek to come to the high table so that they can also give presentation on some of the initiatives that from the African Union Commission and also the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. I think this is maybe so I’ll be very interested interesting so because you’re going to hear some good news about some development of new policies and and also some new project that are going to be launched in Africa. So let me give the floor to Mr. Walid Hamdi. Mr. Walid Hamdi is the new head of division for the information society division within the African Union Commission. Mr. Walid please go ahead. Thank you. I think there was a mic here.

Waleed Hamdi: Hello. Very good evening brothers and sisters. Very good evening everyone. All protocol all protocol observed. I’m really proud to see this African representations in the room. It’s something that show how we are very keen to for our voices for African voices to reach to this global platforms and to be very effective in shaping global policies. I’m talking about 2024 both very intense as globally the directive the strategic directions was about how to move from strategies to actions. So at the African Union Commission particularly the information society division we were thinking about how to move from strategy strategies to actions and then we kind of like wanted also to promote African efforts and like I mentioned we are very keen that the African voices to be heard in this global platforms. So we started with Global Digital Compact. We had a very long session of thinking about how to submit an African common position to the Global Digital Compact so that our voice is united and also our goals objectives so that we can easily accomplish these tasks all as African all together. So in the preparation of the summit of the future under the African Union Commission stewardship we produce a common position towards an open free and secure digital future for all. These positions have been articulated in an African Digital Compact which was submitted during the summit of the future as I mentioned as a common position for Africa in the Global Digital Compact. That was during the second half of the year and I’m very proud also to say that we managed to develop the continental AI strategy at the same time. We have been working very hard utilizing our resources to provide the African Digital Compact as well as the AI continental strategy because as we all know AI is a very hot topic and we don’t want to be late and also the emerging technologies and specifically AI is now in every conversation around achieving sustainable development goals, addressing the African challenges and we have a lot of unique challenges in Africa as you may know. The continental AI strategy was endorsed by the EU Council back in July in July 2024 with the support from UNESCO and also the African Digital Compact was supported by our colleagues in GIZ. We provided these two frameworks, and those two frameworks developed by multi-stakeholder groups representing African actors in the digital sphere. They developed oriented with specific commitment that measurables, time-bound, and with ownership of objectives clearly assigned. I’m pleased to announce that both frameworks, of course, now are adopted by the EU Summit, by the EU Executive Council, and now they are available. Both of them are accompanied by implementation plans so that Member States can follow these implementation plans for the ease of start implementing those frameworks. I’m very pleased to share today with you all that the second phase of PRIDA, PRIDA Phase 2, will formally launch early 2025. We are speaking about second half of January. Internet governance will be a focus area under the new initiative. I would also like to announce that EU Commission will launch, with the support of LuxDev, a continental CERT initiative following the completion of the project formalization phase which is currently underway. The EU developed a common position on the application of international law, cyberspace, this year. This common position was adopted by EU organs early this year and the Commission is currently assisting Member States to develop their own national position. As I mentioned, we are moving from strategies and policies to actions so that this one is kind of like applying international law into the cyberspace and also to assist Member States to do so. Next, I’m also pleased to report that a continental cybersecurity strategy is under development. Once the draft is finalized, the EU Commission will carry out validation workshops with different stakeholders, African stakeholders, involving various groups in the continent. Ideally, the final draft should be presented to the EU organs for consideration and possible adoption within the second half of 2025. We started with 2024 very excited, but we are continuing to have also 2025 to have these big milestones where we will have the African cybersecurity strategy. This EU cybersecurity flagship project, the EUC will be launching cybersecurity initiatives in close collaboration with the World Bank and the German Foreign Affairs Ministry. This collaboration, the key areas will be domestication of the Malabo Convention Center for Cybersecurity. Also, the cyber strategy and we can’t talk about this without mentioning the child online safety and digital ID. With this, I’ll stop here and thank you so much.

Adil Sulieman: Thank you very much, Walid, for the presentation. Now, I’ll give the mic to my good friend, Dr. Makhtar Sheikh, to also give us some insights on the activities that were carried or plan to be carried by ECA in 2024 and 2025. Dr. Sheikh, please. I think so. You can use your.

Makhtar Sheikh: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for this. For we are going to let’s go faster because we have a meeting running soon. For UNECA, we have a lot of accomplishment during this 24 years, but 25 will be more busy. Just so we can highlight in 2024, the adoption of the Global Digital Compact by the UN General Assembly in New York in September. And also was the launch of the AI Working Group and also the Data Governance Working Group at the UN level. We work closely with the AUC and we support a lot of member states in several areas. And now we are going to align our work in 2025 on the five objectives of the Global Digital Compact. Let me give you a summary of what we plan to do in 2025. Regarding the first objective of the Global Digital Compact, closing the digital divide and achieving sustainability. Today, our support to member states to develop their national strategy on digital technology. This year, we focus on 10 countries. 10 countries will be beneficial for this support. We will continue also to work on digital public infrastructure, DPI, to support some member states and also to develop some African guidelines on digital and DPI. And focus more on climate change, the impact of the climate in our continent. Also, we will continue to support African members to expand their broadband infrastructure by bringing some investment companies to support them. 2025. Also, in terms of connectivity, we are going to continue our work to promote connectivity across the school. And as a joint program, we have UNICEF, ITU, and ECA to connect a lot of schools across the continent this year. And also capacity building. We are going to build the capacity of young students. We target 100,000 this year across 14 countries. Now, on the second objective regarding this digital inclusion and to make this digital technology beneficial for all. We have several activities like the digital ID program. We will continue our digital ID program in member states. Now, we focus in 2025 on seven countries. We will add four more countries on 2025. Now, we have a great result in Ethiopia. In the database, we have now, at the end of last week, 1 million registered to get their digital ID. And next year, we plan to go to 24 million. And we will add also, we already have finalized a strategy for Malawi. And we are going to start this implementation in Gambia, in Malawi, and other African countries. Also, we are going to launch this STEAM Center in Rwanda in June. Also, inclusion needs this whole meeting we are going to organize. WSIS Plus 20 will be discussed in May in Benin to discuss how we can align WSIS Plus 20 and the Global Digital Compact for African countries before the Global WSIS in July in Geneva and also before the General Assembly in September where we are going to organize the continuation of IGF and WSIS Plus 20 in line with the Global Digital Compact. The third objective regarding cybersecurity, make our cyberspace secure. We are going to continue our work on cybersecurity. We focus more on capacity building this year because last year, we have a lot of policy and AUC will develop the national African continental. We are going to revise the Malabo Convention. We are going to see how to assist member states to implement this new revision of the Malabo Convention. We will continue also the capacity building program targeting member states, parliamentarians, and the private sector as well as the law judiciary. On cybersecurity also, hopefully, we are going to launch this year the African Center of Cybersecurity in Togo. We are working closely with GFC and World Bank on that. We think by the end of this year, we are going to launch this cybersecurity center. Also, objective four regarding data governance and data sharing. We have the implementation of the African Union Data Governance Framework. We are going to support six member states to build their capacity on data governance and also to develop their data. their national strategy. The country has already identified, and the work will start as of 1st or 2nd January next year. Also, on data governance, we are going to develop this data governance guideline for Africa. We are going to set up in place a working group on data governance for the continent. Because at the world level, we already put a data governance working group. And this data governance working group, we have only four member states per continent. Africa will be represented by four member states. And at UNECA, we are going to put a large data governance group. And this data governance group, the outcome will be discussed in the global data governance to make sure all the parts of Africa are being taken into consideration in this data governance. The last one, it is AI, very important, AI governance. And we’ll continue our work to artificial intelligence policy supporting member states and to develop their national policy. Already, we support the AUC to develop the African AI strategy on AI. Now, we are implementing at the member states. We’ll organize next year’s African Summit on AI in Mozambique before June 2025. That agreed now with the government. We are going also to put a lot of capacity building on AI. Because the issue is we need to build the capacity of the policymaker and the youth generation on AI. And we are going to use this artificial intelligence center we have created in Congo to build more capacity for member states and for African youth in AI. Also, we are going to organize this STI forum in April in Uganda. And we are going to show a lot of innovation on AI at the continental level. We already developed a website showing more than 300 innovation on AI in several areas, going to agriculture, health, business sector, industry. And we are going to launch this platform during the African STI forum that we organized in April with the government of Uganda. On AI also, there is an issue of ethics of AI. It’s a regulation we will work with UNESCO to have a one ethic guideline for the continent, as well as how to regulate this emerging technology. We have an approach sandbox for Africa. I will provide the result as soon as possible. As you see, I’m going to stop there. Because we have a lot of activity in 2025 going to policy development, capacity building, project knowledge sharing, as well as a platform of dialogue like this, which is African IGF. And also, the think tank for Africa to discuss how they fit their priority in the global agenda. Because we have a big issue in Africa. If you look at the statistic last year, 2023, the connectivity, it was at 37%. And the last statistic we get two weeks ago by ITU, it is at 38%. We have only 1% increase on connectivity in one year. It is a big issue because we need to make progress. Also, when we look at this digital gender gap, the digital gender gap in 2023 was between men and women. Now, it is 13.13 point. And there is an increase. And we need to find a solution to make everybody access a digital space. And also, we have to curb the digital ID negative impact. Because we still have 500 million not connected without any form of legal ID. We have some challenges like that. And also, as you know, by 2050, 40% of the African youth population will represent 40% of the youth population. We need to build their capacity. And by 2030, we need to create 625 million jobs in Africa focused on digital skills. And we have to find a way to bridge the gap and to create more, more, more, more people connected and more, more people skilled in the digital era to make sure we leave no one offline. Thank you. Thank you very much, Dr. Sek, for the presentation. As you can see from the two presentations, there’s a lot to be done. And if you are representing an institution or maybe individual, we will seek your help with all this. Because we cannot do it alone. We need the support of everybody in their own capacity so that we can accomplish all these aspirations. With that, we finish our presentation.

Adil Sulieman: And we come to the real work of receiving comments from the floor. And please keep it to one question or one intervention comments, because there are so many people in the room. And we want to give opportunity to everybody who wants to speak, who wish to speak, so that we can learn from you. And also, maybe you can ask question not to only these two gentlemen, but also to the people who were here before on the African IGF, the MAG, and all that. So without further ado, let me open the floor. I see one hand here. Let’s take maybe four at a time. One, two, three, where is number four? And OK, four. Start with the lady. By the way, I am very proud that we have a very good gender balance in the room and also on the panel. I think this is good. And I think this is a testimony of the African spirit. I think this is great. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

Audience: My name is Jingbo Huang. I’m the director of United Nations University Research Institute in Macau. So I’m very enthusiastic about the plans for African continent, because we have a lot to offer. And UNU, as you know, is a UN organization, also think tank. We do teaching, training, capacity building specifically, and education. So our institute, the institute that I’m heading in Macau, is specialized in digital tech and SDG, research and capacity building. We have a 13 institute in 12 countries. And I hear from both of the distinguished speakers and also the previous panel the needs of strategy development, for example, related to digital tech, capacity building for youth, for policymakers. That’s exactly what we can do in UNU Macau. So I will be happy to connect offline to let you know. For example, we have a training catalog related to demystifying AI. We have also done the UNESCO AI ethics readiness assessments in some other countries. So we have a lot to offer. And in our institute, it consists of former university professors from different parts of the world and with different backgrounds related to digital tech. So just to provide you that we have this implementation power and also to support your visions in doing so. So the second point is that we hold a UNU AI conference. And this year, we had the first one. And we actually invited some African ministers of ICTs to our conference. And in collaboration with the UNDESA, we put together a data governance digital transformation workshop. So many of the ministers have already participated in it. So this year, 2025, we would like to invite our guests here to join our AI conference. October 24, UN Day 2035, is going to mark the UNU’s 50th anniversary and also the UN’s 80th. So it will be a big year. I hope that you will come to join us. Third is we have a UN for youth. During this conference, we will also have a AI social innovation hackathon awards competition for young people to present AI social innovation solutions for local problems. So I also invite the youth from Africa. Thank you.

Adil Sulieman: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Is there a mic? Thank you very much.

Audience: My name is Wisdom Donkor, the executive director for Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation. My concern goes to. Waleed, you talk about the strategies to help Africa, but my worry is that we still not talking about how we are going to get the rural communities out of the state in which they are now. So I want to understand from you what concrete strategies do you have in order for us to be able to bridge that digital divide gap within the rural communities because within our part of the continent that is where most of our food basket comes from, that is where most of the, I should say, employment comes from within the agriculture sector and trade. So I would like to know. And then also to Dr. Maktar, now we are talking about data governance and then the working group and all of that. The AI is also coming up. Other programs are also coming up. We still have the rural communities to connect. And then, I don’t know, it looks like we are overloading ourselves. I just want to understand how we can move towards these rural communities and then help them because everybody in the room here seems to come from the urban cities and all of that. The rural communities are still in the dark. When you talk about electricity, they are still in the dark. When you talk about connectivity, it’s still in the dark. And then other components, and if you take the educational sector as well, you mentioned UNESCO. Now, I didn’t hear about local content. I was expecting to hear about local content and what we can do to bridge that gap because if you look at our educational institutions, the urban cities, the programs that we learn, the rural communities, it’s the same thing that they also learn. But then the urban cities have that privilege of having everything digitally. The rural communities don’t have. But yet, this is the case that the rural communities sit in the same exam room as the urban cities. We write the same exam. So what do we have concretely to do for us to bridge that gap? Because that is where I think those problems are coming from. If we’re able to bridge those gaps, then we’ll be there. Good afternoon. I’m Levi Siansege from Zambia. I lead the Internet Society Zambia chapter and also the youth IGF. I think from its two comments in one, my concern question goes to Dr. Macta. You mentioned, I think, a number of projects are supporting a limited number of countries in Africa. I would like to find out which country, which project Zambia would fall in. I would like to write on that since I’m from Zambia. And then earlier, I think part of the opening, there was a concern about the Africa IGF 2026. If there is room to place a voluntary role for 2027, I’d like to pledge my country. We can work, I think, on a number of things to ensure that 2027 can be hosted in Zambia. And with that said, I think those are my questions and contributions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. It’s okay? Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. It is Abdi Jalil Bashar from Chad. I’m the partnership advisor of National Cyber Security Agency in Chad and also a member of Economic Council of African Union. So I need to thank Walid and Macta for the intervention because there’s a lot of things to do it in next year or in the few days. So about the artificial intelligence strategy in Africa and how to do the revision of Malabo Convention. So my question is about capacity building. So I think that capacity building is very key. So we need to train the young people, women, the official, the parliamentary. So how we can contact you because sometimes you send the official invitation through the foreign affair, but sometimes are not sent to the key minister of ICT or National Cyber Security Agency. So is that any opportunity to send the request directly to you and we can work together on that? Thank you so much.

Adil Sulieman: Just am I audible? Can hear me guys? You can hear me? Okay. I don’t know. Sorry for

Speaker 4: that. Yes. So I would like to start by thanking director UNU Macau. Definitely at the African Union we value this collaboration, we value this cooperation and we value these partnerships because we cannot do it all by ourselves and Africa is a part of the world and we need to position ourselves in this as partners to other organizations as well as also to kind of like exchange our African experience, our African knowledge in terms also to know what others are doing and we have already some collaboration with UNU and we are happy of course to receive your invitation and also to participate in UNU Macau event. So thank you so much for your comments, we appreciate it and we can also always discuss future collaboration. So my brother, that’s a great question regarding the strategies to bridge the digital divide especially focusing on rulers, areas and communities. So yes, you might not hear it today but we all know that it’s a real challenge. I talked about that we have real unique challenge in Africa but the reason that we mentioned AI and other frameworks it’s not to neglect this gap rather than also to look for innovative ways to kind of like bridge the gap of the connectivity. So it’s been in our agenda, in our priorities. The strategies we put in place for this is that we are working very closely with ATU, African Telecommunication Union. We are exploring new technologies that can help because connectivity issue, we had so many conversations with ITU for example, we look at the ITU fact sheets and we’re also monitoring this gap bridging. So we are working very closely with African Telecommunication Union, we are trying also to look at innovative and not so traditional way of bridging the gap by using you know internet satellites, maybe using low orbit connectivity. So all these things are things that we are thinking about, we work together, we push for bridging the gap with the rural area and we thank you for being the voice in the room for these communities that’s like you mentioned might not be able to come all the way here. We thank you for your interest, we thank you for being the voice for these communities and we work tirelessly to kind of like see improvement in this challenge. You mentioned electricity, earlier this month we have our STC for energy and we tabled Africa energy efficiency strategy and we have been very clearly given directions also to use AI technology in these things and to use AI in also kind of like when we use renewable energy to reserve the African resources and to best utilize these resources. So we are working on that, our strategies work together is to take a multi-stakeholder and collaborative approach with our colleagues in Ato. The capacity building Abdul Jalil mentioned, well as I said earlier that we have implementation plans for both for African digital compact and for AI strategy and in those framework, in those strategies there is a pillar for the capacity building, there is a pillar about advocating and promoting the AI application development. All this needs capacity building, all this needs training and maybe also as a director of UNU Macau mentioned that we are working, this is a good example in the room, that we are doing this either by our resources or by collaborating with other international organizations. How to approach us? Everyone knows in the AU my door is always open, you can have my card, you can have my email, there is an email also isd at africa union africa-union.org you can send us we keep monitoring and we don’t ignore any email any idea any suggestion any kind of like communication you can approach me directly if not all my team are there

Adil Sulieman: and also through the official channels of course through the AU official channels we are approachable and we are happy to work peer-to-peer and also to work together with anyone who is interested for the gentleman I will give Dr. Mokhtar because the question was addressed to him. Thank you I think you

Makhtar Sheikh: have a very interesting question first we work together we have a MOU and we develop some activity at the regional level on e-government I think we took note on your idea and we’ll see how we can involve you on our activity on capacity building and AI we work also on climate change review how to use digital for climate change to mitigate it this like climate impact in the continent digital gap you have a right because now Africa in the real area we have a 25% productivity as a digital area and our objective is to bridge this digital gap when you look at the first objective of now United Nation on the global standard compacted to bridge this digital divide in the UNEC our strategy is to involve the private sector in the development of the infrastructure in the real area now we start with some country we are going to start with Ethiopia how to bring private sector to develop the real area through PPP with the government and it will work very well because we did something like in Guinea to develop the broadband infrastructure and also we have a research strategy universal service strategy we are going to launch next year I think it is something we can help to bridge this digital divide and in the real area also we have our program on digital ID and we provide digital ID to all people across the country now Zambia we woke up and request if there is advisory service we have to receive a letter from the government just to if government want to develop national strategy or to develop policy or need support to develop one project digital ID program or cyber security or e-commerce or AI policy now we have to receive the letter from the government it is a process I think all the government Africa know how to work with UNECA and if we have activity on capacity building now we send directly we target people in the parliamentarian in the policymaker among youth and we target people to be part on this policy on this capacity building Zambia it will be digital ID we support Zambia in digital ID but our strategy is not is to we don’t have a possibility to support all African country for one project we build the capacity for one or two country and this country will serve as model for other country and other country can go there to learn and to develop their policy what we did I give you an example we build is the capacity of Rwanda in digital technology yeah me I spent seven years in Rwanda that just working on the digital Zambian project the digital now Rwanda is a model people country can go there learn about what they have done on the digital policy what they have done on the on digital finance and can use the system and lot of country now go to Rwanda for this kind of for collaboration how we can use it AI in the agriculture sector how we can transform with this real area by creating more activity we we have the example of Botswana and people can go there we have the developer the innovative technology at 700 kilometers from the capital at this place when we come there is no network there is nothing but now we have everything and the farm has very happy because there is a lot of new revenue using digital technology for for their farm and I think we thank you very much for this very good questions and I think if I may complement also the panel Jalil I think it’s the request has to be sent to the formal channel and also you can contact the individuals who are here I think that will make sure that and then to the point on the connectivity is the rural connectivity I think maybe we need

Adil Sulieman: to change the mindset not to talk about connectivity anymore rather to talk about solutions will provide solution to the communities and then part of the solution will be the connectivity but this is the different discussion so we can so we open the floor for the next round of questions okay you have one here two three and four yeah you are the first question you thank you you we can hear you

Audience: Technology is failing us. Thank you. My name is Ahmed Farak. I’m chair of the North African IGF and I would like to share with with you some activities that we have organized in 2024 and followed up with a question for the panel. We have organized our annual meeting the 8th annual meeting in October and in Mauritania and we have almost more than 10 sessions actually the 11th session and we have discussed some important topics regarding the data governance, the broadband and cybersecurity and more than this GDC as well and the women inclusion and we are in the North African IGF we are committed to organize a specialized session for the youth IGF initiative in the North African. Before the forum we have organized the school internet governance. We served the program for more than 34 students of from the seven countries of the North African IGF. As you see and as I mentioned before we are focusing on the youth okay we are dedicated our efforts to help them and to offer them a class building program that allow them to be the next leaders of the region. My question is if there any channel okay that can support the sub-regional in our continent Africa during the sub-regions IGFs that can might help us in the capacity building track that we are insist to promote and enhance the outcomes of these tracks. Thank you.

Adil Sulieman: Thank you very much for this opportunity. First of all let me take this opportunity to thank AUC and of course UNECA for the cooperation that we’ve

Audience: had. My name again is Martin from the GFC Africa. What I have is first of all I’ll just want to give you four areas that came out of our regional meeting which require some interventions from the floor and probably you may want to respond to. During the global during the regional meeting that we had in the margins of the Africa IGF we had a session where we covered four areas. The first area looked at the protocols the strategies that have been developed within the continent especially looking at Malabo Convention the IE’s strategy and so forth. The key question that came out within that was how do we allow and how do we expand the inclusion of specific interest groups in expanding the understanding of the implementation. For example we have different sectors we’ve got health we’ve got transport and so forth so those sectors need to be included so the question is how do we do that. And then there was also an intervention within the area of diversity and I know we haven’t covered quite a bit on that in terms of women and girls inclusivity and the key issue is to strengthen the intervention when it comes to policy especially to make sure that policies are gender sensitive within either regional or national level and also when we do capacity in those sectors how do we ensure that we get people absorbing the people who are being trained so that’s another question that came out of that and then the other one that we looked at was cyber diplomacy norms and issues of confidence building measures which is a new area and I know we’ve had a session today looking at cyber diplomacy but the key there was the issue around building capacity at regional level so what is it that we can do in the ECOWAS region we know ECOWAS is doing a good job but more likely in SADAC East African region to build capacity to understand those particular areas and then finally when it came to the issues of enhancing resilience we are seeing that there is an agreement that regional dynamics in terms of resilience is important we are seeing SATs being looked at and I’m glad AUC has actually formally announced that they are going to look at the formulation of the Africa SAT at a continental level and the key question is the understanding of the services and other areas that need to be absorbed and then lastly just a quick one here is the issue around the Togo Center which Mark Tasek talked about this has progressed significantly there are two areas which are being looked at one is the issue around the interest within the region and investment from the private sector thank you very much thank you okay so thank you just to know I want to know if there are some MOU with the different universities in Africa for okay I want to know if there are some MOU UN and African Union and each the university in Africa to let the knowledge you are providing to be available for everyone in Africa is there something like that you my name is James from Zimbabwe mine is on the revision of the Malabo Convention I think this is long overdue but really welcome now that we hear that African Union is going to look at that if you look at the fate of Budapest now you have a new UN treaty on cyber security and I think what was observed today should have been long observed for us under Malabo my hope is for African Union to devise a strategy to push for more ratifications of the Malabo Convention there is one hurdle in terms of ratification with the Malabo where a member state is supposed to have in place a data protection legislation in southern Africa we have tried to go around this by having model laws to assist member states to come up with their data protection legislations so perhaps the African Union can also consider something similar to help member states to come up with those data protection legislations as a condition to fulfill the ratification of Malabo and then we can have more ratifications it’s very possible to have 100% ratification of Malabo we have already seen it happening with the African continental free trade area protocol where you have a massive number of member states who have ratified the protocol so it’s an appeal to African Union to consider devising a strategy to increase the ratifications of Malabo otherwise it’s a document which won’t be useful let it be useful further and we can avail our AU network and arrangement collaboration arrangement to well I don’t want to say to more empower because now we are doing our best to empower the youth but to continue empowering them to the full limits so that we can they can assist us in our mission and to reach Africa we want so I’m very glad to continue this discussion maybe offline and put all our resources to support the regional initiatives dr. Martin you the question was about the four main areas the strategies how to include different players so the African Union Commission when we look at the strategies we we serve all our member states all of them equally and to be able to kind of like zoom in to integrate specific stakeholders regarding in different fields health education all our strategies comes with a pillar around partnerships how can we achieve the strategy goals of the strategy and we are working also the same approach cybersecurity strategy we are taking the same approach of trying to have a strategy that’s inclusive and that we can reach we can reach our strategic objectives with with integrating everyone however it’s challenging to be done completely at the continental level so there is some work to be done as a country level that we always try to put it as a direction in the strategies but it’s it’s also kind of like a shared responsibility between us and the member states gender inclusivity and gender sensitivity all our initiatives or meeting or groups are gender sensitive and inclusive and we always try to take initiatives that encourage African women to join us in the cybersecurity sphere and to participate more and also kind of like to have opportunities where they can show their abilities and also where can they learn from others and we started by ourself in the division where we always advocate for women in cybersecurity the cyber diplomacy the regional we tend to take peer-to-peer regional approach meaning that we are in we are advocating for regional experience sharing and peer to peer learning between all our regions and Mohtar is not here to answer the toggle part so I’m going to maybe you can take it offline with Dr. Seck so yes James regarding the Malabo Convention I am going to divert this question to Mr. Adil because he is he is one of the pioneers and he worked closely with the team and he spearheaded the Malabo Convention work so I think he’s going to make justice answering your question more than me so also just to share the floor not to feel that I’m under the spot by myself share some of the questions with him so Mr. Adil if you would like to address yeah thank you

Adil Sulieman: very much thank you for the questions let me go also through the just to enrich the answers on the questions that were raised. So the first question was about the regional initiative. I think PREDA2 is going to focus, as mentioned by Waleed, that IG is going to be one of the pillars of PREDA2 and of course you know PREDA2, IG is national, regional, continental. So there’s going to be support for the regional initiatives. Martin, I think we’ve been working with the UK government on CBMs and training for the RECs. We started with ECOWAS and we did SADEC and hopefully next year we’ll do Central Africa, East Africa, North Africa and we will do one for the continent so that we can go bottom up and then we have Africa common position when it comes to CBMs and norms. A Malibu Convention, you are right, I think we have to devise and I think this is also was announced by Waleed in his initial remark that this is something that we are going to be working on, on the ratification and also model laws so that the country can also ratify and accelerate the ratification. There is support from German government on that and the World Bank and we’ll be working on that exclusively. For the question on PREDA2 and the lesson learned and the scope, AI is going to be featured in PREDA2, IG and DTS, the sectorial strategies, so that’s going to be covered and also data is going to be also featured. Lesson learned, so we had COVID and then we had to work around COVID and this is something that also we need to focus on. Gender was missing in PREDA2, so this is lesson learned that we have also to have more focus on gender in PREDA2, but we are very excited about the initiative so that this is also going to be, is going to have a reflection on also IGF, the global IGF. We may have more African participating in the global IGF. I was told that I think we have five minutes, if there is one intervention. She wants to ask a question and then I don’t know if we are going to be covered more than one question. It’s okay. Hi, my name is Winnie Kamau from the Association of Freelance Journalists. You can hear me now? Thank

Audience: you. For me, I’m just wondering where is the role of storytelling in telling the good work that is being done by the IGF sector, especially in Africa. We are not telling our stories more. It’s the first time I’m hearing about North Africa having, I mean, what they did. I would like to hear more stories from the North Africa team, what they’re doing there and also in AU and everything. So I don’t know what is the role of the media and in your storytelling. Thank you. Initially, can you hear me? Yes, this is Aisha Jaridi. I’m the Vice Chair of the North African IGF. I am from North Africa and I just wanted to compliment what my colleague says, Ahmad, is that during the last North African IGF, we’ve launched a new initiative, especially for women, capacity building for women in North Africa. So it’s a series of webinars that we will conduct to address the needs of women in North Africa. This is being said, my question to be short, and we can link after that to tell you more about North Africa. My question is to you, Dr. Waleed or Dr. Adel. In your agenda, where is women? Do you intend or do you have specific objectives, specific inclusion measures for women or do you have specific projects targeting immediately women? So this is shortly what I wanted to know. Thank you. Yes, I think I will agree with my sister that storytelling is a very powerful tool. We are always using storytelling. We are always engaging with media. We share with them media briefs. We share with them what we are doing, what we have achieved, our success. But I think there is room

Adil Sulieman: for improvement. I think we need also to understand. We have a team of communication experts. Maybe if they were here, they would tell more. But for us, we need also to do more about storytelling, do more about sharing our success, do more about sharing our experiences. So I do agree with you. Storytelling is a very powerful tool to show and to learn also from these stories and inspire people also to come work with us. Because again and again and again, we will keep mentioning that we cannot do it alone. We need all Africans to come work with us in different capacities to achieve these goals for Africa we want to. Thank you so much for the question. Yeah, let me take the women question. I think BRIDA 2 is going to feature. I think we did a study on BRIDA 1 and how to improve women involvement in ICT and hopefully this is going to be reflected in BRIDA 2. And as mentioned also in the opening statement by Walid, that women in cyber, this is something that we are going to also, is going to take off in 2025. So this is a couple of things that we can talk about, we can make reference to. But I think we come to the end of this session. Thank you very much for being here and attending the session and actively

Agreement Points

Need for capacity building and digital skills development

Makhtar Sheikh

Audience

Supporting member states on digital strategies, ID programs, and capacity building

Importance of capacity building for youth, women, and officials

Multiple speakers emphasized the importance of capacity building and developing digital skills across various groups in Africa, including youth, women, and government officials.

Focus on youth engagement in internet governance

Amina Ramalan

Lilian Nalwoga

Youth track focused on digital governance and emerging tech

New charter developed to guide organizing of African IGF

There was a shared emphasis on engaging youth in internet governance discussions and processes, both through dedicated youth tracks and in the overall organization of the African IGF.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers highlighted initiatives aimed at developing comprehensive digital strategies and frameworks at the continental and national levels in Africa.

Waleed Hamdi

Makhtar Sheikh

Continental AI strategy and African Digital Compact developed

Supporting member states on digital strategies, ID programs, and capacity building

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of storytelling and media engagement

Audience

Adil Sulieman

Enhancing storytelling and media engagement about IGF activities

I think we need also to do more about storytelling, do more about sharing our success, do more about sharing our experiences.

There was an unexpected consensus on the need to improve storytelling and media engagement about IGF activities in Africa, with both the audience and organizers recognizing its importance for increasing awareness and participation.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement centered around the need for capacity building, youth engagement, development of continental digital strategies, and improving communication about IGF activities.

Consensus level

There was a moderate level of consensus among speakers on key issues, particularly on the importance of capacity building and youth engagement. This consensus suggests a shared vision for developing Africa’s digital ecosystem, which could lead to more coordinated efforts in implementing digital strategies and policies across the continent.

Different Viewpoints

Unexpected Differences

Overall Assessment

summary

No significant areas of disagreement were identified in the discussion.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among speakers was minimal to non-existent. This implies a high level of alignment and cooperation among African stakeholders in addressing internet governance and digital development challenges. The lack of disagreement suggests a unified approach to tackling issues such as digital divide, capacity building, and policy development across the continent.

Partial Agreements

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers highlighted initiatives aimed at developing comprehensive digital strategies and frameworks at the continental and national levels in Africa.

Waleed Hamdi

Makhtar Sheikh

Continental AI strategy and African Digital Compact developed

Supporting member states on digital strategies, ID programs, and capacity building

Key Takeaways

The African IGF 2024 was successful, with over 430 delegates from 43 member states participating

The African Union Commission and UNECA have developed several new initiatives, including a continental AI strategy and African Digital Compact

PRIDA Phase 2 will launch in early 2025, focusing on internet governance

There is a need to address the digital divide in rural African communities

Capacity building for youth, women, and officials remains a priority

Collaboration with international organizations and support for sub-regional IGF initiatives is important

Resolutions and Action Items

Tanzania will host the next African IGF, likely early in the year before the global IGF in June

A call for new MAG members will be opened towards the end of next month

The continental cybersecurity strategy draft will be presented to AU organs for consideration in the second half of 2025

UNECA will support 10 countries to develop their national digital technology strategies

An African Summit on AI will be organized in Mozambique before June 2025

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively bridge the digital divide in rural communities

Specific strategies for increasing women’s participation in ICT and cybersecurity

Methods to accelerate ratification of the Malabo Convention

How to improve storytelling and media engagement about IGF activities

Suggested Compromises

Exploring innovative technologies like internet satellites and low orbit connectivity to address rural connectivity issues

Developing model laws to assist member states in creating data protection legislation to facilitate Malabo Convention ratification

Integrating gender sensitivity and inclusivity measures into all strategies and initiatives

We still not talking about how we are going to get the rural communities out of the state in which they are now. So I want to understand from you what concrete strategies do you have in order for us to be able to bridge that digital divide gap within the rural communities

speaker

Wisdom Donkor

reason

This comment challenged the presenters to address a critical gap in their strategies – the digital divide in rural areas. It highlighted an important issue that had not been adequately addressed.

impact

This led to more focused discussion on rural connectivity challenges and prompted the speakers to elaborate on strategies for bridging the digital divide.

How we can contact you because sometimes you send the official invitation through the foreign affair, but sometimes are not sent to the key minister of ICT or National Cyber Security Agency. So is that any opportunity to send the request directly to you and we can work together on that?

speaker

Abdi Jalil Bashar

reason

This comment highlighted practical challenges in communication and coordination between African Union initiatives and national agencies. It raised an important operational issue.

impact

It prompted discussion on improving communication channels and processes for engagement between continental bodies and national agencies.

My hope is for African Union to devise a strategy to push for more ratifications of the Malabo Convention there is one hurdle in terms of ratification with the Malabo where a member state is supposed to have in place a data protection legislation

speaker

James from Zimbabwe

reason

This comment provided specific, actionable suggestions for addressing challenges with an important continental policy framework.

impact

It shifted the discussion towards concrete strategies for increasing ratification of the Malabo Convention and highlighted the need for supporting legislation.

For me, I’m just wondering where is the role of storytelling in telling the good work that is being done by the IGF sector, especially in Africa. We are not telling our stories more.

speaker

Winnie Kamau

reason

This comment introduced a new perspective on communication and highlighted the importance of narrative in promoting African digital initiatives.

impact

It broadened the discussion to include communication strategies and the importance of sharing African success stories in the digital space.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by highlighting critical gaps in current strategies, particularly around rural connectivity and communication. They prompted more concrete discussion of implementation challenges and strategies, while also broadening the conversation to include important aspects like storytelling and regional cooperation. The comments helped shift the dialogue from high-level policy announcements to more practical considerations of how to effectively implement and communicate about digital initiatives across Africa.

What concrete strategies are there to bridge the digital divide gap within rural communities?

speaker

Wisdom Donkor

explanation

Rural communities are still lacking in connectivity and digital resources, which impacts education and economic opportunities.

How can local content be developed and integrated to address educational disparities between urban and rural areas?

speaker

Wisdom Donkor

explanation

Rural students lack access to digital resources but are expected to compete with urban students in the same exams.

Which specific projects and countries is UNECA supporting in Africa?

speaker

Levi Siansege

explanation

Understanding which countries are receiving support can help others learn about potential opportunities for collaboration or assistance.

How can countries directly contact AUC and UNECA for capacity building and training opportunities?

speaker

Abdi Jalil Bashar

explanation

Improving communication channels could help ensure key ministries and agencies receive information about training opportunities.

Is there a channel to support sub-regional IGFs in Africa, particularly for capacity building tracks?

speaker

Ahmed Farak

explanation

Sub-regional IGFs are focusing on youth development and could benefit from additional support to enhance their programs.

How can specific interest groups and sectors (e.g., health, transport) be included in expanding the understanding and implementation of continental strategies?

speaker

Martin Koyabe

explanation

Ensuring diverse sector representation is crucial for comprehensive strategy implementation.

How can policies be made more gender-sensitive at regional and national levels?

speaker

Martin Koyabe

explanation

Gender-sensitive policies are important for promoting inclusivity in the digital sphere.

What can be done to build capacity for cyber diplomacy and norms at the regional level, particularly in SADC and East African regions?

speaker

Martin Koyabe

explanation

Regional capacity building in cyber diplomacy is crucial for addressing cybersecurity challenges.

Are there MOUs between the UN, African Union, and African universities to make knowledge more widely available?

speaker

Unnamed audience member

explanation

Formal agreements could help disseminate knowledge and resources more effectively across the continent.

Can the African Union devise a strategy to increase ratifications of the Malabo Convention, possibly including model laws for data protection?

speaker

James

explanation

Increased ratification is necessary for the Malabo Convention to be effective across the continent.

What is the role of storytelling in sharing the work being done by the IGF sector in Africa?

speaker

Winnie Kamau

explanation

Better communication of initiatives and successes could increase awareness and engagement across the continent.

What specific objectives or projects does the AUC have targeting women’s inclusion in digital initiatives?

speaker

Aicha Jeridi

explanation

Understanding specific measures for women’s inclusion is important for addressing gender disparities in the digital sphere.

Summary

This discussion focused on the challenges and opportunities of artificial intelligence (AI) in relation to human rights, inclusivity, and responsible development. Panelists from diverse backgrounds explored how AI systems can perpetuate societal biases and inequalities, particularly affecting marginalized communities and individuals with disabilities. They emphasized the need for a human-centered approach to AI development, incorporating diversity in teams, rigorous auditing, and transparency in algorithmic processes.

The conversation highlighted the importance of comprehensive regulatory frameworks and standardization to ensure AI accountability and fairness. Panelists stressed the critical role of governments in establishing clear guidelines and independent oversight mechanisms. They also discussed the significance of public awareness and education about AI systems to empower users and drive demand for responsible AI practices.

The discussion touched on specific examples of AI applications in healthcare, welfare systems, and assistive technologies, illustrating both the potential benefits and risks of these systems. Panelists agreed on the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration, including youth engagement, to address AI-related challenges effectively.

The importance of data quality, representation, and transparency in AI development was a recurring theme. Panelists advocated for proactive bias mitigation techniques and the establishment of clear mechanisms for individuals to challenge algorithmic decisions.

While acknowledging the complexities of making AI responsible and transparent, the participants concluded that pausing AI development is not a viable option. Instead, they called for continued efforts to improve AI explainability, enhance public understanding, and foster collaboration among all stakeholders to shape a more inclusive and ethical AI-driven future.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The potential for algorithmic bias and discrimination in AI systems, especially impacting marginalized groups

– The need for human-centered approaches, diversity, and inclusion in AI development

– The importance of transparency, explainability, and accountability in AI systems

– The role of governments in regulating AI and establishing frameworks for responsible development

– The need for public awareness, education, and AI literacy

The overall purpose of the discussion was to explore the challenges and potential solutions for developing responsible, ethical, and inclusive AI systems that respect human rights and do not perpetuate or amplify existing societal biases and inequalities.

The tone of the discussion was largely serious and concerned, given the gravity of the issues being discussed. However, there were also notes of optimism, especially towards the end, as speakers emphasized the potential for positive change through collaboration, education, and proactive policymaking. The tone shifted slightly from highlighting problems to focusing on potential solutions and calls to action.

Speakers

– Monica Lopez: CEO and co-founder of Cognitive Insights for Artificial Intelligence, expert in human intelligence, machine intelligence, human factors, and system safety

– Paola Galvez: Worked on AI readiness assessment and national AI strategy for Peru

– Ananda Gautam: Moderator

– Yonah Welker: Visiting lecturer at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ambassador of EU projects to the MENA region

– Abeer Alsumait: Public policy expert with experience in cybersecurity, ICT regulation and data governance in the Saudi government

Additional speakers:

– Meznah Alturaiki: Representative of the Saudi Green Building Forum

– Aaron Promise Mbah: No specific role mentioned

Expanded Summary of AI and Human Rights Discussion

Introduction

This discussion brought together experts from diverse backgrounds to explore the challenges and opportunities presented by artificial intelligence (AI) in relation to human rights, inclusivity, and responsible development. The panel included Monica Lopez, CEO and co-founder of Cognitive Insights for Artificial Intelligence and member of the global partnership on AI; Paola Galvez, who worked on the national AI strategy for Peru and has experience with Microsoft; Yonah Welker, a visiting lecturer at MIT; and Abeer Alsumait, a public policy expert with experience in cybersecurity, ICT regulation, and data governance in the Saudi government. The conversation was moderated by Ananda Gautam.

Key Themes and Discussion Points

1. Algorithmic Bias and Its Impact

A central theme of the discussion was the potential for algorithmic bias and discrimination in AI systems, particularly affecting marginalised communities and individuals with disabilities. Monica Lopez emphasised that algorithms are not neutral tools but powerful social mechanisms that can perpetuate or challenge existing power structures. This sentiment was echoed by Abeer Alsumait, who noted that AI systems have demonstrated bias against marginalised groups in various domains, including healthcare, as evidenced by the Pennsylvania University study she mentioned.

2. Addressing Algorithmic Bias and Promoting Responsible AI

To combat algorithmic bias, the speakers proposed several strategies:

a) Diversity in AI development teams: Monica Lopez stressed the crucial importance of diverse teams in AI development to mitigate bias. Paola Galvez emphasized the need for gender equity in AI.

b) Rigorous algorithmic auditing and transparency: Lopez advocated for comprehensive auditing processes and increased transparency in algorithmic decision-making, calling for standardization in AI audit documentation and metrics.

c) Proactive bias mitigation techniques: The implementation of proactive measures to identify and address bias before AI systems are deployed was recommended.

d) Comprehensive regulatory frameworks: There was consensus on the need for robust regulatory frameworks to guide responsible AI development, with multiple speakers referencing the EU AI Act as a potential model.

e) Ongoing community engagement: The speakers emphasised the importance of continuous dialogue with affected communities throughout the AI development process.

3. AI in Assistive Technologies

Yonah Welker highlighted the potential of AI to support people with disabilities through assistive technologies. He emphasized that creating disability-centric AI is a complex process requiring a multi-modal and multi-sensory approach. Welker also stressed the need for legal frameworks to complement assistive technologies and called for dedicated safety models and regulatory sandboxes for AI testing.

4. Government Role in Responsible AI Development

The panellists agreed on the critical role of governments in regulating AI adoption and ensuring responsible development. Abeer Alsumait discussed the Saudi Data and Artificial Intelligence Authority’s role in advancing AI governance. Paola Galvez advocated for structured public participation in AI policy development and stressed the importance of investment in AI skills development.

5. Education and Public Awareness on AI

Monica Lopez argued that increased public knowledge would drive demand for more responsible AI practices and create more engaged and critical AI users. An audience member raised the point that even professionals like judges require specialised understanding of AI systems, underscoring the breadth of educational needs across society.

6. Localization and Language in AI

Yonah Welker emphasized the need for localized AI solutions, especially for non-English languages, to ensure inclusivity and effectiveness across diverse populations.

7. Environmental Impact of AI

Paola Galvez raised concerns about the environmental impact of AI, highlighting the need to consider sustainability in AI development and deployment.

8. AI in Healthcare

Abeer Alsumait discussed challenges in healthcare AI, referencing the Pennsylvania University study that revealed biases in healthcare algorithms.

9. Content Recommendation and User Safety

An audience question addressed the issue of AI recommending potentially harmful content to vulnerable users, highlighting the need for responsible content curation and user protection.

10. Balancing AI Progress and Responsible Development

While acknowledging the complexities of making AI responsible and transparent, the participants concluded that pausing AI development is not a viable option. They advocated for continued efforts to improve AI explainability, enhance public understanding, and foster collaboration among all stakeholders to shape a more inclusive and ethical AI-driven future.

Conclusion and Future Directions

The discussion concluded with several key takeaways and action items, including the need for diverse development teams, rigorous auditing, proactive bias mitigation, comprehensive regulatory frameworks, ongoing community engagement, investment in education, and the development of national AI strategies.

Unresolved issues included how to effectively standardise AI audit documentation and metrics, balance rapid AI development with responsible implementation, make complex AI systems easily explainable to the general public, and ensure AI policies are effectively implemented and enforced.

The panelists, particularly Yonah Welker, expressed optimism about stakeholders working together to address these challenges and shape a more inclusive, ethical, and human-centred approach to AI development and governance.

Monica Lopez: Okay, yes. So, can you hear me okay? Yes? All right. Well, first of all, thank you for the forum organizers for continuing to put together this summit on really such critical issues related to digital governance. I’m really excited to be here, at least online. And I also want to thank Paola Galvez for really bringing all of us from across the world together, whether virtually or in person. So, as a brief introduction, I’m Dr. Monica Lopez and I come from a technical background. So, I’m trained in the cognitive and brain sciences and I’ve been in the intersecting fields of human intelligence, machine intelligence, human factors, and system safety now for 20 years. I’m an entrepreneur and the CEO, co-founder of Cognitive Insights for Artificial Intelligence. And I essentially work with product developers and organizational leadership at large to develop robust risk management framework from a human centered perspective. I’m also an AI expert on scaling responsible AI for the global partnership on AI. So, I certainly do recognize many, many individuals. So, as for my contribution, I really do hope to complement the group here. I’m coming from the private sector perspective. So, certainly as we all know, today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, we know that algorithms have essentially become the invisible architects, perhaps we can call that of our social, economic, and political experiences. And so, what we have are very complex mathematical models designed to process information and make decisions many times fully automated that now essentially underpin every aspect of our lives. And as we all well know at this point, from job recruitment to financial services, to criminal justice and social media interactions. And so, this promise of technological neutrality essentially masks a reality. One where algorithmic systems are not objective, but instead they are essentially reflections of the biases, the historical inequities and the systemic prejudices that are across our societies. And so they are essentially embedded in the design and training of data. And so this, as we all know, as well as this has direct human rights implications of algorithmic bias that are profound at this point and really far reaching. And these systems essentially perpetuate and amplify these existing inequalities and are creating digital mechanisms of exclusion that are systematically disadvantaging marginalized communities. And so just very quick before I enter into why we need a human centered perspective on this, but I’m sure very clear examples that you may be familiar with already are with facial recognition technology or FRT and that they have demonstrated significantly higher error rates for women and people of color. We continue to see that problem. AI driven hiring algorithms that have shown to discriminate against candidates based on gender, on race and other protected characteristics. And AI enabled criminal justice risk assessment tools. And we’ve certainly seen this, I’m based in the United States. And so we’ve shown that it has continued to perpetuate racial biases leading to more severe sentencing recommendations for black defendants compared to white defendants with similar backgrounds. So essentially, why do we have this? And the root of these challenges really lies in the fundamental nature of algorithmic development. And we know that machine learning models are trained on historical data that inherently reflect, as I mentioned earlier, these societal biases, power structures and systemic inequalities. And I want you to take a moment right now to consider what a data point even means. How a single- data point has limits. As those of you know, for those who work closely with data on a daily basis, and by that I mean whether you’re collecting it, whether you’re cleaning it, analyzing it, making conclusions from it, you know that the basic methodology of data is such that it systematically leaves out all kinds of information. And why? Because data collection techniques, they have to be repeatable across vast scales, and they require standardized categories, and while repeatability and standardization make database methods powerful, we have to acknowledge that they have power as a price. So it limits the kind of information we can collect. So when these models are then deployed, without any sort of critical examination, they don’t just reproduce existing inequities, they actually normalize and scale them. And so here is where I would argue, and I know the rest of the panel will continue to discuss this, but why a human-centered approach to algorithmic development offers essentially a critical, at this point, pathway to addressing these systemic challenges. And essentially what this means is that we need to reimagine technology as a tool for empowerment and well-being, instead of a tool for exclusion. And so in this regard, prioritizing human rights, equity, and meaningful inclusion, every single step of technological design through implementation. And by that, I mean across the entire AI lifecycle becomes essential. And so I work with a lot of clients, as I mentioned earlier, I am in the private sector, and there are key strategies right now that are very clear that we know that we can advance this human-centered approach. And I’ll just briefly mention five of them real quick. So first is we need comprehensive diversity across algorithmic development. I’m sure you’ve been hearing that a lot, but the problem is that the change has not, the transformative change has not really begun. And we know that if we diversify teams, we do get more responsible development of algorithmic systems. We do get new perspectives at the table. And so I would say that’s absolutely essential no matter what moving forward. The second element is rigorous algorithmic auditing and transparency. Again, that is another element that we have seen. It is now part, in fact, in part related to the European Union’s AI Act requirement. But what we need is we need to see this across the three perspectives of equality, equity, and justice. And this is not just for big tech companies to be engaging in. This is truly for everyone. And we know that irrespective of emerging legal requirements in some jurisdictions and some where there isn’t much work happening on the legal side, all organizations must implement mandatory algorithmic impact assessment to thoroughly examine the potential discriminatory outcomes before deployment. And then not just that, but continuously monitor those outcomes as more data are collected and models drift. And I have noticed that when companies do that, whether they’re small or medium-sized or large, we do see better outcomes. A third element is the establishment of proactive bias mitigation techniques. Now, there are all sorts of technical strategies for that. Some of them are based essentially on what I was mentioning in regards to, you really need to think about what data means. So careful curation of the trading data. We need to make sure it truly is representative and balanced across the data sets. It does matter and it does change outcomes. Implementation of fairness constraints. Also the development of testing protocols that actually specifically examine the potential for discriminatory outcomes. We know that when you identify that beforehand and you actually look for that, you will see it and you can actually mitigate change. and actually improve on the issue. The fourth element is of course, the classic need for legal and regulatory frameworks. And so here, I can’t stress enough at this point that governments and international bodies, we have to truly come up with comprehensive regulatory frameworks that treat algorithmic discrimination as a fundamental human rights issue. And from a business perspective, what this means is that there needs to be clear legal standards for algorithmic accountability. There also need to be very clear mechanisms for individuals to be able to challenge algorithmic decisions. There certainly are not enough. And even in some cases where we have the requirement for companies to actually put on their website, their auditing results, that is still not enough. And then of course, we need significant penalties for those systems. And then the last issue, which is the fifth, is that we need ongoing community engagement. I also cannot stress that inclusion does matter and it requires continuous dialogue with communities most likely to be impacted by algorithmic systems. And this is not an easy task. It’s a lot to ask for, but we know, and I’ve seen it with companies that actually make concerted efforts to create participatory design processes across the AI lifecycle. And that essentially means you’re establishing relevant feedback mechanisms of communications as you create and design these systems, you pilot them and you work with those individuals. And then you’re essentially end up empowering marginalized communities to actually want to actively provide their input because it is of value. So what I’m calling for here essentially to conclude is that we need this fundamental re-imagining of technological innovation. And we know at this point that algorithms are not neutral tools, but they’re very powerful social mechanisms. that either perpetuate or challenge existing power structures. So if we change now our methods, and every single one of us, in the design and deployment choices of today, then I think we will very profoundly actually shape the future of human rights in the digital age in a very positive way. And so I look forward to your questions, and I know we’re going to discuss this more in detail. So thank you. Thank you for listening.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Monica, for all your thoughts, and I think you have also covered the second part of the questions already. My apologies. I should have mentioned the time before. So I’ll go to Paola to give a short introduction, and for the first round, let’s wrap within five minutes, and then we’ll go for the second round of questions. For Monica, I think we’ll be going a bit short on the second round. We’ve covered almost most of the things. So, Paola, over to you.

Paola Galvez: Thank you, Ananda. Hello, everyone. Thank you so much for joining us to this very, very critical conversation. I’d like to start by posing a question. What does it take to make society more inclusive? You know, my interest in social impact began early, inspired in part by my grandfather, who is a judge in the Central Highlands of Purdue, who often spoke about societal disparities he witnessed. I went to law school believing it would really equip me with the tools to drive meaningful change in a country with high levels of inequalities and social disparities, like this country where I’m from. But my first year lacked inspiration at all. I think my courses were disconnected from real-world problems. But my perspective really changed in 2013 when I began an internship in Microsoft. I was looking at a demonstration video of seeing AI prototypes. It was 10 years ago. But it was this project that used artificial intelligence and helped the visually impaired perceive their surroundings that opened my eyes, that really showed me the profound potential that this technology can be as a catalyst for social change. So I said, I can really help as a lawyer to help leverage this technology as a force for inclusion, and I can use public policy and help drive human-centric and evidence-based policy. And that’s when my commitment started to transform Purdue into a more inclusive and detailed society. And I think that’s the path that led me to what I’m doing now, and I hope will help beyond. So I worked in the private sector for a long time. I was in the position that Dr. Monica Lopez was mentioning how private sector does. Then I received a proposition from the government to work there to help them with the national AI strategy and the digital assistance strategy. And most of my friends told me, you’re going to be so frustrated. The bureaucracy is going to kill you. Come on, you’re used to Microsoft, big tech. But I said, no, I can actually bring and shed a light on disruptive ways to govern. So I decided to do it. I’m a firm believer on participatory bottom-up processes. So the first thing I did was form a multi-stakeholder committee to do this policy. And we’re here at IGF, a global forum. We’re talking about AI and data at a global level. And I have seen firsthand a local experience bringing civil society, academia, private sector together to find solutions and challenges. And one of the most challenging things is AI policy. And I do believe that protecting democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and establishing clear guidelines on AI is a shared responsibility that a government alone cannot do, not a private sector company, nor academia. an endeavor that must be taken in a multi-stakeholder approach. But I do think that one stakeholder is crucial in this pursuit, and that is youth civil society. The youth must be included, and youth engagement is a critical area that we need to protect now. That’s what I believe in these first remarks and then I wanted to mention. Because I do see generative AI producing fake and biased synthetic content, large language models, reinforcing polarization, poorly designed AI power applications that are not compatible with assistive technologies leading to discrimination against youth with disabilities. And I have the expert here. Yona will mention more about that. But apart from that, I sincerely believe that AI holds immense potential as a technology if we use it wisely. AI systems can break down language barriers. I mean, if IGF is as powerful as it is, and the youth IGF and youth seek of internet society is powerful if we’re a community of more than 2,000 youth connected, and sometimes we use translation that is powered by AI. So that’s powerful. Or, of course, making resources more accessible to diverse youth populations. Sadly, AI has yet to live up to its potential. Dr. Monica Lopez mentioned most of its challenges, which I absolutely agree with. AI is reproducing the society’s bias. It is deepening inequalities. Someone heard, I heard someone saying, but that’s just the way the world is. The world is biased, Paola. What do you think? That’s what AI is going to do. And yes, that’s true, but I agree at one point that it depends on us how we want to develop this technology. It depends on us the results that this technology is going to provide us an output. Because data is the oxygen of AI, and transparency should be at its core. So it’s up to us to shape the future of AI now, to talk about the data that should be more representative. And the focus on IDF of bringing youth to the discussion, I think it’s a great tool to really congratulate, because we have a big youth community in this IDF. So I’m really looking forward to this discussion, and up to you, Ananda.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you so much, Paola, for touching a bit of how powerful it can be. And the work of your government bringing a multi-stakeholder committee was really commendable. I’d like to go with Yonah Wicker to give, I’ll also give you five minutes to briefly introduce you and touch upon the base that Dr. Monica and Paola has set up. Over to you.

Yonah Welker: Yes, thank you so much. It’s a pleasure to go back to Riyadh. Three years ago, I had the opportunity to curate the Global AI Summit of AI for the Good of Humanity, and we continued this movement. I’m a visiting lecturer for Massachusetts Institute of Technology, but also I’m an ambassador of EU projects to the MENA region. And my goal is to bring all of these voices and ideas to actual policies, let’s say EU AI Act or Code of Practice. And today, I specifically would love to address how it may affect the most vulnerable groups. And as Paola mentioned, individuals with disabilities. And that’s why I would love to quickly share my screen. Hopefully, you can see it. So 28 countries signed the agreement about AI safety, including not only Western countries, but the countries of the Global South, Nigeria, Kenya, countries of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. And the big question, how these actual frameworks can address designated and vulnerable groups. For instance, currently, there is a one billion people. It’s 15% of the world live with disabilities, according to the World Health Organization. And it’s important to understand that sometimes these disabilities are invisible. Let’s say neurodisabilities, at least one in six people living with one or more neurological conditions. And it’s actually a very complex task to bring all of these things to the frameworks. And let’s say why for EU, we have a whole combination of laws and frameworks. We address classifications and taxonomies in Accessibility Act and standardization. directive. We’re trying to address manipulation and addictive design at the level of AI Act, Digital Services Act, GDPR. We’re trying to understand and identify higher risks for systems related to certain critical infrastructure, transparency risks, prohibiting particular use of effective computing. But still it’s not enough because we need to understand how many systems we actually have, how many cases we have. And for instance, for assistive technologies, we have over 120 technologies for the racing OECD report and I had opportunity to contribute to this report. We use AI to augment smart wheelchairs, walking sticks, geolocation and city tools. We use AI to support hearing impairment using computer vision to turn sign language into text. We support cognitive accessibility including ADHD, dyslexia, autism. But we also should understand all the challenges which are coming with the AI including recognition errors than individuals with facial differences or asymmetry, craniofacial syndrome, just not properly identified by facial recognition system, as was mentioned by my colleague, or accused identification errors than individuals can understand AI interface. They can hear or see this signal or when they deal with excluding patterns and errors or exclusion by generative AI and language-based models. Also we have all the complexity driven by different machine learning techniques, supervised learning which are connected to errors induced by humans, unsupervised learning which brings all the errors and social disparities from the history, or reinforcement learning which is limited by training environments including robotics and assistive technologies. And finally we should understand that AI is not limited by software. it’s also about hardware, it’s about human centricity of physical devices, it’s about safety, motion and sensing components safety, power components and environmental safety, production and training cycle. So overall, working on disability-centric AI is not just about words, it’s an extremely complex process of building environments where we have a multi-model and multi-sensory approach. When we deal with the families, caregivers, patients and different types of users, then they try to understand and identify scenarios of misuse, actions and non-actions, so-called omission, potential manipulation or addictive design. So it’s why the next level of AI safety institutes, offices and oversight will include all these comprehensive parameters. When we talk not only about risk-based approach, but understanding different scenarios, workplaces, education, law enforcement, immigration, we think about taxonomies, frameworks and accidents repositories, working with UN, World Health Organization, UNESCO, OECD and finally we try to understand the intersectionality of disabilities, thinking about children and minors, women and girls and all the complexity of history behind these systems and context. Thank you. Thank you, Yonah, for your wonderful things, how AI could be used in

Abeer Alsumait: assistive technologies, but there are challenges like a very minor issue might also be a kind of we cannot accept minimal level of error in the use of like AI in healthcare system and we’ll come back to you on these questions. So I’ll ask Avir to talk about herself and I’ll give you five minutes as well. Please introduce yourself and we’ll do opening remarks. Thank you. Thank you. Hello everyone. It’s a privilege to be a part of this discussion and I would like also to thank Paola for initiating this and kick-starting it. I’d like to thank the rest of the panel and the moderators as well and event organizers. Just to introduce myself briefly, this is Avir Smyth, I’m a public policy expert with a little over a decade of experience in cybersecurity, ICT regulation and data governance in the Saudi government. I hold a master’s degree in public policy from Oxford University and a bachelor of science in computer and information sciences. My interest lies in shaping inclusive and sustainable digital policies that drive innovation and advance the digital economy. I would like to briefly just start the conversation of this session by mentioning examples that show while algorithms and AI promise efficiency and innovation, they have the power to replicate and amplify suicidal inequalities when not governed responsibly. The first example I would like to mention is from France. In France, a welfare agency used an algorithm to detect fraud in welfare and errors in payments and this algorithm, while in text, was a wonderful idea, in practice it ended up impacting specific segments of its population and marginalized groups, specifically single parents and individuals with disabilities far more than any others. It ended up tagging them more as high risk more frequently than the rest of the beneficiaries of the system. So this impact was profound on those individuals, it led to more investigations, a lot more stress and in some cases even suspension of benefits. So in October of this year, a coalition of human rights organizations launched legal action against the French government for this algorithm used by the welfare agencies, arguing that this algorithm actually violates the privacy laws and anti-discrimination regulations. So this case shows us the reminder of how risks can be inherent in some opaque systems and maybe governed AI tools. Another example I would like to quickly highlight in the healthcare sector, where a study in 2019 from Pennsylvania University highlighted an AI-driven healthcare system that was used to allocate medical resources for a little over 200 million patients, and that system relied on hysterical healthcare expenditure as a proxy for healthcare needs. So this algorithm was not considering the systematic disparity in healthcare access and spending in society at that time, and it ended up resulting in black patients being less likely to be flagged for need of enhanced care to a percent that reached 50 percent than their white counterparts. So even though this algorithm and this system was intended to streamline healthcare delivery, it ended up perpetuating inequality and deepening distrust in AI systems and in technology overall. So this example will underscore one undeniable truth that algorithms are not neutral when built on biased data or flawed assumptions, and it might lead to amplified existing injustices and exacerbate exclusion, often impacting the most vulnerable population. These challenges and these issues generated actions from governments on an international level, one of which, as mentioned by Dr. Lopez, the EU AI Act that was entered forth this year, and it classifies AI systems based on risk, classifying things such as welfare, employment, and healthcare as areas of high risk where very high standards of transparency, quality, and human intervention is required. A lot of nations and governments followed suit, I believe. One example for that is here in my country, in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Data and Artificial Intelligence Authority, established a few years ago, started or adopted recently the AI ethics principles that emphasizes transparency, fairness, and accountability. Therefore, I believe governments play a very important role. While every actor and every player is really important in discussions and conversations, governments have critical roles in regulating and establishing responsibility and advancing the way forward for AI adoption in an equitable and fair way. Thank you.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Avit. So, I’ll come back to Dr. Monica. You have touched over how algorithmic bias are there and what could be the role of private sector. I’d like to touch you up on what are the measures that private sector could take to overcome those biases, along with the role of other stakeholders. If there are any best practices that could be shared, kindly share, and I’ll ask you to wrap up very soon. Thank you.

Monica Lopez: Absolutely, thank you. Thank you for that question. And I know I briefly mentioned some of them, but I think I’ll right now highlight some that in fact, many of our fellow colleagues have been already in fact mentioning. So the first one and one that is starting to happen, but not to the extent that I believe should happen more is the whole question of diversity in teams. Again, we hear this a lot. We hear that we need to bring in different perspectives to the table, but at the end of the day, unfortunately, and I have seen even startups, so small and medium-sized enterprises who make the argument, we don’t have enough resources, we can’t. And they actually do. And sometimes it’s as simple as bringing the very customers, the very clients that they intend to be, that they intend for their product or their service to be for to the discussion. So I would say that that is one very key element and we just need to make that a requirement at this point. And it needs to essentially be something, a best practice, frankly, at this point. And the other one is the bias audits. We are seeing certainly across legislation, the need for the requirement for, so one needs to comply now with providing audits for these systems, particularly on the topic of bias. So to ensure that they are non-discriminatory, non-biased. So that is a good thing. However, what ends up being the problem is that we haven’t yet standardized the type of documentation, the type of metrics and the benchmarks. So that is right now the conversation, at least in the, not just in the private sector, but certainly also in academia as to what should we, and at the, I also, I am in communication work with individuals from IEEE, from ISO, who set the industry standards. And so this is a very big topic right now, a debate as to how do we standardize what these audits. should look like, and how do we make sure that not only we standardize that, but we actually have the right committees in place, experts who can then review this documentation. So I would say that that in a way, while extremely important, sometimes does become a barrier of sorts, precisely because individuals, just organizations rather, companies don’t know exactly what needs to be put into these audits. So that’s the second element. And the third and final point here is the whole issue of transparency and explainability of these systems. We’ve heard many, many times about the black box nature, black box nature of these systems. But to be quite honest, we know much more about these systems. Developers do know the data that is involved. We do make mathematical assumptions. So there’s a lot of information at the very pre beginning stage of data collection of system creation, for which we have a lot of information about. And we’re not necessarily being very transparent about that in the first place. So I would say that that in and of itself is extremely important, but also is becoming a type of best practice because if you can establish that from the beginning, it does have downstream effect across the entire AI life cycle, which then becomes extremely important when you start integrating a system. And let’s say you have a problem, you have a negative outcome as is, someone ends up being harmed. And then you can essentially reverse engineer back again, if you have that initial very clear transparency put out in the beginning. We are starting to see some good practices around that, particularly around model cards, nutrition like labels that have all been, especially in healthcare, there’s examples given in healthcare. I do a lot of work with the healthcare industry. And so there’s a very big push right now to essentially standardize and normalize and nutrition like labels around AI model transparency that I think then should be utilized. across all systems, frankly, at this point, all contexts and domains. Thank you.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Dr. Monica. So I’ll go to Paula. I think after you guys complete, we can go. So I’ll go to Paula that you have already worked on the AI readiness assessment for the country and how countries and regions are making declarations, how it can be transitioned into the action, you know, like based on your experience. Can you share, please?

Paola Galvez: Sure, Ananda. And what you say, it’s key, right? How to pass from declarations to actions. We’ve seen so many commitments already. So great call. Thank you for the question. I’d say, first of all, we need to start by going into the international frameworks of AI. If there are countries that have not adopted, they will be left out. So that way, we ensure alignment with global standards, best practices, and that also helps with local business to join and be easy to go out to the borders. This is first. But second, when you start formulating the national AI policies, governments need to develop a structured and meaningful public participation process. This means receiving comments from all stakeholders, but it’s not only that, because that happens a lot in my country, I can tell you. By law, they need to publish 30 days, any regulation. Actually, it just happened. The second draft of the AI Act regulation was published. But what we need for a meaningful participation is government saying how they took this comment, and if they are not considering, why? I believe that the citizens and all the civil society organizations, the private sector, the committed, need to know what happened after they commented at any bill. Third, enhance transparency and accessibility. Any AI policy material must be readily accessible, complete, and accurate to the public. Then, independent oversight, I think it’s a must. Ananda, creating or designating an independent agency. Here, Abir mentioned the Saudi Data and AI Agency. I think that is a very good example. Sometimes, governments have a challenge with this, because they say, oh, it’s a huge amount of effort, people, resources, right? But if it’s not possible having a new one, then let’s think, maybe the Data Protection Authority can take over AI. Also, and I think this cannot be left behind, investment in AI policy, AI skills development, that’s a must. We can have the best AI law, but if we don’t help our people understand what is AI, how to read and know that the AI can hallucinate, we will be lost. So AI skills for the people is a must. And just to finish, from always what I’ve said, with a gender lens, because gender equity and diversity in AI is a must, as something that is not being looked at as it should be. You mentioned I conducted the AI readiness assessment methodology of UNESCO, and I’m proud to say that the UNESCO recommendation on the ethics of AI is the only document at the moment that has a chapter on gender. And it must be reviewed because it’s very comprehensive and it has practical policies that should be taken into consideration and into practice. And of course, environmental sustainability in AI policy should be considered, it is often overlooked. What is the impact on the energy? Should we promote an energy-efficient AI solution? Definitely. Minimizing carbon footprint, of course, and fostering sustainable practices, because this is, I will finish with this data, but when you send a question to a large language model, as we all know, HHTTP, cloud, Gemini, et cetera, it’s the same consumption that an airplane has in a year from Tokyo to New York. So we should be thoughtful on what are we sending to AI, or maybe Google can do it for us, too. Thank you.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Paula, for your strong thoughts. I’ll come back to Yona. You have mentioned about AI in assistive technologies. So now I’ll come back to how legal frameworks can complement on the assistive technologies while protecting the vulnerable population that are using those technologies. We have briefly underlined that minor, either might be a major in case of assistive technologies. Over to you, Yona.

Yonah Welker: Yes. So first of all, we have a few main elements of these frameworks. The first one is related to taxonomies and repositories in cases. And here I would love to echo my colleagues, Dr. Monica and Paula. We actually need to involve all of the stakeholders, and for instance, cooperating with OECD. involve over 80 organizations to understand existing barriers of access to these technologies. It’s affordability, it’s accessibility, it’s energy consumption, it’s safety, it’s adoption technique is the first thing. Second thing is the accuracy in original solutions. So one of the lessons we learned both working in EU and MENA region, we can’t localize open AI, we can’t localize Microsoft solutions, but we can build our own solutions, sometimes not large language models, but small language models, not with the 400 billion parameters, maybe with 5, 10, 15 billion parameters, but for more specific purposes or languages. For instance, when we’ve made the research for Hungarian language, we have in 1,000 times less sources of training for charge GPT in comparison to English. So we have a similar situation for many other non-English languages. It just doesn’t work, not only from original perspective, but from scientific research and development perspective. Another thing is a dedicated safety models. Sometimes we can’t fix all of the issues within the model, but we can build dedicated agents or additional solutions which track or improve our existing systems. For instance, currently for the Commission, I evaluate a few companies and technologies which will address the privacy concerns, compliance with the GDPR, with the data leakages, breaches, and also online harassment, hate speech, and other parameters. It’s also complemented with the safety environments and oversights. So it’s the job of the government to create so-called testbeds and regulatory sandboxes. It’s a kind of specialized centers where startups can come to in order to test their AI model, to make sure they’re on one hand compliant and also they build actually safe systems. It specifically relates to areas of a so-called critical infrastructure. These are areas of health, education, smart cities, and for instance, Saudi Arabia is known for so-called cognitive cities. All these areas are a part of our work when we’re trying to build efficient, resilient, and sustainable solutions. And finally is a cooperation with intergovernmental organizations. So for instance, we work on frameworks called digital solutions for girls with disabilities, with UNICEF. We work with UNESCO on AI for children. So we’re trying to reflect more specific scenarios, and adoption techniques related to specific ages, let’s say from eight to 12 years old, or specific regions, or specific gender, including both specific of adoption, but also safety considerations and even unique conditions or illnesses, which are very specific to particular region. For instance, we have a very different statistic related to diabetes, craniofacial syndrome, different types of cognitive and sensory disabilities if we compare the MENA region in EU. So it’s a very complex process. And as I’ve mentioned, now our policy is becoming overlapped. So even for privacy, for manipulation, for addictive design, we have an overlap not only in AI Act, but also for other frameworks, Digital Services Act, for data regulation. So some essential pieces of our vision exist in different frameworks. even governmental employees are aware of it. And the final thing is AI literacy adoption. So we’re working to improve the literacy of governmental workers and governors who will employ these policies and bringing to the life.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Yonah, so much. So I’ll come back to Avil. So we have been talking about the complexity of making AI responsible. And when it comes to making the responsible AI, it demands for ensuring accountability and transparency. While we are seeing many automated AI systems, who will be responsible if automated car kills a man in the street? This has been kind of serious question and there are other consequences. So in this context, how governments can ensure the responsible AI while ensuring the accountability and transparency? Kindly go through. Thank you.

Abeer Alsumait: Thank you. So I think this question actually relates to what Dr. Lopez mentioned. The keywords here are transparency and explainability. Of course, for sure, regulations and law establish responsibilities and make it sure every actor involved in any event, knows their role and knows when to be responsible. But also the fact that they can explain and they can be transparent at how they work and how they operate and how they might impact others and individuals specifically vulnerable populations is really key. And as Dr. Lopez mentioned, private sector knows more than maybe we understand. But we’re not very clear on how we want the transparency and explainability to work. And maybe my thoughts on that is government should work hand in hand, should push for standardization to happen as soon as possible, should be clear in establishing the responsibility and be clear about what it is, what it means to have a point for transparency, for AI and algorithm. One extra thing that I think government should also focus on is to establish a right, establish a way for individuals to challenge such systems and impactful algorithms on their life. So my idea is that there should be continuous evaluation and risk assessment of how it is actually working in the real life, in case any incident of bias or discrimination happens, there should be a clear way, clear procedure for individuals and for governments to start auditing, reviewing any system that’s in work and impacting lives of individuals.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Abir. Maybe we’ll come back to you going to the Q&A session. There is one contributor in our audience. I’ll ask her to provide her and then Martilda will bring what we have in the discussions in the chat and if there are any questions online and we’ll go to the question and answer. Over to you, please.

Audience: Thank you so much. My name is Zemizna Atareki and I’m representing the Saudi Green Building Forum, which is a non-governmental and non-profit organization that supports and promotes green practices as well as decreasing carbon emissions and decreasing energy consumption. Of course, it contributes to the digital transformation that the world now is witnessing. And for that, I would like to just participate and give an idea that we’re going through a critical perspective, which means that we’re having, as algorithms offers an immense potential to enhance our daily lives, yet we face a fundamental challenges relating to biases and exclusion. Now, many of these systems function as an opaque, as Dr. Monica said, lacking transparency, which of course perpetuates a social disparities and exacerbates discrimination against marginalized communities. Now, in the absence of the proper scrutiny and accountability, algorithms sometimes contribute to human rights violation instead of addressing them. What we should do about that as a civil society? We need to take an action, and we need to call for a greater transparency and accountability to ensure algorithms are open to scrutiny and include clear mechanisms for identifying and addressing biases. Of course, we need to integrate human rights into algorithm design, which means we need to focus on developing human-centered algorithms that prioritize the needs for marginalized groups. Of course, finally, we need to foster a multilateral collaboration to engage all stakeholders, as you all mentioned, to ensure algorithms are fair and inclusive, considering diverse cultural and social dimensions. Now, we recommend the following. First, we need to launch a global algorithmic transparency initiative that establishes an international platform to set standards for evaluating the impact for algorithms on human rights and promoting transparency. Second, design inclusive-oriented algorithms, which develops algorithmic tools that prioritize accessibility, improve service delivery for people with disabilities, and ensure greater inclusivity. And last but not least, implement training programs

Ananda Gautam: that build capacity of developers and design makers to understand the risks of algorithms, bias, and address them effectively. Thank you. Thank you so much. So if we have any kind of question on site, there are no online questions, I believe. So while asking questions, please also mention whom you are asking to so that it is easier to answer. Or if it is common, let it know as well. Please. OK. Thank you.

Audience: My name is Aaron Promise-Amba. And I worked on this with Paola and all of you here. So I’m very excited because of the insights we’ve been sharing. So I have a question. And I would like Dr. Monica to help me address it. I understand where you talked about algorithms helping for marketing and some other business, right? And then the kind of divide that comes with it, the risk that comes with it, that it can actually amplify the digital divide, especially with persons with disability, right? And then I’ve worked with some persons with disabilities using social media and all of that. And then there’s a particular case where I think Abe also mentioned something about depression, suicide, right? Suicide, right? So now you have someone click on Spotify to listen to music. Maybe he’s feeling down. And then after that, you see Spotify recommending music, suicide and music, right? That kind of music. So how do we address this, right? And Paola also mentioned something about, sorry, let me get the standardization, right? Having a policy. And then countries are making declarations, right? How to take action is how to take action on this. Then she talked about ownership, right? Public participation. Now, when you are talking, you talk about a particular policy that Nigeria, I’m from Nigeria, right? A particular policy that Nigeria has adopted. So I wanted to know, Nigeria has a lot of policies, even AI policy, right? We are always at the forefront of adopting when we look at other countries doing a lot of things and then we start doing our own. And then we have a lot of this document, but then there’s no implementation and enforcement, right? So now how do we ensure that it’s not just paperwork, right? We don’t just do all of these policies and it’s just the creator said. That’s, it’s actually been enforced and then it’s followed through onto an implementation on all of that. So if you can share some of your insights about that. Thank you very much.

Monica Lopez: Thank you for that question. a very complex, I mean, you really touched upon many, many aspects, but I think something that actually really stands out and perhaps Paola, I think had also mentioned this at one point, is that there really needs to be, I think at this point, what makes, so let me backtrack a second. So yes, everybody’s talking about regulation. Everybody’s talking about standards, normalization. Everybody’s talking about, we need implementation. How do we do this enforcement? But I think part of the problem lies in, we simply do not have enough public awareness and understanding. Because I think if we actually did have more of that, there would be more of a demand. And I see this in terms of, I mean, yes, we hear some even very tragic examples. So you did mention about, you know, someone who has depression and may use Spotify and then get recommended different new types of music to apparently, quote unquote, improve or fix, it’s one has to be careful with the words one uses here, deal with that situation. And we’ve seen two recent even suicides as a result of chatbot use, because of an anthropomorphization of these systems. And I think it really goes back to this question of many times, many users, unfortunately, maybe most users do not understand these systems fundamentally. That’s an education issue. That’s an education question. Because if you know and understand, then you can critically evaluate these systems. You can be more proactive because you know what’s wrong or you see the gap, you see what needs to be improved. And I say it as, so I’m also in, I didn’t mention this, but I’m also in academia and I do teach in the School of Engineering at Johns Hopkins University in the Washington DC, Maryland region in the United States. And I teach the courses on AI ethics and policy and governance to computer scientists and engineers. And I love when they come to the beginning of class with no awareness. And at the end, they are absolutely more engaged and they all say, we wanna go and be those engineers who can talk to policymakers. And so to me, that is very clear evidence, whether they’re high schoolers, undergraduate students, professionals, working professionals go back to school, graduate students, whatever it is, I see this change. And it’s changed because of the power of knowledge. So my main, really my call here is we need far more incentivization to make much more educated users in everyone, all ages. Then we’re gonna see the need for, and I really think that because there’s gonna be that demand from companies that we wanna ensure that our data is private. We wanna ensure that we’re not being harmed. We wanna ensure that we actually have benefits from these technologies. I’ll stop there. I think, yeah, others can add to it, I’m sure.

Ananda Gautam: Hello. Thank you, Monica, for your wonderful response. We have only five minutes left. I have been already one. So Martinda, is there any online discussion or question or any contribution? No? If there is any question, please feel free and contributions are also welcome. We have five minutes. Please keep the time in mind, both speakers and like speakers.

Audience: Thank you, I’ll be quick. It’s been a great discussion. We do get this, the point on education is very well made and we’ve realized in our work, I work in New Delhi in India, and we’ve realized even with very specialized sector of the population like judges and lawyers, it takes a lot of conversation, a lot of detailing to get to a point where something like bias that judges work with daily, for them to start to understand what bias in an AI system might look like. So my question, I guess what I’m trying to ask is when something requires such specialized and detailed understanding, then clearly the problem isn’t with people not being able to understand, maybe it’s with the technology not being at a stage where it’s readily explainable, where it’s easily explainable for societal use. So is there any merit to, frequently we keep getting these discussions on maybe there’s a need to pause, especially with technologies like deep fakes, which everyone who does research in this area knows are primarily going to be used for harm, or not primarily, but massively going to be used for harmful ends. So is there any credence or is there any currency to pushing for a pause at certain levels, or are we way past that? that point already, and we just have to mitigate now. That’s a small question. Sorry if it’s a little depressing in there. Yeah.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you so much for the question. If there are any questions, let’s take it. And I’ll give each speaker with one minute, and then wrap it up. Any questions, contributions from the floor? No. None from online. So each speaker can have one minute and respond. If not, they can proceed. Yeah. OK. Like just one liner that you want to give for the wrap-up. Thank you. You can start with Abir, maybe.

Abeer Alsumait: Quick question to end that. I think we’re just pondered about it. I don’t think there is a real answer. Are we beyond that point? I don’t think so. But should we pause? I also don’t think so, to be honest. I think we can put more effort into making technology more explainable and just bridging the gap little by little. And that’s, I think, what everyone, every actor and every player should work towards. That’s my thoughts on that.

Paola Galvez: Totally agree. Absolutely, we cannot pause. Because if some group decides to do it, then some others will continue. And it’s like just put a blanket in your eyes. So we cannot do it. But we can use what we have. And if our countries don’t have a data protection law or an AI national strategy, we need to pull for it to happen. Because if a country does not have the idea of how they want this technology to develop, what is the future of us as citizens? So I just leave this question for us. And let’s reflect on how we can contribute to the future of AI.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Paola. Now, Monica and Jona, please.

Monica Lopez: Yeah, I would agree absolutely with. the both comments. We can’t pause, we can’t ban, that’s not going to work, absolutely. We’re moving far too fast anyway at this point. But I would say that where there’s a will, there’s a way. So if we all come to the agreement and acknowledgement that we need, and I mean all of us, not just those of us right now here and our colleagues, everyone, that we need to do this, then I think it’s possible and we need to act.

Ananda Gautam: Yona, please.

Yonah Welker: Yes, I’m always on the positive side, because finally we have all the stakeholders together and it includes also the European Commission. I would love to quickly respond to the question of Aaron about the key words in suicide, because it’s actually about awareness. Yes, because if you know that recommendation engines use so-called stop words, if you know how the history of these engines works, you can easily fix it through regulatory sandboxes. And emerging companies and start-ups just come into the centers and you can provide the oversight to fix these issues. The same as a bias. Then you know that bias is not an abstract category, but just the problem of under- or over-representation. Just bigger error for smaller groups is purely data and mathematical things coming from society. You can clearly identify the issue. It can be a technical issue, it can be a social issue, and then you see it, you can fix it. And that’s why now we have these tools, testbeds, regulatory sandboxes, policy frameworks, and all the stakeholders working together to come up with real-life terms, understanding, and finally we can fix it together. Thank you.

Ananda Gautam: Thank you, Jona. Thank you, all of our panelists, and thank you, Paula, for organizing this. To all of our on-site audience and audiences online, and this is not the end. of the conversation. We have just began it. You can just connect with our speakers in the LinkedIn or wherever you are. Thank you so much everyone. Have a good rest of the day. Thank you all. Can you just stay our panelists? We can take a picture with you on the screen. Thank you.

Agreement Points

Algorithmic bias perpetuates inequalities

Monica Lopez

Abeer Alsumait

Paola Galvez

Algorithms reflect societal biases and perpetuate inequalities

AI systems have demonstrated bias against marginalized groups in various domains

AI can deepen inequalities if not developed responsibly

The speakers agree that AI systems and algorithms can reflect and amplify existing societal biases, potentially deepening inequalities if not developed and implemented responsibly.

Need for comprehensive regulatory frameworks

Monica Lopez

Paola Galvez

Comprehensive regulatory frameworks are needed

Countries need to develop national AI strategies

Both speakers emphasize the importance of developing comprehensive regulatory frameworks and national AI strategies to guide responsible AI development and implementation.

Importance of public participation and awareness

Monica Lopez

Paola Galvez

Ongoing community engagement is essential

Structured public participation is needed in AI policy development

Investment in AI skills development is crucial

The speakers agree on the need for public engagement, participation in AI policy development, and investment in AI skills development to create a more informed and engaged public.

Similar Viewpoints

All speakers agree that pausing AI development is not the solution. Instead, they advocate for continued development with a focus on making AI more explainable, addressing challenges collaboratively, and implementing national strategies and frameworks.

Monica Lopez

Abeer Alsumait

Paola Galvez

Yonah Welker

Pausing AI development is not a viable option

Focus should be on making AI more explainable and bridging knowledge gaps

Countries need to develop national AI strategies

Collaborative efforts are needed to address AI challenges

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of diversity in AI development

Monica Lopez

Yonah Welker

Diversity in AI development teams is crucial

Challenges exist in developing inclusive AI for assistive technologies

While coming from different perspectives (general AI development and assistive technologies), both speakers emphasize the importance of diversity and inclusivity in AI development, highlighting an unexpected area of consensus.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The speakers generally agree on the existence of algorithmic bias, the need for comprehensive regulatory frameworks, the importance of public participation and awareness, and the necessity of continued AI development with a focus on responsible practices.

Consensus level

There is a high level of consensus among the speakers on the main challenges and necessary actions for responsible AI development. This consensus suggests a shared understanding of the critical issues in AI governance and ethics, which could facilitate more coordinated efforts in addressing these challenges across different sectors and stakeholders.

Different Viewpoints

Pausing AI development

Abeer Alsumait

Paola Galvez

Pausing AI development is not a viable option

We cannot pause. Because if some group decides to do it, then some others will continue. And it’s like just put a blanket in your eyes. So we cannot do it.

While both speakers agree that pausing AI development is not feasible, they have slightly different reasons. Abeer Alsumait focuses on the need to improve the technology, while Paola Galvez emphasizes the risk of falling behind if some groups continue development.

Unexpected Differences

Overall Assessment

summary

The main areas of disagreement were minimal, with speakers largely agreeing on the importance of responsible AI development, the need for regulatory frameworks, and the challenges of algorithmic bias. The primary differences were in emphasis and specific approaches rather than fundamental disagreements.

difference_level

The level of disagreement among the speakers was low. This general consensus implies a shared understanding of the challenges and potential solutions in AI development and governance, which could facilitate more unified approaches to addressing these issues.

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the need for regulatory frameworks and strategies for AI development, but they emphasize different aspects. Monica Lopez focuses on human rights and algorithmic accountability, Paola Galvez stresses the importance of national strategies, and Yonah Welker highlights the need for frameworks specific to assistive technologies.

Monica Lopez

Paola Galvez

Yonah Welker

Comprehensive regulatory frameworks are needed

Countries need to develop national AI strategies

Legal frameworks need to complement assistive technologies

Similar Viewpoints

All speakers agree that pausing AI development is not the solution. Instead, they advocate for continued development with a focus on making AI more explainable, addressing challenges collaboratively, and implementing national strategies and frameworks.

Monica Lopez

Abeer Alsumait

Paola Galvez

Yonah Welker

Pausing AI development is not a viable option

Focus should be on making AI more explainable and bridging knowledge gaps

Countries need to develop national AI strategies

Collaborative efforts are needed to address AI challenges

Key Takeaways

Algorithmic bias is a significant issue that perpetuates and amplifies societal inequalities

A human-centered approach is crucial for developing responsible AI

Diversity in AI development teams is essential to mitigate bias

Governments play a critical role in regulating AI and ensuring responsible development

Public awareness and education about AI systems is lacking but necessary

AI has potential benefits for assistive technologies but also poses challenges

Transparency and explainability of AI systems are crucial for accountability

Resolutions and Action Items

Implement comprehensive diversity across algorithmic development teams

Conduct rigorous algorithmic auditing and increase transparency

Establish proactive bias mitigation techniques

Develop comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks for AI

Engage in ongoing community engagement, especially with marginalized groups

Invest in AI skills development and public education

Create independent oversight mechanisms for AI systems

Develop standardized documentation and metrics for AI audits

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively standardize AI audit documentation and metrics

How to balance rapid AI development with responsible implementation

How to make complex AI systems easily explainable to the general public

How to ensure AI policies are effectively implemented and enforced, not just created

Suggested Compromises

Instead of pausing AI development, focus on making technology more explainable and bridging knowledge gaps

Use existing regulatory frameworks and adapt them for AI governance

Develop smaller, more specific language models for regional needs instead of relying solely on large, generalized models

Algorithms are not neutral tools, but they’re very powerful social mechanisms that either perpetuate or challenge existing power structures.

speaker

Monica Lopez

reason

This comment reframes algorithms from neutral technical tools to powerful shapers of society, highlighting their profound social impact.

impact

Set the tone for discussing the ethical implications and societal effects of AI throughout the conversation.

AI holds immense potential as a technology if we use it wisely. AI systems can break down language barriers.

speaker

Paola Galvez

reason

Provides a balanced perspective by highlighting AI’s positive potential alongside its risks.

impact

Shifted the discussion to consider both opportunities and challenges of AI, leading to more nuanced analysis.

Working on disability-centric AI is not just about words, it’s an extremely complex process of building environments where we have a multi-model and multi-sensory approach.

speaker

Yonah Welker

reason

Highlights the complexity of developing truly inclusive AI systems, especially for those with disabilities.

impact

Deepened the conversation around inclusivity in AI, prompting discussion of specific challenges and approaches.

Governments play a very important role. While every actor and every player is really important in discussions and conversations, governments have critical roles in regulating and establishing responsibility and advancing the way forward for AI adoption in an equitable and fair way.

speaker

Abeer Alsumait

reason

Emphasizes the crucial role of government regulation in ensuring responsible AI development.

impact

Shifted focus to policy and regulatory aspects of AI governance.

We simply do not have enough public awareness and understanding. Because I think if we actually did have more of that, there would be more of a demand.

speaker

Monica Lopez

reason

Identifies lack of public understanding as a key barrier to effective AI governance.

impact

Prompted discussion on the importance of AI literacy and education for the general public.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by highlighting the complex societal impacts of AI, the need for balanced consideration of risks and opportunities, the importance of inclusivity, the role of government regulation, and the critical need for public education on AI. The conversation evolved from identifying problems to exploring multifaceted solutions involving various stakeholders, emphasizing a holistic approach to responsible AI development and governance.

How to standardize the type of documentation, metrics, and benchmarks for AI bias audits?

speaker

Dr. Monica Lopez

explanation

Standardization is crucial for effective bias audits across the industry, but there’s currently a lack of consensus on how these audits should be conducted and documented.

How can we improve AI literacy and adoption among government workers and governors who will implement AI policies?

speaker

Yonah Welker

explanation

Improving AI literacy among policymakers is essential for effective implementation and enforcement of AI regulations.

How can we ensure that AI policies and regulations are not just paperwork but are actually enforced and implemented?

speaker

Audience member (Aaron Promise Mbah)

explanation

Many countries adopt AI policies, but there’s often a gap between policy creation and actual implementation, which needs to be addressed.

How can we address the issue of AI systems (like music recommendation algorithms) potentially exacerbating mental health issues?

speaker

Audience member (Aaron Promise Mbah)

explanation

This raises concerns about the unintended consequences of AI systems on vulnerable individuals and the need for safeguards.

Is there merit to pushing for a pause in the development of certain AI technologies, particularly those with high potential for harm like deepfakes?

speaker

Audience member (unnamed)

explanation

This question addresses the ethical dilemma of whether to slow down AI development in potentially harmful areas to allow for better safeguards and regulations.

How can we make AI technology more readily explainable for societal use?

speaker

Audience member (unnamed)

explanation

The complexity of AI systems makes it difficult for the general public to understand and critically evaluate them, which is crucial for responsible AI adoption.