The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
good afternoon everybody. Am I audible? The mic is not working. I can use another mic. hi everybody. Lots of greetings. And meeting long lost friends. I think idea of that space. But we have sobering business to deal with. This afternoon. Of course, like everything that is political and has opportunity in the hors, we will deal with it with sincerity that is requires. So welcome to this event. Organized bit global digital justice forum and IT for change. Just to set the context, and more people are coming in, so please do take the sees around the square table or the roundtable. Bay I would like to do is just make a few initial remarks before we start with our exciting panelist. * I want to general and characterization by the secretary general, of how we are coping with just digital divide but unfolding data epoch and we are also besieged by the developmental divide. We also know that the game gains connectivity are skewed at some point, we thought that the access debate was over. It isn't yet*. Either of the digital infrastructure and public Jeff Good, all the more confronted by this question of access and connect
>>J l1 ason l0 : divide. ‑‑ connectivity divide. Few P trans‑national courses are able to embrace the digital revolution. Which heard references to how ‑‑ we heard references certain parts of the world cloud infrastructure used by Governments is actually someone behold to go corporations from trans national corporations*. Inequality of digital economy presents urgent challenges and these are not just challenges for those already connected but these are also challenges for those who may not ever be connected but whose lives will be inDellably impact by the digital refresh lateral geniculate nucleus. Actions we ‑‑ revolution. Dempewolf objecting terrorize Asian of benefits. ‑‑ digital eyes Asian. Digital policies capitalize digital that accounts. In world of sleeping all of that, we see that invasion is often held hostage*. To the which intellectual properties operates digital space. Ultimate test I think is public and social value that digitalisation can create and human freedoms that it connect panned. So we can do just these two things well we would have done it. Globe digital coming come tactile one such opportunity. We need to carry done census that is‑consensus possible to build around compact digital PACT forward. Not easy to build consensus. People around the table who business it has been to build consensus all their live. Really count on their experience*. Both civil society and from the UN system. Trying to really Galinda swrannize voices that ‑‑ galvanize voices that can hold the bottom line. This session is organized because we want to listen very carefully to the devil in the detaste test. So we need to ‑‑ details. Locate and listen carefully to the devil the details, voice saying same thing coming from different standpoint us. Words like trust. Discussed in the last session, very, very beautifully. Very evocativeically. We do not mean the same thing we say freedoms. Say trust. When we see openness. We all mean different things. Very important to start there. From these then go closer to the norm and pathways of digitalisation. Of course when this happened privilege to be in those spaces to watch listen and learned, seemed like human rights really very important to protect. Continue to be important. But in the context of structural ininjustice in the world, emerging Ong site about the ‑‑ anxiety about the emerging AI. Our constitutions red sunny are they an Macronnistic. Can they mediate social Gisella ties? Very ‑‑ social justice. At critical juncture. Session is series of questions. Interesting format I was part of some time ago in the University of Hawaii of western Australia. It worked very well. It was for a thematic conference on tech crimes. So you know, this was build it, break it, and fix it. So the first round which is build it, will answer the question as to why is the U.N. global digital compact to important to address CAPs in cooperation. What is its prom Insys second ‑‑ promise. Break it round. Get real. Look at this proposition an seek if we can at all build it. Second round will be side of propositions that are really where rubber hits the road so to speak. Gaps in U.N. global digital compact. Really transformative? Digital justice even possible in this world? We are talking about the climate transition. And challenges con transplanting us. Similarly, digital transition. Fix it round has the a moment of pause. Step back and say, all people with vision. People are optimism*. Who will bring it together and how can we make the U.N. powerful place for governance paradigm. How do we realize spirit of. Discussing and we agreed, that agenda, was very, very pressures. It's important to keep it with all of its flaws does articulate need for inclusive people centered development oriented information society. In the data and AI age. Anticipate but may add. Without ado I would like to suggest this is the format. We will have five speakers. Per round. First round is build it round. It's very hard for us to play to a certain script. But try and keep to building breaking and fixing so in that posturing maybe we can actually be able to turn out better sense. Hopefully. And in this room, there is I think all intelligence that is needed. So I would like to invite ambassadors tech envoy to the U.N. siblght general to build it.
hello. Okay. Thank you. Very nice scene setting. I love idea of, I think with children you might have seen Thomas the tank. Or Bob the builder. We build it. Yes, we can. What are we building? In the global digital compact? We are building a shared vision. Global framework. For digital governance. That is negotiated by Governments. But it is open to participation by organizations, private sector, and Civil Society. So the process has intergovernmental bias in a sense. With stakeholder input. Even the product that is open to stakeholder commits and participation. Commitments and participation. With this global framework*, we are attempting to address some of the challenges that you mentioned. Loading the entry barriers to digital governance. For more countries, more Civil Society participation, more of the private sector beyond the usual suspects. Beyond big tech to participate and then shape together. Lowering barriers there is that opportunity that we are trying to build*. We a also trying to build and shape a transition away from solutions orientation. To ecosystems and infrastructures for digital development. Let me just pause here because I think this is very critical for digital r digital justice. If we just stay with the connectivity paradigm*. All we need do is bring the 2.6 to 2.7 billion who are unconnected online. And good things will follow. All we need do is look at specific problems and use digital technologies to solve those problems. We will have progress. No doubt about it. Plenty of evidence out there. Want connect ticht. Broadband connectivity does to economic growth. Social participation. We will not get the kind of acceleration we need to cover that 85 percent deficit on the SDG. 15 percent on target. 85 percent, of the goals and targets within those goals we are not on target. We need a big boost. Not going to come from the same paradigm. We are building a shift in paradigm. Focusing more on digital public infrastructure, that creates those inclusive invasion spaces. Focusing more on capacity building and Network approach to capacity building. Innovation spaces. As social distancing policy brief, creating 1 million
SDG 1 million digital champions for the SDGs, quarter million in Africa. Focusing* more on data commons. Where data flows, data comes together. To drive progress on the SDGs. Not just better measurement. Of where we are. That's critical. You can't be navigating blind in this. You need to know where you are. But also, data for the SDGs where it data used transformative way to innovate for the SDGs. Also this aspect of guiding steering digital transformation. Has too to expand human freedoms and create that public social value*. For that, the policymakers need to feel they are in charge of this digital transformation. Civil Society needs to feel they are not being left aside. They also have agency for how things are shaping up. So we need to create those blueprints for this transformation that help policymaker and other actors in the space get more agencies over the digital transformation. Those are some of the kind of paradigm shifting build elements. And most crucially, if we look at the space where there are risks, where there are harm, where they are coming from tradition digital sources of those risks and harms or some of the emerging sources, generative AI for instance, we need to put in place guardrails. We need to put in place effective mechanisms. As the SDG scug suggested human rights McKenna anism. Proactive how legislative is shaped. More proactive in terms of public sector interprets the law regulates frameworks*. Also suggests around regulators capacity and how E safety commissioner it's and others get together regularly to exchange experience to raise the* bar on accountability. And equally on data frocks, those kind of
Data protection protection related guardrails to areas. Are 'essential in this building exercise we are up to*. Lastly, I would just like to spend spend a minute on artificial intelligence. Which is really best case for what we are building. If the architecture we are putting together, action areas alongside commitments putting together are not able to handle this latest manifestation of innovation, it's not working. Digital innovation we need to make sure that apart from the different very important conversations that are going on, G7 Hiroshima process, the G pay discussions UKAI summit, we make sure* that all the other country is not participating in those conversations have a space where they can also shape how the governance of AI happens and for that, the secretary general is creating advisory body on AI. Stakeholder global advisory body. That will look at emerging landscape of risks and opportunities that look at the current landscape of gmp ANSI. What are the gaps there? Governance. Scientific experience we can build around and challenges? And is* there some role in terms of not just the U.N. role, but perhaps institution, Network institutional role, for the international governance of AI? Industrious space, code of conduct. Frames, self regulatory approaches. National space. AI act. Legislation, that's in the parliament in Brazil. So on. What is the kind of SNAP international level orchestration that could be put in place? What is the international level? Important building* block in the collective build‑out exercise that attempted to sketch out. Let me just conclude by saying that this cannot be the task of open the U.N. secretary ‑‑ only U.N. secretary. Cannot be the task only of member states they'll have to play leading role. Building exercise has to be truly multi‑stakeholder. All stakeholders have to participate. Procreate this together. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much. If I might just break order of build it, break it, fix it. Because you have very limited time. A lot of people might just want to ask you questions. I gather you have to leave in about 20 minutes. Is that right? So since we have the pleasure of your company here, and if there are questions, to the ambassador, we could probably take three questions.
>> Retired Professor from the university. I am really impressed by your approach that you say we have to go beyond connectivity. And I think internet was always enabling environment and enabling individuals, enable enabling smaller and need yum Enterprises for I think to create environment medium end prices create environment where we can really bring* the activities from the ground into tradition, processes to the forefront. I think this is really important fit so we go beyond this just to know count it how many people on the internet. And it's not enough. Education, skills, all of these are I think key issues which has to bring in the forefront and has to be based human rights declaration. Good approach. I have concrete questions. Some problems with procedure. How to develop. You said in your introduction, mainly ingovernmental process. Stakeholder involvement. The yes question is how? We had the experience in negotiations * question was*, act is access to the negotiation rooms. Speak. Proposals commend on several articles and things like that*. For me still, I'm here because the experiences from the five consultations, we had everybody could say everything but there was not impression. That input from nonstate actors have really impact on the governmental reactions and we have to have some safe procedures in place, which we guarantee that the input so welcome when you with you always say the mighty stakeholder has to be on the forefront. How you can make sure this impact really input. Thank you.
>> Thank you one online and one more. So online first. Can you unmute and speak?
>> Hello. I hope you are able to hear me.
yes.
idea for change. My question is, how can the globe district identify gaps in the identification of outcomes over year and how do we see what is coming out of it linking with the view, especially in terms of the enhanced corporation agenda and related issues?
I will be very brief. Because I will have time to speak P this in the third part of the session. I am Professor of the school. And my question is, with regard to the implementation. We have a already had very good discussion about this some months ago. I keep on having this curiosity how this de facto will be implemented. Let me explain my point. I think you that something emerged in a very eloquent and telling way from the experience of the past zero years, also implementation of the on the agenda an commitment, sometimes what is puts into paper in the project of a process, assignment does not correspond to the reality of implementation. Take the definition interaim governance stakeholders join hands and collectively define principles, rules, norms and procedure, it sounds fantastic. But then we don't consider in in practice. Might be some stockholders enormous economic or political interest is sabotaged of this joining hands and collectively defining norms procedures and rules. So what is the is there my question is, is this any thinking about how to create guardrails and safeguards also with regard to the potential, I don't want to call them bad Faith actors. A EA actors nod interested in having a global digital compact. Huge comig economic or political interest in the sabotage of this kind of initiative*.
thank you very thoughtful questions. How do ensure continued stakeholder participation in the negotiations phase. So I think one is what happens in inside the room. And you're absolutely right. Having transparency, having different stakeholders. In the room somehow, so that they can see what is going on. And having the opportunity to shape that as well. Whether you lobby Governments, individual Governments, that governments of places you come from, or others. That is important. Equally important is the opportunity around the room. Like intercessionally for the cofacilitaters to sit down with different stake hold, listen to them and take their feedback on what do you think about this*? As leaders have been doing so far. On the summing up sat down with the different stakeholders. Consulted them. Took their feedback. So we have to be creative. And we have to be constantly inventive to enlarge the space. Because we are stuck with a structure that is intergovernmental by design. We've succeeded creatively with this forum for instance. The IGF. Even there is a recent example. Negotiations with the chemical industry. Found some creative ways to engage in industry and enhance their accountability to find a space between hard norms and self‑regulation. That space. Was invented. In a sense. We'll have to keep doing that. And we will need your cooperation. So that we can have the inside room and outside the room all through the process. The question that was asked about the gaps that are there, in the secretary policy brief, you see a chart in which different forums are put there, IGF, and if you remember CSTD, kind of in the driving seat. You also, that chart also allows to you see some gaps like misinformation, disinformation. Not a big deal at that time. AI, again, not a big deal. The human rights element, it has been there from the beginning. Centered inclusion aspect. Kind of things we've seen since social media platforms became multi‑billion platforms were not an tus pay thed at that time ‑‑ anticipated at that time. There are some gaps we have to consider as we look at build‑out of business plus 20. How do we address those gap sns repurposes existing forum sns tweaking mandates? Is it just as we are seeing now, are the AI space. Creation of this advisory body,* room for initiatives. Not e‑cig forums. I'm saying ‑‑ not saying for ums. Initiatives actions. Address those gaps. That's an exercise that is* actually LRB on the way. We have to be sophisticated flew nuanced about it. A lot of sometimes misinformation, disinformation about that. This is somehow centralizing.* It's pulling things to New York. Things like that. And I've been at pains to emphasize this, exactly the contrary. What we a are trying to do pull together the Insight it's, outcomes different forums so that people who are attend them have a whole of Government perspective. So nationally, also, when policymakers go back and implement, there are no gaps. We're talk not only of gaps international level, talking gaps at the national level. Sometimes regulative capacity completely missing. Fortunately, countries who can afford E safety commissioner data protection commissioner, competition policy, and enforcement regulator. And so on. The many in which these functions are act actually inside ministries, * conflict of interest.* You're not up to date when is required. Those are the kind of gaps at the national regional level that we also need to look at. We need to kind of create incentives so that those gaps are a result resolved. Kind mutual learning international learning that needs to be facilitated. So that building should not* be kind of empty building. Has to have that fluidity, exchange, that allows that learning to take place. On the question about bad actors, what can I say? I mean, I think good have to be more activity they have to be more active.
>> Thank you so much. For that. So we move on. And without delaying. Because we have limited time. We have four other speakers. I would like to invite ambassador Reggie even Greenburger cyber ambassador from the general foreign officers.
thank you. Thank you for structuring this discussion. In this specific way*. I with have preferred to be in the fix it part. But of course. You cannot choose. What I'm speaking from government point of view. More explicitly from MFA point of view. Foreign affairs. Diplomacy is the turf where I feel most comfortable. Some function that I say, when describing how we try to help building DDC, more normative than what this actually happened. Purpose it's also my wishful thinking that it should work out like this*. First thing that from r for me is important to state is this is the moment, knowledge, that the digital* gap digital divide exist and it actually has affects achieving sustainable development goals. And the trend is increasing. Gap is increasing. Gap ever growing. If you imagine AI quantum computing, the Met averse, it is even more increasing. You can expects even more increasing in the future. Also really* the time to reorganize our forces, our energy, and try to, try again to bridge this digital gap. If you look from a local perspective, for example, German perspective, of course we are industry 4.0 giants digitize Asian. Public administration, digitization. Completely* only moving in our national domestic environment. Don't see this gap or identify the gap in a different place. First thing that I learned and I would like to stress here is when you speak about the global digital compact. You have to move from the local national level, to global level. This is really worth it and this will also help reaching sustainable development goals. This means also involving stakeholders, nongovernmental stakeholders, I mean, for Germany, think for Europeans, already our DNA. But of course, still necessary. Then jimple facilitated ‑‑ Germany facilitated region consultations for all deep Kenya African region. America city for the America and Delhi * for the some Asia countries. This was not only to help you prepare global digital compact also schect more context from the ‑‑ collect more context from the regions for this discussion*. Consequence, we had Medical center informed discussion also in Germany and in Brussels for Europe, we didn't have European consultations in the same way that we had it in Nairobi for example. But we had more informal, informed discussion about what the DDC is about. I suspect if we would have had the regional consultations, with Africa, Latin America, so on before we prepared our European contribution to the global digital compact, this European contribution would have looked differently. Because of when as it is, it is very Europe focused and we should have revia Microsoft Teamed our contribution ‑‑ should re‑evaluated this contribution unto the perspective what does it do and how does it work on globing global level? Third element I would like to stress is what we don't have enough and what we should do more is cross regional dialogue. I would like to give you an example. Makes absolutely sense. For example, if you look at the top 10AI companies in the world, there is not a European company among them. There is not an African company among them. When we think about thou shape glebe ail governance structures to govern AI, I think Europe, Africa have a lot in common and we should touch this issue in our cross regional dialogue. Shape global. Across all level and nongovernmental stakeholders*. Fourth element, so I mentioned already global district compact is about global challenges. It has to be compact global level. Regional solution is not enough. Will not help reaching sustainablable development goals. Real unleashing potential of digital transformation can only work if we do it in a glebe ail scale. Which also means of course we have to find ways to mitigate the risks that come with it and also, the risks like climate change, risks on a global level and not Allan on a national or regional level. Not on national. Human rights charter around regional charter. Has do something else. Specify how these documents from analog* time apply to the digital age. Then also how Governments can commit to these principles. What should be in the global digital compact. Referring to basic documents foundation documents of the United Nations in this morning mean meeting with declaration of the fortunate of internet group. Five principles there. I think a lot of people also, not adhering to this initiatives can commit to these principles. This protection of human rights. Carrying for global internet. Inclusive and affordable access. Strengthen digital trust, protecting the mighty stakeholder internet Goff ANSI structure. Governance structure. Last point what I would like to have in the global digital compact is language and technology center strategic and‑strategic and fixed role for the internet governance forum. Place to negotiate internet governance also in the future. Building up and openfully, some of the points that have been mentioned will be taken to the next round. Particularly want to note the point that you made about the need to really look or relook at the way the human rights charter 'requires dearticulation base of strength it's and abiding and enduring importance of human civil invasion says what the AI age really mean. Really important but can get contentious. AI really main mep. I would like to invited doctor director of division of East Kapolei nothing and logistics. Technology in the logistics. Familiar with the unit in the form of collectible suggest to everybody download of takes which is digital economy reports. * thank you very much for joining us.
thank you. Delegates ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity. I don't want to take too much of your time. Let me cut out half of my what I'm supposed to say. Let me emphasize few things. Online, technological refresh lateral geniculate nucleuses. Very ‑‑ revolutions we're in a very special digital technologies move very fast. Number one. Also, all technologies are converging toward digital. Used to be talk a photo, olden times chemistry. Now digital. All of that is tough. Everything is moving like convergence happening. Because of that, opportunities that are open up and especially for developing countries, are there only for a very limited period of time. If we cannot capture the benefits these technologies Move on. Enormous benefits from the digital technologies towards in fact all SDGs. Talk about education. Sometimes criticize TPT. But enormous things that we can do. For the education system. Sector. Developing countries. We can use this technologies for health, manufacturing, at, you name it. All of these SDGs. Agricultures. Potentials are e norm us*. Enormous. One of the things we hear. Nations commission for science and technology for development. Focal point of system. In the U.N. system. On the science policies. SDI and conversations. And increasing we hear when we have the meeting coming. Quite concerned that this digital technology revolution is yet again to bypass developing countries. There's a real concern. There's a real concern, minister asking us do we do with AI? Everywhere I go in the country, what do we do? AI revolution coming to us. Do you have experience of other developing countries using this in what kind of national strategies we need to build? Enormous amount of questions that are coming out on this technology side. Just A I is one thing. All other technologies too*. Just want to say it is not just access to internet. It's not just digital divide as we said. Issues that are raised much more complex and difficult. Access to internet is one thing. I think both of you mentioned, not just access. It's also the quality of this access. And affordability of this access. If you look at the least developed countries and pay exorbitant amount of money, for data. And we work on the preparedness of countries for the digital economy, and we find that participation in the digital economy is not just about access and quality of access. And the cost of access. But it's also the whole regulatory environment. Like for example, if I want to have a platform and sell all of my stuff, if in my country, no privacy and no data protection laws case of 50 percent of the LDC I don't think any of you are going to put your credit card and start bying from my platform. It will not happen. These things, another aspect. All regular tore and I frill work‑regulatory and framework. Scale is not just scales to use, telephone. You need some form of calling skills to prepare your platform and things going. These skills don't exist. These skills don't exist in least developed countries. So this other, among that, one of the other things coming up, in CSTD is about the whole aspect of data for development. In fact, CSTD will meet at mystery level in April. One thief theme is data for development. Thank you ‑‑ theme is data for development. Thank you for giving shout out to digital economy. In our digital economy report 2021, we called for a global data govern governance approach so data can cross borders with trust. * you are not going to have international trade and international transactions and international economy if can your data cannot bored cross border. We need to build operability. Big plays. 90 percent of the big platforms opened by just two countries. Completed and China. Big players. U.S. and China. Not going to give up data governance sense system. * we need to develop OIP rablght to system. Three. Public sector. Data Government system of chienl. (operability) laissez‑faire private sector. Data system for U.S. We have European unions GDP in the more human Sen trachdata governance. I don't think none of these groups are going to give up their data gomps systems they are ‑‑ governs system and depend on aspiration. Need to build interopera nlt. Economic value * but there are situations where we need to have data sharing too. Inoperability. You mentioned climate change. * these are issues. Develop the vaccine for COVID‑19, it was just because the data was shared. Very quickly across boarders. We managed to understand and develop it. We need to have data sharing principles when we talk about. We need have the whole data privacy security standards. At least common standards we all can agree. Ethics. I think you talk a lot about the whole AI and ethics. I think this, all saying here, this cannot be done just by Governments because you need to, if yeah you're going to do AI ethics you need industry sitting with you. * because they are the ones who understands this. You need the society organization. Every struggle begins I mean, honestly, you need a greater toolbox of this world in this data discussion. So it has to have a global and multi‑stakeholder approach to data. So let me conclude saying that all is not lost. I think we have the GDC process to push forward some of these ideas mpt don't forget WSSIS20. Coming to an end * and the principles that you or aspirations that you agreed to 20 years ago, very much, they are unfinished business. Inclusive and people send information society. We have not seen. So please also feed into that process with a lot of vigor because it's undertaking evaluation part of the we're doing. As secretary STD. ITU, UNESCO all here to talk about WSISS. I appeal to you, push * many ideas through many of these so we will converge towards the DDC and summit of the future. We get somewhere. That's how we can build it.
>> WILLIAM DRAKE: I think key take away is struggle.
thanks so much. We move now to Alison. Executive director of research Africa
>> thank you so much. For the input. I guess we all want to be in the fix it stage. I think actually foundational system very important. Picking up some of the points that are being made. To really highlight the kind of challenges we're facing. No longer ICT central challenges. Not infrastructure challenges. These are really globe global problems we're fating. Deal with some of the appropriation concepts we're using. That we're facing. Important part of this suppose*. That we return to them and understand that I am Pali cakes it's ‑‑ implications we're speaking about are going to affect the whole of humanity. I would like to he Rhode Island muse of secretary general ‑‑ remind us secretary general, spoken 2020 of thed in need for new social contract for new era. Important if we're approaching thisser from social and economic justice point of view. Described digital transformation two seismic shifts CPAed 21st century.‑shape 21‑cent enrichment other being climate change. Contented would lied widen inequalities further unless urgent care planetary scale. Identification of the need for global digital compact to underpin common agenda to erase these negative trends and collective and Carolann ray difficult re‑‑ collaborative renewal of social contract and human rights gender equality to rebuild trust and social cohesion with people need to see reflected in their daily lives. Highlighting centrality of digital conclusion and temporary society, secretary general called for compact that should include updated governance arrange thes to deliver better public Jeff Good and usher in new era of universal social protection, health coverage, education, skills, descent work and housing. As well as universal access to the internet by 2030 as basic human right. All dense have a say in envisioning country's futures. All citizens have a right. We were part* of a peer review process for the African economic commission for of Ka. Sore
>> MAIKO MAGURO: U.N. economic commission for Africa working together with the Africa union* reflection are there to make very much research. Africa research. Continental reflection and important of African voices access significantly up to now. Intervention is required more than ever. I think advanced digital technologies over the existing inequalities we have which are already reflecting underlying structural inequalities is exacerbating inequality. Exowntding effects of digital inequality on existing inequality was highlighted by COVID‑19. Compounding, majority of people in Africa unable to mitigate associated health and economic risks through digital substitutions. Of the access to work, school, to banking and even to food*. Those sinus infection of these multiple inequalities threwing gender succumbing to December and economic fallout. Being least best position to prepare for economic reconstruction. African countries, surveyed by rereceive Africa during and after the COVID‑19 pandemic, showed despite pandemic driving the growth of digital economy globally. Pandemic widened inequalities between those who internet prak access retire Po prior to the pandemic and access after. This highlights underlying wicked policy problem we face of the damage tail inequality PAR docks. What this ‑‑ paradox. Paradox global digital compact needs to address. This digital inequality paradox is no longer just that connectivity one where those who are connect and those are unconnected, gap grows there. This is really to deal with.
>> ELI NOAM: Of the already spoken about the complexity of this and shifting from a notion of digital divide, issues of inquality much more complexion. Pair buyer dice lies more people are connected, digital inequality is amplified. Not only between those online and off line in the case of voice or basic text in our old environment. It is between those who have the technical an financial resources to use the* internet is to transact actively, to produce and prosper and even contribute to the wealth of their nations. Those who are barely on line, using tiny bits of data undermetly from time to time. Addressing these challenges we are doing our submission to the global digital compact we need a governance environment look at global regulation of digital public goods. One of the key public goods is of course data. Unlying that and far more fundamentally, also public statistics. We absolutely don't have the data to assist how far we are. We think year 85 percent of the distion. For Africa don't know. Distion, Africa don't know. We don't have the disat, SDGs, appropriated and used misused from classical sense as a Russia for public regulation. Even in the use of the public good goods component of secretary general officers, set up as Public/private enterprise essentially to access open data. Public digital public Jeff Good is far more than open data. Public data. Goods. Public data is basis. Without reliable data little knowing progress being made targets including SDGs and I ICT targets underpin them. Makes it Imparato impossible assist generally. Africa affect global data, gender inequality based on patchy data. Extrapolated few data points from the whole content. High level statistics conceal real determinants of inequality, national representative macro studies reretire inquired to ‑‑ required to build evidence based. Need to be informed by intersectional inequality approach, assist impact of gender, race, class, ethnicity and digital access location. Rural and urbanist major determinant of this. Kind of data we have. Presents these groups as heterogeneral homogeneous groups. E normcy of generality in these categories. Not all men and women equally accessed to these services. Really only through this more granular data that we can identify these multiple or intersectional aspects of inquality. Diversion of multi‑lateral agendas affordable around universal access, public good, internet access, cyber security resourcing research of data driven technologies big data analytics artificial intelligence exacerbating digital inequality pair dogs docks. Resources don't have multi‑lateral going towards the data and AI. Paradox. Data driven technologies.* Reel really important if we are going to address digital inequality in the information era, we need to address this issue of accessing data. I think the important issue here is moving in this framework for governance of digital public Jeff Good is shifting from a purely social justice perspective, human rights perspective, to looking at perspective that is actually also cognizant of the economic justice. We need at the moment, we are looking primarily individualized first generation rights preoccupied by Privacy Act. Important obviously. Don't want to lose that. But we really need to look at uneven impact, uneven distribution of the negative impacts of these data driven technologies seriously need to look at the uneven distribution of opportunities associated with these enormously powerful and potentially important technologies. At the moment, I think that is not adequately on our agenda. Because there is the sense we simply cannot regulate these big tech op companies operating global level. Abdicated some of responsibilities for economic regulation that can happen in the under Pinning infrastructure assets. Importantly of course now, data. I think while compact covers number of key area, we have argued actually the Hahaione Ridge AJs between different policy areas. Broader digital ecosystem needs to be addressed in the compact. Speak about indicated, speak about the invoicability. Lack of ‑‑ visibility. Lack of representation of people outcomes algorithm business actually linkages of that, aren't able no matter how much we try to have right spaced ethically design*ed big data, we can't unbias it. Isn't the data to unbias it with half the word's population, Africa's proposition not online. Linkages between these unto lying digital inequality and manifestations we see in the inequalities is completely different. Perhaps lastly, just been must close. Just think we condition be saying the same things been speaking about. You were there. Geneva got to do things differently. Cannot be continuing do the same things using same policies and east Pacific Hoping we have different out ‑‑ hoping we have different outcomes. Not just supplies structural issue. Have to focus, all evidence we have from sour Brad McVay is challenges are now not in infrastructure. Challenges. From our surveys. Human development challenges. Whether you have access to the internet or not is education*. Associated of income. Until we actually address these underlying human development challenges, no amount amount of high level Goff ANSI and ethical designs are going to address these problems. High level govern angst. Govern Arnold Schwarzenegger. No long ‑‑
High level governance. Cannot be dealt with single ministry. Need transfers of policy address education challenges and high level requirements for data science. Education requirements.*
>> Thank you so much. I think the very hard hitting I think it links also back to what Luke a said. Little bit about being in this kind of bind, but it is ab did I gages. Political abdication. Untenable. Unable to keep time. One more speaker*. Online. Then we can probably decide we will regroup in a certain way and so over to you. Who is the head of open knowledge foundation. Could she, can you unmute and we'll just chat?
>> RENATA AVILA: We are able to hear you. Ever to you. Hi. What you.
>>J l1 ohn l0 : the background is.
See in the background my country. Hearing all of this previous speakers thinking of the reality of country like that.* Country both most vulnerable countries in the world and countries facing economic political, societal trouble. At the moment. We have, we had a mammogram. We would see, be able to visualize all the red spots, all points in the world right now, live in this unprecedented unrest. We will take it into account when we think about global initiatives. So the two points that I want to address in this bill session. We need to build this global digital compact. Taking into consideration that taking into consideration that their r there are countries that according to predictions IMF, about to collapse because of that. Countries according to all the predictions climate, are going to suffer in the near future. Catastrophes cannot prevent don't have the resources do so. With that in mind, I know that is pessimistic approach. Realistic approach. We need to take when thinking about the digital global digital compact, we need to understand that people coming to the room, will be coming with all of this baggage all of these problems. Talk about ethics and principles and sophisticate systems of governance, people there in the room will be thinking of so, how am I going to fund this if most of my budget goes to pay debt from the accredited tore's countries. Creditor's countries. It is again*, problem of nice words, nice declarations, end up in nothing but words. Because you do not define times how it's going to be possible for countries in the south to fund this. In building idea global digital compact, I think that stewings like the IFS should be involved institutions creditor's countries should be involved to give us an answer to that sand say maybe we will pardon the debt of countries that in this struggle had so behind in digitalisation.* That money will be allocated instead of been paid by the country tiemple. To develop about digital information infrastructure needed requires political will. Second thing that we need to be aware of power dynamics. Most powerful actors we have on planet tergt earth at the moment big tech companies? Constant and constant and constant*. Discourse. We need to invite them at the table. Problem is many times, many countries they own the table. Sometimes in some situations, they have gone so far to capture, academia, capture Civil Society, so on. When designing digital compact. Especially attention ‑‑ special attention should be paid to attain the power of big tech not to be just like, low hanging fruit for them to shape economy, future of our digital society. One quick example of that is skills. Of course, very important in this to address the promise of knowledge and quality and skills. But what we have doing through corporations, between private sector and public sector, skills development, is just to prepare the workers that will be useful for them and to keep them on policy growing we have a problem. Another aspect important to address and the bring in is to remove, when we saw climate crisis. Very aware sharing knowledge and sharing capacity. And sharing infrastructure. We still have with that 20 century, still have a 20th century copyright system. Still have 20th century patent system that is not enabling corporations in the way that we need. I think that issues like intellectual property should be addressed at this global digital compact. Those are not like the CSCy topics any more. Sexy topic is A I. Not addressed problem of global north, global south inequalities access to knowledge and access to patents. We will be like far behind an never meet goals of saving the planet. Connecting the disconnected. Last, issue of fee owe politic and role of the press. Geopolitics. Global digital compact to be successful, it would be incredible to* involve from from the first stages globe and initiatives from the media. Shaping away from not completely awareness of the processes or not complete technical knowledge what's going on in the digital sphere. I prepared weak presentation because one of these build it, fix it, is direct. Was to neighboring visual. I would like ‑‑ make is visual. I would like to share quick Lihue see we can meet the goals. In a second.
can you wind up in a minute? Is that okay?
>> Yes. Going to be very, very quick. So ideally, our global digital compact will fix knowledge and politics. Powerball and SAAC. Without replicating. Constructivism, advance people's right an involve people in shaping it. It will be reproducible impact as a result. It will unlock possibilities of technology fast. That's why I mentioned mobile of the pay tons block it. It will bring people together. It will also be extracted economics and participation watching. People who do not really shape the process. It will be sustainable for the people. And for the planet. It will be generic. Not only under privileged communities on the receiving end, would activate if we need power of individuals an communities and think that's what purpose is. Socially innoaferlings layer should be taken into account. Innovation. Rooted in the local. Hopefully we have explanation impact and dissemination. So I guess that with that, knowing that it was very little time to unpack all of this, I think that global digital compact that says how are they going to fund these. Does not defend only on voluntary contributions, but on sea risk ‑‑ serious commitments to the global north to the global sort and global digital compact invites interconnects financial issues and climate issues and knowledge and equality issues to bring them to the same table. Global digital compact that recognizes addresses meaningful acts that imbalance of power, that beat tech companies bring and dynamic that they cost when they have like the person's with equal power in the room. Time to see what's society. If that is addressed I think we have all the elements for a successful global digital compact.
>> Thank you so much. If we only had changed world trade system IP system, and entire debt paradigm. Forty years ago. Not been here. Been able to reap aspirations of the WSIS. Now compounded issues. If with your permission, what I could do is take on some very fierce and MOA hard hitting statements from the more hard hitting break an round. Why perhaps all of the aspirations and and ‑‑ aspirational and praying mate I can statements from the ‑‑ magnate being first round of statements need to be subject to some kind of skeet symphony. * we could ‑‑ scecht EA except sivment. Five to six minutes from each of you. Have an here slot for discussion. Scepticism. I would like to open* up next round right away. Take inputs. Break for period of discussion. Over to you.
act within the particular one‑third of this. Let me try to do this. You can say on the one hand, on the other hand, let me just stick to the one hand. Think GDC was damned if you do, damned if you didn't. Great consultations. People flying across the world. Still flying on world on this. For the skeptic great way to spend government money Civil Society money on private sector airplanes. Could we not have done this whole thing with a lot more online consultation and written these statement sns Serg looking at the current March 2023 or may 2023 draft,* certainly looking at. Stuff that certainly Civil Society has been talking for ten, 20, 30 years. So could we not have done it for a lot cheaper an money particularly let's say some Government spend on this, could there not have been actually spent on drijing digital divide. Right kinds of institution set up in countries developing capacity of Government. Second, a lot of the process involved keeping Civil Society in one track having consultations Government, other track, and so on. Then regional receivers society. I think that was absolutely important because thrforts a lot each group had to say. And not all Civil Society is alike. Sometimes the process doesn't really recognize all Civil Society was aliking. Brought us together all wouldn't wanted same thing. * now, issue is how real sticky points. Forget within society, how the challenge of negotiates between Civil Society and sometimes private sector and Government is going to talk place. At this point, looks like the team are going to sit and use their brain cells to do this. I think is really poor form to not keep the rest of us informed as to what the next steps are. Because that is the real negotiation. Between Civil Society perhaps at one extreme and other parties. And that is I think really important in terms of implementating next steps. Otherwise, Civil Society could have gotten together and written this statements by ourselves. Real challenge before the September global summit. Long structured facilitated process. Third, calls in the current draft for funtding commitments. From Governments, donors, multi‑lack troughs. Et cetera. * situation right now in certainly south Asia, some south Asia countries some laten American countries, very soon African countries is that we are facing a kind of inflation driven Covid driven fiscal squeeze every dollar coming in is going to food, social safety payments water, electricity. Nobody is going to ask and negotiate for digital related funding. Bo is going to paw for this? Fundamental question. We have.Er the poorer the country, poorer ‑‑ IMF bailouts. Mine included. Several of my neighbors about to go into. Some Latin American countries in the 20 something round of IMF bailout. What we talking about in terms of funding basic necessity and Governments are not any thinking IC T digital basic necessity. Ignoring ICTs for creating AI plan to create jobs. When funder comes new need to think about rights. Cut and paste from European policy completely unimplementable with the capacity and money that we have*. In this terms of funding, comes big question, taxation aches. Global taxation. Global compact could come into play. Normal global conversation equitably share the benefits of large global global technology. User base from companies. Companies are else war. * global impacts mentions none of this. global south countries look at OEDC. No interest negotiating. Negotiated between tiny countries large countries. Never going to happen. Individually coming up with digital digital tax regimes. Global companies might be comply with. Small platforms are going to die if they have to comply with one rule in Sri Lanka. Global compact does not address this issue of taxation. Related to financing. * last point I want to make is that this is presented as something that is led by nations states. In multi‑lateral system. And we do need functioning multi‑lateral systems. With significant multi‑stakeholder party participation as it should be. But setting this in a multi‑lateral system * that is dysfunctional is a funlt r fundamental problem. Fundamental problem. Where is the accountability we talk about topping internet fragmentation in the one. Pages. Bo going to hold accountable country runs large err firewall in the world doing so much more to fragment the internet than anybody else. Offend everyone including my Diversity Reboot 2021. Came on online safety bill nothing but curbing speech of people they don't like and speech they don't like. * equal opportunity offense. So where is the multi‑lateral system accountability holding their own members to account? I mean this, is going to be another dysfunctional U.N. security council. Which can't stop millions of people from being killed. That's a had much more important thing. What are we thinking about digital governance? How are we going to hold Hoag rogue nations to can.‑rogue nation to account. There are many. Not talk about companies. I'll just stop there. Thank you.
[applause]
>> SPEAKER: Sufficiently broken. Yes. I would like now for Ali cost at that Barbosa. Fellow of member of homeless workers movement technology sector from Brazil. * I can speak from there? I think will be do more than break after one. So first I would like to thank Anita on behalf of idea for change and global digital for inviting me. Important debate. Showing influence and activities of the following days. I hope I can break it in a way I contribute to fixing it. With honor, I am speaking as coordinator for the homeless workers movement technology sector in Brazil. Housing movement accounts for roughly 30,000 people. Button up approach, doing in practice in the territories, some of what GDC is promoting for. Communication and this, labor. Invite all of you to join our network and session to learn about our work. Closing gaps in U.N. digital compact. I don't think civil organizations find project legitimate. I would like to highlight two on the GDC sustainable digital public infrastructure and AI and labor. Alludes to sustainable public infrastructure. Should be more precise about sustainable.
>>KON: Census definition. IGF could enable this * forces acceptable to GPI. Supported primarily through actions of multi‑lateral organizations. Which supported by big tech related big foundations shaped what dpi is in practice. Twenty tests * forces to promote additional public infrastructure. Last meeting in New Delhi. Closely, different definition. Internet Pioneer Ethan Zuckerberger man set of technology systems for the healthy functioning of society. Last 20, document restricts to ID, payment methods platforms. They're sharing. Really important but not enough for that. At least for the majority of the world. Must consider additional public infrastructure as a general purpose or essentially for infrastructure or platforms. Even. Mentioned by colleagues in the first round, multi‑level approach is necessary. Although missing. Searching working global level. Social media. Health care education, social protection, platforms work national levels. Multi‑lateral organizations move for that development. Social protection. Could be infrastructure for education for instance. Municipal lower levels mobility house rental food delivery, and labor platforms should be considered. So why not create infrastructure and human rights oriented policy frameworks front row most local sustainable innovation? Including developing countries the economies connectivity structure, capacity, building and access to technology ina ovation is important but not enough. Innovation is important. Dependent on substantially economy two/of three of market. Microsoft and Google. Two/three of market. Not solve the problem enables companies to bid low private networks. Considered a threat to fragment for Network. Promote development, why is dealing with infrastructure not considered public infrastructure? Even if technology big player is not give up on data governance. Again, sustainable dpi. Evident by the policy Network environment, report, DDC policy brief should have mentioned carbon additional footprint. * document says potential of digital technology track supply chains. Does not refer to the supply chain itself. What the Clites. Finer op.
Collier fiberoptic towers. Consider exchange extraction republic of Kong doe, believe yeah, Amazon forest. To ensure environmental justice. * AI regulation governance debate must include labor discussions. Not with withstanding GDC absence labor rights. Acting partnership with labor organizations. G7 summit in May, technologies ministers committed to fully discussing diverse AI aspects. Hiroshima AI process. Nothing on labor. Same is true with G20 in the policy Network artificial intelligence. Until with, why not consider it? Brazilian snare scenario. Platform regulation held by, considered among four pillars descent work. Some issues have concensus such as writ control, transparency, development and govern governance. Lack attention to workers role in developing A I systems. Not to mention impact of AI on workforce. Do not think of workers led AI governance, lack Hollywood writers, we will not see improvement in livelihoods. But the opposite. Maybe vehicle. Too optic optimistic division of labor come out. Is it's really transform sniff no. Unfortunately it is not yet. * but it can be. Transformative? I hope none of us would be here. * crucial for our SDGs. If IGF anticipates critical dimensions, only if IGF anticipating those critical dimensions likely succeed and meaningful contributing to the road map for the corporation. Conclude, humility, allow me to echo president LULA statement during the United nation Jenna assembly. * U.N. broadest and most ambitious collective action aimed at development, 2023 agenda, could turn into biggest failure. Thank you.
sad. So sobering. I think that issues at that are not on the table are as important. P mic is not on. Yes. Okay. So I move over to next speaker. Online. Deputy director of IT for change.
>> thank you Anita. Today I will be speaking on behalf of IT for change as well as global digital justice forum. Network offer organizations digital rights, groups organizations who have been working together to advance the cause of digital justice and specific listenen aging in process and idea of change member of this group. And just without much ado*, to kind of continue to break this, I think a lot of this task has been completed already. So look at the global digital compact from global perspective. Two major unresolved concerns. Some of these concerns have come across multiple times in the public consultation. That were held in the GDC process especially from Civil Society groups in the south. So the first concern is that this was also discussed in the last round. That when you look at the at like the global governance seen 20 years adventure, they say that ‑‑ years after. Democrat I can stakeholder vision. All these years. End Ed ending up in a world see governance space captured by a few trans‑NACSA Allan corporations and dominant stays states. Trans‑EA national corporations. Issues that benl only grown. Not able to fix these arrangements after the question. * institutional challenges only growing. Offered in the global digital compact right now adequate to this? I believe the answer is no. I just get to that in a moment. Second major concern is that today, all know that data governance direction extremely important. And as was again mentioned in round one, not just about privacy and personal protection. But it's about how do you govern cross bodily for all countries in the digital economy? Here too, I believe global digital compact falls short. So just to get to slightly more detailed all of these
>> ELI NOAM: , let's take the question of ‑‑ take the question of institutional arrangements for global digital justice. As proposed by the U.N. secretary general in his July 2023 policy brief. We see that the policy brief has like two things. One is the Constitutional of digital policy space. Digital cooperation longterm, short term, longterm. Establish global commission on just continue sustainable stabilization. Take the case forum, many examples set in membership of private entities in. ITU * proposal that digital cooperation forum should be new tripod dialogue modality for follow‑up on the GDC states private sector and Civil Society. Unfortunately, there is no ground nonclarifying rights and duet us of stakeholder groups or the process through which * governmental stakeholders are going to be Nahme knee‑toed to the‑nominated to the proposed policy table. Inviting small and medium size Enterprises to bodies at this policy table but by the presentation would that be sufficient and neutralize agendas power of big corporations? Something we should think about. And this point, already come up. State, cooperation business, unclear. How will internet governance and district conference forum stand in relation to each of it? If the forum is planned does the enhanced corporation McKenna taism never set up after the business, mechanism. How about public policy states duty for economic social development in the paradigm secured by the GDC process. Longterm proposal of the global commission on justice and sustainable, this body is imagined as enabler of stakeholder cooping between states private sector in all future issues of inclusive and sustainable digital. With disconnect. All been talk about. Mentioned for this, is to move beyond traditional interstate cooperation to a new Network multi‑laterallism. New Network, multi‑laterallism, without clear separation of rules, responsibilities an powers of state and nonstate actors decision‑making. End up leading to Consul dating capture of global digital cooperation at governance. Powerful big tech actors. Problem facing for more than 20 years now. * coming to the second issue of the directions for data governance*. Policy briefs says that the convergence for data governance to be negotiated in a separate process. Global data compact. Date an timeline not next mentioned. This evidently means that the most contentious issue in global digital cooperation which is about the jurisdictional of states to exercise controls across border, of citizens, and associated implications for human rights, national security, trade, competition, taxation and internet governance, will remain undissolved. Knew from the economy, rip led lack of news on this issue exact colonial data economy that we had all already unhappy with. Ripped. Final coming to final set of coins in the new institutional arrangements for global digital governs ANSI I completely understand point we can can't back to an terroristic. We have sit and think about vision * because of not able to understand how to make the stakeholderrism work. Leap nothing a new Network multi‑naturalism face, without actually thinking about the institutional checks and balances, we actually ending up with adage goes. Coming to the governance of data, we all agree shed multi‑lateral vision on the access due and use of data lacking today. Know what the class board, question, is not just about privacy and personally, protection. How are they going to talk about developmental when rights of people to determine how did aggregate data utilized enjoyed rightful claims and benefits of data enabled knowledge. From my perspective, glebe ail dictionary contract compact is broken. We have to fix both of these questions institution AJ Government deficit and challenge look at very many. At dating sovereignty. Thank you.
thank you so much. That's very important. Think, to connect older
>> ELI NOAM: Er pointed out in, in all of the economic fault lines, globally, we see questions around **sovereignty, coming back. Call up next speaker from Africa. P position that choices internet governance able to ‑‑ digital regulations.global. Policy from the United Attorney General on DDC, ‑‑ shape. Digitalization and human ‑‑en tremping details regulation. My view, knowledge notion that rights are protected by the mental duties. Expecting date stationary fronts to refrain actions may not be enough. * briefing proposed objecting objectives members states. Rules commits to laundry list of action. Areas points to members, expected to ‑‑ shutdowns. Efforts to close the divide. Members are scectd to come together with technology developed digital platforms. Contribute to A I system. However, no mention of how such commitments from states will be getting. Led by the Judiciary to take cognizant of the power of big corporations to set the agenda. Seen in the AI system. They ado appear if AI, influenced by big tech corporations. They did appear. Compact, commitments from states and active. Come up with consequences action by both state and corporations. May be Levied both states. Much needed plans, dealing inequality digital governance. Second gap in the G DC relate to the idea, human rights. Is brief does not uphold human rights. Capture disability of human rights. Leads to economics social rights. Political rights. Digital rights, gig economy for instance. Coupled with big tech, into the health and sector. Threatening vaccinated communities, rights to health. Education and right to enjoy progress and so forth. Internet spreading. Mind and connectivity, divide. Also education. For instance, students rely on remote education. OSHA economic an social rights. Also mentioned is reduction of rights to the singular agenda of individual privacy and personal data protection of which knows economics and social rights. So those will be my main contributions gaps. Make point on the possibility activities. Possible digital diswris obtaining digital future requires articles. Equality and economic policy distributes. Benefits of technology equally are made prime and capitalism intellectual and extraction. Obtain global justice, needs to align mandate to complimentary process of enhanced corporation. Over to you. Anita.
>> ANITA: Thank you so much three enforcing points. (speaking off record).
A.Co‑hosting rights? Is that possible?
>> Dennis?. Quite a bit of breaking. Last one am the room. Trying to lead * researcher. University of Germany. Not really perspective on this global digital compact. Trying to let the empirical evidence from recent study speak for itself. Why I brought a few slides. Not too long. Not at all. Ozawa see ‑‑ wonderful. Do you see that, wonderful. When thinking about global digital compact. Thought one puzzle that I have is in spite of consultations in spite of many people being drawn into the pro process, regular user citizens as much as policymakers in the room * I felt it's not clear to me what people actually want and think and particularly, would they want to be at the table. Who they want to be particularly listened to in the consultation. I put this on a larger survey. Off around 17.5000 people. Four countries. Asked these questions. If I asked questions about global digital compact. I knew I couldn't ask about complex detailed questions of the consultations because people will not ab tuned to these kind of questions. Might not have an opinion. I asked three questions. First is who should die ideally provide input providing global digital compact to the U.N. * would do you think in reality puts input no in that process. Principles basic level. What are the most important thing fewer you? Privacy to suppression. What should be in there? Taken care of by the this process?
forty‑one countries, six different languages ran November, last year to March this year. And this is online based. Recruitments through social media. Only social media user FCC Facebook and Instagram. Different forum. * first question I had was who should actually have input in this. Surprisingly, technical expert ask most for 60 percent of the respondents had technical's expect. Academic people said that. 145 percent senior citizens. 40 percent civil see side and NGOs. National Governments. 35 percent ‑‑ 45 percent senior citizens) businesses only 20 percent of ther think business should be listened to what the global digital compact conversations take place. And if you just compare this to what people think who actually gets to say something, well, experts get a say. Academics are not being lid ended to. Citizen is not being listened to. Civil Society isn't being listened to NGOs are. National Governments are not * being listened to surprisingly. People think that business * are more listened to than they should be according to normative presences. Found results a little bit interesting brings something to the table. About breaking. GDC or consultations mismatch between general conversation and countries looked at what is going on. These are principles that people wanted to be included. And most included secure security for children online. Security of privacy I. Fighting hate speech. Privacy. Diversity. Least often open source. Open data. And so on. Two more slides. Differences between countries. If we look at partnership of no sensorship. A lot of countries strongly emphasized led in America, survey, eastern university, not EA eastern Europe not so much in Africa or receivers ASEAN. Greater cultural ‑‑ northeast Asia. Global digital compact Africa strong emphasis on that relative to other countries * quite emphasized in Latin America. That's it. Thank you very much. Thank you so much Dennis. Clearly I think experiences of what to build and how to fix may be very context world. Why it's broken my perhaps have a very vendor piewfl niewfl narrative. Take some time ‑‑ beautiful narrative comes through. First runed and second round may want to weigh in comments on the room. Direct those. * request to everyone keep your comments short. But please contribute to breaking and building and then maybe the WISIS in the room will fix it. Questions online in everybody is ready to go fix it. Are you still there is this comment here. Anyone online that wants to comment?
>> ELI NOAM: Hi. Just very quick comment.
*
>> SPEAKER: Geopolitical aspects. Breaking it very important. * because currently, a lot of tensions among the big powers. Basically. Playing up from the mental role inin tech. U.S., tensions with China. We have Russia. And so on and so forth. I think for the global digital compact to be effective, to truly needs to engage key actors. I think that Rick is going play 'very interesting role in this. Pity not to connect efforts of G20. CD first of the G77 efforts of and vulnerable. I think what is would be like very, very important is to welcome everyone at the table. Regardless of political attentions that word is going through. Political tensions. Other thing is to* I'm bay bias here. Laten America. Brazil is historical learm. Which will be like next year at the G20, presenting G20 also force behind the revival of Greeks to be connecting point at this, Civil Society in Brazil. So powerful. It might be like key when both in the breaking process and fixing process of this, multi‑lateral moment.
thank you. Go ahead.
>> . Thank you for this. Indeed Brazil leading G 20 next year. And follows would be South Africa. Pretty much related to the brinks agenda. * and I think we must play really strong role shaping what the buzzword off this IGF additional public infrastructure. Assured that it will be on there protesting in front of meeting. Also, prbl going to take place‑probably going to take place. During this IGF. Going to take place, the ten. I think is going to can be really good. Really important meeting also to shape the DDC and summit of the future. So on. I would like to make a comment. Good aspect. Informationally, need instituting public education for literacy and I think it's missing something like good good examples glad to hear from internet governance school coordinators. Or even sessions IGF really concrete programs for literacy public schools. I say that because doing this in homeless week movement. Partnership with public schools and some follow‑up. Glad to share that. Had time, I like to hear. More about the profiled this respondents. I think it's interesting to see how they're concerned about children rising. Good outcomes. People are aware of the risks. Speak anybody online wants to come back? For those who can see this, little one there. Yes.* Already fix it. I guess you could have to speak. I can't. Yeah. From pragmatic to scepticism to hope, thank you. So we move to the final round. And Anna, are you here already? Yes. Thank you very much. We hope you will tie everything together. Allie said maybe people know it all so that is very important segue to go into, Anna Krista Willis. Senior program professional from UNESCO. Welcome. I don't know if I'm the WISIS wants to fix this. Happy to be the fix session*. I think we had UNESCO really aim with our work to try to fix some of the issues acknowledging that actually, there is no one only actor that is able to, to solve all of this issues that you have already mentioned. But we are aiming actually think how this multi‑stakeholder approach will actually look like with it Dom comes to for instance dealing with digital platform governs systems an how we manage to balance and create a balance between freedom of expression, safeguarding for expression, access to information with adolescent potential harmful content such as information hate speech or conspiracy thiers seeing that is scaling online. So I want to start * very quickly. Saying that UNESCO working since the year ago with a set of consultation process. For the awareness of digital platform and this is one of the elements that will inform global digital PACT in future 2024. We're aiming here to try to create a document that will guide the process awareness of digital platform. Acknowledgeing that we with talk about governance, we are talking about coherence system where different regulatory arrangements can quick fix. We acknowledge self‑regulation. Coregulation. Statutory regulation has to happen. Has to safeguard in any case freedom of access. Access to information. We don't want regulation to become a year of exclusion or discrimination. Regulation is happening different parts of world that doesn't even mention or acknowledge freedom of expression. They are trying to regulate content. We know there's regulation that does put in this trade, in their core, human rights approach and that is happening there. Creating divisions. Creating huge layer of exclusion. In our point of view. So this guidelines are very much focus odd structures in process. Digital pro platforms to identify potential harmful content and tries to create a no list these Government ANSI systems is dependent on multi‑stakeholder. Governance) participation. I have to stop here because I have heard a little about what does it mean. During the consultation process one of the questions that we made. We wanted to know what receives society. What is role that GFCE society wants to Phil in * when it comes to a hole recycle. Not only in participating regulatory processes, monetary relation, all of the process of regulatory cycle, and one of the things that we realize it is a conversation that is mostly bread. There is a silence conversation where regulators talk to each other. One policies being approved by the legislators. Regulators never talk with the companies. Companies never talk with the regulators. Not with the seeftion society. Impression with the different aping Torres. One of thing we're aiming for, wants guideline. Approve, try to convene and Crete and regulatory or a framework off Network off Network. Regulators. Society organizations*.** Companies media, academia, think tanks, participate in this cause among, why aren't those indicators from the global regional label, that have to be observed when it comes to governance of digital platforms. So for instance, there's many regulators that have till this, I have a question here. It they never participated in their internet govern Asperger forum. Never been part of this. Governance form forum now given responsibility to attend to these all of these issues. Haven't discussed different layers responsibilities each one of the companies. Right now, in another session, companies were saying we never talk with the regulators. We are being regulated. So it's a problem of breaking the silos and also, creating discussion where other thing that regulates mentioned is we never talked with civic society. Civic society talks with the policymakers. Then we don't understand what the different problems happening among with regulation comes into place. If we understand how it is being put in place, what is effect having other things, then we could do something. Creating networks for key issue to identify, potential follow‑ups. Potential way to identify how governance of digital platform work and when I say networks. Never think about global Network. Or we can think about global Network we need to go button down and understand there will be always always local indicators very important follow you up and prioritized. In one country and then regional indicators would be prioritized in other iewn countries. For instance, in Africa, many specific comments about making sure that threat mechanisms were translated. Of the people, because right now, it's not possible to access to those. Other countries say we need to focus on marginalized communities. I think what I mean with this, what I want to think about this is for us, fixing it means actually giveen meaningfulness to the work. With the stakeholders. We say it a lot. Bhedgesing it a lot. When ‑‑ mentioning it a lot. Question what does it mean, with the action, specific action, to follow, each each one of the actors doesn't have an actual answer. So what we want to is as UNESCO, after lunch guidelines to convene all of you to participate and to walk together to the define specifically how to actually start the finding. Multi‑stakeholders in the ordinance of the platform. More specifically to the awareness of digital platform in the local regional and global level. That would be my, presentation. Thank you. Little bit mischievous I think we should ask maybe somebody from the break it group to ask a question to Anna. Are you convince by the answer? She didn't want to give answer to everything. She did speak about, addressed point about participation washing. Are you convinced? Let me go ahead, please.
Yeah. I have a question. I think he also has a question. My question to Anna I completely understand that stakeholder system kind of become empty significant flyer and need to accord meaning to it. But in the talent, we have like treated this magic stakeholder orangements. How do you think we can pin down the responsibility on corporations so that my stakeholder less symphony listened. In the context of information and dignity and interest of trust. Can't be that platforms make like lose like commitments. Can also be that we just like treated us Najuma problem for states to regular night. Transaction corporations at the global level, how did do we hold platforms responsible for like enforcement human rights and ensure they don't enjoy emimpunity. How can we fix that going forward? (impunity ‑‑
do you have anything to ask? I think you should go ahead. She may be busy.
>>PETER: Lines have'd are need about the platform to comply with three key principle
>> Many regulations as I mentioned target users * and not the companies. I think it is important, which mean by users, utilize Louiseer. Did not touch the companies. So one the things we want is to actually make sure that companies are transparent, are accountable, perform due diligence empower users providing tools met relates to a lot with information tourists. Come back to that. Actually very interesting this part of consultation relating to median information. Fifth is guidelines human rights principle. Guidelines say, if it's whatever kind of arrangement of regulatory arrangement. Should be checking balances an should be comfortablably and meaning. Companies need to be subject of unforestment in case they don't comply. With the five principles. Need to comply with these five principle ANSI any kind of regulation should be fine. Should be in the Court of any kind of regulation. In the guideline, we understood from the consultation, that the role of saving society, act dime yeah, of media, different role that is not related. It's a real that makes companies to comfortable, role of Government is also for enforce accomplishments of the compliance of the digital platforms. At the same time ‑RPBGTS roll of the society, media and academia is to make Governments accountable to make sure they are not using regulation to go against freedom of expression, access to information. To identity, potential heart content into create trust worthy place.
>> NEHA MISHRA: That would be my response. Thank you. Thank you to see ‑‑ great to see Rene ought a.
>> Thank you so much. From the * questions about corporate responsibility and accountability have trans muted into very urgent questions about corporate capabilities of liability. * there I think there is a need to move the vocabulary and then fix it. So on that note, Andrea, take it away. So good at breaking it. Fixing it might not be possible.
>> STEPHANIE HONIE: Am I allowed to say that?
>> NEHA MISHRA: I'm not easy. I I think that I would agree with everything that the break as said. * but I think do we have luxury of just breaking and not fixing. I think we don't. I think especially after spending all of that money that h*ighway lawfn I was talking about, some of us ‑‑ by the way, highway Lani not everyone was known around the world to be part of the GDC consultation. A lot of us to do it online with short of cutoff points if you were not a member. Take step back. Organizations. Take a step back. Look at what principles do we already have in this digital space? What norms are there? Are they being complied with? If not, why not? We have norms unresponse behavior. Group of governmental experts norms. Those norms sign ten to create more trust. More predictability. In the relationship between states an behavior of states. Bay is happening with those moments? Date back I think to 2011. Let's look at the WISIS principles. Take a step back. What has worked well from the Geneva declaration. And WISIS outcome documents. What are the principles in those documents still hold people together. Notion of people sent to development. For example of Acrivment T ace driver for dreasessing poverty. For more inclusion. ‑‑ as a driver ‑‑ snmplet look at that. Whether we need digital compact that is not really about digital. But about pam. And how people are affected. By digitalisation. And what the consequences are of this emergencying evolving relationship between society, our natural environment and technology, I think there is some of that in the geds. Overautisming.
>>AMBER: Blare comments. Looking at the big picture. When it coves to the compact and what we're supposed to expect to see in the can conflict, not sure that's reflected. Also need to take back look at evidence. I don't see the dej tail compact forks really being informed by the State of digital inequality. Deals with connectivity. Deals with access. In a very I feel, rather tokenistic way. Maybe if the digital compact can really serious look at the impact of social economy and infrastructure in the form of digital. Unto cuts everything that we are trying to do to create a better world through digitalisation. When you have, I've recently been in Nigeria. In the last three months. 1,140,000,000 Nigerians I think is research ICT data. 140 million. Not connected to the internet. Many of them actually have an internet connection. But they can't afford or might not have the devices. Nigeria ear a country investing e normally in digital. Where is it going? Public service. Why invest new digital public services not yet invested and people able to have access to them. * a lot of taking step back. Looking at evidence and prioritizing. I think geds could actually benefit from take one problem that we understand. (SDG, Jr. digital inequality and move granular system targets around there. And another thank I would recommend, to fix it, so to work in a very complimentary way. With woorltd summit on the information society. World summit , Jr. and the process. Yes, I'm deep was not here yet. I think he used to really beautiful analogy. In this session on gender. Talked about how the SDGs WSIS and CDS are like an orchestra. That can all wok to go and play beautiful music. But orchestras don't always play beautiful Mays utility music. Beautiful music. Make sort of not such I did listen mice you I can. Don't have a clear manuscript or conductor. ‑‑. You have to really work with it. Good mesh. * I think the other thing about, a lot of you have spoken about the consultation. I think you're, again, I mean, I think if you're going to look at something like AI governance, struck me during the GDC process Hollywood actors and writers and their strike, had a clearer take on the chal he cans of AI than that U.N. did. ‑‑ N challenges Jeri Jeri I think maybe that's what happens. Bring workers in the conversation, bring the people that are actually organized at discriminatory level ‑‑ discriminatory level. People affected by AI. Industry level ‑‑ way of not phut putting AI first. Important issue. Significant that the GDC does address it. * but address in a way that puts people at the forefront, that will then First Lady from there that you Consul. People that are actually working on fair. Work. And work dig economy and workers in AI. That is something I would recommend to fix it. Be more tech neutral. There's a sense I think in which the GDC responding to narrative that has been created by big IT companies. They create the narrative of the power of tech. But also created narrative of danger of tech. GDC is very much responding to that. What the GDC is responding to the narrative of inclusion. Of.
>>Senator Ihara: quality. Accountability. Good governance. Now, taking hook EA looking at those issues and AI, very important. * I think it would open up a way in which the GDC at the moment is looking* at I A. A.
>> MAIKO MAGURO: In fact an application of technological innovation that has been with us for a very long time. ‑‑ with it comes to multi‑participation well* that emphasis on that. WIOA think that the GDC could really learn here from the work of SDG, ITU, WISIS process and many of us Najuma label, that you have to be actually more inclusive. Never going to have effective conversations about climate change and technology if you're not actually working with environmental sector and environmental rights defenders. Both from the level of people that are at community level. Defending forests from being destroyed by miners. Or relieve farming to people that are doing advocacy at another global level. Opportunity here where the GDC because it's new, because it's fresh, not e merlinging from an internet‑emerging from internet Government ants process, but larger. Could open up * stakeholder participation to make it more granular, both at the community‑based level but also at the advocacy level. Similarly, issues of trade, of fining, of indebtedness. All issues that impact digital public infrastructure for example. Capacity of states to invest in infrastructure. That can be resilient. That enable inclusion. I think if the GDC can open up talks to, saying to Anita prepared for this, I have been looking at data in Africa. Currently, Africa countries are spending on average more on debt servicing than on public Health Department. Now, if this is the status quo, how are those Governments ever going to be able to actually effectively invest in inclusive digital public infrastructure and addressing digital inequality? So if we don't address the cycles of indigenous, way in which the global financial system operates at the M.O.E., we're not going to‑moment we're not going so see any change. What happens at the GDC level* will float on top. Another fix it. Draw down, look at what we want to get out of the GDC look at from a ecosystem perspective. What did do we need to it in terms of public sector. Public having capacity and resources to effectively implement. What do we need it he level of Civil Society. Being able to ‑‑ effectively hold Government Kathyable. What do we need of cailging how we regular lay corporations? Changing how we regulate corporations. Market regulation creates more market entrance as well? Granularity there absolutely missing. And I think if we don't have that, we might be able to get consensus. But will we get value? I think that is the thing. I think that is actually probably where I will end. I think I would say Leete let's we have ‑‑ let's we have an imperfect system world summit on information society. Follow‑up and implement Asian. Actually has‑implementation. Grounded in many respects. We have the work that CSD has been doing and UMT awww D doing an digital creativity. Good data, small enterprise dollars Angelled or disabled by how digital markets are regulated.* Data from human rights organizations and UNESCO impact on woman adjournest of certain on line practices we know as ILANI said, miss information legislation is Tsi learning the standpoint Saint. Freedom of expression. * also know that community Soroses are not effectively included. In many countries. When it comes to addressing Community Centered con ectivity. We they that current business models are not succeeding in terms of access Mark E. we know the Nohealani operators have reached a kind of ceiling in terms of beings tending access. What I would like to see with the GDC, really just using summit of the future, using resources of the numple and broughter community, to WICOR with the data. I ‑‑ work with the data. My last point I think your data very interesting.* Such an opportunity for GDC fix approach it multi‑stakeholder participation not using it as a brand, not use reducing to be try PAR diet. Epicking it up and bringing in technical community. I do think there's a ten dearncy sometimes to think of the technical community as being in lined with the corporate sending tore. Sometimes it is. Often it is not. I think absolutely we cannot do digital governance effectively without bringing the technical community into the table. Not just as part of civil society, or government or business, but as stakeholder their own right. That applies to the research economic community as well. Thank you more I think about it, prioritize something so important. Also know that so much of our future tied to the digital and cases we make and the what we do now might have cascading impacts. Under the paradox of in the context of digital inequality. How do we actually address the policy paradox. I think that is quite important. I wanted to propose a small change in the order of speakers. Going to replace a speaker. Untiebl join us. Therefore, NAN, Justin, about 24 hours, kindly offered to come on board. * and what I want to the suggest, she has what she says, very well define bye now bounded agenda to talk about. She want to flag issue in digital trade. Rir Ward Avenue Overpass to come in speak how trades an digital rights play out. If you think ethics over to you. Over to you, Nani.
thank you so much.
NAN
>>KEOLA: Thank you. Hole. You can see my screen yes. Hello. * and we can hear you.
NAN. Rights project coordinator at engage media where I violates in voccy group in southeast Asia. Here as part of the dej tail trade alliance digital trade alliance. I wanted to speak to you briefly about * using this trade a graiment namely in the Pacific economy framework for prosperity. I like to use this as concrete use case it I will straws how court access covers the strength. IPAF also highlights the give‑away owe political aspects that come into the dynamics and how this plays out. * FDA in particular is understood. As reaction rir I attempt to U.S. to balance another FTA. Namely ORSEP dominated by the Chinese Government influence. * a pad 14 Dunn tries. U.S., India. Some countries in OSHA. Fourteen countries most of southeast Asia including Japan east Asia countries a as well. As such, soft Government charities all chapters of the and controls test. Expected to conclude by November 2023. Unlike other FTA he is, IPTH will offer market access and GSP prief edges, so signatures ‑‑ privileges. Global south will not receive trade benefits other FTA may offer. Text, digital trade chapter is not available making it difficult for nonprofit organizations and others stakeholders to participate in the process. Quickly, extrapolate FTA as first and important to note that U.S., Mexico Canada, FTA or USM cravment is
>> Morita Ally cited as baseline for the commitments in the I‑PAD. Baseline for the commitments. Widely recorded as pro big tech agreement. We have observed in the U.S. MCA is corporate interest or very well captured in* particular big tech in terms digital trade. 69 percent of US trade visors represent large corporations and trade associations. And this agreement is commonly seen as favorable in interest of big tech. U.S. trade reps themselves. Would have solicited advice from big tech and on digital trade provisions. Some of the alarming issues include, I'll go quickly on this. U.S. MCA. enforce nl cross border data flow requirements. Doe mistake aimed enhancing private and security of data measures providing for regulatory access to data * therefore be affected by this provision. Such as that in Thailand * I'm from, personal data protection act in 2022, which was modeled after the EU's GDPR. Multiple, few implications. First, it makes it difficult to introduce any domestic measures for cross border transfers and while there may be exceptions to this, in the agreement, there are very narrow and scope of necessity and proportionality requirements. Very high bars to meet. In the ultimate nail sus, such provision could help data flow to countries with weaker data protection standards. Accountability mechanisms. Provision ‑‑ ultimate analysis. Another issue aim is to establish safeguards against forced source* code disclosure as a condition of market access. Aim to establish safeguard against any algorithm disclosure in particular. Many countries in the global south right now are developing regulatory responses to the use of algorithm and or AI and one or two regulation is ensuring transparency and accountability over how algorithms and software work mpt and with the safeguard, if this comes into play, it will restrict various tools available to a state to promote competition, fairness in the digital economy. Preventing such disclosure in the future may need to also disKarimiistic. Payment, employment, policies insurance policies. Search, ranking have the effect of competitiveness of smaller businesses in the global south. * now, I'm sure everyone in the Republican are aware of the dangers of AI. So this lack of transparency in source code disclosure and will limit the ability for independent and EXXON verification of how a software product works which can be essential to limiting the risk arise to go the use of this and black box problem with AI. Secrecy algorithm goes against developing regulatory cone census use of AI atoll tools. AI policy observatory. * as well as number of the post laws that seek to ensure predeployment verification of software and AI.* Capture a all? Codefication of the U.S. MCA, if it will be adopted in future trade agreements. Number one, free flow of data across will limit ability for countries to implementation localization norms. Inclusion of this clause would awe Laura for continued flow of data to the global north where it would be subjected to its relatively lower or freer standard data protection and accountability mechanism. Provisions restrictedding access to source code, and algorithm also limit the ability of regulators and independent entity to scrutinize software products prior to their employment. In tig particular global right now process developing regulatory frim works concerning AI restriction will seek to preemptty limit ability for states an regulators implement public interest or consumer interest regulation in the digital space. Preempt the ability. * limit regulatory options available to signatory countries in the future to implement regulations over ecosystem. Now, in the spirit of fix it, I'm not sure if my presentation fit into this but first and foremost, you think the mechanism should aim to promote regulating data and technology and public interest. Realizing that digital comments as a global public good. Aiming to establish international security standards and cross compliance recognition frameworks of Zion, testing, and ‑‑ design testing certification ensure safety relightening of trust of critical information and improve security around through technologies is includes but not limited to for example, privacy protections and grievance*, FA negotiations should also ‑‑ FTA negotiations agreement how to define different types of data. Can then be used to create Harrison Rue on data govern rules on data governance. Another issue with labor rights integration algorithm digital labor. And gig economy ensuring* aim to ensure that workers discriminatories frocked. Access to fair employment decisions including including gig work, right to organize. Should be top priority. Industry. Fair taxation on global companies*. Epic EA ensuring that the ‑‑ ensuring that so‑called big tech pay their fair share of taxes an countries where they operate. Which can contribute to funtding essential public services and digital infrastructure in the global south. Amplify nonprofit and stakeholder voices to also be at the forefront of all digital trade agreements. Stakeholder listening session mechanism for CSO to participate. But it's not it as meaningful as you would like it to be because negotiations is secretive and so we just end up with civiller actors listening to each other in the room. With that, option, we have to address how we can make this more meaningful contribution and ebb engagement. So that ‑‑ engage. So digital trade agreements can be more responsible and as the U.S. NCA codification will likely become trajectory digital trade, calls for robust mobilization to push back against the interest of big tech an incur consumer interest can be protected as well as their rights. And I would like to end my presentation here with the report by our colleague understanding the i‑pad and intersection with internet governance. That's about it. For me. Thank you very much. I wanted to say getting more complicated. A for the last voices I think count on your power. But we also remember SHAMINKA call do not give um. Continue good struggle. One important thing that comes out of this articulation, not just additive around the ‑‑ narrative around GDC. Narrative lies is not where the politics Elyssa. Maybe we will go away feeling happy that everyone was equally unhappy with the GDC. But trade wars will be fought differently at a different place. Whole questions around localization, public interest, capacity*, exploitation of the comments extractism will remain. Without letting short‑term shopping by the powerful. How do you occurrence in the multi‑lateral system. Always existed sharper. We have the smattest voice in roomen ultimate and ultimate. Smartest voices in room. Coordinator for ther digital rights for equality now.
>>
thank you so much. Complexity of this issue is increasing. Isn't it as we go on with the session. I definite don't have the whole solution to fixing the GDC. I have got part of the solution. A alliance digital rights. Considering essential question of how to come up with a set of principles that guide our digital future. So that it ensures justice for the majority world. This time LAC year, IGT launched ‑‑ last year, IGF launched nine principles securing human rights and digital world. Since then, we've really been building on that. Working with really wide range of organizations it from all over world. Including in the global majority. And what our partial solution is that G DC has to be feminist. If it's going to work. Feminism benefits everybody. Yesterday, we launched new set of principles, seem to be a lot of principles around, these are ten, these are feminist principles for the global digital compounds. We launched these with over 50 other CSO's mainly from the global majority. In partnership with organizations like APC, digital is, digital rights foundation, Pakistan. Policy. Aiu Yuh‑Gatewood an da and U.N. UGAND U.N. agencies. Member states including U.S., chile, Finland, Germany, Iceland, all talked about need for feminist approach to global internet governance.* I thought it may be helpful today if I talked you through briefly through the main headlines of our ten principles. Ways basic premise is that the core principles for the global digital compacts of openness, freedom and security are going to be met, they need to be infused with intersectional feminist perspective to make sure ongoing digital transformation of economies and societies can usher in agenda just world. Principle number one. Any digital future must be grounded in existing human rights law. Many people have said that already. Including Professor ambassador Gil. Rooted in sinus infection Allan approach. Pro‑‑er intersection. Promeetings women and girl in diversity and multi‑sectional form much don't want digital inequality to widen the divide. Second principles is that the agreement must guarantee freedom from technology facilitated gender based violence. Academic of at the moment*. Stopping many women and people from diverse genders and sexualities taking part in society. Undermining our democracy. Third principle is around promoting rights to freedom of expression. Privacy and peaceful assembly. UNESCO have been talking about as well. Includes right toen creption online. Anonymity. To encryption ‑‑ prohibition of internet prohibitions don't comply with human rights law. Ensuring universal affordable accessible and safe internet access for all which many people have talked about. This includes something that wonder of our speakers earlier talked about. One of our speakers talked about. Creating and sharing content in your own language. Which is really important. The fifth principle is around demanding strict action against harmful surveillance applications and high risk AI systems. Number six, is about expanding women's participation on leadership in the tech sector. Digital policy making. So if you want this new tech to actually work for us, make our lives better, we need to be in the driving seat. That means that women women in all of diversity need to be involved in the design of new technology, leading tech companies, but also being involved in decision‑making at national and international levels on governance, regulation and technology development. This is going to include supporting more women and girls in STEM Sundays. Require more involvement of women in Democratic processes. Number seven, around prioritizing strategies reduce environmental impact of new technology. Really pleased to hear and react talking about the need to involve environmental organizations in this process. Impacts of climate change are not felt equally around the world. Women in developing countries are most likely to be disproportionately affected. Machine learning is incredibly energy intensive. Also going to be greater impact on water use. So AI contribution to climate change could be very significant in the future. States are going to have to be much more proactive in setting limits on how much carbon new technology can produce. Also, minimize hample from the example traiks extraction natural resources to fuel this new technology. Falls disproposition atly small number of nations often on digital luck land and countries re‑‑ indigenous land and countries recovering from being colonized. Implement measures for states and trans‑national corporations to ensure data privacy on govern and consent. Protection people. Personal data is the bedrock a lot of these other principles mentioned by other speakers. Many states don't yet have privacy and data protection laws. Measures to stop trans‑national companies from exploiting our data are not in place. Also been talked about already.th continue r principle is around adulting ‑‑ nineth principle, equality by design principles human rights based approach all fades dollars of digital ‑‑ phases technology development. Algorithms make decisions about us are discriminating us every day with no accountability for the harm caused. I was really concerned by our previous speaker talking about how some trade agreements are actually going to make this situation worse because they won't provide the transparency of the algorithms we need. Which is why we need human rights based approach, equality by design principles baked into the development of Al Gore ight Mikasa decision makes systems prior to deployment. This means things like gender rights. Impact assessments. Brings me to the final principle. (algorithm decisions, sets AI safeguards to prevent discriminatory bias bay yays. Must be put in place gender and discriminatory bias not translated into AI systems. Standard need to be developed in consultation with those would are being harmed already. You need to talk to us. And minimum need transparency and data sets sources uses how that data is being applied in algorithm. That's it really. Not whole whole solution. But important part of fixing the global digital HPACC. So pleased to hear some of Governments our launch event yesterday talk about agree with us about the importance of feminist approach. Some countries already got feminists foreign policies help. Get all of this into the globe digital compound, stands a chance of making GDC a powerful tool for democrat I can global digital Governments. Thank you.
>> STEPHANIE HONIE: Thank you so much. Democratic global digital *. This need to invert the question sometimes and say, all the talk about digital public infrastructure, what about the quasi‑public that are Keolaed by the private? ‑‑ celled bit private? Why aren't we asking them to open he EA open up and make data set public. Questions like this. He didn't be narrative that I would often sold to us. Luke a is here. Is extremely JETT lagged. And therefore we hope that the stream of consciousness from him will fix it.
thank you very much. Aware of the time. Only thing that is stands between us and dinner and at the same time, last speaker after two it hour‑and‑a‑half being here. Two it Daven hours. I will try to ‑‑ two and a half hours. Try to be provocative. Luke A Professor of digital governance regulation at law school. So what I'm going to say is very much informed on the research and thinking on how digital governance mechanism works and how can they work effectively or not. And now regulatory framework work and how they can work effectively or not. Full disclosure over the past year, been building for five years project calmed cyber bricks. Analyze digital portion efforts Brikena it's. A lot of ‑‑ bricks. Going to say is based on how also very large emerging economies have tackled some of these issues. I have three structural challenges that we have to face. And three potential remedies that we could use but I'm not sure we will use. Let's start with the structural challenges was the first one is that, I'm also building especially what Alison and ALANI were saying. Good comments there. I want to expand. First, structural challenge we have ‑‑ analyze digital governance. Which is what kind of framework that global digital compact aims at addressing, you know very well that's extremely fragmented. Not only geographically, something we have stressed theme atically. Enormous structural challenge. Only have regulators that deal with competition and speak only amongst them. You have regulators deal with ‑‑ speak only about them. Regulations speaks only about data. Only amongst them. Don't have platform regulators, don't have AI regulators. All regulators wants to be some of them. Now, this means that extraordinary and difficult, almost impossible, to have strategy that is holistic and can work in practice. You have face enormous fragment Asian. Have good strategy, second structural challenge * you might have extraordinary relevant political and economic interest that will play against your strategy. And as already been raised. Let me stress that there has been over the past, pandemic period, enormous almost. Indecent profits from five or six corporations and no one has ever taxed that profit. No one. Because there is only one country that doesn't want it to be taxed and that is enormous political and economic interest that you have to face. Come back towards the end. If you have to regulate AI, and everyone agrees with AI has to regulate, there is even one specific seal that shows in Latin America upon the I have Kaitlining about we need international regulation on AI. ‑‑ pontificating ‑‑ at the same time, we will regular regulate based on risk and limit your profit. No. We do not want AI regulation. All aware of the fact that there is, on going effort on AI. U.S., for them, will only apply for the public sector. If AI is developed by the private sector. That's specific treatcy not even worth the paper it's writ own on. Sorry to be so blunt. Maybe some time time, start to wake up a little bit. It's written on. Third structural challenge is systemically, I don't think I used best possible term before I made my question. Asking about bad Faith actor. It's not bad Faith. Most of the multi‑national corporations are publicly traded corporations. This means that executive legal obligation if he shared your obligation, to prefer, share older interest to anything especially that is not binding by law. It is simply, not naive to think that large multi‑national corporations will human rights shareholder profit. Every three months meet shareholders tell them wesm have increased costs ‑‑ reduced costs redude benefits. Very interesting. What happened after the pandemic. Or after this. Enormous indecent profits. Has been not it redistribution of the profits. But firing of at least 10 percent of the workforce because shareholders were annoyed because he profits could not be kept. Of course had to be reduced. Corporation start firing people. Systemic challenge we have. Those who have the power to decide, have not open inSen testify, marketing inSen testify, fiduciary to increase benefits and cost. Fiduciary obligation. Also very good study that wanted to mention by SU bavment colleagues multi‑national corporations violations in emerging economies. Match more or less 200 corporations subdescribed global compact showing 90 percent of them engage in human rights violation. Even if you have specific commitment to the global compact. They have a Dutro toy do so. Shareholder want to be pleased they have increase profits. They have a duty do so. Nothing against this specific corporations. But that is something one has considered to be transgender mat I can and find solution ‑‑ pragmatic find solution. Lack of tackle systemic approach. Only let's say document that gives us idea of what is happening with global discomfort. Policy brief that was released in May and I think it's make a good effort of doing initial systemic approach. Mapping principles, mapping potential actions and mapping for already exists. That is very embryonic approach. Needs to be complemented also. Kind of good practice if you have to use to implement those actions and to implement those principles. Nonexisting. I hope it will come with the forking phases ‑‑ following phases. Compact. Here, my second point of suggestion is to actually learn from the IGF as a good platform for suggests solutionses. Nobody seems to remember, is that mandate of the IGF is will Theros recommend things. So if you taken agenda, paragraphs, 72G, explicitly states that the IG it should recommend issues to the gloib ail stage holders ‑‑ global stakeholders. Never been done because people think recommending means imposing. Identifying good practices in recommending them doesn't mean that IGF will say, all Governments of the world follow this example. IGF or any other person, people, entity these sceuferls you should consider it. Lyft ‑‑ exist. You should consider it. People discuss fancy places discuss solution an recommend them. Start mapping them and proposing them as potential solutions. Nothing controversial in it. If we want to have it digital robot compact meaningful, really have to focus on implementation. That does not only means suggesting good practices should be followed. Math weeks that should be if they succeed or not, something that is if you study China and study big tech, you start to understand they do in net everybody the same way. Understanding which kind of facilitators and obstacles exist. That is the greatest point if you want, greatest difficulty or advantage if you want to implement something, knowing what about will go wrong and try to address it. And knowing who would be helpful and EA and try to address it. Something that paradoxically we can learn from big tech because sometimes that has booster shot booster shot sometimes a sad joke with friendsism mean, I'm not sure which least is longer. If the last of potentially new businesses that have been acquired by big tech of the least of brilliant friends working in Makaiau or hot. If you have to implement medium or longterm strategy, have to identify what are the obstacles and why are the facilitators. I will little bit frustrated the if I asked if they had a plan for it. Answer that is good faith actor have to do more, I'm not sure if is the most effective to achieve a effective global digital compact. I home I've been enough provocative. I see people sleeping. No. No. We are. Just want to wear politically correct face in the IGF. That's all. Thank you so much to everybody. I just want to take like since we have 15 minutes to go before the room is closed and shut, I just wanted to know if there are people in the room who have thoughts to fix it, to build it, anyway? And I know that janitor wanted to make a point. Maybe we can start with RENA it A and I can bring the microphone to anyone that wants to contribute. RENATA wanted to make a point.
>> Some people say, I forgot to mention. As I'm sure that five or six multi‑national corporations, global corporations have earned this very hefty profits from the pandemic, extremely extremely committed to the global digital complex. Something one may ask them so to make a voluntary contribution or let's say, 30 percent of their billions they have earned because people were obliged to use their services for two years. To finance all it's nice things we have said or nice ideas we can have. Does not require taxation. As they are fully committed to the global additional compact. I'm sure they will accept.
>> Certainly. This is somebody who is online.
>> Thank you so much. There is a way. As to speak. Because I have to leave very quickly. I'm from Guam. PR for U.N. I'm one of the cofacilitaters together with my colleague here from Sweden. We came here specifically to listen to you. And one of the things which you have to make clear is that is there is no digital compact now. Complying ideas. So that there is an intergovernmental discussion and later on, will come up with a global digital compact. We have heard consultations widely. We have heard so many deep dives in every of the eight areas. And heard from different people. We heard special sessions for the Civil Society itself. There reason why we came here is at the end of the day, nobody happy with maybe what is going on. That's why we came here to say, narrow it down. So that we see the issues and ones what I think should be compart of compact, or which country, of the compact, given to us, because next year we are going to come and sit down together with everybody to make sure that we can use these kind of ideas that you're giving us as part of the discussion with the members. Members tips discussing but given to compared already toomple. To Kemp for the idea people spitting and especially for your team. For you to narrow down and give us writing so you all of your ideas and what you think is very, very important. They can affix everybody. Affects way of life. Doesn't effect one or the other. Affects all of us. Whether you're in education, whatever business you are doing, affects all of us. Want to hear from everyone. To want to make sure we did it in organize and manner. Bring ideas put them together and say this is your position. What do you think which contribute your discussion. So we take them into accountant that will be more protected in times of doing things. We would be unhappy with the some of things. Don't do it right, then you find, we don't have a right of discussing, listen to you and it's very, very important for us to be able to capture exactly what you think that can be included. That's why we're here listening. Wanted to be at the back. So I can listen and take notes. I think I thought it was very important for to us tell you that if you put something in writing, to for us, our case to and be able to convince people. We hide what you said. If you can help us I think that would be useful. Thank you.S
gratedful for you to give us an opportunity to submit in this writing. Three‑hour discussions able to generate a report in the morning as well,. And would be happy to share that with you* and if your co‑chair from Sweden wants to speak. Would you like to? Thank you very much for being here with us. You go and after that, Andrea and Alison.
very quick. Specific point. Funding. If we achieve one thing, as Civil Society, we'll be that digital global digital compact is formed together with fund. Mandatory contributions from richest countries in the world and richest companies, voluntary because we have no legal mechanism to make that happen to be mandatory. I think that all the west, we will waste a long process. Only in principles. That then will not be applied because of lack of resources. If we can do one thing united, poorest country in the world, soifl civil sew state work together to the future, big announce., big headline. After the effort is substantial money is committed. Increase the capacity, to increase the ability, and to make not only worse, but worse transforming to actions I need to public proper digital infrastructure. Localized in the countries that need it the most. To fix it, financing mechanism to make all of this nice words, into actions
thank you so much. Andrea. Thanks so much. What I wanted to say, partly in response to what Luke a was saying about the original mandate of the IGF was to facilitate, enter institutional. Important aspects of it and recommendations. I think one of the reasons that we are not doing women enough in this IGF space and what we have at the moment is on multi‑stakeholder ecosystem don't have certainty. And it's very unpredictable. I think that this is something else I think that the geds can do. Take away that element of will the IIGT continue? Not continue? IGT continue? Decision of the process. ‑‑ else I take the GDC away ‑‑ make them more relevant and inclusive. Not being used political football
>> member states or UN agencies or territorial issues welcome back the N system. These processes are not as strong as they should be. Not as inclusive as they should be. They are the best that we have. I think I really facilitied, event letter from the Covid facilitators I got the message. Take years of evolving an continuing to strengthen these places. One thing is Civil Society we have to be careful is just set our own terms. DDC consultation process required us to respond to what was given to us. I think we probably did not do enough to Phil the gaps. Two years created thematic structure based on what was given to it by the GDC or process. That's good. Wants to be relevant, in that process, you could actually be missing exactly the same things that this other top down process is missing., like Texas.
>> Thank you. Thawj for this very much for reminding us for this very informative session. Heard a lot of very interesting insightful, and also useful comments. I think some of points may be also good forrous to take into account‑for to us take into account. Review. Forgot introduce myself. I'm working for SHAMICA our director. Servicing U.N. commissioner. Signs signs and technology add developments. In order to provide input to the Jenna assembly, going to inten/25. You might agree to participate. Muffal points very relevant. To several speakers mentioned, we also need to look at what are this now? They were working why are he not working or how can we? What can we do to work better to really achieve vision of inclusive people centered on development or entity from society CSV it s going to launch open consultation March stadium so of objecting. In this you house. Or room E, from 315 to four:15. Four:456789 circulate the questionnaire together with lucky actors UNESCO and A.I. TO and UNDP. Phil out questionnaire. It's available on their IGF website. Question. Taking into account preparing our property reports. Report is going to be discussed as their two an ail r wail sessions. One is next year. April. The other is interisland 25. Then after this two discussions, we're going to present a report to the general pub utility assembly for ‑‑ to the report to the assembly. Encourage the group to participate. For the review. Offered very insightful comments and points and messages that we can definitely consider in our review. Thank you again.
yes. Nigel. From the Carribean tell communications union. Government organization. I did come in late. Not sure if the specific comment was made before. Hearing judgments, comments about this structural short coming with regulation, I am bare aware that the ITU has a fledgeing attempt at regulatory collaboration. Which they are calling digital regulation. Which they launched at the global Sim Post‑It yum for regulators in St. ‑‑ symposium for regulate understand May of this year. It's probably something that should be taken into account.
>> STEPHANIE HONIE:
thank you. ‑‑ thank you. First phase. Wanted to say something about the fix it. Some of
>> ELI NOAM: We raise in the beginning. We raised in beginning. Really raised in the fix it session * are really, we still not addressing what fundamentally has to be done. Dealing with some of the problems and maybe not sufficiently what the solutions are. Just in response to con straintly using what we've got and how relevant still remains, relevant IGT remains. I think these are important continuities. Significantly because we still have the same problems. Really important in referencing those that we commit ourselves to doing something differently. We continue to identify the same problems and speak about the same kind of neo blue market, domino. Assumptions best value contact tracing is out of private sector. These kind of things. When the ambassador Gil speaks about this need to be a paradigm shiest, paradigm shift is not a institutional changing of chairs. Constitutional arrangements. We have to something fundamental. Problem is what do I Russian for governance. Around traditional commercials, supply side regulations of resources in the allocation of resorters. We need to really challenge that. We need to starts looking at the demand side and value that we need in our recite organization. If we're serious about building public value. Serious about economic justice. We've got to be looking at those, that is how we get to comment, not about causing out little bit of space commercial sector doesn't want for little bit of wifi. Or something. We need really address fundamental issues. Our structural issues at the Government advocacy level, eloquently addressed, still not dealing with structural inquality that we bursted. Make all this inequality manufactures. Wants to make a paradigm shift, needs to come in the local call for local governance and regulation. Anyone else?
thank you for your formative discussion an comments. I'm Japanese randomly participating in this workshop. I have after listening through the fruitful discussion realized that the process, fixing the process of goes is quite important because GDC we have a expression in Japanese, rice Kekuewa painted in a pig tour. We cannot ‑‑ picture. We cannot teeth even it looks delicious. We have to make it through real process and I have one question. So maybe GDC should be like orchestra with beautiful music but we need a conducer. Who should be conductor in this process. Maybe very difficult. I would like to hear the recommendation from IGF what should be play conductor. Maybe only one. But who several conducers for the process. Snmplet snmplet conduct you aves for the process, conduct,
>> will need, I think entirely * another zero day event. It's Constitutional request. Alison said, it's only partly exhaustion AJ. Name for the report. Not just a little bit of wifi. * we want real rice cakes. So I mean, yes. Just to say thank you to everybody who had constructed this. Dynamite coalition said we're involved. Thank you Dennis. Thank you Luke a. Also, global digital justice forum. And to all of you, who so readily gave up your time and sat here and came back after your other commitments. And to our surprise visitors, co‑chairs, of the D DC, wanted to also say that the thing that struck me when I read the idea of justice, was that never, never should he make the mistakes of going behind the idea of justice. Must understand the idea of injustice. Couldn't have done your job. In some sensor session was very instructive all of us contributed to cocreating the pool of ideas of what we don't want. I think for long, people of world have to what is necessary, to fix. It's not rocket science at all. We know it and I we political economy of Aunty's solutions in the right way. We should build public volume, probably go to the report in the next state. Request all of you and maybe reach out and if you would like, to please send back your comments. That would really help. And the IG of job of closed captioning. May not always be accurate. Nice to have your comments. Thanks to everybody. And round of applause.