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.
***
>> WU SHENKUO: Distinguished guests and colleagues, Wu Shenkuo. Our online Moderator, Li Yuxiao Secretary‑General from Cybersecurity Association of China is online. Welcome to Open Forum hosted by the Bureau of International Cooperation, Cyberspace Administration of China, Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies. Thank you for joining us. The theme for the Open Forum is Jointly Share the Responsibilities in the Digital Era and promote Digital Governance and cooperation. Taking this as a starting point, we have invited representatives from Government, international organization enterprise industry, and think tank worldwide to hold dialogues on the two topics.
First, the impact of Internet innovations on Digital Governance. And second approach of Digital Governance capacity building and international cooperation. To jointly explore the ways to promote the Global digital Governance cooperation and strengthen the digital Governance capacity building. More important, we would like to continue to build a sound Digital Governance ecosystem. Now, let's start the Forum.
First, let us welcome Ms. Qi Xiaoxia, Director‑General, Bureau of International Cooperation, Cyberspace Administration of China, organizer of this Forum to give an opening speech.
>> Qi Xiaoxia: I'm please to meet all of you in Kyoto on behalf of the Bureau of International Cooperation, Cyberspace Administration of China. I wish to extend a warm welcome and heartfelt appreciation to all guests both present and online. Today, the phenomenon development of information technology revolution and digital economy is transforming the way of production and life, exerting far‑reaching influences over social and economic development of States, global Governance system and human civilization.
The rapid application and development of Emerging Technologies represented by artificial intelligence also poses a new problem of Governance to all countries.
Problems with the Internet such as unbalanced development, unsound regulation, unreasonable order still exist across the globe.
Enhancing Digital Governance is increasingly a matter of interest to all countries as well as an important topic for discussion. Against this backdrop, it is necessary and relevant for us to have a discussion on this important topic.
Since China gained full featured action to the Internet it has always been committed to promoting Internet development and Governance. Historic progress in relevant undertakings has been made in China. Hundreds of millions of Chinese people have a greater sense of gain from sharing the achievements of Internet development.
Last year, China released the white paper entitled jointly build a community with a shared future in cyberspace. This paper introduces China's vision of Internet development and Governance, shares achievements in promoting the building of a community with a shared future in cyberspace. Outlines the prospects for international cooperation and expresses China's sincere desire to strengthen Internet development and Governance cooperation in cyberspace.
We are ready to work with all parties to keep pace with the vends of the time ‑‑ trends of the time, seize the historical revolution and tackle the risks in cyberspace and make the Internet deliver more benefits to mankind.
With this in mind, I wish to propose efforts in three years. First, we need to follow a people‑centered approach with a focus on inclusiveness and shared benefits. Focusing on people is the purpose of the Digital Governance. We need to put people first making positive efforts to apply Internet to education, healthcare, and the poverty alleviation. Improve digitally enabled service and the enhanced digital literacy and skills of different groups. We're willing to work with the international community to increase support and assistance to vulnerable groups, promote science and technology for good, bridge the Digital Divide and facilitate the effective implementation of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Second, we need to promote security and stability and maintain good order. Security and stability is the cornerstone for Digital Governance. We uphold the philosophy of open and cooperative cyberspace with respect to cyber sovereignty and respect of the rights of all countries to choose their own path of network development and Governance model. As well as equally participate in international Governance in cyberspace.
We are ready to deepen exchange and cooperation with other countries in cyberspace. Cooperating to combat cyber terrorism and crimes and jointly safeguarding peace, security and stability in cyberspace.
Third, we need to stay united and work together for shared Governance. Unity and cooperation is the effective way for Digital Governance. Practices have proved (audio skipping) to form exclusive blocks will only impede Digital Governance. To improve Digital Governance, we must uphold multilateral participation and multiparty participation so as to foster an enabling environment for digital economic development.
We should liberate the role of the United Nations as the main channel in international cyberspace Governance and give play to the role of Government international organizations, Internet companies, technical communities, social organizations, and individual citizens to jointly study and formulate norms for cyberspace Governance that reflect the interests and concerns of all parties in a more balanced way. Making the Governance system more just and equitable. Ladies and gentlemen, IGF is the important platform under the United Nations. We are willing to join hands with all parties on the basis of mutual respect and trust to solve difficult issues, strengthen areas of weakness and improve self‑governance concerning Digital Governance. Constantly developing governance landscape featuring multilateral participation and multiparty participation and jointly build a community with a shared future in cyberspace. Thank you for your attention. I wish the Forum a full success. Thank you.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you very much Ms. Qi Xiaoxia for the relevant approach of China. No, sir we have Xuan Xingzhang Vice President of Chinese Academia of cyberspace studies to deliver a speech.
>> Xuan Xingzhang: On behalf of Chinese academy of cyberspace studies I would like to give warm congratulations on the holding of the Open Forum of Internet Governance Forum and welcome all the guests.
At present the innovation of the Internet Big Data, Cloud computing AI and other digital technologies are assimilating. The industry and Digital Economy are booming. This has many forces. The Government models and people styles.
But at the same time, the Digital Divide is becoming more and more pronounced. Cyberspace and data security risks are increasingly penetrating and the Global digital Governance is still facing problems such as unbalanced foundations. Imperfect session and fragmented laws.
In this context, it is of great significance for us to explore to strengthen Digital Governance and international cooperation. It is a shared aspiration of all countries to build and maintain a peaceful, secure, open cooperative and orderly cyberspace. The community has a shared future in cyberspace has increasingly become broader concern of the international community.
Now, from the perspective of think tank, I would like to share with you some of the observations and reflections of how to promote capacity building and the international cooperation of Digital Governance.
First of all, seize the opportunity in the Digital Era to unleash the potential of Digital Era. We have historical development of opportunities, but it is also accompanied by risks and challenges. Digital technology governance, data Governance and platform Governance have become important topics, think tank should be actually carry out research to explore how to adapt to the development in the Digital Era.
Results for technical innovation and development are the premise of security. Optimize digital development environment so as to have full tap the potential of digital technology, facilitating to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and enable people around the world to share the fruits of digital development.
Second, enhance mutual trust through dialogues and exchange to prevent digital security risks. At the present, the Global security threats are becoming increasingly permanent and rapid development of new technologies and applications have brought new risks.
The importance and urgency of building a solid bottom nine and development have become more permanent in the face of the new issues and challenges. Think tanks should play a bridging role in strengthening dialogues and exchange research and discussion so to enhance strategic mutual trust in cyberspace.
Think tanks should innovative to build platforms across Plenary field and national exchange and cooperation. And (?) the situation to prevent digital security. Risks and the improving the system of a Digital Governance rules.
Third, guide mutual ‑‑ multiple parties to actively participate in building a sound Digital Governance ecosystem. A sound Digital Governance ecosystem is the best guarantee for promoting the digital innovation and development.
In the iteration of digital technology and complex issues in Digital Governance we need to adhere to mutual natural and mutual party participation. The parties in Digital Governance include the Government international organization and enterprise, social organization, et cetera.
All parties should apply their respective role to cooperate with each other and stress the changes. Think tanks should be open minded with a strong sense of responsibility and should through dialogue, communication, general research and other means build confidence, resolve misunderstanding and differences and contribute to the building of the Global Digital Governance ecosystem.
Last but not least, promote cooperation on Digital Governance to improve the Global Digital Governance system. Promoting openness and cooperation, it is an important principle for building a community in cyberspace. Think tanks should promote the cooperation and wisdom to the development of the digital technology and formulation of the Governance rules.
We're very willing to cooperate with research institutions, Universities, think tanks, enterprises and international organizations from all countries in the field of the Internet. The study of digital development and Governance issue can contribute to the development of the Internet. Chinese President calls on the international community first with opportunities and challenges, with digital innovation. In cyberspace is fair and more equitable, and open and inclusive, safer and more stable. And more vibrant. Let us work together to find solutions to the challenges of the Digital Governance. Promote the building of the closer community with shared area in cyberspace and create a better future for mankind.
Finally, our wish for the Forum is a complete success. Thank you.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you, Mr. Xuan Xingzhang for your wonderful speech. Next is the second session of the speech. Welcome Ren Xianliang Secretary‑General of World Internet Conference, President
of China Federation of Internet Societies.
>> Ren Xianliang: (No English translation available)
Ladies and gentlemen, friends, the world today is undergoing major changes in this century, the pace of digitalization, network and intelligence is accelerating. The way we produce, lead and govern is undergoing profound changes, driven by transformation of the industries is accelerating. The data flows are growing and data platforms are accelerating expansion.
Digital Governance has become increasingly important global issue. At the same time unilateralism is on the rise. The Digital Governance capabilities among countries is becoming more evident. (Audio skipping)
With the goal of jointly building community and sharing cyberspace, we will adhere to the concept of consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits and actively explore ways to create Digital Governance system for the participation of Government, departments, enterprises, Academia and industry organizations.
In order to build a community of shared responsibilities and common interests in the field of Digital Governance and make digital technology give more to mankind, I would like to propose the following ...
First, the Digital Governance should be more precise and efficient, Digital Transformation provides new ideas and means to solve Governance problems.
We should look at the positive side of the digital technology and using technology to Governor technology and improve the efficiency of Governance based on digital means.
Over the years, the WIC has organized events over cutting‑edge technologies, including Forums and technological achievements, presentation of practice cases, exhibitions and competitions to provide a platform to promote commercialization and application of cutting‑edge technologies and national Governance.
Second, digital Governance should be more inclusive. There are 3 billion people in the world who are unconnected.
Large proportion of whom are women, elderly and rural population.
Digital Governance should avoid further widening of the Digital Divide and prevent vulnerable groups from being further marginalized.
The WIC stands ready to make concerted efforts with all parties to achieve U.N. targets for the universal connectivity. Every person should have safe and affordable access to Internet by 2030 Agenda.
Third, the Digital Governance should adhere to women cooperation.
Unity is a strength, division is weakness. In the face of risks and challenges we should stay in the same boat and share responsibilities in the digital age.
We should engage in dialogues and exchanges to address issues such as cross‑border data flows, platform governance, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity.
The WIC, we do our best to build bridges, to promote closer and pragmatic Global cooperation on Digital Governance.
Ladies and gentlemen, every year the WIC will host a Summit in China.
This marks the 10th year of the Summit to take place November 8‑10.
I'd like to take this opportunity to invite you all to attend the Summit in the area to build a better digital future together. Thank you.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you very much Mr. Ren Xianliang for the important words. Let's start the third session of keynote speech. We have consulted scholars in a variety of institutions in advance to determine the two topics. Please remind you that each speaker has six minutes. Let's move to the first topic, the impacts of Internet innovation on Digital Governance. First, let me introduce the father of Internet in Japan. Jun Murai from Keio University. Please.
>> Jun Murai:
Okay. Thank you very much for the introduction. It is an honor to be here to discuss with you about the subject and also I'd like to welcome two Kyoto, Japan ... on behalf of the Japanese side of the host. And also, I would like to mention that I'm a frequent Summit participant. I have been missing the visit there during the COVID‑19. Unfortunately, I have a conflict schedule. So in that sense, it is very nice to be here to talk with you.
The subject of this about the impact on Internet innovation and Digital Governance. I would like to mention three points from my experience a long time participant of the development of the Internet. The first one is was mentioned by Ms. Qi Xiaoxia, about the user human being based Governance type of thinking.
Remember when we started the developing the Internet, it is always started from the supply side of the Internet services. Right? So you know, that has been very successfully done for the first two decades or something of the Internet. But now, Internet is outreaching to most of the people and most of the Region, the most of the industries therefore, it is always important to view from the user side and then to find out the issue and the sharing the issue with the Governance leaders and then the users and the industries and commercial entities.
So that is a big change after the two or three decades of the development of the Internet.
So the user point of view. That's the first point I'd like to mention. The second point I would like to mention is architecture advancement. The technology. So the Internet started off ‑‑ because with kind of an IP and digital package switching network. But then they introduce the web. And then the Cloud. And social network. And IoT was essential information to be exchanged over the Internet. And AI, with a lot of data generated from mainly from social network, but also from the sensors and digital image data, et cetera.
So those are advancements after the advancement of the technology is creating very much the complex requirement to the Governance of the Internet as well.
One issue I see these days is of the policy leaders to understand the architecture getting harder and harder. That is a natural thing. Technology architecture getting very much complex and advanced way.
So what is going to be the solution? It is a really all the stakeholder working together with each other and should be the place to discuss about what is new technology and impact and from the different standpoint to discuss that is a priority, one of the ways to be described the multistakeholder approach as well. And then the Global discussions will be also very important. Because of the technology going to be, you know, different in various part of the world.
So I see the photo network type of thing. Quantum computation will be one. And also the nonterrestrial, the space infrastructure type of discussions are really happening this year. So those are the new area to discuss globally about the future of the Internet Governance as well. The third point is about cybersecurity.
The advancement of the leading technology and changing technology, the technology can be used in a proper way. But there is always abusers of the new convenience technology. Right? That is very natural in a sense. So the cybersecurity approach is jointly working toward the abuse of the new technology as well. So it is also a very important point the abuse ‑‑ I mean, working together to against the abusers. That is cybersecurity. Very natural.
But also working together for the proper use and the ethical use of the technology. Together. It will be very important way of thinking about the Governance for the innovation and the future together. So ... those are the three points I wanted to mention regarding these topics. Thank you very much.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you very much Professor for your wonderful sharing. Now I give the floor to Veni Markovski
Vice President for UN
engagement, ICANN. Please.
>> Veni Markovski: Thank you very much to the organizers for putting this session together. We're hearing about what is happening around the world in the field of Internet innovations and Digital Governance. And one of the fundamental principles of the Internet since its inception was the way it was developed and the way the decision have been taken to shape the Internet trajectory have resulted from the multistakeholder approach of collaborative and bottom‑up consensus based decision‑making as opposed to other types of Governance.
We are at the IGF, which was created after the World Summit on the Information Society in 2005. And those of us who have been there ... I'm one of them ‑‑ we remember that in the beginning of this whole process, people were thinking that the multistakeholder model of Internet Governance is only about ICANN. 20 years later, we see almost no one is talking about ICANN because of so many different services on the Internet that people don't even know that we exist. I say that is a good thing. That means we're doing a good job.
If the Internet is not working, and it is ICANN's fault, everybody would know about us.
The reality is that all of the innovations became possible because exactly of the open architecture, open standards, open way of developing the Internet.
I can give an example of the services developed in the test enum. Nobody has heard about it, by the way, which is no surprise because it is tested for the last 20 years. And nothing happened. Everything else that relates to the domain names, IP addresses and other parameters that are functioning and working widely is working. This model built out has turned out to be a successful one, even though people who said the IGF has been speaking and will continue to speak in the next couple of days, never imagined the Internet would become what it is.
That is why some of the architecture may not necessarily reflecting the growth of the Internet. However, companies, innovators people have shown that there is always a way to create something. To use the infrastructure or TCP/IP and make available new services.
I come originally from Bulgaria, I can share the fact it used to be a very poor country following the communism.
Our Internet users department have money to pay for high speed at high prices, unlike people in the western countries. We created different ways of providing Internet services, which were low price high speed. And this was going against everything that you have in the knowledge of how to provide Internet service.
Going back to the issue and the topic, you know, the impact of Internet innovation on Digital Governance, there is another important point, which is there is a point where Digital Governance is used interchangeably with Internet Governance. At the U.N. where I spend time talking to diplomats and U.N. officials, there is a lack of understanding that these are two different issues. So Internet Governance and Digital Governance are not the same.
Although sometimes they may be confused by Member States or people not familiar with that.
I think it is important to know that there is a difference between those two. Because that will reflect the possible approaches of issues dealing with innovation. Digital Governance is the reference to approaches necessary to mitigate the use and risk of technologies, application, services, things like artificial intelligence.
And these are usually technologies that are distinct from the Internet. So because of the focus of ‑‑ on specific issues affecting everyday online users have it broader than the Internet or the technical layer along digital governance is comparable to public health challenges. We are trying to make a difference between those and raise awareness in U.N. level and other places we speak. We believe it is important for the users and policymakers and technical community and also Civil Society, businesses, et cetera. All of the stakeholders who are engaged in the IGF. And in the development of the Internet to know that actually there is a big difference between Internet Governance and Digital Governance and we shouldn't confuse them.
The Internet Governance has shown that the multistakeholder approach is working. Whenever there is an issue that needs to be addressed, it has been addressed with the ‑‑ sometimes it takes more time than people really want to, but there hasn't been a problem that was developed on the Internet that was not solved using the multistakeholder. We have big opponents of the Internet Governance Forum, I can support it. We participate where we're invited which goes into the Mission and we can't go and discuss issues that are not related the technical underpinnings of the Internet. But when there are issues touching on those, on ICANN's Mission, we're happy to participate and provide technical mutual information about how the Internet functions and what we do. We have found times and again through the last I would say 10 or so years, after the WSIS plus 10 review, 2015 of the United Nations, the more we talk to every stakeholder, the better it becomes, because there is more knowledge that we share and more facts.
People take decisions based on those facts, not based on the opinions about how the Internet is functioning or should be functioning. I will finish with that. I'm happy we have also among us and he will speak in a little bit, Wolfgang Kleinwaechter one of the pioneers of the Internet Governance model. And also a member of WIG upon the world Internet Governance. That defined what Internet Governance is. Maybe at some point, there is a need for another Working Group to define what Digital Governance is so there is no confusion between those two. Thank you.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thanks to Mr. Veni Markovski for the interesting insights. Next I would like to invite Xu Peixi, Professor and Director, Global Internet Studies Center, Communication University of China to speak. Thank you.
>> Xu Peixi: Thank you, my topic is Global Digital Governance. Moving into the direction of Global common sense or regression of digital fragmentation. There is a question mark here. It is somehow beyond the Internet Governance but similar somehow to cybersecurity Governance. So I treat cybersecurity governance and Digital Governance in a rather similar way.
The idea is that after being blasted by the Internet and the associated innovations for decades, two basic directions of Global Digital Governance can be observed, identified and treated in a various way. The first direction is rather treated positively. It is rather bright. And it can be called a direction or approach towards Global commons.
The hard interaction is a harder one. It is an interaction toward digital fragmentation or a Division of The Global digital ecosystems. This is a simplified way of making the distinctions.
I introduced the first direction, the direction towards digital commons, in spite of the fact I have observed that the international community is very difficult for the international community to replicate or repeat the successes in climate change and to repeat the success in nuclear weapons and the success in the Governance or so of the sea. In spite of failure, for example, to reach a binding Treaty in cyber and digital governance, due to different reasons. Digital issues can be so complicated and comprehensive and multidimensional and so interwoven. In spite of the failures to have such a Treaty ‑‑ you are welcome first to have a Keio University protocol in the cyber area depending where this happens. Despite of this there are many positive initiatives that are permanent from States, enterprise and from Internet pioneers, that move beyond the ICANN model. ICANN model is represented by the stakeholder approach can be said to be something towards Global commons. Which is very successful and intriguing.
In addition to that, in 2014, Brazil, where they are from has a maximum initiative. And 2017, Microsoft has this digital Geneva Convention. Microsoft now didn't talk about this much after it was proposed in 2017. It is very brave attempt or effort. 2018, I think the French President Macron proposed the Paris Call for trust and security. 2019, the Global Convention on the Global stability put forward the eight norms.
Same year, Internet pioneer Tim Lee launched contract for the web. 2020 China put forward a global initiative on data security. And now at United Nations, it is the discussions around the Global Digital Compact. So these initiatives and efforts are designed both for the like‑minded countries or stakeholders and the not like‑minded stakeholders. So it is rather inclusive. It is made for inclusion, not for exclusion. So it is intended for finance solutions. In this sense, I think these are the initiatives that are moving towards the direction of a global common. However, there are other active trends that can be described as a direction towards digital fragmentation and division.
Some leading States are putting intervention very heavily with the digital domain and creating tensions and divisions in terms of, for example, telecommunications service providers. In terms of applications, in terms of application stores. In terms of undersea cable constructions and in terms of Cloud services and mobile phone operation systems and also in terms of 5G supply chain of chips in terms of tech companies can be listed on the market and the most recently in terms of the capital flow about new technologies. So these are the rather active trends I observed.
Therefore, I believe it is now a critical moment to find measures to avoid such digital fragmentation and avoid the digital divisions by having new innovative approaches of Global digital governance I think of the Secretary‑General WIC, talked about this in new measures, this aspect. I stop here. Thank you very much.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you Professor for your relevant remarks. Let's move to the second topic. The approach of Digital Governance and capacity building and international cooperation. First of all, let us welcome Professor Wolfgang Kleinwaechter Professor from University of Aarhus for the speech.
>> Wolfgang Kleinwaechter: Thank you very much. Indeed, 25 years ago, the Internet was seen as a technical problem with some political implications. Today the Internet is a political problem with technical component. This is a big difference. When the World Summit started the deliberations I had the honor to work with the President of the Internet Society of China and our task was to define what Internet Governance is. A lot of people had different ideas what it is. When we had first meeting with Kofi Annan, the Secretary‑General of the United Nations in 2003, he said, he argued that the Internet is a technological innovation. But what we need now are policy innovations. So that means you cannot handle, treat, Governor the Internet ass any other thing. It is technically innovation and we have to innovative policymaking.
All of the debates in the Working Group on Internet Governance that led to the Agenda in 2005, they were driven by how we innovative policymaking. And the result is the multistakeholder approach. The argument was the Internet is too big, it cannot be managed by one group alone. That is not a question of leadership. Who leads it, but the Internet needs collaboration from all sides. So I think this is really was the starting point for what we see now penetrates a lot of areas which are related to the Internet.
So there is no definition exactly what the multistakeholder approach. So different people have different ideas, but the basic concept behind this is you have to involve the affected and concerned people in policy development. So the three elements of the definition was number one ... multistakeholder. Number two, it has to be based on shared principles, norms, and decision‑making procedures. What Madam Qi Xiaoxia said. The responsibilities and the concept of sharing is the key element. The third element is important because we're differentiated between the evolution of the Internet and the use of the Internet.
So when Veni Markovski talked about the Internet Governance and Digital Governance, I would disagree because this is really, you know, fighting with words or playing with words.
So the understanding of the two terms evolution and use of the Internet, reflects the Internet is a layered system. With different layers you can't have different Governance models.
On the technical layer, on the ground layer, we have one world, one Internet concept. We are using the same protocol, the TCP/IP, the hardware system, ATDPS, this enables that everybody can communicate with everybody. This is what Jan said, the people centered approach so everybody can enjoy this right to communicate. On application, that is different. This is the use of the Internet. This is the reality of one world but 193 national jurisdictions.
The two layers are interlinked, but, you know the visionaries of the Internet in the '90s had probably the idea that one world one Internet would go also to the application layer. But this is unrealistic, we have 193 sovereign States with their international policy. The risk I see is probably Governments can say bring the 193 jurisdiction also to the ground layer, to the ‑‑ this would be the interpret fragmentation. So far, the Internet is not fragmented, it works thanks to ICANN. And as was said, it is good no one questions ICANN. Because they're doing their job. Whether it was in pandemic or war or as a crisis. People could understand emails, go to websites and this is like the air. We need in our air in our environment. Internet is like air. There is no Chinese air, there is no American air, no Russian or German air. We have polluted air or clean air. What we have to do in the community is keep the Internet air clean. To keep out and avoid pollution.
So far, I think the Global Digital Compact, that is now as Patrick has outlined, you know, the most relevant political initiative on the table, would be a good opportunity to bring different groups together and find a Global consensus for the next 10 years. So there will never be a solution forever. The former President Clinton of the United States argued Internet Governance is like stumbling forward.
(Chuckling)
We are moving, you know, from one step to the next step, to the next step. As long as it is forward and as long as everybody is included and based on what you said, you are people centered, human rights centered. Based on the secure Internet that it is for all, inclusive, then we are in the right direction. We have differences, we have others that are different in the world. We have to learn to accept this. Thank you very much.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you, Professor Wolfgang Kleinwaechter for this wonderful sharing. Let's welcome the speech of Mr. Luca Belli, Director of CyberBRICS from Brazil. Please.
>> Luca Belli: Thank you very much. I would like to start thanking the organizers for putting together the excellent session. Very interesting speeches so far.
I would like to contribute a little bit with some ideas we have developed over the past years within the CyberBRICS project, which is a research project at the center for technology of the society law school I direct.
The idea we have been developing the past five years of mapping are trying to understand to what extent the grouping that has over the past weeks, gained a lot of prominence, with the expansion, to which this group has been discussing, sharing, good practices of information about digital policies and Internet governance over the last years.
I'm bringing evidence of research we have been conducting. FGV is a relevant academic institution in Brazil, it is the third most relevant think tank in the world out of more than 11,000. CyberBRICS project and information I will share, everything we will say is available in open access, including the recording of many interesting lectures on this website.
This is the team, I'm particularly proud of this. It is the only ‑‑ not only the only research project that relates to the digital policy, it only does it with CyberBRICS. There is a good project with 65% of the project members that are female. It is gender balanced. It is a community that although we house a law school. We have not only lawyers, economists and sociologist.
The three main pillars are analyzing the existing policies and identifying good practices and ideally propose effective solutions so this grouping can foster joy in understanding of shared challenges.
Some of the research products is a mapping of the data protection frameworks in the BRICS. We have these kind of tools and develop classic research process like this where we mapped the contributions of the countries.
The introduction of the book and other papers we stress if you start to analyze digital policies in the BRICS, you understand it is a telling example of enhanced cooperation. Professor Wolfgang is mentioned the result of WSIS. Another result is the process of enhanced cooperation that has never been put into practice by the U.N. for lack of consensus on what it is. The BRICS offer a good example of how it could look in practice. The fact that they have sense 2014, created a Working Group on the security of ICTs to share Best Practices and information on how they approach the cybersecurity and define joint commitment for instance, to advocate for Global norms on cybersecurity and data protection.
There are other initiatives, these are explicitly from the Declarations of the ICT Ministers where they expressly commit to cooperate and enhance cooperation in Digital Governance than there are concrete initiatives like the BRICS framework on consumer protection in e‑commerce. The BRICS initiative on enhancing cooperation in the supply chain. There are very good elements that we can assess as successful enhance cooperation in the grouping.
There is an interesting Article published last year that will be the introduction of our upcoming book on data architectures in the BRICS where we expressly BRICS framework to the Digital Governance and to what extent they're compatible, actually. We demonstrate a shared principle base of data protection in the frameworks, similar sets of rights and obligations and that each of the BRIC has their own system to defined to what extent data can be exported or transport. They all want to transfer data but want to do it securely and retain some sort of digital sovereignty on them and that is another work stream to which we have an upcoming book on the digital sovereignty that demonstrated nuances of the concept. Very different from what we could have in the western countries, usually in terms of thinking.
To conclude, this is a preview of what will be the next phase of the project that will be dedicated to mapping AI supply chain and interoperability frameworks in the BRICs, this is published in a good book prepared my Chinese academy of cyberspace studies. Published this year and launched ‑‑ my colleagues told me I received hard copies in my office in Rio this morning.
To the last, final thought I want to share, I think I believe if we want to work together for community with shared future in cyberspace, the first step is to understand which kind of regulatory frameworks, approaches, Governance mechanism we already have. So our small contribution to this effort is precisely to start to map and understand how this enhanced cooperation process works and to what extent it can be replicated and scaled. Thank you for your attention.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you for the relevant story of CyberBRICS. Let's welcome Dai Lina with Deputy Director, Institute of
Journalism, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences.
>> Dai Lina: It is an opportunity to do short speech in this panel. Since yesterday there has been a lot of discussion about artificial intelligence. Today, I would like to say a little more about international cooperation on AI Governance.
In recent years, both nation‑states, non‑nation‑state actors and others have paid attention to the Internet Governance and will take action. Unified governance rules and Global level Governance mechanism has yet to be found. It is important to be aware of concerning trends in international AI Governance. One is that there is a growing trend of fragmentation in the development of AI Government rules. The (?) of big countries that led to further deficit in national mutual trust and the ideas of unilateral, statism and protectionism have left profound impact on the formulation of AI rules.
The other one is that the Digital Governance is widening. A lot of developing countries being notably absent and the voiceless in AI Governance. At the same time, some developing countries are coalescing to shape the development ecosystem of AI and exercising permanence in rule setting. Based on this, there are two critical places to effectively breakthrough in the current international process of AI governance. Firstly, we should especially promote the establishment of specialized Agency for the Governance of AI and in the framework of United States. Last but not least since AI poses different stress to countries with different levels of technology, it is important to strength dialogue and cooperation among all countries. We would better to advocate for human centered and AI focused approach. And insurability and controllability and reliability of AI to empower the Global Sustainable Development and enhance the well‑being of all humankind. That's all. Thank you for your attention.
>> WU SHENKUO: Thank you very much Ms. Dai Lina for your kind contribution. Due to the time limitation, we have to conclude this Forum, but we hope to have more in depth exchange and discussions also in the future. You are welcome to share your views and stories with us when convenient.
Once again, we thank all guests and friends for your wisdom and efforts to contribute to this Open Forum. We also would like to thank the Secretary of IGF for providing us with the important dialogue platform.
The Open Forum is concluded here. Thank you.
(Applause)