The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF virtual 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.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Good afternoon, morning, and evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the first Open Consultations for 2022. And everything is remote because of the COVID and et cetera, but we do hope that our second meeting is going to be face to face.
So just before we start, I just want to remind everybody that the meeting is being recorded, and it's also being streamed to YouTube and transcribed as well.
The link to the transcription I think can be put into the chat for those people who want to follow.
And a summary report is also going to be made available next week after the Open Consultations, and of course the MAG meeting which is going to take place tomorrow and on Friday.
If you would like to take the floor when our chair opens the floor, please use the Zoom hand-up system. I will trust that all of you are familiar with it. So just use the hand-up system that's integrated into Zoom, and only speak when the chair has called your name.
As this is the Open Consultations segment of our three-day meeting, I'd just also like to underline that this day is mainly for the community at large. So they'll be given preference over MAG members for today. But of course it is with the discretion of the chair to pick whomever he sees to speak and that order.
So with that, I would like to introduce our chair, who is a new chair for the IGF, Mr. Paul Mitchell, to start the meeting.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you, Chengetai. Is my audio okay?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, it is.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much. And welcome to everyone, whatever time of day or evening or night it is where you are. I really appreciate you taking the time to care about the agenda and the Internet Governance Forum and to work with everyone here to make it better than it's ever been before in 2022.
I don't want to waste a lot of time on opening statements. I'd like to move straight on so we can get to the agenda. And I'd like to pass this on to our UN DESA colleague, Mr. Liu Zhenmin, the Undersecretary General for Economic and Social Affairs.
>>MR. LIU ZHENMIN: Dear members of the multistakeholder development distinguished delegates, colleagues, friends from around the world. First, I take this opportunity to once again congratulate all members of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group on your appointment. I also congratulate Mr. Paul Mitchell, the newly appointed chair of the MAG on taking up this important job. I welcome Ms. Myriam Said, digital advisor to the Prime Minister's office, government of Ethiopia, who joins us here as host country co-chair.
The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs and IGF Secretariat look forward to working with you. My colleagues and I are fully committed to supporting you in your efforts to prepare the 17th meeting of the Internet Governance Forum.
I have no doubt that under able guidance of the MAG chair and through close collaboration with the host country and the MAG's work, as well as through inclusive engagement with the community, the 2022 IGF will be a success.
I urge you to learn from the very good practices of last year's IGF, its MAG, and host country, the Government of Poland. They managed to organize a remarkable IGF meeting despite the huge global challenges the pandemic has continued to cause. The testament to the success of IGF 2021 is the quality of its outcomes and outputs, especially the Katowice IGF messages.
The Katowice IGF will be remembered as the first-ever hybrid IGF and the first record-breaking participation and stakeholder engagement, successful (indiscernible) and cooperation among high-level leaders and experts, parliamentarians, youth, and over 10,000 other participants with expertise in different disciplines have set strong foundations for the IGF's work in 2022.
I very much look forward to this year's IGF convening on African continent. This is an important opportunity to understand the perspectives and priorities of Africa; to change knowledge, and to learn from all stakeholders.
The IGF is at the crossroads. Collectively, the MAG and the vibrant IGF community are already delivering on the IGF mandate in (indiscernible) and concrete ways, but we could do more.
This has been clearly expressed through MAG's dedication to strengthening the IGF's program, the community's continued support to the IGF and otherwise during the stock-taking processes, and by the United Nations, beginning with the calls for action on the commitments in the Secretary-General Roadmap for Digital Cooperation and his report on outcome agenda.
In order to better understand how we should organize our work in the years ahead, we're holding an Expert Group Meeting in the headquarters in New York on March 30th to April 1st. I encourage those stakeholders to respond to the call for inputs and to nominate representatives, those who are not only well versed in Internet policies but committed to the digital well-being of all people on our planet.
Dear MAG members, I urge you to work together with all stakeholders in an inclusive preparation of the IGF 2022 program. As you embark upon your work, I also call upon you to support fundraising efforts to ensure the financial sustainability of the IGF. This financial support is critical for the forum to deliver its program and achieve its mandate.
Through our continued cooperation and under the guidance of the Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we will make the 2022 IGF a great success.
I wish you fruitful deliberations on this challenging agenda. I thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you to the Under-Secretary-General.
I'd like to pass the microphone over to our country co-chair, Myriam Said, Digital Advisor at the Prime Minister's Office in the government of Ethiopia and give her the floor.
>>MYRIAM SAID: Good afternoon, good morning, or good evening. Can you hear me well?
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Yes, thank you very much.
>>MYRIAM SAID: Great. So excellencies, distinguished attendees, ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon, good morning. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the introduction. Under-Secretary-General, thank you for the introductions. In my capacity of host country co-chair 2022 designated by my government, it gives me great pleasure to connect with the IGF community and welcome you to this virtual meeting that launches the Open Consultations for the 17th edition for the U.N. Internet Governance Forum to be held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
The Ethiopian government values the global multistakeholder platform that facilitates discussions around public policy pertaining to the Internet because Internet access is the foundation of the digital economy.
Our government strongly believes that a digitalized economy offers governments unprecedented opportunities to achieve the sustainable development goals and can improve the well-being of our citizens. We are very grateful to have been given the opportunity to host the forum here in Ethiopia and more broadly in Africa. It has been 11 years since the IGF was held on our continent.
This is an important and timely event for our continent, especially in challenging times. The current global health crisis showed us the crucial contribution of the Internet in supporting the society and economy in times of major turmoils.
Our first virtual meeting today is a good example, but we sincerely hope we can have the second planning meeting in person.
We look forward to welcoming all stakeholders from all regions here in Ethiopia, a country that has one of the richest histories in Africa. Ethiopia was among the first independent nations to sign the charter of the United Nations. And it gave morale and material support to the colonization of Africa and to the growth of pan-African cooperation.
Our capital city, Addis Ababa, is a diplomatic hub. It is where the organization of the African Union was founded in 1963, and it is today the headquarters of the African Union Commission. It is also the headquarters of the U.N. Economic Commission for Africa since 1958.
Our capital city has over 115 embassies, and most international organizations are represented. With thus have a very long history of hosting important international meetings coupled with a strong tradition of hospitality.
Ethiopia and Africa at-large is vibrant, full of energy, of youth, and it is buzzing with new ideas, innovations, and technology, thus making it an excellent region to discuss how that transformation can be safe, secure, and accessible to all through the IGF processes.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me finally wish you successful virtual sessions and assure you that the government of Ethiopia, especially the Office of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Innovation and Technology in partnership with the Economic Commission for Africa and Ethiopian community, already working intensively in planning the IGF, will spare no efforts to contribute and support the Multistakeholder Advisory Group to deliver a successful 17th edition of the U.N. Internet Governance Forum. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much for those remarks.
I'd like to move us on very quickly now to adoption of the agenda, the work we're going to do today.
So, Chengetai, can you display the agenda, please?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sorry, just give us a second. Luis?
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: There we go. Thank you very much.
After we get finished with the opening here, we'll take stock of the past year and we'll hear from the secretariat's summary of all of the inputs that were received to our stocktaking report and the process/program. We'll have feedback from the community on improvements, discuss the work of IGF 2022 process annual meeting and intersessional work, and then we will have a break.
After the break, we will discuss issues and themes for the coming year. We will review the IGF secretariat summary of inputs that have been received from the call to issues and the strategic discussion on implementation of the Secretary-General's One Common Agenda and Digital Compact. And then we will move on and review the process and the time line.
We have important work to get through in a fairly short period of time between now and the end of the year. And we'll outline intersessional work, and we will take another break.
And if you could move the slide up, please, so we can see what follows the break. Thank you.
We'll take updates from the related initiatives and possible 2022 activities and collaboration. And we will conclude with a review of the objectives for the next two days with summing up and closing. I hope we can keep ourselves well on track with short interventions when it's time for interventions, short and to-the-point interventions. And I ask everyone to be very respectful and attentive when their colleagues are speaking.
I would like to ask if there's any other agenda items that should be included. If so, please put up your hand, identify yourself.
I see none, so can I ask that the agenda be approved? No dissent, so the agenda is approved.
And we will move straight into our next session.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: That's the presentation and update from the IGF 2022 host country.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Are we having a technical glitch?
>>MYRIAM SAID: I will share my screen.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Great.
>>MYRIAM SAID: Thank you.
So thank you, again, for the opportunity. I'll be presenting the next agenda item.
So like I said, a dedicated team is actively engaged in the preparation to host the IGF. And the first output is a freshly designed host country logo for IGF 2022, which I have the pleasure to reveal today.
So here's the logo. That's how we propose to brand the event, with some Amharic script.
So why Ethiopia for IGF? Ethiopia, as I was saying earlier, has recognized a necessity to leverage the Internet and the digital economy to build a more inclusive and prosperous society.
We are on a journey of rapid change here in Ethiopia and the continent at-large. We have prioritized ICT in our national development plans and launched a strategy to accelerate the pace of our national digital transformation in Ethiopia called Digital Ethiopia 2025.
Ethiopia's population, like most African countries, is a very young population. 70% is youth. And we have bright minds, bright educated minds. We graduate around 200,000 students every year from higher educations.
And I'd like to quote our Prime Minister that says that government commits to invest in future and emerging technologies as well as creating an enabling environment for courageous, innovative, and committed people.
So a couple of facts about Addis Ababa. Addis Ababa translates as the "new flower" in Amharic, which is our national language. Addis was founded in 1987. It is a diplomatic city of -- it's known as a diplomatic city of Africa because of the headquarters of the African Union, of the U.N. Economic Commission for Africa, the number of embassies and diplomatic corps we have.
Addis is located on a well-watered plateau. It's surrounded by hills and mountains. We have subtropical highland climate, so rains depends on the month, but November, December is usually a very good month to be in Ethiopia. It is quite hot at night and chilled in the evenings, so that's the weather here.
It's a very dynamic city. It's booming. It's fast-growing. It's one of the fastest growing capital cities in Africa, actually. This has several public parks, monuments, landmarks, museums, and it's a very vibrant -- it has a very vibrant night life with a large variety of restaurants, (indiscernible) and jazz, and other cultural events.
So to get here, we have one of the most renowned and successful airlines in the world. Ethiopian Airlines is known for its success, including during COVID. It is one of the airlines that stayed very dynamic and profitable. It serves 125 destinations across the globe and has 23 domestic destinations.
Our airport is called Bole International Airport. It's about five kilometers away from the city center.
In terms of visas, Ethiopian visas can be obtained online at our embassies or consulates, but for this particular event, a Steering Committee with all relevant institutions will be set up to facilitate the process for conference attendees.
The venue, just very quickly here because we have representatives from the Economic Commission of Africa that will do a presentation on the -- a more detailed presentation of the venue, but it will be located at the United Nations Conference Centre in Addis, which is conveniently located in the heart of the city very close to hotels, and...
So in terms of recommendation and talking about hotels, Ethiopia is ranked among the top ten leading markets in Africa for international chains. We have 13 five-star hotels, 20 four-star hotels, about a hundred 3-star hotels, and other lower-budget accommodations as well.
In terms of transportation, we're going to have services between the airport and hotels, conference, social events, through hiring a logistics operator, but Addis also has a public transit and a very vibrant ride-hailing -- very vibrant ride-hailing systems, so Uber-like type systems.
In terms of event management and promotion, we are in the process of launching a tender for hiring an event manager to ensure events run smoothly and that the targeted audience is engaged and the message of the event is properly communicated and marketed.
In terms of preparation, we will have a Steering Committee with the relevant institutions, so security, immigration, customs, health, finance. A core Technical Committee has already been set up and is currently actively working. We are establishing an advisory team with private sector, civil society, academia, associations, and specifically the youth.
We have,, like I said, event management and logistics operators in the process of being selected.
So we will be revising or providing more information about hotels -- names, location, and proximity to the event -- entertainment, restaurants, price ranges, and so on. And we are looking at launching a host-country website latest by June.
In terms of health and safety, Ethiopia is a safe and reasonable -- reasonably healthy country, of course provided you take a few common-sense precautions which will be listed on the website.
COVID-19 measures. We just hosted the African Union General Assembly which worked very well. We had pre-arrival, arrival and during-event measures. So pre-arrival would be vaccination and PCR tests. During arrival, we would have tests, and during the event, a preparation of rapid tests, but obviously all of that will be updated in due time and communicated, as well, as the preparation matures.
The leadership of the preparatory team is led by His Excellency Dr. Belete Molla who is the minister of innovation and technology. He will be the national committee chair.
We have the state minister of innovation who will be leading the Steering Committee chair. And myself, I'm the digital economy advisor at the Office of the Prime Minister, and I will be host country co-chair.
So thank you (non-English word or phrase) for now. This is how you say thank you in Amharic. And, yeah, that's the presentation for now.
Over to you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much for that introduction.
I'd like just now to take us to the next -- to the next item and begin our stock-taking exercise with the secretariat's summary of the inputs that were received. And can --
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sorry, no. The next thing is a presentation by the Economic Commission for Africa.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Okay.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. They are the ones whose venue we'll be using, will be co-hosting us in Ethiopia.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Okay. Thank you.
>>YEMERSRATCH TEWOLDE: Good afternoon. Hello, everyone. I'm Yemersratch Tewolde, and I work for the U.N. Conference Centre.
As mentioned, the U.N. Conference Centre is a prime property in conferencing terms, located in Addis Ababa, the political hub of Africa as well as the regions and, indeed, the continent's communication center. The center itself is centrally positioned only minutes away from Bole International Airport and critical institutions such as the African Union and of course right on the grounds of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, housing numerous U.N. agencies. You really cannot get a better conference center than this.
The center is -- just to give you a general information, the center is purpose-built, features state of the art conference rooms with all the (indiscernible), simultaneous interpretation equipment, and all of the sound, audiovisual, I.T. and technical aids and support one would expect from a world-class venue which frequently houses head of state and other international top-level meetings.
From equipment to technical service to five-star catering and integral security, all essential services and amenities are provided in-house, ensuring immediate availability and reliability. We operate as a one-stop shop. Above all, through the center's management and supremely skilled and highly experienced coordination team, our attempt to facilitate clients' every requirement being at hand in planning as well as in execution of events. Ensuring all services and logistics are provided efficiently in crafting a perfect event each and every time.
So we have these facilities offline here. Video conferencing, teleconferencing, Webex, live streaming, we have upgraded audio system in all conference rooms. There is a way of combining the two plenary halls using the second hall as an overflow. So digitally connected, that is.
The communication and services, our exhibit access, cable, and Wi-Fi. Technical service, virtual and hybrid conference facilities. Recently we have posted many numerous hybrid conferences due to COVID, of course. Service desk assistance is there, regular incident management, full I.T. support, rental and user support of equipment and facilities for I.T.
Next slide, please.
Next slide, please.
Can you hear me?
>>ANJA GENGO: Yes, we can hear you. I think the next slide, that would be 4.
>>YEMERSRATCH TEWOLDE: This is the UNCC floor plan. The first floor is where we have all the conference facilities, the conference rooms, including executive offices in the east and west wing, ministerial lounge, executive offices, VIP room.
The second -- On the second floor is where we have the multi-purpose halls where the banquet hall, the cafeteria that can also be used during events. So here on the second floor mainly are the catering amenities and some caucus rooms that could be used by the secretariat and for various uses. We can customize the rooms as per the need of our client. We have done it for many, many events.
The ground floor is where we have the U.N. clinic where we have an exhibition concourse that could be -- we have modular panels that we could use for bilateral -- to build temporary bilateral booth as per the need requires. Thank you.
So this is just to give you -- this outlines the capacities of all of our rooms. The plenary halls, the conference -- we have three -- four identical rooms with a simultaneous interpretation booth, briefing rooms, caucus rooms, the exhibition area, and of course the business center.
So in a nutshell, this is what our conference center offers. They say a picture speaks a thousand words, so we will share a very short video just to give you an overview.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Luis, do we have the video?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: I think they're playing it from their side.
Am I right, Yemersratch?
>>YEMERSRATCH TEWOLDE: Yes, Chengetai. Yes.
>> If I'm allowed to share my screen, I can play it from my side.
>>LUIS BOBO: Please go ahead.
[ Video playing ]
>> Welcome to the United Nations Conference Centre in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Our integrated and secure complex has a state-of-the-art facilities for all kinds of meetings. Whether for ten people or a thousand, it can accommodate a broad range of needs.
Our technology-cleared advance facilities are very impressive and convenient. Large high-tech LED screens with an eConferencing platform in both plenary rooms support virtual and hybrid conferencing arrangements. Full web streaming, and remote simultaneous interpretation in all six languages of the U.N. have been added to the existing simultaneous interpretation service.
Combining facilities, location, professionalism and style, the United Nations Conference Centre is unmatched in Africa. Home to the headquarters of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, numerous diplomatic missions in the political Kal Capitol of Africa, it is a leading point for diplomats around the world. The conference center in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, is situated at the heart of the beautiful capital city among major 5-star hotels, providing our guests a convenient location to conduct their conferences or other events.
The city is one of Africa's largest travel hubs, with air links to more than hundred cities worldwide, making it a key node in the international transport network.
With the healthy mountain climates, warm sunshine and new breath-taking parks, you have an ideal setting for both business and pleasure. The United Nations Conference Centre in Addis Ababa.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you for that. It looks like a wonderful facility.
I wonder, do we have any questions at this point? Of the facilities or any of these preparations?
Okay. If we have no questions at this point in time, I think --
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: We have Nigel.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We do?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. Nigel Hickson from the UK government.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We do? Go ahead.
>>NIGEL HICKSON: Yes. Can you hear me?
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Yes.
>>NIGEL HICKSON: Well, Good morning or good afternoon, et cetera. It's a pleasure to be on this Open Consultation call. Thank you so much for organizing it, Chengetai and colleagues.
Congratulations, Paul, on your chairmanship, and we certainly, from the UK, look forward to working with you towards this very important IGF in 2022.
And I must say my spirits have been lifted this morning by the -- well, both by the news, the confirmation that this meeting will be in Addis, and for the most informative and constructive presentations that we've heard about the venue and the host country and other elements.
So I don't have any specific questions at this time. I'm sure there will be other questions that come along. But I really would like to thank our Ethiopian colleagues, and really look forward to working with you through this -- through the MAG and the Open Consultation process for a really successful IGF later in the year.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you, Nigel.
Anyone else? Questions or comments at this point?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Mark Carvell.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Mark, go ahead, please.
>>MARK CARVELL: Yes, thank you, Paul. My congratulations to you as well for -- on your appointment at this critical juncture. (indiscernible) the whole IGF community and new participants will support you in every way possible in taking forward the preparations for the IGF this year in Addis.
And, likewise, I appreciate very much the confirmation from the hosts and Myriam's excellent presentation on the road to Addis for the IGF. That's great news, and confirmation of the dates.
We've considered, of course, the transformational events like the IGF from being wholly physical events to ones that are hybrid in the sense that the participation remotely is on an equal basis with those physically present. And I just wondered if the hosts, in particular, had any comments about how the UNCC AA facility (indiscernible) hybrid format event of this size.
And I said in the chat, I wondered if actually the recent ECA conference was an example of this and whether there were indications of how the venue has adapted to this kind of format. That was my question in addition to great appreciation for all the work by the secretariat, by the hosts. And looking forward to contributing in my capacity as a EuroDIG member, a member of the European IGF, EuroDIG, and as an independent consultant as well on Internet governance policy. And I've been involved in the IGF really from the very start, when I was with the U.K. government.
So that was the point I wanted to raise, in particular about the hybrid format. Thank you, Paul.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. Do we have any other hands up?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, no more hands up.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: No more hands.
Then my copy of the schedule says we take a break at this point in time. And we'll -- we will then come back and begin with the secretariat's summary of the inputs that have been received up to this point in time.
Chengetai, does your agenda agree with mine?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can take a short break, a bathroom break.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We will take ten minutes and come back at 52 minutes past the hour.
[ Break ]
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Okay. That's our ten minutes. And I hope you're all ready to dive right in. We will bring the meeting back to order and move on with the secretariat's summary of what's -- on the inputs that have been provided up to this point in time.
So turn this over to Chengetai and Luis, if you could display the slide with the guiding questions.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Chair. I think we have a hand up from our ECA colleagues. They may want to respond to the hybrid meeting question.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Absolutely.
>>ALMOUSTPHA CISSE: Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon, USG and representatives from the governments. My name is Almoustpha Cisse, and I'm the Chief of Technology here at ECA.
I just would like to give you some confidence about our capabilities in terms of conducting hybrid meetings. Even last year we had our statutory meeting here at ECA, and it was fully hybrid. So we had member states joining from across the region and other stakeholders as well from New York. And we had also people physically present, and it was clearly a success. Although we don't know your requirements in details thus far, we are ready to work and collaborate with the host country to actually look into all the requirements and details and be prepared to address any gaps that may occur.
So I just would like to give you that confidence. We've already run this. We have the state of our screens and systems in place to be able to accommodate a hybrid solution. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much for that clarification.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yeah. And I'd also like to add when we went to the -- to Addis for our planning mission, we did speak to them and we also spoke to the ministry and the organizing committee. And they are quite aware of our requirements, and they are also organizing so that they can boost up the bandwidth and et cetera. So I do have a lot of confidence in their ability to meet our requirements. I mean, yes, some work has to be done, but I think that work will be done.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Very good. Thank you.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: I can now go into the stocktaking.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Yes. Please.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: All right. Thank you very much, Chair.
So for the IGF 2021 process, as we do at the end of every IGF meeting, we did have a call for inputs to take stock of what happened last year in IGF 2021, ask you what highlight, what worked well, and what they would want for us to keep in particular, and also suggestions for improvements for the IGF 2022 process.
We also did have an open mic session at the end of the IGF meeting in Katowice which we did take notes down. And our Ethiopian hosts were also present there, so they took note of that as well, as well as our ECA colleagues.
So for the written inputs, that call was open from the 15th of December, 2021, until the 20th of January, 2022.
Apart from the stocktaking, we also asked stakeholders if they could submit -- any comments they would like to submit in the context of the United Nations' Secretary-General's Common Agenda and to the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation. But those comments will mainly be presented in another section, and Eleonora will do that. So for this one, I will just concentrate on the taking-stock process and suggestions for 2022.
We did receive 95 contributions. And the highest number came from the WEOG group, followed by the African region and then Asia-Pacific, Latin America/Caribbean. And Eastern Europe we had the least number from as well as IGOs. But that is fine. And it also works very well with our focus for this year, which we are focusing on the Africa region as well.
The private sector and civil society stakeholder groups both submitted the highest number of inputs followed by the technical community, government, and IGOs.
So the summary of the inputs is structured around six areas and also -- sorry, I forgot to mention that all the submissions that we received are available on the IGF website. And there is also a longer summary document that's available on the IGF website.
And I would ask somebody from the secretariat just to please post the link into the chat for people who want to look at it later, if you have not already.
So the inputs were structured around these six areas, which is the IGF process, the intersessional work and the national and regional initiatives, the program structure and content of the IGF annual meeting, the technical matters which include the hybrid features, communications, and then, lastly, other logistics and host country role and participation and stakeholder engagement including with U.N. processes.
For each area, stakeholders express largely positive views on IGF 2021, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic which caused organizational challenges globally and could have jeopardized the holding of this physical meeting.
They were very appreciative to the secretariat and especially grateful to the host country, Poland, for its warmth, hospitality, and superb planning.
For the purpose of this first overview, we will focus on some of the major suggestions for improvement and next steps to provide a basis for the work of organizing the IGF this year.
The suggestions in full can be read on the website, as I've said.
On the preparatory process, stakeholders did comment and said hybrid meeting planning should continue and they feel that this is a critical aspect of all meetings going on to the future.
They should be more inclusion of Global South stakeholders with meetings scheduled according to the time zones.
Session organizers should receive more practical guidance was one of the comments as well. And main session organization should follow guidelines and be a transparent process.
More time should be allocated to MAG nominations. This is on the MAG nominations process. I think last year we had four weeks for MAG nominations. This week we are looking to extending that nomination process.
The working roles of the MAG and the IGF leadership panel should be defined. In that sense, the MAG should continue to have primary responsibility for the programmatic organization and the plentiful advice strategically on the main themes, speakers, and draft messages.
On intersessional work and the national and regional initiatives, there should be greater cooperation among the different intersessional groups and the national and regional initiatives. There should be better integration of intersessional and NRI work in the annual meeting agenda in a nonduplicative way and in alignment with the meeting themes.
Intersessional public calls for the dynamic coalitions, Best Practice Forums, and also for the policy networks. And the output documents should be more widely publicized.
Regarding the national and regional initiatives and youth initiatives, especially -- especially -- should be given more space in the annual meeting and representation of the national and regional initiatives in the annual meeting should be maximally inclusive.
And throughout the year, national and regional initiatives may think of further collaborative action-oriented projects and perhaps as a part of a multiyear strategy.
For the program structure and content, comments range -- and also, I'd just like to point out that we are -- I am just focusing on the action-oriented comments and things that we can consider to change which I think is more important than just reading out praise and what we did right, just what we should -- what people think we should take into consideration for next year.
On the program and structure and content, there should be fewer sessions and fewer thematic tracks to enable a deeper discussion on the issues. However, the variety of different types of sessions should be maintained.
The thematic outputs from the prior year should act as input for the subsequent year's program. More continuity between IGFs was also requested.
High-level sessions should be better integrated into the program and also linked to the themes of that year's IGF and, in fact, all types of sessions should be linked into the themes.
Speakers, especially those well known at the IGF, should not speak at multiple sessions. And treating the private sector as big tech neglects the SMEs with different interests and perspectives.
On technical matters, including the hybrid features and communications, comments ranged from stronger support for the IGF website that is needed as it is the main portal for the meeting and to also avoid crashes, et cetera.
And the registration should be simpler and more straightforward, both for online and onsite participation.
The schedule should be more visually clear and easier to navigate, including a time converter.
Develop mechanisms to facilitate participation among participants and also increase the engagement of the global media outlets and equip participants with a social media tool box to support the promotion of all sessions. And that is definitely something that we will look at, at least from the secretariat's side.
In other logistics and host country roles, networking events as designed for the IGF 2021 were not effective for virtual participation and creative solutions need to be found.
For sessions with online-only organizing teams, the host could provide onsite support for engaging in-person participants.
Aim to extend the meeting hours to fit as many time zones as possible. Again, I'd just like to comment on this, is that if we go beyond an eight-hour stretch, there needs to be a whole new shift, so a whole new team. That basically doubles the cost. So it's a balance between the costs -- the support costs and the meeting costs.
There's also cost to extend the language interpretation beyond the high-level and main sessions and enables certification for participants. Ensure that the IGF Village is centrally located as during the IGF 2019 in Berlin.
And each meeting room should have enough power outlets.
And, finally, on participation on stakeholder engagements, including with U.N. processes, create more space for youth inclusion, building on IGF 2021 efforts. The IGF should continue to embrace gender diversity in all its work.
And investment efforts in engaging -- sorry, invest efforts in engaging statistically missing regional and stakeholder groups as well as marginalized and vulnerable groups such as people with disabilities and stakeholders from developing countries.
And I'd just like to comment again that this is something that we really do do. We do analyze the participation. We check which countries are missing and even which regional groups are missing. And the next time around, we do pay particular interest in those and try and encourage people from those regions to come and participate intersessionally as well as in the IGF meeting.
In-person participation of the U.N. Secretary-General as well as of a diverse group of high-level stakeholders is important.
IGF 2022 is to integrate program components related to the WSIS+20 review. So that's a suggestion to integrate the component that will be reviewed at the WSIS+20 to the IGF 2022. And the IGF is encouraged to step up its efforts in engaging with existing observatories on Internet governance.
So that is the -- a very quick summary of the inputs. I hope you could all understand me. And back to you, Chair.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you for that. I'd like to ask if there's questions or comments from the floor at this point in time.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: So sorry again for interjecting. We do have a slide with the questions that we would like answered to help us with our work.
So if that slide can be shown, please, thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Right. Can everybody see the questions? Going to assume the answer is yes.
I encourage you to use the hands-up feature so we can identify who would like to speak.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: We have Jutta.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Okay. Jutta.
>>JUTTA CROLL: Thank you for giving me the floor, Chair. Jutta Croll, former MAG member and also coordinator of the dynamic coalitions together with Markus Kummer and Adam Peake.
I wanted to refer to the stocktaking. We really appreciate the recognition of the work of the dynamic coalitions was also mentioned in the stocktaking process, especially the aspect that dynamic coalitions are a diverse group, have lots to bring forward to the table of the IGF, to the program, with all the sessions organized by the dynamic coalitions individually but also with their joined main session.
If I'm not mistaken, we now have 22 dynamic coalitions. Each dynamic coalition has a number of organizations that are a part of the dynamic coalition and members of the dynamic coalitions. So there is a huge network of expertise and knowledge that brings their issues to the table or the program.
And I just appreciated -- we all appreciated that this was also mentioned in the stocktaking process. Thank you so much for listening.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much for the intervention. I think we have Wout de Natris. Wout, would you like to speak?
>>WOUT DE NATRIS: Yes. Thank you, Chair, and congratulations in person, except for Zoom linked in.
I think Jutta covered what I want to say on the dynamic coalitions. And perhaps one comment to make here is that in the program making, perhaps the dynamic coalitions could be evolved a bit more as we work hard on content and tangible outputs, and perhaps that it's important for the MAG to know more about the different activities that are being undertaken so that over the year, perhaps, a coordination session between the two of us could be a good idea.
So let me leave it at that for now.
Thank you, Chair.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: All right. Thank you.
>>JORGE CANCIO: Hello. Hello, everyone.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Hello.
>>JORGE CANCIO: This is Jorge Cancio from the Swiss government, for the record. Thanks for giving me the floor. And again, congratulations to Paul and to all new MAG members.
I would like to thank Chengetai and the IGF Secretariat for the great work in summarizing the inputs. I think there's a lot of very valuable inputs there.
I would just like to draw your attention to two points we made in our input from the Federal Office of Communications. If you have interest, it's available online. And those important points which I would like to highlight are the following.
The first one is that we think that it would be very important to move to a fully integrated program of the IGF so that we don't have different tracks of programs which, in turn, have different topics that distract the attention of the participants. So we mean with fully integrated program that the ministerial, the parliamentarian and the regular sessions converge on three to four focus topics and culminate in few short, concise and to-the-point messages from the IGF to the outside world. So that would be the first point we would like to stress. I think we have been making progress, but still, there is some room to improve.
And the second one related to what topics to choose. I think it's very important that the IGF plays out as fully as possible its role as Internet governance discussion platform for the multistakeholder community and for the United Nations. And, therefore, that it serves as a platform for the development of the global Digital Compact that is being discussed as we speak in New York on how the process will go. I think we can be proactive, innovative, and bottom-up there, and offer very practical means to those discussions to be effective and to offer meat on the bones of what the Secretary-General envisaged with the global Digital Compact.
I'll leave it at that, and of course I'll be happy to answer any questions, if you have any.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
>>TIMEA SUTO: Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. As this is the first time speaking in this meeting, I just want to take the opportunity to congratulate you taking on this new position, and to congratulate new MAG members on their first meeting and gathering. I'm sorry it is virtual. I wish we would had the opportunity to all meet face-to-face. Being in Geneva in the springtime is really a good place to be, so I hope we can do that very soon all together.
I'm addressing you today on behalf of the International Chamber of Commerce Business Action to Support the Information Society initiative, ICC/BASIS for short, but I also base my remarks on my experience as a former MAG member from the business community.
First of all, a huge thanks I think is warranted to the IGF Secretariat and the last year's MAG community, but also especially to the last year's host country and the entire team for putting to the an event that really we have a lot to learn from and build on. As Mr. Liu said as well, it will go down in history as the first hybrid meeting, and I do think that is a model to be followed going forward.
I don't want to take up too much time. ICC/BASIS's contribution to the taking stock is fully online, and you can read more details on this if you'd like. I just want to highlight three points, two of which actually were also said by Jorge here, so I won't take up much time.
First of all, on the terms of tracks and the agenda for the IGF, I fully support what Jorge just said now, that we need to be mindful and careful that we have a concentrated and well-determined agenda for the IGF. I know we all have our favorite issues that we like the IGF to talk about but we do need to be mindful of the time constraints and the capacity of both attendees and organizers to pay attention to that many issues. So if we can streamline to three, maximum four tracks that are, as ISOC has said, a bit more concentrated, more integrated. And this includes everything from workshops to intersessional work, work of the NRIs, work of the dynamic coalitions, as many people have talked about before, but also the high-level tracks and others.
So if they could all move in the same direction, I know the especially the dynamic coalitions are issue based so it's very difficult to ask them to focus all on three issues, but if we could have some sort of work that prioritizes the main tracks and main themes of the IGF per year, I think that would help us move forward.
And why I say this is also two of my points that I want to still add here. First of all is that the IGF does not operate in a vacuum. We are pretty extensive community and we are aware of a lot of things that are happening within our individual communities, but I think there is room to improve in how the IGF connects with other intergovernmental, multistakeholder, international, regional processes that all have their own agendas as regards the Internet and digital policies.
If we can take a look at what is happening around us, inspire ourselves from the issues that are of top of mind to those communities but also share with them what the IGF has been doing and is doing throughout the year that relates to their work, I think it can also help increase our impact. So if we can improve on that, that would be one of my recommendations.
And thirdly, what I want to talk about is really the communication efforts of the IGF. We've seen significant improvement, especially in the last two years, on how the IGF communicates its inputs, but not just its inputs on its yearly goings on. Taking from the newsletters to social media campaigns to information about what's happening within the IGF role. I think there is still room to improve there as well. We've been talking about this in the business community for a long time. It's not just about communicating that the event is taking place and talking about what's going to happen at the event maybe the month before. I think the communication effort needs to be based on this outlook towards the IGF ecosystem and the ecosystem that connects the IGF to the rest of the digital policy world. Think about what's going on, where can the IGF contribute to raise awareness of what the IGF is putting on the agenda this year, but also to bring in those communities to add to the IGF's yearly work at the junctures that are available for the outside community to do so. And this includes everything from workshop and other session proposals to contribution to intersessional work, better publication of what DCs and NRIs are doing and all those other things.
So these would be my three points, really. Concentrated tracks, linkage with other international and governmental and multistakeholder activities, and a communication within a clearly defined communication and process strategy.
So thank you all for listening, and I'm looking forward to our conversations today and through the rest of the week.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Would anyone else like to take the floor at this point in time?
>>PAULA MARTINS: Thank you, and apologies. I was trying to turn on the video and it's not working, but you can hear me. So apologies for that.
I just want to agree with many soft points that were raised. We -- My name is Paula Martins. I'm speaking on behalf of the Association for Progressive Communications, APC. And we feel that the point of a more integrated and focused agenda for the main sessions, during the main meeting, is an important point. And we agree with some of the suggestions that were put forward by Jorge Cancio. And we think a good way of possibly helping to build that more integrated agenda is to work better and in more innovative ways in the expansion and maintenance of the -- the maintenance and expansion of the preparatory engagement phase.
So the second point would be really favor of maintaining this space. We think it worked quite well in the previous year, and we think that we could consider further ways in which it can build on this more focused agenda, that we will end up with more -- a more limited number of focused messages at the end of the annual meeting, the annual session.
The second -- or I'm already on my third point. Sorry. My third point is about the hybrid event; that we also feel that -- So the question is about the continuation of the hybrid format, and we're very much in favor of it. We just think an assessment of what took place last year should start right away. We recommend the maintenance of the working group on the hybrid format so that we can think of better ways, because we feel that there's a lot of challenges that we had to face last year. We are not yet there in the most optimal format for the hybrid event. So this meant a lot of work, and we recommend we start doing it now, and mainly start by assessing. So thinking how we can assess the hybrid component that took place last year.
And the final point is about links to other processes, and in particular to the process that will be launched this year for the preparation of the Digital Compact, but also the WSIS discussion, so WSIS+20 preparations. We think now, the intersessional work should also start thinking of how to input into these key processes. Others as well, but I think we have timely opportunity. This is a good time to start planning on how the IGF community and the IGF spaces can help us input very strongly into these two international processes.
I will leave it there for now. Thank you so much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
>>BRUNA SANTOS: Thank you very much, Chair.
Hi, everyone. My name is Bruna Santos, and I am an incoming MAG member. So just raising my hand to add some support for us to keep the hybrid meeting working group, and also maintaining this continuous assessment about the meeting format and how can we better integrate our topics and agenda, and so on. Because I think that having attended the meeting on-site last year, one of the most -- like one of the most clear issues was that the online sessions, they worked out pretty well for everyone who was willing to join and participate on the discussions, but there were some missing connections between the ones who were, like, actually attending the event and providing the discussions online. And I think like it's one of the perks of the hybrid model, but some of the sessions I had a chance to attend, they worked far better in the online way than the on-site.
So, yeah, just keeping the continuous assessment on how can we improve those things and just making sure that all the sessions run really well for this year's event. It can be a really positive thing.
Thank you so much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
Anyone else with an initial comment you'd like to make?
Not seeing any hands. I'd encourage you to look at the questions on the slide that's in front of you. Hopefully you can all see the questions on the slide.
And I'd like to maybe think a little bit about -- since we are in the preparatory and engagement phase, how we can more Philadelphia use the time that we have in not only this meeting this week but the next one coming up to be a little bit more efficient and a little bit more responsive to the feedback.
Does anybody like to take the opportunity to comment on this?
I see Jutta and Wout. So let's go with Jutta first.
>>JUTTA CROLL: Thank you, Paul, for giving me the floor again.
It's just a question. The question on the slide asks for the number of themes or tracks on the themes in the annual meeting. Wouldn't it be better to discuss that question after we have seen the input to the call for issues? Then we would maybe have a clearer view on how we can cluster all the issues that have been brought in by the community, and that would help us to answer the question whether we need to have three or four tracks or whether it's better to have more tracks but with a shorter number of sessions, and so on.
So I think it might be a bit difficult to answer this question right now.
Thank you for listening to my input.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>WOUT DE NATRIS: Yes, thank you, Paul. Wout de Natris speaking in my personal capacity now and not as coordinator.
I think I have three comments. The first one is that we had an extensive NL IGF, Netherlands IGF session last week, and a few things came out that I think are important to note here as well.
The first one comment that was made quite generally is that perhaps when focusing on topics for the upcoming IGF, we should focus on what concerns Internet governance and what does not. And the example given was, for example, artificial intelligence is not Internet governance, so why have so many sessions on artificial intelligence?
The second topic is my personal one, and that is about we are discussing tangible outcomes of the IGF for years at this point in time. So my suggestion for -- for you for this year would be how can we make sure that the tracks that we do choose, whatever they are, become more focused? And I think that should be by some criteria, looking at the output of the themes. So when people propose workshops or whatever sort of sessions, there could be questions like what is the actual challenge that you are facing? What would you like to come out of the IGF? So what would -- what could potential messages be, and how would you like to have them presented? Because if that becomes clear up front, then we do not just have a talk-show for four people talking about their favorite topic but working toward some sort of a solution and some sort of an agreement.
The final one, to go back to the NL IGF session, when asked about the theme for the coming two years, there was absolute unanimity on it has to be on Internet security, because if we do not get the Internet more secure and safe, it will probably be lost forever. And there literally was no other topic that came up between 16 people who visit the IGF each and every year.
So that's, I think, the message I would like to share. And thank you for listening, Paul.
Give it back to you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
>>CAROL ROACH: Hello, everybody. I hope you can hear me.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Yes.
>>CAROL ROACH: Good. I think Wout -- I hope I pronounced that right -- covered a lot of what I was about to say.
I found some of the sessions did not live up to the topics of the policies that were given to us, so I was pretty much disappointed in a few of them. As Wout said, when you got into the session, people were talking about their favorite things. And you couldn't really see the policies that they were supposed to be looking at. You couldn't see the objectives. It was disappointing in some of the sessions.
Also, some of the moderators, oh, my gosh, they spoke so long that the other panelists did not have a chance to speak, nor was there any time for interaction with the audience. And that was one of the main things that we were looking for, especially in a hybrid situation. I think that's basically what I have to say.
I think it's too many sessions, really. I don't know how we're going to narrow it down.
As Wout said, maybe we need to really focus on what the themes are and what we're trying to accomplish as far as the IGF is concerned. Thank you for listening.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. Talant, is that how you pronounce it? If not, please correct me. You're on mute.
>>TALANT SULTANOV: Thank you very much. That's correct. Thank you, Chair, for this opportunity.
Since the IGF is an U.N. IGF and United Nations every year proclaims the year of a certain theme. And, for example, this year is proclaimed the international year of basic sciences for sustainable development and international year of sustainable mountain development. Maybe if we want to align kind of our work with the U.N.'s general work and focus on issues that the United Nations in general is focusing, maybe that could also bring kind of more attention to the work that we are trying to do. Thank you very much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. And Myriam.
>>MYRIAM SAID: Yes, thank you, Chair.
I actually -- on the topic of themes, I wanted to also propose some tag lines that maybe could align with the themes that we will be following. But maybe it can also give a general context on how the IGF could go this year.
We have three tag lines we are proposing. One is Internet for Shared Prosperity or Unleashing Shared Prosperity or Resilient Internet for a Sustainable Future. So through these tag lines, what we would like to express is the need to have shared principles, norms, and rules as well as programs that are catalytic to inclusive prosperity across the world.
So, you know, on that, I'd like to actually tell you that Ethiopia is very ready to have open discussions, bringing all communities together in finding innovative approaches to deliver on fair global governance and equitable access to opportunities. Thank you. Over to you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>MARK CARVELL: Yes, thank you, Paul. Just a couple of thoughts from me as a EuroDIG member and also involved in a dynamic coalition. This issue of narrowing down the focus to specific themes in one year is important and that -- I think there's a broad consensus in support of that. It's more likely to lead to an impactful IGF.
But I wonder if we also should think about how to consider this process of identifying what those themes are, can be taken into account within a multiyear strategy, which I think is also an important objective now. It's one that the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation endorsed, that the IGF think in terms of multiyear.
So one theme could be considered in two years' time or the major work of that could be anticipated beyond the event coming up in this year.
So the multiyear strategy and how that interacts with the selection of themes is important. We should also, I think, retain some agility in order to take account of emerging issues within the year. I think that's still an important aspiration for the planning process, not to set too much in stone, and allow space for something new that emerges within the year. Maybe, I don't know, related to a new technology or some critical cybersecurity process of attacks or whatever. I think it's important to retain that facility within the planning process to allow space for emerging issues.
And, I mean, I further thought -- and this is something that EuroDIG, the European IGF, is now taking on in practical terms, is that maybe a particular theme could be covered in a separate event, an intersessional one-day event. EuroDIG has these extra all-day events now as part of its planning process throughout the year. And this intersects with, I think, the transition of the IGF to being a year-round activity. And, again, the dynamic coalitions, NRIs and other related initiatives to the IGF can contribute to identifying what could be covered in a separate session during the year so that it doesn't crowd out stuff during the main weeklong forum. I hope those thoughts are helpful. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>NIGEL HICKSON: Yes, thank you very much. And I'll be very brief because I think others have said a lot which makes a lot of sense.
I mean, first of all, on the hybrid aspect, I think the IGF secretariat need to be congratulated for what took place in Katowice. This was a significant move forward into hybrid meeting space. And there were many other organizations looking at how the IGF worked in this way, and I think obviously there was some teething problems, but it was very important. So I think those lessons need to be taken forward to Ethiopia later in the year.
Secondly, on the sessions, on the themes, I'm not going to go into the numbers game. But clearly, as others have said, we need to keep it limited. And I think as Mark has said, we need to consider the themes should have some sort of continuity and be relevant for the age we live in. So, you know, clearly this year, I would have thought one of the themes has to be the WSIS+20 process because this is a fundamental part. I mean, it's not turkeys voting for Christmas. We are the IGF. We are part of the WSIS process. We are part of the WSIS mandate. We are only there because of the WSIS mandate. And, therefore, this surely is important to stakeholders of the IGF. So I think that has to be important. As Mark said, there might be other relevant issues that we ought to focus on.
Yes, we ought to have outputs. And we've said a lot about that already. And I know the IGF is taking great strides in that, but this is really important. Although less people now talk about the IGF as just a talking shop, this is still damaging especially in terms of the WSIS process.
And, finally, because I talk far too much, finally, yes, in terms of the -- in terms of the IGF this year, I would hope that we can try and make it as diverse as possible. We can try and ensure that we all have a responsibility in reaching out to other people to be involved in this process.
I'll stop there. Thank you very much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. Others who would like to speak?
This feels like an appropriate time to take a bit of a break, if no one has anything further to add at this point.
Okay then. Shall we take -- Chengetai, what would you suggest in terms of break time?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Let me see. Sorry. My agenda just disappeared. This is supposed to be actually the long break. But if everybody is -- if everybody is still at it, we can take another 15-minute break or we can make it the 45-minute break that we're supposed to have.
I would say let's make it the 45-minute break, but it's up to you, Chair.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: All right. If there's consensus roughly, let's take this as the long break, 45 minutes, and convene back at what would be 6:30 my time.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sorry. I've just been corrected here. It is supposed to be half an hour break, 30-minute break.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: 30-minute break, okay. Then it will be 6:15 my time. And you can adjust accordingly wherever you are. Thanks for the input so far.
As we go to a break, I just ask you to be thinking about the next stage of the discussion in terms of how we're going to put some meat on the bones of topics and themes and addressing some of the very good points that have been made in this last 45 minutes or so.
So let's take a 30-minute break and resume in half an hour.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Chair. Yes.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We are adjourned for 30 minutes.
[ Break ]
>>ANJA GENGO: Paul, if you're speaking, we can't hear you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: All right. Obviously it's still too early in the morning for me. Thanks for -- thanks for that.
I'd like to start this next session on issues and themes for this year's IGF, and really see if we can get a good focus on some consensus on the key issues, what we've heard in the last session, how we should address those, and basically have a path into a real focus this year.
Personally, I would very much like to see us be able to get a very crisp articulation of the focus or foci, if we want to have more than one, but be really crisp and contained.
So this is an open session with the -- We'll start with Anja presenting the inputs that have been received on issues, and then we'll get to everyone having an opportunity to talk.
So, Anja, over to you.
>>ANJA GENGO: Thank you very much, Chair. And officially good afternoon from Geneva to everyone.
I hope you can see the slides. These slides that I will walking you through are also available on the list of input documents on the IGF website, and I kindly ask my colleagues to post the link in the chat.
So as you know, the IGF 2022 call for thematic inputs was available on the IGF website for four weeks, between 14th of January and 14th of February. The community was invited to select up to three themes and up to three issues under each of the theme.
The whole process resulted in 191 stakeholders responding and submitting 524 themes, or translated in issues, that would be 1,140 issues
Issues. A full list of all these received submissions is available on the IGF website.
A very quick overview on who was submitting. If we look first of all at the submissions by stakeholder and regional groups, then it's quite obvious that the inputs -- the biggest number of inputs came from the African region followed by the Western European and Others group of countries, and then followed by Asia and Pacific.
The 10% or less than 10% came from GRULAC, Eastern Europe, and the lowest number came from intergovernmental organizations.
In terms of the stakeholder groups, we have the IGOs that submitted the least number of inputs. The biggest number of inputs came from the civil society group, around 39%, followed by technical community and the private sector.
Speaking about whether the stakeholders were submitting in their personal capacity or on behalf of their organizations, then slightly bigger number of inputs came in personal capacity, around 56%, while the rest of 44% came on behalf of the organizations.
Gender-wise, probably it's not relevant to track just because the number of inputs, almost half, came on behalf of the organizations, but in case somebody wonders in terms of the submitters, so people that were submitting, then the bigger number came from those who identify themselves as male.
And finally, to go to the -- into the thematic areas which were offered to the stakeholders to mark their preferences. The biggest preference, indeed, was for cybersecurity and trust, around 18%, followed by emerging technologies and universal access and meaningful connectivity. About 10% also were issues related to data governance, thematic cluster, and digital cooperation.
Environmental sustainability and climate change was 10%, slight, followed by rights and freedoms. And below 10% you can see that those are economic issues and development, followed by the cluster on media and content, and technical and operational topics.
Now we're going to look at specific issues under each of this thematic cluster that stakeholders were marking.
So on highest ranked thematic cluster, which is cybersecurity and trust, you can see here that child online safety and cyberattacks and cyber conflicts were the ones who were represented with the biggest number of issues, followed by cybersecurity practices, trust and accountability measures, legal and regulatory issues.
The rest of the issues that you can see here were below 10%, so I invite you to take a look at the document, and I'll be going just through those that were 10% or above.
On emerging technologies and innovation, as the second ranked thematic cluster, artificial intelligence was the top ranked issue. 30% of all respondents marked this issue. Followed by Internet of Things and smart cities as well as 5G, while the others were represented with less than 10% of issues. There are a number of them which you can see on the slide.
Moving into universal access and meaningful connectivity, the biggest number of issues related to access and connectivity, followed by capacity development, accessibility, education online, and marginalized and vulnerable groups. The rest of the issues were below 10%, which you can see on the slide.
Continuing with the data governance thematic cluster, data privacy and protection was the issue that was represented with the highest number of respondents, followed by cross-border data flows, data services, and Big Data. The rest of the issues were not marked; that's why you don't see them. They were offered but they were not at all selected.
Then going into digital cooperation, 23% is the highest issue was reserved for international cooperation, followed by multistakeholderism and multi-disciplinarity and IGF organization and role. 17% was reserved for broadening stakeholder engagement in Internet governance, followed by Internet ethics, while the rest were below 10% again.
And finally, as I said, environmental sustainability and climate change as a thematic cluster received around 10% of the overall support, and the issue that ranked as the highest was sustainable development with 27% of responses received, followed by climate change, environmental data, e-waste, and circularity and transparency.
On the rights and freedoms, also 10% as the overall cluster received. Freedom of expression, human rights, civil and political rights, digital citizenship were the issues that ranked above 10% while the rest of the issues are below 10%.
Moving into the economic issues and development, certainly eCommerce and eTrade received the highest attention of stakeholders who responded to the call, followed by future-of-work, eGovernment, and business models online, as well as over-the-top services.
As for the thematic cluster on media and content, content policy and regulation received the biggest number of inputs, followed by same percentage for local content and multilingualism and misinformation. And the rest were below 10%.
And finally, the lowest-ranked cluster was reserved for technical and operational topics. If we look at the topics that received the biggest -- issues that received the biggest attention, then it's certainly Internet shutdowns, Internet protocols, network issues, Domain Name System, and followed by two more issues which ranked below 10%, Internet routing and net neutrality.
The call for issues also asked about inputs on particular international processes which are also available in the IGF ecosystem, but I understand that we will now just focus on the issues, and later my colleague Eleonora will be presenting more about the responses received on how these practices reflect better -- can be reflected better in the IGF, how can the IGF better contribute.
I'll just conclude very quickly with the couple of inputs that came through the comments input on the call for issues. Many of them were actually reiterated from the taking stock as outlined by Chengetai in the summary. So without going to repeat all those ideas, maybe I'll just underline that certainly there was an appetite for limiting the number of thematic tracks, better flow among sessions on the overall agenda, having better cooperation between the session organizers, better support to promote individual sessions within the IGF agenda, and then certainly a number of inputs which came for ways to support better or more effective communication on the final outputs, final messages of the IGF concretely to the decision-makers.
So with that, thank you very much, Chair, and back to you.
I think we cannot hear you again.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thanks very much. And just before we move on, I'm wondering if there is anyone that would like to make just a short intervention on anything that you've presented up to this point.
>>JUTTA CROLL: Yes. I have a short question to Anja.
Thank you so much for the presentation of the outcomes of the call for issues. When you said that it was a smaller majority of people who answered in their personal capacity than for their organization, would it be possible to break that also down on the various stakeholder groups? So to better understand whether for civil society maybe there are more people who answer in their personal capacity than for their organization, while in other stakeholder groups, that might be different?
>>ANJA GENGO: Yes, certainly, Jutta. I certainly can provide that.
So now we just did a breakdown per stakeholder group for the overall submitters, but I understand you would like breakdowns within personal capacity and per organization. So we can produce that, yes.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Roberto.
>>ROBERTO ZAMBRANA: Thank you very much, Chair. It's great to speak the first time here. My name is Roberto Zambrana from GRULAC; La Paz, Bolivia. I am a third year MAG member.
Since it's my first time of intervention, I want to congratulate for the designation Paul as chairman. Of course, to give a warm welcome to all MAG members that are for first year here.
And I just wanted to comment that it's very nice outcomes that we have received after the reception of the call for issues. And I think those are slightly changing about the previous calls for issues during the last years, and I think there are no surprises concerning the top three, maybe. Maybe the one that is all -- that is increasing this year is regarding to emerging technologies. And perhaps it's also aligned with one of the major topics that was presented by the Secretary-General inside the compact -- the Digital Compact.
So I think, anyway, it's going to be a very challenging year regarding to make this -- or providing this balance between what we have from the community regarding this call for issues and also what we are aiming to do regarding aligning or at least making the effort to have this alignment with the Digital Compact that we all want to pursue this year. And it will be a particular challenge for MAG members because, as we all know, during the first stage of our work, we're going to define, actually, as someone said earlier today, to define what will be the criteria to select the proposals. In one side, how many -- finally, how many workshops are we going to accept for the program in order to make it more compact and also more outcome oriented or more focused IGF. And it's not going to be a matter for the proposers that perhaps they're going to receive a message about this, but this is going to be a challenge for the MAG members themselves because we, as MAG members, are going to evaluate this and to provide maybe -- to discuss about criteria that we have to define.
So I am just -- to urge, just to encourage MAG members to participate in this important process that we're going to have regarding the evaluation. We have a working group that for sure we're going to discuss about during the following days, and (indiscernible).
Thank you very much, Paul.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
>>TIMEA SUTO: Thank you for giving me the floor again.
I couldn't agree more with Roberto's last comment. This is going to be a very important process for the MAG members. I think setting the agenda and perhaps the evaluation of the proposals we received are the two largest and most complicated tasks and the MAG has in front of them every year.
And to give two suggestions or advices for this process, I would like to draw your attention to two things as we look into what we received from the community.
First of all, this is a really excellent summary of the secretariat, and thank you, Anja, for that, but it is a by-the-numbers summary. So we counted how many issues were preferred, but we did not -- it's not necessarily a representative sample of the community, right? So this is a voting process, not a census process, for those of you who do statistics.
I do want to caution that when we look at selecting the top issues, we don't only look X many people preferred this so this is clearly the top issue that needs to be on the program. It is a huge indicator, but it's not necessarily the most representative indicator, because there are more people in the world than there are businesses, there are more businesses than governments, there are more governments than international organizations, at least for a while.
So we need to look into that, that when we put the program together, even though an issue was, by the numbers, very popular, we need to also look that the program is balanced, and that we put things on the agenda that attracts the participation and the input of those stakeholder groups that might be fewer or might be concentrated in different parts of the world, so to give something to everyone. So try to look at this in a more weighted fashion. That's one of my recommendations.
And then the other recommendation is also, as was said by Roberto and as Jorge put in the chat, try and look not just internally into the year-to-year most active IGF community to shape our agenda but also to look externally, to people who might not have contributed to this process but have indicated in other forums their priorities for the IGF and for the international community. And I think here obviously the Secretary-General and the OCA and the global compact process, but also at other major international organizations or multistakeholder venues that deal with these issues and have already set their agenda. Think about the G20, for example, or if we (indiscernible) by cybersecurity issues, what is the GXE doing this year, a number of other organizations like that. They might not have contributed but the issues are there, and they're already working on it. So are there synergies with the IGF's work plan?
So for me, those are the two -- two main issues: Balance, and collaboration.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Great. Thank you. Any other comments? Anyone else who would like to take the floor? We will be coming back to all of this material as we try to synthesize it down into what might be doable in this year. But just before we go on, just give people one more opportunity to intervene at this point.
Okay, seeing none, the next portion is to be taking a look at the discussion on IGF and implementation of U.N. global policy initiatives: The Common Agenda, Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, and the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. So I think I will turn this over to Eleonora.
>>ELEONORA MAZZUCCHI: Thank you, Chair. Yes, I'm going to take us through a brief presentation if everyone would just give me a moment to share my screen.
Okay. I hope you can see this.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Looks good.
>>ELEONORA MAZZUCCHI: Okay, perfect. So to feed into this next agenda item on the strategic discussion on the IGF and implementation of U.N. global policy initiatives, we've prepared a brief overview of where the stakeholder inputs converged on this.
So in the secretariat, first through the call for stocktaking inputs and then the call for thematic inputs, we asked stakeholders to tell us how the IGF can make progress on and contribute to three U.N.-initiated policy mechanisms or proposals.
One is the Secretary-General's Common Agenda inaugurated last year for the U.N.'s 75th anniversary, that includes our potential Global Digital Compact. You'll see that there, if you can read it there because this type is very small, under Commitment 7 of the agenda.
Another was the Secretary-General's Roadmap for Digital Cooperation that also includes potential recommendations for -- I'm sorry, not potential, which contains recommendations for enhancing and adapting the IGF.
And, finally, the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda with its 17 SDGs. Most of you, I'm sure, are familiar with this.
Across all of these inputs there was convergence on a number of points. Namely, first and foremost -- and this is the big one that was very much emphasized by many, many inputs. Stakeholders said that the IGF should utilize its unique position in the digital space to play a central role and lead the multistakeholder consultation or input collection processes on the Common Agenda, the Roadmap, and the SDGs to, transmit these to the Secretary-General and member states. Essentially that the -- the IGF should really be at the forefront of any kind of multistakeholder consultation process on these agendas.
Inputs said that consultations could be conducted during the annual meeting as well as through the preparatory phase and IGF intersessional work. In other words, it could be done in a variety of ways throughout the IGF cycle.
Next concrete action. Stakeholders emphasized that the IGF should define and advocate for concrete ways to implement the commitments contained in the Common Agenda, particularly the call to connect all schools in the Global Digital Compact as well as the recommendations of the roadmap, including by drawing on the concrete improvements to the IGF suggested by last year's MAG working group on IGF strengthening and strategy. And IGF discussions on the SDGs should similarly have this action-oriented focus.
Next there was convergence on potentially hosting dedicated sessions. Stakeholders said that main -- or town hall plenary sessions on the Common Agenda and Roadmap could be held. Support was also expressed for dedicated sessions on the SDGs as well as for maintaining what the IGF has done for some years now, which is linking all sessions in the program in one way or another to the SDGs.
Also themes and outputs, essentially having these U.N. policy agendas in one way or another represented by dedicated themes in the IGF program. Specifically it was mentioned that the 12 commitments of the Common Agenda could structure the program and also be reflected in the IGF's outcomes.
Maximizing potential of the NRIs. Stakeholders have suggested that the vast network of local NRIs could be harnessed in a variety of ways, among others to conduct cross-regional consultations, to promote national-level implementation of commitments and recommendations, and to foster more SDG-focused discussion in national IG fora.
And, finally, capacity-building. Many people said that the IGF could be a hub or catalyst for various capacity-development activities related to these U.N. agendas.
So you will see these major points gathered here at the top of this slide. And in addition to these, several inputs also said that the IGF should work closely with the Office of the U.N. Tech Envoy toward implementation of the Roadmap. It should also have a close -- it should also think about a close working relationship and clear division of responsibilities between the MAG and the forthcoming IGF Leadership Panel. And they would like to see the IGF make a connection with the WSIS+20 review in 2025. And this is something that we have touched on already in this meeting.
So that's it for the overview. If you would like to see these inputs captured in full, I would encourage you to take a look at the thematic inputs analysis that Anja just walked us through as well as the stocktaking summary.
So thank you, Chair. That concludes our overview.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
I open the floor for comments and interventions.
>>SHEETAL KUMAR: Hi. I just wondered if I could come in at some point about a proposal a group had made for a policy network, an international work stream. But I'm happy to leave it till later if anyone wants to comment on the presentation just now.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We have Jorge.
>>JORGE CANCIO: Thank you so much. Jorge Cancio for the record.
Just to highlight what I posted on the chat, I think that it's mostly a question of framing and also of grouping the themes that we have coming from the call of issues and what we are seeing from the different intersessional -- international processes, especially the Our Common Agenda and this envisioned Global Digital Compact. And if we do this framing, I think, in an intelligent fashion and we try to align with what are the main contents envisaged for the Global Digital Compact, this is quite consistent with what we heard from the stakeholders proposing in the call of issues.
I see that there is a common or shared goal which I think we all agree on, which is an open, free, and secure Internet. And the different issues can be organized in the baskets that are being envisaged for the Global Digital Compact.
And these are, first, connecting the unconnected.
Second, avoiding Internet fragmentation. And we just saw that there is an initiative to work intersessionally on that.
Third, all the thematic about data use and control by the people or data governance.
Fourth basket, the trustworthy Internet, especially also considering discriminatory and misleading content.
And, finally, as a fifth topic which we also saw very strongly represented in the call for issues, the regulation of artificial intelligence.
So I think this would be a very nice way of using the IGF as the platform for this very important international discussion. And just, yeah, framing the inputs coming from the community along these lines would be very helpful. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
Sheetal, did you want to intervene?
>>SHEETAL KUMAR: Thank you. I'm happy to come in under agenda item 4 in relation to the proposal I wanted to present, if that's better.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Okay. We'll wait till we get to agenda item 4.
>>SHEETAL KUMAR: Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Does anyone else have interventions on the current topics?
>>AMADO ESPINOSA: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. This is Amado Espinosa, third-year MAG member.
Just to support the statements from Jorge which I think already covered very well the new vision, the new strategy which the MAG members and certainly the private sector are seeking for. Thank you very much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
Others wishing to take the floor? Remind you to use the hand feature. Nigel.
>>NIGEL HICKSON: Yes, yes, thank you very much. And I'll be very brief in support of Jorge and what he says in terms of the use of the IGF.
And I think this is something that's been, you know, mentioned before. And I think it's very important that we -- that the IGF is the prime global multistakeholder platform, is, indeed, used by the U.N. in this way. I mean, not used by the U.N. I don't mean it in that sense but, you know, these issues that should be discussed in a multistakeholder environment are.
And I think this year is a great place to discuss the Digital Compact and establish working groups or whatever. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>WOUT de NATRIS: Yes. Thank you, Paul.
Just to set the scene a little, I've been in several meetings in international diplomacy from a private sector point of view, and I noticed that -- I won't name any names because that's irrelevant. But the government representatives saying in those meetings, "We need a platform where all stakeholders could meet to discuss Internet security issues." And when I point out that we have such a platform, I just draw some sort of blanks.
So, in other words, what I would suggest is that we ask an IGF community -- and we all are the IGF community, always wait for proposals quite often to come to us. Perhaps it is time that on some of these extremely relevant discussions on Internet governance that are going on to draw them towards the IGF, to invite them to actually present, discuss together. In that way, we could perhaps become more relevant because from a passive -- the passive sort of nature we quite often have, these organizations never come to the IGF. So perhaps it's just a way of thinking of how can we make ourselves more relevant to all these organizations that now sort of go by us.
Thank you, Paul.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. That's a good point.
>>COURTNEY RADSCH: Thank you so much. My name is Courtney Radsch, second-year MAG member. And I wanted to absolutely reiterate support for what was just said.
I think that the process we used traditionally to solicit input and proposal sessions actually reduces the ability for the IGF to play the full role that it could play as the multistakeholder venue where different entities come. And I would suggest that perhaps this year one of the things that the MAG could do and that we could do with the broader community is put together a list, for example, of major processes, which obviously has started in the chat.
But, you know, what are the major processes that will affect the Internet for everyone that are happening this year? Whether it's the cybercrime treaty, whether it's a multistakeholder consultation for the creation of a future Internet alliance or the Global Internet Forum for Counterterrorism or whatever it is that is in our various worlds.
When we started with that and maybe one of the things we can do is to look through that and see, okay, how can we bundle these together and really offer the IGF as a place for multistakeholder consultation. One of the things especially that comes up in a lot of civil society discussions is how stretched civil society is in trying to provide their input and expertise to so many different processes and often encouraging states and companies and other actors to go to places like the IGF where you already have civil society and where you have such an emphasis on inclusion on multilingualism. For all of the challenges that remain with that, the IGF is, from my perspective, the most kind of globally inclusive venue to come do multistakeholder consultation and assessment.
And so I think we should double down on that.
And part of that might mean of getting away from this rigid idea of you submit a proposal and then we just kind of evaluate in somewhat of a vacuum and to say how do we craft the agenda in a way that gets -- that makes the IGF very relevant to these processes, shows the utility of it. And it might mean that some of those sessions are informative. It might mean that there's a lack of structure to some of those sessions because it's just about hearing from participants and the audience. And so I think we need to be very strategic about that and devote, say, a certain percentage of the program to that.
But we need to do that in an inclusive and collaborative way. So I would suggest that we start by creating a list of key processes, entities, issue areas that there are consultations or multistakeholder initiatives going on and get them into this venue. And, again, that will then also increase the relevance and the utility of the IGF. Thank you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much. Other thoughts? Mark.
>>MARK CARVELL: Yes. Thank you very much, Paul. I'm very much in line with what Courtney has said. I've mentioned a couple of things in the chat. There's the U.N. open-ended working group which had an open stakeholder consultation meeting which I joined -- was it last month? Anyway, fairly recently -- and is looking, as I understand it, to create some mechanics of open engagement with nongovernment stakeholders. So there's the IGF. Could we provide that important linkage to a working group within the U.N. system is my thought.
And then earlier I mentioned the WSIS+20 review and all of that, which Nigel mentioned early on in this meeting as a critical context for the IGF. And there can be decisions, including, you know, what's going to happen with the IGF mandate where this community really needs to connect effectively and provide substantive briefing and contributions. So that the national delegates in the U.N. who are taking decisions about -- well, about the IGF, the future of the IGF, really understand what we do and how we are best placed -- best placed to contribute to develop the Digital Compact and all the other processes that Eleonora mentioned.
So open-ended work group and WSIS+20 is what I suggest is included.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much.
Anyone else want to come in on these topics?
Okay. I would -- Our schedule here would give us another break, but I think we're -- we're moving along pretty well, so I'd like to move to agenda item 4, and an overview of the process and timeline, ask then we can have some discussion.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Paul. Can you hear me?
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Yes.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Great. Let me just share my screen for the...
Ah. Okay. It's working now.
I hope I'm sharing the right thing.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: It's a timeline, it looks like.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. All right. Thank you.
So for -- The secretariat has made this draft timeline for the activities for IGF 2022, and this is to the run-up to, of course, the IGF 2022 meeting. It has been slightly updated, so I will just show you the updates.
We've shared it with the MAG, and we've incorporated the MAG's comments as it is. At the moment, we are here (indicating) which is the first Open Consultations and MAG meeting. And of course we are on the 23rd of February, so we have the Open Consultations today and then the MAG meeting day 1 tomorrow and day 2 of the MAG meeting on Friday.
And of course, as you all know, what we do want to do -- if somebody can share the link of this in the chat, that would be great, so people can also follow, as well, that would be great.
So here we've written what the objectives are. So the IGF stock-taking and looking ahead to 2022, which we are in the process of doing. Strategic discussion on implementation of the Common Agenda, which we've just passed through. And then we've heard the views for the main thematic tracks and the number, et cetera. So we've had the stakeholder input, and so tomorrow and on Friday the MAG is going to discuss and hopefully come to some definite recommendations for the IGF 2022, which we will follow.
So -- And then the next thing that we do plan is to launch the intersessional work. Again, I'm not too sure whether -- yes, we can do it on the 1st of March, that's no problem. So with the intersessional work, what we're going to be doing as well in these three days, again, is to discuss the intersessional work, the Best Practice Forums, what Best Practice Forums should we have. Policy networks, should we also have a policy network? Should we carry on the ones of last year? Should we change it? So as a result of this meeting, we should be able to launch the intersessional work for this year on the 1st of March.
And then we do plan to have the call for sessions on the 1st of April to the 20th of May. Again, it's -- the MAG is going to be discussing it during the next two days. Courtney has several ideas that she just mentioned on how to change this. So we'll be listening as well to see whether or not we can be prepared for the launch of the call of sessions on the 1st of April.
And then we plan to launch the call for the village booths, 20th of April to 20th July. I don't think that's any problem. And of course this year, we do plan to continue what we did last year, is that physical booths and also virtual booths. So if you have a physical booth, you will have a virtual booth, but if you're not able come to Ethiopia, you can still have -- you can still apply for a virtual booth.
And then remote hubs. As we know, we've been using remote hubs for I think over the last decade, but the importance of the remote hubs has increased, especially due to COVID and the travel restrictions that we have experienced over the last two years. Hopefully this year it's not going to be that much of a -- restricted as far as travel-wise, but there are still people there who cannot travel due to financing, scheduling conflicts, et cetera. So the remote hubs are very important, and we do plan to continue having them and also to fund those remote hubs that we can, as we have done in the last couple of years.
We plan to launch the workshops and other sessions evaluations on the 26th May to 17 June. So the MAG will evaluate the workshops. And following the practice that we did last year and the year before, all input will basically stop for the other sessions on the 26th of May. So even if it's an open forum, et cetera, these have to be in before the 26th of May. And so the evaluation process will take place from 26th May to 17th of June.
We do plan to have the second Open Consultations and MAG meeting. Unfortunately, we had to move the date because the 22nd of June is actually the last day of EuroDIG, and then the following week is going to be the African IGF is scheduled for the following week after that week. So now we have consulted with the MAG, and it seems that the most suitable dates is going to be from the 6th to 8 of July. So that's when we're going to have the second IGF Open Consultations and MAG meeting. And in those -- in that time, we hope to finalize the selection of workshops and the other sessions, et cetera. This is what we traditionally aim for or we have traditionally aimed for during the past couple of years.
Also, please don't book and pay for your tickets right now for 6 and 8 July. We still have to finalize the venue, you know, the room and et cetera, and once that is done we will, of course, publish it on the website and also tweet it so you know that you can now go ahead. But that's the plan at the moment.
And then we'll have the drafting of the IGF 2022 schedule as we've traditionally done during June and August because we have to ask the workshop organizers -- or session organizers, I should say, about conflicts, et cetera. And so that's quite an involved process. So we're going to -- the secretariat is going to be doing that during June, July, and August.
And then of course there's the bilateral meeting request system, which we have traditionally offered participants. And then we hope to open the registration for the IGF 2022. And some of you -- well, I know some of you did notice that the prospect of dates were announced, 20th of November I think it was to the 1st of December. So these are still prospective dates. They still have to do the rounds to make sure that they don't clash with anything. And once those are, again, confirmed by all parties involved, then we will publish them. But those are the working dates that we have at the moment.
And then of course we do plan to finalize the IGF outputs in December.
I think that is roughly what we plan to do -- or not roughly, but specifically what we plan to do. As I said, some of the dates may change because of circumstances, but for those people who are planning to put in a session, we're going to have the call for session proposals, as I said here. So you have from the 2nd of April to 20th of May. You can mark your calendars, and that's what we plan to do.
Again, I say those dates have been changed (indicating).
So that's the overview of the schedule.
Let me just pause here for questions on the schedule, and then I'll go into the overview of our intersessional work again so we can have a discussion on that as well. But for here, let me just pause in case anybody has some questions.
>>CHRIS BUCKRIDGE: Hi, Chengetai, and thank you very much for that. That's really useful to have a view of the year here.
Just to note what I mentioned in the chat. I didn't see sort of MAG renewal processes there. And, I mean, obviously that's not a responsibility of the MAG, et cetera, but I think MAG members certainly have an important role in socializing and trying to get the best candidates for the MAG. And I know there's been some discussion in the feedback on last year as well about maybe extending some of those -- those nomination and selection processes.
So, yeah, just a suggestion that maybe it would be useful to include that in there and have everyone thinking about that at this stage so that we can make sure that we are providing enough opportunity to think and find the best candidates.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you, Chris. Yes, we will put that out as well. And we do plan to make it longer. I think last week was -- last year was four weeks. So we will try to see if we can make it eight weeks, two months, for people to garner and canvass for the best candidates. Thanks, Chris.
Do we have any other comments on this timeline for IGF 2022?
>>MARK CARVELL: Yes. Thank you very much, Chengetai. Thank you for running through the schedule for the year. It's very helpful.
And I just mentioned in the chat, forgive me if you did refer to it somewhere, but there's the leadership panel as well, isn't there. And is that mentioned there? I didn't see it.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: No, it is not mentioned.
>>MARK CARVELL: What do you think is going to be the practical arrangement for the panel to meet with the MAG and whether that would be an open -- that would be open to stakeholders? Is there developed thinking on that already? Sorry if I missed a message about it earlier, if that's the case.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thanks, Mark. No, we have not had any messages about when the leadership panel is going to be announced. So that is above me, and so we are just waiting to hear. And once we hear, of course we will transmit that information.
When I last spoke about it with New York, yes, they do plan to -- for the leadership panel to meet with the MAG, and the leadership panel is going to be accessible. So they have that in mind, in their thinking.
I don't want to put anybody on the spot, but I will just give a four count to see if either Wai Min or Dennis wants to say something about that?
Okay, no. So, yes, we just have to wait to hear from the Secretary-General's office. Thank you.
>>BRUNA SANTOS: Hi, Chengetai. Actually, it was the same question as Mark about the leadership panel and us thinking of ways of integrating the conversations they are going to have and the MAG's as well. So I'll take down my hand. Thank you so much.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: All right. Thank you.
>>JOYCE CHEN: Thanks so much, Chengetai. This is my first time taking the mic so I am Joyce, and I am a second year MAG member, and hello to everyone.
I do have a question, Chengetai, whether we should include the IGF Expert Group Meeting or retreat that's scheduled 30th March into this timeline. I mean, just so that everybody sort of knows in terms of the IGF flow, there are some of these meetings that are happening.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, sure. I don't see why not. Yes, we can include the -- yes.
And I'll give it to a six count before I move to the overview of just the intersessional work.
Chris, is that your hand up again?
>>CHRIS BUCKRIDGE: Sorry, Chengetai. I was trying to find my "hand up" button. And, sorry, Joyce puts me to shame here. Yes, it was my first time taking the mic before. Chris Buckridge, first-term MAG member.
And just I think it's also -- I wanted to reiterate that point about the Expert Group Meeting. I think it would be useful either now or sometime in the coming days to sort of get a sense of what the role of that group is going to be. We have the website there which explains a bit about it, but also how that's going to feed back into MAG discussions and Open Consultations and how we see that work progressing over the course of the year, maybe in relation to this timeline.
So I think that would be really useful.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Chris. Yes, I mean just a very short answer. Yes, I mean, the MAG work this year is mainly -- I say mainly but not exclusively because of course we have to work on the multiyear program, et cetera, but mainly focused on the IGF 2022, which is what this timeline is focused on. But -- And for the EGM, it's more -- it's not just for this year but it's a more strategic conversation on the role of the IGF, how can the IGF adapt to the current situation, and also how can the IGF respond to the Common Agenda and what role can the IGF play in the Digital Compact, and also beyond, with the WSIS+25 and beyond there as well. I mean, so it's more of a strategic thinking of the IGF and bringing all the various components of -- or representatives from these -- from the IGF community and also beyond, because we do not want to be a closed community. We want to be an open community.
So that's what the discussion of the EGM is going to be about, much like what we did with the retreat that took place in, if I'm not mistaken, 2016. So it's more like that. But we can have another discussion about it as we go on. I mean, that's also fine.
Okay. Chris, I take it your hand is down, right? It's not a follow-up question.
>>CHRIS BUCKRIDGE: Sorry, it is.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay. Thanks.
Okay. So just looking at the agenda as well, there was a discussion on the intersessional work, and so I just wanted to go very quickly that -- also what we are going to be doing, what we want to do today as well, and tomorrow and the next day is, first of all, discuss the hybrid format, which we have done a bit at the beginning. So -- and I'm sure all of you are quite familiar with what we did for the hybrid format. We had the IGF Village, we had meeting that we tried, as much as we possibly could, to shift a little bit to make it more conducive for people from other time zones, but then again, as I said this morning, we really can't go above this eight-hour bubble because then it's a new shift, and that basically doubles the human cost of holding the meeting. And we did hear some feedback of the hybrid, but I think that's going to be a discussion again.
And for the bilateral meeting rooms, we did include online participation facilities, and we did have the networking opportunities, which of course we are going to try and improve. We took note of the comment that came through from the input of the stock-taking that I read out this morning.
And then, of course, we did have the new website and the mobile app which we will continue to develop and continue to make as user-friendly as we can but keeping in mind security issues so that we don't have what we had at the very beginning, like Zoom bombing and stuff like that. So we do have to have a balance of ease of use and security, which we will try and find.
Sorry to pile up before I hand back to the Chair. The other thing that was on the point was there was a discussion on intersessional work. And this is also where Sheetal can also make her intervention because she has an idea for a policy network, if I'm not mistaken.
Last year for the intersessional work, we did have the Best Practice Forum on cybersecurity, the use of norms was to foster trust and security, and we also had the BPF gender and digital rights.
So we are looking for community input today and also decision by the MAG tomorrow and the next day on whether we should carry on these BPFs, maybe we should shelf one and pick up another topic that is high on the agenda on everybody's agenda and work with that or pick up a topic that we can fully integrate into the Common Agenda.
But those are the two we had last year. And also last year we had the policy network on the environment and the policy network on meaningful access. So that's another -- those two policy networks as well is whether they should continue or whether they should have -- we should have another policy network.
The thing about these best practice forums and the policy networks is the secretariat does support them and we do have a consultant that basically holds the pen, organizes the meetings, does the writing, and produces the report at the end.
So we can only basically support four. We cannot go above these four unless we have new funding sources to cover more of these.
And then, of course, there's the dynamic coalitions and intersessional work. But these are more independent, act independently from the MAG and the secretariat as such, though we do provide support and we do provide a consultant to support them. And they are two MAG liaisons that also work with the dynamic coalitions. But we also want to know your points of views on how we can better internally collaborate with these dynamic coalitions.
So thank you. I'll stop here and hand it back to the Chair.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Just before we close, just asking if there's anyone who would like to make a last intervention on this topic.
No? Okay. That's great.
I think we have a short break scheduled at this time. And then we'll follow it up with a review of the various activities from other U.N. organizations and international organizations feeding into this a little bit.
So we'll take 15-minute break, I think.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, okay. And we'll see you at 7:42 my time, 15 minutes.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Sorry, I'm just seeing the hands that are up. Sheetal and Bruna, we will start with you unless the chair wants to come back and reopen the meeting. It's up to him.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: There are hands up.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: So why don't we take care of that.
So, Sheetal, go ahead.
>>SHEETAL KUMAR: Oh, thank you. Sorry. I was taking my time to put my hand up there. Hopefully you can hear and see me okay. And thanks for the opportunity to take the floor.
For those I don't know, my name is Sheetal Kumar. And I'm head of Global Engagement at Global Partners Digital.
It's been great to hear all the feedback on all the topics we've been discussing today, including the discussion on the Global Digital Compact and the importance of connecting the IGF to relevant discussions happening elsewhere including where decisions are made.
And really, what I have to say is not on behalf of GPD or myself, it's actually on behalf of a group of civil society and industry stakeholders who made a proposal for a policy network on Internet fragmentation. So we've sent that to the IGF secretariat, and it builds on a statement of principles for an open, interconnected, and interoperable Internet, which I can post in the chat actually.
Let me just do that.
Just so you have that as a reference.
I think there's a bit of -- someone has got their mic on. That's okay. I'll just keep going.
I think it's Mary. There we go. Thank you so much.
So when it comes to Internet fragmentation, what we're concerned about is the technical, legislative, and policy developments which threaten to further risk the fragmentation of the Internet into siloed parts. And these developments are happening at all layers, and they pose a threat to the open, interconnected, and interoperable Internet but also to the social and economic benefits that the Internet provides to human rights and to the progress that we need to make on the SDGs.
And so the objective of the policy network, which we put in the proposal, would be to offer a systematic and comprehensive framework to define Internet fragmentation, its intended and unintended causes and impacts, and to collect and analyze case studies that would further increase our understanding of this phenomenon and to establish shared principles, recommendations, or codes of conduct, for example, to prevent fragmentation and preserve the open, interconnected, interoperable Internet. And the proposal we sent in aligns well with the responses that we have already discussed in response to the call for thematic inputs.
There wasn't one topic in fragmentation, but it cuts across so many of the themes that we've already discussed. So, for example, Internet shutdowns and the responses was the highest ranked of the technical and operational topics.
Freedom of expression and human rights were considered the two most important issues under rights and freedoms.
And then under data governance, cross-border data flows is the second highest-scoring issue.
So just to wrap up on this, we need to connect the discussions that have been had all week, including today. On Monday and Tuesday this week, the U.N. Secretary-General had informal thematic consultations which I'm sure many of us followed on Our Common Agenda. And that includes digital cooperation and the proposed Global Digital Compact. And a number of member states and other stakeholders referenced the role of the IGF in supporting the development of that compact in an inclusive way. And I've been hearing today from everyone how important that is. And the ASG Maria Spatalisano also made reference to the importance of utilizing the IGF as a way of harnessing stakeholder input, providing -- and playing a key role, developing it.
Why am I saying that? It's because Our Common Agenda explicitly makes reference to Internet fragmentation and the need to address it. But we believe much more needs to be done to build a common understanding of the issue, its impacts, and how we can address it.
So the full policy network proposal would do that, and our proposal will encourage widespread participation from all stakeholder groups through focused invitations at the outset of the process. But it just wouldn't be about discussion, it would be about developing in an inclusive way concrete deliverables and recommendations that can feed into other processes outside of the IGF.
So we hope this proposal will receive the support of the IGF community. Happy to take any questions. And thank you for your attention.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much. And there's a lot of hands up now. So that's great.
Let's go, starting with Wout and then Bruna, Ben, Timea, and Mark in that order.
>>WOUT de NATRIS: Thank you, Paul. Wout de Natris as coordinator of the dynamic coalition on Internet standard, security, and safety, IS3C.
First, just a little bit of a surprise. In 2020, we have asked MAG if we could be a policy network and we got the answer they don't exist, become a dynamic coalition.
And now I see to my surprise -- well, of course not a surprise because they were there for a year, but there are two policy networks and the third one is being proposed. So that is an option that was not presented to us. And the question is why.
I don't know if it really makes sense to discuss it now. But it is a question why did we get the answer it doesn't exist and not much later there was the policy network for the environment.
That said, I think that where the dynamic coalitions are concerned in general, we have produced a big report with the thanks of Sorina and Markus but a lot of effort from Sorina for which we give all the gratitude that she deserves for that.
I think it's important to look -- for the MAG to look at this document because the dynamic coalitions, some of them are extremely ambitious, are in need of a different sort of support because we cannot do everything by ourselves. It's a network of people who are working on different topics. And that's being stressed every time. They are different topics; and yes, they are. But, on the other hand, they are topics that matter. So it becomes important that the MAG and also the wider community gets to know these topics more in depth because we are sort of scheduled to become the tangible outputs of the IGF. We are specifically mentioned in the Roadmap.
So, in other words, it doesn't be right anymore if we are sort of detached from the rest of the IGF because if we're going to be the dynamic coalition delivering tangible outputs, that will be the outputs of the IGF as a whole and not just anymore of a dynamic coalition that is on the side of the IGF. And as the former chair, Paul, you can do whatever you like there.
It's not about what we like, it's about what the importance of the topics are, the importance of the outcomes, the importance of recommendations, toolkits, and guidelines. That should be a more integral part of the IGF and how can we achieve this ambition. I think that is something that we would very much like to discuss with the MAG over the coming weeks and months and perhaps have also regular meetings with the MAG so that we -- everybody is aware of what is going on.
One dynamic coalition may be more ambitious than another, but they can indicate at what sort of level they would like to operate. And that would give the opportunity for outcomes to come to IGF tangible outputs. And that is something that I think several dynamic coalitions -- I can only speak for my own IS3C. But I know that there are several dynamic coalitions who would like to have this discussion.
And that's why I propose with an open invitation to do so together and in that way become more attached to the IGF, also more influential.
So let me put it here, and hopefully we can be able to discuss this in the near future together some more and find out how we can actually be working together in a more integrated way.
So I will leave it at that for now. And thank you, Paul, for this opportunity.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
>>BRUNA SANTOS: Thank you so much, Chair.
Just a little comment on the BPF gender. We understand this has been one of the long-time running BPFs and long-time running efforts around the intersessional work of the IGF. And I fully understand that this is an issue that the MAG will address in the upcoming days.
But I just wanted to put this on the record, that there is still a vast support for the BPF gender to take place again. I don't know under which shape or format.
But since we're discussing prioritization and also how are we moving with intersessional work, I think we also need to be a little more careful in the way we put some things because we also don't want to hint the topics such as all the intersection between gender and Internet governance are not relevant right after a pandemic that has been not only increasing gender divide, dissemination of hate speech, and balance against women wide.
So, yeah, just wanted to take the space to put on the record there is still support for the BPF gender. Thank you so much for the floor.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>BEN WALLIS: Thank you, Paul. This is Ben Wallis from Microsoft.
So I -- I wanted to support Sheetal's presentation of a proposed policy network on Internet fragmentation. Microsoft has been involved with this as well. We think Internet fragmentation is an increasingly troubling issue, complex issue, and it's come up in many discussions in recent IGFs.
Governments and regulators appropriately need to understand and respond to some of the challenges that are presented by the use of new technologies. But we're seeing many examples of this being done in ways that undermines the open and interoperable Internet, sometimes intentionally, sometimes not.
I think the IGF is the perfect place to gather perspectives and experiences from around the world to understand this trend and provide recommendations to how to respond to it and try and reverse this trend.
The proposal was submitted in writing before the 14th of February deadline. We understood it was going to be circulated to the MAG ahead of the meeting. It's always helpful when any proposal of intersessional work can come to the MAG before the meeting so they can read them.
Maybe the secretariat can send it at the end of today's meeting so that the MAG has the opportunity to read it before it discusses intersessional work on Friday.
And, lastly, just a note partly in response to question about why this wasn't an option in 2020. I think policy networks, last year was the first year we've seen them. They're one example of how the IGF is starting to respond to calls from the June 2020 Roadmap on Digital Cooperation for the IGF to strengthen and expand and think of new ways of working.
And I think it was a really interesting first year of seeing how they work and how they can bring a more structured approach to this intersessional work. So I think Internet fragmentation would be a great topic for policy network in 2022.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Great. Thank you.
>>TIMEA SUTO: Thank you for giving me the floor again.
I think Sheetal and Ben have said much of what I wanted to say, but I did want to add my support for ICC/BASIS for this proposal. I think in addition to all the great reasons that Ben just repeated on why we should have this policy network, there is one that Jorge was also referring to several times during today's conversation, which is the issues and the process of contributing to the Digital Compact through the Secretary-General's OCA report.
And I think this umbrella concept, if you will, of Internet fragmentation and the layered approach this proposal lays out to look at actions, regulatory or otherwise, that could impact the functioning of the Internet under the technical infrastructure or content layers is a great umbrella concept under which we can add in much of what the IGF has been discussing and will continue to discuss that can contribute to those five baskets of issues that the Secretary-General has laid out for us.
So I think if this can be not just a proposal for intersessional work but really a framework on how the IGF's work can be considered going forward. And we're very happy to support that here at ICC/BASIS.
So all my support for this one. I do urge MAG members, if you haven't had a chance to look at the proposal that was sent in about a week ago, to look at it, and us as community members will not be able to take the floor when you discuss this on Friday, but I do hope that MAG members who will have the chance to speak will table this proposal and that the MAG will consider it strongly when the time comes.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>MARK CARVELL: Yes, thank you, Paul. This policy network proposal is very welcome. It demonstrates how the IGF has matured as a coherent, robust, well-coordinated multistakeholder process that can engage on issues on a permanent year-round basis. So it's a very welcome development of the IGF model, and I very much support it.
The reason I wanted to raise my hand was just to come in briefly on the question raised by Chengetai about dynamic coalitions and what he described as fostering greater collaboration, whereas I think I'll really with Wout on describing it not so much as collaboration as integration.
And for the benefit of newcomers, there is a Coordination Group, the Dynamic Coalition Coordination Group, which some dynamic coalitions are actively engaged in. And I have to declare I'm with one; that I'm working with Wout, actually, as a policy advisor to IS3C on Internet standards, security and safety. So the DCCG I think has an increasingly valuable role to play in facilitating the development of those dynamic coalitions that are really outcome-orientated, who can deliver, as Wout was describing, to deliver outcomes for the IGF, which then can be transmitted to policymakers and governments and IGOs and decision-takers in the private sector, and so on, worldwide.
Those dynamic coalitions really need to be much more visible and understood and supported within the IGF structure. And working with the MAG, with the leadership panel, with the experts group, so many processes now to connect with, but will be important so that the dynamic -- the role and contribution of dynamic coalitions are making is understood and actively supported. So there is the Coordination Group for the dynamic coalitions for the MAG to connect with in particular in the context of the question raised by Chengetai.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: And thank you very much.
I think that brings us to our break at this point. So we'll take a 15-minute break, and then reconvene.
[ Break ]
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Hi, Paul, we cannot hear you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Can you hear me now?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Can you see me now?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: All right. Excellent.
Okay. So we're in this last segment -- almost last segment of our meeting today: Update from related Internet governance initiatives and processes, followed by an open discussion. So agenda item number 5.
And, Chengetai, I think this is you.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, okay. So I will call. Our first intervention is from the United Nations Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization, UNESCO.
>>UNESCO: Yes. Well, thank you very much. Hold on for a second. I'm having a little trouble here with my log-in. So hold just -- Okay.
Thank you, Chairperson, for giving me the floor. And hello, Chengetai, Anja.
Let me start by congratulating on behalf of UNESCO all the MAG members on their new appointments, and you, Paul Mitchell, on your appointment as the new MAG chair. We have worked productively in the Broadband Commission and other context together, so I want to make sure you know that the MAG and the IGF Secretariat can count on UNESCO's full support to the IGF, and we line up behind the work you do.
So let me also thank the outgoing country, host country, Poland, for a really exceptionally well organized hybrid IGF, and Ethiopia for hosting the 2022nd IGF.
We really could not be stopped by COVID, and we sent a high-level delegation to Poland led by UNESCO's Assistant Director-General, Tawfik Jelassi. In that meeting we convened and participated in over 16 sessions and events there to share UNESCO's work on transparency of Internet platforms, on AI ethics, open education resources, and of course on the Internet Universality ROAM-X framework, all of which were really well received by the stakeholders.
So this is just an example of the kind of support we wish to bring. And in the next -- last 15 years, UNESCO has been really a strong supporter of the IGF. We work together with its multistakeholder community to really place Internet governance at the center of the global debate, and we'll continue to do so going forward.
But before we -- I proceed, let me take a minute to, on behalf of the entire UNESCO team, to thank really very much Anriette, Esterhuysen who is a good friend and the outgoing MAG chair, for extraordinary leadership, excellent work in driving the MAG and the IGF. She did it with deep grace and deep commitment in the past two years. Her work has been much appreciated by all stakeholders, including UNESCO. So thank you, Anriette.
Now let me touch briefly upon a number of the topics discussed today. I found Anja's presentation of issues prioritized by stakeholders most helpful, so thank you very much. And while the first cybersecurity issue is not exactly UNESCO's first priority, we'll be delighted about the placement of all following issues and will take every effort to contribute to emerging technologies, universal access, data governance, digital cooperation, environment sustainability, and rights and freedoms, particularly on freedom of expression and access to information, of course, which are in our DNA. So we are very keen to debate and address some of the just-mentioned issues after the prioritization and focusing processes. Many MAG members want to undertake and to lead up to the next 2022nd IGF. And we'll be there as well.
So we're also keen to support the IGF's contribution to the Common Agenda, the Global Digital Compact. Also to the WSIS+20 review process which were discussed today. And in fact, our member states have endorsed our way forward on this review, which is going to be done in close integration with the other U.N. entities in the 41st General Conference.
So with regards to the intersessional work just discussed before the break, most of you are aware of the dynamic coalition UNESCO leads on the Internet Universality ROAM principles and indicators, which is another good example, tangible output of UNESCO's deep engagement with the IGF community and how it builds synergies with all stakeholders.
So just a recap. The four ROAM principles -- human rights, openness, accessibility to all, remote stakeholder participation -- measured by 303 Internet Universality ROAM-X indicators, or we call the IOIs, have filled this (indiscernible) setting void to serve as an internationally recognized framework for digital ecosystems development.
It's in its strength lies in the providing a solid evidence base out of which policy recommendations are derived for protecting all human rights in an indivisible way, preserving the Internet's openness and accessibility, all done in a spirit of multistakeholder engagement and participation.
So with the support of the IGF community and the MAG, UNESCO has launched the dynamic coalition on Internet Universality ROAM-X indicators at the IGF 2020 and had that as a new shared space for experiences in raising awareness of the value of ROAM principles and indicators, and of course we're tremendously grateful to the MAG chair for all the support, inputs, contributions received in this process. And we hope to take it forward with the new MAG chair.
Just as a kind of a little recap on that, national assessments of Internet development are progressing in 44 countries now. Six have completed them. We're covering all five continents, and with eight years until the deadlines for the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and the forthcoming hosting of the IGF in Africa in 2022nd, we really are looking forward to scaling up the assessment, implementation of ROAM-X indicators in all African countries, and of course in more other countries in all regions of the world so that we can really use these instruments as a policy deriving analysis of trends that allows us to understand how Internet is developing and what are the gaps and opportunities around the world.
And so of course for that, we count on the continued collaboration with the IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group, national and regional IGFs, best practice platforms, and all the dynamic coalitions that help strengthen UNESCO's synergies and partnerships, and jointly advance the evidence-based Internet policies at both national, regional, and of course at the global level.
So looking ahead, we are committed to supporting the U.N. Secretary-General with his Digital Cooperation Roadmap and the forging of a much needed Global Digital Compact.
So of course we wish to see principles established, and we have the Internet Universality ROAM-X framework as an example. We seek to play our role in applying human rights online, protecting data, connecting all people to the Internet, fostering inclusive and meaningful access, preventing Internet fragmentation, humanistic development of artificial intelligence, and we look forward to a digital future that leaves no one behind.
So this is really, you know, a great opportunity for us. So thank you very much for allowing us a moment to share where we stand now.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very -- Oh, carry on.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: I was just -- Thank you very much for the presentation and the FUJ cooperation and collegiality. It's very important.
>>UNESCO: Thank you, Paul. And welcome again, you know.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: And from the secretary's side as well, thank you very much. And we do look forward to continue our strong collaboration and also deepen it this year as well.
>>UNESCO: Thank you, Chengetai. Always a pleasure.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Next we have the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD. Lucia Russo. If you are around. I'll give it a three count then move to the next. Which would be Jason Munyan from the United Nation's Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Technology.
And Jason is not here.
So Council of Europe.
Ah, we have started the session earlier than usual, so those people who did not listen into the earlier sessions may not be here yet and may be in other meetings. I see. So let me just go down the list to see who is here, and then they can give their intervention, and then we'll go back up. But before I go to the next, I see Jutta has got her hand up.
>>JUTTA CROLL: Thank you, Chengetai.
I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank Marielza for her presentation on the ROAM-X Internet Universality Indicators. As a civil society organization from Germany, we base lots of our discussions, programs, and strategies to achieve digital inclusion on the indicators, and you have provided for such a perfect framework that I would like to encourage all the other organizations and stakeholders to make use of it because it's very, very useful for our work.
Thank you so much for that.
>>UNESCO: This is music to our ears. I must say that the last report we completed was from Germany. You know of course we had indicators on children's rights and safety online. And we are very grateful. It was a tremendously illuminating report, and we appreciate very much your recommendation that we update these indicators and principles. So thank you for your contribution to that.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you.
Okay. So next on my list I have Association for progressive communications, Paula Martins.
And also no. Okay.
DotASIA, Jennifer Chung.
And that would be a no, too.
Asia Pacific? Jennifer?
>>DotASIA: Yeah. I'm just trying to get --
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Okay.
>>DotASIA: -- organized right now. It's a little early for me.
Hello, everyone. My name is Jennifer Chung, and I work for DotAsia Organization. I see some of you that I worked with before on the MAG and also continue to work with.
First off, I would like to send a hearty congratulations to Paul Mitchell, being the first MAG chair from the private sector. This is a hearty congratulations from me since I am also a former MAG member from the private sector. And it also emphasizes the importance of, I guess, all the stakeholders, like we always do. At the IGF and at the MAG, that without the private sector this is not a conversation we could continue with.
I also want to express my thanks to the previous hosts, Poland, for their incredible job of hosting the first hybrid IGF. I had the good fortune of being able to travel to Poland and Katowice. Many of my colleagues from Asia-Pacific were not able to do so. And I really appreciate the care and detail both host country Poland, the IGF secretariat, and, of course, the MAG has worked very hard towards making a very successful hybrid meeting.
Thank you to the IGF secretariat for looking at the taking-stock heart and hearing the voices from the community. I think there's also quite a large reaction and a large contribution from the Asia-Pacific community, which is always welcomed. There is always a very strong need to continue to engage and continue to try to engage the communities that we haven't quite reached yet with the IGF and also the NRIs in the region.
Now, speaking a little bit about DotAsia, we are an organization that is the registry operator for the top-level domain .ASIA. But in the Internet governance works, we actually support key programs, especially when we're looking at capacity-building with Internet governance.
I'm not sure if my colleague Jenna Chung is on the call because we started a little earlier with this segment. But one of our key programs that we've already established for, I think over ten years now is the NetMission.Asia program where we train and we build capacity in youth where they then become the trainers of their own peers. And in this program, I think it's very important to underline the contributions, the voices, and the acts of the meaningful participation of youth in the Internet governance matters and Internet governance positions and especially at the IGF and its intersessional works and the NRIs.
I have to underline again a hearty congratulations to Poland for bringing the spotlight on the importance of the youth contribution, especially with the Youth Summit that was held very successfully in the last edition of the -- during the last edition of the IGF.
I think it's incredibly important right now especially as we are two years' deep in the COVID-19 pandemic when we are all online and all looking to make more of our lives meaningful this way, the Internet being such a tool especially for the youth. It is incredibly important to continue to engage, reach out to these digital natives because all these initiatives that we're talking about right now, be it the digital cooperation, be it the Common Agenda, be it the Digital Compact, all of this impacts youth. So continuing to engage them in specific Internet governance matters and discussions is incredibly important.
Speaking from our region Asia-Pacific, it's a vast region. It's a very diverse region. It's very diverse in many ways, politically, economically, and geographically. And there are many, many very important issues that we face.
So, I mean, I do not want to speak, of course, for our entire region, and I cannot speak for our entire region, but we also -- at DotAsia, we support the regional initiative, the Asia-Pacific Regional Internet Governance forum and there we speak about a lot of Internet governance issues, policy issues, regulatory issues that come up in our region that are very important to us. And we continue to do this work.
We are, of course, supported very well at the IGF secretariat with Ms. Anja Gengo. And she's always been extremely important and instrumental to keeping the NRI network the way it is, how it has flourished under her care from, I think, maybe around 40-some NRIs to now over 130+. It might be more than that. I think Anja would probably know more than me.
But to continue to engage with the NRI network, to engage with people at the grassroots level is so important. And I know that the MAG this year will look at these things, will look to integrate further and to align further all these really good outputs and these processes that add value to all the conversations we have at the IGF.
So thank you for your time.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Jennifer.
And next we have Asia-Pacific Network Information Center, APNIC, Joyce Chen.
>>JOYCE CHEN: Thanks very much, Chengetai. I am a second-year MAG member again, but I will be speaking in the capacity of my role in APNIC as senior advisor for strategic engagement.
I have prepared some slides. So I know we've not been given a lot of time to provide the update. And so what I will do is absolutely fly through these slides. And so I urge you to just hang on to your seats.
So thank you for the invitation for APNIC to give an update. We have five strategic pillars that look towards building a global, open, stable, and secure Internet.
We are member-based. We are a not-for-profit organization. And what we do is basically we are the regional Internet registry for Asia-Pacific. What that means is really we are coordinating the addressing layer of the Internet. We allocate, register. We delegate IPv4, IPv6, and autonomous system numbers. So the key message here is really that iPv4 is running low. It's pretty much exhausted around the world. And we have been doing a lot of work in terms of promoting IPv6 deployment.
We are also committed to routing security. We have RPKIs, improve route management, and then just some statistics for the Asia-Pacific region in terms of our IPv6 capability.
Development is a very key pillar for APNIC. We do a lot of Internet development. It's very much in line with our vision. And so we have multistakeholder policy development where the APNIC community will gather to develop policies relating to the management and use of Internet number resources in our region.
And we hold two APNIC conferences a year where these policy development processes will run. So one's in February. One's in September. And, in fact, this week and next week is APNIC53. So this week is tutorial week, and next week is actually our conference week.
So join us if you are interested to know what is happening. And usually the first conference of the year is held in conjunction with APRICOT which is a conference for network operators to attend and to share their best practices, experiences within this conference.
So last year, because of the pandemic, we pioneered for the first time an online-only fellowship program. The fellowship program is usually tied to the APNIC conferences and so to provide travel support, et cetera. But this time around, because conferences were being held online, we decided to run a six-month online program and provide all kinds of support and training, introduction sessions for our fellows.
So just talk a bit about our Internet governance commitment. We go from local to regional and then, of course, to global. On a global side, there's me on the MAG. And I have had past colleagues Sylvia who was also on the MAG. And I'm part of the IGFSA, the IGF Support Association executive committee.
And at the IGF itself, the APNIC conducted three IGF sessions, of which I will go through in a little bit more detail, one of them later on.
We are also huge supporters of the regional IGF. So in this case, as you've heard from Jennifer before, that would be the APrIGF, including being part of the steering group, being part of the different committees and supporting that work.
We also ran two workshops there. And we've been involved in other subregional IGFs as well, helping to help the Southeast Asia IGF last year. That took place for the first time, continuation of the Pacific IGF.
And we also help out with different schools of Internet governance. So I've just named in there, APIGA and APSIG.
And then, of course, a number of local IGFs that have taken place despite the pandemic. And we have provided support and participated in those as well.
So we also provide support to the technical community. I won't get into detail, but main comprises of going to the NOGs and meeting up with the community and providing training to security as well.
Government engagement, active in ITU. We also look after lots of issues that are being dealt with there. And then all the other places like OECD, APEC TEL, and law enforcement training and engagement.
The APNIC Academy is a place where you can find out more about just different topics to do with the Internet. For example, how the Internet works, how routing works. So we run a lot of online courses. And this has been tremendously beefed up, especially because of the pandemic.
We also provide support for Internet infrastructure development. And the latest project that came out from APNIC -- and this was done in conjunction with our organization LACNIC. So if you know, APNIC is one of the five RIRs and LACNIC is one of the other key organizations in the global space. In fact, I want to say hello to Paula from LACNIC and my colleague Chris from RIPE. They are both new on the MAG. Very, very happy for you guys to be on the MAG.
Just coming back to this study, it's really about the Internet technical success factors. I put down some of those dimensions of success.
We ran a workshop in last year's IGF. And I put the links here. But what you can do is really get the presentation. I'll send it on to Anja, and then she will be able to circulate it on my behalf.
Just want to talk a bit about the APNIC Foundation. That was really set up to support APNIC's development work. Last -- sorry, this year, in fact, we granted $1.8 million in funding to 22 projects under the Information Society Innovation Fund, or ISIF Asia, for those of you who are aware. And this covered 16 economies. So we are very, very happy with this. This is the most amount of money that we have been able to grant funding for, so it's a record for us.
So just a bit about our information resources. We do provide a lot of blog articles about Internet-related issues. We provide a lot of statistics and data on network traffic, et cetera.
And just our internal capability, this is just a snapshot of APNIC staff. We're always happy to support the IGF and support all the different Internet governance-related events that are happening, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. So thank you very much for your time.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Joyce. Thank you for updating us on your very wide range of activities. It's also very important.
Next we have from the European Commission, Esteve Sanz.
>>EUROPEAN COMMISSION: Can you hear me?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can hear you. We can't see you, but we can hear you.
>>EUROPEAN COMMISSION: You cannot see me? Okay. Full package.
Thank you so much for the invitation. As always, it's an honor for me to be here. I am the head of the Internet governance sector in the Commission.
I will, as I take the floor in these circumstances, go through a few things that the Commission has been doing so far.
The Commission -- our current Commission is extremely active on digital issues and Internet-related policies. And this has resulted in a very large number of regulatory packages, of actions, of funding that we're in the process of implementing, or have been implemented already.
Probably one of the main regulatory packages that we have on the table right now is the Digital Services Act, which basically proposes new rules for a safe and accountable online environment with a strong focus on big online platforms.
And also the Digital Markets Act which is sets a new regulatory framework to ensure a fair and open market.
These acts were proposed last year. Now they are in the process of being discussed by the co-legislators in the E.U. (indiscernible), basically the Council and the European Parliament. And they are expected to be approved this year and probably having a very significant impact on the -- online and the Internet environment.
Let me also tell you that today -- effective today the Commission adopted the Data Act which proposes new rules on who can use and access data generated in the E.U. across all the economic sectors. This now has been proposed by the Commission. Again, it will go through a process of discussion with the co-legislators, again the Council, made of E.U. member states of the European Parliament, made of MPs and members of European Parliament.
The Data Act will, once approved, stimulate competitive data markets. And we hope it will also make data more accessible for all players in the digital ecosystem.
Moreover, the European Commission has proposed the first-ever legal framework on artificial intelligence, to ensure the technology evolves in a trustworthy environment and with the citizen interest at its center.
The AI act basically has a risk-based approach where stronger regulations are put into those services and algorithms that are deemed to have potentially the strongest negative impact for the citizens.
We have also recently proposed the European Chips Act that aims at boosting European competitiveness and resilience in semiconductor technologies and applications, et cetera.
At the level of funding actions that are broader legislative actions and the involvement of regulatory framework, let me just mention something very important in terms of open Internet, even though sometimes it's not thought about this in these terms but it's, indeed, extremely important.
On December 1st, 2021, the E.U. adopted a new global connectivity strategy, what we call the Global Gateway. Through the Global Gateway, the E.U. will mobilize up to 3 billion investment between 2021 and 2027. This is investment in different connectivity infrastructures and aspects on not only digital but it includes a very strong digital chapter on digital infrastructure.
The Global Gateway initiative is really about empowering and creating trustful partnerships across the globe based on transparency and good government rules. And it has -- and this is what I wanted to stress -- the promotion of the open Internet at its very core. Digital investments of the E.U., digital infrastructure investments, will be from now on intrinsically linked to the open Internet standards and protocols. That's why the gateway really shows the extreme commitment of the E.U. to develop and contribute to the development of the open Internet, also in terms of funding.
On January 26, 2022, so this is last month, a month ago, the Commission also proposed declaration of rights and principles that will guide through the digital transformation in the E.U. But they will also guide the E.U. external policies and vision on digitization by the E.U.
These digital principles cover rights such as placing people at the center of digitization, placing human rights at the center of digitization; supporting solidarity and inclusion; ensuring the freedom of choice online; fostering participation in the digital public sphere; increasing safety, security and empowerment of individuals; and promoting the sustainability of this future.
As you well know, the Commission is a firm supporter of the multistakeholder model. And we are and we will continue to be actively involved in the reflection on how to strengthen the IGF, the IGF+, and make it even more inclusive and relevant.
We are highly committed to implementation of the Digital Roadmap including, of course, the role of the Tech Envoy Office and the actions announced in Our Common Agenda.
We think however that we should work together to make sure that the IGF plays a fundamental role in such implementation. We should really explore the synergies between all these programs of the U.N. and the IGF in a way they will empower each other and also make sure those initiatives progress in a multistakeholder fashion, as the IGF symbolizes and represents and also executes this multistakeholder philosophy and access of Internet governance.
We need more than ever an inclusive IGF where all stakeholders, developing countries, companies, et cetera feel really empowered to bring their perspective on how the free and open Internet should be earned with a view of bridging the digital divide in the process that truly empowers people in local ecosystems.
The open Internet has always been but will be even more a key theme for the European Union in the following years. While digitization is probably irreversible, the open and fragmented Internet is not -- that's why we should not take it for granted.
Let me conclude by saying that we very much look forward to the IGF and also take this opportunity to thank the MAG, the new MAG chair, and the IGF secretariat for the tremendous work that is carried out to ensure an inclusive and relevant forum and, from now on, combining in a very productive way this online and face-to-face exchanges. Thank you so much.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Esteve, and thank you for the briefing and thank you also for the strong support you all have shown us through the years.
Next on the list is from CGI Brazil, Vinicius Santos.
>>CGI BRAZIL: Hi Chengetai. Do you hear me?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we do.
>>CGI BRAZIL: Very good, very good. Thank you.
Hi to everyone. It is a pleasure to be here once again to present some initiatives of our organization. Thank you to the IGF Secretariat and the MAG for this opportunity to be here. And I'm here on behalf of Professor Hartmut Glaser who is the executive secretary of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee in Brazil.
Well, I will just do some overview on our activities since our last update a year ago in this same event. So let me begin with the working groups of CGI.BR.
Our multistakeholder working groups have been working on different initiatives and projects, ranging from general aspects and also broader policy discussions, such as draft bills presented by the Mission of Congress in Brazil, but also overarching issues such as application blocking, which is a very hot topic in Brazil right now because of specific cases and situations with applications.
Brazil has also been having an intense discussion on the preparations for the 2022 Mission (indiscernible) actions and putting up measures to combat misinformation and harmful content within social network and messaging apps. CGI is also taking part in these dialogues and helping to frame best possible guidelines to move forward; also by partnering with some public authorities supporting parliamentarians, ministries, electoral court, prosecution authorities, and also the national Data Protection Authority among others.
I would like also to mention our initiative that is the CGI .BR book series which is something we care a lot. In this sense, we have been increasing the efforts on translating important Internet governance materials to Portuguese to reach the -- not only the Brazilian audience but also a wider Portuguese-speaking audience. And in the sense, we have established some partnerships. One of them was with the Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network, and we have already translated two of their publications, two very important publications of the set of publications that they have. And also, we have a third one that is already moving forward and goes to having a launch soon.
Other than that, we are also very close to releasing a new opinion piece which is a translation of the book authored by Dr. Carolina Aguerre on the history of the creation of LACNIC, which will also be a very good release.
We also would like to comment on our Internet Governance Collection Initiative which is something we first presented in the IGF 2017 in Geneva, I think, if I remember correctly. And it continues to grow year after year. It consists of a set of materials bought by or donated to CGI.BR, and also a digital repository and many other things related to the initiative. The committee has also been putting on some relevant efforts on documentation and archiving initiatives, such as a research led by Institute for Research on Internet and Society, a Brazilian think tank, which deals with Internet governance information and envisages a glossary as an output. So we think this is something very relevant for the organization of the information about Internet governance, mainly in our local context but also something that could feed wider initiatives.
Well, two years ago, we reported to you that the Internet exchange points operated by NIC.BR who are peaking 11 terabits of peak Internet traffic, then 16 last year, and more recently we had 20 terabits. This result comes from the growth of the Internet ecosystem in Brazil with an increasing number of companies accessing content providers interested in exchanging traffic, with special regards to the role played by small and regional ISPs in the national providers.
Well, the pandemics are still out there and from our side we continue to implement members to protect the staff and all the people involved in CGI.BR activities, but of course things are getting better and gradually we also expect to be able to advance some other onsite activities soon, as soon as possible, at least.
Well, this was not exhaustive. It was just an overview of our activities. We actually have a bunch of other projects and initiatives going on, things related to cybersecurity, statistics, Internet in schools, a new initiative related to together on the Internet, and many other discussions that are going on. And I would be glad to respond to any question, and I'm available to any further interaction anyone would like to have.
Well, this was the update. I would like to thank, once again, the IGF Secretariat and the MAG for this opportunity. Thank you, Chengetai. Thank you, Anja. Congratulations to Paul to the new position as well as the others have remembered. And I wish you all a very fruitful meeting and hope you and your family and friends are well and safe.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much for the update.
Next I think I'll -- it's going to be International Telecommunication Union, Sadhvi.
>>ITU: Thank you very much. And hopefully you can hear me?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>ITU: Perhaps you can also see me now.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. Yes, we can.
>>ITU: Thanks. Thank you.
Hi, everyone, and a very good afternoon to you all from Geneva. My name is Sadhvi, and I work with the ITU.
Let me first convey on behalf of ITU our thanks to the IGF and MAG for giving us the opportunity to contribute to the meeting today. And of course our congratulations to you all and the government of Poland on organizing a very successful forum last year as well.
As in previous years, ITU did participate at the highest level at IGF, and it organized a number of different sessions, including those related to the WSIS Forum, the Equals Initiative, and the multistakeholder network launched last year with the Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Technology and UNDP. We look forward to continuing our active engagement and collaboration this year as well. And of course taking the opportunity to briefly present a number of activities that we organized recently and which will be of interest for the discussion today.
Perhaps I'll start with December 2021 where we successfully concluded the sixth world telecom slash ICT Policy Forum with a number of key policy outcomes relating to a wide range of new and emerging telecom slash ICT issues. And following that, in 2022, we have three major conferences that are usually held once every four years but have had to be compacted into 2022 because of COVID, but we'll start with the World Telecommunications Standardization Assembly in Geneva next week which will define the next spirit of study for the ITU telecommunications standardizing sector. And this will be followed by the World Telecommunication Development Conference in June, which sets the strategies and objectives for the development of telecom slash ICTs providing future direction and guidance to the development sector, the ITU development sector.
And finally, in September we'll have the ITU plenipotentiary conference, which, as the organization's highest policy-making body, sets the general policies for the Union and also elects senior management. The Member States of Council, which is a governing body, and members of the Review Regulations Board.
Also starting next month is the WSIS Forum which last year had hosted more than 250 sessions and had a cumulative attendance of over 50,000 participants from 185 countries.
And in January this year as well, the Always Online AR for Good launched the neural network, an AI powered community networking and content platform aimed at accelerating innovation and collaboration to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. And in the meantime, we also have also been actively contributing to various tracks of the U.N. Secretary-General's Our Common Agenda, including the one on connectivity and capacity development.
So let me stop here. More information on all of these initiatives and activities and more is available on our website. And of course I'm here to answer any questions or to provide any further information. All stakeholders are welcome to join us for all these various activities and projects, and we look forward to working together.
So with that, thank you for your time and your consideration, for listening to me today. We remain committed to the IGF process and look forward to continuing our work together.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Sadhvi, and we will continue to cooperate.
Next it's going to be ICC/BASIS, Timea.
>>ICC/BASIS: Thank you, Chengetai. Thank you, everyone.
Changing hats now, I've been talking today quite a bit, but I'm changing hats now from just ICC/BASIS to talk to you about the International Chamber of Commerce and our work on digital issues as a whole.
For those of how don't know, ICC is the institutional representatives of over 45 million companies and about a hundred countries around the world, and our mission is to make business work for everyone every day, everywhere. We do this through a unique mix of advocacy, solutions, and standard setting. We promote international trade, responsible business conduct, and a global approach to regulation in addition to providing dispute resolution services.
Our members include many of the world's leading companies, SMEs but also business associations and local chambers of commerce. So quite a varied membership there.
And we also represent the interest of business at the highest levels of intergovernmental decision-making such as the World Trade Organizations, the G20 or the United Nations where we hold observer status to the UNGA since 2016.
So ICC works on a number -- in the policy field on a number of issues. We have 12 so-called policy commissions that work on issues that are important to business, everywhere from taxation to trade facilitation to anti-corruption to competition, and of course digital. So we're not a purely digital organization or purely digital-focused organization, but we do put a lot of emphasis and interest into the digital economy issues.
Our commission on the digital economy has published last year, early last year, a paper on our principles and priorities which really sets the work in which ICC wishes to engage with digital policy issues. And through that paper we established for the near future three main areas where we want to focus our work, and these are connectivity and access, cybersecurity, and data governance. These are not new issues, but we feel that all three warrant a lot more focus. And of course you will see them mentioned by me also in the IGF context because those are also, surprise, surprise, the three top issues that the community had selected as the main focus issues, as you saw earlier today.
So the way we work in ICC is of course we work with our member companies to set our positions and views around these policy discussions, but we also work to establish partnerships, conversations, and to advocate some of the private sector voice and expertise in intergovernmental, international, multistakeholder conversations. So we use ICC/BASIS, which is our primary input into Internet governance discussions ever since the meetings in the early 2000s. So we use ICC/BASIS as an advocacy platform so we can bring the voice of the private sector in a lot of these conversations. And IGF is really -- we've seen this since its inception, is the prime forum to do that.
So what I want to do today is really give you a quick overview of what we've done last year on these three topics and how we link that up with our engagement at the IGF. And then just give you a little preview of what's in plan for this year so that if anything sounds familiar or interesting to you, we can see how we can collaborate in the future.
On the topic of cybersecurity, which was the most prolific topic for us last year, we launched two papers. First of all, a policy primer which truly just came together to -- as a repository of issues that present the highest interest and concern for business vis-a-vis cybersecurity matters. And the plan is to follow up that policy primer with dedicated issue briefs on a number of topics.
The first issue brief was launched publicly at the IGF last year. We call it Call for Government Action on Cybersecurity. And that addresses the expanding cybersecurity risk landscape with which businesses must contend every day and also looks at the wider economic and social impact of cybersecurity threats on the business community primarily but also the communities, governments, and societies more widely. And the paper also outlines the urgent steps that governments must take to curb cyber threats and shield their citizens and economies from the destructive consequences of cyberattacks.
So we launched a statement at the IGF, and we are working on a series of other statements that we want to do this year. The one that is in most complete status and we hope to launch it by the end of this first quarter will provide recommendations for business and governments regarding the implementation of cyber norms, of the existing cyber norms, for irresponsible state behavior online, and also to work on cybercrime rules and international cooperation to curb cybercrime. And we hosted a wide industry roundtable on this latter topic just early this January, and we hope to continue on with that series of roundtables on that topic throughout the year.
Moving on to the topic of connectivity and access, we've worked last year in pulling together a larger compendium of issues that we classify into three main barriers to providing universal connectivity. We group them under financial, technical, and regulatory issues. And we are about to hopefully, by the middle of this year, to launch a comprehensive report on that.
We worked with the IGF. One of our sessions at last year's very successful IGF was on this topic, and so we gathered a lot of interesting input from those who participated in that workshop, and that will be reflected in our paper that is -- we're hoping to be able to launch by the middle of this year.
And then the third issue is on data, which our mission here is to work on establishing or re-establishing trust on international data flows. That is visibly being eroded these days over concerns for many issues. The first one that we picked that we want to address is the issue of government demands to private sector-held personal data. And the reason why we picked this topic as the first one to address in the myriad of issues that concern data is because we were encouraged by ongoing work in the OECD to define global principles on these issues. So the private sector together with ICC is working on providing evidence and input into that work, and that defines our main work on data this year. And we've held a workshop on this topic as well at the IGF last year. Again, a very successful, very lively conversation. So we thank you for that opportunity.
So that's basically the substantive work that ICC is doing and will continue to do this year.
One more thing that I wanted to mention was our way to group all this work into a campaign that we -- that we launched around the IGF from our booth and in person there in Katowice, but also online, and we called it a Campaign to Keep the Internet Whole. And we translated it into three major actions that we -- that we worked on, basically keeping the Internet open, keeping the Internet flowing, and keeping the Internet safe. So issues on connectivity, data flows, and security. And also we added a fourth element to that, to keep the Internet ours, which is our way of saying that we need to continue with the multistakeholder model for Internet governance.
We want to keep those calls open throughout this year and to work with the IGF and you all in that spirit. We're ready to support the IGF as we've done so far, both in, you know, engagement and also financially. So we're looking forward to working with you all this year and going forward.
Thank you for listening to me.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Timea. And we do, too. Next we're going to Internet Cooperation for the Assignment of Names and Numbers. We'll start off with Adam Peake.
>>ICANN: Thank you very much, Chengetai. Adam Peake for the record. I'm also a member of the MAG. And thank you for -- thank you that.
I'll make a brief introduction, and then pass it over to my colleague Veni. Really I just wanted to say remembering the IGF in 2021, I just wanted to say thank you again to our hosts, government of Poland, the U.N. of course, and you, Chengetai, and your team.
And thank you Anriette Esterhuysen for her outstanding work as the MAG chair, the great steps she made of furthering the evolution of the IGF.
Thank you, Anriette. It was a pleasure to work with you.
And, of course, congratulations, Paul. Welcome. Welcome as the new MAG chair. ICANN is very pleased to extend our support to you in this role and, of course, as a member of the MAG, which you'll be taking care of.
We've continued our meetings online. We've held six online meetings now. Many, many thousands of hours of work developing policy for the domain name system, furthering technical developments, and it's a challenge.
Our next meeting will be held from -- well, the preparatory stage has started now. And we will be holding another meeting for three or four days online progressing this work for furthering the evolution of the domain name system and the policies that underpin the Internet.
And we're very much looking forward to moving this to a hybrid format. We'll be learning from the IGF experience and passing our experience on to the IGF so we can learn how to work in this inclusive, global process so that people can participate whether they're online or in person. So we are very much looking forward to participating in the IGF in 2020. We'll continue our support for the IGF secretariat. And we're particularly proud of our work across the African continent and the strong African ICANN community. Very, very pleased to be able to work with our kind hosts from Ethiopia for the IGF in 2022.
And with that, I think I'll pass along to Veni, Veni Markovski. Thank you very much.
>>ICANN: Thank you, Adam. And I hope you can hear me.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>ICANN: I was reading my own transcript.
Thank you, Chengetai. And, hello to my former colleagues from the MAG. I'm happy to report that a couple of years later I am feeling much better, not being -- not spending time there. But I wanted to add to what Adam said, a couple of things we've been doing within the government and intergovernmental organization engagement team.
We have continued publishing papers. We're going to share in a bit in the chat a link to our publication page where you can see everything that we have published through the years. The latest paper is a China country-focused paper report. People who are interested in all the Internet policies, national, international, that China has in the last few years will enjoy it, I hope. And obviously if you have comments, just address them to Adam or myself.
We also have been following a lot what's happening at the United Nations and at the ITU with regards to issues that can touch on the ICANN's mission. At the U.N., we are following the policies called OEWG, open-ended working group, that is dealing with cybersecurity. It's a four-year program which, I mean, work that will finish in 2025 just before the World Summit on Information Society review, WSIS+20, which we will be discussing the future of the IGF.
We are also following the ad hoc committee that is drafting a new cybercrime convention. And it has -- it's starting actually -- its first substantive meeting -- session is next week.
We're also following the big conferences that the ITU is having this year, the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly next week and the following one and then the World Telecommunications Development Conference in June in Africa and then the plenipotentiary meeting in September and October in Bucharest, Romania.
We do that because those organizations are touching every once in a while on ICANN's mission, so we have to make sure that we follow and we inform our community but also the broader Internet community about what's happening at those venues.
There is a lot of conversations going on there. I don't know how many of you are following them. But if not, please do read our papers -- and the link is already in the chat -- because you may be surprised to see how many countries are now interested in international-related and also national-related policy and are talking about the need for changes at the IGF, changes at the way the Internet is governed, et cetera. It's fascinating stories that is happening at multiple places at the same time. And we are trying to keep track of everything and keep you guys informed.
So thank you for the invitation. And, again, if any questions, stay in touch.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Veni. And thank you as well to Adam.
Next we have from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, Lucia Russo.
>>OECD: Good morning, good afternoon, good evening. So thank you very much for this ability to give a brief update today about the OECD activities in Internet-related governance.
So I will just give a brief update on our three main initiatives. So as you may recall, we are now in the third phase of our project on ongoing digital.
So the third phase focuses on -- I'm sorry. I have a problem with my paper -- on data governance issues. And we have adopted as a key deliverable in October last year the recommendation on enhancing access to and sharing of data, which is the first international agreed-upon set of principles and policy guidelines on how governments can maximize the ecosystem and benefits of all types of data.
And this recommendation intends to help governments develop continuing data governance policies and frameworks to unlock the potential benefits of data across regional sectors and also to enforce trust across the data ecosystem.
So this project is spanning over two years. And we have models looking at different aspects of data governance such as data stewardship, measuring the value of data, data shaping things and markets. And we will keep you posted on the deliverables that are published on our website.
A second highlight I would like to focus on is that we -- as we speak, actually the third day of the second OECD international conference on AI in Work, Innovation, Productivity and Skills, is taking place. And it's a conference that is in its second edition and will take place until Friday, 25th of February. So I invite you all to have a look at the impressive lineup of speakers and sessions. Very interesting sessions.
And, also, you can watch replays of previous days on the website of the conference.
And here yesterday the OECD launched the OECD framework for classifying AI systems, which is a result of two years of work led by the network of OECD experts. More than 60 experts have contributed to the development of this classification system which has also been subject to testing and private consultation and has received over 800 contributions from the public and testing of the framework.
And so what is it? This is a user-friendly framework that allows classifying AI systems according to their policy impact and it helps distinguish AI applications according to their potential impact on individuals, on society, and the planet.
And so what it aims to do is to provide a baseline framework to help support and advance a common understanding of AI metrics and also advance sector-specific frameworks such as in the health care sector. And the next step for this framework is to design an assessment method building on it.
So, again, I invite you to check out the conference website and also the related paper. I can share the link afterwards.
And third, the flagship initiative of the OECD is the approval of the voluntary transparency reporting framework for terrorist and violent extremist content. This reporting framework is also the result of a one-year multistakeholder, consensus-driven process which has seen participation of governments, businesses, civil society.
And what will happen sooner -- I don't have a date. But in March, the OECD will launch -- sorry for the acronym -- the VTRF1.0, which is a Web portal where the conference will be able to submit transparency reports by completing an online questionnaire. And this questionnaire will be available in a public database. And so here again, we encourage that you have a look when it will be available. I will share the information. And also the online content sharing services are invited to test this framework so that we can improve it with action and information that comes from the comments.
And here I conclude my short briefing. And I thank you, once again, for the invitation.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much for the update on the interesting work the OECD is doing. And please do share the links. You can either put them in the chat or send us an email and then we will distribute the links. Thank you.
Next is Council of Europe. Rodica.
>>COUNCIL OF EUROPE: Yes. Good evening. I hope you can hear me. If no, just make a sign.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>COUNCIL OF EUROPE: Okay. So thank you very much for offering the possibility to briefly update on the current work of the Council of Europe relevant to this discussion. I will try to keep it short, but I beg your pardon in advance, if I will go slightly over the time.
Probably most of you are familiar or have been participating actually to some of the organization's work. So you may be aware that the Internet governance's job (indiscernible), which developed and implement an array standard-setting cooperation and awareness-raising activities related to this area.
The division operates under a steering committee and its experts. We have presented the work of the committees previously, including in the 2021 session so I won't go much into that. But maybe just mention among one of the deliverables of the former committees was guidance note on prioritization of public interest content online, which addresses a checklist of reference points, issues of online content creation practices, and related prioritization decisions which are not yet covered by a harmonized Europe-wide regulatory framework.
Among the deliverables of the new three expert committees to be elaborated by 2023 are text offering guidance on countering the spread of online mis- and disinformation through fact checking and platform design solutions in a human right-compliant manner.
On the use of digital tools, including artificial intelligence for journalism, by journalists, and good practices for sustainable media financing and, maybe a bit less relevant here, a draft recommendation on strategic lawsuits against public participation.
On another line, the Council of Europe will also continue its close cooperation with its business partners to promote the adoption of the best human rights standards by private Internet or telecommunication companies. The partnership currently includes 26 major companies and their associations with some new ones joining. We are currently working on the cooperation work plan for the next biennium in this moment.
In terms of cybercrime, work continues on enhanced public-private cooperation across borders for the disclosure of electronic evidence with data protection safeguards. Basically, this is about the new second edition of protocol to the Budapest Convention that will be open for signature on 12th May. This would also be a theme that we would like to tackle in this year's edition. We did it in the past but now that these tools are available, we could take the discussions to another level.
In terms of privacy for the data protection unit, let's say, the Committee of the Convention 108 secretariat, the number one priority is the entering (indiscernible) of the Modernized Convention by 2023. This would still require some ratifications both by member states and other parties. The whole process is already having an impact on Internet governance as it contributes to the convergence of privacy regimes around the globe which will surely intensify once the instruments come into force.
So in terms of topics, we could bring to the table of discussion are also the level of privacy on the Internet, interoperability of privacy regimes, impact of data protection legislation on the functioning of the Internet, how to enforce privacy rights across jurisdiction, which data transfer regime for the future to facilitate data flows while protecting individuals in the digital age.
And, finally, as you know, Council of Europe is carrying on important work on AI regulation. In 2021, the ad hoc committee on artificial intelligence, CCAI, finalized its staff by submitting to the committee of ministers a document outlining the possible relevance of a legal framework on artificial intelligence based on the Council of Europe's standards. The outcomes of this work is a basis of an appropriate framework on the development, design and application of AI systems.
The work will be undertaken by the new committee on artificial intelligence which is composed of member states and other international actors. Internally, it will be complimented by sectoral approaches working closely with other bodies of the Council of Europe which will integrate the AI aspect in their work.
Of course, the particularity of this legal framework is that it will naturally focus on the aspects of AI related to the respect of human rights, functioning of democracy, and the observance of rule of law which will also be complementary to the E.U. proposed regulation.
I will stop here. Thank you.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Oh, I'm muted. I'm so sorry. Thank you very much, Rodica, very much for our presentation and update.
Next on my list I do have the Association for Progressive Communication, Paula Martins.
>>APC: Thank you, Chengetai. Can you hear me well?
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes, we can.
>>APC: So thank you for the opportunity to exchange some of the plans for this year with you.
APC remains very much committed to engage with the IGF and its community throughout the intersessional work and during, of course, the global meeting late 2022. And the focus of our engagement this year will be the work on gender, environmental sustainability, connectivity, and meaningful access and digital cooperation and the strengthening of the IGF.
But in relation to gender, APC will be working broadly on gender disinformation, on gender and cybersecurity this year. We know of the work of the BPFs in this regard and plan to continue our engagement with the BPF on gender but also increase our engagement with the BPF on cybersecurity.
On gender information, we'll be working this year with the United Nations, the U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of expression to carry out consultations and research to better frame this concept and create the responses to it.
On cybersecurity, we are putting together a toolkit to engage with policymakers at the national level on the introduction of gender recommendations to national cybersecurity strategies. And we're trying to link this very much with some international discussions that are taking place in this regard, including some discussions on gender that are taking place as part of the open-ended working group that was already mentioned earlier today.
On environmental sustainability, we are working -- well, again, we are -- we are committed to continue participating in the policy network, should it be confirmed. And we do recommend it to be. And we look forward to discussing its impacts so far and concrete ways in which we can connect to policy-making spaces and follow-up measures on the report from last year.
We think it would be interesting to propose some level of coordination between youth and the CODES Coalition which has been facilitating the thematic focus area on environment as part of the digital cooperation process.
For APC, key thematic areas for 2022 in relation to environmental concerns would be environmental and human rights transparency and impact assessment.
Circular economy, we have put together a guide and we will be organizing consultations and discussions in relation to get to very concrete recommendations.
And we'll be working on applying the family principles of the Internet to the developmental, environmental justice principles for the Internet. And, of course, all IGF spaces will be safe spaces for discussing these ideas.
On connectivity and meaningful access, we look forward to, again, the continuation of the policy network should it be confirmed. We consider it is crucial to coordinate its work with the relevant roundtables that are part of the digital cooperation process in this regard, and also some recent multistakeholder initiatives under way at the ITU; in particular, the Partners to Connect coalition, where we will be engaging to discuss the concept of meaningful access and manners to (indiscernible) alternative policies in this regard; for example, for the promotion of local and community-centered solutions.
Another central aspect of our work this year, it's a project that we are calling "imagining the futures of Internet governance." We had this last year, organized in the middle of sessions, including during the past IGF Katowice meeting, on this -- as part of this project.
This year we are launching a series of research components as part of this project, and we'll continue to create spaces for the discussion of some key themes that include identifying and discussing models of governance, Internet governance, and examples of effective multistakeholderism. Spaces to take stock and prepare for WSIS+20 with very concrete proposals and organize movement building within civil society boundary. Engaging in the preparation of the Digital Compact led by the U.N. Secretary-General and the Tech Envoy's office. We are really looking forward to bringing the discussion to IGF spaces so the IGF community can contribute to the design of the Digital Compact.
And finally, the strengthening of the IGF itself through following up on some of the recommendations we have been proposing for a while. We have made a series of submissions throughout the years and are submitting now some suggestions for the retreat that will be taking place soon. So these are also some of the priorities for our work throughout the intersessional period for 2022.
I'll stop here, and happy to continue conversations on any of these topics if anyone would like to engage with APC on these plans.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Paula.
Next we will hear from the United Nations Office of the Secretary-General's Envoy on Technology, Jason.
>>OFFICE OF ENVOY ON TECHNOLOGY: Thank you, Chengetai. It's a pleasure to be here and to share -- and to be here for this opening consultation and to share this brief update on behalf of the Office of the Envoy on Technology. My name is Jason Munyan, and I've in this office. And I think some of you have heard this, but for those of you that are not aware, obviously our office continues to prioritize implementation of the Secretary-General's Roadmap for Digital Cooperation. Each of those different thematic areas of the roadmap. So, for example, in the area of universal connectivity, ITU is working to finalize a baseline framework, which has been consulted with multistakeholders, and we're hoping to be able to launch it the coming months.
In the area of capacity building, we are happy at this last IGF to be able to launch a multistakeholder network on capacity building with UNDP and ITU. And we are now working on follow-up on this network, and we welcome further interest by stakeholders to participate.
In the area of digital human rights, one of the recommendations in the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation on digital human rights is a development of guidance on human rights due diligence on the technologies. A draft has been prepared of this guidance and has been circulated to civil society and other stakeholders for input. And this will be discussed further in a dedicated session at RightsCon this summer.
As many of you may be aware, in our Common Agenda there are several related topics to digital human rights; specifically, the action points related to human rights and technology as well as Internet shutdowns specifically, in addition to areas in civil society engagement and youth engagement and others.
And in the area of Internet shutdowns, in addition, the Human Rights Council has called for a paper to be prepared, a report to the Secretary-General on the shutdowns, and that paper is being drafted and inputs are being sought from all stakeholders on this paper.
In the area of digital public goods, many of you may be familiar with the Digital Goods Alliance, which we work closely with. This alliance has announced new Steering Committee members, which includes UNDP, our office, as well as the governments of Germany and Norway.
In the area of global digital cooperation, first and foremost there's the strengthening of the IGF, and our office was pleased to participate in and co-organize several sessions and see a number of you in person at the 2021 IGF. The report is hosted on our website, and we are looking forward to the Expert Group Meeting as well as the announcement of the IGF Leadership Panel which is forthcoming.
In another week, on the 3rd of March, then, the Permanent Mission of Poland will be convening a discussion looking at post IGF briefing to discuss -- summarize the IGF and talk briefly about the Katowice IGF messages.
Our Assistant Secretary-General or I.T. envoy is also scheduled to speak at the High-Level Panel that will take place on WSIS follow-up as part of the session CCD session in March.
As you may be aware, the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation mentions the environment as another key area. And as some of the other speakers have already mentioned, the CODES Coalition was created in addition to the Policy Network on the Environment. And the CODES Roundtable, they convened a roundtable on the 7th of February where they discussed the draft action plan for sustainable planet in the digital age, and we appreciate the input that a number of you have provided. A second round of listening will take place with the broader community, especially member states in the private sector, during the U.N. Environment Assembly in March, and we anticipate to be able to launch the action plan for that coalition at Stockholm 50 in June.
As -- During this week, there have been consultations convened by the president of the General Assembly on our Common Agenda, and yesterday and Monday was the third thematic cluster on promoting peace, international law and digital cooperation, including the Global Digital Compact. And so we appreciate and will take into account the remarks and input that were provided both during the discussions in last two days as well as written contributions. And we will consider these as we prepare for consultations on the Global Digital Compact. And obviously as those are organized and as there are more details, we'll be sure to let you all know and look forward to your engagement throughout this process.
So that's just a quick summary of the highlights of our office, and appreciate the opportunity to join this Open Consultation and share this briefing with you.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Jason.
Next we have from the World Intellectual Property Organization Victor Owade.
>>WIPO: Thank you very much, Chengetai.
Good evening to you all, dear colleagues, from Geneva. I'm grateful for this opportunity to provide a brief update on the work of the World Intellectual Property Organization in 2022 relating to the Internet governance.
Before I share these quick updates regarding WIPO's IGO-related work in 2022, let me first begin by affirming that WIPO is strongly committed to the IGF, and this commitment spans across many years and covers many IGF mandates. So in this context, I'd like to take this community to commend the entire MAG for their continuous leadership and for the IGF Secretariat for their tireless efforts as well in facilitating our engagement in this important process throughout the years.
That said, the first update which I wish to share relates to the successful IGF meeting which took place in Poland under which, we can all agree, were particularly challenging and difficult circumstances.
In Katowice, WIPO organized an interesting session focusing on a theme of video games and its uniting power. The video games industry in an important driver for innovation, and it relies on all forms of intellectual property, and this is one of the industries which has not only remained resilient during the pandemic but has also grown.
There are many positive stories to tell relating to video games including how they offered spaces for artists to continue performing within virtual worlds during the pandemic. It's a topic that's especially interesting to the youth both from the professional side of young game developers on the one hand and professional eSports players on the other. And importantly, video games demonstrate that -- in an interesting and positive way, the benefits of intellectual property for everyone everywhere.
In addition, the topic was especially relevant in Poland and other Central European and Baltic states, and this is because the region is a fast-growing video game industry, has a fast-growing video game industry, and it contributes a lot to their national economic development. So, therefore, based on the interest generated from the IGF event in Katowice, WIPO plans to build further on this by organizing a visit in Geneva of representatives of the video game industry to further explore how we can support this innovation -- how we can further support innovation and creativity in this evolving ecosystem.
The second update which I wish to provide relates to WIPO's work on frontier technologies. Since the end of 2019, WIPO has been organizing open, inclusive, and multistakeholder dialogues to discuss the impact of frontier technologies on all IP rights and to bridge the existing information gap in this fast-moving and evolving field.
The next WIPO conversation will take place on April 5 and 6, and will consider new technologies and assess their possible uses in the administration and registration of IP as well as consider the disruption they may cause to the IP system. These conversations aim to encourage information sharing and exchange of views across all stakeholders. Registration is open to all on the WIPO website. And I invite and encourage those of you who are interested to please register and attend.
And related to this, WIPO is also running a series of webinars on copyright infrastructure featuring several speakers from the public and private sector on a range of topics relevant to copyright infrastructure, such as metadata, identifiers, technology solutions, as well as WIPO services in this field.
These webinars again are also open to the general public, and the next one will be held on March 2nd focusing on rights data and identifiers for visual artists.
Again, registration is open, and Chengetai, I'll make sure to send you the links to all of this so you can share it with the wider community.
And finally, the third update relates to WIPO's work on building confidence and security in the Internet governance ecosystem. Here, WIPO's arbitration and mediation center has, in the last five years, seen quite a marked increase in copyright and content-related mediation and arbitration cases. So bearing this in mind, we conducted a survey from 2019 to 2020 on the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, ADR mechanisms, specifically targeting such disputes in order to help develop a fact-based understanding of digital copyright and content-related disputes across industries and to assess as well the current use of ADR mechanisms as compared to court litigation.
That survey was completed by close to 1,000 copyright stakeholders from over 120 countries, and this includes companies, collective management organizations, creators, as well as legal representatives. Hence, in 2022, this year, the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center is building on the results of this survey, and will be undertaking specifically work in terms of developing alternative model ADR submission agreements to facilitate the negotiation of licensing agreements for distribution of content and the adjustment of existing licensing terms concerning remuneration from online platforms.
It will also undertake work to adapt the WIPO expert determination rules to reflect best international practices for the resolution of user-generated content disputes by online content sharing service providers.
Colleagues, therefore, these are just some quick highlights of WIPO's work related to Internet governance which I wanted to share. And in view of time, let me stop here. And thank you for your attention. And of course I wish you all excellent deliberations for the rest of the Open Consultations meeting.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Victor. Very interesting workstreams. Thank you.
I've reached the end of my list. I did see a message somewhere about ISOC. I don't know if there's somebody from ISOC who wants to make a brief intervention.
>>ISOC: Yeah, thank you, Chengetai. I'm here. I'm Agustina Callegari, Senior Manager of Community and External Engagement at the Internet Society. The Internet Society is a longstanding partner of the IGF and supportive of national and regional IGF initiatives currently through the foundation. So I thank the opportunity to provide an update, and I promise I will be quick.
So let me start by sharing the focus of our work for this year. At the annual 2021, the Internet Society launched its action plan 2022, which provides a roadmap to keep the Internet a resource for everyone everywhere.
Firstly, the Internet Society is working to grow the Internet. Still, nearly half of the population is not connected. Community network, fostering peer infrastructure are still part of our work this year, and we are also working on exploring low-earth orbit satellite solutions. We are also continuing providing meaningful, reliable and understandable data about health availability and evolution of the Internet through our Expose platform. Secondly, we continue working to make the Internet stronger by maintaining and protecting its critical properties. Encryption, routing security are part of our work project portfolio this year as well, and we are exploring the concept of digital sovereignty, and together with our community we are trying to develop a policy position about it. And the IGF of course is a key platform to have open discussions about these key issues.
Thirdly, as our impact is amplified when we empower today's Internet champions and tomorrow's Internet advocates, this year we are going to continue offering the Internet governance for -- program for young people, the IGF young ambassador program. I know that some of you might be familiar with it, to promote young people to get involved at the IGF.
We will also continue with another program that we launched last year that is called early career fellowships. This year we are launching a mid-career Fellowship Program as well to continue empowering Internet champions.
And last year we also started a platform called learning at ISOC, our training and development program that gives people all over the world valuable skills and knowledge they need to become, again, Internet leaders and advocates of tomorrow. So I will post that on the chat for all of you to check the opportunities.
And as regards the IGF itself, as I said before, we are longstanding partners and supporters, and we believe that the IGF is an important platform for addressing existing and emerging Internet policy issues in a multistakeholder fashion. So we will be actively participating in the fora this year.
And as we have highlighted in our submissions, we are also aware that there are expected changes that the IGF could go through in the coming year, and in this context, we continue recommending involving the IGF community and the MAG in all the phases of the discussions as any changes should be discussed in an open and multistakeholder fashion and is a tradition of this space.
So that's everything from my side. Feel free to reach out if you have any comments or questions. And I thank you very much for the opportunity to provide an update.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Thank you very much, Agustina. Thank you.
Before I hand it back to the chair, is there any other organization that wants to give an intervention?
I'll just give that a four count. Or anybody I've missed out? I know I skipped over a few people at the beginning.
And raise your hand if there's any.
So I'll take that that we've got everybody and hand it back to our chair for the discussion and questions.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you, Chengetai. And thanks to all of the guest speakers.
And I'd just ask if there are interventions from the floor at this point in time.
>>JUTTA CROLL: Yes. Thank you for giving me the floor again.
I just -- If you allow, I just would like to have a short remark on the Digital Services Act.
As Esteve said before, the Digital Services Act will regulate very large online platforms, and that is only those platforms that have more than 45 million users in the EC -- in the EU.
But as the Digital Services Act overrides national legislation, we will lose a degree of child protection that we have already achieved in many countries. And you may have recognized that we heard before that child online safety was given high priorities among the issues for Internet governance and for the IGF 2022.
If the DSA comes into draft as it is now, the platforms that have less than 45 million users will no longer be obliged to their duty of care for child online safety. There is no obligation to them when the DSA comes into force as it is drafted now.
We do think that this issue cannot be solved by referring to Article 3 of the U.N. CRC child's best interest, only in a recycle of the DSA as it is now drafted.
So we are definitely asking the European Commission, sorry, in the dialogue to put attention to this effect that the DSA will have in child online safety in the future. Thank you so much for listening.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you very much for that intervention.
Anyone else have anything they'd like to add to the floor before we close? All right.
Well, I want to thank all of you for participating today. It's been a very information-filled journey over the last several hours. And I think it's been a great opportunity to get ourselves level set as to what the important issues are, what the community has been thinking about, and what we will need to do to put the IGF together for this coming year as we start our work tomorrow unpacking all of the information we learned today.
Anriette, do you want to offer something? For some reason you're on my screen looking like you're asking for the floor.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: And also Nnenna.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Nnenna.
>>NNENNA NWAKANMA: Hello, everyone. I hope you can hear me. I am here.
I have listened all through, and I was in meetings this evening. Since you are going into your sessions tomorrow, I would like to make a plea to the MAG Internet.
My name is Nnenna. I come from the Internet. I'm an advocate for the World Wide Web Foundation.
I want to say two things. Yesterday I did make a statement during the consultation on -- the Open Consultation on the Common Agenda specifically on the process and inclusion and civil society participation in the Global Digital Compact.
And I wanted to share that there is a platform of civil society organizations in collaboration with IGF civil society co-chairs that we exchange. We talk and about a hundred civil society organizations are on that platform. And that was the message I took to the U.N. yesterday.
Just so you know that there is that civil society platform that exists, that we hope can collaborate more with the national, regional IGF initiatives.
The second thing that I would like to call the attention of the MAG on is on looking further than this year. I know that we are looking at intersessional work this year, but I think that we might want to lift our head just one bit, one degree higher to actually target the summit for the future in September 2023 because that is a big time line for the Global Digital Compact and digital cooperation itself.
I do take cognizance of the reports that colleagues have shared here. So two things. Please note there's a civil society platform that we will encourage to be engaged with national, regional IG initiatives and that there is the Summit for the Future in September 2023.
And I think that this is a good time while the IGF engages on the Global Digital Compact on the digital cooperation and on the Common Agenda itself to have that Summit for the Future in view when we discuss. Thank you very much.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: And thank you very much.
Anyone else would like to make an intervention?
All right. Then I'd ask Chengetai and the secretariat to just give us a refresher of tomorrow's logistics for those of us who are participating.
>>CHENGETAI MASANGO: Yes. Thank you, Chair.
So tomorrow is the first day -- you can hear me, right? Sometimes I don't press enough buttons.
So tomorrow is the first day of the MAG meeting. Observers are welcome, but, of course, the preference will be given to the MAG to speak because this is the first of the two days where we will try and discuss everything that we've heard today. And everything else that has been submitted as well, all the written submissions, et cetera. And hopefully we will come out of it with some solid decisions, which you can see on the agenda what the desired outputs are.
So we are going to start at 1300 hours UTC. And the first thing after the opening of the meeting will, of course, be a recap of the discussions today. The first thing is about the issues and themes. And then we're going to try and narrow down the choices and hopefully come up with some themes for this year.
And then after that, for the afternoon, we will also go through the overall program and structure of the IGF for this year just to see if we want to make any changes. This includes the formats, the flow of the program, et cetera, to see if we can do anything.
And we also have to just -- I think it will be good just to look at the venue again to see what is an offer because some of the rooms we can -- I mean, it's just like here at UNOG. These rooms are not like we had in Germany where we can move things around very easily. Everything is fixed more or less, so we have to work around that and plan around that as well.
And then, of course, the discussion about the sessions. And it's always very good to make the decisions now about number of sessions and type of sessions now than in July when we -- after the meeting, at least before we see the proposals because there's always this -- you know -- and it's very understandable that we have to incorporate everything that was submitted to us but then there's always been this other competing argument that we have more focus. So that's another thing we're going to be discussing tomorrow and see what the advice of the MAG is on that.
So that's basically what it is. And, also, the selection criteria and process. We have heard a few interventions today about the selection criteria and the process. And I think I heard one or two comments that this might -- it might be time to look at it more carefully and see whether or not it's not just an improvement but radically change it a little bit. But that's a discussion that we're going to have tomorrow.
And not to say any names, but Courtney was one of those who said something that I really did take notice on.
I think that's it, Chair. Back to you.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: Thank you. And I would encourage all of you to reflect as you go through the rest of your day or evening on what we've heard today and come prepared to further the discussion into the 2022 event.
If there isn't any other call for intervention, then I will ask for closure of the meeting until 1300 tomorrow.
>> Thank you, bye-bye.
>> NNENNA NWAKANMA: I was saying bye.
>> All right. See you.
>> Bye, everyone.
>>CHAIR MITCHELL: We will see you tomorrow morning.