Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/wgig/public_html/igf/website8/web/cms/libraries/cegcore2/gcloader.php on line 63
2015 11 12 WS 169 Building Internet Observatories: approaches and challenges Workshop Room 4 FINISHED
 Welcome to the United Nations | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in João Pessoa, Brazil, from 10 to 13 November 2015. 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 to understanding the proceedings at the event, but should not be treated as an authoritative record. 




>> DIEGO CANABARRO: We are about to start in 50 seconds.  So good afternoon.  Welcome you all to this roundtable.  First of all, before introducing myself, I would like to commend the great work of the United Nations Office in Geneva.  They could switch rooms while the IGF was on the fly, and we actually now have a much more suitable table for our discussions.  And my name is Diego and I work as an Expert Advisor to the Board of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee and one of the things that I take care of is what is called the Brazilian Internet Observatory. 

I will have more opportunity to speak about this.  And for this I know if we thought of proposing this workshop because we decided that talking to some of our peers that we decided that it would be great to put on the same table for discussions very different projects, very different initiatives with different focuses so that we could try to start talking a bit about collaboration between these different projects and initiatives.

The notion of collaboration and jointed work by different projects and observatories is not a new one.  Some people who are here on this table, they have a lot of experience in that enterprise, but we actually thought it would be great to give this idea another opportunity and another IGF, and we invited some very nice people that you will know right away.  So I would like to begin with a sentence, which was actually set by Stefaan last week in which it says, we all have initiatives that try to cope with the distributed ecosystem of the Internet and Internet Governance, which is highly fragmented, and we should try to avoid the fragmentation of those initiatives that is try to deal with the fragmentation of Internet Governance.

So, we prepared this workshop.  Is it a collaborative effort of all these institutions that you guys see on the screen now.  We have the friends of the IGF, which unfortunately Suzanne Chalmers is not able to be here with us because she is in another different session.  We have the Geneva Internet Platform, Digital Watch.  We have the Global Internet Policy Observatory tool.  We have the Global Cyber Security Capacity Centre.  We have the Internet and Jurisdiction Observatory.  We have the Mapping Global Media Policy and the Net Solutions Map and we have Open Net Korea on the table.  We have Carlos, and me from the Brazilian Internet Observatory, but all of our team is in the audience working to report this session. 

We have the great spiritual and practical leader of this project.  We also have in the remote participation channel the Brazilian Internet Bill of Rights Observatory.  We have the Internet Monitor from the Berkman Center.  We have the World Intermediary Liability Map and also have the perspective observatory from those very nice ladies and gentlemen who are part of the Youth IGF Project. 

So, it is very happy to see them on this table because the main objective of this workshop is already fulfilled and the fact that this conversation can inspire them and can help them to move with their project.

Valentina, did I mention your observatory?  Please, just say the name.  I forgot to put it here.  Valentina joined us ladies and gentlemen.

>> VALENTINA PAVEL:  I'm sure I'll have time to explain more about it.  It's called mapping project, and one of the tracks is building a policy observatory but I'll describe it later.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: I'm sorry for that Valentina.  We value some of the projects who helped preparing this session and we will increase the size of those leaflets as we consolidate the report of the session.  And to sum up just this outline of this workshop, please correct me if I'm wrong or complete the information just raise your hands and do that.  We will divide the session into two main parts.  One a brief introduction and then we will sort of have a brief conversation on why do we need observatories, maps and other efforts?  And then we have a sort of a overview of the current landscape because the Global Internet Policy observe tory is trying to map the federation of this projects.

As soon as we conclude that session, the session, the idea is to start community dialogue.  So we are going to have some 15‑20 minutes of our talking and presenting some information about our projects.  We have to be very, very brief just like one minute and a half or so.  And we are trying to present the niche of our action and the priorities and the current situation that our projects face.

And then, after that, Stefaan is going to lead a unstructured ‑‑ not structured conversation, on the perspective of those users in the audience and also on our perspectives as users of each one's projects.  And then in the end, we will conclude the way we can.  You try to cross a river and you never know at what point you're going to reach bank.  And that is it for my part.  I will just like to thank our Consultant to the Brazilian Internet Observatory from ITS Rio.  I forgot mention Joana.  I'm so sorry.  But Joana was one of the leaders in 2014 of this idea of putting different strategies and projects to talk.  And Stefaan used to work for the former Brazilian Internet Observatory when these observatory of the out swords.  So in 2013‑14, CGI decided to put it back to its staff to take care of.

So, after this brief introduction, I will just like to ask if there is any other project that is here, present here or in the audience.  Please join the table.  If you want, please go ahead.

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: My name is ‑‑ (Indiscernible) from Argentina.  I'm here ISOC Ambassador.  Currently I'm working at the Office in Buenos Aires.  We have created there observatory on Human Rights on the Internet recently, because we want to address the issue locally.  We are receiving a lot of complaints about things related to the Internet and we want to start addressing the issues to give citizens solutions.  So I think that workshop is a very good idea.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Great.  Welcome.  So should we proceed right away with the idea of why this is all important?

>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA:  Thank you and good afternoon.  My name is Tereza.  I'm from DiploFoundation and platform and we are running observatory called (Indiscernible)

Thank you Diego, for organizing this, for putting us together.  And let me share with you a few observations from my side about why I think there is a need for exercises like various people here around the table are undertaking we each deal with specific communities and all have our target groups and have our own issues.  We will talk in detail about what is the respective niche of everyone later.  It will be very clear to get the feeling of the commentary of one to each other. 

Now in each of our cases, I would say that our work is reflecting the requests that come from our communities.  Our communities need some contents, easy access, information about digital politics issues.  This is the key.  Yes, Internet Governance is fragmented as such but there is also not one place where you can really get the information that you are after.  You can have a different starting point.  You may be new to the debate in Internet Governance and you need some clear overview, or you're deeply in it and you need to make sure that you do not miss important developments or that you do not miss something going on in the irrespective field of expertise.

What I think is crucial is that there always needs to be adjustment to the specific context.  There is no one‑size‑fits‑all.  Diplomats in Geneva or diplomats in general for instance, which you will hear is one of our target communities, would definitely have different needs than activists, than people from the Private Sector, various Civil Society members, with different advocacy purposes and all of them need a specific source to get this information from.  So that is in my point of view.  Why is there a need for this? The fact we are sitting around this table proves that our trek of the debate is really in this direction.  I wanted to stress that a conversation did not start just here this afternoon with us sitting here.  We are having regular phone calls.  We are really discussing about how to complement each other and how to make it as easy as possible and get the best product as possible for you as a community.  It will be help to hear from you how we can make your lives easier.  I guess you would like to add something, Paul?

>> PAUL FEHLINGER: Yes.  First of all, I would like to say thank you to Diego for having taken the initiative because I think this is in a way, a sort of historic moment that all those different observatories are gathered for the first time around the same table.  Why is it historic development?  Because if you think about it, most of those observatories emerge in the past two or three years so this is actually a very new phenomenon on the Internet Governance space.  And pointed out already, the why question is very easy to answer. 

We have more stakeholders who are involved in Internet Governance debates.  We have new stakeholders who are not as familiar with those issues as the experts agree and formed the early years of internet governs, the core community.  Is there a broader audience of people in the general public interested in those issues and want to keep track of what is happening. 

So, for me the fact that this workshop happens here today is a sign of maturity and for the entire Internet govern ecosystem and as such.  And I think and one notion that I would like to highlight and before we go into the debate, is that I think the real need and benefit of the observatories are to provide or enable what we at the Internet and Jurisdiction Project call, evidence‑based policy innovation.  So that the debates and the Internet Governance space are actually inspired and informed by evidence.  So congratulations for having taken this initiative.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: As we have one minute left in that slot, does anyone like to add any perspective on what is the usefulness of having Internet observatories, maps and why actually you guys are involved with that?  So, okay.  I think we should go right away to Kasia who is going to share some results of the work ‑‑ I lost something here.  One second.  You can use this.  I'm having trouble with my computer.  Don't worry.

>> KASIA JAKIMOWICZ:  So good afternoon everybody.  I am cassia representing Global Internet Policy Observatory and in this scope of government observatory and the project that was, this is a project initiated this year.  We were pursuing a survey as a part of analysis of the possible scenarios of collaboration between initiatives.  And as a result, we going to prepare a report for the regional map and today, I just want to present some first results that will give you some kind of an insight into the landscape of initiatives.

So this is first results, the final results will be published by the end of 2015.  So, if you feel after this presentation that you have something to add that you want your initiative to be included, I welcome you all to take part in the survey itself.  So we invited different initiatives and 16 surveys and the result was ‑‑ can you click on the next one faster?  What the result was that we actually have seen that we are dealing with a variety of stakeholders that represent broad range of organizations. 

You can see at the table the 16 initiatives that responded.  They represent different type of organizations, NGOs and Academia, universities and industry and national and International authorities.  And as you can see, they also represent different types of initiatives, like observatories, some of them are repositories and databases.  Some are mapping efforts and we have also a quite big representation of networks and centers of networks. 

So, quite a big representation of academia projects.  As for global coverage is concerned, as you can see, it is quite broad.  We have some initiatives that focus on specific regions that focus on America, Africa and initiatives that focus on global coverage and it is a majority of initiatives that we surveyed. 

As for target group itself as you will see, also very broad.  There are initiatives that talk to everybody and policymakers and society and media in general users but also initiatives that that have focus target groups like for example Digital Watch that focuses on diplomats and focusing on research and observatories and the Internet that focuses on community.  As for scope of coverage, what we tried to present to show you very briefly all this initiatives are also covered here at the table.  Different scopes so some of them focus on the Internet Governance or even very specific internal governance but there are also initiatives that with broader scope than Internet Governance itself. 

And from all of these scopes, we see that we could see security and trust issues most prevailing subject of focus for all of them.  Of course there are initiatives that have other issues but this one is the most and this is very interesting and that was mentioned before that most of the initiatives are very young.  So as you can see, most were founded after 2012.  And they are actually very small so most of them are below five people.  So actually, 70% of initiatives surveyed have less than five people involved.  And very often those people work on a voluntary basis or are assigned part‑time to the project from the home institution.  So it is kind of obvious that as a result, financial sustainability of initiatives and lack of resources is one of the big concerns.

And this is also why it is so important to achieve synergies and collaborators, not just with ICANN.

And just for a little bit of insight on what the initiatives are dealing with, so, it is not all about providing access to information.  That is the basic thing.  But, a lot of initiatives actually focus on evidence‑based policy and trends in the digital world and ambition, a lot of them as a strategy has fostering dialogue and multistakeholders process, which is also very important partially ‑‑ part of them focuses on crowd sourcing of knowledge.

And for the variety of content, some of the observers’ initiatives provide documents that also variety of initiatives provides multimedia and other tools as well as social media tools.  And just as a starting point for the discussion, we ask the initiatives that have learned and main challenge that is we are dealing with.  So what are the concerns?  Of course resources are a challenge.  Relevancy of information is a very big challenge.  Diego, can you pass another slide?  Then the need for multilingualism is an ambiguous concern and discussion.  And finally taxonomy and semantics is a issue and topic that most observatories and initiatives is dealing with. 

So, as I said, these are just the initial results of the survey we performed so we are ‑‑ I don't want to take more time.  We were trying to assess whether there is potential for interoperability and synergies and other initiatives as a result, we seen that it is a very nice thing to see.  Can you move one before?  Most of the initiatives really are eager to cooperate and to want to collaborate with each other and with Diplo itself.  And there are different areas of collaboration covered.  We are talking about syndication of content but also common events, training and courses and what is very important, common conceptual cooperation and of course cross communication of activities.  And we also check the potential for interoperability of all the initiatives and it is not so bad.  So, most of the initiatives have displayed some potential for interoperability, which makes it a positive outcome for the future.

So that is the last one.  That is all.  If you feel that your initiative can contribute to the survey and should be included, just please feel free to access the site and fill in the survey.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much.  I would like to raise a protest with the guys from support because we had 5 minutes more on the clock and it was miraculously suppressed.  So, if you could simply put 5 minutes back to the clock?  It would be very, very good for us for the flow of discussions.

So, thank you very much for those introductory remarks.  We should now enter the session in which ‑‑ that screen is very ‑‑ can you see it?

So now we are entering the phase in which all of us are going to speak very briefly about our individual projects.  You will have the link in the aftermath of this session.  And we are going around the table for those projects.  I'm just going to do it randomly because of the browser.  And the general idea here is to get a glimpse on what we have as our main niche of action, the priorities that we have in terms of developing this project and also in working with other programs and initiatives and so on.  So, would you like to begin, rob?  You have one minute and a half.

>> ROB FARIS:  So thank you very much for giving me the opportunity.  I'm working at the Berkman Center with a marvelous team on a project called, the Internet monitor.  The Internet monitor is designed to understand human activity on the Internet and how different government policies influence the shape of the network public sphere in other ways that people collaborate for social and political and economic means on the Internet. 

We work on trying to bridge the gap between data, evidence and research and policy making.  And we see it as a stack of various activities being collecting data, analyzing data, producing reports, and communication and outreach getting this information actually to policymakers.  So we are working on those various steps in the stage so we are collecting available data, curating and sharing that data.  We are collecting new data in the coming weeks and we will announce the launch of a new project that is designed to study Internet censorship and availability around the world.  We produce reports based on that. 

If you look at the net, which is shown on the screen, you'll see we just produced a report on Chinese Twitter.  We have one on Saudi Arabian Twitter going out.  And we also have a tool which I hope you'll experiment with called, the Internet monitor dashboard designed to take different sources of data and to display it and share it with people to essentially be able to tell stories about Internet activity.  I just want to make another pitch and say thank you for this wonderful to see the other people in this same endeavor.  We very much see this as an ecosystem that needs to be built to really achieve the ambitious goals we have. 

So nice to have people in the same road and the wonderful constellation of fellow mappers.  Thanks.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you, rob.  I think we'll go to your right now Stefaan.  You were just like the next one in our process.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  Thank you very much.  So my name is Stefaan, co‑founder and Chief of Research of the Gov Lab, and the project that we have been working on is called the NETmundial Solutions Map, and we started off by doing an extensive user analysis on what is needed in and is the demand and there was a high demand in deed. 

The question was then how do we meet the demand?  From our point of view, we developed a variety of approaches to meet the demand that is out there.  With regard to information and with regard to getting knowledge in a manner that is non‑biassed and also somewhat comprehensive and accurate and up‑to‑date.  So the approach we have taken is the demand can be met by tapping into the vast supply that is in this room and elsewhere that has the information and that is working on Internet Governance but somehow fails to access a platform that can share the data, share their insights, share the information that they have and so the NETmundial solutions map is basically a platform that seeks to map the demand that is out there with the vast supply that is in the Internet Community in the spirit of openness and the spirit of open source and in the spirit of crowd sourcing and so, it is an initiative that really seeks to tap into the intelligence that is out there.

The other unique feature I guess of the map is that it is based upon connections.  So it is not about entering one data point.  It is about connecting data points with other data points so that you know what solution was provided by what actor, what are the other issues that the actor is working on and what region and so on.  So by having those connections, you suddenly see the web of Internet Governance emerging which also can be visualized which is another key feature of the NETmundial solution where you can visualize the connections with regard to an issue, with regard to an actor, with regard to a resource or even at the regional level. 

So we see this very much as a open dataset for the field.  We have an open data Panel a few minutes ago and to a large extent there is a lack of data that then can be extracted, analyzed and so, this is an attempt to tap into the intelligence that is out there in order to provide an open dataset on Internet Governance that can be explored and can ultimately make Internet Governance more distributed and collaborative.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you.  That was perfect in both of you guys can simply work with radio and transmissions in Brazil.  You can speak very, very fast.  Thank you very much.  So next one in line is Valentina with your mapping policy observatory and I have all the three web pages.

>> VALENTINA PAVEL:  Thank you Diego.  And just shortly going to present observatory and how you can explore the different functions it has so the observatory is only part of the activities of the mapping project and it is a policy watch for several European countries which is looking in three main areas, privacy, intellectual property rights and Internet Governance.

So on the main page you are going to find the most relevant and up‑to‑date news, also a nice map of interactive map, showing the latest news around Europe.  And if you go to the news and views section, you will find the table based on several European countries and also two sections on global happenings as well as E.U.-focused news.

I think one of the most useful features of the observatory are the tables, which I'm going to shortly present, but I'm going to take only one as an example to give other times to show their projects. 

So there are three tables based on the areas we are looking at and for example, for the privacy section, we have retention legislation table, which asks several questions like, is retention law in place your country?  What were the government's reactions on this?  Has the constitutional court reacted on the retention law, et cetera?  And all of the three sections have subsets of tables which can be or updated regularly based on what is happening in the country.  But of course, the observatory and these tables are highly customizable so based on the users which are interacting with the observatory, we can of course amend and give more information and news based on interests. 

Also there is another small section on startups which looks at national initiatives in relationship to advising, ICT companies, and web start ups to encourage innovation and competitiveness and market growth.  And that would be all for now.  And if there are any questions, I am happy to answer them later.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Okay.  Thank you very much Valentina.  Tereza?  I think that is you guys, right?

>> TEREZA:  Thank you very much.  You're now on the website of the journey-wide platform, Digital Watch.  So this is one of the pillars of the work of the Internet Platform which is an initiated supported by the Swiss authorities and operated by the DiploFoundation.  We undertake the online pillar of the GIP Incorporation with the Internet Society and it is a strictly neutral and independent resource which should serve as a one‑stop shop for diplomats and other target groups. 

The idea for something like this came when one diplomat came to us at a GAB.  It was a new diplomat that didn't cover Internet Governance issues before and was assigned to cover cybersecurity.  And she was totally lost while covering different issues before.  And asked us, can you please advise me where can I go to get contents information about cybersecurity?  I would need small basic background information but I would also need to know what actors I should watch for?  What are the policy instruments relevant to this topic?  What are the events I may be shouldn't miss to follow in Geneva and elsewhere?  This is exactly what is in our mind and creating a tool of this site. 

If you browse briefly through, you will see that the observatory is built on Diplo's taxonomy, DiploFoundation has been having repository of resources for more than 10 years.  So we did have something to start building on.  And the niche that we were asked to present in this one minute and a half is the curated content, which means the GAB Digital Watch is not automated but there are human elements in it. 

For each issue, for each basket, maybe if you can go a bit up and just click randomly on one of the baskets.  That is a security basket you're clicking on.  And then choose whichever topic, cybercrime is your choice.  And here you get updates about cybercrime.  You get, or can be sure that you get, the information that matches most and that is where the human touch comes in.  You get description of the topic.  You get overview of events happening and an overview of actors, including the policy instruments.  So it is a very smart interplay that you really get the information in one place.

I have a little surprise for you.  I will stop now and I cannot work for a radio because I'm over two minutes now.  But because we combine both qualitative and quantitative tools in our work, we are quite strong on date mining.  You will see this is one of the angles we really try to elaborate a lot.  Our team back in Europe is that the moment while we are speaking, preparing life analyzers of this particular session.  So if you at the end of the session give fee two minutes I'll be able to show you some of the samples.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much for your words and also for the willingness to help with that consolidation of our session.  Next we have Joana, our famous Joana from the opening ceremony, and her very, very important Mapping Internet Governance Project.

>> JOANA VARON:  Thank you.  Thank you for the invitation.  This is so exciting because we have the project that I'm going to show it is Gov Map.  We started last year and a little bit before IGF Turkey but it emerged from another mapping that we did by Deborah Brown and others and myself and it was also voluntary in the hobby moments of our days and it was static.  And then we started to play with this interactive platform together with Burak Arikan, the developer of this tool that is called, Graph Commons and it is very nice to see all the technologies that the other initiatives have been using. 

The institution I'm a part of, we are trying to think about ways to use technology to enable our policy advocacy mandate.  So, Net Gov Map was focused also on mapping the Internet Governance, because we were attending so many meetings and we didn't know what were the relation and the pipeline of the documents from one meeting to another and how does it affect this organization?  One organization or another? 

So we started to map processes, events, and institutions within the U.N. system but also within the Technical Community.  This is a very, very bad ‑‑ project it is a bit redundant lately.  Only Burak is working on Graph Commons because it's a tool that also for other kinds of maps or graphs but the idea is that you can have a timeline there and also filters.  So that was very interested on the integrity of other observatories to be able to filter those processes and events according to the Internet issues.

This is something that remains to be done and now our idea was actually because the platform is easy, is it collaborative and you can put data and our idea initially was to make an Internet Governance to bring the input because we just need to teach people the methodology and to make it more alive, we just need to bring data because the structure is there. 

So I'll stop here.  But that is the thing I think there is a lot of synergies and we could use those events of other IGFs and even capacity building sessions to do how to feed the observatories because that is it.  We are little and it is a lot of information to compile and organize.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much Joana.  I'm going to skip the Friends of the IGF for now because Susan is in the Main Session.  She asked me to briefly present her project.  But I'm going to give the floor to Kasia.

>> KASIA JAKIMOWICZ:  I cannot present the tool itself.  You canny see the size of Global Internet Policy Observatory because the tool itself is in the development process and we have a better version.  So I invite you all to our session tomorrow at 2:30 workshop where we are going to present the tool.  But very briefly so you can understand the difference between Global Internet Policy Observatory and other initiatives, the main difference is the observatory tool is automated tool. 

So, it has complex technology behind and analyzes information on the Internet Governance from the variety of online sources and that makes it available to communities for further usage.  So the idea is you don't have to invest in technology anymore because the tool will cover all the information from different sources and other initiatives and others can use the tool to get the information and focus on curation and adding additional value to it. 

The tool itself will have additional functionalities.  There will be a user interface organization dashboard and a complex system of evaluating and rating content and creating the content itself and the system to retract the content for use for reuse by others and next year planning to have an App for you to use.  The content will come from different sources and will be derived from automated processes and there will be web pages and social media and we will present documents, spreadsheets, videos, tweets, a variety of content.

The most important thing for you to understand is the observatory tool is not an RSS reader.  It will analyze and classify the information for a maximum relevancy and then, it will give it back for further reuse and curation.  And that is the most important thing.  So once again, I invite you to our session tomorrow at 2:30 Workshop Room 2.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you.  So just one second because Carolin just told me that I made a mistake here.  Thanks for Google for helping us to get there.

>> CAROLIN WEISSER:  Maybe just introductory comments.  This is also a problem you probably faced when you started an observatory.  So I'm from the University of Oxford from the Global Cyber Security Capacity Centre and what we have started online platform, which should be publicly available.  It provides policymakers and Governments one‑stop shop for regarding Cyber Security Capacity Building globally. 

It provides information research documents, reports, industry insights, but also like development and activities.  So it actually has the idea to be comprehensive and holistic and inclusive.  So it doesn't only have government programs or big institutions but also ground‑level outputs. 

Another part of the portal is an inventory of global International, regional and also national activities and Cyber Security Capacity building and also areas of cybercrime, data protection and e‑Governance.  And the idea is to show not only like the big players, the actors, International organization or Governments doing activities in Cyber Security capacity building but also show what is happening on the national level, what is happening on the multilateral level and giving or reaching the new models of partnerships and also to allow to share knowledge, to collaborate, to share best practices but also learn from each other what works and what doesn't work and yes, this is fortunately we can't see it right now.



>> CAROLIN WEISSER:  I'm sorry.  Happy to show because it's open on my screen.  If anybody has questions on it I'm happy to show it afterwards.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: We can come back later.  Thank you, Carolin.  So next, Paul.

>> PAUL FEHLINGER:  Yes.  As I said in the beginning, I think one of the purposes of observatories is to enable evidence‑based policy innovation and was the reason why we created the Internet and Jurisdiction Observatory.  When we launched the Internet and Jurisdiction process in 2012, there was a real need for the different participants who come together to different stakeholders to address the tension between across border nature of the Internet and geographically defined jurisdictions to understand what is going on around the world.  What are the trends that we see around the world?  And hardly anybody has the capacity to follow what is going on in different jurisdictions to observe not only court cases in the very strict sense but on a global social science sense of what is happening with regards to our laws of cyberspace and what do tensions lie. 

So we created the Internet and Jurisdiction Observatory to support the Internet and jurisdiction process.  The Internet and Jurisdiction Observatory is composed today of about 30 leading experts and from top universities around the world and 16 countries.  Some are also here around the table; Carlos, Giancarlo, Berkman Center and others.  And we have collected over the past four years or three years, more than 1000 cases that we have in our archivals on our website that show this tension and this is a unique resource not only for policymakers and practitioners but for researchers to have the high‑level patterns. 

And what is novice about this observatory is it produces every month the retrospect news centre.  So there is a crowd‑ranging process where all the Members rank the different cases collected over the past four weeks according to their relevancy and based on this ranking identified a top 20 cases that go out every month to all the participants in the Internet and jurisdiction process but also to the wider communities.  So feel free to subscribe to the newsletter on

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much for sticking to the time, Paul.  Arne we have you now.  And before you proceed to let you know because the guys have not returned our time now, we are actually now with 40 minutes left.  It's not 32.  It's 40 minutes left.  Thank you.

>> ARNE HINTZ:  Thank you very much my name is Arne from College University.  Mapping Global Media Policy is a project created in 2009 so it is probably one of the oldest here.  It was created in academic environments specifically within the IAMCR, International Association for Media and Communication Research, and it is now run by scholars from Canada, U.K., Italy and Australia.  Primary purpose is not necessarily to provide a service to policymakers that perhaps too, but actually or the idea is more to find or to develop a tool to understand where policy emerges, what actors have a role particularly roles in policy debate, how local and national and global levels intersect and communication governance; so to understand the complex field of communications policy.

It has an online database with profiles as we call them of organizations, policy documents, policymakers and so on, and the connections between these.  What organizations collaborate with each other?  Who wrote which policy statement and then influence which policy process and all of that.  Content is created entirely by the users; so, by all of you ideally.  And everyone can get a log in.  If you're interested let me know afterwards.  Everyone can start creating profiles or in a section with a bunch of profiles and take ownership over it.  It is a kind of Wikipedia kind of platform with content to be created by all of you.

It's broader than Internet Governance.  Sections include all kinds of topics that users want to create around media and communications policy.  There is a section on Broadcast Policy in Canada.  There is one on Media Reform in the Middle East.  There is one on Net Neutrality and so on.  And so, yes, all of this data of organizations, policymakers and so on, is created and inserted according to a taxonomy and the site therefore includes this organically growing database but also some visual mapping tools to display, for example, networks of organizations dealing with specific issues, or the geographic distribution of actors and so on.  And that is basically that.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much Arne.  Now, we have Open Net Korea.  Kelli, you have the floor.

>> KELLI KIM:  I'm Kelli and that is our website.  Could you go to


>> KELLI KIM:  Yes just type in the address.  So, we have a Civil Society Association fighting for rights in Korea and we are supporting this Country Internet Transparency Report Project, which yes, which is very well staffed as we have one full‑time lawyer.  The project is that we get all legal availably data with the government related to Internet transparency which online censorship and surveillance and then we acknowledge the data and observations and findings and you will find it on the website and we will show PDF version of our report available.

And the sources of the data are varied from government to private companies.  And the aim of the project is promoting awareness of online censorship and surveillance carried out by the government, and promoting transparency reporting of both the government and private companies.  And raising issues and making the public aware of the problems associated with the government's practices and policies of Internet censorship and surveillance.  And in the end, bring about changes.

So the project launched last year.  And interestingly, two major Internet companies in Korea which are (Indiscernible).  They started to publish transparency reports in few months.  So we considered it a great achievement and we also purposed the Bill together with National Assemblymembers mandating Governments' transparency reporting on mass surveillance.

And also we are involved in (Indiscernible)

‑‑ which will be in building Korea, South Korea page.  And the map has been very useful in our advocacy for intermediary regime in Korea.  I must say we have been interpreting the data and observations with our actions in promoting user rights on the Internet very effectively.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you, so much, Kelli.  Now we have the Brazilian Internet Advocacy Bill Observatory.  Omar Kaminski, the person in charge of the observatory, he was not able to join us today and he asked us to present his project.  Carlos, who is a much better lawyer than I am, will be in charge of that.  Go ahead Carlos.

>> CARLOS SOUZA:  That is you saying that.  Just mentioning briefly the Deigo's observatory in Brazil.  I believe it is an interesting example for two reasons.  First of all, it is an example of observatory written in Portuguese so definitely is restricting the audience of the observatory, but at the same time it shows that it service a specific purpose which is Brazil approved its own Internet Bill of Rights.  I believe you all know about it right now since we are talking about that almost like in ever single session possible.  We might be talking about that for a while in the IGF of the past. 

But what was interesting about this observatory is focused on analysis of recent case law on the Marcos view (?) so since a lot has been said about the contents of the Marcos review, sometimes it's tricky for you to keep track what is coming up in the case law, what type of issues the courts are hearing, what type of decisions are being issued on issues such as Net Neutrality, privacy, and definitely liability of Internet and intermediaries.  This observatory is an example of Portuguese only observatory, and it is focusing on one specific law, which ends up being more restrictive than larger focus Internet observatories but at the same time serves a very specific purpose and has a specific need to fit into the whole discussion about the complexities and the challenges of implementing one specific law.  So that is why I believe this is a good example for us to fit in the whole framework. 

This is a project that has been created by Omar Kaminski and Pualo Diaz, two lawyers that have been observatory for a while now being ran by Kaminski himself and has the partnership by with the Brazilian Internet Observatory as a whole.  That is it.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Giancarlo the floor is yours.

>> GIANCARLO FROSIO:  Good afternoon everybody.  I'm Giancarlo from the Stanford Law School and since September, 2013, I joined The Center for Internet Society at Stanford and about a year later, we helped launch at the Center what we called the World Intermediary Liability Map, a map showcasing legislation, pending bills, case law and additional information related to intermediary for as many jurisdictions as possible. 

So first key point I want to stress is synergists are very, very important to us and we have started already creating some of them with people sitting around this table.  Kelli mentioned that Open Net Korea, helped to draft the Korean page.  The Internet Jurisdiction Project represented by Paul as well helped us very much because many members of the observatory drafted pages.

One of the key feature of the map is that it includes as I said, different types of legal instruments with regional language but with summaries in English for each case law that we showcase there and to give you a great example ‑‑ and this is a very good example of completely network peer production with low cost.  Everybody joining the project -- we tried to ‑‑ it's a big production but a way ‑‑ a high level of review and to give you great example, a few minutes ago this morning, a caller from Ph.D. candidate from the University, from China, sending me a new case, a new guideline related to copyright infringement and liabilities and this is happening constantly and on a constant basis.  We have what you find link on the site and please reach me after this session.  Reach me through the content because we want to expand the map and we want to showcase all the jurisdiction in the world.

Another key point I heard and an issue raised is taxonomy.  Taxonomy is one of the key problem with the discussion intermediary level because we don't have a common taxonomy.  So this is an additional project we like to develop a consistent taxonomy in connection with intermediary and I imagine in connection with Internet Law and this is something we could do with the synergy of the observatories around this table.  Thank you very much.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much, Giancarlo.  We have remote participation but we have just two more projects to present tow, we will go back to that as soon as we start debates in the last 25 minutes of the session.

So, before I go to the Youth IGF, I would like to go back to you from Argentina.  Would you like to describe a bit more your project?

>> AUGUSTINA CALLEGARI:  I work at the Ombudsman Office of the City of Buenos Aries.  The office is inside the government but it is at independent institution.  So, we want to address the issue on a local level because we want to start giving some answers to people.  We are receiving a lot of complaints regarding Human Rights on the Internet and people don't know where to go.  So, we are going to work on three issues first.  The first one is connected to capacity building.  We want to or we are going to schools to talk to children, teachers, about is happening on the Internet.  What is the Internet?  Where can they go to if they have any problem or something like that?

The second point, we are going to do research and since we are inside a big institution, we are an observatory because we are not going to work alone.

We are going to work with the other areas of the institution like data protections like consumers, like education, that is why we are an observatory because we are going to cross work.

The third point is connected to awareness and communication.  We are starting a campaign about Human Rights on the Internet.  We want to highlight that things you have off line, you have it online.  So, and finally, we want to work together with other Ombudsman Office of the Country because Buenos Aires is the capital of Argentina and we are receiving a lot of questions of other state of the country of what are we going to do with the Internet?  Because it is very difficult to a government in my opinion, to understand how it works.  So we are trying to start speaking about this topic.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you.  So, let me go back.  Now it's my time and I have minus one minute and a half to go.  So, we started with the Brazilian Internet Observatory as an analytical tool to meet the decisions of the Board.  It was created around 2010 and for three years it was outsourced to the guys in Rio because they have the best shore in the country.  And actually, we started rebuilding the whole project.  A

nd our niche is everything that is related to Internet Governance basically.  And we re‑created our portal and our portal has three main sort of streams.  So we have an analytical part and some committee members and advisory groups and Carlos and Nathalia, they all work with me in the production of analysis of the things that we follow.  And the presence in the IGF the WSIS track and so on. 

But we also have been trying to compile as much as possible information about other sources, open sources online and we have been building a mosaic of different sources, news feeds, and analysis that you guys provide in English, Spanish and Portuguese.  Our analysis so far is only 5 or 6 and we have Carlos who also produces a lot for us.  We don't have time to translate them to other sources.  That is why we try to get sources in other languages and I say the greatest challenge of this project is to create connections to other institutions that can help us with the production of content which is irrelevant for Brazil and Latin America as a whole. 

But we also have a second pillar of that project, which is a sort of network of people with whom we want to develop projects, and that's our main specific task for 2016.  Research institutions in Brazil, and abroad, other observatories, think tanks and so on, that can help us provide information with quality to the Board Members of CGI.  Some of you will recognize our logos here because you have been working with us. 

And all of these leads to the major pillar of that Internet Observatory, which is we want to create a reference center, a structured reference centre with semantics and taxonomy and all the things that have been cleared and are a need in this conversation, so that the community in Brazil in the first place and then Latin America in the second place, and then the rest of the global community, can go for to browse for information and publications and so on related to Internet Governance. 

So that is basically it for the project.  And I'll briefly go back to the Friends of the IGF.  You probably know this project a lot.  It was created by Susan Chalmers and it was, I believe, potentially designed to compile as much information as possible for every session of the IGF transcripts, videos audio records and so on.  She has been doing that all by herself with the support of several different stakeholders and organizations. 

I know Diplo is a great supporter of that.  That project, that specific project of collecting the memory of the IGF is going to be steward by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee as for 2016 and on.  So that is one of the things we will have more information on the future.

Before I proceed with Stefaan who is in the audience, I think that at this point, we could go back to the youth folks because apparently they in their process of coming to the IGF, they sort of develop the idea of having their own observatory.  So it would be great to understand a bit more about the niche and the priorities and the challenges that you guys have been talking about.  But I mean, yes go made.

>> ADELA GOVERNA:  I'm part of the Youth IGF.  We are 72 youngsters from Latin America who came with the idea of building an observatory in the youth problems.  While talking about ever coming to the IGF, we realized there snow platform where the youngsters can get‑together and cooperate on making new content on Internet.  So the thing is, we are trying to make a observatory that creates a platform where people that is from our age, can connect themselves with our youngsters.  This means people from young to young.

This is from kids to kids, from youngster to youngsters.  So that is basically our idea.  We created this project with this kind of mission and we are trying to get engaged all the youth.  You know we saw a lack of young participation on the Internet Governance firms,  not only on the IGF but also in ICANN and another forums.  So the main idea of the observatory is starting to get people engaged.  We are trying to develop strategy to make them come to the debates and get them tools to actually take an active role on the debates which means creating capacities among the young people.

So, this observatory is just being raised so we do need all the cooperation we can have from you guys, all seem so solid with your platforms.  We got no web page yet; because we are just recently born.  So, that is our main point here so we are open to suggestions and we are looking forward to your collaboration with us.  Thank you very much.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you it is very great to hear that.  Stefaan, one minute before we listen to remote participation.  Could you go with the remote participation?

>> REMOTE PARTICIPANT:  Thank you for the opportunity.  We have one question from Andrés from Switzerland and it says, I have a question to Tereza.  Some seem to be more divisive than others.  I have a particularly impressive live reporting from the IGF provided by GIP Digital Watch.  One challenge can be different classification on Internet Governance usage.  How do you address this?  And then another one is from Omar from bra ‑‑ it's a Brazilian guy.  He says we are aware of the lack of translation for our initiative as Brazilian Bill of Rights Observatory.  Perhaps we must think of translation Brazilian legal decisions first?  And how about these ideas with --


Thank you for the opportunity.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much for the remote participation.  I suggest we give the floor to Stefaan because I'm pretty sure that with his knowledgeable moderation of the remaining let's say, we have according to my correct watch here, 19 minutes until the end of this session.  And I think he will be able to get the response for both questions.  Could you turn on Stefaan's microphone?  He was so patient so far.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  So I think we heard about the diversity of mappings and the different ways of trying to address the demand and I think what we tried to do now is go back to the demand and go back to the need that might be out there and especially focus on what you might experience with regard to two issues, one is how hard is it to get information with regard to the Internet Governance issues and with regard to what is happening and especially with regard to how to contextualize it in order to make sense of what is happening for your day‑to‑day kind of decision‑making if needed? 

And the second element which is not only about information seeking, but which is about the need that some of the maps seek to address as well is that how hard it is to start sharing information that ultimately can and also support others in trying to understand and find information?  So these are the two guiding questions that we, as mappers, would like to see addressed during the remainder 18.5 minutes according Diego. 

And as a way to then ultimately also see to what extent are the different mapping exercises.  Who has indeed are all complementary to different issues and different ways of going about extracting and sharing the information?  But to what extent do they address different needs that are still out there and ultimately can be integrated into the next iteration of the maps as they are being developed further? 

So who has some first reflections with regard to the need for information?  Need for especially information that is contextualize like in observatories or as in mappings?  Or has anyone reflections about the need to actually have a platform or multiple platforms where they also can start sharing the information in a man they're reaches perhaps a different audience than the audience that would be visiting your own website?  Or have we address today all?  Is everyone floored by the abundance that we have right now?

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: My name is Nicki (sp) and I work for an International Development non‑profit called Internews, and I'm responsible for ‑‑ I almost wanted to join the table but ‑‑ sorry?

>> (Off mic)

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER:  It's in the works.  We write a weekly newsletter captures news from around the world as much as we can on Internet Policy Developments.  So it really, your question about challenges really spoke to me because as someone who for the most part only speaks English, we are pretty limited to publications that publish in English.  And therefore whoever gets our newsletter and whoever ‑‑ we are also building a map of where all the news is from and you would eventually be able to search it by a certain topic or country or ‑‑ its no not totally finished yet.  We are challenged by the language limitations and therefore our resources only useful to people who speak English. 

And I know a lot of the platforms we have seen are in English.  Some are localized to the Portuguese Brazilian Internet policy observatory.  But in general, that is a huge limitation when really it is a global phenomena we are trying to capture.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  Thanks.  Any other reflections?  Any other maps that needs to be identified?  So everyone is satisfied with the information provision?  Everyone feels that there is no challenge in becoming informed?  Yes?

>> LAURA KAPLAN:  Hello.  My name is Laura and I'm from LACNIC.  I have a question or maybe a general idea to share with you.  We at LACNIC is thinking in open observatory about policy.  We know a lot about policy and we think that this very important for the region for Latin America and the Caribbean to have that information better organized.  But we are a little bit scared to start this and then how you can control the real time information, you know?  How real is everything?  I think that a good observatory depends on how you can trust the people who hold the information and can trust that information is very ‑‑ how you say it?  Up‑to‑date.  Sorry.  It is up‑to‑date.  So that is one of the main channels and that is why sometimes this kind of process just fall apart.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  Are we going to collect?  Diego, is that okay?  We are going to collect and then perhaps given the shear amount of mappers, it might be useful to first collect and then respond.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: We have 11 minutes minus two minutes.  There is going to go back for the real time monitoring of the system , social technical system.

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: I'm Haley.  I work with Nicki on the Global Digital Download from Internews.  One of the questions I had or something to bring up was as somebody that worked on the global digital download for a few years now, a lot of these are still new projects for me and I hasn't heard about a lot of them and I think that there is a lack of a place to find all of those things.  I mean, if you happen to search intermediary liability, you can probably get some answers there but it seems to me and I don't know maybe other people know if there is a resource page that somebody has or there is a good place to even collect based on global or whether or not the global reach or a regional reach or national reach would be really helpful for a lot of people doing research or working in the space.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  Thank you.  So I think being considered by the mappers.  So, one of the elements that we developed as a result of planning the map was a network of mappers.  So to join the network of mappers so then we also can then start saying the challenges that might be out there.  But there is also ‑‑ and we did the first scan but now you seen an additional scan and I think eventually we should develop some kind of a resource page where we can have an overview of the different maps and have some kind of a tax on me.  I think that is a great idea.  Yes?

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: My name is ‑‑ prince.  I'm a Ph.D. student at Kings College in London.  I don't represent an observatory or mapping initiative.  I'm involved in text mining, the IGF transcripts.  I have been in touch with some colleagues at the Geneva Internet Platform about that and maybe we can also collaborate with other observatories, especially the friends of IGF initiatives in this sense that there is lots of synergy in many works that are being doing.  And we could joint efforts to avoid redundancy –

I'm telling you this because last Monday, in this room, at the Internet symposium, we identified the need for better creation of IGF transcripts.  We have this Secretariat has been made a great job and the friends of IGF too, but we feel that if we joined the efforts of every observatory and academic researcher that is dealing with this material, we could provide searchable XML version, for instance, of this material openly to foster new knowledge in the field.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: We have a gentleman here with his hand being raised all the time.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  Sorry.  And then there is remote participation.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Great.  We have eight minutes.

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Good afternoon.  My name is Jean from the Youth Programme in the observatory in ‑‑ (Indiscernible) 

If I could make a question that is quite quick.  I would ask someone from the table to tell us a little bit how they started.  How was it beginning of the observatory initiatives, especially in the independent ones, so since the workshops would like to know a little bit about how they develop, how they stood up for first time given the first steps.  Thank you very much.

>> STEFAAN VERHULST:  So, Christina and then remote participation and then I suggest to have some responses.

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Hello.  My name is Christina Monty from the European Commission, and I work also on the Global Internet Policy Observatory.  First of all, I wanted to thank the organizers of this workshop because indeed, it it's very good progress I think that we are making here.

Just one consideration, I heard that multilingualism is one of the main concerns that we have to deal with, especially when we are thinking about global observatories and global analysis.  And I think here we should also consider how technology can help us.  There are many experts also in automatic translation tools and facilities but one of the problems we are facing is to reach out to experts in other fields other domains and try to get their knowledge and expertise and make full use of that knowledge.  So, I just wanted to share this remark with you.  For instance, also with Java we try to organize regularly webinars and to reach out to these other communities.  But of course this is an ongoing effort and all of us can play a role.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much.  Could the guys from the remote participation booth just raise the last question?  Or manifestations?

>> REMOTE PARTICIPANT:  This is Miguel from Argentina and he says, is there any collaborative initiative that anyone in the room may recommend for a new bee on Internet Governance?  Something to start from scratch?  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Great.  I would suggest the following use for our last five minutes.  You can see here it is 3:25.  I don't think we will have an opportunity for everybody on the table to give final remarks and stuff.  Part of that is that we also can manage time and I suck at organizing but it was very interesting. 

I would suggest that Valentina could tackle the question of how do we start?  Because they are also in the very beginning of the project, Valentina, and I would also say that Tereza has to respond to that specific question about tools and so on.  And I would ask rob to tackle the question of what is a beginner's guide for all of these if you try to give a glimpse on what sources you consult and Stefaan can also do that and in the last minute and I'm going to be very dictator, I just come back to conclude everything.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO:  I forgot that Tereza wants to show us the map in the end.  But that is going to separate us from coffee break.  And I will show you page for all those interested in not having coffee break.

>> VALENTINA PAVEL:  The project was launched one year ago but due to the fact that we didn't have any funds to invest in promotion, the website has very limited access rate.  And how we put content into the observatory goes like this.  So we have 12 different project partners from 11 different European countries, and they have to submit regularly both news and to check the tables I showed you earlier that are updated and whenever there is any legislative or important development to signal back to us.

And how they do that is we have two means.  One, they feel in ‑‑ fill in one of the forms we send and also they click the suggest button, which is available on the website and I also encourage all of you to share news of this feature on the observatory to make a more content available and to have better exposure of the information available there.

So, this is how we try to get to stay up‑to‑date and to provide relevant content.  But I have to say this is not always working because all of our partners are also involved in other activities and it is not ‑‑ it happens update.

So I have two things to recommend.  One is promote your tool or your observatory.  Make sure you invest a lot in this area and also, explore different ways to get or to have on the spot updates about different policy issues or information that you're exploring.  And you can probably have the GIP watch as best practice example.  And thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much, Valentina.  Would you tackle the question and go to the map Tereza?

>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA:  For remote participation or talk about a map.

>> REMOTE PARTICIPATION:  Thank you for the question and the kind words.  I will be very brief.  But we prepare integrated reporting from most of the sessions here at the IGF.

If we have available on The Watch as well as in a printed form in the morning after.  There was a sub‑question on taxonomies and different ones used here.  I would like to say this is very decide that we cooperate in this apex as well.  DiploFoundations, development of taxonomy is unfinished project and we definitely do encourage and seek partners to help us finish this.  I will stop here on that. 

Diego, do you want me to quickly have a look at this?  So my colleagues in Europe do not want to sleep.  They want to be involved in the IGF.  And this was a very spontaneous suggestion from them that because we do this work anyhow.  We do analyze the sessions here at the IGF and even at the general approach for the Diplo Watch.  We combine qualitative and quantitative analyzers.  What you're looking at on the screen and the data in making of the partial transcript of this session.  This is what we have been discussing up until now.  And then in our Techs‑Analytics framework, it inspected which essential keywords were used and computed the similarity of this session to all previously‑held Internet Governance Forum sessions between 2006 and 2014.  So, what you're seeing is to access the implicit relevance is on the X axis and that is based on decision similar to the previous sessions while the Y axis shows the explicit similarity based on the count of keywords.  And the total relevance that you can see is found in the markers on the plot there is an average of implicit and explicit issue relevance.  So it is just the taster of the type of work we are doing.  If we have 20 seconds or 10, I send another file which shows ‑‑ because this is nice visual tool that can help you understand this a bit more.  You see content, policy, definitely dominated this particular session.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: It hasn't arrived yet.

>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA:  It did arrive about 10 minutes ago.  But get it up whenever you get the chance.  It will show the categorization of the keywords used and the session linked to each other.  I'll stop here thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Before we go to Carolyn, she wanted to show a website.  Rob, Stefaan, very quickly.  You guys are attached to very strong academic institutions.  What are the sources that you recommend people to begin with?

>> ROB FARIS:  We have a Director of User experience and every project that we do is trying to understand the user needs and if you start a new observatory, I think that probably should be step Number 1. 

Before you start thinking about sources is that what is the need and what is the experience of users?  So we for instance for the map that we developed we had about 50 interviews with specific user groups and tried to understand what would be the need?  What would be the taxonomy that would gel and how would they start contributing?  And we are iterating that as we go forward.

>> PANEL MEMBER:  That is good advice from my radio station.  I would add a couple of things.  So start small, be modest.  Choose a focus.  And it could be a geographic focus.  Could be a topical focus, but something that you know and love and really want to work on.  Don't be too ambitious but start with that and borrow from existing sources.  There is way too much information out there and if there is something that you're really interested in, feel passionately about, sharing with the world, your role in curating and aggregating the existing information in a way that tell us an effective story is a great place to start.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much for being very brief.  Carolin, can you just go very quick?

>> CAROLIN WEISSER:  I would like to do that for intervention.  I think the collaboration between us is very crucial.  I'm grateful that the solutions map and also Kasia and already reaching out to me and even though I didn't know you yet, to ask how we can collaborate.  So this is a portal.  It is still on the development by ‑‑ it gives you impression what it will look like and also we also got a lot of input and expertise from the organizations they mentioned who work in security capacity building and of course we have advisory group from the Global Cybersecurity Centre and it is an institute, Oxford Business School.  So we also bring together different multistakeholders from different disciplines and I'm very happy to share any experience and knowledge I get.  Thank you.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: Thank you very much.  I'll try to be very brief.  I'd like to thank for the participation of all.  I will try to say that instead of thinking of trying to build something from scratch, a good alternative could be jump into the process that are on this table and elsewhere.  I would suggest everybody try to apply to the network of mappers that Governor lab curates so they can understand which tools can be used, which niche are already covered and so on.  What my key take away for this are three, actually. 

Technology is available out there and I think that all of our projects can collaborate with those who are starting.  And I'm pretty sure that all of the tools are open source and can help us building things that our projects don't actually do it.

But there is huge, huge need for multilingualism.  Both for us to get rid of the majority of the initiatives being in English, and for the idea of promoting different content and local content to this huge mosaic, let's say, of observatories and maps and so on.  And Joana said something very interesting.  We should use things to build together with our cooperation in the future much more events like this one that we are doing.  And I really encourage you all to think of just like doing the same in your events and inviting us and I'm pretty sure the majority will be able to join. 

It seems that taxonomy language, the soft part of our projects are what is the most important thing to tackle in the future.  We are trying to avoid fragmentation and we cannot run the risk of not having the proper ways of communicating with one another.  I'm going to put a list on this page of all of your initiatives and your contacts so that people can right away, solve questions and answer questions that were not gotten into because of time.  And I would like to thank you very much for joining us, both on the table and in the audience.  And as soon as we have any news on how this is going to go in the future, we will probably get your attention in any way that we can.  Thank you very much for your patience and your presence so far.  And Tereza wants to show you something else.  Here we go.

>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA:  Just a little add-on, the categorization.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: It is here.

>> TEREZA HOREJSOVA:  The categorization of the keywords used in this session and how they were linked together.  Thank you, Diego.

>> DIEGO CANABARRO: I'm going to leave that on the screen and you can look at that before coffee break.  Have a very nice afternoon.