IGF 2016 - Day 3 - Room 8 - OF29: OECD


The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Jalisco, Mexico, from 5 to 9 December 2016. 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. 


>> ANNE CARBLANC: Good afternoon. Welcome to this open forum. My name is Anne Carblanc. I work at OECD in the Digital Policy Division. We take this opportunity -- thank you. To present and discuss an event we had a few months ago here in Mexico, which was an interesting meeting at the ministerial level on the digital economy. The meeting -- let me see -- took place in Cancun of June last year. And the presentation is -- okay. So it was hosted by Mexico with Canada, Korea, France, the United States and European Commission as co-vice chairs. There were two publications that were launched at the ministerial, the policy for Latin America, which is the publication given to me, it is just here. The open government review of Mexico and the one Internet. We had four stakeholder forums from the business trade unions, the technical communities. There were more than 150 press articles that our media people tell us. And there was again -- it was a very good meeting in social media. Over 1,000 participants covering 36 economies at the level of ministers, senior government officials, international organizations and business and so forth. So it was really a huge gathering. And the ministerial was organized around four themes.

The first was the role of Internet openness for supporting innovation. The second one was around the policies to building Global Connectivity, so announcing the infrastructure, the communication factors. The third theme was on building trust, improving digital security and privacy as basic pre-conditions to the economy and then there were two panels on jobs and skills on our digitalization is changing the demand for labor and the demand for skills. With the number of outcomes, the most important one from the perspective in terms of the worldwide policy agenda was to establish the digital economy stabilization to bring it up to a high level and bring it to the center of the global policy agenda. There were a number of discussions on policy issues that relate to digitalization and there was a strong, strong support from all stakeholders to the need to support to making -- implement and further support the digital economy and knowledge flow as a potential driver of economic growth and social well-being. There was also the main approach of the ministerial and also the work that was carried out was to involve stakeholders in the identification of the issues and the implementation of the policy approach to deal with them.

We had U.S. member companies and Latin American companies and who adopted the declaration, the Cancun declaration that sets up a roadmap to push the digital agenda forward. The main points of the declaration is about the need to preserve Internet openness while acknowledging that there are important policy -- public policy objectives to be taken into account. To improve the access and speed of broadband connections, to improve the infrastructure. Empowering people with the skills, with a new set of skills that are required by those in everyday life in the digital economy and society. There was a lot of discussion, a lot of strong support in the declaration to improve privacy and data protection and to bring this up to the highest level of the government, and the declaration also invited the stakeholders to improve the evidence-base to digitalization to provide information for policymakers.

We will take the opportunity to be hearing and to thank the Mexican -- Raul is here for hosting this big event and also for making it very successful, for making possible was such a strong participation. So what we would like to do today is to give you a bit more of a sense of what was achieved in Cancun and give you a different perspective of the different stakeholders that took part and contributed to this event. So we have today several stakeholders from government from the Civil Society, from the business. I will probably start from Tarik Kamel, the senior advisor for government engagement at ITAC and the committee for the -- policy. Then we have Raul Eduardo Montema yor and we have Joe Alhadeff, and representing the Business Advisory Committee, and we have on his right Marc Rotenberg, the electronic privacy -- representing the Civil Society Advisory Committee again at the OECD, and we have Anders Hektor on my right, Deputy Director of Enterprise Information in Sweden.  And finally Anna Byhovskaya, Communication Advisor at the Trade Union Advisory Committee of the OECD.

We would like to organize the discussion in two rounds, if you like. The first one I'll ask the panelists to give their take, their view about what has been the main outcome in Cancun and what they foresee to be the main obstacle to the implementation of the Cancun recommendations and we open the floor for your participation and we'll have a second round that is more forward-looking and so we'll look at things that OECD is looking to do. If you allow me we will go the order as we are seated. Anna, do you want to start?

>> ANNA BYHOVSKAYA: Here at the IGF I don't think you see many trade unions. In Cancun it was different. We had a big trade union delegation. So in a sense, we see that digitalization needs a social dimension which doesn't mean that we are only confined to employment and skills topics at the same time but maybe in terms of takeaways I would start with the OECD emphasis on quality jobs in the digital economy which we endorsed as well which we think is an important mention in the declaration and in the follow up that you would probably talk about later on. It was also important that the declaration emphasized that digitalization bears many opportunities but may also lead to inequalities and it is important to see the connection between technological change, digital diffusion and inequality as well. Also on the positive side we that the OECD took a broad stand on skills. Across different socio-economic backgrounds. The challenge is to devise recommendations on how to achieve that. I.T. skills is a bit easier to a certain extent if you want to reach I.T. professionals or those who want to become that. On the broader agenda it might be harder in terms of modernizing the school systems etc.

We support Internet openness and we support your stance on investment in innovation systems. We don't agree on every aspect of it but we feel like Internet openness is important to achieve greater productivity. We stand behind that as trade unions. However, maybe one critical point and also something that might be a point that the OECD might want to take up going forward is the stance on platforms. In the declaration but also in the way it has been discussed during the ministerial. And here we felt that there was a bit of an unfiltered endorsement of platforms and we are not saying that platforms are all the same. Of course, they are not. But there are some platforms where there are problems with the competitive structures in the business models in view of taxation, in view of the rise of non-standard forms of work that we all know what I am speaking about here, that leads to wage dumping, that leads to competition between workers for tasks, etc. So overall we felt like -- and we will talk about the solutions and the way forward afterwards but we felt the multi-stakeholder approach the will be beneficial in precisely taking those aspects forward and have a better perspective on sectors and regions on the stakeholders in terms of social dialogue. We thought it should be amplified more. How does business and workers representatives contribute to technological diffusion. And therefore we need a detailed examination of the OECD on how to take this forward.

There are good, broad outcomes but now we need to go forward to look at the how and in doing so we would like to see proposals for smart regulation. So not reactive regulation but smart regulation that will enable digital diffusion but also address the shortcomings and address the risks for people. Because we as trade unions must stand for a just transition approach toward digitalization and workers and people shouldn't bear the costs and the risks of technological change. Thanks. >> For the record, I think we need to see the ministerial in the context of other ministerial meetings as well and the one before the 2016 ministerial was in 2008 in South Korea. So with eight years in between I guess it's 2024 before we have the next one. But the main takeaway for me is how surprisingly easy it was to agree on the ministerial declaration actually. I mean, there are issues with the digitalization and digitally driven globalization, of course, in many directions, small issues and bigger issues, but it was surprisingly easy to agree on this declaration. So the takeaway for me is the broad almost global, I would say, consensus on these issues. I think this is really important. And if you haven't read the declaration, I actually implore you to do it. It is quite interesting to read.

The consensus is that digital transformation drives economic growth, social prosperity, social empowerment, economic opportunities. But there is also work to be done, which is also reflected in the declaration. There are -- I shouldn't say adverse effects but issues that need to be further discussed and further monitored by OECD preferably and others. One of them is jobs, of course. We have discussed this during these days in other seminars as well quite recently only today where the question is what will happen with the ones that are losing the jobs? Will they be the ones gaining the new jobs as well? That's one issue. Another issue is could it be that jobs are lost in country A and are gained in country B? So there is a net loss in a country and what would that do to social tension within a country or even perhaps between countries and regions? So this is an area we need answers.

Productivity is an area where the OECD has done. We know the ICT sector have been driving productivity for several years. In Sweden between 1995 and 2005 it was 50% of the quite substantial growth we had, 50% came from the ICT sector. That's significant. Outside of that we see mainly improvements in quality and it doesn't show up in the GDP. Another economic aspect is how -- what will happen with inflation when you have a lot of cheap or free services and prices are pushed down. In Sweden we have the objective to have a 2% inflation but we are -- I don't know, we are below 1%. Digitization is one of the things holding it down. We need knowledge to understand how digital transformation plays out in the economy and the bigger issue of creation of wealth and redistributing wealth, what happens when it is difficult to in the global economy, to tax economic activity within the region. So it is difficult for a country to take up tax, so much of the wealth being created is not coming to the country. And there is the best project today which is very important and interesting and over all this are the political models of redistribution of wealth, which is a totally different issue and we shouldn't open that door perhaps.

But for policymakers to be able to discuss those important issues, we need knowledge. I know facts and knowledge is perhaps not as sexy these days as it used to be, but I think that will be hopefully a passing fad and that it will come to the conclusion that facts and knowledge is actually -- we are in dire need of this in order to be able to deal with the issues. And the OECD has a very significant role to play there.

The horizontal project which we haven't spoken about yet but the OECD is starting a horizontal project on digitalization that are including not all, but many, directorates and levels and a great challenge to coordinate this but I have great faith for them to pull it off. My summary for this brief introduction the broad consensus as a take away and the road ahead to continue collecting data and making good analysis. Thank you.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you, Anders. Marc, do you feel like -- okay. You prefer to reacts.

>> MARC ROTENBERG: We work as a team. It's okay. So I just want to do a couple of opening points just because I'm not sure how familiar everybody is with the OECD. It was multi-stakeholder before it was cool to be multi-stakeholder. They should be driven cite credit for that. Cancun has taken place in the important series that started in Ottawa and progressed in SEOUL and the members of the council don't want to wait eight years. So start working on the next one. I want to try a small experiment. Not everyone has had a chance to read the declaration. There was a book written where the last chapter was the first sentence of every paragraph of every chapter of the book. I tried to see if I could make my summary take away from each of the nine recommendations only using the black letter print of those recommendations.

The takeaway was that the conclusion was to foster innovation and creativity and the free flow of information supported by broadband interconnected and converged communications infrastructures and capitalizing on opportunities arising from emerging technologies, platform and applications while reducing the barriers and impediments across borders. That was the part that was focused at the organizational and technological level. There was one that was equally focused at the user level. The need to promote and elevate trust through digital security, risk management and privacy protection to ensure the skills of lifelong learning and spurring new employment opportunities for quality jobs in the digital economy. And that really is the black letter version of the nine recommendations in the OECD declaration and that really is an important takeaway because sometimes you look at the nine declaration pieces and you don't see the cohesiveness that sits within them. It is a cohesive store and a narrative. It is not nine independent pieces but it is the story we need to be thinking about as we go into the next decade or however long before the next ministerial inflection point. The other thing that was new to this ministerial was the hack-A-Thon. We never would have done it without the help of Mexico so we thank you very much and we thank the Mexican students who were phenomenal. The level of innovation, ingenuity was fantastic. How policymakers started to look at students operate, function and innovate. I think it was a little eye opening. I think they think of innovation occurring as scientists in a research laboratory. That is no longer the way innovation on the Internet works. Innovation on the Internet works with people eating pizza and coffee in different locations. This time we had them in the same place. Understanding the way innovation works is not the way it used to be.

We still need research labs and scientists but there is a lot of other stuff going on. And the individual's role in this. This isn't just the organization anymore. These are individuals who are innovating also. We have an economy that actually has an organizational dimension. An individual dimension and creates societal pressures that come into tension at times. We have to figure out how to take the best of these things and address the risks that come with them. I think that really was the outcome that there is a lot of opportunity, there are some risks associated with those opportunities, and we need to figure out how to address the risks without impairing the opportunities. That's the task ahead of us and part of our second question.

>> Just a quick comment on -- speaking as one of those people who was once up at 3:00 in the morning and having pizza and caffeine fueled. You only think you are having brilliant ideas. It's the exception that results in the big startup. Your comments are an important point. A brief word about CSIAC. We were established actually at the last ministerial conference which took place in Seoul in 2008. I think it was a very important endorsement of the role of Civil Society at the OECD. Partly in reflection of the changing nature of the economy the OECD recognized the participation of Civil Society groups and technical groups and so we have both actively supported and participated over the last 10 years. I think it's also important if I may say another word about Civil Society and our ongoing discussion at IGF and the multi-stakeholder process and elsewhere, governments must continue to reach out to Civil Society groups to ensure that decisions that are made are well-informed, legitimate and reflect the active participation of those who will be affected. So to the credit of the OECD I think that goal was accomplished this year in Cancun. We were grateful to the hosts -- host country which did a very nice job providing for the participation of Civil Society. And as to the outcomes, I think it reflected an important debate and maybe a little more maturity from our earlier points on the Internet economy.

Our first statement I think came out, in fact, in 1998 in Ottawa in the very early days of the so-called E-economy and then in 2008 at Seoul we were on to a different thing and now digitalization is our current phrase. But from Civil Society perspective to briefly conclude, our goal is to ensure that our measures of success for the new economy do reflect the full interest of the larger public. Improved education and literacy, improved employment opportunity and good jobs. Respect for the environment. All of these factors help us understand in objective terms whether or not the benefits of technology are producing outcomes that favor our society. The OECD continues to be a leader on that front. The last point I'll make is that there are good resources available on our website, CSIAC.org including the Seoul declaration from 2009 regarding the goals we are pursuing. We continue to look forward to working with the OECD on these issues. It's CSISAC.ORG. We try to think of a more complicated acronym and that's the best we can do.

>> Thank you very much for inviting me. 1998 and then the Seoul conference in 2008 which I was fortunate to attend. And this conference in Cancun because definitely we have seen in the last eight years a leapfrog that has been putting us today in a completely different environment when it comes to digital transformation. If we look at where we are today -- it has been also touched upon in Cancun, I have been following up this remotely, and others who have attended the conference. We see today what we call the globalization of economy in different sectors as such. It is another term for globalization, another term of changing the models that we have been using in delivery of service and several industrial areas.

Suddenly the systems are not able to cope anymore in different countries, even in the developed world from a low making machine point of view or from a policy making machine -- public policy machine point of view was the technology innovation as such. We see this in the transport sector and the tourism sector and in the banking sector. And the Internet has been challenging the border-based or sovereign-based State as it is started in the telecommunications sector. Its effect but now it is providing challenges to the public policy and the regulatory systems in different other sectors as well. I see this very challenging, I think, -- a big challenge to countries and governments and to the different stakeholders because if we don't help to hand held the different communities, including the governments, including the different stakeholders in absorbing this change and helping them and putting the right public policy to cope with this change showing the benefits and appreciating the benefits and growth in the economy that is happening, we can see slowing down definitely of the new innovations and of the incoming innovations that we want to see in the different countries. So I would hope that the OECD takes leadership in different sectors, not only in the ICT sector, and start to work with the different regulatory agencies in the different industries to help them overcome this barrier, which from their point of view, seems challenging or even disruptive to the models that they have been used to for several years.

Back in 2008 ICT was considered as a catalyst within the existing framework as such. It is just an addition at making things more efficient. Today, no, a complete transformation. It is diminishing of sectors that have been managed for tens of years with a different frameworks and different policy making frameworks. And new players are coming in as such. Are we ready from a jurisdiction point of view from this change? It's questionable. Are we ready from an arbitration point of view as well as from the judiciary point of view for this change? I hope we sense it coming out from Cancun partially takes within the lead within the next two or three years to shed the light on this area and hand held also the developing world as such.

My last comment is this challenge is not only being observed in the developing countries, it is happening also in the developed ones as such. And maybe it has reflected recently in some of the political results that we have been seeing here and there. The transformation is faster than some of the societies are able to absorb even in the developed world. So I see this an observation and OECD as a multi-stakeholder think-tank has great legitimacy and experience in leading the way forward. Thank you.

>> Thank you.

>> RAUL EDUARDO RENDON MONTEMA YOR: Okay. I have to apologize for my Spanish inheritance and promise to shorten my name to Raul Rendon. Thank you for the -- to be your host at Cancun. I think the outcome was very good. Third, when you are the last in the line it is difficult then to report or say another thing. It was very well for in my opinion very well negotiated and writing. I am going to give let's say the resume or the view of the people in the community. As you here the OECD public think tanks. We're servants. That's the view I'm trying to reflect here. I am going to quote some people interesting on the resume in order to give this idea. So the Cancun declaration will serve as a light guide to navigate in this known worlds and will allow us to strengthen our commitment to bring innovation through social prosperity and growth to the digital economy and to create a better world for humanity. That was not the only thing mentioned but we shall measure the digital economy, that's the main point. To promote the growth and be able to measure the side effects. So this was saying, trying to wrap up the declaration and I will continue in this quotation because it is important just to give you the right idea. Together we recognize that the free and open and secure Internet is the life blood of our global digital economy. Together we have committed to perfect the Internet as a platform for innovation, free expression, commerce, economic opportunities. We have embraced those principles of openness and multi-state and world's governance. The right word here period is governance. That was said by the Secretary of Commerce of the U.S.

These are giving you these thoughts and ideas. Finally the last thing I want to comment to wrap up, there is a single word that we can use to summarize the discussions held during the ministerial and that is the word trust. And without trust from the part of the users, whether they are citizens, enterprise or public organizations, we cannot flourish in the digital economy. We all -- that was -- Secretary of State of the digital economy of France said that. So when you have all the points that Joe said, which is basically the declaration, I can summarize in my own ideas this part. First I can say that I think from our point of view the debate is over. We have to put it on the right -- what this is saying clear here, you have to reap the benefits but you have to take into account the side effects in a very professional approach manner. The second thing is this multi-stakeholder approach is cool, very cool, but it is here to stay. There is no other way to approach this issue by any means other than a multi-stakeholder approach. But also it's a multi-task and multi- activity. We have to put the interests of people, I quote you because I think the final issue that we have to pursue.

So for our view and resume this it is a roadmap that has to take into account the side effects, a multi-stakeholder approach but also governance and the main part is governance and the final word is we have to develop a trust environment. That's what three pages. It's very easy to agree on but some issues are not very easy to negotiate, I can tell you. So that's --

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Many thanks. I would like to open the floor if there is anyone who would like to make comments or ask questions or you are very welcome. If you can just briefly introduce yourself before --

>> My name is -- I'm an academic person from the university and I was involved in a lot of this discussion the last 20 years. And insofar it's interesting to remember that 1998, when the OECD meeting was in Ottawa, this was the first year of ICANN when that was established. The interesting thing was in the early days it was still unclear whether the core issue of management of critical Internet resources which was labeled Internet governance had something to do with the E-economy or the new economy. I think it was the OECD who understood early that you cannot separate the management of these technical issues from the management what is the digital economy. And so far the conference opened the door to bring all the experiences which came out from the let's say the management of the critical Internet resources, in particular the multi-stakeholder to the broader issue of users of the Internet in the economy.

The problem I see ahead of us is exactly what our colleague from Mexico has said. Internet governance. Another declaration was adopted three months later. The G20 declaration which adopted a document on the digital economy and development initiative. And which is also a very good document but it has a paragraph in it which says for Internet governance we support the multi-stakeholder model. That means for Internet governance not the digital economy. I think this is a point we should discuss. It means how far this experiences with the multi-stakeholder model has been made so far can be used also for all the challenges which are described in the Cancun declaration, including the implications, the questions that you have raised between win in country A and loss in country B. The skills. This can be managed in the future only in a multi-stakeholder environment. It cannot be done by governments alone.

We have a good opportunity now that the Germany hosts the G20. The summit meeting will be in May in Hamburg but a special ministerial meeting in April in Dusseldorf and then there is a stakeholder meeting. Even the German government has problems to link Internet governance to the digital economy and what I heard is that they argued yeah, we have the conference but the -- I think this is a conceptual mistake and it would be good if the OECD, because they have realized that you cannot separate this. So this is in one package, two different issues. I don't say it's the same issues but you have to take into consideration the technical management when you discuss the use of the Internet for the economy. And insofar it would be all the good message from Guadalajara in the preparation process for the forthcoming leaders of the G20 that OECD channels this paragraph of the Cancun declaration into the G20 documents. Thank you.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you.

>> Good evening. I represent African alliance. The Cancun declaration is very interesting and I am here for the first time and it's impressive. So in the spirit of more engagement and maybe enhance corporation, getting everybody together, a country in Africa. We're up to the rest of the countries in Africa, is that a criteria for participation from the rest of Africa?

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Do we have more comments? I can maybe clear up the issue, the question about the participating countries. It is -- it is between -- it reflects the involvement with the work that has been done to lead to the preparation of the ministerial. They don't have to be there but it is part of the engagement that they had in the past. If you like the short answer. I don't know if there is any reaction to the issues of--

>> I was -- I thought it was -- Wolfgang was saying how far can the multi-stakeholder be taken to deal with the issues that are identified? I don't have an answer to that. But I guess it's one issue to make the analysis and another issue to pave the way forward and discuss the different options of moving forward. And I would agree the multi-stakeholder participation would be important certainly for that part, for the finding the way forward. But governments aren't experts on multi-stakeholderism I think. Other groups are. Academia is a good example of -- could show us examples of how can we use multi-stakeholder model to find solutions such as the ones that we are talking about for jobs, for example. I don't have a good answer. But it would be interesting to see what the options are. What the alternatives are. The ideas of how they could be utilized. Thanks.

>> Wolfgang and I have actually had this debate over several years. My view is, in fact, that the OECD originated the multi-stakeholder model that does a better job than many groups today associated with the multi-stakeholder model. The work of the OECD has certain characteristics. The constituencies are well defined. There is a BIAC, ATUAC and the creation of constituencies has made it possible for these groups to establish their own organizations and to reparticipate ongoing participation in the work of the OECD which I think is something lacking in many of the multi-stakeholder processes. The other key characteristic that favors the OECD is a commitment to finalty. There is a date, declaration, report or review or there is something. You don't have the opportunity, when the ministers are convening, expecting to release a declaration, to create another committee to discuss what the declaration might possibly say. Things are finalized and again, I think the OECD model works quite well. The phrase we've actually used purposely is not multi-stakeholder, we talk about participation parity from Civil Society. If governments want to meet with governments, that's fine. But if governments are going to involve business groups, then we think Civil Society has an equal right to be present because that's actually the nature of Democratic decision making. We don't favor one stakeholder group over another. But it's not open-ended participation, it's equal participation. Participation parity. I've just lost all my friends in the multi-stakeholder world.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you.

>> I just wanted also to comment on the same topic that Wolfgang has mentioned. We need to distinguish when we talk about the multi-stakeholder model between multi-stakeholder discussion platform and multi-stakeholder decision making process. I can, for example, when it has been established from the beginning because it is a private sector led industry from the beginning is multi-stakeholder decision making process as such where governments, for example, are playing an advisory role. Let's not get misled easily by that. I like very much this would be copied in other sectors but it is not easy, because the well-established other sectors in other areas and other disciplines where we have a lot of legacy that has been there for many years and that have their own regulations and policies are not easy to adapt to the multi-stakeholder model as it was easy and technical community going forward, wasn't in the transition process or in other things. So despite the case that the technical community deserves the credit for what it has been establishing over the last 15 years and other processes, this is not that easy to keep, although we all wish it has. We see positive signs even at the U.N. not only at the multi-stakeholder platform.

UNESCO is becoming more open for multi-stakeholder discussion platform. The decision making is government based. The ITU has made progress involving players in the multi-stakeholder discussion to some extent as such. So I just wanted to make this distinction when we talk about multi-stakeholder governments as such that has been mentioned by Secretary Prytzger so we keep the distinction while we think forward and we look for leadership from the OECD. Thank you.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: We'll move to the second part as we're running out of time. Would like to give briefly. Please put the presentation on. Some information about this project that we are just starting at the OECD, Anders mentioned before. The title is digitalization of the economy in society. The fact that it is OECD wide, we are trying to involve the different communities in the OECD that relate to the committees that relate to taxation policies, the one related the trade policies, the one to labor and so forth. The overall aim of the project is trying to build up the whole of the government approach to policy making in the digital area. We have seen during the discussion of the ministerial itself sometimes there is a tendency for the different parts of the governments to go in different directions and sometimes policies for instance some innovation policies may go in different direction with trade policies and so there is a need to coordinate and even to build from the beginning the perspective different policy areas.

This project is really in the face of definitions. We will cover it in 2017 and 18 so the next two years there will be a series of events. The technical lab and higher political lab in order to engage different stakeholders and to refer to the outcome there will be a number of reports. We will try to dig deeper in some specific areas to cross borders, related to jobs and skills, related to Internet so far and also there would be a final report where the policy framework for this whole government approach is put forward.

So I like pretty much to have the views from the different stakeholders and eventually from the public on what you think should be the main outcome that you like to see this project achieving. One minute. Reminds you don't have much time so -- who wants to start. Joe, please.

>> JOE ALHADEFF: I think digitization and to think about the topics we spoke about, the way the work will expand is to look at the benefits of potential application of technologies and practices, the trends and how to measure them to identify and discuss the risks associated, to discuss the practices that can help mitigate those risks while still maintaining the innovation and then to have this discussion across sectors and hopefully making sure that that discussion is also relevant to developing countries and addresses the needs -- looks at the impacts at a societal and individual level as well. That's really the way these projects work. They are horizontal in nature, include everybody, but they have those distinct elements and pieces are thematic across those elements and within sectors and topics. That was just a way for people to think about the way the OECD manages some of these topics.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you. Anders --

>> ANDERS HEKTOR: I will be brief. I agree with Joe. It is all important, but I know we need to prioritize. It is difficult. We can't do everything. I think one of the really important things to do is to look at the -- continue to look at the open Internet as a means for digital transformation. Without that we're smoked. So it is a basic, fundamental. It begins there. And then we need to look at the evidence for why it matters, because many times we have emotional reactions to it but we also need evidence to it. We're approaching it, we're looking at how it contributes to trade and so forth but we need more solid support for it or understanding of it. And we also need to discuss and understand better the necessary means to preserve a global interoperable Internet with open innovation without barriers to entry. Thank you.

>> Just a couple of points going forward and for next steps. Obviously Civil Society will continue to engage in the horizontal project and also the OECD G20 meeting which I understand is coming up in January. I would say also for all of us who work with the OECD, one of the ongoing responsibilities we need to think about is continue to communicate the relevance of the OECD's work to the broader public and not just to the member governments. The press releases are helpful in that respect. CESAC tries to communicate the reports back to the NGO community when they come out from the OECD. A lot of reports provide good data about which approaches to broadband deployment for example are working. Mobile penetration. All the key Internet indicators. That information I think is useful to a broader public and we should make an effort in this next round to try to really reach out to the general public.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you.

>> Quick, just -- first, we support the horizontal -- secondly, we see this product and service sold in terms of implementation of the declaration and implementation is a whole other animal than just the -- so it is going to be hard so we'll have to take into account that it is going to be hard. Governance is the word but making decision process is important, very important, transparency is another word that is very important. Prioritization is very, very important because there is a very wide -- there are a lot of issues and a lot of things. We don't have the complete resources, you know that at the OECD. So I think we have to wish us good luck and share things with -- I agree with Mark that we have to put it more in the global issue. It is a very important issue.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you.

>> I agree with everybody who already -- the points that have already been raised. We have been supportive of the horizontal project for the reason that we felt like there are many silos in between government entities also and between stakeholders on the national level where we would need OECD to bring together knowledge, to bring together policy recommendations that can then be reviewed at the national level and implemented and here, for instance, in terms of the multi-stakeholder approach OECD is in the position to have case studies where it works in regulatory frameworks and social dialogue and bringing Civil Society into privacy discussions and so on and so forth. So this is one.

Second one you already started doing is looking at the effects of different technologies. Artificial intelligence, you started doing that. So maybe an approach, tailored approach would be useful. Until now we have been talking about the broader issue of digitalization which can mean a lot and have very different impacts and positive and negative. So I think this is a good way forward, measurement was already mentioned. So for us where will the new jobs come from is an important question and lastly I think the horizontal project is a good way to bring in OECD outputs already in existence on a responsible business conduct. On taxation and all the other good work on skills, for example, can be featured in the horizontal project. So this is just some very general thoughts and we also wish you good luck with that.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you, indeed the technical community definitely sports your ambitious horizontal projects and continue to work together towards an open and interoperable Internet.

The concerned States we talk about one open Internet that still half of the world population is still unconnected as such. And this is a challenge for everybody. Not only for those countries that are suffering from this problem. And I think this needs also attention by showing again the benefits of having one and open Internet, interoperable. We have been recently a year ago engaged into our study with ICANN and Price, Waterhouse Cooper talking about friction that we are happy to share which shows, okay, what are the benefits of an open interoperable Internet for businesses, for small businesses specifically in the developing world? What are the friction in this case from a business enabling point of view to be overcome in order to provide the benefits for the citizens as such. Because at the end the citizens don't care how the Internet works but what are the benefits in their life and their own languages. I hope this will also be taken into consideration so that they don't call us talking within an exclusive club. Thank you.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you.

>> Just a few reactions what I heard here. I think this is a very ambitious project and I heard about it sort of marginally beforehand. When you thought the project should be I thought a strange questions. Before embarking what you should think the project should be about but more seriously speaking, personally I am doubtful that this project should focus on Internet governance-related issues because there are other projects or other reports that have been released already, the Swedish Prime Minister. It escapes me. The Canadian CIGI report on Internet. But rather this project should focus more on showcasing the impact of technologies to societies. In many countries, ministries are looking only one side of the coin and not necessarily understand the second or other side of the coin. And increasingly we see that there are many unintended consequences of different developments. And explaining and revealing those unintended consequences, I think this would be one of the aims of this horizontal project.

Secondly, I think OECD is very well placed to do a little bit of forecast and look in the crystal ball in the future. And also sort of showcasing how that might influence development both of individuals and societies. And so these are reflections from the conversation you have here. Thank you.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Michael.

>> We run out of time? I'll be very quick. Thanks for making time and for the useful overview. I was involved in Cancun. I was in Seoul and at the White House when they first hatched the idea of doing the Ottawa meeting. I'm somewhat of a futurist so I will look to the future and what you could do. And I'm going to start with the point you made which is how easy it was to get agreement in Cancun. The reason it was easy is because we avoided five or six of the really big, hairy problems. And we can't do that. Particularly as we go to the digitization report where we're looking at the entire economy. We have to address the big hairy problems. Many of those were touched on in the OECD Internet policy principles but then kind of covered up. And in Cancun there was a conscious effort from almost every government, most of the corporate sector, to avoid anything controversial. And so we didn't talk about what happens when a Brazilian company wants to get data stored in a cloud service in the U.S., or Ireland. We didn't talk about what is the appropriate level of surveillance online.

We didn't talk about how we are going to have to change copyright in a world where it doesn't make sense to apply copyright rules written when printing presses cost the equivalent of a million dollars. There is just a whole series of seven or eight really big, hairy problems and we didn't talk about them in Cancun and we have to talk about them when we start talking about digitization. Particularly the law enforcement access issue. If we have this Internet of Things or the cloud of things embedded in every company, in every bedroom, we better be able to tell the American people, the French people, the UK what that data is going to be used for. So I give you that challenge and I'm happy to talk at length about this afterwards.

>> ANNE CARBLANC: Thank you very much. Thank you all for this more critical comments at the end and suggestions for future work. Thank you to all panelists. I hope we can continue this discussion. I invite you to have a look at our website for the ministerial for coming work and if you have further inputs don't hesitate to get in contact with us. Thank you again.

(Session ended at 4:00 PM CT)