The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Good afternoon, everyone. Can you hear me? Thank you so much for joining us for this session and discussion on UNESCO's universality ROAMX indicators. The revised and enhanced indicators which we launched this Sunday with a high-level discussion.
And we were going to have opening remarks and follow with a discussion from colleagues and experts from different regions who have the experience of implementing the IUI indicators.
We don't have a lot of time, so I will proceed immediately to giving the floor to UNESCO's isn't Director General for introduction who leads the work on communication integration including IUI ROAMX indicators, Tawfik Jelassi, the floor is yours to introduce your opening remarks.
>> TAWFIK JELASSI: Good afternoon to you and thank you for coming to this session which we are organizing on the revised ROAMX indicators. The Internet universality indicators and their contribution to advancing inclusion digital transformation.
As Tatevik mentioned, we had on Sunday afternoon a panel which launched the new indicators. This is for us very important and first before I proceed, I want to show you how the report looks like. And if you don't have your own copy, we brought you a number of copies so you can take your copy. But if you're traveling, this will add weight to your luggage, therefore, you can connect to the UNESCO website and you can find the same report in English but it will be also available in many languages.
So before I proceed I want to thank some major contributors to this work, starting of course with the Brazilian network information center. NIC.br, but the regional studies for the development of Civil Society, and you'll hear from Fabio Senne who is here to my left. I tried to increase the stress level by saying you are going to be the main speaker. He said, no, don't call me the main speaker. One of the speakers in the session. And he has first-hand knowledge, he has contributed to this work.
I believe this revised version is very important because it does include to the earlier version which we put into action back in 2019. It does include the new issues that were not incorporated then, such as environmental impact, gender equality, but also emerging technologies like artificial intelligence. So these are important developments that have happened since the initial version was put together.
And I'm glad that we believe this is more relevant, hopefully this set of indicators which are both quantitative and qualitative are more useful and value adding to each member state. And let me identify something that I was asked about.
These indicators lead to national digital assessments by countries around the world. And the initial set of indicators were used by 40 countries around the world. So that's our base. And hopefully now we'll have more countries involved.
But this is not about coming up with a comparative study, and it is not about ranking countries along these criteria and these indicators. UNESCO is not in the business of rankings nor of making comparisons of countries. UNESCO has been around for 80 years, that's 8-0. We provide a guidance, hopefully, to you formal policymakers and decision-makers at government level. But also in a multi-stakeholder approach so define the gaps they see through this digital assessment and then to come up with the actions which will overcome the shortcomings. This is the purpose of these guidelines.
I think as we proceed, you should take them or consider them in this context.
I mentioned 40 implementations worldwide. Let me give you some specificities here.
We had 17 countries from Africa who have implemented the UNESCO Internet universality indicators. It's the leading contingent, Africa. 12 countries in Asia-Pacific. Five countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Three countries in Europe and three countries in Arab states.
So it's definitely the five corners of the world, but we hope, of course, to have more Member States embracing this. We had seven small island developing states which we call seven SITS who have completed their assessment.
And I must say that the feedback we received, the lessons learned from these 40 implementations of the indicators and their related national digital assessments, the learnings have informed us in revising the indicators to know what worked best, what maybe needed to be revised or revisited. And now a new set of indicators contain fewer, much fewer questions to make it easier, simpler, more comprehensive for the parties to carry out these assessments.
So again, it's a national -- it's a guidance for national digital assessment, as I said, for digital strategy. I want to mention here a region like the South Pacific, where these indicators have informed key priorities and bolstered the achievements or advancing of the achievement towards the Sustainable Development Goals.
And these are among our objectives, how to reduce inequalities, how to bridge the digital divide, and how to foster economic development in each one of the countries where these were used.
Now, what I mentioned digital divide, statistic that I'm sure many of you if not all of you are aware of. We have 93% of high-income populations connected online while we have only 27% in low-income countries connected online.
So you see the gap between 93% in developed economies and only 27% in developing economies. That's the type of digital gap that you talk about.
And how can we go forward, not only UNESCO brings a modest brick to the more affordable future, so we call for more partnerships, more collaboration between different stakeholders, governments, Civil Society, academic associations, technical community, this is very, very important if you want to achieve trust, inclusion, but also prosperity since we all know that digital technologies are not only an important lever, but sometimes a unique lever for value creation and value adding.
Thank you for being here and now that I warmed up the audience, I think it's time for the speakers to take it forward.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much for your welcoming remarks and also highlighting some of the key and important issues that we're facing in the statistics or facts that IUIs have and are trying to address.
I know that you will need to leave soon to your next meeting, thank you so much for joining us. Welcome, people. We'll carry on with the -- with the discussion and I want to mention that we have key people here, okay, I'll move towards you so that you're not lonely.
>> (Away from mic).
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Yes, I think we have good gender balance. We have key people here. We have Fabio Senne who works for the NIC.br. He's a city service project coordinator and he's a senior specialist who has helped us throughout the IUI not only for the revision as was mentioned, but Cedric was the one to pilot the first IUI assessment in Brazil and they have been instrumental in supporting and giving technical guidance to countries who are implementing the IUIs.
We have my colleague who is bringing the experience of the Arab states where he implemented the IUIs and also Africa where he still did the IUIs. So I'll allow him to elaborate.
And I think the first time in the past few years we have two representatives from the South Pacific, and I'm very proud and happy that we've completed the assessments in five South Pacific countries and we had the first ever regional -- sub-regional report on the Internet development for the South Pacific which highlighted -- which did not do any ranking, as was said, or comparison, but it looked at common trends and learning experiences and showcased the sub-regional priorities which can help the government and other stakeholder groups to better advance their digital strategies, digital policies and actions. But also to help guide the other international organizations and key donors to perhaps prioritize their support when it comes to the region.
So this is the panel of the speaker. And before we go to the speakers, I just wanted to give a few very quick facts since I'm a moderator. I would not normally do it, but just to say why UNESCO is doing what it's doing on ROAMX indicators. UNESCO has the mandate to ensure the free flow of ideas, and ROAMX focuses while it has indicators on technical aspects, infrastructures -- infrastructure, it mainly focuses on the contents on human rights online, open education resources online, openness accessibility, and multi-stakeholder participation while also addressing cross-cutting issues such as gender equality online, security and a few recent things where advanced technologies such as AI and the environmental impact of the Internet.
So, okay, it's not working, but these are the core principles. This is UNESCO's position on the Internet. As I mentioned, the core principles that the Internet should be based on. And this is the -- these are the principles that were endorsed by UNESCO's general conference.
And while revising the indicators, we had aimed to gather the lessons learned and try and make revisions to ensure that it's easier to implement the indicators are easier to implement, faster to conduct the assessment, and also take into consideration the ongoing processes and digital -- around the digital transformation and it's highlighted here.
Here are how the assessments look like. These are so far the published assessments, but of course we have many more which you could hear. I did mention the countries so you can see the division. Distribution.
I will not talk about all of this for the sake of time, but I hope Fabio will mention a few of these things. But as I was said, if you're interested, you're more than welcome to contact me, I'm coordinating the IUI work at UNESCO and of course you're more than welcome to join our dynamic coalition and visit our website for further information and to read some of the reports.
Now I would like to give the floor to Fabio. Fabio Senne, as I said, has been key in supporting us throughout this pathway of implementing the IUIs and also revising the IUIs.
I would like to invite you to speak about how do the revised indicators tackle the challenges, the emerging challenges, and address the gaps that were identified during the revision process since you conducted all these interviews and surveys and consultations with countries that implemented but also with a wider public?
>> FABIO SENNE: Thank you very much, Tatevik. Thank you all for participating. It's a pleasure to be here.
For us, I think it was -- we are -- we participated in the process since the very beginning.
We're one of the first countries that conducted the methodology and also pilot this back in 2018/19. And then we were invited as a Category 2 UNESCO center to participate in the revision.
Regarding your question, the process was designed by UNESCO and we participated in the process as a highly collaborative and inclusive process. We tried to not only ensure that multiple sectors participated in the presentations but from our regional perspectives.
So several open consultations were conducted along we survey. We tried to speak well, you after the -- with all the 40 countries that participated and have feedback.
So I think it was critical in developing the new version. And the challenge here is to have indicators that are globally relevant and still are relevant in the new context, but also adaptable, flexible to a wide range of social, economic, and culture and political context that we have for different cultures.
So I would like to talk about two of these processes. From a multi-stakeholder perspective, I think we try to engage different governments and society and also the private sector in the process. As that happened, we had a few open consultations on very strategic multi-stakeholder event happening in San Pao happening in April of this year. And sorry, during this fora, we had a lot of private sector worry and concerns about emerging technology and also market trends that are considering indicators.
Is it going? While civil society highlights lots of digital inequalities and human rights processes and the like.
So we have to combine all these interplays and viewpoints to the review IUI. So it was considered in the process.
From a regional perspective, I think it was also interesting to understand that we had to address specific challenges that we have in each region. For instance, from the Global South, and we had lots of comments regarding still how to face the digital divide, the rural divides, the gender divides, and all the gaps in media information, literacy in those countries.
So I think it came out with more indicators that uses that more or less the framework of the meaningful connectivity or how to have a connectivity that really is useful to change people's lives and especially in the Global South.
While in countries that the connectivity was high, we had more discussion or trust, security, and human rights and we also benefit from the UNESCO discussion on information integrity or the governance of digital platforms to be also incorporated in this process and this feedback was fundamental.
We have lots of lessons from the 40 countries that already implemented the process. So we interviewed all those countries and it's interesting to say that the indicators was relevant in very different cultures. Being from big economies such as Germany, Argentina, and Brazil, but the island and other countries, the indicators has proven to be very relevant.
In the end, I think we came out with a model that is more user friendly also. So we received this feedback from the field that we needed to have indicators that are more easy to implement and questions that are more straightforward to be comprehensive in the process.
I think these are the main, to say in a few words, the main issues and then I can comment more on different aspects of it.
Thank you.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you so much, Fabio. I hope we will indeed have time to have your impactful comments on the different aspects.
Now I would like to move to Najib. You implemented the IUI assessments in Tunisia in three countries in Central Africa, in Cameroon, in Burundi, in the two Congos, actually. It's four countries in Africa. And I think we've had very successful collaboration there from different stakeholders. But I wanted to invite you to actually speak about the -- while we had effective communication with different stakeholders, what were the main -- what were the main success and what were the lessons learned in terms of the main barriers to effective collaboration between all these different stakeholders, governments, Civil Society, and the private sector in Africa? And what are the barriers in this collaboration for Africa Internet policy development and from your experience how can this be overcome through multi-stakeholder approach, bearing in mind that we put so much emphasis not only on the actually -- not only on the findings of the assessment, but also on the process which is truly multi-stakeholder and cooperative throughout the assessment process. Which then leads to multi-stakeholder cooperation in implementing the recommendations.
Please, Najib.
>> Najib: Thank you so much for the question. Let me first of all congratulate all of us for this second generation of IUIs. I was pleased to support the first generation since the consultations. So a since the adoption process of the IUIs and then the implementations in at least three or four countries.
Was difficult also to implement them in other countries. We tried a lot. That's why there is a lot of challenges. But there is a lot of lessons learned and we can share also.
So I think that integrating the IUIs include and IUIs is the Internet universal indicators. At UNESCO we like to use acronyms. International framework and policy making processes can, of course, enhance effectiveness and inclusivity of Internet Governance and so on.
And here we are not discussing the relevance of those IUI, but how we can use this framework to change the reality to improve the policies and so on.
So I think there is a keyword here, the ownership. By all the stakeholders. This is very important. But at the national and divisional levels. We have to work with all the stakeholders. They need to be aware about this framework and the importance of this framework. It's not ranking countries, and this is not very clear for many governments.
So we have to work with governments, of course, Civil Society, academia, regulators, media, private sector, divisional organizations, and then choose the ownership of these IUIs is very important.
The process should be led by those actors. And we need to understand this framework and the objective and the purpose of the assessment. And then they could contribute to its implementation.
So this needs a lot of actions. The first one is the awareness raising, capacity building, and the public awareness campaigns. It's very important.
And even before conducting the assessments, because there is a need of understand this framework and its implications.
So before even conducting assessment, it's very important to organize information sessions, workshops, training workshops, et cetera.
The second key element for this ownership is the stakeholders engagement. And the stakeholders engagement is the engagement of all the stakeholders during the whole process. Not at the beginning or during -- so it's -- it's not easy to maintain this dynamic and create this dynamic among stakeholders and maintain it during one year or two years to prepare the assessment, conduct the data collection and analyse it, develop the recommendations and, of course, implementing the recommendations. And I'll talk about that later.
So this very important and we need to agree on the role of each actor before, during, and at the implementation phase of the recommendations as well.
So it's important to do the smart thing at the regional, but especially at the national levels with all concerned stakeholders and each domain and area. It's very important, because we don't have specialists on all of those. So it's very important that we work with all of them and to get [?] during the whole process.
The key element for this ownership and -- I mean, for implementation, is -- this is the most important component, the assessments, the data collection, analyse, and recommendations. It's very important. And we need to think about an normative approach to better involve stakeholders at this phase. And we have also to showcase, I mean, transformative impact after the assessment is -- is developed.
So of those assessment, and it's important also to monitor the implementation of the recommendation in the participatory and inclusive model as well.
This is very important. And this lead for the other element, the monitoring and evaluation. This is very important. It should be based on the performance indicators for each component of the ROAMX indicators to track progress and measure outcomes.
And also we need regular reviews, because we did some assessment at the end of the previous iteration, and in the meantime there's improvements and developments. So it's important that we do a kind of regular review or updates of the assessment to reflect change and development and improvement.
And it's very important for the national counterparts, because it's also a kind of recognition about their efforts that they are following this framework and they are advancing.
So -- and I think the original population, it's very important to exchange best practices when we see, for example, the success stories, et cetera, it's very important for sharing on successful implementation of IUI, it's very -- we have to think also about some fora, for example, IUI forum, original forums, also IGF also would be a platform to enhance this original cooperation and thank you so much.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much, Najib. Actually I have a follow-up question, but very briefly you mentioned you draw upon your experience in five countries, actually. I wanted to ask you when it comes to the challenges of multi-stakeholder cooperation, do you see patterns of challenges that are relevant to any country? Or the challenges in each country are rather unique? What's your take on this?
>> Najib: There's some -- I mean, we can find both. So we have some challenges where we find everywhere. The first one is the political will, of course. Because if we don't have this high-level commitment, the political commitment on that, we cannot advance on the implementation. And this is the case of most countries I try to implement the IUI there.
And there is, for example, another common barrier or challenge is the -- is the effective collaboration between partners. And also the lack of trust.
So -- and the lack of trust between partners, I mean, it's leading to reluctance of engagement. So I mean, of actors. And we have also sometimes a problem of a weak communication between actors. We have in some countries we have a very limited resources. And also sometimes the impact of Civil Society or the -- I mean, there is the role of Civil Society sometimes it's very limited.
And sometimes also we find the kind of shrinking civic space. So it's also very difficult to identify the actors and to work with them.
So this limit the scope of the assessment and also the data collection and everything. Of course, another challenge, is the fragmentation of the intergovernance framework. You have pieces of it and this is very difficult for the data collection.
So the lack of comprehensive frameworks and processes for Internet Governance can also complicate the collaboration effort.
So those are the main -- it's -- I mean, it depends on the context of the country, but we found those challenges, I mean, with difference, of course, but we found them in all countries. Thank you.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much, Najib. Now we'll go to another region, to the South Pacific actually where I had the pleasure and on this visit to conclude the IUI assessments and see the strong will power and cooperative approach to changing the country and driving the digital transformation forward. And (broken audio) you've been instrumental in not only in driving the IUI assessment forward, but in driving the digital transformation in value forward. By the way, congratulations on this huge achievement of under the undersea cable shipped. This is a huge achievement and I know you've had an instrumental input in this.
I wanted to invite you to speak about the relevance, first of all, relevance of IUIs for small countries, but also I wanted to ask you to reflect on your experience of implementing the IUI assessments and talk a little bit about how governments from the perspective of Telco, how could the government engage with all these diverse stakeholders, telecoms, private sectors, Civil Society, and all the other special actors to collaboratively create a more inclusive digital ecosystem and drive this digital transformation.
Thank you.
>> TENANOIA SIMONA: Thank you so much, Tatevik. Thank you for the kind words. We landed our first submarine cable four days ago, and it's a milestone and a historic moment for our country.
And coming back to your question, I mean, government in a small Pacific Island country, government is very important. And we need to engage government with private sector and other stakeholders. Because it is critical for building more, like you said, more inclusive and sustainable digital economy ecosystem in the Pacific.
And I would like to take you into how we see the IUI framework strategizing and guiding dominate in a few points I want to mention.
Some of the points was echoed by our other speakers which is a very important point when it comes to shared ownership. Because shared ownership of digital development goals can really build the trust between stakeholders and get that working together.
The other thing that I wanted to highlight here, a strategy that I feel because we -- small Pacific Island countries, we're communal based. Community is very strong in our countries. And engaging local community and Civil Society is very, very important and government should collaborate with Civil Society organizations and to make sure and ensure that digital initiative really address local needs.
By saying how to engage, you have to engage community leaders. Government can improve digital literacy from a very -- the grass root level, accessibility, and take into account we value our you causes and traditions. So it's very important that we have that cultural relevance in this approach.
The other point that I really want to mention is how to prioritize capacity building and skill development. We are very small in size, and we depend so much on partnership and private sector bringing back training and knowledge sharing opportunities to build our local technical expertise because of our remoteness. And we're far from developed countries and building capacity is a challenge.
I think on Day 0 I talked a little bit on the challenges. In the Pacific we have very, very unique challenges, and I mentioned a couple of them. And the role of the government in that is very important.
The other last point I want to mention, I will leave others to my colleagues. The other that I want to -- the other strategy that I feel that government should do is to drive innovation through local businesses. Government can really encourage entrepreneurship, SMEs, small and medium enterprises.
I think the way to do that is to do start-up, frankly, digital ecosystem, because a small Pacific Island countries, as I said, it's communal based and we are very friendly. So building that kind of start-up, friendly, digital ecosystem can really -- the adaption will be very, very fast, I will say. And one of the -- an example that I would say which is develop a mobile money solution just recently, and from experience and from experience from other countries, they said that it would take a long time to adopt a mobile app in such context.
But in the case of us, our approach is different and we like to do it in a more frankly way, because that trust is very -- it's very much in our community. So we promote that kind of inclusion and economy participation in that context.
Thank you.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much, you mentioned the small solutions and I hope I'll have time to come back and inquire a little bit about your country becoming the first digital nation country which is related to our fortunate environmental impact which impacts small islands a lot and Tuvalu is one of them which is at risk.
But perhaps you could think about that to say a few points while in the meantime I would like to gift floor to Salu. I would like to build on what Tenanoia said about values.
It was very interesting for me to see that, for example, some small islands, nations, countries have values listed or defined in their constitution. And so for -- but I just wanted overall to talk about the clarities of the sea. It's small island developing countries when it comes to the -- can you hear me?
Sorry. Yeah, it's weird.
So I just wanted you to -- we know that there are particularities about different digital challenges and particularities of values, cultures. I wanted to see your perspective on how do you think ROAMX indicators can help strengthen the digital development strategy pursuits taking into consideration the particularities and diverse challenges?
>> Thank you. I'm kind of struggling here, it's 2:00 a.m. so I'll keep it short and sweet. Firstly, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to share today. Just a little, because two of us is from the same region, so I'll just share quite a few from the experience of implementing the IUIs assessment in Tonga. I was part of the team on the ground in Tonga conducting this assessment, this national assessment for Tonga, and from a Civil Society organization, we conducted this IUI in Tonga.
So a few pointers from there. We identified it as a toolkit for measuring Tonga's digital economy. Playing a crucial role in strengthening and I'd -- an identifying where Tonga is digitally.
Another indicator that we pinpointed was Internet access at its weakest. This was data driven, so it was something we highlighted and was good to share. It was community based, so it was something good to share amongst Tonga to know and identify areas that we need to invest more in.
The IUIs was specifically awesome because it was data driven. And that was a bit difficult from a CSO conducting the IUIs. But one thing that we learned was though challenging for us to conduct this being a Civil Society, but government support was very crucial.
And so amongst all this, there is the multi-stakeholder Advisory Board and to make government share that will push everything easier for us.
From small islands developing state in Tonga, the biggest thing that ROAMX can indicate is to share progress across the region.
Share best practices, advocate, and monitor so that we could align. Most of us in this region are very familiar with risks. Earlier along the year, we had a volcanic eruption. This morning was a big tsunami earthquake, so I think climate change and all that, these are risks that us in the small island developing states face every day.
So cross-cutting and bringing ROAMX indicators into our region, we can easily just share best practices instead of Tonga doing their own and Tuvalu doing their own, since we're kind of very familiar, very same, we can share and advocate more on this.
Two more points. In my experience, in implementing this IUI and having digital inclusion initiatives, as mentioned by the speakers earlier is the multi-stakeholder approach inquires and tailors solutions to our region.
So solutions are tailored specifically for us in the region. For example, us in Tonga, we found some success -- big success in evolving communities. So when you go down grass level and involving community directly, you can shape technology policies there. And you can also deliver and conduct more around digital literacy, online safety, and connectivity.
Just two challenges besides all this that I wanted to highlight during this programme for us, is, one, the digital divide. And the challenge in aligning policies in our region with the fast-moving technology changes due to the gap around there.
And one thing that was not mentioned was we found it quite difficult conducting this assessment and indicators and interviews, the language. Trying to indicate to the local communities in the Tonga language from a context that is mostly tech language or mostly international language. We had a little challenge there around interpreting to community level in Tonga.
Thank you.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much, Salu. As she mentioned, she's from the Civil Society, she's -- she's consultant on ICT, cybersecurity, and I.T. management and she co-led the assessment in Tonga.
Actually, I would have wanted to reflect on the implementation of the recommendations, but the caution of time, I think we've got only six minutes left, and I wanted to give the floor to each of the speakers to say for one minute, any remarks, final remarks you have. Please, let's start with Fabio.
>> FABIO SENNE: Thank you, Tatevik.
No, just to say that I really like what my colleagues mentioned about -- first about ownership and collaboration. I think these are two keywords that I want to remind when using this. So this is not for ranking or for just classifying encounters, but how to create a conversation. A conversation that is based on sound principles so that it is good to have UNESCO involved establishing main principles such as human rights, openness, and accessibility, multi-stakeholders.
I think now the process, I would like to see the next steps in the cultures that already implemented to see, for instance, the new indicators on environmental impacts on digital technologies can be very impactful for the new assessments.
And finally, I think I really like also this comments on how to create a network of implementing counters and between counters is this is not planned in the beginning of the process, but naturally it came out as a key too and I think we have international fora and other spaces to keep this as a collaborative of different stakeholders and researchers that implemented the indicators.
Thank you very much.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you very much, Fabio.
Najib.
>> Najib: Thank you so much. It's relevant for Africa countries, but also most the developing countries. I think ICT and artificial intelligence, they are among the most compromising sectors. I mean, structure transformation in Africa and other developing countries in terms of reliability, in terms of contribution of funding and the creating and, of course, the know-how of [?]
So it's very important to use the AI framework, but it's time to think about a novel approach for all those stakeholders to conduct this to implement.
So, and to discuss their -- and build the trust through the engagement of all those sectors before conducting the assessment. And after also the assessment is done, to implement the framework, the recommendations, and we need a framework for the implementation with performance indicators.
It's very important to monitor and so we can also reevaluate and update those -- it will be easier for us to monitor this.
Thank you so much.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you so much, gentleman anybody. Tenanoia, please.
>> TENANOIA SIMONA: I will just have a few remark. It's just that leveraging the revised frameworks emphasizing resilience, inclusion, and small island nation like ours and other Pacific Island countries can address this in digital divides and enhanced environmental preparedness. Because we're very, very vulnerable to climate change.
I think the multi-stakeholder approach should combine with international collaboration to ensure that the small island developing states navigate the path for digital development journey more sustainably and inclusive in a way.
So I think I'm thankful to the UNESCO for bringing that over to our South Pacific Islands. Thanks.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you so much. These are all points that we could talk about for an extended period of time, but we have only one minute left. So Salu.
>> SALU: Thank you. I think ending for me is the main indicator moving forward is empowering people and fostering collaboration.
>> TATEVIK GRIGORYAN: Thank you all so much for the discussion and excellent points. I hope we can carry forward the conversation and continue the conversation, including to our dynamic coalition. Unfortunately our time is up and I have could conclude by showing, again, our new indicator framework. And I must say that you discussed different challenges, new challenges and technologies, and the -- in the revised indicators, it has indicators, we took this into consideration, like Fabio said.
And it's not (broken audio) more inclusive of these challenges and it's now Internet universality advancing inclusive digital transformation with ROAMX indicators.
So thank you so much again and I should thank once again to all of you, but also special thanks you for being throughout UNESCO throughout all these years and through the implementation of the indicators and of course for the revision for the instrumental role.
I would like to acknowledge the presence of the head of the regional status on the development of information society setting.BR. They can agree to institute and Fabio, of course, for our years of work which has been a delight. And with this, I would like to thank the audience for coming and I'm truly sorry we didn't have time for questions.
You can catch us in the corridors now if you have any questions or any remarks to make. But thank you so very much for coming and being with us. Thank you so much.