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: Okay. I think that's the sign that we get to start. Everybody have their headsets on, ready to go?
>> Yes.
>> MODERATOR: Good, good. Fantastic. First, I would like to thank you for joining us. This is fantastic for you to be Abe to do this session. My name is Theresa Swinehart. I work with ICANN. And we are very much looking forward to this panel section which will focus on the WSIS process and where we are with regards to. That this does build on our discussion that we held at the last IGF in December 2024. And what has been and can be done between now and the upcoming December WSIS +20 related negotiations.
And what matters to us leading up to that. But clearly the decisions that are still to come could effect the Internet Governance aspects for the next deck it's
And really need to look at what practical steps different communities can take between now and December, and what their oaks are from the past.
So with that, I would like to ask the panelists to briefly introduce themselves. You will see that we have a panel from the technical community from government, Civil Society and intergovernmental initiatives and this will be an important oak from each of these sectors for the discussions. So if I could start with the panel to my right for the brief ducks.
>> YU PING CHAN: Thank you so much so my name is ewe ping Chan from the digital partnerships and engagement UNDP programme.
>> Hello, I'm with the international trade foreign minister.
>> FIONA ALEXANDER: Hi, Fiona Alexander, a professional at American university from Washington, D.C.
>> I'm Kurtis Lindqvist.
>> I'm Jarno from the African organisation based in deli.
>> MODERATOR: Fantastic. Very good. Thank you, everybody. Now we have four seconds to today's session. And a limited amount of time. So we go through each of them. And we do have a poll as well. So that will add to the excitement.
The first part, we really want to talk about is understanding WSIS +20 and what it is. It's in a 20-year review process at this time. And the commitments made between 2003 and 2005 and building on a more inclusive development oriented information society. What would you very good to hear from the panelists is to start discussing the scope of that process. Who is involved, what is at stake and how different communities still contribute.
So with that, question 1, I will go over to Yu Ping. UNDP is one of the co-facilitators of the action in Japan. If you can go over deliverables and timelines have you in place and the broad range of stakeholders engaged and influenced. That would be great.
>> YU PING CHAN: Thank you so much, Theresa. So I think a lot of us have been following the WSIS process for a number of years. And for those of us not up to speed with the intricacies of the UN process which are very long and implicated. What will happen at the end of the year is the WSIS +20 review. This will be the second review conducted by the United States of the documents that Theresa mentioned the 2003/2005 Tunis and Geneva outcomes of WSIS submits then access.
So the question is how will member states reflect the review to discuss the ongoing discussions happening at digital both at the organisations and other international forums, will the WSIS action lines actually have been established to look at the outcomes suffice to cover the wrath and multitude of the global discusses and developments themselves and due to the institutions such as the internet governance forum that brings us all together today. Still be obtained and updated and refined and still for the purpose.
And how do the member states reflect on the conversations that have taken place for development so far in the last 20 years, the process has been -- actually, I mentioned it's quite complex. There have been a number of UN agencies involved in drafting is being reports, the INTU and the colleagues have also had processes that culminated in a number of submissions to the Secretary General.
The Secretary General will be putting forward a report, the timing is unclear that will summarize the ongoing conversations as an input for the member states. And as some of you have already been involved, in there are ongoing consultations that are held in forums such as the IGF, such as the Paris conferences that convened by UNESCO a couple of weeks ago and in two weeks at the high level WSIS event convened by UNDP which is a forum where again we get the stakeholders to really talk about what we see as the progress made through WSIS and the future going forward as well.
There will be a number occasions where it will be important to hear the stake point of view because part of the WSIS and the outcomes of the WSIS and the reason why the process endured so long, and something that has been Abe to carry through documents in concrete ways is the commitment of the multistakeholder community and the network that has developed around the implementation of these aspects.
It is important as stakeholders we continue to be engaged in this process. And I include the UN system because for us, we as UNDP see the WSIS process is very important to translating guidance by the member states into actionable outcomes focused on delivery and deliveries. So in context of the outgoing context are the digit A global compact last year how then do we reflect these sort of developments into the WSIS action lines and into the WSIS review, reflecting on the fact that the principals Ma were greed 0 years ago in Geneva and Tunis remain as relevant today as they were 20 years ago. That is the opening context where I hope that stakeholder will continue to have conversations such as in IGF and other forums to confirm the importance of the multistakeholder approach as embody of the WSIS process itself.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, you really highlight the stakeholder and the multistakeholder in interest in all of these areas. Thank you.
First of all, Finland, thank you so much for co-hosting this and by example also from government engagement in the process, what steps can governments take to ensure that really all region, not just that digital actors are meaningfully included in this WSIS +20 process?
>> JARNO SYRJALA: I think governments like the one in Finland -- so we are doing a lotting to with different actors, organisations and making WSIS. And I think through the recent global digital content, it's a better place to force the multistakeholder corporation and different matters and to leverage digital technologies for sustainable development.
We believe at the GDC and WSIS is highly implemented in sync with each other. It is also to guarantee that everybody will be on board. For us the IGF is the primary multistakeholder forum for shaping international digital policy and Internet Governance at the UN level.
Clear indication of its structure, the 16/0 national regional and youth initiatives of the IGF. It has also become an important platform for discussing emerging digital issues such as AI.
And Finland -- so we of course are strongly supporting the IGF. We have given financial support to the IGF throughout the existence. In one of the top contributors and we encourage, of course other actors to step up their support to the IGF.
In these geopolitical circumstance of today, I think it's even more important to support and enhance the model stakeholder, the model on the Internet Governance which is in essence within essence and powers to various stakeholders and enhances resilience of our common internet structure. And I think fragmentation of internet is a danger to actual saying of universal human rights and international trade and global geopolitical stability.
But I think how we can reach everybody and do good for everybody is that we have to of course address the digital divide and the maturity of the world's population does not yet have meaningful and safe access to the internet which requires certain actions.
And reaching this digital divide is not only about affordability, connectivity, it requires also developments in skills and competencies and respectful human rights and human fundamental freedoms on the line.
And we want to develop new technologies and the internet by respecting democratic values and principals.
Still I think it with this 20-year review should highlight the need to focus on trusted connectivity and global, inoperable and secure internet. And the rereview is also an important opportunity to renew and strengthen the IGF mandate, including by ensuring a more sustainable punish basis from the regular UN budget that sets a global inclusive effort deserves. So to conclude, I think we are doing a lot.
>> MODERATOR: Yeah, I would agree. And thank you for your observations of -- for an IGF, one needs sustainable budget. One needs to be able to bridge all stakeholders around the global and be inclusive. So I think those are important elements coming into the WSIS +20 aspect.
Fiona, from your perspective, you have had quite a bit of experience in this as well. What areas and where is the input most needed before the WSIS +20 outcome is finalised? And how can we make sure the inputs reflect a global perspective that has already been touched upon by our first two speakers.
>> FIONA ALEXANDER: Thank you, Theresa, and for the introduction. For a lot of years, and at the end of December, member states will adopt a resolution and the resolution will decide whether or not the IGF will continue and continue to update the act lines and the GDC. The process has been kicked off. There are co-facilitators to work with stakeholders and governments to put the base documenting to. And those co-facilitators have had stakeholder constable takings and they had a government consultation which is broadcast on web TV, or UN web TV, if you wanted to watch it, and if you had an issue in the Elements paper this past Friday, that came out.
I think there's a litany of issues, there are subjective issues whether it's getting people connected or ensuring human right online. Whether it's dealing with AI internet governance issues. But there is one issue that people have united around from a Civil Society perspective, and that is making sure -- what I at least personally think is one of the biggest hallmark achievements of the WSIS is opening up the conversations so all stakeholders are considered.
And we saw last year, unfortunately in the Global Digital Compact process, the GIC process, that the systems in New York are not nearly as open as UNDP or other expert agencies of the UN have become. They originally weren't 20 years ago either. And they have made a lot of effort to do that.
So I think the challenge we have before us in year is to make sure that the process that will unfolded this year has a real voice and gives real space to be able to provide input into that prose is. And the two club facilitators and the agenda they have laid out and the timeline and the schedule seems to be allowing that, which is a great outcome and great improvement.
There is a grouch stakeholders and others that have signed on that have submitted a couple of letters giving very specific recommendations and suggestions for how to allow for that engagement. And so far we are seeing positive movement in. That so I think that's good. But we shouldn't take that for and think everyone should always be pushing to make sure everyone in the room has a say. I think conversations at IGF are helpful and UNDP and at ITU and in Geneva. These are all going to be great things.
But these conversations that the co-facilitators will lead, and actually having conversations that are not just about giving empty statements and seeing what they say provided and reflected in the documents discussed will be an important next step and that's what I think we want to make sure happens going forward next year until we get to the final resolution point to be adapted in December.
>> MODERATOR: This is a great setup for where the next question goes. And I can only echo that we have come a long way from 20 years ago. There were these kind of panels and these kinds of discussions, not normal opportunity. So inclusivity in all stakeholders has led to really core rule. Which brings us to the secs of this session by where WSIS outputs have shown an impact.
We talked about WSIS has produced different frameworks and dialogues and some tangible changes, including stakeholders at the table, in discusses. Discussing subject matters and sub-expertise into different conversations. Which outputs, though, have been effective and which ones still need support is an important part of this conversation?
So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Kurtis, actually, about where have WSIS related initiatives sufficient as domain names demonstrated lasting value for the unserved regions and where are there still gaps? Where can we still do some work?
>> KURTIS LINDQVIST: Thank you, Theresa. I think you're right, as mentioned, within the WSIS process there's been a lot of talk about where the internet has been or where there was development or gaps to be filled such as security and domain system, universal access or global reach and access. And UNESCO has a success story. Weakness in the main system and work in the IGF to create technical standards, capacity building and community building through the IGF. And the multistakeholder awareness racing adaptation.
And this wasn't verified by top mandate. This came from the real saying from the technical communities from the work here and elsewhere, really that this was a problem that needed to be addressed to create a reliable and trust in the system.
And through persistent cooperation and engagement and work, and the technology was developed and the standard was set and the outreach and the work and the explanation of the value of this system was done. And the outcome is really measurable. We can see as they deployed and a stronger authentication, a more secure DNS and thereby a more secure internet and a naming system that has a more robust foundation.
And like, already in Tunis, we talked about the accessible of the internet and global reach and accessibility includes linguistic accessibility. And that includes DNS. We have seen this being evolved over the years and against standardisation done throughout the IGF.
But where we now today have a technical system in IDNs, which has covered the domain name system for non-Latin scripts or Chinese, other Latin scripts like Swedish, my native language.
And we also see a lot of work being pushed over into the universal accept Ann where we go I don't know the domain name system and start talking about applications supporting these scripts in a way that we haven't had before. And from technical standards has been done. We have the universal acceptance to get these adopted and really used in all the world's applications. Again something that has been discussed and pushed through awareness and awareness racing in the IGF systems and in the WSIS context about how important this is, we at ICANN have done a lot of work and research around this as well.
And I think this showcases this last point,er it is that asked about where there are still gaps and the gap is not necessarily always about capability -- we have the technical capability. It's about the alignment and ongoing alignment and work that we build on these capabilities and make them accessible everywhere.
And we continue to do the work and coordination to rolling out the DNS ground operators around the world. And we also see that -- where this cooperative effort fails or fragments that's where we see fragmentation which is a bad thing, and we see lack of progress. And I think WSIS +20 really need to draw a clear distinct here that the internet, actually the technical solutions work when they are supported by this long-term coordination that we have even as part of the IGF and part of the WSIS process. The bottom line is really this, the output has delivered a lot of positive examples of work where the multistakeholder level has put into practice concrete action.
And the WSIS +20 should really serve and protect this. Because this is what we start delivering. If we Rick this we start risking the delivery in the panel second we should not try to bypass this but ensure continued employment.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. And that does really tie into the first part of making sure we bridge into the south, use the technologies that we have and the awareness that we have that is already underway. And build on the momentum of the past 20 years forward, and fast forward that.
Lacinia, if I could ask you about the past practices or policy gains. And what insights does that afford us as we go into the WSIS +20 overall?
>> LACINA KONE: Thank you so much, Theresa for the questions and thank you for inviting Smart Africa it's partners and Civil Society dedicated to transforming Africa into a single digital market. Tock we represent over 1.1 billion populations united around just one vision. An integrated sovereign and inclusive digital Africa. Our mission is to convert WSIS commitments into a measurable progress:
By saying that, excuse me, over the past decade we have joined three core lessons. Number one is the continental ownership that creates leverage. With a direction enforcement from African head of the state, a digital development has become a political imperative for all nations. Flagship priorities like a broadband strategy developing to with Senegal, digital identity developed together with the (?) cloud infrastructure and champions are championed internationally and regionally with a regional perspective thereby reflecting a shift from a fragmented to share continental ambition.
Number 2 of what we have actually drawn the policy framework must deliver a real rule. From a trust alliance which is a digital ID interoperability for digital nations and the accountability and the Smart Africa backbone which calls every country in Africa to be connected to at least two neighbours. In every other initiative we have moved from policy ideas to operational pilots in regional implementation.
These are not just the future aspirations, they are a work model. Number 3, and the last one is the multistakeholder corporation it works if its rooted in African needs. Our additional scholarship fund created back in 2018. Today we have more than 90 students in the masters degree in the transformation at the University of in Africa and the data governance framework in Senegal and Uganda. Not just with the government but also Civil Society and Academia and private sector, both African and global.
So WSIS gives us a vision, Smart Africa is building a bridge. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: That is so well articulated I have to same between the continental ownership, the ambition but also importantly taking policy and how to operationalize that in a way that is rooted in the local community needs, which are very distinct from different communities to each other. So we are going to run a little experiment here we will see how this works. It did work. We have a slide up. Fantastic. So much of this work has involved contributions across different sectors including the private sector. And what we would like to do is just get a quick read from the room, including the Zoom attendees, which WSIS related initiatives do you think need greater support today?
So from the audience I will ask for a show of hand. And Becky I think you are going to work magic in the Zoom room. Is that right? Something to that effect?
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: Yes the poll such in the Zoom room. So I will let you know.
>> MODERATOR: For the first question, IGF -- so the question is does it need greater support? So first one, the IGF as a globally accessible platform for dialogue. Is that a yes? Okay. Sense of the room. Very good. Okay. Excellent.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: Online so far that has 8%. In the Zoom room that one has 8%.
>> MODERATOR: Wonderful. Very good. Let's keep track of this. Okay. For the second one, digital capacity building in underresourced regions.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: This one just polled ahead at 41%.
>> MODERATOR: Excellent. Okay. Thank you. Open technical standards and cross-border interoperability. Okay it's a little less. Maybe because it's working better than it was.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: And 0% for online.
>> MODERATOR: 0%. So that's interesting. I wonder whether 20 years ago that might have been a different result. Maybe it's a demonstration of how things have evolved over time.
Universal acceptance, including support for multilingual internet infrastructure. Okay. Yes. Very good.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: Online this is our second runner up at 35%.
>> MODERATOR: Oh, my gosh. Very good. For the last one cycle security collaboration through multistakeholder approaches. Okay. Very good.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: 12%. Oh, 16 now.
>> MODERATOR: 16%. That's very interesting. Some of the areas 20 years ago or 15 or 10 years ago might have had a different sector but it certainly does show where greater support is needed today and also the cross-sectorial and regional aspects that we want to take a look at. Fantastic.
So going into the next section here, we are going to focus in on what can still be done before December. Now December being when we looking at the either negotiations in New York and the conversations that will be happening which will hopefully be as inclusive as possible. But what work do we need to undertake in order to demonstrate the value what have needs to be done next?
So with that, how can government, Civil Society and the technical community really help shape that?
And Yu I will turn to you for them. What are some of the most critical inputs or messages that government should be prioritizing now, particularly from those regions that have not been traditionally represented in these internet global policy discussions? And you touched on that earlier in your remarks, and we certainly heard about it from the others -- Jarno.
>> JARNO SYRJALA: I think some thing are quite obvious for us but still we should try to keep on repeating them. For example, as we know, so digitisation accelerates progress towards the sustainable development goals digital -- mobilised increased agenda -- transition. But still we also have to talk about the other side of the thing. So coming back to the topic of this digital divide.
So it remains quite a concern. And 2.6 billion people lacking access and disparities between nations. And the gender gap remains a significant concern in the position in the digital economics and for Finland that is one of the top priorities. In this seven we are trying to work with different organisations.
And I think addressing the current digital divide will help us to get back on the track also when it comes to agenda 2030. And the majority of targets and globally, of course we are still quite far from reaching the target of universal connectivity as set out by the agenda 2030.
And at the international level, especially in developing countries, significant gaps remain between urban and rural areas and as I said, it changed. --
(Audio Difficulties)
And opening this essential in the review. The action lines -- the outlines the perspectives related to new technologies that are essential for the development of the information society. It should also be more comprehensive than before. And this includes technologies sufficient as AI, high performance computing, content technology, semiconductor technology, mobile network and for the internet, for example.
So quite a number of items still on the table.
>> MODERATOR: A lot of items and new sub areas as well. So thank you. That's very helpful.
Fiona, from your perspective, in light also what we heard from government perspective, what advice would you offer to smaller or underresourced organisations aiming to participate. And in that, how might they also be liaisoned to helping with other conversations.
>> FIONA ALEXANDER: That's a good question. And I wanted to comment on the poll, and I read the as a resulted, the capacity building, one might have been the highest in the strongest in the room vote. I found that really interesting. Because in any recollection the original idea for WSIS came from a 1998 pot resolution and development and productivity was the basis of that resolution and the base us is for calling for the summit in the process and underwent the entire five years of the WSIS process.
I think it's great that that continues, and it's important we keep that in mind. At the end of the day, I'm not a government official. I know we can spend a lot of time about words in the room. This is about getting people connected and doing the thing. I found the poll really interesting. It was kind of cool. So answer your specific question. I think -- you know as I said the process underfolding throughout the rest of the calendar year, the co-face it's tarots have been making great efforts to give people a space to have a say. They had a stakeholder session and the elements paper they put out. The comments for that are due July 15th, I cannot believe something has happened to quickly in the UN system.
But when I listened to the stakeholder position there was proposal from the EU for the creation of an informal multistakeholder feedback group of some kin. I will get the Compaq name. And a few week ago they announce they had are doing. It I've literally never seen that happen so fast. That means there's a group of multistakeholders to run that group past. So once that gets announce I encourage you to find the people in that stakeholder group. Because I think talking to those people can be helpful and talking to your individual government at home to understand what they are doing and how can you participate and how can you inform their process is equally as important.
But I am optimistic than last year, in this year's process there will be opportunities for you to provide your own input. Whits online or through written submissions or working with like-minded grews. And to do others. I would encourage every everyone to take advantage of it and keep pushing. So keep pushing. Don't accept the status quo. But you have to show up. So I would encourage everyone who cares about these issues to do that and for the events that will unfolded over the course of the year.
>> MODERATOR: It's a really good point not to take it for granted. It took a lot of work and stakeholders so take advantage and don't miss these opportunities and let's keep going.
Lacina, as we approach the face of the policy review and the policy gaps particularly from your perspective and from digital development and coordination in Africa, you turned on some really core operational aspects in your introductory remarks so we would love to hear more about that.
>> LACINA KONE: Thank you so much, Theresa. WSIS +0, if I need to look at the most pressing regional policy gap that WSIS +20 should be addressing, first of all if I had to rewind the tape back to 1999 when WSIS was being create when they talked about connectivity I would have said meaningful connectivity. Because the connectivity led us to affordability challenge as well in Africa.
So the WSIS +20 addressed four consistent gaps for Africa's digital future which is meaningful connectivity, and regulations and skills and sovereignty. I will start with meaningful connectivity. Too many African countries depend on external routes for local internet traffic.
We must complete the regional backbone and increase IXPs, very important. And reinforce initiatives like the Smart Africa backbone that calls every single country to connect with at lease two neighbour ask one African network. Not only that we must focus also on affordability. Because today, if you look at the usage gap today in Africa it's over 40%. Which mean the infrastructure of telecommunications available. But people are not using it for four reasons. One affordability, two, local context, three, capacity building because they know what we understand. It 4, cyber hygiene. So I will move to number 2. Regulatory harmonisation.
Africa has over 50 digital laws but little international operability. And I was very surprised in the poll. We had very few 10% only for interoperability. So investor they need clarity. So one likes unpredictability. So they should champion converses through agile right-based framework aligned with Africa's Internet Governance framework.
Number 3, capacity and inclusion, less than 10% of adult in civil count police Africa position basic digital skills and we have now -- it's not enough to be digital savvy, but you can also be AIic. That's the reality. Absolutely you can be a PhD, but if you are not adapted to AI, we have another gap. So AI gap.
So through smart additional academy and fund, we are interested in both grass-roots literacy and high level technical training, including AI, cybersecurity and quantum ready on. Number 4 and the last one which is a sovereignty and institutional coordination. Africa must govern its data, and digital assets and like a Smart Africa alliance and the category that we are putting together are essential to asserting reasonable leadership and then suring that the global governments reflect African reality. Which is 20 +must not only review past but equip regions like Africa to co-lead in the next decade of Internet Governance in digital, secure and sovereign. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much. I love your four very concrete areas. That is really very thoughtful and also a good way to go into conversations. Kurtis which contributions should the technical community bring forward, whether through data case studies or core examples to ensure that the WSIS +20 outcome reflects how the community actually works.
>> KURTIS LINDQVIST: So we often talk about the IGF and the WSIS +20 and what has been achieved and here's another thing, we forget quite ate about of what actually has been issued. All these success stories. And I think maybe, to what these colleagues here just referred to about the poll is the lack of engagement and the need for global standards.
Maybe if we had just been a little too successful. Because the internet has been a phenomenal success because it's built on the existing global standards that have been produced for multistakeholder processes and you know been take taking it for granted. And I think that's a success story we should talk more about it. The reason you can do that is because of the global standards that enabled this.
And the flip side of that is it also makes us to a large extent forget what happens when the opposite occurs when we see fragmentation and we see how the value, the access to the internet by having that fragmentation and by having silos which is something that we actually built away from -- I'm old enough to have been here before that, and what we saw before that. And what we had to see was internet unified has created today a much more valuable network for everyone that allowed all of this digital economy flourish upon these standards.
And I think that we also forget about what the work and the multistakeholder mold and WSIS +20 outcomes and the organizes meant and what we deployed with. This we talked about the underserved regions and we have seen a lot of buildup with IXP as the director general mentioned. African has seen a phenomenal explosion in IXPs in 20 years. It doesn't mean there is more work to be done, and in the rest of the world as well. And we have seen -- one of the thing we talked about in the earlier IGFs is building a better infrastructure. We have deployed internet access to make sure the world is more stable and more secure in those regions. ICANN is one of those operators.
And there is today almost 2,000 instants around the world and we operate 24 in other countries. And we can show where this has improved performance. And we saw, for example, at one of the data points we have is in Egypt. And how traffic became much more localised and the same as IXP destroyed we see local traffic both for the benefit of resilience and security of the network but also for improved use of the performance and again stimulating the local economy.
And for all of the G7 countries and also for any other countries, by the way. These infrastructures really matters. And this has been a showcase of what we had established so far. As we heard there's more that can be done but we tend to forget what we also have achieved. This has really improved how the internet works.
As I mentioned before the multilingual support and universal access work is very far away. Again there's much more to do. But this has come out. We should celebrate the success stories and highlight what we have actually done. We at ICANN in society produced the 20 years at IGF which really summarizes all of this achievement. Not the technical community.
That has delivered over the years and I think maybe had we not done enough reflecting and talking about this. And saying that I also think what we should bring with us and forward is that language matters and having clarity in language is very important.
We are here to talk about sovereignty or control, which are two words that can look very different thing to different people. If I heard -- if someone hears them, I believe -- well probably believe, if we are talking about fragmentation. To others there may be word that had other things. But what we are trying to achieve and what was the ultimate goal. And what protect us. The technical community since before IGF in the early process to provide the input and sea guard to explain what the consequences are of decisions to ensure we can prevent a breakage or siloing or fragmentation of exactly the internet values that really create this value creation and provided all of this economic growth over the last 20 years.
And we really need to reinforce the success record and showcase that it is the fundamental principals that the technical community have highlighted and safeguarded and provided the understanding over the past 20 years. A core value and we need to continue to make these point all between now and December. And really reiterate how important these are for the success of the internet in the future. Just like it's been for the past 22 years.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. I think those are some really concrete examples of where we can actually share those stories. Yu Ping I want you to offer your thought.
>> YU PING CHAN: I asked to offer my comments -- and forgive the other diplomats in room. There's a big gap between the New York community and those of us gathered in room that have been working on the issues for a long time. There's a tenancy when put resolutions to assembly to sicking to compromised language when you don't understand the indications. What have the language means and to put a political context on terms that are otherwise accepted or actually understood by the technical community. So for instance Kurtis mentioned sovereignty and control. In the UN context it has a loaded meaning and even the use of those terms would actually be debated.
And some shadows into the use of that term nothing that could have implications to the use. But my appeal to all of the stakeholders really engaging in this conversation. And I applaud the fact that there have been really good, concrete ideas, we have been united forward and into the WSIS reveal.
To keep it clear and simple to word it in language that diplomats are already using so they understand certain things.
The reason capacity building is such a high build is that the language when it comes to sustainable development and equipping countries of the global majority to have kind of moment.
So really I think the way we are starting to frame this conversation into what appeals to the countries of the world in a united collective effort around digital versus take an approach that might be seen as a little bit more divisive is very earn to.
I would also say there seems to be a tenancy to write off the WSIS as being dusty, out of date. That we have new developments now that must supersede the WSIS. But as Fiona said, the fact we are still here talking about capacity building from years on is a testament to how endearing the principals are. And what I need to make sure, in the next years going forward, these value days remain as good in the past and going forward as well.
And the last tipping I would say -- and I put on my UN hat and say a lot of us are aware in the UN system where it's a very difficult time for a lot of us. And in this moment of difficulty, the greatest guidance is to double down on what has worked and impact, particularly for the communes we serve so concretely following my recommendation to be clear and simple.
In the WSIS there is no reference to the high level segment of the WSIS forum occurring very soon in a couple of week. That to us, UN agencies and UNESCO UNDP has been success for the line. So we would ask that this be reflected again in the WSIS review. So concrete recommendation to how the UN should continue implementing these areas and guidance around the states would you important.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you so much. That almost led into the closing part, but I don't want to skip the opportunity to open up very briefly if there are any questions from the audience. Becky I don't know if you have anybody in the Zoom room or anybody want to have a question. Or their own oaks about what would be -- their own observations about what would be useful. Should I jump to the closing.
>> ONLINE MODERATOR: We can jump to closing.
>> MODERATOR: We are not closing yet. We are not letting our panelists loose. But Yu Ping tipped it off but one community that should help shape the global outcome of the WSIS community. By useful it can be anything practical, pragmatic, anything they think is useful. We have already heard conversations not in New York outside of New York. So those are some examples and practical solution.
But to the panelist, for the audience if you want them to walk away with one action and one thinking, what would it be? So phone Jarno I will turn to you first from the political aspect.
>> JARNO SYRJALA: I have to focus on the as peck. Think international perspective. From the regional and global level and the development of orientation and development and the focus on human rights also. And this is a key challenge which all stakeholders need to address.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. So I hope everybody heard that and wrote it down. Fiona, over to you. What would you take as an action for everybody.
>> FIONA ALEXANDER: Sure. I this -- there's lots of different thing we could all point to. But if I'm look for one very specific thing, I would say to people and different stakeholder groups is that he this should continue to demand their seat at the table. But that means have you to show up when you get the seat. And I think we have seen some progress access this year. Probably not enough. We should acknowledge that and take advantage of it and continue to push the really truly multistakeholder environment we want to see.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Kurtis from the technical side.
>> KURTIS LINDQVIST: I think the technical community really must continue to contribute evidence and tangible implementation and coordination outcomes and data that shows what has worked. That's really our response internationally to bring it to the table.
And this can happen in isolation in the governments and Civil Society needs to bring their inputs forward rooted in experiences and not just declarations to bring the tangible examples of what works.
And this will only succeed if the outcomes reflect the systems that are already making it work. And we don't need new structures we need continued collaboration and a clear commitment to the model that is actually delivered.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. I think those are -- really we need to show that very carefully. Yu Ping you shared some operations but I think have you more.
>> YU PING CHAN: This is tricky for me because we are guided by the member states. Looking to the member states but also that the member states listen to the stakeholder community. Because again I have said this in a number of discussions before. Multistakeholderism is not natural to the UN system itself. It is a multilateral organisation itself.
But multistakeholderism. The way it's been done in 20 years is not the way New York does things. And perhaps New York needs to adapt to.
That but exactly as Fiona says, saying this and demanding debt and accountability for this over and over again is how we make the change.
Truly the fact we now have these changes and the way the WSIS stakeholders are incorporating multistakeholderism, many people are showing up in the GDP process and showing up more than ever before.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. And Lacina, from your perspective.
>> LACINA KONE: From our perspective, multilateral is a choice. It's a decision to divide and to build a trust among ourselves and to shape a fairer global order, not despite our differences but because of them.
>> MODERATOR: That's very well said. Thank you. Thank you. Not own is the light flashing red, so I I've been told I need to call it a wrap. But we have heard a wide range of perspectives. And observations of what has been transformative over the past 20 years but also where we have gaps and where we need to go.
The question we were going to pose to you or comments to seek would be what would help you and your organisation and WSIS +20 before December. So I would ask that you walk away from this conversation thinking about that.
Encourage you to sign up for different thing to help inform our get materials. For example we have a WSIS +20 outreach mailing list with update. Everybody is sharing different information. And there's also other dialogues happening. Engage in those. Provide your input and provide your data. And as has been reiterated here, the process is open. Take those opportunities and engage and participate. Share your stories. Share your observations, where have you seen pragmatic results, but also where there are gaps and where we can work to improve thing. So with that I would thank everybody for joining and participating. And let's make the WSIS +20 a successful conversation and outcome. So thank you, everybody.
(Applause)
