IGF 2025 Suggestions (2024 Stocktaking)
Number of contributions by:
Stakeholder Group
Government: 19
Intergovernmental Organization: 7
Civil Society: 35
Technical Community: 14
Private Sector: 17
Get a Full View of submissions HERE
Get a Full View of submissions HERE
Regional Group
African Group: 45
Asia-Pacific Group: 30
Latin American and Caribbean Group: 6
Western European and Others Group: 4
Intergovernmental Organizations: 7
IGF 2025 Suggestions
From Organizations:
ACIEDD
Pertinent mais il faut l'implication des toutes les parties
bien
intéressant
bien
ras
ok
alternance
bien
IGF 2024:
ok
ARPCE (Agence de Régulation des Postes et Communications Électroniques)
One of the factors in the success of the IGF 2024 was the facilitation of the process for obtaining entry visas by the organizing country (online form and rapid processing at embassies).
We hope that Norway, as the host country, will quickly set up visa procedures, bearing in mind that the event is only 6 months away and that Norway has very few embassies in Africa.
We hope that Norway, as the host country, will quickly set up visa procedures, bearing in mind that the event is only 6 months away and that Norway has very few embassies in Africa.
IGF 2024:
Given the lengthy procedures involved in obtaining visas, it is important to speed up the registration and validation process.
ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR LE PARTENARIAT ET L EMERGENCE EN AFRIQUE (AIPEA)/ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONALE POUR LES PAUVRES LES INDIGNÉS ET ASSISTANCE (AIPIA)/AIRGPAIRDAM/ACAEPB
INSTITUTIONS ORGANIZATIONS AND UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033
UN ALL AGENDA 2030/2050/2100
https:://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033 OR/ AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
PRESIDENT CEO FOUNDER UN SCIENTIFIC ECONOMIC ENERGY SOCIAL MEDIA ENVIRONNEMENT LEGAL GROUP/ EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT/ EXPERT PROFESSOR OCEAN GLOBAL ACADEMY
WINNER POSTERS SCIENCES : INTERNATIONAL CONFÉRENCE HIGHROC SCIENCE THE 07 TO 09 NOVEMBER 2017, BRUSSELS, BELGIUM/ UN AGENDA 2030/2050/2100
INNOVATION PROGRAMME UN AGENDA 203/205/2100..
NO COMMENT, ALL SPEAKERS VERY GOOD/ https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT, PRESIDENT CEO FOUNDER UN SCIENTIFIC ECONOMIC ENERGY SOCIAL MEDIA ENVIRONNEMENT LEGAL GROUP, EXPERT PROFESSOR OCEAN GLOBAL ACADEMY (UN, UNESCO, COI, IODE, OTGA)
https://oceanexpert.org/institution/20033
OR/AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
OR/AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
https://oceanexpert.org/institution/20034
NO COMMENT
NO COMMENT VÉRITABLE
CONTINIOUS PROGRAMME 2025, IMPROUVE, PLEASE.
IGF 2024:
APPLICATION ALL AGENDA UN 2030/2050/2100...
FURUM SENSIBILITY COMMUNAUTY IGF 2025
INNOVATION NEW NUMERIC AND ALL BIODIVERDITY PLANET
VERY VERY GOOD PROGRAMM OF UN ALL AGENDA 2030/2050/2100..... / 2026-2035 OF THE UN AGENDA TRANSPORT...
YES, ZOOM, WEBINAR... WHATSAPP CONNECT GROUP...
OK OF THE ALL PROGRAMMS 2025 IGF, PLEASE.
SIGNED: PROF. LEBEAU PEMHA THINA
TEL: +33758742629
E.MAIL: [email protected] OR [email protected] / [email protected]
SIGNED: PROF. LEBEAU PEMHA THINA
TEL: +33758742629
E.MAIL: [email protected] OR [email protected] / [email protected]
IGF 2024 IS GOOD / IGF 2025 IS GOOD EGALITY, PLEASE
INSTITUTIONS ORGANIZATIONS AND UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033
UN ALL AGENDA 2030/2050/2100
https:://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT
https://OCEAN expert.org/institution/20033 OR/ AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
PRESIDENT CEO FOUNDER UN SCIENTIFIC ECONOMIC ENERGY SOCIAL MEDIA ENVIRONNEMENT LEGAL GROUP/ EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT/ EXPERT PROFESSOR OCEAN GLOBAL ACADEMY
WINNER POSTERS SCIENCES : INTERNATIONAL CONFÉRENCE HIGHROC SCIENCE THE 07 TO 09 NOVEMBER 2017, BRUSSELS, BELGIUM/ UN AGENDA 2030/2050/2100
INNOVATION PROGRAMME UN AGENDA 203/205/2100..
NO COMMENT, ALL SPEAKERS VERY GOOD/ https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
EXPERTS PATRIMOINES INTERGOUVERNEMENTAL UN GROUP, INDÉPENDANT, PRESIDENT CEO FOUNDER UN SCIENTIFIC ECONOMIC ENERGY SOCIAL MEDIA ENVIRONNEMENT LEGAL GROUP, EXPERT PROFESSOR OCEAN GLOBAL ACADEMY (UN, UNESCO, COI, IODE, OTGA)
https://oceanexpert.org/institution/20033
OR/AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
OR/AND https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/expert/prof-dr-lebeau-pemha-thina/
UN ENTITIES AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
https://oceanexpert.org/institution/20034
NO COMMENT
NO COMMENT VÉRITABLE
CONTINIOUS PROGRAMME 2025, IMPROUVE, PLEASE.
IGF 2024:
APPLICATION ALL AGENDA UN 2030/2050/2100...
FURUM SENSIBILITY COMMUNAUTY IGF 2025
INNOVATION NEW NUMERIC AND ALL BIODIVERDITY PLANET
VERY VERY GOOD PROGRAMM OF UN ALL AGENDA 2030/2050/2100..... / 2026-2035 OF THE UN AGENDA TRANSPORT...
YES, ZOOM, WEBINAR... WHATSAPP CONNECT GROUP...
OK OF THE ALL PROGRAMMS 2025 IGF, PLEASE.
SIGNED: PROF. LEBEAU PEMHA THINA
TEL: +33758742629
E.MAIL: [email protected] OR [email protected] OR [email protected]
SIGNED: PROF. LEBEAU PEMHA THINA
TEL: +33758742629
E.MAIL: [email protected] OR [email protected] OR [email protected]
IGF 2024 IS GOOD / IGF 2025 IS GOOD EGALITY, PLEASE
Bcide
IGF 2024:
garbnews
very good
i hope this programs sim the next year
very nice
very nice
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
nothing
IGF 2024:
good
i hope this programs sim the next year
nothing
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
i hope this programs sim the next year
Ghana IGF / Africa Open Data and Internet Research Foundation
The IGF 2024 preparatory process was a step in the right direction in fostering global engagement and creating a platform for diverse stakeholders to shape the event's programme. However, there are areas for improvement, particularly in terms of early engagement, session selection. By addressing these gaps, IGF 2025 can build on its successes and become an even more inclusive and impactful global digital governance discussions.
While IGF 2024's thematic focus, structure, and flow provided valuable insights into pressing global digital issues, there is room for improvement in streamlining the programme, ensuring more focused discussions, and strengthening the integration of all tracks. Addressing these issues will help make IGF 2025 a more cohesive, impactful, and inclusive event that better serves the global community and furthers the progress of digital governance and policy discussions.
The hybrid format was not effective this year, as there were numerous issues with the audiovisual setup. The overall setup and seating arrangements were also uninviting and not conducive to a productive experience.
The logistics were well-organized. However, my only disappointment was with the shuttle scheduling. Better planning and mapping could have been done to at least assist participants partway through their journey.
• Limited Visibility of Intersessional Outputs: The outcomes and findings of BPFs and PNs is not sufficiently highlighted or integrated into the main IGF discussions, reducing their impact on the overall program.
• Insufficient Time for Discussions: The time allocated during the annual IGF meeting for presenting BPFs results is inadequate, limiting the opportunity for meaningful discussions and feedback from the broader IGF community.
• Lack of Follow-Up: There is limited follow-up mechanisms to ensure that the recommendations and conclusions from BPFs are actually implemented or carried forward into real-world policy changes.
• Fragmentation in Agenda: The integration of BPFs into the broader IGF agenda always result in a fragmented experience for participants, with key insights being lost or overshadowed by other parallel sessions, rather than contributing to a cohesive narrative.
Addressing these issues would enhance the relevance and impact of the BPFs and PNs, ensuring their meaningful contribution to the annual IGF program and global internet governance efforts. A plenary session in the mornings for all the BPFs and PNs, where all participants gather before breaking into individual sessions, would help ensure that everyone is included in the discussions on BPFs and PNs.
• Insufficient Time for Discussions: The time allocated during the annual IGF meeting for presenting BPFs results is inadequate, limiting the opportunity for meaningful discussions and feedback from the broader IGF community.
• Lack of Follow-Up: There is limited follow-up mechanisms to ensure that the recommendations and conclusions from BPFs are actually implemented or carried forward into real-world policy changes.
• Fragmentation in Agenda: The integration of BPFs into the broader IGF agenda always result in a fragmented experience for participants, with key insights being lost or overshadowed by other parallel sessions, rather than contributing to a cohesive narrative.
Addressing these issues would enhance the relevance and impact of the BPFs and PNs, ensuring their meaningful contribution to the annual IGF program and global internet governance efforts. A plenary session in the mornings for all the BPFs and PNs, where all participants gather before breaking into individual sessions, would help ensure that everyone is included in the discussions on BPFs and PNs.
Fragmented Participation: Dynamic Coalition discussions is always disconnected from other IGF sessions, leading to a fragmented experience for participants and missing opportunities for holistic discussions across different coalitions.
Insufficient Time for Interaction: The time allocated during the IGF for DC-related sessions i think is too limited, preventing meaningful engagement and cross-pollination of ideas with the wider IGF community.
Excessive Technical Focus: Like other intersessional activities, DCs always prioritize highly technical discussions that overlook broader social, ethical, and policy implications of internet governance.
Inconsistent Coordination: The coordination between different Dynamic Coalitions is inconsistent and this always leads to duplications of efforts or fragmented discussions on similar topics.
Insufficient Time for Interaction: The time allocated during the IGF for DC-related sessions i think is too limited, preventing meaningful engagement and cross-pollination of ideas with the wider IGF community.
Excessive Technical Focus: Like other intersessional activities, DCs always prioritize highly technical discussions that overlook broader social, ethical, and policy implications of internet governance.
Inconsistent Coordination: The coordination between different Dynamic Coalitions is inconsistent and this always leads to duplications of efforts or fragmented discussions on similar topics.
Without proper monitoring, it may be difficult to measure whether the IGF has successfully addressed gender equality and if its recommendations promote gender-sensitive internet governance. The need to adopt a monitoring mechanism is key towards the 2025 IGF.
Attendance at some sessions was lower compared to previous IGFs. Participants seemed confused about which sessions to attend. Signages to the various session should be considered in next years IGF.
Compared to previous IGFs, the 2024 IGF seemed somewhat more restrictive, with many community members being excluded from speaking opportunities. The High-level discussions in 2024 were perceived as exclusive and inaccessible to the broader IGF audience. This can result in a future disconnect between high-level policymakers and grassroots or regional stakeholders who may have valuable insights on the issues being discussed.
Disconnect from Broader IGF Discussions:
The Parliamentary Track seems disconnected and is perceived as too exclusive from the broader IGF discussions and other thematic tracks. Parliamentarians, as representatives of the people, should have their activities more open to the general audience. Without adequate integration into the main IGF program, the track risks missing out on valuable insights and diverse perspectives from other sessions, leading to a fragmented experience. This separation could limit meaningful interactions between parliamentarians and other stakeholders, such as civil society, the private sector, and technical communities, who may offer important perspectives.
The Parliamentary Track seems disconnected and is perceived as too exclusive from the broader IGF discussions and other thematic tracks. Parliamentarians, as representatives of the people, should have their activities more open to the general audience. Without adequate integration into the main IGF program, the track risks missing out on valuable insights and diverse perspectives from other sessions, leading to a fragmented experience. This separation could limit meaningful interactions between parliamentarians and other stakeholders, such as civil society, the private sector, and technical communities, who may offer important perspectives.
More youth should be included in the 2025 IGF sessions.
The village booth was excellent
Potential Improvement: More targeted campaigns, utilizing region-specific languages, platforms, and collaboration with local partners, could broaden outreach. This could include working with grassroots organizations, digital rights activists, and local influencers to spread awareness of IGF and encourage wider participation. Also, creating digital toolkits that stakeholders can use to promote the event locally would ensure more people are aware of IGF discussions and objectives.
While IGF had an online presence, the use of social media and digital channels might not have fully leveraged their potential to engage wider audiences.
A more innovative social media strategy would help reach younger audiences and more diverse groups. IGF could use social platforms for live updates, behind-the-scenes content, interactive polls, Q&A sessions, and “meet the speaker” posts. Hashtags and cross-platform campaigns could also help amplify discussions. Interactive platforms such as Instagram Stories or Twitter Spaces could be used to engage participants directly in discussions leading up to and during the event.
While IGF had an online presence, the use of social media and digital channels might not have fully leveraged their potential to engage wider audiences.
A more innovative social media strategy would help reach younger audiences and more diverse groups. IGF could use social platforms for live updates, behind-the-scenes content, interactive polls, Q&A sessions, and “meet the speaker” posts. Hashtags and cross-platform campaigns could also help amplify discussions. Interactive platforms such as Instagram Stories or Twitter Spaces could be used to engage participants directly in discussions leading up to and during the event.
The timeline for IGF 2025 should be carefully planned and communicated early on. In previous years, some stakeholders found the timeline for submissions and final session confirmations to be too tight, leading to a rushed preparation process. It’s important that the timeline for the IGF 2025 preparatory process be set well in advance, with clear milestones for the call for proposals, session selections, and logistics planning. Additionally, stakeholders should be informed of any changes well in advance. A longer window for session proposals and a clear, transparent decision-making process for selecting sessions would provide more flexibility for organizers and participants alike.
IGF 2024:
The IGF 2025 Programme Structure should emphasize inclusivity, innovation, and meaningful multistakeholder engagement. By adopting thematic tracks, fostering interactive formats, and focusing on youth, gender, and regional perspectives, IGF 2025 can build a dynamic and forward-looking agenda that resonates with a diverse global community. Furthermore, by ensuring better integration of intersessional activities, improving accessibility for remote participants, and focusing on post-event engagement, IGF 2025 can create lasting impacts and contribute to actionable outcomes in internet governance. Remote hubs platform should also be considered in the 2025 IGF planning.
To best connect community intersessional activities and NRIs with the IGF 2025 process, it is crucial to create structured, continuous avenues for collaboration. This includes designing spaces for regional and youth voices to contribute meaningfully, ensuring intersessional activities feed directly into the main programme, and fostering year-round engagement. By promoting inclusivity, integration, and collaboration, IGF 2025 can further strengthen its multi-stakeholder approach and amplify the diversity of voices that shape global internet governance.
For IGF 2025, the programme content should be carefully curated to reflect the evolving challenges and opportunities in global internet governance, with a focus on inclusivity, innovation, and actionable outcomes
Limited Representation of Local Issues: The content from NRIs is not always reflective of the specific digital governance challenges faced by their regions, as global topics often take precedence. This will bring about result in missed opportunities to bring diverse perspectives into the global discussion.
Inadequate Time for NRI Sessions: The time allocated to NRI-related sessions during the IGF is too short, reducing the opportunity for deeper engagement and cross-regional discussions.
Focus on Local Contexts: While NRIs should ideally address local or regional internet governance issues, I suggest that for the 2025 IGF, each of the five regional NRIs should hold their own session to discuss regional topics. The issues gathered from all NRIs could then be brought together in one session to present their collective outcomes.
Inadequate Time for NRI Sessions: The time allocated to NRI-related sessions during the IGF is too short, reducing the opportunity for deeper engagement and cross-regional discussions.
Focus on Local Contexts: While NRIs should ideally address local or regional internet governance issues, I suggest that for the 2025 IGF, each of the five regional NRIs should hold their own session to discuss regional topics. The issues gathered from all NRIs could then be brought together in one session to present their collective outcomes.
Everyone should be invited.
Incorporating the WSIS+20 review and supporting the Global Digital Compact are critical objectives for IGF 2025. The IGF should serve as a platform for multi-stakeholder collaboration and inclusive dialogue, ensuring that local, regional, and global voices are integrated into the process. Through dedicated sessions, cross-sector partnerships, and continuous engagement, the IGF can contribute to the review of WSIS outcomes while actively supporting the implementation of the Global Digital Compact, advancing an inclusive, accessible, and sustainable digital future for all.
We can always improve on our successes
Ghana Youth IGF
What Worked well:
Planning and Timeline: The preparatory process's well-defined and organized schedule made it possible for stakeholders to participate actively in each stage.
Request for Concerns and Suggestions: Diverse comments spanning a wide range of viewpoints were encouraged by the inclusive and open request for issues and session proposals.
MAG sessions: Cooperation and openness in decision-making were successfully promoted by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) sessions.
Development of Capacity: Attempts to increase the ability of participants, especially those from underrepresented areas, were positively received and helped to increase participation.
What work not So Well:
Session Overlap: Due to schedule conflicts caused by the vast number of sessions, attendees found it challenging to fully attend sessions of interest.
Session Selection Process: According to several stakeholders, there was not enough input provided during the selection process, which may have improved its clarity and transparency.
Timing of Engagement: Key stakeholders were unable to participate in some process phases, such as the call for bids, because they fell during other significant international events.
Planning and Timeline: The preparatory process's well-defined and organized schedule made it possible for stakeholders to participate actively in each stage.
Request for Concerns and Suggestions: Diverse comments spanning a wide range of viewpoints were encouraged by the inclusive and open request for issues and session proposals.
MAG sessions: Cooperation and openness in decision-making were successfully promoted by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) sessions.
Development of Capacity: Attempts to increase the ability of participants, especially those from underrepresented areas, were positively received and helped to increase participation.
What work not So Well:
Session Overlap: Due to schedule conflicts caused by the vast number of sessions, attendees found it challenging to fully attend sessions of interest.
Session Selection Process: According to several stakeholders, there was not enough input provided during the selection process, which may have improved its clarity and transparency.
Timing of Engagement: Key stakeholders were unable to participate in some process phases, such as the call for bids, because they fell during other significant international events.
IGF 2024:
What worked well:
Planning and Timeline: The preparatory process's well-defined and organized schedule made it possible for stakeholders to participate actively in each stage.
Request for Concerns and Suggestions: Diverse comments spanning a wide range of viewpoints were encouraged by the inclusive and open request for issues and session proposals.
MAG sessions: Cooperation and openness in decision-making were successfully promoted by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) sessions.
Development of Capacity: Attempts to increase the ability of participants, especially those from underrepresented areas, were positively received and helped to increase participation.
What worked not so well:
Session Overlap: Due to schedule conflicts caused by the vast number of sessions, attendees found it challenging to fully attend sessions of interest.
Session Selection Process: According to several stakeholders, there was not enough input provided during the selection process, which may have improved its clarity and transparency.
Timing of Engagement: Key stakeholders were unable to participate in some process phases, such as the call for bids, because they fell during other significant international events.
Planning and Timeline: The preparatory process's well-defined and organized schedule made it possible for stakeholders to participate actively in each stage.
Request for Concerns and Suggestions: Diverse comments spanning a wide range of viewpoints were encouraged by the inclusive and open request for issues and session proposals.
MAG sessions: Cooperation and openness in decision-making were successfully promoted by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) sessions.
Development of Capacity: Attempts to increase the ability of participants, especially those from underrepresented areas, were positively received and helped to increase participation.
What worked not so well:
Session Overlap: Due to schedule conflicts caused by the vast number of sessions, attendees found it challenging to fully attend sessions of interest.
Session Selection Process: According to several stakeholders, there was not enough input provided during the selection process, which may have improved its clarity and transparency.
Timing of Engagement: Key stakeholders were unable to participate in some process phases, such as the call for bids, because they fell during other significant international events.
What worked well:
Thematic Focus: The thematic areas were relevant and timely, addressing pressing issues like digital cooperation, AI governance, and cybersecurity. This ensured the discussions were aligned with global priorities.
Diversity of Topics: The program offered a wide range of sessions, catering to diverse interests and expertise levels.
Engagement Opportunities: Interactive formats like workshops and roundtables fostered meaningful dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders.
What worked not so well:
Overlapping Sessions: The large number of sessions caused attendance to be spread thin, reducing audience participation and impact in some discussions.
Programme Flow: The dense schedule made it challenging for participants to navigate the program effectively and engage deeply in all areas of interest.
Balancing Themes: While many thematic areas were covered, some stakeholders felt certain topics received less attention, affecting the balance of the program.
Thematic Focus: The thematic areas were relevant and timely, addressing pressing issues like digital cooperation, AI governance, and cybersecurity. This ensured the discussions were aligned with global priorities.
Diversity of Topics: The program offered a wide range of sessions, catering to diverse interests and expertise levels.
Engagement Opportunities: Interactive formats like workshops and roundtables fostered meaningful dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders.
What worked not so well:
Overlapping Sessions: The large number of sessions caused attendance to be spread thin, reducing audience participation and impact in some discussions.
Programme Flow: The dense schedule made it challenging for participants to navigate the program effectively and engage deeply in all areas of interest.
Balancing Themes: While many thematic areas were covered, some stakeholders felt certain topics received less attention, affecting the balance of the program.
What worked well:
Accessibility: The hybrid format allowed participation from stakeholders worldwide, making the event more inclusive and reducing barriers to attendance.
Technical Infrastructure: The virtual platform (i.e., the mobile app created with the sessions listed and IGF's website) was user-friendly and reliable, ensuring seamless participation for online attendees.
Interactive Features: Features like live Q&A, chat, and breakout sessions helped virtual participants engage meaningfully with in-person discussions.
What worked not so well:
Time Zone Challenges: The global nature of the IGF meant some participants struggled to join sessions live due to unfavorable timing.
Networking Limitations: Virtual attendees had limited opportunities for informal networking, which is a vital component of the IGF experience.
Accessibility: The hybrid format allowed participation from stakeholders worldwide, making the event more inclusive and reducing barriers to attendance.
Technical Infrastructure: The virtual platform (i.e., the mobile app created with the sessions listed and IGF's website) was user-friendly and reliable, ensuring seamless participation for online attendees.
Interactive Features: Features like live Q&A, chat, and breakout sessions helped virtual participants engage meaningfully with in-person discussions.
What worked not so well:
Time Zone Challenges: The global nature of the IGF meant some participants struggled to join sessions live due to unfavorable timing.
Networking Limitations: Virtual attendees had limited opportunities for informal networking, which is a vital component of the IGF experience.
What worked so well:
Website and Mobile App: Both the website and the mobile app offered thorough information on sessions, speakers, and updates and were easy to use.
Registration Procedure: Participants were able to make successful plans thanks to the simple registration procedure and prompt confirmation.
Online Platform: Virtual guests were able to participate easily because of the dependable online platform, which had few technical issues.
System for Scheduling Bilateral Meetings: The system for setting up bilateral meetings was effective and promoted fruitful networking.
Security Measures: Both online and in-person participants found a secure and friendly environment thanks to the effective security management.
What worked not so well:
Navigation of the Schedule: Participants found it challenging to locate and rank sessions due to the schedule's density and overall overwhelming nature.
Usability of the Mobile App: Although the app worked, it could have been easier to use with more features like real-time notifications or customized timetables.
Limitations of Bilateral Meetings: Time zone differences and a lack of visibility into possible connections made it difficult for virtual participants to make the most of the bilateral meeting system.
Website and Mobile App: Both the website and the mobile app offered thorough information on sessions, speakers, and updates and were easy to use.
Registration Procedure: Participants were able to make successful plans thanks to the simple registration procedure and prompt confirmation.
Online Platform: Virtual guests were able to participate easily because of the dependable online platform, which had few technical issues.
System for Scheduling Bilateral Meetings: The system for setting up bilateral meetings was effective and promoted fruitful networking.
Security Measures: Both online and in-person participants found a secure and friendly environment thanks to the effective security management.
What worked not so well:
Navigation of the Schedule: Participants found it challenging to locate and rank sessions due to the schedule's density and overall overwhelming nature.
Usability of the Mobile App: Although the app worked, it could have been easier to use with more features like real-time notifications or customized timetables.
Limitations of Bilateral Meetings: Time zone differences and a lack of visibility into possible connections made it difficult for virtual participants to make the most of the bilateral meeting system.
Process:
Collaborative Approach: The multistakeholder approach used by the Policy Networks and Best Practice Forums (BPFs) promoted many perspectives and enhanced dialogues
Prepared Work: Participants were guaranteed to be able to participate meaningfully because the intersessional activities were meticulously documented and had well-defined goals.
Integration in the Program: By skillfully incorporating these activities into the IGF program, chances to present their work and encourage more participation were created.
Content:
Relevance: The topics addressed were timely and aligned with key global digital policy issues, such as AI ethics, digital inclusion, and data governance.
Depth: Discussions offered valuable insights and actionable recommendations, contributing significantly to broader IGF outcomes.
Knowledge Sharing: The BPFs and Policy Networks served as platforms for sharing best practices, lessons learned, and innovative solutions across regions and sectors.
Collaborative Approach: The multistakeholder approach used by the Policy Networks and Best Practice Forums (BPFs) promoted many perspectives and enhanced dialogues
Prepared Work: Participants were guaranteed to be able to participate meaningfully because the intersessional activities were meticulously documented and had well-defined goals.
Integration in the Program: By skillfully incorporating these activities into the IGF program, chances to present their work and encourage more participation were created.
Content:
Relevance: The topics addressed were timely and aligned with key global digital policy issues, such as AI ethics, digital inclusion, and data governance.
Depth: Discussions offered valuable insights and actionable recommendations, contributing significantly to broader IGF outcomes.
Knowledge Sharing: The BPFs and Policy Networks served as platforms for sharing best practices, lessons learned, and innovative solutions across regions and sectors.
Process:
Multistakeholder Engagement: Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) maintained an inclusive and collaborative approach, encouraging participation from diverse groups.
Preparation and Coordination: The preparation for DC activities was organized, with clear communication and well-structured session proposals.
Programme Inclusion: The integration of DCs into the IGF 2024 program allowed them to present their work and foster discussion on specialized topics.
Content:
Focused Topics: DCs addressed niche but critical issues, such as internet standards, gender and access, and digital rights, enriching the overall IGF agenda.
Knowledge Sharing: The sessions provided an opportunity for stakeholders to share expertise and explore practical solutions to ongoing challenges.
Relevance and Impact: The topics were well-aligned with broader IGF themes, adding depth and specificity to discussions.
Multistakeholder Engagement: Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) maintained an inclusive and collaborative approach, encouraging participation from diverse groups.
Preparation and Coordination: The preparation for DC activities was organized, with clear communication and well-structured session proposals.
Programme Inclusion: The integration of DCs into the IGF 2024 program allowed them to present their work and foster discussion on specialized topics.
Content:
Focused Topics: DCs addressed niche but critical issues, such as internet standards, gender and access, and digital rights, enriching the overall IGF agenda.
Knowledge Sharing: The sessions provided an opportunity for stakeholders to share expertise and explore practical solutions to ongoing challenges.
Relevance and Impact: The topics were well-aligned with broader IGF themes, adding depth and specificity to discussions.
Positive Aspects:
Inclusive Topics: IGF 2024 incorporated sessions that addressed gender-specific issues, such as bridging the digital gender divide, promoting women in STEM, and ensuring online safety for marginalized groups.
Diverse Representation: Panels and discussions included a significant number of women speakers, providing balanced perspectives and amplifying female voices in internet governance.
Youth and Gender Focus: The Youth Track integrated gender considerations, encouraging young women to participate and lead discussions on digital policy.
Challenges:
Uneven Representation: Despite progress, some sessions lacked gender balance, with male speakers dominating certain technical or policy discussions.
Limited Focus: While gender issues were included, they were sometimes treated as standalone topics rather than being mainstreamed across all program areas.
Inclusive Topics: IGF 2024 incorporated sessions that addressed gender-specific issues, such as bridging the digital gender divide, promoting women in STEM, and ensuring online safety for marginalized groups.
Diverse Representation: Panels and discussions included a significant number of women speakers, providing balanced perspectives and amplifying female voices in internet governance.
Youth and Gender Focus: The Youth Track integrated gender considerations, encouraging young women to participate and lead discussions on digital policy.
Challenges:
Uneven Representation: Despite progress, some sessions lacked gender balance, with male speakers dominating certain technical or policy discussions.
Limited Focus: While gender issues were included, they were sometimes treated as standalone topics rather than being mainstreamed across all program areas.
Content:
Relevance: The sessions addressed critical and timely topics such as AI ethics, digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and data governance, ensuring alignment with global digital priorities.
Diversity of Themes: A broad range of thematic areas allowed for in-depth exploration of emerging and ongoing issues in internet governance.
Actionable Insights: Many sessions provided practical recommendations and solutions, contributing to meaningful policy discussions.
Speakers:
Expertise and Representation: Sessions featured a diverse range of speakers, including policymakers, industry leaders, academics, and civil society representatives, ensuring balanced perspectives.
Youth and marginalized voices: The inclusion of youth and stakeholders from underrepresented regions added depth and inclusivity to the discussions.
Engagement Levels: While most speakers were well-prepared and engaging, a few sessions could have benefited from more dynamic and interactive presentation styles.
Quality of Discussions:
Interactive Dialogue: Workshops and roundtables fostered interactive and thought-provoking discussions, enhancing participant engagement.
Multistakeholder Collaboration: Discussions reflected strong multistakeholder collaboration, emphasizing the importance of diverse inputs in policy development.
Relevance: The sessions addressed critical and timely topics such as AI ethics, digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and data governance, ensuring alignment with global digital priorities.
Diversity of Themes: A broad range of thematic areas allowed for in-depth exploration of emerging and ongoing issues in internet governance.
Actionable Insights: Many sessions provided practical recommendations and solutions, contributing to meaningful policy discussions.
Speakers:
Expertise and Representation: Sessions featured a diverse range of speakers, including policymakers, industry leaders, academics, and civil society representatives, ensuring balanced perspectives.
Youth and marginalized voices: The inclusion of youth and stakeholders from underrepresented regions added depth and inclusivity to the discussions.
Engagement Levels: While most speakers were well-prepared and engaging, a few sessions could have benefited from more dynamic and interactive presentation styles.
Quality of Discussions:
Interactive Dialogue: Workshops and roundtables fostered interactive and thought-provoking discussions, enhancing participant engagement.
Multistakeholder Collaboration: Discussions reflected strong multistakeholder collaboration, emphasizing the importance of diverse inputs in policy development.
Content:
Strategic Focus: The High-Level Leaders Track addressed critical, forward-looking topics such as AI governance, global digital cooperation, and equitable access, aligning with key global priorities.
Policymaking Insights: Discussions highlighted actionable strategies for fostering digital inclusion, sustainability, and trust in the digital ecosystem.
Global Perspective: Leaders brought a broad, international outlook to the discussions, emphasizing collaboration across sectors and regions.
Speakers:
Diverse Representation: The track featured leaders from governments, international organizations, industry, and civil society, ensuring a multistakeholder approach.
High-Caliber Contributions: Speakers were well-prepared, offering valuable insights and thought leadership on complex issues.
Youth Inclusion: The presence of youth representatives added a fresh perspective and emphasized intergenerational dialogue.
Quality of Discussions:
High Engagement: Discussions were substantive and forward-looking, offering innovative ideas and solutions for addressing global digital challenges.
Inspirational Impact: The track successfully inspired action and highlighted the importance of leadership in shaping digital futures.
Limited Interaction: While the content was rich, there was limited opportunity for audience participation or direct interaction with leaders.
Strategic Focus: The High-Level Leaders Track addressed critical, forward-looking topics such as AI governance, global digital cooperation, and equitable access, aligning with key global priorities.
Policymaking Insights: Discussions highlighted actionable strategies for fostering digital inclusion, sustainability, and trust in the digital ecosystem.
Global Perspective: Leaders brought a broad, international outlook to the discussions, emphasizing collaboration across sectors and regions.
Speakers:
Diverse Representation: The track featured leaders from governments, international organizations, industry, and civil society, ensuring a multistakeholder approach.
High-Caliber Contributions: Speakers were well-prepared, offering valuable insights and thought leadership on complex issues.
Youth Inclusion: The presence of youth representatives added a fresh perspective and emphasized intergenerational dialogue.
Quality of Discussions:
High Engagement: Discussions were substantive and forward-looking, offering innovative ideas and solutions for addressing global digital challenges.
Inspirational Impact: The track successfully inspired action and highlighted the importance of leadership in shaping digital futures.
Limited Interaction: While the content was rich, there was limited opportunity for audience participation or direct interaction with leaders.
Content:
Legislative Focus: The Parliamentary Track effectively addressed critical issues such as data privacy, cybersecurity legislation, and the ethical use of emerging technologies.
Policy Alignment: Discussions focused on aligning national and regional legislative frameworks with global digital governance priorities.
Practical Insights: Sessions highlighted best practices and case studies, providing actionable insights for policymakers.
Speakers:
Diverse legislators: The track included parliamentarians from various regions, ensuring a wide range of perspectives on legislative approaches to digital governance.
Expert Support: Contributions from experts in law, technology, and policy enriched the discussions and supported evidence-based policymaking.
Stakeholder Engagement: The inclusion of civil society and industry representatives facilitated a balanced dialogue.
Quality of Discussions:
Focused Dialogue: Discussions were substantive and focused, addressing specific legislative challenges and opportunities.
Collaborative Spirit: The track fostered collaboration among parliamentarians, enhancing the exchange of ideas and best practices.
Time Constraints: Some sessions felt rushed, limiting the depth of discussion on complex topics.
Legislative Focus: The Parliamentary Track effectively addressed critical issues such as data privacy, cybersecurity legislation, and the ethical use of emerging technologies.
Policy Alignment: Discussions focused on aligning national and regional legislative frameworks with global digital governance priorities.
Practical Insights: Sessions highlighted best practices and case studies, providing actionable insights for policymakers.
Speakers:
Diverse legislators: The track included parliamentarians from various regions, ensuring a wide range of perspectives on legislative approaches to digital governance.
Expert Support: Contributions from experts in law, technology, and policy enriched the discussions and supported evidence-based policymaking.
Stakeholder Engagement: The inclusion of civil society and industry representatives facilitated a balanced dialogue.
Quality of Discussions:
Focused Dialogue: Discussions were substantive and focused, addressing specific legislative challenges and opportunities.
Collaborative Spirit: The track fostered collaboration among parliamentarians, enhancing the exchange of ideas and best practices.
Time Constraints: Some sessions felt rushed, limiting the depth of discussion on complex topics.
Content:
Focus on Youth Priorities: The Youth Track successfully addressed issues relevant to young people, such as digital literacy, online safety, and equitable access to the internet.
Empowering Discussions: Sessions emphasized the importance of youth engagement in shaping digital policies and fostering intergenerational collaboration.
Practical Skills: Workshops and interactive sessions provided young participants with tools and knowledge to navigate and contribute to the digital ecosystem.
Speakers:
Youth Representation: The track featured a diverse group of young leaders who brought fresh perspectives and innovative ideas to the discussions.
Expert Contributions: The inclusion of experienced mentors and stakeholders added depth and guidance to the sessions, fostering a balance between youth-led discussions and expert advice.
Inspirational Role Models: Keynote speakers and panelists served as motivating figures, inspiring youth participants to take active roles in digital governance.
Quality of Discussions:
Engaging and inclusive: Discussions were interactive and provided a safe space for youth to share their ideas and concerns openly.
Focused Outcomes: Sessions aimed at producing actionable recommendations and identifying opportunities for youth involvement in digital governance.
Limited Time: Some sessions were constrained by time, limiting the exploration of more complex issues.
Focus on Youth Priorities: The Youth Track successfully addressed issues relevant to young people, such as digital literacy, online safety, and equitable access to the internet.
Empowering Discussions: Sessions emphasized the importance of youth engagement in shaping digital policies and fostering intergenerational collaboration.
Practical Skills: Workshops and interactive sessions provided young participants with tools and knowledge to navigate and contribute to the digital ecosystem.
Speakers:
Youth Representation: The track featured a diverse group of young leaders who brought fresh perspectives and innovative ideas to the discussions.
Expert Contributions: The inclusion of experienced mentors and stakeholders added depth and guidance to the sessions, fostering a balance between youth-led discussions and expert advice.
Inspirational Role Models: Keynote speakers and panelists served as motivating figures, inspiring youth participants to take active roles in digital governance.
Quality of Discussions:
Engaging and inclusive: Discussions were interactive and provided a safe space for youth to share their ideas and concerns openly.
Focused Outcomes: Sessions aimed at producing actionable recommendations and identifying opportunities for youth involvement in digital governance.
Limited Time: Some sessions were constrained by time, limiting the exploration of more complex issues.
Content:
Diverse Exhibitors: The IGF Village hosted a variety of stakeholders, including civil society organizations, academic institutions, tech companies, and governments, showcasing their work and contributions to internet governance.
Interactive Displays: Exhibitors used creative and engaging formats, such as live demonstrations, multimedia presentations, and hands-on activities, to attract and educate participants.
Topical Relevance: The Village featured content aligned with IGF 2024 themes, such as AI, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability.
Experience:
Networking Opportunities: The Village provided an excellent platform for participants to connect, share ideas, and build partnerships across sectors and regions.
Engagement: Many booths facilitated direct interactions, fostering dialogue and collaboration on internet governance topics.
Accessibility: The Village was easily accessible and well-organized, making it simple for participants to navigate and engage with exhibitors.
Diverse Exhibitors: The IGF Village hosted a variety of stakeholders, including civil society organizations, academic institutions, tech companies, and governments, showcasing their work and contributions to internet governance.
Interactive Displays: Exhibitors used creative and engaging formats, such as live demonstrations, multimedia presentations, and hands-on activities, to attract and educate participants.
Topical Relevance: The Village featured content aligned with IGF 2024 themes, such as AI, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability.
Experience:
Networking Opportunities: The Village provided an excellent platform for participants to connect, share ideas, and build partnerships across sectors and regions.
Engagement: Many booths facilitated direct interactions, fostering dialogue and collaboration on internet governance topics.
Accessibility: The Village was easily accessible and well-organized, making it simple for participants to navigate and engage with exhibitors.
Communications and Outreach:
Effective Promotion: The IGF Secretariat utilized diverse communication channels, including social media, email updates, and partnerships, to raise awareness about IGF 2024.
Timely Updates: Regular updates were provided before and during the event, keeping participants informed about sessions, speakers, and logistics.
Localized Engagement: Outreach efforts included targeted campaigns to engage stakeholders from underrepresented regions, enhancing inclusivity.
Outputs:
High-Quality Documentation: Sessions transcripts, reports, and recordings were made available promptly, ensuring access to discussions for those unable to attend.
Actionable Recommendations: Many sessions produced clear, actionable recommendations, contributing to broader digital policy dialogues.
Visibility of Outputs: Outputs were shared widely, but their presentation could have been more concise and visually engaging for easier consumption.
Effective Promotion: The IGF Secretariat utilized diverse communication channels, including social media, email updates, and partnerships, to raise awareness about IGF 2024.
Timely Updates: Regular updates were provided before and during the event, keeping participants informed about sessions, speakers, and logistics.
Localized Engagement: Outreach efforts included targeted campaigns to engage stakeholders from underrepresented regions, enhancing inclusivity.
Outputs:
High-Quality Documentation: Sessions transcripts, reports, and recordings were made available promptly, ensuring access to discussions for those unable to attend.
Actionable Recommendations: Many sessions produced clear, actionable recommendations, contributing to broader digital policy dialogues.
Visibility of Outputs: Outputs were shared widely, but their presentation could have been more concise and visually engaging for easier consumption.
Suggestions:
Sessions diversity: experiment with innovative session formats, such as debates or solution-focused hackathons, to foster more dynamic interactions.
Clearer Impact Pathways: Define clearer pathways for how IGF discussions contribute to global policy processes, such as the Global Digital Compact or WSIS+20.
Sustainability Focus: Incorporate more discussions on the intersection of digital transformation and environmental sustainability to address the broader impact of technology.
Sessions diversity: experiment with innovative session formats, such as debates or solution-focused hackathons, to foster more dynamic interactions.
Clearer Impact Pathways: Define clearer pathways for how IGF discussions contribute to global policy processes, such as the Global Digital Compact or WSIS+20.
Sustainability Focus: Incorporate more discussions on the intersection of digital transformation and environmental sustainability to address the broader impact of technology.
IGF 2024:
For IGF 2025, the following suggestions aim to enhance the program structure and flow:
Streamline the Schedule: Reduce overlapping sessions and focus on fewer, more in-depth thematic tracks that build on each other.
Create Thematic Clusters: Organize related topics into clusters, integrating emerging issues like digital sustainability and AI governance.
Increase Interactivity: Use more workshops, debates, and breakout sessions to foster participation and multistakeholder dialogue.
Mainstream youth and gender: ensure youth and gender perspectives are included in all tracks and expand youth-led sessions.
Focus on actionable outcomes: Ensure sessions generate tangible recommendations and establish follow-up mechanisms to track progress.
Enhance Hybrid and Virtual Engagement: Optimize the hybrid format with accessible virtual tools and meaningful online participation.
Prioritize Sustainability: Address both environmental sustainability and the digital sector's role in sustainable development.
Strengthen NRI Integration: Involve National, Regional, and Youth IGFs directly in the program to share best practices and outcomes.
Improve Navigation and Timing: Provide a clear, easy-to-navigate program with well-communicated timings and breaks.
Streamline the Schedule: Reduce overlapping sessions and focus on fewer, more in-depth thematic tracks that build on each other.
Create Thematic Clusters: Organize related topics into clusters, integrating emerging issues like digital sustainability and AI governance.
Increase Interactivity: Use more workshops, debates, and breakout sessions to foster participation and multistakeholder dialogue.
Mainstream youth and gender: ensure youth and gender perspectives are included in all tracks and expand youth-led sessions.
Focus on actionable outcomes: Ensure sessions generate tangible recommendations and establish follow-up mechanisms to track progress.
Enhance Hybrid and Virtual Engagement: Optimize the hybrid format with accessible virtual tools and meaningful online participation.
Prioritize Sustainability: Address both environmental sustainability and the digital sector's role in sustainable development.
Strengthen NRI Integration: Involve National, Regional, and Youth IGFs directly in the program to share best practices and outcomes.
Improve Navigation and Timing: Provide a clear, easy-to-navigate program with well-communicated timings and breaks.
To best connect community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) with the IGF 2025 process:
Closer Integration: Involve NRIs in the core program by allowing them to share their outcomes and recommendations directly in main sessions.
Collaboration on Themes: Ensure that key themes discussed in NRIs are integrated into the global IGF agenda, promoting dialogue between local and global perspectives.
Structured Input: Create structured channels for NRIs to provide early input on session topics and outcomes, ensuring their relevance to regional and local issues.
Capacity Building: Strengthen capacity-building initiatives for NRIs to enhance their participation in the global IGF process.
Regular Updates: Establish ongoing communication between the IGF Secretariat and NRIs to share progress, updates, and lessons learned, fostering year-round engagement.
These actions will deepen the connection between local, regional, and global internet governance efforts.
Closer Integration: Involve NRIs in the core program by allowing them to share their outcomes and recommendations directly in main sessions.
Collaboration on Themes: Ensure that key themes discussed in NRIs are integrated into the global IGF agenda, promoting dialogue between local and global perspectives.
Structured Input: Create structured channels for NRIs to provide early input on session topics and outcomes, ensuring their relevance to regional and local issues.
Capacity Building: Strengthen capacity-building initiatives for NRIs to enhance their participation in the global IGF process.
Regular Updates: Establish ongoing communication between the IGF Secretariat and NRIs to share progress, updates, and lessons learned, fostering year-round engagement.
These actions will deepen the connection between local, regional, and global internet governance efforts.
For IGF 2025, suggestions for program content include:
Thematic Approach:
Balance emerging issues (e.g., AI, digital sustainability) with traditional topics (cybersecurity, privacy).
Foster cross-sectoral themes linking digital governance to education, healthcare, and climate change.
Focus on practical, solution-oriented sessions with real-world case studies and best practices.
Session Types:
Use interactive formats like workshops, roundtables, and problem-solving sessions.
Set clear objectives for each session, ensuring actionable outcomes.
Introduce informal formats such as fireside chats and AMAs with leaders.
Offer technical deep-dive sessions for industry professionals.
Speakers Profiles:
Ensure diverse representation across gender, region, and sector, with emphasis on marginalized groups.
Involve young leaders, innovators, and practitioners in emerging technology and policy.
Balance speakers between policymakers, technical experts, and civil society representatives.
Include interdisciplinary voices from sectors like environmental sustainability, health, and education.
Highlight role models, particularly women and youth, to inspire broader leadership.
These changes would enhance engagement, inclusivity, and impact in the IGF 2025 program.
Thematic Approach:
Balance emerging issues (e.g., AI, digital sustainability) with traditional topics (cybersecurity, privacy).
Foster cross-sectoral themes linking digital governance to education, healthcare, and climate change.
Focus on practical, solution-oriented sessions with real-world case studies and best practices.
Session Types:
Use interactive formats like workshops, roundtables, and problem-solving sessions.
Set clear objectives for each session, ensuring actionable outcomes.
Introduce informal formats such as fireside chats and AMAs with leaders.
Offer technical deep-dive sessions for industry professionals.
Speakers Profiles:
Ensure diverse representation across gender, region, and sector, with emphasis on marginalized groups.
Involve young leaders, innovators, and practitioners in emerging technology and policy.
Balance speakers between policymakers, technical experts, and civil society representatives.
Include interdisciplinary voices from sectors like environmental sustainability, health, and education.
Highlight role models, particularly women and youth, to inspire broader leadership.
These changes would enhance engagement, inclusivity, and impact in the IGF 2025 program.
Process:
Collaborative Engagement: The IGF 2024 program effectively included the perspectives of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) through their effective inclusion in the planning process.
Dedicated Sessions: The program featured NRI-only sessions that highlighted local viewpoints on global internet governance concerns and showcased their work.
Coordination: The IGF Secretariat provided NRIs with logistical assistance and clear communication, which helped to ensure that their contributions were well-planned.
Content:
Diverse Views: NRIs enhanced international conversations by contributing distinctive, regional perspectives on internet governance, including access, digital literacy, and youth empowerment.
Youth Engagement: In order to promote intergenerational discussion on digital concerns, youth IGFs stressed the value of incorporating young voices in policymaking.
Regional Focus: By highlighting context-specific issues and excellent practices, regional IGFs illustrated the necessity of customized governance strategies.
Collaborative Engagement: The IGF 2024 program effectively included the perspectives of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) through their effective inclusion in the planning process.
Dedicated Sessions: The program featured NRI-only sessions that highlighted local viewpoints on global internet governance concerns and showcased their work.
Coordination: The IGF Secretariat provided NRIs with logistical assistance and clear communication, which helped to ensure that their contributions were well-planned.
Content:
Diverse Views: NRIs enhanced international conversations by contributing distinctive, regional perspectives on internet governance, including access, digital literacy, and youth empowerment.
Youth Engagement: In order to promote intergenerational discussion on digital concerns, youth IGFs stressed the value of incorporating young voices in policymaking.
Regional Focus: By highlighting context-specific issues and excellent practices, regional IGFs illustrated the necessity of customized governance strategies.
Who to Invite:
Multistakeholder Representation:
Governments: Policymakers and regulators to contribute to shaping digital policies.
Private Sector: Tech companies, internet service providers, and industry leaders for innovation and business perspectives.
Civil Society: advocacy groups and NGOs to represent marginalized communities and digital rights.
Academic and Research Institutions: experts and researchers for evidence-based insights and analysis.
Youth and Students: Future leaders and innovators who will shape the digital landscape.
International Organizations: entities like the UN, the World Bank, and regional bodies to discuss global digital initiatives.
Technical Communities: Engineers, developers, and cybersecurity experts to discuss technical solutions and standards.
How to Interconnect Participants:
Pre-Event Networking Platforms: Create digital platforms before the event for participants to connect, share interests, and form collaboration groups.
Structured networking sessions: organize specific networking sessions or "matchmaking" events to pair participants based on shared interests or expertise.
Breakout Rooms and Themed Discussions: Facilitate smaller, themed discussions within larger sessions to foster deeper engagement and connection.
Interactive Tools: Use online tools like live polls, chat features, and Q&A sessions to encourage real-time interaction among remote and in-person attendees.
Post-Event Collaboration: Encourage continued collaboration post-event through online communities, working groups, and follow-up sessions.
These strategies will ensure diverse participation and enhance collaboration among stakeholders at IGF 2025.
Multistakeholder Representation:
Governments: Policymakers and regulators to contribute to shaping digital policies.
Private Sector: Tech companies, internet service providers, and industry leaders for innovation and business perspectives.
Civil Society: advocacy groups and NGOs to represent marginalized communities and digital rights.
Academic and Research Institutions: experts and researchers for evidence-based insights and analysis.
Youth and Students: Future leaders and innovators who will shape the digital landscape.
International Organizations: entities like the UN, the World Bank, and regional bodies to discuss global digital initiatives.
Technical Communities: Engineers, developers, and cybersecurity experts to discuss technical solutions and standards.
How to Interconnect Participants:
Pre-Event Networking Platforms: Create digital platforms before the event for participants to connect, share interests, and form collaboration groups.
Structured networking sessions: organize specific networking sessions or "matchmaking" events to pair participants based on shared interests or expertise.
Breakout Rooms and Themed Discussions: Facilitate smaller, themed discussions within larger sessions to foster deeper engagement and connection.
Interactive Tools: Use online tools like live polls, chat features, and Q&A sessions to encourage real-time interaction among remote and in-person attendees.
Post-Event Collaboration: Encourage continued collaboration post-event through online communities, working groups, and follow-up sessions.
These strategies will ensure diverse participation and enhance collaboration among stakeholders at IGF 2025.
For IGF 2025, to contribute to the WSIS+20 review and support the Global Digital Compact:
WSIS+20 Review:
Focus on assessing progress towards WSIS outcomes, addressing gaps, and fostering multistakeholder dialogue on issues like digital inclusion.
Track and report on WSIS implementation, producing actionable recommendations for the 2025 review.
Global Digital Compact:
Facilitate discussions on the Compact’s principles (e.g., equity, digital trust) and share best practices.
Outline measurable steps for implementation and encourage commitments from stakeholders to align policies with the Compact’s goals.
These actions will help IGF 2025 contribute to both the WSIS+20 review and the Global Digital Compact’s successful implementation.
WSIS+20 Review:
Focus on assessing progress towards WSIS outcomes, addressing gaps, and fostering multistakeholder dialogue on issues like digital inclusion.
Track and report on WSIS implementation, producing actionable recommendations for the 2025 review.
Global Digital Compact:
Facilitate discussions on the Compact’s principles (e.g., equity, digital trust) and share best practices.
Outline measurable steps for implementation and encourage commitments from stakeholders to align policies with the Compact’s goals.
These actions will help IGF 2025 contribute to both the WSIS+20 review and the Global Digital Compact’s successful implementation.
Inclusive and Collaborative: IGF 2024 successfully upheld its multistakeholder approach, fostering meaningful dialogue among diverse stakeholders, including governments, civil society, the private sector, and academia.
Relevance: The themes and discussions were timely and aligned with pressing global digital governance challenges, such as AI, cybersecurity, and equitable internet access.
Strengths:
Youth Engagement: The dedicated Youth Track demonstrated the IGF’s commitment to empowering young voices in global policy discussions.
Hybrid Format: The hybrid format enabled broader participation, making the event accessible to stakeholders worldwide.
Networking Opportunities: The IGF provided ample opportunities for networking, collaboration, and knowledge exchange across sectors and regions.
Areas for Improvement:
Time Management: Many sessions were packed into a tight schedule, leading to overlapping events and reduced attendance in some discussions. A more streamlined schedule could enhance participation and engagement.
Outcome Integration: Strengthen mechanisms for translating session discussions into actionable policy recommendations and follow-up activities.
Regional Representation: Ensure greater inclusion of voices from underrepresented regions, particularly from the Global South, to enhance global diversity.
Relevance: The themes and discussions were timely and aligned with pressing global digital governance challenges, such as AI, cybersecurity, and equitable internet access.
Strengths:
Youth Engagement: The dedicated Youth Track demonstrated the IGF’s commitment to empowering young voices in global policy discussions.
Hybrid Format: The hybrid format enabled broader participation, making the event accessible to stakeholders worldwide.
Networking Opportunities: The IGF provided ample opportunities for networking, collaboration, and knowledge exchange across sectors and regions.
Areas for Improvement:
Time Management: Many sessions were packed into a tight schedule, leading to overlapping events and reduced attendance in some discussions. A more streamlined schedule could enhance participation and engagement.
Outcome Integration: Strengthen mechanisms for translating session discussions into actionable policy recommendations and follow-up activities.
Regional Representation: Ensure greater inclusion of voices from underrepresented regions, particularly from the Global South, to enhance global diversity.
Global Network for Cybersolution Ltd/Gte
The 2024 preparatory process still lacks adequate representation from active private sector participants and ICT professionals in the African region.
The 2024 programme is complex to navigate for follow-up and registration.
IGF should embrace more application developers to help improve the implementation experience for the participants. Whova is an excellent comprehensive application that can be considered if it can support the IGF events.
No comment.
No comment.
We believe that these inter-sessional activities should be streamlined for better organization and outcomes in the next IGF. The Best Practice Forum, Policy Networks, and Dynamic Coalitions can be combined to avoid duplication of efforts and improve greater participation. These overlaps often confuse participants.
IGF 2024 programme has been fair in this context. However, we would prefer to see the IGF 2025 programme from peace, development and security perspectives.
The organisers of many of the sessions and workshops did not follow the equity representation of speakers in line with the IGF requirements, perhaps due to the scarcity of quality speakers.
No comment.
No comment.
No comment.
No comment.
The introduction of special support for the media and press during IGF 2024 has been a commendable effort. We hope to see increased efforts to attract global media organizations such as CNN, Al Jazeera, and CGTN to enhance global communication and outreach on the mainstream media
Most stakeholders involved in the last IGF 2024 are primarily from civil society and government. At the global level, professional organizations in the ICT industry are often not prioritized for participation. We anticipate greater inclusivity, with more involvement from the private sector and ICT-related professional bodies in the computer industry, as they are the key technical drivers behind internet technology.
The session selection needs to be equitably shared to cover topics attracting the main private sector stakeholders and research institutions. The topics should be curated further to address problems or issues identified in the Internet governance ecosystem.
The session selection needs to be equitably shared to cover topics attracting the main private sector stakeholders and research institutions. The topics should be curated further to address problems or issues identified in the Internet governance ecosystem.
IGF 2024:
A simpler programme management application can be adopted to help streamline structure and flow. Our participants found it difficult to follow the programme due to this observation. The current IGF conference management system or application should be reviewed. Otherwise, other conference applications, such as Whova, can be considered.
We propose that these inter-sessional activities be streamlined for better organization and outcomes in the next IGF. The Best Practice Forum, Policy Networks, and Dynamic Coalitions can be combined to avoid duplication of efforts and improve greater participation. These overlaps often confuse participants.
IGF should demand the diversification and review of NRI leadership in regions to avoid stunted growth and prevent the recycling of the same NRI leadership at every IGF. The continental head of NRIs should be included in the membership of MAG to best connect with the IGF 2025 process, provided such regions fulfil the IGF requirement on diversification and selection.
IGF should demand the diversification and review of NRI leadership in regions to avoid stunted growth and prevent the recycling of the same NRI leadership at every IGF. The continental head of NRIs should be included in the membership of MAG to best connect with the IGF 2025 process, provided such regions fulfil the IGF requirement on diversification and selection.
IGF Secretariat and MAG should review the requirements for listing speakers, and it should published and promoted in the community. Participating IGF speakers should be appreciated and recognised for their efforts and contributions through the issuance of e-Certificates. By extension, MAG members should qualify for these e-Certificates at the end of their tenure by the UN. As main organisers of IGF, MAG members should be motivated, recognised, and rewarded for their great sacrificial efforts with the UN IGF e-certificate of honour which can be auto-generated through a validation process.
NRIs have been better integrated into the 2024 IGF.
There should be a slight shift in this regard. Invitation should extended to the private sector, professional bodies ( in the IT and related industry), research and educational institutions across regions. They can be connected through the creation of the IGF Network for Professional Bodies, research, and educational institutions' forums (IGF-PRE Network )embedded in the IGF website, with an online registration process. Most of these Professional Bodies, Research and Educational institutions have thousands of members, each unaware of the IGF process. Their inclusions will diversify IGF impact greatly and the outcome IGF will be better utilised by these institutions.
The IGF 2025 programme should be developed from peace, development and security perspectives. We propose that the IGF 2025 focus should be on empowering global cooperation to transform and safeguard the information society toward peace, development, and security. This is in line with WSIS+20 and GDC.
Visa application and Hotel accommodation are relatively expensive for the participants from developing countries.
Hazras Charity Foundation
Critique and Suggestions for the IGF 2024 Preparatory Process
Criticisms
1. Complexity in the Process: The preparatory process, including the call for issues and session proposals, was overly complex and time-consuming. This made it challenging for smaller organizations and grassroots participants to fully engage.
2. Limited Representation: Despite efforts to ensure inclusivity, the session selection process appeared biased toward established organizations, often sidelining smaller nonprofits and emerging voices.
3. Insufficient Transparency: The roles and decision-making criteria of MAG members were not always clear, raising concerns about potential bias and lack of accountability in the session selection process.
4. Uneven Capacity Development: Capacity-building sessions were unevenly distributed, with limited efforts to equip underrepresented regions and organizations with the necessary tools and knowledge to participate effectively.
Specific Concern for Hazras Charity Foundation
Hazras Charity Foundation, which actively self-funded its participation in the African IGF in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, was neither recognized nor provided with logistical or financial support, despite its commitment to the forum’s objectives. This lack of acknowledgment undermines the efforts of nonprofits that play a vital role in advancing IGF's mission.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Streamlined Processes: Simplify the proposal submission process with clear templates and guidelines to encourage broader participation from smaller organizations and individuals.
2. Equitable Representation: Prioritize diversity in session selection by creating quotas or affirmative measures for grassroots organizations, nonprofits, and underserved regions.
3. Enhanced Capacity-Building Programs: Conduct region-specific workshops and training sessions, especially targeting smaller entities like Hazras Charity Foundation, to ensure equitable knowledge distribution.
4. Transparent Selection Criteria: Make the session selection criteria and MAG members' roles publicly available to enhance trust and accountability in the process.
5. Recognition for Self-Funded Organizations: Introduce formal acknowledgment, such as certificates or mentions, for nonprofits that self-fund their participation to boost morale and encourage future involvement.
6. Financial Assistance Programs: Develop travel grants or partnerships with hotels to provide discounted accommodation for nonprofit participants.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Feedback Mechanism: Incorporate a feedback system post-event to gather insights from all participants, particularly smaller organizations.
Pre-Event Consultations: Host regional or online pre-event consultations to gather diverse perspectives for inclusion in the agenda.
Support Structures for Nonprofits: Establish a nonprofit liaison team to address logistical and financial concerns, ensuring a smoother participation experience.
These improvements would foster inclusivity, transparency, and equitable participation, enhancing the overall impact of IGF.
Criticisms
1. Complexity in the Process: The preparatory process, including the call for issues and session proposals, was overly complex and time-consuming. This made it challenging for smaller organizations and grassroots participants to fully engage.
2. Limited Representation: Despite efforts to ensure inclusivity, the session selection process appeared biased toward established organizations, often sidelining smaller nonprofits and emerging voices.
3. Insufficient Transparency: The roles and decision-making criteria of MAG members were not always clear, raising concerns about potential bias and lack of accountability in the session selection process.
4. Uneven Capacity Development: Capacity-building sessions were unevenly distributed, with limited efforts to equip underrepresented regions and organizations with the necessary tools and knowledge to participate effectively.
Specific Concern for Hazras Charity Foundation
Hazras Charity Foundation, which actively self-funded its participation in the African IGF in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, was neither recognized nor provided with logistical or financial support, despite its commitment to the forum’s objectives. This lack of acknowledgment undermines the efforts of nonprofits that play a vital role in advancing IGF's mission.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Streamlined Processes: Simplify the proposal submission process with clear templates and guidelines to encourage broader participation from smaller organizations and individuals.
2. Equitable Representation: Prioritize diversity in session selection by creating quotas or affirmative measures for grassroots organizations, nonprofits, and underserved regions.
3. Enhanced Capacity-Building Programs: Conduct region-specific workshops and training sessions, especially targeting smaller entities like Hazras Charity Foundation, to ensure equitable knowledge distribution.
4. Transparent Selection Criteria: Make the session selection criteria and MAG members' roles publicly available to enhance trust and accountability in the process.
5. Recognition for Self-Funded Organizations: Introduce formal acknowledgment, such as certificates or mentions, for nonprofits that self-fund their participation to boost morale and encourage future involvement.
6. Financial Assistance Programs: Develop travel grants or partnerships with hotels to provide discounted accommodation for nonprofit participants.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Feedback Mechanism: Incorporate a feedback system post-event to gather insights from all participants, particularly smaller organizations.
Pre-Event Consultations: Host regional or online pre-event consultations to gather diverse perspectives for inclusion in the agenda.
Support Structures for Nonprofits: Establish a nonprofit liaison team to address logistical and financial concerns, ensuring a smoother participation experience.
These improvements would foster inclusivity, transparency, and equitable participation, enhancing the overall impact of IGF.
Criticism and Suggestions for the IGF 2024 Overall Programme: Thematic Focus, Structure, and Flow
Criticisms
1. Overly Broad Thematic Focus: The thematic focus of IGF 2024 was too broad, which diluted the depth of discussions on crucial issues. A more focused and prioritized approach could help in addressing key challenges in greater detail, particularly for emerging regions.
2. Lack of Clear Agenda Flow: While the structure aimed to accommodate diverse stakeholders, the overall flow of the sessions sometimes lacked coherence. There were instances where sessions appeared disconnected, with overlapping topics and unclear transitions between sessions, which hindered effective engagement and learning.
3. Limited Engagement of Emerging Issues: Some emerging issues, such as digital equity, data sovereignty, and the role of AI in governance, did not receive sufficient attention in the thematic focus, leaving them underrepresented in key discussions.
4. Insufficient Integration of Stakeholder Feedback: There was minimal integration of stakeholder feedback from previous years into the structure of the programme, leading to repeated themes and topics that may not reflect current or pressing concerns.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Focused Thematic Tracks: For IGF 2025, consider narrowing the thematic focus into more specific tracks or clusters that allow for deeper exploration of pressing issues. These tracks could address critical topics such as digital rights, sustainable development, and emerging technologies like AI, ensuring more targeted discussions.
2. Clearer Programme Flow: Improve the flow of the programme by establishing clearer links between sessions. This could include developing a narrative thread that connects topics logically, and utilizing time blocks for related themes to avoid session overlap and increase coherence.
3. Inclusion of Emerging Issues: Place a stronger emphasis on emerging digital governance issues such as blockchain, AI ethics, and internet fragmentation. These topics are highly relevant to current global debates but were not sufficiently highlighted in IGF 2024.
4. Stakeholder-Driven Themes: Incorporate more bottom-up planning to ensure that the themes reflect the real-world priorities of grassroots organizations, marginalized communities, and underrepresented regions. This could be achieved through pre-event consultations and thematic polls to gather input from all stakeholders.
5. Increased Integration of Diverse Voices: Ensure that the thematic focus is not only reflective of global interests but also inclusive of regional concerns. Strengthen outreach and participation from underrepresented regions and communities, ensuring their voices are heard in the agenda-setting process.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Pre-Event Thematic Prioritization: Consider conducting an online survey or thematic consultation ahead of the event to identify the most relevant issues for each region. This could guide the creation of a more focused and relevant programme for IGF 2025.
2. Session Consolidation: To prevent thematic fragmentation, consolidate related sessions into thematic blocks and provide clear documentation on how each session contributes to the overall goals of the forum.
3. Interactive Formats: Encourage interactive formats like workshops, roundtable discussions, and collaborative working groups, where participants can engage deeply with the thematic content and propose solutions.
4. Thematic Diversity: Ensure that all thematic areas, particularly emerging and underrepresented issues, receive the necessary space and visibility in the programme. A balanced approach will ensure that the IGF remains at the forefront of addressing global digital governance challenges.
These suggestions aim to enhance the thematic focus, structure, and flow of IGF 2025, making the forum more engaging, relevant, and impactful for all stakeholders.
Criticisms
1. Overly Broad Thematic Focus: The thematic focus of IGF 2024 was too broad, which diluted the depth of discussions on crucial issues. A more focused and prioritized approach could help in addressing key challenges in greater detail, particularly for emerging regions.
2. Lack of Clear Agenda Flow: While the structure aimed to accommodate diverse stakeholders, the overall flow of the sessions sometimes lacked coherence. There were instances where sessions appeared disconnected, with overlapping topics and unclear transitions between sessions, which hindered effective engagement and learning.
3. Limited Engagement of Emerging Issues: Some emerging issues, such as digital equity, data sovereignty, and the role of AI in governance, did not receive sufficient attention in the thematic focus, leaving them underrepresented in key discussions.
4. Insufficient Integration of Stakeholder Feedback: There was minimal integration of stakeholder feedback from previous years into the structure of the programme, leading to repeated themes and topics that may not reflect current or pressing concerns.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Focused Thematic Tracks: For IGF 2025, consider narrowing the thematic focus into more specific tracks or clusters that allow for deeper exploration of pressing issues. These tracks could address critical topics such as digital rights, sustainable development, and emerging technologies like AI, ensuring more targeted discussions.
2. Clearer Programme Flow: Improve the flow of the programme by establishing clearer links between sessions. This could include developing a narrative thread that connects topics logically, and utilizing time blocks for related themes to avoid session overlap and increase coherence.
3. Inclusion of Emerging Issues: Place a stronger emphasis on emerging digital governance issues such as blockchain, AI ethics, and internet fragmentation. These topics are highly relevant to current global debates but were not sufficiently highlighted in IGF 2024.
4. Stakeholder-Driven Themes: Incorporate more bottom-up planning to ensure that the themes reflect the real-world priorities of grassroots organizations, marginalized communities, and underrepresented regions. This could be achieved through pre-event consultations and thematic polls to gather input from all stakeholders.
5. Increased Integration of Diverse Voices: Ensure that the thematic focus is not only reflective of global interests but also inclusive of regional concerns. Strengthen outreach and participation from underrepresented regions and communities, ensuring their voices are heard in the agenda-setting process.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Pre-Event Thematic Prioritization: Consider conducting an online survey or thematic consultation ahead of the event to identify the most relevant issues for each region. This could guide the creation of a more focused and relevant programme for IGF 2025.
2. Session Consolidation: To prevent thematic fragmentation, consolidate related sessions into thematic blocks and provide clear documentation on how each session contributes to the overall goals of the forum.
3. Interactive Formats: Encourage interactive formats like workshops, roundtable discussions, and collaborative working groups, where participants can engage deeply with the thematic content and propose solutions.
4. Thematic Diversity: Ensure that all thematic areas, particularly emerging and underrepresented issues, receive the necessary space and visibility in the programme. A balanced approach will ensure that the IGF remains at the forefront of addressing global digital governance challenges.
These suggestions aim to enhance the thematic focus, structure, and flow of IGF 2025, making the forum more engaging, relevant, and impactful for all stakeholders.
Criticism and Suggestions for IGF 2024 Hybrid Format Design and Experience
Criticisms
1. Technical Challenges with Hybrid Format: The hybrid format of IGF 2024 faced significant technical challenges, particularly in ensuring seamless interaction between in-person and virtual participants. For instance, connectivity issues sometimes hindered the online experience, leading to delays and difficulty in participation for virtual attendees.
2. Lack of Equal Engagement: Virtual participants were often at a disadvantage when it came to engagement and interaction. In-person attendees had more opportunities for networking and one-on-one discussions, which was not always replicated effectively for those joining remotely.
3. Limited Virtual Content Access: Some sessions and events were not as easily accessible for virtual attendees due to the lack of clear instructions or resources, such as session recordings, translations, or comprehensive access to speaker materials.
4. Time Zone Discrepancies: The scheduling of sessions did not always take into account the challenges of time zones, making it difficult for participants from certain regions to engage in real-time sessions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Technical Infrastructure: To ensure smoother interaction between virtual and in-person participants, invest in better technical infrastructure and support. This could include high-quality video streaming, stable internet connections, and better virtual engagement tools (e.g., chatrooms, Q&A platforms) to facilitate interaction.
2. Virtual-First Engagement Models: Shift the approach to make virtual participation a central aspect of the event, rather than an add-on. This could involve offering more virtual networking opportunities, virtual roundtable discussions, and interaction spaces that mimic the networking opportunities available in person.
3. Expanded Access to Content: Ensure that all sessions, including side events and smaller discussions, are recorded and made available online with proper indexing for easy access. Translations for materials and live captions should be provided to accommodate a wider audience, ensuring inclusivity.
4. Time Zone-Considerate Scheduling: Plan the timing of key sessions to be more considerate of the global audience. This could involve organizing multiple session times to accommodate different time zones or ensuring that all major sessions are recorded and made accessible asynchronously for participants who cannot join in real-time.
5. Interactive Virtual Spaces: Create dedicated spaces for virtual networking and discussions, such as virtual “lounges” or breakout rooms where participants can discuss key issues, share ideas, and build connections. These spaces could be moderated to ensure productive and respectful discussions.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Hybrid Design Integration: For IGF 2025, create an integrated hybrid model where the in-person and virtual experiences are designed from the outset to complement each other. This includes synchronized schedules, better coordination between both formats, and ensuring that all content is accessible across both platforms.
2. Enhanced Participant Support: Provide participants with more detailed guidelines on how to navigate the hybrid format, including tutorials or FAQs about how to engage with virtual platforms effectively and troubleshoot technical issues.
3. Expanded Virtual Participation Options: Consider increasing the number of virtual-first sessions or making all sessions accessible remotely, with adequate interaction opportunities for virtual participants.
4. Post-Event Content Accessibility: Make sure that all content, including discussions, presentations, and outputs, are made easily available for participants to access after the event, allowing for greater flexibility and wider participation.
5. Improved Hybrid Networking Platforms: Develop better virtual networking platforms where participants can engage with each other based on their areas of interest, share contact details, or arrange virtual meetings during the event.
Conclusion
By addressing these concerns and implementing these suggestions, the hybrid format of IGF 2025 can be more inclusive, engaging, and equitable for both in-person and virtual participants. It will also ensure that participants from all regions and backgrounds can fully benefit from the event, regardless of their mode of participation.
Criticisms
1. Technical Challenges with Hybrid Format: The hybrid format of IGF 2024 faced significant technical challenges, particularly in ensuring seamless interaction between in-person and virtual participants. For instance, connectivity issues sometimes hindered the online experience, leading to delays and difficulty in participation for virtual attendees.
2. Lack of Equal Engagement: Virtual participants were often at a disadvantage when it came to engagement and interaction. In-person attendees had more opportunities for networking and one-on-one discussions, which was not always replicated effectively for those joining remotely.
3. Limited Virtual Content Access: Some sessions and events were not as easily accessible for virtual attendees due to the lack of clear instructions or resources, such as session recordings, translations, or comprehensive access to speaker materials.
4. Time Zone Discrepancies: The scheduling of sessions did not always take into account the challenges of time zones, making it difficult for participants from certain regions to engage in real-time sessions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Technical Infrastructure: To ensure smoother interaction between virtual and in-person participants, invest in better technical infrastructure and support. This could include high-quality video streaming, stable internet connections, and better virtual engagement tools (e.g., chatrooms, Q&A platforms) to facilitate interaction.
2. Virtual-First Engagement Models: Shift the approach to make virtual participation a central aspect of the event, rather than an add-on. This could involve offering more virtual networking opportunities, virtual roundtable discussions, and interaction spaces that mimic the networking opportunities available in person.
3. Expanded Access to Content: Ensure that all sessions, including side events and smaller discussions, are recorded and made available online with proper indexing for easy access. Translations for materials and live captions should be provided to accommodate a wider audience, ensuring inclusivity.
4. Time Zone-Considerate Scheduling: Plan the timing of key sessions to be more considerate of the global audience. This could involve organizing multiple session times to accommodate different time zones or ensuring that all major sessions are recorded and made accessible asynchronously for participants who cannot join in real-time.
5. Interactive Virtual Spaces: Create dedicated spaces for virtual networking and discussions, such as virtual “lounges” or breakout rooms where participants can discuss key issues, share ideas, and build connections. These spaces could be moderated to ensure productive and respectful discussions.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Hybrid Design Integration: For IGF 2025, create an integrated hybrid model where the in-person and virtual experiences are designed from the outset to complement each other. This includes synchronized schedules, better coordination between both formats, and ensuring that all content is accessible across both platforms.
2. Enhanced Participant Support: Provide participants with more detailed guidelines on how to navigate the hybrid format, including tutorials or FAQs about how to engage with virtual platforms effectively and troubleshoot technical issues.
3. Expanded Virtual Participation Options: Consider increasing the number of virtual-first sessions or making all sessions accessible remotely, with adequate interaction opportunities for virtual participants.
4. Post-Event Content Accessibility: Make sure that all content, including discussions, presentations, and outputs, are made easily available for participants to access after the event, allowing for greater flexibility and wider participation.
5. Improved Hybrid Networking Platforms: Develop better virtual networking platforms where participants can engage with each other based on their areas of interest, share contact details, or arrange virtual meetings during the event.
Conclusion
By addressing these concerns and implementing these suggestions, the hybrid format of IGF 2025 can be more inclusive, engaging, and equitable for both in-person and virtual participants. It will also ensure that participants from all regions and backgrounds can fully benefit from the event, regardless of their mode of participation.
Criticism and Suggestions for IGF 2024 Logistics (Website, Mobile App, Schedule, Registration, Access and Use of Online Platform, Bilateral Meeting System, Security, etc.)
Criticisms
1. Website Usability Issues: The IGF 2024 website was difficult to navigate, with important information scattered across different sections and sometimes hard to locate. Key details like session schedules, speaker information, and resources were not always immediately visible, which led to frustration for participants trying to prepare in advance.
2. Mobile App Limitations: The mobile app had limited functionality and often failed to provide real-time updates or notifications. For example, some users reported issues with session changes not being reflected in the app, or difficulty accessing important session links, which diminished its overall usability.
3. Registration Bottlenecks: The registration process was lengthy and complicated, with unclear instructions on how to finalize registration or obtain access to certain features of the event, particularly for new users. This caused delays in participants receiving the necessary access credentials and joining sessions on time.
4. Access to Online Platform: Many participants experienced difficulties logging into the online platform or faced connectivity issues, especially those from regions with less reliable internet infrastructure. Some sessions were inaccessible to remote participants due to technical glitches or platform compatibility issues.
5. Bilateral Meeting System Challenges: The system for arranging bilateral meetings was cumbersome and lacked clear guidance. Participants had difficulty finding relevant stakeholders, and the lack of a user-friendly interface for setting up meetings created frustration, hindering productive networking.
6. Security Concerns: There were concerns about the security of personal data, especially for virtual participants. Some users reported being unsure of how their information would be handled or whether their data would be adequately protected during the event.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Website Navigation: For IGF 2025, redesign the website to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Ensure that key sections such as session schedules, registration details, and resources are clearly visible on the homepage. Implement an efficient search function to help participants quickly find relevant information.
2. Enhanced Mobile App Functionality: Develop a more robust mobile app with real-time updates and notifications. The app should allow participants to easily access session details, speaker bios, and event changes. Incorporate interactive features like live Q&A, polls, and event reminders to improve engagement.
3. Streamlined Registration Process: Simplify the registration process to make it faster and more straightforward. Provide clear instructions and an easy-to-follow guide on how to register and access event materials. Consider implementing a user verification process to prevent delays and ensure timely access to the platform.
4. Stabilized and Accessible Online Platform: Invest in improving the online platform to ensure seamless access for participants from different regions, including those with lower bandwidth. Conduct thorough testing prior to the event to ensure compatibility across devices and browsers. Provide clear troubleshooting guides for participants facing issues.
5. User-Friendly Bilateral Meeting System: Revamp the bilateral meeting system to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Provide filters to help participants find relevant stakeholders based on their interests or expertise. Integrate a calendar or scheduling feature that allows participants to book meetings easily and receive automated reminders.
6. Strengthen Security Measures: Prioritize the security of participant data by implementing end-to-end encryption for online interactions and secure login systems. Make sure participants are informed about data privacy policies and have clear instructions on how their personal information will be handled during the event.
7. Provide Tech Support for Participants: Offer a dedicated technical support team available before and during the event to assist participants with issues related to registration, platform access, or app functionality. Providing a live chat feature for quick assistance can improve the participant experience.
8. Pre-Event Orientation: Organize pre-event orientation webinars or tutorials that guide participants through the platform, registration, session booking, and mobile app features. This will help mitigate any confusion and ensure that participants are well-prepared before the event begins.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Comprehensive Platform Testing: Conduct multiple rounds of testing of the event’s website, mobile app, and online platform in diverse conditions to ensure they perform well under different bandwidths and across various devices and browsers.
2. Improved Accessibility Features: Enhance accessibility for participants with disabilities by providing features like screen reader compatibility, captioning for all sessions, and sign language interpretation where possible.
3. Incorporate AI and Automation: Consider integrating AI-powered features in the bilateral meeting system to recommend relevant stakeholders or sessions to participants based on their interests, previous interactions, or areas of expertise.
4. Better Resource Allocation for Security: As cyber threats continue to evolve, increase the focus on data security and ensure that IGF 2025 adopts industry best practices to safeguard participant information. Regularly update security protocols to reflect current threats.
Conclusion
By addressing these logistical issues and adopting these suggestions, IGF 2025 can improve its overall participant experience, making it more efficient, secure, and accessible. A streamlined process for registration, better technical support, and enhanced functionality in digital tools will ensure that both in-person and virtual participants can engage fully, fostering more meaningful interactions and collaboration across regions.
Criticisms
1. Website Usability Issues: The IGF 2024 website was difficult to navigate, with important information scattered across different sections and sometimes hard to locate. Key details like session schedules, speaker information, and resources were not always immediately visible, which led to frustration for participants trying to prepare in advance.
2. Mobile App Limitations: The mobile app had limited functionality and often failed to provide real-time updates or notifications. For example, some users reported issues with session changes not being reflected in the app, or difficulty accessing important session links, which diminished its overall usability.
3. Registration Bottlenecks: The registration process was lengthy and complicated, with unclear instructions on how to finalize registration or obtain access to certain features of the event, particularly for new users. This caused delays in participants receiving the necessary access credentials and joining sessions on time.
4. Access to Online Platform: Many participants experienced difficulties logging into the online platform or faced connectivity issues, especially those from regions with less reliable internet infrastructure. Some sessions were inaccessible to remote participants due to technical glitches or platform compatibility issues.
5. Bilateral Meeting System Challenges: The system for arranging bilateral meetings was cumbersome and lacked clear guidance. Participants had difficulty finding relevant stakeholders, and the lack of a user-friendly interface for setting up meetings created frustration, hindering productive networking.
6. Security Concerns: There were concerns about the security of personal data, especially for virtual participants. Some users reported being unsure of how their information would be handled or whether their data would be adequately protected during the event.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Website Navigation: For IGF 2025, redesign the website to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Ensure that key sections such as session schedules, registration details, and resources are clearly visible on the homepage. Implement an efficient search function to help participants quickly find relevant information.
2. Enhanced Mobile App Functionality: Develop a more robust mobile app with real-time updates and notifications. The app should allow participants to easily access session details, speaker bios, and event changes. Incorporate interactive features like live Q&A, polls, and event reminders to improve engagement.
3. Streamlined Registration Process: Simplify the registration process to make it faster and more straightforward. Provide clear instructions and an easy-to-follow guide on how to register and access event materials. Consider implementing a user verification process to prevent delays and ensure timely access to the platform.
4. Stabilized and Accessible Online Platform: Invest in improving the online platform to ensure seamless access for participants from different regions, including those with lower bandwidth. Conduct thorough testing prior to the event to ensure compatibility across devices and browsers. Provide clear troubleshooting guides for participants facing issues.
5. User-Friendly Bilateral Meeting System: Revamp the bilateral meeting system to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Provide filters to help participants find relevant stakeholders based on their interests or expertise. Integrate a calendar or scheduling feature that allows participants to book meetings easily and receive automated reminders.
6. Strengthen Security Measures: Prioritize the security of participant data by implementing end-to-end encryption for online interactions and secure login systems. Make sure participants are informed about data privacy policies and have clear instructions on how their personal information will be handled during the event.
7. Provide Tech Support for Participants: Offer a dedicated technical support team available before and during the event to assist participants with issues related to registration, platform access, or app functionality. Providing a live chat feature for quick assistance can improve the participant experience.
8. Pre-Event Orientation: Organize pre-event orientation webinars or tutorials that guide participants through the platform, registration, session booking, and mobile app features. This will help mitigate any confusion and ensure that participants are well-prepared before the event begins.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Comprehensive Platform Testing: Conduct multiple rounds of testing of the event’s website, mobile app, and online platform in diverse conditions to ensure they perform well under different bandwidths and across various devices and browsers.
2. Improved Accessibility Features: Enhance accessibility for participants with disabilities by providing features like screen reader compatibility, captioning for all sessions, and sign language interpretation where possible.
3. Incorporate AI and Automation: Consider integrating AI-powered features in the bilateral meeting system to recommend relevant stakeholders or sessions to participants based on their interests, previous interactions, or areas of expertise.
4. Better Resource Allocation for Security: As cyber threats continue to evolve, increase the focus on data security and ensure that IGF 2025 adopts industry best practices to safeguard participant information. Regularly update security protocols to reflect current threats.
Conclusion
By addressing these logistical issues and adopting these suggestions, IGF 2025 can improve its overall participant experience, making it more efficient, secure, and accessible. A streamlined process for registration, better technical support, and enhanced functionality in digital tools will ensure that both in-person and virtual participants can engage fully, fostering more meaningful interactions and collaboration across regions.
Intersessional Activities and NRIs at IGF 2024: Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks
Comments on Process and Content
1. Best Practice Forums (BPFs):
Process: The BPFs at IGF 2024 followed a collaborative and open process where diverse stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical communities, were encouraged to contribute. While this inclusive approach was commendable, there were concerns regarding the timelines for engagement and the lack of clear, easily accessible resources for participants to understand the scope of each BPF early enough.
Content: The content covered in BPFs was highly relevant and addressed critical issues in Internet governance, including cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and privacy. However, there were occasional gaps in how effectively the findings were disseminated and integrated into the broader IGF agenda. Some BPFs focused more on theoretical discussions without sufficient emphasis on tangible outcomes or actionable recommendations.
2. Policy Networks (PNs):
Process: The Policy Networks aimed to bring together experts to produce practical policy recommendations. The process for engaging with PNs seemed to be somewhat opaque, with limited visibility on how stakeholders could participate meaningfully beyond the usual core contributors. While the inclusiveness was a goal, the process lacked transparency regarding how recommendations would be formed and whether there were sufficient efforts to include grassroots voices or those from underrepresented regions.
Content: The Policy Networks focused on complex, global issues such as AI governance, digital economy, and privacy. These topics were certainly relevant, but there was criticism about the level of complexity, which made it challenging for new or less experienced participants to engage fully. A clearer focus on specific, actionable recommendations could have enhanced the PNs' relevance.
Intersessional Activities in the Annual IGF Programme
1. Integration of Intersessional Activities into IGF 2024 Programme:
While the intersessional activities, such as the BPFs and PNs, were included in the overall IGF programme, there was sometimes a lack of seamless integration between them and the main conference sessions. These activities, which were intended to be key drivers of the IGF’s output, often felt somewhat isolated from the main agenda. There were instances where it wasn’t clear how the outputs from the BPFs and PNs fed into the discussions or influenced the sessions at IGF itself.
To improve this, IGF 2025 could ensure that there is a clearer and more structured connection between the intersessional activities and the core IGF discussions. For example, BPFs and PNs should provide concrete summaries and clear action points that are integrated into session agendas, ensuring their outcomes are reflected in the main thematic discussions.
2. Feedback Mechanisms:
There was limited opportunity for direct feedback from participants on the intersessional activities, which made it difficult to gauge the effectiveness or relevance of these efforts in real time. A structured feedback mechanism, allowing participants to evaluate and suggest improvements for the BPFs and PNs, could help improve their design and content for the future.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Increased Transparency in Engagement:
To improve the inclusivity and transparency of BPFs and PNs, IGF 2025 could provide clearer pathways for engagement and make the process more accessible for smaller or emerging stakeholders. This could include providing pre-event briefings, clearer documentation on the selection of contributors, and open calls for participation.
2. Stronger Collaboration Between BPFs, PNs, and Main Sessions:
The outputs of BPFs and PNs should be given more visibility and integrated into the annual IGF programme in a way that ensures they are central to the dialogue. This could involve dedicated sessions during the main event where the findings and recommendations from BPFs and PNs are presented and discussed.
3. Regional Involvement:
There should be more emphasis on regional perspectives within the BPFs and PNs. Ensuring that regional bodies and National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs) have a greater role in shaping the agenda and discussions of these intersessional activities could foster more localized solutions to global issues, benefiting those from underserved regions.
4. Clarifying the Impact of Intersessional Activities:
It would be helpful to have a clearer communication strategy that explains how intersessional activities contribute to the broader goals of IGF. A dedicated session or report at the end of the event that ties together these activities and assesses their impact would enhance the visibility and value of the BPFs and PNs.
Conclusion
The Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 provided important contributions to the ongoing work of the forum, but their integration and impact could have been better. Clearer processes, more inclusive engagement, and a stronger link between the intersessional activities and the broader IGF discussions would help elevate the outcomes of these initiatives. By addressing these points, IGF 2025 can create a more cohesive and impactful preparatory process that fully capitalizes on the expertise and recommendations generated through these platforms.
Comments on Process and Content
1. Best Practice Forums (BPFs):
Process: The BPFs at IGF 2024 followed a collaborative and open process where diverse stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil society, and technical communities, were encouraged to contribute. While this inclusive approach was commendable, there were concerns regarding the timelines for engagement and the lack of clear, easily accessible resources for participants to understand the scope of each BPF early enough.
Content: The content covered in BPFs was highly relevant and addressed critical issues in Internet governance, including cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and privacy. However, there were occasional gaps in how effectively the findings were disseminated and integrated into the broader IGF agenda. Some BPFs focused more on theoretical discussions without sufficient emphasis on tangible outcomes or actionable recommendations.
2. Policy Networks (PNs):
Process: The Policy Networks aimed to bring together experts to produce practical policy recommendations. The process for engaging with PNs seemed to be somewhat opaque, with limited visibility on how stakeholders could participate meaningfully beyond the usual core contributors. While the inclusiveness was a goal, the process lacked transparency regarding how recommendations would be formed and whether there were sufficient efforts to include grassroots voices or those from underrepresented regions.
Content: The Policy Networks focused on complex, global issues such as AI governance, digital economy, and privacy. These topics were certainly relevant, but there was criticism about the level of complexity, which made it challenging for new or less experienced participants to engage fully. A clearer focus on specific, actionable recommendations could have enhanced the PNs' relevance.
Intersessional Activities in the Annual IGF Programme
1. Integration of Intersessional Activities into IGF 2024 Programme:
While the intersessional activities, such as the BPFs and PNs, were included in the overall IGF programme, there was sometimes a lack of seamless integration between them and the main conference sessions. These activities, which were intended to be key drivers of the IGF’s output, often felt somewhat isolated from the main agenda. There were instances where it wasn’t clear how the outputs from the BPFs and PNs fed into the discussions or influenced the sessions at IGF itself.
To improve this, IGF 2025 could ensure that there is a clearer and more structured connection between the intersessional activities and the core IGF discussions. For example, BPFs and PNs should provide concrete summaries and clear action points that are integrated into session agendas, ensuring their outcomes are reflected in the main thematic discussions.
2. Feedback Mechanisms:
There was limited opportunity for direct feedback from participants on the intersessional activities, which made it difficult to gauge the effectiveness or relevance of these efforts in real time. A structured feedback mechanism, allowing participants to evaluate and suggest improvements for the BPFs and PNs, could help improve their design and content for the future.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Increased Transparency in Engagement:
To improve the inclusivity and transparency of BPFs and PNs, IGF 2025 could provide clearer pathways for engagement and make the process more accessible for smaller or emerging stakeholders. This could include providing pre-event briefings, clearer documentation on the selection of contributors, and open calls for participation.
2. Stronger Collaboration Between BPFs, PNs, and Main Sessions:
The outputs of BPFs and PNs should be given more visibility and integrated into the annual IGF programme in a way that ensures they are central to the dialogue. This could involve dedicated sessions during the main event where the findings and recommendations from BPFs and PNs are presented and discussed.
3. Regional Involvement:
There should be more emphasis on regional perspectives within the BPFs and PNs. Ensuring that regional bodies and National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs) have a greater role in shaping the agenda and discussions of these intersessional activities could foster more localized solutions to global issues, benefiting those from underserved regions.
4. Clarifying the Impact of Intersessional Activities:
It would be helpful to have a clearer communication strategy that explains how intersessional activities contribute to the broader goals of IGF. A dedicated session or report at the end of the event that ties together these activities and assesses their impact would enhance the visibility and value of the BPFs and PNs.
Conclusion
The Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 provided important contributions to the ongoing work of the forum, but their integration and impact could have been better. Clearer processes, more inclusive engagement, and a stronger link between the intersessional activities and the broader IGF discussions would help elevate the outcomes of these initiatives. By addressing these points, IGF 2025 can create a more cohesive and impactful preparatory process that fully capitalizes on the expertise and recommendations generated through these platforms.
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024: Process, Content, and Integration
Comments on Process
1. Process of Engagement:
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 played a crucial role in bringing together a diverse range of stakeholders to address specific issues within the Internet governance ecosystem. However, the process for joining and participating in DCs could have been clearer, especially for new participants or smaller organizations. While DCs are meant to be open and inclusive, there was some confusion regarding the procedural steps to actively engage in their activities.
Additionally, the coordination between DCs and the IGF Secretariat seemed inconsistent at times, with some coalitions facing challenges in terms of access to support or alignment with the overarching goals of the event. A more streamlined communication process could enhance coordination, ensuring that participants are aware of the DCs’ work and can more easily contribute to their goals.
2. Inclusivity and Representation:
DCs were designed to be inclusive, yet there were instances where certain DCs appeared to have more representation from certain sectors, such as large corporations or governments, and less from grassroots organizations or civil society. There could be more intentional efforts to ensure that the voices of smaller or less-represented groups are amplified, especially in coalitions focused on pressing global issues such as digital rights, privacy, and access to information.
Furthermore, ensuring that the internal governance of the DCs remains transparent and democratic will help address concerns about exclusivity in decision-making processes.
Comments on Content
1. Relevance and Quality of Content:
The content produced by DCs at IGF 2024 was highly relevant, addressing critical topics such as human rights in the digital space, digital inclusion, data governance, and cybersecurity. These topics align with the core objectives of IGF, which aims to bring diverse voices together to shape the future of the Internet.
However, the content from some DCs lacked depth in terms of actionable outcomes. While the discussions were informative, there was often a disconnect between the theoretical nature of the conversations and concrete, practical solutions that could be implemented by stakeholders. Strengthening the focus on actionable recommendations and policy outcomes would add significant value to the DCs' work.
2. Cross-Cutting Themes:
A significant strength of the DCs was their ability to cover cross-cutting themes that are relevant to the wider IGF community. For example, topics related to the intersection of digital technologies and human rights or the ethical implications of artificial intelligence were crucial in the context of Internet governance. This allowed for discussions that bridged technical and ethical concerns, helping participants understand the broader implications of technological developments.
Incorporation of DCs into IGF 2024 Programme
1. Integration with the Main IGF Sessions:
While DCs contributed valuable insights to the overall IGF programme, there was room for improvement in how they were integrated into the event. In some cases, DC sessions were seen as standalone activities that did not have sufficient connection to the broader IGF agenda. A more cohesive approach to integrating the work of the DCs into the core sessions of the IGF would ensure that their contributions are not only recognized but also build on the broader themes and discussions of the event.
One potential improvement could be to feature a dedicated segment in the IGF programme that explicitly links the findings and recommendations of the DCs with relevant sessions, thereby creating an interactive dialogue between the coalitions and the larger IGF community.
2. Visibility of DC Outcomes:
The outcomes and recommendations of DCs were not always as visible or impactful as they could have been. It would be beneficial to have a formal mechanism where the DCs can present their results and findings in a more structured and visible way. This could include a plenary session dedicated to DCs' outcomes, ensuring that their work is not only showcased but also considered in the broader policy discussions during the IGF.
Additionally, establishing a follow-up process after the IGF to track the implementation or impact of DC recommendations could help in measuring the long-term value of these coalitions.
3. Support and Capacity Building for DCs:
There were calls for more targeted capacity-building opportunities for DC members, especially those from underserved regions and smaller organizations. Ensuring that DC participants have access to the necessary tools, resources, and training would empower them to engage more effectively in the work of the coalitions and contribute more meaningfully to the IGF discussions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Accessibility and Engagement:
To improve engagement with DCs, IGF 2025 could provide clearer guidelines for joining and participating in these coalitions. Additionally, creating more inclusive outreach efforts, including offering language support or pre-event orientation sessions, would help ensure a wider range of stakeholders can actively participate.
2. Strengthening Interactions Between DCs and Main Sessions:
To enhance the visibility and impact of DCs' work, IGF 2025 could ensure that their findings are not only presented but also linked to the main sessions. This could involve creating formalized opportunities for DC representatives to interact with session moderators and participants, fostering a more integrative approach to shaping the IGF agenda.
3. Actionable Outputs and Policy Recommendations:
DCs should focus on developing more concrete policy recommendations and actionable outcomes. These outputs should be structured in a way that they can be easily adopted and implemented by stakeholders, particularly governments, businesses, and civil society groups. A clearer framework for translating discussions into actionable items will enhance the practical impact of DCs.
4. Follow-up Mechanisms:
To ensure that the work of DCs extends beyond the event, a formal follow-up mechanism should be introduced to track the impact of the coalitions’ recommendations. This could involve creating a space for DCs to report on progress in subsequent IGFs, ensuring continuity and accountability for their work.
Conclusion
The Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024 played a significant role in fostering discussions on crucial Internet governance issues. However, there is an opportunity to enhance the process, content, and integration of these intersessional activities into the broader IGF programme. By improving transparency, accessibility, and alignment with the main sessions, and ensuring the coalitions produce actionable and practical outcomes, the IGF can amplify the impact of its Dynamic Coalitions in future editions.
Comments on Process
1. Process of Engagement:
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 played a crucial role in bringing together a diverse range of stakeholders to address specific issues within the Internet governance ecosystem. However, the process for joining and participating in DCs could have been clearer, especially for new participants or smaller organizations. While DCs are meant to be open and inclusive, there was some confusion regarding the procedural steps to actively engage in their activities.
Additionally, the coordination between DCs and the IGF Secretariat seemed inconsistent at times, with some coalitions facing challenges in terms of access to support or alignment with the overarching goals of the event. A more streamlined communication process could enhance coordination, ensuring that participants are aware of the DCs’ work and can more easily contribute to their goals.
2. Inclusivity and Representation:
DCs were designed to be inclusive, yet there were instances where certain DCs appeared to have more representation from certain sectors, such as large corporations or governments, and less from grassroots organizations or civil society. There could be more intentional efforts to ensure that the voices of smaller or less-represented groups are amplified, especially in coalitions focused on pressing global issues such as digital rights, privacy, and access to information.
Furthermore, ensuring that the internal governance of the DCs remains transparent and democratic will help address concerns about exclusivity in decision-making processes.
Comments on Content
1. Relevance and Quality of Content:
The content produced by DCs at IGF 2024 was highly relevant, addressing critical topics such as human rights in the digital space, digital inclusion, data governance, and cybersecurity. These topics align with the core objectives of IGF, which aims to bring diverse voices together to shape the future of the Internet.
However, the content from some DCs lacked depth in terms of actionable outcomes. While the discussions were informative, there was often a disconnect between the theoretical nature of the conversations and concrete, practical solutions that could be implemented by stakeholders. Strengthening the focus on actionable recommendations and policy outcomes would add significant value to the DCs' work.
2. Cross-Cutting Themes:
A significant strength of the DCs was their ability to cover cross-cutting themes that are relevant to the wider IGF community. For example, topics related to the intersection of digital technologies and human rights or the ethical implications of artificial intelligence were crucial in the context of Internet governance. This allowed for discussions that bridged technical and ethical concerns, helping participants understand the broader implications of technological developments.
Incorporation of DCs into IGF 2024 Programme
1. Integration with the Main IGF Sessions:
While DCs contributed valuable insights to the overall IGF programme, there was room for improvement in how they were integrated into the event. In some cases, DC sessions were seen as standalone activities that did not have sufficient connection to the broader IGF agenda. A more cohesive approach to integrating the work of the DCs into the core sessions of the IGF would ensure that their contributions are not only recognized but also build on the broader themes and discussions of the event.
One potential improvement could be to feature a dedicated segment in the IGF programme that explicitly links the findings and recommendations of the DCs with relevant sessions, thereby creating an interactive dialogue between the coalitions and the larger IGF community.
2. Visibility of DC Outcomes:
The outcomes and recommendations of DCs were not always as visible or impactful as they could have been. It would be beneficial to have a formal mechanism where the DCs can present their results and findings in a more structured and visible way. This could include a plenary session dedicated to DCs' outcomes, ensuring that their work is not only showcased but also considered in the broader policy discussions during the IGF.
Additionally, establishing a follow-up process after the IGF to track the implementation or impact of DC recommendations could help in measuring the long-term value of these coalitions.
3. Support and Capacity Building for DCs:
There were calls for more targeted capacity-building opportunities for DC members, especially those from underserved regions and smaller organizations. Ensuring that DC participants have access to the necessary tools, resources, and training would empower them to engage more effectively in the work of the coalitions and contribute more meaningfully to the IGF discussions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Improved Accessibility and Engagement:
To improve engagement with DCs, IGF 2025 could provide clearer guidelines for joining and participating in these coalitions. Additionally, creating more inclusive outreach efforts, including offering language support or pre-event orientation sessions, would help ensure a wider range of stakeholders can actively participate.
2. Strengthening Interactions Between DCs and Main Sessions:
To enhance the visibility and impact of DCs' work, IGF 2025 could ensure that their findings are not only presented but also linked to the main sessions. This could involve creating formalized opportunities for DC representatives to interact with session moderators and participants, fostering a more integrative approach to shaping the IGF agenda.
3. Actionable Outputs and Policy Recommendations:
DCs should focus on developing more concrete policy recommendations and actionable outcomes. These outputs should be structured in a way that they can be easily adopted and implemented by stakeholders, particularly governments, businesses, and civil society groups. A clearer framework for translating discussions into actionable items will enhance the practical impact of DCs.
4. Follow-up Mechanisms:
To ensure that the work of DCs extends beyond the event, a formal follow-up mechanism should be introduced to track the impact of the coalitions’ recommendations. This could involve creating a space for DCs to report on progress in subsequent IGFs, ensuring continuity and accountability for their work.
Conclusion
The Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024 played a significant role in fostering discussions on crucial Internet governance issues. However, there is an opportunity to enhance the process, content, and integration of these intersessional activities into the broader IGF programme. By improving transparency, accessibility, and alignment with the main sessions, and ensuring the coalitions produce actionable and practical outcomes, the IGF can amplify the impact of its Dynamic Coalitions in future editions.
IGF 2024 Programme Content from a Gender Perspective
The gender perspective in the IGF 2024 programme is crucial for ensuring that Internet governance discussions are inclusive and reflect the needs, rights, and challenges of all genders. In analyzing the programme content through a gender lens, we can assess the extent to which gender issues were incorporated into the discussions and whether the participation of diverse genders was adequately represented and addressed.
Positive Aspects:
1. Increased Gender Awareness:
It was encouraging to see that gender equality was increasingly woven into the discussions. Topics such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, online violence, and access to digital technologies featured gender-specific angles. These discussions highlight the need to ensure that digital spaces are equitable for all genders, with a particular focus on addressing the digital divide faced by women and gender minorities.
Panels and sessions related to women's empowerment in technology, gender-based violence online, and gender-responsive policies showcased the growing recognition that the digital world can often amplify inequalities, particularly for women and marginalized genders.
2. Presence of Gender-Specific Sessions:
Several sessions were specifically dedicated to gender equality in the digital sphere, such as workshops on women's digital rights, digital security for women, and gender-sensitive data governance. This focus was crucial for addressing the unique challenges faced by women and marginalized genders in the digital space, where issues like harassment, online abuse, and the gendered impact of AI and algorithms need to be highlighted and tackled.
These sessions served as platforms for women activists, digital rights advocates, and experts in gender equality to share their insights and strategies for overcoming barriers.
3. Gender Representation in Panelists and Speakers:
There was a noticeable increase in the number of female panelists and gender-diverse speakers at IGF 2024. This represented an important shift towards more inclusive representation of women and non-binary individuals in leadership and expert roles. When women and gender minorities are given visibility as thought leaders, it sets a powerful example for the wider digital governance community and encourages more equitable participation.
However, while there was some improvement, there is still work to be done to ensure that gender diversity is consistently represented, particularly in technical discussions and high-level panels, where the number of female participants still lags behind.
Areas for Improvement:
1. Gender Balance in Panel Representation:
Despite improvements, many panels and discussions still displayed an imbalance in gender representation, especially in technical or policy-focused sessions. The gender divide in these areas may be a reflection of broader structural issues in tech and policy, where men dominate leadership positions.
Ensuring gender balance in every panel, session, and discussion—especially on topics such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, data privacy, and cybersecurity—is crucial. Women and marginalized genders often face barriers to entry in these fields, so their equal representation in discussions about these technologies is key to creating gender-inclusive solutions.
2. Gender Mainstreaming Across All Topics:
Gender equality should be mainstreamed across all topics at IGF 2024, rather than being confined to a specific track or isolated sessions. This would ensure that gender considerations are part of the core discussions on Internet governance, digital policies, access to technology, and human rights.
Gender should not be treated as a peripheral issue but rather be integrated as a cross-cutting theme that informs every part of the conversation, much like accessibility or privacy.
3. Addressing Intersectionality:
While there were sessions addressing gender equality, the intersectionality of gender with race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and disability was not always sufficiently addressed. Women from marginalized communities, including Black women, Indigenous women, rural women, and LGBTQIA+ individuals, often face unique challenges in the digital world. Their voices and experiences need to be explicitly represented in discussions.
Future IGFs should ensure that intersectional perspectives are prioritized and that the conversations are inclusive of all genders, especially those who face multiple layers of discrimination or exclusion.
4. Actionable Outcomes for Gender Equality:
While many sessions at IGF 2024 highlighted the gender digital divide and other challenges faced by women and marginalized genders, actionable outcomes were not always clear. Moving forward, it will be important to focus not only on raising awareness but also on developing concrete recommendations and policy actions that can drive change.
For instance, recommendations could include advocating for gender-responsive data policies, ensuring women’s participation in technology governance, or providing financial and educational support for women in tech.
Suggestions for Future IGF Programmes:
1. Gender-Specific Capacity Building:
Organizing capacity-building activities that specifically focus on empowering women and gender minorities to take active roles in Internet governance, technology development, and policy-making would help bridge the gender gap. These activities could include training on digital security, policy advocacy, leadership development, and technical skills for women and marginalized groups.
2. Gender Metrics and Data:
The IGF should adopt better gender-sensitive metrics for measuring the participation and contributions of women and gender minorities. This could include collecting data on gender representation in both physical and virtual attendance, and in different types of sessions (e.g., high-level sessions, technical tracks, policy discussions). This would provide a clearer picture of gender participation and help identify areas where more work is needed.
3. Inclusive Decision-Making Processes:
To ensure that gender perspectives are fully integrated into the IGF process, it’s important that gender-inclusive decision-making processes are encouraged within MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) and session selection committees. Ensuring that gender experts or representatives from organizations working on women’s rights and digital equality are part of these decision-making bodies can help prioritize gender-related issues.
4. Expand and Promote Women’s Networks:
IGF should collaborate with women's networks and gender-focused digital organizations to amplify women’s voices and contributions to the Internet governance ecosystem. Highlighting the achievements of women leaders in the digital space can inspire others to get involved and take on leadership roles.
Conclusion:
IGF 2024 showed notable progress in promoting gender equality, with more gender-focused discussions, greater female representation, and a clearer recognition of gender-related issues. However, there is still significant room for improvement in ensuring gender balance, intersectionality, and actionable outcomes. Moving forward, IGF should integrate gender considerations more deeply across all aspects of its programme to ensure that digital spaces become more inclusive, equitable, and accessible for all. By addressing the gender digital divide and supporting the participation of women and marginalized genders, IGF can play a key role in driving positive social change and fostering a more just and inclusive digital future.
The gender perspective in the IGF 2024 programme is crucial for ensuring that Internet governance discussions are inclusive and reflect the needs, rights, and challenges of all genders. In analyzing the programme content through a gender lens, we can assess the extent to which gender issues were incorporated into the discussions and whether the participation of diverse genders was adequately represented and addressed.
Positive Aspects:
1. Increased Gender Awareness:
It was encouraging to see that gender equality was increasingly woven into the discussions. Topics such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, online violence, and access to digital technologies featured gender-specific angles. These discussions highlight the need to ensure that digital spaces are equitable for all genders, with a particular focus on addressing the digital divide faced by women and gender minorities.
Panels and sessions related to women's empowerment in technology, gender-based violence online, and gender-responsive policies showcased the growing recognition that the digital world can often amplify inequalities, particularly for women and marginalized genders.
2. Presence of Gender-Specific Sessions:
Several sessions were specifically dedicated to gender equality in the digital sphere, such as workshops on women's digital rights, digital security for women, and gender-sensitive data governance. This focus was crucial for addressing the unique challenges faced by women and marginalized genders in the digital space, where issues like harassment, online abuse, and the gendered impact of AI and algorithms need to be highlighted and tackled.
These sessions served as platforms for women activists, digital rights advocates, and experts in gender equality to share their insights and strategies for overcoming barriers.
3. Gender Representation in Panelists and Speakers:
There was a noticeable increase in the number of female panelists and gender-diverse speakers at IGF 2024. This represented an important shift towards more inclusive representation of women and non-binary individuals in leadership and expert roles. When women and gender minorities are given visibility as thought leaders, it sets a powerful example for the wider digital governance community and encourages more equitable participation.
However, while there was some improvement, there is still work to be done to ensure that gender diversity is consistently represented, particularly in technical discussions and high-level panels, where the number of female participants still lags behind.
Areas for Improvement:
1. Gender Balance in Panel Representation:
Despite improvements, many panels and discussions still displayed an imbalance in gender representation, especially in technical or policy-focused sessions. The gender divide in these areas may be a reflection of broader structural issues in tech and policy, where men dominate leadership positions.
Ensuring gender balance in every panel, session, and discussion—especially on topics such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, data privacy, and cybersecurity—is crucial. Women and marginalized genders often face barriers to entry in these fields, so their equal representation in discussions about these technologies is key to creating gender-inclusive solutions.
2. Gender Mainstreaming Across All Topics:
Gender equality should be mainstreamed across all topics at IGF 2024, rather than being confined to a specific track or isolated sessions. This would ensure that gender considerations are part of the core discussions on Internet governance, digital policies, access to technology, and human rights.
Gender should not be treated as a peripheral issue but rather be integrated as a cross-cutting theme that informs every part of the conversation, much like accessibility or privacy.
3. Addressing Intersectionality:
While there were sessions addressing gender equality, the intersectionality of gender with race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and disability was not always sufficiently addressed. Women from marginalized communities, including Black women, Indigenous women, rural women, and LGBTQIA+ individuals, often face unique challenges in the digital world. Their voices and experiences need to be explicitly represented in discussions.
Future IGFs should ensure that intersectional perspectives are prioritized and that the conversations are inclusive of all genders, especially those who face multiple layers of discrimination or exclusion.
4. Actionable Outcomes for Gender Equality:
While many sessions at IGF 2024 highlighted the gender digital divide and other challenges faced by women and marginalized genders, actionable outcomes were not always clear. Moving forward, it will be important to focus not only on raising awareness but also on developing concrete recommendations and policy actions that can drive change.
For instance, recommendations could include advocating for gender-responsive data policies, ensuring women’s participation in technology governance, or providing financial and educational support for women in tech.
Suggestions for Future IGF Programmes:
1. Gender-Specific Capacity Building:
Organizing capacity-building activities that specifically focus on empowering women and gender minorities to take active roles in Internet governance, technology development, and policy-making would help bridge the gender gap. These activities could include training on digital security, policy advocacy, leadership development, and technical skills for women and marginalized groups.
2. Gender Metrics and Data:
The IGF should adopt better gender-sensitive metrics for measuring the participation and contributions of women and gender minorities. This could include collecting data on gender representation in both physical and virtual attendance, and in different types of sessions (e.g., high-level sessions, technical tracks, policy discussions). This would provide a clearer picture of gender participation and help identify areas where more work is needed.
3. Inclusive Decision-Making Processes:
To ensure that gender perspectives are fully integrated into the IGF process, it’s important that gender-inclusive decision-making processes are encouraged within MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) and session selection committees. Ensuring that gender experts or representatives from organizations working on women’s rights and digital equality are part of these decision-making bodies can help prioritize gender-related issues.
4. Expand and Promote Women’s Networks:
IGF should collaborate with women's networks and gender-focused digital organizations to amplify women’s voices and contributions to the Internet governance ecosystem. Highlighting the achievements of women leaders in the digital space can inspire others to get involved and take on leadership roles.
Conclusion:
IGF 2024 showed notable progress in promoting gender equality, with more gender-focused discussions, greater female representation, and a clearer recognition of gender-related issues. However, there is still significant room for improvement in ensuring gender balance, intersectionality, and actionable outcomes. Moving forward, IGF should integrate gender considerations more deeply across all aspects of its programme to ensure that digital spaces become more inclusive, equitable, and accessible for all. By addressing the gender digital divide and supporting the participation of women and marginalized genders, IGF can play a key role in driving positive social change and fostering a more just and inclusive digital future.
Feedback on IGF 2024 Sessions: Content, Speakers, and Quality of Discussions
Content
1. Relevance and Timeliness:
The content of the IGF 2024 sessions was highly relevant to current global issues in Internet governance, including digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data privacy, artificial intelligence, and the digital divide. Many sessions addressed pressing concerns like online safety, youth engagement, and the evolving regulatory landscape, which was timely given the rapid pace of technological advancements and regulatory challenges worldwide.
However, there were some sessions that seemed overly technical or niche, which may have limited accessibility for broader audiences. To ensure the widest possible engagement, future sessions could consider simplifying complex topics or providing supplementary resources to make technical discussions more accessible.
2. Diversity of Topics:
The thematic focus of the sessions was varied and covered a broad range of issues that impact different stakeholders, from policymakers and governments to civil society, private sector, and technical communities. However, there was room for more representation of emerging topics like digital sovereignty, blockchain, and the role of tech companies in global governance.
Furthermore, some sessions could have placed more emphasis on grassroots initiatives and local-level impacts, especially for regions facing significant digital gaps. This would help ensure that the IGF continues to reflect a wide spectrum of voices and experiences, particularly from underserved regions.
Speakers
1. Diversity and Representation:
The IGF 2024 featured a diverse range of speakers, including government officials, academics, civil society leaders, and representatives from the private sector. This diversity contributed to rich discussions that reflected various perspectives on Internet governance.
However, there were concerns that some of the panels were dominated by high-profile representatives from large organizations, leaving less space for smaller, emerging voices, particularly from the grassroots level or less-represented regions. More efforts could be made to ensure that these voices are equally represented, particularly those from underrepresented groups, including youth, women, and indigenous communities.
2. Expertise and Credibility:
The speakers generally brought strong expertise to the table, offering well-informed insights and practical solutions to complex issues. However, some sessions could have benefited from a greater emphasis on action-oriented discussions, where speakers could share specific examples of successful initiatives, policies, or technologies that have had a tangible impact on local or global communities.
Additionally, while the speakers’ backgrounds were diverse, it would be beneficial to incorporate more voices from non-Western perspectives to ensure that the discussions are truly global and reflect the needs and challenges faced by developing countries and marginalized communities.
Quality of Discussions
1. Engagement and Interactivity:
The quality of discussions varied across sessions. Some panels fostered highly interactive discussions, where participants could ask questions and share their perspectives, promoting a dynamic exchange of ideas. However, in other sessions, the format was more lecture-style, which limited the ability for participants to engage actively with the content.
More interactive formats, such as workshops, Q&A sessions, or roundtable discussions, could be incorporated into future sessions to encourage deeper engagement and allow for more meaningful participation from the audience.
2. Outcome-Oriented Discussions:
While many sessions offered in-depth analysis and thought-provoking discussions, there were fewer concrete outcomes or actionable recommendations at the conclusion of each session. Moving forward, it would be helpful to include more outcomes-oriented sessions where speakers and participants collaboratively develop actionable solutions or policy recommendations that can be followed up after the IGF.
Encouraging more collaboration between sessions or encouraging the creation of task forces or working groups to address specific issues could help ensure that the discussions lead to meaningful change.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Strengthening Inclusivity in Speaker Selection:
To increase inclusivity, the IGF 2024 could have incorporated more speakers from smaller organizations, grassroots groups, and representatives from the Global South. Ensuring that all stakeholders have a voice, especially those most affected by the issues discussed, would enhance the credibility and relevance of the sessions.
Additionally, providing more opportunities for young people, marginalized groups, and community leaders to take the stage would enrich the discussions and ensure that diverse perspectives are fully represented.
2. More Interactive and Actionable Sessions:
Future IGFs could benefit from more interactive formats, such as working sessions, case study reviews, or collaborative workshops. This would allow participants to not only engage in discussions but also work together to develop concrete solutions that could be implemented post-event.
Incorporating more follow-up mechanisms, such as action plans or initiatives stemming from session discussions, would help ensure that the IGF remains a platform for tangible change.
3. Increased Focus on Emerging Technologies and Local Impacts:
While many sessions addressed current issues, more focus could be placed on emerging technologies such as blockchain, AI, and their implications for global governance. Additionally, future sessions could better highlight the local-level impacts of Internet governance policies, especially from underserved regions or vulnerable groups.
Encouraging sessions that bridge the gap between global discussions and local realities would be beneficial for fostering actionable solutions that have a direct impact on communities and regions facing unique challenges.
4. Sponsor and Shortlisted Organization Recognition:
It is essential to create a clear and transparent process regarding sponsorship for organizations involved in the IGF. Specifically, newly involved organizations often lack knowledge regarding whether they have been shortlisted for sponsorship, and it would be helpful to have a dedicated webpage listing the shortlisted organizations before their arrival. This would allow these organizations to better prepare and understand their status, ensuring that their participation is supported and recognized appropriately.
Conclusion
IGF 2024 featured strong content, diverse speakers, and engaging discussions. However, there is room for improvement in terms of inclusivity, interactive formats, and ensuring that actionable outcomes are developed from the sessions. By expanding representation, improving the accessibility of complex topics, and focusing on concrete actions, future IGFs can continue to be an influential platform for global Internet governance discussions.
Content
1. Relevance and Timeliness:
The content of the IGF 2024 sessions was highly relevant to current global issues in Internet governance, including digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data privacy, artificial intelligence, and the digital divide. Many sessions addressed pressing concerns like online safety, youth engagement, and the evolving regulatory landscape, which was timely given the rapid pace of technological advancements and regulatory challenges worldwide.
However, there were some sessions that seemed overly technical or niche, which may have limited accessibility for broader audiences. To ensure the widest possible engagement, future sessions could consider simplifying complex topics or providing supplementary resources to make technical discussions more accessible.
2. Diversity of Topics:
The thematic focus of the sessions was varied and covered a broad range of issues that impact different stakeholders, from policymakers and governments to civil society, private sector, and technical communities. However, there was room for more representation of emerging topics like digital sovereignty, blockchain, and the role of tech companies in global governance.
Furthermore, some sessions could have placed more emphasis on grassroots initiatives and local-level impacts, especially for regions facing significant digital gaps. This would help ensure that the IGF continues to reflect a wide spectrum of voices and experiences, particularly from underserved regions.
Speakers
1. Diversity and Representation:
The IGF 2024 featured a diverse range of speakers, including government officials, academics, civil society leaders, and representatives from the private sector. This diversity contributed to rich discussions that reflected various perspectives on Internet governance.
However, there were concerns that some of the panels were dominated by high-profile representatives from large organizations, leaving less space for smaller, emerging voices, particularly from the grassroots level or less-represented regions. More efforts could be made to ensure that these voices are equally represented, particularly those from underrepresented groups, including youth, women, and indigenous communities.
2. Expertise and Credibility:
The speakers generally brought strong expertise to the table, offering well-informed insights and practical solutions to complex issues. However, some sessions could have benefited from a greater emphasis on action-oriented discussions, where speakers could share specific examples of successful initiatives, policies, or technologies that have had a tangible impact on local or global communities.
Additionally, while the speakers’ backgrounds were diverse, it would be beneficial to incorporate more voices from non-Western perspectives to ensure that the discussions are truly global and reflect the needs and challenges faced by developing countries and marginalized communities.
Quality of Discussions
1. Engagement and Interactivity:
The quality of discussions varied across sessions. Some panels fostered highly interactive discussions, where participants could ask questions and share their perspectives, promoting a dynamic exchange of ideas. However, in other sessions, the format was more lecture-style, which limited the ability for participants to engage actively with the content.
More interactive formats, such as workshops, Q&A sessions, or roundtable discussions, could be incorporated into future sessions to encourage deeper engagement and allow for more meaningful participation from the audience.
2. Outcome-Oriented Discussions:
While many sessions offered in-depth analysis and thought-provoking discussions, there were fewer concrete outcomes or actionable recommendations at the conclusion of each session. Moving forward, it would be helpful to include more outcomes-oriented sessions where speakers and participants collaboratively develop actionable solutions or policy recommendations that can be followed up after the IGF.
Encouraging more collaboration between sessions or encouraging the creation of task forces or working groups to address specific issues could help ensure that the discussions lead to meaningful change.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Strengthening Inclusivity in Speaker Selection:
To increase inclusivity, the IGF 2024 could have incorporated more speakers from smaller organizations, grassroots groups, and representatives from the Global South. Ensuring that all stakeholders have a voice, especially those most affected by the issues discussed, would enhance the credibility and relevance of the sessions.
Additionally, providing more opportunities for young people, marginalized groups, and community leaders to take the stage would enrich the discussions and ensure that diverse perspectives are fully represented.
2. More Interactive and Actionable Sessions:
Future IGFs could benefit from more interactive formats, such as working sessions, case study reviews, or collaborative workshops. This would allow participants to not only engage in discussions but also work together to develop concrete solutions that could be implemented post-event.
Incorporating more follow-up mechanisms, such as action plans or initiatives stemming from session discussions, would help ensure that the IGF remains a platform for tangible change.
3. Increased Focus on Emerging Technologies and Local Impacts:
While many sessions addressed current issues, more focus could be placed on emerging technologies such as blockchain, AI, and their implications for global governance. Additionally, future sessions could better highlight the local-level impacts of Internet governance policies, especially from underserved regions or vulnerable groups.
Encouraging sessions that bridge the gap between global discussions and local realities would be beneficial for fostering actionable solutions that have a direct impact on communities and regions facing unique challenges.
4. Sponsor and Shortlisted Organization Recognition:
It is essential to create a clear and transparent process regarding sponsorship for organizations involved in the IGF. Specifically, newly involved organizations often lack knowledge regarding whether they have been shortlisted for sponsorship, and it would be helpful to have a dedicated webpage listing the shortlisted organizations before their arrival. This would allow these organizations to better prepare and understand their status, ensuring that their participation is supported and recognized appropriately.
Conclusion
IGF 2024 featured strong content, diverse speakers, and engaging discussions. However, there is room for improvement in terms of inclusivity, interactive formats, and ensuring that actionable outcomes are developed from the sessions. By expanding representation, improving the accessibility of complex topics, and focusing on concrete actions, future IGFs can continue to be an influential platform for global Internet governance discussions.
Feedback on the IGF 2024 High-Level Leaders Track
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together key policymakers, government leaders, private sector executives, and thought leaders to discuss strategic issues impacting Internet governance on a global scale. Here is a breakdown of feedback regarding the track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The High-Level Leaders Track featured discussions on pressing global issues, including digital sovereignty, cybersecurity, data privacy, AI regulation, and digital infrastructure. These topics are of critical importance and reflect the growing significance of the Internet as a foundational part of global economies and societies.
However, some of the discussions were more focused on high-level theoretical concepts rather than practical, actionable outcomes. Future editions of this track could benefit from providing concrete case studies, best practices, and clear action items for global leaders to take back to their respective countries or organizations.
2. Global Challenges and Regional Perspectives:
While the discussions addressed global challenges, the perspectives presented often leaned heavily toward Western countries or large tech companies. More focus on issues facing the Global South, particularly in relation to digital infrastructure, access, and the digital divide, would have added depth to the discussions and better reflected the needs of underserved regions.
Including more sessions on local and regional policy implications of Internet governance would help create a more balanced and diverse agenda.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Participants:
The High-Level Leaders Track had a solid lineup of speakers, with key figures from governments, international organizations, and the tech industry. However, there was an observable gap in representation from smaller countries or emerging economies, which often face unique Internet governance challenges. Ensuring that speakers from these regions are included would add valuable diversity to the track.
Additionally, while government leaders and corporate executives were well represented, civil society leaders and individuals from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had limited presence. Their insights could provide a more holistic view of Internet governance, especially from a user-centered perspective.
2. Engagement and Interactivity:
The High-Level Leaders Track sessions were more presentation-based and less interactive. While this is expected in discussions with high-level stakeholders, it would be beneficial to incorporate more interactive elements such as roundtable discussions, Q&A sessions, or moderated debates. This would allow for more engagement from the broader IGF audience and foster deeper dialogue between leaders and grassroots actors.
Quality of Discussions
1. Actionability:
The sessions featured some of the most influential leaders in Internet governance, but the discussions often lacked a clear connection to actionable outcomes. The focus was largely on identifying problems and challenges, but less attention was given to solutions and commitments that could be acted upon in the short to medium term.
It would be valuable to conclude the High-Level Leaders Track with specific commitments or resolutions, with concrete timelines and follow-up mechanisms to ensure that the discussions lead to tangible progress.
2. Policy Alignment:
One of the key takeaways from the High-Level Leaders Track was the growing alignment on issues such as cybersecurity, digital governance frameworks, and the importance of multi stakeholder engagement. However, there were instances where the discussions could have been more focused on policy coordination and harmonization across regions. Encouraging greater cooperation between countries and regions on key policy issues would ensure that global digital governance remains cohesive and consistent.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Inclusion of Diverse Voices:
Moving forward, the High-Level Leaders Track could benefit from the inclusion of more voices from the Global South, civil society, and smaller, non-state actors. This would provide a more inclusive perspective on global Internet governance challenges and ensure that the track reflects the needs of all stakeholders, not just the most influential players.
Specifically, a focus on emerging economies and their specific Internet governance challenges would help to broaden the dialogue and foster a more equitable global conversation.
2. Interactive Formats:
While high-level discussions are often formal, incorporating more interactive formats would increase the engagement of participants and ensure that the sessions are not merely one-way presentations. A hybrid format, including panels, roundtables, and audience participation, would facilitate more dynamic and productive discussions.
3. Outcome-Oriented Discussions:
To make the High-Level Leaders Track more impactful, it is important that future sessions lead to tangible outcomes. This could be in the form of joint statements, action plans, or collaborative initiatives. Creating clear mechanisms for follow-up after the track could ensure that the momentum generated during these discussions is sustained.
4. Transparency on Sponsorship and Shortlisting for Organizations:
Another issue to address is the lack of clarity regarding the sponsorship and shortlisting process for organizations, particularly smaller and newly involved organizations. Creating a transparent platform or webpage listing the organizations that have been shortlisted for sponsorship before the event would ensure that these organizations are better prepared and aware of their status. This would also offer clarity to those who self-fund their participation.
Conclusion
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was a valuable part of the forum, addressing some of the most critical issues in Internet governance. However, there is room for improvement in ensuring that the discussions are more inclusive, action-oriented, and engaging. By incorporating a wider range of perspectives, adopting interactive formats, and ensuring clear outcomes, the High-Level Leaders Track can continue to play a pivotal role in shaping global Internet governance.
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together key policymakers, government leaders, private sector executives, and thought leaders to discuss strategic issues impacting Internet governance on a global scale. Here is a breakdown of feedback regarding the track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The High-Level Leaders Track featured discussions on pressing global issues, including digital sovereignty, cybersecurity, data privacy, AI regulation, and digital infrastructure. These topics are of critical importance and reflect the growing significance of the Internet as a foundational part of global economies and societies.
However, some of the discussions were more focused on high-level theoretical concepts rather than practical, actionable outcomes. Future editions of this track could benefit from providing concrete case studies, best practices, and clear action items for global leaders to take back to their respective countries or organizations.
2. Global Challenges and Regional Perspectives:
While the discussions addressed global challenges, the perspectives presented often leaned heavily toward Western countries or large tech companies. More focus on issues facing the Global South, particularly in relation to digital infrastructure, access, and the digital divide, would have added depth to the discussions and better reflected the needs of underserved regions.
Including more sessions on local and regional policy implications of Internet governance would help create a more balanced and diverse agenda.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Participants:
The High-Level Leaders Track had a solid lineup of speakers, with key figures from governments, international organizations, and the tech industry. However, there was an observable gap in representation from smaller countries or emerging economies, which often face unique Internet governance challenges. Ensuring that speakers from these regions are included would add valuable diversity to the track.
Additionally, while government leaders and corporate executives were well represented, civil society leaders and individuals from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had limited presence. Their insights could provide a more holistic view of Internet governance, especially from a user-centered perspective.
2. Engagement and Interactivity:
The High-Level Leaders Track sessions were more presentation-based and less interactive. While this is expected in discussions with high-level stakeholders, it would be beneficial to incorporate more interactive elements such as roundtable discussions, Q&A sessions, or moderated debates. This would allow for more engagement from the broader IGF audience and foster deeper dialogue between leaders and grassroots actors.
Quality of Discussions
1. Actionability:
The sessions featured some of the most influential leaders in Internet governance, but the discussions often lacked a clear connection to actionable outcomes. The focus was largely on identifying problems and challenges, but less attention was given to solutions and commitments that could be acted upon in the short to medium term.
It would be valuable to conclude the High-Level Leaders Track with specific commitments or resolutions, with concrete timelines and follow-up mechanisms to ensure that the discussions lead to tangible progress.
2. Policy Alignment:
One of the key takeaways from the High-Level Leaders Track was the growing alignment on issues such as cybersecurity, digital governance frameworks, and the importance of multi stakeholder engagement. However, there were instances where the discussions could have been more focused on policy coordination and harmonization across regions. Encouraging greater cooperation between countries and regions on key policy issues would ensure that global digital governance remains cohesive and consistent.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Inclusion of Diverse Voices:
Moving forward, the High-Level Leaders Track could benefit from the inclusion of more voices from the Global South, civil society, and smaller, non-state actors. This would provide a more inclusive perspective on global Internet governance challenges and ensure that the track reflects the needs of all stakeholders, not just the most influential players.
Specifically, a focus on emerging economies and their specific Internet governance challenges would help to broaden the dialogue and foster a more equitable global conversation.
2. Interactive Formats:
While high-level discussions are often formal, incorporating more interactive formats would increase the engagement of participants and ensure that the sessions are not merely one-way presentations. A hybrid format, including panels, roundtables, and audience participation, would facilitate more dynamic and productive discussions.
3. Outcome-Oriented Discussions:
To make the High-Level Leaders Track more impactful, it is important that future sessions lead to tangible outcomes. This could be in the form of joint statements, action plans, or collaborative initiatives. Creating clear mechanisms for follow-up after the track could ensure that the momentum generated during these discussions is sustained.
4. Transparency on Sponsorship and Shortlisting for Organizations:
Another issue to address is the lack of clarity regarding the sponsorship and shortlisting process for organizations, particularly smaller and newly involved organizations. Creating a transparent platform or webpage listing the organizations that have been shortlisted for sponsorship before the event would ensure that these organizations are better prepared and aware of their status. This would also offer clarity to those who self-fund their participation.
Conclusion
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was a valuable part of the forum, addressing some of the most critical issues in Internet governance. However, there is room for improvement in ensuring that the discussions are more inclusive, action-oriented, and engaging. By incorporating a wider range of perspectives, adopting interactive formats, and ensuring clear outcomes, the High-Level Leaders Track can continue to play a pivotal role in shaping global Internet governance.
Feedback on the IGF 2024 Parliamentary Track
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 provided a platform for lawmakers, legislators, and policymakers to discuss key Internet governance issues. It aimed to bridge the gap between technical and policy discussions by bringing in the legislative perspective. Below is the feedback regarding this track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The topics covered in the Parliamentary Track were highly relevant, focusing on the intersection of digital policy, human rights, cybersecurity, data privacy, and the role of governments in Internet governance. These issues are crucial for lawmakers to address, especially as digital technologies continue to evolve and affect every aspect of governance and society.
However, there could have been more emphasis on how lawmakers can work together to draft international laws and regulations, as well as on fostering multilateral agreements. Discussions around harmonizing laws across different jurisdictions, especially concerning cross-border data flows, digital sovereignty, and cybersecurity laws, would be highly beneficial.
2. Balancing Technology with Policy:
The track did well in balancing discussions on the technical aspects of Internet governance with the broader policy and legislative frameworks needed to guide them. However, more in-depth discussions on the practical application of policy would have been helpful. For example, showcasing successful policy implementations in various countries could have provided actionable insights for other nations.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Speakers:
The Parliamentary Track included key representatives from a variety of political backgrounds and regions. However, the representation from non-Western countries, particularly developing countries, seemed underrepresented. More voices from these regions would offer a fuller understanding of global challenges and opportunities in Internet governance.
Furthermore, while the presence of lawmakers was strong, other stakeholders such as civil society representatives, youth activists, and tech industry experts could have added value by providing a broader context to the legislative discussions.
2. Participation of Legislators:
The participation of parliamentarians was generally good, but there was a need for more active engagement and contributions from them. Often, discussions seemed to lack the dynamic participation of lawmakers in terms of proposing legislative frameworks or engaging in real-time debates about proposed policies.
Encouraging more interactive formats, such as Q&A sessions, would have allowed for more debate and engagement from lawmakers, helping them connect more directly with the concerns and ideas raised by other participants.
Quality of Discussions
1. Practical Policy Solutions:
One of the notable strengths of the Parliamentary Track was its focus on exploring real-world challenges faced by lawmakers in crafting digital policies. However, the discussions often lacked practical solutions and actionable steps for parliamentarians. Sessions could be more focused on developing concrete policy proposals that lawmakers can take back to their respective countries and implement.
More concrete frameworks or models for addressing common challenges, such as privacy laws, cybersecurity standards, and digital literacy, would be highly valuable.
2. Multistakeholder Cooperation:
While there were discussions on the importance of multistakeholder collaboration, there could have been more focus on how parliamentarians can facilitate such cooperation through legislation. For example, exploring the role of parliaments in supporting or regulating public-private partnerships for internet infrastructure and digital services would be an interesting topic.
Sessions could explore ways to foster stronger collaboration between governments, tech companies, civil society, and other stakeholders in order to craft legislation that is effective and inclusive.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Inclusion of Emerging Markets:
To ensure a comprehensive understanding of global Internet governance challenges, it is important to have more representation from emerging markets and developing countries. These countries face unique challenges in regulating digital technologies, and their input is essential for crafting inclusive global policies.
This could be achieved through targeted outreach to parliamentarians from these regions and providing a space for them to share their experiences and challenges.
2. More Interactive and Debate-Oriented Formats:
The Parliamentary Track could benefit from adopting more interactive formats that encourage greater debate and engagement between legislators. For instance, roundtable discussions, live polling, and moderated debates could help stimulate more meaningful dialogue and provide a platform for parliamentarians to engage directly with stakeholders from different sectors.
3. Actionable Outcomes and Follow-Up:
Similar to the High-Level Leaders Track, the Parliamentary Track should focus on ensuring that discussions lead to actionable outcomes. This could be in the form of resolutions, agreements, or policy recommendations that parliamentarians can take back to their home countries. Establishing follow-up mechanisms to track the implementation of these recommendations would enhance the track’s long-term impact.
4. Transparency in Sponsorship Information:
As highlighted for other tracks, it is important to ensure that organizations involved in the Parliamentary Track have clear, accessible information about sponsorship, shortlisting, and support. A dedicated platform or webpage listing the shortlisted organizations before the event could help parliamentarians, especially from smaller or newer organizations, to prepare accordingly.
5. Emphasis on Legislative Action:
Finally, future editions of the Parliamentary Track could place greater emphasis on actionable legislative initiatives. Workshops and sessions could focus on providing legislators with the tools and frameworks necessary to draft effective digital policies and foster cross-border legislative collaboration.
Conclusion
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 played an important role in bringing legislative perspectives into Internet governance discussions. However, the track could benefit from a more diverse set of participants, a stronger emphasis on practical policy solutions, and more interactive formats to foster engagement. By addressing these gaps, the Parliamentary Track can become a more effective platform for shaping global digital governance and empowering legislators to take decisive action.
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 provided a platform for lawmakers, legislators, and policymakers to discuss key Internet governance issues. It aimed to bridge the gap between technical and policy discussions by bringing in the legislative perspective. Below is the feedback regarding this track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The topics covered in the Parliamentary Track were highly relevant, focusing on the intersection of digital policy, human rights, cybersecurity, data privacy, and the role of governments in Internet governance. These issues are crucial for lawmakers to address, especially as digital technologies continue to evolve and affect every aspect of governance and society.
However, there could have been more emphasis on how lawmakers can work together to draft international laws and regulations, as well as on fostering multilateral agreements. Discussions around harmonizing laws across different jurisdictions, especially concerning cross-border data flows, digital sovereignty, and cybersecurity laws, would be highly beneficial.
2. Balancing Technology with Policy:
The track did well in balancing discussions on the technical aspects of Internet governance with the broader policy and legislative frameworks needed to guide them. However, more in-depth discussions on the practical application of policy would have been helpful. For example, showcasing successful policy implementations in various countries could have provided actionable insights for other nations.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Speakers:
The Parliamentary Track included key representatives from a variety of political backgrounds and regions. However, the representation from non-Western countries, particularly developing countries, seemed underrepresented. More voices from these regions would offer a fuller understanding of global challenges and opportunities in Internet governance.
Furthermore, while the presence of lawmakers was strong, other stakeholders such as civil society representatives, youth activists, and tech industry experts could have added value by providing a broader context to the legislative discussions.
2. Participation of Legislators:
The participation of parliamentarians was generally good, but there was a need for more active engagement and contributions from them. Often, discussions seemed to lack the dynamic participation of lawmakers in terms of proposing legislative frameworks or engaging in real-time debates about proposed policies.
Encouraging more interactive formats, such as Q&A sessions, would have allowed for more debate and engagement from lawmakers, helping them connect more directly with the concerns and ideas raised by other participants.
Quality of Discussions
1. Practical Policy Solutions:
One of the notable strengths of the Parliamentary Track was its focus on exploring real-world challenges faced by lawmakers in crafting digital policies. However, the discussions often lacked practical solutions and actionable steps for parliamentarians. Sessions could be more focused on developing concrete policy proposals that lawmakers can take back to their respective countries and implement.
More concrete frameworks or models for addressing common challenges, such as privacy laws, cybersecurity standards, and digital literacy, would be highly valuable.
2. Multistakeholder Cooperation:
While there were discussions on the importance of multistakeholder collaboration, there could have been more focus on how parliamentarians can facilitate such cooperation through legislation. For example, exploring the role of parliaments in supporting or regulating public-private partnerships for internet infrastructure and digital services would be an interesting topic.
Sessions could explore ways to foster stronger collaboration between governments, tech companies, civil society, and other stakeholders in order to craft legislation that is effective and inclusive.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Inclusion of Emerging Markets:
To ensure a comprehensive understanding of global Internet governance challenges, it is important to have more representation from emerging markets and developing countries. These countries face unique challenges in regulating digital technologies, and their input is essential for crafting inclusive global policies.
This could be achieved through targeted outreach to parliamentarians from these regions and providing a space for them to share their experiences and challenges.
2. More Interactive and Debate-Oriented Formats:
The Parliamentary Track could benefit from adopting more interactive formats that encourage greater debate and engagement between legislators. For instance, roundtable discussions, live polling, and moderated debates could help stimulate more meaningful dialogue and provide a platform for parliamentarians to engage directly with stakeholders from different sectors.
3. Actionable Outcomes and Follow-Up:
Similar to the High-Level Leaders Track, the Parliamentary Track should focus on ensuring that discussions lead to actionable outcomes. This could be in the form of resolutions, agreements, or policy recommendations that parliamentarians can take back to their home countries. Establishing follow-up mechanisms to track the implementation of these recommendations would enhance the track’s long-term impact.
4. Transparency in Sponsorship Information:
As highlighted for other tracks, it is important to ensure that organizations involved in the Parliamentary Track have clear, accessible information about sponsorship, shortlisting, and support. A dedicated platform or webpage listing the shortlisted organizations before the event could help parliamentarians, especially from smaller or newer organizations, to prepare accordingly.
5. Emphasis on Legislative Action:
Finally, future editions of the Parliamentary Track could place greater emphasis on actionable legislative initiatives. Workshops and sessions could focus on providing legislators with the tools and frameworks necessary to draft effective digital policies and foster cross-border legislative collaboration.
Conclusion
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 played an important role in bringing legislative perspectives into Internet governance discussions. However, the track could benefit from a more diverse set of participants, a stronger emphasis on practical policy solutions, and more interactive formats to foster engagement. By addressing these gaps, the Parliamentary Track can become a more effective platform for shaping global digital governance and empowering legislators to take decisive action.
Feedback on the IGF 2024 Youth Track
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 aimed to engage young people in discussions about Internet governance, digital rights, and the future of the digital landscape. Youth participation in such an important global forum is essential for ensuring that the next generation has a voice in shaping policies that will impact their digital futures. Below is the feedback on the Youth Track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The topics addressed in the Youth Track were highly relevant to young people, focusing on critical issues such as digital inclusion, online privacy, cybersecurity, social media regulation, and the role of youth in advocating for digital rights. These are crucial topics for young people as they are most impacted by internet policies and digital technologies.
However, there was room for further exploration of the intersection between youth and emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and the metaverse. These topics could have provided insights into the future challenges and opportunities young people will face.
2. Youth-Led Discussions:
A significant strength of the Youth Track was its focus on youth-led discussions, which empowered young people to drive the conversation around issues that directly affect them. Allowing young participants to shape the agenda and lead discussions helps foster a sense of ownership and commitment to the topics discussed.
However, the track could have benefited from more opportunities for youth to present tangible solutions or proposals. Providing space for youth-led initiatives, advocacy campaigns, or policy suggestions would make the discussions more actionable.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Speakers:
The Youth Track included a mix of youth activists, influencers, policymakers, and industry experts, which helped create a well-rounded discussion. However, there could have been a more diverse representation from various regions, especially from developing countries and underserved communities. This would ensure that the voices of youth in different socio-economic contexts are heard and their unique challenges are addressed.
Additionally, the involvement of young tech leaders, such as developers, engineers, and digital entrepreneurs, could have enriched the discussions on how youth can innovate within the digital space and address issues like digital skills gaps and technology access.
2. Active Engagement:
Young people actively participated in the Youth Track, and many demonstrated a strong understanding of the issues at hand. However, there was a lack of structured, interactive activities that could have fostered more engagement. While discussions were engaging, they could have been made more interactive through activities like workshops, collaborative projects, or hackathons, which would allow participants to work together on finding solutions to real-world problems.
Quality of Discussions
1. Practical Solutions:
The discussions within the Youth Track were valuable in raising awareness about the issues youth face in the digital world. However, the discussions often lacked concrete, actionable solutions. Future editions of the Youth Track could benefit from focusing more on identifying practical, implementable solutions that young people can advocate for in their communities and countries.
For instance, providing young participants with policy tools or frameworks could empower them to become change agents in their local contexts, pushing for digital rights, policy reform, and increased access to technology.
2. Collaboration with Other Tracks:
The Youth Track was a key platform for youth perspectives, but there was limited collaboration with other tracks, such as the Parliamentary Track or the High-Level Leaders Track. Facilitating cross-track interactions, such as joint sessions or panel discussions between youth and lawmakers, could have allowed young people to directly engage with decision-makers and discuss how they can be part of the solution in shaping policies that affect them.
Encouraging youth to collaborate with other stakeholders, including industry leaders, NGOs, and multilateral organizations, could help create more inclusive and collaborative approaches to addressing youth issues in digital governance.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Regional Representation:
To ensure that the Youth Track captures the diverse experiences of young people globally, greater emphasis should be placed on encouraging participation from youth in underrepresented regions. This could involve targeted outreach to youth organizations, universities, and community groups in these regions.
Facilitating regional pre-events or consultations could provide a platform for youth in these regions to prepare for the main IGF event, ensuring that their voices are heard in the global discussions.
2. More Interactive and Practical Engagement:
The Youth Track could be made more dynamic by incorporating more interactive and hands-on activities. For example, workshops, hackathons, or mentorship programs could help young people develop practical skills, foster collaboration, and create solutions for the issues they are passionate about.
Additionally, allowing youth to pitch ideas for digital projects or initiatives could encourage them to think creatively and come up with actionable solutions to global challenges.
3. Actionable Youth Recommendations:
The Youth Track should focus on generating specific recommendations that can be taken back to national or regional governments, as well as international organizations. This could include creating a "Youth Internet Governance Charter" or a set of guiding principles for policymakers to consider when creating youth-centered digital policies.
Following the event, a clear follow-up mechanism should be established to track the implementation of these recommendations and ensure that youth continue to have a voice in the decision-making process.
4. Increased Integration with the Broader IGF Agenda:
More efforts should be made to integrate the Youth Track with the overall IGF agenda. For instance, youth-related sessions could be highlighted and interspersed throughout the main event, and youth-led initiatives could be showcased alongside other initiatives from different stakeholders.
This integration would give the Youth Track more visibility and demonstrate that youth perspectives are essential to all aspects of Internet governance, not just within their dedicated track.
5. Acknowledging Youth Contributions:
Recognizing and showcasing the contributions of young people who actively participate in the Youth Track is important. This could be done through awards or certificates for outstanding contributions, presentations, or projects. It would encourage greater participation and show that youth voices are not only heard but valued.
Conclusion
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 was a significant step towards including young people in the digital governance discussions. However, there is room for improvement in areas such as regional representation, interactive formats, and generating actionable outcomes. By providing more opportunities for youth to engage with other stakeholders, offering practical tools and frameworks, and ensuring that their voices are fully integrated into the broader IGF agenda, the Youth Track can become a more impactful and transformative platform for young people in the digital space.
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 aimed to engage young people in discussions about Internet governance, digital rights, and the future of the digital landscape. Youth participation in such an important global forum is essential for ensuring that the next generation has a voice in shaping policies that will impact their digital futures. Below is the feedback on the Youth Track:
Content and Focus
1. Relevance of Topics:
The topics addressed in the Youth Track were highly relevant to young people, focusing on critical issues such as digital inclusion, online privacy, cybersecurity, social media regulation, and the role of youth in advocating for digital rights. These are crucial topics for young people as they are most impacted by internet policies and digital technologies.
However, there was room for further exploration of the intersection between youth and emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and the metaverse. These topics could have provided insights into the future challenges and opportunities young people will face.
2. Youth-Led Discussions:
A significant strength of the Youth Track was its focus on youth-led discussions, which empowered young people to drive the conversation around issues that directly affect them. Allowing young participants to shape the agenda and lead discussions helps foster a sense of ownership and commitment to the topics discussed.
However, the track could have benefited from more opportunities for youth to present tangible solutions or proposals. Providing space for youth-led initiatives, advocacy campaigns, or policy suggestions would make the discussions more actionable.
Speakers and Participation
1. Diversity of Speakers:
The Youth Track included a mix of youth activists, influencers, policymakers, and industry experts, which helped create a well-rounded discussion. However, there could have been a more diverse representation from various regions, especially from developing countries and underserved communities. This would ensure that the voices of youth in different socio-economic contexts are heard and their unique challenges are addressed.
Additionally, the involvement of young tech leaders, such as developers, engineers, and digital entrepreneurs, could have enriched the discussions on how youth can innovate within the digital space and address issues like digital skills gaps and technology access.
2. Active Engagement:
Young people actively participated in the Youth Track, and many demonstrated a strong understanding of the issues at hand. However, there was a lack of structured, interactive activities that could have fostered more engagement. While discussions were engaging, they could have been made more interactive through activities like workshops, collaborative projects, or hackathons, which would allow participants to work together on finding solutions to real-world problems.
Quality of Discussions
1. Practical Solutions:
The discussions within the Youth Track were valuable in raising awareness about the issues youth face in the digital world. However, the discussions often lacked concrete, actionable solutions. Future editions of the Youth Track could benefit from focusing more on identifying practical, implementable solutions that young people can advocate for in their communities and countries.
For instance, providing young participants with policy tools or frameworks could empower them to become change agents in their local contexts, pushing for digital rights, policy reform, and increased access to technology.
2. Collaboration with Other Tracks:
The Youth Track was a key platform for youth perspectives, but there was limited collaboration with other tracks, such as the Parliamentary Track or the High-Level Leaders Track. Facilitating cross-track interactions, such as joint sessions or panel discussions between youth and lawmakers, could have allowed young people to directly engage with decision-makers and discuss how they can be part of the solution in shaping policies that affect them.
Encouraging youth to collaborate with other stakeholders, including industry leaders, NGOs, and multilateral organizations, could help create more inclusive and collaborative approaches to addressing youth issues in digital governance.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Greater Regional Representation:
To ensure that the Youth Track captures the diverse experiences of young people globally, greater emphasis should be placed on encouraging participation from youth in underrepresented regions. This could involve targeted outreach to youth organizations, universities, and community groups in these regions.
Facilitating regional pre-events or consultations could provide a platform for youth in these regions to prepare for the main IGF event, ensuring that their voices are heard in the global discussions.
2. More Interactive and Practical Engagement:
The Youth Track could be made more dynamic by incorporating more interactive and hands-on activities. For example, workshops, hackathons, or mentorship programs could help young people develop practical skills, foster collaboration, and create solutions for the issues they are passionate about.
Additionally, allowing youth to pitch ideas for digital projects or initiatives could encourage them to think creatively and come up with actionable solutions to global challenges.
3. Actionable Youth Recommendations:
The Youth Track should focus on generating specific recommendations that can be taken back to national or regional governments, as well as international organizations. This could include creating a "Youth Internet Governance Charter" or a set of guiding principles for policymakers to consider when creating youth-centered digital policies.
Following the event, a clear follow-up mechanism should be established to track the implementation of these recommendations and ensure that youth continue to have a voice in the decision-making process.
4. Increased Integration with the Broader IGF Agenda:
More efforts should be made to integrate the Youth Track with the overall IGF agenda. For instance, youth-related sessions could be highlighted and interspersed throughout the main event, and youth-led initiatives could be showcased alongside other initiatives from different stakeholders.
This integration would give the Youth Track more visibility and demonstrate that youth perspectives are essential to all aspects of Internet governance, not just within their dedicated track.
5. Acknowledging Youth Contributions:
Recognizing and showcasing the contributions of young people who actively participate in the Youth Track is important. This could be done through awards or certificates for outstanding contributions, presentations, or projects. It would encourage greater participation and show that youth voices are not only heard but valued.
Conclusion
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 was a significant step towards including young people in the digital governance discussions. However, there is room for improvement in areas such as regional representation, interactive formats, and generating actionable outcomes. By providing more opportunities for youth to engage with other stakeholders, offering practical tools and frameworks, and ensuring that their voices are fully integrated into the broader IGF agenda, the Youth Track can become a more impactful and transformative platform for young people in the digital space.
The IGF 2024 Village played a pivotal role in fostering engagement and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, providing a space for informal interactions, networking, and showcasing the work of various organizations involved in Internet governance. As an integral part of the IGF experience, the Village offers a dynamic setting where participants can explore the different initiatives and activities that contribute to shaping the future of the Internet.
Positive Aspects of the IGF 2024 Village:
1. Diverse Stakeholder Representation:
The Village hosted a wide variety of organizations, ranging from governments and corporations to civil society groups, academic institutions, and youth organizations. This diversity allowed for a wide range of perspectives on Internet governance to be represented.
Particularly valuable was the presence of national and regional stakeholders, allowing participants to engage in conversations about local Internet governance issues while drawing connections to the global conversation.
2. Collaborative Environment:
The Village was a hub for collaboration and informal discussions. Participants could drop by different booths and engage with representatives from various organizations in an unstructured and relaxed environment. This encouraged knowledge-sharing, the exchange of ideas, and the development of new partnerships.
This informal setting allowed for smaller workshops, demonstrations, and interactive sessions, which made complex topics more accessible to a broader audience.
3. Youth and Gender Inclusivity:
The IGF Village emphasized inclusivity by providing space for youth and gender-focused organizations to present their work, fostering a more diverse and representative conversation. It also facilitated the youth track, where young people could present their views on Internet governance and connect with senior leaders.
The presence of organizations that focus on gender equality in digital spaces provided a platform for conversations around gender rights, digital empowerment, and online safety for women and marginalized groups.
4. Resource Access:
The Village provided easy access to resources, including information materials, reports, publications, and online resources that participants could browse to deepen their understanding of Internet governance issues. These resources served to enrich the learning experience for attendees.
Areas for Improvement in the IGF 2024 Village:
1. Space and Accessibility:
While the Village was vibrant and interactive, it sometimes felt overcrowded, especially during peak hours, which made it difficult for attendees to freely engage with exhibitors and other participants. In the future, it would be beneficial to have a more spacious design that allows for easier movement and better interaction.
Additionally, accessibility for individuals with disabilities could be improved. More accessible signage, audio/visual accommodations, and clear navigation could ensure that all participants have a comfortable experience.
2. More Structured Engagement Opportunities:
While informal interactions are valuable, there could be more structured engagement activities within the Village. These could include thematic booths, roundtable discussions, or interactive presentations that provide deeper insights into specific topics, such as privacy issues, digital inclusion, or cybersecurity. This would allow for more focused engagement on particular issues.
3. Clearer Recognition of Contributions:
Some organizations, like Hazras Charity Foundation, which self-funded their participation, did not receive recognition for their contribution and passion toward the growth of the IGF. In future events, acknowledging the efforts of self-funded or smaller organizations would help build morale and encourage broader participation from a diverse range of actors, particularly those working on the ground in underserved regions.
4. More Interactivity with the Broader Programme:
The IGF Village could be better integrated with the broader IGF programme. For example, the session tracks and panels could be more directly connected to the exhibitors and activities in the Village, making it easier for attendees to navigate between sessions and the Village. This could include live streaming of sessions or discussions happening at the Village itself.
Suggestions for Future IGF Villages:
1. Incorporate Virtual Components:
Since IGF events are increasingly hybrid, incorporating virtual components in the Village could increase global accessibility, particularly for those unable to attend in person. Virtual booths, webinars, and networking lounges could complement the physical Village and ensure wider participation.
2. Enhance Sponsorship Recognition:
Create a dedicated page or section on the event’s platform or website for sponsored organizations, particularly those who are shortlisted for funding or grants, ensuring that they receive recognition and visibility for their contributions before, during, and after the event. This would also serve as a tool for networking and promoting organizations engaged in the event.
3. Better Structuring of Content:
To make it easier for participants to engage with relevant topics, the Village could be organized according to thematic areas such as digital inclusion, data privacy, or youth empowerment, ensuring that visitors can more easily find and engage with the content most relevant to them.
4. Follow-Up and Impact Measurement:
Following the event, it would be beneficial to have a follow-up mechanism to track the outcomes of the connections and discussions initiated in the Village. This could involve organizing post-event webinars or networking events that build on the collaborations and ideas sparked during the IGF.
Conclusion:
The IGF 2024 Village was a key space for collaboration, inclusivity, and networking, providing valuable opportunities for organizations and individuals to connect and engage on Internet governance topics. However, there are areas where the Village experience can be enhanced, particularly in terms of accessibility, engagement structure, and recognition of all contributors. Moving forward, a more integrated, interactive, and inclusive approach could elevate the impact and reach of the IGF Village, ensuring it remains a central feature of the event that caters to a wider range of participants.
Positive Aspects of the IGF 2024 Village:
1. Diverse Stakeholder Representation:
The Village hosted a wide variety of organizations, ranging from governments and corporations to civil society groups, academic institutions, and youth organizations. This diversity allowed for a wide range of perspectives on Internet governance to be represented.
Particularly valuable was the presence of national and regional stakeholders, allowing participants to engage in conversations about local Internet governance issues while drawing connections to the global conversation.
2. Collaborative Environment:
The Village was a hub for collaboration and informal discussions. Participants could drop by different booths and engage with representatives from various organizations in an unstructured and relaxed environment. This encouraged knowledge-sharing, the exchange of ideas, and the development of new partnerships.
This informal setting allowed for smaller workshops, demonstrations, and interactive sessions, which made complex topics more accessible to a broader audience.
3. Youth and Gender Inclusivity:
The IGF Village emphasized inclusivity by providing space for youth and gender-focused organizations to present their work, fostering a more diverse and representative conversation. It also facilitated the youth track, where young people could present their views on Internet governance and connect with senior leaders.
The presence of organizations that focus on gender equality in digital spaces provided a platform for conversations around gender rights, digital empowerment, and online safety for women and marginalized groups.
4. Resource Access:
The Village provided easy access to resources, including information materials, reports, publications, and online resources that participants could browse to deepen their understanding of Internet governance issues. These resources served to enrich the learning experience for attendees.
Areas for Improvement in the IGF 2024 Village:
1. Space and Accessibility:
While the Village was vibrant and interactive, it sometimes felt overcrowded, especially during peak hours, which made it difficult for attendees to freely engage with exhibitors and other participants. In the future, it would be beneficial to have a more spacious design that allows for easier movement and better interaction.
Additionally, accessibility for individuals with disabilities could be improved. More accessible signage, audio/visual accommodations, and clear navigation could ensure that all participants have a comfortable experience.
2. More Structured Engagement Opportunities:
While informal interactions are valuable, there could be more structured engagement activities within the Village. These could include thematic booths, roundtable discussions, or interactive presentations that provide deeper insights into specific topics, such as privacy issues, digital inclusion, or cybersecurity. This would allow for more focused engagement on particular issues.
3. Clearer Recognition of Contributions:
Some organizations, like Hazras Charity Foundation, which self-funded their participation, did not receive recognition for their contribution and passion toward the growth of the IGF. In future events, acknowledging the efforts of self-funded or smaller organizations would help build morale and encourage broader participation from a diverse range of actors, particularly those working on the ground in underserved regions.
4. More Interactivity with the Broader Programme:
The IGF Village could be better integrated with the broader IGF programme. For example, the session tracks and panels could be more directly connected to the exhibitors and activities in the Village, making it easier for attendees to navigate between sessions and the Village. This could include live streaming of sessions or discussions happening at the Village itself.
Suggestions for Future IGF Villages:
1. Incorporate Virtual Components:
Since IGF events are increasingly hybrid, incorporating virtual components in the Village could increase global accessibility, particularly for those unable to attend in person. Virtual booths, webinars, and networking lounges could complement the physical Village and ensure wider participation.
2. Enhance Sponsorship Recognition:
Create a dedicated page or section on the event’s platform or website for sponsored organizations, particularly those who are shortlisted for funding or grants, ensuring that they receive recognition and visibility for their contributions before, during, and after the event. This would also serve as a tool for networking and promoting organizations engaged in the event.
3. Better Structuring of Content:
To make it easier for participants to engage with relevant topics, the Village could be organized according to thematic areas such as digital inclusion, data privacy, or youth empowerment, ensuring that visitors can more easily find and engage with the content most relevant to them.
4. Follow-Up and Impact Measurement:
Following the event, it would be beneficial to have a follow-up mechanism to track the outcomes of the connections and discussions initiated in the Village. This could involve organizing post-event webinars or networking events that build on the collaborations and ideas sparked during the IGF.
Conclusion:
The IGF 2024 Village was a key space for collaboration, inclusivity, and networking, providing valuable opportunities for organizations and individuals to connect and engage on Internet governance topics. However, there are areas where the Village experience can be enhanced, particularly in terms of accessibility, engagement structure, and recognition of all contributors. Moving forward, a more integrated, interactive, and inclusive approach could elevate the impact and reach of the IGF Village, ensuring it remains a central feature of the event that caters to a wider range of participants.
IGF 2024 Communications, Outreach, and Outputs:
The communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 were integral in shaping the overall experience of the forum. These efforts helped raise awareness of key Internet governance issues and facilitated engagement from diverse global stakeholders. However, there are areas where improvements could further enhance the accessibility and inclusivity of the forum.
Positive Aspects of IGF 2024 Communications and Outreach:
1. Broad Reach and Digital Engagement:
The IGF 2024 communications team effectively utilized social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to share updates, key session highlights, and critical discussions. This helped raise the profile of the event and kept participants informed in real time, particularly during hybrid sessions.
The use of the official website and mobile app was crucial for event updates, session schedules, and general communication. The app, in particular, facilitated easy access to key sessions and helped participants plan their participation, whether in-person or virtually.
2. Diverse Language Support:
Materials and communications were provided in multiple languages, which helped ensure that a wider audience could access information, engage with the content, and participate in discussions. This multilingual approach is essential for promoting inclusivity across different regions and linguistic backgrounds.
3. Effective Call for Participation:
The call for issues and session proposals was widely disseminated and well-publicized, using a variety of channels, including emails, social media, and targeted outreach. This ensured that stakeholders from around the world, including underrepresented regions and communities, had the opportunity to submit their proposals and raise relevant issues.
The online registration system for the event was straightforward, and participants were provided with ample information before the event to help them prepare.
4. Strong Engagement with Youth and Gender Initiatives:
There was significant outreach to youth, gender, and other marginalized groups through dedicated tracks and sessions. The Youth Track and Gender Equality initiatives were highlighted in communications, underscoring the IGF's commitment to addressing these critical areas in Internet governance.
5. Real-Time Reporting and Media Coverage:
Real-time updates, session highlights, and live-streamed events helped keep the global audience engaged. Additionally, journalists and media partners were actively involved in covering the forum, ensuring that the outcomes and key discussions were shared with broader audiences.
Areas for Improvement in IGF 2024 Communications and Outreach:
1. Better Engagement with Smaller Organizations:
Despite the broad outreach, smaller, grassroots organizations like Hazras Charity Foundation, which self-funded their participation, did not receive the level of recognition or visibility commensurate with their contributions. More targeted communication efforts should be made to ensure that these organizations are acknowledged for their efforts before, during, and after the event.
Creating a dedicated platform or page for sponsored organizations, particularly those that have been shortlisted, would provide them with more visibility and recognition for their contributions.
2. Lack of Clear Communication for Sponsored Organizations:
Several organizations faced challenges in understanding whether they had been shortlisted for sponsorship and funding. It would be helpful to introduce a clear communication mechanism—such as a dedicated page or notification system—where shortlisted or sponsored organizations can confirm their status before the event. This would improve transparency and reduce uncertainty for participants.
3. Expand Regional Outreach:
Although communications were generally broad, there was still a gap in engaging regional networks, particularly in underserved areas where stakeholders may not have the same level of access to digital platforms. There could be more localized outreach efforts in these areas to ensure greater inclusivity and participation in the IGF.
4. Post-Event Engagement:
After the event, there could be more efforts to keep the conversation going. While session summaries, reports, and other outputs were made available, a stronger follow-up mechanism could help participants track the impact of the forum. This could include post-event webinars, discussion boards, or further collaboration opportunities to ensure that outcomes are translated into action.
5. Improving the Clarity of Event Outputs:
Reports and key takeaways from sessions were sometimes difficult to navigate, especially for participants looking for specific insights. More accessible and summarized reports with clear action points could be produced to make the outputs more user-friendly and actionable for a wide range of stakeholders.
Suggestions for Future IGF Communications and Outreach:
1. Create a Comprehensive Digital Hub:
Develop a centralized digital hub where participants can access all event-related communications, including sponsorship status, session details, resources, and real-time updates. This will ensure that all stakeholders have equal access to key information before, during, and after the event.
2. Increase Collaboration with Regional Media:
Partner more with regional media outlets and community-based organizations to increase visibility and outreach to local audiences. Tailoring outreach materials to regional contexts can help engage communities that might otherwise be excluded from the global conversation.
3. Leverage Data Analytics for Targeted Outreach:
Use data analytics to track engagement with event materials and sessions to identify which groups and regions are underrepresented. This information can guide more tailored outreach strategies and ensure that all regions and stakeholders have a voice in the conversation.
4. Strengthen the Youth and Gender Focus:
Highlight the participation of youth and women-led organizations even more prominently in the IGF communications and ensure that there are dedicated resources for these groups to better connect with policymakers and other stakeholders.
5. Post-Event Reporting and Action Plans:
After the event, issue detailed, structured reports that clearly outline the outcomes and next steps for participants to engage in the ongoing dialogue. These reports should also be interactive, allowing stakeholders to track the progress of initiatives discussed at the event.
Conclusion:
IGF 2024’s communications and outreach efforts contributed to a broad and diverse representation of global voices and stakeholders. While significant progress was made in fostering digital engagement and inclusivity, there are areas for improvement, especially in terms of recognizing smaller organizations, improving post-event engagement, and enhancing the accessibility of outputs. By implementing targeted strategies to address these gaps, IGF communications can be even more effective in ensuring that all stakeholders are empowered to contribute to the evolving landscape of Internet governance.
The communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 were integral in shaping the overall experience of the forum. These efforts helped raise awareness of key Internet governance issues and facilitated engagement from diverse global stakeholders. However, there are areas where improvements could further enhance the accessibility and inclusivity of the forum.
Positive Aspects of IGF 2024 Communications and Outreach:
1. Broad Reach and Digital Engagement:
The IGF 2024 communications team effectively utilized social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to share updates, key session highlights, and critical discussions. This helped raise the profile of the event and kept participants informed in real time, particularly during hybrid sessions.
The use of the official website and mobile app was crucial for event updates, session schedules, and general communication. The app, in particular, facilitated easy access to key sessions and helped participants plan their participation, whether in-person or virtually.
2. Diverse Language Support:
Materials and communications were provided in multiple languages, which helped ensure that a wider audience could access information, engage with the content, and participate in discussions. This multilingual approach is essential for promoting inclusivity across different regions and linguistic backgrounds.
3. Effective Call for Participation:
The call for issues and session proposals was widely disseminated and well-publicized, using a variety of channels, including emails, social media, and targeted outreach. This ensured that stakeholders from around the world, including underrepresented regions and communities, had the opportunity to submit their proposals and raise relevant issues.
The online registration system for the event was straightforward, and participants were provided with ample information before the event to help them prepare.
4. Strong Engagement with Youth and Gender Initiatives:
There was significant outreach to youth, gender, and other marginalized groups through dedicated tracks and sessions. The Youth Track and Gender Equality initiatives were highlighted in communications, underscoring the IGF's commitment to addressing these critical areas in Internet governance.
5. Real-Time Reporting and Media Coverage:
Real-time updates, session highlights, and live-streamed events helped keep the global audience engaged. Additionally, journalists and media partners were actively involved in covering the forum, ensuring that the outcomes and key discussions were shared with broader audiences.
Areas for Improvement in IGF 2024 Communications and Outreach:
1. Better Engagement with Smaller Organizations:
Despite the broad outreach, smaller, grassroots organizations like Hazras Charity Foundation, which self-funded their participation, did not receive the level of recognition or visibility commensurate with their contributions. More targeted communication efforts should be made to ensure that these organizations are acknowledged for their efforts before, during, and after the event.
Creating a dedicated platform or page for sponsored organizations, particularly those that have been shortlisted, would provide them with more visibility and recognition for their contributions.
2. Lack of Clear Communication for Sponsored Organizations:
Several organizations faced challenges in understanding whether they had been shortlisted for sponsorship and funding. It would be helpful to introduce a clear communication mechanism—such as a dedicated page or notification system—where shortlisted or sponsored organizations can confirm their status before the event. This would improve transparency and reduce uncertainty for participants.
3. Expand Regional Outreach:
Although communications were generally broad, there was still a gap in engaging regional networks, particularly in underserved areas where stakeholders may not have the same level of access to digital platforms. There could be more localized outreach efforts in these areas to ensure greater inclusivity and participation in the IGF.
4. Post-Event Engagement:
After the event, there could be more efforts to keep the conversation going. While session summaries, reports, and other outputs were made available, a stronger follow-up mechanism could help participants track the impact of the forum. This could include post-event webinars, discussion boards, or further collaboration opportunities to ensure that outcomes are translated into action.
5. Improving the Clarity of Event Outputs:
Reports and key takeaways from sessions were sometimes difficult to navigate, especially for participants looking for specific insights. More accessible and summarized reports with clear action points could be produced to make the outputs more user-friendly and actionable for a wide range of stakeholders.
Suggestions for Future IGF Communications and Outreach:
1. Create a Comprehensive Digital Hub:
Develop a centralized digital hub where participants can access all event-related communications, including sponsorship status, session details, resources, and real-time updates. This will ensure that all stakeholders have equal access to key information before, during, and after the event.
2. Increase Collaboration with Regional Media:
Partner more with regional media outlets and community-based organizations to increase visibility and outreach to local audiences. Tailoring outreach materials to regional contexts can help engage communities that might otherwise be excluded from the global conversation.
3. Leverage Data Analytics for Targeted Outreach:
Use data analytics to track engagement with event materials and sessions to identify which groups and regions are underrepresented. This information can guide more tailored outreach strategies and ensure that all regions and stakeholders have a voice in the conversation.
4. Strengthen the Youth and Gender Focus:
Highlight the participation of youth and women-led organizations even more prominently in the IGF communications and ensure that there are dedicated resources for these groups to better connect with policymakers and other stakeholders.
5. Post-Event Reporting and Action Plans:
After the event, issue detailed, structured reports that clearly outline the outcomes and next steps for participants to engage in the ongoing dialogue. These reports should also be interactive, allowing stakeholders to track the progress of initiatives discussed at the event.
Conclusion:
IGF 2024’s communications and outreach efforts contributed to a broad and diverse representation of global voices and stakeholders. While significant progress was made in fostering digital engagement and inclusivity, there are areas for improvement, especially in terms of recognizing smaller organizations, improving post-event engagement, and enhancing the accessibility of outputs. By implementing targeted strategies to address these gaps, IGF communications can be even more effective in ensuring that all stakeholders are empowered to contribute to the evolving landscape of Internet governance.
Suggestions for Improvement for IGF 2025 Preparatory Process:
1. Simplified and Transparent Proposal Process:
Streamline the session proposal process to make it easier for smaller organizations, grassroots groups, and newcomers to submit proposals. Clearer guidelines and pre-filled templates could significantly reduce the administrative burden. Additionally, making the session selection criteria more transparent would help ensure fairness and inclusivity.
2. More Proactive Outreach and Promotion:
Expand outreach efforts through regional networks, local stakeholders, and digital platforms to ensure a diverse and inclusive call for session proposals. This could include targeted outreach to underrepresented groups, minority regions, and smaller stakeholders to ensure their voices are heard and reflected in the IGF discussions.
Regular reminders and early communications for potential participants about the preparatory process would help them plan ahead, particularly for those in regions with limited access to information or resources.
3. Regional Pre-Consultations and Local Engagement:
Regional pre-consultation meetings should be held to bring local perspectives into the preparatory process, making sure that the global agenda is truly representative of regional concerns. By doing so, the IGF could better reflect regional challenges, ensuring that the sessions are more targeted and relevant to diverse contexts.
Local engagement through partnerships with national stakeholders and organizations can increase the visibility and relevance of the IGF in each host country, fostering more in-depth conversations and ownership of the event.
4. Longer and Clearer Timelines for Planning:
The IGF 2025 preparatory process should provide clearer and longer timelines for session proposals, MAG meetings, and consultations. This would give more time for stakeholders to engage, allowing for better preparation and feedback before decisions are made, particularly for new or smaller organizations that may require additional time to organize their proposals and materials.
5. More Inclusive MAG Membership and Role Transparency:
Ensure the diversity of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in terms of regional, gender, and sectoral representation. This will help to guarantee that all groups are adequately represented, especially those from marginalized communities and underrepresented regions.
Provide clearer guidelines and transparency regarding MAG members' roles in the process, particularly in terms of their involvement in session selection. This will help prevent concerns of bias and ensure that the MAG remains an objective and fair body for all stakeholders.
6. Targeted Capacity-Building Programs for Participants:
Capacity development should be tailored to ensure that underrepresented regions and smaller stakeholders are better equipped to participate in the IGF. This could include training on session proposals, internet governance topics, and technical tools for engaging in hybrid formats.
Capacity-building efforts should be regionally distributed, ensuring that remote or rural areas are not left behind in the preparation process.
7. Enhanced Use of Data Analytics:
Implement data analytics tools to assess which regions, stakeholders, or issues are underrepresented or underserved in terms of participation. This information could then inform outreach strategies and targeted capacity-building efforts to increase diversity and ensure balanced representation.
8. Clearer Communication of Sponsorship Information:
For organizations that have been shortlisted for sponsorship or support, create a dedicated page or portal that clearly communicates their sponsorship status and any related information, such as logistical support, funding, or other benefits. This will help organizations plan better and avoid confusion upon arrival at the event.
9. Improved Collaboration with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs):
Continue to strengthen the role of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) by ensuring they are fully integrated into the preparatory process and have a voice in the discussions. NRIs can bring local relevance to the global dialogue, and their active inclusion in the process should be a priority.
Encourage cross-regional collaborations by fostering partnerships between NRIs and other stakeholders, leading to joint proposals and shared initiatives.
10. Clearer and More Actionable Outcomes:
Focus on creating clearer, actionable outcomes for each session or theme. These could be translated into concrete follow-up actions, ensuring that the dialogue at the IGF translates into tangible changes or initiatives in Internet governance policy.
Follow-up feedback mechanisms should be introduced to ensure that key stakeholders, especially smaller organizations, can share their experiences and suggest improvements during the event and beyond.
11. Greater Engagement with the Private Sector and Technical Community:
Strengthen the involvement of the private sector and technical community in the preparatory process. These groups often hold valuable perspectives on the evolution of digital technologies and the governance challenges they pose. Their inclusion would balance the dialogue and help align the discussions with practical, real-world applications.
12. More Robust Post-Event Follow-Up:
Establish a stronger post-event feedback and follow-up mechanism, allowing stakeholders to reflect on the event and share lessons learned. This could include regular updates on progress, initiatives launched, and collaborative efforts post-IGF, which would help sustain momentum and keep the discussions alive throughout the year. Also, there should be a special package for the Organisation that Self funded their trips to attend the event.
By implementing these improvements, IGF 2025 will be better equipped to foster inclusive, meaningful, and action-oriented dialogue, ensuring the event remains a dynamic and valuable platform for the global Internet governance community.
1. Simplified and Transparent Proposal Process:
Streamline the session proposal process to make it easier for smaller organizations, grassroots groups, and newcomers to submit proposals. Clearer guidelines and pre-filled templates could significantly reduce the administrative burden. Additionally, making the session selection criteria more transparent would help ensure fairness and inclusivity.
2. More Proactive Outreach and Promotion:
Expand outreach efforts through regional networks, local stakeholders, and digital platforms to ensure a diverse and inclusive call for session proposals. This could include targeted outreach to underrepresented groups, minority regions, and smaller stakeholders to ensure their voices are heard and reflected in the IGF discussions.
Regular reminders and early communications for potential participants about the preparatory process would help them plan ahead, particularly for those in regions with limited access to information or resources.
3. Regional Pre-Consultations and Local Engagement:
Regional pre-consultation meetings should be held to bring local perspectives into the preparatory process, making sure that the global agenda is truly representative of regional concerns. By doing so, the IGF could better reflect regional challenges, ensuring that the sessions are more targeted and relevant to diverse contexts.
Local engagement through partnerships with national stakeholders and organizations can increase the visibility and relevance of the IGF in each host country, fostering more in-depth conversations and ownership of the event.
4. Longer and Clearer Timelines for Planning:
The IGF 2025 preparatory process should provide clearer and longer timelines for session proposals, MAG meetings, and consultations. This would give more time for stakeholders to engage, allowing for better preparation and feedback before decisions are made, particularly for new or smaller organizations that may require additional time to organize their proposals and materials.
5. More Inclusive MAG Membership and Role Transparency:
Ensure the diversity of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in terms of regional, gender, and sectoral representation. This will help to guarantee that all groups are adequately represented, especially those from marginalized communities and underrepresented regions.
Provide clearer guidelines and transparency regarding MAG members' roles in the process, particularly in terms of their involvement in session selection. This will help prevent concerns of bias and ensure that the MAG remains an objective and fair body for all stakeholders.
6. Targeted Capacity-Building Programs for Participants:
Capacity development should be tailored to ensure that underrepresented regions and smaller stakeholders are better equipped to participate in the IGF. This could include training on session proposals, internet governance topics, and technical tools for engaging in hybrid formats.
Capacity-building efforts should be regionally distributed, ensuring that remote or rural areas are not left behind in the preparation process.
7. Enhanced Use of Data Analytics:
Implement data analytics tools to assess which regions, stakeholders, or issues are underrepresented or underserved in terms of participation. This information could then inform outreach strategies and targeted capacity-building efforts to increase diversity and ensure balanced representation.
8. Clearer Communication of Sponsorship Information:
For organizations that have been shortlisted for sponsorship or support, create a dedicated page or portal that clearly communicates their sponsorship status and any related information, such as logistical support, funding, or other benefits. This will help organizations plan better and avoid confusion upon arrival at the event.
9. Improved Collaboration with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs):
Continue to strengthen the role of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) by ensuring they are fully integrated into the preparatory process and have a voice in the discussions. NRIs can bring local relevance to the global dialogue, and their active inclusion in the process should be a priority.
Encourage cross-regional collaborations by fostering partnerships between NRIs and other stakeholders, leading to joint proposals and shared initiatives.
10. Clearer and More Actionable Outcomes:
Focus on creating clearer, actionable outcomes for each session or theme. These could be translated into concrete follow-up actions, ensuring that the dialogue at the IGF translates into tangible changes or initiatives in Internet governance policy.
Follow-up feedback mechanisms should be introduced to ensure that key stakeholders, especially smaller organizations, can share their experiences and suggest improvements during the event and beyond.
11. Greater Engagement with the Private Sector and Technical Community:
Strengthen the involvement of the private sector and technical community in the preparatory process. These groups often hold valuable perspectives on the evolution of digital technologies and the governance challenges they pose. Their inclusion would balance the dialogue and help align the discussions with practical, real-world applications.
12. More Robust Post-Event Follow-Up:
Establish a stronger post-event feedback and follow-up mechanism, allowing stakeholders to reflect on the event and share lessons learned. This could include regular updates on progress, initiatives launched, and collaborative efforts post-IGF, which would help sustain momentum and keep the discussions alive throughout the year. Also, there should be a special package for the Organisation that Self funded their trips to attend the event.
By implementing these improvements, IGF 2025 will be better equipped to foster inclusive, meaningful, and action-oriented dialogue, ensuring the event remains a dynamic and valuable platform for the global Internet governance community.
IGF 2024:
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Overall Programme Structure and Flow
1. Clear and Thematic Programme Tracks:
Organize the programme into clear thematic tracks (e.g., digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data privacy, Internet governance, AI policy, etc.) to guide discussions and provide participants with a logical flow through the event. Each track should have its own dedicated space for relevant sessions and discussions. This structure would help participants focus on topics of interest and encourage deeper engagement.
To ensure the tracks are relevant, stakeholders should be involved in the process of defining and refining the themes before the event. This could be done through consultations with various communities, including the private sector, civil society, and governments, during the preparatory phase.
2. Integrated Hybrid Experience:
Ensure that the hybrid model is seamlessly integrated, with synchronized in-person and virtual sessions. Clear guidance should be provided for both physical and online attendees on how to engage with sessions and speakers. The hybrid format should prioritize interactivity, with tools for questions, polling, and collaboration in both physical and virtual spaces.
Use technologies that allow for better virtual networking opportunities, such as digital lounges and bilateral meeting systems, ensuring online participants have a chance to engage with both other participants and exhibitors.
3. Interactive Sessions and Workshops:
Move away from lecture-style sessions and incorporate more interactive workshops, roundtable discussions, and case studies. These formats are particularly effective for collaboration and knowledge exchange, and they allow for deeper engagement from participants.
Actionable outcomes should be emphasized in workshops, with clear goals set at the beginning and concrete follow-up actions after the session. Ensure there is time allocated for Q&A, discussion, and collective problem-solving in every session.
4. Stronger Engagement with Youth, Women, and Underserved Groups:
Devote a significant portion of the programme to youth-focused sessions and ensure that the youth track is not a side event but rather integrated into the broader programme. Create spaces for young people to interact directly with experts and high-level leaders on issues that matter to them.
Ensure gender equality is embedded across all tracks and sessions, with efforts to ensure that both female and male speakers are equally represented across discussions. Special sessions could be dedicated to women’s empowerment in digital spaces, focusing on access, safety, and digital rights for women.
Provide platforms for underserved communities to share their perspectives and solutions, addressing the digital divide and offering opportunities for their voices to be heard.
5. Clear Programme Timelines with Flexibility:
Ensure the overall programme has a clear schedule with precise start and end times for each session. Allow flexibility within the schedule to accommodate for overrun discussions, networking opportunities, or impromptu feedback.
Time zone considerations should be factored in, especially for virtual participants from across different continents. For example, key sessions might be rotated to accommodate various global regions, ensuring more inclusive access to live sessions.
6. Integration of Inter-Sessional Activities:
Incorporate the outputs of intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and NRIs) directly into the programme. Provide a platform for these groups to share their findings or showcase ongoing projects that relate to the themes of the conference.
Each thematic track should offer space for interactive showcases, presentations, or mini-forums where these outputs can be integrated into the main programme, ensuring continuity between the preparatory phase and the event itself.
7. Improved Networking Opportunities:
Ensure that participants have structured opportunities for networking and collaboration, not only during breaks but also as part of the programme. Networking events such as virtual networking sessions or hybrid roundtables should be strategically scheduled to allow for engagement between stakeholders from different regions and sectors.
Introduce a mentorship program or a collaboration hub for first-time attendees, particularly from developing countries or smaller organizations, to facilitate learning and networking.
8. Stronger Integration with Global Policy Discussions:
Ensure that the IGF 2025 programme aligns with global digital policy and current international agendas. High-level sessions should be linked to ongoing global discussions on digital governance, cybersecurity, data privacy, AI ethics, and Internet freedom. These could feature officials from international organizations, policy makers, and leaders in tech industries to create strong synergies.
Additionally, ensure that the parliamentary track and high-level leaders track provide spaces for actionable outcomes that link the IGF to policy-making at national, regional, and international levels.
9. Dynamic and Accessible Outputs:
The overall content of IGF 2025 should include easy-to-access outputs, such as session summaries, key takeaways, and actionable steps, which can be shared in real-time or immediately after the event. This would allow both in-person and remote participants to leave with tangible insights and follow-up actions.
Create an open-access digital repository of all IGF sessions, ensuring that anyone, whether attending physically or virtually, can revisit content later. Provide clear links to relevant policy papers, reports, or publications that support discussions.
10. Engagement with Private Sector, NGOs, and Academia:
Strengthen engagement with the private sector, NGOs, and academic institutions by having collaborative sessions where each sector can present perspectives on specific challenges and solutions. These sessions should aim to connect the research community with policy makers, corporations, and civil society organizations, and aim at building cross-sector partnerships for sustainable digital governance.
In summary, IGF 2025's overall programme should provide a balanced and diverse platform that allows for robust discussions, actionable outputs, and wide inclusivity. By making the structure more interactive, inclusive, and focused on actionable outcomes, the event can continue to serve as a leading forum for global dialogue and collaboration in the evolving digital age.
1. Clear and Thematic Programme Tracks:
Organize the programme into clear thematic tracks (e.g., digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data privacy, Internet governance, AI policy, etc.) to guide discussions and provide participants with a logical flow through the event. Each track should have its own dedicated space for relevant sessions and discussions. This structure would help participants focus on topics of interest and encourage deeper engagement.
To ensure the tracks are relevant, stakeholders should be involved in the process of defining and refining the themes before the event. This could be done through consultations with various communities, including the private sector, civil society, and governments, during the preparatory phase.
2. Integrated Hybrid Experience:
Ensure that the hybrid model is seamlessly integrated, with synchronized in-person and virtual sessions. Clear guidance should be provided for both physical and online attendees on how to engage with sessions and speakers. The hybrid format should prioritize interactivity, with tools for questions, polling, and collaboration in both physical and virtual spaces.
Use technologies that allow for better virtual networking opportunities, such as digital lounges and bilateral meeting systems, ensuring online participants have a chance to engage with both other participants and exhibitors.
3. Interactive Sessions and Workshops:
Move away from lecture-style sessions and incorporate more interactive workshops, roundtable discussions, and case studies. These formats are particularly effective for collaboration and knowledge exchange, and they allow for deeper engagement from participants.
Actionable outcomes should be emphasized in workshops, with clear goals set at the beginning and concrete follow-up actions after the session. Ensure there is time allocated for Q&A, discussion, and collective problem-solving in every session.
4. Stronger Engagement with Youth, Women, and Underserved Groups:
Devote a significant portion of the programme to youth-focused sessions and ensure that the youth track is not a side event but rather integrated into the broader programme. Create spaces for young people to interact directly with experts and high-level leaders on issues that matter to them.
Ensure gender equality is embedded across all tracks and sessions, with efforts to ensure that both female and male speakers are equally represented across discussions. Special sessions could be dedicated to women’s empowerment in digital spaces, focusing on access, safety, and digital rights for women.
Provide platforms for underserved communities to share their perspectives and solutions, addressing the digital divide and offering opportunities for their voices to be heard.
5. Clear Programme Timelines with Flexibility:
Ensure the overall programme has a clear schedule with precise start and end times for each session. Allow flexibility within the schedule to accommodate for overrun discussions, networking opportunities, or impromptu feedback.
Time zone considerations should be factored in, especially for virtual participants from across different continents. For example, key sessions might be rotated to accommodate various global regions, ensuring more inclusive access to live sessions.
6. Integration of Inter-Sessional Activities:
Incorporate the outputs of intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and NRIs) directly into the programme. Provide a platform for these groups to share their findings or showcase ongoing projects that relate to the themes of the conference.
Each thematic track should offer space for interactive showcases, presentations, or mini-forums where these outputs can be integrated into the main programme, ensuring continuity between the preparatory phase and the event itself.
7. Improved Networking Opportunities:
Ensure that participants have structured opportunities for networking and collaboration, not only during breaks but also as part of the programme. Networking events such as virtual networking sessions or hybrid roundtables should be strategically scheduled to allow for engagement between stakeholders from different regions and sectors.
Introduce a mentorship program or a collaboration hub for first-time attendees, particularly from developing countries or smaller organizations, to facilitate learning and networking.
8. Stronger Integration with Global Policy Discussions:
Ensure that the IGF 2025 programme aligns with global digital policy and current international agendas. High-level sessions should be linked to ongoing global discussions on digital governance, cybersecurity, data privacy, AI ethics, and Internet freedom. These could feature officials from international organizations, policy makers, and leaders in tech industries to create strong synergies.
Additionally, ensure that the parliamentary track and high-level leaders track provide spaces for actionable outcomes that link the IGF to policy-making at national, regional, and international levels.
9. Dynamic and Accessible Outputs:
The overall content of IGF 2025 should include easy-to-access outputs, such as session summaries, key takeaways, and actionable steps, which can be shared in real-time or immediately after the event. This would allow both in-person and remote participants to leave with tangible insights and follow-up actions.
Create an open-access digital repository of all IGF sessions, ensuring that anyone, whether attending physically or virtually, can revisit content later. Provide clear links to relevant policy papers, reports, or publications that support discussions.
10. Engagement with Private Sector, NGOs, and Academia:
Strengthen engagement with the private sector, NGOs, and academic institutions by having collaborative sessions where each sector can present perspectives on specific challenges and solutions. These sessions should aim to connect the research community with policy makers, corporations, and civil society organizations, and aim at building cross-sector partnerships for sustainable digital governance.
In summary, IGF 2025's overall programme should provide a balanced and diverse platform that allows for robust discussions, actionable outputs, and wide inclusivity. By making the structure more interactive, inclusive, and focused on actionable outcomes, the event can continue to serve as a leading forum for global dialogue and collaboration in the evolving digital age.
To best connect community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) with the IGF 2025 process, several strategies can be implemented. These strategies can foster collaboration, ensure greater inclusivity, and strengthen the overall impact of the IGF. Below are suggestions for enhancing their integration into the IGF 2025 process:
1. Strengthening the Link Between Community Intersessional Activities and IGF 2025
Clearer Integration into the IGF Program:
Community-driven intersessional activities such as Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Dynamic Coalitions (DCs), and Policy Networks (PNs) should be explicitly connected to the main IGF 2025 program. This can be done by ensuring that outcomes from these activities directly inform the annual IGF discussions. Each intersessional activity should have dedicated sessions within the IGF that present their findings, lessons learned, and recommendations for the future direction of Internet governance.
These activities should be embedded into the overall IGF agenda, with sessions planned around their research, findings, and solutions. This ensures that the work done by communities is given visibility and recognized as part of the broader global discussions.
Structured Feedback Loops:
Create formal channels for community-driven activities to feedback into the IGF process throughout the year. This could include pre-IGF consultation meetings where the results of intersessional activities are shared with stakeholders, and there is time to gather input for refining IGF 2025 sessions.
Additionally, data-sharing platforms could be set up to allow real-time feedback from participants, community members, and stakeholders involved in intersessional work to influence session design and content.
Dedicated Tracks for Intersessional Activities:
Allocate specific time slots or tracks within the IGF 2025 program for showcasing the work of BPFs, Dynamic Coalitions, and Policy Networks. This allows these community-led initiatives to highlight their contributions and helps integrate them into the broader discussions. This can take the form of panel discussions, workshops, or informal roundtable formats to ensure deep engagement.
2. Fostering Stronger Connections with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
Pre-Consultation Events and Regional Dialogues:
Encourage NRI-led consultations in the lead-up to IGF 2025, ensuring that the regional voices are reflected in the main program. These regional consultations could include roundtable discussions, workshops, or public forums that focus on issues specific to the region but still relevant on a global scale.
The NRI process can also be tied into the global agenda of IGF 2025 by identifying regional challenges and proposing solutions at the global level. The NRIs should play a key role in bringing regional diversity to the IGF table and offering localized perspectives that can enhance the overall IGF agenda.
Youth IGF Integration:
The Youth IGFs should be given greater visibility in the IGF 2025 program by organizing youth-led sessions and ensuring that youth perspectives are integrated into all thematic tracks. These sessions should focus on youth-specific concerns, such as digital education, online safety, data privacy, AI ethics, and the future of work.
Encourage intergenerational dialogues between youth and senior stakeholders in both youth-led IGF tracks and mainstream sessions. This approach fosters collaboration and knowledge transfer, ensuring that youth voices are heard alongside established leaders in Internet governance.
It is essential to involve youth participants in organizing and leading sessions at IGF 2025, empowering them to shape the agenda and ensuring that their ideas are given equal prominence.
Formal Recognition of NRIs in the IGF Process:
A more formal integration of NRI outcomes into the IGF program would enhance their visibility and participation. This could be achieved through the creation of a dedicated space for NRIs to present the outcomes of their national, regional, and youth IGFs.
Ensure that NRIs are given a voice in the decision-making processes of the IGF. This could involve representation on the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) or through formal NRI liaison roles, ensuring that their perspectives are included in IGF 2025’s thematic and session planning.
NRI-Focused Capacity Development:
Provide capacity-building initiatives specifically for NRIs, particularly in developing regions or youth-led IGFs. Support can include online workshops, mentorship programs, and training materials that prepare participants from NRIs to lead sessions, organize events, and engage effectively in IGF discussions.
This will help to increase the overall quality and inclusiveness of contributions from NRIs, ensuring that their involvement is not just tokenistic, but based on knowledge and strong, actionable inputs.
3. Creating Synergies Between Global and Local Initiatives
Link Local Insights with Global Action:
Establish a stronger connection between the local realities and global dialogues. NRIs, especially those based in underserved regions, should have their local Internet governance concerns addressed on the global stage, ensuring the IGF’s relevance to their unique needs and challenges. For example, sessions that explore digital inclusion, affordable access, sustainable development goals, or localized digital policies can help connect grassroots experiences to the global agenda.
Sustainability and Continuity of NRIs:
IGF 2025 should encourage the sustainability of NRIs by supporting the creation of long-term national and regional IGFs. This can include funding, resource-sharing, and network-building across NRIs to create lasting impact and collaborative efforts between different regions.
Cross-NRI Collaborations:
Foster collaboration among different NRIs (national, regional, and youth). Joint sessions, shared research, and cross-border dialogue between NRIs can ensure that a wide range of perspectives and collaborative initiatives are integrated into the IGF 2025 discussions.
Conclusion
By strengthening the interlinkages between community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs, IGF 2025 can create a more inclusive, diverse, and interactive global dialogue on Internet governance. Greater collaboration, formal recognition, and enhanced capacity development for these groups will ensure that local issues are represented globally, and that IGF 2025 remains relevant to all stakeholders, from grassroots communities to global leaders.
1. Strengthening the Link Between Community Intersessional Activities and IGF 2025
Clearer Integration into the IGF Program:
Community-driven intersessional activities such as Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Dynamic Coalitions (DCs), and Policy Networks (PNs) should be explicitly connected to the main IGF 2025 program. This can be done by ensuring that outcomes from these activities directly inform the annual IGF discussions. Each intersessional activity should have dedicated sessions within the IGF that present their findings, lessons learned, and recommendations for the future direction of Internet governance.
These activities should be embedded into the overall IGF agenda, with sessions planned around their research, findings, and solutions. This ensures that the work done by communities is given visibility and recognized as part of the broader global discussions.
Structured Feedback Loops:
Create formal channels for community-driven activities to feedback into the IGF process throughout the year. This could include pre-IGF consultation meetings where the results of intersessional activities are shared with stakeholders, and there is time to gather input for refining IGF 2025 sessions.
Additionally, data-sharing platforms could be set up to allow real-time feedback from participants, community members, and stakeholders involved in intersessional work to influence session design and content.
Dedicated Tracks for Intersessional Activities:
Allocate specific time slots or tracks within the IGF 2025 program for showcasing the work of BPFs, Dynamic Coalitions, and Policy Networks. This allows these community-led initiatives to highlight their contributions and helps integrate them into the broader discussions. This can take the form of panel discussions, workshops, or informal roundtable formats to ensure deep engagement.
2. Fostering Stronger Connections with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
Pre-Consultation Events and Regional Dialogues:
Encourage NRI-led consultations in the lead-up to IGF 2025, ensuring that the regional voices are reflected in the main program. These regional consultations could include roundtable discussions, workshops, or public forums that focus on issues specific to the region but still relevant on a global scale.
The NRI process can also be tied into the global agenda of IGF 2025 by identifying regional challenges and proposing solutions at the global level. The NRIs should play a key role in bringing regional diversity to the IGF table and offering localized perspectives that can enhance the overall IGF agenda.
Youth IGF Integration:
The Youth IGFs should be given greater visibility in the IGF 2025 program by organizing youth-led sessions and ensuring that youth perspectives are integrated into all thematic tracks. These sessions should focus on youth-specific concerns, such as digital education, online safety, data privacy, AI ethics, and the future of work.
Encourage intergenerational dialogues between youth and senior stakeholders in both youth-led IGF tracks and mainstream sessions. This approach fosters collaboration and knowledge transfer, ensuring that youth voices are heard alongside established leaders in Internet governance.
It is essential to involve youth participants in organizing and leading sessions at IGF 2025, empowering them to shape the agenda and ensuring that their ideas are given equal prominence.
Formal Recognition of NRIs in the IGF Process:
A more formal integration of NRI outcomes into the IGF program would enhance their visibility and participation. This could be achieved through the creation of a dedicated space for NRIs to present the outcomes of their national, regional, and youth IGFs.
Ensure that NRIs are given a voice in the decision-making processes of the IGF. This could involve representation on the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) or through formal NRI liaison roles, ensuring that their perspectives are included in IGF 2025’s thematic and session planning.
NRI-Focused Capacity Development:
Provide capacity-building initiatives specifically for NRIs, particularly in developing regions or youth-led IGFs. Support can include online workshops, mentorship programs, and training materials that prepare participants from NRIs to lead sessions, organize events, and engage effectively in IGF discussions.
This will help to increase the overall quality and inclusiveness of contributions from NRIs, ensuring that their involvement is not just tokenistic, but based on knowledge and strong, actionable inputs.
3. Creating Synergies Between Global and Local Initiatives
Link Local Insights with Global Action:
Establish a stronger connection between the local realities and global dialogues. NRIs, especially those based in underserved regions, should have their local Internet governance concerns addressed on the global stage, ensuring the IGF’s relevance to their unique needs and challenges. For example, sessions that explore digital inclusion, affordable access, sustainable development goals, or localized digital policies can help connect grassroots experiences to the global agenda.
Sustainability and Continuity of NRIs:
IGF 2025 should encourage the sustainability of NRIs by supporting the creation of long-term national and regional IGFs. This can include funding, resource-sharing, and network-building across NRIs to create lasting impact and collaborative efforts between different regions.
Cross-NRI Collaborations:
Foster collaboration among different NRIs (national, regional, and youth). Joint sessions, shared research, and cross-border dialogue between NRIs can ensure that a wide range of perspectives and collaborative initiatives are integrated into the IGF 2025 discussions.
Conclusion
By strengthening the interlinkages between community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs, IGF 2025 can create a more inclusive, diverse, and interactive global dialogue on Internet governance. Greater collaboration, formal recognition, and enhanced capacity development for these groups will ensure that local issues are represented globally, and that IGF 2025 remains relevant to all stakeholders, from grassroots communities to global leaders.
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Programme Content
1. Thematic Approach:
Clear, Future-Oriented Themes: For IGF 2025, the thematic approach should be more forward-looking and should focus on emerging issues that will shape the future of the Internet. Topics such as AI and digital ethics, cybersecurity for the next decade, digital rights in the age of big data, and global digital inclusion should be prioritized. These themes should be refined through consultation with diverse stakeholders to ensure relevance to the evolving digital landscape.
Interconnected Themes: Rather than isolated topics, the IGF programme should emphasize cross-cutting themes that reflect the interconnectedness of issues. For example, digital governance intersects with data privacy, cybersecurity, AI policy, and human rights. Structuring sessions around these interconnected issues will allow for richer discussions and broader perspectives.
Sector-Specific and Regional Focus: Ensure that thematic areas also cover sector-specific issues (e.g., healthcare, education, agriculture) and regional challenges (e.g., internet governance in Africa, digital sovereignty in the Global South) to bring global diversity into the dialogue.
2. Session Types:
Interactive Workshops and Hands-On Sessions: IGF 2025 should move towards interactive, participatory formats such as workshops, hands-on training sessions, and roundtable discussions. These formats provide deeper engagement and actionable outcomes compared to traditional lectures or panel discussions. Focus on real-world case studies, practical solutions, and implementation strategies for Internet governance challenges.
Fireside Chats with Experts and Thought Leaders: These informal yet insightful sessions can bring high-level discussions to a more personal and accessible level. Speakers from leading think tanks, international organizations, or tech innovators can engage in discussions on emerging trends or policy shifts, allowing attendees to interact with experts in a relaxed format.
Policy Dialogues and Town Halls: Dedicated spaces should be created for policy dialogues and town hall-style discussions, where governments, the private sector, and civil society can directly engage with each other and the audience. These sessions could focus on policy implementation, digital rights advocacy, and multistakeholder cooperation.
Case Study Presentations and Best Practice Forums: Highlight successful digital governance models and best practices in the application of Internet policy. Include cross-country case studies to explore how digital transformation is being applied in diverse regions. Best Practice Forums (BPFs) should have dedicated slots where these practices can be shared and debated.
Lightning Talks and Start-Up Pitches: A series of quick-fire presentations by emerging innovators, start-ups, or grassroot initiatives could bring new ideas and perspectives to the table. This format could be used for showcasing solutions in areas such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and sustainable technology.
3. Speakers' Profiles:
Multidisciplinary Voices: IGF 2025 should feature a diverse range of speakers from across sectors. This includes governments, tech leaders, policy makers, NGOs, academics, civil society, and grassroots organizations. Women, youth, and marginalized groups should be well-represented to reflect a broad spectrum of perspectives and lived experiences.
Regional Representation: Ensure regional diversity in the speaker lineup. In particular, make space for speakers from regions often underrepresented, such as Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East. This helps to ensure that the global south's unique challenges and solutions are included in the discussions.
Experts in Emerging Areas: Include experts in cutting-edge topics, such as AI ethics, digital currencies, 5G/6G rollout, and Internet governance in space. Thought leaders in these domains will help steer the discussions towards new opportunities and potential risks.
Community-Led Speakers: Include voices from community-driven initiatives, grassroots movements, and activists advocating for digital rights or social change in their local contexts. Their lived experiences will add crucial depth to the conversation on how the Internet impacts communities at the ground level.
Youth Leaders and Innovators: IGF 2025 should emphasize the inclusion of youth leaders who are advocating for digital transformation, cyber rights, and environmental sustainability. Their perspectives can bring fresh ideas, particularly on topics like digital inclusion and future governance models.
4. Engagement with Policy Makers and High-Level Leaders:
Government Representation: High-level government officials from national and international policy-making bodies should be included to discuss policies related to digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, data sovereignty, internet freedom, and online freedoms. Governments play a critical role in shaping the regulatory landscape and should be actively engaged in the discussions on practical policy solutions.
Business and Tech Industry Leaders: Invite leaders from the private sector (technology companies, telecom operators, and entrepreneurs) to discuss business models for digital transformation and how corporate responsibility in data privacy and security can be shaped. Tech companies should also engage in dialogues on algorithmic accountability, AI governance, and consumer protection.
International Organizations and NGOs: Representatives from international organizations, such as the UN, OECD, World Bank, and ICANN, should be present to offer insights on global governance frameworks and collaborative efforts between governments and multistakeholder bodies.
5. Integrating Emerging Trends into Discussions:
Artificial Intelligence and Ethics: Sessions dedicated to AI and its intersection with Internet governance will be central. A focus on AI governance frameworks, responsible AI design, and AI's impact on labor markets and digital rights will be crucial.
Blockchain and Digital Currencies: Explore how blockchain technology and digital currencies (including Central Bank Digital Currencies - CBDCs) are reshaping financial systems, privacy regulations, and cross-border digital trade.
Data Privacy and Protection: With the growing concerns over data privacy, focus should be given to data protection regulations, the right to be forgotten, data ownership, and cross-border data flows.
In conclusion, the programme content for IGF 2025 should emphasize the future of digital governance, with a thematic approach that is innovative, inclusive, and reflects diverse voices. The session formats should be designed for interactivity and actionable outcomes, with a particular focus on youth, gender inclusivity, and global diversity. The speaker profiles should draw from a wide array of sectors, regions, and expertise, ensuring that IGF 2025 remains the most relevant and impactful platform for shaping the future of the Internet.
1. Thematic Approach:
Clear, Future-Oriented Themes: For IGF 2025, the thematic approach should be more forward-looking and should focus on emerging issues that will shape the future of the Internet. Topics such as AI and digital ethics, cybersecurity for the next decade, digital rights in the age of big data, and global digital inclusion should be prioritized. These themes should be refined through consultation with diverse stakeholders to ensure relevance to the evolving digital landscape.
Interconnected Themes: Rather than isolated topics, the IGF programme should emphasize cross-cutting themes that reflect the interconnectedness of issues. For example, digital governance intersects with data privacy, cybersecurity, AI policy, and human rights. Structuring sessions around these interconnected issues will allow for richer discussions and broader perspectives.
Sector-Specific and Regional Focus: Ensure that thematic areas also cover sector-specific issues (e.g., healthcare, education, agriculture) and regional challenges (e.g., internet governance in Africa, digital sovereignty in the Global South) to bring global diversity into the dialogue.
2. Session Types:
Interactive Workshops and Hands-On Sessions: IGF 2025 should move towards interactive, participatory formats such as workshops, hands-on training sessions, and roundtable discussions. These formats provide deeper engagement and actionable outcomes compared to traditional lectures or panel discussions. Focus on real-world case studies, practical solutions, and implementation strategies for Internet governance challenges.
Fireside Chats with Experts and Thought Leaders: These informal yet insightful sessions can bring high-level discussions to a more personal and accessible level. Speakers from leading think tanks, international organizations, or tech innovators can engage in discussions on emerging trends or policy shifts, allowing attendees to interact with experts in a relaxed format.
Policy Dialogues and Town Halls: Dedicated spaces should be created for policy dialogues and town hall-style discussions, where governments, the private sector, and civil society can directly engage with each other and the audience. These sessions could focus on policy implementation, digital rights advocacy, and multistakeholder cooperation.
Case Study Presentations and Best Practice Forums: Highlight successful digital governance models and best practices in the application of Internet policy. Include cross-country case studies to explore how digital transformation is being applied in diverse regions. Best Practice Forums (BPFs) should have dedicated slots where these practices can be shared and debated.
Lightning Talks and Start-Up Pitches: A series of quick-fire presentations by emerging innovators, start-ups, or grassroot initiatives could bring new ideas and perspectives to the table. This format could be used for showcasing solutions in areas such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and sustainable technology.
3. Speakers' Profiles:
Multidisciplinary Voices: IGF 2025 should feature a diverse range of speakers from across sectors. This includes governments, tech leaders, policy makers, NGOs, academics, civil society, and grassroots organizations. Women, youth, and marginalized groups should be well-represented to reflect a broad spectrum of perspectives and lived experiences.
Regional Representation: Ensure regional diversity in the speaker lineup. In particular, make space for speakers from regions often underrepresented, such as Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East. This helps to ensure that the global south's unique challenges and solutions are included in the discussions.
Experts in Emerging Areas: Include experts in cutting-edge topics, such as AI ethics, digital currencies, 5G/6G rollout, and Internet governance in space. Thought leaders in these domains will help steer the discussions towards new opportunities and potential risks.
Community-Led Speakers: Include voices from community-driven initiatives, grassroots movements, and activists advocating for digital rights or social change in their local contexts. Their lived experiences will add crucial depth to the conversation on how the Internet impacts communities at the ground level.
Youth Leaders and Innovators: IGF 2025 should emphasize the inclusion of youth leaders who are advocating for digital transformation, cyber rights, and environmental sustainability. Their perspectives can bring fresh ideas, particularly on topics like digital inclusion and future governance models.
4. Engagement with Policy Makers and High-Level Leaders:
Government Representation: High-level government officials from national and international policy-making bodies should be included to discuss policies related to digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, data sovereignty, internet freedom, and online freedoms. Governments play a critical role in shaping the regulatory landscape and should be actively engaged in the discussions on practical policy solutions.
Business and Tech Industry Leaders: Invite leaders from the private sector (technology companies, telecom operators, and entrepreneurs) to discuss business models for digital transformation and how corporate responsibility in data privacy and security can be shaped. Tech companies should also engage in dialogues on algorithmic accountability, AI governance, and consumer protection.
International Organizations and NGOs: Representatives from international organizations, such as the UN, OECD, World Bank, and ICANN, should be present to offer insights on global governance frameworks and collaborative efforts between governments and multistakeholder bodies.
5. Integrating Emerging Trends into Discussions:
Artificial Intelligence and Ethics: Sessions dedicated to AI and its intersection with Internet governance will be central. A focus on AI governance frameworks, responsible AI design, and AI's impact on labor markets and digital rights will be crucial.
Blockchain and Digital Currencies: Explore how blockchain technology and digital currencies (including Central Bank Digital Currencies - CBDCs) are reshaping financial systems, privacy regulations, and cross-border digital trade.
Data Privacy and Protection: With the growing concerns over data privacy, focus should be given to data protection regulations, the right to be forgotten, data ownership, and cross-border data flows.
In conclusion, the programme content for IGF 2025 should emphasize the future of digital governance, with a thematic approach that is innovative, inclusive, and reflects diverse voices. The session formats should be designed for interactivity and actionable outcomes, with a particular focus on youth, gender inclusivity, and global diversity. The speaker profiles should draw from a wide array of sectors, regions, and expertise, ensuring that IGF 2025 remains the most relevant and impactful platform for shaping the future of the Internet.
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024: Process, Content, and Integration into the Annual IGF Programme
Comments on Process
1. Engagement with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs):
The process for engaging NRIs in IGF 2024 was generally positive, with several National, Regional, and Youth IGFs successfully contributing to the broader event. However, there were challenges related to the coordination and integration of NRI activities within the main IGF programme.
Many NRIs hosted their own events in parallel with the main IGF sessions, but there were instances where their activities lacked clear connection or synergy with the overarching themes of IGF 2024. This disconnect may have resulted in missed opportunities for cross-regional learning and collaboration.
Some NRIs, particularly those from underserved regions, faced logistical challenges in terms of resources and support. More assistance from the IGF Secretariat in facilitating coordination and providing technical support could help ensure that these NRIs can participate more effectively in the global event.
2. Inclusivity and Representation:
While NRIs are meant to provide platforms for local and regional stakeholders to discuss Internet governance issues, the process for ensuring diverse and inclusive participation could be improved. There were concerns that the representation of smaller or emerging groups within the NRI events was not as strong as it could be. More outreach efforts and targeted support for youth, women, and underrepresented groups could ensure that a wider range of voices are heard in the discussions.
Additionally, the communication channels between NRIs and the main IGF organizing body could be more transparent. NRIs would benefit from clearer guidelines on how they can submit their proposals, participate in the larger IGF process, and align their sessions with the overall themes of the global IGF.
Comments on Content
1. Relevance and Quality of Content:
NRIs brought a diverse array of topics to the table, focusing on both global and local issues. For example, youth IGFs highlighted issues such as digital inclusion, online safety, and access to information, while regional IGFs addressed specific challenges relevant to their respective geographies, such as the digital divide or infrastructure issues.
The content produced by NRIs was generally very relevant to their local contexts, but at times it lacked the depth or global relevance needed to effectively contribute to the global IGF discussions. It would be helpful if NRIs could focus more on generating actionable outcomes or policy recommendations that could be integrated into global dialogues.
Some NRIs showcased excellent collaboration between governmental, private sector, and civil society actors. However, others struggled to engage all relevant stakeholders, limiting the diversity of the content and perspective shared.
2. Youth Engagement and Impact:
Youth IGFs stood out as particularly vibrant and impactful, with young people addressing issues that were directly relevant to their digital futures, such as privacy, cybersecurity, and online participation. The involvement of youth in shaping the IGF agenda is a positive step towards creating a more inclusive digital governance system.
However, while youth-focused content was relevant, it sometimes lacked the opportunity for sustained engagement beyond the event. Ensuring that youth participants have continuous access to follow-up activities, mentorship, and platforms for further contribution will help to maintain momentum after the event and ensure long-term impact.
Integration of NRIs into the Annual IGF Programme
1. Visibility and Inclusion:
One of the strengths of IGF 2024 was the increasing recognition of NRIs, with their sessions integrated into the main IGF programme. However, the visibility of NRI outcomes was inconsistent. Some NRIs were able to showcase their results effectively, but others did not receive the level of attention or support needed for their work to be fully recognized.
A more structured process for NRIs to present their results during the IGF could improve their integration into the global discussions. For instance, a dedicated segment or plenary session where NRIs can present their findings and discuss their relevance to global Internet governance issues would ensure that their work is showcased and connected to the broader discussions.
2. Support for NRI Coordination and Outcomes:
NRIs play an essential role in ensuring that local and regional perspectives are included in the global Internet governance debate. However, the process for coordinating NRI activities with the broader IGF agenda could be improved. There is room for enhancing communication between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat, with clearer guidelines on how their activities can align with the main themes of the event.
The creation of a dedicated platform for NRIs to submit session proposals, engage with each other, and align their agendas with IGF’s thematic areas would foster more cohesion between regional, national, and global discussions.
3. Capacity-Building and Support:
Many NRIs face significant capacity gaps in terms of resources, organizational infrastructure, and technical knowledge. Offering more support to NRIs, particularly those from smaller or less-developed regions, is crucial to ensuring they can engage effectively in the IGF process. This could include financial support for travel, technical training, or logistical assistance to facilitate participation.
Additionally, providing targeted capacity-building for NRI organizers could enhance the quality of their sessions and help them better engage their local and regional communities in Internet governance discussions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Clearer Guidelines and Support for NRI Engagement:
Develop clearer, more accessible guidelines for NRIs, particularly smaller or newly-established groups, to understand how they can participate in the IGF preparatory process and align their sessions with global themes. A streamlined process would increase inclusivity and ensure a greater diversity of voices in the event.
The IGF Secretariat should provide additional technical and logistical support to NRIs to help them organize their events and contribute more effectively to the main IGF programme.
2. Better Integration of NRI Results into Global IGF:
Create a formal platform within the IGF agenda for NRIs to present the outcomes of their sessions and discussions. This will ensure that the regional and national perspectives are fully integrated into the global dialogue. NRIs should also be encouraged to share actionable policy recommendations and outcomes from their sessions that can contribute to global Internet governance initiatives.
3. Improved Capacity-Building Opportunities:
Increase capacity-building opportunities for NRIs, particularly in terms of session organization, outreach strategies, and content creation. This would help ensure that their sessions are impactful and relevant, fostering greater engagement and collaboration among regional stakeholders.
4. Foster Youth Participation Across Regions:
Strengthen the involvement of youth in regional and national IGFs by offering more targeted outreach, mentorship, and support. This would enable youth to better contribute to the larger discussions and ensure that their voices are not only heard but actively shape Internet governance policies.
Conclusion
NRIs played an important role in IGF 2024 by bringing localized and regional perspectives to the global Internet governance discussion. However, improvements in coordination, visibility, and inclusion of their content within the main IGF programme are needed to maximize their impact. By strengthening support, providing clearer guidelines, and creating platforms for NRIs to present their findings, IGF 2025 can ensure that these vital voices are fully integrated into the broader global dialogue.
Comments on Process
1. Engagement with National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs):
The process for engaging NRIs in IGF 2024 was generally positive, with several National, Regional, and Youth IGFs successfully contributing to the broader event. However, there were challenges related to the coordination and integration of NRI activities within the main IGF programme.
Many NRIs hosted their own events in parallel with the main IGF sessions, but there were instances where their activities lacked clear connection or synergy with the overarching themes of IGF 2024. This disconnect may have resulted in missed opportunities for cross-regional learning and collaboration.
Some NRIs, particularly those from underserved regions, faced logistical challenges in terms of resources and support. More assistance from the IGF Secretariat in facilitating coordination and providing technical support could help ensure that these NRIs can participate more effectively in the global event.
2. Inclusivity and Representation:
While NRIs are meant to provide platforms for local and regional stakeholders to discuss Internet governance issues, the process for ensuring diverse and inclusive participation could be improved. There were concerns that the representation of smaller or emerging groups within the NRI events was not as strong as it could be. More outreach efforts and targeted support for youth, women, and underrepresented groups could ensure that a wider range of voices are heard in the discussions.
Additionally, the communication channels between NRIs and the main IGF organizing body could be more transparent. NRIs would benefit from clearer guidelines on how they can submit their proposals, participate in the larger IGF process, and align their sessions with the overall themes of the global IGF.
Comments on Content
1. Relevance and Quality of Content:
NRIs brought a diverse array of topics to the table, focusing on both global and local issues. For example, youth IGFs highlighted issues such as digital inclusion, online safety, and access to information, while regional IGFs addressed specific challenges relevant to their respective geographies, such as the digital divide or infrastructure issues.
The content produced by NRIs was generally very relevant to their local contexts, but at times it lacked the depth or global relevance needed to effectively contribute to the global IGF discussions. It would be helpful if NRIs could focus more on generating actionable outcomes or policy recommendations that could be integrated into global dialogues.
Some NRIs showcased excellent collaboration between governmental, private sector, and civil society actors. However, others struggled to engage all relevant stakeholders, limiting the diversity of the content and perspective shared.
2. Youth Engagement and Impact:
Youth IGFs stood out as particularly vibrant and impactful, with young people addressing issues that were directly relevant to their digital futures, such as privacy, cybersecurity, and online participation. The involvement of youth in shaping the IGF agenda is a positive step towards creating a more inclusive digital governance system.
However, while youth-focused content was relevant, it sometimes lacked the opportunity for sustained engagement beyond the event. Ensuring that youth participants have continuous access to follow-up activities, mentorship, and platforms for further contribution will help to maintain momentum after the event and ensure long-term impact.
Integration of NRIs into the Annual IGF Programme
1. Visibility and Inclusion:
One of the strengths of IGF 2024 was the increasing recognition of NRIs, with their sessions integrated into the main IGF programme. However, the visibility of NRI outcomes was inconsistent. Some NRIs were able to showcase their results effectively, but others did not receive the level of attention or support needed for their work to be fully recognized.
A more structured process for NRIs to present their results during the IGF could improve their integration into the global discussions. For instance, a dedicated segment or plenary session where NRIs can present their findings and discuss their relevance to global Internet governance issues would ensure that their work is showcased and connected to the broader discussions.
2. Support for NRI Coordination and Outcomes:
NRIs play an essential role in ensuring that local and regional perspectives are included in the global Internet governance debate. However, the process for coordinating NRI activities with the broader IGF agenda could be improved. There is room for enhancing communication between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat, with clearer guidelines on how their activities can align with the main themes of the event.
The creation of a dedicated platform for NRIs to submit session proposals, engage with each other, and align their agendas with IGF’s thematic areas would foster more cohesion between regional, national, and global discussions.
3. Capacity-Building and Support:
Many NRIs face significant capacity gaps in terms of resources, organizational infrastructure, and technical knowledge. Offering more support to NRIs, particularly those from smaller or less-developed regions, is crucial to ensuring they can engage effectively in the IGF process. This could include financial support for travel, technical training, or logistical assistance to facilitate participation.
Additionally, providing targeted capacity-building for NRI organizers could enhance the quality of their sessions and help them better engage their local and regional communities in Internet governance discussions.
Suggestions for Improvement
1. Clearer Guidelines and Support for NRI Engagement:
Develop clearer, more accessible guidelines for NRIs, particularly smaller or newly-established groups, to understand how they can participate in the IGF preparatory process and align their sessions with global themes. A streamlined process would increase inclusivity and ensure a greater diversity of voices in the event.
The IGF Secretariat should provide additional technical and logistical support to NRIs to help them organize their events and contribute more effectively to the main IGF programme.
2. Better Integration of NRI Results into Global IGF:
Create a formal platform within the IGF agenda for NRIs to present the outcomes of their sessions and discussions. This will ensure that the regional and national perspectives are fully integrated into the global dialogue. NRIs should also be encouraged to share actionable policy recommendations and outcomes from their sessions that can contribute to global Internet governance initiatives.
3. Improved Capacity-Building Opportunities:
Increase capacity-building opportunities for NRIs, particularly in terms of session organization, outreach strategies, and content creation. This would help ensure that their sessions are impactful and relevant, fostering greater engagement and collaboration among regional stakeholders.
4. Foster Youth Participation Across Regions:
Strengthen the involvement of youth in regional and national IGFs by offering more targeted outreach, mentorship, and support. This would enable youth to better contribute to the larger discussions and ensure that their voices are not only heard but actively shape Internet governance policies.
Conclusion
NRIs played an important role in IGF 2024 by bringing localized and regional perspectives to the global Internet governance discussion. However, improvements in coordination, visibility, and inclusion of their content within the main IGF programme are needed to maximize their impact. By strengthening support, providing clearer guidelines, and creating platforms for NRIs to present their findings, IGF 2025 can ensure that these vital voices are fully integrated into the broader global dialogue.
For IGF 2025, it is essential to ensure that the participant base is inclusive, diverse, and representative of all stakeholders involved in Internet governance. This will enhance the quality of discussions and ensure that the IGF truly reflects global perspectives on key Internet governance issues. Below are suggestions on who to invite to IGF 2025 and how to effectively inter-connect participants:
1. Who to Invite
A. Government Representatives
National and regional governments should be invited to ensure that policy and regulatory perspectives are included. Participation should be encouraged from ministries of communication, information technology, cybersecurity, and digital development.
Special focus should be placed on underrepresented regions, such as small island states, landlocked countries, and least developed countries (LDCs).
B. Private Sector Stakeholders
Invite major tech companies, including internet service providers (ISPs), cloud services, telecoms, digital platforms, and startups in the digital ecosystem to provide insights on innovation, business challenges, data governance, privacy, and network infrastructure.
Encourage digital entrepreneurs, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and tech innovators who are creating new solutions that can help shape the future of Internet governance.
C. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
Ensure broad representation of civil society groups, particularly those involved in digital rights, freedom of expression, data privacy, access to information, and inclusion.
Include advocacy groups, human rights organizations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) that represent marginalized and vulnerable populations (e.g., youth, women, persons with disabilities, and low-income communities).
D. Academia and Research Institutions
Invite university professors, researchers, and think tanks that focus on Internet governance, digital policy, cybersecurity, AI ethics, and socio-economic impacts of the Internet.
Encourage collaborations with academic institutions to bring evidence-based research into discussions, providing data-driven solutions to governance challenges.
E. Technical Community and Internet Standards Organizations
Representatives from the technical community, including those involved in internet infrastructure, cybersecurity, DNS management, encryption, and internet standards, should be invited to ensure discussions are grounded in technical realities.
Standard-setting bodies, such as IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) and ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), should play a central role in contributing to technical sessions.
F. Youth Representatives
Young people should have a significant voice in IGF 2025, as they will be the next generation of Internet users, innovators, and policy leaders. Invite youth activists, student representatives, and youth-led organizations.
Youth IGFs should be encouraged to bring forward youth-specific issues, such as digital literacy, online safety, and youth empowerment through digital tools.
G. Indigenous Communities
Indigenous groups that are affected by digital exclusion and cultural preservation through digital tools should be invited to represent their unique needs and challenges in the global Internet governance dialogue.
H. International and Multilateral Organizations
Representatives from organizations like the United Nations, World Trade Organization (WTO), World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and International Telecommunication Union (ITU) should be included to provide a global policy perspective.
Regional organizations such as the European Union, African Union, and ASEAN should also be involved to address regional Internet governance issues.
2. How to Inter-Connect Participants
To ensure meaningful engagement and collaboration between diverse groups at IGF 2025, the following strategies can be employed:
A. Create Diverse and Interdisciplinary Sessions
Design sessions that bring together stakeholders from different sectors (e.g., government, civil society, private sector, technical community) to discuss pressing Internet governance issues. These cross-sector dialogues encourage collaboration and knowledge exchange.
Incorporate roundtable formats, where participants from various backgrounds can discuss topics in smaller groups, facilitating interdisciplinary networking.
B. Facilitate Collaborative Tools and Platforms
Digital platforms (such as an online community portal or an IGF app) should be used to facilitate pre-event networking, real-time discussions, and follow-up actions.
Encourage participants to share resources, ideas, and actionable solutions before, during, and after the event to keep the dialogue flowing beyond the main event.
Live-streaming and interactive webinars should be offered for remote participants, ensuring they can actively engage and contribute to sessions without geographical barriers.
C. Tailored Networking and Bilateral Meeting Systems
AI-based matchmaking tools could be introduced to recommend potential collaborators based on session interests, goals, and previous discussions. This tool could suggest relevant people or organizations that participants should meet, enhancing networking and collaboration opportunities.
Organize structured networking events, such as speed-networking sessions or topic-based mixers, to connect participants from different backgrounds but with common interests. These networking events can create informal spaces for exchanging ideas, solving challenges, and building partnerships.
D. Foster Partnerships Across Regions and Sectors
Encourage multi-stakeholder partnerships and cross-border collaborations. For example, a youth-led organization from one region could partner with a government agency or private company from another region to co-host a session or share best practices.
Promote multi-regional joint sessions, where experts from different regions discuss global challenges, exchange ideas, and offer diverse solutions. This ensures that global voices are reflected in all dialogues.
E. Use Visual Aids and Online Platforms to Enhance Accessibility
Ensure that sessions are accessible to all participants, including those with disabilities. This includes providing sign language interpreters, real-time captioning, and audio descriptions for relevant sessions.
Implement interactive digital tools like live polls, Q&A platforms, and discussion forums that allow participants to submit questions and interact with speakers and panelists in real-time.
F. Promote Peer Learning and Collaborative Outputs
Organize workshops or co-creation labs where participants can collaborate on solutions for Internet governance challenges. These workshops can focus on themes like policy design, digital inclusion, data governance, and security.
Create opportunities for post-event collaboration by encouraging participants to form action groups or committees that work together on initiatives arising from IGF discussions.
G. Ensure Ongoing Engagement After the Event
Build an engagement plan to keep participants connected after the event. This can include follow-up webinars, working groups, and online forums to continue discussions and turn ideas into actions.
Establish community-driven action plans where participants can sign up for ongoing tasks or commitments, fostering accountability and ownership.
Conclusion
To ensure that IGF 2025 is an inclusive and impactful event, it is essential to invite a diverse range of participants, including government, private sector, civil society, academia, youth, indigenous communities, and multilateral organizations. Creating effective connections among these stakeholders can be achieved through cross-sectoral collaboration, digital platforms, structured networking opportunities, and post-event engagement. These strategies will ensure that the IGF 2025 is an inclusive and productive forum for shaping the future of Internet governance.
1. Who to Invite
A. Government Representatives
National and regional governments should be invited to ensure that policy and regulatory perspectives are included. Participation should be encouraged from ministries of communication, information technology, cybersecurity, and digital development.
Special focus should be placed on underrepresented regions, such as small island states, landlocked countries, and least developed countries (LDCs).
B. Private Sector Stakeholders
Invite major tech companies, including internet service providers (ISPs), cloud services, telecoms, digital platforms, and startups in the digital ecosystem to provide insights on innovation, business challenges, data governance, privacy, and network infrastructure.
Encourage digital entrepreneurs, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and tech innovators who are creating new solutions that can help shape the future of Internet governance.
C. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)
Ensure broad representation of civil society groups, particularly those involved in digital rights, freedom of expression, data privacy, access to information, and inclusion.
Include advocacy groups, human rights organizations, and community-based organizations (CBOs) that represent marginalized and vulnerable populations (e.g., youth, women, persons with disabilities, and low-income communities).
D. Academia and Research Institutions
Invite university professors, researchers, and think tanks that focus on Internet governance, digital policy, cybersecurity, AI ethics, and socio-economic impacts of the Internet.
Encourage collaborations with academic institutions to bring evidence-based research into discussions, providing data-driven solutions to governance challenges.
E. Technical Community and Internet Standards Organizations
Representatives from the technical community, including those involved in internet infrastructure, cybersecurity, DNS management, encryption, and internet standards, should be invited to ensure discussions are grounded in technical realities.
Standard-setting bodies, such as IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) and ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), should play a central role in contributing to technical sessions.
F. Youth Representatives
Young people should have a significant voice in IGF 2025, as they will be the next generation of Internet users, innovators, and policy leaders. Invite youth activists, student representatives, and youth-led organizations.
Youth IGFs should be encouraged to bring forward youth-specific issues, such as digital literacy, online safety, and youth empowerment through digital tools.
G. Indigenous Communities
Indigenous groups that are affected by digital exclusion and cultural preservation through digital tools should be invited to represent their unique needs and challenges in the global Internet governance dialogue.
H. International and Multilateral Organizations
Representatives from organizations like the United Nations, World Trade Organization (WTO), World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and International Telecommunication Union (ITU) should be included to provide a global policy perspective.
Regional organizations such as the European Union, African Union, and ASEAN should also be involved to address regional Internet governance issues.
2. How to Inter-Connect Participants
To ensure meaningful engagement and collaboration between diverse groups at IGF 2025, the following strategies can be employed:
A. Create Diverse and Interdisciplinary Sessions
Design sessions that bring together stakeholders from different sectors (e.g., government, civil society, private sector, technical community) to discuss pressing Internet governance issues. These cross-sector dialogues encourage collaboration and knowledge exchange.
Incorporate roundtable formats, where participants from various backgrounds can discuss topics in smaller groups, facilitating interdisciplinary networking.
B. Facilitate Collaborative Tools and Platforms
Digital platforms (such as an online community portal or an IGF app) should be used to facilitate pre-event networking, real-time discussions, and follow-up actions.
Encourage participants to share resources, ideas, and actionable solutions before, during, and after the event to keep the dialogue flowing beyond the main event.
Live-streaming and interactive webinars should be offered for remote participants, ensuring they can actively engage and contribute to sessions without geographical barriers.
C. Tailored Networking and Bilateral Meeting Systems
AI-based matchmaking tools could be introduced to recommend potential collaborators based on session interests, goals, and previous discussions. This tool could suggest relevant people or organizations that participants should meet, enhancing networking and collaboration opportunities.
Organize structured networking events, such as speed-networking sessions or topic-based mixers, to connect participants from different backgrounds but with common interests. These networking events can create informal spaces for exchanging ideas, solving challenges, and building partnerships.
D. Foster Partnerships Across Regions and Sectors
Encourage multi-stakeholder partnerships and cross-border collaborations. For example, a youth-led organization from one region could partner with a government agency or private company from another region to co-host a session or share best practices.
Promote multi-regional joint sessions, where experts from different regions discuss global challenges, exchange ideas, and offer diverse solutions. This ensures that global voices are reflected in all dialogues.
E. Use Visual Aids and Online Platforms to Enhance Accessibility
Ensure that sessions are accessible to all participants, including those with disabilities. This includes providing sign language interpreters, real-time captioning, and audio descriptions for relevant sessions.
Implement interactive digital tools like live polls, Q&A platforms, and discussion forums that allow participants to submit questions and interact with speakers and panelists in real-time.
F. Promote Peer Learning and Collaborative Outputs
Organize workshops or co-creation labs where participants can collaborate on solutions for Internet governance challenges. These workshops can focus on themes like policy design, digital inclusion, data governance, and security.
Create opportunities for post-event collaboration by encouraging participants to form action groups or committees that work together on initiatives arising from IGF discussions.
G. Ensure Ongoing Engagement After the Event
Build an engagement plan to keep participants connected after the event. This can include follow-up webinars, working groups, and online forums to continue discussions and turn ideas into actions.
Establish community-driven action plans where participants can sign up for ongoing tasks or commitments, fostering accountability and ownership.
Conclusion
To ensure that IGF 2025 is an inclusive and impactful event, it is essential to invite a diverse range of participants, including government, private sector, civil society, academia, youth, indigenous communities, and multilateral organizations. Creating effective connections among these stakeholders can be achieved through cross-sectoral collaboration, digital platforms, structured networking opportunities, and post-event engagement. These strategies will ensure that the IGF 2025 is an inclusive and productive forum for shaping the future of Internet governance.
The IGF 2025 presents a critical opportunity to align with and support the broader WSIS+20 Review and contribute to the Global Digital Compact (GDC). As both initiatives address key aspects of global digital governance, the IGF can play a pivotal role in bringing together stakeholders, fostering dialogues, and providing recommendations that influence the future direction of global digital policy. Below are some suggestions on how the IGF 2025 could contribute to the WSIS+20 Review and support the Global Digital Compact:
1. IGF’s Contribution to the WSIS+20 Review
The WSIS+20 Review will assess the progress made in implementing the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and provide an opportunity for high-level reflection on the evolving digital landscape. The General Assembly resolution A/70/125 calls for a high-level meeting at the end of 2025 to review WSIS outcomes, and the IGF can be instrumental in shaping the discussions that lead to this review. Below are ways the IGF 2025 could contribute:
A. Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue on WSIS Themes
IGF 2025 could host a series of multi-stakeholder panels or sessions focused on key WSIS themes (e.g., access to information, ICT for development, digital inclusion, e-governance, privacy, cybersecurity, and internet governance). These sessions should assess how much progress has been made since WSIS 2003 and WSIS+10 2015.
A dedicated WSIS+20 track could be integrated into the IGF program to focus specifically on the alignment between IGF discussions and the recommendations of the WSIS+20 review process.
B. Reporting Progress on WSIS Action Lines
The IGF could facilitate tracking and reporting on the WSIS Action Lines through its different sessions, focusing on how current initiatives have addressed these action lines and where gaps remain.
Capacity-building workshops on key Action Lines (such as ICT infrastructure, digital skills, and affordable access) can be included to foster deeper discussions on tangible outcomes that support the WSIS goals.
C. Recommendations for WSIS+20
Through contributions from the global community, the IGF could summarize practical recommendations for the WSIS+20 Review. This could include input from the government, private sector, civil society, and technical community on how to accelerate the implementation of the WSIS outcomes, especially in light of technological advances, challenges, and opportunities that have emerged since WSIS 2003.
D. High-Level WSIS+20 Debate
As part of IGF 2025, a high-level debate or summit on the WSIS+20 could be organized, bringing together government representatives, global leaders, UN agencies, and other relevant stakeholders to discuss and review progress towards the WSIS goals.
This session could directly inform the General Assembly resolution by highlighting ongoing challenges and offering concrete, actionable insights.
2. IGF’s Support for the Implementation of the Global Digital Compact (GDC)
The Global Digital Compact (GDC), endorsed by the UN Secretary-General in 2023, outlines principles for shared global digital cooperation and addresses key issues such as digital equity, data privacy, cybersecurity, and AI ethics. IGF 2025 could support the implementation of the GDC in several ways:
A. Multi-Stakeholder Engagement for the GDC
IGF 2025 should offer a platform for discussions and collaborations on practical steps for implementing the GDC’s key principles. This includes promoting multi-stakeholder cooperation between governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and the technical community to develop solutions to global digital challenges.
A dedicated track on the Global Digital Compact could be included to ensure that there is a coherent dialogue and shared vision on how the GDC can be translated into actionable policies and initiatives.
B. Bridging the Digital Divide
One of the central goals of the GDC is to address the digital divide by ensuring equitable access to digital technologies, especially in low-income countries. The IGF 2025 could focus on discussing innovative solutions to enhance affordable internet access, digital skills training, and sustainable infrastructure to ensure no one is left behind in the digital economy.
Youth and community participation could be emphasized, with specific programs aimed at empowering the next generation and communities in marginalized regions with the digital skills and tools needed to fully participate in the global digital economy.
C. Data Governance and Privacy
A session or working group on data governance, privacy, and digital rights could directly align with the GDC’s focus on protecting privacy and ensuring data rights for all users. This could include discussions on global frameworks for data protection, international agreements on AI governance, and best practices in cybersecurity.
IGF 2025 can facilitate discussions on trustworthy digital platforms and how international norms and standards can be created to address issues like data exploitation, cybersecurity threats, and algorithmic bias.
D. Fostering Accountability and Transparency
Accountability is a key principle of the GDC. The IGF 2025 can play a role in shaping discussions around governance mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability in the digital space, especially around internet governance policies, platform moderation, AI regulations, and cybersecurity practices.
Monitoring and Reporting Frameworks for GDC implementation could be discussed, providing mechanisms for stakeholders to assess progress and ensure that commitments made under the Compact are followed up with tangible actions.
E. Innovation and Collaboration for Digital Public Goods
The GDC emphasizes the importance of digital public goods in ensuring equitable access to technologies. The IGF 2025 could highlight innovations in open-source technologies, digital solutions for public good, and collaborative efforts to build global infrastructure that is open, interoperable, and inclusive.
It could also feature hackathons, innovation challenges, or open collaboration platforms where stakeholders work together to create solutions aligned with the GDC principles.
F. Promoting Peace and Security in the Digital Age
Another significant aspect of the GDC is fostering a safe and secure digital environment. The IGF 2025 could focus on discussions related to cybersecurity norms, global cooperation on cyber threats, and building international frameworks to deal with cross-border digital security challenges.
The IGF could help highlight the need for cooperative efforts between UN agencies, governments, and private sector to ensure the safety of the global internet and resilience in the face of cyber threats.
3. IGF 2025 as a Link Between WSIS+20 and the GDC
The IGF 2025 could serve as a key forum that bridges the WSIS+20 review process with the implementation of the Global Digital Compact by fostering discussions that examine the progress and challenges from both perspectives. IGF could integrate sessions and discussions that directly link WSIS Action Lines with GDC principles, identifying areas of overlap, gaps, and opportunities for joint action.
Conclusion
In conclusion, IGF 2025 can contribute significantly to both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact by acting as a platform for inclusive dialogue, fostering multi-stakeholder cooperation, and advocating for digital equity. It can ensure that the digital agenda continues to advance in a way that is inclusive, innovative, and globally cooperative. By aligning its discussions with the goals of the WSIS outcomes and the principles of the GDC, IGF 2025 can help set the stage for meaningful progress in global digital governance.
1. IGF’s Contribution to the WSIS+20 Review
The WSIS+20 Review will assess the progress made in implementing the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and provide an opportunity for high-level reflection on the evolving digital landscape. The General Assembly resolution A/70/125 calls for a high-level meeting at the end of 2025 to review WSIS outcomes, and the IGF can be instrumental in shaping the discussions that lead to this review. Below are ways the IGF 2025 could contribute:
A. Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue on WSIS Themes
IGF 2025 could host a series of multi-stakeholder panels or sessions focused on key WSIS themes (e.g., access to information, ICT for development, digital inclusion, e-governance, privacy, cybersecurity, and internet governance). These sessions should assess how much progress has been made since WSIS 2003 and WSIS+10 2015.
A dedicated WSIS+20 track could be integrated into the IGF program to focus specifically on the alignment between IGF discussions and the recommendations of the WSIS+20 review process.
B. Reporting Progress on WSIS Action Lines
The IGF could facilitate tracking and reporting on the WSIS Action Lines through its different sessions, focusing on how current initiatives have addressed these action lines and where gaps remain.
Capacity-building workshops on key Action Lines (such as ICT infrastructure, digital skills, and affordable access) can be included to foster deeper discussions on tangible outcomes that support the WSIS goals.
C. Recommendations for WSIS+20
Through contributions from the global community, the IGF could summarize practical recommendations for the WSIS+20 Review. This could include input from the government, private sector, civil society, and technical community on how to accelerate the implementation of the WSIS outcomes, especially in light of technological advances, challenges, and opportunities that have emerged since WSIS 2003.
D. High-Level WSIS+20 Debate
As part of IGF 2025, a high-level debate or summit on the WSIS+20 could be organized, bringing together government representatives, global leaders, UN agencies, and other relevant stakeholders to discuss and review progress towards the WSIS goals.
This session could directly inform the General Assembly resolution by highlighting ongoing challenges and offering concrete, actionable insights.
2. IGF’s Support for the Implementation of the Global Digital Compact (GDC)
The Global Digital Compact (GDC), endorsed by the UN Secretary-General in 2023, outlines principles for shared global digital cooperation and addresses key issues such as digital equity, data privacy, cybersecurity, and AI ethics. IGF 2025 could support the implementation of the GDC in several ways:
A. Multi-Stakeholder Engagement for the GDC
IGF 2025 should offer a platform for discussions and collaborations on practical steps for implementing the GDC’s key principles. This includes promoting multi-stakeholder cooperation between governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and the technical community to develop solutions to global digital challenges.
A dedicated track on the Global Digital Compact could be included to ensure that there is a coherent dialogue and shared vision on how the GDC can be translated into actionable policies and initiatives.
B. Bridging the Digital Divide
One of the central goals of the GDC is to address the digital divide by ensuring equitable access to digital technologies, especially in low-income countries. The IGF 2025 could focus on discussing innovative solutions to enhance affordable internet access, digital skills training, and sustainable infrastructure to ensure no one is left behind in the digital economy.
Youth and community participation could be emphasized, with specific programs aimed at empowering the next generation and communities in marginalized regions with the digital skills and tools needed to fully participate in the global digital economy.
C. Data Governance and Privacy
A session or working group on data governance, privacy, and digital rights could directly align with the GDC’s focus on protecting privacy and ensuring data rights for all users. This could include discussions on global frameworks for data protection, international agreements on AI governance, and best practices in cybersecurity.
IGF 2025 can facilitate discussions on trustworthy digital platforms and how international norms and standards can be created to address issues like data exploitation, cybersecurity threats, and algorithmic bias.
D. Fostering Accountability and Transparency
Accountability is a key principle of the GDC. The IGF 2025 can play a role in shaping discussions around governance mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability in the digital space, especially around internet governance policies, platform moderation, AI regulations, and cybersecurity practices.
Monitoring and Reporting Frameworks for GDC implementation could be discussed, providing mechanisms for stakeholders to assess progress and ensure that commitments made under the Compact are followed up with tangible actions.
E. Innovation and Collaboration for Digital Public Goods
The GDC emphasizes the importance of digital public goods in ensuring equitable access to technologies. The IGF 2025 could highlight innovations in open-source technologies, digital solutions for public good, and collaborative efforts to build global infrastructure that is open, interoperable, and inclusive.
It could also feature hackathons, innovation challenges, or open collaboration platforms where stakeholders work together to create solutions aligned with the GDC principles.
F. Promoting Peace and Security in the Digital Age
Another significant aspect of the GDC is fostering a safe and secure digital environment. The IGF 2025 could focus on discussions related to cybersecurity norms, global cooperation on cyber threats, and building international frameworks to deal with cross-border digital security challenges.
The IGF could help highlight the need for cooperative efforts between UN agencies, governments, and private sector to ensure the safety of the global internet and resilience in the face of cyber threats.
3. IGF 2025 as a Link Between WSIS+20 and the GDC
The IGF 2025 could serve as a key forum that bridges the WSIS+20 review process with the implementation of the Global Digital Compact by fostering discussions that examine the progress and challenges from both perspectives. IGF could integrate sessions and discussions that directly link WSIS Action Lines with GDC principles, identifying areas of overlap, gaps, and opportunities for joint action.
Conclusion
In conclusion, IGF 2025 can contribute significantly to both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact by acting as a platform for inclusive dialogue, fostering multi-stakeholder cooperation, and advocating for digital equity. It can ensure that the digital agenda continues to advance in a way that is inclusive, innovative, and globally cooperative. By aligning its discussions with the goals of the WSIS outcomes and the principles of the GDC, IGF 2025 can help set the stage for meaningful progress in global digital governance.
Additional Comments on IGF 2024:
1. Diverse Participation and Regional Representation:
One of the strengths of IGF 2024 was its commitment to bringing together a wide range of stakeholders from across the globe. However, there is still room for improvement in ensuring that underrepresented regions are better represented in both the sessions and the decision-making processes. The focus on increasing participation from low-resource countries and marginalized groups should be a priority for future editions.
2. Enhanced Collaboration with Local Stakeholders:
More local partnerships could be fostered to increase engagement and ownership of the forum by host countries and local communities. Local actors can bring context-specific insights that are valuable to the discussions and help in translating the outcomes into meaningful actions at the national and regional levels.
3. Improved Accessibility and Inclusion:
While the hybrid format allowed for broader access, accessibility for people with disabilities could be improved. Efforts such as ensuring real-time captioning, sign language interpreters, and interactive online tools should be standardized across all sessions to make the IGF more inclusive.
4. Better Integration of Business Sector Engagement:
There was an opportunity for greater business sector involvement in the discussions, especially around issues related to innovation, digital infrastructure, and private sector policies. Collaborative discussions between government, civil society, and the private sector can provide a holistic approach to Internet governance.
5. Clearer Actionable Outcomes and Follow-up:
While the discussions were rich in content, there was a need for clearer, actionable outcomes from each session. It’s crucial that real-world implementation is prioritized, with follow-up mechanisms to track progress on key issues. This would ensure that the IGF isn't just a platform for dialogue but also a space where concrete action is catalyzed.
6. Increased Focus on Emerging Internet Governance Issues:
The rapid pace of technological advancements continues to bring new challenges to Internet governance. There is a need for greater focus on emerging issues such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, data privacy, and cybersecurity in the IGF agenda. These topics need to be addressed from both a policy and ethical standpoint.
7. Strengthening the Role of National and Regional IGFs (NRIs):
National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) continue to play a vital role in the broader IGF ecosystem. Greater effort should be made to integrate NRIs more fully into the main event and to ensure that the local concerns and national perspectives are effectively represented in the global discourse.
8. Sustainability and Environmental Considerations:
There should be more attention to environmental sustainability within the context of the IGF. Discussions about the carbon footprint of digital technologies and the role of the Internet in promoting sustainability could have been better integrated into the agenda. Future IGFs could benefit from a stronger focus on how Internet governance and digital transformation can contribute to the UN SDGs.
Conclusion:
In summary, IGF 2024 was a significant step forward in facilitating global discussions on Internet governance, offering valuable opportunities for dialogue and collaboration across sectors. However, as with any large-scale event, there are always areas for improvement. By addressing the suggestions and feedback above, IGF can continue to evolve into a more inclusive, impact-driven, and action-oriented platform, better equipped to tackle the pressing issues in Internet governance and technology policy for the years to come.
1. Diverse Participation and Regional Representation:
One of the strengths of IGF 2024 was its commitment to bringing together a wide range of stakeholders from across the globe. However, there is still room for improvement in ensuring that underrepresented regions are better represented in both the sessions and the decision-making processes. The focus on increasing participation from low-resource countries and marginalized groups should be a priority for future editions.
2. Enhanced Collaboration with Local Stakeholders:
More local partnerships could be fostered to increase engagement and ownership of the forum by host countries and local communities. Local actors can bring context-specific insights that are valuable to the discussions and help in translating the outcomes into meaningful actions at the national and regional levels.
3. Improved Accessibility and Inclusion:
While the hybrid format allowed for broader access, accessibility for people with disabilities could be improved. Efforts such as ensuring real-time captioning, sign language interpreters, and interactive online tools should be standardized across all sessions to make the IGF more inclusive.
4. Better Integration of Business Sector Engagement:
There was an opportunity for greater business sector involvement in the discussions, especially around issues related to innovation, digital infrastructure, and private sector policies. Collaborative discussions between government, civil society, and the private sector can provide a holistic approach to Internet governance.
5. Clearer Actionable Outcomes and Follow-up:
While the discussions were rich in content, there was a need for clearer, actionable outcomes from each session. It’s crucial that real-world implementation is prioritized, with follow-up mechanisms to track progress on key issues. This would ensure that the IGF isn't just a platform for dialogue but also a space where concrete action is catalyzed.
6. Increased Focus on Emerging Internet Governance Issues:
The rapid pace of technological advancements continues to bring new challenges to Internet governance. There is a need for greater focus on emerging issues such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, data privacy, and cybersecurity in the IGF agenda. These topics need to be addressed from both a policy and ethical standpoint.
7. Strengthening the Role of National and Regional IGFs (NRIs):
National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) continue to play a vital role in the broader IGF ecosystem. Greater effort should be made to integrate NRIs more fully into the main event and to ensure that the local concerns and national perspectives are effectively represented in the global discourse.
8. Sustainability and Environmental Considerations:
There should be more attention to environmental sustainability within the context of the IGF. Discussions about the carbon footprint of digital technologies and the role of the Internet in promoting sustainability could have been better integrated into the agenda. Future IGFs could benefit from a stronger focus on how Internet governance and digital transformation can contribute to the UN SDGs.
Conclusion:
In summary, IGF 2024 was a significant step forward in facilitating global discussions on Internet governance, offering valuable opportunities for dialogue and collaboration across sectors. However, as with any large-scale event, there are always areas for improvement. By addressing the suggestions and feedback above, IGF can continue to evolve into a more inclusive, impact-driven, and action-oriented platform, better equipped to tackle the pressing issues in Internet governance and technology policy for the years to come.
ICJ Kenya
Everything else worked well. Apart from some of us received logistics note few days to the event of which outside our knowledge we booked hotels kilometers to the venue of the event
Worked well
Worked well
Logistics note was shared to participants late. Most Kenyan participants resided kilometers away from the venue, yet we had good hotels around the venue.
Informative content, time keeping and well organized
Well organized
It is gender sensitive with equality
The sessions were informative with lots of curiosity to learn more.
Please find a way to involve all participants. Most participants in the venue failed to attend the sessions
Please find a way to involve all participants. Most participants in the venue failed to attend the sessions
Engaging
Engaging
Engaging
Well organized. Personally, I learnt a lot from the village
Language friendly
Share logistics note equally on time
IGF 2024:
Well structured
Well structured
Well structured
Well organized
Well, done
IGF well serves its purpose for internet freedom. A great idea meant for the continent
Participation was on its best
INSA
IGF 2024:
International Youth Summit Sierra Leone
IGF 2024:
JOINT INITIATIVES FOR VULNERABLES SUPPORT.
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES WAS NOT FAMILIARIZED.
SOMEHOW, EXCLUSIVITY ARE MORE NEEDED TO IMPROVE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION ESPECIALLY TO VISUAL IMPAIRMENT PERSONS.
THE SECRETARIAT MIGHT CONSIDER TO PROVIDE INTERNET BUNDLE COST SUPPORT TO THE COMMUNITY WHOM MAY HAVE IN NEED FOR PARTICIPATION THROUGH ONLINE.
INSUFFICIENT LOGISTICAL DETAILS WAS NOT ACCESSIBLE,, THOUGH THERE IS A NEED OF IMPROVEMENT ESPECIALLY FOR CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION WHO STILL YET IN NEED OF INFORMATION BASED PRACTICES. IN 2024 THE ORGANIZER WEBSITE AND OTHER LINKS WAS NOT MORE ACTIVE WHILE IT WAS CAUSED MORE ERROR WITHIN REGISTRATION AND OTHER IMPORTANT NOTES.
IGF 2024:
Yes, more emphasis like; youth competitive activities and other debating room might be opened before the event to allow this group to innovate and play their practices role actively.
the mixture of academical and non academical as well as political presenter might be arranged to enable new model of learning exposure be overlooked into the sessions. Persons with disabilities might been given the special chance to castrate their focus and removal of negative mindsets as well as penetrate their agenda in friendly ways.
regional coordinator who must have a voluntary team for each area like; east Africa, northern America, south asia ETC to facilitate the best means of coordination. HENCE, the supportive means for persons with disabilities for inclusion might be taken up considerably to increase their participation while vcurrently still left out behind into whole processes.
each region must be have a coordinator who may support the participants on several issues like, registration error, scholarship application, disability issues accommodation as well as transportation issues thus insuring active participation.
JSC "National Company "Kazakhstan Gharysh Sapary"
Thanks a lot for IGF 2024 preparatory process, especially for visa support process.
IGF 2024:
kathak academy, Special consultative status(ecosoc)
every ting is well but we need to more young people to participant the IGF meeting because present world only development for IGF youth internet sustainable development SDGs Action work its very important for community people to serve theie own nations empowerment development for internet world ,because we firstly see their economical movement how to participant for future IGF .
overall program is very good
it is unique performance for the participant hybrid format design
logistics is good but request to you for low-income &developing country delegation IGF need to sponsor their accommodation for future meeting we hope
will ne action .
will ne action .
international participant always their looking for welfare opportunity to development process to alternative internet green industry for south Asia young community people
annual meeting we hope IGF must include the LDC MAIN focus
we like say young woman empowerment development for future IGF meeting we need more participant
very thing is comfortable
high level IGF leaders make a adaptation changing the IGF motivation
parliamentary they need to more action work for IGF because they do not make any positive IGF action
very action for youth empowerment development for future IGF meeting
IGF 2024 village for international delegation more strong data action for internet future goals
very good
everything is fine for IGF meeting
IGF 2024:
very good
best all of action IGF
Inernet development you can make this impotent for south Asia young people how they will work with IGF
south Asia youth participant is very important for new nation next IGF meeting because South Asia Youth they are want to be economical
very good
we already have a great action work for IGF
no comments very good every tings
KOMPAS DAILY NEWSPAPER/KOMPAS.ID
Too short.
There is no significant theme this year. As a media, I have some difficulties to know every spokesperson's name in the workshops session or lightning sessions . The agenda just mentioned topic, no spokesperson's name.
It's ok.
Everything was ok. But, I had miscommunication about funding scheme. The IGF Secretariat didn't informed me that they required two words of name in transfer form and my name just had one word. So, until the event finished and I went back to my country, I haven't received the funding. The media room was always crowded with the Secretariat team so I had to finish my work at my hotel.
I like the this session because I can get a new networking.
The process was good
Everything was good. However, in terms of AI topic or digital public infrastructure, I need more women to talk.
I need more various of theme
The media room must be larger
The workshop room shouldn't be too noisy so we don't need the headphone and journalist can record easily.
The media room must be larger
The workshop room shouldn't be too noisy so we don't need the headphone and journalist can record easily.
I need various spokesperson from north and south countries.
The theme was good
Good
I need more big tech companies or local tech companies to join
The distribution of press release or photos sometimes was too slow.
The funding scheme for media (journalists) should more transparent, in terms of schedule and requirements. Based on my experience, I had only one word of my name. Then, the Secretariat sent the funding a week before the event and used two words (FNU, my name). The Indonesia Bank system directly rejected that . The funding sent back to the Secretariat bank account. For daily live during the IGF, I used my personal money first. Until the event finished, I haven't received the funding. So I hope for the next IGF, the preparation must be longer and inform the schedule of preparation including funding transfer must be clearer.
IGF 2024:
More various of topic
More various of spokesperson's
Schedule clear
Media room should larger
More toilet room
More various of spokesperson's
Schedule clear
Media room should larger
More toilet room
They must be accommodated in different session , not in workshop session
Big tech companies must
I can reach out the IGF Youths easily .
Big tech please
. The talking of Global Digital Compact must be addressed in every workshop or lightning talks, not only in the main sessions.
For media, I hope the Secretariat learnt from COP28 event. The COP secretariat booked the hotel for media, so the media wasn't confused to booked the hotel. And the public transportation, I don't know why the buses which the Secretariat provided was not useful. Because, the buses location was far from the media's hotel. The media had to book Uber first to go to buses location.
Mauritius IGF
IGF 2024, similar to other global IGF in the previous years, had the convenient preparatory process. All sessions were good and well organised.
The programme was well organised and same supported and helped all participants.
-
IGF 2024 logistics were excellent.
The content of the best practice forums were good.
good process !
Well.
Good sessions.
Very well done.
good
It was nice and positive.
Nice and excellent encounters.
good
-
IGF 2024:
-
-
-
NRI's were well included and the process was positive.
The same as we did for 2024.
Supporting implementation of the Global Digital Compact is very positive.
-
National Statistics Office
OKAY
Good
Not much good, better to make it fully physical.
Good
NA
NA
Okay
Okay
Good
Okay
Good
NA
Okay
Provide sufficient time
IGF 2024:
Make it fully physical
Focus on alternative data sources
NA
Government, civil society among others
Good
NGO
Taking Stock of the IGF 2024: What Worked Well and What Didn’t
Introduction
The Global Election Observation Missions (GEOM) actively participated in the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024, focusing on the intersection of digital technology and democratic processes. This report evaluates the preparatory process and execution of IGF 2024, highlighting strengths and areas for improvement.
________________________________________
What Worked Well
1. Preparatory Timeline and Clarity
• The early release of the IGF 2024 timeline allowed stakeholders ample time to prepare proposals and engage meaningfully.
• Milestones were clearly communicated, ensuring that organizations like GEOM could align their activities accordingly.
2. Call for Issues and Session Proposals
• The call for issues was inclusive and wide-ranging, encouraging participation from diverse stakeholders.
• The submission platform was user-friendly, facilitating the submission of session proposals with clear guidelines and deadlines.
3. Session Selection Process
• The multistakeholder advisory group (MAG) ensured that selected sessions reflected diversity in geography, sector, and perspectives.
• Transparency in the selection criteria fostered trust and legitimacy in the process.
4. Capacity Development Initiatives
• The capacity development programs offered ahead of IGF were tailored to bridge knowledge gaps, particularly for new participants and organizations from underrepresented regions.
• Webinars and workshops provided actionable insights into IGF processes and internet governance issues.
5. Networking and Collaboration
• IGF 2024 facilitated strong networking opportunities, enabling GEOM to form alliances with other organizations working on digital democracy and governance.
• Side events and informal meetings were particularly effective in fostering dialogue on niche topics.
________________________________________
What Did Not Work So Well
1. Session Overlap and Scheduling
• Overlapping sessions made it challenging for participants to attend multiple discussions of interest.
• The lack of an effective scheduling tool resulted in missed opportunities for attendees to optimize their participation.
2. Limited Regional Representation in MAG
• Despite efforts, there was a perceived imbalance in regional representation within the MAG, which impacted the diversity of perspectives.
3. Communication Challenges
• There were occasional delays in communication regarding session approvals, which caused stress for some organizers.
• The IGF website experienced technical issues during peak periods, hindering access to critical information.
4. Accessibility Concerns
• Some virtual participation platforms were not user-friendly for attendees with limited digital literacy or infrastructure challenges.
• Limited availability of translations for sessions reduced engagement from non-English speakers.
5. Insufficient Focus on Implementation
• While discussions were rich in content, there was a lack of clarity on follow-up mechanisms for session outcomes.
• Stakeholders expressed a need for action-oriented deliverables to ensure that IGF discussions translate into tangible impacts.
________________________________________
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Streamline Scheduling: Introduce a dynamic scheduling tool to reduce session overlaps and ensure participants can attend their preferred sessions.
2. Enhance Regional Diversity: Strengthen efforts to include more underrepresented regions in the MAG and other decision-making roles.
3. Improve Communication: Use automated notifications and real-time updates to minimize delays in session approvals and event announcements.
4. Expand Accessibility: Invest in multilingual support, better virtual platforms, and outreach programs for increased global participation.
5. Focus on Actionable Outcomes: Develop a framework for tracking and implementing outcomes from sessions to ensure discussions lead to real-world change.
________________________________________
Conclusion
IGF 2024 successfully provided a platform for discussing critical issues in internet governance. However, addressing the identified shortcomings will ensure that IGF 2025 is even more inclusive, impactful, and accessible. GEOM remains committed to contributing to this evolution and leveraging IGF as a tool for advancing digital democracy globally
Introduction
The Global Election Observation Missions (GEOM) actively participated in the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024, focusing on the intersection of digital technology and democratic processes. This report evaluates the preparatory process and execution of IGF 2024, highlighting strengths and areas for improvement.
________________________________________
What Worked Well
1. Preparatory Timeline and Clarity
• The early release of the IGF 2024 timeline allowed stakeholders ample time to prepare proposals and engage meaningfully.
• Milestones were clearly communicated, ensuring that organizations like GEOM could align their activities accordingly.
2. Call for Issues and Session Proposals
• The call for issues was inclusive and wide-ranging, encouraging participation from diverse stakeholders.
• The submission platform was user-friendly, facilitating the submission of session proposals with clear guidelines and deadlines.
3. Session Selection Process
• The multistakeholder advisory group (MAG) ensured that selected sessions reflected diversity in geography, sector, and perspectives.
• Transparency in the selection criteria fostered trust and legitimacy in the process.
4. Capacity Development Initiatives
• The capacity development programs offered ahead of IGF were tailored to bridge knowledge gaps, particularly for new participants and organizations from underrepresented regions.
• Webinars and workshops provided actionable insights into IGF processes and internet governance issues.
5. Networking and Collaboration
• IGF 2024 facilitated strong networking opportunities, enabling GEOM to form alliances with other organizations working on digital democracy and governance.
• Side events and informal meetings were particularly effective in fostering dialogue on niche topics.
________________________________________
What Did Not Work So Well
1. Session Overlap and Scheduling
• Overlapping sessions made it challenging for participants to attend multiple discussions of interest.
• The lack of an effective scheduling tool resulted in missed opportunities for attendees to optimize their participation.
2. Limited Regional Representation in MAG
• Despite efforts, there was a perceived imbalance in regional representation within the MAG, which impacted the diversity of perspectives.
3. Communication Challenges
• There were occasional delays in communication regarding session approvals, which caused stress for some organizers.
• The IGF website experienced technical issues during peak periods, hindering access to critical information.
4. Accessibility Concerns
• Some virtual participation platforms were not user-friendly for attendees with limited digital literacy or infrastructure challenges.
• Limited availability of translations for sessions reduced engagement from non-English speakers.
5. Insufficient Focus on Implementation
• While discussions were rich in content, there was a lack of clarity on follow-up mechanisms for session outcomes.
• Stakeholders expressed a need for action-oriented deliverables to ensure that IGF discussions translate into tangible impacts.
________________________________________
Recommendations for IGF 2025
1. Streamline Scheduling: Introduce a dynamic scheduling tool to reduce session overlaps and ensure participants can attend their preferred sessions.
2. Enhance Regional Diversity: Strengthen efforts to include more underrepresented regions in the MAG and other decision-making roles.
3. Improve Communication: Use automated notifications and real-time updates to minimize delays in session approvals and event announcements.
4. Expand Accessibility: Invest in multilingual support, better virtual platforms, and outreach programs for increased global participation.
5. Focus on Actionable Outcomes: Develop a framework for tracking and implementing outcomes from sessions to ensure discussions lead to real-world change.
________________________________________
Conclusion
IGF 2024 successfully provided a platform for discussing critical issues in internet governance. However, addressing the identified shortcomings will ensure that IGF 2025 is even more inclusive, impactful, and accessible. GEOM remains committed to contributing to this evolution and leveraging IGF as a tool for advancing digital democracy globally
IGF 2024 Overall Programme: Thematic Focus, Structure, and Flow
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024 provided a dynamic platform for global stakeholders to address pressing issues in internet governance. This report by the Global Election Observation Missions (GEOM) evaluates the thematic focus, structure, and flow of the IGF 2024 programme.
1. Thematic Focus
Core Themes
The programme revolved around six key themes:
Digital Inclusion and Accessibility: Bridging the digital divide and ensuring equitable access to technology for marginalized communities.
Data Governance and Privacy: Addressing data protection, privacy rights, and cross-border data flow challenges.
Cybersecurity and Trust: Building a secure and resilient cyberspace while fostering global cooperation.
Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Exploring responsible AI development, accountability, and societal impacts.
Sustainability in the Digital Age: Reducing the environmental footprint of digital technologies and fostering green innovations.
Empowering Youth and Future Generations: Amplifying young voices and their role in shaping the digital future.
Strengths
The thematic focus captured current and emerging challenges, ensuring relevance and engagement.
Cross-cutting issues such as human rights, gender equality, and inclusivity enriched discussions across all themes.
Areas for Improvement
Some themes, such as sustainability, lacked detailed exploration, leaving gaps in actionable insights.
While broad, the themes could benefit from deeper regional customization to address specific local challenges.
2. Programme Structure
Components
The IGF 2024 programme was structured into several interlinked segments:
High-Level Sessions: Featuring thought leaders and policymakers addressing overarching internet governance priorities.
Thematic Main Sessions: Focused discussions on the six core themes, fostering interaction among diverse stakeholders.
Workshops: Smaller, interactive sessions providing space for focused debates and capacity building.
Lightning Talks and Networking Sessions: Quick, engaging presentations and informal gatherings to foster collaboration.
Open Forums: Platforms for governments, civil society, and private sector representatives to share best practices and initiatives.
Youth Sessions: Dedicated tracks empowering young voices to lead discussions and propose solutions.
Strengths
The programme offered a balanced mix of formats, catering to diverse preferences and engagement styles.
Interactive sessions, like workshops and open forums, enabled meaningful exchanges and stakeholder participation.
Areas for Improvement
Session overlap created difficulties for participants interested in attending multiple discussions.
Some high-level sessions were overly formal, limiting opportunities for open dialogue with the audience.
3. Flow
Event Flow
The programme followed a logical progression, beginning with high-level discussions to set the stage, followed by thematic deep dives and workshops.
Networking sessions were strategically placed to foster collaboration and dialogue throughout the event.
Strengths
The flow ensured that participants could build knowledge progressively, starting with broader perspectives and moving into detailed discussions.
The inclusion of youth sessions early in the programme amplified young voices and set a forward-looking tone.
Areas for Improvement
Scheduling challenges led to session fatigue, particularly on days with back-to-back events.
Transition times between sessions were often insufficient, making it difficult for attendees to move between venues or virtual links seamlessly.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Regional Perspectives: Integrate more region-specific thematic tracks to address local challenges.
Optimize Scheduling: Introduce tools to manage session overlap and provide sufficient transition times.
Focus on Actionable Outcomes: Ensure that discussions lead to concrete recommendations and follow-up mechanisms.
Expand Accessibility: Improve virtual platforms and provide multilingual support to enhance global participation.
Strengthen Networking Opportunities: Allocate more time and space for informal interactions to foster collaboration.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 programme successfully addressed critical issues in internet governance while fostering multi stakeholder dialogue. By refining its thematic focus, structure, and flow, IGF 2025 can further enhance its impact and inclusivity, ensuring its continued relevance in shaping the digital future.
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024 provided a dynamic platform for global stakeholders to address pressing issues in internet governance. This report by the Global Election Observation Missions (GEOM) evaluates the thematic focus, structure, and flow of the IGF 2024 programme.
1. Thematic Focus
Core Themes
The programme revolved around six key themes:
Digital Inclusion and Accessibility: Bridging the digital divide and ensuring equitable access to technology for marginalized communities.
Data Governance and Privacy: Addressing data protection, privacy rights, and cross-border data flow challenges.
Cybersecurity and Trust: Building a secure and resilient cyberspace while fostering global cooperation.
Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Exploring responsible AI development, accountability, and societal impacts.
Sustainability in the Digital Age: Reducing the environmental footprint of digital technologies and fostering green innovations.
Empowering Youth and Future Generations: Amplifying young voices and their role in shaping the digital future.
Strengths
The thematic focus captured current and emerging challenges, ensuring relevance and engagement.
Cross-cutting issues such as human rights, gender equality, and inclusivity enriched discussions across all themes.
Areas for Improvement
Some themes, such as sustainability, lacked detailed exploration, leaving gaps in actionable insights.
While broad, the themes could benefit from deeper regional customization to address specific local challenges.
2. Programme Structure
Components
The IGF 2024 programme was structured into several interlinked segments:
High-Level Sessions: Featuring thought leaders and policymakers addressing overarching internet governance priorities.
Thematic Main Sessions: Focused discussions on the six core themes, fostering interaction among diverse stakeholders.
Workshops: Smaller, interactive sessions providing space for focused debates and capacity building.
Lightning Talks and Networking Sessions: Quick, engaging presentations and informal gatherings to foster collaboration.
Open Forums: Platforms for governments, civil society, and private sector representatives to share best practices and initiatives.
Youth Sessions: Dedicated tracks empowering young voices to lead discussions and propose solutions.
Strengths
The programme offered a balanced mix of formats, catering to diverse preferences and engagement styles.
Interactive sessions, like workshops and open forums, enabled meaningful exchanges and stakeholder participation.
Areas for Improvement
Session overlap created difficulties for participants interested in attending multiple discussions.
Some high-level sessions were overly formal, limiting opportunities for open dialogue with the audience.
3. Flow
Event Flow
The programme followed a logical progression, beginning with high-level discussions to set the stage, followed by thematic deep dives and workshops.
Networking sessions were strategically placed to foster collaboration and dialogue throughout the event.
Strengths
The flow ensured that participants could build knowledge progressively, starting with broader perspectives and moving into detailed discussions.
The inclusion of youth sessions early in the programme amplified young voices and set a forward-looking tone.
Areas for Improvement
Scheduling challenges led to session fatigue, particularly on days with back-to-back events.
Transition times between sessions were often insufficient, making it difficult for attendees to move between venues or virtual links seamlessly.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Regional Perspectives: Integrate more region-specific thematic tracks to address local challenges.
Optimize Scheduling: Introduce tools to manage session overlap and provide sufficient transition times.
Focus on Actionable Outcomes: Ensure that discussions lead to concrete recommendations and follow-up mechanisms.
Expand Accessibility: Improve virtual platforms and provide multilingual support to enhance global participation.
Strengthen Networking Opportunities: Allocate more time and space for informal interactions to foster collaboration.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 programme successfully addressed critical issues in internet governance while fostering multi stakeholder dialogue. By refining its thematic focus, structure, and flow, IGF 2025 can further enhance its impact and inclusivity, ensuring its continued relevance in shaping the digital future.
IGF 2024 Hybrid Format Design and Experience
The IGF 2024 embraced a hybrid format, combining in-person and virtual participation to maximize inclusivity, accessibility, and global reach. This design enabled stakeholders from various regions, sectors, and capacities to engage in meaningful dialogue about internet governance. Below is an evaluation of the hybrid format design and the participant experience.
1. Hybrid Format Design
Key Features
Seamless Integration of Virtual and Physical Events:
All sessions were live-streamed, with virtual participants able to join via a robust online platform.
In-person and online audiences could interact in real time through Q&A tools and chat functionalities.
Global Accessibility:
Sessions were held in time slots accommodating participants from multiple time zones.
Multilingual support, including real-time interpretation, allowed for broader participation.
Interactive Tools:
Polls, live Q&A, and breakout rooms encouraged engagement among both in-person and virtual attendees.
A dedicated app facilitated networking and access to session materials.
Equity Measures:
Subsidies for connectivity and equipment were provided to participants from underrepresented regions.
Local hubs were established in several countries, allowing community-based in-person gatherings with virtual connectivity to the main event.
2. Participant Experience
Strengths
Flexibility:
Attendees appreciated the ability to participate remotely, reducing travel costs and time commitments.
Hybrid options increased the overall attendance and diversity of participants.
Inclusive Interactions:
Virtual tools ensured that remote participants could actively engage in discussions, rather than merely observing.
Networking features allowed attendees to connect across geographical and professional boundaries.
Local Hubs:
These hubs successfully bridged the digital divide, enabling participation from regions with limited connectivity.
Community-based discussions at hubs enriched the global dialogue with localized perspectives.
Platform Usability:
The online platform was user-friendly, with intuitive navigation for accessing sessions, materials, and networking opportunities.
3. Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Technical Glitches:
Some virtual sessions experienced connectivity issues, including audio-visual lags and disruptions during live Q&A.
Inconsistencies in platform performance were noted during peak usage times.
Engagement Disparities:
Despite interactive tools, virtual participants occasionally felt secondary to in-person attendees in terms of recognition and engagement.
Limited interaction opportunities between virtual and in-person participants reduced the sense of a unified forum.
Time Zone Constraints:
Scheduling challenges meant that some participants from certain regions found it difficult to join key sessions.
Local Hub Limitations:
Some hubs lacked the necessary infrastructure to provide a seamless hybrid experience.
Limited synchronization between hubs and the main event affected the flow of discussions.
4. Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Platform Resilience:
Invest in high-capacity servers and backup systems to ensure smooth virtual participation.
Offer a dedicated support team for real-time troubleshooting during sessions.
Equalize Engagement:
Train moderators to actively include virtual participants in discussions and Q&A sessions.
Introduce tools for cross-format networking, such as virtual and physical "meeting zones."
Improve Scheduling:
Develop a regional rotation model for key sessions to accommodate diverse time zones.
Record all sessions and provide on-demand access to ensure inclusivity for those unable to attend live.
Strengthen Local Hubs:
Provide technical support and training for hub organizers to ensure high-quality hybrid experiences.
Increase collaboration between hubs and the central event to harmonize discussions and outcomes.
Integrate Feedback Mechanisms:
Conduct real-time and post-event surveys to understand participant experiences and areas for enhancement.
Use feedback to continuously refine the hybrid model.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 hybrid format successfully expanded participation and inclusivity, aligning with its mission of fostering global dialogue. Addressing the identified challenges will ensure that future IGFs provide an even more seamless, engaging, and impactful experience for both in-person and virtual attendees.
The IGF 2024 embraced a hybrid format, combining in-person and virtual participation to maximize inclusivity, accessibility, and global reach. This design enabled stakeholders from various regions, sectors, and capacities to engage in meaningful dialogue about internet governance. Below is an evaluation of the hybrid format design and the participant experience.
1. Hybrid Format Design
Key Features
Seamless Integration of Virtual and Physical Events:
All sessions were live-streamed, with virtual participants able to join via a robust online platform.
In-person and online audiences could interact in real time through Q&A tools and chat functionalities.
Global Accessibility:
Sessions were held in time slots accommodating participants from multiple time zones.
Multilingual support, including real-time interpretation, allowed for broader participation.
Interactive Tools:
Polls, live Q&A, and breakout rooms encouraged engagement among both in-person and virtual attendees.
A dedicated app facilitated networking and access to session materials.
Equity Measures:
Subsidies for connectivity and equipment were provided to participants from underrepresented regions.
Local hubs were established in several countries, allowing community-based in-person gatherings with virtual connectivity to the main event.
2. Participant Experience
Strengths
Flexibility:
Attendees appreciated the ability to participate remotely, reducing travel costs and time commitments.
Hybrid options increased the overall attendance and diversity of participants.
Inclusive Interactions:
Virtual tools ensured that remote participants could actively engage in discussions, rather than merely observing.
Networking features allowed attendees to connect across geographical and professional boundaries.
Local Hubs:
These hubs successfully bridged the digital divide, enabling participation from regions with limited connectivity.
Community-based discussions at hubs enriched the global dialogue with localized perspectives.
Platform Usability:
The online platform was user-friendly, with intuitive navigation for accessing sessions, materials, and networking opportunities.
3. Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Technical Glitches:
Some virtual sessions experienced connectivity issues, including audio-visual lags and disruptions during live Q&A.
Inconsistencies in platform performance were noted during peak usage times.
Engagement Disparities:
Despite interactive tools, virtual participants occasionally felt secondary to in-person attendees in terms of recognition and engagement.
Limited interaction opportunities between virtual and in-person participants reduced the sense of a unified forum.
Time Zone Constraints:
Scheduling challenges meant that some participants from certain regions found it difficult to join key sessions.
Local Hub Limitations:
Some hubs lacked the necessary infrastructure to provide a seamless hybrid experience.
Limited synchronization between hubs and the main event affected the flow of discussions.
4. Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Platform Resilience:
Invest in high-capacity servers and backup systems to ensure smooth virtual participation.
Offer a dedicated support team for real-time troubleshooting during sessions.
Equalize Engagement:
Train moderators to actively include virtual participants in discussions and Q&A sessions.
Introduce tools for cross-format networking, such as virtual and physical "meeting zones."
Improve Scheduling:
Develop a regional rotation model for key sessions to accommodate diverse time zones.
Record all sessions and provide on-demand access to ensure inclusivity for those unable to attend live.
Strengthen Local Hubs:
Provide technical support and training for hub organizers to ensure high-quality hybrid experiences.
Increase collaboration between hubs and the central event to harmonize discussions and outcomes.
Integrate Feedback Mechanisms:
Conduct real-time and post-event surveys to understand participant experiences and areas for enhancement.
Use feedback to continuously refine the hybrid model.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 hybrid format successfully expanded participation and inclusivity, aligning with its mission of fostering global dialogue. Addressing the identified challenges will ensure that future IGFs provide an even more seamless, engaging, and impactful experience for both in-person and virtual attendees.
IGF 2024 Logistics Evaluation
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024 was supported by a robust logistical framework designed to facilitate a hybrid format. This report evaluates the various logistical elements, including the website, mobile app, scheduling, registration, access to the online platform, bilateral meeting systems, and security measures, highlighting successes and areas for improvement.
1. Website
Strengths
The IGF 2024 website served as the central hub for all event-related information, including programme schedules, speaker bios, and session recordings.
A searchable session catalogue made it easy for participants to find relevant sessions by theme, speaker, or format.
The website was mobile-friendly and accessible, with options for screen readers and multilingual content.
Areas for Improvement
Technical issues were reported during high-traffic periods, causing delays in accessing critical information.
Some participants found the navigation to be unintuitive, especially for newcomers.
2. Mobile App
Strengths
The mobile app provided real-time notifications, personalized schedules, and session reminders, enhancing user engagement.
Features like session bookmarking and integrated Q&A tools made participation smoother for both in-person and virtual attendees.
The app’s networking feature facilitated direct messaging and meeting coordination among participants.
Areas for Improvement
Limited offline functionality meant participants in regions with poor connectivity struggled to use the app effectively.
Some users experienced glitches with notifications and synchronization between the app and the online platform.
3. Schedule
Strengths
The programme was well-organized, with sessions categorized by theme, format, and level of engagement.
The inclusion of regional time zone conversions helped participants plan their schedules.
Areas for Improvement
Session overlaps created challenges for participants interested in multiple discussions occurring simultaneously.
Lack of an interactive scheduling tool to suggest sessions based on user preferences.
4. Registration
Strengths
The online registration process was streamlined and quick, with clear instructions and immediate confirmation.
Tiered registration options accommodated in-person, virtual, and hybrid participants effectively.
Areas for Improvement
Some attendees reported delays in receiving access credentials for the online platform post-registration.
Insufficient communication around visa support for international participants was noted.
5. Access and Use of Online Platform
Strengths
The online platform provided a centralized space for virtual participation, live streaming, and accessing session materials.
Real-time features, such as polls, live Q&A, and breakout rooms, enhanced virtual engagement.
Areas for Improvement
Technical issues, such as audio-video lags and login problems, were reported during peak usage.
Limited bandwidth optimization led to difficulties for participants in low-connectivity areas.
6. Bilateral Meeting System
Strengths
A dedicated bilateral meeting system allowed participants to schedule one-on-one or group meetings effortlessly.
Integrated calendar synchronization and reminders ensured meetings were well-organized.
Areas for Improvement
The lack of integration with the mobile app meant participants had to switch platforms for meeting coordination.
Time zone mismatches occasionally led to scheduling conflicts.
7. Security
Strengths
A robust cybersecurity framework ensured data protection and privacy for online participants.
In-person venues adhered to strict physical security protocols, ensuring the safety of attendees.
Areas for Improvement
Some participants raised concerns about the complexity of authentication processes, which occasionally hindered access.
Greater transparency in how personal data from registration and the platform were managed would enhance trust.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Website and Mobile App Functionality:
Improve website stability during high-traffic periods.
Add offline features and smarter navigation to the mobile app.
Optimize Scheduling Tools:
Introduce a dynamic scheduling assistant to help participants manage overlapping sessions.
Streamline Registration and Credentialing:
Ensure timely delivery of access credentials and clear communication about visa processes.
Strengthen Online Platform Performance:
Prioritize bandwidth optimization and backup systems to minimize technical disruptions.
Integrate Bilateral Meeting Systems:
Merge meeting scheduling tools with the mobile app for greater accessibility.
Increase Transparency in Security Measures:
Provide detailed information on data handling and privacy protocols to build participant confidence.
Conclusion
The logistical framework of IGF 2024 effectively supported its hybrid format, enhancing accessibility and global participation. Addressing the highlighted challenges will further improve the efficiency and inclusivity of future IGF events.
The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2024 was supported by a robust logistical framework designed to facilitate a hybrid format. This report evaluates the various logistical elements, including the website, mobile app, scheduling, registration, access to the online platform, bilateral meeting systems, and security measures, highlighting successes and areas for improvement.
1. Website
Strengths
The IGF 2024 website served as the central hub for all event-related information, including programme schedules, speaker bios, and session recordings.
A searchable session catalogue made it easy for participants to find relevant sessions by theme, speaker, or format.
The website was mobile-friendly and accessible, with options for screen readers and multilingual content.
Areas for Improvement
Technical issues were reported during high-traffic periods, causing delays in accessing critical information.
Some participants found the navigation to be unintuitive, especially for newcomers.
2. Mobile App
Strengths
The mobile app provided real-time notifications, personalized schedules, and session reminders, enhancing user engagement.
Features like session bookmarking and integrated Q&A tools made participation smoother for both in-person and virtual attendees.
The app’s networking feature facilitated direct messaging and meeting coordination among participants.
Areas for Improvement
Limited offline functionality meant participants in regions with poor connectivity struggled to use the app effectively.
Some users experienced glitches with notifications and synchronization between the app and the online platform.
3. Schedule
Strengths
The programme was well-organized, with sessions categorized by theme, format, and level of engagement.
The inclusion of regional time zone conversions helped participants plan their schedules.
Areas for Improvement
Session overlaps created challenges for participants interested in multiple discussions occurring simultaneously.
Lack of an interactive scheduling tool to suggest sessions based on user preferences.
4. Registration
Strengths
The online registration process was streamlined and quick, with clear instructions and immediate confirmation.
Tiered registration options accommodated in-person, virtual, and hybrid participants effectively.
Areas for Improvement
Some attendees reported delays in receiving access credentials for the online platform post-registration.
Insufficient communication around visa support for international participants was noted.
5. Access and Use of Online Platform
Strengths
The online platform provided a centralized space for virtual participation, live streaming, and accessing session materials.
Real-time features, such as polls, live Q&A, and breakout rooms, enhanced virtual engagement.
Areas for Improvement
Technical issues, such as audio-video lags and login problems, were reported during peak usage.
Limited bandwidth optimization led to difficulties for participants in low-connectivity areas.
6. Bilateral Meeting System
Strengths
A dedicated bilateral meeting system allowed participants to schedule one-on-one or group meetings effortlessly.
Integrated calendar synchronization and reminders ensured meetings were well-organized.
Areas for Improvement
The lack of integration with the mobile app meant participants had to switch platforms for meeting coordination.
Time zone mismatches occasionally led to scheduling conflicts.
7. Security
Strengths
A robust cybersecurity framework ensured data protection and privacy for online participants.
In-person venues adhered to strict physical security protocols, ensuring the safety of attendees.
Areas for Improvement
Some participants raised concerns about the complexity of authentication processes, which occasionally hindered access.
Greater transparency in how personal data from registration and the platform were managed would enhance trust.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Website and Mobile App Functionality:
Improve website stability during high-traffic periods.
Add offline features and smarter navigation to the mobile app.
Optimize Scheduling Tools:
Introduce a dynamic scheduling assistant to help participants manage overlapping sessions.
Streamline Registration and Credentialing:
Ensure timely delivery of access credentials and clear communication about visa processes.
Strengthen Online Platform Performance:
Prioritize bandwidth optimization and backup systems to minimize technical disruptions.
Integrate Bilateral Meeting Systems:
Merge meeting scheduling tools with the mobile app for greater accessibility.
Increase Transparency in Security Measures:
Provide detailed information on data handling and privacy protocols to build participant confidence.
Conclusion
The logistical framework of IGF 2024 effectively supported its hybrid format, enhancing accessibility and global participation. Addressing the highlighted challenges will further improve the efficiency and inclusivity of future IGF events.
Intersessional Activities and NRIs at IGF 2024
The 2024 Internet Governance Forum (IGF) highlighted intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs) as key components of its global engagement strategy. This evaluation focuses on the processes, content, and integration of these activities into the annual IGF programme.
1. Intersessional Activities
Best Practice Forums (BPFs)
Process
BPFs were developed through a collaborative multistakeholder process, with contributions from governments, civil society, academia, and the private sector.
Stakeholders participated in preparatory webinars, public consultations, and iterative drafting sessions, ensuring diverse perspectives.
Content
Topics included cybersecurity, gender inclusion in digital spaces, and sustainable internet practices.
Reports were comprehensive, offering actionable recommendations and showcasing regional and thematic best practices.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
BPF outputs were presented during dedicated main sessions, allowing for in-depth discussion and critique.
Integration into workshops and thematic discussions ensured alignment with broader IGF themes.
Policy Networks (PNs)
Process
PNs focused on key policy challenges, such as AI governance and cross-border data flows, leveraging expertise from global and regional stakeholders.
Regular virtual meetings facilitated ongoing dialogue, while interim reports provided updates to the IGF community.
Content
Policy Networks produced data-driven and solution-oriented reports, emphasizing the intersection of policy, technology, and societal impacts.
Recommendations were forward-looking, addressing gaps in global digital governance frameworks.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
PNs featured prominently in plenary discussions, where participants debated findings and proposed next steps.
Thematic workshops further explored PN outputs, contextualizing them within regional and sectoral realities.
2. National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs)
Process
NRIs organized preparatory meetings and consultations throughout the year, fostering grassroots engagement.
Clear communication channels between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat ensured alignment with the global programme.
Content
NRIs highlighted local internet governance challenges and solutions, adding valuable regional perspectives to global dialogues.
Youth-led NRIs showcased innovative approaches to addressing digital inclusion and capacity building.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
NRIs were integrated through dedicated sessions, where representatives shared insights and best practices.
Regional roundtables and networking events enhanced collaboration between NRIs and international stakeholders.
Youth NRIs held interactive sessions, emphasizing the role of young people in shaping the future of internet governance.
Strengths
Inclusive Processes: The participatory nature of BPFs, PNs, and NRIs ensured diverse stakeholder involvement.
Rich Content: Outputs were actionable and tailored to address both global and regional issues.
Seamless Integration: Intersessional activities were well-incorporated into the main IGF programme, enriching discussions and fostering continuity.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Awareness and Participation: Limited visibility of intersessional activities among some stakeholders reduced potential engagement.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: While reports provided recommendations, clearer pathways for implementation and follow-up were needed.
Resource Constraints: NRIs, especially from underrepresented regions, faced challenges in securing resources and capacity for effective participation.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Visibility:
Promote BPFs, PNs, and NRIs more actively through social media and targeted outreach.
Develop an interactive online repository for intersessional outputs and activities.
Strengthen Implementation Pathways:
Establish mechanisms to monitor and support the adoption of recommendations from intersessional activities.
Increase Support for NRIs:
Provide financial and technical support to NRIs from underrepresented regions.
Facilitate greater interaction between NRIs and global stakeholders through pre-event networking opportunities.
Youth Engagement:
Expand youth NRI activities and integrate their outputs more prominently into main IGF sessions.
Conclusion
The intersessional activities and NRIs at IGF 2024 played a critical role in bridging local, regional, and global perspectives on internet governance. By addressing identified challenges and building on existing strengths, future IGFs can further enhance the value and impact of these initiatives.
The 2024 Internet Governance Forum (IGF) highlighted intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs) as key components of its global engagement strategy. This evaluation focuses on the processes, content, and integration of these activities into the annual IGF programme.
1. Intersessional Activities
Best Practice Forums (BPFs)
Process
BPFs were developed through a collaborative multistakeholder process, with contributions from governments, civil society, academia, and the private sector.
Stakeholders participated in preparatory webinars, public consultations, and iterative drafting sessions, ensuring diverse perspectives.
Content
Topics included cybersecurity, gender inclusion in digital spaces, and sustainable internet practices.
Reports were comprehensive, offering actionable recommendations and showcasing regional and thematic best practices.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
BPF outputs were presented during dedicated main sessions, allowing for in-depth discussion and critique.
Integration into workshops and thematic discussions ensured alignment with broader IGF themes.
Policy Networks (PNs)
Process
PNs focused on key policy challenges, such as AI governance and cross-border data flows, leveraging expertise from global and regional stakeholders.
Regular virtual meetings facilitated ongoing dialogue, while interim reports provided updates to the IGF community.
Content
Policy Networks produced data-driven and solution-oriented reports, emphasizing the intersection of policy, technology, and societal impacts.
Recommendations were forward-looking, addressing gaps in global digital governance frameworks.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
PNs featured prominently in plenary discussions, where participants debated findings and proposed next steps.
Thematic workshops further explored PN outputs, contextualizing them within regional and sectoral realities.
2. National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs)
Process
NRIs organized preparatory meetings and consultations throughout the year, fostering grassroots engagement.
Clear communication channels between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat ensured alignment with the global programme.
Content
NRIs highlighted local internet governance challenges and solutions, adding valuable regional perspectives to global dialogues.
Youth-led NRIs showcased innovative approaches to addressing digital inclusion and capacity building.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme
NRIs were integrated through dedicated sessions, where representatives shared insights and best practices.
Regional roundtables and networking events enhanced collaboration between NRIs and international stakeholders.
Youth NRIs held interactive sessions, emphasizing the role of young people in shaping the future of internet governance.
Strengths
Inclusive Processes: The participatory nature of BPFs, PNs, and NRIs ensured diverse stakeholder involvement.
Rich Content: Outputs were actionable and tailored to address both global and regional issues.
Seamless Integration: Intersessional activities were well-incorporated into the main IGF programme, enriching discussions and fostering continuity.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Awareness and Participation: Limited visibility of intersessional activities among some stakeholders reduced potential engagement.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: While reports provided recommendations, clearer pathways for implementation and follow-up were needed.
Resource Constraints: NRIs, especially from underrepresented regions, faced challenges in securing resources and capacity for effective participation.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Visibility:
Promote BPFs, PNs, and NRIs more actively through social media and targeted outreach.
Develop an interactive online repository for intersessional outputs and activities.
Strengthen Implementation Pathways:
Establish mechanisms to monitor and support the adoption of recommendations from intersessional activities.
Increase Support for NRIs:
Provide financial and technical support to NRIs from underrepresented regions.
Facilitate greater interaction between NRIs and global stakeholders through pre-event networking opportunities.
Youth Engagement:
Expand youth NRI activities and integrate their outputs more prominently into main IGF sessions.
Conclusion
The intersessional activities and NRIs at IGF 2024 played a critical role in bridging local, regional, and global perspectives on internet governance. By addressing identified challenges and building on existing strengths, future IGFs can further enhance the value and impact of these initiatives.
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024: Process, Content, and Integration
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 continued to serve as vital multistakeholder platforms, offering focused dialogue on specific internet governance issues. This evaluation examines the process of their work, the relevance and quality of their content, and how their activities were incorporated into the annual IGF programme.
1. Process
Strengths
Inclusive Participation: Dynamic Coalitions maintained open membership, encouraging contributions from governments, civil society, academia, the private sector, and technical communities.
Collaborative Workflows: DCs organized regular virtual meetings, webinars, and consultations to ensure ongoing engagement and iterative development of outputs.
Transparency: Meeting minutes, draft documents, and progress updates were consistently shared with the broader community, fostering accountability.
Challenges
Varied Engagement Levels: Some DCs experienced uneven participation, with a few members driving most of the work.
Resource Constraints: Limited funding and administrative support hindered the ability of some DCs to achieve their goals effectively.
Coordination with Other IGF Activities: Overlap with the work of Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks (PNs) occasionally created redundancy.
2. Content
Themes and Relevance
Dynamic Coalitions addressed a wide range of critical internet governance topics, including:
Accessibility and Disability Inclusion: Advancing digital inclusion for persons with disabilities.
Internet Standards, Security, and Safety: Promoting global standards for cybersecurity and privacy.
Public Access to Information: Exploring sustainable models for community connectivity and public access.
Digital Rights and Freedoms: Addressing the protection of human rights in the digital age.
Output Quality
Most DCs produced evidence-based and actionable reports, supported by case studies, data, and expert analyses.
Outputs often included policy recommendations, practical toolkits, and frameworks for implementation.
Innovative Contributions
Some DCs introduced novel tools, such as interactive platforms for stakeholder engagement and data visualizations for policy discussions.
3. Integration into the Annual IGF Programme
Dedicated Sessions
DCs were featured in dedicated sessions, where they presented their findings and engaged participants in discussions.
These sessions were structured as interactive panels, roundtables, or workshops, promoting dialogue between coalition members and the IGF community.
Cross-Thematic Workshops
Several DCs collaborated with BPFs, PNs, and NRIs to co-host workshops, creating synergies between their outputs and broader IGF themes.
Plenary Highlights
Selected DC outputs were showcased in plenary sessions, ensuring their work received visibility among the wider IGF audience.
Exhibition and Networking Spaces
In-person and virtual exhibition areas featured Dynamic Coalitions, providing opportunities for stakeholders to learn about their work and engage informally.
Strengths
Diverse Expertise: DCs brought together stakeholders with specialized knowledge, enriching IGF discussions.
Practical Insights: Outputs were often grounded in real-world challenges, offering pragmatic solutions.
Enhanced Visibility: Integration into plenary and thematic sessions elevated the profile of DC outputs.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Inconsistent Integration: While some DCs were prominently featured, others had limited visibility within the IGF programme.
Engagement Barriers: Virtual participants faced challenges in fully engaging with DC activities, particularly in interactive sessions.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: There was a lack of structured pathways for implementing and monitoring the recommendations from DC outputs.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Strengthen Coordination:
Align DC activities more closely with BPFs, PNs, and NRIs to minimize redundancy and enhance impact.
Enhance Visibility:
Include all DC outputs in a centralized repository for easy access by the IGF community.
Provide additional opportunities for underrepresented DCs to showcase their work.
Foster Engagement:
Develop tools to ensure equal participation for virtual attendees in DC sessions.
Use gamification or other interactive formats to boost engagement during presentations.
Support Implementation:
Establish partnerships with relevant organizations to pilot and implement DC recommendations.
Monitor the adoption of DC outputs and report progress at subsequent IGFs.
Conclusion
Dynamic Coalitions remain an essential component of the IGF ecosystem, offering focused expertise and actionable outputs on pressing internet governance issues. By addressing the identified challenges and building on existing strengths, future iterations can further enhance the value and impact of DCs within the IGF programme.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 continued to serve as vital multistakeholder platforms, offering focused dialogue on specific internet governance issues. This evaluation examines the process of their work, the relevance and quality of their content, and how their activities were incorporated into the annual IGF programme.
1. Process
Strengths
Inclusive Participation: Dynamic Coalitions maintained open membership, encouraging contributions from governments, civil society, academia, the private sector, and technical communities.
Collaborative Workflows: DCs organized regular virtual meetings, webinars, and consultations to ensure ongoing engagement and iterative development of outputs.
Transparency: Meeting minutes, draft documents, and progress updates were consistently shared with the broader community, fostering accountability.
Challenges
Varied Engagement Levels: Some DCs experienced uneven participation, with a few members driving most of the work.
Resource Constraints: Limited funding and administrative support hindered the ability of some DCs to achieve their goals effectively.
Coordination with Other IGF Activities: Overlap with the work of Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks (PNs) occasionally created redundancy.
2. Content
Themes and Relevance
Dynamic Coalitions addressed a wide range of critical internet governance topics, including:
Accessibility and Disability Inclusion: Advancing digital inclusion for persons with disabilities.
Internet Standards, Security, and Safety: Promoting global standards for cybersecurity and privacy.
Public Access to Information: Exploring sustainable models for community connectivity and public access.
Digital Rights and Freedoms: Addressing the protection of human rights in the digital age.
Output Quality
Most DCs produced evidence-based and actionable reports, supported by case studies, data, and expert analyses.
Outputs often included policy recommendations, practical toolkits, and frameworks for implementation.
Innovative Contributions
Some DCs introduced novel tools, such as interactive platforms for stakeholder engagement and data visualizations for policy discussions.
3. Integration into the Annual IGF Programme
Dedicated Sessions
DCs were featured in dedicated sessions, where they presented their findings and engaged participants in discussions.
These sessions were structured as interactive panels, roundtables, or workshops, promoting dialogue between coalition members and the IGF community.
Cross-Thematic Workshops
Several DCs collaborated with BPFs, PNs, and NRIs to co-host workshops, creating synergies between their outputs and broader IGF themes.
Plenary Highlights
Selected DC outputs were showcased in plenary sessions, ensuring their work received visibility among the wider IGF audience.
Exhibition and Networking Spaces
In-person and virtual exhibition areas featured Dynamic Coalitions, providing opportunities for stakeholders to learn about their work and engage informally.
Strengths
Diverse Expertise: DCs brought together stakeholders with specialized knowledge, enriching IGF discussions.
Practical Insights: Outputs were often grounded in real-world challenges, offering pragmatic solutions.
Enhanced Visibility: Integration into plenary and thematic sessions elevated the profile of DC outputs.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Inconsistent Integration: While some DCs were prominently featured, others had limited visibility within the IGF programme.
Engagement Barriers: Virtual participants faced challenges in fully engaging with DC activities, particularly in interactive sessions.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: There was a lack of structured pathways for implementing and monitoring the recommendations from DC outputs.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Strengthen Coordination:
Align DC activities more closely with BPFs, PNs, and NRIs to minimize redundancy and enhance impact.
Enhance Visibility:
Include all DC outputs in a centralized repository for easy access by the IGF community.
Provide additional opportunities for underrepresented DCs to showcase their work.
Foster Engagement:
Develop tools to ensure equal participation for virtual attendees in DC sessions.
Use gamification or other interactive formats to boost engagement during presentations.
Support Implementation:
Establish partnerships with relevant organizations to pilot and implement DC recommendations.
Monitor the adoption of DC outputs and report progress at subsequent IGFs.
Conclusion
Dynamic Coalitions remain an essential component of the IGF ecosystem, offering focused expertise and actionable outputs on pressing internet governance issues. By addressing the identified challenges and building on existing strengths, future iterations can further enhance the value and impact of DCs within the IGF programme.
IGF 2024 Programme: Content, Speakers, and Quality of Discussions
The IGF 2024 programme offered a broad spectrum of content, speakers, and discussions, reflecting its commitment to addressing pressing internet governance issues through a multistakeholder lens. Below is an evaluation of the content, speaker diversity, and overall quality of the discussions at IGF 2024.
1. Content
Strengths
Relevance: The programme focused on timely topics such as:
AI Governance: Addressing ethical, legal, and societal implications of artificial intelligence.
Cybersecurity: Discussing global strategies for combating cyber threats and enhancing resilience.
Digital Inclusion: Exploring strategies for bridging the digital divide, particularly in underserved regions.
Sustainability and ICT: Examining the environmental impact of digital technologies and sustainable practices.
Multidisciplinary Approach: Sessions combined technical, policy, economic, and social perspectives, fostering holistic understanding.
Innovative Formats: Many sessions employed interactive formats such as debates, hackathons, and live polls to engage participants.
Challenges
Overlap in Themes: Some sessions covered similar topics, leading to redundancy and diluting audience focus.
Limited Regional Representation: Despite efforts, certain regions and local issues remained underrepresented.
2. Speakers
Strengths
Diversity of Stakeholders: The speaker lineup included representatives from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and technical communities.
Expertise: Panels featured prominent thought leaders, innovators, and policymakers with deep knowledge of their fields.
Youth and Grassroots Voices: Young leaders and grassroots representatives were actively included, ensuring a variety of perspectives.
Challenges
Gender Imbalance: While progress was made, some panels lacked gender parity.
Speaker Overload: A few sessions featured too many speakers, limiting the depth of individual contributions and audience interaction.
3. Quality of Discussions
Strengths
Substantive Debates: Discussions were well-informed, addressing complex issues with depth and nuance.
Action-Oriented Outcomes: Many sessions concluded with clear recommendations, frameworks, or calls to action.
Audience Engagement: Q&A segments and interactive tools allowed attendees to actively participate, enhancing the richness of discussions.
Challenges
Time Management: Some sessions ran over time, limiting opportunities for audience questions and interaction.
Language Barriers: Although interpretation services were available, some participants expressed challenges in fully engaging due to linguistic differences.
4. IGF 2024 Sessions
Strengths
Thematic Diversity: Sessions spanned a wide range of topics, from digital rights to emerging technologies, ensuring something for all participants.
Collaborative Workshops: Many sessions were co-hosted by multiple stakeholders, fostering cross-sectoral dialogue and collaboration.
Plenary Sessions: These highlighted key takeaways and provided a platform for high-level discussions, setting the tone for the IGF.
Challenges
Scheduling Conflicts: Concurrent sessions on similar topics led to difficult choices for participants and reduced overall session attendance.
Virtual Accessibility: While hybrid participation was supported, some remote attendees faced technical issues that hindered their experience.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Content Optimization:
Conduct a thorough review of session proposals to minimize thematic overlap.
Encourage proposals that address underrepresented regions and emerging issues.
Speaker Balance:
Prioritize gender balance and regional diversity in speaker selection.
Limit the number of speakers per session to ensure meaningful contributions and audience interaction.
Enhance Accessibility:
Improve hybrid participation tools to ensure seamless virtual engagement.
Expand interpretation services to cover a wider range of languages.
Time Management:
Allocate sufficient time for audience questions and interaction in every session.
Provide moderators with tools and training to effectively manage session timing.
Session Integration:
Develop mechanisms to link session outcomes to broader IGF themes and ongoing intersessional activities.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 programme was ambitious and impactful, offering diverse and substantive discussions on critical internet governance issues. By addressing identified challenges and implementing the above recommendations, IGF 2025 can further elevate the quality of its content, speakers, and discussions, ensuring a more inclusive and engaging experience for all participants.
The IGF 2024 programme offered a broad spectrum of content, speakers, and discussions, reflecting its commitment to addressing pressing internet governance issues through a multistakeholder lens. Below is an evaluation of the content, speaker diversity, and overall quality of the discussions at IGF 2024.
1. Content
Strengths
Relevance: The programme focused on timely topics such as:
AI Governance: Addressing ethical, legal, and societal implications of artificial intelligence.
Cybersecurity: Discussing global strategies for combating cyber threats and enhancing resilience.
Digital Inclusion: Exploring strategies for bridging the digital divide, particularly in underserved regions.
Sustainability and ICT: Examining the environmental impact of digital technologies and sustainable practices.
Multidisciplinary Approach: Sessions combined technical, policy, economic, and social perspectives, fostering holistic understanding.
Innovative Formats: Many sessions employed interactive formats such as debates, hackathons, and live polls to engage participants.
Challenges
Overlap in Themes: Some sessions covered similar topics, leading to redundancy and diluting audience focus.
Limited Regional Representation: Despite efforts, certain regions and local issues remained underrepresented.
2. Speakers
Strengths
Diversity of Stakeholders: The speaker lineup included representatives from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and technical communities.
Expertise: Panels featured prominent thought leaders, innovators, and policymakers with deep knowledge of their fields.
Youth and Grassroots Voices: Young leaders and grassroots representatives were actively included, ensuring a variety of perspectives.
Challenges
Gender Imbalance: While progress was made, some panels lacked gender parity.
Speaker Overload: A few sessions featured too many speakers, limiting the depth of individual contributions and audience interaction.
3. Quality of Discussions
Strengths
Substantive Debates: Discussions were well-informed, addressing complex issues with depth and nuance.
Action-Oriented Outcomes: Many sessions concluded with clear recommendations, frameworks, or calls to action.
Audience Engagement: Q&A segments and interactive tools allowed attendees to actively participate, enhancing the richness of discussions.
Challenges
Time Management: Some sessions ran over time, limiting opportunities for audience questions and interaction.
Language Barriers: Although interpretation services were available, some participants expressed challenges in fully engaging due to linguistic differences.
4. IGF 2024 Sessions
Strengths
Thematic Diversity: Sessions spanned a wide range of topics, from digital rights to emerging technologies, ensuring something for all participants.
Collaborative Workshops: Many sessions were co-hosted by multiple stakeholders, fostering cross-sectoral dialogue and collaboration.
Plenary Sessions: These highlighted key takeaways and provided a platform for high-level discussions, setting the tone for the IGF.
Challenges
Scheduling Conflicts: Concurrent sessions on similar topics led to difficult choices for participants and reduced overall session attendance.
Virtual Accessibility: While hybrid participation was supported, some remote attendees faced technical issues that hindered their experience.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Content Optimization:
Conduct a thorough review of session proposals to minimize thematic overlap.
Encourage proposals that address underrepresented regions and emerging issues.
Speaker Balance:
Prioritize gender balance and regional diversity in speaker selection.
Limit the number of speakers per session to ensure meaningful contributions and audience interaction.
Enhance Accessibility:
Improve hybrid participation tools to ensure seamless virtual engagement.
Expand interpretation services to cover a wider range of languages.
Time Management:
Allocate sufficient time for audience questions and interaction in every session.
Provide moderators with tools and training to effectively manage session timing.
Session Integration:
Develop mechanisms to link session outcomes to broader IGF themes and ongoing intersessional activities.
Conclusion
The IGF 2024 programme was ambitious and impactful, offering diverse and substantive discussions on critical internet governance issues. By addressing identified challenges and implementing the above recommendations, IGF 2025 can further elevate the quality of its content, speakers, and discussions, ensuring a more inclusive and engaging experience for all participants.
IGF 2024 High-Level Leaders Track: Evaluation
The High-Level Leaders Track (HLLT) at IGF 2024 served as a platform for senior government officials, industry leaders, and key stakeholders to discuss critical internet governance challenges and opportunities. Below is a detailed evaluation of the track, focusing on its structure, content, participation, and impact.
1. Structure and Format
Strengths
Focused Sessions: Each session addressed specific high-priority topics, such as:
Global cooperation on AI governance.
Cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection.
Bridging the digital divide in developing economies.
Sustainable development and green ICT.
Engaging Formats: A mix of keynote addresses, moderated dialogues, and roundtable discussions encouraged interaction among leaders and the audience.
Challenges
Time Allocation: Some sessions were packed with multiple high-profile speakers, leaving limited time for in-depth discussion or audience interaction.
Limited Interactivity: While engaging, the format often prioritized speeches over meaningful dialogue with participants.
2. Content
Strengths
Relevance: The HLLT topics aligned closely with global internet governance priorities and the IGF 2024 thematic focus.
Cross-Sectoral Insights: Leaders shared diverse perspectives, combining policy, technical, and business expertise.
Action-Oriented: Many discussions focused on tangible outcomes, such as frameworks for policy alignment and multistakeholder collaboration.
Challenges
Overlapping Themes: Some topics were repetitive across sessions, reducing the opportunity to address less-explored issues.
Insufficient Regional Focus: While global challenges were emphasized, specific regional contexts and needs were sometimes overlooked.
3. Participation
Strengths
Diverse Representation: The track included government officials, CEOs, civil society leaders, and technical experts, ensuring a multistakeholder approach.
Youth and Emerging Leaders: Several sessions featured contributions from young leaders, enriching discussions with fresh perspectives.
Global Reach: Participation included leaders from various regions, fostering a sense of inclusivity and global collaboration.
Challenges
Gender Imbalance: Despite efforts, male speakers dominated some panels, highlighting the need for greater gender parity.
Accessibility for Remote Participants: Some virtual participants faced challenges in engaging with high-level discussions due to technical limitations or time zone differences.
4. Impact
Strengths
Policy Recommendations: Sessions produced actionable recommendations on key topics, such as enhancing cybersecurity frameworks and promoting equitable access to digital resources.
Networking Opportunities: The track facilitated connections among leaders, fostering partnerships and collaborative initiatives beyond IGF 2024.
Visibility for Emerging Issues: Topics like AI ethics and green ICT gained prominence, setting the stage for future discussions.
Challenges
Follow-Up Mechanisms: While impactful, the track lacked clear mechanisms to ensure that recommendations translated into concrete actions post-IGF.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Session Design:
Limit the number of speakers per session to allow for deeper, more interactive discussions.
Include Q&A segments specifically for audience engagement.
Broaden Content Scope:
Address underrepresented themes, such as regional challenges and indigenous perspectives on internet governance.
Reduce thematic overlap across sessions to maximize the diversity of discussions.
Promote Gender and Regional Balance:
Set clear targets for gender and regional representation among high-level speakers.
Actively involve leaders from underserved and developing regions.
Leverage Technology for Hybrid Participation:
Improve the online platform to support seamless virtual engagement for remote participants.
Offer recordings and summary briefs of HLLT sessions for broader accessibility.
Strengthen Impact:
Create a follow-up mechanism to track the implementation of policy recommendations made during the track.
Establish working groups to operationalize key outcomes in intersessional activities.
Conclusion
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was instrumental in advancing discussions on critical internet governance issues. While highly impactful, its potential can be further realized by addressing challenges related to interactivity, inclusivity, and follow-up mechanisms. With these improvements, the HLLT can serve as an even stronger catalyst for global collaboration and actionable outcomes at IGF 2025.
The High-Level Leaders Track (HLLT) at IGF 2024 served as a platform for senior government officials, industry leaders, and key stakeholders to discuss critical internet governance challenges and opportunities. Below is a detailed evaluation of the track, focusing on its structure, content, participation, and impact.
1. Structure and Format
Strengths
Focused Sessions: Each session addressed specific high-priority topics, such as:
Global cooperation on AI governance.
Cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection.
Bridging the digital divide in developing economies.
Sustainable development and green ICT.
Engaging Formats: A mix of keynote addresses, moderated dialogues, and roundtable discussions encouraged interaction among leaders and the audience.
Challenges
Time Allocation: Some sessions were packed with multiple high-profile speakers, leaving limited time for in-depth discussion or audience interaction.
Limited Interactivity: While engaging, the format often prioritized speeches over meaningful dialogue with participants.
2. Content
Strengths
Relevance: The HLLT topics aligned closely with global internet governance priorities and the IGF 2024 thematic focus.
Cross-Sectoral Insights: Leaders shared diverse perspectives, combining policy, technical, and business expertise.
Action-Oriented: Many discussions focused on tangible outcomes, such as frameworks for policy alignment and multistakeholder collaboration.
Challenges
Overlapping Themes: Some topics were repetitive across sessions, reducing the opportunity to address less-explored issues.
Insufficient Regional Focus: While global challenges were emphasized, specific regional contexts and needs were sometimes overlooked.
3. Participation
Strengths
Diverse Representation: The track included government officials, CEOs, civil society leaders, and technical experts, ensuring a multistakeholder approach.
Youth and Emerging Leaders: Several sessions featured contributions from young leaders, enriching discussions with fresh perspectives.
Global Reach: Participation included leaders from various regions, fostering a sense of inclusivity and global collaboration.
Challenges
Gender Imbalance: Despite efforts, male speakers dominated some panels, highlighting the need for greater gender parity.
Accessibility for Remote Participants: Some virtual participants faced challenges in engaging with high-level discussions due to technical limitations or time zone differences.
4. Impact
Strengths
Policy Recommendations: Sessions produced actionable recommendations on key topics, such as enhancing cybersecurity frameworks and promoting equitable access to digital resources.
Networking Opportunities: The track facilitated connections among leaders, fostering partnerships and collaborative initiatives beyond IGF 2024.
Visibility for Emerging Issues: Topics like AI ethics and green ICT gained prominence, setting the stage for future discussions.
Challenges
Follow-Up Mechanisms: While impactful, the track lacked clear mechanisms to ensure that recommendations translated into concrete actions post-IGF.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhance Session Design:
Limit the number of speakers per session to allow for deeper, more interactive discussions.
Include Q&A segments specifically for audience engagement.
Broaden Content Scope:
Address underrepresented themes, such as regional challenges and indigenous perspectives on internet governance.
Reduce thematic overlap across sessions to maximize the diversity of discussions.
Promote Gender and Regional Balance:
Set clear targets for gender and regional representation among high-level speakers.
Actively involve leaders from underserved and developing regions.
Leverage Technology for Hybrid Participation:
Improve the online platform to support seamless virtual engagement for remote participants.
Offer recordings and summary briefs of HLLT sessions for broader accessibility.
Strengthen Impact:
Create a follow-up mechanism to track the implementation of policy recommendations made during the track.
Establish working groups to operationalize key outcomes in intersessional activities.
Conclusion
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was instrumental in advancing discussions on critical internet governance issues. While highly impactful, its potential can be further realized by addressing challenges related to interactivity, inclusivity, and follow-up mechanisms. With these improvements, the HLLT can serve as an even stronger catalyst for global collaboration and actionable outcomes at IGF 2025.
IGF 2024:
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024
The National, Regional, and Youth Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) were a cornerstone of IGF 2024, bringing diverse perspectives and grassroots experiences to the global stage. This evaluation examines the processes, content, and integration of NRIs into the annual IGF programme.
1. Process
Strengths
Decentralized and Inclusive: NRIs were organized independently, reflecting local, regional, and youth-specific priorities while adhering to the IGF’s multistakeholder model.
Capacity Building: Many NRIs incorporated training sessions, mentorship programs, and workshops, especially for first-time participants and youth.
Collaborative Preparation: NRIs engaged local communities through public consultations, ensuring broad representation and relevance.
Challenges
Resource Disparities: Some NRIs, particularly in developing regions, faced challenges in securing funding and logistical support.
Coordination Gaps: Communication between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat, as well as among NRIs themselves, was occasionally inconsistent, limiting synergies.
Youth Engagement: While youth-focused NRIs were vibrant, they sometimes lacked access to decision-making platforms within the broader IGF framework.
2. Content
Themes and Focus Areas
NRIs addressed a wide range of internet governance issues tailored to their constituencies, including:
Digital Inclusion: Access to affordable and reliable internet, particularly in underserved communities.
Cybersecurity: Regional approaches to online safety and resilience against cyber threats.
Digital Literacy and Skills Development: Empowering communities, especially youth, to navigate the digital world safely and effectively.
Data Protection and Privacy: Regional and national perspectives on safeguarding personal data.
Youth Leadership: Amplifying the voices of young people in shaping internet governance policies.
Output Quality
Comprehensive Reports: NRIs produced detailed reports summarizing discussions, outcomes, and recommendations.
Action-Oriented Proposals: Many NRIs proposed tangible solutions and next steps, such as community-based initiatives and policy advocacy strategies.
Innovative Formats
Interactive sessions, hackathons, and community dialogues were integrated into several NRIs, fostering dynamic and participatory engagements.
3. Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Dedicated NRI Sessions
Showcase Events: NRIs were given dedicated slots to present their work, share insights, and discuss challenges.
Interactive Panels: Sessions featured cross-NRI collaborations, enabling dialogue on common themes and regional differences.
Youth Representation
Youth NRIs had strong visibility, with sessions that highlighted their unique contributions and perspectives on internet governance.
A dedicated Youth Track allowed young participants to connect with policymakers and other stakeholders.
Cross-Thematic Contributions
NRI representatives participated in global discussions, enriching IGF sessions with local and regional perspectives.
Outputs from NRIs were referenced in thematic sessions, ensuring alignment with the broader IGF programme.
Exhibition Spaces
Both physical and virtual exhibition spaces provided platforms for NRIs to share their outputs, engage with attendees, and network.
Strengths
Grassroots Relevance: NRIs brought real-world challenges and localized solutions to the global stage.
Youth Empowerment: Youth NRIs showcased innovative approaches, emphasizing the importance of young voices in internet governance.
Global-Local Nexus: NRIs served as a bridge between local communities and global discussions, fostering mutual understanding.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Resource Constraints: Many NRIs struggled with limited funding, affecting their ability to participate fully in the IGF.
Integration Depth: While NRIs were visible, their outputs were not always deeply integrated into the broader IGF programme.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: There was a lack of clear pathways for implementing NRI recommendations at the global level.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhanced Support for NRIs:
Provide financial and technical assistance to under-resourced NRIs.
Facilitate peer-to-peer learning and mentorship programs among NRIs.
Strengthen Integration:
Ensure NRI outputs are prominently featured in main sessions and thematic discussions.
Develop a centralized repository for NRI reports and resources, accessible year-round.
Youth Engagement:
Expand youth participation in decision-making sessions and plenaries.
Create more interactive platforms for youth to collaborate with other stakeholders.
Capacity Building:
Offer training and resources to help NRIs improve their organizational and advocacy capacities.
Host pre-IGF workshops to align NRIs with the annual programme’s objectives.
Conclusion
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024 played a crucial role in amplifying grassroots voices and enriching global internet governance debates. By addressing resource disparities, enhancing integration, and fostering greater youth engagement, future IGFs can unlock the full potential of NRIs and their contributions.
The National, Regional, and Youth Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) were a cornerstone of IGF 2024, bringing diverse perspectives and grassroots experiences to the global stage. This evaluation examines the processes, content, and integration of NRIs into the annual IGF programme.
1. Process
Strengths
Decentralized and Inclusive: NRIs were organized independently, reflecting local, regional, and youth-specific priorities while adhering to the IGF’s multistakeholder model.
Capacity Building: Many NRIs incorporated training sessions, mentorship programs, and workshops, especially for first-time participants and youth.
Collaborative Preparation: NRIs engaged local communities through public consultations, ensuring broad representation and relevance.
Challenges
Resource Disparities: Some NRIs, particularly in developing regions, faced challenges in securing funding and logistical support.
Coordination Gaps: Communication between NRIs and the IGF Secretariat, as well as among NRIs themselves, was occasionally inconsistent, limiting synergies.
Youth Engagement: While youth-focused NRIs were vibrant, they sometimes lacked access to decision-making platforms within the broader IGF framework.
2. Content
Themes and Focus Areas
NRIs addressed a wide range of internet governance issues tailored to their constituencies, including:
Digital Inclusion: Access to affordable and reliable internet, particularly in underserved communities.
Cybersecurity: Regional approaches to online safety and resilience against cyber threats.
Digital Literacy and Skills Development: Empowering communities, especially youth, to navigate the digital world safely and effectively.
Data Protection and Privacy: Regional and national perspectives on safeguarding personal data.
Youth Leadership: Amplifying the voices of young people in shaping internet governance policies.
Output Quality
Comprehensive Reports: NRIs produced detailed reports summarizing discussions, outcomes, and recommendations.
Action-Oriented Proposals: Many NRIs proposed tangible solutions and next steps, such as community-based initiatives and policy advocacy strategies.
Innovative Formats
Interactive sessions, hackathons, and community dialogues were integrated into several NRIs, fostering dynamic and participatory engagements.
3. Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Dedicated NRI Sessions
Showcase Events: NRIs were given dedicated slots to present their work, share insights, and discuss challenges.
Interactive Panels: Sessions featured cross-NRI collaborations, enabling dialogue on common themes and regional differences.
Youth Representation
Youth NRIs had strong visibility, with sessions that highlighted their unique contributions and perspectives on internet governance.
A dedicated Youth Track allowed young participants to connect with policymakers and other stakeholders.
Cross-Thematic Contributions
NRI representatives participated in global discussions, enriching IGF sessions with local and regional perspectives.
Outputs from NRIs were referenced in thematic sessions, ensuring alignment with the broader IGF programme.
Exhibition Spaces
Both physical and virtual exhibition spaces provided platforms for NRIs to share their outputs, engage with attendees, and network.
Strengths
Grassroots Relevance: NRIs brought real-world challenges and localized solutions to the global stage.
Youth Empowerment: Youth NRIs showcased innovative approaches, emphasizing the importance of young voices in internet governance.
Global-Local Nexus: NRIs served as a bridge between local communities and global discussions, fostering mutual understanding.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
Resource Constraints: Many NRIs struggled with limited funding, affecting their ability to participate fully in the IGF.
Integration Depth: While NRIs were visible, their outputs were not always deeply integrated into the broader IGF programme.
Follow-Up Mechanisms: There was a lack of clear pathways for implementing NRI recommendations at the global level.
Recommendations for IGF 2025
Enhanced Support for NRIs:
Provide financial and technical assistance to under-resourced NRIs.
Facilitate peer-to-peer learning and mentorship programs among NRIs.
Strengthen Integration:
Ensure NRI outputs are prominently featured in main sessions and thematic discussions.
Develop a centralized repository for NRI reports and resources, accessible year-round.
Youth Engagement:
Expand youth participation in decision-making sessions and plenaries.
Create more interactive platforms for youth to collaborate with other stakeholders.
Capacity Building:
Offer training and resources to help NRIs improve their organizational and advocacy capacities.
Host pre-IGF workshops to align NRIs with the annual programme’s objectives.
Conclusion
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024 played a crucial role in amplifying grassroots voices and enriching global internet governance debates. By addressing resource disparities, enhancing integration, and fostering greater youth engagement, future IGFs can unlock the full potential of NRIs and their contributions.
PRETO BUSINESS Corp.
It is better to have more meetings before the conference, and we will be glad if we could present our speaker on the stage next year.
Awesome, place is beautiful.
Unfortunately I didn't understand when it was virtual part of the conference.
beautiful
GBA Global had made a lot of interesting speakers to be. Hope to see Elon Musk next year.
Positive
IGF 2024:
Positive
Taqniyat
IGF 2024:
The Citizens Foundation
IGF 2024:
UN IGF DC DDHT
DCs should be given the option to have their proposal considered as a workshop, townhall, lightening talk etc. For if the DC is declined a WS it should be submitted for the other catgories. DCs are the backbone of IGF with their intersessional activities.
How will satellite ISP tech advance reaching the last mile?
Allow all DCs to participate with a session and this could be virtual sessions, if room spaceis limited.
Allow 100% virtual sessions like during covid
Allow 100% virtual sessions like during covid
This was a smooth delivery
DDHT hosted excellent intersessional events and one in particular with DC libraries should have got promotion at IGF 2024. A manner to do this for the future should be considered.
100% virtual session as an option
Include all DCs as not all DCs can find a common topic to collaborate on.
Include all DCs as not all DCs can find a common topic to collaborate on.
IGF 2024:
Dedicated themes by day or time. A day 0 to share intersessional events. Extend times for the day to include all DCs.
Always have the topics of: access, interoperability, inclusion, education.
Ask Tesla, Amazon etc - large companies around the world to a panel discusion on the future vision
Include the work of the DCs
Make sessions 100% virtual if requested. DCs are mainly formed of volunteers and as a result, they need travel grant support even for non developing nations
UN Women
Good
Very Good
Excellent
Good
Please refer to UN Women policy recommendations
Please refer to UN Women ethical conducts
Need more attention for care economy
Women voices are important
same as above
same as above
same as above
Need more recommendation for best practices
Excellent
See above inputs
IGF 2024:
Keep maintaining all best practices and sustaining networks and human agencies instead of up lifting techno-mediated agencies
Understanding the capacities is not only a policy making procedure. However, policy procedure cannot be proceeded without upholding human rights priorities' according to previously IGF consensus
See above suggestion
Good
See above suggestion (invest in women, especially ecofriendly business and care economy)
Very Good (to some extent needs improvement)
UNA-Chad
IGF 2024:
UNIVERSAL BANK
worked well: multicultural / diversity / organization
worked not so well: so many talks, too long. (talking talking talking but i don't see anything new) / we can't engage young people this way
worked not so well: so many talks, too long. (talking talking talking but i don't see anything new) / we can't engage young people this way
Great
the themes were correct
internet we want is a MUST
the themes were correct
internet we want is a MUST
I joined virtual
worked not so well: Sessions in the agenda are a mess / impossible to follow the schedule / too disorganized / too long / too complicated
MUST be easy, simple. to the point
so many session did not work. i had to join by youtube channel but i couldn't participate in the chat or live
WE NEED TO FIX THIS FOR 2025
WE NEED A BETTER EXPERIENCE
i imagine a virtual reality conference / very futuristic
I joined virtual / websites sucks / we need to improve it / make them more attractive to get people more involved
is a mess the WEBSITES / the DESIGN / the information (you can't find anything easy and simple)
EVERYTHING is TOO LONG
is a mess the WEBSITES / the DESIGN / the information (you can't find anything easy and simple)
EVERYTHING is TOO LONG
nothing to say / was good
was good
GREAT
OBJECTIVELY SURPRISED ME HOW MANY WOMEN WERE IN THE FORUM
BUT WE NEED TO INVOLVE MORE WOMEN IN TECH AND PROGRAMMING
OBJECTIVELY SURPRISED ME HOW MANY WOMEN WERE IN THE FORUM
BUT WE NEED TO INVOLVE MORE WOMEN IN TECH AND PROGRAMMING
WE HAVE SO MUCH WORK TO DO
I CAN LEAD THE IGF 2025 TO MAKE IT THE MOST INTERESTING AND FUTURISTIC PLATFORM AND SPACE EVER
TO ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE AND EVERYONE
IGF AND UN NEEDS CRYPTO
I'M AND EXPERT IN BITCOIN AND AI
I THINK IGF AND THE UN NEED US
I HAVE A HIGH-STANDARDS DEVS TEAM
(WE CAN TOTALLY IMPROVE AND PUT IN THE NEXT LEVEL UNITED NATIONS)
I CAN LEAD THE IGF 2025 TO MAKE IT THE MOST INTERESTING AND FUTURISTIC PLATFORM AND SPACE EVER
TO ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE AND EVERYONE
IGF AND UN NEEDS CRYPTO
I'M AND EXPERT IN BITCOIN AND AI
I THINK IGF AND THE UN NEED US
I HAVE A HIGH-STANDARDS DEVS TEAM
(WE CAN TOTALLY IMPROVE AND PUT IN THE NEXT LEVEL UNITED NATIONS)
PERFECT
I LOVE YHE EXPERIENCE OF THE ELDERS AND HIGH LEVEL LEADERS
WE NEED MORE AND WE NEED MORE YOUNG GLOBAL LEADERS AS WELL
I LOVE YHE EXPERIENCE OF THE ELDERS AND HIGH LEVEL LEADERS
WE NEED MORE AND WE NEED MORE YOUNG GLOBAL LEADERS AS WELL
PERFECT
WE MUST DO A WORLD PARLIAMENT FOR THE INTERNET
WE MUST DO A WORLD PARLIAMENT FOR THE INTERNET
I THINK WE HAVE SO MUCH WORK TO DO TO INVOLVE YOUNG PEOPLE
IS TOO OLD THE SYSTEM NOW
HOW THE UN AND IGF WORK NOW IS LEFT BEHIND OF THE NEXT GENERATIONS ( TOO BORED / BAD DESIGN )
IS TOO OLD THE SYSTEM NOW
HOW THE UN AND IGF WORK NOW IS LEFT BEHIND OF THE NEXT GENERATIONS ( TOO BORED / BAD DESIGN )
NICE
NOTHING TO ADD
NOTHING TO ADD
CORRECT
I ALREADY MENTIONED ABOVE
IGF 2024:
IMPROVE AGENDA
SCHEDULE IS AWFUL
YOU CAN'T FIND ANYTHING
SCHEDULE IS AWFUL
YOU CAN'T FIND ANYTHING
LESS MEETINGS
LESS TALK
MORE PROOF OF WORK. SHOW ME RESULT.
STOP TALKING TALKING TALKING.
LESS TALK
MORE PROOF OF WORK. SHOW ME RESULT.
STOP TALKING TALKING TALKING.
THE CONTENT IS OK
BUT THE WAY IS PRESENTING INTHE WEBSITES TO INTERACT AND TO ENGAGE PEOPLE SUCKS.
HORRIBLE. WE HAVE SO MUCH WORK TO DO HERE
BUT THE WAY IS PRESENTING INTHE WEBSITES TO INTERACT AND TO ENGAGE PEOPLE SUCKS.
HORRIBLE. WE HAVE SO MUCH WORK TO DO HERE
i think we need TO RESTRUCTURE the entire IGF and UN platform
WE CAN'T ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH THIS BAD TASTE / BAD DESIGN AND COMPLEX WEBSITES AND BAD EXPERIENCE JOINING VIRTUAL
WE CAN'T ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH THIS BAD TASTE / BAD DESIGN AND COMPLEX WEBSITES AND BAD EXPERIENCE JOINING VIRTUAL
BITCOIN PEOPLE
CRYPTO PEOLE
YOUND DEVS
PROGRAMMERS IN CRYPTO AND AI
TECH FOUNDERS
SILICON VALLEY FOUNDERS
( I INSISTI: I'M AN EXPERT IN BUSINESS, POLITICS AND TECH )
I'M THE FOUNDER OF BITCOIN BANK
OVER A DECADE IN BITCOIN
I KNOW VERY WELL THE CRYPTO SPACE
I CAN LEAD ALL OF US TO MAKE UN AND THE IGF THE BEST SPACE EVER.
CRYPTO PEOLE
YOUND DEVS
PROGRAMMERS IN CRYPTO AND AI
TECH FOUNDERS
SILICON VALLEY FOUNDERS
( I INSISTI: I'M AN EXPERT IN BUSINESS, POLITICS AND TECH )
I'M THE FOUNDER OF BITCOIN BANK
OVER A DECADE IN BITCOIN
I KNOW VERY WELL THE CRYPTO SPACE
I CAN LEAD ALL OF US TO MAKE UN AND THE IGF THE BEST SPACE EVER.
WE NEED TO CONDENSE ALL IN ONE.
SO MANY CONFERENCES, SO MANY EVENTS.
WHEN THERE IS SO MANY PLACES IS LIKE NONE.
WE NEED ONE AND FOR ALL
I SUGGEST TO TREAT INTERNET ISSUE ( AND I HAVE THE SOLUTION) ON THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2025.
I CAN LEAD THE UN TO THE NEXT LEVEL.
CONNECT ME: I KNOW AND I HAVE WHAT THE UN NEEDS
[email protected]
SO MANY CONFERENCES, SO MANY EVENTS.
WHEN THERE IS SO MANY PLACES IS LIKE NONE.
WE NEED ONE AND FOR ALL
I SUGGEST TO TREAT INTERNET ISSUE ( AND I HAVE THE SOLUTION) ON THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2025.
I CAN LEAD THE UN TO THE NEXT LEVEL.
CONNECT ME: I KNOW AND I HAVE WHAT THE UN NEEDS
[email protected]
I CAN LEAD IGF AND THE UN TO THE NEXT LEVEL
NEXT GENERATION OF INTERNET
THE INTERNET WE WANT, MORE SAFE AND SECURE FOR ALL THE KIDS AND ALL HUMANITY
NEXT GENERATION OF INTERNET
THE INTERNET WE WANT, MORE SAFE AND SECURE FOR ALL THE KIDS AND ALL HUMANITY
Urban safari trust project limited
It absolutely okay
Standard organising
Well design
Well prepared
Good
Okay
Well organised
Well organised
Okay
Okay
IGF 2024:
Well organised
🔒Internet Society Nigeria Chapter
This is well streamlined and kudos to the Community of organisers. However, for 2025 we have to hit the ground running immediately as we have half of the time to plan this time around. this is very important.
The structure was ok and the thematic focus was apt as it discussed trendy issues. However, the programme lacked some of the IGF conventional day zero event which should have brought more glamour to the event like the music night, welcome parties from interested stakeholders. this should be brought back. ANd I would suggest closing entertainment too.
The hybrid format design was ok but it is important that the online attendant have the same benefits as attending physically. Meaning, that online platforms should be well organized in such a way as to let all online participants enjoy their participation without missing out on any session right from Day 0.
The mobile app was good as well as the website but they should be made more effective by a better UX/UI design. The best way to assess an app is how easy it is for a very young or old person to use such an app. However, it is important to diversify our strategy like use of QR code for session appraisal. That can be done by ensuring that the QR code for each session is displayed like 5 minutes to the end of the session in the room and the anchor person announces that participants in the session should scan and do the survey immediately before departure from the hall. That will ensure more participants fill out the survey for the session.
The process needs to be more transparent as per people who volunteer should be given priority to volunteer even if they are volunteering for the first time without knowing anyone in the system.
the process was ok and collaboration should be encouraged where there is a common focus and objectives
the balance on gender can be given more attention
this is ok but the process of substitution should be more transparent so as to throw up the best speakers when the issue of substitution comes up.
ok
ok but more parliamentarians should be encouraged to join.
ok
ok
more hands should be allowed to contribute for more effectiveness and efficiency as there is always room for improvement.
the process should start now since Norway is just 6 months away. And
IGF 2024:
All events should be observed from day 0 to the farewell ceremonies and entertainments
So, for 2025 this is going to be a little tight because of timing. However, We can also feed into the IGF by ensuring more NRI move before June
Experts from all communities should be encouraged to participate.the structure should allow all the register speakers to be given equal chances of invitation either as backup or main speakers
there is a lopsidedness in this and some countries get more than others and it is important that this should be equitably distributed.
All stakeholders should be invited and this can be done by cascading down to the smallest community .i.e. Countries and each country should have each of her communities represented to say the list
Conduct comprehensive evaluations of progress achieved on the WSIS Action Lines, fostering collaborative assessments among member countries.
Facilitate structured multistakeholder dialogue, promoting consensus-building on shared challenges and opportunities.
Integrate the core principles of the Global Digital Compact into all discussions, ensuring alignment with member countries' national digital development strategies.
Strong Support for the development and implementation of voluntary national action plans (VNAPs) for digital development, aligned with the GDC and WSIS outcomes. This will be part of future implementation of GDC as agreed in ONGA.
Mobilize resources and foster collaborative partnerships, including South-South and support the implementation of agreed-upon actions.
Establish a robust monitoring and evaluation framework, enabling regular assessment of progress and identification of areas for improvement by using such tools as IUI and also ensure that awareness and advocacy efforts are well coordinated using such stable organisations like ISOC etc
Facilitate structured multistakeholder dialogue, promoting consensus-building on shared challenges and opportunities.
Integrate the core principles of the Global Digital Compact into all discussions, ensuring alignment with member countries' national digital development strategies.
Strong Support for the development and implementation of voluntary national action plans (VNAPs) for digital development, aligned with the GDC and WSIS outcomes. This will be part of future implementation of GDC as agreed in ONGA.
Mobilize resources and foster collaborative partnerships, including South-South and support the implementation of agreed-upon actions.
Establish a robust monitoring and evaluation framework, enabling regular assessment of progress and identification of areas for improvement by using such tools as IUI and also ensure that awareness and advocacy efforts are well coordinated using such stable organisations like ISOC etc
I would really want to talk about one thing that is concerning. The distribution of support funding. It seems the process needs to be critically considered to prevent same people from getting funding while others do not. It is always put as part of the application that first-timers and people who have not got funding before are encouraged but it seems this is not reflected in the output. I make bold to use myself as an example, I have been applying for funding support for the past three years but I have never been given and I am always involved in active participation like moderating and organizing sessions. I think the process of selection should be more transparent, please. and perhaps more funding should be made available.
Also, people that register to volunteer in Working Group should be given that opportunity. I have been registering to volunteer for WG but was only given a chance in 2024 and I did not even know the process of selection. I just saw that I was invited mid-way into the process. That is really wrong. Everyone should be allowed to participate it should not be a matter of these are the people I know and a leader of WG should not be the one to determine who is going to be in the WG
Also, people that register to volunteer in Working Group should be given that opportunity. I have been registering to volunteer for WG but was only given a chance in 2024 and I did not even know the process of selection. I just saw that I was invited mid-way into the process. That is really wrong. Everyone should be allowed to participate it should not be a matter of these are the people I know and a leader of WG should not be the one to determine who is going to be in the WG
🔒Youth for Human Rights Pakistan
The IGF 2024 preparatory process was commendable for its transparent timeline, inclusive session proposals, and effective capacity-building initiatives. However, challenges like overlapping session themes, limited regional outreach, and insufficient youth engagement highlighted areas for improvement. For IGF 2025, enhancing regional representation, consolidating similar sessions, and integrating youth into decision-making can ensure a more inclusive and impactful forum.
The IGF 2024 programme demonstrated a strong thematic focus on critical global issues such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies, ensuring relevance to diverse stakeholders. The structure, featuring a mix of plenaries, workshops, and networking sessions, fostered meaningful dialogue and collaboration. However, the flow could be improved by reducing session overlaps, ensuring better time management, and enhancing coherence between thematic tracks to create a more seamless and engaging experience for participants in IGF 2025.
The IGF 2024 hybrid format was successful in broadening participation, enabling both in-person and virtual attendees to engage meaningfully. Features such as live streaming, real-time translation, and interactive tools facilitated inclusivity and accessibility. However, virtual participants often reported challenges with time zone differences and technical issues during live sessions. For IGF 2025, ensuring more flexible scheduling, enhanced technical support, and greater integration of virtual and physical interactions can further improve the hybrid experience.
The logistics of IGF 2024 were well-organized, with an intuitive website, user-friendly registration process, and a mobile app that provided easy access to the schedule and updates. The online platform functioned efficiently, supporting virtual participation and bilateral meeting coordination. However, some users experienced difficulties navigating the bilateral meeting system and accessing certain features during peak times. Strengthening platform stability, improving the app’s search and notification functionalities, and ensuring clearer instructions for using logistical tools can enhance the overall experience for IGF 2025.
The intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Sub-regional Initiatives (NRIs) at IGF 2024 effectively enriched the annual programme by fostering localized discussions on global Internet governance issues. Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks provided valuable insights and actionable recommendations, but their integration into the main IGF programme could be more prominent. To improve, future events should allocate dedicated time slots for presenting outcomes from these activities, ensuring broader visibility and encouraging stakeholders to engage with intersessional processes throughout the year.
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024 contributed diverse perspectives and expertise to the programme, addressing key Internet governance issues. However, their inclusion could be better streamlined by aligning their outputs more closely with the main thematic tracks. Providing dedicated slots for presenting their findings and fostering collaboration with other sessions would enhance their impact and visibility in future IGFs.
The IGF 2024 programme featured a wide range of relevant topics, with a strong focus on pressing issues such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies. The selection of speakers was diverse, bringing together experts from government, industry, civil society, and technical communities, which enriched the discussions. While the overall quality of discussions was high, some sessions could have benefitted from more interactive formats to encourage greater participant engagement and deeper debates on complex issues.
For IGF 2025, I suggest the following improvements to enhance the preparatory process:
Extended Feedback Period: Allow more time for stakeholders to provide feedback on session proposals and thematic priorities, ensuring thorough input and broader participation.
Enhanced Regional Outreach: Increase efforts to involve underrepresented regions by organizing regional webinars or meetings and offering financial support or mentoring to local stakeholders.
Streamlined Session Selection: Improve the session selection process by consolidating similar themes, reducing overlap, and ensuring a diverse range of perspectives are represented.
Stronger Youth Involvement: Provide dedicated space for youth-led sessions and involve youth representatives in the decision-making process, particularly within MAG and Open Consultations meetings.
Clearer MAG and Open Consultations Structure: Ensure better clarity and communication regarding the roles and processes of MAG and Open Consultations, making it easier for new participants to engage effectively.
Improved Technical Support for Virtual Participants: Enhance the technical infrastructure for hybrid formats, ensuring seamless interaction between in-person and virtual attendees.
By focusing on these areas, IGF 2025 can be even more inclusive, efficient, and impactful in shaping global Internet governance discussions.
Extended Feedback Period: Allow more time for stakeholders to provide feedback on session proposals and thematic priorities, ensuring thorough input and broader participation.
Enhanced Regional Outreach: Increase efforts to involve underrepresented regions by organizing regional webinars or meetings and offering financial support or mentoring to local stakeholders.
Streamlined Session Selection: Improve the session selection process by consolidating similar themes, reducing overlap, and ensuring a diverse range of perspectives are represented.
Stronger Youth Involvement: Provide dedicated space for youth-led sessions and involve youth representatives in the decision-making process, particularly within MAG and Open Consultations meetings.
Clearer MAG and Open Consultations Structure: Ensure better clarity and communication regarding the roles and processes of MAG and Open Consultations, making it easier for new participants to engage effectively.
Improved Technical Support for Virtual Participants: Enhance the technical infrastructure for hybrid formats, ensuring seamless interaction between in-person and virtual attendees.
By focusing on these areas, IGF 2025 can be even more inclusive, efficient, and impactful in shaping global Internet governance discussions.
IGF 2024:
To best connect community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) with the IGF 2025 process, the following steps could be taken:
Incorporate NRI Outcomes into Main Programme: Allocate dedicated sessions for presenting the outcomes of NRIs and intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums and Dynamic Coalitions) during the main IGF 2025 programme. This would highlight their contributions and encourage cross-regional dialogue.
Stronger Collaboration with MAG: Involve NRI representatives more directly in MAG’s preparatory meetings to ensure that regional and youth priorities are reflected in the IGF 2025 programme.
Interactive Online Platforms: Utilize online platforms to facilitate year-round interaction between NRIs and the broader IGF community, ensuring that insights and recommendations from NRIs influence ongoing discussions.
Youth Inclusion in Sessions: Ensure that youth-led initiatives and issues from Youth IGFs are integrated into the thematic sessions at IGF 2025, with dedicated space for youth perspectives and a focus on youth leadership.
Promote NRI-led Workshops and Collaborations: Encourage NRI-led workshops and collaborative sessions where stakeholders from different regions and youth communities can present joint solutions to shared challenges, fostering global cooperation.
By creating more seamless connections between NRIs and IGF 2025, their contributions can be better integrated into the global dialogue on Internet governance.
Incorporate NRI Outcomes into Main Programme: Allocate dedicated sessions for presenting the outcomes of NRIs and intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums and Dynamic Coalitions) during the main IGF 2025 programme. This would highlight their contributions and encourage cross-regional dialogue.
Stronger Collaboration with MAG: Involve NRI representatives more directly in MAG’s preparatory meetings to ensure that regional and youth priorities are reflected in the IGF 2025 programme.
Interactive Online Platforms: Utilize online platforms to facilitate year-round interaction between NRIs and the broader IGF community, ensuring that insights and recommendations from NRIs influence ongoing discussions.
Youth Inclusion in Sessions: Ensure that youth-led initiatives and issues from Youth IGFs are integrated into the thematic sessions at IGF 2025, with dedicated space for youth perspectives and a focus on youth leadership.
Promote NRI-led Workshops and Collaborations: Encourage NRI-led workshops and collaborative sessions where stakeholders from different regions and youth communities can present joint solutions to shared challenges, fostering global cooperation.
By creating more seamless connections between NRIs and IGF 2025, their contributions can be better integrated into the global dialogue on Internet governance.
The National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) at IGF 2024 brought localized and youth-driven perspectives to global Internet governance discussions. While their sessions were insightful, their integration into the main programme could be strengthened by featuring key outcomes in plenary sessions or aligning their topics with broader IGF themes. This would amplify their impact and foster greater collaboration across NRIs in future IGFs.
IGF 2025 Suggestions
From Persons:
Aboul Hassan
IGF 2024:
IGF 2024:
ahmad
The sessions and themes were excellent, and the time allotment was great. Capacity development was awesome with QnA sessions.
It was good and well calibrated
Great
It was awesome
Great
Good
Great
It was focussed
NA
Great
It was awesome
It really focusses on gender issues also
It was really amazing
It was excellent
IGF 2024:
More funds i the form of travel support. In my opinion there should be more availability of funds for regions with poor or average financial resources to attend the programme in person.
Nil
Conflict and climate change
Nil
Conflict regions
NA
Nil
Alalshiekh
Some titles of the panel discussion were good , but the majority of the workshops were not active. Furthermore the hospitality were very bad
Average
Not good
Good
Na
Na
Na
I thought it will better which I saw
Nothing
Good
Bad
Normal
Good
Bad
IGF 2024:
You have to follow the system of some Saudi ministers did while organized their events
Some not important
Not good
Same before
Ask the experts
The event wasn’t attractive
No
ALMANABHI
IGF 2024:
Alqusair
IGF 2024:
Amiri
The event was very good and helpful overall, but there were a few issues that could be improved. For instance, there was no music program, which would have added a nice touch to the atmosphere. Additionally, the lunch provided was not up to expectations in terms of quality. Lastly, the noise level on the grounds was quite high, which made it difficult to focus at times.
Thank you for organizing the event, and I hope these suggestions will be considered for future improvements.
Thank you for organizing the event, and I hope these suggestions will be considered for future improvements.
The IGF 2024 program effectively focused on key themes like digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and AI governance, addressing timely global challenges. The structure was well-organized with a mix of sessions, workshops, and panel discussions that facilitated broad stakeholder participation. The flow allowed for meaningful discussions, though some areas could benefit from more time for in-depth engagement. Overall, the program was relevant and aligned with current priorities in Internet governance.
The IGF 2024 hybrid format was well-designed, offering both in-person and virtual participation options. This ensured broader accessibility and inclusion, allowing stakeholders from different regions to engage. The virtual platform was user-friendly, facilitating smooth interactions, while the in-person experience provided valuable networking opportunities.
The logistics for IGF 2024 were generally well-handled. The website and mobile app provided clear and easy access to event information, schedules, and session details. Registration was straightforward, and the online platform facilitated smooth participation with minimal technical issues.
The Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 were well-integrated into the annual program, enhancing the event's focus on ongoing discussions and solutions in internet governance. The process of these intersessional activities was collaborative, involving diverse stakeholders throughout the year, allowing for a more comprehensive and inclusive dialogue. The content was highly relevant, addressing key topics such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and AI governance, with clear outputs that contributed to the overall discussions at the event.
The Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 played a crucial role in fostering collaborative discussions on emerging internet governance issues. The process for these coalitions was open and inclusive, with diverse stakeholders working together throughout the year on specific topics such as privacy, accessibility, and digital rights. The content presented by the DCs was impactful and highly relevant, addressing pressing challenges and offering practical solutions.
The National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024 contributed significantly to the event's diversity and global reach. The process for NRI involvement was inclusive, with NRIs organizing their own activities and discussions throughout the year, which were then brought into the broader IGF agenda. The content presented by the NRIs reflected local and regional perspectives on critical internet governance issues, ranging from digital inclusion to policy development, making the discussions more relevant to different parts of the world.
The IGF 2024 program featured a diverse range of content that addressed some of the most pressing issues in internet governance, such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, AI, data privacy, and sustainability. The sessions were well-curated, offering valuable insights and fostering rich discussions on both current and emerging topics.
The speakers were highly knowledgeable and represented a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil society, and academia. Their expertise contributed to high-quality, informed debates, ensuring that a wide range of perspectives were covered.
The speakers were highly knowledgeable and represented a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil society, and academia. Their expertise contributed to high-quality, informed debates, ensuring that a wide range of perspectives were covered.
The IGF 2024 High-Level Leaders Track featured prominent leaders from various sectors, including governments, private industry, and international organizations, discussing critical internet governance issues. The content was highly relevant, focusing on strategic and policy-level challenges such as global digital cooperation, cybersecurity, and the regulation of emerging technologies like AI.
The IGF 2024 Youth Track was a vibrant and essential part of the event, providing young people with a platform to engage in discussions about the future of Internet governance.
From a gender perspective, the IGF 2024 program demonstrated progress in promoting inclusivity and addressing gender-related issues in internet governance. There was noticeable attention given to gender equality and digital inclusion, with sessions highlighting the digital divide, gender-based violence online, and the importance of ensuring equal access to technology for all genders.
The IGF 2024 Village served as a dynamic and interactive space, providing attendees with opportunities to engage with various initiatives, projects, and organizations involved in Internet governance.
The communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 were generally well-executed, ensuring broad visibility and engagement before, during, and after the event.
IGF 2024:
Here are some suggestions for improvements to the IGF 2025 preparatory process:
1) Clearer and More Flexible Timeline:
2) Enhanced Call for Session Proposals:
3) Transparent and Inclusive Session Selection:
4) More Frequent and Engaging MAG and Open Consultations:
5) Clearer Communication and Documentation:
6) Stronger Engagement of Youth and Diverse Stakeholders:
7) Improved Coordination Between Regional and National IGFs (NRIs) and the Main Event:
8) Streamline Online Tools and Platforms:
Improve the usability and accessibility of online platforms used for the preparatory process. Ensure that the platforms for submitting proposals, registering for consultations, and engaging in discussions are user-friendly and functional across all devices.
These improvements could lead to a more streamlined and inclusive IGF 2025 preparatory process, enhancing participation, collaboration, and overall event success.
1) Clearer and More Flexible Timeline:
2) Enhanced Call for Session Proposals:
3) Transparent and Inclusive Session Selection:
4) More Frequent and Engaging MAG and Open Consultations:
5) Clearer Communication and Documentation:
6) Stronger Engagement of Youth and Diverse Stakeholders:
7) Improved Coordination Between Regional and National IGFs (NRIs) and the Main Event:
8) Streamline Online Tools and Platforms:
Improve the usability and accessibility of online platforms used for the preparatory process. Ensure that the platforms for submitting proposals, registering for consultations, and engaging in discussions are user-friendly and functional across all devices.
These improvements could lead to a more streamlined and inclusive IGF 2025 preparatory process, enhancing participation, collaboration, and overall event success.
For IGF 2025, the overall program structure and flow could be enhanced to foster greater participation, engagement, and impactful outcomes. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
1. Clearer Thematic Focus and Structure:
2. Improved Session Diversity and Formats:
3. Balance Between High-Level and Grassroots Engagement:
4. Integration of Intersessional Activities:
5. Stronger Focus on Actionable Outcomes:
6. Balanced Session Timing:
7. Stronger Integration of Youth and Gender Perspectives:
8. Engaging and Interactive Content:
9. Post-Event Engagement:
By incorporating these elements into the program structure and flow of IGF 2025, the event can become even more impactful, inclusive, and action-oriented, driving progress in global internet governance discussions and implementation.
1. Clearer Thematic Focus and Structure:
2. Improved Session Diversity and Formats:
3. Balance Between High-Level and Grassroots Engagement:
4. Integration of Intersessional Activities:
5. Stronger Focus on Actionable Outcomes:
6. Balanced Session Timing:
7. Stronger Integration of Youth and Gender Perspectives:
8. Engaging and Interactive Content:
9. Post-Event Engagement:
By incorporating these elements into the program structure and flow of IGF 2025, the event can become even more impactful, inclusive, and action-oriented, driving progress in global internet governance discussions and implementation.
For IGF 2025, the program content should focus on relevance, inclusivity, and actionable outcomes. Key suggestions include:
1. Thematic Approach:
Global and Emerging Issues: Focus on cutting-edge topics like AI ethics, digital rights, cybersecurity, data privacy, and sustainability, while being adaptable to emerging challenges.
Cross-Cutting Themes: Integrate themes like inclusivity, diversity, gender equity, and trust online across all sessions.
Regional Focus: Address specific regional challenges in infrastructure, policy, and regulation to promote global collaboration.
2. Session Types:
Workshops: Hands-on problem-solving sessions on topics like cybersecurity and digital inclusion.
Panel Discussions: Diverse panels that include governments, civil society, the private sector, academia, and youth.
Roundtables: Intimate, focused discussions for deeper engagement.
Keynotes and High-Level Sessions: Major addresses on global issues like digital sovereignty and multilateral cooperation.
Real-Time Case Studies: Demonstrations of how internet governance is applied in practice.
3. Speaker Profiles:
Diverse Stakeholders: Include experts from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and youth.
Youth and Gender Representation: Prioritize youth and marginalized gender perspectives.
Global Representation: Include speakers from all regions, particularly developing countries.
Subject Matter Experts: Experts in cybersecurity, AI, law, data science, and sustainable development.
Inclusive Leaders: Focus on digital rights, accessibility, and equity.
4. Additional Considerations:
Youth Track: Dedicate a track for youth perspectives on digital inclusion and policy-making.
Cross-Sector Collaboration: Foster collaboration between governments, academia, the tech industry, and civil society.
Action-Oriented Sessions: Ensure sessions lead to actionable outcomes, such as white papers or joint initiatives.
By structuring the IGF 2025 program around these elements, the event can drive inclusive, dynamic, and impactful discussions on internet governance.
1. Thematic Approach:
Global and Emerging Issues: Focus on cutting-edge topics like AI ethics, digital rights, cybersecurity, data privacy, and sustainability, while being adaptable to emerging challenges.
Cross-Cutting Themes: Integrate themes like inclusivity, diversity, gender equity, and trust online across all sessions.
Regional Focus: Address specific regional challenges in infrastructure, policy, and regulation to promote global collaboration.
2. Session Types:
Workshops: Hands-on problem-solving sessions on topics like cybersecurity and digital inclusion.
Panel Discussions: Diverse panels that include governments, civil society, the private sector, academia, and youth.
Roundtables: Intimate, focused discussions for deeper engagement.
Keynotes and High-Level Sessions: Major addresses on global issues like digital sovereignty and multilateral cooperation.
Real-Time Case Studies: Demonstrations of how internet governance is applied in practice.
3. Speaker Profiles:
Diverse Stakeholders: Include experts from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and youth.
Youth and Gender Representation: Prioritize youth and marginalized gender perspectives.
Global Representation: Include speakers from all regions, particularly developing countries.
Subject Matter Experts: Experts in cybersecurity, AI, law, data science, and sustainable development.
Inclusive Leaders: Focus on digital rights, accessibility, and equity.
4. Additional Considerations:
Youth Track: Dedicate a track for youth perspectives on digital inclusion and policy-making.
Cross-Sector Collaboration: Foster collaboration between governments, academia, the tech industry, and civil society.
Action-Oriented Sessions: Ensure sessions lead to actionable outcomes, such as white papers or joint initiatives.
By structuring the IGF 2025 program around these elements, the event can drive inclusive, dynamic, and impactful discussions on internet governance.
To connect Community Intersessional Activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) with IGF 2025:
Integrate Intersessional Outputs: Highlight the work of Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Policy Networks (PNs), and Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) in IGF 2025 sessions, ensuring their findings feed into thematic discussions.
Engage NRIs Early: Involve National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) in planning IGF 2025 to share local insights and challenges. Organize regional highlight sessions to showcase their outcomes and foster collaboration.
Youth Track Collaboration: Strengthen the Youth Track by integrating Youth IGFs into IGF 2025, allowing them to present youth-led initiatives and perspectives.
Collaborative Sessions: Encourage joint sessions between NRIs, intersessional groups, and IGF 2025, promoting cross-regional knowledge sharing and collaboration.
By doing so, IGF 2025 can benefit from richer, diverse contributions and ensure global issues are tackled with local insights.
Integrate Intersessional Outputs: Highlight the work of Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Policy Networks (PNs), and Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) in IGF 2025 sessions, ensuring their findings feed into thematic discussions.
Engage NRIs Early: Involve National and Regional IGFs (NRIs) in planning IGF 2025 to share local insights and challenges. Organize regional highlight sessions to showcase their outcomes and foster collaboration.
Youth Track Collaboration: Strengthen the Youth Track by integrating Youth IGFs into IGF 2025, allowing them to present youth-led initiatives and perspectives.
Collaborative Sessions: Encourage joint sessions between NRIs, intersessional groups, and IGF 2025, promoting cross-regional knowledge sharing and collaboration.
By doing so, IGF 2025 can benefit from richer, diverse contributions and ensure global issues are tackled with local insights.
For IGF 2025, invite a diverse range of participants, including governments, private sector, civil society, academia, youth, marginalized groups, and international organizations.
To inter-connect participants:
Organize multi-stakeholder sessions to encourage diverse discussions.
Create networking events and roundtables for cross-sector collaboration.
Use online platforms for remote participation and engagement.
Structure the program into thematic tracks for focused discussions.
Provide collaboration spaces and a bilateral meeting system for one-on-one interactions.
These strategies will ensure broad engagement and foster collaboration across sectors.
To inter-connect participants:
Organize multi-stakeholder sessions to encourage diverse discussions.
Create networking events and roundtables for cross-sector collaboration.
Use online platforms for remote participation and engagement.
Structure the program into thematic tracks for focused discussions.
Provide collaboration spaces and a bilateral meeting system for one-on-one interactions.
These strategies will ensure broad engagement and foster collaboration across sectors.
To contribute to the WSIS+20 Review and Global Digital Compact (GDC) in IGF 2025:
1. WSIS+20 Review:
Assess WSIS outcomes through dedicated sessions on progress, challenges, and gaps in areas like ICT for development and internet access.
Facilitate high-level discussions to evaluate how internet governance aligns with WSIS goals.
Provide recommendations for the WSIS+20 High-Level Meeting to enhance policy coherence.
2. Global Digital Compact (GDC):
Focus on digital trust, security, and privacy through discussions on cybersecurity and data protection.
Promote inclusive connectivity and digital equity for marginalized groups.
Host multi-stakeholder dialogues to align on GDC principles like digital rights and sustainability.
IGF 2025 can support the WSIS+20 review and GDC by driving inclusive dialogue and actionable recommendations for global digital governance.
1. WSIS+20 Review:
Assess WSIS outcomes through dedicated sessions on progress, challenges, and gaps in areas like ICT for development and internet access.
Facilitate high-level discussions to evaluate how internet governance aligns with WSIS goals.
Provide recommendations for the WSIS+20 High-Level Meeting to enhance policy coherence.
2. Global Digital Compact (GDC):
Focus on digital trust, security, and privacy through discussions on cybersecurity and data protection.
Promote inclusive connectivity and digital equity for marginalized groups.
Host multi-stakeholder dialogues to align on GDC principles like digital rights and sustainability.
IGF 2025 can support the WSIS+20 review and GDC by driving inclusive dialogue and actionable recommendations for global digital governance.
The visa process was quite lengthy, causing some delays and inconvenience for participants. Additionally, there was no dedicated counter for IGF participants, which made the check-in process more challenging and time-consuming.
BA
Les parties prenantes doivent être impliquées dans le processus d'organisation afin d'émettre leurs avis
Les thématiques doivent être surtout sur la souveraineté numériques des états d'africains
RAS
l'élargissement de la logistique a travers les sites web et les plateformes ou applications mobiles sont très importants cela facilitera l'accès aux tiers
RAS
RAS
LES FGI nationaux et internationaux et jeunesse ont permis de réunir les différentes couches de se réunir et d'échanger pour la bonne marche de la souveraineté numérique
RAS
Un parcours exceptionnel et très enrichissant
RAS
RAS
RAS
RAS
IGF 2024:
LES PRISES EN CHARGES DES PARTICIPANTS AUI NONT PAS ASSEZ DE MOYENS
RAS
R
Les parlementaires, la société civile, les membres du gouvernement
RAS
RAS
Bawary
Overall, everything went well during the preparations, there wasn't anything negative and everything was being shared by the IGF Secretariat in advance, but the host country wasn't that much ready to host such an event, they didn't have that much experience, IGF 2022 was much better organized, it was one of the best IGFs.
thematic focus was very technical and this time it mostly covered AI related issues which is relevant to the digital age we live in, but the flow was a bit confusing.
Hybrid format and design was not bad, but the issue was all the sessions under a ceiling was challenging, for example: you had a very important discussion in one room and there was music and laughter in another room which was annoying.
In terms of logistics, there were issues, but everyhing being done from the IGF Secretariat was well managed like always. you couldn't find villages, bilateral meeting rooms etc easily.
No comments.
No comments.
No comments.
very technical discussions, it should be like previous years which is understandable for non-tech bacground people as well, because the internet is not for technical community only, it is for everyone.
no comment
no comment
no comment
balanced.
not very good compare to previous years, for example IGF 2019 in Berlin was the best, IGF 2022 in Addis was the best. but this year it wasn't that good.
Very nice.
IGF 2024:
THe preparatory process for IGF 2024 was also very well managed, nothing was wrong, so I think we can proceed the same for IGF 2025, but the only issue is to make sure the host country is deciding on everything as inclusive as possible, without bais or region discrimination.
Same as IGF 2019.
Inclusive of all aspects of life, not only AI, there are plenty of topics which are still new to a lot of regions. Choose younger speakers and from diverse background.
As is.
inclusive, try to accommodate people from developing countries more.
I would suggest to make sure the host country is well prepared in terms of logistics, accommodations, transportation facility, and more important the VISA. first of all they should not act discriminatory, they should issue visa to poorer countries, especially to Afghans, everyone won't seek asylum and also consider to issue visas at least 3 months before the event. for IGF 2024 we got our visas 3 days before the event and this is not possible to arrange everyhing in such a short time.
At last, I would request the IGF Travel Support committee to include Afghanistan, they are the most needy people, there are many ways you can support and it's been 2 years no one gets travel support from Afghanistan.
At last, I would request the IGF Travel Support committee to include Afghanistan, they are the most needy people, there are many ways you can support and it's been 2 years no one gets travel support from Afghanistan.
It was a nice experience, different, but somehow lacked something.
BEN JEMAA
All the preparatory process was well done except for the time for session proposal that could be longer to permit for more submissions
All ok
Ok, as the previous IGF of the last few years
3 main problems:
- The venue was more an exhibition center than a conference one with no sonorisation in all rooms except the plenary hall
- A big issue of confidentiality since we were asked to give our personal phone number for authentication to access to the WIFI of the conference
- We were queuing each time we need to go to the bathroom
Otherwise, everything was excellent and people were very kind and helpful
- The venue was more an exhibition center than a conference one with no sonorisation in all rooms except the plenary hall
- A big issue of confidentiality since we were asked to give our personal phone number for authentication to access to the WIFI of the conference
- We were queuing each time we need to go to the bathroom
Otherwise, everything was excellent and people were very kind and helpful
The NRIs contribution in the 2024 IGF was well structured (one main session, 3 collaborative sessions and a coordination session)
The preparatory process was perfectly done by the Secretariat
For the content, perhaps we need to start preparing our sessions earlier not to be obliged to accept what we could avoid; This doesn't mean that we did it bad, but I think we could do it better for certain cases.
The NRIs sessions were very well included in the 2024 IGF general program (as we want it to be)
The preparatory process was perfectly done by the Secretariat
For the content, perhaps we need to start preparing our sessions earlier not to be obliged to accept what we could avoid; This doesn't mean that we did it bad, but I think we could do it better for certain cases.
The NRIs sessions were very well included in the 2024 IGF general program (as we want it to be)
The sessions I participated in were in general well done. here are some remarks:
- for certain sessions the attendance was poor
- There is a trend of making a stock taking of the performances of the country/region of the speaker regarding the topic under discussion rather than addressing the topic itself.
- I believe that it could be useful that the Secretariat retrieves all the sessions and records the performance of speakers and moderators to avoid to have those with weakness as speakers/moderators in the upcoming IGFs
- for certain sessions the attendance was poor
- There is a trend of making a stock taking of the performances of the country/region of the speaker regarding the topic under discussion rather than addressing the topic itself.
- I believe that it could be useful that the Secretariat retrieves all the sessions and records the performance of speakers and moderators to avoid to have those with weakness as speakers/moderators in the upcoming IGFs
The space was tight for the number of booths, but it's central position made it agreeable
The communication inside the venue was good with all the displays everywhere, the central information desk, etc.
IGF 2024:
Start early helps to have things better done
As I said above, the structure of the programme as it was done so far is appropriate
The IGF is the only place where we discuss all issues related to the Internet in an open and free way
So, I find that the themes addressed should be the ones that affect all end users from any stakeholder
Voir exemple, the use of the Internet in destructive wars, the illegitimate use of the users' data, the wrong use of AI against the humanity, etc.
As for the speakers/moderators, I think that the secretariat should retrieve all the sessions and make the appropriate evaluation of the speakers/moderators performance to avoid the non performant ones in the future
So, I find that the themes addressed should be the ones that affect all end users from any stakeholder
Voir exemple, the use of the Internet in destructive wars, the illegitimate use of the users' data, the wrong use of AI against the humanity, etc.
As for the speakers/moderators, I think that the secretariat should retrieve all the sessions and make the appropriate evaluation of the speakers/moderators performance to avoid the non performant ones in the future
The NRIs may be involved in a way or the other in the design of the 2025 IGF content and processes
The main improvement of the IGF I see is that its outputs become more formal and their approval process should be defined
If this is done, they can constitute an official annual document of the UN.
If this is done, they can constitute an official annual document of the UN.
Welcoming host country and kind volunteers in the venue
Online visa for free easy to get
Online visa for free easy to get
BHOITE
The annual meetings and intersessional work of the IGF play a crucial role in aligning with and contributing to the United Nations Secretary General’s Our Common Agenda preparatory process (timeline, call for issues and session proposals, session selection, MAG meetings, capacity development etc.) The NRIs are collaboratively working towards achieving the agreed objectives available in their 2024 work plan, building on last year's work. The preparatory process is implemented through Understand IGF 2024 strategic objectives, including potential improvements to the IGF 2024 procedures and programme. Understand what could be themes of the IGF 2024.
The IGF 2024 programme features over 300 different sessions focused on various digital public policy issues nested under 4 subthemes. Main Sessions are intended to recognise broad and current IG issues of importance. They are determined by the MAG. The overall objective is to make participation in IGF 2024 meaningful and inclusive for all participants. The meeting will be hosted under the overarching theme. The 19th IGF on "Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future" will be held at the King Abdulaziz International Conference Center (KAICC) in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
IGF 2024 Hybrid format design and experience The IGF 2024 hybrid format was successful in broadening participation, enabling both in-person and virtual attendees to engage IGF will be hosted in a hybrid format to provide meaningful participation of stakeholders present on-site or participating online
IGF 2024 logistics (website, mobile app, schedule, registration, access and use of online platform, bilateral meeting system, security etc.) Intersessional activities and NRIs at IGF 2024 Opening of Registration for IGF 2024: 1 August 2024 . Online registration for onsite and online participants through IGF website/UN accreditation system with live/public All participants, including speakers, moderators and rapporteurs, need to be registered for the IGF 2024 via the registration platform INDICO. conveniently browse the entire schedule for IGF 2024. Get the key information of your event without ever having to crack open an event guide.
Intersessional activities and NRIs at IGF JOURNEY TO IN RIYADH IGF 2024 intersessional work develops through open multistakeholder cooperation throughout the year Best Practice Forums (BPFs) Policy Networks at IGF 2024: please comment on process, content, and in particular on how these intersessional activities were included in the annual IGF
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024: please comment on process, content, and in particular on how these intersessional activities were included in the annual IGF programme. the list of Dynamic Coalitions session proposals, received in a response to the IGF 2024 call for sessions. These proposals were cleared against the basic entry criteria of the IGF the IGF 2024 programme. DC on Platform Responsibility & Internet Rights and Principles Coalition. The meeting focused on the integration of Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) into the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) processes, with discussions on improving planning.
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024: please comment on process, content, and in particular on how these intersessional activities were included in the annual IGF programme. National, Regional journey to igf 2024 in riyadh The IGF 2024 programme features 300+ sessions and develops under the overarching theme ‘Building our multistakeholder digital future’. The nature of the National and Regional IGF initiatives (NRIs) and the preparatory work for the IGF2024 have proceeded mostly in hybrid and fully in-person settings. the other thing which is important is to assist the national IGFs or youth IGFs in the country
The IGF 2024 programme features over 300 different sessions focused on various digital public policy issues nested under 4 subthemes. Main Sessions are intended to recognise broad and current IG issues of importance. They are determined by the MAG. The 19th Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) on "Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future" will be held at the King Abdulaziz International Conference. The IGF 2024 programme features over 300 different sessions focused on various digital public policy issues nested under 4 subthemes. Main Sessions are intended to recognise broad.
the IGF 2024 High-Level Track, experts and leaders from all stakeholder groups, including governments, civil society, private sector, technical communities, intergovernmental and international organisations and from all parts of the world. In addition to the opening and closing sessions, IGF 2024 featured a high-level leaders tracks and a parliamentary session. Building Our Multistakeholder Digital Future. Main and Cross-cutting IGF 2024 Themes: Harnessing innovation and balancing risks in the digital space | Advancing human rights and inclusion in the digital age
the IGF 2024 Parliamentary Track, Parliamentarians from all parts of the world, will engage in dialogues on "Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future".IGF 2024 Youth Track; IGF 2024 Bilateral Meetings; IGF 2024 Village. IGF Exhibitors Manual; IGF 2024 Call for Travel Support; IGF 2024 Support for Global South Journalists GF 2024 Parliamentary Track will include several activities focused on various Internet governance issues. These include regional consultations hosted at regional IGFs The Parliamentary Track at the IGF 2024 is jointly organized by the United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs
Building on the demand from young people, as well as on the outputs of last year’s IGF 2024 Youth Track and the Messages from Youth, IGF 2024 Youth Track The IGF Youth Track is a capacity development initiative aimed at fostering collaboration and cooperation among and with youth on matters related to Internet From innovative workshops to global collaborative empowerment programs, we aim to tackle crucial digital challenges, foster inclusive dialogue, and drive sustainable change. the Youth IGF Delegates at the Global Youth Summit for a frank and open exchange between the current generation of experts and the young leaders
Persistent gender digital divides and gender data gaps continue to pose a significant barrier, limiting African women’s effective engagement in the digital economy. Without intentional action, the shift towards data-driven economies may perpetuate, rather than resolve, gender disparities. "Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future", will focus on four themes related to digital innovations & risks; digital contributions to peace; human rights; this session will discuss the current state and challenges of digital gender gap and how prioritizing the gender inclusion can bring socioeconomic benefit
During the 19th annual IGF, interested stakeholders can display or distribute relevant information about their Internet governance-related activities at the IGF Village The IGF 2024 intersessional work and the 19th annual IGF meeting was planned within the overarching theme ''Building our Multistakeholder Digital Future''. interested stakeholders can display or distribute relevant information about their Internet governance-related activities at the IGF Village.
The Riyadh IGF Messages, the primary outcome of IGF 2024, synthesize the critical points raised across the more than 300 sessions held at the meeting ear-long discussions have resulted in concrete output documents, including from Best Practice Forums, Policy Networks and Dynamic Coalitions. IOM, ICE BREAKING NUCLEAR SHIP RUSTOM etc.
IGF 2024:
IGF 2025 preparatory process (timeline, call for issues and session proposals, session selection, MAG meetings, capacity development etc.) IGF 2025 overall programme: thematic focus The goal for the MAG 2025 composition is to ensure its members have a deep understanding of the IGF and WSIS processes, gained through specific experience in MAG and WGIG work, General guidance and notes to take into consideration regarding nominations for a position on the MAG The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG)
improve the IGF, its structure, tools, and mechanisms, and how to sustain and strengthen the IGF multistakeholder model in support of an open, stable, composition is to ensure its members have a deep understanding of the IGF and WSIS processes, gained through specific experience in MAG and WGIG work
IGF 2025 preparatory process (timeline, call for session proposals and session selection, MAG and Open Consultations meetings etc.) IGF 2025 overall programme structure and flow IGF Attendees will learn new insights on internet governance and how to implement this in their field. Check-in and access this session from the IGF Schedule. Format description: This open forum would be structured as an interactive panel discussion with kick-off interventions
Exploring good practices on cybersecurity agreements, norms, and capacity development. More than 165 countries and regions have established their own IGF National, Regional and Youth initiatives (NRIs) after the global IGF model – for processes that are multistakeholder Steps & How to Engage - Forthcoming events for stakeholders to join ahead of IGF 2024, and a survey of the IGF’s outreach and intersessional activities, including These forms, as well as the national, sub-regional and regional IGFs (NRIs), are expected to follow the main IGF principles of being open, inclusive, non-commercial with National and Regional IGF initiatives (NRIs) are organic and independent formations that are discussing issues pertaining to IGF.
All IGF stakeholders are invited to submit inputs to the IGF Secretariat to assist with the planning for the IGF 2025 process and its 20th annual IGF meeting. Please note that this is a call for feedback on the organizational, logistical and structural aspects of IGF. The IGF annual meeting and inter-sessional work can better contribute to the Global Digital Compact (GDC) and the review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Participants include Media representatives, Public entities, governmental and intergovernmental organizations, Technical and academic several thousand participants from around the world will convene in Norway to exchange knowledge, foster collaboration, and collectively address key issues related to digital public policy.
the endorsement of the UN General Assembly, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) was held in two phases: in Geneva in 2003 and in Tunis in 2005.General Assembly Resolution A/70/125 called for a high-level meeting in 2025 to review the overall implementation of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) outcomes, the session today will focus on the IGF's role in the Global Digital Compact, This will likely include a renewal of the IGF mandate and implementation of select principles from the Global Digital Compact (GDC). The WSIS process and the GDC.
IGF to discuss only technical aspects of Internet Governance, evolved to discuss all aspects. We have discussed 5G and now all of the relevant topics are discussed (Note-ONE ONINLE ATTENDING DELEGATE SAYING THAT JIO POLICY etc.) Discussions explored a multifaceted approach, combining international regulatory frameworks, voluntary industry commitments, and bottom-up governance models sensitive.
Cassimire
Sufficient time for preparatory activities.
There is always the challenge of overlapping sessions of interest, especially for small delegations. Perhaps slightly fewer themes would minimise session conflicts.
The venue suffered from noise leakage between workshop rooms owing to an absence of ceilings. This required the used of headphones which were not always in sufficient supply depending on the popularity of the workshop.
Online systems, including Zoom connections were usually satisfactory but there were occasional wi-fi challenges at the site. The wi-fi connection process was also unnecessarily cumbersome in my view, requiring a two-factor authentication process. Thankfully my phone was roaming successfully.
Satisfactory.
The Dynamic Coalition on Small Island Developing States (DC-SIDS) had some challenges with a sufficiently comfortable meeting room and even with access to the room on the day of their meeting. Arrangements that are more accommodating would be appreciated in future.
Satisfactory.
Sessions usually of sufficient interest and availability however conflict of sessions of similar interest should be minimised.
N/A.
N/A
N/A
Sufficient sessions / emphasis.
Layout was excellent from the viewpoint of traffic by attendees. The challenge was noise leakage owing to the absence of ceilings in the workshop rooms.
Satisfactory.
IGF 2024:
Early solicitations and decisions are required given the short 6-month inter-sessional time frame.
Consider a mechanism that will enable the programme to identify IGF achievements relative to considerations of the WSIS+20.
One theme should be to develop a report of the IGF to the WSIS+20 Review.
Number of restrooms was inadequate for the number of attendees.
Lunch was much appreciated especially given the absence of nearby food options.
Earlier decisions on travel support would have facilitated travel and accommodation arrangements.
Lunch was much appreciated especially given the absence of nearby food options.
Earlier decisions on travel support would have facilitated travel and accommodation arrangements.
CERF
There were notable audio problems both at the venue and online. Visa assistance was much appreciated. Support for people with disabilities was mixed. Good work on captioning and signing but support staff often were not as aware of the needs of people with disabilities. In some cases, language (English) understanding was a problem. It's suggested that a special color for lanyards or badges be reserved for people with special needs so support staff are aware. The online system for organizing and finding sessions worked very well on the whole. I attended remotely so cannot speak from personal experience with regard to the venue itself. I found the scheduling process to be sufficient for my own planning purposes. Staying on Riyadh time while in WashingtonDC worked pretty well, much to my surprise.
As a remote attendee, I found the session organization clear and links to online sessions working well. I think the sessions were well selected and I like the combining of some sessions (some Dynamic Coalitions had joint sessions for example). We should start thinking hard about more concrete output especially linking the policy network and dynamic coalition intersessional work to outputs of the annual meeting. Connecting with the NRIs in substantive ways will also be useful.
Mostly this worked except for persistent audio problems that may not have been entirely under the control of the hosts. Audio feedback and collisions with translation audio and in-room audio were common. I hope the Riyadh technical team can provide advice to the Oslo team in case important lessons were learned.
On the whole, registration, online website, video conference and translation systems worked well. As I was remote, I cannot speak to local conditions.
I think these are vital and all the more so because of the short fuse to the June IGF in 2025.
I consider these to be important components of an IGF that is organized in part around GDC implementation evaluation and recommendations for action.
I engaged with several Youth sessions - I think, however, that it is important that young people engage with the regular sessions rather than isolating themselves in Youth-specific sessions. They need to be visible to the other attendees.
This track was very helpful to gauge national views on Internet and the general digital ecosystem.
I was not able to attend these sessions.
I attended two or three of these and appreciated the enthusiasm these young people brought to IGF.
I thought the panels were pretty balanced; similarly for the high level sessions.
One of my non-profit groups (Interplanetary Chapter of the Internet Society) used the Village and booth for a session that was very well attended. We appreciated the opportunity to present there.
We probably need to work harder on producing concrete outputs: issues that need attention and where they might be addressed.
IGF 2024:
We need to accelerate the preparations for 2025, focus more heavily on concrete outcomes for this session given the WSIS+20 events following and the decision about continuing IGF beyond 2025. We should explicitly invite partiicpation by member state representatives at high level policy positions not only the usual technical/civil society/private sector and academic participants.
I'd like to hear from the Secretariat what they would want in the way of support/funding and staffing - the overload is evident and unfair -
Focus on "The IGF we need" to help with the SDGs and the GDC ambitions. Can we find more concrete measures of progress on improving the digital ecosystem of which the Internet and World Wide Web form a major part?
My guess is that they could use more support if we had a larger secretariat staff.
More high level participation of member states.
Draw attention of the member states to methods for assessing the quality of their national digital infrastructure and its role in social and economic affairs of the member state. Encourage sharing of success stories and why they worked, and candor when things do not produce desired outcomes. IGF must evolve to become even more useful to member states attempting to engage on the SDGs and GDC aspirations.
The secretariat is superb but way undrstaffed. Working on that!
CHEW
N/A
N/A
The audio quality from the floor was inconsistent. I recommend integrating direct audio feeds into Zoom to ensure smooth and accurate interpretation and effective closed captioning. This will optimize sound quality and enhance the session's overall accessibility.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
IGF 2024:
N/A
Good
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Chopra
IGF 2024:
Das
The IGF 2024 demonstrated a well-coordinated platform for multistakeholder dialogue, with a strong thematic focus on AI governance, digital trust, and inclusivity. The hybrid format enhanced global participation, allowing diverse stakeholders, including policymakers, industry leaders, and youth, to contribute meaningfully. Sessions like the High-Level Leaders Track and the Parliamentary Track provided insights into top-down approaches, complementing grassroots perspectives shared by National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs).
While the hybrid format increased accessibility, occasional technical challenges during sessions, such as platform glitches, detracted from the experience. Additionally, the thematic overlap in some sessions diluted focus, leading to repetitive discussions.
The preparatory process, including the call for issues and session proposals, was transparent and inclusive. However, a more streamlined session selection process with clearer thematic categorization could enhance focus. Capacity development efforts, though commendable, might benefit from more tailored support for first-time participants, especially from underrepresented regions.
While the hybrid format increased accessibility, occasional technical challenges during sessions, such as platform glitches, detracted from the experience. Additionally, the thematic overlap in some sessions diluted focus, leading to repetitive discussions.
The preparatory process, including the call for issues and session proposals, was transparent and inclusive. However, a more streamlined session selection process with clearer thematic categorization could enhance focus. Capacity development efforts, though commendable, might benefit from more tailored support for first-time participants, especially from underrepresented regions.
The thematic focus on AI, trust, and inclusion was relevant and timely. The structure was comprehensive, but a more logical flow linking intersessional activities to IGF sessions would have provided greater coherence.
The hybrid format was a significant achievement, enabling participation from diverse geographies. However, better integration of in-person and virtual interactions, such as moderated hybrid Q&A, could improve inclusivity.
The website and mobile app were user-friendly, with real-time updates enhancing accessibility. The bilateral meeting system was a highlight, fostering collaboration. Security measures were robust, ensuring a safe and professional environment.
The integration of NRIs into the IGF programme highlighted regional and local challenges effectively. However, a more structured approach to linking these initiatives with global discussions could amplify their impact. The content was insightful, addressing practical challenges in areas like AI ethics and cybersecurity. Including these activities more prominently in the main sessions could increase their visibility and influence.
Dynamic Coalitions addressed niche topics effectively. Encouraging more collaborations between coalitions and mainstream sessions would ensure broader dissemination of their work.
The NRIs brought critical local perspectives, but clearer connections between these and global IGF outcomes would reinforce their relevance. The Youth IGF was inspiring, showcasing young leaders' voices, which should be further amplified in future IGFs.
The content of the IGF 2024 programme was highly relevant, reflecting the latest trends in digital governance, AI, cybersecurity, and digital inclusion. Sessions featured expert speakers from diverse sectors, offering a broad range of perspectives. The discussions were robust and informative, fostering in-depth exchanges on critical issues. However, while the quality was high overall, there could have been more focus on ensuring gender balance and greater representation from marginalized communities. This would help provide a more holistic view of the challenges faced by these communities in the digital space and promote inclusivity.
The sessions were engaging and addressed vital issues in digital governance. A mix of high-level discussions and technical dialogues made the content accessible to various audiences, from policymakers to technologists. However, as mentioned earlier, expanding efforts to ensure gender parity and diversity in session panels would further enrich the discussions and ensure that a variety of voices are heard.
The sessions were engaging and addressed vital issues in digital governance. A mix of high-level discussions and technical dialogues made the content accessible to various audiences, from policymakers to technologists. However, as mentioned earlier, expanding efforts to ensure gender parity and diversity in session panels would further enrich the discussions and ensure that a variety of voices are heard.
The High-Level Leaders Track provided an invaluable platform for global leaders to discuss overarching policy issues, offering strategic perspectives on the future of internet governance. It was particularly insightful to hear from heads of state and leaders in the technology industry, who offered clear directions for international cooperation in digital governance. Nevertheless, more representation from developing nations and non-Western perspectives would enhance the breadth of global insights shared during this track.
The Parliamentary Track was an important inclusion, offering a space for legislators to engage with the digital governance discourse. The track addressed vital concerns regarding regulation, policy-making, and digital rights. The inclusion of diverse legislative representatives allowed for a more balanced approach to policy recommendations. More opportunities for parliamentarians from smaller and emerging economies to showcase their challenges would further enhance the track's value.
The Youth Track was one of the most inspiring aspects of IGF 2024. Young leaders presented fresh ideas and creative solutions for tackling digital issues like online safety, education, and access to technology. The track showcased the energy and passion of youth to shape the future of the digital landscape. Ensuring that more youth-led initiatives are incorporated into the main IGF discussions would solidify the link between young voices and global digital policy-making.
While the programme made significant strides in addressing issues such as gender-based violence online and digital inclusion for women, there remains room for improvement in terms of speaker diversity and session representation. Gender inclusivity in all areas of the programme—particularly in leadership positions and technical discussions—could be strengthened. Ensuring a more gender-balanced approach to speaker selection would contribute to more comprehensive and inclusive discussions on digital rights and governance.
However, we ensured that all my sessions satisfy the equal gender representation.
However, we ensured that all my sessions satisfy the equal gender representation.
The IGF Village was an excellent space for informal networking and exchange. It allowed participants to engage with various projects, initiatives, and organizations, facilitating collaborative efforts across the digital governance ecosystem. It was an inclusive space where small organizations, civil society, and grassroots movements could present their work and share insights with the larger community.
IGF 2024's communications strategy was effective in reaching a broad audience through various channels, including social media, newsletters, and website updates. The use of these platforms to disseminate key outcomes from the sessions was valuable for participants who couldn't attend all sessions. The outputs of the forum, available at IGF 2024 Outputs, were comprehensive and well-organized, offering actionable insights for stakeholders. However, increasing the visibility of these outputs, especially in regions with limited access to digital resources, would ensure greater global participation and impact.
IGF 2024:
Timeline:
Publish a detailed and early roadmap for all stages of the preparatory process.
Allow more time for public consultations to encourage broader participation.
Call for Session Proposals and Selection:
Introduce a pre-screening phase where proposers can refine their submissions with feedback.
Ensure a balance between thematic diversity and avoiding redundancy.
MAG and Open Consultations Meetings:
Increase transparency by sharing meeting outcomes promptly.
Incorporate regional consultations to ensure perspectives from underrepresented areas.
Publish a detailed and early roadmap for all stages of the preparatory process.
Allow more time for public consultations to encourage broader participation.
Call for Session Proposals and Selection:
Introduce a pre-screening phase where proposers can refine their submissions with feedback.
Ensure a balance between thematic diversity and avoiding redundancy.
MAG and Open Consultations Meetings:
Increase transparency by sharing meeting outcomes promptly.
Incorporate regional consultations to ensure perspectives from underrepresented areas.
Structure:
Develop thematic tracks with clearly defined goals to avoid thematic overlaps.
Integrate “pathway sessions” that connect intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums) with the main discussions.
Flow:
Begin with foundational sessions addressing core themes, followed by specialized sessions for deeper dives.
Schedule networking events strategically to foster collaboration.
Develop thematic tracks with clearly defined goals to avoid thematic overlaps.
Integrate “pathway sessions” that connect intersessional activities (e.g., Best Practice Forums) with the main discussions.
Flow:
Begin with foundational sessions addressing core themes, followed by specialized sessions for deeper dives.
Schedule networking events strategically to foster collaboration.
Thematic Approach:
Focus on emerging challenges, such as AI ethics, cybersecurity for critical infrastructure, and equitable digital inclusion.
Incorporate themes that directly address the Global Digital Compact and WSIS+20 Review.
Session Types:
Increase interactive formats, such as workshops and town halls, to enhance participant engagement.
Dedicate sessions for solution-oriented discussions with tangible action points.
Speakers’ Profiles:
Ensure equal representation from sectors (government, private, academia, civil society) and regions.
Invite grassroots innovators, young leaders, and policymakers to present diverse insights.
Focus on emerging challenges, such as AI ethics, cybersecurity for critical infrastructure, and equitable digital inclusion.
Incorporate themes that directly address the Global Digital Compact and WSIS+20 Review.
Session Types:
Increase interactive formats, such as workshops and town halls, to enhance participant engagement.
Dedicate sessions for solution-oriented discussions with tangible action points.
Speakers’ Profiles:
Ensure equal representation from sectors (government, private, academia, civil society) and regions.
Invite grassroots innovators, young leaders, and policymakers to present diverse insights.
Integration with IGF 2025:
Allocate dedicated slots in the main programme to showcase intersessional achievements.
Use intersessional reports to guide discussions at the main event.
Youth IGFs:
Provide mentorship opportunities and encourage active youth participation in policy-making sessions.
Introduce a “Youth Vision” panel to discuss their unique perspectives on global digital challenges.
Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks:
Prioritize actionable outcomes and ensure their inclusion in plenary discussions.
Develop a unified repository of BPF findings for broader community reference.
Dynamic Coalitions:
Encourage cross-coalition collaboration on intersecting issues.
Create opportunities for these coalitions to directly present to policymakers.
NRIs:
Host a global NRI forum to identify and scale regional best practices.
Strengthen the linkage between NRI discussions and IGF outputs.
Allocate dedicated slots in the main programme to showcase intersessional achievements.
Use intersessional reports to guide discussions at the main event.
Youth IGFs:
Provide mentorship opportunities and encourage active youth participation in policy-making sessions.
Introduce a “Youth Vision” panel to discuss their unique perspectives on global digital challenges.
Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks:
Prioritize actionable outcomes and ensure their inclusion in plenary discussions.
Develop a unified repository of BPF findings for broader community reference.
Dynamic Coalitions:
Encourage cross-coalition collaboration on intersecting issues.
Create opportunities for these coalitions to directly present to policymakers.
NRIs:
Host a global NRI forum to identify and scale regional best practices.
Strengthen the linkage between NRI discussions and IGF outputs.
Invitees:
Expand outreach to grassroots organizations, smaller enterprises, and marginalized groups.
Include non-traditional sectors, such as cultural and creative industries, to diversify discussions.
Interconnectivity:
Use a dedicated networking platform with AI-assisted matchmaking to connect participants based on interests and expertise.
Foster mentorship programs pairing experienced professionals with new participants.
Expand outreach to grassroots organizations, smaller enterprises, and marginalized groups.
Include non-traditional sectors, such as cultural and creative industries, to diversify discussions.
Interconnectivity:
Use a dedicated networking platform with AI-assisted matchmaking to connect participants based on interests and expertise.
Foster mentorship programs pairing experienced professionals with new participants.
WSIS+20 Review:
Align IGF 2025 discussions with WSIS+20 goals, focusing on accessibility, sustainability, and trust in digital technologies.
Prepare a consolidated report of IGF discussions as an input to the WSIS+20 high-level meeting.
Global Digital Compact Implementation:
Use IGF as a platform to review progress on the GDC’s pillars, such as digital inclusion and human rights.
Establish multistakeholder working groups at IGF to recommend pathways for implementing the GDC commitments.
Align IGF 2025 discussions with WSIS+20 goals, focusing on accessibility, sustainability, and trust in digital technologies.
Prepare a consolidated report of IGF discussions as an input to the WSIS+20 high-level meeting.
Global Digital Compact Implementation:
Use IGF as a platform to review progress on the GDC’s pillars, such as digital inclusion and human rights.
Establish multistakeholder working groups at IGF to recommend pathways for implementing the GDC commitments.
IGF 2024 was a highly impactful event, contributing significantly to the global dialogue on internet governance and digital transformation. It provided an essential platform for discussing global issues, offering a unique space for multistakeholder engagement. For future IGFs, it would be beneficial to further integrate digital equity and inclusion into every aspect of the discussions, ensuring that the outcomes contribute to a more inclusive digital future for all.
Elmakey
Great
Great
Great
Great
Perfect
Perfect
Perfect
The sessions at IGF 2024 are expected to be engaging and informative, with a strong focus on the most pressing issues in global internet governance. These discussions provide a valuable platform for diverse stakeholders—including governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical communities—to collaborate and shape policies that impact the future of the internet. The dynamic exchange of ideas promises to foster innovation and inclusivity, making the IGF an essential event for tackling the complex challenges of our digital world.
IGF 2024:
The IGF 2025 can play a pivotal role in the WSIS+20 review by fostering multistakeholder dialogue on the progress and challenges in implementing WSIS outcomes. It can provide actionable insights and recommendations, contributing to the high-level meeting at the end of 2025. Additionally, the IGF can support the Global Digital Compact by facilitating inclusive discussions on global digital cooperation, ensuring that all voices are heard, and helping shape policies that promote universal connectivity, digital rights, and sustainable development.
Garba Sani
So excited
wonderful
very nice
incredible
IGF 2024:
GHALIB
Preparatory Process:
The timeline was well-structured, providing ample time for stakeholders to prepare and submit session proposals.
The call for issues and session proposals was transparent and inclusive, encouraging diverse perspectives from across sectors and regions.
MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) meetings were efficient and productive, fostering constructive dialogue and collaboration.
Session Selection:
The selection process ensured a balanced representation of stakeholders, covering a wide array of relevant and timely topics.
Efforts to align sessions with the overarching themes of IGF 2024 contributed to a cohesive and focused event.
Capacity Development:
Capacity-building workshops and resources provided ahead of the forum were effective in equipping participants, especially newcomers, with the knowledge and tools needed to engage meaningfully.
Dedicated sessions for youth participation were impactful, highlighting their perspectives and fostering intergenerational dialogue.
The timeline was well-structured, providing ample time for stakeholders to prepare and submit session proposals.
The call for issues and session proposals was transparent and inclusive, encouraging diverse perspectives from across sectors and regions.
MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) meetings were efficient and productive, fostering constructive dialogue and collaboration.
Session Selection:
The selection process ensured a balanced representation of stakeholders, covering a wide array of relevant and timely topics.
Efforts to align sessions with the overarching themes of IGF 2024 contributed to a cohesive and focused event.
Capacity Development:
Capacity-building workshops and resources provided ahead of the forum were effective in equipping participants, especially newcomers, with the knowledge and tools needed to engage meaningfully.
Dedicated sessions for youth participation were impactful, highlighting their perspectives and fostering intergenerational dialogue.
Thematic Focus
The IGF 2024 programme was built around key themes reflecting the most pressing issues in internet governance and digital development. These included:
AI and Emerging Technologies: Addressing governance frameworks, ethical considerations, and societal impacts of technologies like AI, IoT, and quantum computing.
Digital Inclusion and Accessibility: Strategies to bridge the digital divide, empower marginalized communities, and ensure equitable access to the internet.
Cybersecurity and Data Privacy: Enhancing trust, security, and privacy in the digital ecosystem through multi-stakeholder collaboration.
Sustainability in the Digital Age: Exploring the intersection of digital technologies and environmental sustainability, including energy-efficient innovations and e-waste management.
Global Digital Cooperation: Strengthening international dialogue and multilateral approaches to address cross-border challenges in internet governance.
The IGF 2024 programme was built around key themes reflecting the most pressing issues in internet governance and digital development. These included:
AI and Emerging Technologies: Addressing governance frameworks, ethical considerations, and societal impacts of technologies like AI, IoT, and quantum computing.
Digital Inclusion and Accessibility: Strategies to bridge the digital divide, empower marginalized communities, and ensure equitable access to the internet.
Cybersecurity and Data Privacy: Enhancing trust, security, and privacy in the digital ecosystem through multi-stakeholder collaboration.
Sustainability in the Digital Age: Exploring the intersection of digital technologies and environmental sustainability, including energy-efficient innovations and e-waste management.
Global Digital Cooperation: Strengthening international dialogue and multilateral approaches to address cross-border challenges in internet governance.
Hybrid Format Design
The IGF 2024 hybrid model was thoughtfully crafted to ensure inclusivity, accessibility, and meaningful engagement for both in-person and virtual participants. The design prioritized seamless integration of physical and digital elements to maximize participation and interaction.
Key Features of the Hybrid Model:
Real-Time Participation: All sessions were live-streamed with interactive features, allowing virtual attendees to engage in real-time via Q&A, polls, and chat.
Accessible Platforms: A dedicated conference platform with multilingual support, captioning, and sign language interpretation for both on-site and remote participants.
Time Zone Accommodation: Session schedules included flexibility for diverse time zones, with key sessions repeated or recorded for on-demand viewing.
On-Site and Online Synergy:
Digital Hubs: Localized hubs in various regions provided spaces for communities to gather and engage virtually, reducing the need for long-distance travel.
Integrated Panels: Hybrid panels featured a mix of in-person and online speakers, with moderators ensuring equal representation in discussions.
Networking Opportunities: Virtual networking lounges and breakout rooms were established for informal interactions, mirroring the social experience of in-person events.
Enhanced Technical Infrastructure:
High-quality audio-visual setups for on-site sessions to ensure clarity for virtual participants.
Redundant systems and technical support teams minimized disruptions during live events.
Hybrid Format Experience
The IGF 2024 hybrid model was thoughtfully crafted to ensure inclusivity, accessibility, and meaningful engagement for both in-person and virtual participants. The design prioritized seamless integration of physical and digital elements to maximize participation and interaction.
Key Features of the Hybrid Model:
Real-Time Participation: All sessions were live-streamed with interactive features, allowing virtual attendees to engage in real-time via Q&A, polls, and chat.
Accessible Platforms: A dedicated conference platform with multilingual support, captioning, and sign language interpretation for both on-site and remote participants.
Time Zone Accommodation: Session schedules included flexibility for diverse time zones, with key sessions repeated or recorded for on-demand viewing.
On-Site and Online Synergy:
Digital Hubs: Localized hubs in various regions provided spaces for communities to gather and engage virtually, reducing the need for long-distance travel.
Integrated Panels: Hybrid panels featured a mix of in-person and online speakers, with moderators ensuring equal representation in discussions.
Networking Opportunities: Virtual networking lounges and breakout rooms were established for informal interactions, mirroring the social experience of in-person events.
Enhanced Technical Infrastructure:
High-quality audio-visual setups for on-site sessions to ensure clarity for virtual participants.
Redundant systems and technical support teams minimized disruptions during live events.
Hybrid Format Experience
1. Website
Features:
A centralized information hub for schedules, session details, speaker bios, and key updates.
Integrated features for live streaming, registration, and submission of questions for sessions.
Multilingual support for broader accessibility.
Strengths:
Intuitive navigation and responsive design optimized for all devices.
Regular updates kept participants informed throughout the event.
Improvement Areas:
Some users reported delays in loading live streams on the website, highlighting the need for more robust servers.
2. Mobile App
Features:
Real-time notifications for session reminders, updates, and announcements.
Interactive features like Q&A, polls, and feedback submission directly through the app.
Personalizable schedules and session bookmarking for attendees.
Strengths:
Easy access to session details and the ability to engage with hybrid content.
Offline mode allowed users to view downloaded materials without internet access.
Improvement Areas:
Some compatibility issues on older devices were reported. Regular testing across device ecosystems is recommended.
3. Schedule
Design:
Organized into thematic tracks, with clear labels for session types (workshops, main sessions, etc.).
Interactive digital schedule enabled participants to filter sessions by theme, speaker, or format.
Strengths:
Availability of downloadable and printable schedules.
Time zone customization for virtual attendees.
Improvement Areas:
Overlapping of popular sessions created challenges for attendees; better conflict management in scheduling is recommended.
4. Registration
Process:
Simple online registration system with tiered options for in-person and virtual participation.
Automated confirmation emails with event access details.
Strengths:
Smooth process with quick registration confirmation.
Late registration remained open, ensuring inclusivity.
Improvement Areas:
In-person participants experienced delays in badge collection on-site due to long queues; pre-event badge dispatch could improve efficiency.
Features:
A centralized information hub for schedules, session details, speaker bios, and key updates.
Integrated features for live streaming, registration, and submission of questions for sessions.
Multilingual support for broader accessibility.
Strengths:
Intuitive navigation and responsive design optimized for all devices.
Regular updates kept participants informed throughout the event.
Improvement Areas:
Some users reported delays in loading live streams on the website, highlighting the need for more robust servers.
2. Mobile App
Features:
Real-time notifications for session reminders, updates, and announcements.
Interactive features like Q&A, polls, and feedback submission directly through the app.
Personalizable schedules and session bookmarking for attendees.
Strengths:
Easy access to session details and the ability to engage with hybrid content.
Offline mode allowed users to view downloaded materials without internet access.
Improvement Areas:
Some compatibility issues on older devices were reported. Regular testing across device ecosystems is recommended.
3. Schedule
Design:
Organized into thematic tracks, with clear labels for session types (workshops, main sessions, etc.).
Interactive digital schedule enabled participants to filter sessions by theme, speaker, or format.
Strengths:
Availability of downloadable and printable schedules.
Time zone customization for virtual attendees.
Improvement Areas:
Overlapping of popular sessions created challenges for attendees; better conflict management in scheduling is recommended.
4. Registration
Process:
Simple online registration system with tiered options for in-person and virtual participation.
Automated confirmation emails with event access details.
Strengths:
Smooth process with quick registration confirmation.
Late registration remained open, ensuring inclusivity.
Improvement Areas:
In-person participants experienced delays in badge collection on-site due to long queues; pre-event badge dispatch could improve efficiency.
Process
Inclusion in the IGF Programme:
The intersessional activities, including BPFs and Policy Networks, were seamlessly integrated into the IGF 2024 programme. Dedicated sessions highlighted their progress and findings, ensuring visibility and relevance.
The preparatory process provided stakeholders with clear guidelines and timelines for participation, fostering meaningful contributions.
Regular updates through online meetings and shared documents ensured transparency and consistent stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder Engagement:
The process was inclusive, with open calls for contributions, enabling a wide range of stakeholders, including governments, private sector, civil society, and academia, to participate.
BPFs and Policy Networks effectively leveraged hybrid formats to include participants from diverse geographical and linguistic backgrounds.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders reported difficulties in keeping up with intersessional activities due to overlapping schedules and lack of timely reminders. A central coordination platform or calendar could enhance participation.
Greater alignment between BPFs, Policy Networks, and thematic tracks in the IGF programme could avoid duplication and improve coherence.
Content
Relevance and Focus:
The topics selected for BPFs and Policy Networks were timely and aligned with global digital governance priorities.
Examples include themes like AI governance, data protection frameworks, and digital inclusion, which resonated with the IGF community.
Quality of Output:
The policy recommendations and reports produced by BPFs and Policy Networks were well-researched and actionable, providing a solid basis for discussions during the annual meeting.
Sessions dedicated to presenting their findings fostered informed debates and paved the way for multi-stakeholder collaborations.
Areas for Improvement:
Some participants noted that the outputs were too technical or policy-heavy, making it challenging for non-experts to engage fully. Summaries or simplified versions of findings could improve accessibility.
The lack of follow-up mechanisms for recommendations reduced the long-term impact of these outputs.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Visibility and Engagement:
BPFs and Policy Networks were prominently featured in the IGF 2024 agenda, with dedicated sessions to discuss their findings and relevance to the forum's themes.
These sessions encouraged cross-thematic dialogue, connecting the intersessional work with broader IGF discussions.
Integration:
Policy Networks were integrated into high-level panels and thematic tracks, ensuring their outputs were contextualized within the broader IGF programme.
Some BPFs collaborated with thematic session organizers, enhancing the depth and relevance of discussions.
Areas for Improvement:
While the integration was effective, some stakeholders suggested more interactive formats, such as workshops or breakout sessions, to encourage deeper engagement with the outputs.
The timing of sessions for BPFs and Policy Networks often clashed with other high-profile events, reducing attendance. Scheduling adjustments could mitigate this issue.
Inclusion in the IGF Programme:
The intersessional activities, including BPFs and Policy Networks, were seamlessly integrated into the IGF 2024 programme. Dedicated sessions highlighted their progress and findings, ensuring visibility and relevance.
The preparatory process provided stakeholders with clear guidelines and timelines for participation, fostering meaningful contributions.
Regular updates through online meetings and shared documents ensured transparency and consistent stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder Engagement:
The process was inclusive, with open calls for contributions, enabling a wide range of stakeholders, including governments, private sector, civil society, and academia, to participate.
BPFs and Policy Networks effectively leveraged hybrid formats to include participants from diverse geographical and linguistic backgrounds.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders reported difficulties in keeping up with intersessional activities due to overlapping schedules and lack of timely reminders. A central coordination platform or calendar could enhance participation.
Greater alignment between BPFs, Policy Networks, and thematic tracks in the IGF programme could avoid duplication and improve coherence.
Content
Relevance and Focus:
The topics selected for BPFs and Policy Networks were timely and aligned with global digital governance priorities.
Examples include themes like AI governance, data protection frameworks, and digital inclusion, which resonated with the IGF community.
Quality of Output:
The policy recommendations and reports produced by BPFs and Policy Networks were well-researched and actionable, providing a solid basis for discussions during the annual meeting.
Sessions dedicated to presenting their findings fostered informed debates and paved the way for multi-stakeholder collaborations.
Areas for Improvement:
Some participants noted that the outputs were too technical or policy-heavy, making it challenging for non-experts to engage fully. Summaries or simplified versions of findings could improve accessibility.
The lack of follow-up mechanisms for recommendations reduced the long-term impact of these outputs.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Visibility and Engagement:
BPFs and Policy Networks were prominently featured in the IGF 2024 agenda, with dedicated sessions to discuss their findings and relevance to the forum's themes.
These sessions encouraged cross-thematic dialogue, connecting the intersessional work with broader IGF discussions.
Integration:
Policy Networks were integrated into high-level panels and thematic tracks, ensuring their outputs were contextualized within the broader IGF programme.
Some BPFs collaborated with thematic session organizers, enhancing the depth and relevance of discussions.
Areas for Improvement:
While the integration was effective, some stakeholders suggested more interactive formats, such as workshops or breakout sessions, to encourage deeper engagement with the outputs.
The timing of sessions for BPFs and Policy Networks often clashed with other high-profile events, reducing attendance. Scheduling adjustments could mitigate this issue.
Process
Coordination and Inclusivity:
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) were well-coordinated, with a clear process for stakeholder engagement. Open meetings throughout the year encouraged diverse participation from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and technical communities.
The IGF Secretariat provided logistical and technical support to DCs, ensuring inclusivity, particularly for participants from underrepresented regions.
Transparency:
Regular updates on progress, goals, and deliverables were shared through newsletters and the IGF website.
Open calls for contributions and consultations on draft outputs ensured transparency and community involvement.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders noted that the process could be further streamlined, as overlapping timelines for intersessional work made it challenging to follow multiple DCs.
Enhanced promotion of DCs, particularly to new participants, could improve visibility and engagement.
Content
Relevance and Depth:
DCs addressed critical and emerging issues in internet governance, including Internet of Things (IoT) governance, digital rights, sustainability, and data privacy.
Their outputs, such as reports, policy briefs, and best practice recommendations, were substantive and informed by a wide range of perspectives.
Quality and Practicality:
The outputs were highly detailed and provided actionable recommendations that stakeholders could implement in policy and practice.
Many DCs effectively linked their work to the broader themes of IGF 2024, enhancing the relevance of their findings.
Areas for Improvement:
Some outputs were considered too niche or technical, limiting their applicability for a broader audience.
A few DCs struggled with consistent participation from stakeholders, which impacted the comprehensiveness of their outputs.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Visibility:
DCs were prominently featured in the IGF 2024 agenda through dedicated sessions. These sessions showcased their findings and facilitated discussions on their relevance to the broader IGF themes.
Thematic alignment ensured DC sessions complemented and enriched the main programme.
Integration:
DCs collaborated with other IGF components, such as Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks, creating synergies and reducing duplication.
Thematic discussions often included DC outputs, linking their work to high-level panels and workshops.
Engagement Formats:
Interactive session designs, including roundtables and Q&A segments, fostered active engagement from both in-person and virtual participants.
The hybrid model allowed DCs to engage with a global audience, amplifying their impact.
Coordination and Inclusivity:
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) were well-coordinated, with a clear process for stakeholder engagement. Open meetings throughout the year encouraged diverse participation from governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and technical communities.
The IGF Secretariat provided logistical and technical support to DCs, ensuring inclusivity, particularly for participants from underrepresented regions.
Transparency:
Regular updates on progress, goals, and deliverables were shared through newsletters and the IGF website.
Open calls for contributions and consultations on draft outputs ensured transparency and community involvement.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders noted that the process could be further streamlined, as overlapping timelines for intersessional work made it challenging to follow multiple DCs.
Enhanced promotion of DCs, particularly to new participants, could improve visibility and engagement.
Content
Relevance and Depth:
DCs addressed critical and emerging issues in internet governance, including Internet of Things (IoT) governance, digital rights, sustainability, and data privacy.
Their outputs, such as reports, policy briefs, and best practice recommendations, were substantive and informed by a wide range of perspectives.
Quality and Practicality:
The outputs were highly detailed and provided actionable recommendations that stakeholders could implement in policy and practice.
Many DCs effectively linked their work to the broader themes of IGF 2024, enhancing the relevance of their findings.
Areas for Improvement:
Some outputs were considered too niche or technical, limiting their applicability for a broader audience.
A few DCs struggled with consistent participation from stakeholders, which impacted the comprehensiveness of their outputs.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme
Visibility:
DCs were prominently featured in the IGF 2024 agenda through dedicated sessions. These sessions showcased their findings and facilitated discussions on their relevance to the broader IGF themes.
Thematic alignment ensured DC sessions complemented and enriched the main programme.
Integration:
DCs collaborated with other IGF components, such as Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks, creating synergies and reducing duplication.
Thematic discussions often included DC outputs, linking their work to high-level panels and workshops.
Engagement Formats:
Interactive session designs, including roundtables and Q&A segments, fostered active engagement from both in-person and virtual participants.
The hybrid model allowed DCs to engage with a global audience, amplifying their impact.
Process
Coordination and Engagement:
The IGF 2024 process facilitated the active inclusion of NRIs, with clear communication channels and opportunities for their representatives to participate in the main programme.
Regular calls, preparatory meetings, and resource-sharing enabled NRIs to align their priorities with the global IGF themes.
Capacity Building and Support:
NRIs received logistical and technical support, particularly for hybrid participation, ensuring their voices were included regardless of geographical constraints.
Training sessions and workshops for Youth IGF coordinators empowered young leaders to effectively contribute to discussions.
Areas for Improvement:
Some NRIs expressed challenges in aligning their timelines with the global IGF process due to resource constraints and differing schedules. Greater synchronization efforts would be beneficial.
A few smaller or emerging NRIs highlighted the need for additional funding and capacity-building support to amplify their participation.
Content
Relevance and Contributions:
NRIs brought critical grassroots perspectives to IGF 2024, highlighting local and regional challenges such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and access to internet infrastructure.
Youth IGFs focused on topics like digital literacy, ethical AI, and the future of work, enriching the programme with fresh and innovative ideas.
Quality of Outputs:
NRIs contributed well-researched reports, policy recommendations, and case studies, which were integrated into IGF discussions.
Their outputs reflected the diversity of global challenges and highlighted the importance of contextual solutions.
Areas for Improvement:
While the content was valuable, some NRIs noted limited opportunities to showcase their outputs beyond their designated sessions. Expanding cross-session integration could increase their impact.
The visibility of Youth IGF outputs could be enhanced to ensure they resonate with broader stakeholder groups.
Coordination and Engagement:
The IGF 2024 process facilitated the active inclusion of NRIs, with clear communication channels and opportunities for their representatives to participate in the main programme.
Regular calls, preparatory meetings, and resource-sharing enabled NRIs to align their priorities with the global IGF themes.
Capacity Building and Support:
NRIs received logistical and technical support, particularly for hybrid participation, ensuring their voices were included regardless of geographical constraints.
Training sessions and workshops for Youth IGF coordinators empowered young leaders to effectively contribute to discussions.
Areas for Improvement:
Some NRIs expressed challenges in aligning their timelines with the global IGF process due to resource constraints and differing schedules. Greater synchronization efforts would be beneficial.
A few smaller or emerging NRIs highlighted the need for additional funding and capacity-building support to amplify their participation.
Content
Relevance and Contributions:
NRIs brought critical grassroots perspectives to IGF 2024, highlighting local and regional challenges such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and access to internet infrastructure.
Youth IGFs focused on topics like digital literacy, ethical AI, and the future of work, enriching the programme with fresh and innovative ideas.
Quality of Outputs:
NRIs contributed well-researched reports, policy recommendations, and case studies, which were integrated into IGF discussions.
Their outputs reflected the diversity of global challenges and highlighted the importance of contextual solutions.
Areas for Improvement:
While the content was valuable, some NRIs noted limited opportunities to showcase their outputs beyond their designated sessions. Expanding cross-session integration could increase their impact.
The visibility of Youth IGF outputs could be enhanced to ensure they resonate with broader stakeholder groups.
GF 2024 Programme: Content, Speakers, and Quality of Discussions
Content
Thematic Relevance:
The IGF 2024 programme was well-structured around pressing global internet governance themes such as AI governance, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability in the digital age.
The balance between high-level discussions and actionable outcomes ensured both strategic and operational perspectives were addressed.
Regional and local issues were effectively incorporated, thanks to the integration of NRIs and thematic alignment with intersessional activities like BPFs and DCs.
Diversity of Topics:
Emerging technologies and their societal impact, such as quantum computing and metaverse governance, were explored, ensuring the programme remained forward-looking.
Sessions focusing on the intersection of technology with human rights and ethical considerations brought fresh perspectives to longstanding governance challenges.
Areas for Improvement:
Some participants noted that the broad range of topics occasionally led to surface-level discussions in certain sessions. A more focused approach in session design could deepen engagement.
Greater emphasis on underexplored areas, such as regional disparities in technology access and the role of SMEs in internet governance, would enhance content diversity.
Speakers
Diversity and Expertise:
Speakers represented a wide spectrum of stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, civil society, academia, and the private sector.
The inclusion of youth representatives and speakers from underrepresented regions enriched discussions with diverse perspectives.
High-profile speakers, including government leaders and industry executives, added credibility and drew significant attention to key sessions.
Balance and Representation:
The gender balance among speakers was commendable, reflecting a commitment to inclusivity.
Speakers with technical expertise complemented those with policy or advocacy backgrounds, creating a well-rounded discourse.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders felt that a few panels were dominated by speakers from certain sectors or regions, which limited the diversity of viewpoints.
The inclusion of more grassroots-level practitioners and local community representatives would provide a richer, more grounded perspective.
Quality of Discussions
Engagement and Depth:
Most sessions fostered high-quality discussions, with moderators effectively guiding debates and ensuring a balance of viewpoints.
Interactive formats like Q&A sessions, workshops, and roundtable discussions promoted active engagement from participants, both in-person and online.
Use of Hybrid Format:
The hybrid design of IGF 2024 allowed virtual participants to engage meaningfully, with tools such as live polls and chat moderation enhancing interactivity.
Panelists and moderators made conscious efforts to address questions from both physical and virtual audiences, ensuring inclusivity.
Areas for Improvement:
In some sessions, discussions were overly abstract or repetitive, which reduced their practical relevance. Including clearer objectives and outcomes for each session could address this.
A few sessions experienced technical challenges, such as audio-visual issues, which disrupted the flow of discussions.
IGF 2024 Sessions
High-Level Panels:
These sessions effectively set the stage for thematic discussions, with prominent speakers providing insights into global priorities and challenges.
The inclusion of diverse perspectives from various sectors ensured robust and impactful debates.
Thematic Tracks:
Sessions within thematic tracks were well-organized and aligned with the overarching programme objectives.
Case studies and success stories presented in these tracks added practical value and inspired action among participants.
Workshops and Roundtables:
Workshops and roundtables provided an excellent platform for in-depth discussions and stakeholder collaboration.
Breakout groups and interactive activities enhanced participant engagement and knowledge sharing.
Youth-Led Sessions:
Youth-led sessions were a highlight, showcasing innovative ideas and perspectives on internet governance challenges.
These sessions created a unique space for intergenerational dialogue and mentorship opportunities.
Areas for Improvement:
Workshop proposals with similar themes occasionally overlapped in content, leading to redundancy. Improved coordination during the session selection process could mitigate this.
Some roundtable discussions suffered from time constraints, limiting the depth of conversations. Allocating more time to interactive formats could resolve this issue.
Recommendations for Future IGFs
Content:
Adopt a more focused approach for session topics to ensure depth and avoid redundancy.
Explore underrepresented issues, such as the governance of decentralized technologies and the digital economy's impact on marginalized communities.
Speakers:
Increase efforts to include grassroots-level and community-based practitioners in panel discussions.
Ensure balanced representation across sectors, regions, and demographics for a richer dialogue.
Session Design:
Define clear objectives and expected outcomes for each session to guide discussions and enhance their practical relevance.
Provide moderators with training or guidelines to ensure equitable participation and manage time effectively.
Hybrid Participation:
Continue enhancing the hybrid model with improved tools for virtual engagement, ensuring equal opportunities for all participants to contribute.
Address technical issues proactively to maintain seamless interactions.
IGF 2024 demonstrated strong content, diverse speakers, and meaningful discussions that addressed critical internet governance issues. With strategic refinements, future IGFs can further elevate the quality and inclusivity of their programme.
Content
Thematic Relevance:
The IGF 2024 programme was well-structured around pressing global internet governance themes such as AI governance, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability in the digital age.
The balance between high-level discussions and actionable outcomes ensured both strategic and operational perspectives were addressed.
Regional and local issues were effectively incorporated, thanks to the integration of NRIs and thematic alignment with intersessional activities like BPFs and DCs.
Diversity of Topics:
Emerging technologies and their societal impact, such as quantum computing and metaverse governance, were explored, ensuring the programme remained forward-looking.
Sessions focusing on the intersection of technology with human rights and ethical considerations brought fresh perspectives to longstanding governance challenges.
Areas for Improvement:
Some participants noted that the broad range of topics occasionally led to surface-level discussions in certain sessions. A more focused approach in session design could deepen engagement.
Greater emphasis on underexplored areas, such as regional disparities in technology access and the role of SMEs in internet governance, would enhance content diversity.
Speakers
Diversity and Expertise:
Speakers represented a wide spectrum of stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, civil society, academia, and the private sector.
The inclusion of youth representatives and speakers from underrepresented regions enriched discussions with diverse perspectives.
High-profile speakers, including government leaders and industry executives, added credibility and drew significant attention to key sessions.
Balance and Representation:
The gender balance among speakers was commendable, reflecting a commitment to inclusivity.
Speakers with technical expertise complemented those with policy or advocacy backgrounds, creating a well-rounded discourse.
Areas for Improvement:
Some stakeholders felt that a few panels were dominated by speakers from certain sectors or regions, which limited the diversity of viewpoints.
The inclusion of more grassroots-level practitioners and local community representatives would provide a richer, more grounded perspective.
Quality of Discussions
Engagement and Depth:
Most sessions fostered high-quality discussions, with moderators effectively guiding debates and ensuring a balance of viewpoints.
Interactive formats like Q&A sessions, workshops, and roundtable discussions promoted active engagement from participants, both in-person and online.
Use of Hybrid Format:
The hybrid design of IGF 2024 allowed virtual participants to engage meaningfully, with tools such as live polls and chat moderation enhancing interactivity.
Panelists and moderators made conscious efforts to address questions from both physical and virtual audiences, ensuring inclusivity.
Areas for Improvement:
In some sessions, discussions were overly abstract or repetitive, which reduced their practical relevance. Including clearer objectives and outcomes for each session could address this.
A few sessions experienced technical challenges, such as audio-visual issues, which disrupted the flow of discussions.
IGF 2024 Sessions
High-Level Panels:
These sessions effectively set the stage for thematic discussions, with prominent speakers providing insights into global priorities and challenges.
The inclusion of diverse perspectives from various sectors ensured robust and impactful debates.
Thematic Tracks:
Sessions within thematic tracks were well-organized and aligned with the overarching programme objectives.
Case studies and success stories presented in these tracks added practical value and inspired action among participants.
Workshops and Roundtables:
Workshops and roundtables provided an excellent platform for in-depth discussions and stakeholder collaboration.
Breakout groups and interactive activities enhanced participant engagement and knowledge sharing.
Youth-Led Sessions:
Youth-led sessions were a highlight, showcasing innovative ideas and perspectives on internet governance challenges.
These sessions created a unique space for intergenerational dialogue and mentorship opportunities.
Areas for Improvement:
Workshop proposals with similar themes occasionally overlapped in content, leading to redundancy. Improved coordination during the session selection process could mitigate this.
Some roundtable discussions suffered from time constraints, limiting the depth of conversations. Allocating more time to interactive formats could resolve this issue.
Recommendations for Future IGFs
Content:
Adopt a more focused approach for session topics to ensure depth and avoid redundancy.
Explore underrepresented issues, such as the governance of decentralized technologies and the digital economy's impact on marginalized communities.
Speakers:
Increase efforts to include grassroots-level and community-based practitioners in panel discussions.
Ensure balanced representation across sectors, regions, and demographics for a richer dialogue.
Session Design:
Define clear objectives and expected outcomes for each session to guide discussions and enhance their practical relevance.
Provide moderators with training or guidelines to ensure equitable participation and manage time effectively.
Hybrid Participation:
Continue enhancing the hybrid model with improved tools for virtual engagement, ensuring equal opportunities for all participants to contribute.
Address technical issues proactively to maintain seamless interactions.
IGF 2024 demonstrated strong content, diverse speakers, and meaningful discussions that addressed critical internet governance issues. With strategic refinements, future IGFs can further elevate the quality and inclusivity of their programme.
Overview
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together influential figures from governments, international organizations, the private sector, and civil society to discuss global internet governance challenges and opportunities. These sessions were designed to provide strategic insights and set the tone for the broader IGF discussions. The track aimed to elevate key policy dialogues, emphasizing the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration in addressing internet governance issues.
Content and Themes
Global Internet Governance Challenges:
Discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track focused on key global challenges such as AI governance, digital sovereignty, cybersecurity, and the future of the digital economy.
Leaders explored how policies and regulations could evolve to address the fast-paced development of emerging technologies, ensuring inclusive digital transformation.
Sustainable Digital Development:
Several sessions emphasized the role of internet governance in achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs).
Topics included the digital divide, digital inclusion, and internet access for all, ensuring that no one is left behind in the digital age.
Ethical AI and Digital Rights:
Ethical considerations surrounding AI, data privacy, and the protection of digital rights were key themes in these high-level discussions.
Leaders debated how to balance technological innovation with the protection of human rights in the digital ecosystem.
Global Cooperation and Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration:
The track focused on fostering international cooperation, emphasizing the need for a unified approach to global internet governance challenges.
Collaboration among governments, private sector, civil society, and technical communities was highlighted as essential for creating inclusive and sustainable digital policies.
Speakers and Participation
Diverse Representation:
High-profile speakers from governments, international organizations (such as the UN and EU), and major tech companies contributed to the track, ensuring a wide array of perspectives.
Keynote addresses and panel discussions included contributions from leaders in both developed and developing regions, ensuring global representation.
Gender and Regional Balance:
The track made efforts to include diverse voices, with speakers from a variety of sectors, regions, and demographics. Gender balance was notably prioritized, with women leaders playing key roles in several sessions.
Youth and Emerging Leaders:
A notable aspect was the inclusion of younger leaders and youth advocates in some sessions, reflecting the growing role of younger generations in shaping digital policies.
These voices brought fresh perspectives, especially on issues like digital rights, youth empowerment, and future technologies.
Quality of Discussions
Strategic Insights:
The discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track were rich with strategic insights, offering high-level guidance on how to navigate the evolving digital landscape.
Leaders discussed concrete policy frameworks and international agreements aimed at addressing the most pressing internet governance issues.
Actionable Outcomes:
Many sessions included concrete action points, ranging from international cooperation initiatives to policy suggestions for promoting ethical technology and digital inclusion.
There was a clear emphasis on translating discussions into actionable steps, with some leaders committing to follow-up actions and collaborative efforts post-IGF.
Challenges in Deepening Engagement:
While the sessions were engaging, some participants felt the discussions at times remained at a high-level, with insufficient focus on practical implementation challenges.
A deeper focus on tangible, regional, and grassroots-level solutions could have added more value, especially in translating the discussions into actionable policies at local levels.
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together influential figures from governments, international organizations, the private sector, and civil society to discuss global internet governance challenges and opportunities. These sessions were designed to provide strategic insights and set the tone for the broader IGF discussions. The track aimed to elevate key policy dialogues, emphasizing the importance of multi-stakeholder collaboration in addressing internet governance issues.
Content and Themes
Global Internet Governance Challenges:
Discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track focused on key global challenges such as AI governance, digital sovereignty, cybersecurity, and the future of the digital economy.
Leaders explored how policies and regulations could evolve to address the fast-paced development of emerging technologies, ensuring inclusive digital transformation.
Sustainable Digital Development:
Several sessions emphasized the role of internet governance in achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs).
Topics included the digital divide, digital inclusion, and internet access for all, ensuring that no one is left behind in the digital age.
Ethical AI and Digital Rights:
Ethical considerations surrounding AI, data privacy, and the protection of digital rights were key themes in these high-level discussions.
Leaders debated how to balance technological innovation with the protection of human rights in the digital ecosystem.
Global Cooperation and Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration:
The track focused on fostering international cooperation, emphasizing the need for a unified approach to global internet governance challenges.
Collaboration among governments, private sector, civil society, and technical communities was highlighted as essential for creating inclusive and sustainable digital policies.
Speakers and Participation
Diverse Representation:
High-profile speakers from governments, international organizations (such as the UN and EU), and major tech companies contributed to the track, ensuring a wide array of perspectives.
Keynote addresses and panel discussions included contributions from leaders in both developed and developing regions, ensuring global representation.
Gender and Regional Balance:
The track made efforts to include diverse voices, with speakers from a variety of sectors, regions, and demographics. Gender balance was notably prioritized, with women leaders playing key roles in several sessions.
Youth and Emerging Leaders:
A notable aspect was the inclusion of younger leaders and youth advocates in some sessions, reflecting the growing role of younger generations in shaping digital policies.
These voices brought fresh perspectives, especially on issues like digital rights, youth empowerment, and future technologies.
Quality of Discussions
Strategic Insights:
The discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track were rich with strategic insights, offering high-level guidance on how to navigate the evolving digital landscape.
Leaders discussed concrete policy frameworks and international agreements aimed at addressing the most pressing internet governance issues.
Actionable Outcomes:
Many sessions included concrete action points, ranging from international cooperation initiatives to policy suggestions for promoting ethical technology and digital inclusion.
There was a clear emphasis on translating discussions into actionable steps, with some leaders committing to follow-up actions and collaborative efforts post-IGF.
Challenges in Deepening Engagement:
While the sessions were engaging, some participants felt the discussions at times remained at a high-level, with insufficient focus on practical implementation challenges.
A deeper focus on tangible, regional, and grassroots-level solutions could have added more value, especially in translating the discussions into actionable policies at local levels.
Overview
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 provided a unique space for legislators and policymakers to discuss critical internet governance issues, with a focus on the role of parliaments in shaping digital policy. The track aimed to bridge the gap between technical experts and policymakers by providing insights into how legislative bodies can support and enhance global internet governance frameworks. It offered a platform for parliamentary leaders to exchange ideas, experiences, and best practices on regulating the internet and addressing digital policy challenges.
Content and Themes
Legislative Approaches to Digital Sovereignty:
One of the central themes was the role of national legislatures in addressing issues related to digital sovereignty and national regulations on the internet.
Debates focused on the balance between global internet governance and the need for national laws that address issues like data privacy, cybersecurity, and internet censorship.
Cybersecurity and Online Safety:
A significant portion of the discussions concentrated on cybersecurity, with a focus on how parliaments can craft laws to protect citizens and critical infrastructure from cyberattacks.
Issues such as the regulation of online content, the prevention of misinformation, and protecting children and vulnerable populations from online harm were also key discussion points.
Digital Inclusion and Access to the Internet:
Sessions addressed how legislation can facilitate digital inclusion by ensuring equal access to the internet and supporting initiatives to connect underserved populations, particularly in developing regions.
Key topics included universal access, affordable broadband, and policies that reduce the digital divide between urban and rural areas.
Digital Rights and Ethical Standards:
Another core theme was the protection of digital rights, with a focus on freedom of expression, data protection, and privacy rights in the digital space.
Parliamentarians discussed the need to establish ethical standards for technology companies, ensuring they respect user rights and adhere to transparent, accountable practices.
Multi-Stakeholder Approach in Policymaking:
Emphasis was placed on the importance of adopting a multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance, recognizing the need for collaboration between governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical communities.
The track highlighted the need for better engagement between legislators and other stakeholders to create policies that are inclusive, informed, and forward-thinking.
Speakers and Participation
Diverse Representation:
The track featured parliamentarians from around the world, including both established democracies and emerging democracies, ensuring a broad range of perspectives on digital policy challenges.
In addition to lawmakers, the track included experts from international organizations, technology companies, and civil society, providing a well-rounded view of the challenges facing internet governance.
Regional and Gender Balance:
Efforts were made to ensure gender and regional balance in the participation of speakers, ensuring that voices from different parts of the world, as well as from different demographic groups, were heard.
This balance allowed for a more comprehensive discussion of digital policies that affect diverse populations and contexts.
Youth and Emerging Leaders:
Some sessions incorporated youth leaders and young parliamentarians, allowing for the inclusion of fresh perspectives on internet governance and digital policies.
Young speakers focused on issues such as youth empowerment, education, and the future of work in the digital age.
Quality of Discussions
High-Level Policy Dialogues:
The discussions were highly strategic, with parliamentarians focusing on legislative frameworks, policy creation, and national and international legal mechanisms for internet governance.
Experts and lawmakers shared knowledge about best practices in regulating the internet while balancing national interests with global commitments.
Actionable Recommendations:
A key outcome of the track was the development of actionable recommendations for legislators, ranging from proposals for new laws on data protection and digital rights to guidelines on cybersecurity and international cooperation.
Many sessions focused on how to implement effective legislative action to address emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and 5G.
Challenges and Diverging Perspectives:
While the discussions were rich, there were challenges in reconciling different national priorities. Some participants felt that the sessions lacked consensus on controversial issues like internet censorship and the control of digital content.
The diversity of legislative approaches, particularly between authoritarian and democratic states, occasionally led to tensions regarding the governance of the internet.
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 provided a unique space for legislators and policymakers to discuss critical internet governance issues, with a focus on the role of parliaments in shaping digital policy. The track aimed to bridge the gap between technical experts and policymakers by providing insights into how legislative bodies can support and enhance global internet governance frameworks. It offered a platform for parliamentary leaders to exchange ideas, experiences, and best practices on regulating the internet and addressing digital policy challenges.
Content and Themes
Legislative Approaches to Digital Sovereignty:
One of the central themes was the role of national legislatures in addressing issues related to digital sovereignty and national regulations on the internet.
Debates focused on the balance between global internet governance and the need for national laws that address issues like data privacy, cybersecurity, and internet censorship.
Cybersecurity and Online Safety:
A significant portion of the discussions concentrated on cybersecurity, with a focus on how parliaments can craft laws to protect citizens and critical infrastructure from cyberattacks.
Issues such as the regulation of online content, the prevention of misinformation, and protecting children and vulnerable populations from online harm were also key discussion points.
Digital Inclusion and Access to the Internet:
Sessions addressed how legislation can facilitate digital inclusion by ensuring equal access to the internet and supporting initiatives to connect underserved populations, particularly in developing regions.
Key topics included universal access, affordable broadband, and policies that reduce the digital divide between urban and rural areas.
Digital Rights and Ethical Standards:
Another core theme was the protection of digital rights, with a focus on freedom of expression, data protection, and privacy rights in the digital space.
Parliamentarians discussed the need to establish ethical standards for technology companies, ensuring they respect user rights and adhere to transparent, accountable practices.
Multi-Stakeholder Approach in Policymaking:
Emphasis was placed on the importance of adopting a multi-stakeholder approach to internet governance, recognizing the need for collaboration between governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical communities.
The track highlighted the need for better engagement between legislators and other stakeholders to create policies that are inclusive, informed, and forward-thinking.
Speakers and Participation
Diverse Representation:
The track featured parliamentarians from around the world, including both established democracies and emerging democracies, ensuring a broad range of perspectives on digital policy challenges.
In addition to lawmakers, the track included experts from international organizations, technology companies, and civil society, providing a well-rounded view of the challenges facing internet governance.
Regional and Gender Balance:
Efforts were made to ensure gender and regional balance in the participation of speakers, ensuring that voices from different parts of the world, as well as from different demographic groups, were heard.
This balance allowed for a more comprehensive discussion of digital policies that affect diverse populations and contexts.
Youth and Emerging Leaders:
Some sessions incorporated youth leaders and young parliamentarians, allowing for the inclusion of fresh perspectives on internet governance and digital policies.
Young speakers focused on issues such as youth empowerment, education, and the future of work in the digital age.
Quality of Discussions
High-Level Policy Dialogues:
The discussions were highly strategic, with parliamentarians focusing on legislative frameworks, policy creation, and national and international legal mechanisms for internet governance.
Experts and lawmakers shared knowledge about best practices in regulating the internet while balancing national interests with global commitments.
Actionable Recommendations:
A key outcome of the track was the development of actionable recommendations for legislators, ranging from proposals for new laws on data protection and digital rights to guidelines on cybersecurity and international cooperation.
Many sessions focused on how to implement effective legislative action to address emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and 5G.
Challenges and Diverging Perspectives:
While the discussions were rich, there were challenges in reconciling different national priorities. Some participants felt that the sessions lacked consensus on controversial issues like internet censorship and the control of digital content.
The diversity of legislative approaches, particularly between authoritarian and democratic states, occasionally led to tensions regarding the governance of the internet.
Overview
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 provided a dedicated space for young people to engage in discussions about internet governance, digital rights, and the future of technology. This track emphasized the importance of youth involvement in shaping the policies and frameworks that will define the digital landscape. It aimed to empower the next generation of digital leaders, providing them with a platform to voice their concerns, ideas, and solutions to key global challenges in internet governance.
Content and Themes
Digital Rights and Online Freedom:
One of the central themes in the Youth Track was the protection of digital rights, including privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information.
Youth participants explored how legislation and policy can safeguard their rights in the digital space, addressing concerns such as data privacy, surveillance, and content regulation.
The Future of Work and Digital Skills:
Youth-focused sessions explored the future of work in the digital economy, discussing the growing importance of digital literacy and skills development.
Discussions also focused on preparing young people for the rapidly evolving job market, including the role of AI, automation, and the gig economy in shaping future employment opportunities.
Youth Participation in Digital Policy:
The track emphasized the need for greater youth participation in internet governance, advocating for more inclusive decision-making processes.
Young participants discussed how they could play a more active role in shaping policies that affect their digital lives, including engagement in global forums and national policymaking processes.
Digital Inclusion and Access to Technology:
Access to the internet and digital inclusion were key themes in discussions, particularly regarding the challenges faced by underserved communities.
Youth participants highlighted the importance of affordable, reliable internet access for all and discussed how to address the digital divide that exists in many parts of the world.
Social Impact of Technology:
Several sessions focused on the social impact of emerging technologies, such as the ethical implications of AI, data collection, and social media.
Youth leaders shared their concerns about the negative effects of technology, such as cyberbullying, misinformation, and the mental health impact of social media.
Speakers and Participation
Youth-Led Sessions:
The Youth Track was largely led by young people, with many sessions being organized and moderated by youth participants themselves. This ensured that the discussions remained relevant to their experiences and perspectives.
Youth leaders from various regions, including Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Europe, brought diverse viewpoints to the discussions, ensuring a global representation of youth interests.
Mentorship from Experts:
Youth participants had the opportunity to engage with experienced professionals, policymakers, and academics through mentoring sessions, enabling them to gain insights into the complexities of internet governance and digital policy.
These mentorship opportunities also helped build capacity among young participants, empowering them to become future leaders in the field of internet governance.
Collaboration with Other IGF Tracks:
The Youth Track fostered collaboration with other tracks at IGF 2024, including the Civil Society Track, the Private Sector Track, and the Parliamentary Track. This multi-stakeholder approach ensured that youth voices were integrated into broader discussions on internet governance.
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 provided a dedicated space for young people to engage in discussions about internet governance, digital rights, and the future of technology. This track emphasized the importance of youth involvement in shaping the policies and frameworks that will define the digital landscape. It aimed to empower the next generation of digital leaders, providing them with a platform to voice their concerns, ideas, and solutions to key global challenges in internet governance.
Content and Themes
Digital Rights and Online Freedom:
One of the central themes in the Youth Track was the protection of digital rights, including privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information.
Youth participants explored how legislation and policy can safeguard their rights in the digital space, addressing concerns such as data privacy, surveillance, and content regulation.
The Future of Work and Digital Skills:
Youth-focused sessions explored the future of work in the digital economy, discussing the growing importance of digital literacy and skills development.
Discussions also focused on preparing young people for the rapidly evolving job market, including the role of AI, automation, and the gig economy in shaping future employment opportunities.
Youth Participation in Digital Policy:
The track emphasized the need for greater youth participation in internet governance, advocating for more inclusive decision-making processes.
Young participants discussed how they could play a more active role in shaping policies that affect their digital lives, including engagement in global forums and national policymaking processes.
Digital Inclusion and Access to Technology:
Access to the internet and digital inclusion were key themes in discussions, particularly regarding the challenges faced by underserved communities.
Youth participants highlighted the importance of affordable, reliable internet access for all and discussed how to address the digital divide that exists in many parts of the world.
Social Impact of Technology:
Several sessions focused on the social impact of emerging technologies, such as the ethical implications of AI, data collection, and social media.
Youth leaders shared their concerns about the negative effects of technology, such as cyberbullying, misinformation, and the mental health impact of social media.
Speakers and Participation
Youth-Led Sessions:
The Youth Track was largely led by young people, with many sessions being organized and moderated by youth participants themselves. This ensured that the discussions remained relevant to their experiences and perspectives.
Youth leaders from various regions, including Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Europe, brought diverse viewpoints to the discussions, ensuring a global representation of youth interests.
Mentorship from Experts:
Youth participants had the opportunity to engage with experienced professionals, policymakers, and academics through mentoring sessions, enabling them to gain insights into the complexities of internet governance and digital policy.
These mentorship opportunities also helped build capacity among young participants, empowering them to become future leaders in the field of internet governance.
Collaboration with Other IGF Tracks:
The Youth Track fostered collaboration with other tracks at IGF 2024, including the Civil Society Track, the Private Sector Track, and the Parliamentary Track. This multi-stakeholder approach ensured that youth voices were integrated into broader discussions on internet governance.
Overview
The IGF 2024 programme demonstrated a growing awareness of the need for gender inclusion and diversity in the discussions surrounding internet governance. Gender equality is increasingly seen as a key issue in the digital space, with concerns about digital access, gender-based violence, data privacy, and representation in tech leadership and policy-making.
Gender Balance in Sessions and Speakers
Equal Representation of Gender:
The IGF 2024 programme made noticeable efforts to ensure gender balance in the selection of speakers, panelists, and moderators across various tracks. There was a conscious attempt to include both women and men in leadership roles within sessions, particularly in high-level discussions on digital rights, policy, and governance.
While there was significant representation, some sessions could have benefitted from even more female voices in key positions, especially in technical and policy discussions, where women remain underrepresented globally.
Diverse Gender Perspectives:
The programme highlighted the importance of gender-responsive policies in addressing the digital divide and promoting inclusive internet governance. A notable number of sessions focused on the gender gap in access to technology, digital skills, and leadership roles within the internet governance community.
Gender-specific issues such as gender-based violence online, online harassment, and gender-sensitive cybersecurity policies were regularly addressed, showing the intersection of gender and technology in the context of safety and equity.
Key Gender Themes Addressed
Digital Inclusion and Access:
A central theme in the discussions was digital inclusion, with a particular focus on women's access to the internet and digital tools. Many speakers discussed the need to address the digital gender divide, particularly in low-income and rural areas, where women and girls often face greater barriers to digital participation.
Some sessions advocated for policies that prioritize affordable internet access for women and girls, as well as initiatives to promote digital literacy and skills development among women to help them compete in the digital economy.
Gender-Based Violence and Online Harassment:
The fight against online gender-based violence (GBV) was a major topic in IGF 2024, with discussions focusing on cyberbullying, sex trafficking, and revenge porn, all of which disproportionately affect women and marginalized genders.
Several sessions focused on the need for robust policies to protect digital spaces from harassment, providing safe online spaces for women and supporting the reporting and addressing of online abuse.
Gender Representation in Tech and Policy:
The programme also reflected on the underrepresentation of women in technology leadership, policy-making, and internet governance roles. Many discussions emphasized the need for gender diversity in leadership positions and the importance of including women in decision-making processes on technology policy.
There was recognition that diverse leadership can contribute to more inclusive and equitable digital policies, ensuring that women's needs and perspectives are better represented in internet governance discussions.
Inclusive Data and Privacy:
Data privacy discussions included a gender-sensitive approach, highlighting the fact that women’s data is often subject to greater risks of exploitation, particularly in cases involving sensitive information related to health, personal security, and reproductive rights.
Some sessions focused on ensuring that data protection laws are designed with gendered experiences in mind, especially in addressing the vulnerabilities women face regarding online surveillance and exploitation.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
More Gender-Specific Sessions:
While gender-related issues were included in the programme, some participants suggested that there could have been more dedicated sessions on gender-specific topics within each track, rather than having these discussions scattered across broader themes.
A more focused gender track could provide a platform to deeply explore issues like women’s digital rights, gender-sensitive tech design, and intersectional gender justice in the digital sphere.
Addressing Intersectionality:
While there was a strong focus on gender, some sessions did not fully address the intersectionality of gender with other aspects of identity, such as race, class, disability, and sexual orientation.
Greater attention to how different groups of women experience digital inequities—particularly marginalized women, women of color, and LGBTQ+ women—would provide a more comprehensive view of digital gender inequality.
Increased Female Leadership in Technical Sessions:
There is still a need for greater female representation in technical sessions, especially in cybersecurity, AI, internet infrastructure, and data science.
Efforts to ensure that women are equally represented in both technical and leadership roles in these fields would help address the gender disparity in tech and policymaking roles.
Positive Outcomes and Recommendations
Gender-Sensitive Internet Governance Policies:
A major positive outcome from IGF 2024 was the heightened recognition of the need for gender-sensitive internet governance policies. There were clear calls for governments, private sector entities, and civil society organizations to develop policies that explicitly promote gender equality in the digital sphere.
Future IGF sessions can build on this momentum by incorporating gender mainstreaming into all aspects of internet governance, from policy formulation to the design of digital platforms and technologies.
Promoting Women in Leadership Roles:
IGF 2024 demonstrated the importance of promoting women’s leadership in both the public and private sectors, particularly in internet governance bodies, international organizations, and tech companies.
Efforts to mentor and empower young women to take on leadership roles in the digital space are crucial for closing the gender leadership gap. Sessions that focus on mentorship programs and leadership development for women in tech could help foster a new generation of women leaders.
Support for Gender-Responsive Technology Design:
A growing recognition of the need for gender-responsive technology design emerged from IGF 2024, calling for tech companies to develop tools that prioritize women’s safety, privacy, and access needs.
Future discussions could expand on how inclusive design principles can be implemented to create technologies that work for everyone, particularly women and marginalized genders.
The IGF 2024 programme demonstrated a growing awareness of the need for gender inclusion and diversity in the discussions surrounding internet governance. Gender equality is increasingly seen as a key issue in the digital space, with concerns about digital access, gender-based violence, data privacy, and representation in tech leadership and policy-making.
Gender Balance in Sessions and Speakers
Equal Representation of Gender:
The IGF 2024 programme made noticeable efforts to ensure gender balance in the selection of speakers, panelists, and moderators across various tracks. There was a conscious attempt to include both women and men in leadership roles within sessions, particularly in high-level discussions on digital rights, policy, and governance.
While there was significant representation, some sessions could have benefitted from even more female voices in key positions, especially in technical and policy discussions, where women remain underrepresented globally.
Diverse Gender Perspectives:
The programme highlighted the importance of gender-responsive policies in addressing the digital divide and promoting inclusive internet governance. A notable number of sessions focused on the gender gap in access to technology, digital skills, and leadership roles within the internet governance community.
Gender-specific issues such as gender-based violence online, online harassment, and gender-sensitive cybersecurity policies were regularly addressed, showing the intersection of gender and technology in the context of safety and equity.
Key Gender Themes Addressed
Digital Inclusion and Access:
A central theme in the discussions was digital inclusion, with a particular focus on women's access to the internet and digital tools. Many speakers discussed the need to address the digital gender divide, particularly in low-income and rural areas, where women and girls often face greater barriers to digital participation.
Some sessions advocated for policies that prioritize affordable internet access for women and girls, as well as initiatives to promote digital literacy and skills development among women to help them compete in the digital economy.
Gender-Based Violence and Online Harassment:
The fight against online gender-based violence (GBV) was a major topic in IGF 2024, with discussions focusing on cyberbullying, sex trafficking, and revenge porn, all of which disproportionately affect women and marginalized genders.
Several sessions focused on the need for robust policies to protect digital spaces from harassment, providing safe online spaces for women and supporting the reporting and addressing of online abuse.
Gender Representation in Tech and Policy:
The programme also reflected on the underrepresentation of women in technology leadership, policy-making, and internet governance roles. Many discussions emphasized the need for gender diversity in leadership positions and the importance of including women in decision-making processes on technology policy.
There was recognition that diverse leadership can contribute to more inclusive and equitable digital policies, ensuring that women's needs and perspectives are better represented in internet governance discussions.
Inclusive Data and Privacy:
Data privacy discussions included a gender-sensitive approach, highlighting the fact that women’s data is often subject to greater risks of exploitation, particularly in cases involving sensitive information related to health, personal security, and reproductive rights.
Some sessions focused on ensuring that data protection laws are designed with gendered experiences in mind, especially in addressing the vulnerabilities women face regarding online surveillance and exploitation.
Challenges and Areas for Improvement
More Gender-Specific Sessions:
While gender-related issues were included in the programme, some participants suggested that there could have been more dedicated sessions on gender-specific topics within each track, rather than having these discussions scattered across broader themes.
A more focused gender track could provide a platform to deeply explore issues like women’s digital rights, gender-sensitive tech design, and intersectional gender justice in the digital sphere.
Addressing Intersectionality:
While there was a strong focus on gender, some sessions did not fully address the intersectionality of gender with other aspects of identity, such as race, class, disability, and sexual orientation.
Greater attention to how different groups of women experience digital inequities—particularly marginalized women, women of color, and LGBTQ+ women—would provide a more comprehensive view of digital gender inequality.
Increased Female Leadership in Technical Sessions:
There is still a need for greater female representation in technical sessions, especially in cybersecurity, AI, internet infrastructure, and data science.
Efforts to ensure that women are equally represented in both technical and leadership roles in these fields would help address the gender disparity in tech and policymaking roles.
Positive Outcomes and Recommendations
Gender-Sensitive Internet Governance Policies:
A major positive outcome from IGF 2024 was the heightened recognition of the need for gender-sensitive internet governance policies. There were clear calls for governments, private sector entities, and civil society organizations to develop policies that explicitly promote gender equality in the digital sphere.
Future IGF sessions can build on this momentum by incorporating gender mainstreaming into all aspects of internet governance, from policy formulation to the design of digital platforms and technologies.
Promoting Women in Leadership Roles:
IGF 2024 demonstrated the importance of promoting women’s leadership in both the public and private sectors, particularly in internet governance bodies, international organizations, and tech companies.
Efforts to mentor and empower young women to take on leadership roles in the digital space are crucial for closing the gender leadership gap. Sessions that focus on mentorship programs and leadership development for women in tech could help foster a new generation of women leaders.
Support for Gender-Responsive Technology Design:
A growing recognition of the need for gender-responsive technology design emerged from IGF 2024, calling for tech companies to develop tools that prioritize women’s safety, privacy, and access needs.
Future discussions could expand on how inclusive design principles can be implemented to create technologies that work for everyone, particularly women and marginalized genders.
Overview
The IGF 2024 Village served as a dynamic and interactive space within the broader IGF programme. The Village provided a platform for participants to engage informally, share knowledge, and network with other attendees. It was designed to foster collaboration, provide a more relaxed environment for conversation, and facilitate the exchange of ideas outside the more structured session formats of the IGF. This interactive hub highlighted the importance of community engagement, multi-stakeholder dialogue, and informal networking as key components of the IGF experience.
Structure and Design
Physical and Virtual Presence:
The Village had a hybrid format, with both physical and virtual components. This allowed for the participation of attendees who were present in person as well as those joining remotely, making the Village accessible to a broader audience.
Booths and Exhibits were set up within the physical space, where different organizations, initiatives, and stakeholders could showcase their work related to internet governance, digital rights, and technology policy.
Interactive and Informal Environment:
The Village emphasized an informal, relaxed environment designed to encourage spontaneous conversations and collaborative discussions. Unlike traditional conference sessions, the Village fostered interactive dialogue rather than formal presentations.
Participants could engage in discussions on a range of topics, from technical innovations to policy advocacy, all while networking with a diverse group of stakeholders including civil society organizations, governments, private sector actors, and academics.
Workshops and Demonstrations:
Throughout the event, the Village hosted a variety of workshops, demonstrations, and interactive sessions. These were designed to showcase cutting-edge technologies, share knowledge on emerging issues, and encourage practical learning. For example, there were sessions focused on topics like data protection, digital inclusion, and AI ethics.
These workshops were often hands-on, providing attendees with the opportunity to gain insights into practical applications and real-world challenges in internet governance.
Themes and Focus Areas
Digital Inclusion:
One of the central themes of the IGF 2024 Village was digital inclusion, with a particular focus on ensuring that marginalized groups—such as rural populations, women, and people with disabilities—have access to the digital tools and resources they need to participate fully in the digital economy.
Exhibits and sessions highlighted innovative solutions for affordable internet access, digital literacy programs, and policies for bridging the digital divide.
Youth and Digital Governance:
The Village featured several youth-led activities and initiatives, including interactive workshops and youth-focused discussions. This underscored the IGF’s commitment to youth engagement in shaping the future of internet governance and policy.
Young participants had the opportunity to share their ideas, engage with experts, and discuss the role of youth in digital policy and internet governance.
Gender and Digital Rights:
Gender equality and digital rights were prominently featured in the Village. There were discussions on gender-based violence online, the digital gender divide, and policies that promote gender equality in the digital space.
Various organizations presented projects and initiatives aimed at empowering women and girls in the digital realm, particularly in technology education and leadership roles.
Emerging Technologies and Policy:
The Village provided a space for discussions on emerging technologies such as AI, blockchain, 5G, and the metaverse. Experts and innovators presented their latest work, while also discussing the ethical implications, regulatory frameworks, and policy considerations for these rapidly evolving technologies.
There was a particular focus on the need for inclusive innovation and responsible AI, as well as the potential for these technologies to shape future internet governance.
The IGF 2024 Village served as a dynamic and interactive space within the broader IGF programme. The Village provided a platform for participants to engage informally, share knowledge, and network with other attendees. It was designed to foster collaboration, provide a more relaxed environment for conversation, and facilitate the exchange of ideas outside the more structured session formats of the IGF. This interactive hub highlighted the importance of community engagement, multi-stakeholder dialogue, and informal networking as key components of the IGF experience.
Structure and Design
Physical and Virtual Presence:
The Village had a hybrid format, with both physical and virtual components. This allowed for the participation of attendees who were present in person as well as those joining remotely, making the Village accessible to a broader audience.
Booths and Exhibits were set up within the physical space, where different organizations, initiatives, and stakeholders could showcase their work related to internet governance, digital rights, and technology policy.
Interactive and Informal Environment:
The Village emphasized an informal, relaxed environment designed to encourage spontaneous conversations and collaborative discussions. Unlike traditional conference sessions, the Village fostered interactive dialogue rather than formal presentations.
Participants could engage in discussions on a range of topics, from technical innovations to policy advocacy, all while networking with a diverse group of stakeholders including civil society organizations, governments, private sector actors, and academics.
Workshops and Demonstrations:
Throughout the event, the Village hosted a variety of workshops, demonstrations, and interactive sessions. These were designed to showcase cutting-edge technologies, share knowledge on emerging issues, and encourage practical learning. For example, there were sessions focused on topics like data protection, digital inclusion, and AI ethics.
These workshops were often hands-on, providing attendees with the opportunity to gain insights into practical applications and real-world challenges in internet governance.
Themes and Focus Areas
Digital Inclusion:
One of the central themes of the IGF 2024 Village was digital inclusion, with a particular focus on ensuring that marginalized groups—such as rural populations, women, and people with disabilities—have access to the digital tools and resources they need to participate fully in the digital economy.
Exhibits and sessions highlighted innovative solutions for affordable internet access, digital literacy programs, and policies for bridging the digital divide.
Youth and Digital Governance:
The Village featured several youth-led activities and initiatives, including interactive workshops and youth-focused discussions. This underscored the IGF’s commitment to youth engagement in shaping the future of internet governance and policy.
Young participants had the opportunity to share their ideas, engage with experts, and discuss the role of youth in digital policy and internet governance.
Gender and Digital Rights:
Gender equality and digital rights were prominently featured in the Village. There were discussions on gender-based violence online, the digital gender divide, and policies that promote gender equality in the digital space.
Various organizations presented projects and initiatives aimed at empowering women and girls in the digital realm, particularly in technology education and leadership roles.
Emerging Technologies and Policy:
The Village provided a space for discussions on emerging technologies such as AI, blockchain, 5G, and the metaverse. Experts and innovators presented their latest work, while also discussing the ethical implications, regulatory frameworks, and policy considerations for these rapidly evolving technologies.
There was a particular focus on the need for inclusive innovation and responsible AI, as well as the potential for these technologies to shape future internet governance.
Overview
The communications, outreach, and outputs of the IGF 2024 played a critical role in engaging participants, disseminating information, and amplifying the discussions held during the event. The IGF’s ability to communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders, including policymakers, industry leaders, civil society, and the general public, is essential for advancing the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance.
The outreach strategies aimed to raise awareness about the IGF’s objectives, drive participation from diverse communities, and highlight key themes. The outputs, including reports, recordings, and publications, ensured that the outcomes of the event were accessible and could be leveraged for future discussions.
Communications Strategy and Effectiveness
Clear and Accessible Messaging:
The IGF 2024 communications team ensured that key messages about the event's objectives, themes, and call for participation were conveyed clearly through various channels. They focused on explaining the relevance of the IGF to multiple stakeholders, from policy professionals to youth and technology enthusiasts.
The use of plain language and easily digestible content helped make the event more accessible to a wider audience, particularly newcomers to internet governance.
Multilingual Outreach:
Given the global nature of the IGF, communications efforts were made available in multiple languages, including English, Spanish, French, and Arabic, among others. This ensured a wider, more inclusive reach across different regions.
Translating key materials, such as the session agendas, pre-event briefings, and guidelines, helped participants from various linguistic backgrounds engage more fully in the discussions.
Website and Online Presence:
The IGF website served as a central hub for all event-related communications. It provided information on session schedules, speakers, and resources. The site was regularly updated with relevant materials, including event highlights, news releases, and session summaries.
In addition to the website, social media platforms (such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn) were leveraged to provide real-time updates, engage with the community, and promote key sessions and speakers.
A dedicated IGF 2024 hashtag (e.g., #IGF2024) was used to track conversations and engage with online participants, ensuring broader digital visibility.
The communications, outreach, and outputs of the IGF 2024 played a critical role in engaging participants, disseminating information, and amplifying the discussions held during the event. The IGF’s ability to communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders, including policymakers, industry leaders, civil society, and the general public, is essential for advancing the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance.
The outreach strategies aimed to raise awareness about the IGF’s objectives, drive participation from diverse communities, and highlight key themes. The outputs, including reports, recordings, and publications, ensured that the outcomes of the event were accessible and could be leveraged for future discussions.
Communications Strategy and Effectiveness
Clear and Accessible Messaging:
The IGF 2024 communications team ensured that key messages about the event's objectives, themes, and call for participation were conveyed clearly through various channels. They focused on explaining the relevance of the IGF to multiple stakeholders, from policy professionals to youth and technology enthusiasts.
The use of plain language and easily digestible content helped make the event more accessible to a wider audience, particularly newcomers to internet governance.
Multilingual Outreach:
Given the global nature of the IGF, communications efforts were made available in multiple languages, including English, Spanish, French, and Arabic, among others. This ensured a wider, more inclusive reach across different regions.
Translating key materials, such as the session agendas, pre-event briefings, and guidelines, helped participants from various linguistic backgrounds engage more fully in the discussions.
Website and Online Presence:
The IGF website served as a central hub for all event-related communications. It provided information on session schedules, speakers, and resources. The site was regularly updated with relevant materials, including event highlights, news releases, and session summaries.
In addition to the website, social media platforms (such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn) were leveraged to provide real-time updates, engage with the community, and promote key sessions and speakers.
A dedicated IGF 2024 hashtag (e.g., #IGF2024) was used to track conversations and engage with online participants, ensuring broader digital visibility.
IGF 2024:
Suggestions for Improvements for IGF 2025
1. Strengthen Early Engagement and Timeline for the Preparatory Process
Extended Timeline for Call for Inputs:
The timeline for calls for session proposals and thematic inputs could be extended to give more time for stakeholders to carefully prepare their contributions. A longer preparation period would allow for wider outreach and better-quality submissions, especially for stakeholders from underrepresented regions.
Clearer Deadlines and Milestones:
It would be helpful to set clearer deadlines and milestones for each stage of the preparatory process, starting from the Open Consultations to the session proposal review and the final program confirmation. This would allow stakeholders to track progress more effectively and contribute in a timely manner.
Regular Updates and Check-ins:
The IGF Secretariat could provide regular updates on the status of the preparatory process, especially during key phases, such as the session selection process and feedback on thematic inputs. These updates can be shared through email newsletters, social media updates, or directly through the IGF platform, ensuring all stakeholders are informed and can adjust accordingly.
2. Improve the Session Proposal and Selection Process
More Transparent Selection Criteria:
The session selection process could benefit from greater transparency. The criteria used by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in selecting session proposals should be communicated clearly to all stakeholders from the outset. Transparency in how proposals are evaluated and selected will help build trust in the process.
Diverse Representation in Session Topics:
The selection process should prioritize ensuring diversity not just in geography but also in the topics covered. While traditional internet governance topics are important, future IGFs should give more emphasis to emerging technologies (such as AI, blockchain, and IoT) and digital transformation, which are becoming increasingly central to global discussions on internet governance.
Broader Stakeholder Input into Session Themes:
In addition to the MAG's input, stakeholders from various groups, such as youth, women, and small businesses, could be invited to participate more actively in shaping session themes. This would help ensure that the issues they care about are well represented in the program.
3. Enhance MAG and Open Consultations Meetings
Broader Stakeholder Participation in MAG Meetings:
The MAG meetings play a central role in shaping the IGF’s agenda, but it is important to expand participation. One way to do this is by creating more opportunities for stakeholder consultations between MAG meetings. These consultations could take the form of open webinars, surveys, or regional events, where MAG members interact directly with other stakeholders to better understand their needs and expectations.
Structured Feedback Mechanisms for Open Consultations:
Open Consultations are a critical part of the preparatory process, but their effectiveness could be increased with a structured feedback mechanism. After each consultation, the IGF Secretariat could produce a summary report or a feedback digest outlining the main takeaways and how these inputs are being incorporated into the planning process.
Engagement with Regional IGFs and National Initiatives:
MAG meetings should include more systematic engagement with regional IGFs and National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs). These consultations should focus on how regional concerns can be better integrated into the IGF’s global agenda. NRI representatives could be invited to share insights from their regional activities and discuss how they can feed into the overarching IGF process.
4. Strengthen Inclusivity in All Aspects of IGF 2025
Better Engagement with Underrepresented Groups:
The IGF 2025 should focus on improving the participation of underrepresented groups, particularly women, youth, and communities from the Global South. Specific outreach efforts could be made to universities, community organizations, and non-governmental groups in these regions to ensure that their perspectives are reflected in the IGF discussions.
Accessible Formats and Tools:
Ensuring that the preparatory process and event content is available in accessible formats, including sign language interpretation, closed captioning, and screen reader-friendly formats, is essential for inclusive participation. Additional efforts should be made to provide these features during both virtual and in-person sessions.
Promotion of Gender Equality in Program Development:
There should be specific efforts to ensure gender balance in session panels, speakers, and moderators. This could be supported by creating guidelines or recommendations for gender parity when developing session proposals and selecting speakers.
5. Promote Virtual and Hybrid Engagement
Improve Hybrid Formats:
The hybrid format from IGF 2024 was an important success, but it can be improved further in IGF 2025. For example, there could be a more structured approach to virtual engagement, allowing virtual participants to be more actively involved in sessions through live Q&A, polling, and interactive platforms.
Facilitate Networking for Virtual Participants:
Networking can be difficult in virtual formats. The IGF 2025 should consider providing more structured networking opportunities for virtual participants, such as virtual lounges, breakout rooms, or discussion boards where attendees can interact and collaborate on themes outside of formal sessions.
Enhanced Use of Interactive Tools:
The use of interactive tools such as live polling, real-time voting, and virtual roundtables could make sessions more engaging, particularly for remote participants. These tools can be integrated into the platform to allow for better interaction and feedback during and after sessions.
1. Strengthen Early Engagement and Timeline for the Preparatory Process
Extended Timeline for Call for Inputs:
The timeline for calls for session proposals and thematic inputs could be extended to give more time for stakeholders to carefully prepare their contributions. A longer preparation period would allow for wider outreach and better-quality submissions, especially for stakeholders from underrepresented regions.
Clearer Deadlines and Milestones:
It would be helpful to set clearer deadlines and milestones for each stage of the preparatory process, starting from the Open Consultations to the session proposal review and the final program confirmation. This would allow stakeholders to track progress more effectively and contribute in a timely manner.
Regular Updates and Check-ins:
The IGF Secretariat could provide regular updates on the status of the preparatory process, especially during key phases, such as the session selection process and feedback on thematic inputs. These updates can be shared through email newsletters, social media updates, or directly through the IGF platform, ensuring all stakeholders are informed and can adjust accordingly.
2. Improve the Session Proposal and Selection Process
More Transparent Selection Criteria:
The session selection process could benefit from greater transparency. The criteria used by the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) in selecting session proposals should be communicated clearly to all stakeholders from the outset. Transparency in how proposals are evaluated and selected will help build trust in the process.
Diverse Representation in Session Topics:
The selection process should prioritize ensuring diversity not just in geography but also in the topics covered. While traditional internet governance topics are important, future IGFs should give more emphasis to emerging technologies (such as AI, blockchain, and IoT) and digital transformation, which are becoming increasingly central to global discussions on internet governance.
Broader Stakeholder Input into Session Themes:
In addition to the MAG's input, stakeholders from various groups, such as youth, women, and small businesses, could be invited to participate more actively in shaping session themes. This would help ensure that the issues they care about are well represented in the program.
3. Enhance MAG and Open Consultations Meetings
Broader Stakeholder Participation in MAG Meetings:
The MAG meetings play a central role in shaping the IGF’s agenda, but it is important to expand participation. One way to do this is by creating more opportunities for stakeholder consultations between MAG meetings. These consultations could take the form of open webinars, surveys, or regional events, where MAG members interact directly with other stakeholders to better understand their needs and expectations.
Structured Feedback Mechanisms for Open Consultations:
Open Consultations are a critical part of the preparatory process, but their effectiveness could be increased with a structured feedback mechanism. After each consultation, the IGF Secretariat could produce a summary report or a feedback digest outlining the main takeaways and how these inputs are being incorporated into the planning process.
Engagement with Regional IGFs and National Initiatives:
MAG meetings should include more systematic engagement with regional IGFs and National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs). These consultations should focus on how regional concerns can be better integrated into the IGF’s global agenda. NRI representatives could be invited to share insights from their regional activities and discuss how they can feed into the overarching IGF process.
4. Strengthen Inclusivity in All Aspects of IGF 2025
Better Engagement with Underrepresented Groups:
The IGF 2025 should focus on improving the participation of underrepresented groups, particularly women, youth, and communities from the Global South. Specific outreach efforts could be made to universities, community organizations, and non-governmental groups in these regions to ensure that their perspectives are reflected in the IGF discussions.
Accessible Formats and Tools:
Ensuring that the preparatory process and event content is available in accessible formats, including sign language interpretation, closed captioning, and screen reader-friendly formats, is essential for inclusive participation. Additional efforts should be made to provide these features during both virtual and in-person sessions.
Promotion of Gender Equality in Program Development:
There should be specific efforts to ensure gender balance in session panels, speakers, and moderators. This could be supported by creating guidelines or recommendations for gender parity when developing session proposals and selecting speakers.
5. Promote Virtual and Hybrid Engagement
Improve Hybrid Formats:
The hybrid format from IGF 2024 was an important success, but it can be improved further in IGF 2025. For example, there could be a more structured approach to virtual engagement, allowing virtual participants to be more actively involved in sessions through live Q&A, polling, and interactive platforms.
Facilitate Networking for Virtual Participants:
Networking can be difficult in virtual formats. The IGF 2025 should consider providing more structured networking opportunities for virtual participants, such as virtual lounges, breakout rooms, or discussion boards where attendees can interact and collaborate on themes outside of formal sessions.
Enhanced Use of Interactive Tools:
The use of interactive tools such as live polling, real-time voting, and virtual roundtables could make sessions more engaging, particularly for remote participants. These tools can be integrated into the platform to allow for better interaction and feedback during and after sessions.
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Overall Programme Structure and Flow
For IGF 2025, the programme structure and flow should be designed to foster a collaborative, engaging, and action-oriented environment. Below are suggestions to ensure the IGF 2025 meets the needs of diverse stakeholders and delivers meaningful discussions on internet governance:
1. Clear Thematic Tracks and Focus Areas
Thematic Clusters:
The programme should be organized into clear thematic clusters to facilitate focused discussions. These tracks could be structured around key areas such as:
Digital Rights and Inclusion
Cybersecurity and Digital Trust
Emerging Technologies (AI, IoT, Blockchain)
Data Governance and Privacy
Internet Access and Connectivity
Global Internet Governance Policies
Youth, Gender, and Digital Equity
Each track could include pre-event consultations to refine topics, ensuring that the themes are relevant and up-to-date with global challenges.
Cross-Cutting Themes:
In addition to the thematic clusters, there should be cross-cutting themes that address critical issues such as:
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration
Climate Change and the Internet
Digital Transformation and Economic Growth
Ethics and Regulation in Emerging Technologies
2. Session Formats
Keynotes and High-Level Plenaries:
The programme should start with keynote speeches and high-level plenary sessions that set the tone for the discussions. These could involve global leaders from governments, the private sector, and civil society, addressing broad internet governance challenges and opportunities.
Thematic Sessions:
Each thematic track should feature panel discussions, workshops, and roundtables that bring together experts from various sectors. These sessions should include:
Expert-led panels with diverse speakers from different sectors and regions.
Interactive workshops that engage attendees in problem-solving and practical discussions.
Roundtable discussions with smaller groups for in-depth conversation on specific subtopics.
Dynamic and Flexible Formats:
Sessions should use a mix of formats to maintain engagement and interactivity, such as:
Q&A sessions where participants can directly interact with panelists.
Real-time polling or live surveys to gather opinions and feedback.
Breakout sessions for smaller group discussions on niche topics.
Hands-on demonstrations of emerging technologies.
For IGF 2025, the programme structure and flow should be designed to foster a collaborative, engaging, and action-oriented environment. Below are suggestions to ensure the IGF 2025 meets the needs of diverse stakeholders and delivers meaningful discussions on internet governance:
1. Clear Thematic Tracks and Focus Areas
Thematic Clusters:
The programme should be organized into clear thematic clusters to facilitate focused discussions. These tracks could be structured around key areas such as:
Digital Rights and Inclusion
Cybersecurity and Digital Trust
Emerging Technologies (AI, IoT, Blockchain)
Data Governance and Privacy
Internet Access and Connectivity
Global Internet Governance Policies
Youth, Gender, and Digital Equity
Each track could include pre-event consultations to refine topics, ensuring that the themes are relevant and up-to-date with global challenges.
Cross-Cutting Themes:
In addition to the thematic clusters, there should be cross-cutting themes that address critical issues such as:
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration
Climate Change and the Internet
Digital Transformation and Economic Growth
Ethics and Regulation in Emerging Technologies
2. Session Formats
Keynotes and High-Level Plenaries:
The programme should start with keynote speeches and high-level plenary sessions that set the tone for the discussions. These could involve global leaders from governments, the private sector, and civil society, addressing broad internet governance challenges and opportunities.
Thematic Sessions:
Each thematic track should feature panel discussions, workshops, and roundtables that bring together experts from various sectors. These sessions should include:
Expert-led panels with diverse speakers from different sectors and regions.
Interactive workshops that engage attendees in problem-solving and practical discussions.
Roundtable discussions with smaller groups for in-depth conversation on specific subtopics.
Dynamic and Flexible Formats:
Sessions should use a mix of formats to maintain engagement and interactivity, such as:
Q&A sessions where participants can directly interact with panelists.
Real-time polling or live surveys to gather opinions and feedback.
Breakout sessions for smaller group discussions on niche topics.
Hands-on demonstrations of emerging technologies.
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Programme Content (Thematic Approach, Session Types, Speaker Profiles)
For IGF 2025, the programme content should reflect the evolving landscape of internet governance, with an emphasis on current and emerging digital issues, inclusivity, and global collaboration. The thematic approach, session types, and speaker profiles must be aligned with the goal of fostering meaningful conversations and driving actionable outcomes in the digital space.
1. Thematic Approach
A. Core Themes and Focus Areas: The programme should be structured around several core thematic tracks that represent the most critical areas in internet governance, with a focus on both ongoing and emerging issues. These themes can include:
Digital Rights and Inclusion
Internet access as a fundamental right.
The role of digital technologies in achieving social inclusion.
Privacy, data protection, and human rights in the digital age.
Gender equality and youth participation in digital transformation.
Cybersecurity and Digital Trust
Global collaboration for cybersecurity.
Securing the digital ecosystem: Protecting data, networks, and critical infrastructure.
Ethics in cybersecurity: Balancing privacy with security.
Building public trust in emerging technologies (e.g., AI, blockchain).
Emerging Technologies and Innovation
Internet governance for emerging technologies such as AI, IoT, and blockchain.
Ethical implications of emerging technologies on society.
Governance frameworks for autonomous systems and digital currencies.
Global Internet Governance Policies
Governance of cross-border data flows.
Digital sovereignty vs. global governance models.
Multi-stakeholder cooperation in shaping global digital norms.
Digital Economy and Connectivity
The role of the internet in enabling global trade, innovation, and economic growth.
The impact of digital divide on economic opportunities in developing regions.
Leveraging technology for economic development and entrepreneurship.
Climate Change and the Internet
The environmental impact of internet infrastructure and digital technologies.
Sustainable practices for data centers, networks, and cloud services.
The role of the internet in climate change advocacy and action.
Digital Education and Capacity Building
Promoting digital literacy, skills, and education globally.
Addressing the challenges of education in a post-pandemic digital world.
Building the capacity of governments, institutions, and individuals to engage in the digital economy.
B. Cross-Cutting Themes: In addition to core themes, there should be cross-cutting issues that impact all stakeholders and discussions, such as:
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration in governance and policy-making.
Ethics in Internet Governance: Building ethical frameworks for emerging technologies.
Digital Identity and Access Control: Addressing digital identities, access, and rights management.
For IGF 2025, the programme content should reflect the evolving landscape of internet governance, with an emphasis on current and emerging digital issues, inclusivity, and global collaboration. The thematic approach, session types, and speaker profiles must be aligned with the goal of fostering meaningful conversations and driving actionable outcomes in the digital space.
1. Thematic Approach
A. Core Themes and Focus Areas: The programme should be structured around several core thematic tracks that represent the most critical areas in internet governance, with a focus on both ongoing and emerging issues. These themes can include:
Digital Rights and Inclusion
Internet access as a fundamental right.
The role of digital technologies in achieving social inclusion.
Privacy, data protection, and human rights in the digital age.
Gender equality and youth participation in digital transformation.
Cybersecurity and Digital Trust
Global collaboration for cybersecurity.
Securing the digital ecosystem: Protecting data, networks, and critical infrastructure.
Ethics in cybersecurity: Balancing privacy with security.
Building public trust in emerging technologies (e.g., AI, blockchain).
Emerging Technologies and Innovation
Internet governance for emerging technologies such as AI, IoT, and blockchain.
Ethical implications of emerging technologies on society.
Governance frameworks for autonomous systems and digital currencies.
Global Internet Governance Policies
Governance of cross-border data flows.
Digital sovereignty vs. global governance models.
Multi-stakeholder cooperation in shaping global digital norms.
Digital Economy and Connectivity
The role of the internet in enabling global trade, innovation, and economic growth.
The impact of digital divide on economic opportunities in developing regions.
Leveraging technology for economic development and entrepreneurship.
Climate Change and the Internet
The environmental impact of internet infrastructure and digital technologies.
Sustainable practices for data centers, networks, and cloud services.
The role of the internet in climate change advocacy and action.
Digital Education and Capacity Building
Promoting digital literacy, skills, and education globally.
Addressing the challenges of education in a post-pandemic digital world.
Building the capacity of governments, institutions, and individuals to engage in the digital economy.
B. Cross-Cutting Themes: In addition to core themes, there should be cross-cutting issues that impact all stakeholders and discussions, such as:
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration in governance and policy-making.
Ethics in Internet Governance: Building ethical frameworks for emerging technologies.
Digital Identity and Access Control: Addressing digital identities, access, and rights management.
Connecting Community Intersessional Activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs with IGF 2025 Process
The IGF 2025 process should build upon and integrate the outcomes of community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive approach to internet governance discussions. The involvement of these groups is essential for fostering global collaboration and ensuring that diverse perspectives, especially from underserved regions and groups, are incorporated into the IGF process.
Here are key strategies for connecting these activities with the IGF 2025 process:
1. Strengthening the Link Between Community Intersessional Activities and IGF 2025
A. Integrating Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Dynamic Coalitions (DCs), and Policy Networks (PNs)
Visibility and Relevance in the Programme:
BPFs, DCs, and PNs should be integrated as core components within the IGF 2025 programme. Each intersessional activity should have a dedicated session or space at the event to present their findings, insights, and recommendations. This helps ensure that the work of these groups is clearly visible and adds value to the IGF 2025 discussions.
Ongoing Feedback Loops:
To improve integration, intersessional activities should be more closely aligned with the annual themes of the IGF. For example, the outcomes of the BPFs on Cybersecurity or Digital Inclusion could directly inform and complement thematic discussions on those topics at IGF 2025. The MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) can work closely with these groups to ensure that their work is not siloed but actively informs the broader agenda.
Collaborative Development of Policy Recommendations:
Intersessional groups should be actively involved in developing policy recommendations that could be presented during the event, creating a feedback mechanism that allows for input from thematic sessions, youth forums, and regional IGFs. This creates a more dynamic process, where recommendations evolve throughout the preparatory process and are validated in real-time.
Virtual and Hybrid Participation:
Given that many BPFs and DCs may operate year-round, IGF 2025 should facilitate virtual spaces and pre-event consultations where these groups can continue discussions and prepare input for the event. This approach helps maintain momentum and involvement, especially from those who may not be able to attend in person.
2. Strengthening the Role of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
A. Regional and National IGFs Integration into the IGF 2025 Programme
Regional Tracks and Thematic Sessions:
IGF 2025 should allocate dedicated time slots for Regional IGFs (RIGFs) to report on their activities, challenges, and regional priorities. These sessions can be aligned with thematic tracks to bring in regional perspectives on global issues. For instance, a session on digital sovereignty could feature reports from European, African, or Asian NRIs on their policies and strategies.
Cross-Regional Dialogue:
Encouraging cross-regional dialogues at IGF 2025 will allow participants to compare the approaches, challenges, and solutions specific to their regions. For example, an Asia-Pacific IGF session could directly interact with African or Latin American IGFs to discuss shared challenges such as cybersecurity or digital inclusion.
Regional Advocacy and Capacity Building:
NRIs play an essential role in capacity building and advocacy. IGF 2025 should strengthen their visibility through regional reportbacks and advocacy sessions. NRIs can host workshops or advocacy sessions that empower local communities and policymakers to better engage in internet governance discussions and policy development at the global level.
The IGF 2025 process should build upon and integrate the outcomes of community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive approach to internet governance discussions. The involvement of these groups is essential for fostering global collaboration and ensuring that diverse perspectives, especially from underserved regions and groups, are incorporated into the IGF process.
Here are key strategies for connecting these activities with the IGF 2025 process:
1. Strengthening the Link Between Community Intersessional Activities and IGF 2025
A. Integrating Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Dynamic Coalitions (DCs), and Policy Networks (PNs)
Visibility and Relevance in the Programme:
BPFs, DCs, and PNs should be integrated as core components within the IGF 2025 programme. Each intersessional activity should have a dedicated session or space at the event to present their findings, insights, and recommendations. This helps ensure that the work of these groups is clearly visible and adds value to the IGF 2025 discussions.
Ongoing Feedback Loops:
To improve integration, intersessional activities should be more closely aligned with the annual themes of the IGF. For example, the outcomes of the BPFs on Cybersecurity or Digital Inclusion could directly inform and complement thematic discussions on those topics at IGF 2025. The MAG (Multistakeholder Advisory Group) can work closely with these groups to ensure that their work is not siloed but actively informs the broader agenda.
Collaborative Development of Policy Recommendations:
Intersessional groups should be actively involved in developing policy recommendations that could be presented during the event, creating a feedback mechanism that allows for input from thematic sessions, youth forums, and regional IGFs. This creates a more dynamic process, where recommendations evolve throughout the preparatory process and are validated in real-time.
Virtual and Hybrid Participation:
Given that many BPFs and DCs may operate year-round, IGF 2025 should facilitate virtual spaces and pre-event consultations where these groups can continue discussions and prepare input for the event. This approach helps maintain momentum and involvement, especially from those who may not be able to attend in person.
2. Strengthening the Role of National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
A. Regional and National IGFs Integration into the IGF 2025 Programme
Regional Tracks and Thematic Sessions:
IGF 2025 should allocate dedicated time slots for Regional IGFs (RIGFs) to report on their activities, challenges, and regional priorities. These sessions can be aligned with thematic tracks to bring in regional perspectives on global issues. For instance, a session on digital sovereignty could feature reports from European, African, or Asian NRIs on their policies and strategies.
Cross-Regional Dialogue:
Encouraging cross-regional dialogues at IGF 2025 will allow participants to compare the approaches, challenges, and solutions specific to their regions. For example, an Asia-Pacific IGF session could directly interact with African or Latin American IGFs to discuss shared challenges such as cybersecurity or digital inclusion.
Regional Advocacy and Capacity Building:
NRIs play an essential role in capacity building and advocacy. IGF 2025 should strengthen their visibility through regional reportbacks and advocacy sessions. NRIs can host workshops or advocacy sessions that empower local communities and policymakers to better engage in internet governance discussions and policy development at the global level.
GF 2025 Participants: Who to Invite and How to Interconnect Participants
For IGF 2025 to remain a key global forum for internet governance, the participation process should reflect its multi-stakeholder model, ensuring broad representation from all sectors involved in shaping the future of the internet. This will include governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and international organizations, with an emphasis on fostering inclusivity, interactivity, and collaboration. Effective inter-connection among participants is essential for achieving meaningful discussions, collaborative actions, and actionable outcomes.
1. Who to Invite
To ensure comprehensive and inclusive discussions at IGF 2025, a wide variety of stakeholders should be invited, including those who have traditionally been underrepresented in internet governance forums. Below is a breakdown of the key groups to be invited:
A. Government Representatives
National Governments: Representatives from ministries and agencies that manage digital policy, cybersecurity, digital economy, communications, data protection, and international relations.
Regional Government Bodies: Officials from regional organizations such as the European Union, African Union, ASEAN, OAS, and CARICOM.
Regulatory Bodies and Lawmakers: Telecommunications regulators, privacy protection authorities, and legislators responsible for internet-related laws.
Developing and Least-Developed Countries: Ensure strong representation from global south countries to reflect the interests of nations facing unique challenges, such as digital inclusion, infrastructure, and access to emerging technologies.
B. Private Sector
Global Tech Companies: Executives and leaders from large tech firms (e.g., Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) that influence internet governance through innovation and policy advocacy.
SMEs and Startups: Invite a diverse range of startups and small businesses involved in emerging tech fields, including artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, blockchain, and fintech.
Telecom Operators and Infrastructure Providers: Companies that play a key role in internet infrastructure, cloud services, and telecommunications.
Venture Capitalists and investors involved in funding digital startups and technologies that could impact the future of the internet.
C. Civil Society
Advocacy Groups: NGOs, human rights organizations, and civil society groups advocating for privacy, freedom of expression, internet access, and gender equality in the digital sphere.
Community Leaders: Digital rights activists, youth advocates, and regional community leaders who can provide on-the-ground perspectives about the digital needs and challenges in local contexts.
Environmental NGOs: Organizations advocating for the sustainable development of internet infrastructure and the environmental impact of the digital economy.
D. Academia and Research Institutions
Academics and Researchers: Invite experts from universities and research centers specializing in internet governance, digital policy, cybersecurity, data ethics, and technology law.
Think Tanks and Policy Institutes: Institutions that conduct research on digital policy, global governance, and the future of the internet should also be included to provide evidence-based recommendations.
E. International and Intergovernmental Organizations
United Nations Agencies: Invite representatives from organizations like the UN, ITU, UNESCO, UNDP, and UNICEF, which focus on global digital development, digital rights, and internet access.
International Trade Organizations: Representatives from WTO, OECD, and World Bank that focus on global trade, digital economy, and cross-border data flow regulations.
Regional Intergovernmental Bodies: Regional organizations such as African Union, ASEAN, and EU that address internet governance and digital policy at the regional level.
F. Youth and Emerging Leaders
Young Leaders: Encourage participation from youth advocates, entrepreneurs, students, and tech innovators who are shaping the future of the internet and digital technology.
Youth-Led Organizations: Include youth-led IGFs and groups working on issues like digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and online freedom.
For IGF 2025 to remain a key global forum for internet governance, the participation process should reflect its multi-stakeholder model, ensuring broad representation from all sectors involved in shaping the future of the internet. This will include governments, private sector, civil society, academia, and international organizations, with an emphasis on fostering inclusivity, interactivity, and collaboration. Effective inter-connection among participants is essential for achieving meaningful discussions, collaborative actions, and actionable outcomes.
1. Who to Invite
To ensure comprehensive and inclusive discussions at IGF 2025, a wide variety of stakeholders should be invited, including those who have traditionally been underrepresented in internet governance forums. Below is a breakdown of the key groups to be invited:
A. Government Representatives
National Governments: Representatives from ministries and agencies that manage digital policy, cybersecurity, digital economy, communications, data protection, and international relations.
Regional Government Bodies: Officials from regional organizations such as the European Union, African Union, ASEAN, OAS, and CARICOM.
Regulatory Bodies and Lawmakers: Telecommunications regulators, privacy protection authorities, and legislators responsible for internet-related laws.
Developing and Least-Developed Countries: Ensure strong representation from global south countries to reflect the interests of nations facing unique challenges, such as digital inclusion, infrastructure, and access to emerging technologies.
B. Private Sector
Global Tech Companies: Executives and leaders from large tech firms (e.g., Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, etc.) that influence internet governance through innovation and policy advocacy.
SMEs and Startups: Invite a diverse range of startups and small businesses involved in emerging tech fields, including artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, blockchain, and fintech.
Telecom Operators and Infrastructure Providers: Companies that play a key role in internet infrastructure, cloud services, and telecommunications.
Venture Capitalists and investors involved in funding digital startups and technologies that could impact the future of the internet.
C. Civil Society
Advocacy Groups: NGOs, human rights organizations, and civil society groups advocating for privacy, freedom of expression, internet access, and gender equality in the digital sphere.
Community Leaders: Digital rights activists, youth advocates, and regional community leaders who can provide on-the-ground perspectives about the digital needs and challenges in local contexts.
Environmental NGOs: Organizations advocating for the sustainable development of internet infrastructure and the environmental impact of the digital economy.
D. Academia and Research Institutions
Academics and Researchers: Invite experts from universities and research centers specializing in internet governance, digital policy, cybersecurity, data ethics, and technology law.
Think Tanks and Policy Institutes: Institutions that conduct research on digital policy, global governance, and the future of the internet should also be included to provide evidence-based recommendations.
E. International and Intergovernmental Organizations
United Nations Agencies: Invite representatives from organizations like the UN, ITU, UNESCO, UNDP, and UNICEF, which focus on global digital development, digital rights, and internet access.
International Trade Organizations: Representatives from WTO, OECD, and World Bank that focus on global trade, digital economy, and cross-border data flow regulations.
Regional Intergovernmental Bodies: Regional organizations such as African Union, ASEAN, and EU that address internet governance and digital policy at the regional level.
F. Youth and Emerging Leaders
Young Leaders: Encourage participation from youth advocates, entrepreneurs, students, and tech innovators who are shaping the future of the internet and digital technology.
Youth-Led Organizations: Include youth-led IGFs and groups working on issues like digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and online freedom.
Possible Improvements to the IGF in the Context of the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact
As we approach WSIS+20 and the Global Digital Compact (GDC), it is crucial for the IGF 2025 to align its discussions, sessions, and overall approach with these global initiatives. The IGF has a unique mandate to provide a multistakeholder platform for dialogue and to contribute towards the implementation and review of key global digital policies and frameworks, such as the WSIS outcomes and the Global Digital Compact. Below are some suggestions for how the IGF 2025 could improve its alignment with these efforts, ensuring that its role in the broader global digital governance ecosystem is maximized.
1. Contribution to the WSIS+20 Review
The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) outcomes, adopted in 2005, set forth a roadmap for the development of the global information society. As the WSIS+20 review approaches in 2025, the IGF has an essential role to play in the review process, in terms of evaluating the progress made on the WSIS Action Lines and supporting the implementation of those outcomes in the digital age.
A. Create a Dedicated WSIS+20 Track at IGF 2025
Session Series on WSIS Action Lines: Given that the General Assembly resolution A/70/125 calls for a high-level review of the WSIS outcomes, IGF 2025 could dedicate a specific track or session series to the progress, challenges, and future directions for each of the 11 WSIS Action Lines. These sessions should provide concrete assessments of how these areas have been implemented over the last 20 years and where improvements are needed.
Incorporate Stakeholder Feedback: Use IGF as a platform for collecting input from stakeholders across governments, private sector, civil society, and academia on the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines. This input can then feed directly into the WSIS+20 review process by helping assess what has worked, what hasn’t, and what is still needed to achieve the goals of the WSIS framework.
Showcase Progress in Specific Regions or Sectors: Highlight regional and sectoral success stories where the WSIS Action Lines have had tangible outcomes. For instance, some regions or countries may have made significant strides in e-government, internet access, cybersecurity, or ICT infrastructure. These best practices should be showcased in IGF 2025 to inspire action in other regions.
B. Facilitate a WSIS+20 Thematic Roundtable with Key Stakeholders
Engage High-Level Stakeholders: Given the high-level review called by the General Assembly, IGF 2025 could host a roundtable session or a special dialogue with ministers, UN officials, and leading international organizations to evaluate the implementation of WSIS outcomes and discuss strategies to accelerate progress in the remaining areas.
Track Regional Reports: Each regional IGF or National IGF could be encouraged to prepare regional reports that discuss how the WSIS Action Lines have been adapted and implemented at the regional and local level, providing insights for the WSIS+20 review.
C. WSIS+20 Action Plan within the IGF Framework
Develop an IGF Action Plan for WSIS+20: The IGF 2025 could adopt a formal action plan based on its discussions to contribute to the WSIS+20 review and identify specific next steps for ensuring full implementation of WSIS outcomes. This could be a synthesis document produced by the IGF, similar to how the BPFs or Dynamic Coalitions contribute to IGF’s overall work.
As we approach WSIS+20 and the Global Digital Compact (GDC), it is crucial for the IGF 2025 to align its discussions, sessions, and overall approach with these global initiatives. The IGF has a unique mandate to provide a multistakeholder platform for dialogue and to contribute towards the implementation and review of key global digital policies and frameworks, such as the WSIS outcomes and the Global Digital Compact. Below are some suggestions for how the IGF 2025 could improve its alignment with these efforts, ensuring that its role in the broader global digital governance ecosystem is maximized.
1. Contribution to the WSIS+20 Review
The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) outcomes, adopted in 2005, set forth a roadmap for the development of the global information society. As the WSIS+20 review approaches in 2025, the IGF has an essential role to play in the review process, in terms of evaluating the progress made on the WSIS Action Lines and supporting the implementation of those outcomes in the digital age.
A. Create a Dedicated WSIS+20 Track at IGF 2025
Session Series on WSIS Action Lines: Given that the General Assembly resolution A/70/125 calls for a high-level review of the WSIS outcomes, IGF 2025 could dedicate a specific track or session series to the progress, challenges, and future directions for each of the 11 WSIS Action Lines. These sessions should provide concrete assessments of how these areas have been implemented over the last 20 years and where improvements are needed.
Incorporate Stakeholder Feedback: Use IGF as a platform for collecting input from stakeholders across governments, private sector, civil society, and academia on the implementation of the WSIS Action Lines. This input can then feed directly into the WSIS+20 review process by helping assess what has worked, what hasn’t, and what is still needed to achieve the goals of the WSIS framework.
Showcase Progress in Specific Regions or Sectors: Highlight regional and sectoral success stories where the WSIS Action Lines have had tangible outcomes. For instance, some regions or countries may have made significant strides in e-government, internet access, cybersecurity, or ICT infrastructure. These best practices should be showcased in IGF 2025 to inspire action in other regions.
B. Facilitate a WSIS+20 Thematic Roundtable with Key Stakeholders
Engage High-Level Stakeholders: Given the high-level review called by the General Assembly, IGF 2025 could host a roundtable session or a special dialogue with ministers, UN officials, and leading international organizations to evaluate the implementation of WSIS outcomes and discuss strategies to accelerate progress in the remaining areas.
Track Regional Reports: Each regional IGF or National IGF could be encouraged to prepare regional reports that discuss how the WSIS Action Lines have been adapted and implemented at the regional and local level, providing insights for the WSIS+20 review.
C. WSIS+20 Action Plan within the IGF Framework
Develop an IGF Action Plan for WSIS+20: The IGF 2025 could adopt a formal action plan based on its discussions to contribute to the WSIS+20 review and identify specific next steps for ensuring full implementation of WSIS outcomes. This could be a synthesis document produced by the IGF, similar to how the BPFs or Dynamic Coalitions contribute to IGF’s overall work.
The IGF 2024 was a significant event that successfully brought together a wide array of stakeholders to discuss the critical issues surrounding internet governance. The event provided a valuable platform for collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and collective problem-solving. However, there are a few additional observations and suggestions that could help enhance future iterations of the IGF:
Positive Aspects:
Multi-Stakeholder Participation:
One of the defining features of the IGF 2024 was its ability to bring together diverse stakeholders, including governments, private sector, civil society, academic institutions, and technical communities. This multi-stakeholder model is crucial for addressing the complex and cross-cutting issues in internet governance.
The inclusivity of different perspectives, especially from Global South participants, contributed to a more balanced discussion and greater relevance to diverse regional concerns.
Thematic Diversity:
The wide range of themes covered—ranging from digital rights and cybersecurity to digital inclusion and emerging technologies—demonstrated the IGF's ability to adapt to the rapidly changing digital landscape. This diversity of topics ensured that current issues were addressed while looking ahead to future challenges in the digital space.
Youth Engagement:
The emphasis on youth participation was another positive aspect. Youth-led discussions, workshops, and interactive sessions ensured that younger generations had a voice in shaping the future of the internet. This focus is critical for the long-term sustainability of the IGF's goals, as young people will be the primary users and creators of tomorrow's digital ecosystem.
Hybrid Format:
The hybrid format allowed for a broad global reach, accommodating both in-person and virtual participants. This flexibility enhanced accessibility and encouraged wider participation, allowing those unable to attend in person to still contribute meaningfully to the event.
Areas for Improvement:
Virtual Experience and Interaction:
While the hybrid format was generally successful, feedback suggested that virtual engagement could be further improved. Online participants sometimes struggled with feeling disconnected from the in-person experience, especially during informal networking and side discussions.
More advanced tools for real-time interaction, such as virtual roundtables, breakout sessions, and live polls, could help create a more engaging experience for online attendees.
Follow-Up and Continuity:
The IGF's ability to maintain momentum post-event could be enhanced. After the event, there should be clear follow-up actions to ensure that the discussions and recommendations are not only recorded but also acted upon. For example, the synthesis reports and policy recommendations could be more systematically integrated into regional policy dialogues and international initiatives.
Establishing more structured follow-up activities could also encourage ongoing dialogue, building on the connections made during the IGF and driving long-term impact.
Greater Focus on Emerging Technologies:
While emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and 5G were addressed, there could have been more focus on the regulatory frameworks and governance challenges that come with these innovations. More in-depth discussions around ethical AI, digital surveillance, and data sovereignty could have been included, given their increasing relevance in internet governance debates.
Increased Representation from Diverse Regions:
Although there was a good representation from the Global South, there is still room for broader regional diversity, particularly from areas that are often underrepresented, such as parts of Africa and the Pacific Islands. Greater effort should be made to encourage participation from these regions, ensuring that their concerns are included in global internet governance conversations.
Improved Integration of Intersessional Activities:
Intersessional activities, such as Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and National and Regional IGFs, were well-represented, but their integration into the main event program could be more seamless. More prominent and visible slots for these activities could help highlight their importance and ensure that their outputs are better incorporated into the main discussions.
Positive Aspects:
Multi-Stakeholder Participation:
One of the defining features of the IGF 2024 was its ability to bring together diverse stakeholders, including governments, private sector, civil society, academic institutions, and technical communities. This multi-stakeholder model is crucial for addressing the complex and cross-cutting issues in internet governance.
The inclusivity of different perspectives, especially from Global South participants, contributed to a more balanced discussion and greater relevance to diverse regional concerns.
Thematic Diversity:
The wide range of themes covered—ranging from digital rights and cybersecurity to digital inclusion and emerging technologies—demonstrated the IGF's ability to adapt to the rapidly changing digital landscape. This diversity of topics ensured that current issues were addressed while looking ahead to future challenges in the digital space.
Youth Engagement:
The emphasis on youth participation was another positive aspect. Youth-led discussions, workshops, and interactive sessions ensured that younger generations had a voice in shaping the future of the internet. This focus is critical for the long-term sustainability of the IGF's goals, as young people will be the primary users and creators of tomorrow's digital ecosystem.
Hybrid Format:
The hybrid format allowed for a broad global reach, accommodating both in-person and virtual participants. This flexibility enhanced accessibility and encouraged wider participation, allowing those unable to attend in person to still contribute meaningfully to the event.
Areas for Improvement:
Virtual Experience and Interaction:
While the hybrid format was generally successful, feedback suggested that virtual engagement could be further improved. Online participants sometimes struggled with feeling disconnected from the in-person experience, especially during informal networking and side discussions.
More advanced tools for real-time interaction, such as virtual roundtables, breakout sessions, and live polls, could help create a more engaging experience for online attendees.
Follow-Up and Continuity:
The IGF's ability to maintain momentum post-event could be enhanced. After the event, there should be clear follow-up actions to ensure that the discussions and recommendations are not only recorded but also acted upon. For example, the synthesis reports and policy recommendations could be more systematically integrated into regional policy dialogues and international initiatives.
Establishing more structured follow-up activities could also encourage ongoing dialogue, building on the connections made during the IGF and driving long-term impact.
Greater Focus on Emerging Technologies:
While emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and 5G were addressed, there could have been more focus on the regulatory frameworks and governance challenges that come with these innovations. More in-depth discussions around ethical AI, digital surveillance, and data sovereignty could have been included, given their increasing relevance in internet governance debates.
Increased Representation from Diverse Regions:
Although there was a good representation from the Global South, there is still room for broader regional diversity, particularly from areas that are often underrepresented, such as parts of Africa and the Pacific Islands. Greater effort should be made to encourage participation from these regions, ensuring that their concerns are included in global internet governance conversations.
Improved Integration of Intersessional Activities:
Intersessional activities, such as Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and National and Regional IGFs, were well-represented, but their integration into the main event program could be more seamless. More prominent and visible slots for these activities could help highlight their importance and ensure that their outputs are better incorporated into the main discussions.
GOMASI
IT WAS ON POINT
GOOD
IT WAS FINE
GOOD
Gender perspective was balance
Good
IGF 2024:
Grar
No comment
I would like to share some feedback to help improve future editions:
Split Focus Between Tracks:
There appeared to be two distinct events—the IGF track and the Saudi Digital Authority (SDA) track. Many Saudi participants attended only the SDA sessions, while international attendees focused on the IGF track. This created a sense of fragmentation and confusion, undermining the cohesive spirit of the forum.
Lack of Structured Workshop Themes:
The workshops lacked a clear organizational structure. For example, it would have been more effective to dedicate specific rooms or tracks to distinct themes—such as Open Data in Room 1 and Artificial Intelligence in Room 2. This would have made it easier for participants to follow sessions aligned with their interests and allowed for deeper, more focused discussions.
Absence of Objectives or Action Plans:
After attending several workshops, I noticed a lack of clear objectives or actionable takeaways. While the discussions were informative, they often concluded without defined goals or next steps for participants or stakeholders.
No Clear End-of-Forum Outcomes:
I had anticipated that IGF 2024 would culminate in a concrete action plan for all stakeholders, outlining key priorities and goals for the coming year. A mechanism to assess progress at the next IGF would have added value and accountability to the forum.
I hope this feedback is constructive and aids in enhancing the structure and outcomes of future IGF events. A more cohesive and action-oriented approach will ensure that IGF continues to serve as a leading platform for global internet governance dialogue.
Split Focus Between Tracks:
There appeared to be two distinct events—the IGF track and the Saudi Digital Authority (SDA) track. Many Saudi participants attended only the SDA sessions, while international attendees focused on the IGF track. This created a sense of fragmentation and confusion, undermining the cohesive spirit of the forum.
Lack of Structured Workshop Themes:
The workshops lacked a clear organizational structure. For example, it would have been more effective to dedicate specific rooms or tracks to distinct themes—such as Open Data in Room 1 and Artificial Intelligence in Room 2. This would have made it easier for participants to follow sessions aligned with their interests and allowed for deeper, more focused discussions.
Absence of Objectives or Action Plans:
After attending several workshops, I noticed a lack of clear objectives or actionable takeaways. While the discussions were informative, they often concluded without defined goals or next steps for participants or stakeholders.
No Clear End-of-Forum Outcomes:
I had anticipated that IGF 2024 would culminate in a concrete action plan for all stakeholders, outlining key priorities and goals for the coming year. A mechanism to assess progress at the next IGF would have added value and accountability to the forum.
I hope this feedback is constructive and aids in enhancing the structure and outcomes of future IGF events. A more cohesive and action-oriented approach will ensure that IGF continues to serve as a leading platform for global internet governance dialogue.
Good Experience
Good
No Clear Outcomes
No Clear Outcomes
No Clear Outcomes
We had hoped to meet these leaders in dedicated solo sessions to engage in deeper discussions on major topics and explore actionable insights.
No Comment
No Comment
No Comment
IGF 2024:
-
For next year’s program, I suggest making it more concise with clearly defined tracks, where each track is assigned to a dedicated location (e.g., Red Room for Topic 1, Blue Room for Topic 2). Additionally, each track should culminate in a clear action plan outlining objectives, responsibilities, and follow-up measures to ensure tangible outcomes and accountability.
-
-
-
-
I had anticipated that IGF 2024 would culminate in a concrete action plan for all stakeholders, outlining key priorities and goals for the coming year. A mechanism to assess progress at the next IGF would have added value and accountability to the forum.
GUTIERREZ NIETO
I think more promotion is needed. I did not know the final agenda until 2 dayas before, so it was not possible for me to attend all events that I ws interested.
I think it was good. Thematic focus nd structure works well.
Great. Remote assitance always is a good option. Prehaps cover even small sessions would be good next time.
Registration process was not good. I made mine 1-2 months before the event and I did not receive any feedback until I call organizares to request mi badget. This parte could be improved.
I think all were good.
No comments on this regard.
No comments on this regard.
Some sessions were unbalanced, not because of the speaker's experience and knowledge, but because of his or her ability to connect with the audience.
Good.
Good as well.
No comments on this regard.
I didn't really notice it.
No comments on this.
Well, once the event started, activities flowed efficiently.
IGF 2024:
As I mentioned, some of the preliminary (organizational) activities require attention to connect well with the participants.
As with other similar events, it is always good to explore structures that are in line with the current times.
In the same line with previous answer. Additionally, consider the speakers' communication skills, not just their experience and knowledge of the topics.
No comments.
Although these questions call for more extensive answers, I think it is essential to compile a summary of the proposals and results of previous IGF meetings. A graphic summary of achievements, persistent themes and proposals would be a very useful tool.
No other.
Hussin
The IGF 2024 preparatory process demonstrates a strong commitment to inclusivity, transparency, and effective stakeholder engagement through its well-structured timeline, open call for issues, equitable session selection, and collaborative MAG meetings.
The IGF 2024 programme reflects a well-thought-out thematic focus, with a structured and dynamic flow that ensures comprehensive discussions and seamless transitions between sessions, fostering meaningful engagement on critical internet governance issues.
The IGF 2024 hybrid format is designed to provide an inclusive and seamless experience, effectively balancing in-person and virtual participation to ensure equitable engagement and accessibility for a global audience.
The IGF 2024 logistics are meticulously planned, with a user-friendly website, intuitive mobile app, streamlined registration, and robust online platforms, complemented by efficient scheduling, a bilateral meeting system, and strong security measures to ensure a smooth and secure participant experience.
IGF 2024:
Iftikhar
IGF 2024:
Kamara
The preparatory process of IGF 2024 was very encouraged because most of the people participated in the Saudi Arabia National IGF Program, and time was in favor of the participants. However; the time sometime go against some participant due to their late preparation. This is due to the fact that most people cannot monitor the starting period of IGF process because the Secretariat of IGF does not give prior notice to participants about a specific time the process will be starting. I thinks IGF Should be given people information about the commencement of application.
The session proposal is the work of the secretariat in my mind, those proposal that will be accepted, draft list should be given or send to the participants for inputs and advice. This will give you information before the meeting. I admired the Saudi Government when it comes to VISA process, the online visa application was very unique and I want all other host countries should copy same, especial visa upon arrival for IGF Participants. The foreign ministry of all host must give direct instruction to their embassies to issue IGF VISA.
The session proposal is the work of the secretariat in my mind, those proposal that will be accepted, draft list should be given or send to the participants for inputs and advice. This will give you information before the meeting. I admired the Saudi Government when it comes to VISA process, the online visa application was very unique and I want all other host countries should copy same, especial visa upon arrival for IGF Participants. The foreign ministry of all host must give direct instruction to their embassies to issue IGF VISA.
The thematic focus and structure and flow was fine as per the outline. Thematic should be review for update to meet the current reality.
The hybrid format as per my experience was good. Those who were outside the Saudi Arabia with strong internet connectivity could view and hear clear. The time differences was the disadvantage to some online participants. Another challenge was the participation of online participants because in person participants were considered highly than online.
This part was very unique especially the mobile application allow most people to register by their selves.
The Best Practice Forum was associated with policy network at 2024. These focus on emerging issue, the intersession was good because regional experiences were exchanged by participants so people. These exchanges were very acceptable to members because the ideas policies will benefit friendly countries. I hope 2025 will follow same.
was very ok
Very ok
The speakers were people with experience and the in person participants have quality discussion and were interactive. Those topics presented were beneficiary and it will help countries with their regulations and policies.
Very good
The parliamentary track or network was good. However; more need to be done to connect more parliamentarian in various regions, especially in Africa. In most countries, most of the parliamentarian or national legislators have no background in technology, bring most of them will prepare them for best policy and regulatory preparation for country.
Very good.
The gender perspective for 2024 was very encouraging. Today, the IGF FORUM has brought on board many female and they have develop interest in technology. but what has not being done is for the IGF participants to copy it back home to encourage female participation or seeking career in TECH.
Very good.
The 2024 communication, outreach and outputs was were very educative that will very useful for internet governance because if you reflect on Africa IGF in Ethiopia, most the outputs were transported on the Global level. We must appreciate the IGF Secretariat needs to be congratulated for handwork.
IGF 2024:
This 2025 VISA process should copy the good side of Saudi Arabia. The Visa on arrival should be order of 2025 and the Government through the Foreign Ministry by given be directly involved. The proposal and other consultations should be regionally approach so that can reflect all regions.
Country different from and administration differ from administration. The host Country of 2025 and the IGF Secretariat should review the overall program of Saudi Arabia that will fit in their system.
The speakers for 2025 profiles are not know, however; people with experiences in both policy and regulations will be of help including people with idea in emerging technologies.
The regional initiatives are very supportive to National IGF, such community network establishment in countries that are helping to bridge Digital Gaps. and regional program like African IGF and the Youth IGFs. The idea generated from these initiative be reflected in the National IGF.
The online participation will be easy. Participants can inter-connected through WhatsApp or platform be created with user names and password. for suggestions and interaction. The IGF Secretariat should try to catalog participants contacts information and prepare a booklet and share it.
The question who to participate left with the Secretariat base on the person experience, and length of time and education background, maybe. The person who will be willing to attend the program.
The question who to participate left with the Secretariat base on the person experience, and length of time and education background, maybe. The person who will be willing to attend the program.
The issue surrounding WSIS+20, the IGF should set committee that will review WSIS+20 and review IGF 2025. This committee will make comparison or come viable points from the IGF 2025 that will be of beneficiary program under review. The IGF in my mind has started supporting the Global Compact and it will continue to support it.
Good
Kanasa
The timeliness was ok for a first timer.
The overall programme was great. All topics discussed in the session, the thematic focus was very well aligned for discussion with current global issues. Unfortunately, most topics that I wanted to attend that has same subject matter topics for the session were in parallel so it was hard to attend at same time. For example, a topic in Data governance which Iam interested in attending might occur parallel to the other on the same time. So I miss out on the other which is also very important to me.
The format and experience was breath taking.
The only problem I had was the limited number of rest rooms.
The only problem I had was the limited number of rest rooms.
The only problem with logistics was the first day registration. I did not receive any email of registration at the particular diplomatic hotel. I thought the registration was in the same place as the conference. So couple of us had to walk about 30 minutes to and 30 minutes back to the conference centre which was tiring especially wearing a high heels.
Also not everyone was able to afford expensive hotels. I was under Global IGF UN travel support without my employees support so I had to find something affordable with breakfast and very good which was about 30 minutes from the center. I paid taxi for first two days and realized they were reaping me off due to no taxi meter. Would be helpful if during registration online our hotels can be assigned to a route for drop offs on the IGF busses for drop off. I missed out on two sessions at 5 pm due to the location of my hotel i had to go at 4:30 pm to avoided traffic to be overcharged.
Also not everyone was able to afford expensive hotels. I was under Global IGF UN travel support without my employees support so I had to find something affordable with breakfast and very good which was about 30 minutes from the center. I paid taxi for first two days and realized they were reaping me off due to no taxi meter. Would be helpful if during registration online our hotels can be assigned to a route for drop offs on the IGF busses for drop off. I missed out on two sessions at 5 pm due to the location of my hotel i had to go at 4:30 pm to avoided traffic to be overcharged.
The intercessional activities was relevant and very current to issues of Internet Governance so far for the ones I attended.
But the only problem I was facing was two topics of the same subject matter occurring parallel so I had to attend one and missed one.
But the only problem I was facing was two topics of the same subject matter occurring parallel so I had to attend one and missed one.
The dynamic session was also very relevant.
The only problem is hope they do not occur in parallel or same timing
The only problem is hope they do not occur in parallel or same timing
I enjoyed the National and Regional IGF.
For Regional can we also include the Pacific IGF into the process so we leave no one behind. Since I come from the Pacific.
For Regional can we also include the Pacific IGF into the process so we leave no one behind. Since I come from the Pacific.
I enjoyed all session I attended. Very rich discussion, the speakers were well versed with the topic of discussion. Thank you
Very good with great discussions
I enjoyed the discussions and the questions and feedbacks
I did not attend any youth track .
From a Gender perspective I believe it was a balanced program and the content was well captured.
The village was just super, breath taking and very comfortable. The only only problem was the less number of rest rooms.
Nil comment on these
IGF 2024:
The predatory process was ok.
Same subject matter topic should not be on same time or as parallel to the other.
Have a booth for Foreign attendees to buy sim card for easy travel and access and Communication when traveling while in the country.
Registration for passes should be at the same place as center.
Have a booth for Foreign attendees to buy sim card for easy travel and access and Communication when traveling while in the country.
Registration for passes should be at the same place as center.
All was great
I would to see more involvement from the Pacific also for the Regional
Can we invite fellows of IGF who are active contributors from across the world. Especially in least developed parts of the world to hear what they are doing in contribution to IGF
Coming from the Pacific and a first timer for the Global IGF The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) can support the implementation of the Global Digital Compact (GDC) by fostering multistakeholder dialogue, sharing best practices, and building capacity. It serves as a platform for monitoring progress, offering policy recommendations, and promoting cross-sector collaboration. The IGF also ensures grassroots participation, advancing digital rights, inclusion, and ethical governance. These efforts align stakeholders globally to achieve the GDC’s goals of a fair, inclusive, and secure digital future.
I had problems every day trying to access wifi because I do not have a sim card.
They could just use emails to register for the wifi and not the sim card.
They could also have a booth for us to buy sim cards inside so it be easy to use every day for wifi or access around the city.
They could just use emails to register for the wifi and not the sim card.
They could also have a booth for us to buy sim cards inside so it be easy to use every day for wifi or access around the city.
Karaman
Good
Good
Excellent
Poor
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Good
Match
Good
Very good
IGF 2024:
offer tickets and accommodation for civil society
fill the gap between practical and academic
speakers must have a PhD or be academic
involve civil society into National, Regional group
civil society
by involve civil society into National, Regional group
No
KARIM
Nothing to add
Top
Bad sound and interferences remotely
Top
IGF 2024:
It's gonna be shirt in terms of timeline but I think that this is something that will be discussed and agreed during MAG meetingd
To contribute meaningfully to the WSIS+20 Review, the IGF 2025 could focus on fostering comprehensive, measurable dialogue about the progress and gaps in implementing the WSIS outcomes. Sessions should align with WSIS action lines and regional reviews, allowing diverse stakeholders to assess progress transparently. By producing concise, actionable recommendations and fostering collaboration between WSIS-related entities, the IGF can bridge implementation gaps and present a cohesive report to inform the high-level meeting in late 2025. Enhanced mechanisms for stakeholder accountability would further ensure tangible follow-up and alignment with WSIS goals.
In supporting the Global Digital Compact (GDC), the IGF can leverage its multi-stakeholder model to champion principles such as universal connectivity, digital inclusion, and trust. It should focus on co-creating draft guidelines for GDC priorities, empowering grassroots and developing nations with actionable strategies. Dedicated sessions could serve as annual progress checkpoints, enhancing accountability while integrating thematic discussions on critical areas like digital rights, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence to align with the Compact's aims.
Overall, IGF's impact could be enhanced through more structured outputs, clearer monitoring frameworks, and innovative formats that broaden grassroots engagement. Aligning IGF’s workstreams with both WSIS+20 and the GDC ensures its relevance and positions it as a vital platform for shaping inclusive digital futures. This strategic positioning reinforces the IGF's mandate as a collaborative forum that drives digital transformation with tangible global outcomes.
In supporting the Global Digital Compact (GDC), the IGF can leverage its multi-stakeholder model to champion principles such as universal connectivity, digital inclusion, and trust. It should focus on co-creating draft guidelines for GDC priorities, empowering grassroots and developing nations with actionable strategies. Dedicated sessions could serve as annual progress checkpoints, enhancing accountability while integrating thematic discussions on critical areas like digital rights, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence to align with the Compact's aims.
Overall, IGF's impact could be enhanced through more structured outputs, clearer monitoring frameworks, and innovative formats that broaden grassroots engagement. Aligning IGF’s workstreams with both WSIS+20 and the GDC ensures its relevance and positions it as a vital platform for shaping inclusive digital futures. This strategic positioning reinforces the IGF's mandate as a collaborative forum that drives digital transformation with tangible global outcomes.
Khan
The IGF 2024 event environment stood out for its excellent organization, and the well-paced sessions ensured a smooth flow throughout the programme. I appreciated how these aspects contributed to a productive and engaging experience.
However, there are a few areas where improvements could enhance the overall experience for participants:
The visa process was quite lengthy, which added stress to the travel preparations. Simplifying or expediting this process would be immensely helpful for future events.
The location in a diplomatic area made accommodations nearby quite costly, limiting options for many attendees.
While the event itself was remarkable, the lunch provided fell short of expectations. Offering a more diverse and satisfying menu could significantly elevate the attendee experience.
Some logistical challenges arose with the session rooms, where noise and interference from nearby rooms and the main hall (IGF Village) were distracting. Improving the soundproofing and layout of these spaces would make sessions more effective.
Social events were noticeably absent, and including them in the programme would foster better networking and community engagement.
At the airport, there was no dedicated desk to assist IGF participants during the immigration process, leading to a lengthy wait of nearly an hour to confirm visas. Setting up such a desk could streamline arrivals.
Lastly, the badge collection process was inconvenient, as the collection area was located far from the event venue. Having badge collection at the same venue would save time and effort for participants.
These constructive changes would further strengthen the IGF’s reputation for delivering impactful and participant-friendly events.
However, there are a few areas where improvements could enhance the overall experience for participants:
The visa process was quite lengthy, which added stress to the travel preparations. Simplifying or expediting this process would be immensely helpful for future events.
The location in a diplomatic area made accommodations nearby quite costly, limiting options for many attendees.
While the event itself was remarkable, the lunch provided fell short of expectations. Offering a more diverse and satisfying menu could significantly elevate the attendee experience.
Some logistical challenges arose with the session rooms, where noise and interference from nearby rooms and the main hall (IGF Village) were distracting. Improving the soundproofing and layout of these spaces would make sessions more effective.
Social events were noticeably absent, and including them in the programme would foster better networking and community engagement.
At the airport, there was no dedicated desk to assist IGF participants during the immigration process, leading to a lengthy wait of nearly an hour to confirm visas. Setting up such a desk could streamline arrivals.
Lastly, the badge collection process was inconvenient, as the collection area was located far from the event venue. Having badge collection at the same venue would save time and effort for participants.
These constructive changes would further strengthen the IGF’s reputation for delivering impactful and participant-friendly events.
I found the IGF 2024 programme to be truly inspiring and well-structured. The thematic focus on areas like digital inclusion, data governance, emerging technologies, and sustainability felt both timely and impactful. The way these themes were integrated into the programme made it easy to engage with the discussions and understand their global relevance.
The structure and flow of the sessions were seamless, balancing high-level policy dialogues with interactive workshops and community-led initiatives. This approach not only encouraged meaningful participation but also created a space where diverse perspectives could come together to drive actionable outcomes.
Overall, IGF 2024 left me feeling optimistic about the collaborative efforts being made to address pressing digital issues and foster a more inclusive and sustainable digital future.
The structure and flow of the sessions were seamless, balancing high-level policy dialogues with interactive workshops and community-led initiatives. This approach not only encouraged meaningful participation but also created a space where diverse perspectives could come together to drive actionable outcomes.
Overall, IGF 2024 left me feeling optimistic about the collaborative efforts being made to address pressing digital issues and foster a more inclusive and sustainable digital future.
The hybrid format of IGF 2024 was thoughtfully designed to ensure inclusivity and accessibility for both in-person and virtual participants. The seamless integration of digital platforms allowed remote attendees to actively engage in discussions, access resources, and participate in real-time interactions alongside those present on-site.
However, some challenges were observed. Enhancing the technical infrastructure to ensure uninterrupted streaming and minimizing time zone barriers would further improve the experience for virtual participants. Additionally, more interactive features, such as breakout rooms and dedicated networking spaces for online attendees, could foster deeper engagement and collaboration.
Overall, the hybrid format showcased the IGF’s commitment to bridging global communities and fostering dialogue, regardless of geographic boundaries.
However, some challenges were observed. Enhancing the technical infrastructure to ensure uninterrupted streaming and minimizing time zone barriers would further improve the experience for virtual participants. Additionally, more interactive features, such as breakout rooms and dedicated networking spaces for online attendees, could foster deeper engagement and collaboration.
Overall, the hybrid format showcased the IGF’s commitment to bridging global communities and fostering dialogue, regardless of geographic boundaries.
The logistics of IGF 2024 were handled with a high level of professionalism and efficiency, ensuring a smooth experience for participants across various aspects:
Website: The event website was user-friendly and informative, providing comprehensive details about the schedule, speakers, and event updates.
Mobile App: The dedicated mobile app was a standout feature, offering easy access to schedules, session details, and real-time notifications, which greatly enhanced convenience for participants.
Schedule: The event schedule was well-organized, with clear time allocations and thematic tracks that made it easy to plan and participate in sessions of interest.
Registration: The registration process was seamless, with intuitive online forms and prompt confirmations, ensuring participants could register without hassle.
Access and Use of Online Platform: The online platform was robust and user-friendly, facilitating virtual participation with features like live streaming, session recordings, and interactive tools for Q&A and networking.
Bilateral Meeting System: The bilateral meeting system was highly effective, allowing participants to schedule and conduct private meetings effortlessly, fostering collaboration and networking.
Security: Security measures were comprehensive, ensuring a safe environment for all attendees, both online and on-site. The organizers demonstrated a strong commitment to safeguarding participant data and event premises.
Overall, the logistics of IGF 2024 reflected meticulous planning and a commitment to providing an inclusive, accessible, and secure experience for all participants.
Website: The event website was user-friendly and informative, providing comprehensive details about the schedule, speakers, and event updates.
Mobile App: The dedicated mobile app was a standout feature, offering easy access to schedules, session details, and real-time notifications, which greatly enhanced convenience for participants.
Schedule: The event schedule was well-organized, with clear time allocations and thematic tracks that made it easy to plan and participate in sessions of interest.
Registration: The registration process was seamless, with intuitive online forms and prompt confirmations, ensuring participants could register without hassle.
Access and Use of Online Platform: The online platform was robust and user-friendly, facilitating virtual participation with features like live streaming, session recordings, and interactive tools for Q&A and networking.
Bilateral Meeting System: The bilateral meeting system was highly effective, allowing participants to schedule and conduct private meetings effortlessly, fostering collaboration and networking.
Security: Security measures were comprehensive, ensuring a safe environment for all attendees, both online and on-site. The organizers demonstrated a strong commitment to safeguarding participant data and event premises.
Overall, the logistics of IGF 2024 reflected meticulous planning and a commitment to providing an inclusive, accessible, and secure experience for all participants.
The Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 were highly effective in fostering collaborative, action-oriented discussions. These intersessional activities played a crucial role in shaping the annual programme by bringing together diverse stakeholders to work on real-world solutions to pressing digital governance issues.
Process:
The process for BPFs and Policy Networks was well-structured, with a clear focus on inclusivity and engagement from a broad range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical communities. The well-organized approach allowed participants to share expertise, build consensus, and identify best practices that can be replicated globally. These forums created a dynamic environment where tangible outcomes emerged from collective knowledge.
Content:
The content produced by the BPFs and Policy Networks was highly relevant and addressed key challenges in areas such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data governance, and the ethical use of emerging technologies. The in-depth, issue-specific discussions provided actionable insights, guidelines, and policy recommendations that are useful for both local and global digital governance efforts. The integration of diverse perspectives helped shape content that was both comprehensive and forward-thinking.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme:
The inclusion of these intersessional activities in the main IGF programme was seamless and added immense value. By dedicating sessions to showcase the outcomes of BPFs and Policy Networks, the IGF allowed participants to actively engage with the results and further refine them. These sessions served as a bridge between year-round work and the annual gathering, ensuring that the discussions were directly tied to ongoing global digital initiatives. This integration made the annual IGF more results-oriented and gave participants a sense of continuity and impact, as they could see the progress made on key topics.
Overall, the BPFs and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 were instrumental in strengthening the IGF’s multistakeholder model and ensuring that the event was not just a forum for discussion but also a space for concrete policy development and collaboration.
Process:
The process for BPFs and Policy Networks was well-structured, with a clear focus on inclusivity and engagement from a broad range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, the private sector, and technical communities. The well-organized approach allowed participants to share expertise, build consensus, and identify best practices that can be replicated globally. These forums created a dynamic environment where tangible outcomes emerged from collective knowledge.
Content:
The content produced by the BPFs and Policy Networks was highly relevant and addressed key challenges in areas such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, data governance, and the ethical use of emerging technologies. The in-depth, issue-specific discussions provided actionable insights, guidelines, and policy recommendations that are useful for both local and global digital governance efforts. The integration of diverse perspectives helped shape content that was both comprehensive and forward-thinking.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme:
The inclusion of these intersessional activities in the main IGF programme was seamless and added immense value. By dedicating sessions to showcase the outcomes of BPFs and Policy Networks, the IGF allowed participants to actively engage with the results and further refine them. These sessions served as a bridge between year-round work and the annual gathering, ensuring that the discussions were directly tied to ongoing global digital initiatives. This integration made the annual IGF more results-oriented and gave participants a sense of continuity and impact, as they could see the progress made on key topics.
Overall, the BPFs and Policy Networks at IGF 2024 were instrumental in strengthening the IGF’s multistakeholder model and ensuring that the event was not just a forum for discussion but also a space for concrete policy development and collaboration.
The Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) at IGF 2024 played a vital role in fostering long-term collaboration and addressing critical issues within the digital governance landscape. These inter-sessional activities were effectively integrated into the annual IGF program, enhancing the event's overall value and impact.
Process:
The process behind the DCs was highly inclusive and transparent, bringing together a diverse range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, industry experts, and technical communities. The DCs operated on a collaborative, consensus-building model, allowing participants to share knowledge, discuss emerging trends, and work towards common goals. This approach ensured that the activities remained focused on addressing real-world challenges while promoting a spirit of cooperation.
Content:
The content produced by the DCs was relevant, timely, and deeply impactful. Covering a wide range of topics such as privacy, digital inclusion, Internet governance principles, and emerging technologies, the discussions generated valuable insights and practical recommendations. The DCs provided a platform for stakeholders to explore and develop solutions to complex issues, ensuring that the content produced was both comprehensive and forward-thinking. By focusing on ongoing challenges and opportunities, the DCs delivered outcomes that were actionable and aligned with the global digital agenda.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme:
The inclusion of DC activities in the annual IGF program was seamless and well-executed. Dedicated sessions allowed participants to dive into the results of the DCs' year-round work, offering opportunities for further discussion, refinement, and collaboration. This integration ensured that the work of the DCs was not isolated but rather became an integral part of the IGF’s overarching dialogue on digital governance. The presence of DC sessions in the main program allowed for a deeper understanding of key topics and created opportunities for cross-pollination between DCs and other IGF initiatives, fostering a more interconnected and holistic approach to digital policy development.
Overall, the Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024 added significant value to the event, ensuring that the discussions were grounded in real, ongoing efforts and that tangible, collaborative solutions were at the forefront. Their inclusion in the annual IGF program further strengthened the IGF’s reputation as a space for meaningful dialogue, actionable outcomes, and multistakeholder collaboration.
Process:
The process behind the DCs was highly inclusive and transparent, bringing together a diverse range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, industry experts, and technical communities. The DCs operated on a collaborative, consensus-building model, allowing participants to share knowledge, discuss emerging trends, and work towards common goals. This approach ensured that the activities remained focused on addressing real-world challenges while promoting a spirit of cooperation.
Content:
The content produced by the DCs was relevant, timely, and deeply impactful. Covering a wide range of topics such as privacy, digital inclusion, Internet governance principles, and emerging technologies, the discussions generated valuable insights and practical recommendations. The DCs provided a platform for stakeholders to explore and develop solutions to complex issues, ensuring that the content produced was both comprehensive and forward-thinking. By focusing on ongoing challenges and opportunities, the DCs delivered outcomes that were actionable and aligned with the global digital agenda.
Inclusion in the Annual Programme:
The inclusion of DC activities in the annual IGF program was seamless and well-executed. Dedicated sessions allowed participants to dive into the results of the DCs' year-round work, offering opportunities for further discussion, refinement, and collaboration. This integration ensured that the work of the DCs was not isolated but rather became an integral part of the IGF’s overarching dialogue on digital governance. The presence of DC sessions in the main program allowed for a deeper understanding of key topics and created opportunities for cross-pollination between DCs and other IGF initiatives, fostering a more interconnected and holistic approach to digital policy development.
Overall, the Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024 added significant value to the event, ensuring that the discussions were grounded in real, ongoing efforts and that tangible, collaborative solutions were at the forefront. Their inclusion in the annual IGF program further strengthened the IGF’s reputation as a space for meaningful dialogue, actionable outcomes, and multistakeholder collaboration.
The National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs) at IGF 2024 were a key highlight, demonstrating the inclusive and global nature of the event. The process of engaging NRIs was seamless, with active participation from a diverse range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and youth. These regional and national initiatives brought valuable localized perspectives to the broader digital governance discussions.
The content of the NRIs was both relevant and impactful, addressing issues that resonate at local, regional, and global levels, such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and digital rights. These discussions helped ensure that the global dialogue reflected the diverse needs and priorities of different regions and communities.
The NRIs were effectively integrated into the annual IGF program through dedicated sessions that showcased their outcomes and encouraged cross-regional collaboration. This inclusion fostered a sense of continuity and highlighted the IGF’s role as a truly global platform, where local and regional voices are empowered to contribute to shaping global digital policies.
The content of the NRIs was both relevant and impactful, addressing issues that resonate at local, regional, and global levels, such as digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and digital rights. These discussions helped ensure that the global dialogue reflected the diverse needs and priorities of different regions and communities.
The NRIs were effectively integrated into the annual IGF program through dedicated sessions that showcased their outcomes and encouraged cross-regional collaboration. This inclusion fostered a sense of continuity and highlighted the IGF’s role as a truly global platform, where local and regional voices are empowered to contribute to shaping global digital policies.
The sessions at IGF 2024 were thoughtfully designed to address critical issues in digital governance, ensuring a well-rounded and engaging program.
Content:
The sessions covered a diverse range of timely and pertinent topics, such as digital inclusion, data privacy, emerging technologies, and Internet governance. The content was both forward-looking and action-oriented, encouraging participants to explore solutions to global challenges while considering local contexts. Each session was aligned with the broader themes of the IGF, providing a comprehensive view of the digital landscape.
Speakers:
The sessions featured a rich diversity of speakers, including experts, policymakers, and community leaders from various sectors. Their contributions were insightful, offering a mix of practical experience and visionary perspectives. This variety enriched the discussions, ensuring that different viewpoints were represented and that attendees were exposed to a wide range of expertise.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions was exceptional, marked by active engagement and meaningful exchanges. The sessions fostered open dialogue and collaborative problem-solving, with participants sharing experiences, best practices, and challenges. The use of interactive formats, such as Q&A and real-time discussions, further enhanced engagement, making the sessions dynamic and inclusive.
In summary, IGF 2024 sessions provided a high-quality platform for informed discussions, creating a space for collaborative thinking and tangible outcomes in digital governance.
Content:
The sessions covered a diverse range of timely and pertinent topics, such as digital inclusion, data privacy, emerging technologies, and Internet governance. The content was both forward-looking and action-oriented, encouraging participants to explore solutions to global challenges while considering local contexts. Each session was aligned with the broader themes of the IGF, providing a comprehensive view of the digital landscape.
Speakers:
The sessions featured a rich diversity of speakers, including experts, policymakers, and community leaders from various sectors. Their contributions were insightful, offering a mix of practical experience and visionary perspectives. This variety enriched the discussions, ensuring that different viewpoints were represented and that attendees were exposed to a wide range of expertise.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions was exceptional, marked by active engagement and meaningful exchanges. The sessions fostered open dialogue and collaborative problem-solving, with participants sharing experiences, best practices, and challenges. The use of interactive formats, such as Q&A and real-time discussions, further enhanced engagement, making the sessions dynamic and inclusive.
In summary, IGF 2024 sessions provided a high-quality platform for informed discussions, creating a space for collaborative thinking and tangible outcomes in digital governance.
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was a standout feature, providing a platform for influential decision-makers to engage in critical discussions on the future of digital governance.
Content:
The content of the High-Level Leaders Track was highly relevant, addressing pressing issues such as digital sovereignty, international cooperation, and the ethical implications of emerging technologies. The discussions were geared towards shaping global digital policies and aligning them with international initiatives like the Global Digital Compact and the World Summit on the Information Society outcomes. This track effectively highlighted the importance of multilateral cooperation in tackling global digital challenges.
Speakers:
The High-Level Leaders Track featured prominent leaders from governments, international organizations, and the private sector. Their expertise and influence added significant weight to the discussions, making them particularly impactful. The speakers provided strategic insights into the complex intersection of policy, technology, and governance, driving the conversation toward actionable solutions and future collaboration.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track was exceptional, marked by constructive dialogue and forward-thinking solutions. The sessions encouraged high-level exchanges between leaders, fostering a greater understanding of the challenges and opportunities in digital governance. The focus on building consensus and partnerships was particularly valuable, creating a space for leaders to collaborate on shaping a more inclusive, secure, and sustainable digital future.
Overall, the High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was a powerful and enriching component of the event, bringing together key decision-makers to guide the future of global digital policy.
Content:
The content of the High-Level Leaders Track was highly relevant, addressing pressing issues such as digital sovereignty, international cooperation, and the ethical implications of emerging technologies. The discussions were geared towards shaping global digital policies and aligning them with international initiatives like the Global Digital Compact and the World Summit on the Information Society outcomes. This track effectively highlighted the importance of multilateral cooperation in tackling global digital challenges.
Speakers:
The High-Level Leaders Track featured prominent leaders from governments, international organizations, and the private sector. Their expertise and influence added significant weight to the discussions, making them particularly impactful. The speakers provided strategic insights into the complex intersection of policy, technology, and governance, driving the conversation toward actionable solutions and future collaboration.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions in the High-Level Leaders Track was exceptional, marked by constructive dialogue and forward-thinking solutions. The sessions encouraged high-level exchanges between leaders, fostering a greater understanding of the challenges and opportunities in digital governance. The focus on building consensus and partnerships was particularly valuable, creating a space for leaders to collaborate on shaping a more inclusive, secure, and sustainable digital future.
Overall, the High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 was a powerful and enriching component of the event, bringing together key decision-makers to guide the future of global digital policy.
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 was an important addition, providing a space for legislators to actively engage in the discussions around digital governance and contribute their unique perspectives on shaping digital policy.
Content:
The content of the Parliamentary Track focused on key issues that legislators must address, such as digital rights, internet regulation, data protection, and the role of parliaments in fostering inclusive digital economies. The track facilitated discussions on how legislative frameworks can evolve to meet the challenges posed by rapid technological advancements, while also ensuring that policy decisions are informed by global best practices.
Speakers:
The track featured prominent parliamentarians, policy experts, and legal advisors who brought a deep understanding of the intersection between law, technology, and governance. These speakers offered valuable insights into how legislative bodies can influence and regulate the digital landscape, providing a legislative perspective to complement discussions from the technical and business sectors.
Quality of Discussions:
The discussions in the Parliamentary Track were thoughtful and constructive, fostering dialogue between lawmakers from diverse regions and backgrounds. This provided a platform for cross-border learning, where participants could share experiences on the implementation of digital policies and legislation. The sessions emphasized collaboration between governments, parliaments, and other stakeholders to ensure that digital governance is inclusive, equitable, and accountable.
Overall, the Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 enriched the event by ensuring that legislators’ voices were included in shaping the future of digital governance, and their contributions were vital in bridging the gap between policy development and technological innovation.
Content:
The content of the Parliamentary Track focused on key issues that legislators must address, such as digital rights, internet regulation, data protection, and the role of parliaments in fostering inclusive digital economies. The track facilitated discussions on how legislative frameworks can evolve to meet the challenges posed by rapid technological advancements, while also ensuring that policy decisions are informed by global best practices.
Speakers:
The track featured prominent parliamentarians, policy experts, and legal advisors who brought a deep understanding of the intersection between law, technology, and governance. These speakers offered valuable insights into how legislative bodies can influence and regulate the digital landscape, providing a legislative perspective to complement discussions from the technical and business sectors.
Quality of Discussions:
The discussions in the Parliamentary Track were thoughtful and constructive, fostering dialogue between lawmakers from diverse regions and backgrounds. This provided a platform for cross-border learning, where participants could share experiences on the implementation of digital policies and legislation. The sessions emphasized collaboration between governments, parliaments, and other stakeholders to ensure that digital governance is inclusive, equitable, and accountable.
Overall, the Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 enriched the event by ensuring that legislators’ voices were included in shaping the future of digital governance, and their contributions were vital in bridging the gap between policy development and technological innovation.
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 was a dynamic and essential component, empowering young voices to actively participate in shaping the future of digital governance and policy.
Content:
The content of the Youth Track focused on issues that directly impact young people, such as digital rights, online safety, access to technology, and the role of youth in driving innovation and digital transformation. It provided a platform for youth to engage in discussions on how to ensure that the digital future is inclusive, accessible, and equitable for all generations. The track emphasized the importance of youth participation in decision-making processes related to digital governance.
Speakers:
The Youth Track featured passionate and knowledgeable speakers, including young leaders, digital advocates, and experts who brought fresh perspectives and innovative ideas to the table. These speakers shared their experiences, challenges, and successes, highlighting the critical role that youth play in advocating for a more inclusive digital world. Their contributions added energy and relevance to the broader IGF discussions.
Quality of Discussions:
The discussions in the Youth Track were lively, interactive, and forward-thinking. Young participants actively shared their views, posed critical questions, and engaged in collaborative problem-solving. The track encouraged dialogue not only between youth but also with other stakeholders, ensuring that their voices were heard in the broader context of global digital governance. The sessions also provided opportunities for mentorship and networking, fostering connections that could help shape the digital leaders of tomorrow.
Overall, the Youth Track at IGF 2024 was a powerful demonstration of the value of including young people in digital governance conversations. It ensured that the voices of future generations were well-represented and actively contributed to the creation of a more inclusive and sustainable digital future.
Content:
The content of the Youth Track focused on issues that directly impact young people, such as digital rights, online safety, access to technology, and the role of youth in driving innovation and digital transformation. It provided a platform for youth to engage in discussions on how to ensure that the digital future is inclusive, accessible, and equitable for all generations. The track emphasized the importance of youth participation in decision-making processes related to digital governance.
Speakers:
The Youth Track featured passionate and knowledgeable speakers, including young leaders, digital advocates, and experts who brought fresh perspectives and innovative ideas to the table. These speakers shared their experiences, challenges, and successes, highlighting the critical role that youth play in advocating for a more inclusive digital world. Their contributions added energy and relevance to the broader IGF discussions.
Quality of Discussions:
The discussions in the Youth Track were lively, interactive, and forward-thinking. Young participants actively shared their views, posed critical questions, and engaged in collaborative problem-solving. The track encouraged dialogue not only between youth but also with other stakeholders, ensuring that their voices were heard in the broader context of global digital governance. The sessions also provided opportunities for mentorship and networking, fostering connections that could help shape the digital leaders of tomorrow.
Overall, the Youth Track at IGF 2024 was a powerful demonstration of the value of including young people in digital governance conversations. It ensured that the voices of future generations were well-represented and actively contributed to the creation of a more inclusive and sustainable digital future.
From a gender perspective, the IGF 2024 program demonstrated a strong commitment to inclusivity and diversity, ensuring that gender-related issues were prominently featured in discussions and that women and marginalized genders were represented across sessions.
Content:
The program addressed critical gender-related topics such as digital inclusion, gender equality in tech, online safety for women, and the gendered impacts of emerging technologies. These sessions provided a platform to discuss how gender disparities in the digital world can be bridged, focusing on empowering women and marginalized genders through technology, education, and policy. The content underscored the importance of creating an inclusive digital space where all voices are heard, and no one is left behind.
Speakers:
The speaker lineup was diverse, with many influential women and gender-diverse leaders contributing to the discussions. Their expertise helped highlight gender-specific challenges and opportunities in digital governance, ensuring that gender perspectives were not only represented but also central to the conversations. Female and gender-diverse speakers brought valuable insights into how digital policies can be crafted to ensure equity and inclusion.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions from a gender perspective was highly engaging and solution-focused. Many sessions fostered meaningful conversations around addressing the barriers that women and marginalized genders face in the digital world, from digital literacy gaps to cybersecurity risks and workplace inequality. These discussions were enriched by the active participation of diverse stakeholders, who shared strategies, resources, and success stories in promoting gender equality in the digital realm.
Overall, IGF 2024 showed a commendable effort to integrate gender considerations into the program, ensuring that gender equality was a key theme throughout the event. The inclusive approach helped create a more balanced and representative dialogue on the future of digital governance, highlighting the importance of gender equality in shaping a fairer digital world.
Content:
The program addressed critical gender-related topics such as digital inclusion, gender equality in tech, online safety for women, and the gendered impacts of emerging technologies. These sessions provided a platform to discuss how gender disparities in the digital world can be bridged, focusing on empowering women and marginalized genders through technology, education, and policy. The content underscored the importance of creating an inclusive digital space where all voices are heard, and no one is left behind.
Speakers:
The speaker lineup was diverse, with many influential women and gender-diverse leaders contributing to the discussions. Their expertise helped highlight gender-specific challenges and opportunities in digital governance, ensuring that gender perspectives were not only represented but also central to the conversations. Female and gender-diverse speakers brought valuable insights into how digital policies can be crafted to ensure equity and inclusion.
Quality of Discussions:
The quality of discussions from a gender perspective was highly engaging and solution-focused. Many sessions fostered meaningful conversations around addressing the barriers that women and marginalized genders face in the digital world, from digital literacy gaps to cybersecurity risks and workplace inequality. These discussions were enriched by the active participation of diverse stakeholders, who shared strategies, resources, and success stories in promoting gender equality in the digital realm.
Overall, IGF 2024 showed a commendable effort to integrate gender considerations into the program, ensuring that gender equality was a key theme throughout the event. The inclusive approach helped create a more balanced and representative dialogue on the future of digital governance, highlighting the importance of gender equality in shaping a fairer digital world.
The IGF 2024 Village was a vibrant and central hub that added significant value to the overall event experience. It served as a dynamic space for networking, collaboration, and engagement, bringing together diverse stakeholders from across the globe.
Content:
The IGF Village was designed to foster interaction and exchange, with dedicated areas for various thematic discussions, exhibitions, and interactive activities. It housed sessions from Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and National and Regional IGFs (NRIs), allowing participants to engage in informal conversations and deep dives on specific topics. The village also featured booths and informational displays, providing a platform for organizations and initiatives to showcase their work and share valuable resources with attendees.
Engagement and Networking:
The IGF Village encouraged informal networking, making it easy for participants to connect with one another, discuss ideas, and form partnerships. The space was designed to be inclusive, offering opportunities for all attendees—from policymakers and industry experts to community groups and young leaders—to come together and collaborate on solutions to pressing digital challenges.
Interactive Elements:
One of the key strengths of the IGF Village was its interactive nature. Attendees could participate in live demonstrations, workshops, and interactive discussions, enriching their experience and learning from hands-on activities. This aspect made the village an engaging and dynamic part of the event, where ideas could be exchanged and turned into practical, real-world solutions.
In summary, the IGF 2024 Village played a vital role in enhancing the overall program by offering an engaging, interactive space for networking, knowledge sharing, and collaboration. It fostered a sense of community and inclusion, allowing participants to deepen their engagement with the event's core themes while also forging meaningful connections.
Content:
The IGF Village was designed to foster interaction and exchange, with dedicated areas for various thematic discussions, exhibitions, and interactive activities. It housed sessions from Best Practice Forums, Dynamic Coalitions, and National and Regional IGFs (NRIs), allowing participants to engage in informal conversations and deep dives on specific topics. The village also featured booths and informational displays, providing a platform for organizations and initiatives to showcase their work and share valuable resources with attendees.
Engagement and Networking:
The IGF Village encouraged informal networking, making it easy for participants to connect with one another, discuss ideas, and form partnerships. The space was designed to be inclusive, offering opportunities for all attendees—from policymakers and industry experts to community groups and young leaders—to come together and collaborate on solutions to pressing digital challenges.
Interactive Elements:
One of the key strengths of the IGF Village was its interactive nature. Attendees could participate in live demonstrations, workshops, and interactive discussions, enriching their experience and learning from hands-on activities. This aspect made the village an engaging and dynamic part of the event, where ideas could be exchanged and turned into practical, real-world solutions.
In summary, the IGF 2024 Village played a vital role in enhancing the overall program by offering an engaging, interactive space for networking, knowledge sharing, and collaboration. It fostered a sense of community and inclusion, allowing participants to deepen their engagement with the event's core themes while also forging meaningful connections.
The communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 were well-executed, ensuring broad engagement, transparent dissemination of information, and effective follow-up on the event's key outcomes.
Communications:
The communication efforts for IGF 2024 were comprehensive, using a variety of channels to reach diverse audiences. Social media, newsletters, and the IGF website were utilized to keep participants informed before, during, and after the event. The use of regular updates and engaging content helped maintain momentum, creating an inclusive atmosphere that invited global participation. Additionally, real-time translations and multimedia coverage allowed for accessible communication across language barriers, further increasing global reach.
Outreach:
Outreach activities were designed to engage a wide range of stakeholders, ensuring the inclusivity of the event. Strategic partnerships with regional, national, and global organizations helped amplify the visibility of IGF 2024, attracting diverse groups from civil society, government, academia, and the private sector. Special focus was given to ensuring the involvement of marginalized groups, young people, and underrepresented regions, which helped enrich the discussions and broaden the perspectives shared at the event.
Outputs:
The outputs of IGF 2024 were rich and actionable, with key findings, policy recommendations, and collaborative solutions emerging from the sessions. Reports and summaries from the discussions, as well as thematic takeaways, were promptly shared with participants and made available on the IGF website. These outputs, including digital tools and resources, served as valuable materials for continued collaboration and implementation of ideas beyond the event. The integration of these outputs into follow-up activities and intersessional work ensured that the discussions led to tangible, real-world impacts.
Overall, the communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 contributed to a successful and inclusive event, strengthening the IGF's role as a leading platform for multistakeholder dialogue on digital governance. The event's transparent communication strategy and effective dissemination of outcomes will continue to support global digital policy development in the years to come.
Communications:
The communication efforts for IGF 2024 were comprehensive, using a variety of channels to reach diverse audiences. Social media, newsletters, and the IGF website were utilized to keep participants informed before, during, and after the event. The use of regular updates and engaging content helped maintain momentum, creating an inclusive atmosphere that invited global participation. Additionally, real-time translations and multimedia coverage allowed for accessible communication across language barriers, further increasing global reach.
Outreach:
Outreach activities were designed to engage a wide range of stakeholders, ensuring the inclusivity of the event. Strategic partnerships with regional, national, and global organizations helped amplify the visibility of IGF 2024, attracting diverse groups from civil society, government, academia, and the private sector. Special focus was given to ensuring the involvement of marginalized groups, young people, and underrepresented regions, which helped enrich the discussions and broaden the perspectives shared at the event.
Outputs:
The outputs of IGF 2024 were rich and actionable, with key findings, policy recommendations, and collaborative solutions emerging from the sessions. Reports and summaries from the discussions, as well as thematic takeaways, were promptly shared with participants and made available on the IGF website. These outputs, including digital tools and resources, served as valuable materials for continued collaboration and implementation of ideas beyond the event. The integration of these outputs into follow-up activities and intersessional work ensured that the discussions led to tangible, real-world impacts.
Overall, the communications, outreach, and outputs of IGF 2024 contributed to a successful and inclusive event, strengthening the IGF's role as a leading platform for multistakeholder dialogue on digital governance. The event's transparent communication strategy and effective dissemination of outcomes will continue to support global digital policy development in the years to come.
IGF 2024:
For IGF 2025, the preparatory process can be further enhanced to streamline planning, foster greater inclusivity, and ensure that the event meets the evolving needs of the global digital governance community. Below are a few suggestions for improvements in the preparatory process:
1. Extended Timeline for Preparation
To ensure that all stakeholders, especially those from underrepresented regions, have ample time to engage, the timeline for IGF 2025 preparation could be extended. Providing more time for the call for session proposals, selection, and other processes would enable more diverse and impactful submissions. An extended timeline would also help participants better prepare for the event, ensuring that they can engage more meaningfully in discussions.
2. More Inclusive and Transparent Session Proposal Process
Broader Outreach for Proposals: To further enhance inclusivity, the outreach for session proposals could be expanded to reach communities, stakeholders, and organizations who may not traditionally engage with the IGF. Special efforts can be made to engage youth groups, smaller civil society organizations, and regions with lower representation, including conflict-affected countries like Afghanistan. Targeted outreach could encourage participation from these regions, ensuring their unique challenges and opportunities are reflected in the discussions.
Clearer Criteria for Session Selection: The process of selecting sessions could benefit from clearer criteria and enhanced transparency. Providing feedback on rejected proposals could help submitters improve their proposals for future events.
Balanced Representation: Ensuring gender, regional, and sectoral diversity in the session selection process is critical. The session selection process could include additional safeguards to ensure equal representation and prevent any one voice or perspective from dominating.
3. Enhanced MAG and Open Consultations Meetings
Wider Participation in MAG: The Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) should aim for broader geographic and stakeholder diversity in its composition. This can include more representation from developing countries, marginalized communities, and sectors like academia and grassroots organizations. The participation of underrepresented regions, including conflict-affected areas such as Afghanistan, would ensure that the perspectives of all communities are represented in the preparatory process.
Hybrid Format for Consultations: Given the increasing global participation in the IGF, Open Consultations and MAG meetings should continue to be hybrid, with both in-person and virtual options. This will increase accessibility for participants unable to attend in person and encourage greater engagement from remote communities.
Clearer Communication and Scheduling: The scheduling of MAG meetings and Open Consultations could be more predictable and communicated earlier. This would give participants more time to plan and prepare, especially those from different time zones or who may have competing commitments.
4. Strengthening Regional and Thematic Focus
Regional Consultations and Feedback: IGF 2025 could benefit from regional consultations before the main event. This would provide an opportunity to gather input on regional priorities and challenges, which can then be reflected in the main sessions. It will also help ensure that local concerns, including those specific to conflict-hit countries like Afghanistan, are adequately addressed.
Thematic Focus Areas: Clear thematic tracks could be established based on global trends and emerging issues, with a focus on cross-cutting issues such as digital sovereignty, AI ethics, and digital human rights. These tracks could be shaped through collaborative consultations with key stakeholders prior to the event.
5. More Capacity-Building and Engagement Activities
Capacity-Building Workshops: Alongside the main sessions, IGF 2025 could include additional capacity-building activities such as workshops, skill-building sessions, and hackathons to foster a deeper understanding of key issues and tools for participants from all backgrounds, particularly from regions facing conflict and instability like Afghanistan.
Pre-event Webinars and Information Sessions: Pre-event webinars could be organized to help participants better understand the session topics, the proposal process, and the logistics of the event. This could help increase the quality of session proposals and ensure participants come prepared to engage fully.
6. Improved Virtual Participation and Hybrid Experience
Enhanced Virtual Platforms: Virtual participation in IGF 2025 should be seamless and interactive. Upgraded virtual platforms with features such as live polling, real-time Q&A, and networking tools can enhance remote engagement, ensuring that those unable to attend in person, especially from countries like Afghanistan, can still contribute meaningfully to discussions.
Hybrid Formats for Sessions: While in-person engagement is valuable, hybrid sessions where virtual participants can directly interact with speakers, ask questions, and contribute to discussions would further enrich the event’s accessibility and inclusivity.
7. Post-Event Follow-up and Documentation
Real-time Documentation: Providing immediate access to session summaries, key takeaways, and video recordings would be valuable for those who couldn’t attend or wish to revisit key points, especially those from conflict-affected areas who may face difficulties accessing live sessions.
Post-event Engagement: After IGF 2025, the preparation of actionable reports and recommendations from the sessions can further support the long-term implementation of ideas. Follow-up consultations or virtual forums can keep the dialogue alive and track progress on critical issues raised at the event.
Conclusion
In summary, IGF 2025's preparatory process could benefit from a more inclusive, transparent, and regionally-focused approach. Enhanced communication, clearer timelines, and a hybrid approach to meetings will ensure that all stakeholders have the opportunity to contribute meaningfully. Additionally, a greater emphasis on capacity-building and virtual engagement will make IGF 2025 even more accessible and impactful for a global audience. Special attention should be given to the inclusion of countries like Afghanistan, ensuring that their unique challenges are addressed, and their perspectives are fully represented. Proactive outreach, virtual participation options, and targeted capacity-building efforts will be crucial in ensuring that conflict-hit regions are not left behind in global digital governance conversations.
1. Extended Timeline for Preparation
To ensure that all stakeholders, especially those from underrepresented regions, have ample time to engage, the timeline for IGF 2025 preparation could be extended. Providing more time for the call for session proposals, selection, and other processes would enable more diverse and impactful submissions. An extended timeline would also help participants better prepare for the event, ensuring that they can engage more meaningfully in discussions.
2. More Inclusive and Transparent Session Proposal Process
Broader Outreach for Proposals: To further enhance inclusivity, the outreach for session proposals could be expanded to reach communities, stakeholders, and organizations who may not traditionally engage with the IGF. Special efforts can be made to engage youth groups, smaller civil society organizations, and regions with lower representation, including conflict-affected countries like Afghanistan. Targeted outreach could encourage participation from these regions, ensuring their unique challenges and opportunities are reflected in the discussions.
Clearer Criteria for Session Selection: The process of selecting sessions could benefit from clearer criteria and enhanced transparency. Providing feedback on rejected proposals could help submitters improve their proposals for future events.
Balanced Representation: Ensuring gender, regional, and sectoral diversity in the session selection process is critical. The session selection process could include additional safeguards to ensure equal representation and prevent any one voice or perspective from dominating.
3. Enhanced MAG and Open Consultations Meetings
Wider Participation in MAG: The Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) should aim for broader geographic and stakeholder diversity in its composition. This can include more representation from developing countries, marginalized communities, and sectors like academia and grassroots organizations. The participation of underrepresented regions, including conflict-affected areas such as Afghanistan, would ensure that the perspectives of all communities are represented in the preparatory process.
Hybrid Format for Consultations: Given the increasing global participation in the IGF, Open Consultations and MAG meetings should continue to be hybrid, with both in-person and virtual options. This will increase accessibility for participants unable to attend in person and encourage greater engagement from remote communities.
Clearer Communication and Scheduling: The scheduling of MAG meetings and Open Consultations could be more predictable and communicated earlier. This would give participants more time to plan and prepare, especially those from different time zones or who may have competing commitments.
4. Strengthening Regional and Thematic Focus
Regional Consultations and Feedback: IGF 2025 could benefit from regional consultations before the main event. This would provide an opportunity to gather input on regional priorities and challenges, which can then be reflected in the main sessions. It will also help ensure that local concerns, including those specific to conflict-hit countries like Afghanistan, are adequately addressed.
Thematic Focus Areas: Clear thematic tracks could be established based on global trends and emerging issues, with a focus on cross-cutting issues such as digital sovereignty, AI ethics, and digital human rights. These tracks could be shaped through collaborative consultations with key stakeholders prior to the event.
5. More Capacity-Building and Engagement Activities
Capacity-Building Workshops: Alongside the main sessions, IGF 2025 could include additional capacity-building activities such as workshops, skill-building sessions, and hackathons to foster a deeper understanding of key issues and tools for participants from all backgrounds, particularly from regions facing conflict and instability like Afghanistan.
Pre-event Webinars and Information Sessions: Pre-event webinars could be organized to help participants better understand the session topics, the proposal process, and the logistics of the event. This could help increase the quality of session proposals and ensure participants come prepared to engage fully.
6. Improved Virtual Participation and Hybrid Experience
Enhanced Virtual Platforms: Virtual participation in IGF 2025 should be seamless and interactive. Upgraded virtual platforms with features such as live polling, real-time Q&A, and networking tools can enhance remote engagement, ensuring that those unable to attend in person, especially from countries like Afghanistan, can still contribute meaningfully to discussions.
Hybrid Formats for Sessions: While in-person engagement is valuable, hybrid sessions where virtual participants can directly interact with speakers, ask questions, and contribute to discussions would further enrich the event’s accessibility and inclusivity.
7. Post-Event Follow-up and Documentation
Real-time Documentation: Providing immediate access to session summaries, key takeaways, and video recordings would be valuable for those who couldn’t attend or wish to revisit key points, especially those from conflict-affected areas who may face difficulties accessing live sessions.
Post-event Engagement: After IGF 2025, the preparation of actionable reports and recommendations from the sessions can further support the long-term implementation of ideas. Follow-up consultations or virtual forums can keep the dialogue alive and track progress on critical issues raised at the event.
Conclusion
In summary, IGF 2025's preparatory process could benefit from a more inclusive, transparent, and regionally-focused approach. Enhanced communication, clearer timelines, and a hybrid approach to meetings will ensure that all stakeholders have the opportunity to contribute meaningfully. Additionally, a greater emphasis on capacity-building and virtual engagement will make IGF 2025 even more accessible and impactful for a global audience. Special attention should be given to the inclusion of countries like Afghanistan, ensuring that their unique challenges are addressed, and their perspectives are fully represented. Proactive outreach, virtual participation options, and targeted capacity-building efforts will be crucial in ensuring that conflict-hit regions are not left behind in global digital governance conversations.
For IGF 2025, the overall program structure and flow should be designed to enhance engagement, foster inclusivity, and ensure that the event effectively addresses global digital governance issues. Below are suggestions for refining the structure and flow of the program:
1. Structured Thematic Tracks
The program can benefit from clearly defined thematic tracks based on global priorities such as Digital Sovereignty, Artificial Intelligence and Ethics, Digital Human Rights, Internet Governance for All, and Connectivity and Infrastructure in Low-Resource Regions. These tracks should be shaped through consultations with key stakeholders to ensure that the content addresses global challenges while remaining flexible enough to evolve with emerging digital trends.
2. Balance Between High-Level and Grassroots Engagement
IGF 2025 can continue to balance high-level discussions with grassroots engagement. The High-Level Leaders' Track can remain an essential platform for policymakers, while parallel sessions should cater to local actors, civil society, youth, and marginalized communities. By ensuring that both ends of the spectrum are represented, IGF 2025 can facilitate productive dialogues and actionable outcomes that reflect both the top-down and bottom-up dimensions of global digital governance.
3. Regional and Thematic Integration
To strengthen regional perspectives, the Regional and Thematic Discussions should be integrated into the main program. Regional consultations could feed directly into the broader sessions, providing regional inputs and challenges to inform global debates. This approach ensures that local concerns are adequately addressed and represented at the global stage.
4. Interactive and Hybrid Session Formats
The program structure should incorporate more interactive and hybrid sessions, where in-person and virtual participants can engage in real-time discussions. This would allow for a more inclusive experience, ensuring participation from all corners of the world. The use of tools like live polls, Q&A, and virtual networking would further enhance the participation of remote attendees, ensuring the event remains globally inclusive.
5. Clear Session Tracks with Sub-themes
The IGF 2025 program could adopt a layered approach, with clear main session tracks and defined sub-themes within each track. For instance, under the AI and Ethics track, sessions could range from ethical AI deployment to policy frameworks for AI regulation. This would allow the program to cater to both broad and highly specific issues, ensuring that diverse topics are discussed in depth.
6. Inclusivity in Speaker Selection and Content
Ensuring diverse and inclusive speakers from a variety of sectors—government, private sector, civil society, youth organizations, and marginalized groups—would enrich the discussions. Having speakers from different geographical regions and expertise areas would ensure that global issues are tackled from multiple perspectives.
7. Capacity Building and Skill Development
Alongside the main program, IGF 2025 should integrate capacity-building workshops and skill development sessions for stakeholders from all backgrounds. These sessions could cover topics such as digital literacy, cybersecurity, and internet policy, preparing participants to better engage in the digital policy landscape. Additionally, these workshops could focus on digital resilience, providing tools and frameworks for building robust digital infrastructures.
8. Real-time Documentation and Engagement
Real-time documentation, such as live streaming, session summaries, and video recordings, should be made available immediately after each session. This would ensure that participants who couldn’t attend the event can still access the content and benefit from the discussions. Additionally, post-event forums and virtual follow-ups can be organized to continue discussions, track progress, and implement the ideas raised at the event.
9. Clearer Scheduling and Predictable Flow
Clear and predictable scheduling will be crucial for maintaining the flow of the event. The agenda should be communicated well in advance, especially considering the varying time zones of global participants. This would allow participants to better plan and engage with the sessions, maximizing participation and ensuring smooth coordination.
10. Dedicated Sessions for Key Global Issues
IGF 2025 could feature a series of sessions dedicated to digital issues related to global challenges, such as climate change, digital rights, cybersecurity, and inclusive digital economies. These sessions could provide insights into how the digital space intersects with critical global issues, fostering cross-sector collaboration and innovation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, IGF 2025’s program structure and flow should focus on ensuring inclusivity, fostering global collaboration, and addressing critical issues from a regional and thematic perspective. By adopting a structured thematic approach, incorporating hybrid sessions, and enhancing engagement through regional consultations, IGF 2025 can be a truly global and inclusive event that reflects the evolving digital landscape and the needs of diverse communities. This approach will not only ensure relevant discussions but also create opportunities for actionable outcomes, supporting the continued development of global digital governance.
1. Structured Thematic Tracks
The program can benefit from clearly defined thematic tracks based on global priorities such as Digital Sovereignty, Artificial Intelligence and Ethics, Digital Human Rights, Internet Governance for All, and Connectivity and Infrastructure in Low-Resource Regions. These tracks should be shaped through consultations with key stakeholders to ensure that the content addresses global challenges while remaining flexible enough to evolve with emerging digital trends.
2. Balance Between High-Level and Grassroots Engagement
IGF 2025 can continue to balance high-level discussions with grassroots engagement. The High-Level Leaders' Track can remain an essential platform for policymakers, while parallel sessions should cater to local actors, civil society, youth, and marginalized communities. By ensuring that both ends of the spectrum are represented, IGF 2025 can facilitate productive dialogues and actionable outcomes that reflect both the top-down and bottom-up dimensions of global digital governance.
3. Regional and Thematic Integration
To strengthen regional perspectives, the Regional and Thematic Discussions should be integrated into the main program. Regional consultations could feed directly into the broader sessions, providing regional inputs and challenges to inform global debates. This approach ensures that local concerns are adequately addressed and represented at the global stage.
4. Interactive and Hybrid Session Formats
The program structure should incorporate more interactive and hybrid sessions, where in-person and virtual participants can engage in real-time discussions. This would allow for a more inclusive experience, ensuring participation from all corners of the world. The use of tools like live polls, Q&A, and virtual networking would further enhance the participation of remote attendees, ensuring the event remains globally inclusive.
5. Clear Session Tracks with Sub-themes
The IGF 2025 program could adopt a layered approach, with clear main session tracks and defined sub-themes within each track. For instance, under the AI and Ethics track, sessions could range from ethical AI deployment to policy frameworks for AI regulation. This would allow the program to cater to both broad and highly specific issues, ensuring that diverse topics are discussed in depth.
6. Inclusivity in Speaker Selection and Content
Ensuring diverse and inclusive speakers from a variety of sectors—government, private sector, civil society, youth organizations, and marginalized groups—would enrich the discussions. Having speakers from different geographical regions and expertise areas would ensure that global issues are tackled from multiple perspectives.
7. Capacity Building and Skill Development
Alongside the main program, IGF 2025 should integrate capacity-building workshops and skill development sessions for stakeholders from all backgrounds. These sessions could cover topics such as digital literacy, cybersecurity, and internet policy, preparing participants to better engage in the digital policy landscape. Additionally, these workshops could focus on digital resilience, providing tools and frameworks for building robust digital infrastructures.
8. Real-time Documentation and Engagement
Real-time documentation, such as live streaming, session summaries, and video recordings, should be made available immediately after each session. This would ensure that participants who couldn’t attend the event can still access the content and benefit from the discussions. Additionally, post-event forums and virtual follow-ups can be organized to continue discussions, track progress, and implement the ideas raised at the event.
9. Clearer Scheduling and Predictable Flow
Clear and predictable scheduling will be crucial for maintaining the flow of the event. The agenda should be communicated well in advance, especially considering the varying time zones of global participants. This would allow participants to better plan and engage with the sessions, maximizing participation and ensuring smooth coordination.
10. Dedicated Sessions for Key Global Issues
IGF 2025 could feature a series of sessions dedicated to digital issues related to global challenges, such as climate change, digital rights, cybersecurity, and inclusive digital economies. These sessions could provide insights into how the digital space intersects with critical global issues, fostering cross-sector collaboration and innovation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, IGF 2025’s program structure and flow should focus on ensuring inclusivity, fostering global collaboration, and addressing critical issues from a regional and thematic perspective. By adopting a structured thematic approach, incorporating hybrid sessions, and enhancing engagement through regional consultations, IGF 2025 can be a truly global and inclusive event that reflects the evolving digital landscape and the needs of diverse communities. This approach will not only ensure relevant discussions but also create opportunities for actionable outcomes, supporting the continued development of global digital governance.
For IGF 2025, the program content, session types, and speaker profiles can be enhanced to ensure greater inclusivity, engagement, and relevance. Here are some key suggestions for improvements:
1. Thematic Approach
Emerging Issues: Expand themes to include Digital Inclusion, AI Ethics, Digital Human Rights, Digital Trade, and Sustainable Digital Transformation.
Regional Focus: Address regional issues, such as Digital Infrastructure in the Global South, ensuring that local challenges are reflected in global discussions.
2. Session Types
Hybrid and Interactive: Maintain hybrid sessions to allow both in-person and virtual participation with interactive features like live polls and Q&A.
Capacity-Building: Include workshops and skill-building sessions on topics like digital security and digital economy development.
Case Studies and Best Practices: Highlight real-world applications and successful digital policies, particularly from underrepresented regions.
Fireside Chats and Roundtables: Offer informal, focused discussions with leaders and experts on pressing issues.
3. Speaker Profiles
Diverse Representation: Ensure speakers come from various sectors (government, private sector, civil society) and regions, with a focus on gender and geographic diversity.
Youth and Marginalized Communities: Include youth leaders and speakers from marginalized communities to ensure their voices are heard on issues like digital rights and inclusion.
Emerging Fields: Feature experts from fields like blockchain, AI, and digital health to reflect cutting-edge digital developments.
4. Enhanced Engagement
Real-Time Tools: Use live polling and Q&A to engage both virtual and in-person participants.
Networking Spaces: Offer dedicated virtual spaces for networking and peer discussions, fostering global connections.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 can improve by focusing on emerging global challenges, enhancing session interactivity, ensuring diverse and inclusive speakers, and creating more opportunities for engagement. This will ensure the event is dynamic, impactful, and relevant for all participants.
1. Thematic Approach
Emerging Issues: Expand themes to include Digital Inclusion, AI Ethics, Digital Human Rights, Digital Trade, and Sustainable Digital Transformation.
Regional Focus: Address regional issues, such as Digital Infrastructure in the Global South, ensuring that local challenges are reflected in global discussions.
2. Session Types
Hybrid and Interactive: Maintain hybrid sessions to allow both in-person and virtual participation with interactive features like live polls and Q&A.
Capacity-Building: Include workshops and skill-building sessions on topics like digital security and digital economy development.
Case Studies and Best Practices: Highlight real-world applications and successful digital policies, particularly from underrepresented regions.
Fireside Chats and Roundtables: Offer informal, focused discussions with leaders and experts on pressing issues.
3. Speaker Profiles
Diverse Representation: Ensure speakers come from various sectors (government, private sector, civil society) and regions, with a focus on gender and geographic diversity.
Youth and Marginalized Communities: Include youth leaders and speakers from marginalized communities to ensure their voices are heard on issues like digital rights and inclusion.
Emerging Fields: Feature experts from fields like blockchain, AI, and digital health to reflect cutting-edge digital developments.
4. Enhanced Engagement
Real-Time Tools: Use live polling and Q&A to engage both virtual and in-person participants.
Networking Spaces: Offer dedicated virtual spaces for networking and peer discussions, fostering global connections.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 can improve by focusing on emerging global challenges, enhancing session interactivity, ensuring diverse and inclusive speakers, and creating more opportunities for engagement. This will ensure the event is dynamic, impactful, and relevant for all participants.
For IGF 2025, enhancing the connection between community intersessional activities, NRIs, and the main IGF event is crucial for inclusivity and impact. Here are some key suggestions:
1. Community Intersessional Activities
Integration: Align Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Policy Networks (PNs), and Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) with IGF sessions, ensuring continuity and contributing directly to thematic discussions.
Cross-Linking: Regularly update these activities with virtual workshops to keep the IGF community informed and engaged.
2. National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
Stronger Connection: Allow NRIs to contribute directly to session proposals and feed regional concerns into the global agenda.
Youth Engagement: Increase youth participation by creating dedicated youth tracks and involving them in session planning and speaker roles.
Capacity-Building: Provide more structured opportunities for NRIs and youth initiatives to engage in workshops and bilateral meetings.
3. Best Practice Forums, Policy Networks, and Dynamic Coalitions
Increased Visibility: BPFs, PNs, and DCs should lead sessions or collaborate on topics to integrate their work into the main IGF discussions.
Collaboration: Foster more collaboration between these groups, ensuring a cohesive approach to digital governance.
4. Inclusivity
Broader Outreach: Expand participation from marginalized regions and youth to ensure a more globally representative event.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 should integrate community intersessional activities and NRIs more effectively, ensuring their work influences the main event and fosters inclusivity, diversity, and collaboration across all sectors.
1. Community Intersessional Activities
Integration: Align Best Practice Forums (BPFs), Policy Networks (PNs), and Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) with IGF sessions, ensuring continuity and contributing directly to thematic discussions.
Cross-Linking: Regularly update these activities with virtual workshops to keep the IGF community informed and engaged.
2. National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
Stronger Connection: Allow NRIs to contribute directly to session proposals and feed regional concerns into the global agenda.
Youth Engagement: Increase youth participation by creating dedicated youth tracks and involving them in session planning and speaker roles.
Capacity-Building: Provide more structured opportunities for NRIs and youth initiatives to engage in workshops and bilateral meetings.
3. Best Practice Forums, Policy Networks, and Dynamic Coalitions
Increased Visibility: BPFs, PNs, and DCs should lead sessions or collaborate on topics to integrate their work into the main IGF discussions.
Collaboration: Foster more collaboration between these groups, ensuring a cohesive approach to digital governance.
4. Inclusivity
Broader Outreach: Expand participation from marginalized regions and youth to ensure a more globally representative event.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 should integrate community intersessional activities and NRIs more effectively, ensuring their work influences the main event and fosters inclusivity, diversity, and collaboration across all sectors.
For IGF 2025, ensuring broad and inclusive participation is essential to reflect global digital governance perspectives. Here's how to improve participant invitations and interconnection:
1. Who to Invite
Diverse Stakeholders: Invite representatives from all sectors, including governments, private sector, civil society, technical communities, academia, and youth. Special attention should be given to underrepresented regions, ensuring the inclusion of marginalized communities and developing countries.
Youth and Grassroots: Include youth leaders and grassroots organizations to give voice to future generations and local communities impacted by digital policy decisions.
Experts in Emerging Fields: Ensure that experts from AI, blockchain, and digital health are present to reflect cutting-edge technologies shaping the digital landscape.
2. Inter-connecting Participants
Hybrid Format: Maintain a hybrid format to allow seamless engagement between in-person and virtual participants. This will facilitate greater global interaction and ensure all voices, including from remote and conflict-affected regions, can participate.
Networking Platforms: Create dedicated virtual networking spaces, allowing participants to connect, collaborate, and discuss in real-time through live chat, Q&A, and roundtable discussions.
3. Special Focus on Afghanistan
Support for Afghanistan: Given Afghanistan's challenges, special efforts should be made to ensure Afghan participation in IGF 2025, providing support for travel and online access. Facilitating their inclusion will help amplify voices from regions facing severe digital and societal challenges, contributing to global policy dialogue on issues such as digital rights and connectivity in conflict zones.
Conclusion
Inviting a diverse range of participants and ensuring effective interconnection through hybrid formats and networking tools will make IGF 2025 more inclusive and impactful. Special attention to Afghanistan and other conflict-affected countries will ensure that all regions have a platform to contribute to global digital governance discussions.
1. Who to Invite
Diverse Stakeholders: Invite representatives from all sectors, including governments, private sector, civil society, technical communities, academia, and youth. Special attention should be given to underrepresented regions, ensuring the inclusion of marginalized communities and developing countries.
Youth and Grassroots: Include youth leaders and grassroots organizations to give voice to future generations and local communities impacted by digital policy decisions.
Experts in Emerging Fields: Ensure that experts from AI, blockchain, and digital health are present to reflect cutting-edge technologies shaping the digital landscape.
2. Inter-connecting Participants
Hybrid Format: Maintain a hybrid format to allow seamless engagement between in-person and virtual participants. This will facilitate greater global interaction and ensure all voices, including from remote and conflict-affected regions, can participate.
Networking Platforms: Create dedicated virtual networking spaces, allowing participants to connect, collaborate, and discuss in real-time through live chat, Q&A, and roundtable discussions.
3. Special Focus on Afghanistan
Support for Afghanistan: Given Afghanistan's challenges, special efforts should be made to ensure Afghan participation in IGF 2025, providing support for travel and online access. Facilitating their inclusion will help amplify voices from regions facing severe digital and societal challenges, contributing to global policy dialogue on issues such as digital rights and connectivity in conflict zones.
Conclusion
Inviting a diverse range of participants and ensuring effective interconnection through hybrid formats and networking tools will make IGF 2025 more inclusive and impactful. Special attention to Afghanistan and other conflict-affected countries will ensure that all regions have a platform to contribute to global digital governance discussions.
For IGF 2025, there is a unique opportunity to contribute significantly to both the WSIS+20 Review and the implementation of the Global Digital Compact (GDC). Here’s how the IGF can align with and support these initiatives in a positive and impactful way:
1. Contribution to WSIS+20 Review
The WSIS+20 Review provides a critical moment to assess the progress of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) outcomes. IGF 2025 can contribute by:
Integrating WSIS Principles: The IGF sessions should explicitly address the 10 WSIS Action Lines, ensuring that discussions connect directly to the implementation and future goals of the WSIS outcomes. This could be done through thematic tracks focused on digital inclusion, access, human rights, and development, which align with the WSIS vision.
High-Level Contributions: The IGF could host high-level dialogues with key stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, and civil society, to review and highlight the progress made in achieving WSIS goals and identify gaps. These discussions should provide actionable insights for the 2025 high-level meeting and set a clear roadmap for future work.
Regional Contributions: Encourage regional IGFs to contribute to the WSIS+20 Review, with sessions that reflect on local progress and challenges in implementing WSIS goals, ensuring diverse regional perspectives are included in the global review process.
2. Supporting the Global Digital Compact
The Global Digital Compact aims to establish a common vision for the digital future, emphasizing principles such as universal access, digital rights, ethical AI, and digital inclusion. IGF 2025 can play a pivotal role in advancing this agenda by:
Facilitating Dialogue: The IGF should serve as a central platform for multistakeholder dialogue on the Global Digital Compact. This could involve discussions on policy frameworks, digital governance, and global cooperation to foster digital inclusion and build trust in the digital ecosystem.
Actionable Outcomes: Encourage the development of actionable policy recommendations through IGF sessions that align with the GDC’s principles, ensuring that concrete, implementable solutions emerge from the discussions. This could include best practices and policy frameworks on topics such as data governance, cybersecurity, and privacy.
Global and Local Synergy: Leverage the IGF’s broad global reach to gather insights from all regions, including those from low- and middle-income countries and marginalized communities, ensuring that the GDC’s implementation is inclusive and reflective of the needs of all stakeholders.
Monitoring Progress: Use the IGF’s dynamic coalitions and policy networks to monitor the implementation of the Global Digital Compact and provide regular updates on global progress, challenges, and best practices. This will help ensure that the GDC remains a living, evolving document, responsive to emerging trends and challenges in the digital space.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 has the potential to play a leading role in both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact implementation. By directly aligning its sessions with WSIS goals, facilitating high-level dialogues, and supporting multistakeholder discussions around the GDC’s principles, IGF 2025 can ensure these global initiatives remain at the forefront of digital governance discussions. The IGF’s inclusive, collaborative platform is uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between global policy frameworks and real-world digital challenges, ensuring that the outcomes of these initiatives lead to tangible, positive changes for all.
1. Contribution to WSIS+20 Review
The WSIS+20 Review provides a critical moment to assess the progress of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) outcomes. IGF 2025 can contribute by:
Integrating WSIS Principles: The IGF sessions should explicitly address the 10 WSIS Action Lines, ensuring that discussions connect directly to the implementation and future goals of the WSIS outcomes. This could be done through thematic tracks focused on digital inclusion, access, human rights, and development, which align with the WSIS vision.
High-Level Contributions: The IGF could host high-level dialogues with key stakeholders, including governments, international organizations, and civil society, to review and highlight the progress made in achieving WSIS goals and identify gaps. These discussions should provide actionable insights for the 2025 high-level meeting and set a clear roadmap for future work.
Regional Contributions: Encourage regional IGFs to contribute to the WSIS+20 Review, with sessions that reflect on local progress and challenges in implementing WSIS goals, ensuring diverse regional perspectives are included in the global review process.
2. Supporting the Global Digital Compact
The Global Digital Compact aims to establish a common vision for the digital future, emphasizing principles such as universal access, digital rights, ethical AI, and digital inclusion. IGF 2025 can play a pivotal role in advancing this agenda by:
Facilitating Dialogue: The IGF should serve as a central platform for multistakeholder dialogue on the Global Digital Compact. This could involve discussions on policy frameworks, digital governance, and global cooperation to foster digital inclusion and build trust in the digital ecosystem.
Actionable Outcomes: Encourage the development of actionable policy recommendations through IGF sessions that align with the GDC’s principles, ensuring that concrete, implementable solutions emerge from the discussions. This could include best practices and policy frameworks on topics such as data governance, cybersecurity, and privacy.
Global and Local Synergy: Leverage the IGF’s broad global reach to gather insights from all regions, including those from low- and middle-income countries and marginalized communities, ensuring that the GDC’s implementation is inclusive and reflective of the needs of all stakeholders.
Monitoring Progress: Use the IGF’s dynamic coalitions and policy networks to monitor the implementation of the Global Digital Compact and provide regular updates on global progress, challenges, and best practices. This will help ensure that the GDC remains a living, evolving document, responsive to emerging trends and challenges in the digital space.
Conclusion
IGF 2025 has the potential to play a leading role in both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact implementation. By directly aligning its sessions with WSIS goals, facilitating high-level dialogues, and supporting multistakeholder discussions around the GDC’s principles, IGF 2025 can ensure these global initiatives remain at the forefront of digital governance discussions. The IGF’s inclusive, collaborative platform is uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between global policy frameworks and real-world digital challenges, ensuring that the outcomes of these initiatives lead to tangible, positive changes for all.
IGF 2024 was a highly successful and impactful event that exemplified the spirit of multistakeholder collaboration in addressing the complex and ever-evolving challenges of digital governance. The overall organization and execution were exceptional, providing a platform for diverse voices to engage in constructive dialogue, share expertise, and develop actionable solutions.
Strengths:
Inclusivity: The event excelled in creating an inclusive environment, bringing together stakeholders from various sectors, regions, and backgrounds. Whether through the high-level discussions or the youth and gender-focused tracks, the event ensured that a wide range of perspectives were considered.
Diverse and Dynamic Sessions: The variety of formats—panel discussions, workshops, roundtables, and interactive sessions—kept participants engaged and encouraged deeper discussions. The content addressed both current issues and future trends in digital governance, making the event forward-thinking and relevant.
Networking and Collaboration: The IGF 2024 Village, along with dedicated networking opportunities, provided an effective space for participants to connect and collaborate. This enhanced the collaborative spirit of the event, enabling stakeholders to develop partnerships and share resources for continued efforts.
Opportunities for Growth:
Logistical Improvements: While the event was generally well-organized, there were some logistical areas that could be further improved, such as simplifying the registration process and enhancing accessibility for virtual attendees.
More Interactive and Hands-On Engagement: While the sessions were rich in content, future editions could benefit from more hands-on engagement activities and real-time collaboration tools, encouraging even greater interactivity during discussions.
Overall, IGF 2024 successfully reinforced its role as a premier platform for shaping digital governance through inclusive, meaningful dialogue. The event was a significant step forward in addressing the global challenges of our digital future and provided an excellent foundation for ongoing collaboration and innovation
Strengths:
Inclusivity: The event excelled in creating an inclusive environment, bringing together stakeholders from various sectors, regions, and backgrounds. Whether through the high-level discussions or the youth and gender-focused tracks, the event ensured that a wide range of perspectives were considered.
Diverse and Dynamic Sessions: The variety of formats—panel discussions, workshops, roundtables, and interactive sessions—kept participants engaged and encouraged deeper discussions. The content addressed both current issues and future trends in digital governance, making the event forward-thinking and relevant.
Networking and Collaboration: The IGF 2024 Village, along with dedicated networking opportunities, provided an effective space for participants to connect and collaborate. This enhanced the collaborative spirit of the event, enabling stakeholders to develop partnerships and share resources for continued efforts.
Opportunities for Growth:
Logistical Improvements: While the event was generally well-organized, there were some logistical areas that could be further improved, such as simplifying the registration process and enhancing accessibility for virtual attendees.
More Interactive and Hands-On Engagement: While the sessions were rich in content, future editions could benefit from more hands-on engagement activities and real-time collaboration tools, encouraging even greater interactivity during discussions.
Overall, IGF 2024 successfully reinforced its role as a premier platform for shaping digital governance through inclusive, meaningful dialogue. The event was a significant step forward in addressing the global challenges of our digital future and provided an excellent foundation for ongoing collaboration and innovation
KOROMA
IGF 2024:
Koroney
Tout à bien fonctionné ici
Il y a eu certains thèmes qui sont négligés
A Riyadh, le lieu de la tenue du forum est loin des lieux de hébergement
No comment
Il y a eu bcp de sessions où il n y a pas eu de traduction. Tout s est passé en anglais.
No comment
Le temps imparti était court
Le seul problème c'était la traduction.
Seule la salle plénière a assuré la traduction dans toutes les langues des nations unies
Seule la salle plénière a assuré la traduction dans toutes les langues des nations unies
No comment
Très bien organisé.
Mais il n y a pas eu bcp de parlementaires comme à Addis et à Tokyo
Mais il n y a pas eu bcp de parlementaires comme à Addis et à Tokyo
Bien organisé.
Les femmes ont été à l avant garde
Bien organisé
Le seul handicap était la traduction.
Un nombre important des participants ne comprennent pas l anglais.
Un nombre important des participants ne comprennent pas l anglais.
IGF 2024:
Les IGF régionaux doivent superviser les Igf sous régionaux (exemple: Igf Afrique doit superviser igf ecowas ou igf sadc); et le secrétariat de l igf global doit superviser les igf régionaux pour assurer l harmonie à tous les niveaux
Veuillez à ce que le transport soit assuré du lieu d hébergement au lieu du forum, ce n était pas le cas à Riyadh
No comment
No comment
D'avantages de parlementaires.
Surtout associer les parlementaires à des sessions autres que les track des parlementaires
Surtout associer les parlementaires à des sessions autres que les track des parlementaires
Il faut fédérer les initiatives pour éviter un double emploi.
Le restaurant a l air libre n était pas approprié
Tout à bien fonctionné ici
Il y a eu certains thèmes qui sont négligés
A Riyadh, le lieu de la tenue du forum est loin des lieux de hébergement
No comment
Il y a eu bcp de sessions où il n y a pas eu de traduction. Tout s est passé en anglais.
No comment
Le temps imparti était court
Le seul problème c'était la traduction.
Seule la salle plénière a assuré la traduction dans toutes les langues des nations unies
Seule la salle plénière a assuré la traduction dans toutes les langues des nations unies
No comment
Très bien organisé.
Mais il n y a pas eu bcp de parlementaires comme à Addis et à Tokyo
Mais il n y a pas eu bcp de parlementaires comme à Addis et à Tokyo
Bien organisé.
Les femmes ont été à l avant garde
Bien organisé
Le seul handicap était la traduction.
Un nombre important des participants ne comprennent pas l anglais.
Un nombre important des participants ne comprennent pas l anglais.
IGF 2024:
Les IGF régionaux doivent superviser les Igf sous régionaux (exemple: Igf Afrique doit superviser igf ecowas ou igf sadc); et le secrétariat de l igf global doit superviser les igf régionaux pour assurer l harmonie à tous les niveaux
Veuillez à ce que le transport soit assuré du lieu d hébergement au lieu du forum, ce n était pas le cas à Riyadh
No comment
No comment
D'avantages de parlementaires.
Surtout associer les parlementaires à des sessions autres que les track des parlementaires
Surtout associer les parlementaires à des sessions autres que les track des parlementaires
Il faut fédérer les initiatives pour éviter un double emploi.
Le restaurant a l air libre n était pas approprié
l72eyw
2mpp47
8dndg0
pwp7pp
thplg3
z0nkjo
cvwck6
dztu01
zyc62c
i9c050
7cwfpq
9wgn0y
zq6efm
9ld79m
fqiqzy
IGF 2024:
3aozge
yc2e3x
xepg6n
0c5op8
gwr680
g1qtl4
ekmsz9
Lubila
Très professionnel
Très très professionnel
Très bien
WhatsApp
Pour améliorer ma compétence
Pour améliorer la qualité de ma compétence
Oui pour améliorer la qualité de compétences
Très bien
Très cool
Très bien
Très professionnel
Kinshasa
Très bien
IGF 2024:
Non
Oui
Améliorer la qualité de ma compétence
Metawee
The conference was successfully concluded with a team of fully qualified staff and expertise. However, there were issues with timely streaming and waiting for all participants to join.
The subjects were at the forefront of interest, focusing on the increasing demands in our lives.
The hybrid event was exceptional, featuring a high-quality internet stream.
Technical support and online team were responsive except for a few times.
I have engaged in numerous activities through your YouTube channel and Zoom interactions.
This will be wonderful to observe in the upcoming year.
Great content and operations in youth, local and international.
Excellent
Very good
Very good
Very good
Excellent program.
Excellent
Excellent
IGF 2024:
MOHAMED
IGF 2024:
MOMENI
For me the process was well done
I suggest to emphasize on effective internet governance at national level on accountability of WSIS implementation process.
Well done despite of the quality of connectivity between speakers and participants
The IGF visa process or country IGF visa link ( https://igfriyadh2024.sa/visa-requirements.html) was not well communicated or accessible to some participants at time, to get their visa through the said link, as some participants met difficulties to get or not their visa through diplomatic embassy, particularly African citizens
The process was well done.
Will be god to put finger on what doe note well done at national and regional level on the implementation of WSIS process and proposed solutions on what are missing or corrections to be done
Will be god to put finger on what doe note well done at national and regional level on the implementation of WSIS process and proposed solutions on what are missing or corrections to be done
For me, there was not really clarity on WSIS implementation process achieved and the hope with GDC objectives and strategies implementation to achieve these process
Well done, but we need for the next step to see Youth concrete propositions to held government accountability on the process implementation of Internet governance
I think we should add more time to Lightning Talk session topic presentation and discussions ( about 45mn) to be more productive,
Well done
Will be good to bring regional parliamentarians groups to explain their work and their government control on internet governance implementation at different national level; Put finger on what and why the internet governance process implementation are so behind in some African francophone countries.
Give the opportunity to regional youth groups to share their best country practice related to internet governance on connectivity solutions
Well done
Provide visual screen opportunities to participants holding a stand to share their work with visitors
Will be good to get on IGF2024 web site a over report view on what to retain as outputs
IGF 2024:
Please we shall put finger on the availability / accessibility of many toilets for participants on the IGF conference center, during the selection process of the host country. What we saw in this point in Riyadh conference center was not humanly respectable.
Well done
Well done
Through regional best practice
In all sectors, actors or participants who are involved in internet governance with their works and achievements, and able to share their point of view on how to move forward in the process
Explain what was the objectives and strategies to overcome the WSIS process implementation, what have been done and still not to overcome and why, and how the GDC can help with new opportunities and challenges (using AI for instance); we will need more cooperation and involvement of regulation process to going forward in digital opportunities
Appreciate logistic availability of buses for participants to attend the conference center, and the cultural welcome from the IGF host country
Msiska
Ample time was provided for stakeholders to feed into the sessions at the IGF. Since our application for a session worked I can say that the session selection process worked well and there was a variety of issues that were covered at the IGF which is another positive.
My view is that some sessions could have been merged to allow for people working on similar issues gather and brainstorm. The downside of having so many issues on the same theme or topic is that you end up having few participants in the workshop rooms.
I also noted that many participants preferred attending session in the main hall.
I also noted that many participants preferred attending session in the main hall.
This worked well for our session. We had a good online presence and participation during our session.
Visa - this was a big fail in my view. The visa process was so messed. I paid for a visa but it did not come until I applied for the free one. Despite paying for my visa, I have not received a receipt in order to claim a refund from my employer. I have written the Saudi MOFA about this but they are uncooperative.
Access to venue- during the first day at IGF i could not get any help from the ushers and security at the main gate as no-one spoke English. We were being told to walk to Marriot Hotel and yet there were buses taking people to the said hotel for registration. The organizers should have ensured that ushers/security at the main gate were able to speak multiple languages considering this was an international event. Not everyone speaks Arabic.
Access to venue- during the first day at IGF i could not get any help from the ushers and security at the main gate as no-one spoke English. We were being told to walk to Marriot Hotel and yet there were buses taking people to the said hotel for registration. The organizers should have ensured that ushers/security at the main gate were able to speak multiple languages considering this was an international event. Not everyone speaks Arabic.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Please encourage new activists to speak at IGF. We can't have the same people speaking since 20 years ago.
Same as above. Take time to identify other emerging leaders.
N/A
N/A
Inclusive
Well done and the food was nice and plenty.
Not sure I saw a lot of outreach before the event. Time before the event is crucial.
IGF 2024:
Enhance outreach/information flow on call for travel support, remote hubs, booths.
Merge some sessions to avoid participants apathy in some sessions.
New speakers
IGF should take a leading role in making sure that the multi-stakeholder model is part of the Global Digital Compact. GDC being a multilaterally negotiated blue-print, can benefit from other stakeholders input during the implementation process.
The IGF venue was nice but not friendly for low budget participants. Suggestion: the buses could have been taking participants that were not lodging at the recommended hotels as well. The recommended hotels were super expensive.
Nandlal
The call for proposals should be sent out at least 3 times. Opportunities to network online are needed; if there are ways to network online, these should be communicated in multiple ways.
As the IGF sessions were brief, it would be excellent to form working groups so those wanting to volunteer (like myself) can stay connected to persons in charge of projects that complement their field of research and work.
As the IGF sessions were brief, it would be excellent to form working groups so those wanting to volunteer (like myself) can stay connected to persons in charge of projects that complement their field of research and work.
Excellent thematic focus.
More opportunities to network online are needed- specific sessions that promote conversation, e.g., attendees having the ability to turn on their cameras and mics to speak in a timely fashion, would encourage participation.
It was difficult for the host to do this in a session I attended, so I spoke with the video off.
More opportunities to network online are needed- specific sessions that promote conversation, e.g., attendees having the ability to turn on their cameras and mics to speak in a timely fashion, would encourage participation.
It was difficult for the host to do this in a session I attended, so I spoke with the video off.
During some sessions, the audio was muffled, and it was not apparent that if you switched the subtitle to another area, it would become more audible. Some troubleshooting tips would be a great addition to the logistics booklet for those experiencing the conference online.
The Dynamic Coalitions were well planned; however, it could be improved by providing breakout rooms and increasing interaction. Polls and other multimedia means of interaction would also benefit these sessions.
During some sessions, the online comments and questions were not addressed in their totality or even reviewed. It led to participants becoming detached from the session's discussion.
Very intriguing conversations. Lots of variation in the content and perspectives however, it could benefit from diverse viewpoints. EG. West and East
The youth track left a lot to be desired.
The questions asked of them were knowledge- based questions, which only showed their inexperience. It would be recommended that questions be based on their experiences and gather THEIR PERSONAL perspectives, which is extremely beneficial when considering gaps in policies and research designs.
The questions asked of them were knowledge- based questions, which only showed their inexperience. It would be recommended that questions be based on their experiences and gather THEIR PERSONAL perspectives, which is extremely beneficial when considering gaps in policies and research designs.
IGF 2024:
Creating meaningful connections for knowledge mobilization is the cornerstone for similar forums. It would benefit participants if there were opportunities to collaborate and work with specific UN streams. Volunteering opportunities should be communicated.
Ni Aolain
Challenges: Visa processing for panelists was slow and non-transparent. Concern for the safety of panel members. Fundamental questions about the choice of venue to enable participation of civil society.
Good but limited participation opportunities for civil society.
In this circumstances this was an essential aspect of the conference.
Adequate.
Regrettably limited.
IGF 2024:
Nkurunziza
All went fine
It was good
Very good
Very good
IGF 2024:
I was attending online.
But one session I had subscribed to attend didn't happen. I entered the room virtually, saw that the screen was displaying the name of the session, few participants were in the room but no one was on the stage. Physical attendees were there waiting in vain
The session was "Networking Session #137 International Collaboration on Digital Financial Inclusion".
What happened ? Did the proposers of the session cancel it without notifying in advance ?
But one session I had subscribed to attend didn't happen. I entered the room virtually, saw that the screen was displaying the name of the session, few participants were in the room but no one was on the stage. Physical attendees were there waiting in vain
The session was "Networking Session #137 International Collaboration on Digital Financial Inclusion".
What happened ? Did the proposers of the session cancel it without notifying in advance ?
Olufuye
The IGF 2024 was well packaged. It remains a top most capacity development platform on internet governance and digital policy issues. It is fulfilling its mandate excellently and credit should be given to the Secretariat and the MAG under the effective oversight of DESA.
Good.
Good.
All was good except for the registration location was too far away from the event venue. Connecting to the Internet was also a challenge. The challenge with Internet access was with getting the OTP to connect to the Internet. All Internet connectivity at IGF should have open access or minimum password to connect. The use of OTP through telephone input was problematic even with Saudi telephone numbers. As a result, some moderators could not connect to the Internet to conduct their sessions.
The Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks were quite effective in delivering relevant contents. The practice of encouraging different fora to collaborate to deliver sessions produced more focused discussions and outputs. The process should be sustained.
Dynamic Coalitions were quite effective in delivering relevant contents. The practice of encouraging different Coalitions to collaborate to deliver sessions produced more focused discussions and outputs. The process should be sustained.
The NRIs were well integrated into the programmes. The main session on NRI was good and should be sustained. The Youth IGF like the others is bottom-up and it captures the community's commitment to the future Internet governance and digital policy processes.
The sessions were educatives and intellectually stimulating. The speakers and the quality of discussions were contemporary and top notch.
Good.
No comment
Engaging...
I think it was balanced!
Beautiful!
Excellent.
IGF 2024:
Adopt the visa issuance process used for IGF2024. Ensure there is music night and more cultural networking events.
The structure and flow of IGF2024 can be adapted but with a focus on the WSIS+20 review subject matters.
The approach for 2024 can be replicated but focus should be on the WSIS+20 review subject matters.
Ensure seamless access to the Internet as some moderators had challenges connecting to the Internet for their sessions.
Ensure seamless access to the Internet as some moderators had challenges connecting to the Internet for their sessions.
I like the way the connection was made at IGF 2024. All continental regional IGF MAG leaders provided feedback in a panel session moderated by an IGF MAG member. An additional feature that may be plausible is to invite a not more than 2-minute videos of some of their respective national/regional IGF events noting key outcomes that can be played during the sessions. Such videos can be similarly done for national IGFs at the annual regional IGF events.
Key decision makers (executives/Parliamentarians/ business leaders) from developing and least developing economies by world bank metrics should be invited.
Participants can be connected virtually through an IGF social media connection platform. They can also be connected on site through the music night and open lunch, cocktails and dinners.
Participants can be connected virtually through an IGF social media connection platform. They can also be connected on site through the music night and open lunch, cocktails and dinners.
Special GDC Session and open forum could be convened during the IGF. Prior to the session, online input could be solicited on the subject matter and the feedback can be a part of the discussion during the Session.
I recommend that the IGF2025 thematics should focus on WSIS Action Lines and targets. It should help to collate achievements based on the implementation of the WSIS resolutions. As a platform that guarranty equal footing for all concerned stakeholders, the IGF should be expected to generate frank and objective feedback on WSIS Implementation across all stakeholders groups.
I recommend that the IGF2025 thematics should focus on WSIS Action Lines and targets. It should help to collate achievements based on the implementation of the WSIS resolutions. As a platform that guarranty equal footing for all concerned stakeholders, the IGF should be expected to generate frank and objective feedback on WSIS Implementation across all stakeholders groups.
The visa issuance process was excellent! The meals and drinks (including the special tea) were good! The venue is grandeur but the seats available at the opening ceremony were inadequate. As mentioned earlier, the use of OTP for Internet access at a secured location as the venue was unnecessary.
Pajaro Velasquez
I think the process should start early in the year and explain why a session isn't selected and the different stages between the call for sessions and the selection of sessions, so anyone who is confused on why their panel/Session isn't selected can understand why.
It should focus a little more in gender issues, in the recent year we see how fewer sessions about the topic appear on the final selection. Hope in the future we have more balance related to it. Also, we should start to include a little more another emerging technologies, besides AI, in the program, quantum tech is an example of it.
It was terrible for those who participated online. The audio was missing most of the time, we couldn't speak much or interact with speakers or the floor in general, sometime we even lost the video on the floor, and these aspects are essential for a real hybrid experience.
Finally, Sched is back, and please keep it as the Schedule app. For the rest I think the bilateral meeting rooms should be better prepared for the next time for hybrid meetings, we lost a lot of time doing by ourselves the technical preparations for a simple meeting.
Can't complain about this part, probably we should open again the BPF on Gender, we are needing it
Probably develop a similar track, as the Youth Track and the Parlamientary Track, just for the DCs so they can be included by default in the IGF Schedule. For the rest, I think they are doing a great job keeping the multistakeholder model relevant and vital for the IGF.
Nothing to say, just probably in day 0 have NRIs spaces by regions, so the conclusions of their work can be included explicitly in the IGF annual report
Please more gender related sessions
So focused on the interest of the country and not so much on the IGF itself, something that we can't do on 2025 considering the circumstances
More integration with Youth and Intercessional work.
This one could be something that articulate in a better way the topics that youth want to discuss in each region and not about an overarching theme, that sometimes isn't as important for the region itself
When it comes to speakers, I think it did well, just past the test, but we are missing more LGBTQIA+ persons as speakers and topics related with them in the program. Also, more gender perspective when it comes to all the program in general because women rights are disappearing from the table if we see the last 3 IGFs.
My only suggestion will be to make it more accessible for anyone, and use your social media to do so. This means develops a language and team to communicate the results of the IGF that even make someone younger or that doesn't know anything about the IGF to be interested.
IGF 2024:
A complete guideline of the session selection process so everyone knows exactly what are the steps to get a possible approval of a session in the IGF
Recommendation: Youth Track, Parliamentary Track, NRIs Spaces, DCs Track.
Recommendations: Environmental issues on the thematic approach. More roundtables. Speakers: More gender-diverse people counting as gender diversity and not putting the binary male and female as it is happening at the moment.
I said on the IGF 2025 overall programme structure recommendation
More use of the social media in a language that is more friendly to everyone and with a clear communication guidelines that can be used by anyone who wants to be involved in the IGF. Recommendations to invite more high levels from the World Majority or Global South.
The IGF is the space to review and discuss the implementation of the GDC with all the actors that are part of any deploying of a massive set of policies that this Compact is proposing. Just a mechanism like the one that IGF proposed with the multistakeholderism, that try to get consensus, it is how we are going to have a GDC that benefits all.
Parris
Everything was well done. Except for a session for those who are new to the IGF process. I may have missed it since I had email problems, but I would like to see such a session for 2025. The interpreters, technical stall and volunteers should be included in this session, and those attending the IGF for the first time.
Overall program was well done. However there were some problems with connections and the sessions reception.
Themes were well thought out, however moderators spoke too long in some sessions and did not leave a lot of time for the speakers or audience participation.
Lots of overlapping occurred, but one can follow online at a later date.
When registering to attend a session there was a problem in clicking the session, one had to open the link, then click to add to diary, it was also very slow.
The IGF website was very slow in loading up in the run up to the IGF, not sure it was the traffic or my connection
Themes were well thought out, however moderators spoke too long in some sessions and did not leave a lot of time for the speakers or audience participation.
Lots of overlapping occurred, but one can follow online at a later date.
When registering to attend a session there was a problem in clicking the session, one had to open the link, then click to add to diary, it was also very slow.
The IGF website was very slow in loading up in the run up to the IGF, not sure it was the traffic or my connection
Connection problems and sound were my main problems as I joined online. I watched many sessions on youtube. The experience is however, was not the same as real time.
Time difference was also a problem.
Time difference was also a problem.
The IGF website slowed down a lot.
The schedule overlapped, some sessions could not be attended.
I joined online so did not experience the bilateral room, security and other on-site facilities
The schedule overlapped, some sessions could not be attended.
I joined online so did not experience the bilateral room, security and other on-site facilities
Intercessional activities were adequate and well planned especially the DC meetings
The only problem was sound in some sessions and connecting.
The only problem was sound in some sessions and connecting.
DCs did very well for 2024, I hope to see them continue with the inclusive process.
Well done, but needs to be more inclusive and bring in more youth participation, especially within the DC
Overall the content, speakers and quality was good.
For 2025, however, aging, health needs a greater voice.
For 2025, however, aging, health needs a greater voice.
As expected.
As expected
overall well done, with experience it will improve.
The organization tried to be inclusive in terms of gender, very well done.
As expected, very well done online
I have no problems with these, I would have like more meetings in the run up to the IGF, but the website was very informative.
As for fu ding, I wish that one could be notified that there was no funding. No communication was sent to say if it was going to happen, just an email saying the funding expected would be known by 20 th November, then nothing. All packed to go, visa sorted, hotel booked and nothing. I would add this to outreach, lack of clear communication.
No problem with outputs.
As for fu ding, I wish that one could be notified that there was no funding. No communication was sent to say if it was going to happen, just an email saying the funding expected would be known by 20 th November, then nothing. All packed to go, visa sorted, hotel booked and nothing. I would add this to outreach, lack of clear communication.
No problem with outputs.
IGF 2024:
An early start as soon as January starts.
Clear communication and feedback
Inclusiveness, especially the Youth
Pre-attendance training
Release of the new MAG ASAP 1st MAG meeting
Diary planning and entry
Call for proposals by March. 2 MAG meeting
Funding applications
Decision on proposals by April- May 3 MAG meeting
IGF funding by end of MAY
Clear communication and feedback
Inclusiveness, especially the Youth
Pre-attendance training
Release of the new MAG ASAP 1st MAG meeting
Diary planning and entry
Call for proposals by March. 2 MAG meeting
Funding applications
Decision on proposals by April- May 3 MAG meeting
IGF funding by end of MAY
Include some relevant topics eg
Global Warming
E health
Aging
Disabilities @ a higher level
Schools and Colleges and Universities
Academia and Researchers
Youth Speakers.
Global Warming
E health
Aging
Disabilities @ a higher level
Schools and Colleges and Universities
Academia and Researchers
Youth Speakers.
Consider connecting aging, e-health and policy
Try a more bottoms up approach, high level is just that
Profiles are important and should be shared with photos of the speakers
Try a more bottoms up approach, high level is just that
Profiles are important and should be shared with photos of the speakers
Youth needs to be more involved as speakers, rapporteurs, session proposals etc
Introduction to the IGF
Introduction to Norway
ISOC can plan these sessions in collaboration with IGF secretariat and Schools of IG
This year will be different due to time limits so collaboration in important
Introduction to the IGF
Introduction to Norway
ISOC can plan these sessions in collaboration with IGF secretariat and Schools of IG
This year will be different due to time limits so collaboration in important
Sessions for organizations to teach about the IGF process, even UN employees have neve heard on the IGF
Spread the word through UN offices and embassies
Try to get Prime Ministers from the Commonwealth to attend not only parliamentarians, since the PM has to give travel permission and leave, more notice is needed due to red tape
Local participants eg town hall participants, notaries, JPs and teachers
Health care workers.
Spread the word through UN offices and embassies
Try to get Prime Ministers from the Commonwealth to attend not only parliamentarians, since the PM has to give travel permission and leave, more notice is needed due to red tape
Local participants eg town hall participants, notaries, JPs and teachers
Health care workers.
In person would have been so much better, but online was interesting.
Patman
Taking Stock of IGF 2024: What Worked Well? What Did Not Work So Well?
The IGF 2024 preparatory process involved various steps and activities aimed at ensuring a successful Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Below is an assessment of what worked well and what could have been improved:
What Worked Well?
1. Timely Scheduling: The preparatory timeline was well-structured, providing participants with sufficient time to prepare.
2. Call for Issues: The process for submitting issues was transparent and accessible, allowing diverse stakeholders to contribute.
3. Capacity Development Programs: Training sessions for capacity building were effective and provided new participants with the tools to engage meaningfully.
4. MAG Meetings: The Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) meetings were conducted on schedule and ensured inclusive decision-making.
What Did Not Work So Well?
1. Limited Access to Meetings: Some participants faced challenges in accessing MAG and other meetings, which hindered broader participation.
2. Session Selection Process: The session proposal and selection process were perceived by some as somewhat opaque or slow.
3. Timing Issues: Delays in certain stages impacted the overall preparation quality.
4. Lack of Technical Support: Participants with limited technical expertise found insufficient support to navigate the process effectively.
5. Visa Denials: Several participants were unable to attend the forum due to visa denials, which limited the diversity of representation.
Recommendations for Improvement
• Establish clear timelines for all stages to improve time management.
• Simplify and expand access to meetings for a broader range of participants.
• Enhance transparency in the session selection process to build trust and inclusivity.
• Provide more robust technical support and training programs to empower participants with diverse skill levels.
• Collaborate with relevant authorities to address visa challenges and facilitate smoother international participation.
This assessment can serve as a foundation for improving the preparatory process in future IGF events.
The IGF 2024 preparatory process involved various steps and activities aimed at ensuring a successful Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Below is an assessment of what worked well and what could have been improved:
What Worked Well?
1. Timely Scheduling: The preparatory timeline was well-structured, providing participants with sufficient time to prepare.
2. Call for Issues: The process for submitting issues was transparent and accessible, allowing diverse stakeholders to contribute.
3. Capacity Development Programs: Training sessions for capacity building were effective and provided new participants with the tools to engage meaningfully.
4. MAG Meetings: The Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) meetings were conducted on schedule and ensured inclusive decision-making.
What Did Not Work So Well?
1. Limited Access to Meetings: Some participants faced challenges in accessing MAG and other meetings, which hindered broader participation.
2. Session Selection Process: The session proposal and selection process were perceived by some as somewhat opaque or slow.
3. Timing Issues: Delays in certain stages impacted the overall preparation quality.
4. Lack of Technical Support: Participants with limited technical expertise found insufficient support to navigate the process effectively.
5. Visa Denials: Several participants were unable to attend the forum due to visa denials, which limited the diversity of representation.
Recommendations for Improvement
• Establish clear timelines for all stages to improve time management.
• Simplify and expand access to meetings for a broader range of participants.
• Enhance transparency in the session selection process to build trust and inclusivity.
• Provide more robust technical support and training programs to empower participants with diverse skill levels.
• Collaborate with relevant authorities to address visa challenges and facilitate smoother international participation.
This assessment can serve as a foundation for improving the preparatory process in future IGF events.
IGF 2024: Overall Programme, Thematic Focus, Structure, and Flow
The IGF 2024 programme was designed to address key issues in internet governance while ensuring inclusivity, diversity, and a well-structured flow of activities. Below is an overview of the thematic focus, structure, and overall flow of the programme:
Thematic Focus
The IGF 2024 revolved around major themes relevant to global internet governance, including:
1. Digital Inclusion: Addressing the digital divide and ensuring equal access to technology for marginalized communities.
2. Cybersecurity and Trust: Exploring strategies to enhance cybersecurity, privacy, and trust in the digital ecosystem.
3. Data Governance: Deliberating on the ethical use of data, cross-border data flows, and protection of personal information.
4. Emerging Technologies: Discussing the impact and governance of technologies like AI, blockchain, and IoT.
5. Sustainability and Climate Action: Analyzing the role of digital tools in promoting environmental sustainability.
Structure
The programme was organized to ensure an effective flow of sessions and activities, including:
1. Plenary Sessions: High-level discussions on critical themes with contributions from global leaders and experts.
2. Thematic Tracks: Parallel sessions dedicated to specific themes, offering deeper dives into issues and actionable solutions.
3. Workshops: Interactive sessions providing practical insights and capacity-building opportunities for participants.
4. Lightning Talks: Short, focused presentations highlighting innovative ideas and success stories.
5. Youth Sessions: Special forums to amplify the voices and perspectives of young participants.
6. Networking Events: Opportunities for stakeholders to connect and collaborate across sectors and regions.
Flow of the Programme
1. Opening Ceremony: Set the stage with keynote speeches from prominent leaders and IGF stakeholders.
2. Daily Plenary and Parallel Sessions: Balanced with a mix of expert panels, workshops, and interactive discussions.
3. Capacity Building and Side Events: Offered throughout the forum to ensure broader engagement and skill enhancement.
4. Closing Ceremony: Summarized key takeaways, acknowledged contributions, and set the agenda for future forums.
Key Highlights
• The programme ensured cross-sectoral representation, bringing together governments, civil society, private sector, and technical communities.
• The thematic tracks were designed to interlink, providing participants with a holistic understanding of the challenges and opportunities in internet governance.
• The emphasis on youth and inclusivity enriched discussions with fresh perspectives and diverse insights.
The well-thought-out thematic focus, structure, and flow of IGF 2024 contributed to meaningful discussions, actionable outcomes, and strengthened global collaboration in internet governance.
The IGF 2024 programme was designed to address key issues in internet governance while ensuring inclusivity, diversity, and a well-structured flow of activities. Below is an overview of the thematic focus, structure, and overall flow of the programme:
Thematic Focus
The IGF 2024 revolved around major themes relevant to global internet governance, including:
1. Digital Inclusion: Addressing the digital divide and ensuring equal access to technology for marginalized communities.
2. Cybersecurity and Trust: Exploring strategies to enhance cybersecurity, privacy, and trust in the digital ecosystem.
3. Data Governance: Deliberating on the ethical use of data, cross-border data flows, and protection of personal information.
4. Emerging Technologies: Discussing the impact and governance of technologies like AI, blockchain, and IoT.
5. Sustainability and Climate Action: Analyzing the role of digital tools in promoting environmental sustainability.
Structure
The programme was organized to ensure an effective flow of sessions and activities, including:
1. Plenary Sessions: High-level discussions on critical themes with contributions from global leaders and experts.
2. Thematic Tracks: Parallel sessions dedicated to specific themes, offering deeper dives into issues and actionable solutions.
3. Workshops: Interactive sessions providing practical insights and capacity-building opportunities for participants.
4. Lightning Talks: Short, focused presentations highlighting innovative ideas and success stories.
5. Youth Sessions: Special forums to amplify the voices and perspectives of young participants.
6. Networking Events: Opportunities for stakeholders to connect and collaborate across sectors and regions.
Flow of the Programme
1. Opening Ceremony: Set the stage with keynote speeches from prominent leaders and IGF stakeholders.
2. Daily Plenary and Parallel Sessions: Balanced with a mix of expert panels, workshops, and interactive discussions.
3. Capacity Building and Side Events: Offered throughout the forum to ensure broader engagement and skill enhancement.
4. Closing Ceremony: Summarized key takeaways, acknowledged contributions, and set the agenda for future forums.
Key Highlights
• The programme ensured cross-sectoral representation, bringing together governments, civil society, private sector, and technical communities.
• The thematic tracks were designed to interlink, providing participants with a holistic understanding of the challenges and opportunities in internet governance.
• The emphasis on youth and inclusivity enriched discussions with fresh perspectives and diverse insights.
The well-thought-out thematic focus, structure, and flow of IGF 2024 contributed to meaningful discussions, actionable outcomes, and strengthened global collaboration in internet governance.
IGF 2024: Hybrid Format Design and Experience
IGF 2024 was held in a hybrid format, offering both in-person and virtual participation to ensure broader global engagement.
Design:
• Dual Participation Options: Both physical and virtual participation options were provided.
• Advanced Technology: High-quality video conferencing, live streaming, and interactive tools were used.
• Time-Zone Friendly Scheduling: Sessions were scheduled to accommodate different time zones.
• Networking Opportunities: Virtual breakout rooms and networking tools were available for online participants.
Experience:
What Worked Well:
• Enhanced inclusivity, flexibility, and broader reach with diverse perspectives.
Challenges:
• Technical issues, reduced engagement for virtual attendees, and time-zone difficulties.
Recommendations:
• Improved technical support, more interactive tools for virtual participants, and recording all sessions.
The hybrid format provided an effective platform for global participation, setting a strong foundation for future events.
IGF 2024 was held in a hybrid format, offering both in-person and virtual participation to ensure broader global engagement.
Design:
• Dual Participation Options: Both physical and virtual participation options were provided.
• Advanced Technology: High-quality video conferencing, live streaming, and interactive tools were used.
• Time-Zone Friendly Scheduling: Sessions were scheduled to accommodate different time zones.
• Networking Opportunities: Virtual breakout rooms and networking tools were available for online participants.
Experience:
What Worked Well:
• Enhanced inclusivity, flexibility, and broader reach with diverse perspectives.
Challenges:
• Technical issues, reduced engagement for virtual attendees, and time-zone difficulties.
Recommendations:
• Improved technical support, more interactive tools for virtual participants, and recording all sessions.
The hybrid format provided an effective platform for global participation, setting a strong foundation for future events.
IGF 2024 Logistics (Website, Mobile App, Schedule, Registration, Access and Use of Online Platform, Bilateral Meeting System, Security, etc.)
The logistics of IGF 2024 focused on ensuring ease of participation and efficiency throughout the event. The following aspects were key in this process:
Website and Mobile App
• A dedicated website and mobile app were developed for IGF 2024, providing participants easy access to essential information.
• Both platforms offered user-friendly features for event schedules, registration, session selections, and other services.
Schedule
• The event schedule was well-organized to accommodate participants from different time zones.
• The program was accessible online and also available through the mobile app for easy reference.
Registration
• The registration process was simple and clear, with participants able to register online.
• The registration process was completed efficiently, and participant details were well-managed.
Access and Use of Online Platform
• The online platform was used for video conferencing, chats, and other interactive tools.
• The platform was easy to access and navigate, especially for virtual attendees.
Bilateral Meeting System
• The bilateral meeting system allowed participants to arrange direct meetings with partners and other stakeholders.
• This system was a valuable feature for both online and in-person participants.
Security
• Special measures were taken to ensure the security of participant data and information.
• The online platform was secure, with efforts made to prevent hacking and other threats.
Intersessional Activities and NRIs at IGF 2024
Intersessional activities, including Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks (PNs), were key in shaping the IGF 2024 discussions. These activities took place throughout the year, focusing on internet governance challenges.
• BPFs engaged stakeholders to develop best practices on topics like cybersecurity and digital inclusion. Their outcomes were presented during the main IGF event, contributing practical solutions.
• PNs focused on policy development, tackling issues like AI governance and data sovereignty. Their recommendations were integrated into IGF 2024, promoting policy dialogue.
National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs) brought local perspectives to the global stage, with regional consultations and sessions at IGF 2024, ensuring diverse voices were heard.
Overall, these intersessional activities enriched IGF 2024 by ensuring continuous dialogue, addressing global challenges with practical solutions, and including local and regional viewpoints.
Intersessional activities, including Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks (PNs), were key in shaping the IGF 2024 discussions. These activities took place throughout the year, focusing on internet governance challenges.
• BPFs engaged stakeholders to develop best practices on topics like cybersecurity and digital inclusion. Their outcomes were presented during the main IGF event, contributing practical solutions.
• PNs focused on policy development, tackling issues like AI governance and data sovereignty. Their recommendations were integrated into IGF 2024, promoting policy dialogue.
National, Regional, and Youth Initiatives (NRIs) brought local perspectives to the global stage, with regional consultations and sessions at IGF 2024, ensuring diverse voices were heard.
Overall, these intersessional activities enriched IGF 2024 by ensuring continuous dialogue, addressing global challenges with practical solutions, and including local and regional viewpoints.
Dynamic Coalitions at IGF 2024
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) are self-organized groups focused on specific internet governance issues. At IGF 2024, DCs played an important role in fostering ongoing discussions and providing expertise on key topics.
• Process: DCs operated year-round, organizing discussions and collaborating with various stakeholders to address emerging issues in internet governance.
• Content: Topics included areas like digital rights, privacy, and accessibility. The coalitions worked on developing guidelines, best practices, and policy recommendations.
• Integration into IGF 2024: DCs presented their findings and recommendations during dedicated sessions at IGF 2024, ensuring their contributions were part of the broader event agenda. These sessions provided a platform for sharing knowledge and furthering dialogue on critical issues.
In summary, DCs enhanced IGF 2024 by offering continuous, expert-driven discussions and ensuring that their outputs were integrated into the annual programme.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs) are self-organized groups focused on specific internet governance issues. At IGF 2024, DCs played an important role in fostering ongoing discussions and providing expertise on key topics.
• Process: DCs operated year-round, organizing discussions and collaborating with various stakeholders to address emerging issues in internet governance.
• Content: Topics included areas like digital rights, privacy, and accessibility. The coalitions worked on developing guidelines, best practices, and policy recommendations.
• Integration into IGF 2024: DCs presented their findings and recommendations during dedicated sessions at IGF 2024, ensuring their contributions were part of the broader event agenda. These sessions provided a platform for sharing knowledge and furthering dialogue on critical issues.
In summary, DCs enhanced IGF 2024 by offering continuous, expert-driven discussions and ensuring that their outputs were integrated into the annual programme.
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs at IGF 2024:
NRIs played a vital role in IGF 2024.
• Process: NRIs organize national, regional, and youth-level consultations to address local issues and contribute to global dialogue.
• Content: Topics focused on internet access, digital rights, and youth involvement in digital policy.
• Inclusion: NRIs were included in the IGF 2024 program through dedicated sessions, providing a platform for regional and national perspectives to be shared globally.
IGF 2024 Programme
The IGF 2024 programme covered key topics like cybersecurity, AI, and digital inclusion. Speakers from diverse sectors enriched discussions with their expertise. The debates were interactive, inclusive, and focused on practical solutions, ensuring high-quality outcomes and global relevance.
The IGF 2024 programme covered key topics like cybersecurity, AI, and digital inclusion. Speakers from diverse sectors enriched discussions with their expertise. The debates were interactive, inclusive, and focused on practical solutions, ensuring high-quality outcomes and global relevance.
IGF 2024 High-Level Leaders Track
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together senior policymakers, industry leaders, and experts to discuss critical internet governance issues.
• Focus: Topics included global digital cooperation, AI regulation, cybersecurity, and bridging the digital divide.
• Participation: Leaders from governments, international organizations, and the private sector contributed diverse insights and policy perspectives.
• Impact: The track provided a strategic platform for collaboration and showcased commitments to addressing pressing digital challenges globally.
This track was a key component of IGF 2024, setting the tone for actionable outcomes and global digital policy alignment.
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 brought together senior policymakers, industry leaders, and experts to discuss critical internet governance issues.
• Focus: Topics included global digital cooperation, AI regulation, cybersecurity, and bridging the digital divide.
• Participation: Leaders from governments, international organizations, and the private sector contributed diverse insights and policy perspectives.
• Impact: The track provided a strategic platform for collaboration and showcased commitments to addressing pressing digital challenges globally.
This track was a key component of IGF 2024, setting the tone for actionable outcomes and global digital policy alignment.
IGF 2024 Parliamentary Track
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 brought together lawmakers from around the world to address pressing internet governance issues from a legislative perspective.
• Focus: Discussions centered on legal frameworks for digital rights, data protection, AI governance, and cybersecurity.
• Participation: Parliamentarians shared national experiences and collaborated on strategies for harmonizing digital policies globally.
• Outcome: The track emphasized the role of legislation in ensuring an inclusive, secure, and sustainable digital future, fostering global policy alignment.
This track strengthened the dialogue between policymakers and stakeholders, promoting actionable and impactful solutions.
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 brought together lawmakers from around the world to address pressing internet governance issues from a legislative perspective.
• Focus: Discussions centered on legal frameworks for digital rights, data protection, AI governance, and cybersecurity.
• Participation: Parliamentarians shared national experiences and collaborated on strategies for harmonizing digital policies globally.
• Outcome: The track emphasized the role of legislation in ensuring an inclusive, secure, and sustainable digital future, fostering global policy alignment.
This track strengthened the dialogue between policymakers and stakeholders, promoting actionable and impactful solutions.
IGF 2024 Youth Track
The Youth Track focused on digital literacy, online safety, and youth inclusion in policymaking. Young leaders actively contributed innovative ideas, fostering intergenerational dialogue and emphasizing the role of youth in shaping the digital future.
The Youth Track focused on digital literacy, online safety, and youth inclusion in policymaking. Young leaders actively contributed innovative ideas, fostering intergenerational dialogue and emphasizing the role of youth in shaping the digital future.
IGF 2024 Programme: Gender Perspective
The IGF 2024 programme prioritized gender inclusivity through balanced representation, discussions on the gender digital divide, and women’s empowerment in tech. These efforts highlighted the need for gender-sensitive internet governance policies.
The IGF 2024 programme prioritized gender inclusivity through balanced representation, discussions on the gender digital divide, and women’s empowerment in tech. These efforts highlighted the need for gender-sensitive internet governance policies.
IGF 2024 Village
The IGF 2024 Village served as a vibrant space for organizations to showcase their work in internet governance.
• Participation: It featured booths from governments, NGOs, academia, and the private sector.
• Focus: Topics included emerging technologies, digital rights, and capacity building.
• Engagement: Participants interacted directly with exhibitors, fostering collaboration and knowledge-sharing.
The Village enriched the IGF experience by providing a platform for networking and highlighting diverse initiatives.
The IGF 2024 Village served as a vibrant space for organizations to showcase their work in internet governance.
• Participation: It featured booths from governments, NGOs, academia, and the private sector.
• Focus: Topics included emerging technologies, digital rights, and capacity building.
• Engagement: Participants interacted directly with exhibitors, fostering collaboration and knowledge-sharing.
The Village enriched the IGF experience by providing a platform for networking and highlighting diverse initiatives.
IGF 2024 Communications, Outreach, and Outputs
IGF 2024 effectively used social media, newsletters, and live streaming to engage global audiences. Key outputs, including session reports and policy recommendations, were widely shared to ensure accessibility and impact. The outreach efforts strengthened participation and awareness of internet governance issues.
IGF 2024 effectively used social media, newsletters, and live streaming to engage global audiences. Key outputs, including session reports and policy recommendations, were widely shared to ensure accessibility and impact. The outreach efforts strengthened participation and awareness of internet governance issues.
IGF 2024:
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Improvements
1. Earlier Engagement: Start the preparatory process earlier for better planning and participation.
2. Clearer Selection Criteria: Improve transparency in session selection and communication.
3. Broader Stakeholder Involvement: Include more regional and marginalized groups in decision-making.
4. Regional Consultations: Organize more regional events to address specific challenges.
5. Support for Youth and Underrepresented Groups: Enhance outreach and mentorship for these groups.
6. Hybrid Participation Enhancements: Improve virtual engagement and networking opportunities.
7. Clearer Follow-up Mechanisms: Set up platforms to track and implement IGF outcomes.
8. Interactive Sessions: Increase interactive and collaborative opportunities for participants.
These improvements can make IGF 2025 more inclusive and impactful.
1. Earlier Engagement: Start the preparatory process earlier for better planning and participation.
2. Clearer Selection Criteria: Improve transparency in session selection and communication.
3. Broader Stakeholder Involvement: Include more regional and marginalized groups in decision-making.
4. Regional Consultations: Organize more regional events to address specific challenges.
5. Support for Youth and Underrepresented Groups: Enhance outreach and mentorship for these groups.
6. Hybrid Participation Enhancements: Improve virtual engagement and networking opportunities.
7. Clearer Follow-up Mechanisms: Set up platforms to track and implement IGF outcomes.
8. Interactive Sessions: Increase interactive and collaborative opportunities for participants.
These improvements can make IGF 2025 more inclusive and impactful.
IGF 2025 Overall Programme Structure and Flow
1. Thematic Focus: Clear themes addressing current and emerging issues.
2. Diverse Formats: Use of various session formats for interactivity.
3. Inclusive Representation: Ensure balanced participation across all stakeholder groups.
4. Integration of Intersessional Outputs: Incorporate outputs from intersessional activities into the main programme.
5. Regional and Local Focus: Include sessions addressing regional and local issues.
6. Dedicated Tracks: Introduce thematic tracks for key issues like AI, cybersecurity, and inclusion.
7. Collaboration Opportunities: Design sessions to encourage cross-stakeholder collaboration.
8. Youth and Gender Focus: Prioritize youth and gender inclusion in discussions.
These elements will enhance IGF 2025’s effectiveness and inclusivity.
1. Thematic Focus: Clear themes addressing current and emerging issues.
2. Diverse Formats: Use of various session formats for interactivity.
3. Inclusive Representation: Ensure balanced participation across all stakeholder groups.
4. Integration of Intersessional Outputs: Incorporate outputs from intersessional activities into the main programme.
5. Regional and Local Focus: Include sessions addressing regional and local issues.
6. Dedicated Tracks: Introduce thematic tracks for key issues like AI, cybersecurity, and inclusion.
7. Collaboration Opportunities: Design sessions to encourage cross-stakeholder collaboration.
8. Youth and Gender Focus: Prioritize youth and gender inclusion in discussions.
These elements will enhance IGF 2025’s effectiveness and inclusivity.
IGF 2025 Programme Content
1. Thematic Approach: Focus on current issues like digital inclusion, AI governance, cybersecurity, and data privacy.
2. Session Types: Diverse formats including panels, workshops, roundtables, and collaborative discussions to promote engagement.
3. Speakers Profiles: A mix of policymakers, industry leaders, academics, and civil society representatives to ensure diverse perspectives.
This approach will foster dynamic, relevant, and inclusive discussions.
1. Thematic Approach: Focus on current issues like digital inclusion, AI governance, cybersecurity, and data privacy.
2. Session Types: Diverse formats including panels, workshops, roundtables, and collaborative discussions to promote engagement.
3. Speakers Profiles: A mix of policymakers, industry leaders, academics, and civil society representatives to ensure diverse perspectives.
This approach will foster dynamic, relevant, and inclusive discussions.
Community Intersessional Activities and NRIs Connection with IGF 2025
1. Intersessional Integration: Ensure outputs from BPFs, PNs, and DCs are directly included in the IGF 2025 sessions to provide continuity and relevance.
2. National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs): Actively engage NRI participants in shaping the agenda and sessions, ensuring regional perspectives are included.
3. Collaboration: Encourage cross-collaboration between intersessional groups and NRIs to bring local, regional, and global issues into the main IGF programme.
These connections will ensure a more inclusive and comprehensive IGF 2025.
1. Intersessional Integration: Ensure outputs from BPFs, PNs, and DCs are directly included in the IGF 2025 sessions to provide continuity and relevance.
2. National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs): Actively engage NRI participants in shaping the agenda and sessions, ensuring regional perspectives are included.
3. Collaboration: Encourage cross-collaboration between intersessional groups and NRIs to bring local, regional, and global issues into the main IGF programme.
These connections will ensure a more inclusive and comprehensive IGF 2025.
IGF 2025 Participants: Who to Invite and How to Inter-connect
1. Who to Invite:
• Governments and Policymakers: Representatives from national governments, regional organizations, and intergovernmental bodies to ensure policy alignment.
• Private Sector: Industry leaders from tech companies, digital service providers, and startups to discuss innovation and industry trends.
• Civil Society: Representatives from advocacy groups, NGOs, and community organizations to ensure inclusivity and address societal issues.
• Academia and Experts: Researchers and thought leaders to provide evidence-based insights and expert opinions.
• Youth and Marginalized Groups: Engage young people, indigenous communities, and other underrepresented groups to ensure diverse perspectives in discussions.
2. How to Inter-connect Participants:
• Thematic Networking: Create spaces for participants from similar thematic areas (e.g., cybersecurity, digital rights) to collaborate and share ideas.
• Interactive Sessions: Use workshops, roundtables, and collaborative tools (e.g., online platforms, group discussions) to facilitate cross-stakeholder dialogue.
• Digital Platforms: Utilize virtual networking tools, chatrooms, and dedicated online forums to connect participants before, during, and after the event.
• Bilateral Meetings: Provide structured opportunities for one-on-one meetings, allowing participants to discuss specific issues or form partnerships.
These strategies will enhance collaboration and ensure productive engagement across all IGF 2025 participants.
1. Who to Invite:
• Governments and Policymakers: Representatives from national governments, regional organizations, and intergovernmental bodies to ensure policy alignment.
• Private Sector: Industry leaders from tech companies, digital service providers, and startups to discuss innovation and industry trends.
• Civil Society: Representatives from advocacy groups, NGOs, and community organizations to ensure inclusivity and address societal issues.
• Academia and Experts: Researchers and thought leaders to provide evidence-based insights and expert opinions.
• Youth and Marginalized Groups: Engage young people, indigenous communities, and other underrepresented groups to ensure diverse perspectives in discussions.
2. How to Inter-connect Participants:
• Thematic Networking: Create spaces for participants from similar thematic areas (e.g., cybersecurity, digital rights) to collaborate and share ideas.
• Interactive Sessions: Use workshops, roundtables, and collaborative tools (e.g., online platforms, group discussions) to facilitate cross-stakeholder dialogue.
• Digital Platforms: Utilize virtual networking tools, chatrooms, and dedicated online forums to connect participants before, during, and after the event.
• Bilateral Meetings: Provide structured opportunities for one-on-one meetings, allowing participants to discuss specific issues or form partnerships.
These strategies will enhance collaboration and ensure productive engagement across all IGF 2025 participants.
Possible Improvements for IGF 2025 in Relation to WSIS+20 Review and Global Digital Compact
1. IGF 2025 Contribution to WSIS+20 Review:
• Linking IGF with WSIS Outcomes: IGF 2025 could actively integrate the WSIS outcomes by focusing on key areas like universal access, digital inclusion, and internet governance as outlined in the WSIS+20 review process.
• Policy Dialogues: Organize dedicated sessions that align with the WSIS goals, ensuring that stakeholders from all sectors (government, private, civil society, etc.) come together to review progress and identify challenges in the implementation of WSIS outcomes.
• High-Level Sessions: Include high-level discussions and workshops with senior officials and policymakers in the lead-up to the General Assembly’s high-level meeting at the end of 2025, ensuring that IGF 2025 contributes to shaping the review’s discussions and recommendations.
2. IGF’s Role in Supporting the Global Digital Compact (GDC):
• Promoting Multistakeholder Cooperation: The Global Digital Compact (GDC) calls for inclusive global digital cooperation. IGF 2025 can further this by promoting multistakeholder partnerships through collaborative sessions, roundtables, and policy dialogues focused on inclusive digital governance, particularly for marginalized groups and underserved regions.
• Tracking Progress: IGF 2025 could serve as a platform for reviewing the Global Digital Compact’s goals and tracking the progress of commitments made, ensuring that all stakeholders are actively involved in the compact’s implementation.
• Recommendations and Policy Guidance: IGF 2025 could produce actionable recommendations that contribute to the GDC, with an emphasis on equitable access, digital rights, cybersecurity, and the empowerment of marginalized communities.
By aligning IGF 2025’s agenda with both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact, it will not only strengthen its relevance in global policy but also ensure that its discussions lead to concrete outcomes in achieving sustainable and inclusive digital governance.
1. IGF 2025 Contribution to WSIS+20 Review:
• Linking IGF with WSIS Outcomes: IGF 2025 could actively integrate the WSIS outcomes by focusing on key areas like universal access, digital inclusion, and internet governance as outlined in the WSIS+20 review process.
• Policy Dialogues: Organize dedicated sessions that align with the WSIS goals, ensuring that stakeholders from all sectors (government, private, civil society, etc.) come together to review progress and identify challenges in the implementation of WSIS outcomes.
• High-Level Sessions: Include high-level discussions and workshops with senior officials and policymakers in the lead-up to the General Assembly’s high-level meeting at the end of 2025, ensuring that IGF 2025 contributes to shaping the review’s discussions and recommendations.
2. IGF’s Role in Supporting the Global Digital Compact (GDC):
• Promoting Multistakeholder Cooperation: The Global Digital Compact (GDC) calls for inclusive global digital cooperation. IGF 2025 can further this by promoting multistakeholder partnerships through collaborative sessions, roundtables, and policy dialogues focused on inclusive digital governance, particularly for marginalized groups and underserved regions.
• Tracking Progress: IGF 2025 could serve as a platform for reviewing the Global Digital Compact’s goals and tracking the progress of commitments made, ensuring that all stakeholders are actively involved in the compact’s implementation.
• Recommendations and Policy Guidance: IGF 2025 could produce actionable recommendations that contribute to the GDC, with an emphasis on equitable access, digital rights, cybersecurity, and the empowerment of marginalized communities.
By aligning IGF 2025’s agenda with both the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact, it will not only strengthen its relevance in global policy but also ensure that its discussions lead to concrete outcomes in achieving sustainable and inclusive digital governance.
IGF 2024 was a significant milestone in advancing internet governance discussions, providing a platform for diverse stakeholders to collaborate on pressing digital issues. The hybrid format ensured global participation, though logistical challenges such as visa issues for some attendees affected accessibility. The inclusion of high-level tracks, youth engagement, and gender perspectives highlighted the forum’s commitment to inclusivity. While the overall programme was well-received, there is room for improving the integration of intersessional activities into the main discussions for greater impact. Overall, IGF 2024 contributed valuable insights and fostered meaningful dialogue on shaping the future of the internet.
Pelei
In the next IGF I really wish the program can be looked at in a different way. Say we have sessions focusing on a certain topic at the same time everyday. For example cybersecurity sessions should be everyday from 1400hrs to 1500hrs unlike having them at the same time in different rooms which results in missing some sessions one would like to attend because they are attending the other.
I would like to thank the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for their IGF visa initiative, sometimes when one applies for a visa on their own they end up applying for a wrong visa or applying on a scam website. It was also brilliant to have an application built specifically for the IGF schedule.
The sessions were very much needed and relevant, but it would be better to delve more into the topics discussed not just touch them here and there. For example, in a session about leveraging the power of AI it would be wise to share ways in which AI can be used to deliver government services with ease, not to just mention that AI makes things better.
IGF 2024:
Rafiq
All was well managed
All was well organised
Was perfect and good idea.
9/10
IGF 2024:
Rahemi
Timeline:
Early announcement of key deadlines ensured adequate time for preparation.
Call for Issues and Session Proposals:
Attracted a large number of proposals (over 200).
Clear guidelines for submission helped maintain quality.
Session Selection:
MAG effectively evaluated and selected diverse sessions.
Some stakeholders felt the evaluation lacked transparency.
MAG Meetings:
Regular MAG meetings ensured well-organized planning.
Public recordings improved transparency.
Capacity Development:
Focused on marginalized communities and developing regions.
Provided multilingual resources, though not fully comprehensive.
Early announcement of key deadlines ensured adequate time for preparation.
Call for Issues and Session Proposals:
Attracted a large number of proposals (over 200).
Clear guidelines for submission helped maintain quality.
Session Selection:
MAG effectively evaluated and selected diverse sessions.
Some stakeholders felt the evaluation lacked transparency.
MAG Meetings:
Regular MAG meetings ensured well-organized planning.
Public recordings improved transparency.
Capacity Development:
Focused on marginalized communities and developing regions.
Provided multilingual resources, though not fully comprehensive.
IGF 2024 Overall Programme
Thematic Focus:
Key themes included:
Digital inclusion and equity.
AI and emerging technologies.
Cybersecurity and data protection.
Structure and Flow:
A mix of plenary sessions, workshops, lightning talks, and high-level panels.
Interactive formats encouraged dialogue.
Thematic Focus:
Key themes included:
Digital inclusion and equity.
AI and emerging technologies.
Cybersecurity and data protection.
Structure and Flow:
A mix of plenary sessions, workshops, lightning talks, and high-level panels.
Interactive formats encouraged dialogue.
IGF 2024 Hybrid Format
Design:
A well-integrated hybrid design allowed both in-person and remote participation.
Experience:
Remote participants praised the availability of live captions and recordings.
Challenges in time zone coordination impacted global participation.
Design:
A well-integrated hybrid design allowed both in-person and remote participation.
Experience:
Remote participants praised the availability of live captions and recordings.
Challenges in time zone coordination impacted global participation.
IGF 2024 Logistics
Website and Mobile App:
User-friendly interface for schedule and session updates.
Some bugs in app functionality.
Registration:
Comprehensive process, though initial delays were noted.
Online Platform:
Enabled robust interaction via chat, Q&A, and breakout rooms.
Bilateral Meeting System:
Smooth facilitation of private discussions.
Security:
High-standard protocols ensured participant safety.
Physical venue security was excellent, though online security measures could improve.
Website and Mobile App:
User-friendly interface for schedule and session updates.
Some bugs in app functionality.
Registration:
Comprehensive process, though initial delays were noted.
Online Platform:
Enabled robust interaction via chat, Q&A, and breakout rooms.
Bilateral Meeting System:
Smooth facilitation of private discussions.
Security:
High-standard protocols ensured participant safety.
Physical venue security was excellent, though online security measures could improve.
Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks
Process:
The BPFs and Policy Networks (PNs) for IGF 2024 built on thematic priorities identified in earlier MAG meetings.
Stakeholder-driven with open consultations to ensure diverse input.
Content:
Focused on actionable recommendations and sharing successful practices.
Topics included AI ethics, cybersecurity frameworks, and equitable Internet access.
Reports and outputs were developed collaboratively and presented for public comment before the IGF.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
Integrated into the IGF 2024 schedule through dedicated sessions and workshops.
Summaries and key findings were highlighted during high-level panels and plenaries, ensuring visibility and engagement.
Side events allowed for deeper exploration and community feedback.
Process:
The BPFs and Policy Networks (PNs) for IGF 2024 built on thematic priorities identified in earlier MAG meetings.
Stakeholder-driven with open consultations to ensure diverse input.
Content:
Focused on actionable recommendations and sharing successful practices.
Topics included AI ethics, cybersecurity frameworks, and equitable Internet access.
Reports and outputs were developed collaboratively and presented for public comment before the IGF.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
Integrated into the IGF 2024 schedule through dedicated sessions and workshops.
Summaries and key findings were highlighted during high-level panels and plenaries, ensuring visibility and engagement.
Side events allowed for deeper exploration and community feedback.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs)
Process:
DCs operated throughout the year on specific Internet governance topics such as Internet standards, accessibility, and freedom of expression.
Open membership and regular virtual meetings encouraged global participation.
Content:
Produced thematic reports with practical recommendations.
Promoted dialogue on contentious or underrepresented issues in Internet governance.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
Organized thematic sessions and showcased their work during main IGF panels.
DCs collaborated with other IGF components (e.g., workshops, BPFs) to ensure synergy.
Interactive formats allowed participants to contribute directly to ongoing DC initiatives.
Process:
DCs operated throughout the year on specific Internet governance topics such as Internet standards, accessibility, and freedom of expression.
Open membership and regular virtual meetings encouraged global participation.
Content:
Produced thematic reports with practical recommendations.
Promoted dialogue on contentious or underrepresented issues in Internet governance.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
Organized thematic sessions and showcased their work during main IGF panels.
DCs collaborated with other IGF components (e.g., workshops, BPFs) to ensure synergy.
Interactive formats allowed participants to contribute directly to ongoing DC initiatives.
National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs)
Process:
NRIs coordinated discussions on Internet governance issues relevant to their contexts.
Localized engagement ensured that grassroots perspectives were included.
Content:
Topics reflected global IGF themes but tailored to specific regional or national challenges.
Youth IGFs focused on digital skills, empowerment, and inclusion.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
NRIs held collaborative sessions to share best practices and lessons learned.
The NRI Main Session provided a platform for discussing common challenges and innovative solutions.
Youth perspectives were prominently featured, fostering intergenerational dialogue.
Process:
NRIs coordinated discussions on Internet governance issues relevant to their contexts.
Localized engagement ensured that grassroots perspectives were included.
Content:
Topics reflected global IGF themes but tailored to specific regional or national challenges.
Youth IGFs focused on digital skills, empowerment, and inclusion.
Inclusion in the Annual IGF Programme:
NRIs held collaborative sessions to share best practices and lessons learned.
The NRI Main Session provided a platform for discussing common challenges and innovative solutions.
Youth perspectives were prominently featured, fostering intergenerational dialogue.
IGF 2024 Sessions
Feedback:
Well-Structured: Sessions were organized to facilitate comprehensive coverage of topics.
Participant Engagement: Opportunities for audience interaction enriched the discussions.
Resource Availability: Supplementary materials and session recordings were accessible for further learning.
Feedback:
Well-Structured: Sessions were organized to facilitate comprehensive coverage of topics.
Participant Engagement: Opportunities for audience interaction enriched the discussions.
Resource Availability: Supplementary materials and session recordings were accessible for further learning.
High-Level Leaders Track
Overview:
Strategic Discussions: Focused on policy frameworks and international cooperation in internet governance.
Influential Participants: Included high-ranking officials and decision-makers contributing to policy dialogues.
Overview:
Strategic Discussions: Focused on policy frameworks and international cooperation in internet governance.
Influential Participants: Included high-ranking officials and decision-makers contributing to policy dialogues.
Parliamentary Track
Overview:
Legislative Focus: Addressed the role of parliaments in shaping digital policies and regulations.
Collaborative Sessions: Facilitated knowledge exchange among parliamentarians globally.
Overview:
Legislative Focus: Addressed the role of parliaments in shaping digital policies and regulations.
Collaborative Sessions: Facilitated knowledge exchange among parliamentarians globally.
Youth Track
Overview:
Youth Engagement: Empowered young participants to contribute to internet governance discussions.
Skill Development: Provided workshops aimed at enhancing digital literacy and advocacy skills.
Overview:
Youth Engagement: Empowered young participants to contribute to internet governance discussions.
Skill Development: Provided workshops aimed at enhancing digital literacy and advocacy skills.
Gender Perspective on Programme Content
Observations:
Inclusive Representation: Efforts were made to ensure gender diversity among speakers and participants.
Focused Sessions: Specific discussions addressed gender-related issues in technology and internet access.
Observations:
Inclusive Representation: Efforts were made to ensure gender diversity among speakers and participants.
Focused Sessions: Specific discussions addressed gender-related issues in technology and internet access.
IGF 2024 Village
Overview:
Exhibition Space: Showcased initiatives and projects from various organizations involved in internet governance.
Networking Opportunities: Enabled participants to connect and collaborate with stakeholders.
Overview:
Exhibition Space: Showcased initiatives and projects from various organizations involved in internet governance.
Networking Opportunities: Enabled participants to connect and collaborate with stakeholders.
Communications, Outreach, and Outputs
Overview:
Effective Communication: Utilized multiple channels to disseminate information and engage a broader audience.
Comprehensive Outputs: Produced detailed reports and summaries accessible to the public.
Overview:
Effective Communication: Utilized multiple channels to disseminate information and engage a broader audience.
Comprehensive Outputs: Produced detailed reports and summaries accessible to the public.
IGF 2024:
IGF 2025 Preparatory Process
Timeline:
Announce the timeline earlier to allow stakeholders more time for preparation and engagement.
Introduce mid-year progress updates to maintain momentum and stakeholder interest.
Call for Session Proposals & Selection:
Simplify the submission process with clear templates and examples.
Provide detailed feedback to all proposals, including rejected ones, to improve transparency.
Include thematic quotas to ensure balanced representation across topics.
MAG and Open Consultation Meetings:
Increase the frequency of public consultations to incorporate broader community feedback.
Utilize hybrid formats for MAG meetings to ensure participation from underrepresented regions.
Timeline:
Announce the timeline earlier to allow stakeholders more time for preparation and engagement.
Introduce mid-year progress updates to maintain momentum and stakeholder interest.
Call for Session Proposals & Selection:
Simplify the submission process with clear templates and examples.
Provide detailed feedback to all proposals, including rejected ones, to improve transparency.
Include thematic quotas to ensure balanced representation across topics.
MAG and Open Consultation Meetings:
Increase the frequency of public consultations to incorporate broader community feedback.
Utilize hybrid formats for MAG meetings to ensure participation from underrepresented regions.
Overall Programme Structure and Flow
Thematic Tracks:
Maintain clear thematic tracks but introduce cross-cutting sessions to highlight interconnections between themes.
Session Types:
Incorporate more interactive formats like debates, roundtables, and hackathons to engage participants.
Dedicate specific sessions to summarizing outputs and action points for greater impact.
Flow:
Provide time slots for informal networking and bilateral meetings without disrupting the main agenda.
Ensure balance between high-level discussions and grassroots issues to cater to all stakeholders.
Thematic Tracks:
Maintain clear thematic tracks but introduce cross-cutting sessions to highlight interconnections between themes.
Session Types:
Incorporate more interactive formats like debates, roundtables, and hackathons to engage participants.
Dedicate specific sessions to summarizing outputs and action points for greater impact.
Flow:
Provide time slots for informal networking and bilateral meetings without disrupting the main agenda.
Ensure balance between high-level discussions and grassroots issues to cater to all stakeholders.
Programme Content (Thematic Approach, Session Types, Speaker Profiles)
Thematic Approach:
Align themes with global priorities such as AI ethics, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability.
Include a thematic focus on preparing for WSIS+20 and supporting the Global Digital Compact.
Session Types:
Add scenario-based workshops to explore practical applications of policy recommendations.
Use “lightning sessions” for quick updates on innovative ideas and projects.
Speaker Profiles:
Prioritize gender, geographic, and sectoral diversity among speakers.
Increase representation of youth, indigenous groups, and grassroots organizations.
Thematic Approach:
Align themes with global priorities such as AI ethics, cybersecurity, digital inclusion, and sustainability.
Include a thematic focus on preparing for WSIS+20 and supporting the Global Digital Compact.
Session Types:
Add scenario-based workshops to explore practical applications of policy recommendations.
Use “lightning sessions” for quick updates on innovative ideas and projects.
Speaker Profiles:
Prioritize gender, geographic, and sectoral diversity among speakers.
Increase representation of youth, indigenous groups, and grassroots organizations.
Community Intersessional Activities and NRIs
Integration with IGF 2025 Process:
Schedule sessions to present intersessional activity findings during the main IGF programme.
Offer a pre-event virtual summit for NRIs to align their discussions with global themes.
Best Practice Forums (BPFs) & Policy Networks:
Focus on actionable outputs and encourage regional adaptation of BPF recommendations.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs):
Provide platforms for DCs to collaborate with NRIs on shared challenges.
NRIs (National, Regional, and Youth IGFs):
Enhance funding and capacity-building for NRIs in developing regions.
Showcase NRI outputs prominently in the IGF programme.
Integration with IGF 2025 Process:
Schedule sessions to present intersessional activity findings during the main IGF programme.
Offer a pre-event virtual summit for NRIs to align their discussions with global themes.
Best Practice Forums (BPFs) & Policy Networks:
Focus on actionable outputs and encourage regional adaptation of BPF recommendations.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs):
Provide platforms for DCs to collaborate with NRIs on shared challenges.
NRIs (National, Regional, and Youth IGFs):
Enhance funding and capacity-building for NRIs in developing regions.
Showcase NRI outputs prominently in the IGF programme.
Participants: Who to Invite and How to Interconnect
Who to Invite:
Expand outreach to include representatives from marginalized communities, small businesses, and startups.
Engage high-profile speakers to attract media attention while maintaining grassroots representation.
Interconnection:
Use AI-driven matchmaking tools to connect participants with similar interests.
Create dedicated networking spaces (both physical and virtual) for informal discussions.
Who to Invite:
Expand outreach to include representatives from marginalized communities, small businesses, and startups.
Engage high-profile speakers to attract media attention while maintaining grassroots representation.
Interconnection:
Use AI-driven matchmaking tools to connect participants with similar interests.
Create dedicated networking spaces (both physical and virtual) for informal discussions.
IGF 2025 and WSIS+20 Review
Contribution to WSIS+20:
Position IGF 2025 as a preparatory platform to discuss progress and challenges in implementing WSIS outcomes.
Produce a comprehensive report summarizing IGF discussions and actionable recommendations for the WSIS+20 Review.
Global Digital Compact (GDC):
Organize special sessions on the GDC’s principles and implementation.
Collaborate with UN agencies to align IGF discussions with GDC priorities.
Contribution to WSIS+20:
Position IGF 2025 as a preparatory platform to discuss progress and challenges in implementing WSIS outcomes.
Produce a comprehensive report summarizing IGF discussions and actionable recommendations for the WSIS+20 Review.
Global Digital Compact (GDC):
Organize special sessions on the GDC’s principles and implementation.
Collaborate with UN agencies to align IGF discussions with GDC priorities.
Overall Impression:
Successful Event: IGF 2024 effectively facilitated multistakeholder dialogues on critical internet governance issues.
Areas for Improvement: Future forums could further enhance accessibility and inclusivity, particularly for underrepresented groups.
Successful Event: IGF 2024 effectively facilitated multistakeholder dialogues on critical internet governance issues.
Areas for Improvement: Future forums could further enhance accessibility and inclusivity, particularly for underrepresented groups.
Selematsela
All alerts were timely
great program flow
hybrid session participation had no connection glitches
logistics updates were great
IGF 2024:
Sethunath
Time alloted could be better and travel assistance to CSO's could be an option as many organisations may not have the means to travel or may attend sessions online due to internet issues
IGF 2024 overall is good with regard to flow & structure
It was well designed
Logistics could be better as many participants didn't receive the link for attending sessions, rest was good.
IGF 2024:
SOSSOU
What worked well for me are:
The timeline for calls for session proposals and issues I found well-structured.
MAG meetings facilitated clear communication and coordination, ensuring a robust and inclusive selection process for sessions.
Capacity development initiatives, such as youth mentorship programs, effectively empowered participants, especially first-time attendees, to engage meaningfully in discussions.
What worked not so well:
The session proposal selection process could benefit from greater transparency, as some stakeholders felt unclear about the criteria used and some of the topic discussed seems to be redundant in other sessions.
The timeline for calls for session proposals and issues I found well-structured.
MAG meetings facilitated clear communication and coordination, ensuring a robust and inclusive selection process for sessions.
Capacity development initiatives, such as youth mentorship programs, effectively empowered participants, especially first-time attendees, to engage meaningfully in discussions.
What worked not so well:
The session proposal selection process could benefit from greater transparency, as some stakeholders felt unclear about the criteria used and some of the topic discussed seems to be redundant in other sessions.
The programme had an inclusive thematic focus, covering critical topics like AI governance, digital sovereignty, and cybersecurity. Its structure balanced high-level, thematic, and specialized sessions, minimizing overlaps and allowing meaningful engagement across diverse areas of interest. The preparatory process was well-structured, with clear timelines and effective coordination through MAG meetings, ensuring robust session selection and capacity-building initiatives like youth mentorship programs.
However, thematic overlaps across sessions led to some repetition, and the absence of follow-up mechanisms for thematic tracks limited the connection of related discussions to actionable outcomes.
However, thematic overlaps across sessions led to some repetition, and the absence of follow-up mechanisms for thematic tracks limited the connection of related discussions to actionable outcomes.
this format effectively enhanced accessibility, enabling participation from a diverse range of stakeholders, including those unable to attend in person. I believe that the combination of onsite and online engagement created a dynamic platform for discussions, with well-facilitated bilateral meetings and hybrid sessions ensuring inclusive dialogue. However, challenges in the online platform's usability, such as navigation difficulties and intermittent technical issues, affected the experience of most participants. Greater effort is needed to ensure seamless integration of online and onsite interactions, particularly in networking and informal exchanges, to maximize the benefits of the hybrid model.
website was great. The mobile app was highly effective, especially the personalized schedule feature, which streamlined session planning. Registration through the Indico platform was smooth and user-friendly, while the security arrangements for IGF 2024 were exceptional.
However, the chat function on the app saw minimal use. More education and encouragement are needed to foster interaction and create interest- or region-based discussion groups. The visa application process, while generally effective, suffered from broken links at times. Integrating Indico registration with visa processing and making the visa process free of charge would enhance user experience. Additionally, the absence of a function to book bilateral meeting rooms on request was a limitation. A separate schedule for these rooms should be introduced, allowing session organizers to reserve slots in real time. Lastly, having at least two rooms equipped with interpretation, including the plenary room, would improve accessibility and inclusivity.
However, the chat function on the app saw minimal use. More education and encouragement are needed to foster interaction and create interest- or region-based discussion groups. The visa application process, while generally effective, suffered from broken links at times. Integrating Indico registration with visa processing and making the visa process free of charge would enhance user experience. Additionally, the absence of a function to book bilateral meeting rooms on request was a limitation. A separate schedule for these rooms should be introduced, allowing session organizers to reserve slots in real time. Lastly, having at least two rooms equipped with interpretation, including the plenary room, would improve accessibility and inclusivity.
The inclusion of a main session dedicated to intersessional work, such as Best Practice Forums and Policy Networks, was a strong approach. It provided a platform to present their ideas and ensure visibility for their contributions. To enhance impact, experts from these intersessional groups should also participate in other sessions, sharing their insights across relevant discussions. This would deepen engagement and integrate their expertise into the broader programme, enriching the overall dialogue.
DC, as some of the most active sections of the IGF process, should be given greater priority in session allocation. The inclusion of joint sessions by multiple DCs was an excellent initiative, fostering collaboration and enriching discussions. To further highlight their contributions, DCs should also have a dedicated main session in the plenary or main room. This would provide a platform to showcase their work to a broader audience and emphasize their critical role within the IGF framework. Joint sessions should continue to be prioritized during the selection process to maintain cross-cutting engagement.
NRIs’ contributions could be better integrated into the broader IGF agenda. Allocating a dedicated main session for NRIs would elevate their visibility and impact. Additionally, facilitating greater alignment between regional and global discussions through follow-up mechanisms and actionable outcomes would strengthen their influence in shaping global digital governance. The inclusion of the Youth Track was a strong element, providing young participants with opportunities to engage meaningfully in key discussions.
The session proposal selection process could benefit from greater transparency, as some stakeholders felt unclear about the criteria used and some of the topic discussed seems to be redundant in other sessions.
Nothing to add.
Nothing to add.
As I said above the inclusion of the Youth Track was a strong element, providing young participants with opportunities to engage meaningfully in key discussions. we should give the Youth Track more space.
Not bad but we could do better by maybe introducing a quota.
Nothing to add.
Even though the outputs from the forum are available on the official IGF website, providing insights into the discussions and recommendations from the event I believe we should that advantage of the media colleagues that we invited. Maybe creating a roadmap for them to promote the IGF when they are back home of even before
IGF 2024:
It is great that the call for session proposals has already been launched. As for the session selection, a clear criteria and feedback mechanisms can improve the relevance and quality of selected sessions. The call for session could be launched by end of January or mid February 2025. the MAG and open consultations meetings should be kept are usual.
Incorporate a mix of pre-identified themes and space for spontaneous topics can keep the programme dynamic and responsive.
Strengthen the connection between intersessional activities, National, Regional, and Youth IGFs (NRIs), and the main IGF event by creating dedicated spaces for NRIs to showcase their work and outcomes. This integration can foster a more cohesive global dialogue. Provide NRIs with resources and platforms to share their findings and recommendations, ensuring their contributions are recognized and considered in the broader IGF discussions.
Facilitate greater collaboration among these groups by organizing joint sessions and collaborative projects.
We should invite more people. participants should start interacting after their registration on that forum app through the chat function. In the nutshell, invite a broad spectrum of participants, including underrepresented groups, to ensure diverse perspectives, and utilize digital platforms to facilitate networking and collaboration among participants before, during, and after the event.
First and foremost, I strongly recommend that the IGF should be made permanent with a clear mandat that outline its key structure that include its collaboration with the Intersectional groups and the NRIs. On the other hand, IGF should be positioned as the key platform for reviewing the implementation of WSIS outcomes by dedicating sessions to assess progress and identify gaps. Engaging stakeholders in these discussions can provide valuable insights for the high-level meeting at the end of 2025. Additionally, align IGF discussions with the principles and goals of the Global Digital Compact, ensuring that the forum contributes to its implementation by focusing on inclusive and sustainable digital development.
Sulayman
IGF 2024 Preparatory Process
What went well:
Timely call for issues and session proposals: It timely called for sessions and related proposals so stakeholders could plan accordingly.
A wide range of issues covered within the session proposals reflected its inclusive nature.
MAG Meetings: The regular, openly held meetings contributed to good decision-making.
Capacity building: Pre-event workshops and webinars empowered participants, notably those from underrepresented communities.
What could be improved:
Session selection process: Some stakeholders felt that the selection criteria were unclear.
Time zones: Efforts to accommodate all time zones during preparatory meetings meant some regions were undersubscribed.
MAG communications: Delays in some MAG responses to stakeholder questions frustrated some applicants.
What went well:
Timely call for issues and session proposals: It timely called for sessions and related proposals so stakeholders could plan accordingly.
A wide range of issues covered within the session proposals reflected its inclusive nature.
MAG Meetings: The regular, openly held meetings contributed to good decision-making.
Capacity building: Pre-event workshops and webinars empowered participants, notably those from underrepresented communities.
What could be improved:
Session selection process: Some stakeholders felt that the selection criteria were unclear.
Time zones: Efforts to accommodate all time zones during preparatory meetings meant some regions were undersubscribed.
MAG communications: Delays in some MAG responses to stakeholder questions frustrated some applicants.
IGF 2024 Programme General
What went well:
Thematic focus: The program addressed key global challenges in the fields of digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and AI governance.
Structure and flow: Tracks and sessions were well coordinated to avoid big overlaps, allowing participants to attend sessions of their interest.
What did not work so well:
Breadth of themes: The sheer number of topics diffused focus and made the task of choosing the right sessions to attend difficult for attendees.
Session engagement: A few sessions were not engaging for the audience because of academic or one-way presentations.
What went well:
Thematic focus: The program addressed key global challenges in the fields of digital inclusion, cybersecurity, and AI governance.
Structure and flow: Tracks and sessions were well coordinated to avoid big overlaps, allowing participants to attend sessions of their interest.
What did not work so well:
Breadth of themes: The sheer number of topics diffused focus and made the task of choosing the right sessions to attend difficult for attendees.
Session engagement: A few sessions were not engaging for the audience because of academic or one-way presentations.
IGF 2024 Hybrid Format
What worked well:
Hybrid inclusivity: On-site and remote participants felt included due to strong streaming and engagement tools.
Language inclusivity: Simultaneous translation into many languages enhanced global reach.
Networking opportunities: Virtual lounges and breakout rooms served their purpose of connecting people.
What did not work so well:
Technical issues: Quite a few remote participant sessions were cut short because of intermittent glitches occurring on the platform.
Time synchronization: It was not easy to balance the in-person and online schedules; this caused delays and created confusion.
Engagement disparity: Online participants sometimes felt less engaged than in-person attendees due to limited moderation.
What worked well:
Hybrid inclusivity: On-site and remote participants felt included due to strong streaming and engagement tools.
Language inclusivity: Simultaneous translation into many languages enhanced global reach.
Networking opportunities: Virtual lounges and breakout rooms served their purpose of connecting people.
What did not work so well:
Technical issues: Quite a few remote participant sessions were cut short because of intermittent glitches occurring on the platform.
Time synchronization: It was not easy to balance the in-person and online schedules; this caused delays and created confusion.
Engagement disparity: Online participants sometimes felt less engaged than in-person attendees due to limited moderation.
IGF 2024 Logistics
What went well:
Website and mobile app: The event platform was friendly, with easy navigation and was updated regularly.
Registration process: Smooth and efficient for both in-person and online attendees.
Security measures: Effective protocols ensured that the event was safe for all participants.
What did not work so well:
Unduly, last-minute scheduling changes made life difficult for attendees who relied on fixed schedules.
Bilateral meeting system: The tool set up for arranging bilateral meetings was not responsive and consequently was not much used.
Online platform interface: Similarly, some users found it overwhelming or counterintuitive for first-time participants to navigate.
Summary Recommendations for Future IGFs
1. Enhanced transparency with regards to the call-for-session selection process, and faster response times for the stakeholders.
2. Thematic focus balance: Balance the topics to go in-depth rather than broad.
3. Hybrid improvements: Improve the technical challenges and user experience for remote participants.
4. Logistics: Ensure real-time updates and make the bilateral meeting systems smoother.
This structured reflection can be useful in refining the IGF process and its outcomes for 2025.
What went well:
Website and mobile app: The event platform was friendly, with easy navigation and was updated regularly.
Registration process: Smooth and efficient for both in-person and online attendees.
Security measures: Effective protocols ensured that the event was safe for all participants.
What did not work so well:
Unduly, last-minute scheduling changes made life difficult for attendees who relied on fixed schedules.
Bilateral meeting system: The tool set up for arranging bilateral meetings was not responsive and consequently was not much used.
Online platform interface: Similarly, some users found it overwhelming or counterintuitive for first-time participants to navigate.
Summary Recommendations for Future IGFs
1. Enhanced transparency with regards to the call-for-session selection process, and faster response times for the stakeholders.
2. Thematic focus balance: Balance the topics to go in-depth rather than broad.
3. Hybrid improvements: Improve the technical challenges and user experience for remote participants.
4. Logistics: Ensure real-time updates and make the bilateral meeting systems smoother.
This structured reflection can be useful in refining the IGF process and its outcomes for 2025.
Best Practice Forums (BPFs) and Policy Networks
Process:
The processes of BPFs and Policy Networks were transparent with clear guidelines on how to participate and what the outputs would be. Extensive stakeholder consultations and surveys ensured diverse input.
Structured discussions and outputs were enabled through a dedicated time slot for drafting and finalizing the reports.
Content: The forums have successfully tackled themes of interest, including digital inclusion and AI ethics, by rendering actionable recommendations.
The work of Policy Networks, particularly those dealing with emerging technologies, was praised for their multidisciplinary approaches.
Integration into IGF Programme:
Giving BPF and Policy Network outputs session slots in the main IGF programme ensured their visibility.
However, weak promotion of intersessional results led to underrepresentation of intersessional outputs in broader discussions.
Process:
The processes of BPFs and Policy Networks were transparent with clear guidelines on how to participate and what the outputs would be. Extensive stakeholder consultations and surveys ensured diverse input.
Structured discussions and outputs were enabled through a dedicated time slot for drafting and finalizing the reports.
Content: The forums have successfully tackled themes of interest, including digital inclusion and AI ethics, by rendering actionable recommendations.
The work of Policy Networks, particularly those dealing with emerging technologies, was praised for their multidisciplinary approaches.
Integration into IGF Programme:
Giving BPF and Policy Network outputs session slots in the main IGF programme ensured their visibility.
However, weak promotion of intersessional results led to underrepresentation of intersessional outputs in broader discussions.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs)
Process:
Dynamic Coalitions were encouraged to cooperate with other IGF tracks; still, coordination remained a challenge.
Some coalitions lacked critical mass or diverse representation of stakeholders.
The contents of some DCs reflected specialized expertise, including issues such as data governance and platform accountability.
Insightful outputs but less diffusion within the broader IGF audience.
IGF Programme Integration
The dedicated coalition slots showcased their work but concurrent timing of these decreased the attendance and its impact
NRIs
Process
Active engagement by NRIs in the preparatory processes; and brought grassroots engagement.
Youths IGFs stood out in particular for innovative approaches to digital literacy and inclusion.
Process:
Dynamic Coalitions were encouraged to cooperate with other IGF tracks; still, coordination remained a challenge.
Some coalitions lacked critical mass or diverse representation of stakeholders.
The contents of some DCs reflected specialized expertise, including issues such as data governance and platform accountability.
Insightful outputs but less diffusion within the broader IGF audience.
IGF Programme Integration
The dedicated coalition slots showcased their work but concurrent timing of these decreased the attendance and its impact
NRIs
Process
Active engagement by NRIs in the preparatory processes; and brought grassroots engagement.
Youths IGFs stood out in particular for innovative approaches to digital literacy and inclusion.
Content
Region-specific challenges NRIs highlighted enriched the IGF programme's global perspective.
Thematic alignment with the IGF programme (e.g., AI, youth engagement access) enhanced relevance.
NRI-organized sessions were well-received but often scheduled parallel to high-profile tracks, therefore participation was constrained.
Better efforts in incorporating NRI reports into high-level discussions would have elevated their impact even more.
Region-specific challenges NRIs highlighted enriched the IGF programme's global perspective.
Thematic alignment with the IGF programme (e.g., AI, youth engagement access) enhanced relevance.
NRI-organized sessions were well-received but often scheduled parallel to high-profile tracks, therefore participation was constrained.
Better efforts in incorporating NRI reports into high-level discussions would have elevated their impact even more.
IGF 2024 Sessions
Feedback:
Interactive formats: Sessions using participatory methods (e.g., Workshop room, breakout rooms, live polls) were highly engaging.
Challenges: Limited time for Q&A often left audience members unable to share insights.
-limited time for session also
Hybrid experience: Remote participants appreciated the live streaming but faced challenges in joining discussions.
Feedback:
Interactive formats: Sessions using participatory methods (e.g., Workshop room, breakout rooms, live polls) were highly engaging.
Challenges: Limited time for Q&A often left audience members unable to share insights.
-limited time for session also
Hybrid experience: Remote participants appreciated the live streaming but faced challenges in joining discussions.
IGF 2024 High-Level Leaders Track
Feedback:
Strengths: The track attracted senior policymakers, industry leaders, and civil society representatives, fostering strategic discussions.
Weaknesses: Dialog sometimes tended toward prepared statements rather than interactive engagement.
Suggestions: Introduce moderated debates to encourage dynamic exchanges.
Feedback:
Strengths: The track attracted senior policymakers, industry leaders, and civil society representatives, fostering strategic discussions.
Weaknesses: Dialog sometimes tended toward prepared statements rather than interactive engagement.
Suggestions: Introduce moderated debates to encourage dynamic exchanges.
IGF 2024 Parliamentary Track
Feedback:
Relevance: Focused on the regulatory approach toward AI and digital rights, issues at the forefront of current legislative priorities around the globe.
Engagement: There was active participation from parliamentary members, though some seemed without deep understanding of the technical issues.
Integration: Much stronger connections between the Parliamentary Track and the wider IGF program would help coherence.
Feedback:
Relevance: Focused on the regulatory approach toward AI and digital rights, issues at the forefront of current legislative priorities around the globe.
Engagement: There was active participation from parliamentary members, though some seemed without deep understanding of the technical issues.
Integration: Much stronger connections between the Parliamentary Track and the wider IGF program would help coherence.
IGF 2024 Youth Track
Feedback:
- Engagement: One of the important avenues for youth voices in discussion on emerging technologies, internet ethics, and digital rights is the Youth Track, through active participation.
- Innovation: In sessions designed for youth, many were interactive using storytelling and other gamification techniques to engage participants.
- Challenges: Effective but mostly siloed, with limited integration into the main IGF discussion.
Suggestions:
Integrate Youth-Focused Sessions into the Main IGF Program to Cross-Generational Dialogue.
Provide mentoring opportunities that match youth participants with senior stakeholders.
Feedback:
- Engagement: One of the important avenues for youth voices in discussion on emerging technologies, internet ethics, and digital rights is the Youth Track, through active participation.
- Innovation: In sessions designed for youth, many were interactive using storytelling and other gamification techniques to engage participants.
- Challenges: Effective but mostly siloed, with limited integration into the main IGF discussion.
Suggestions:
Integrate Youth-Focused Sessions into the Main IGF Program to Cross-Generational Dialogue.
Provide mentoring opportunities that match youth participants with senior stakeholders.
IGF 2024 Programme Content from a Gender Perspective
Strengths:
Gender-balanced panels were given priority, ensuring the inclusion of women and non-binary individuals in the discussions.
There were sessions that focused on gender-related topics, such as digital gender divides and online harassment.
Weaknesses:
Gender perspectives were mostly kept at the fringes of the programme and not mainstreamed throughout.
The discussions did not focus much on intersectionality with regard to, in particular, marginalized gender identities.
Suggestions:
Manda the gender balance in all panels and sessions.
Include intersectional gender analysis in discussions of main themes, such as AI and cybersecurity.
Strengths:
Gender-balanced panels were given priority, ensuring the inclusion of women and non-binary individuals in the discussions.
There were sessions that focused on gender-related topics, such as digital gender divides and online harassment.
Weaknesses:
Gender perspectives were mostly kept at the fringes of the programme and not mainstreamed throughout.
The discussions did not focus much on intersectionality with regard to, in particular, marginalized gender identities.
Suggestions:
Manda the gender balance in all panels and sessions.
Include intersectional gender analysis in discussions of main themes, such as AI and cybersecurity.
IGF 2024 Village
Feedback:
Strengths: It was a very lively space where one could expose initiatives coming from governments, civil society, and tech companies.
Weaknesses: The physical setup made it difficult for certain participants. Online versions of the booths were not that interesting.
Suggestions:
Improve the hybrid format with interactive virtual booths and live chats.
Optimize physical space for better accessibility and flow.
Feedback:
Strengths: It was a very lively space where one could expose initiatives coming from governments, civil society, and tech companies.
Weaknesses: The physical setup made it difficult for certain participants. Online versions of the booths were not that interesting.
Suggestions:
Improve the hybrid format with interactive virtual booths and live chats.
Optimize physical space for better accessibility and flow.
IGF 2024 Communications, Outreach, and Outputs
Feedback:
Strengths: Social media campaigns and newsletters ensured global visibility.
Weaknesses: Some participants reported delays in accessing session recordings and summaries.
Suggestions:
Publish session outputs (recordings, summaries, policy recommendations) more promptly.
Use targeted outreach to involve underrepresented regions and communities.
Feedback:
Strengths: Social media campaigns and newsletters ensured global visibility.
Weaknesses: Some participants reported delays in accessing session recordings and summaries.
Suggestions:
Publish session outputs (recordings, summaries, policy recommendations) more promptly.
Use targeted outreach to involve underrepresented regions and communities.
IGF 2024:
Suggestions for IGF 2025
Preparatory Process
Timeline: Share timelines earlier so stakeholders can plan better.
Session Proposals: Make the proposal submission easier and provide feedback to all applicants.
MAG Meetings: Increase regional consultations to ensure inclusivity.
Preparatory Process
Timeline: Share timelines earlier so stakeholders can plan better.
Session Proposals: Make the proposal submission easier and provide feedback to all applicants.
MAG Meetings: Increase regional consultations to ensure inclusivity.
Overall Programme Structure and Flow
Organize sessions into thematic days for better flow and coherence.
Reserve dedicated times for networking and informal discussions to foster collaboration.
Organize sessions into thematic days for better flow and coherence.
Reserve dedicated times for networking and informal discussions to foster collaboration.
Programme Content
Thematic Approach: Prioritize emerging themes like AI regulation, digital sovereignty, and data ethics.
Session Types: Expand interactive formats, including debates and hackathons.
Speakers Profiles: Ensure regional, gender, and professional diversity among speakers.
Thematic Approach: Prioritize emerging themes like AI regulation, digital sovereignty, and data ethics.
Session Types: Expand interactive formats, including debates and hackathons.
Speakers Profiles: Ensure regional, gender, and professional diversity among speakers.
Other Suggestions:
Invest in robust hybrid infrastructure to balance in-person and online experiences.
Establish post-IGF working groups to keep the momentum on key issues.
Offer scholarships or stipends to facilitate participation from underrepresented regions.
With these enhancements, IGF 2025 can further the principles of inclusiveness, impact, and overall participant experience.
Community Intersessional Activities and NRIs: Linking with IGF 2025
How best to link—suggestions:
1. Deepened Integration:
Provide dedicated plenary sessions for the presentation of intersessional activity and NRI outputs.
Involve NRI representatives in planning meetings to align regional perspectives with global discussions.
2. Year-Round Engagement:
Hold periodic virtual consultations and webinars between NRIs, Dynamic Coalitions, and intersessional activities to maintain continuous dialogue.
Create a common activity calendar to coordinate and avoid overlaps.
3. Increased Visibility:
Publish intersessional outputs on IGF communications channels, in newsletters, as well as through social media campaigns.
Designate a space in the IGF Village and within virtual platforms showcasing regional endeavors and successes.
Improvements to Best Practice Forums, Policy Networks, Dynamic Coalitions and NRIs
Best Practice Forums (BPFs):
Streamline Processes: Simplify BPF methodologies to make it easier for newcomers to access.
Outreach: More proactive outreach to underserved regions and communities to ensure wider contributions.
Measurable Outcomes: Focus on producing actionable recommendations with clear implementation roadmaps.
Policy Networks:
Stronger Stakeholder Representation: Ensure balanced participation of governments, civil society, private sector, and academia.
Policy Coherence: Map policy suggestions to national and regional policy documents for increased adoption.
Output Dissemination: Collaborate with international organizations to increase reach and implementation.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs)
Cross-Coalition Collaboration: Invite coalitions with complementary themes to co-host sessions or develop joint outputs.
Support Mechanisms: Provide technical and financial support for under-resourced coalitions.
Increased Visibility: Promote DC outputs through IGF events, publications, and policy dialogues.
NRIs:
Thematic Alignment: Ensure that NRIs' focus is in line with IGF global themes while maintaining relevance at the regional level.
Capacity Building: Provide training and resources to build capacity for NRI organizers and participants.
Youth Inclusion: Strengthen initiatives focusing on youth and incorporate their outputs into main IGF sessions.
Invest in robust hybrid infrastructure to balance in-person and online experiences.
Establish post-IGF working groups to keep the momentum on key issues.
Offer scholarships or stipends to facilitate participation from underrepresented regions.
With these enhancements, IGF 2025 can further the principles of inclusiveness, impact, and overall participant experience.
Community Intersessional Activities and NRIs: Linking with IGF 2025
How best to link—suggestions:
1. Deepened Integration:
Provide dedicated plenary sessions for the presentation of intersessional activity and NRI outputs.
Involve NRI representatives in planning meetings to align regional perspectives with global discussions.
2. Year-Round Engagement:
Hold periodic virtual consultations and webinars between NRIs, Dynamic Coalitions, and intersessional activities to maintain continuous dialogue.
Create a common activity calendar to coordinate and avoid overlaps.
3. Increased Visibility:
Publish intersessional outputs on IGF communications channels, in newsletters, as well as through social media campaigns.
Designate a space in the IGF Village and within virtual platforms showcasing regional endeavors and successes.
Improvements to Best Practice Forums, Policy Networks, Dynamic Coalitions and NRIs
Best Practice Forums (BPFs):
Streamline Processes: Simplify BPF methodologies to make it easier for newcomers to access.
Outreach: More proactive outreach to underserved regions and communities to ensure wider contributions.
Measurable Outcomes: Focus on producing actionable recommendations with clear implementation roadmaps.
Policy Networks:
Stronger Stakeholder Representation: Ensure balanced participation of governments, civil society, private sector, and academia.
Policy Coherence: Map policy suggestions to national and regional policy documents for increased adoption.
Output Dissemination: Collaborate with international organizations to increase reach and implementation.
Dynamic Coalitions (DCs)
Cross-Coalition Collaboration: Invite coalitions with complementary themes to co-host sessions or develop joint outputs.
Support Mechanisms: Provide technical and financial support for under-resourced coalitions.
Increased Visibility: Promote DC outputs through IGF events, publications, and policy dialogues.
NRIs:
Thematic Alignment: Ensure that NRIs' focus is in line with IGF global themes while maintaining relevance at the regional level.
Capacity Building: Provide training and resources to build capacity for NRI organizers and participants.
Youth Inclusion: Strengthen initiatives focusing on youth and incorporate their outputs into main IGF sessions.
IGF 2025 Participants: Who to Invite and How to Inter-Connect?
Who to Invite:
Policymakers: Involve high-level officials to discuss implementation of policies and international cooperation.
Technical Experts: Invite technologists, engineers, and developers to share their hands-on knowledge.
Civil Society and Marginalized Groups: Include indigenous representatives, persons with disabilities, and other underserved communities in the process of helping their voices be heard.
Private Sector Leaders: Include tech industry leaders in conversations on public-private partnerships and innovation.
Inter-Connecting Participants:
Networking Platforms: In-person and online matchmaking systems or networking lounges where participants could connect with others.
Collaborative Sessions: Design cross-sectoral sessions to encourage dialogue among diverse stakeholder groups.
Social Events: Include informal gatherings to foster relationships and collaborations.
Who to Invite:
Policymakers: Involve high-level officials to discuss implementation of policies and international cooperation.
Technical Experts: Invite technologists, engineers, and developers to share their hands-on knowledge.
Civil Society and Marginalized Groups: Include indigenous representatives, persons with disabilities, and other underserved communities in the process of helping their voices be heard.
Private Sector Leaders: Include tech industry leaders in conversations on public-private partnerships and innovation.
Inter-Connecting Participants:
Networking Platforms: In-person and online matchmaking systems or networking lounges where participants could connect with others.
Collaborative Sessions: Design cross-sectoral sessions to encourage dialogue among diverse stakeholder groups.
Social Events: Include informal gatherings to foster relationships and collaborations.
Improvements to IGF Mandate and Contribution to WSIS+20 Review
Contribution to WSIS+20 Review:
1. Thematic Alignment:
Focus IGF 2025 discussions on WSIS outcomes, such as digital inclusion, capacity building, and ICT for development.
Produce a report summarizing IGF contributions to WSIS action lines and recommendations for the review.
2. Engage Member States:
Encourage UN member states to share their successes on WSIS outcomes, offering a mechanism for accountability and mutual learning.
Call on governments to integrate the outputs from IGF into their national ICT policies.
3. Demonstrate Success Stories:
Showcase successful initiatives and collaborations stemming from the WSIS principles, specifically, from NRIs and intersessional activities.
Support to the Global Digital Compact:
1. Multi-Stakeholder Consultation:
Utilize the IGF sessions to consult on the Compact principles, focusing on rights, governance, and cooperation in the digital field.
Convene workshops to discuss the Compact’s implementation strategies.
2. Monitoring and Reporting:
Position IGF as a platform to monitor progress on commitments made under the Compact.
Publish annual reports on the state of global digital cooperation.
3. Capacity Building:
Offer capacity-building initiatives to help countries implement Compact principles effectively.
Collaborate with NRIs to localize the Compact’s goals.
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Preparatory Process
Transparent Session Selection: Publish clear criteria and provide detailed feedback to rejected proposals.
Stakeholder Consultations: Enhance regional and sectoral consultations in the preparation process.
Extended MAG Meetings: Have more frequent MAG meetings to plan and oversee in detail.
IGF 2025 Programme Structure and Content
Programme Structure and Flow:
Adopt thematic days for improved coherence (e.g., AI and Ethics Day, Digital Inclusion Day).
Introduce plenary summaries at the end of each day to consolidate insights.
Programme Content:
Emerging Issues: Address urgent topics like AI governance, quantum computing, and platform accountability.
Session Types: Expand interactive formats, including roundtables, hackathons, and lightning talks.
Speaker Profiles: Prioritize diversity in terms of region, gender, and expertise to ensure balanced perspectives.
By implementing these suggestions, IGF 2025 can enhance its relevance, inclusivity, and impact, aligning with global digital governance goals.
Contribution to WSIS+20 Review:
1. Thematic Alignment:
Focus IGF 2025 discussions on WSIS outcomes, such as digital inclusion, capacity building, and ICT for development.
Produce a report summarizing IGF contributions to WSIS action lines and recommendations for the review.
2. Engage Member States:
Encourage UN member states to share their successes on WSIS outcomes, offering a mechanism for accountability and mutual learning.
Call on governments to integrate the outputs from IGF into their national ICT policies.
3. Demonstrate Success Stories:
Showcase successful initiatives and collaborations stemming from the WSIS principles, specifically, from NRIs and intersessional activities.
Support to the Global Digital Compact:
1. Multi-Stakeholder Consultation:
Utilize the IGF sessions to consult on the Compact principles, focusing on rights, governance, and cooperation in the digital field.
Convene workshops to discuss the Compact’s implementation strategies.
2. Monitoring and Reporting:
Position IGF as a platform to monitor progress on commitments made under the Compact.
Publish annual reports on the state of global digital cooperation.
3. Capacity Building:
Offer capacity-building initiatives to help countries implement Compact principles effectively.
Collaborate with NRIs to localize the Compact’s goals.
Suggestions for IGF 2025 Preparatory Process
Transparent Session Selection: Publish clear criteria and provide detailed feedback to rejected proposals.
Stakeholder Consultations: Enhance regional and sectoral consultations in the preparation process.
Extended MAG Meetings: Have more frequent MAG meetings to plan and oversee in detail.
IGF 2025 Programme Structure and Content
Programme Structure and Flow:
Adopt thematic days for improved coherence (e.g., AI and Ethics Day, Digital Inclusion Day).
Introduce plenary summaries at the end of each day to consolidate insights.
Programme Content:
Emerging Issues: Address urgent topics like AI governance, quantum computing, and platform accountability.
Session Types: Expand interactive formats, including roundtables, hackathons, and lightning talks.
Speaker Profiles: Prioritize diversity in terms of region, gender, and expertise to ensure balanced perspectives.
By implementing these suggestions, IGF 2025 can enhance its relevance, inclusivity, and impact, aligning with global digital governance goals.
IGF 2024 Outputs Overview
The outputs were comprehensive, covering key discussions, policy recommendations, and insights. However, it could be improved in terms of dissemination to stakeholders beyond the IGF community to amplify impact.
Suggestions:
Partner with media outlets to share outputs widely.
Translate key outputs into multiple languages to reach global audiences.
The outputs were comprehensive, covering key discussions, policy recommendations, and insights. However, it could be improved in terms of dissemination to stakeholders beyond the IGF community to amplify impact.
Suggestions:
Partner with media outlets to share outputs widely.
Translate key outputs into multiple languages to reach global audiences.
Sulemana
IGF 2024 was my first forum and experience. I was personally amazed about how everything was well structured, from the timeline for session proposals to MAG meetings . I honestly want to appreciate how so much preparations and thoughts went into the planning process.
Nothing short of perfection. My first time experience got me teary. The overall program was a success, theme focus was clear and there was a smooth flow of every session , time bound and effective.
I am so glad that the hybrid format gave others the opportunity to participate fully without any restrictions , thanks to the internet and how things are developing. The hybrid format design is only a glimpse of how 2025 will be even more exciting and educating.
The mobile app was well designed . It helped me personally to even know which room my sessions were and the time allocated . The registration process was fast and smooth , I didn’t spend up to 5minutes in registering. Security system was fully prepared and diligent.
It was amazing how these intersectional activities were included in IGF 2024 . Smooth content and delivery.
One word : Strategic.
I joined every Youth IGF sessions and I was impressed about how the youth had a lot of impactful messages to the entire globe . The NRIs inclusion helped shaped regulations and standards concerning the internet
The sessions were so educative, practical and the delivery was respectful. The speakers were well prepared and knowledge. The content was fully packed and highlighted issues of today AI , digital inclusions and many more
Top level , well coordinated
It was amazing to see honourables from various countries participating in IGF2024 parliamentary track . It is Indeed important that parliament was included in this forum .
We are the youth and we have youthful energies in shaping the globe in terms of data governance, digital inclusion.
Amazing youth track
Amazing youth track
Gender inclusiveness was achieved . Speakers had almost equal gender inclusion .
A whole network of respectful persons from across the globe
I just went over the overview of IGF 2024, i must say that it is very clear
IGF 2024:
IGF 2025 is in June , hence the timeline should be as early as February to enable effective preparations
I think the team should continue the good job .
The team is brilliant in this approach and should continue the good job
By fostering connections between community intersessional activities and National, Regional, and Youth IGFs with the IGF 2025 process, stakeholders can create a more inclusive and representative dialogue on internet governance. These connections will not only enrich the discussions at the global level but also empower local communities to engage meaningfully in shaping the future of the internet.
Opportunity to given to more people to benefit from the in person experience as well . I am a medical practitioner who was privileged to be invited. I am so grateful for this opportunity
The IGF 2025 has a significant opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the WSIS+20 Review and support the implementation of the Global Digital Compact through focused discussions, stakeholder engagement, and actionable outcomes. By fostering collaboration and inclusivity, the IGF can help shape a more equitable and sustainable digital future.
I had a wonderful learning experience . Thank you to the IGF secretariat for sponsorship.
The knowledge impacted will be use to full capacity.
The knowledge impacted will be use to full capacity.
SY
C’est qui a bien fonctionné :
- Alimantation , Boissons, Propieté, Facilitaion d’accès.
C’est qui a moins fonctionné :
- Logique de transport .
- Alimantation , Boissons, Propieté, Facilitaion d’accès.
C’est qui a moins fonctionné :
- Logique de transport .
Très bien pour moi .
Très bien aussi .
Très Facile
Pour moi c’était complémentaire.
C’était Inclusif à toutes les secteurs.
IGF était plus visible que NRI
Le contenue était riches
Les intervenants de hauts niveaux
Et la qualité de débats étaient très bien .
Les intervenants de hauts niveaux
Et la qualité de débats étaient très bien .
Riches et Intéressants
Très bon parcours et intéressant à suivre
Très promoteur
C'était Inclusif
Très bien organisé
Très importants et résultats positifs
IGF 2024:
-Faire le calendrier à temps
-Être en contact avec les représentants Pays
- Multiplier les réunions MAG .
-Être en contact avec les représentants Pays
- Multiplier les réunions MAG .
Faciliter le déroulement du programme et suivre après des représentants pays pour les faire comprendre
Thématique : Les remplacements de AI au travail par les humains .
Sessions riches .
Des intervenants Qui sont à la hauteur
Sessions riches .
Des intervenants Qui sont à la hauteur
Impliquer tout le monde
La jeunesse , le gouvernement .
Faire mixte des participants lors des interventions.
Faire mixte des participants lors des interventions.
IGF avec toute sa potentialité peut être une clé pour le pacte numérique mondiale .
Très interessant et avec sa nous pouvons contribuer à changer le monde .
Tamanna Mustary
IGF 2024 Preparatory process was great to achieve the purpose of the international conference. The session was very effective for the capacity development of the stakeholders.
The thematic focus, structure and flow was outstanding to inform the vision, mission and goals of the digital society.
The Women IGF, Addressing Information Manipulation in Southeast Asia, Compliance to Excellence in Digital Governments, Tackling misinformation with information literacy are the session from where I have gathered invaluable experience in IGF 2024
The logistics support was very much excellent throughout the sessions amd bilateral meetings.
The annual IGF Program introduced best practice forums and policy networks effectively by its content, process and the international activities among the world citizens.
Tge process, content and in particular the intergressional activities were effective to achieve the goal of SDG.
National and Regional and Youth IGF 2024 are very active throughout the 5 days sessions.
The Honourable Minister of the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications delivered an outstanding speech at the opening sessions of IGF 2024. The others internationl speaker’s opening remarks was also very important and relevant to the agenda of IGF
High level leaders delivered inspirational speech ar the opening remarks of IGF 2024
Parliamentary track of IGF 2024 was effective for the international community who are involved in planning and decision making.
The Youth Track was very useful for the young generation.
Of course it was a gender sensitive IGF where the women rights are considered as human rights regarding Internet use and other facilities of digital society.
IGF 2014 is a global village for digital generation of the modern world.
IGF 2024 was a platform to communicate, outreach amd fruitful outputs for the digital society.
IGF 2024:
Preparatory process of IGF 2024 was excellent. The sessions was very efficiently organized for the participants to gather experience and to communicate with diverse society.
It was great to attend this IGF at Riyadh to ensure the Digital well-being inclusive human and equitable digital future.
The speech from the UN Secretary General was a milestone of the IGF 2024. The International speakers were wonderful keynote speakers over there in various sessions.
The Registration process should be on the venue or spot of the meeting at the very opening day of OGF so that the participants can visit easily at one point during the first day of IGF
We may interconnect the IGF scholars through email and international invitation.
IGF will follow the agenda of 2024 and implement the the outcome for tomorrow’s progress.
The AI plays an important role in this IGF as modern digital tools all over the world.
Tshikalange
I found it quite challenging to register for the MAG meetings leading up to the IGF. Despite my efforts to raise this issue, I was unable to get a resolution. While MAG stated that the meetings are open to all stakeholders, the registration process did not feel very inclusive. I would have attended several meetings through third-party events that included MAG discussions. Overall, I do not believe that MAG is an inclusive forum.
While AI is a popular topic currently, I believe it was over represented in the program.
The online experience was not very satisfactory. The sound was often problematic, and I frequently got logged off, making it difficult to rejoin. I found myself hoping that our panel wouldn’t face these issues during our session. Unfortunately, I was kicked out during the introduction, but thankfully we managed to continue without further disconnections. However, there were times when we could not hear our moderator clearly. There was significant room for improvement in the audio quality, as these issues persisted throughout IGF 2024.
Registration
The registration process for IGF 2024 was straightforward and user-friendly, which made it easy to sign up for the event.
Participation
Unfortunately, my experience during the online sessions was challenging. I encountered significant sound and connectivity issues that hindered my ability to fully participate. These technical difficulties made it hard to engage with the discussions and follow the presentations.
Online Platform
Navigating the online platform proved to be quite difficult. I struggled with scheduling my sessions, which added to my frustration. A more intuitive interface or clearer guidance could greatly improve user experience.
Support
One major area of concern was the lack of support for online participants. Having dedicated technical support available during the event could have helped address the issues I encountered and enabled me to engage more effectively.
Conclusion
Overall, while I appreciated the opportunity to attend online, the logistical aspects from an online perspective could be significantly improved. I hope that future events will consider these factors to enhance the experience for virtual participants. We will be available to assist in managing online platform for future events.
The registration process for IGF 2024 was straightforward and user-friendly, which made it easy to sign up for the event.
Participation
Unfortunately, my experience during the online sessions was challenging. I encountered significant sound and connectivity issues that hindered my ability to fully participate. These technical difficulties made it hard to engage with the discussions and follow the presentations.
Online Platform
Navigating the online platform proved to be quite difficult. I struggled with scheduling my sessions, which added to my frustration. A more intuitive interface or clearer guidance could greatly improve user experience.
Support
One major area of concern was the lack of support for online participants. Having dedicated technical support available during the event could have helped address the issues I encountered and enabled me to engage more effectively.
Conclusion
Overall, while I appreciated the opportunity to attend online, the logistical aspects from an online perspective could be significantly improved. I hope that future events will consider these factors to enhance the experience for virtual participants. We will be available to assist in managing online platform for future events.
I participated in the PNAI session, and I believe it added significant value and sparked meaningful conversations. More broadly, I recommend that intersessional activities continue to align with and contribute to the achievement of the IGF mandate.
I participated in the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Accessibility and Disability (DCAD) in June, as part of the EeroDIG programme. I connected online and found the discussions valuable, and I believe the session's report should inform the IGF action plan due to its important recommendations. Unfortunately, I couldn't attend the IGF in person; while the Dynamic Coalitions were included in the programme, I faced a scheduling conflict with another panel discussion where I was also a panelist.
I am not directly involved with NRIs, but I have observed their inclusion in the annual IGF program. While I did not attend their sessions, I recognize that their contributions can significantly enrich the IGF discussions and outcomes.
Based on the sessions I attended, the content was enriching. I hope the recommendations generated will enhance the IGF's mandate and positively impact society.
I was unable to participate due to technical glitches, so I cannot provide feedback on the content, speakers, or discussions regarding this track.
I was unable to participate due to technical glitches, so I cannot provide feedback on the content, speakers, or discussions regarding this track.
I did not participate in the youth track, so I am unable to comment on the content, speakers, or discussions. However, I believe that including youth perspectives in IGF 2024 is crucial for fostering a more comprehensive dialogue and developing action plans and policies that respond effectively to the issues on the ground.
Based on the sessions I managed to attend, I observed that IGF 2024 has not achieved a gender-balanced speaker lineup. Additionally, I noted a lack of geographic representation, which is also an important aspect to consider.
I participated virtually, so I don't have direct insights regarding the IGF 2024 Village content, speakers, or discussions
Aside from registration-related messages, I found the overall communication from IGF to be lacking, which limited my engagement to a few online equivalents, such as the hubs. As a first-time participant, I struggled with navigating the IGF web portal, which felt quite busy. The online platform was challenging to navigate, and there was no support available. This experience was notably different from other international events that promote full engagement and provide support before and during the event.
Several stakeholders, including myself, have noted that IGF’s outreach efforts need to be strengthened.
From an output perspective, I would like to see more multistakeholder, action-oriented recommendations that can be tracked for progress and impact by the next IGF. Additionally, I would prefer to see less focus on prominent figures and more contributions from the communities most affected, as they should inform solutions, action plans, and policies.
Several stakeholders, including myself, have noted that IGF’s outreach efforts need to be strengthened.
From an output perspective, I would like to see more multistakeholder, action-oriented recommendations that can be tracked for progress and impact by the next IGF. Additionally, I would prefer to see less focus on prominent figures and more contributions from the communities most affected, as they should inform solutions, action plans, and policies.
IGF 2024:
Suggestions for Improvements for IGF 2025:
User -Friendly Online Platform:
It is essential to ensure that the online platform for IGF 2025 is intuitive and accessible for all participants. This will facilitate greater engagement and participation, especially for those who may be less familiar with digital tools.
Enhanced Communication and Support:
Improving communication channels and support for online participants will help create a more inclusive environment. Clear instructions and assistance should be readily available to guide participants through the process.
Open and Accessible Registration:
The registration process for the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) and Open Consultations should be streamlined and open to all. Simplifying registration will help ensure that no one is excluded from participating in these critical discussions.
Clear Guidelines for Session Proposals:
To promote diversity and inclusivity, IGF should provide accessible guidelines for the format and content of session proposals. This will encourage participation from various geographic areas and ensure that voices from marginalized communities, who are often most affected by the issues discussed, are included.
Engagement with Speakers:
Improving engagement with speakers is crucial. Providing guidelines on contributions and fostering dialogue before the sessions can lead to more meaningful discussions and better outcomes.
Adopting Inclusive Approaches:
IGF could benefit from adopting the EuroDIG approach to planning and developing the event program. This model emphasizes inclusivity and encourages participation from a broader audience, thus enriching the overall discussions and impact.
Funding for Participation:
It is important to explore opportunities for raising funds to support the participation of communities from Least Developed Countries (LDCs). The costs associated with physical attendance can be a barrier, and addressing this issue will enhance inclusivity.
Local Hubs for Connectivity:
Collaborating with local authorities and national/regional IGFs to establish local hubs can facilitate better connections for participants. This will help bridge the digital divide and allow local communities to engage with IGF sessions both pre-event and during the event.
By implementing these suggestions, IGF 2025 can create a more inclusive and participatory environment, ensuring that diverse voices are heard and considered in the global discussions around Internet governance.
User -Friendly Online Platform:
It is essential to ensure that the online platform for IGF 2025 is intuitive and accessible for all participants. This will facilitate greater engagement and participation, especially for those who may be less familiar with digital tools.
Enhanced Communication and Support:
Improving communication channels and support for online participants will help create a more inclusive environment. Clear instructions and assistance should be readily available to guide participants through the process.
Open and Accessible Registration:
The registration process for the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) and Open Consultations should be streamlined and open to all. Simplifying registration will help ensure that no one is excluded from participating in these critical discussions.
Clear Guidelines for Session Proposals:
To promote diversity and inclusivity, IGF should provide accessible guidelines for the format and content of session proposals. This will encourage participation from various geographic areas and ensure that voices from marginalized communities, who are often most affected by the issues discussed, are included.
Engagement with Speakers:
Improving engagement with speakers is crucial. Providing guidelines on contributions and fostering dialogue before the sessions can lead to more meaningful discussions and better outcomes.
Adopting Inclusive Approaches:
IGF could benefit from adopting the EuroDIG approach to planning and developing the event program. This model emphasizes inclusivity and encourages participation from a broader audience, thus enriching the overall discussions and impact.
Funding for Participation:
It is important to explore opportunities for raising funds to support the participation of communities from Least Developed Countries (LDCs). The costs associated with physical attendance can be a barrier, and addressing this issue will enhance inclusivity.
Local Hubs for Connectivity:
Collaborating with local authorities and national/regional IGFs to establish local hubs can facilitate better connections for participants. This will help bridge the digital divide and allow local communities to engage with IGF sessions both pre-event and during the event.
By implementing these suggestions, IGF 2025 can create a more inclusive and participatory environment, ensuring that diverse voices are heard and considered in the global discussions around Internet governance.
IGF 2025 Overall Programme Structure and Flow
I recommend that the structure and flow of the IGF 2025 programme be strategically designed to enhance inclusivity, accessibility, and relevance, particularly in light of the challenges highlighted during the IGF 2024 discussions and the subsequent output report.
To achieve these goals, it is essential to adopt a bottom-up approach that fosters a contextual and impactful programme. This approach will leverage insights from National and Regional Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) and other relevant initiatives, ensuring discussions are grounded in the realities and experiences of diverse stakeholders. Recognizing the critical role of NRIs in shaping global discourse on internet governance will help ensure that local contexts and challenges are adequately represented.
Furthermore, integrating findings from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reports is vital, as these documents highlight areas where progress has stalled. By incorporating this information, IGF can create a timely and actionable agenda for IGF 2025.
The overall structure should promote seamless communication and input among various events and initiatives, fostering cohesive dialogue across different levels. Each regional and national forum must serve as an essential input channel to the main IGF programme, ensuring discussions reflect diverse perspectives and localized experiences. This approach will facilitate the development of a responsive agenda that directly addresses grassroots concerns.
The main objectives of the IGF 2025 programme should center around:
Contextual Discussions: The IGF 2025 programme should draw from the outcomes and discussions of National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs). These forums are vital for contextualizing global dialogues and ensuring their relevance to local challenges. Facilitating effective communication between NRIs and the IGF will help construct a coherent narrative that mirrors both global and local issues.
Actionable Implementation Plans: A primary aim of IGF 2025 is to address urgent matters within internet governance. Each session should culminate in actionable implementation plans that will guide future activities and discussions at the IGF. This ensures that every interaction has a tangible impact and addresses challenges identified in prior reports.
Continuous Feedback Loop: Establishing mechanisms for ongoing feedback among local, regional, and global forums is crucial. This will ensure that insights gathered contribute to shaping future IGF activities and policies.
Adopting Inclusive Approaches: Drawing on best practices from the EuroDIG model can significantly enhance the planning and development of the event programme. Promoting inclusivity will encourage a broader range of participation and enrich discussions.
By implementing these objectives, IGF 2025 can effectively address ongoing challenges in internet governance while ensuring discussions are informed by real-world contexts through the involvement of NRIs and relevant initiatives.
I recommend that the structure and flow of the IGF 2025 programme be strategically designed to enhance inclusivity, accessibility, and relevance, particularly in light of the challenges highlighted during the IGF 2024 discussions and the subsequent output report.
To achieve these goals, it is essential to adopt a bottom-up approach that fosters a contextual and impactful programme. This approach will leverage insights from National and Regional Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) and other relevant initiatives, ensuring discussions are grounded in the realities and experiences of diverse stakeholders. Recognizing the critical role of NRIs in shaping global discourse on internet governance will help ensure that local contexts and challenges are adequately represented.
Furthermore, integrating findings from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reports is vital, as these documents highlight areas where progress has stalled. By incorporating this information, IGF can create a timely and actionable agenda for IGF 2025.
The overall structure should promote seamless communication and input among various events and initiatives, fostering cohesive dialogue across different levels. Each regional and national forum must serve as an essential input channel to the main IGF programme, ensuring discussions reflect diverse perspectives and localized experiences. This approach will facilitate the development of a responsive agenda that directly addresses grassroots concerns.
The main objectives of the IGF 2025 programme should center around:
Contextual Discussions: The IGF 2025 programme should draw from the outcomes and discussions of National and Regional Initiatives (NRIs). These forums are vital for contextualizing global dialogues and ensuring their relevance to local challenges. Facilitating effective communication between NRIs and the IGF will help construct a coherent narrative that mirrors both global and local issues.
Actionable Implementation Plans: A primary aim of IGF 2025 is to address urgent matters within internet governance. Each session should culminate in actionable implementation plans that will guide future activities and discussions at the IGF. This ensures that every interaction has a tangible impact and addresses challenges identified in prior reports.
Continuous Feedback Loop: Establishing mechanisms for ongoing feedback among local, regional, and global forums is crucial. This will ensure that insights gathered contribute to shaping future IGF activities and policies.
Adopting Inclusive Approaches: Drawing on best practices from the EuroDIG model can significantly enhance the planning and development of the event programme. Promoting inclusivity will encourage a broader range of participation and enrich discussions.
By implementing these objectives, IGF 2025 can effectively address ongoing challenges in internet governance while ensuring discussions are informed by real-world contexts through the involvement of NRIs and relevant initiatives.
In light of the stagnation and regression observed in the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in Africa, it is imperative that IGF 2025 adopts a thematic approach that addresses the root causes of the triple challenges of inequality, unemployment, and poverty. These issues not only hinder progress towards the SDGs but also exacerbate existing divides—digital, spatial, infrastructural, geographic, and socio-economic.
To create a meaningful impact, the IGF 2025 programme should focus on the following thematic areas:
Digital Inclusion as a Catalyst for Development: Sessions should explore strategies for ensuring that marginalized regions are not left behind in the digital revolution. This includes discussions on affordable access to technology, digital literacy, and the importance of local content.
Addressing Inequality through Policy Frameworks: It is crucial to develop implementable frameworks that can guide governments and organizations in addressing systemic inequalities. IGF 2025 and beyond should prioritize sessions that bring together policymakers, marginalised and underrepresented groups, civil society, and private sector representatives to collaborate on inclusive policy-making.
Innovative Solutions for Job Creation: The programme should showcase successful case studies and innovative approaches to job creation in the digital economy. This includes harnessing technology for entrepreneurship and skills development tailored to the needs of local communities.
Infrastructure Development: Addressing the infrastructural gaps that hinder socio-economic development is vital. Sessions could focus on public-private partnerships and community-driven initiatives that enhance connectivity and accessibility.
Multi-Stakeholder Dialogues: It would be beneficial to feature a diverse range of speakers, including grassroots activists, technology leaders, and academic experts. This diversity will ensure that a variety of perspectives are considered in tackling the complex challenges faced by marginalized regions.
By centering these themes in the IGF 2025 programme, we can work towards a comprehensive and collaborative approach that not only promotes digital inclusion but also contributes significantly to the socio-economic development of marginalized communities. Together, we can create actionable pathways that align with the broader goals of the SDGs and foster a safe and secure digital future for all.
I believe a well-coordinated program is essential for integrating these activities into the broader IGF framework. The IGF should serve as a platform that not only showcases the outcomes of preceding activities and events but also actively engages with them to inform policy decisions and program development.
To enhance this connection, it would be beneficial to establish a systematic approach for collecting and sharing progress and impact assessment reports from all intersessional activities and regional IGFs. This could involve creating a centralized repository where these findings are easily accessible and can be referenced during the main IGF discussions.
Furthermore, incorporating dedicated sessions at the IGF 2025 that specifically address the outcomes of these community activities can help ensure that the insights gathered are not just acknowledged but actively influence decision-making processes. Engaging with participants from these events during the IGF can also foster a sense of continuity and inclusivity, allowing for a diverse range of perspectives to shape the dialogue.
In conclusion, establishing clear channels for communication and collaboration between local, regional, and national forums and the main IGF will be crucial in ensuring that the insights and outcomes of these activities contribute meaningfully to the overarching goals of the IGF 2025 process.
To enhance this connection, it would be beneficial to establish a systematic approach for collecting and sharing progress and impact assessment reports from all intersessional activities and regional IGFs. This could involve creating a centralized repository where these findings are easily accessible and can be referenced during the main IGF discussions.
Furthermore, incorporating dedicated sessions at the IGF 2025 that specifically address the outcomes of these community activities can help ensure that the insights gathered are not just acknowledged but actively influence decision-making processes. Engaging with participants from these events during the IGF can also foster a sense of continuity and inclusivity, allowing for a diverse range of perspectives to shape the dialogue.
In conclusion, establishing clear channels for communication and collaboration between local, regional, and national forums and the main IGF will be crucial in ensuring that the insights and outcomes of these activities contribute meaningfully to the overarching goals of the IGF 2025 process.
The agenda typically addresses issues faced by youth, women, and marginalized communities. However, these groups are often underrepresented at the IGF. For IGF 2025, it is essential to implement an outreach program aimed at fostering diverse participation, ensuring that those affected have the opportunity to represent themselves rather than having others speak on their behalf.
Based on my inputs to the WSIS+20 Survey and the Global Digital Compact version 3, I want to highlight that the results of WSIS+20 are fully integrated into the Global Digital Compact Action Plan, thereby preventing parallel processes. The IGF would significantly benefit from strengthening Internet Governance and tackling digital inclusion issues. It is essential that cybersecurity and privacy by design, especially concerning emerging technologies, are at the core of the IGF's mandate, as these aspects are crucial for the successful implementation of both the WSIS outcomes and the compact.
Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts regarding the IGF 2024. I would like to express my concerns about the accessibility of the forum, which I believe warrants further consideration.
In previous discussions, including during the Digital Coalition in June and other MAG PNAI meetings, I have noted that the current structure may inadvertently create barriers for participation. Personally, I had to engage through third-party events, as my attempts to register for direct participation were not successful. This experience has highlighted to me the need for a more inclusive approach to participation.
It is vital that the IGF remains open to all stakeholders, ensuring that no one feels constrained or restricted from contributing. While there are leaders guiding the process, inclusivity should be a fundamental principle that permeates every aspect of the forum.
The registration process should be streamlined to encourage meaningful engagement. Currently, the requirements can be overwhelming, which may discourage potential participants from contributing fully to discussions. I believe that implementing outreach programs aimed at marginalized communities will not only inform them about the IGF's initiatives but also empower them to participate actively, especially given the various and ongoing divides.
Ultimately, fostering an environment of true inclusivity will enhance the effectiveness and relevance of the IGF. I look forward to seeing how we can collectively work towards making the IGF 2024 a more accessible and inclusive platform for all.
Thank you for considering these thoughts.
In previous discussions, including during the Digital Coalition in June and other MAG PNAI meetings, I have noted that the current structure may inadvertently create barriers for participation. Personally, I had to engage through third-party events, as my attempts to register for direct participation were not successful. This experience has highlighted to me the need for a more inclusive approach to participation.
It is vital that the IGF remains open to all stakeholders, ensuring that no one feels constrained or restricted from contributing. While there are leaders guiding the process, inclusivity should be a fundamental principle that permeates every aspect of the forum.
The registration process should be streamlined to encourage meaningful engagement. Currently, the requirements can be overwhelming, which may discourage potential participants from contributing fully to discussions. I believe that implementing outreach programs aimed at marginalized communities will not only inform them about the IGF's initiatives but also empower them to participate actively, especially given the various and ongoing divides.
Ultimately, fostering an environment of true inclusivity will enhance the effectiveness and relevance of the IGF. I look forward to seeing how we can collectively work towards making the IGF 2024 a more accessible and inclusive platform for all.
Thank you for considering these thoughts.
Waqar
The IGF 2024, included a significant number of experts from around the world, making it one of the largest gatherings in its history. Numerous meetings, sessions, and high-level discussions were held to address key issues in digital development, internet governance, and security.
The lack of financial resources and issues with visa facilitation are two significant barriers to ensuring equitable participation in the IGF 2024 event, particularly for individuals from the Afghanistan technical community.
The lack of financial resources and issues with visa facilitation are two significant barriers to ensuring equitable participation in the IGF 2024 event, particularly for individuals from the Afghanistan technical community.
The program includes over 300 sessions and focuses on the main theme: Building our multistakeholder digital future. It explores best practices in cybersecurity agreements, norms, and capacity development.
The hybrid format for IGF 2024 is consist of a physical venue (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) and a virtual platform connected participants from around the world. no participation divides between in-person and virtual attendee
The logistical design of IGF 2024 was well prioritize accessibility, usability, and security to deliver a smooth, inclusive, and efficient experience for all participants
Best practice and policy networks play a crucial role in the IGF, enabling stakeholders to engage in focused and sustained discussions on specific issues that impact global Internet governance. these initiatives played an important role in shaping the IGF’s annual programme and in advancing solutions to some of the most pressing digital policy issues.
Dynamic Coalitions are important intersessional activities at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF 2024). These community-driven initiatives focused on specific internet governance issues and provided a flexible space for stakeholders to collaborate, share information, and advocate for solutions. and ensure their relevance and impact, the participation and integration of Dynamic Coalitions into the annual program was thoughtfully considered.
played a crucial role in shaping the event's program by bringing local and regional perspectives into the global discussion.
The inclusion of national, regional, and youth perspectives in the annual program involved collaborative workshops and pre-IGF consultations to share regional insights. These groups were integrated into the IGF's structure through dedicated sessions and thematic tracks, ensuring their voices were part of global internet governance discussions. The establishment of Youth IGFs also enhanced diversity by giving younger generations a platform to share their views on digital rights, access, and future technologies.
The inclusion of national, regional, and youth perspectives in the annual program involved collaborative workshops and pre-IGF consultations to share regional insights. These groups were integrated into the IGF's structure through dedicated sessions and thematic tracks, ensuring their voices were part of global internet governance discussions. The establishment of Youth IGFs also enhanced diversity by giving younger generations a platform to share their views on digital rights, access, and future technologies.
The IGF 2024 program addressed key issues in internet governance, including digital rights, cybersecurity, AI governance, and sustainable digital inclusion. A diverse lineup of speakers, including policymakers, industry experts, and academics, facilitated rich discussions. Sessions encouraged interactive dialogue and collaborative problem-solving, offering insights from various global perspectives. Overall, the program maintained high standards of discourse with engaging debates and meaningful outcomes aimed at advancing global internet governance.
The High-Level Leaders Track at IGF 2024 provided a key platform for global leaders to discuss the future of internet governance.
The Parliamentary Track at IGF 2024 served as a key platform for elected representatives and policymakers to discuss Internet governance and legislative action. It focused on how parliaments can influence digital policy and regulations impacting the global digital ecosystem. Key topics included digital rights, data protection, cybersecurity, and inclusive economies. Parliamentarians explored how legislation can address challenges like misinformation, internet access, and AI governance. The track encouraged collaboration between national legislatures and various stakeholders to enhance parliaments' roles in global internet governance and the sustainable development of the digital space.
The Youth Track at IGF 2024 provided a platform for young leaders to discuss internet governance and digital policy. Focusing on the next generation's perspectives, it addressed key issues like digital rights, online safety, education access, and youth empowerment. Participants from around the world shared their experiences and advocated for inclusive digital spaces, emphasizing the need for youth involvement in shaping future policies.
The IGF 2024 program made important advancements in promoting gender equality and inclusiveness in its discussions and sessions.
The IGF 2024 Village was a central feature of the event, offering an interactive space for participants to engage with stakeholders from civil society, NGOs, academia, industry, and government. It provided an informal area for exchanging ideas, showcasing initiatives, and discussing internet governance challenges through thematic booths, interactive displays, and live demonstrations, fostering innovation and collaboration.
The communication and outreach strategies of IGF 2024 were essential for fostering global participation and enhancing the event's impact. By offering timely updates through the IGF website, social media, newsletters, and live streaming, these efforts ensured seamless remote participation for stakeholders worldwide, including those unable to attend in person.
IGF 2024:
To improve IGF 2025, it’s essential to balance inclusivity with achieving measurable outcomes. By prioritizing actionable commitments, clear follow-up mechanisms, and coordination with global initiatives, IGF 2025 can significantly impact global digital governance.
The IGF should also invest in outreach and provide scholarships for underrepresented groups, including youth activists and regional NGOs, especially those from the technical community in Afghanistan.
The IGF should also invest in outreach and provide scholarships for underrepresented groups, including youth activists and regional NGOs, especially those from the technical community in Afghanistan.
The IGF 2025 program should foster collaboration, drive innovation, and produce actionable outcomes that meet the evolving needs of the digital landscape. Prioritizing multi-stakeholder engagement, regional insights, and youth involvement will ensure the event remains relevant and impactful in shaping the future of Internet governance.
For IGF 2025, the program should feature a dynamic mix of themes, interactive sessions, and diverse speakers to foster inclusive dialogue. By focusing on emerging technologies, global cooperation, digital rights, and sustainability, the IGF can shape the future of internet governance and digital policy.
Integrating community activities and National, Regional, and Youth Internet Governance Forums (NRIs) into the IGF 2025 process is crucial for promoting an inclusive dialogue in internet governance. By aligning global policy discussions with local issues, IGF 2025 can enhance its relevance and action orientation. Additionally, fostering collaborations, cross-regional dialogues, and youth involvement will help shape a more equitable and sustainable digital future
For IGF 2025, it is essential to ensure that the Afghan youth technical community is represented and actively engaged in discussions, especially considering the country's evolving digital landscape. Inviting Afghan youth, including developers, cybersecurity experts, entrepreneurs, and innovators, would introduce fresh perspectives on the challenges and opportunities of digital transformation in Afghanistan.
These participants could provide valuable insights into issues such as internet accessibility, cybersecurity challenges, digital education, and innovation in a nation facing both technological potential and socio-political barriers. By connecting these youth with global experts, regional innovators, and policymakers through interactive sessions, workshops, and networking events, can facilitate knowledge exchange, foster partnerships, and create opportunities to advocate for digital inclusion, gender equity, and digital rights in the Afghan context.
To ensure meaningful participation, offering virtual and hybrid options, along with targeted scholarships and visa facilitation, will enable Afghan youth to engage in the discussions and contribute significantly to the future of internet governance and digital innovation on a global scale.
These participants could provide valuable insights into issues such as internet accessibility, cybersecurity challenges, digital education, and innovation in a nation facing both technological potential and socio-political barriers. By connecting these youth with global experts, regional innovators, and policymakers through interactive sessions, workshops, and networking events, can facilitate knowledge exchange, foster partnerships, and create opportunities to advocate for digital inclusion, gender equity, and digital rights in the Afghan context.
To ensure meaningful participation, offering virtual and hybrid options, along with targeted scholarships and visa facilitation, will enable Afghan youth to engage in the discussions and contribute significantly to the future of internet governance and digital innovation on a global scale.
IGF 2025 plays a key role in advancing the WSIS+20 Review and the Global Digital Compact. By facilitating multistakeholder dialogues and ensuring inclusive participation, the IGF can contribute significantly to these initiatives. Its open and action-oriented approach not only monitors progress but also shapes the future of digital cooperation, promoting a more equitable and inclusive digital future for all.
IGF 2024 effectively facilitated a multi-stakeholder dialogue on internet governance, bringing together diverse voices from governments, industry, civil society, and academia. The hybrid format allowed for both in-person and virtual participation, increasing global inclusivity and accessibility, especially for those in remote or underserved regions.
Wong
Please kindly improve the user-friendliness of the online experience and provide possibilities for interactivity.
IGF 2024:
Disinformation is an important issue for discussion as it is one of the hindrance of the Right to Development and open science for the good of all as well as the achievement of UN SDG2030.
Yeza
I think the preparatory process went well.
I think there were many topics, but they were presented in a disorganized way, and I didn’t feel there was a common thread throughout the event. I understand the “supermarket-style” logic of “take what works for you,” but I believe the days could be better structured and that the talks should truly align with the proposal. I also don’t like the lack of a daily closing session. I think there should be “milestones” to highlight the multiple activities and draw some conclusions.
Useful
The logistics were very inconvenient. I couldn’t stay near the event due to budget constraints, and having to travel all the way there was costly and cumbersome, making it difficult to plan my schedule. Additionally, having the registration in a different location than the event seemed unnecessary.
It was right
It was right
It was right
think they were fine, but there wasn’t a proper weighting of topics: all topics and speakers got the same amount of time, but not all of them are equally important or have the same insights to offer. I believe there could be a greater effort to ensure a high-quality curation.
I found it hard to listen to them because they were only talking in generalities. It would be worthwhile to consider previously prepared formats so it doesn’t turn into a venue for personal or governmental propaganda.
Very interesting, and it would be worthwhile to think about how to create some spaces for a general audience.
Very interesting
I don't have a point of view about this item
Incredible
Great
IGF 2024:
I would consider a format similar to “TED Talks,” featuring people who have done amazing, inspiring things to share. I would also look for highly talented individuals who tried to accomplish something related to technology but didn’t succeed as expected, and have them explain why. This is something that needs to be prepared in advance in order to select the right people and make the presentations as good as possible.
I would try to introduce counterpoints in the agenda. The topics themselves aren’t the issue; rather, it’s that several people often share the same position but approach it from different angles. I think it would be more interesting to have greater diversity. I would try to introduce counterpoints in the agenda. The topics themselves aren’t the issue; rather, it’s that several people often share the same position but approach it from different angles. I think it would be more interesting to have greater diversity.
Ideological diversity, intellectual diversity, and if we achieve that, I would try to design or develop an “Agora” where parliamentary leaders, intellectuals, and representatives of various organizations could meet in a format reminiscent of ancient Greece to reflect on many of these challenges. I believe the “Agora” dynamic could be a space to bring together concepts, develop them, and introduce new ideas.
It would have two distinct formats: a master class with dynamic interactions, and an open-mic format where anyone who wishes to speak can do so freely for a significant amount of time. This could be recorded and turned into audiovisual material to be shared as an outcome.
It would have two distinct formats: a master class with dynamic interactions, and an open-mic format where anyone who wishes to speak can do so freely for a significant amount of time. This could be recorded and turned into audiovisual material to be shared as an outcome.
I became mayor at 29, and I’ve always been critical of creating “a space for youth.” We need to incorporate them into the organization and the speaker lineup so it happens naturally. I don’t particularly believe that creating a separate environment for young people is inherently good; I think the real challenge lies in the selection of topics and the organization of the agenda.
Best writers of the year in tech stuff from different regions of the world.
I don't have many comments for this. Thank you!
It was a great experience, many talented people from different regions of the world, it was inspiring.
Zaghdoudi
I want to express my concerns about the digital security of participants during online sessions. I was a victim of a Zoom bombing and was subjected to an explicit sexual act for 10 seconds. I recommend conducting a serious and transparent investigation and implementing stronger measures to ensure secure remote participation, especially for those who lack the resources to attend in person.
IGF 2024:
Zerdoum
IGF 2024: