The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>> MODERATOR: Good morning, and welcome, everyone, to the main session on sustainability and environment at the IGF 2023 in Kyoto. Sustainability really is now one of the top priorities in every global agenda from all levels from all Government industry and individual level.
Like my organisation ‑‑ oh, I forgot to introduce myself. I am Edmon Chung from DotAsia and currently serving on the ICANN board. One of the backgrounds in the last few years is that in 2020 when the pandemic hit, the world really witnessed a very significant drop in CO2 emissions on record, and that's primarily due to lockdowns and economic shutdowns, but alongside that, there was a huge surge in Internet usage from Zoom meetings to grocery shopping online, and the attention to the carbon emissions from the Internet itself kind of grew.
But since last year, the lockdowns eased and the carbon emission bounced back strongly to all‑time highs, but the Internet itself, of course, is ever more inseparable, and the sustainability of the infrastructure itself becomes an important question. That's what this session is going to explore.
What is the appropriate narrative to raise awareness and what are the actions to be taken? Certainly it's not about using less of the Internet. Writing shorter emails or watching shorter videos doesn't quite make sense. And on the flip side also, these digital transformation and digital technologies have great potential in help ago dress climate change, helping address the issues and perhaps the question is how we can do more and waste less.
A key to both mitigating the damage and unlock the potential probably lies in better understanding complex and sometimes counterintuitive relationships between the use of these technologies, and their impact on the environment. Many different organisations are working on the topic DotAsia. We have launched the initiative which is called Eco‑Internet DotAsia.
Here in Kyoto, it is an effort together it APNIC and the support from HBS and APNIC Foundation, we have launched this index earlier this week here looking at measuring the eco‑friendliness of Internet infrastructures across different jurisdictions. Please check it out at eco‑Internet DotAsia or come to our booth with the big tiger at the IGF Village.
Wearing my other hat, actually, the ICANN Board, you can also see that ICANN is working on this, and you can see it from the CEO goals set forward for 2024, goal 8, especially calls for the development of a comprehensive approach for developing and implementing an environmental sustainability strategy for ICANN.
Here at IGF, of course, the work and the outputs of the policy network on environment and digitization, and then the subsequent work of the Dynamic Coalition on Development laid the foundation for strengthening links with the UN's ongoing work in the SDGs which is what this session will be building on.
So joining me on this panel are distinguished leaders in the area including David Souter, an international ICT and development expert, often working with the APC. Maike Luiken at IEEE, Chair of the Planet Positive 2030 initiative, and a long‑time advocate for sustainable development. Dulce Saores, a civil engineer, and a water sector leader. Kemly Camacho, has worked for 25 years in the development of feminist social solidarity, economic alternatives in the context of digital society, and Mactar Seck, UN Economic Commission for Africa. And Axel Klahake, my apologies. From Director economic and social development digitization with GIZ.
So without further ado, David, please tell us our work and observation about the paradigm gap between the digital and environment policy making. Over to you.
>> DAVID SOUTER: Thank you very much for the introduction.
My apologies for coming in slightly late to meeting. I had to rush from another commitment. I gather I have five to six minutes and that's what we will be speaking for. That was what we were told yesterday. In his speech Monday, the Prime Minister of the host country says artificial intelligence was poised to change the history of mankind.
That's also true, of course, of climate change. So what we do in relation to both of these things is crucial tour future. I think we need to think about the relationship with each other. I will start with the fundamental problem which is that there isn't enough dialogue between the communities of expert, communities of practice, not enough discussion in environmental fora like IPPC, but also not enough understanding in disability spaces like this of the environmental context and how it's going to affect the decisions we should make.
I will start with three things, digital policy that aren't environmentally sustainable wouldn't be sustainable in other terms either so we should be aiming for an inclusive and sustainable environment policy. It is not simple and not guaranteed. If we are to achieve it, we have to maximize the contribution digitization makes to mitigating environmental harms in other sectors, but we also need to minimize the environmental footprint of the digital sector itself.
I suggest five reasons why they are difficult and five policy approaches. It's difficult because it's complex and much misunderstood. So sustainability is not just about the environment. It's about the interface between economic prosperity, social welfare and environmental viability. These often throw up different priorities. An environmental impacts from digital society aren't just concerned with climate change. There are at least three critical problems.
So as well as energy consumption with climate, there is unsustainable exploitation of minerals and resources, and growing volumes of E‑waste, with little recycling and much dumping in Developing Countries. Impacts are diverse, some positive, some negative, all difficult to measure.
We need to consider not just direct impacts from the way we make and use digital resources, but indirect impacts arising from new types of activity like E‑commerce and the rebound effects that arise when efficiency improvements increase consumption, and societal impacts like the changes in the way we live and work and play.
And these impacts differ greatly between countries. Many of the benefits of digitization are being experienced in richer countries. More of the environmental burdens are being felt in lower income countries, particularly with scarce resources and E‑waste. These impacts are certain to grow with AI and the IoT. Some good potentially, some bad.
So any framework for the governance of AI, for instance, should have environmental sustainability at its heart. Now, I promised five suggestions for improving governance, so let me make those now. The first to build much stronger dialogue between fora such as this and those concerned with the environment.
There is tendency in fora like this to promise digital solution that's look good to digital insiders but haven't been tested out on those they are meant to him, and we need to listen more in fora like this to environmental experts and those dealing with environmental challenges on the ground. I would like to see a main session here at the IGF that listens to speakers from environmental agencies talking about their priorities before considering what digitization has offer.
And my second proposal is to build environmental sustainability into digital policy making at global, regional and national levels, UNCTAD is looking to make E‑commerce more inclusive and environmentally sustainable. Other organisations could do the same in their sectors and Governments should audit digital strategies in pursuit of green goals as well as digital goals.
My third proposal is about a circular digital economy, so one that requires fewer scarce resources and less energy consumption, that extends the life of digital devices and data centers, makes them more adaptable, encouraging recycling and reuse, reduces waste. The responsibility is here for all stakeholders. Governments creating regulatory frameworks and introducing incentives.
Technologists and businesses designing things in ways that are environmentally responsible, citizens adopting more sustainable consumption. It's optimizing rather than maximizing digitization.
And I recommend those who might want to follow this to look at the digital reset report which was recently submitted to the European Commission. The fourth point is to do with standards. Standard‑setting bodies should include the environmental factors in the development of standards. Reducing use of energy and scarce resources and businesses should do the same when we dining applications, network and services.
My last point would be to monitoring what's happening, what's beneficial, what's not? So we have evidence base to build inclusive and environmentally sustainable and digital society we mentioned. For businesses that means being honest and transparent about their impacts with no more green washing, but it requires more independent evaluation and analysis which can and should be multi‑stakeholder, can and should involve United Nations and other international agencies and must cover all countries, not just those in which it's easy to measure things. Those would be my five proposals.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, David, those are really important suggestions and especially about the session here at IGF. One of them is about standards. Next we go to Maike Luiken, which will take us through a little bit more own what's happening at the technical side with the standards.
>> MAIKE LUIKEN: Thank you very much, and it's fascinating to be here and a great honour.
Let me introduce a couple of works the large, IEEE largest association with 420,000 members around the globe in 190 countries, we well known for many things and one of them is 2000 standards. If you happen to use WiFi, you are using an IEE standard 802.11.
As part of its activities a couple of years back the IEEE standard association launched initiative looking at ethics and AI. That's not exactly what we are talking about today, but I thought I would draw your attention to this document called ethically aligned design which is, I think, the first time a technical association looked at ethics and standards.
It's available for download for you. Then early last year we started a new initiative called Planet Positive 2030 with the goal to arrive at pragmatic recommendations to achieve planet positivity. Using a multi‑stakeholder consensus‑based back casting process with at this point around 180 people involved from around the globe. I think 29 countries if I recall correctly. The first draft compendium, strong sustainability by design is available for download as well.
Then following that, across the organisation another initiative was formed, SusTech initiative to further dig into the recommendations from the planet positive initiative to arrive at some identification of potential gaps and standards, technology gaps, road mapping gaps, et cetera. So I'm pointing this out because this is an invitation to participate.
Safeguarding and achieving a truly long‑term sustainable planetary biosphere. That is what this is about. We have a bio sphere that sustains life of all forms 100 years from now, 2,000 years from now, 100,000 year from now. This is a big shiny north star we are aiming for one way or another, maybe slowly, but that's what we like to see. What do we need to do in order to get there?
We need to address global warming or climate change which means achieve is net zero GHE emissions and reduction of greenhouse gases that are currently essentially unbalancing the composition of our atmosphere.
We need to get close to preindustrial levels. That's the climate change agenda. Then we have the SDGs agenda. We do need to achieve the SDGs, and then we do need a secure economy because we are resource bound and we do need to address the waste we are producing and leaving around. Ultimately that means that every Widget we build or use needs to be able to be demanufactured, and if necessary take the materials down to the molecular level so that new widgets can be built from those materials.
I like the term demanufacturing, we manufacture and we demanufacturing. The fourth point is the regeneration of ecosystems. We have done a lot of damage. We have to undo this damage. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will be actually the same way they used to be, but they have to be healthy ecosystems.
So essential to achieving this goal is looking at energy, and that was mentioned by both David and Edmon already. Accessible, clean, sustainable energy is the linchpin of to address this problem or this complex set of problems. That means electric indication of industry, different sectors, potentially the use of hydrogen, but ultimately we need accessible, clean energy. We can solve the water problem with energy. Once we have clean water we can produce food, so on and so on.
This is a global problem, but ultimately we need contextual solutions. One size does not fit all. And in some areas we can use geothermal for clean energy production, in other areas we cannot. That leads me to knowledge sharing. Once we have solutions, solutions and best practices and failures need to be shared so others can learn from it. We need digital knowledge comment that's quickly shares knowledge to other communities to be able to apply it.
The fourth point is standards work. Standards have been mentioned. Standards are essential for interoperability, and I like to call it standards started out with making, with describing how something works, then led to interoperability, then led to include safety, and today we need to include sustainability consideration in the development of standards.
That means environmental, pollution, emissions, demanufacturing, et cetera, including social implications of the use of whatever we are working on in terms of a standard. And we could also call that regenerative design or design for strong sustainability from the beginning, from the outset.
It also requires system thinking. As I just pointed out these various aspects to standard that's really holistic and systems thinking. And what comes next is maybe the most important part and that relates to where we are here at IGF is accountability. We need to have metrics, we need to measure. We have to have the data collection. We have to agree on what the data collection is. We need to agree on how we model. We need to be able to audit. We need to be able to validate, et cetera, and so that's where I think this multi‑stakeholder environment is absolutely essential to come to agreement on how we move forward on these facets to address these as big complex problem set. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, and thank you for bringing up the AI and ethics. I also participate in the IEEE in one of those standards, and I think Axel is here somewhere in the audience. One of the topics that segues into the next speaker is about knowledge sharing, and please sell us a little bit about on‑the‑ground work on this topic.
>> DULCE SOARES: Thank you for having me. As introduced before, I represent local technical company called Similie based in Timor‑Leste, and I am wondering who here know where Timor‑Leste is? Only a few. There is no Timor‑Leste representative here, and I reckon I am the only one here, and thanks to the APNIC that are giving me the opportunity to share the knowledge on the ground. So, yes, before I start my session, I would like to introduce, where is Timor‑Leste, what is the situation there.
Timor‑Leste is a southeast Asian country small state island situated between Indonesia and Australia with a population of 1.36 million people. We are relatively small, however, our history is quite complex. We have 400 years of colonialism, and that would mean the process of development take long to come to this stage today.
So we only gain our independence in 2002, which is 21 years ago. While we are starting to rebuild our nation other emerging countries are moving in advance with the technology and all other things to build the country. So with that, I would like to share a bit of the Internet context, so Internet situation, how does it look like in Timor‑Leste.
In Timor-Leste the Internet is low speed. The average download of the Internet itself is only around 4.5‑megabytes per second. That is very low compared to other countries. We have limited truck including access to high speed broadband in rural areas. It hinders widespread Internet adoption. We also only have 49.6% of the total population that is using Internet.
Timor-Leste relies on mobile connectivity and expensive satellite connection. We have the plan already, the Government has the plan for high speed Internet through submarine fiberoptic connections. We are not sure when it's going to happen, but in terms of the usage of the Internet mostly around the work for email for work and the community focuses more on the social usage. They serve as important communication channels and source of information.
So moving onto the topic today about the environment and sustainability, I would like to focus on the work I more around water supply and climate change issue and how these are linked with the importance of the technology intervention in the context of Timor-Leste situation.
When considering the process of rebuilding the nation in the water sector, the initial emphasis was focusing on water supply infrastructure. Marginal investment on water supply infrastructure. However, in 2015, Timor-Leste got hit by the, I mean the global crisis, and that brought water resource management to the forefront.
There is lack of water source management in Timor-Leste and basically all of the investments are focusing on the water supply itself. And in 2020Lania happen so that bring back the importance of the water supply. And how do we think, what are we going to do in order to integrate the water source management and water supply system itself. I would like to share a bit of the challenges that happen in Timor-Leste around the climate change itself, most of the time large and unsustainable investment into technology that only lasted as long as the project lifecycle. National agencies provide costly and unsustainable project‑based support and these developments were often expensive and highly technical that involved fly in, fly out technicians that are unaffordable by Governments.
These seem to keep Government in the same place, they did not foster growth of the further Government. Climate change and resilience programmes do not foster data sharing and collaboration as they are focused only on the project‑specific activities and outcomes. Now, with the limited resources that we have, international agency, disjointed and project‑bound investments as well as unsustainable technology that hinder the growth of the development of the lifecycle, these three creating the wheel of the response focused initiative only focused on the project base itself.
So this is where the private sector comes in. Private sector comes in because there is slow process in the Government in terms of waiting for the budget allocation, waiting for ‑‑ I mean, there is intervention, and people involve private sector in terms of situation like this. Similar as a tech company, we come up with, the technology innovation where we collaborated with the local grass roots organisations. These local grassroots organisation mainly focusing on water and land conservation. The private sector pride to collaborate in order to validate the work that this local grass roots organisation has put over 20 years.
The idea is if we can validate the efforts that they do, this could be information that influence the Government in terms of the policy decision making. Some of the examples that we do in practice is when we collaborating with the local grass roots organisation, the technology we have, somehow we created the alert system where we inform the focal point of the local grass roots organisation to receive the alert system through SMS and email and they will train the community in order to understand when the alerts come, so what do the messages mean and what are they going to do in terms of to respond for the environmental issue.
Giving a little example, for example, there is an alert about water level indicator. The water level in the tank after three consecutive days, there is overflowing of the water, community will receive the alert system and what they will do is better manage their water system. What they are going to do is allocate time management for it or find alternative options in order to carry the wastage of water to some other purpose.
On the other hand, for information about the weather, they will normally in Timor-Leste, people cut and burn the soil because they think during the dry season they will prepare to plant for the rainy season to come. That actually affecting the environment itself.
So with the alert system we inform to the community that that will help them to sort of understand what sort of action, what sort of behavioral change they could take in order to change the way they practice, the way they practice usually, and then better manage their environment and as well as their water system.
I will stop here and wait for the later session.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, I think you hit on an interesting point, it's the sustainability of sustainability projects, which is, and in Timor-Leste, DotAsia has been supporting a project there and my team was flying there, it's a beautiful country, so welcome to Timor-Leste as well.
But the discussion about the sustainability broadening to other aspects of sustainability is really what our next speaker will talk about.
>> KEMLY CAMACHO: Thank you very much for everybody. Thank you for the invitation to share the table with all of these amazing people and with you all also.
I want to read because we have only six minutes. I would like to contribute to the discussions with some of the reflection about the use of digital technologies or sustainable environment. We have developed it with organisations from the three social movements where we cooperatively support. The indigenous women movement, the feminist movement, and the social solidarity economy movement.
Because of the time restriction, I had to select one or two of their proposals, demands or Call for Action. World view is going to be the word to identify the proposals from the indigenous women movement. In relationship with digital technologies for sustainable environment, they would like to position the following concerns.
Who is going to take in charge the waste produced by these devices installed around their territories. Our common vision is not connected with this material, this waste produced by Okamasu, which is how they call the technology produced for or by white men, or the technology not produced by the area, they call it Kamasui.
How is it guaranteed that these devices for sustainable development or monitoring climate, et cetera, are not surveilling our daily life if they are related to our natural resources which are totally part of our practices, sacred places and others.
If they are collecting data from our territories and in our position we can't separate body, water and land. This data are our property. We claim ownership. They are talking about our lives.
Care is going to be the word to identify proposals from the feminist movements. In the discussion they said care for each person, for the collectives and planetary care must be in the centre of data processes and devices that are being used for environmental sustainability. Digital technologies working for climate change, natural resources and sustainability must be contextualized.
Data model must be correlated with power relationship, land distribution, economic dynamics, citizen participation, women action, et cetera. We as women and as communities demand for participating in the digital technology for accessible environment, climate change, natural resource management process that are going to be developed in our context since the beginning developing collective data models, designing technology solutions together, ideating processes to integrate care as the environmental solutions.
Solidarity is going to be the word to characterize the social solidarity economy movement proposal. The possibility for humanity to survive is with solidarity. Digital technology can contribute or destroy the possibility for humanity to live on the planet. We claim for our responsible consumption of digital technology especially for rich countries, big enterprises and well‑connected population.
Digital technology for sustainable environment must be developed and used in the right measure, in the exact balance between usefulness and negative impact. And that is only possible if solidarity is in the centre of development. Digital technologies for sustainable environment must not only be data‑driven. There is a need to understand them also for technology to organize communities in risk and strengthening citizen participation with collecting data about climate change, natural resources management and other it be mandatory to strengthening citizen participation and organisation.
Then from the social movements where we participate, we would like to ask for an urgent call to integrate respect for cosmo vision, or world view, the focus on care and the priority session for solidarity as principles to develop digital technology for a sustainable world. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: I think it's interesting that all of the speakers seem to have touched on changing attitudes and changing behavior from some of the, not only the actors but the users is a really interesting dimension.
Next we go to Mactar Seck from the UN Economic Commission for Africa. Talk to us a little bit more about this topic is being discussed there.
>> MACTAR SECK: Thank you very much. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for inviting UNECA to be part of this important topic. The discussion about digital technology and climate change become very, very important on this stage. Why? Because digital technology has a positive and negative environment effect, and we need to take into consideration this concern in our digital policy.
And in general, when we define this national digital policy, the issue of climate change is not very well highlighted in this policy. Why at UN ECA is the implementation of the Africa digital transformation strategy we support African countries to put the issue of climate change in the policy, in the national digital policy.
Why we do that? Because when we look at statistic, when we have the statistic, digital technology contributes to 1% to 5% to the greenhouse gas emission., to the energy conception is between 5% and 10%. It's a lot. However, according to several studies, this digital technology can reduce this greenhouse gas emission to 20% by 2030. Why it is important to take this into consideration?
In Africa the key challenges we are facing to increase is to take into consideration digital technology climate change, we have several challenges. First, on the regulatory side, when we go to the regulatory ICT, we didn't have really this relation between ICT service and impact environmental. We need to lack at this on the regulatory side.
And there is also a misunderstanding of several decision makers on the linkage between digital technology and impact of environment. Also the rapid advance of the technology can contribute to this misunderstanding because we need to be, to build capacity to know exactly what are the impact of this new emerging technology like Blockchain on the energy sector on the environment sector and to overcome some solution.
The other issue also we need to develop this digital policy by observing all order. We can't develop national strategy on digital technology without observing the environmental sector without things like the energy sector. We need to involve them and do not work in silo to develop these national digital strategy. It is very important.
Now, let me go through some initiative we have at UNECA. To leveraging digital technology for climate change adaptation. First, at the policy level, when we develop national policy, we have an important component on environment and climate change to promote the contribution of ICT to this environment sector.
Second, on regulatory side also we support African country to change the narrative on the new regulation, so have a new regulation including this environment and climate change issue. We have several initiatives. We organize every year on leveraging digital technology for climate change adaptation. We select several young innovators across the continent, they come up for one week to develop key innovation on the climate change and after that we see how we can build some application around this innovation on climate change adaptation.
And from this, we support African countries to develop several climate information system. Some country also benefit from ECA support to develop some early warning system. She highlight some in this country. I think it is also similar this Africa, also we support a lot of countries to develop this early warning system and climate information system and this positive impact now in the environmental sector in the continent.
Also it is, when we do climate information system, we should have historic on the climate affirmation. We are developing one application starting the historic of all information, all information regarding climate since 1992, and we have a big, very important project now we are working with DRC to develop a Center of Excellence on minerals. We support in African country to track the credit card.
We have important project we work on developing online platform because online platform can also mitigate the issue of climate adaptation, the Smart City also some application to reduce the energy absorption.
>> MODERATOR: Is that also part of UNECA?
>> MACTAR SECK: At UNECA we have established a Center of Excellence on digital ID, digital threat and digital economy. As the Center of Excellence to support African countries, to use digital technology for achieving sustainable development and achievement of the Agenda 2030 of African Union. We focus on activity related to the digital technology. We look at digital technology on health, digital technology on digital economy, digital threat and digital ID also. Platform digital ID will help to mitigate this environment. Also in capacity building, we need to use emerging technology to mitigate this climate change adaptation while we are supporting, we already support a centre of African in Congo on artificial intelligence and one of the objectives of the mission is to focus on how to use artificial intelligence to mitigate the climate change adaptation.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you., I think it's, the topic of not being in silos and bridging that gap between the sustainability side and the digital side is very important, and I think next we go to Axel Klahake. I'm sorry I stumbled on your name earlier. Please tell us more about the work at GIZ.
>> AXEL KLAHAKE: Thank you very much. I also feel very much honored and privileged to be here now and to have the opportunity to share a few thoughts. You were just saying that there is still this divide between the sustainability communities and the digital communities. I would say that this is also our observation that there is much room for bringing these two spheres much closer together probably on all levels.
You if you look at the global level, we still see that those communities discussing challenge issues are still a bit separated from us discussing here the architecture of the global digital systems. I think there is a few initiatives though that try to cross that bridge already. I just want to refer to what ITU, for example, is championing now, also for the upcoming COP 28, this green digital action track which I think is a very valuable initiative and I can only congratulate ITU for this leadership and this initiative. There is also another initiative that has not been mentioned here, but because David was saying maybe it would be good to invite for the next IGF some leaders from environmental agencies, there is already under the umbrella of the United Nations an initiative called CODESs, coalition for digital and environmental sustainability where there is indeed national and environmental agencies and other really prominent actors from the environment sphere discussing digital issues.
So I think there is now some more initiative crossing those bridges but here in the context of the IGF I would love to see really more pure climate people and more pure environmental people to tell us actually what they need from us and vice versa. This is my first message I would want to get across, so we need more cross sector, cross industry artists that help us to shape that agenda properly.
I would want to agree on what the colleagues have just said on the necessity for more concrete standards. I think what we sometimes shy away from in this debate that sooner or later we must move from this general conceptual discussion and pilot projects to more binding regulation and to more clear standards the industry would have to follow. I think to me this is very important that we support this idea. I know it's in the global context always a dream. We don't have a global regulator doing this for us, but I think making sure we talk about the same thing, the same standards and the same terminology is extremely important.
As yet we have also, from our night tur, we are more an agency that implements projects in individual countries on certain topics, but we have recently engaged in contributing to that discussion. So we had an initiative with the World Bank and ITU on standards for green data centers. I think that is a very useful exercise, so we were sitting together with experts on how we can shape that so the result is a practitioner's guide for green data centre that has been launched recently in Nairobi on the occasion of the Africa climate sub Summit and it was very welcome and I think towards this direction I would very much want us to invest more. We have tried to instill in the GO St. STIC initiative that is meant to contribute to the DPI, DPG agenda in a practical way, also to instill elements contributing hopefully to environmental sound rules for procurement, for E‑waste.
Those are really, those concretization what I think are currently really necessary and so we would probably want to see more of. I think that there is big potential, I think that goes without saying. And then in the complexity of the discussion, and this is also probably true for the discussion today, we have some people talking more about the greening of the digital industry, very much important, green data centre is just an example, but this should probably also be expanded to develop tools and instruments for the management of the entire value chains of the digital industry.
So that would be I think also a good idea to develop it in this direction, and on the other hand, we have also people discussing more the potential and how we can unlock the full potential of the Internet of digital technologies and tools to support the necessary transformation of the economy, our economies towards really a carbon free economy, and really for the target really to cool down the planet.
He, of course, we also have lots of individual examples. What I think what we might want to add to that in the near future, again, is also a place where we can have that proper exchange of knowledge and really draw proper conclusion that we could all subscribe to.
So we have brought forward an initiative that is called fail forward. I wanted to refer to this, because we have through this gained some experience on how we can support partner countries in the Global South. We mostly operate in Africa, also India with this initiative on AI in the realm of climate change adaptation. I think what we have done there looks very promising. We have very interesting examples. So working on watershed management, for example, so this is pretty close to what has been introduced here already.
So where we work with communities on using the results of AI and working with AI on shaping management strategies for natural resources. We have in East Africa and Kenya initiatives through this fail forward initiative on AI on promoting climate adaptation prone activities in the agricultural sector.
What I'm trying to say is there is already a good amount of projects and our next step should be probably to really draw the conclusions from this and then to push this agenda forward. So my overall message, I think this discussion is extremely important. We are very much committed to contribute to that in, you know, on those various levels, the global scale, the regional initiatives like in Africa, UNECA or African Union, I think they have a very important role, plus on the national level, but I think what we still have to improve is the cross sectoral nature and how to cross that bridge.
This is still something where we have room for improvement. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, Axel. The theme seems to be crossing that bridge. I would like to open now to the floor, so please come to the mic and for any questions. I see already a question so I don't need my first question. Let's go to the floor first.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you so much. Thank you for your very valuable contributions. My name is Hanna Bowser, Secretariat of Dutch Initiative for Sustainable Digitization. You cannot emphasize enough international cooperation on this topic and in that context I have a question especially for Maike since you were talking standards. We have standards for interoperability, safety, but where do we stand today internationally to develop standards for sustainability in our digital system? Thank you so much.
>> MODERATOR: Maike, I guess it's for you but others, I think David and Axel may add to it as well.
>> MAIKE LUIKEN: So from the IEEE point of view, standards are developed for global use. They are not limited to any jurisdiction. And adaptation, of course, is the question of whether companies or Governments adopt various standards and ultimately it can lead to regulation.
So standards are developed at many different levels so, for example, there might be a standard on how to integrate micro grid into the larger grid today. There are standards on energy, wireless systems. There is a long list of many detailed standards essentially to have more sustainable infrastructure not necessarily referred to as sustainable. It's referred to as more efficient, et cetera.
Am I getting to your question?
>> AUDIENCE: Yes. So thank you for your answer. I think that's very helpful, but as already said, I think the necessity for the adoption of those standards is crucial to accelerate the sustainable digitization transition we need to make in order to the climate change.
>> MAIKE LUIKEN: So the work is starting to work towards the standard of measuring carbon footprint of a small organisation like a farm, a small company. Think of the fact that over 90% of enterprises are small or medium‑sized enterprises around the globe, but they bring in over 50% of the GDP around the globe.
So we don't have frameworks for these companies to participate in the quote, unquote, carbon economy, carbon credits, et cetera. So we do need those standards as well so that these small companies can ultimately participate in a sustainable value chain, sustainable supply chain that will allow us to practice sustainable procurement.
I'm firmly convinced if we can get to sustainable procurement, we can solve a large part of our problems, like, and I think the European suggestion of product tagging which is really the digital product passport that is committed to but not quite designed yet is a huge step forward in what Axel was referring to, a global initiative because it will have global impact like GDPR had to get us towards being able to essentially vote with our wallets as individually, Governments, companies, et cetera.
So I think your question is 100% at the core of the matter. Thank you.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you so much. Just a final remark, I would love to stay in touch and so I will send you a LinkedIn invitation. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Adding to that, I guess not only, well, enforcement is a big word, but implementation of the standards is really the key, and I think both David and Axel talked about furthering this discussion, and I guess IGF is one of those forums that can have this multi‑stakeholder discussion so that implementation of these standards could actually be carried out. I wonder if David or others want to add to it.
As David is asking, I, again, invite the audience to come to the mic for the next question. David, please.
>> DAVID SOUTER: A phrase which I have heard a number of times here and which is becoming more current is responsible innovation. And that's something that incorporates standards bodies very importantly. It also encompasses a wider frame of reference. So it's about the innovation frameworks that take place in academia. It's about how businesses develop applications, goods, services, so on. And if you have that kind of concept of an environmentally responsible innovation, you are unlikely to have innovations such as bitcoin which are developed in a way which is not environmentally sustainable and, therefore, not economically sustainable either.
The other thing I would say is that I reiterate the point made about standards and measurements that we need consistent standards by which we are measuring all of the things that are happening at this digital environmental interface. We don't have those.
>> MODERATOR: It's a common language that we can talk about things as well.
>> MACTAR SECK: Thank you very much. I think she touched one important point, the issue of standards. I think what we are doing now in the digital technology to mitigate impact of climate change. At the UN level we have this United Nations framework Convention on climate change to support African, to support all countries to develop their policy strategy on climate change energy, but we need to add this piece, this missing piece on the standard. I think it is a work we can look at it at the international level.
We have this ITU partnership for ICT, ICT is something we can see how we can develop standard as well as we need to have all of these private sectors to come on board to develop the standard because it's an issue of interoperability becomes crucial. IGF is a good forum, a platform to start this discussion on the standard of digital technology and climate change. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. And we go online and I see a hand up in the Zoom room. Please go ahead first.
>> AUDIENCE: We received a good question online to I will quickly read it out for you, it was a question by Izumi and she asked what can we each do to strengthen collaboration between environmental and Internet sector. And was added to that maybe at a personal level as well. So I think that's maybe aimed at Axel to reply to.
>> AXEL KLAHAKE: This is a very good question, but it's also a very broad question, isn't it? I think what we are doing is already towards this idea. I believe very much in fora like this one, and I think we really need to bring the communities closer together. I think this is something we have already, I think, all of us expressed in the first round so that we really have to intensify those discussions.
And then I think we really have to look deeper into the linkages between those two spheres. This is the technology, the standards, so and many other things as the side of the consumers, we have only a very briefly touched on their responsibility of consumers so it has really different levels that lead also the involvement of different actors and, again, also different forms of regulation. At the end of day, I do believe this is not only a matter of talking and bringing people together.
It's also a matter of defining standards, clear responsibilities, monitoring, and really very responsible follow‑up, because the discussion, I think, it's not a luxury discussion we are having. I even feel very much a sense of urgency looking in this broader context of where we are in terms of climate protection and really this acceleration of the current situation plus negotiations that are not so easy internationally.
I would very much admire and love this digital community taking this issue up more prominently and proactively. So that is something I would want to come up with as an answer.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you.
>> KEMLY CAMACHO: Yes, just I want to comment a little bit on that. I think it's crucial to connect with other social movements, other movements, and especially with environmental movement that they have already a long part in the negotiation about good practices, standards, and others.
And in my experience at least in Central America, it has been very difficult until this moment to really connect and to really have an interaction between environmental movement and digital rights movement and digital environment and all of that until now.
And I think we need to do the effort to really work together on that. And sometimes the environmental movement doesn't understand very well our concerns, and we also are sometimes trying to do this parts alone while there are other movements that have already advanced the discussions.
Then we always claim for the connection between movements, and develop real interaction and try to build together proposals for the decision making, but also for the communities. One movement that I always put as an example is the organic agriculture movement who really have developed some practices that I think is important to take a look, and have this example for the issues that we are working on. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you.
I see a hand up, and so I will go there first and then come to you, Chris. Derege, please go ahead.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you very much, Axel that you have the initiative to liberate AI for environmental protection and management. As you stated you have different projects on this initiative, so as was stated, UN ECA is supporting the establishment of the first AI research centre which could have an impact in just mitigating the environment of the climate change. So is there any proper channel that we could leverage so that there would be really a kind of liaise with your organisation and the research centre we established for further implementing those AI and emerging technologies for climate change? Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Are you pointing this to a particular centre that you would like to ask? Or is it for ‑‑ Axel, you want to ‑‑
>> AXEL KLAHAKE: I think I have read your question now in a way that you would want us to explore possibilities for collaboration, and I can just answer that we are more than ready to look into that. I think all of those initiatives can only be successful if you really think of it as partnerships, as something we do not just as one separate institutional organisation and the other institution is also doing something.
I was already trying to say that I really think in this discussion of AI application on climate change protection, I do believe there is a need to exchange more on experiences, on results and how we really want to push this agenda further. So just contact me and then I will connect you to our teams and our experts and we are more than ready to discuss.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Chris.
>> AUDIENCE: Thank you very much. Chris Buckridge. I'm a technical community representative on the IGF MAG and for full disclosure I was involved in organising the session, so I want to thank the speakers for their participation. It's been a really interesting discussion so far. I want to change hats slightly though to make a comment and to ask a question. I think the comment relates to some of the questions we have already had about the role of the IGF and Internet Governance structures and what they can do to connect more with the environmental policy making and discussion.
And I wanted to shift the focus a bit to the national and regional initiatives, so thinking in terms of the IGF as a broader ecosystem which also includes regional and national IGFs of which there are many as we have heard. So I have been involved quite heavily in EuroDIG and I know there has been a number of sessions and workshops at the European IGF level on this topic over the last few years.
I know APrIGF has also had a number of sessions and I'm sure there are others in other parts of the world that I'm less aware of. I think that's a really useful opportunity to connect, and this is kind of in relation to what Dulce and Kemly were saying at the more local level and with the smaller grass roots organisations and private sector organisations that are doing that work and maybe you are not going to come along to a big annual IGF event but might be able to connect with the local communities that are involved in Internet Governance.
So having that connection at that level is really important. I wanted to build on the work at this year's EuroDIG and give a brief report there because the topic we were looking at was in relation to do policy makers actually have the level of understanding that they need to be making policy with an environmental concern, but towards the digital sector?
I think, Mactar had to leave but made the comment about the confusion that exists around the link between ICTs and digital activities and environmental impact. And so in EuroDIG we were looking at a number, we were looking at AI certainly, and OECD presented there. They have also done some work. I think that probably complements the work that IEEE has done.
We were looking at data centers and streaming, and that is certainly a very big discussion in Europe at the moment, the link between data centers and increased sort of data throughput and what that means for energy usage, whether there is a sort of direct linkage or whether the linkage is a little bit more complicated.
And then also looking very briefly at the quantum Internet and what that might, how that might impact. I guess the question I wanted to throw open is do you on the panel see a need for better information for policy makers in relation to environmental impact? And can the IGF both at the global level but also the sort of more regional and national level help to foster that? Thanks.
>> MAIKE LUIKEN: So policy makers can have too much information to base evidence‑based decisions on. The other thing I would like to point out that whatever is true ten years ago is not necessarily the best solution today. One of the things we have to deal with in terms of informing policy makers is really to keep people up to date of what today's ultimate or close to best solutions are, and we have to be willing to re‑examine those in a year or two or three depending what is going on, and as far as I'm concerned, development of regulation and development of policy is far too slow.
It doesn't keep up, which is happening in the ‑‑ what is happening in the industry, what is happening in technology. Like in 2007 we had dire predictions about how much power ICT would use, now ICT power use or electricity use has gone up but no in the way it was predicted way back then. If you look at the nuclear industry, the big strides are being made with small modular reactors that could potentially solve the, certainly the issue with providing remote communities with clean energy.
I can go into big long debate about that. Truly exponential strides have been made. So policy has to be or policy makers really have to be kept up to date. We actually need a better way to do that. I mean, there is one, IEEE USA is doing it for Congress once a year and sometimes in between, but I think the channels need to be opened up much more.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, I think David wants to add.
>> DAVID SOUTER: Just firstly, reinforce Chris' point about the NRIs and the UK IGF had major focus a couple of years ago on environmental issues which was introduced to a keynote from an advisor to the IPCC, which focused around circular economy issues and so forth.
I think there is a scope there. My disappointment with that is that so few people actually take part ultimately in that sort of forum, and it needs to reach out further. On the broader policy issues, I think a lot of discussion around this tends to focus on what can happen in ideal circumstances if the best technologies can be used in, with the right policy commitments, but actually what matters what will happen in real circumstances which are never close to ideal.
And so there is a lot of aspiration for what might be achieved. It needs a healthier dose of realism. I think policy maker's perceptions in the digital sector of what is happening in the environmental context are often outdated and vice versa. That's an important reason for bridging it.
CODE is an initiative, the European academic network that built the digital reset initiative also an important one to look at.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. I will add a little bit. I guess that's really the ‑‑ I see two persons on the mic as well. Just quickly, that's why we published the Eco Internet index, and to add to that discussion, we need information, we need to know certain ways of measuring the impact is an appropriate way to measure the impact, balancing between digital transformation and the digital carbon footprint.
>> KEMLY CAMACHO: Very quickly, we think at will local IGF it's really a need to integrate other voices from other movements to discuss the Internet Governance and to discuss these key problems. I have been working in the local IGF for, I don't know, for ten, twelve years, on, and in the original one also, and we always try to integrate more voices from other sectors. I think the discussion is not only our discussion. I think we really need to integrate other actors in the discussion, environmental movement, indigenous movement, these have to be here discussing with us.
And that has to begin first in the local IGFs. Then this discussion has to be, has to be open, has to be, has to integrate other actors and other voices. This is one thing.
I have to say something because the time is about to finish, and I don't want to leave this issue while we have business model in the base of our digital society, it's going to be very difficult to really take balance in the use of the digital technology between usefulness and the bad impact on the environment. I wanted to say that we had some discussion in this IGF about destructivist business model in the base of the digital society, and then this is one of the discussions we have had inside the indigenous movement, feminist movement, and socioeconomic movement.
While we have this model and there is a need to create other business models, and to develop other business models with other references to really have the possibility to use technology and without such a big impact on the environment.
I wanted to say that also.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. I'll go to the ones on the mic first. I don't know if Izumi, you want to add as well. I'm not sure where the Chat Garcia Ramilo was first and then Jasmine, and then we will come to please respond, and then also include your closing remarks, looking at the time as well.
>> CHAT GARCIA RAMILO: My name is Chat Garcia Ramilo from APC. Yesterday we had a lightning talk, and we had two people from our network to speak of how, what they are doing in relation to E‑waste. One of the things that came out, so one from India and the other from Gambia, and these are small, these are organisations that are trying to contribute so that the impact of E‑waste is not, is diminished at least in their communities.
This is really looking at what, for example, what David was talking about. We produced through the network a toolkit on circular economy, working with different organisations or members of the network, and I think this is ‑‑ I raise this, so one of the points that came up there is that we know that 2.6 billion need to be connected, and 2.6 billion means more gadgets and more resources.
So I just wanted to ‑‑ that sort of struck us in the sense that there are many different things we can do, and I do think that perhaps one thing that we are able to do is to really maybe highlight more the stuff that works now. And to David's point about it cannot be, you know, it has to be pragmatic or realistic. So there are things, I think, that we can do now and that works now that might have much more impact.
And I do think that that is maybe something we can contribute, we can do together and look at what it is that really works where we can, you know, collaborate on. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. Kino.
>> AUDIENCE: I am Vice President of Internet association Japan. My comment or question is about standard which I completely concur the importance in this context. That said, I heard the comments from a couple of speakers earlier that with respect to the sustainability and the digitization, there is room to separate domains to con come together to understand each other. So my comment and question is that before getting on the actual standardization to be developed, I do see the necessity of developing a practice, how the digital technology will contribute to accelerating the environmental protection and also sustainability.
So question to the panel is that do you also see similar necessity opportunity to work on practice development before taking on the initiative on the standards for this matter?
>> MODERATOR: I will go to Jasmine and then online to Izumi and we will start over for the response and closing remarks.
>> This is Jasmine. I'm from technical community and youth from Hong Kong. I focus more on data collection centre and standards. I'm fond of the idea of system mapping and seeing the gap of mapping. My observation also my question will be because we are all from different regions. We have our own standards in the way we collect data, but the thing is when we come on this platform, we need to have more visualization or really a same centralized platform or database that we could see how we each parcel how we could collectively see the impact we are making at the same time.
I just wonder how do you see your role in your circle of influence or circle of concern that you are measuring data of technology with its environmental impact? Because I really want to tackling the gap about the roadmap and also the things we have been talking for a while. So I feel like I see a need of accelerating the discussion and the way we share information together as a globe. Thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you., Izumi, are you able to unmute and add? Is it like the administrator, please unmute Izumi Okotani so she can speak.
>> AUDIENCE: This is Izumi Okutani. Very interesting discussion and I especially like the point about having some platform for information sharing between different players. I think in the earlier context there was more focus on providing information for policy maker and I would like to add that in addition to that putting more focus on industry players, on what can each of these businesses and Internet communities can take actions, can also be helpful, not just for policy makers. And in that context, I think having some, like, mission to regulations, I think having some milestones and guidelines on what actions that each industry players can take can be really helpful.
So in order to do that, national and Regional IGF I think would certainly be helpful as a place where these players can actually come to obtain information, but I think there needs to be more additional efforts to put into so that the discussions and information sharing doesn't just stop at the IGF forum, but it actually reaches the businesses and the technical community as well.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you. And one last intervention, very short, please.
>> AUDIENCE: Given that this is the last one I will make it very brief. My name is Elayne, I'm based in Singapore, I participate in this as an individual today, and as a citizen of the global around the world I like to make a few points. First of all, we live in a city where there are very few choices and sustainable living options and all. Second about education, I attended United Nations staff systems college on sustainability of lifestyles and digital for sustainability. What I'm trying to call upon is whether we could have policy makers to provide more incentive and education for citizens, because that's the fundamental of all of the people, the population that will embrace that, the way they consume and commute and many more. So thank you.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you.
>> DULCE SOARES: I'm coming all the way from a country in the developing country where everybody talking about AI, high technology, policy makers, we are just starting talking about digitization. And when we talk about digitization back in our country, our focus is more on looking at best practices that are available in the country and what can we learn from the best practice itself. How do we integrate technology with the best practice available in our country, and how do we educate our people by providing capacity building regardless what sort of technology that we have, but how do we make sure that the technology that we deployed within the country should or must ensure that the understanding of the user of the technology itself.
And on the other hand, I would like to provide sort of like a comment around maybe in this sort of platform IGF can help to influence a more inclusive environment among sustainability actors by encouraging, Izumi, you mentioned before more business people, private sectors, Government and international agency collaboration so we can hear many aspects from different sectors that can provide their inputs around the technology and the Internet, the environment itself. Thank you.
>> AXEL KLAHAKE: Yes, thank you. There are so many complex questions, so I will probably not answer those in one minute. I think what I found very obvious in the discussion now, I think when we want to explain that complex issue better to decision makers, I think we have to make it simpler and clearer in terms of priorities.
I do believe this is really something most likely we want to do next, really clearly making the point for, I don't know, ten points of action or maybe less so that really the decision makers can understand what is actually urgently needed. Sometimes we tend in the discussion to add, again, a new layer of complexity, and for a decision maker it's not so easy to disentangle that and derive conclusions that are relevant to the sphere of action.
I think that is something I do believe we should work on making things clearer. So making sure that we have in mind the same big trends. So what is coming up in the next ten years? We have heard about still the 30% of the world population being unserved, not having access. This is going to change with dramatic consequences for the environment.
So we have currently a lower percentage of data centers being located in the Global South, again, this is going to change with massive implications in terms of sustainability so forth so on. So this is a few examples of what we should up on.
>> So a little bit of a take away, so as we move forward and build and implement a way to a planetary biosphere because it is more than the environment, we do need and we have talked about this multilateral cooperation across jurisdictions, civil society, (Maike Luiken) all essential so that we can agree on accountability frameworks. We don't even have that fork large companies yet today.
We need to measure and be accountable and be ready to revise decisions. We need to measure impact, be accountable and be ready to revise.
We also have at our hands what I would like to call a wicked problem or maybe one, like it's very complex, and we have to deal with competing interests, actually competing needs at the same time. The urgency of today's problems versus the urgency of tomorrow's problems, and so one of the, this is one of the big items that will require fora like this to debate how we can keep the balance, how we can address those needs.
And then I would like to say that as we move forward and build a sustainability culture, that we take into account for every project, everything we do, what we need to do in terms of sustainability. And we cannot leave anybody behind. And I like to say failure is truly not an option.
>> MODERATOR: Certainly not.
>> KEMLY CAMACHO: Thank you very much for all of the interventions. I think that is really valuable, all of the discussion here. We talk about four steps, the first step is integrate more people in the discussion, more movements, more thoughts, more generation, et cetera, in this discussion. The second one, understand better, we think this complex problem we need to understand better what is happening, the idea about this common platform is very interesting, but another possibility is to understand better what is happening, how it's happening, and who is producing all of the situations.
I think we are beginning with that to be honest. The third point is disseminate and create movements around, around what is happening in the digital society environment, and we prefer to talk about the digital society and the environment, not the digital technologies, and the fourth one is change practices. We really think we need to change practices.
We need to really put on the agenda the right measure. I don't know if the translation is good in Spanish we talk about the fair measure between the utility and the destruction. I began to work in all of that 25 years ago I remember, and 25 years ago I worked hard for connectivity for connection to everybody, and now 25 years later, I claim for less connectivity for the very well connected and more connectivity for the ones not connected. Then I think that changed a lot of perspective of the digital society. Thank you.
>> DAVID SOUTER: So one of the problems here is that for every individual actor in an environmental context, every individual actor thinks that their own actions make only a marginal impact on overall environmental outcomes, so they are not really that important. That's the reason why the governance structures around this are critical.
So governance and creating incentives for environmental responsibility, the ways in which businesses develop products and services and standards are developed and so forth. The way in which citizens can, the kind of information around the overall environmental context that is available to citizens and the information that they can take to make environmentally responsible choices as consumers.
All of those things are what I would sum up as saying we need an E‑source of environmental responsibility across the digital sector so the decision makers at all level of Government, business, standard‑setting bodies, data centers and so forth are taking into account the environmental impacts of what they do.
>> MODERATOR: Thank you, David, I have run over time but there is clear consensus that this is a journey and there is willingness to continue this dialogue and there is this gap between, this gap that while citizens may not be able to make a big impact, I think it's still important for each citizen to work on it, and the other thing is there is a clear direction action point as well is for this community to go back to your NIRs, the national and Regional IGFs, and bring those stakeholders that matter, bring the right Ministers, bring the industry to talk about this issue, and I expect everyone to go back to your national and regional initiatives and do that, and then next year to come back at this main session and tell us about what further actions we can take on this very important matter that we cannot fail to accomplish.
Thank you, everyone.
Please join me in a round of applause to the panel.
(Applause).