IGF 2023 Workshop Submission and Review Process

Stage 1: Initial Screening

Why:    Remove proposals that do not satisfy minimum criteria
Who:    IGF Secretariat
When:  Completed within 1 week after proposal deadline

All proposals must meet the minimum criteria listed below. Proposals that do not will be removed from consideration for the IGF programme.

  • The proposer must complete all fields of the submission form with relevant information.
  • The proposal must have at least 3 provisionally confirmed speakers who have been contacted by the proposer, and who have expressed their interest and intent to participate.
  • The proposal must have one speaker should be of a different gender from the rest of the speakers.
  • The proposals must list at least one moderator and two speakers who will be present onsite.
  • Workshop reports are important to building discussion at the IGF. If the proposer organized an IGF workshop in recent years, he/she would have been required to submit a report to the IGF Secretariat. Proposers can provide a link to the report on the submission form. If a report was not submitted, the proposal will be declined.
  • MAG members cannot submit workshop proposals. 


Stage 2: MAG Member Evaluation

Why:    Rank proposals according to criteria
Who:    Individual MAG members
When:  Completed by the MAG in up to three weeks' time

After Stage 1, the IGF Secretariat will circulate the workshop proposals to individual MAG members for evaluation. MAG members will evaluate workshops based upon the following criteria:

  1. Proposed topic
    Proposed topics should be relevant both to Internet ‎Governance and one of the eight subthemes for IGF 2023: (1) AI & Emerging Technologies; (2) Avoiding Internet Fragmentation; (3) Cybersecurity, Cybercrime & Online Safety; (4) Data Governance & Trust; (5) Digital Divides & Inclusion; (6) Global Digital Governance & Cooperation; (7) Human Rights & Freedoms; (8) Sustainability & Environment. The 2005 Report of ‎the Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) describes Internet Governance ‎as ''the development and application by Governments, the private sector and civil ‎society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making ‎procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet.''

  2. Workshop content
    Under this criterion, MAG members will assess ‎the overall quality of the proposal's description: whether it is well-thought through, presents a concrete plan, and is clearly focused on one of the eight selected subthemes.

  3. Policy questions
    Proposals should put forward up to three timely, interesting and relevant policy questions that will be addressed during the ‎workshop. These should also relate to the proposal's expected outcomes.

  4. Engagement and hybrid strategy
    The MAG wishes to see whether the proposal lays out an effective strategy for interactive engagement of participants - including whether new or creative approaches are deployed. The 2023 IGF will be a hybrid event in which participants, whether onsite or online, engage in sessions fully, meaningfully and on equal terms with one another. Online participation will be supported technically via a platform provided by the IGF Secretariat and Host Country. This criterion will assess whether the proposal fully takes into account the hybrid nature of the meeting and is designed to ensure seamless interaction and flow between online and onsite participants.

  5. Diversity
    This relates to content, process and speakers. Proposers are strongly ‎advised to pay particular attention to ensuring as much as possible diversity in ‎participation, including of views, gender, region, stakeholder group, and inclusion of youth, ‎persons with disabilities, and persons from under-represented or marginalized groups, ‎within their organizing teams as well as listed speakers, as these will be reviewed ‎against the key diversity measures listed in the form.

Proposers are further advised ‎that they should limit ‎their number of speakers to no more than five wherever possible, so as to ensure ‎space in their session for participant engagement. While the latter is not a ‎disqualifying criterion, excessive numbers of speakers will result in lower support for ‎the proposal.

The total score for each proposal will be the mean average of the grades received by MAG ‎members.
Upon receiving the MAG member scoring, the Secretariat will prepare a synthesis of the evaluation. The Secretariat will also conduct a final review of the results, in preparation for the Second Open Consultations and MAG meeting on 10-12 July 2023. 


Stage 3: MAG discussion, identification of merger candidates, and finalization

Why:    Determine the final list of workshop sessions
Who:    MAG members and IGF Secretariat
When:  Following the 2nd Open Consultations and MAG Meeting (10-12 July)

Before and during the July meeting, MAG members will look at the results to ensure an overall balance of the topics within the programme. Proposals that did not score highly overall, but which show promise and could help balance the programme, may be set aside for further consideration. Proposers will then be contacted and asked to submit a revised proposal, addressing any shortcomings in their initial submission.

In some cases, the MAG will receive workshop proposals on the same issues, topics and format. Similar workshops may be accepted on the condition that they “merge” together. In this case, the workshop proposers will be contacted by the IGF Secretariat.

Following the merger process and other necessary arrangements, the IGF workshop selection will then be finalized.